What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    13
thommyjo said:
I'd argue it being built before the transit is bad though. Cause it won't attract people hoping to regularly use transit. It'll attract drivers. And the time it takes for someone to move from driver to non car owner is very long. Usually the lifetime of the vehicle. So effective TODs always have the transit first. That's why blatchford is being done as it is.
Click to expand...
That's a fair point and I'm not super opposed to the city's current strategy. However, compared to the parking lot that is Claireview, this place looks like it'll have some nice mixed use and active transport paths. It's shaping up to be a fairly decent place to live (relatively speaking) and having a early residents with cars isn't going to change the urban design.

Even if the first round of residents includes a lot of car owners, transit usage doesn't have to be a binary thing. If you have a train line literally right by your home, a lot of people with cars will still use it for trips that make sense (especially since the capital line is often faster than driving). Maybe a 2 car household turns into a 1 car household (which in the short term is probably the most realistic conversion we can hope for most of the families/couples that buy in our sprawling suburbs). Either way, there are a lot more trips generated by a few sets of fully populated medium density developments than by parking lots that take 5+ years to fully build out.

Plus, the people buying here will be paying some premium for a condo right by a LRT line and the mixed use. There's absolutely no shortage whatsoever of low/medium rise condo buildings in the middle of suburban desert bordering the Henday. If people are choosing here over those other developments, I assume it's because they want to not have to drive so much.
 
soupcrate said:
That's a fair point and I'm not super opposed to the city's current strategy. However, compared to the parking lot that is Claireview, this place looks like it'll have some nice mixed use and active transport paths. It's shaping up to be a fairly decent place to live (relatively speaking) and having a early residents with cars isn't going to change the urban design.

Even if the first round of residents includes a lot of car owners, transit usage doesn't have to be a binary thing. If you have a train line literally right by your home, a lot of people with cars will still use it for trips that make sense (especially since the capital line is often faster than driving). Maybe a 2 car household turns into a 1 car household (which in the short term is probably the most realistic conversion we can hope for most of the families/couples that buy in our sprawling suburbs). Either way, there are a lot more trips generated by a few sets of fully populated medium density developments than by parking lots that take 5+ years to fully build out.

Plus, the people buying here will be paying some premium for a condo right by a LRT line and the mixed use. There's absolutely no shortage whatsoever of low/medium rise condo buildings in the middle of suburban desert bordering the Henday. If people are choosing here over those other developments, I assume it's because they want to not have to drive so much.
Click to expand...
Yeah, fair points. It probably will attract those at least interested in commuting by train or using it occasionally since there's other similar condos elsewhere. And I think the 2 to 1 car per household is the lowest hanging fruit for our city to pursue. The number of 2 car households is crazy in edmonton vs other cities. Getting a bunch to 1 will be a game changer.

And fair on clareview. Although I think that's more "neighbourhood" related than TOD. The strategy wasn't there back then. I think what we've seen around Stadium this past decade is better as an example. Rec center helped too. But thousands of new apartments around there, heavily marketed based on transit proximity. Century park is probably an example of where it has struggled too though.

I think the valley line will be the best test. Both the SE and W are majorly targeting to redevelop areas. If those projects do well, I think the train will be the reason. And that'll be a big win, cause those moving to those TODs will be car-free, car-share, or car-lite.
 
Daveography said:
Some additional future TOD being constructed just south of this one:

PERMIT_DATE July 12, 2019
JOB_CATEGORY Commercial Final
ADDRESS B1, 811 - DANIELS WAY SW
NEIGHBOURHOOD DESROCHERS AREA
JOB_DESCRIPTION To construct the footing and foundation (PARKADE ONLY) for two 5-Storey mixed Use buildings (commercial - main floor, apartments on floors 2-5) - "Desrochers Village"
BUILDING_TYPE Parkade (490)
WORK_TYPE (01) New
CONSTRUCTION_VALUE 3,000,000
ZONING DC1, DC1
Click to expand...
Looks like the first building is already completed (or nearly there) and being rented out.
liveslate.ca

Slate Residences | Edmonton Luxury Apartments in Desrochers Village

Slate Residences is a brand new five-storey luxury apartment building located in Edmonton’s Desrochers Village
liveslate.ca liveslate.ca
 
Im so confused. whats being/been built looks NOTHING like the drawings or the layout at all. I dont understand what happened. It looks like the SLATE residence building is where this was supposed to be built, but if thats a different project, then the one thats almost done across the street is only like 3 stories tall, has a huge parking lot in front of it. meanwhile, theres a brand new condo building a few buildings away south from this site thats going to be a like 5 or 6 storey medium rise that started like 6 months ago which is too tall considering that one is much closer to residential area suburbs. the mixed use one "towns at desrochers" is perfect place for a taller building, yet its only 3 storeys. also looks nothing like the rendering, definitely a huge downgrade in styling choices. its all one grey colour, no pop , just looks like something built as cheaply as possible. would it hurt to splash a bit of colour or accent materials?
sincerely, a resident who lives in this neighbourhood.
Also, they should add a small playground for one of these apartment buildings close by, to reduce how long a walk it takes to get to the nearest playground (for the kids)
 
mohankeneh said:
Im so confused. whats being/been built looks NOTHING like the drawings or the layout at all. I dont understand what happened. It looks like the SLATE residence building is where this was supposed to be built, but if thats a different project, then the one thats almost done across the street is only like 3 stories tall, has a huge parking lot in front of it. meanwhile, theres a brand new condo building a few buildings away south from this site thats going to be a like 5 or 6 storey medium rise that started like 6 months ago which is too tall considering that one is much closer to residential area suburbs. the mixed use one "towns at desrochers" is perfect place for a taller building, yet its only 3 storeys. also looks nothing like the rendering, definitely a huge downgrade in styling choices. its all one grey colour, no pop , just looks like something built as cheaply as possible. would it hurt to splash a bit of colour or accent materials?
sincerely, a resident who lives in this neighbourhood.
Also, they should add a small playground for one of these apartment buildings close by, to reduce how long a walk it takes to get to the nearest playground (for the kids)
Click to expand...
oh, Sorry, So i realize now that they havnt actually started construction of building A, they are finishing up building B right now. part of the "big parking lot" i mentioned before was actually going to be for the future building.
I still stand by my word that they should style the building they have built already a bit more, and also still confused as to why its only 3 storeys when the website for the construction project said it would be "8 storeys for all 3 buildings"
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top