archited
Senior Member
Actually a more cogent comparison would be San Antonio which is quite pleasant and livable
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Coprolite
Active Member
I actually really enjoyed living in the Quarters. It was quieter than anywhere I had lived in the city to that point and I had great access to bike infrastructure, transit and amenities. But it's hard to recover from shittyparkinglotitis, especially if the landowners are in no hurry to sell. All of those decades of demolition order after demolition order and the toll of building fires adds up, especially if what was there before can't legally be rebuilt. Not to mention all of the grand visions from the "what if we knock down Chinatown and put it over there" era that just fizzled in the oil bust, and the weird wall of really impersonal buildings with uninviting street presence that popped up on 97 Street.
This is why encouraging infill in core/mature neighbourhoods is a good thing, by the way. It keeps ageing neighbourhoods from reaching this state where you have blocks of lands dominated by abandoned buildings, vacant lots, and Impark's professional blighting services.
wormwood
Active Member
I was 14 when I visited but it felt almost European.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I also don’t consider rowhouses TOD. I’m talking about 200-400 unit apartments, 6+ stories. And suggesting we should allow the current vacant/underdeveloped land near transit to get developed first before we upzone stuff 10+ minutes away from transit for 6+ stories.
We also should incentivize TODs to more quickly fill in lots all along the valley line and stuff like century park instead of letting greenfield cheapness suck up all the market demand for apartments.
Last edited:
Coprolite
Active Member
Well, adding a little gentle density to mature neighbourhoods actually is a great way to achieve transit ridership through development, and it's a lot easier to get going than 200-400 unit apartment buildings.
johnnyboy
Active Member
This seems like such common sense it's a bit bewildering it's not actually the case here.
David A
Senior Member
Yes, we are a society with a number of rules so we can function well like stop signs, speed limits, parking limits in some areas and so on.
A lot of people are not happy with the free for all now in older area. Maybe we don't need to go back to what we had before, but having a system that encourages more development where wanted and needed and some restrictions in some other areas is good planning.
thommyjo
Senior Member
Sorry. I feel like maybe my original posts weren’t read? I’m not talking about 8plexes or infill at all.
I’m responding to a suggestion that we need to expand the TOD potential near transit by allowing 6 story buildings within 800m of train stops.
I’m saying that it’s not a good move when we have so much undeveloped land already right next to train stations and risks losing public trust.
Plopping a 6 story build in the literal middle of meadowlark’s bungalows, a 10+ minute walk to the train, when numerous lots along 156st are vacant and almost all are still bungalows, is silly. We should prioritize density (and spend our “pissing off pennies”) on projects that actually move the needle on transit use, vibrant nodes, and reducing traffic.
ntt1
Active Member
Some infill projects in Aspen Gardens over the last decade, before and after. A few lot splits too, not all McMansions, but definitely a lot of them. Seems like 2-3 new teardown projects begin every 6 months - I frequently bike through here.
IanO
Superstar
How Common is the “Missing Middle” Housing in Canada?
Discover the rise of Missing Middle housing in Canada’s 6 major cities. Learn how this housing type is addressing affordability, diversity and urban density challenges.
archited
Senior Member
Looks like Edmonton and Calgary have it just about right.
ChazYEG
Senior Member
David A
Senior Member
It seems to me many of the apartments being built here now are around 6 storeys, so not less than 4 storeys, but IMO they can still fit in well especially in an area with a mix of housing.
ChazYEG
Senior Member
I wonder what those numbers would look like if they were to account for 6 stories or less, instead of 4. My guess is that it would be even more skewed towards Edmonton and Calgary. For all its issues, it seems like Alberta is a few steps ahead of the rest of Canada when it comes to "getting" missing middle.
I will give a huge shoutout to Kelowna on this, tho. The central and downtown adjacent areas are densifying quickly with stuff between 4 and 6 stories on average, and high quality at that, and a good mix of units being offered. My building, for example, has 206 units, in 6 stories, ranging from studios to 3 bedrooms. About 2/3 of the building are studios and 1 bedroom (136 units), the remainder are 2 bedrooms (50 units) and 3 Bedrooms (20 units). It was the first one in the block where I live, with another one down the block that just started occupancy last month and another 4 currently under construction, and another 2 in the utility and excavation phases. All of similar size and with similar unit split, and some are condos and some are rentals, a few of them will even have townhomes and two of them have CRUs that will likely become a corner store and a small cafe or something. .
2 Years ago, if you look at the map, this area was all older bungalows, housing less people than each of these buildings houses individually, right behind a busy mall, several amenities, bike lanes and arterial roads. Now, with the second building that just started having people moving in, there are as many 3 bedroom units in the area as SFH, we have a mix of people going from university students to families of 4, and everything in between, in the building. The park that centres the area is always busy, most people walk to the amenities at the mall just across the road and our bike storage is as full as our underground parking. It is, honestly, the kind of stuff that I would LOVE to see in Edmonton, and which I honestly believe we could see in many neighbourhoods there. It's appropriately dense and urban, but not overwhelming like towers, it feels nice to have families and people who might commit to be around for the long term (sense of community) and it makes the best out of an area that just a few years ago felt very suburban and underutilized considering all the amenities around it,
David A
Senior Member
Of course Kelowna is a very different size than Edmonton, but it seems to be a good example of how adding housing in the central area that is not just high rise can also help revitalize it.