News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.7K     0 
JuliallThat said:
Agreed, and I'm not asking a lot, I can live with bland design if it's not a high value location. Just take this exact same design, and put the parking behind the building and scoot the building up to the sidewalk. EZ.
Click to expand...
So easy, and should be required. But I imagine in that case we'd end up with a dead streetfront anyway as they'd put doors in the back so people who park don't have to, *gasp*, walk around the building to get in, and businesses wouldn't want to monitor/secure 2 doors and would close up the front. 🤦‍♂️
 
mcr said:
So easy, and should be required. But I imagine in that case we'd end up with a dead streetfront anyway as they'd put doors in the back so people who park don't have to, *gasp*, walk around the building to get in, and businesses wouldn't want to monitor/secure 2 doors and would close up the front. 🤦‍♂️
Click to expand...
Yup, I think that's exactly what happened with these two shops on 102ave/109st
 
archited said:
The building that those two shops occupy will be slated for demolition within the next few years as part of NorQuest expansion.
Click to expand...
Which is great, but the point remains that it's a good example of the typical Edmonton way of prioritizing parking and drivers over walkability and street interaction as a whole.
 
mcr said:
Which is great, but the point remains that it's a good example of the typical Edmonton way of prioritizing parking and drivers over walkability and street interaction as a whole.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is not hard to find examples of this over the last few decades, even downtown. The Staples store on 101 St was also good example of that, but gone now and replaced by structures more pedestrian friendly.

Given the value of land, I suspect big parking lots in front are going to become less common particularly in more central areas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcr
David A said:
Yes, it is not hard to find examples of this over the last few decades, even downtown. The Staples store on 101 St was also good example of that, but gone now and replaced by structures more pedestrian friendly.

Given the value of land, I suspect big parking lots in front are going to become less common particularly in more central areas.
Click to expand...

*** cough cough *** Manchester Square
 
I would say Manchester Square was quite an improvement of the previous furniture outlet store there and certainly better than having to drive to a suburban place to shop, but yes the big parking lot in front is not great.

I suspect where it is located and the "quiet" neighbourhood nearby is just far enough from the downtown core that the land prices are not as high.
 
I hate street facing parking but I will always defend Manchester square. It reused an existing building (sustainability points), so it was limited how it could be redeveloped as they were working with the existing footprint. It has been very successful (or at least it was a year and a half ago when I was their last lol). I’m sure it wasn’t cheap to do that faux Dutch(?) facade, but at the same time, it wasn’t a massively involved undertaking that is going to limit this site from eventually being developed further in the future. It’s like a 4 out of ten in general, but a 9 out of ten given the circumstances and location and improvement on what was there. Nothing is permanent and it’s a hell of a place filler
 
It also has a very nice selection of local and other businesses, not just a bunch of the same national franchises and chains as elsewhere.
 
IMG_2284.png

Not far from that Casia development
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top