paratransit
New Member
um... Chestermere and Calgary have shared a common border (Range Road 284/116 Street E. ) since 2009 when Chestermere annexed the last of remaining county land
|
|
|
- Thread starter Oddball
- Start date
um... Chestermere and Calgary have shared a common border (Range Road 284/116 Street E. ) since 2009 when Chestermere annexed the last of remaining county land
lemongrab
Active Member
That's great news - that street should be a lot more pedestriant friendly than it is. It really doesn't need to be 2 travel lanes each way, except to accommodate long left turn lines onto Crowchild, which is of course another whole issue altogether
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Sure the boundaries touch, but you still leave the urban area and drive through farmland when commuting between the 2.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Yes, he even clearly said in his post “between cities without driving through farmland.”
Pretty clear.
Pretty clear.
Not much space between the two cities. ~2.7km stretch between developed land areas.
Though Airdrie isn't too far either. ~4.1km. With the sheer amount of people in Airdrie, and the fact that acreages lots make up the gap on the east of side of the highway, it's possible some rapid development of a string of strip malls could happen on the west side of the highway bridging the two cities.
Though Airdrie isn't too far either. ~4.1km. With the sheer amount of people in Airdrie, and the fact that acreages lots make up the gap on the east of side of the highway, it's possible some rapid development of a string of strip malls could happen on the west side of the highway bridging the two cities.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
A community presentation from a developer last night has this slide in it showing vehicle ownership trends for the T2T postal code.
Pretty interesting that 59% of homes in this area have 1 car or less. Unfortunately, the other 31% likely make up for the lack of cars in the other two groups but still.
Pretty interesting that 59% of homes in this area have 1 car or less. Unfortunately, the other 31% likely make up for the lack of cars in the other two groups but still.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
With the new Chelsea neighbourhood in Chestermere, that gap will start to close quite fast. For Airdrie, the whole Cross Iron area has bridged the gap quite a bit, but it will still be a while before it's continuously built up.
MichaelS
Senior Member
The biggest gap in "urban form" between Calgary and Chestermere is the fact the City has not put in place an ASP north of 160th Ave, leaving about 1.6 kms of unplanned lands north of communities like Carrington and Lewiston. However, there is the Nose Creek ASP that runs all the way to the City Limits (highway 566), but it has not had its GMO removed, so who knows when that development will happen.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
You mean Airdrie? 
MichaelS
Senior Member
Woops, yep.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Interesting data - I am not aware of any publicly available source that estimates car ownership at that level of geography. Would be cool to see this data more accessible community-by-community.
The other part of this story is amount of off-street parking in this area - it's typically invisible as the discouse immediately goes to an obsession with onstreet congestion and "never being able to find parking" within a block of a popular destination rather than this area wide view. For example, despite only having a demand of 1 or fewer cars for 59% of households, most households have access to at least 1 or 2 off-street parking stalls. In effect we over-supplied off-street parking in most of these areas, while also undercharged and oversupplied on-street parking everywhere.
Data like this is why developers seem to have no problem selling townhomes with one stall and secondary suites with zero. The demand for parking is far below supply in almost everywhere in Calgary except a few clusters of higher activity.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
The slide definitely peaked my interest for multiple reasons too. The NIMBY people on the call of course dismissed these facts as hearsay and granted the parked car counts do only come from one night of observation but still.
This was the first time I sat in one of these information sessions and for the post part people were quite respectful but one participant did call the presenters arm chair architects because they had "never walked the street".
Some participants would argue more cars in the area makes it less safe, the traffic engineer would point out that more cars parked in the area, making the road smaller, actually would make it safer because smaller roads cause people to drive slower.
For context: the parcel is this one DMAP at 2008 28 AV SW.
Out of context for this thread:
If it goes through it will set a new precedent as it is a three building 18 unit corner development that isn't on any major road in the area like 33/34/26 ave or 20 st. But i did submit comments in support of it because although it's a lot of units it is well scaled for the area.
Big thing with this one that it's a rental, the single-family home owners did not like that. And there was a lot of anti-renter innuendo that essentially added up to: Renters do not belong on this street.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Cops have 12 Ave shut down at 4st and traffic is F'd! the one day I drive to work...
FCC1982
Active Member
Related to recent discussion here if not the title of this thread:
www.westerninvestor.com
Calgary aims to annex 415 acres from Foothills County
April 27 open house will give Foothills residents a chance to ask questions and comment
www.westerninvestor.com
jhappy77
Active Member
Found this in the Sirocco ASP from Foothills County:Related to recent discussion here if not the title of this thread:
Calgary aims to annex 415 acres from Foothills County
April 27 open house will give Foothills residents a chance to ask questions and comment
These road layouts are truly horrid for transit and I hope they get re-examined now that the city is applying annex the lands in Cell 2 and 3.