News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

Well they National Building code will dictate what and how things are rebuilt. It is advantageous for the 2 hotels to build bigger. Tekkars lodge and JPL can update as well. As for the retail that was lost multi story with rental can be done. Homes definitely can be made more sustainable.New guidelines will make building bigger feasible without major implications to the utility structure.A lot of the structures destroyed were of the older systems. And any new building should have PV Panels.
 
trevorhayden said:
I hope that Jasper takes advantage of provincial and federal reconstruction funds. While the scenery is gorgeous, Jasper itself is pretty Alberta-average. What would make it better would be to allow small apartments in all parts of the town east of Bonhomme; permanently pedestrianize the area between Miette, Geikie, Connaught, and Hazel; replace buildings lost along the tracks and big inner town parking lots next to the rail tracks with parks; move the parking lots to the east side of the tracks; narrow Connaught, Geikie, Bonnehomme/Pine, Pyramid Lake, and Miette to add multi use paths. Would also consider changing some road names to less colonial names.
Click to expand...
It was and is a very well kept up small town by Alberta standards, although it became a bit too frozen in time over the last few decades in my opinion.

I feel the Parks people realized they let things get too out of hand in Banff, so they then became overly restrictive when it came to changing or expanding anything in Jasper.
 
David A said:
It was and is a very well kept up small town by Alberta standards, although it became a bit too frozen in time over the last few decades in my opinion.

I feel the Parks people realized they let things get too out of hand in Banff, so they then became overly restrictive when it came to changing or expanding anything in Jasper.
Click to expand...
Not so much Parks Canada but the Residence of Jasper are pretty vocal about redevelopment. However I do believe they should be replacing most of the hotels with newer versions. Yes some added rooms but a hell of a lot more sustainable.
 
It is a shame that so much damage was to the residential area. Most hotels and a good portion of the commercial area is intact, so tourism may resume without too much difficulty, but where will a lot of the residents and those who work there live?
 
A bigger question remains for me. Do you rebuild as is/was? Do you take this opportunity to build back better, denser, more walkable and far less of a suburban neighbourhood in the mountains? Complex as heck though given the landowner, Park development requirements, expectations etc.

That said, to have neighbourhoods like that in this day and age, in a place such as that seems counterintuitive.

The 'legal non-confirming' tests will be interesting to review.
 
^Even legal non-conforming, if permitted, would need to meet the current building codes/fire codes/energy codes etc. In my mind some designs might have to change.
 
IanO said:
A bigger question remains for me. Do you rebuild as is/was? Do you take this opportunity to build back better, denser, more walkable and far less of a suburban neighbourhood in the mountains? Complex as heck though given the landowner, Park development requirements, expectations etc.

That said, to have neighbourhoods like that in this day and age, in a place such as that seems counterintuitive.

The 'legal non-confirming' tests will be interesting to review.
Click to expand...
Any rebuilding may be complex, so it should probably be done based on what makes sense now, not on just recreating motels, commercial space or housing from the 1960's.

I also hope the parks people are sensible, make rebuilding as easy as possible and avoid a Lytton like situation where almost nothing happens for years. Given the high profile of Jasper that would not look good for them.
 
David A said:
Any rebuilding may be complex, so it should probably be done based on what makes sense now, not on just recreating motels, commercial space or housing from the 1960's.

I also hope the parks people are sensible, make rebuilding as easy as possible and avoid a Lytton like situation where almost nothing happens for years. Given the high profile of Jasper that would not look good for them.
Click to expand...
Canadian Building codes are a bit more robust since most of these were built. But I suspect the Hotels and non residential will take advantage of sustainability. I don't know what level of rebuild the homes will have but just new products will be much more sustainable.
 
Opportunity to increase the number of dwellings/rooms for some of the hotels & apartments that were lost if that sort of thing is allowed by moving from surface parking to underground and building a bit taller.
 
The physical space for Jasper is very constrained, so surface parking lots really do not make much sense now. It may have made sense when the town was smaller in the 1960's.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top