nextCITY

Spring2008 · #1 Posted **Jan 31, 2015, 6:50 PM**

Anybody been to any of these Main Street workshops? There are 3 more today including one for 17th av. I'm booked all day, if anybody attends I'd like to hear about what's being discussed for 17th especially.

http://www.calgary.ca/engage/Pages/Mainstreets.aspx

*Stardust* · #2 Posted **Jan 31, 2015, 8:17 PM**

Id go to one if it was about 10th ave. I'll definitely take a look at this. Thank you!

Full Mountain · #3 Posted **Jan 31, 2015, 8:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spring2008

Anybody been to any of these Main Street workshops? There are 3 more today including one for 17th av. I'm booked all day, if anybody attends I'd like to hear about what's being discussed for 17th especially.

http://www.calgary.ca/engage/Pages/Mainstreets.aspx

I haven't been to one yet, but am looking forward to the 16th Ave and 4th St NW ones coming up next week.

bt04ku · #4 Posted **Feb 1, 2015, 12:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spring2008

Anybody been to any of these Main Street workshops? There are 3 more today including one for 17th av. I'm booked all day, if anybody attends I'd like to hear about what's being discussed for 17th especially.

http://www.calgary.ca/engage/Pages/Mainstreets.aspx

Walkability was the recurring focus for all the groups.

I'll put the groups 'issues' in italics, and their 'outcomes' in bold. Each area had two groups that I mashed together if it seems like some things don't quite mesh.

The Shaganappi/Killarney/'Western most' groups:

-Speed of eastbound traffic coming from the hill
-Narrow and/or bad sidewalks
-air quality walking along 17th
-"Cluttered" buildings (mostly related to how parking works)
-Lack of priority: bad for all modes of transportation

-Become a destination
-vibrant business district
-Better mode balance
-residential over retail (I assume this means residential on top of retail)
-'Westbrook' community associations working together

Sunalta/'Middle' group

-Pedestrian safety (left hand turns)
-Lack of light
-Fear of losing homes to development

-Clean up eyesores (i.e. boarded up church)
-Walkable
-Tecumseh/Children's Hospital: retail options? Other vibrancy options?

Beltline/'Lower Mount Royal'/All-Star Groups

-Safety
-4th St to Stampede Park is 'dead'
-Lack of Public realm
-Lack of priority (battle between pedestrian street vs. transportation cooridor)
-"The mattress store"

-Prioritize pedestrians
-More "people generators" (i.e. theatres, markets)
-Big box stores on second floor
-Walkable, vibrant 'people street'
-Remain a destination street
-Live, work, play and not just a destination street
-Revitalization of 4th St to Stampede Park

Those were the big points I'd say. In addition to the 'mattress store' the banks sure got a hard time (and rightfully so).

*Stardust* · #5 Posted **Feb 1, 2015, 7:07 PM**

Yeah the mattress store and the banks need to go. Even though 17th ave is awesome, I think the best part is between 4th street and 9th. Between 9th and 14th needs a lot of work. I'm looking at you... CIBC, ATB, Sleep Country, Huntington Apartments, Liquor Depot, Scotiabank.

In my opinion, the west side of 17th ave is almost as bad as the east side closer to Victoria park.

Everything else though is great

Koolfire · #6 Posted **Feb 1, 2015, 9:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

Yeah the mattress store and the banks need to go. Even though 17th ave is awesome, I think the best part is between 4th street and 9th. Between 9th and 14th needs a lot of work. I'm looking at you... CIBC, ATB, Sleep Country, Huntington Apartments, Liquor Depot, Scotiabank.

In my opinion, the west side of 17th ave is almost as bad as the east side closer to Victoria park.

Everything else though is great

I disagree with getting rid of the banks. They part of a healthy neighbourhood. If you relocate them near by fine but I wouldn't want to get rid of them completely.

As for Liquor Depot, I'm indifferent as there is so many liquor stores in the area.

The Sleep Country I don't mind per say but it is a fish out of water with that location. If they are turning a profit I'm fine with the diversity.

Huntington Apartments, sure they don't look nice but you going to pay for the renovations? Are they privately owned or rentals? If rentals I could see the landlord doing updates to increase rent but if it's private it usually doesn't make economical sense to do it.

My bigger issue in that area is the McDonald's and the Wendy's. I would like to see a drivethru ban in Downtown and Beltline. I don't have an issue with the restaurants themselves but it would be nice to see them change to a urban format without all that parking.

Anyone know what is going on with the building beside Liquor Depot that is boarded up?

bt04ku · #7 Posted **Feb 1, 2015, 9:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolfire

I disagree with getting rid of the banks. They part of a healthy neighbourhood. If you relocate them near by fine but I wouldn't want to get rid of them completely.

It's not that there are banks, it's that they take up so much space. There's a big difference in the Servus, ATB, and CIBCs taking up old Blockbusters and other half-block buildings and the TD in the 'Best Buy building' taking up two bays.

It's pretty similar to wanting the big box stores to be on the second level with a bunch of shops on the main level. They provide a valuable service but they limit the number of shops on the main levels which can kill vibrancy on a block.

Surrealplaces · #8 Posted **Feb 1, 2015, 11:26 PM**

I would be interested in the ones for Centre St N and 4th street N. Especially Centre Street...it's got so much potential.

DizzyEdge · #9 Posted **Feb 2, 2015, 8:44 AM**

Could have a policy that service/office (including banks) have a max frontage width?

Spring2008 · #10 Posted **Feb 2, 2015, 7:21 PM**

Great summary, agree with it all. So what are the next steps? Data is forwarded to city planners?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bt04ku

Walkability was the recurring focus for all the groups.

I'll put the groups 'issues' in italics, and their 'outcomes' in bold. Each area had two groups that I mashed together if it seems like some things don't quite mesh.

The Shaganappi/Killarney/'Western most' groups:

-Speed of eastbound traffic coming from the hill
-Narrow and/or bad sidewalks
-air quality walking along 17th
-"Cluttered" buildings (mostly related to how parking works)
-Lack of priority: bad for all modes of transportation

-Become a destination
-vibrant business district
-Better mode balance
-residential over retail (I assume this means residential on top of retail)
-'Westbrook' community associations working together

Sunalta/'Middle' group

-Pedestrian safety (left hand turns)
-Lack of light
-Fear of losing homes to development

-Clean up eyesores (i.e. boarded up church)
-Walkable
-Tecumseh/Children's Hospital: retail options? Other vibrancy options?

Beltline/'Lower Mount Royal'/All-Star Groups

-Safety
-4th St to Stampede Park is 'dead'
-Lack of Public realm
-Lack of priority (battle between pedestrian street vs. transportation cooridor)
-"The mattress store"

-Prioritize pedestrians
-More "people generators" (i.e. theatres, markets)
-Big box stores on second floor
-Walkable, vibrant 'people street'
-Remain a destination street
-Live, work, play and not just a destination street
-Revitalization of 4th St to Stampede Park

Those were the big points I'd say. In addition to the 'mattress store' the banks sure got a hard time (and rightfully so).

Full Mountain · #11 Posted **Feb 3, 2015, 4:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surrealplaces

I would be interested in the ones for Centre St N and 4th street N. Especially Centre Street...it's got so much potential.

Make sure you come out, I think 4th, Centre and Edmonton tr all have a lot of potential just waiting to be taken advantage of.

UofC.engineer · #12 Posted **Feb 3, 2015, 4:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Make sure you come out, I think 4th, Centre and Edmonton tr all have a lot of potential just waiting to be taken advantage of.

I plan to go to the edmonton trail workshop this Saturday. It would be nice to see more mixed use along Edmonton trail and centre street.

DizzyEdge · #13 Posted **Feb 3, 2015, 5:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Make sure you come out, I think 4th, Centre and Edmonton tr all have a lot of potential just waiting to be taken advantage of.

When are they scheduled for?

Full Mountain · #14 Posted **Feb 3, 2015, 7:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

When are they scheduled for?

16th Ave - Wednesday February 3rd @ 7pm - SAIT – MacDonald Hall, 1301-16 Ave NW
Centre & Edmonton Tr - Saturday February 7th @ 1:30pm - Calgary Italian Club, 416 1 Avenue NE
4th St - Thursday February 12th @ 7pm - Calgary Scandinavian Centre, 739 20 Ave NW

DizzyEdge · #15 Posted **Feb 3, 2015, 10:15 PM**

Cool, I can probably make the 2nd two.

Spring2008 · #16 Posted **Feb 3, 2015, 10:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

Id go to one if it was about 10th ave. I'll definitely take a look at this. Thank you!

Only for main streets outside of the City Centre. I'm sure Beltline Planning Group has more planned around 10th in terms of public realm, I think funding is still the main issue for some of the projects though.

Full Mountain · #17 Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 12:02 AM**

One interesting note from last night's event Calgary Transit is starting functional planning for the North Crosstown BRT this year with the intent of having it in service in 2018.

Otherwise the key points for the majority of the folks were very similar, improve the pedestrian experience. Though there was some questions regarding why the current ARP doesn't seem to be having the desired effect on the corridor (i.e. redevelopment).

There was also some discussion about 16th's role as the Trans Canada, both around what restrictions that places on the roadway (if any) and if it would be better for Stoney to be designated as the TCH rather than 16th. Transportation didn't have any stats on hand regarding the change in traffic (volume and type) pre-Stoney to post Stoney.

dazzlingdave88 · #18 Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 3:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

One interesting note from last night's event Calgary Transit is starting functional planning for the North Crosstown BRT this year with the intent of having it in service in 2018.

Otherwise the key points for the majority of the folks were very similar, improve the pedestrian experience. Though there was some questions regarding why the current ARP doesn't seem to be having the desired effect on the corridor (i.e. redevelopment).

There was also some discussion about 16th's role as the Trans Canada, both around what restrictions that places on the roadway (if any) and if it would be better for Stoney to be designated as the TCH rather than 16th. Transportation didn't have any stats on hand regarding the change in traffic (volume and type) pre-Stoney to post Stoney.

You were there too? I drew the short straw from my group and had to present our discussion summary.

Full Mountain · #19 Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 2:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dazzlingdave88

You were there too? I drew the short straw from my group and had to present our discussion summary.

I got someone else to present, I had yabbered the most during so I thought I'd let someone else have a chance. I was at the back table in SW corner (a west of 4th table), which section did you get (east or west)?

UofC.engineer · #20 Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 3:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

One interesting note from last night's event Calgary Transit is starting functional planning for the North Crosstown BRT this year with the intent of having it in service in 2018.

Otherwise the key points for the majority of the folks were very similar, improve the pedestrian experience. Though there was some questions regarding why the current ARP doesn't seem to be having the desired effect on the corridor (i.e. redevelopment).

There was also some discussion about 16th's role as the Trans Canada, both around what restrictions that places on the roadway (if any) and if it would be better for Stoney to be designated as the TCH rather than 16th. Transportation didn't have any stats on hand regarding the change in traffic (volume and type) pre-Stoney to post Stoney.

Functional study??? I thought the only thing this route required was the purchase of buses, signs and road paint.