Quote:
Originally Posted by osirisboy
I'm guessing it's relative to developments like Gilmore station or Brentwood that are basically attached to the station. Or relative to the person. If you are senior with mobility issues trying to walk home with groceries they may consider it "far away" and who are you to tell them that their personal perception is wrong?! Hence the term "relative"
I'm still puzzled why people are still talking about this
|
Yes of course, if you are a senior with mobility issues it would be considered "far away", and I literally pointed that out in my own comment that you quoted - you virtually repeated what I said.
But that's an exception - not the norm.
And who's this project being designed, geared and primarily marketed towards?
Seniors with mobility issues?
Or families that typically have cars and young professionals (who can walk and can drive)?
If it's the latter then how does the notion that living 2 blocks away from the 2nd largest mall in the region (when it's complete) is "far away" begin to compute?
And if it's the former, then you're talking about designing a seniors' residential home - which typically tend to have amenities and services that take things like this into consideration (such as the fact that the mall commercial business can provide home delivery to save the residents the trip, or the residence itself providing chauffeured drive service for seniors who want to visit it.). And guess what you won't find a lot of in the podium levels of such buildings? Lots and lots of commercial and retail units mostly because they have to use that space to provide even MORE amenities and services for their seniors and health-afflicted residents.
So even in the exception case (of residents who have mobility issues since they are seniors) you still wouldn't do that (i.e add an unnecessarily higher than usual amount of retail to the podiums or the projects writ large).
The original person I responded to (Vin) phrased it to make it seem like "relatively far away" was a general condition applying to everyone who would live in those residences.
Fact of the matter is that it's not.
Fact of the matter is that for the primary and target demographic that the developers will likely be gearing this project towards and marketing to, it most certainly is not.
And to come back with a literal exception to the rule (or exceptional case from the norm for the intended target marketbase) as if it proves anything makes even less sense.
The project will almost certainly have some retail component on the podium levels, but certainly nothing matching what's at the mall, and that's almost likely what Vin was suggesting, and that close to the mall, it makes no sense (financial or otherwise) to try to create a "mini-mall" or bigger than usual retail complex that will only end up trying (and failing) to compete with the mall rather than providing a convenience for their own residences.
Threaded Mode