TAS
Senior Member
It's unfortunate that what should be a mainstreet, 118Ave, is converting to this.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
JuliallThat
Active Member
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.
Airboy
Senior Member
The one that was announced. They have contractors now.
mcr
Active Member
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.
degrandprix
Active Member
Yup, I think that's exactly what happened with these two shops on 102ave/109stSo 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.
archited
Senior Member
The building that those two shops occupy will be slated for demolition within the next few years as part of NorQuest expansion.
mcr
Active Member
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.
David A
Senior Member
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.
MacLac
Senior Member
Nm found it! 10903 University Ave!
Gronk!
Senior Member
*** cough cough *** Manchester Square
David A
Senior Member
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 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.
MattPT
Active Member
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
David A
Senior Member
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.
Agard
New Member
I think in the future some sort of mixed use structure could replace most of the existing parking at Manchester Square and create a nice mixed use walkable shopping center
MacLac
Senior Member
Not far from that Casia development