Avenue West End Calgary

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by stophs

The last time I was through the area (a few weeks back) all retail units on 6th Ave were occupied. I know there was a time when a number of them were vacant, but I imagine the rental rates and dropped and eventually it made enough sense for a few destination time companies to move-in (law firm).

To me, the inner-city retail market is far too fragmented - you have a few blocks with a few shops, then it disappears, then starts again. It's not convenient for people that want to walk and shop, which means fewer people are out on the streets and this hurts retailers that in turn aren't able to sell enough to cover their overhead.

I think Calgary could do with a significant increase in retail to make better connections with the fragmented small strips. If that happens, I think you would end up seeing a lot of the shops you see in places like Chinook and Market Mall want to have a street retail presence in the inner city.

The key I think is a matter of (1) population and (2) essential goods. We can't just build retail and expect it to be successful. Retail should be built to serve a community, and there has to be a large enough local (pedestrian) population to keep businesses afloat. If there aren't enough people in the immediate area, limited-parking retail won't work. At the same time, it's important that people who live in the immediate area are not forced to look elsewhere for things like groceries, household items, and prescriptions. If they have to leave the neighbourhood for necessities, there is a high chance they will buy other goods away from their neighbourhood as well.

I've often wondered if some kind of tax break or incentive could be used to open more grocery stores and mom-and-pop drug stores, seeing as these businesses benefit other local businesses and promote pedestrian lifestyle (reduce congestion, strain on health care, etc). Better yet, bonus density or something could be given to developers who guarantee retail space for essential goods.

On a final note, downtown retailers could really benefit from attracting more parents. This is a real challenge, and I'm not sure the best way to solve it. More 4-room apartments? More greenspace and safer image? Developing adult consumer patterns independently of family goods? Position retail on arterial roads (RioCan, Macleod trail/First South/Curtis Block)? Better funding for inner-city schools? I don't know... it's a pickle.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

The key I think is a matter of (1) population and (2) essential goods. We can't just build retail and expect it to be successful. Retail should be built to serve a community, and there has to be a large enough local (pedestrian) population to keep businesses afloat. If there aren't enough people in the immediate area, limited-parking retail won't work. At the same time, it's important that people who live in the immediate area are not forced to look elsewhere for things like groceries, household items, and prescriptions. If they have to leave the neighbourhood for necessities, there is a high chance they will buy other goods away from their neighbourhood as well.

I've often wondered if some kind of tax break or incentive could be used to open more grocery stores and mom-and-pop drug stores, seeing as these businesses benefit other local businesses and promote pedestrian lifestyle (reduce congestion, strain on health care, etc). Better yet, bonus density or something could be given to developers who guarantee retail space for essential goods.

On a final note, downtown retailers could really benefit from attracting more parents. This is a real challenge, and I'm not sure the best way to solve it. More 4-room apartments? More greenspace and safer image? Developing adult consumer patterns independently of family goods? Position retail on arterial roads (RioCan, Macleod trail/First South/Curtis Block)? Better funding for inner-city schools? I don't know... it's a pickle.

Doesn't Vancouver already require or incentivize ground-level retail in many corridors? I heard that cause all sorts of unexpected behaviour as their condo-fueled boom created a ridiculous amount of retail units. However, I would definitely be open to a lighter regulatory touch for retail units in yyc. I would thing almost all uses should be allowed on many streets that there currently are none. A good example would be 5th Street 9th to 17th ave. heavy, heavy pedestrian coorridor, but only has retail on a few corners. I suspect it was a product of its time, as most buildings were built in the 1980s or earlier, but even newer ones (i think its called Xenex condos? has that office building built with it) should have been heavily encouraged to make retail provisions on the main floor. Now another 50 years will go by before that building comes down and something more than a blank wall replaces it.

[Policy Wonk]

I think building more of the same is just utterly pointless, crap retail detracts from an area rather than adding to it. It isn't entirely a matter of population, most of these retail bays just plain suck.

Do something like Emerald Park in North York, or just don't bother at all.
http://www.thegalleriaatemeraldpark....f/brochure.pdf

[Spring2008]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

The one on the website looks like a waterfront clone, the variety in Calgary has to do with age, towers of a similar age have similar looks (Waterfront, Avenue, etc.)

Waterfront and Avenue are similar in general, but I don't agree with the rest. I think there's a lot of variety within the newer product in terms of massing and color.

Mark on 10th vs Guardian vs Calla vs Verve vs First vs 6th on 10th vs Alura vs Keynote vs Arriva vs Evolution vs Telus Sky vs Le Germain etc.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

Waterfront and Avenue are similar in general, but I don't agree with the rest. I think there's a lot of variety within the newer product in terms of massing and color.

Mark on 10th vs Guardian vs Calla vs Verve vs First vs 6th on 10th vs Alura vs Keynote vs Arriva vs Evolution vs Telus Sky vs Le Germain etc.

I would argue Calla falls in a similar vein as Waterfront and Avenue, though not as directly similar. The rest I'll give you have significantly less commonality across them, and some with significant deviations Telus Sky, Le Germain, and 6th & 10th.

[kw5150]

Adding 400 people to the streets......and then another 500 somewhere else, then adding 1000 will always necessitate more retail. Sometimes these retail bay s are dormant for a while.....but soon there is always a need for them. Plan for them now.

There will always be a few empty retail bays somewhere.

Originally Posted by RyLucky

The key I think is a matter of (1) population and (2) essential goods. We can't just build retail and expect it to be successful. Retail should be built to serve a community, and there has to be a large enough local (pedestrian) population to keep businesses afloat. If there aren't enough people in the immediate area, limited-parking retail won't work. At the same time, it's important that people who live in the immediate area are not forced to look elsewhere for things like groceries, household items, and prescriptions. If they have to leave the neighbourhood for necessities, there is a high chance they will buy other goods away from their neighbourhood as well.

I've often wondered if some kind of tax break or incentive could be used to open more grocery stores and mom-and-pop drug stores, seeing as these businesses benefit other local businesses and promote pedestrian lifestyle (reduce congestion, strain on health care, etc). Better yet, bonus density or something could be given to developers who guarantee retail space for essential goods.

On a final note, downtown retailers could really benefit from attracting more parents. This is a real challenge, and I'm not sure the best way to solve it. More 4-room apartments? More greenspace and safer image? Developing adult consumer patterns independently of family goods? Position retail on arterial roads (RioCan, Macleod trail/First South/Curtis Block)? Better funding for inner-city schools? I don't know... it's a pickle.

[craner]

Really not excited about this project at all.

[vinny28]

Originally Posted by craner

Really not excited about this project at all.

Why not...awesome location close to the river which leads you to eau claire and East Village...Right across from Kensington...2 blocks from C train and short distance to 17th ave.

Public transportation and river are what of value to most people. I see this project $$$$

[craner]

Originally Posted by vinny28

Why not...awesome location close to the river which leads you to eau claire and East Village...Right across from Kensington...2 blocks from C train and short distance to 17th ave.

Public transportation and river are what of value to most people. I see this project $$$$

I agree with all that, and I'm glad another surface lot is getting built upon. It's just nothing about the design of this project excites me. Perhaps if there wasn't so many other projects & potential projects happening I might be more excited about Avenue.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by craner

I agree with all that, and I'm glad another surface lot is getting built upon. It's just nothing about the design of this project excites me. Perhaps if there wasn't so many other projects & potential projects happening I might be more excited about Avenue.

All of the great inner city areas have signature streets. Inglewood has 9th, Bridgeland's 1st ave is shifting nicely towards being a cool retail hub and has Edmonton trail, Eau Claire is going to be the nuts when they get their new development, Lower Mount Royal and the Beltline has 17th ave and a rapidly improving 1st street, Mission has 4th street.

The West end has not a single retail corridor at all that do not require crossing the Bow River. Kensington is great but it is not close enough to truly be considered as part of the West End community. The West End needs to develop their own cool and trendy retail corridor before it will start to come into it's own.

That is the main problem the West End has and why it is struggling to keep up with the other areas I mentioned above. People who decide to live in an urban high density area of a city want the benefits and perks that those places tend to offer. Most of the urban areas of Calgary that are doing great and are extremely popular have really cool areas associated with them and awesome retail options right outside people's doors. Great cafes and restaurants, some trendy shopping options, interesting streets to walk along and window shop or people watch. The West End has none of that, it has no life atm.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by craner

I agree with all that, and I'm glad another surface lot is getting built upon. It's just nothing about the design of this project excites me. Perhaps if there wasn't so many other projects & potential projects happening I might be more excited about Avenue.

I would agree. It could use some colour, but otherwise is a simple, clean and modern addition to the skyline. Nothing outstanding but certainly not offensive. And an excellent boost in density which is perfect.

I would love to see a bit development towards 9th ave and the tracks. It would link the West End with the vibrant node around the Co-op on 10th ave. All in good time

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by Tropics

All of the great inner city areas have signature streets. Inglewood has 9th, Bridgeland's 1st ave is shifting nicely towards being a cool retail hub and has Edmonton trail, Eau Claire is going to be the nuts when they get their new development, Lower Mount Royal and the Beltline has 17th ave and a rapidly improving 1st street, Mission has 4th street.

The West end has not a single retail corridor at all that do not require crossing the Bow River. Kensington is great but it is not close enough to truly be considered as part of the West End community. The West End needs to develop their own cool and trendy retail corridor before it will start to come into it's own.

That is the main problem the West End has and why it is struggling to keep up with the other areas I mentioned above. People who decide to live in an urban high density area of a city want the benefits and perks that those places tend to offer. Most of the urban areas of Calgary that are doing great and are extremely popular have really cool areas associated with them and awesome retail options right outside people's doors. Great cafes and restaurants, some trendy shopping options, interesting streets to walk along and window shop or people watch. The West End has none of that, it has no life atm.

Seems one of the easiest/logical things to do would be the redevelop the large parking lots along the last 3 blocks of 8th avenue into Stephen Ave style smaller retail. (smaller width bays, not saying the buildings themselves have to be small, can be base of large condos/office.) That way they get their own part of Stephen Avenue.

[lespoir]

Such a mediocre project...

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Seems one of the easiest/logical things to do would be the redevelop the large parking lots along the last 3 blocks of 8th avenue into Stephen Ave style smaller retail. (smaller width bays, not saying the buildings themselves have to be small, can be base of large condos/office.) That way they get their own part of Stephen Avenue.

That could potentially work.

The triangle of land between 4th and 5th ave at 10th street should have something decent go in there. And they should kill the parking lot just south of that and build retail there and redevelop the whole west side of 10th between 5th and 6th. That would make a nice retail hub.

[Habanero]

Originally Posted by lespoir

Such a mediocre project...

I respectfully disagree. It's not an exciting project, but IMO it's solid. Materials will be a key, and good materials, can make this quite a nice one.

[Chadillaccc]

I like glass, and this isn't just a square box, and the fact that they are different heights definitely is a plus. I really see nothing wrong with this. I like it. Also, the fact that they will partially obscure some of the late-90s/early-2000s Chateau-style dreck makes it even sweeter! IMO it will definitely be nicer than Waterfront, which, sorry to say, has the most suburban architecture I've ever seen in a major/important downtown premier project.

[TallBob]

^^ Chad: Try Livingston Place for "suburban style" buildings in the core/beltline. ^^

[Pavlov]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I like glass, and this isn't just a square box, and the fact that they are different heights definitely is a plus. I really see nothing wrong with this. I like it. Also, the fact that they will partially obscure some of the late-90s/early-2000s Chateau-style dreck makes it even sweeter! IMO it will definitely be nicer than Waterfront, which, sorry to say, has the most suburban architecture I've ever seen in a major/important downtown premier project.

I would argue that, in many ways, Waterfront is the most urban residential design in Calgary.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I like glass, and this isn't just a square box, and the fact that they are different heights definitely is a plus. I really see nothing wrong with this. I like it. Also, the fact that they will partially obscure some of the late-90s/early-2000s Chateau-style dreck makes it even sweeter! IMO it will definitely be nicer than Waterfront, which, sorry to say, has the most suburban architecture I've ever seen in a major/important downtown premier project.

hahah agreed!

Originally Posted by TallBob

^^ Chad: Try Livingston Place for "suburban style" buildings in the core/beltline. ^^

I hate Livingston Place. looks like something that might be built in suburban Atlanta or Houston.

[Wigs]

anyone have info. on unit sizes and pricing for this development?