East Hills Development

CalgaryArchitecture · #1 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 12:48 AM**

Cited: http://www.cicadadesign.ca/portfolio/EastHill.html

RicoLance21 · #2 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 12:56 AM**

I almost thought the building in the first pic is a brown lunch bag lying on its side.

Spring2008 · #3 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 1:48 AM**

Is that downtown Red Deer lol.

No, looks decent considering the location. I want to see renderings for the mixed use development at C.O.P. have much higher expectations for that one.

CalgaryArchitecture · #4 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 2:28 AM**

Nope this is along 17th Avenue SE and near Stoney Trail.

lineman · #5 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 2:29 AM**

The amount of people walking around in these power centre renders is almost comical.

DungHeap · #6 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 2:51 AM**

Not almost, it is comical !

Chadillaccc · #7 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 4:11 AM**

It looks really bad. Not as bad as a regular power centre or strip mall, as it has sidewalks and seemingly semi attractive buildings... but it is still terrible. The last thing this city needs is more surface level parking lots and pedestrian unfriendly areas.

TallBob · #8 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 5:31 AM**

Man it's so "sterile" looking..... Not my cup of tea for sure!

Full Mountain · #9 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 2:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalgaryArchitecture

Cited: http://www.cicadadesign.ca/portfolio/EastHill.html

So let me get this straight a huge 4-6 lane intersection that is suddenly pedestrian friendly by adding some colored brick? And then the next photo shows your typical car first shopping center. I really hope this thing gets killed ASAP. At very least move the parking to the back of the building and keep the area in front of the building for pedestrians.

MichaelS · #10 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 2:50 PM**

A site plan of this development can be seen on page 26 of this pdf:
http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/DBA/Docume...p2012-5280.pdf

There are a couple of "high streets" that have parallel parking off of them, with wider sidewalks and buildings fronting them.

kw5150 · #11 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 3:36 PM**

And dont even get me started on those STUPID little strips of green grass between the sidewalk and the road.......with no bollards or plants to demarcate the corners or edges, you will just have a giant mud bog in one year....or heaps of sand and gravel and cigarette butts. Who are we kidding?? no one will be walking around there!! Look at ikea, the landscape is nice, there are sidewalks, but nobody walks around there!

Grrrrrrr. This is why the city needs a fucking action plan! Just because a bunch of people move to calgary for jobs (and dont seem to care about anything else but getting to and from work, and buying the cheapest possible products) does not mean we all should have to live like that!! Give this thing 10 years and it will just be another shithole with empty retail bays waiting to get redeveloped into something like university city or westbrook. Why not just do it properly THE FIRST TIME.

kw5150 · #12 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 3:41 PM**

Calgary is starting to remind me of an oilfield camp.......put a bunch of temporary or cheap shacks up, reap the rewards and then abandon later.....walk away with your money.

Thank god we have a good chunk of citizens fighting for our fine city. I really like it here. The people are awesome and some parts of the city are starting to reflect that. They should seriously close the Sun Newspaper. Never has one establishment confused the masses on such a large scale to the point that people dont even know why they are angry or what they are even arguing anymore.

Get out and enjoy the city on a nice summer afternoon!

Double rant over.

milomilo · #13 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 3:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

So let me get this straight a huge 4-6 lane intersection that is suddenly pedestrian friendly by adding some colored brick? And then the next photo shows your typical car first shopping center. I really hope this thing gets killed ASAP. At very least move the parking to the back of the building and keep the area in front of the building for pedestrians.

That was exactly what I thought straight away! It doesn't even show stop signs...

Calgary would do well to be start limiting the standard 4 lane roads and be more creative with it's road network, especially within pedestrian focused areas.

Although I do see a roundabout in the plans! Which I'm sure will be met with derision by a 'Disgusted, of Mckenzie Towne'.

Spring2008 · #14 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 4:01 PM**

I might be in the minority here, but I always enjoy ur rants, KW.

RWin · #15 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 4:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

It looks really bad.

I agree. Why don't we build "downtowns" any more?

O-tacular · #16 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kw5150

Calgary is starting to remind me of an oilfield camp.......put a bunch of temporary or cheap shacks up, reap the rewards and then abandon later.....walk away with your money.

Thank god we have a good chunk of citizens fighting for our fine city. I really like it here. The people are awesome and some parts of the city are starting to reflect that. They should seriously close the Sun Newspaper. Never has one establishment confused the masses on such a large scale to the point that people dont even know why they are angry or what they are even arguing anymore.

Get out and enjoy the city on a nice summer afternoon!

Double rant over.

Let me ask you something KW. Will you ever shop at East Hills? Would you have shopped there if the design was better? Let's be honest, this development is on the fringe of the city and will likely see many shoppers from outside the city from places like Strathmore and Chestermere. As much as the city should prioritize more pedestrian friendly designs, we need to acknowledge reality.

I work in an industrial area in the SE called Eastlake. Our building has bike racks in front which are mandated by the city. I have never even once seen a bike tied to one of them. The fringe of the city will never be the same as the inner city. To try and compare the two is a waste of time.

H.E.Pennypacker · #17 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 4:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RWin

I agree. Why don't we build "downtowns" any more?

You mean transit-oriented developments?

RWin · #18 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 4:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

You mean transit-oriented developments?

No, I mean a place that looks more like Inglewood than Deerfoot Meadows.

Full Mountain · #19 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Let me ask you something KW. Will you ever shop at East Hills? Would you have shopped there if the design was better? Let's be honest, this development is on the fringe of the city and will likely see many shoppers from outside the city from places like Strathmore and Chestermere. As much as the city should prioritize more pedestrian friendly designs, we need to acknowledge reality.

I work in an industrial area in the SE called Eastlake. Our building has bike racks in front which are mandated by the city. I have never even once seen a bike tied to one of them. The fringe of the city will never be the same as the inner city. To try and compare the two is a waste of time.

True, but does that give them carte blanche to do what every they want?

As someone who might go there if I happen to be in the area (as much as I go to any other big box center) I'd like to see a more friendly environment for pedestrians. I hate (strong word I know but its true) having to move my car from one store to another because walking between them is so inhospitable. Whether it's 130th, Deerfoot Meadows or the Home Depot complex across from Chinook they all force you back to your vehicle to move from one store to another. Is this development going to be any different?

Also how do we deal with the externalities of a development like this? Parking = vehicles, are we expecting that the city is going to complete roadway improvements (now or in the future) to service this development? Ultimately people want to get there, let make sure that it's developed in a way that encourages efficient modes of transportation (transit, biking, walking). Granted not all trips can be accommodated through those modes but we could go from 0 to at least a portion.

The bike racks in front of your building that don't get used have more to do with not having infrastructure than people not wanting to use them. If we removed all the roads that lead to your work, wouldn't your parking lot be empty too?

If you had the option to walk, bike or take transit rather than drive would you? Wouldn't it be nice to ride/walk home on a sunny day? What's keeping you from doing that? Sidewalks? Bike path/cycle tracks?

WaitWhat? · #20 Posted **Mar 19, 2014, 5:34 PM**

I currently live in the western part of the city and so I look at Westhills and Aspen Landing as comparisons. Personally, I think Westhills is one of the worst retail developments in the city and probably compares well with Shaughnessy or 130th ave. I'm sure the concept of walking between stores didn't even enter the developers mindset. Although driving from one store to another is equally bad.

On the other hand, I actually don't mind the way Aspen Landing is laid out. Two larger parking lots on either end with a "street" of retail in between. It's fairly easy to walk between stores.

It's a little difficult to see whether East Hills is more of a Westhills or Aspen Landing. There are multiple parking lots but at least it looks more walkable than some other developments with two "streets" crossing in the middle.