The_Cat
Senior Member
As much as I like LRT, I wonder if street-level crossings are and impediment to higher-density development.
As much as I like LRT, I wonder if street-level crossings are and impediment to higher-density development.
Yeah instead of tower clusters, what we might get along the Valley Line are more midrise/high density corridors. I personally would love to see more mixed use ground retail along the line because you can actually see it.I think in terms of TOD potential, a grade-separated metro would've probably brought higher concentrations of density per site, similar to Vancouver (but not quite that intense). The urban LRT won't discourage high-density development from happening (it'll still very much promote it, actually), it just might look a bit different.
Davies has gotta be 25+ years away imo. I don’t think it’s even in the TOD convo. 20 better sites for TODs with tens of thousands of possible units. Davies being so industrial makes it pretty undesirable imo vs almost all other stops along the line. And we don’t get 8 tower mega redevelopments of large sites all at once here yet. Maybe in a few decades.Yeah instead of tower clusters, what we might get along the Valley Line are more midrise/high density corridors. I personally would love to see more mixed use ground retail along the line because you can actually see it.
We still might get Vancouver level TOD's in Millwoods, Bonnie Doon and Davies but based on how it's essentially a tram, the corridor idea might have more merit and would work much better than anything that Translink has.
If only Bonnie Doon would move forward with their proposal that one could be a very good TOD.
agreed, for a city so against sprawl, take a look along highway 2 to the airport and the Big lake and Secord areas...Agreed. Edmonton is giving away too much free land in the suburbs to make urban renewal possible.