(08-22-2015, 05:00 PM)tomh009 Wrote: Well, no, it's not great -- but it is what it is, and changing this one project wouldn't make it fine, either. The street interaction would be pretty useless given the traffic speeds and volumes.Why not both?
I would rather focus street interaction/enhancement efforts on the core downtown areas, rather than throwing darts at scattered suburban areas that are heavily car-focused (and difficult to change). Downtown now is starting to have critical mass, it will take much longer to reach that in various suburban areas, and especially ones far away from the LRT.
The point of Official Plans and zoning rules is to help guide large swaths of city building, without needing to apply direct attention to each and every project. Pedestrian non-hostile developments need not be a zero-sum game.
Here's an example from Ottawa, at Merivale and Hunt Club. The planning department in Ottawa started to push for ubanized form, without making exceptions for the vehicular hellscape of Merivale Rd. While the new building initially stuck out like a sore thumb compared to the big boxy malls, and small pads surrounded by parking, I've come to see how it's an important first step. The next urban-ish building will stick out a little less. The one after, even less so. After that, an urban form will positively fit in. And each of these baby steps help support future transit uses.
I'm still wondering when Ottawa will get a Hunt Club bus, connecting Kanata, Nepean, and South Keys, and as things like this are built, it helps build the case for such a route.