(01-12-2016, 04:43 PM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: We still need to have balance. If we redeveloped half of all the buildings along King (assuming that not everything will ever truly be replaced) and it was all 6 storeys, it would still not be enough people focused in the core, and we would have difficulty putting more denser-than-average buildings elsewhere in the cities. Will we take it? Of course. But six storeys as the pinnacle of King is not dense enough, nor will accommodating more people who want to live near King be easier if we chew up that land with the lowest worthwhile development height (even if you use wood development, which none of these buildings have, eventually some level of density on the same plot makes up for the cost increase for concrete, let alone when housing the equivalent number of people on six storeys can chew up many times more available King-fronting land).
I'm not saying anyone here is saying that we should aim to be Paris, the endless suburb, but I want to point out that indeed we should not be aiming for that.
I don't think I'm suggesting this as the pinnacle of King. I mean, if you look at it already, we've got Bauer lofts and other buildings (some off King) going much higher near uptown, and much taller developments up and going up near downtown. But I am looking at the midtown area and thinking it would be better off with a more continuous midrise scale streetwall.
You seem worried about this idea of chewing up land without having got enough people living in these parcels, but I question that. For one thing, much of the higher density zoned area along King is quite a narrow corridor, on which it would be difficult to build high to begin with (I'm thinking about the east side of King where Red and Cortes are.) Widening this corridor is both premature and throws away attempts to balance the protection of mature neighbourhoods just off the corridor. For another, I don't think we've got either the need to build everything to 15 stories, nor do we need to worry about failing to do so.
The outcome I see about a "go high or go home" strategy is that you'll see slower development of more expensive units facing more obstacles (from engineers and from NIMBYs) while leaving great gaps between them, which will fail to provide any vibrance to any meaningful part of the King streetscape between William and Victoria.
It's going to take the better part of a generation to fill in this corridor even to this density. The nodal areas (RT stations, major intersections, downtown edges) are probably going to see taller buildings anyway-- hopefully with a podium design which will require deeper plots-- let's look to the area between GRH and Sunlife, how about? Meanwhile I'm very happy to see the spaces in between start to fill with a 4-6 story scale of development that bridges the gap between King as a major corridor and the inner suburbs which exist between uptown and downtown.