konradiical
Active Member
Hopefully it’s a go, that lot needs to go ASAP
|
|
|
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
Mountain Man
Senior Member
I've enjoyed the cheap parking and medium sized trees in that lot before, but yeah, needs to be developed.
kora
Active Member
Any chance we're still getting a post-secondary school on that block?
trtcttc
Senior Member
A real school? or a diploma mill college? Should ask West end residents how much they love having the "CityU of Canada in Calgary" in their neighborhood.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
With UofC taking Nexen, it definitely won't be them...
trtcttc
Senior Member
Primaris REIT Puts 32-Acre Northland Village Mall In Calgary On The Market
Northland Village is located at 5111 Northland Drive NW and 4600 Crowchild Trail NW in Calgary and was just listed for sale by TD Cornerstone and RBC Capital Markets.
storeys.com
Northland being sold after most of the redevelopment is complete.
Looks like LOC2025-0133 has been submitted for The Harriet on Riley Park.
For some reason I thought they were going for 16 floors at that site. 12 is a good number though, it shouldn't overshadow the park in the summer.
TooBizzy
Active Member
2 big LOCs coming very close to decision in east Crescent Heights / west Bridgeland.
80m tower along 4 St NE just north of Era going to Public Hearing (and final decision) next Tues, Sept 9. https://dmap.calgary.ca/?p=LOC2024-0166
Both the Crescent Heights and Bridgeland Riverside Community Association Planning Committees oppose it, is asking to keep the max height capped at 50m. CH asking for a detailed market analysis study, adherence to an LAP that doesn't include the site, and requirement for below-market housing. Claims the density and new CRUs will hurt retail vacancy in the area. BR claims development will encourage "transience" and "social disorder".
Bridgeland-Riverside CA as a whole seems ambivalent, wrote a longer letter asking mostly that the development work to preserve and celebrate the historic significance of the street as a 'Little Italy' sort of area - but also explicitly asking for adequate parking for a TOD site.
CPC approved it but quite lukewarmly, could go either way at Council depending on the Hearing.
Docs available here: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings...a=Agenda&lang=English&Item=39&Tab=attachments
Phase 2 of the same project going to CPC October 2nd, and Public Hearing either last-second, or next Council. Just to the south and west of Phase 1, also max 80m tower along the north side of 1 Ave, and 50m on the south. https://dmap.calgary.ca/?p=LOC2024-0221__
80m tower along 4 St NE just north of Era going to Public Hearing (and final decision) next Tues, Sept 9. https://dmap.calgary.ca/?p=LOC2024-0166
Both the Crescent Heights and Bridgeland Riverside Community Association Planning Committees oppose it, is asking to keep the max height capped at 50m. CH asking for a detailed market analysis study, adherence to an LAP that doesn't include the site, and requirement for below-market housing. Claims the density and new CRUs will hurt retail vacancy in the area. BR claims development will encourage "transience" and "social disorder".
Bridgeland-Riverside CA as a whole seems ambivalent, wrote a longer letter asking mostly that the development work to preserve and celebrate the historic significance of the street as a 'Little Italy' sort of area - but also explicitly asking for adequate parking for a TOD site.
CPC approved it but quite lukewarmly, could go either way at Council depending on the Hearing.
Docs available here: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings...a=Agenda&lang=English&Item=39&Tab=attachments
Phase 2 of the same project going to CPC October 2nd, and Public Hearing either last-second, or next Council. Just to the south and west of Phase 1, also max 80m tower along the north side of 1 Ave, and 50m on the south. https://dmap.calgary.ca/?p=LOC2024-0221__
Albertasaurus
Senior Member
Claiming that development will encourage "transience" and "social disorder" is one of the dumbest arguments I have ever heard. Good news is, even though it's an election year, most of the current Council (including the area Councillor) aren't running again, so hopefully it will pass.
Edit: Never mind, I just saw that it's Ward 7 rather than Ward 9. Crap.
Edit: Never mind, I just saw that it's Ward 7 rather than Ward 9. Crap.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
People associate those issues with downtown, and downtown is high density, so it makes sense to them. Most arguments are trying to find ways to justify opposition to a development, so people latch onto dumb ideas lol.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Lol community associations. These people make themselves out to be community representatives but don't represent anything other than people with enough free time to volunteer. Now if they show up at council with coordinated shirts this development is fricked.
gsunnyg
Senior Member
Perfect density boost. Nimbyist anti-height arguments are such a headache. Looking at inner city Vancouver—areas like South Granville are coming alive with 30+ storey towers. Calgary can either resist or start building now, because high density in the inner city is inevitable.
John Wick
New Member
I hope that Dobbin is over-asking with 12 stories and anticipating a "compromise" at 8~ stories.
12 stories seems like way too much on the southern border of Riley Park.
12 stories seems like way too much on the southern border of Riley Park.
Albertasaurus
Senior Member
It's just a Land Use application so even if they get 12, they might only go 6 to save money with wood frame. I do think the 6 storey development that went up a few years ago is perfect height and scale for south side of the park.