1875
Senior Member
thats an improvement on anything up there
|
|
|
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
I like it. Where did you find the renders?
I was perusing the area looking for any new DPs, and saw it. It had the renders in the pdf file.
1875
Senior Member
misson bridge complete
Finally! but worth the wait. It looks like two pedestrians can actually pass each other without having to take a deep breath and squeeze to the side.
CT_
Active Member
The Italian Cultural Centre LOC has been revised (From 26 storeys to 12 storeys) and is going to CPC on Thursday. These changes are in response to the Crescent Heights Community Association's pushback.
The new scheme proposes a 12-storey slab building on the North site, and a 6-storey midrise on the South site. There is another unrelated LOC to the north currently proposing a 26-storey tower.
The CA is still opposed, even with the massive reduction in height. They want additional height reductions (Lower than 10 storeys) and a removal of CRUs, as they apparently do not fit into the "existing context" of the area.
Some images from the agenda:
CA Response:
The new scheme proposes a 12-storey slab building on the North site, and a 6-storey midrise on the South site. There is another unrelated LOC to the north currently proposing a 26-storey tower.
The CA is still opposed, even with the massive reduction in height. They want additional height reductions (Lower than 10 storeys) and a removal of CRUs, as they apparently do not fit into the "existing context" of the area.
Some images from the agenda:
CA Response:
Attachments
Roaring Flames
Senior Member
Can we please get rid of community associations? Why do we allow these associations government money to interfere with developments?? They aren't even voted in by neighborhood members, so why do we recognized them and allow them to interfere?
This is LOC2024-0221. (It's written out in the CA response, but I didn't notice it at first).
I guess I can kind of see that, in that 1 Ave NE is very different/narrower west of 4 St NE, and like Marsh Rd NE, it dead ends into a hill after 2 blocks. But, it's also very urbanized, being 90% apartments and parking lots for that stretch. I don't think the people living there will be put out by commercial units.
Hopefully this can simply go through as is. The developer dropped from 26 floors to 12, that should be good enough. We already have a 13 story tower next to it.
Albertasaurus
Senior Member
I suspect that the developer and consultant team knew all along that 26 storeys would be a tough sell. I'd bet that they had a shorter proposal in their back pockets from the beginning, so that they could show how they are "working with the community". I think 12 storeys is fine for the site - the site on 4th St where O2 is proposing their other 26 storey tower is a more appropriate one to attempt to push the boundaries for acceptable height in the community.
That said, I share the frustrations with CAs. Unfortunately they're so entrenched in Calgary that I fear they will always have outsized influence in development matters and be looked at by many Councillors as the "de facto" voice of communities even though they're not.
That said, I share the frustrations with CAs. Unfortunately they're so entrenched in Calgary that I fear they will always have outsized influence in development matters and be looked at by many Councillors as the "de facto" voice of communities even though they're not.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
I hope the 26 storey tower goes ahead still. This area should have a few highrises due to the proximity to downtown...
Is anything going to happen to that big vacant lot on 1st? It's a steep site so it's challenging but something needs to happen there. Maybe they should just turn it into a park
Is anything going to happen to that big vacant lot on 1st? It's a steep site so it's challenging but something needs to happen there. Maybe they should just turn it into a park
CBBarnett
Senior Member
It's a tricky one - at crux of the problem, CAs and communities are simply too small to be effective at representative decision-making on most issues. 90% of communities do not have enough population to generate enough volunteers to have a self-sustaining infrastructure and consensus building apparatus that can consistently be the "representative voice" of a local area.
The unsustainable small size is why CAs have such dramatic rise-and-fall in prominence and effectiveness over the years. Small groups can cobble together a coherent group with enthusiasm and get organized for a bit, then collapse or fall apart when energy fades years or a decades later. The small and volunteer nature mean CAs are super susceptible to be taken over by single-issue movements (e.g. all the CAs near the Glenmore Landing proposal). Meanwhile they have really limited financial or logistically capacity to maintain any stuff they own like community halls, or even keep up with providing local events and programming in the community.
Unsurprisingly, the most stable CAs in the current paradigm are the wealthiest ones with lots of time on their hands to volunteer and advocate. Larger CAs are more effective too, as they have easier time raising revenues and have a larger volunteer pool.
I do think there's a big opportunity if the city could reform CAs though consolidating them to a sustainable size and granting them a clearer scope of responsibility. Perhaps this is less about development, and more about the many infrastructure, street and park questions that could be way better managed if the city had a way to devolve things to an reliable hyper-local group. Top of mind is local street design and traffic calming - for minor streets I'd argue local communities should have more actual authority over how minor streets are managed rather than be subject to top-down, black box warrant processes that have difficult to understand thresholds for action and only a limited scope of what can ever be considered. CAs have no consistent or effective way to influence any of this local network stuff, despite it really being almost exclusively a local issue.
Last edited:
MichaelS
Senior Member
Does anyone know where Chartwell Retirement Residences Kingsview project is? According to this article, it is starting construction now:
renx.ca
Chartwell buys $315.2M of seniors residences, kicks off Calgary development
Chartwell Retirement Residences (CSH-UN-T) has agreements to acquire three Quebec properties comprising almost 950 suites for $315.2 million, and has commenced development of its Chartwell Kingsview Retirement Residence in Calgary.
renx.ca
Albertasaurus
Senior Member
Interesting! I scoured the internet and, unfortunately, there's zero info on this one as far as location, design etc.
jhappy77
Active Member
I'd guess Kingsland based on the name and description, lots of multifamily being built there too