[trtcttc]

Honestly, The City is terrible at getting these projects moving. Their affordable housing project by the dog park in Mt Pleasant (a whopping 16 units) was proposed before Covid and is still under construction. This one - 5 years to produce a DP and they aren't even anticipating construction start til next year. Add it all up and it'll be 10 years to occupancy by the time this thing opens.

Scotia Place does show that The Cit can get things done if the momentum and political will are there.

Scotia Place feels quite different though, it seems to be an issue with the Calgary Housing group in general. It's also not a Calgary issue alone, when I lived in Toronto, the City Housing corp was similarly slow at getting things done. Sometimes I wonder if it's cheaper for them to contract out the whole thing rather than have the city run it.

 

[gsunnyg]

Man, they should've torn it down and built 3 new towers on such a large site, while incorporating affordable units in it. This is so ugly

 

[CT_]

I must be in the minority, but I don't find this to be ugly at all. It's quite attractive and elegant- And no random rectangles!

 

[whatchyyc]

This version would've been VEd to oblivion into a giant gray slab

 

[O-tac]

That version still looked better. The weird awnings are throwing me with the new version. I can’t tell what material they will be. I fear they’ll be fabric and end up filthy and tattered.

 

[potatopizzafan]

Cant say i agree, that grey version looks horrible IMO. I dont mind the new one, but like most simple designs, materials will make or break it. Fabric awnings? Not a chance, probably some kind of metal panel

 

[trtcttc]

That version still looked better. The weird awnings are throwing me with the new version. I can’t tell what material they will be. I fear they’ll be fabric and end up filthy and tattered.

I sincerely hope it's not fabric... But no matter the material, it looks like such a dated design for 2026.

 

[DiscoStu]

Assuming the materials aren't total shit (and that may be a big assumption), I think I actually prefer this new one over the grey bunker. If done well, this one has a chance to atleast be non-offensively decent...potentially even elegant?

 

[CalgaryTiger]

I see this as more of an Eau Claire Place I than the Eau Claire Place II people think it is.

 

[Albertasaurus]

If done well, it could end up being a cool building in a retro-'60s/70s sort of way.

 

[Chowda7]

Calgary awards sole-source contract for feeder main replacement, work to begin this week - Calgary | Globalnews.ca

Work on the first phase of the Bearspaw feeder main replacement was originally set to begin this spring, but Calgary officials say they want the pipe complete by next winter.

globalnews.ca

 

[CalgaryTiger]

So... ATCO is up to something: https://dmap.calgary.ca/?p=LOC2025-0233

Address

• 2922 PEACEKEEPERS WY SW
• 99 PEACEKEEPERS DR SW

Community
GARRISON GREEN
LINCOLN PARK
Existing land use district
Direct Control (1P2007) (DC)
Industrial - Business (I-B f0.63)
Proposed land use district
Mixed Use - General District (MU-1f4h24)
Mixed Use - General District (MU-1f7h95)
Multi-Residential - Contextual Grade-Oriented District (M-CG)
Special Purpose - Recreation District (S-R)
Description
This combined outline plan and redesignation application proposes an outline plan for the future subdivision and development of 9.34 hectares of land 2922 Peacekeepers Way SW and 99 Peacekeepers Drive SW. The application provides for:

• an anticipated 109 dwelling units within 2 to 3 storey residential buildings (M-CG);
• approximately 706 dwelling units within mixed use buildings with a maximum height of 24 metres and a maximum floor area ratio of 4.0 (MU-1);
• approximately 1,018 dwelling units within mixed use buildings with a maximum height of 95 metres and maximum floor area ratio of 7.0 (MU-1);
• approximately 1.34 hectares of land intended for commercial development (MU-1);
• approximately 0.28 hectares for a linear park (S-R);
• the location and size of future public roads and public pathways; and
• the location of major utilities and services.

There's also... https://dmap.calgary.ca/?p=LOC2025-0223

Description
This outline plan application proposes an outline for the future subdivision and development of 4.97 hectares of land in the community of Lincoln Park.

Curious where they plan to relocate their manufacturing facility... Would be good to have this underutilized part of the city filled in.

 

[trtcttc]

Someone needs to show the Ship what happened when Marda Loop businesses said loudly and often, "don't come here." Their worry is about residents complaining about the live music. Isn't that on the residents? If the Ship isn't violating bylaws, that's just too bad if you rent an apartment and don't realize your downstairs neighbour is a busy live music venue.

Or they currently violate bylaws, and they don't want to have the people above complain, forcing them to operate within the rules.

 

[Mountain Man]

I think the Ship has very valid concerns, I love that place and would be sad if it had to close or change significantly. We need live music venues in this city and the Ship is basically the heart of 17th. I also wouldn't have a lot of faith in Strategic, they don't seem the most trustworthy of developers.

 

[CBBarnett]

Someone needs to show the Ship what happened when Marda Loop businesses said loudly and often, "don't come here." Their worry is about residents complaining about the live music. Isn't that on the residents? If the Ship isn't violating bylaws, that's just too bad if you rent an apartment and don't realize your downstairs neighbour is a busy live music venue.

I think the Ship has very valid concerns, I love that place and would be sad if it had to close or change significantly. We need live music venues in this city and the Ship is basically the heart of 17th. I also wouldn't have a lot of faith in Strategic, they don't seem the most trustworthy of developers.

I think a couple things are true, the Ship will probably be fine (in the end), but they are fair to be concerned and shouldn't be assumed to know everything about how the development process works, and the planning process isn't the only tool here that is being confused together.

For example, I don't see how the developer can construct the scale and size of building they are envisioning around and above the ship without covering the patio for safety, which materially would impact how that business works and functions for a year or two. It's got to be the highest revenue patio in the city. That's not really something to figure out at this stage but is a legitimate question that impacts the business and customers, especially concerning if the developers are already demonstrating unclear and spotty communication with the business.

Similarly how noise complaints work within buildings - Ship has loud music until 2 or 3 am. Will this still be allowed in a mixed-use building? I assume so, but what does the rules say? How will it actually work? Without an answer, the Ship has a legitimate question.

Every concern can be mitigated, but it really takes effort from the developer and some acknowledgement of how important a tenant the Ship is. That's the concerning part if the developer can't already demonstrate that in the earliest of stages of development.