Glo | 15.85m | 5s | Russell RED | Casola Koppe

Surrealplaces

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
12,638
Reaction score
72,778
Location
Calgary
This is a thread for the new development on 2nd ave in Sunnyside that @MichaelS had posted about. (http://skyrisecities.com/forum/threads/general-construction-discussion.24791/page-87#post-1247223)

5 floors with the 5th floor having rooftop terrace type balconies. Fairly basic design of brick and EIFS.....similar to Ven.

Not sure who the developer is yet.

Image4.jpg


GLO 2nd Avenue.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Image4.jpg
    Image4.jpg
    89.1 KB · Views: 1,299
  • GLO 2nd Avenue.jpg
    GLO 2nd Avenue.jpg
    276.6 KB · Views: 960
Last edited:
This is a thread for the new development on 2nd ave in Sunnyside that @MichaelS had posted about. (http://skyrisecities.com/forum/threads/general-construction-discussion.24791/page-87#post-1247223)

5 floors with the 5th floor having rooftop terrace type balconies. Fairly basic design of brick and EIFS.....similar to Ven.

Not sure who the developer is yet.

View attachment 118093
I thought it was being called Russell Red and being developed by Russell Real Estate Development

http://friendsofsunnyside.weebly.com/
 
I thought it was being called Russell Red and being developed by Russell Real Estate Development

http://friendsofsunnyside.weebly.com/
^Interesting.

Some of the pages on the DP list it as Glo, and some pages as Glo by Russell....which now makes sense. In the DP the height is shown as 15.8 Meters...I wonder if they decided to drop the height from the original 6 floor/20M in order to avoid any pushback?
 
Anxious to see a rendering, hopefully it's something sexy.
Unfortunately, it's not what I would describe as sexy.... it's not of the Pixel/Lido/Ezra tier, but it's decent, and will add good density, also will help with the building up of 2nd ave.
 
Unfortunately, it's not what I would describe as sexy.... it's not of the Pixel/Lido/Ezra tier, but it's decent, and will add good density, also will help with the building up of 2nd ave.

Which is too bad considering the bar raising that the Palfreyville building has brought to the area.
 
I really hope the developer sorts the design out and ups their game. This received a lot of criticism from Council.
 
I really hope the developer sorts the design out and ups their game. This received a lot of criticism from Council.
Interesting that it has received a lot of criticism from the council. I didn't find the design mind blowing by any stretch, but it seemed like something you would expect for that location.
 
It was an interesting public hearing. Item 8.18 was the land use for Truman Home's Memorial Drive project. A project that exceeded the height/density of the ARP for the location, but they had a really solid presentation and rationale, and a very attractive building. End result is they got their zoning approval (although Councillor Farrell opposed it).

This item is next, conforms entirely with the ARP, but when council saw the building (I think the image was just shown out of curiosity) they did not care for it. End result is , well from the minutes:

2.Give first reading only to the proposed Bylaw 291D2017; and

3.Withhold second and third readings pending the tentative approval of a DevelopmentPermit by Calgary Planning Commission, with particular regard to the following:
a.Improved and more sensitive transition to low-density residential and M-CG designated parcels,
b.Mitigation of overlooking issues to adjacent parcels,
c.Improved material differentiation and durability, in accordance with the Hillhurst/Sunnyside Area Redevelopment Plan, and
d.Facade articulation and grade-level interfaces that promote the pedestrian-scale vision of the Hillhurst/Sunnyside Area Redevelopment Plan.

I see several angles/points of view from this. Frustrating for the community, because it shows that the ARP seems to be kind of meaningless. Frustrating for developers as well, because it shows that despite conforming with all the rules, you still won't get your approval, while your competition can get extra height and density. Lesson is, have a well prepared presentation and above average building I guess.

The plus side is, it should push for better designed buildings. The downside is, you can bet these units will now have a higher price to cover this extra cost.

And, the fact that council (often) ties land use decisions to DP is just crazy, unless they do a directly tied to plans Direct Control bylaw. All they have done in this circumstance is ensure the applicant go out and design a fancy DP. They get their 2nd and 3rd reading. Applicant can then promptly cancel the "fancy" DP and re-apply for the old design. Technically, it is discretionairy, so it could be refused by CPC/Administration (I am not even sure if a conforming DP needs to go to CPC?...). But, do you think a fully conforming DP's refusal would stand up at SDAP "because it is too ugly"? It would be interesting to see.
 
I bet @DougR would agree.
I see several angles/points of view from this. Frustrating for the community, because it shows that the ARP seems to be kind of meaningless. Frustrating for developers as well, because it shows that despite conforming with all the rules, you still won't get your approval, while your competition can get extra height and density. Lesson is, have a well prepared presentation and above average building I guess.
.
 
Probably. I see the same challenges for the people of Marda Loop. Where it gets frustrating for developers is if the ARP is, for lack of a better word, bad. Often times when the policy is being written, it is the community members who make the most noise who get the most influence on a plan. That doesn't necessarily mean it is the best plan, but it is the plan no less.

So many times though, when I see certain projects at open houses, and hear community members citing the ARP (especially relatively new, non-outdated ones) I secretly hope one of them does the Seinfeld bit about car rentals. Just replace "take reservation" with "set a plan", and "hold reservation" with "implement the plan"
 
I actually don't mind this one at all. It's certainly better than Ven. I love the extensive use of brick. My biggest critiques are that the brick should go up to the fourth floor on all three areas, and that the main entrance should be centred under the middle brick area.
 

Back
Top