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

Apparently this is circulating around the community:

RusselRedLetter.jpg


I'm assuming there is no chance the appeal board sides with them, especially since everything for the development is in line with what the city is allowing.
 

Attachments

  • RusselRedLetter.jpg
    RusselRedLetter.jpg
    303.9 KB · Views: 992
If anything the side by side photos make me more excited about this kind of development all over Hillhurst and Sunnyside
 
They live literally a couple hundred meters from 175 meter towers. Like, what the actual sh*t is up with these people? :p lmfao!
 
I'm a little disappointed. The design seems okay, kind of banal...but okay.
 
I think you’re right, there’s little chance this will get refusal, as it easily fits into the zoning.
Was that circulated by the community association? Or just a handful of opponents?

Apparently this is circulating around the community:

View attachment 140944

I'm assuming there is no chance the appeal board sides with them, especially since everything for the development is in line with what the city is allowing.
 
They live literally a couple hundred meters from 175 meter towers. Like, what the actual sh*t is up with these people? :p lmfao!
I'm surprised it's being opposed. It's nothing out of the ordinary and is typical for what you'd find in the area.
 
I don’t think the NIMBY’s will get very far with their opposition to this one. Both Land Use and DP are approved and there’s nothing offensive about the scale/design of this for that location.
The most they can do is slow it down a bit.
 
That's exactly the scale we should see in that area, too bad for the NIMBYs as that precedent has already been set many times over in the area.

I agree with you, you'll probably always have NIMBY's. However, I think if the design was a little more alluring I think many of the NIMBY's would go away.

This is just my opinion...but I think most people don't mind new developments if the new development is more beautiful than what is being replaced. Personally, if I lived across the street from the site, I'd rather see a line of bungalows with lots of greenery than a block of concrete and brick.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0553...4!1suYtD4ERGtnhPWyE5dQA-vg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Don't get me wrong, these types of developments have a positive impact for the inner city. They bring more people, customers and pedestrian traffic to Kensington. Also, I don't think auto traffic would increase much either. However, if I lived north of that block or across the street I'd have a few concerns.


tl;dr: I'm not against the project. I just wish the design was better or more nuanced.
 
Not a bad project, a jump in density from 4 houses (5-10 units due to several being cheap rental) to 56 units within a block of the LRT is a no-brainer given the location and amenities of the area. The only argument a NIMBY in Sunnyside would have here is the destruction of those cheaper rental units and replacement with higher market units. Most NIMBY groups in Calgary have yet to play this angle of equity and what adding new, more expensive housing to an area does for access/income diversity (largely because NIMBYs often don't want "poor" or renters either). However, Calgary is a long way from having gentrification and low-income displacement as part of the social/planning dialogue as it is in other cities so even that angle is unlikely to get any traction.

In the long run, more units of this type will be good for the area and it's affordability. An additional 50 - 100 residents will be great for vibrancy. But I am disappointed the developer is not asking/receiving a parking reduction given the location. Each stall adds a premium to construction costs (and rents/mortgages) that exists forever. For an area with as good of access as Sunnyside, a parking maximum should be applied.
 

Back
Top