Interesting rendering found on Farmor Architecture's website. I don't know how serious the proposal is as there is no DP, but it would be nice to see another highrise near the Banff trail LRT station.
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
gsunnyg
Senior Member
^ wow please, anything to drown out that horrid building, "The Hub."
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Ah yes, the Banff Trail Triangle: Where design disappears. Except for the ground floor of this idea... This looks to be at the end of the strip mall and not on the empty lot just to the south of this.
Anyhow I would've thought, being that this triangle is mostly hotels they would want to put some effort into the area around their businesses, but I guess not. I imagine tourists coming to Calgary, finding these cheaper hotels and training into downtown. Not the best impression of the city staying here but I guess it is probably cheap.
Anyhow I would've thought, being that this triangle is mostly hotels they would want to put some effort into the area around their businesses, but I guess not. I imagine tourists coming to Calgary, finding these cheaper hotels and training into downtown. Not the best impression of the city staying here but I guess it is probably cheap.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
the Banff Trail motel village triangle is another inner NW Calgary example on the list where design and planning has been largely forgotten - or at least misaligned - with the role the area plays in the region. The area's design is as if no one ever realized that demand would be permanently high in an area this central, with such close access to major hospitals, universities, malls and transportation networks. The result is just weird ad-hoc stuff, like Motel Village incrementally building towers, that Uxborough project across from Foothills, and Brentwood's half-redeveloped push. Clearly demand existing in a wide swathe of area around these big hubs, but only is realized in strange, uncoordinated pockets of development thanks to no real land use plan or strategy that reflected the persistently high demand in the area.
As much as these random developments stand out, the other standout is on the opposite side of the density equation - so much unusable land or land locked in at zero density. Enormous un-useful vacant grasslands all over, from giant random lots around the research park to giant transportation setbacks around major corridors like the 16th/Crow/University Drive. We have doubled-down on this further with long-term plans to further expand Crowchild and the land take on the transportation side, as if the already excessive land dedication isn't enough. Meanwhile some neighbourhoods like University Heights are successful at resisting redevelopment pressures despite being in the centre of it all.
Put simply - it's like this whole area circled below can't decide if land is worse nothing (so is stagnant with sprawlly, inefficient land uses and corridor designs) or if land actually worth more than land anywhere else outside the core (so redevelops into higher density). The answer appears to be both all the time, resulting in such a strange density pattern and a lack of design follow-through on details for things like sidewalks in Motel Village.
Last edited:
trtcttc
Senior Member
From the redevelopment of UD, there's clearly lots of untapped potential in this area if it's done right with proper planning.
Research Park is just getting started and will be a longer build out since it's tied to the University/not residential. North Hill mall has the contamination problem, Banff Trail/McMahon has been stuck due to a combination of ownership structure issues, it's owned by the university but they're not a property developer, and city planning issues, lots of well-used but dated facilities, and the fieldhouse is in design. In the end it's like a suburban parking lot stadium, combined with some city amenities. All are well used so it's not an easy area to redevelop.
trtcttc
Senior Member
Saw this on Certus' website. Redevelopment of an old car service garage to street oriented retail.
www.certusdevelopments.com
COMING SOON — Certus
www.certusdevelopments.com
NWUrbanism
Active Member
Looks nice, but that parking lot in the front should not be allowed on Centre Street. Maybe they are repurposing the existing building?Saw this on Certus' website. Redevelopment of an old car service garage to street oriented retail.
View attachment 698730
COMING SOON — Certus
lemongrab
Active Member
Half-baked idea:
1. City buys back McMahon lands from UofC.
2. Tunnel Crowchild from south of 16th to north of 24th
3. ???
4. Profit
Would the lift in value from not abutting a freeway exceed the delta between a tunnel and the costs for the current plans for 16th/24th? My first thought was no - not even close you idiot! But holy cow do the medium-term plans for Crowchild eat up a lot of land:
At least 40,000 sq meters of space on the west side of current Crowchild Tr between 16th and 24th. That's at least 3 full blocks of land area wasted. Plus the Mormon Church and the whole triangle on the south side of 16th (which would also need to be bought for my idea, but could be productive land in the end).
Interesting to imagine how 16th, University Dr, 24th Ave, and 24th St could work if 24th St was actually a complete street in place of current surface Crowchild. Especially in timeline where UD and Currie are fully built out and this is one of the last big central parcels left.
1. City buys back McMahon lands from UofC.
2. Tunnel Crowchild from south of 16th to north of 24th
3. ???
4. Profit
Would the lift in value from not abutting a freeway exceed the delta between a tunnel and the costs for the current plans for 16th/24th? My first thought was no - not even close you idiot! But holy cow do the medium-term plans for Crowchild eat up a lot of land:
At least 40,000 sq meters of space on the west side of current Crowchild Tr between 16th and 24th. That's at least 3 full blocks of land area wasted. Plus the Mormon Church and the whole triangle on the south side of 16th (which would also need to be bought for my idea, but could be productive land in the end).
Interesting to imagine how 16th, University Dr, 24th Ave, and 24th St could work if 24th St was actually a complete street in place of current surface Crowchild. Especially in timeline where UD and Currie are fully built out and this is one of the last big central parcels left.
outoftheice
Active Member
Huh. Apparently actions have consequences....
globalnews.ca
Calgary’s $129M in federal housing funds ‘paused’ pending citywide rezoning status - Calgary | Globalnews.ca
Calgary city council is preparing to debate a motion that calls for the repeal of the citywide rezoning policy in December, which would require a public hearing in the spring.
globalnews.ca
trtcttc
Senior Member
That would be multi billion dollar investments with a very uncertain return. There's plenty of developable land there without spending billions to bury a highway.
trtcttc
Senior Member
Seems like the easy thing to do is wait for that third and final payment then repeal rezoning. I personally support rezoning, but agree with councilors it should tie to units built and overall affordability rather than specific policies. A city could simply pass rezoning and put up some other road block and the Feds are just playing whack-a-moleHuh. Apparently actions have consequences....
Calgary’s $129M in federal housing funds ‘paused’ pending citywide rezoning status - Calgary | Globalnews.ca
Calgary city council is preparing to debate a motion that calls for the repeal of the citywide rezoning policy in December, which would require a public hearing in the spring.
Yep, a repurpose of an existing building. I'm guessing they can get away with it as is, due to the building itself not changing much. I would prefer a new building with parking in the back, but this will be better than the auto mechanic shop for sure.
darwink
Senior Member
this is the exact opposite of the program design. Won't relitigate this here, but the number of units built in a given year doesn't demonstrate success or failure of regulatory reform.
outoftheice
Active Member
It looks pretty clear to me that some form of rezoning had to be part of the bargain in order to access these funds. Perhaps the funding wasn't dependent on rezoning the entire city to RCG but 4 units as-of-right is definitely way more than the R1 zoning Calgary used to have.
If Council is smart, they'd repeal the RCG and replace with a new city wide rezoning that is better than R1 all at the same time. It would lock in the federal funding and also provide certainty to developers amd residents. The current strategy of repeal but promising something new will come within this term is just a ridiculous amount of uncertainty and is no way to run a city.
If Council is smart, they'd repeal the RCG and replace with a new city wide rezoning that is better than R1 all at the same time. It would lock in the federal funding and also provide certainty to developers amd residents. The current strategy of repeal but promising something new will come within this term is just a ridiculous amount of uncertainty and is no way to run a city.
DougB
Senior Member
Did Toronto with its Liberal MPs lose funding?
Ottawa doubles down on threat to reduce Toronto’s housing funding following sixplex vote
Toronto City Council’s recent decision to permit low-rise sixplexes in nine wards, instead of across the city as initially proposed, could cost it nearly $30 million in federal housing funding.
www.ctvnews.ca