Kensington Yards | 130m | 38s | Bankside | Allies and Morrison

Yeah, it's almost like people should drive to the conditions to be able to stop on a hill with all the new technology cars have now.

Not sure what progress has been made on that pedestrian crossing at 8th avenue, it started up during Wong's term as Councillor. I assume Myke will push for it at some point.
 
trtcttc said:
Are there any amenities in plan? I'm not sure how much NIMBY concern it'll alleviate but these master planned communities, especially if they are proposing a height 10 stories beyond the LAP that was done last year (I think the height could work, but LAPs are dumb and a waste of time), they usually include some community amenities. For example, Toronto's Fort York area was a master planned community, about 20 years ago when this concept was new to Toronto, and there's a community rec centre and a library within the community. Pinnacle's One Yonge development has a rec centre and pool in one of the podiums. West District in the SW is getting a YMCA. Much like how we build roads before building homes, we need to do the same with infrastructure. And it's not true that inner city somehow has spare infrastructure capacity, schools are full, recreation programs are full. That's not a reason to not build more homes, but they have to be done in a way that the infrastructure is able to keep up.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, Calgary Board of Education still owns the old Louise Dean site at Kensington Rd. and 22nd Street. That is less than 1 km from the QE Elementary. Perhaps a new larger school could be built there and QE Jr/Sr High could be expanded into the area that is currently the elementary school.

The plan is to do a Fieldhouse at Foothills Athletic Park, so that should help with the recreational facilities. I also seem to recall there being talk about a four season outdoor pool being included in the upcoming Riverwalk West project.

Perhaps the City of Calgary could work with the Hillhurst Sunnyside Community Association to add some more facilities too. Just looking at the satellite view, they have a large amount of parking lot, perhaps more than the West Hillhurst CA a few blocks away and WHCA has one more ball diamond, a hockey rink, an extra tennis court, outdoor pool, gym and racketball courts that Hillhurst doesn't have.
 
KensingtonLurker said:
As far as I know, Calgary Board of Education still owns the old Louise Dean site at Kensington Rd. and 22nd Street. That is less than 1 km from the QE Elementary. Perhaps a new larger school could be built there and QE Jr/Sr High could be expanded into the area that is currently the elementary school.

The plan is to do a Fieldhouse at Foothills Athletic Park, so that should help with the recreational facilities. I also seem to recall there being talk about a four season outdoor pool being included in the upcoming Riverwalk West project.

Perhaps the City of Calgary could work with the Hillhurst Sunnyside Community Association to add some more facilities too. Just looking at the satellite view, they have a large amount of parking lot, perhaps more than the West Hillhurst CA a few blocks away and WHCA has one more ball diamond, a hockey rink, an extra tennis court, outdoor pool, gym and racketball courts that Hillhurst doesn't have.
Click to expand...
Yes there are sites available, but it'd be nice if these projects are approved to come with committed funds for improvements in the area to accommodate additional residents. I was looking through the newest classroom data and QE Elementary has among the highest average class sizes, same with the Middle School grades in QE, with some approaching 40.

Yes all of these plans exist, but the field house is budgeted for 2027+ in the latest capital budget. Between North Hill, this Riley Park site, the McMahon/Foothills lands, there's space, but we still seem to be building YMCA and rec centers in the corners of our city.
 
DiscoStu said:
Definitely a bit of an odd area to try to cram this much into...kind of feels they assumed it was the last plot of land available in Calgary. I think this would have a better chance of working if they just kept all the buildings mid-rise...it could be a nice little University District for SAIT/ACAD.

I guess good luck and all, but I imagine the chances of this coming to life anywhere close to as-is are probably pretty low.
Click to expand...
It likely depends on if they have a partner in tow that can make a concrete rental project make sense like Harrison Street in UD. This site has the same revenue assumptions, has a lot of upside. Could see the low rise go condo though
 
trtcttc said:
Yes there are sites available, but it'd be nice if these projects are approved to come with committed funds for improvements in the area to accommodate additional residents. I was looking through the newest classroom data and QE Elementary has among the highest average class sizes, same with the Middle School grades in QE, with some approaching 40.

Yes all of these plans exist, but the field house is budgeted for 2027+ in the latest capital budget. Between North Hill, this Riley Park site, the McMahon/Foothills lands, there's space, but we still seem to be building YMCA and rec centers in the corners of our city.
Click to expand...
The city seems to want to do everything in base land use districts usually without doing a DC. If they created density bonusing guidelines and attached them to DCs they could do that but they don’t seem to want to.
 
Robo said:
I like the proposed density for this. It’s a great way to add a tin of density to Kensington without having shadowing issues or directly affecting neighbors.
Click to expand...
This is also what I’m thinking. It would be great for Kensington to have more density, but it’s not an easy place to do it. It has to be either along 10th St. 5th Avenue or 14th St. This would add a couple of thousand or so residents without causing too much grief.
 
We really have to be careful about self-subjection in this conversation - why are we creating an imagined opponent in our heads to squander ourselves with instead of just fighting for what we want? This is what I mean when I say we have a small city mindset, it's infected even people that disagree with it on substance, and that's exactly what makes it prosper and sustain.
 
O-tac said:
Kinda disappointed that it was this site. There are so many areas that need this more including Northhill mall up the hill. I actually also like the retro institutional vibe of the old hospital. My wife was born there I think.
Click to expand...
They're still cleaning up contaminants on the North Hill site, that's why it's been pretty vacant. Most of this is also parking and empty land, the value lift of developing it is very high.
 
O-tac said:
Kinda disappointed that it was this site. There are so many areas that need this more including Northhill mall up the hill. I actually also like the retro institutional vibe of the old hospital. My wife was born there I think.
Click to expand...
I know where you're coming from. If I could wave a magic wand, I would have chosen North Hill, Brentwood, Westbrook or Chinook.

That said, those sites will be developed, it's only a matter of when. This will be good inner-city density that has good transit connectivity, but unlike those others which make TOD sites, this is much more than a TOD. It's a high density build that's entirely walkable, with the bonus of good transit and good cycling infrastructure. It's walkable to downtown, walkable to SAIT, walkable to a grocery store and 100 or so retail options. Basically walkable in all directions.

The more I think about this development, the more I like it.
 
Is it odd they brough in A+M so early in the process? This seems to be purely a Land Use application, the renders are very preliminary and they don't mention phases. There's no way this is getting built all in one go. We'll see with how Broadway and the Truman hotel residences sell, but that's a lot of condo inventory (including Imperia, Lincoln, 1405, etc.) coming into a market where condos aren't highly valued.
 
This actually reminds me more of Anthem in Erlton. A developer can get entitlements for multiple 40 storey towers and then they can wait 15 years for market conditions to align and then they will eventually figure out the demand for 40 storey condos/apartments doesn't exist at price that pencils. And so after all that time, they just end up building the original five storey stick buildings the land was originally entitled for.

I call the story: "there and back again, a developer tale, by bilbo baggins."

The only twist to this tale of Riley Park Yards is that I wouldn't be surprised if the developer tries to flip it after they get the land entitlements.

My guess is that if they successfully flip it, the end result is still going to be mostly stick frame buildings with 1-2 towers at most. And by tower, I mean a 15-storey building.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top