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

Mountain Man

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
1,800
Reaction score
1,836
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.
I disagree based on the pushback we have seen for nicer projects Courtyard 33 and Avli on Atlantic. I think people are scared of the increase in density and will find whatever reason they can to appeal it. If this looked more like the SFH it's replacing, I could see some reduced opposition, but it's the greater change in the area that people seem opposed to.
 

Nimbus

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2017
Messages
343
Reaction score
546
The appeal on this one is coming up to SDAB soon, if you'd like you can write to the board at info@calgarysdab.ca and reference SDAB2018-0018.
Apparently the appeal is based on Height, Density, and character. The first two both fall within what is allowed for that site, so really it's a gamble on the "character" argument.
 

Mountain Man

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
1,800
Reaction score
1,836
The Character is not too dissimilar from the Ven project Bucci did a few years back, so I don't see it being stopped. The one thing I hope they can do is have a bit of variety in the colour of the brick, I hate it when every single one is the exact same colour (Keynote podium for example), a bit of variety in shades makes it look so much better.
 

Surrealplaces

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
7,510
Reaction score
17,676
Location
Calgary
The ladies who spoke about Glo at the meeting said their main opposition was that it was 'too big' They started the sentence by saying 'We're all for density increases, but this is too much density' They did mention character, but didn't elaborate on what that meant. They mentioned having 200 signatures in their petition, but in a neighborhood of ~4k, that isn't much. The SDAB is a bit of a wild card though.
 

MichaelS

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 5, 2016
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
2,896
I have heard that this one was refused by the SDAB. The written decision hasn't been released yet I don't think, but heard that the board gave a verbal decision, with the written decision to follow. This came from someone involved with the development at the appeal board.
 

Surrealplaces

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
7,510
Reaction score
17,676
Location
Calgary
Disappointed to hear that. The design is plain for the most part, but decent for a less busy road. I'm guessing it's the unfortunate victim of nimbyism. I know there were some people in the community against it saying it was too large.
 

gsunnyg

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 26, 2017
Messages
541
Reaction score
999
That was to big for them?o_O. Jeez what a joke. Theres much bigger condos in new suburban areas overshadowing small detached homes. NIMBYist like that should just pack their bags and move out of city limits. Wish I had a few million to play with, I'd purposely propose something even bigger on that site just to get on their nerves and let the appeal board know how gutless they are for rejecting the previous proposal. Shame seeing this one go, kind of creates a dim outlook for Sunnyside if this one is considered "too big." On top of that, it doesn't leave a good impression on developers looking to develop slightly more ambitious projects in the inner city.
 

Surrealplaces

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
7,510
Reaction score
17,676
Location
Calgary
Having been to a couple of HSCA meetings I can tell you that there is a mostly nimby undercurrent there. Every time a project is introduced the the people speaking against start off with the phrase 'I do support more density in the inner city' and it's always followed with a 'but'. The last meeting I was at one of the people actually said 'I'm all for more affordable housing in Calgary, just not any more of it in Hillhurst' The people opposing Glo pretty much echoed those comments. Something like 'while we support increased density in Calgary, we feel this is too big for the neighborhood, and doesn't fit its surroundings of single family homes'
 

jdixon

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 19, 2017
Messages
128
Reaction score
97
I fail to see how something like this can get rejected. The city needs to change their procedures so that a rejection like this is impossible...
 

Nimbus

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2017
Messages
343
Reaction score
546
I'm baffled by the SDAB decision too. While the building was nothing amazing they did make changes on the massing to give vertical lines a more pronounced look (akin to a lot of infill going up in the community) and the height was not an issue considering existing buildings around it.

I'm not too worried overall though because Sunnyside continues to add density, the Truman project on Memorial, Minto on 9A Street (Annex) are continuing to progress, and there are other projects still in other stages.
 

haltcatchfire

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
926
Reaction score
1,772
Location
Hillhurst
Even if this had been architecturally the nicest 5 storey condo building in the city those NIMBY's would have fought it just the same. It's a few home owners on 3rd Avenue who seem to have successfully killed it. Amazing really. The "Courtyard 33" guy has some new heroes.

The answer is to buy out the north side of the block first and build the 5 there and then build 7 on the south side.
 

AccUnit

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 29, 2018
Messages
155
Reaction score
274
Location
Calgary
Great spot for some low rise apartments. Used to live across the street, that area is so prime for more projects like this.
 

Top