It's also an entirely inefficient use of land. I recognize the conversation towards intensification has likely shifted some since that building was developed, but density along our main streets is sorely needed. It's like the new-is retail development at 17th Ave and 4th Street SW. The retail spaces themselves are fine, but a single storey building at such a prominent intersection of activity, is again, entirely inefficient. To avoid these issues we need to set policy that stipulates minimum densities too. That's as important of a conversation as maximum density/height.
Concentrate density on the main streets... or be prepared to really intensify all surrounding streets in all directions by a factor of 10 or 20 (over time). Ideally a bit of both.
Of course this kind of "radical" density is only required if the goal is to have a healthy, sustainable main street across a range of possible futures over decades or a century. If it's acceptable to let the street one-day return to obsolescence again you might not need to do as much.
Digging in the census data, it gets a bit weird at the tiny dissemination block level (all regular data and small area calculation caveats apply), but the block that this proposal is on has a total of 19 residents in 2016 for a density of 9 people per hectare. Surrounding blocks aren't much better and then you hit parks or train yards with zero people. Local people = local main street customers, they are the key to maintaining an area's vibrancy in all futures, including ones where tastes change and trendy becomes boring.
Put another 100 residents on this block with RNDSQR's proposal, you end up at 120 residents or a density of ~60 people / ha. Congratulations, Inglewood has it's first block that is approaching the lowest density block along the entire Osslington Avenue corridor in Toronto ranging from 50 - 150 people /ha. For those unfamiliar, here's a density map from censusmapper.ca and a street photo:
Note Osslington's lack of tall buildings and successful retail district through many ebbs and flows of tastes, consumer preferences and economic conditions. Only possible due to the incredible local density stretching for kilometres in all directions, most of which is low-rise and ground-oriented yet approaches and exceeds the density of the Beltline in many places. A place lucky enough to see a few centuries of growth, mostly under conditions of zero setbacks, zero parking requirements and almost no land use regulations will create this environment.
Now lacking magic powers, unfortunately we can't just wish a sustainably dense but low-height main street into existence in Calgary. Our history is different, our past and current development conditions are different. Inglewood doesn't have kilometres of possible infill to support it thanks to the rivers and train yards, both fairly insurmountable development barriers except in exceptional circumstances (if the redevelopment of a shabby old car dealership get's this kind of reception by the community, imagine attempting to redevelop one of the main underutilized park spaces in the area!). Inglewood (and the vast majority of Calgary) can barely build townhouses without resistance off the main street, let along 10x the density on every street in every direction that is required to support a main street sustainably.
So what can we do?
To save the main street and live in the complicated reality of city-building, we have to use the opportunities and hand we are dealt, there are no wishes and magic wands. The current plan for mid-rise density with effective design and good heritage integration is a pretty solid compromise to get us one step closer to a sustainable local population. Meanwhile, lets toss setbacks and parking requirements in the trash for low-rise and work to make it easier to infill with the types of developments that are less intrusive but still offer the local density boost desperately needed throughout the inner city.
