SOLA | 26.21m | 9s | Ocgrow | Riddell Kurczaba

haltcatchfire

haltcatchfire

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
2,619
Reaction score
15,218
Location
Sunnyside
Ocgrow is proposing to develop an 8 storey mixed-use development on the site of the current yellow National Transmission building on the west side of 14th St NW between Kensington Road and 2nd Ave NW.

22,500 sq ft total
12,600 sq ft retail
140 Residential units

http://engageocgrowkensington.com

No DP yet but they’re starting doing open houses. There are some massing images on the website. Not sure why they’re showing on street parking. It would be nice if 14th had on street parking, especially both sides, but I don’t think that will happen anytime soon. Looking at the site plan further, perhaps they intend to propose to the city to allow shifting the sidewalk west and squeeze in a parking lane.

It will be great to have more pedestrian oriented retail units with no setback. Hopefully more developments follow suit.

Project vision
A visionary catalyst first class mixed use project along 14th Street NW to reignite the vibrancy along this corridor. Our project shall lead to slower traffic in the area, make it more pedestrian friendly, and ensure it becomes a far more walkable street, people oriented with exciting new streetscape. The proposed land use redesignation and supporting ARP amendment will seek to achieve mid-rise development height and intensity which is more aligned with the highly successful 10 Street NW neighbouring corridor, which has seen tremendous support by all stakeholders involved. The subject site is advantageously positioned to reap the benefits of established inner-city fabric with significant investments in transit infrastructure, all within a short distance of various amenities and other destinations. The project vision for this development is fully aligned with local and city wide goals and policies, and will serve as a strategic catalyst for mixed use development along a Main Street corridor, which todate has not seen any major redevelopment. The goal is to introduce small scale neighbourhood retail commercial destinations at grade to help revitalize this 14 Street NW streetscape.
Click to expand...

rsz_11rsz_1rsz_1street_2b-2-800x397.jpg
 
Last edited:
Scale is perfect. It's a little bit higher than the current ARP height, but not much higher. If half decently designed, it'll probably get approved.
 
A project of this scale, in that location should easily be approved, but there will be opposition from some residents for sure. My feeling without seeing the end design is that it should be okay, they aren't asking for the moon here.
 
Finally 14th street is getting some attention! Hopefully this starts a trend. There are so many large underutilized lots along that stretch. Car wash, auto glass, NAPA. Not really befitting one of Calgary's best neighbourhoods.
Looking forward to seeing some renderings!
 
Surrealplaces said:
Scale is perfect. It's a little bit higher than the current ARP height, but not much higher. If half decently designed, it'll probably get approved.
Click to expand...
The great question: will this trigger a controlled, signaled intersection at 14th & 2nd Ave? It's an urban pedestrian-focused land use vs. historic auto-centric transportation corridor throw-down!

For 14th to ever be tamed into the kind of urban place that 10th Street is, it'll have to happen. The continuous "green-wave" heavy traffic needs to be broken up as the streets switches to interchanges both south (e.g. Memorial - 10th Ave) and North (5th Ave - 20th Ave) and has no full-stop intersection for 550m between 5th Ave and Kensington Road. Otherwise it will remain a street that is terrible for everyone - congested and dangerous for cars, terrible pedestrian and transit environment, suicidal bicycle environment.

As the city continues to grow and densify, this type of project will happen more and more - a dense urban design in a completely hostile, auto-centric environment. MacLeod Trail and Marda Loop both have examples of this already. The city will need to come to terms with it's side of the bargain - with plenty of internal/external struggles I am sure - taming and controlling the traffic flow to reflect the more urban reality that is emerging in pockets.
 
Parking on 14th would also make a difference into making it more like 10th, but yeah, a controlled intersection at 2nd would be of help. They have a ways to go, in getting rid of some of those businesses with parking lots for setbacks.
CBBarnett said:
The great question: will this trigger a controlled, signaled intersection at 14th & 2nd Ave? It's an urban pedestrian-focused land use vs. historic auto-centric transportation corridor throw-down!

For 14th to ever be tamed into the kind of urban place that 10th Street is, it'll have to happen. The continuous "green-wave" heavy traffic needs to be broken up as the streets switches to interchanges both south (e.g. Memorial - 10th Ave) and North (5th Ave - 20th Ave) and has no full-stop intersection for 550m between 5th Ave and Kensington Road. Otherwise it will remain a street that is terrible for everyone - congested and dangerous for cars, terrible pedestrian and transit environment, suicidal bicycle environment.

As the city continues to grow and densify, this type of project will happen more and more - a dense urban design in a completely hostile, auto-centric environment. MacLeod Trail and Marda Loop both have examples of this already. The city will need to come to terms with it's side of the bargain - with plenty of internal/external struggles I am sure - taming and controlling the traffic flow to reflect the more urban reality that is emerging in pockets.
Click to expand...
 
The arguments they do have are mostly reasonable, but the complaint about it being too high not something I agree with. Having it 30% taller than the current limit of 20 meters is not a big deal at all, especially on a busy thoroughfare like 14th. I hope the city allows the increase. The planning commission is recommending approval, so must likely it'll go through.

In the past I would have agreed with their wish that the developer submit a concurrent LOC and DP, but listening to @MichaelS' arguments regarding the cost of the DP portion, I understand why they wouldn't.
 
Patrick.1980 said:
The arguments they do have are mostly reasonable, but the complaint about it being too high not something I agree with. Having it 30% taller than the current limit of 20 meters is not a big deal at all, especially on a busy thoroughfare like 14th. I hope the city allows the increase. The planning commission is recommending approval, so must likely it'll go through.

In the past I would have agreed with their wish that the developer submit a concurrent LOC and DP, but listening to @MichaelS' arguments regarding the cost of the DP portion, I understand why they wouldn't.
Click to expand...
I think the way it works is the city administration is recommending to the planning commission that it gets approved.What the 'administration' is, I'm not sure. It might be the file manager only.
 
The Administration is the file manager, and generally CPAG, representing Parks, Development Engineering and Transportation. The staff of the city essentially. For all land use applications, the administration makes a recommendation to the Planning Commission, which is a board composed of citizen members (generally industry professionals), two council members, and two senior members of administration (Director of Growth Service and Director of Transportation Planning currently).

Planning Commission will review the report prepared by administration, as questions of them during the presentation, and make a recommendation. Sometimes it agrees with the administration recommendation, sometimes not. All land use changes then go to Council, to be heard at a public hearing. It is at this council meeting that the public, both in support and opposed to the application, get to speak. Ultimately it is Council that makes the decision on zoning.
 
MichaelS said:
The Administration is the file manager, and generally CPAG, representing Parks, Development Engineering and Transportation. The staff of the city essentially. For all land use applications, the administration makes a recommendation to the Planning Commission, which is a board composed of citizen members (generally industry professionals), two council members, and two senior members of administration (Director of Growth Service and Director of Transportation Planning currently).

Planning Commission will review the report prepared by administration, as questions of them during the presentation, and make a recommendation. Sometimes it agrees with the administration recommendation, sometimes not. All land use changes then go to Council, to be heard at a public hearing. It is at this council meeting that the public, both in support and opposed to the application, get to speak. Ultimately it is Council that makes the decision on zoning.
Click to expand...
I guess it can't hurt to send e-mails in support of a given project to the file manager and then to your council member should the CPC approve it.
 
Glad to see this get approved. I don't know which councilors voted for it, but I watched the video of the approval process for this one, and all the resistance was from Nenshi and Farrell, especially Farrell. I found it annoying that the the two people who were most vocal against the 14 new greenfield projects, were also vocal against this. Look it's not perfect, but it's easily within a reasonable scale for its location, and the developer is planning on a few upgrades due to density bonusing.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top