Mountain Man
Senior Member
Pretty much, Sunnyside / Hillhurst are setting the example with how 10st is evolving.
The developer is starting a conversation which is good, but yeah, don't hide lol.
The Grid | 23m | 6s | Eagle Crest | FAAS Architecture
- Thread starter MichaelS
- Start date
The developer is starting a conversation which is good, but yeah, don't hide lol.
dazzlingdave88
Active Member
My favourite quote from the article is from the planning director of the Inglewood Community Association:
'"It's basically putting a large phallic symbol in the middle of a historic community," said Robertson.'
While I agree with most on here that shooting up to 20 stories is probably a little extreme, I do believe the billions we are spending on people moving infrastructure needs to have maximized returns through better alignment with planning policies.
On a side note, I very much dislike how much press and power CA's have. Only a small percentage of the community get involved with these organizations. (My community association has had two vacant positions for over a year) But when they speak, they make it sound like they are speaking for everyone in the community. Talk about the minority ruling the majority. They seem like an outdated form of governance given our ability to poll whole communities with technology quite easily these days.
'"It's basically putting a large phallic symbol in the middle of a historic community," said Robertson.'
While I agree with most on here that shooting up to 20 stories is probably a little extreme, I do believe the billions we are spending on people moving infrastructure needs to have maximized returns through better alignment with planning policies.
On a side note, I very much dislike how much press and power CA's have. Only a small percentage of the community get involved with these organizations. (My community association has had two vacant positions for over a year) But when they speak, they make it sound like they are speaking for everyone in the community. Talk about the minority ruling the majority. They seem like an outdated form of governance given our ability to poll whole communities with technology quite easily these days.
Alex_YYC
Senior Member
I’m ambivalent about this tower, it’s in a location where I don’t think it matters whether it’s five floors, 10 floors or 20 floors. Given that it’s beside a soon to be BRT node, the density is needed - I think we can all agree on that. So the real question is, is 20 floors too high? Personally I don’t think it is, at least for that location.
As for dazzlingDave’s comments about the CA, he has a very valid point. In the article it says that there has been positive feedback from some of the residents, it makes me wonder if the CA really represents everybody in Inglewood.
As for dazzlingDave’s comments about the CA, he has a very valid point. In the article it says that there has been positive feedback from some of the residents, it makes me wonder if the CA really represents everybody in Inglewood.
maestro
Senior Member
That quote is awesome.
There's alternatives to building tall to achieve the densities around transit infrastructure without putting a way finding structure up without the budget conducive of being a landmark. It just comes across as boorish and insensitive to slam tall towers and huge densities around new transit stations in older established, lower density neighbourhoods as if density is the be all and end all to transit usage.
There's alternatives to building tall to achieve the densities around transit infrastructure without putting a way finding structure up without the budget conducive of being a landmark. It just comes across as boorish and insensitive to slam tall towers and huge densities around new transit stations in older established, lower density neighbourhoods as if density is the be all and end all to transit usage.
Alex_YYC
Senior Member
I’m sure most of us agree on the whole concept of building to the scale of the neighbourhood. In this case I don’t think it applies. While some might find a tall tower boorish, I assumption is the developer is Building tall because of the economics of it. If building tall helps get that density in that location I’m OK with that. If it was another location say along 9th ave or somewhere else in Inglewood I would feel differently about it. As it stands now that area isn’t very well-developed, and it’s also the place where a new BRT station is going.
maestro
Senior Member
Something shorter with a stronger base and a mix of uses will be more successful than what is being floated by this hidden developers. No reason to assume the developer couldn't do almost as well off of that either. Community planning and interests should always take precedent over what is best or more lucrative for developers. There also that common theme of more density being always better lurking in there. Density without consideration of form, shape and, function is not what builds successful places to work, live and play. This is not a suggestion those consideration are being ignored. It's just the vibe I get from your post.
Alex_YYC
Senior Member
I agree with most of what you’ve said Maestro. The only difference being that I don’t believe height is an issue for this particular location. As long as the podium and street frontage is done well I have no issue with it being 20 floors.
That said, if this building was in another part of Inglewood I would be concerned about the height even with a good podium and street frontage.
That said, if this building was in another part of Inglewood I would be concerned about the height even with a good podium and street frontage.
Beazley66
Active Member
This probably belongs on another thread, but I'd like to get a handle on where the AVPA ruling stands with regards to the MGA, the City, etc, and where negotiations stand.
The 30 Db NEF contours included that property. Hypothetically, if dude on 17th street SE can't get a DP for a secondary suite because of AVPA,
a 20 storey tower approval would likely cause a furor. On the other hand, others might enjoy the perverse thrill of an aircraft on final approach, with wheels down, heading
in their direction.
The 30 Db NEF contours included that property. Hypothetically, if dude on 17th street SE can't get a DP for a secondary suite because of AVPA,
a 20 storey tower approval would likely cause a furor. On the other hand, others might enjoy the perverse thrill of an aircraft on final approach, with wheels down, heading
in their direction.
Habanero
Active Member
Would this tower be tall enough to be an issue with the AVPA? There are some buildings up around Barlow that are 5-10 floors that are directly under the flight path. But yeah, if the regulations are what they are, then maybe it falls under that protection.
LloydBraun
Active Member
I'm in favour of more mid-rise intensification as well, but right next to a future transit line...... 20 Storeys would seem appropriate considering the infrastructure $$$. Agreed though, this will face a tough time getting approval - why on earth would the developer remain anonymous? It makes it seem all the more sinister!
Oddball
Senior Member
I think the density could only be good for the area. More people means more culture. More culture means more... uhhh... points IRL game of Civilization?
Good enough for me.
Good enough for me.
maestro
Senior Member
Someone should come up with a list of the 20 densest neighbourhoods and see how they compared to the 20 most "cultured" neighbourhoods.
Habanero
Active Member
Good point. My favorite areas in Calgary are Kensington, Bridgeland, Marda Loop, Inglewood and Mission. None of those have 20 floor highrises, but have low rise buildings some mid rise buildings. I would be completely happy with 8-10 floors and another 8-10 floor building across the street (where the truck stop is) at some point.
Just my opinion, but Kensington is probably the perfect model for an inner city neighborhood. add in a few more low rise buildings and maybe a 12 story tower where Fushion Sushi is, and another 15 storey tower on 14th and voila.
Jake46
New Member
Density, yes, in hopes of getting a grocery store on the truck stop land. But not with 20 stories equalling 63 meters at this site. Especially when the Inglewood ARP calls for a maximum height of 20 meters. A few meters over, okay, but triple is just boorish as was previously stated. The tower design just doesn’t fit the environment being next to single family homes. A couple 8 or so story buildings would fit better.
Another thing not mentioned yet is access. The City won’t allow vehicle access off 19th St and is forcing traffic to go down 9th, past the elementary school and down 20th St to access the building which isn’t ideal.
And what’s with the developer remaining anonymous? It just looks bad on his/her part.
Another thing not mentioned yet is access. The City won’t allow vehicle access off 19th St and is forcing traffic to go down 9th, past the elementary school and down 20th St to access the building which isn’t ideal.
And what’s with the developer remaining anonymous? It just looks bad on his/her part.
darwink
Senior Member
With $50 bucks and a few hours one could find out - unless they’ve been way more careful than likely.