The Grid | 50m | 16s | NORR

MichaelS

MichaelS

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 5, 2016
Messages
3,048
Reaction score
25,360
A highrise proposed for Inglewood:
http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/2018/01/11/inglewood-pushes-back-against-20-storey-tower.html

I actually think this is a pretty appropriate spot for that level of height/density in Inglewood. Granted there are those houses to the south and east that it may seem out of place with now, but the truck stop across 19th Street is a prime place to put in more density as well, all anchored by the new BRT stop for the SE line down 17th Ave and into downtown.
 
I think 20 storeys is about 10 too tall for the area. That part of Inglewood NEEDS intensification, but that's too much too soon. The Riverside Quays / SoBow site to the north is about the size we need, maybe a few floors taller.
 
I think we need a lot more aggressive moves for towers like this outside the core. Most cities have small downtown nodes. If we keep turning towers down Calgary will continue to have serious urban sprawl issues. A recent article published showed Calgary has roughly 2000 people per sq.KM. While the other Canadian cities on the list had well over double with the exception of Mississauga. Higher density not only adds to more life within the city limits but can be a great saviour for tax dollars spent on serving new suburban communities. Building these towers is a good first step, once 1 is made more would likely follow and people would problem quit their complaining.
 
Towers aren't the only way to build density, I think a mid rise (8-10 storeys) is more appropriate considering there are only SFH in the area currently. Inglewood should intensify much the same way Sunnyside and Hillhurst are. The midrise density is the buffer between high rise and low rise and will have an easier time gaining approval.

I give this tower no chance at happening, it violates the ARP big time, and people are going to fight it.
 
I'm okay with a tower this size going in because of its location within Inglewood. Any other spot in Inglewood and I would be re-considering for sure. I have a feeling they are starting at 20 and hoping to come away with 10-14, but who knows. I would be quite happy with 1-14 also.
 
If I have the right parcel, the land is .299 OF A HECTARE (0.74 OF AN ACRE). So 32,184 square feet.

You can fit a whole lot of units in there even in a shorter building. Get opponents focused on one thing, so they don't resist the thing you actually want.
 
Something of a similar 20 floor scale is planned at the Inglewood/Ramsay Green Line LRT station. The flood gates are just starting to open for high rises in communities like Bridgeland, Sunnyside, Inglewood. In one sense, the LRT side location is even better because it's ideal for transit users, but there are shading issues for the single family homes around there. The SoBow location is better in terms of shading, but worse when it comes to transit. On the other hand, there is a BRT and it's located on one of the busiest bus corridors in the city.
 
See cities that are well know for their density like Paris London all have towers in the 30 storey ranges outside their cores many of the times in residential areas. It adds a more metro vibe to the city. Right now Calgary looks like a bunch of suburbs glued together with no real sense of a city. I think this tower would be great start so we can eventually lead up to more highrise nodes like Westbrook.
 
darwink said:
If I have the right parcel, the land is .299 OF A HECTARE (0.74 OF AN ACRE). So 32,184 square feet.
You can fit a whole lot of units in there even in a shorter building. Get opponents focused on one thing, so they don't resist the thing you actually want.
Click to expand...
Lol, I have a feeling that what's happening here. Come out as the bad guy pushing 20 floors, and compromise at 12 floors. In the article, Carra mentions that most people are opposed to the height, and not the density. The article also mentions that there have been letters of support for this.
 
gsunnyg said:
See cities that are well know for their density like Paris London all have towers in the 30 storey ranges outside their cores many of the times in residential areas. It adds a more metro vibe to the city. Right now Calgary looks like a bunch of suburbs glued together with no real sense of a city. I think this tower would be great start so we can eventually lead up to more highrise nodes like Westbrook.
Click to expand...
Paris is actually a terrible example for you to use, and actually supports my argument much better. Firstly, there is no core (they have a modern business district away from the historic city called La Defense, but that's definitely not the core as we think about it), and second, the entire city is low-mid rise development, same with most other European cities.
 
Surrealplaces said:
Lol, I have a feeling that what's happening here. Come out as the bad guy pushing 20 floors, and compromise at 12 floors. In the article, Carra mentions that most people are opposed to the height, also mentions that there has been letters of support for this.
Click to expand...
I think you are correct and I hope it works for them. Does anyone have a copy of the ARP? I'm curious what the maximum height is. I'm pretty sure the Avli on 9th was like 2m over and people went nuts, but they allowed an exemption in that case as it was only 2m.
 
I would bet that the height is quite a ways over the limit, and they are testing the waters. It doesn't cost anything other than sending out some brochures to do that. B&A says that out of the brochures sent, they have received 17 responses, with 5 in support and the other 12 more or less looking for clarification.
 
I’m kind of on the side of the community in this case. Yes, that location could survive a 20 story building, but IMO, it’s best to build the neighbourhood properly from the start and build up to the point of 20 storey towers. I would rather see 3, 7 storey buildings than 1, 20 story tower at this point of the neighbourhood’s development cycle.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top