I like those infills. They remind me of older apartments from the 50's.
The mid-century apartment look is a huge upgrade on the mid-century ranch house look.I like those infills. They remind me of older apartments from the 50's.
Unfortunately no info on this project, it more or less came out of nowhere.There does not seem to be a thread for this project? It's along 17 Ave and opposite the Shaganappi Plaza.
Provide themselves or their future buyer absolute certainty.What do you think their play is
I think the cost for townhome construction is much lower than midrise. And in this area, you can sell or rent a townhome for a lot of money. This is a trend across the city.Here's an interesting one LOC2024-0144 on a pretty large consolidated site along 26 Avenue SW:
View attachment 570243
I am a bit surprised they didn't propose something denser here after all the work that it must have took to consolidate the parcels. Lots of precident only a block or two away for 6-storey apartments too:
This application proposes to change the designation of this property to a Direct Control (DC) District based on the Residential - Grade-Oriented Infill (R-CG) District. The DC (R-CG) District will primarily allow for rowhouse and townhouse buildings and will prohibit single detached, semi-detached, and duplex homes.
- The maximum building height is 11.0 metres, about 3 storeys (no change from what is currently allowed).
The proposed Direct Control (DC) District is based on the rules of the existing Residential - Grade-Oriented Infill (R-CG) District, with the additional requirement of a 25-dwelling unit minimum. The existing maximum of 34 dwelling units will remain unchanged.Any theories on the owner's rationale? What do you think their play is - just big townhome fans?
I'm also curious about this - if they're building something that would be allowed under R-CG, why go through the effort of redesignation to DC?The proposed Direct Control (DC) District is based on the rules of the existing Residential - Grade-Oriented Infill (R-CG) District, with the additional requirement of a 25-dwelling unit minimum. The existing maximum of 34 dwelling units will remain unchanged.
Yeah seems odd in that way - but I am not an expert in the R-CG rezoning process now that that has passed citywide, perhaps to @darwink 's point, this is just to really spell out exactly what can happen on this parcel to make it easier to sell. It sounds like it just has R-CG base characteristics, but they have removed the ability to have single, semis or duplexes via the DC - so that would be the only change?I'm also curious about this - if they're building something that would be allowed under R-CG, why go through the effort of redesignation to DC?
Mostly if somehow the R-CG zoning concept as a whole disappears due to crazy politics, this project would still be allowed imo, to expand on my certainty point.Yeah seems odd in that way - but I am not an expert in the R-CG rezoning process now that that has passed citywide, perhaps to @darwink 's point, this is just to really spell out exactly what can happen on this parcel to make it easier to sell. It sounds like it just has R-CG base characteristics, but they have removed the ability to have single, semis or duplexes via the DC - so that would be the only change?
ah that makes a lot of sense.Mostly if somehow the R-CG zoning concept as a whole disappears due to crazy politics, this project would still be allowed imo, to expand on my certainty point.