Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

[gsunnyg]

I think Montreal and Toronto are bad comparisons simply because of their history, age and population. It is not much different than saying look at how vibrant NYC or Chicago are compared to Calgary. Sure, but they have been vibrant cities in one form or another for many decades before Calgary was even a spot on the map. So for me, these comparisons are not constructive because they fail to place Calgary in the context of an exceptionally young city without a comparatively large population. Context matters.

Vancouver is a great example of a city that built its identity as a major cosmopolitan city with all the fixings fairly recently over the last few decades. It began around the time when their population was about the same as Calgary is now. If we can go in that direction based on solid policy and planning as opposed to the direction other young cities like Dallas or Denver went (outwards), then I think over the coming decades we will flesh out a reputation as a vibrant, cosmopolitan city. As of right now, I wouldn't panic too much if 17th ave didn't feel like Yonge Street or Granville or St. Catherines last time you drove down it.

At the growth split of 90/10, 90% of the growth happening in new communities, 10% in existing communities, do you think we're gonna be anywhere close to Vancouver in the next few decades in terms of vibrancy? These are issues that we pick out and force change on. Issues like vibrancy matter because problems like brain drain are big obstacles to a healthy growing city. I've personally had friends that left the City solely because Calgary didn't provide the same level of energy other metros in Canada provide. These are important factors younger demographics consider when choosing where to live. It's crazy but I got buddies willing to pay double in rent in Toronto just to live in a more energetic place. In fact, the City of Calgary conducted a survey a couple of years ago that concluded lack of entertainment and culture in the city as the number one reason outside of job opportunities for young people to leave Calgary.

Again, we need these young people to build the future of our City. I want Calgary to succeed, its already proven to be a great place to raise a family, but in areas where it's lacking, we need to be objective* and call it out. You don't need a larger population to make a place more vibrant, you need better planning! Sure Calgary isn't in the same context as Toronto and Montreal but we're still competing for talent with these cities. We may not have the history those cities had that enabled them to grow the way they did but why do our councilors still continue to make the same mistakes as earlier councils? We might say we're improving gradually, with developments like Bridgeland but in the bigger picture stats don't lie, 10% growth happened in existing neighborhoods over the last decade when the goal is to get closer to 50% by 2076. These are things we need to act on. I personally wrote a few emails to my councillor when he voted in favor of the 14 new communities, but I don't think many other people did. I got no reply back. I feel if more of us pressured our councilors and called them out on issues like vibrancy, they'd feel more accountable to make some serious changes. Then through effective policies, we could see more areas like Bridgeland pop up!

 

[outoftheice]

My wife's parents just moved into the old International Hotel building which has been reno'd into rental apartments by Minto. I have a vague recollection that there once was a proposal for a new high-rise to be built on the Impark lot immediately to the east of the International Hotel building. Does anyone on here remember that and, if so, know if it's still in the realm of possibilities?

 

[Surrealplaces]

My wife's parents just moved into the old International Hotel building which has been reno'd into rental apartments by Minto. I have a vague recollection that there once was a proposal for a new high-rise to be built on the Impark lot immediately to the east of the International Hotel building. Does anyone on here remember that and, if so, know if it's still in the realm of possibilities?

Nice to hear they've turned it into residential. The more, the merrier when it comes to the CBD.

As far as the old expansion proposal, here's some of the info for it.

 

[gsunnyg]

https://calgaryherald.com/business/...lan-for-downtown-calgary-under-ndp-government hmmm, politics aside, a post-secondary expansion in the Core would be great to see.

 

[darwink]

https://calgaryherald.com/business/...lan-for-downtown-calgary-under-ndp-government hmmm, politics aside, a post-secondary expansion in the Core would be great to see.

Calgary could realistically support another institution the size of Mount Royal. I doubt governments of any stripe would really like to spend $150 million a year plus a billion in startup costs to make it happen. Finding the right building or group of buildings to turn into a UArts new campus I can get behind 100% though.

 

[MichaelS]

A development permit has been submitted for the former Jacques Lodge land, next to Shaganappi LRT Station:

DMAP

Brookfield bought this parcel off of Silvera, and the planning, land use and engagement was done by Ground Cubed planning, who have an engagement website up for this project;

Jacques Lodge Redevelopment (Approved) — Cultivate Ideas

www.cultivateideas.ca

 

[gsunnyg]

A development permit has been submitted for the former Jacques Lodge land, next to Shaganappi LRT Station:

DMAP

Brookfield bought this parcel off of Silvera, and the planning, land use and engagement was done by Ground Cubed planning, who have an engagement website up for this project;

Jacques Lodge Redevelopment (Approved) — Cultivate Ideas

www.cultivateideas.ca

View attachment 295194

Wow, what a wasted opportunity next to an LRT station, highway, and proximity to downtown. Non-grid layout with a pretty suburban format version of high density, reminds me of Rundle Station. This site should've gone to a developer like Truman. Perfect spot for 4-8 storey midrises, with a Mainstreet and maybe 3-4 highrises bundled on the west or south side. Something similar to the Bridges, a well attempted TOD!

 

[UrbanWarrior]

My wife's parents just moved into the old International Hotel building which has been reno'd into rental apartments by Minto. I have a vague recollection that there once was a proposal for a new high-rise to be built on the Impark lot immediately to the east of the International Hotel building. Does anyone on here remember that and, if so, know if it's still in the realm of possibilities?

I've been looking into renting their once I graduate and my lease is up. The renovation is fabulous, the rent is right, and the amenities are amazing. For me it's either there or First on Tenth (formerly Bromley Square), as thy have the best rent to square foot to amenity ratio in the city.

 

[outoftheice]

I've been looking into renting their once I graduate and my lease is up. The renovation is fabulous, the rent is right, and the amenities are amazing. For me it's either there or First on Tenth (formerly Bromley Square), as thy have the best rent to square foot to amenity ratio in the city.

I'd encourage you to do it. On top of everything you've mentioned the on-site staff has been amazing. My wife's parents also don't have a car and use the free-fare zone on 7th to shop at the Superstore in East Village. They love the direct access to the +15 network (although it temporarily closed a few days after they moved in) and it's a short walk to Eau Claire and Prince's Island. The fact they're adding cycle tracks to 3rd Ave is also a huge bonus. I never realized how great of a location it was until they moved in... one of the reasons I was asking about the old development proposal as I think once they fill the existing building Minto would do well in building a brand new rental there as well.

 

[AJX]

Wow, what a wasted opportunity next to an LRT station, highway, and proximity to downtown. Non-grid layout with a pretty suburban format version of high density, reminds me of Rundle Station. This site should've gone to a developer like Truman. Perfect spot for 4-8 storey midrises, with a Mainstreet and maybe 3-4 highrises bundled on the west or south side. Something similar to the Bridges, a well attempted TOD!

I agree. The west edge of the parcel is really close to the train station, it’d be a waste not to have more density there.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

I'd encourage you to do it. On top of everything you've mentioned the on-site staff has been amazing. My wife's parents also don't have a car and use the free-fare zone on 7th to shop at the Superstore in East Village. They love the direct access to the +15 network (although it temporarily closed a few days after they moved in) and it's a short walk to Eau Claire and Prince's Island. The fact they're adding cycle tracks to 3rd Ave is also a huge bonus. I never realized how great of a location it was until they moved in... one of the reasons I was asking about the old development proposal as I think once they fill the existing building Minto would do well in building a brand new rental there as well.

Yeah I live in Mission already so I am definitely versed in the amenities of the area. Hadn't thought about the +15, but that is very cool. The biggest selling point of both The International and First on Tenth is that they have a ton of amenities and they allow dogs. The International gets the edge because of the in-suite laundry and the pool... andd being like a block away from U & Me dim sum. However, the 25-foot wide, 5 foot deep balconies at First on Tenth are very tempting since I could basically turn it into a backyard for my dog to play.

 

[Calgcouver]

A development permit has been submitted for the former Jacques Lodge land, next to Shaganappi LRT Station:

DMAP

Brookfield bought this parcel off of Silvera, and the planning, land use and engagement was done by Ground Cubed planning, who have an engagement website up for this project;

Jacques Lodge Redevelopment (Approved) — Cultivate Ideas

www.cultivateideas.ca

View attachment 295194

Looks like I will be going against the grain on this one, personally I am glad we are getting a whole lot of three-storey slab-on-grade townhomes in this location, especially if they hit reasonable pricepoints. I think they should have gone for a more street-oriented and grid-like approach and cranked up the unit count out here, but overall, it provides the exact type of housing that people are looking for in a location like this. Besides, even if we got a mid-rise master planned site design to look at, it's Calgary. The mid-rise development would've turned it's back on Bow Trail and if I am being honest it would sit undeveloped for decades waiting for condo demand to pick up and to see any development at all. I can think of a million areas where we have given away a whole shwack of density in these mid-rise TOD plans that languish forever, undeveloped (take a look at Westbrook). This is responsive to market demand that they would see in the area and will provide townhouse stock in an area that doesn't have any new slab-on-grade townhomes. If the smaller units end up priced with numbers starting with a 4 or 5, these will do really well. Good investment by Brookfield this will do very well at the right pricepoint. Obviously I am wearing the developer hat and not the planner hat for this comment. Hopefully the site has really good amenities as well (fitness centre, common area for bbq's, even a small outdoor pool if they have enough units to support). Yes, I am in agreement that densities should've transitioned upwards to maybe a 4 or 6 storey M-U2 building in the SW corner closer to the train station, but i am cool with this being a whole lot of townhouses.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Looks like I will be going against the grain on this one, personally I am glad we are getting a whole lot of three-storey slab-on-grade townhomes in this location, especially if they hit reasonable pricepoints. I think they should have gone for a more street-oriented and grid-like approach and cranked more units out here, but overall, it provides the exact type of housing that people are looking for in a location like this. Besides, even if we got a mid-rise master planned site design to look at, it's Calgary. The mid-rise development would've turned it's back on Bow Trail and if I am being honest it would sit undeveloped for decades waiting for condo demand to pick up and to see any development at all. I can think of a million areas where we have given away a whole shwack of density in these mid-rise TOD plans that languish forever, undeveloped (take a look at Westbrook). This is responsive to market demand that they would see in the area and will provide townhouse stock in an area that doesn't have any new slab-on-grade townhomes. If the smaller units end up priced with numbers starting with a 4 or 5, these will do really well. Good investment by Brookfield this will do very well at the right pricepoint. Obviously I am wearing the developer hat and not the planner hat for this comment. Hopefully the site has really good amenities as well (fitness centre, common area for bbq's, even a small outdoor pool if they have enough units to support). Yes, I am in agreement that densities should've transitioned upwards to maybe a 4 or 6 storey M-U2 building in the SW corner closer to the train station, but i am cool with this being a whole lot of townhouses.

I think a mix of density is good for that location. I'm fine with low rise builds in that area but wish they had a couple of higher density builds right across from the station. Doesn't have to be huge, even a couple of 5-6 storey builds would be great.

It's too bad there is the strip of houses along 26th. Maybe that's why they don't go bigger at that end of the land.

 

[Calgcouver]

I think a mix of density is good for that location. I'm fine with low rise builds in that area but wish they had a couple of higher density builds right across from the station. Doesn't have to be huge, even a couple of 5-6 storey builds would be great.

It's too bad there is the strip of houses along 26th. Maybe that's why they don't go bigger at that end of the land.

I agree with you, although the apartments with a townhouse base at the SE corner sort of accomplish that. It is a challenge for sure sharing a lane with existing homes, and they certainly took the safe approach to minimize negative feedback from existing neighbours even though the apartments/density should be located closest to the LRT station.

 

[darwink]

It's too bad there is the strip of houses along 26th. Maybe that's why they don't go bigger at that end of the land.

Bingo.

There will be two mid rise buildings on the SE portion of the site. Which is still solidly within 400m of the LRT.