News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 4.7K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 6.6K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 3.8K     0 

Urban Development and Proposals Discussion

Surrealplaces said:
I wonder if it's a generational shift thing? 20 years ago, the mantra told to young people in Calgary was that it was always better to buy than rent. Home prices were reasonable enough that young people could always buy as long as they had reasonable steady income. In the early parts of the millennium, house prices saw good appreciation and it help push that idea of buying. Over the past few years, younger people seem more geared to renting for different reasons, but who knows, it's possible we may see a boom in buying in 10 years when the millennials are in their mid 30's etc, and settling more.
Click to expand...
Long-time lurker, first-time poster here.
I am currently renting at Hat 7th Av - so I am somehow representative of the discussed demographic.
I do have savings in excess of 20% downpayment for a comparable property, however, several factors have been preventing me from buying to date:
  • relative lack of job stability: in the recent years I moved across the country and back. Owning place would mean taking a financial hit on each move. Not that I share view that job security was dramatically better in the days of yore, but finding a job from thousands of km away is definitely easier now
  • two body problem: both me and my spouse are quite specialised professionals. This aggravates the problem above and means that we may have to move to ensure that both of us have jobs. This consideration clearly affects more people now (i.e. there are less families with sole/dominant breadwinner).
  • I have seen several people being burned by the Calgary's market. I.e. property anchored them to local job market during downturn preventing them from moving elsewhere.
We do consider buying (FOMO is real), but it requires quite a few things to align.

Urban Outdoorsman said:
My plan right now is basically to buy a small condo under 150k with the cheapest condo fees I can find. Hoping to put down 20% and probably get a 25 year mortgage. At this rate, between my payments, insurance, fees, utilities, etc., I'd be paying somewhere in the ballpark of 1000$/m. This is well below average rents, albeit it probably wouldn't be the nicest condo.
...
Are the any obvious flaws to this plan? I'm no expert and have little knowledge of real estate beyond the basics, so I won't be surprised to learn I'm missing something obvious. But it seems like a pretty good plan to me 🤷🏻‍♂️
Click to expand...
Cheapest condo fees may indicate lack of reserve fund contributions and/or poor maintenance => probability of being hit by large special assessments.
 
So this seems to have flown a bit under the radar but the City of Calgary's 4 Year Development Roadmap was shot down at committee today. This seems to throw a wrench into the desire to start the next round of Local Area Plans and the reorganization of the Planning Department to take a more holistic approach to city building. Sharp just seems to hate Duckworth and anything to do with the reorganization and the other No votes aren't that surprising but I wonder if this is a sign of an anti-density coalition forming at Council.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1489374846010081280
 
Surrealplaces said:
Had some time to kill so I thought I'd compare high-rise construction growth in the core (Downtown/EV/Beltline) from a little over 4 years ago years ago (Dec 2018) to today. I didn't include Bridgeland, Kensington or Mission, but I believe those neighborhoods also have more units u/c than was the case 4 years ago. I included Sunalta towers though it's not technically in the Beltline, it's close enough. I didn't include Curtis block or 11+11, even though they are still technically u/c.

For the time being our core growth in multi-family is very solid. Looking at all the projects u/c including 11+11 and Curtis Block we are looking at at least 4,130 new units for the core. This should result in a strong population boost over the next 3-4 years.

Dec 2018
U/C Units
Underwood Tower - 225
11th and 11th - 369 (site prep)
Marriott Residences - 303
One Tower - 379
500 Block South - 463
The Royal - 223
Curtis Block - 628 (site prep)
Redstone - 137 (Site prep)
Cube - 66
Total Units: 2,793


Jan 2022
U/C Units
Oliver - 866
Sunalta Towers - 333
The Hat 14th - 239
1334 10th - 80
Arris Tower west - 310
Park Central II - 460
Sierra Place - 80
West Village Towers - 554
The Fifth - 34
Nude - 177
Total Units: 3,133

That new total doesn't include the still u/c
11th and 11th - 369
Curtis Block - 628
Click to expand...
Great to see Calgary hasn't slowed down since 2018, and I'm hoping we can be at the same pace 3 years from now in 2025. I don't want to be a wet blanket, but there doesn't seem to be many larger multi tower projects coming down the pipe.
 
Patrick.1980 said:
Great to see Calgary hasn't slowed down since 2018, and I'm hoping we can be at the same pace 3 years from now in 2025. I don't want to be a wet blanket, but there doesn't seem to be many larger multi tower projects coming down the pipe.
Click to expand...
There are still a few that are on the backburner ( Portefino, EV Court, Connaught Gardens, The Hat @ Elbow, are some) but yes, not much news or rumours on them right now. Maybe we'll see a string of single tower projects going forward, and that would suit me just fine.
 
A DP for a smaller scale mixed use project is going to CPC this week, called Glendale Commons. It is a site that fronts 17th Ave SW, close to the 45th Street C-Train station. The DP looks promising for the first significant redevelopment in Glendale, however I do wonder if something more significant, such as a proper 4-6 storey mixed use building, should have been pursued. Bonus for having residential over retail, but the site contains surface parkng and a drive-through. I know the residents in Glendale have been vehemently opposed to density like that in the past, including for the land use for this site if I recall, so maybe this was settled on as a palatable level of intensification for the first significant project in the community. The developer is a resident and sits on the CA, according to the CA letter. Also, 17th Ave SW in this location is not exactly condusive for pedestrian oriented development/lifestyles, despite the proximity of the C-Train station.

For clarity, here is the site location:
1644179433497.png


Report, DP drawings, Renderings, UDRP Commentary, CA Letter, Applicant Submission
1644179393665.png

1644179511786.png
 
Edit: Beaten to the punch by @darwink !

That is this project:

1644180753303.png


The rendering is listed incorrectly in the Skyrise Cities Map, as I pulled this rendering from the Chinook Landing project, by Brava Living, that is located at Elbow Drive and 58th Avenue. The rendering is actually for this project (and FYI, I think Chinook Landing is dead, since Brava doesn't list it on their website anymore).
 
MichaelS said:
The rendering is listed incorrectly in the Skyrise Cities Map, as I pulled this rendering from the Chinook Landing project, by Brava Living, that is located at Elbow Drive and 58th Avenue. The rendering is actually for this project (and FYI, I think Chinook Landing is dead, since Brava doesn't list it on their website anymore).
Click to expand...
I'll take a look and fix that.

Edit: It should be sorted out now
 
Last edited:
MichaelS said:
A DP for a smaller scale mixed use project is going to CPC this week, called Glendale Commons. It is a site that fronts 17th Ave SW, close to the 45th Street C-Train station. The DP looks promising for the first significant redevelopment in Glendale, however I do wonder if something more significant, such as a proper 4-6 storey mixed use building, should have been pursued. Bonus for having residential over retail, but the site contains surface parkng and a drive-through. I know the residents in Glendale have been vehemently opposed to density like that in the past, including for the land use for this site if I recall, so maybe this was settled on as a palatable level of intensification for the first significant project in the community. The developer is a resident and sits on the CA, according to the CA letter. Also, 17th Ave SW in this location is not exactly condusive for pedestrian oriented development/lifestyles, despite the proximity of the C-Train station.

For clarity, here is the site location:
View attachment 378855

Report, DP drawings, Renderings, UDRP Commentary, CA Letter, Applicant Submission

View attachment 378856
Click to expand...
Ouch. Another absolutely painful one. Don't be fooled by the polish, it's a 2020s strip mall.
  • Less than a block from an LRT
  • Drive-through
  • Not only a drive-through, but a drive-through lane in parallel to the existing laneway.
  • Accommodates ~13 parking stops, about the same amount if street parking was allowed on 17th Avenue and the side street
This is another textbook example - if there are any rules that are preventing pedestrian-focused retail designs a block from an LRT station they should be thrown away. Further, new rules that restrict auto-oriented uses a block from the LRT should be added until the interaction between the application of policy + applicant intent literally can't produce something like this even under any circumstance.
 
(idk if this is the right forum to post this in)

But I just got a fun little question. When do you guys think that we will be getting a new tallest building? (Or atleast a new building taller then 200 meters)

I personally believe we will be getting a new tallest within 2026-2032
 
asd1232468 said:
(idk if this is the right forum to post this in)

But I just got a fun little question. When do you guys think that we will be getting a new tallest building?

I personally believe we will be getting a new tallest within 2026-2032
Click to expand...
When the city removes the stupid height restrictions. The fishies will be OK I'm sure.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top