[potatopizzafan]

Ahh yes, that is actually a key distinction in this case. Killarney is not the Beltline. Hope this helps!

Beltline also has delivery trucks, garbage collection and emergency access with narrow laneways, and significantly higher density than this area. What about this development specifically causes issues with those services?

 

[Mountain Man]

Not the Beltline, but a very inner city community where we need to intensify and start pushing for more midrise development, especially along major throughfares like 17th. Developments like this also should constrain vehicle access, there's not a lot of room for more cars on the roads, so people need alternatives. Transit is an option, cycling, car pooling anything other than the endless single occupant vehicles that drive past this development every day. I live a similar distance from downtown and I cycle every day, far superior to driving about 90% of the time.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

There's a choice, larger roads that will need to take over private property to accommodate more cars, or more investment in transit to try and delay or replace the needs for larger roads.

I prefer the latter to the former. Some places we don't really have a choice (Crowchild north of memorial) but most places we do.

What cannot be missed in the "war on cars" debate is that the city is growing and will continue to grow, the consequences for the type of growth we choose need to be understood. The cars or nothing crowd seem to miss the consequences of more cars (mostly because it isn't their home that's going to be expropriated to expand the roads).

Macleod cannot get bigger without expropriating properties; Crowchild cannot get bigger without expropriating properties; Bow Trail cannot get bigger without expropriating properties; Memorial cannot get bigger without expropriating properties, and Deerfoot cannot get bigger beyond undertaking a rebuild of every interchange from Peigan to 64th.

That's the choice, you do those things or you create more dense communities and invest in transit. Answer seems pretty obvious to me.

 

[MichaelS]

Fully agree with your point. I just feel like pointing out that, ironically, 17th Avenue SW has a 5.182m public realm setback on it, so this project will need to be pushed back from the current property line by 5.182m, to widen the ROW for 17th Avenue. You can see this in the DP drawings. I am being a bit tongue in cheek though, the City has at least started allowing these setbacks to be used for widened sidewalks, street furniture, trees, etc... But, this setback table has existed in the land use bylaw for decades, and for the longest time was meant to preserve land to allow for road widenings as you described.

I guess that is not really ironic, I just felt like pointing out this technical requirement on this project, as it relates to the above post.