[CalgaryTiger]

opposition to the proposed height

Hmm I'm new enough to the forum I don't know of people fighting height in the Beltline? Is this seen as a legitimate argument? I can see why people do it for infills and in places like Marda Loop and Glenmore Landing (although I mostly don't agree) but height in the Beltline?! C'mon people, demand quality, that's the fight we should have don't hold them hostage and force value engineering because they had to spend money and time fighting the height. Something like what is proposed here should be going in at 17th and 14th SW; I know that proposal has nothing to do with appeasing opposition but we cannot turn this into that.

 

[konradiical]

I can see Mount Royal being opposed as there are beautiful houses on hill overlooking downtown, and the high-rise could be close enough for them to not like it, as in blocking an existing view for example. I dont think people in the Beltline in itself would have an issue

 

[JoeUrban]

Anyone know if it would shadow Haultain and/or Central Memorial parks? Both start at about 250m from the middle of the site.

 

[Mountain Man]

There will be opposition as there always is, but I bet this gets unanimous approval from CPC and Council.

 

[trtcttc]

Anyone know if it would shadow Haultain and/or Central Memorial parks? Both start at about 250m from the middle of the site.

I can't imagine that would have an effect on approval. Central Memorial has high rises much closer, and Haultain is shadowed in the Google satellite view by the building with the First Street Market.

As summers get hotter... some shadowing should really be a positive.

 

[Albertasaurus]

The Mount Royal folks tend to limit their griping to their immediate community, thankfully. I don't get the sense they care much what happens in Beltline.

 

[Dārayavauš]

View attachment 590620View attachment 590621View attachment 590622

This looks amazing! I hope that we can actually build it. It would be great for the city.

 

[Dārayavauš]

If I had to guess, I'd assume because they expect opposition to the proposed height, so they don't want to highlight it.

Why would there be opposition to height in that location?

 

[Mountain Man]

Why would there be opposition to height in that location?

There are people opposed to height everywhere. I once had a lady try to get me to sign a petition to stop a 20 storey tower in the west beltline, she said it was "too tall" and "out of scale with the neighbourhood". She didn't like me saying it was the perfect location for a tower and that I would start a petition in favour of it... lol.

 

[MissingMiddle]

Why would there be opposition to height in that location?

Someone more in tune with the land use change application process can probably speak to this better, but I'll give it a go:

The current Beltline Area Redevelopment Plan says that high density in this location is substantially above the planned height for the area:

However, this specific parcel is also a Special Policy Area, as defined:

This basically means that they'll allow some density if they prove it's a positive contribution to the community. But they'll have quite a bit of work to do in order to get 45+ stories. getting 25 or 30 is substantially different, especially since there's no LRT access here.

For the record, I don't mind the height, I think this would be a great development! I'm just highlighting that they do have some convincing to do.

 

[Albertasaurus]

Someone more in tune with the land use change application process can probably speak to this better, but I'll give it a go:

The current Beltline Area Redevelopment Plan says that high density in this location is substantially above the planned height for the area:
View attachment 591589
However, this specific parcel is also a Special Policy Area, as defined:
View attachment 591582
This basically means that they'll allow some density if they prove it's a positive contribution to the community. But they'll have quite a bit of work to do in order to get 45+ stories. getting 25 or 30 is substantially different, especially since there's no LRT access here.

For the record, I don't mind the height, I think this would be a great development! I'm just highlighting that they do have some convincing to do.

If you look at the clause for Area D that stipulates base and max density in bonusing (expressed in FAR) it says: 3.0 (7.9 for the southern portion of the parcel legally described as Plan 1910115, Block 120, Lot 51 for base, and for max including bonusing (9.0 for the southern portion of the parcel legally described as Plan 1910115, Block 120, Lot 51). Guess which site that exception refers to?

This project still works with an FAR max of 9

 

[maestro]

Why would there be opposition to height in that location?

Not everyone gets super excited about a new height benchmark. Height gets too much attention for the wrong reasons. It's about how tall instead of if there are enough elevators and if the unit layouts are light and airy or narrow and cavernous. The greater concern should be over three tall towers on this site and whether the spacing between the towers is sufficient or is this representative of overdensification. Matters from the feel inside the apartments as well as the public spaces at grade.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

I actually really appreciate this little space they built. I wouldn’t call it “nice” by any means, but it’s certainly a nice gesture. They didn’t have to do anything. I think it bodes well.

Also Vesta located their office in the building across the street, so I figure they’re 100% serious about this thing.

 

[Tothewest]

Atleast there is some precedent to the west for taller towers 1/2 block off 17th....I doubt it's a dealbreaker if they both ended up in the 30-35 story range, but the variance is appealing

 

[Dārayavauš]

Someone more in tune with the land use change application process can probably speak to this better, but I'll give it a go:

The current Beltline Area Redevelopment Plan says that high density in this location is substantially above the planned height for the area:
View attachment 591589
However, this specific parcel is also a Special Policy Area, as defined:
View attachment 591582
This basically means that they'll allow some density if they prove it's a positive contribution to the community. But they'll have quite a bit of work to do in order to get 45+ stories. getting 25 or 30 is substantially different, especially since there's no LRT access here.

For the record, I don't mind the height, I think this would be a great development! I'm just highlighting that they do have some convincing to do.

Makes some sense, but really that planned area max limit needs to be removed.