[Chinook Arch]

One can dream instead of the typical response that it adds density which doesn't give too much concern to the future occupants here and how they will move about the majority of the time. Of course, initially they will drive and that's exactly how these towers were designed. No initiative put into a creating a walkable future with follow up development. Developers are prone to copy one another leading to discussions of precedence on the forums. Every follow up development will likely take the same lazy approach with high density housing with cars at the forefront.

Griffintown is basically boxy slabs one after another. Ditch the podium and cut down the length of the slabs would do wonders here. Above ground parking should be behind street facing units. It shouldn't matter if it's a main street or a public lane.

The majority of us are in no position to change anything. Why not wish for the best than accept something for being better than a parking lot? It's one thing if you like a design. Most people are pretty harmonious on such things. The difference is the acceptable standard. Shouldn't where and how people live matter more than simply an increase to population density particularly when population growth is through outsourcing people than home grown?

I don’t disagree that as a city or as a community we still need to push for better designs, but there’s a point where you have to be realistic.
Those lots have been wastelands for over 50 years, so for me any development is a positive. I’d rather see this get built, than have it sit as a wasteland lot for another 50 years waiting for a nicer design. If this was proposed for Mission or Beltline or Kensington, etc., I would be against it but outside of some of those key areas I don’t care much about the design.
I think people focus too much on trying to get nicer designs for new developments when it’s not actually important in the grand scheme of things.

 

[darwink]

I dunno. It might just be that asking rents in Burnaby are much higher. 1 bed, $2398 vs $1658; 2 bed, $3062 vs $2004. And that is the entire rental stock asking price, not a new build. A run through a very simple cap rate (5.1%, $300 a month in owner ops cost), in Burnaby that allows the 2-bed a capital cost of $650,000, where the comparable in Calgary is $400,000. That is a whole lot of extra.

The Amazing Brentwood in Burnaby has plenty of housing stock that wouldn't be out of place anywhere in suburban calgary.

It is important to remember that the extreme TOD in parts of greater Vancouver is the result of an incredibly dysfunctional planning regime

 

[Chinook Arch]

I can understand the frustration, especially when you're aware of how other cities like Van and Toronto are developing their industrial parking lots.
Sure, the speedy delivery of affordable housing is important, but this is a very prominent location near the city's best mall.
They can absolutely kill two birds with one stone.
This one looks like the designers and the planning behind the project wanted it to look suburbian

Example:

Brentwood Block replacing parking lots and industrial buildings, much like the area around Chinook.
Provides 3500 affordable rental units

View attachment 617116

View attachment 617109

View attachment 617110
View attachment 617113
View attachment 617114View attachment 617115

Comparing the empty lots around Chinook to Brentwood station in Burnaby isn’t really an apples to apples comparison. The situation here in Calgary is different than Metro Vancouver.
Land is much more expensive in Vancouver/Burnaby, and the layout of their neighbourhoods and zoning in cities like Burnaby is geared towards clusters of towers in certain locations. That’s why we’re seeing so many tall apartment buildings in places like Brentwood, and other centres in Surrey, Coquitlam. etc.. Calgary doesn’t have that situation so developers aren’t going to go that route anytime in the near future.

 

[DiscoStu]

Good points. If you want more affordable housing to be built, it needs to pencil out in the context of wherever it's built. It needs to be "affordable" for the owner/landlord just as much as it does for whoever is buying/renting...probably even more so, as otherwise it just doesn't exist. Nobody is going to invest millions for the greater good.

 

[HudsonA08]

Is there a grocery store in that area? It seems to me to be a major missing. Maybe someone can build a coop with a tower on top?

 

[darwink]

Is there a grocery store in that area? It seems to me to be a major missing. Maybe someone can build a coop with a tower on top?

Community Natural Foods and Franchesa Foods. Eccentric but functional for fill in shops. Wholesale Club up on 58th.

A bit weird but it would work for without a car.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Is there a grocery store in that area? It seems to me to be a major missing. Maybe someone can build a coop with a tower on top?

Agreed. A coop or superstore like the one in EV would be perfect. There is already a busy LRT station, and some affordable housing towers 4 blocks to the north. Add in these towers and you are getting close to the critical mass needed for one. A mixed use building with a grocer on the location where the Staples is, would crush it.

 

[darwink]

Agreed. A coop or superstore like the one in EV would be perfect. There is already a busy LRT station, and some affordable housing towers 4 blocks to the north. Add in these towers and you are getting close to the critical mass needed for one. A mixed use building with a grocer on the location where the Staples is, would crush it.

When looking into studies for community services, the tipping point is around 12,000 people in the immediate service area (which explains the lack of a store in Inglewood/Ramsay). 16,000 gets you a second store. Given choice in groceries, picking up elsewhere on the commute, you need a lot of people to anchor a new store.

 

[Surrealplaces]

When looking into studies for community services, the tipping point is around 12,000 people in the immediate service area (which explains the lack of a store in Inglewood/Ramsay). 16,000 gets you a second store. Given choice in groceries, picking up elsewhere on the commute, you need a lot of people to anchor a new store.

Interesting. I wonder if there are other things that can factor in? EV Superstore seems to to do well and is always busy, with a low population, though maybe they're factoring in Bridgeland and DT as well?

 

[darwink]

Interesting. I wonder if there are other things that can factor in? EV Superstore seems to to do well and is always busy, with a low population, though maybe they're factoring in Bridgeland and DT as well?

Can think of it like black holes in space. Pull a sheet of flexible fabric, like spandex taut that is the 'map'. Each grocery store is marble, some larger than others, and each 12,000 not in slope caused by a marble can cause a grocery store marble to pop into existence.

In absence of a travel time chron generating map, transit time will suffice. Can see how the catchment zones could roughly be, creating the opportunity for the EV Superstore.

 

[MichaelS]

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

Community Natural Foods. Probably not your everyday type store for some, but there are others a c-train ride away.

Edit: Didn't see Darwink's post pointing this out already.

 

[TooBizzy]

Is there any kind of master plan for this area that lays out future retail corridors etc or is it just 'we'll get what we get' ?
Edit: I suppose the 2 natural corridors would be 61st and 58th. But it would be good to set out a North/South one as well

Chinook Area LAP final draft available to the public, will probably be accepted early next year.

Chinook Communities Local Area Planning

Working together to plan for the next 30 years

engage.calgary.ca

 

[TooBizzy]

The design on this isn't even bad. There's a lot of merit in doing the simple stuff right. It's basic, but it's refined.
That podium is hot too. Lighten up y'all.