[Ramsayite]

Cars come off of SB Crowchild or EB Bow Trail, turn immediately on 19 St and then continue on 12 Ave. There are no lights or stop signs so I guess that traffic is mainly noticeable on 12 Ave. There is a similar situation with 11 Ave and 18 St, although there is a traffic light.

The 10 Ave connection is the whole reason for the 11/12 Ave one way couplet. If it really is low volume, it seems like there is a great opportunity to close access from 10 Ave, eliminate a bunch of ramps, save maintenance costs, and restore two-way streets. But the story of the last 10 years (since the west LRT opened) has been to tweak this area for higher traffic volumes. Anyone remember that weird shirt-lived half circle ramp near 18 St?

Great, then it seems like the only relevant stretch of 10th is a single 200m stretch which sorts the the traffic volume onto 11th/12th. The rest is a great opportunity for pedestrianization. It sure looks like you could barricade 10th Ave just past 18th and push all traffic onto the couplets.

 

[badc0ffee]

Exactly, it is low volume east of 18 St SW.

 

[Golfing guy]

What does any of this have to do with the Glenmore Landing proposal? Move it to an appropriate thread!?!?

 

[Mountain Man]

Sounds like a local residents group has organized and is pushing back on the land on the east and south being re-zoned. They claim this is parkland to be protected in perpetuity, the city has it marked as surplus land and want to develop it. I would like to see it developed personally. Article

 

[Nimbus]

That group is going to throw every bit of feces they can at the wall and hope some of it sticks.

 

[darwink]

People act like zoning is sacrosanct. Rules made by humans can be changed by humans.

 

[Urban4Lyfe]

Parkland? I wish these people would just speak plainly - cut the shit and tell us all exactly why you are opposed to this development.

 

[Mountain Man]

Agreed for the most part, however if the City acquired a piece of land and agreed in the terms of sale to use is as park, then I think they have a point. If it's just green space, they can pound sand.

I wonder how many of the ready to enrage people are involved in this group.

 

[Nimbus]

"I wonder how many of the ready to enrage people are involved in this group."

All of them, maybe not the really old ones that have passed away since.

 

[maestro]

People act like zoning is sacrosanct. Rules made by humans can be changed by humans.

Certain zoning like parkland is sacrosanct in most jurisdictions to prevent humans making short sighted decisions at the expense of future generations. We would have far fewer parks now I think without it.

I don't think this property was zoned park from reading the article. If the facts over the deal from the group's spokesperson are true than the fact that this wasn't rezoned as park is shady .

 

[Surrealplaces]

Calgary group pushes against park space sale | CityNews Calgary

As the City of Calgary contemplates the sale of Glenmore Landing green space, a local preservation group is questioning that choice.

calgary.citynews.ca

 

[Atticus]

I don’t agree with the residents with respect to the parkland. The area they are referring to isn’t used much by anyone as parkland. I’m okay with the city developing it.
I kind of agree with the residents about the height and number of buildings. Are towers 36 stories high really necessary for that location?
I’d much rather see 36 storey towers built in the core or near an LRT station.

 

[CBBarnett]

I don’t agree with the residents with respect to the parkland. The area they are referring to isn’t used much by anyone as parkland. I’m okay with the city developing it.
I kind of agree with the residents about the height and number of buildings. Are towers 36 stories high really necessary for that location?
I’d much rather see 36 storey towers built in the core or near an LRT station.

Up to 36 storeys is tall, but I don’t know what you mean by “necessary”. Necessary defined in what sense?
I go back to there enormous setbacks and road right of ways on this one, even if the buildings are 36 storeys very few people would notice. Tall slender towers with huge setbacks from adjacent housing are not likely to trigger a material impact on anyone.

Shadows are often cited as a concern, but ironically that only a concern to these suburban situations - building a 36 storey tower in the Beltline shadows a thousand times the people but we hardly even talk about it - and most of those have zero setbacks!

 

[Atticus]

Up to 36 storeys is tall, but I don’t know what you mean by “necessary”. Necessary defined in what sense?
I go back to there enormous setbacks and road right of ways on this one, even if the buildings are 36 storeys very few people would notice. Tall slender towers with huge setbacks from adjacent housing are not likely to trigger a material impact on anyone.

Shadows are often cited as a concern, but ironically that only a concern to these suburban situations - building a 36 storey tower in the Beltline shadows a thousand times the people but we hardly even talk about it - and most of those have zero setbacks!

What I mean by necessary is, the developer is asking for up to 36 stories, so i’m assuming they must think it’s necessary for this development.
My concern isn’t with shadowing, only that it’s a large development for a small area that has two ingress points/one egress point. It has BRT, but I’d still rather see developments of this scale built around an LRT station or in an area walkable to DT
I’d rather see this development at around 600-800 units instead of 1300 units.

 

[darwink]

It is a good area to service the workers for Rocky View Hospital (akin to university district) and MRU. Plus retirees with all the amenities.