[JoeUrban]

Inglewood has done a great job of marketing itself as a historical area, but the idea (also in the petition) that it's Calgary's heritage main street is sort of bunk.

True, 9th Avenue was the location of the first commercial street in what is now Calgary back in 1875 or so. And true, it does have a number of historic buildings that do deserve respect.

But the two aren't really connected; the 1875 Atlantic Avenue streetscape was demolished a century ago. 9th Ave's buildings aren't any more historic than in any other inner city community., The 9th Ave streetscape dates from 1908-1912 primarily, just like historical buildings in other inner city communities, like the warehouses in Victoria Park, Vendome in Sunnyside, the Bridgeland Market etc. There are 443 historical resources on the City website from the 1906-1913 era, about a hundred each in the downtown core and Beltline, only 36 in Inglewood.

The oldest main street in Calgary in terms of the buildings actually on the street is Stephen Avenue; a number of the core buildings are pre-1900 and most are pre-1908.

And I agree, I wouldn't support more density than we already have on our oldest preserved historic street (Stephen Ave) on our second oldest and second best preserved one. I would strenuously object to any tower taller than Banker's Hall being built in Inglewood.

the 1875 Atlantic Avenue streetscape was demolished a century ago

Sort off, what happened was before it was revealed where the CPR station was going to go, no one wanted to put down very permanent roots, so much of Inglewood in the 1800s was shacks and tents. Then once it was announced the CPR station was going where the Calgary tower is now most of the people packed up their tents or dragged their shacks over to the Stephen Avenue area.

Here's a pic of Inglewood in 1883

This is why the commercial buildings are older on Stephen Ave than they are on 9th avenue.

So, what is the oldest or original community or main street?
The oldest main street in a commercial sense is Stephen Avenue.

The oldest residential communities could be looked at as Inglewood and Ramsay as they were the first laid out, and there are a few 1800s homes there, but most of the 1800s homes were built downtown and in the east village.
Think blocks of houses like this (downtown)

(If you ever wonder why we don't have "Victorian" homes in Calgary, it's not because we're too young, it's because we tore them all down except for the Prince house which we moved to Heritage Park)

So arguably the oldest 'main street' is 9th Ave in Inglewood, the oldest 'commercial strip' is Stephen Avenue, and oldest residential communities in the sense of being mapped, and in the sense of still remaining mostly intact, is Inglewood and Ramsay.

There are 443 historical resources on the City website from the 1906-1913 era

The tricky thing about this is the inventory is not even close to being completed, there are still over 2000 properties city-wide that need to be looked at.

From a 6 yr old MyProperty extract though, 1906-1913 translates to

Upper Mount Royal	108​
Mount Royal Lower	122​
Renfrew	130​
South Calgary	133​
Cliff Bungalow	153​
Sunalta	174​
Bankview	190​
Mount Pleasant	191​
Tuxedo Park	210​
Crescent Heights	213​
Elbow Park	220​
Sunnyside	286​
Bridgeland/Riverside	287​
Beltline	348​
Ramsay	348​
Inglewood	350​
Hillhurst	384​

So Inglewood and Ramsay together had about 700 buildings from that era 6 or 7 years ago.

 

[Disraeli]

Inglewood has done a great job of marketing itself as a historical area, but the idea (also in the petition) that it's Calgary's heritage main street is sort of bunk.

True, 9th Avenue was the location of the first commercial street in what is now Calgary back in 1875 or so. And true, it does have a number of historic buildings that do deserve respect.

But the two aren't really connected; the 1875 Atlantic Avenue streetscape was demolished a century ago. 9th Ave's buildings aren't any more historic than in any other inner city community., The 9th Ave streetscape dates from 1908-1912 primarily, just like historical buildings in other inner city communities, like the warehouses in Victoria Park, Vendome in Sunnyside, the Bridgeland Market etc. There are 443 historical resources on the City website from the 1906-1913 era, about a hundred each in the downtown core and Beltline, only 36 in Inglewood.

The oldest main street in Calgary in terms of the buildings actually on the street is Stephen Avenue; a number of the core buildings are pre-1900 and most are pre-1908.

And I agree, I wouldn't support more density than we already have on our oldest preserved historic street (Stephen Ave) on our second oldest and second best preserved one. I would strenuously object to any tower taller than Banker's Hall being built in Inglewood.

I don't think the core of the argument for imposing height restrictions is because it is Calgary's oldest main street. Whether it is the oldest or not, the height restrictions are meant to protect the feel of a neighbourhood which, in my opinion, is one of the most unique in the county.
Also, Stephen ave is not well preserved relative to Inglewood. The vast majority of pre-war buildings on Stephen ave are long gone. On 9th ave and 7th ave they are nearly all gone. Stephen ave is a cautionary tale of historical preservation and that point should be kept in mind when looking at Inglewood's zoning.

 

[JoeUrban]

Also, when it comes to this petition which might exaggerate some things, or the discussion of perhaps not the best heritage examples with the 24 properties in Ramsay, these things are all directly the result of having no heritage plan in this city. The logical route would be to not to focus on these lesser sites but only protect the best ones. The problem is with no plan we have to assume that even the best are likely to be lost, so instead the fight shifts to just to try to keep anything at all, which means all sites will be fought over.

Identify all the sites, evaluate the heritage value of the sites, strongly protect some percentage or class of the best, and then I think a lot of this flailing would go away.

 

[haltcatchfire]

Perhaps there needs to be an Inglewood thread.

Which properties, that should be up for heritage protection, are potentially going to be lost due to the multiple proposed developments and land use amendments in Inglewood/Ramsay? Can we get a breakdown?

 

[JoeUrban]

Perhaps there needs to be an Inglewood thread.

Which properties, that should be up for heritage protection, are potentially going to be lost due to the multiple proposed developments and land use amendments in Inglewood/Ramsay? Can we get a breakdown?

The inventory is not even close to being completed so there's no way to know.

 

[haltcatchfire]

Ok, which buildings all together are currently being proposed? Lets start there and at least tackle those ones first.

Should Inglewood be tied to Ramsay in discussion or should they be separate? We're friends with Sunnyside over here in Hillhurst, but some days we feel like we can take care of ourselves. But then we remember that Bigtime (I know you're here somewhere) lives in Sunnyside and we figure we might as well stick together.

Maybe Surreal can drag all of this discussion relevant to Inglewood as a whole out of the RNSDQR Block and into an Inglewood thread, if he wishes. He has the power, I've seen it, should he want to use it.

Let me know what I've missed for proposed developments in the area and current buildings awaiting a destruction. If anyone has any history on these buildings please chime in.

Inglewood
RNDSQR Block:
- No buildings to be demolished that I can gather

Edison (Hungerford Properties):
- 907 9 Ave SE that houses Fairs Fair Bookstore and Galleria Inglewood (1.5 storeys)
Built 1948
- 915 9 Ave SE that currently houses Foxglove Studio, formerly Nemalux Lighting (2 storeys)
Built 1956

Louis on 9th (Landstar):
- 1025 9 Ave SE that formerly housed Trail Appliance Gallery (2 storeys)
Built 1945
- 1139 9 Ave SE that houses Starbucks, California Closets, Oak & Vine (1 storey)
Built 1981

1390 17 Ave SE (Hungerford Properties):
- 1390 17 Ave SE The very large, self named, Yellow Warehouse (1 storey)
Built 1963

1502-1508 10 Ave SE (Professional Custom Homes):
- 1502 single family bungalow
Built 1928
- 1508 single family bungalow
Built 1913

Ramsay
1100 Block of Maggie & 8th Street SE:
- 20 of 21 single family residences fronting 8th Street SE (The entirety of the block excluding #1127)
North half: #1105 (1900), #1107 (1932), #1109 (1906), #1111 (1912), #1113 (1913), #1115 (1912), #1117 (1977), #1121 (1906), #1123 (1908), #1125 (1944)
South half: #1129 (1914), #1131 (1914), #1133 (1914), #1135 (1910), #1137 (1911), #1139 (1908), #1141 (1908), #1143 (2018), #1145 (1910), #1147 (1914),

- 2 of 3 single family residences fronting Maggie Street SE (#1110 & 1120. #1140 being excluded)
#1110 (1983), #1120 (1975)

- 2 of 3 single family residences fronting 11th Ave SE (#803 & #805. #801 being excluded)
#803 (1913), #805 (1922)

I see that the city has 61 properties listed for Inglewood on the Inventory of Historic Resources. How do we know what properties haven't yet been evaluated or already have and have been excluded from consideration?

The inventory is not even close to being completed so there's no way to know.

 

[Kōsō]

https://calgaryherald.com/life/home...restigious-design-award-for-inglewood-project

"The design includes a cast-in-place concrete, three-storey commercial podium, topped with cross-laminated timber residential floors, all wrapped in a wood diagrid."

I quoted this tidbit from the article above, as I am confused. They are doing the first three floors in concrete and the rest in timbre. I thought code only allowed 6-7 storeys to be done in wood which would only bring this to 10 storeys. How is this project going to meet code if the building is 12 storeys?

 

[Mountain Man]

Some types of engineered wood products can achieve a flame spread rating that is considered non combustible, so I would assume that's the direction this one is going. They may require a variance or an alternative solution to get this approved, not sure what the restrictions are in the new 2019 Alberta Building Code as I haven't even looked at it yet. I know codes were supposed to be relaxing requirements on engineered wood products...

 

[googspecial]

https://calgaryherald.com/life/home...restigious-design-award-for-inglewood-project

"The design includes a cast-in-place concrete, three-storey commercial podium, topped with cross-laminated timber residential floors, all wrapped in a wood diagrid."

I quoted this tidbit from the article above, as I am confused. They are doing the first three floors in concrete and the rest in timbre. I thought code only allowed 6-7 storeys to be done in wood which would only bring this to 10 storeys. How is this project going to meet code if the building is 12 storeys?

Some types of engineered wood products can achieve a flame spread rating that is considered non combustible, so I would assume that's the direction this one is going. They may require a variance or an alternative solution to get this approved, not sure what the restrictions are in the new 2019 Alberta Building Code as I haven't even looked at it yet. I know codes were supposed to be relaxing requirements on engineered wood products...

Thought I had read this here, but maybe not... The province has approved 12-storey mass timber buildings, and is reducing traditional stick frame from 6 to 4.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-wood-building-change-1.5440182

 

[JoeUrban]

Ok, which buildings all together are currently being proposed? Lets start there and at least tackle those ones first.

Should Inglewood be tied to Ramsay in discussion or should they be separate? We're friends with Sunnyside over here in Hillhurst, but some days we feel like we can take care of ourselves. But then we remember that Bigtime (I know you're here somewhere) lives in Sunnyside and we figure we might as well stick together.

Maybe Surreal can drag all of this discussion relevant to Inglewood as a whole out of the RNSDQR Block and into an Inglewood thread, if he wishes. He has the power, I've seen it, should he want to use it.

Let me know what I've missed for proposed developments in the area and current buildings awaiting a destruction. If anyone has any history on these buildings please chime in.

Inglewood
RNDSQR Block:
- No buildings to be demolished that I can gather

Edison (Hungerford Properties):
- 907 9 Ave SE that houses Fairs Fair Bookstore and Galleria Inglewood (1.5 storeys)
Built 1948
- 915 9 Ave SE that currently houses Foxglove Studio, formerly Nemalux Lighting (2 storeys)
Built 1956

Louis on 9th (Landstar):
- 1025 9 Ave SE that formerly housed Trail Appliance Gallery (2 storeys)
Built 1945
- 1139 9 Ave SE that houses Starbucks, California Closets, Oak & Vine (1 storey)
Built 1981

1390 17 Ave SE (Hungerford Properties):
- 1390 17 Ave SE The very large, self named, Yellow Warehouse (1 storey)
Built 1963

1502-1508 10 Ave SE (Professional Custom Homes):
- 1502 single family bungalow
Built 1928
- 1508 single family bungalow
Built 1913

Ramsay
1100 Block of Maggie & 8th Street SE:
- 20 of 21 single family residences fronting 8th Street SE (The entirety of the block excluding #1127)
North half: #1105 (1900), #1107 (1932), #1109 (1906), #1111 (1912), #1113 (1913), #1115 (1912), #1117 (1977), #1121 (1906), #1123 (1908), #1125 (1944)
South half: #1129 (1914), #1131 (1914), #1133 (1914), #1135 (1910), #1137 (1911), #1139 (1908), #1141 (1908), #1143 (2018), #1145 (1910), #1147 (1914),

- 2 of 3 single family residences fronting Maggie Street SE (#1110 & 1120. #1140 being excluded)
#1110 (1983), #1120 (1975)

- 2 of 3 single family residences fronting 11th Ave SE (#803 & #805. #801 being excluded)
#803 (1913), #805 (1922)

I see that the city has 61 properties listed for Inglewood on the Inventory of Historic Resources. How do we know what properties haven't yet been evaluated or already have and have been excluded from consideration?

There's a few things at play here

1) The concern with the towers in Inglewood is the proposed heights increasing the pressure on the community to continue to allow such heights in what is considerd a historic community, or as @Disraeli put it "the height restrictions are meant to protect the feel of a neighbourhood which, in my opinion, is one of the most unique in the county. "

2) The Ramsay issue is upzoning on a block and in a community with high concentration of turn of the century buildings when the Inventory has not been finished.

In both instances the issue isn't just the specific sites, but the pressure the actions can place at the surrounding community.

I see that the city has 61 properties listed for Inglewood on the Inventory of Historic Resources. How do we know what properties haven't yet been evaluated or already have and have been excluded from consideration?

There really isn't which is a problem. All we know currently is the city hired a heritage consultant to survey most of the 'inner city doughnut' around downtown for buildings built before 1944 that had a high degree of original architectural integrity as this is typically required for a site to even be considered for inventory evaluation. The count came back at over 2000 sites. This isn't to say that the inventory is missing 2000 sites, as some or many of these would be considered as 'contributing' buildings if they were in a historical district, but a smaller subset would have the historical or architectural quality to be placed on the inventory in their own right.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

I just did a mini project in my capstone course (UBST 591) about mass timber (CLT is the most popular version) and hearing that this one will be the first mass timber tower in the prairies and probably the first in Canada east of Vancouver is verrrrry exciting to me

 

[zagox]

From the Inglewood CA newsletter:

"High-Density Residential / RNDSQR Block:

AFTER MULTIPLE MEETINGS with the Applicant since summer 2019 and a public Open House in December 2019, the Committee finally received the land-use change for this high-density residential project planned for the corner of 9 Ave and 12 St SE (across
from Spolumbo’s, adjacent to the Inglewood Lawn Bowling Club), which will include the historic CIBC building.

The Applicant is seeking a land-use change to MU-2 (with a DC) with 12 stories, a height of 45m, and 6.5 FAR. It should be noted the Committee is not opposed to development along this important commercial corridor – some high-density residential projects have been supported along 9 Ave that respected the current bylaw maximum height of 20 metres and FAR of 3.0 within their zoning restrictions.

Based on the application submitted (without any DC information, not expected until spring 2020), the Committee did not support the application, based on concerns related to: height (45m), FAR (6.5), heritage preservation concerns (particularly concerning the CIBC building), and significant impacts to the adjacent neighbour (Lawn Bowling Club).

Two attendees from the Lawn Bowling Club attended the meeting and provided a summary of their engagement with RNDSQR, and the initiatives they’ve taken to communicate the plans out to their membership and club user groups. The Committee feels strongly that buildings along 9 Ave should respect the current bylaw maximum height of 20 metres, with a FAR not exceeding
3.0, in order to respect, preserve, and enhance 9 Avenue’s unique character and vibrant pedestrian-oriented streetscape."

 

[outoftheice]

I can appreciate the arguments that have been made in terms of limiting height to reduce the likelihood of Inglewood losing historic properties but in terms of street presence I really don't understand the concern. I live in East Village and 12 stories is essentially in the height range of the Alt Hotel, Hilton Hotel and N3 buildings. None of them feel like they over-power the street or the historic buildings located close to them. They're probably all close to the maximum height before that started to become an issue but the density they bring to the area is important. Having a handful of projects like this in Inglewood would be a benefit in my mind. Obviously the neighbourhood feels different.

 

[Kōsō]

I just did a mini project in my capstone course (UBST 591) about mass timber (CLT is the most popular version) and hearing that this one will be the first mass timber tower in the prairies and probably the first in Canada east of Vancouver is verrrrry exciting to me

Let us not forget where this all started. The whole mass timbre push came from the Wood and Innovation and Design Centre in Prince George BC, which was the first project of its kind in North America. They have been one of the driving forces for change in code for cross laminated timber materials across Canada.

Wood Innovation and Design Centre - Think Wood

www.thinkwood.com

 

[Cowtown]

This is so gaudy. How disappointing

Gaudy to the point of being cool

 

[haltcatchfire]

It’s about as gaudy as it is Gaudi.

This is so gaudy. How disappointing