[JoeUrban]

What I would love to see:
a) Finish the Inventory of Historic Resources for Inglewood, it's never been completed
b) determine which portions, blocks, have the highest concentration of historic resources
c) have very restrictive development guidelines within that area
d) apply a more 'city-wide' guideline to the rest
e) apply a relaxed density allowance to the current and former industrial areas to help make up for c)

Actually one other thing: A desired amount of density (in the form of population/sq km) from innercity communities.
Then task the communities to map out where they would accept how much density to reach that goal.
Set the goal, but don't be prescriptive to how a community achieves it, leave that to them to create their own 'home-grown' plan and then stick to it.

 

[DiscoStu]

Good discussion!

I work in the neighbourhood, and while I'm generally for these developments, I get, and even share, some of the concerns.

Personally, my biggest issue is not necessarily one of height, but one of volume. I think what gives a good neighbourhood character is a certain eclectic mish-mash of different forms. You look at the character blocks in Inglewood or anything similar, and there's typically a half-dozen different buildings on every block, each with its own particular quirks, mistakes, and eras. Imperfection and variety of form is what gives it charm.

You can't replicate (or rush) that feeling with massive half or full-block developments, regardless of the height. They always end up being a little too master planned. Yes, they try their best to design in some variety, but it always feels fake, so you lose that eclectic experience.

I think the key is to prevent too much land from being conglomerated. I'd much rather have 4-6 taller buildings taking up a block, than one shorter monolith that takes up the whole thing.

 

[Mountain Man]

Can we start a counter petition? I get what they are trying to do, but Inglewood needs more density and it starts with 9th. Look at 10St for an example of what density looks like, it's not 6Ave downtown it still has character.

 

[JoeUrban]

Can we start a counter petition? I get what they are trying to do, but Inglewood needs more density and it starts with 9th. Look at 10St for an example of what density looks like, it's not 6Ave downtown it still has character.

I agree about 10th street, but all of the buildings on 10th that are a positive addition to the street (in my opinion) are all around 6 stories or less, which Inglewood supports.

 

[JoeUrban]

I think one of the issues in Inglewood is you have a struggle of identities. It's both 'the historical origin community of Calgary', and it's an inner-city community 1 km from downtown. In some sense it's like the 'real' Heritage Park, actually a historic area and not contrived. Thoughtful density is good, but on the other a 12 or 18 story tower doesn't exactly scream "Historic Inglewood".
Is the solution segregation? Carve out a historical village and redevelop around it? Is it to do a 50:50 mesh of historical buildings and towers? Is it to just create East Village Part 2 just with some more character buildings?

If you were in another international city would a 12 or 18 story tower be what you would expect as the entrance to a place that is apparently the most historic area of a city, and would it invite you to explore it?

( and I realize this isn't an 18 story proposal, I'm talking about the various proposals not just the RNDSQR one)

 

[CBBarnett]

I think one of the issues in Inglewood is you have a struggle of identities. It's both 'the historical origin community of Calgary', and it's an inner-city community 1 km from downtown. In some sense it's like the 'real' Heritage Park, actually a historic area and not contrived. Thoughtful density is good, but on the other a 12 or 18 story tower doesn't exactly scream "Historic Inglewood".
Is the solution segregation? Carve out a historical village and redevelop around it? Is it to do a 50:50 mesh of historical buildings and towers? Is it to just create East Village Part 2 just with some more character buildings?

If you were in another international city would a 12 or 18 story tower be what you would expect as the entrance to a place that is apparently the most historic area of a city, and would it invite you to explore it?

I would think most wouldn't explore Inglewood due to it's isolation from the urban fabric and lack of local population (e.g. it's far sleepier than typical tourist areas on most nights). This is a very Calgary problem of having pockets of urban vibrancy separated by swathes of nothingness or auto-orientation - but Inglewood is the prime example ( see the CensusMapper clip below). The scale is in residents per hectare. Everything in grey has a population of zero, most have a daytime population of zero as well (rivers, train yards, Stampede Park etc.)

Inglewood has done great things on it's transition as a retail hub the past 10 years, but in the long term I would be far more concerned about the structural problems that come from persistently low local population within and around the community. Improving non-automotive connectivity is crucial (e.g. pathways and Greenline), but so is having a local resident population. When consumer tastes change or competing retail areas become bigger attractions, there is little to fall back on without a strong local population (see Stephen Avenue over the past 5 years for a current local example). Enormous local populations in a walkable catchment area are the secret of the longevity of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver's best vibrant main streets.

 

[MichaelS]

Actually one other thing: A desired amount of density (in the form of population/sq km) from innercity communities.
Then task the communities to map out where they would accept how much density to reach that goal.
Set the goal, but don't be prescriptive to how a community achieves it, leave that to them to create their own 'home-grown' plan and then stick to it.

A caveat to this: make sure it is informed by actual infrastructure capacity and costs to achieve necessary capacity. To be fair, this is something sorely missing from the current ARP process at The City as these policy plans showing large density increases are drawn up. Sure, everyone can talk and agree to what the amount of people should be, and where they should be, when it is only drawing colours on a map. What happens when the chosen scenario is discovered to require a $100 million sanitary sewer upgrade?

 

[JoeUrban]

I would think most wouldn't explore Inglewood due to it's isolation from the urban fabric and lack of local population (e.g. it's far sleepier than typical tourist areas on most nights).

Yup I agree. One major issue, and maybe the most major issue is someone exploring our downtown has to walk almost 1 km past a whole lot of almost nothing between 4th St and the Deane House to even get to Inglewood which is a huge problem. Inglewood definitely can benefit from more population as well, no argument there.

If someone said to me "hey let's go walk to this historic district way in the distance.

I'd be like... no thanks.

 

[DiscoStu]

Ha, I literally just got back from walking that stretch from Inglewood to the Library and back. It's a pretty desolate experience, that's for sure...especially through the tundra known as Fort Calgary.

 

[DiscoStu]

This is a very Calgary problem of having pockets of urban vibrancy separated by swathes of nothingness or auto-orientation

Not only is it surrounded by nothingness, but access from inner-city neighbourhood to inner-city neighbourhood in Calgary has always been pretty poor.The growth of bike lanes are definitely helping, but our entire public transit system is based on shuttling people into the inner-city, but there's very little thought given to transporting people around the inner city. For example, I live in Bridgeland, but it's surprisingly time consuming to get to Inglewood by public transit or walking. There's no bus connecting the two communities, and walking wise you have to snake around quite a bit. Biking is the only really efficient way, but that's not really a year-round solution for most. Similarly, I have couple of employees who live in the west Beltline, and getting to Inglewood with public transit has been a lot more challenging than one would imagine.

 

[Mountain Man]

I agree about 10th street, but all of the buildings on 10th that are a positive addition to the street (in my opinion) are all around 6 stories or less, which Inglewood supports.

I think Pixel is a good addition. St John's is pretty ugly, but the retail at grade saves it and the height isn't overwhelming to 10th. I think 10 - 12 storeys is the absolute max, as long as the height is setback a bit from the street with a podium.

 

[JoeUrban]

What's interesting here is while we discuss how to shoehorn density into Inglewood, there is approx 40,000 sq m of undeveloped land just west of the Brewery site, from 14a st west to 13 st, and from 17 ave to the tracks mostly of which is just being used as a giant yard, where thousands of people could live without affecting the community negatively at all.

 

[Mountain Man]

Soon that will all go away hopefully!

 

[Social Justice]

I would think most wouldn't explore Inglewood due to it's isolation from the urban fabric and lack of local population (e.g. it's far sleepier than typical tourist areas on most nights). This is a very Calgary problem of having pockets of urban vibrancy separated by swathes of nothingness or auto-orientation - but Inglewood is the prime example ( see the CensusMapper clip below). The scale is in residents per hectare. Everything in grey has a population of zero, most have a daytime population of zero as well (rivers, train yards, Stampede Park etc.)

Inglewood has done great things on it's transition as a retail hub the past 10 years, but in the long term I would be far more concerned about the structural problems that come from persistently low local population within and around the community. Improving non-automotive connectivity is crucial (e.g. pathways and Greenline), but so is having a local resident population. When consumer tastes change or competing retail areas become bigger attractions, there is little to fall back on without a strong local population (see Stephen Avenue over the past 5 years for a current local example). Enormous local populations in a walkable catchment area are the secret of the longevity of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver's best vibrant main streets.

View attachment 224867

Not only is it surrounded by nothingness, but access from inner-city neighbourhood to inner-city neighbourhood in Calgary has always been pretty poor.The growth of bike lanes are definitely helping, but our entire public transit system is based on shuttling people into the inner-city, but there's very little thought given to transporting people around the inner city. For example, I live in Bridgeland, but it's surprisingly time consuming to get to Inglewood by public transit or walking. There's no bus connecting the two communities, and walking wise you have to snake around quite a bit. Biking is the only really efficient way, but that's not really a year-round solution for most. Similarly, I have couple of employees who live in the west Beltline, and getting to Inglewood with public transit has been a lot more challenging than one would imagine.

I think the Greenline is going to be a huge bonus for Inglewood. Similar to how Sunnyside station benefits Kensington, it'll ferry a lot of people into the neighborhood.

 

[ByeByeBaby]

I think one of the issues in Inglewood is you have a struggle of identities. It's both 'the historical origin community of Calgary', and it's an inner-city community 1 km from downtown. In some sense it's like the 'real' Heritage Park, actually a historic area and not contrived. Thoughtful density is good, but on the other a 12 or 18 story tower doesn't exactly scream "Historic Inglewood".
Is the solution segregation? Carve out a historical village and redevelop around it? Is it to do a 50:50 mesh of historical buildings and towers? Is it to just create East Village Part 2 just with some more character buildings?

If you were in another international city would a 12 or 18 story tower be what you would expect as the entrance to a place that is apparently the most historic area of a city, and would it invite you to explore it?

( and I realize this isn't an 18 story proposal, I'm talking about the various proposals not just the RNDSQR one)

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.