Calgcouver said:
What are the expected amenity areas in buildings in Calgary (per sq.m)? I know in different municipalities in the lower mainland, amenity space is expected at varying amounts per sq.m or per unit, depending on municipality and unit type, but not sure what the requirement is in Calgary. It can be a bit onerous and throw off a proforma here with high land prices, depending on the pricepoint.
Click to expand...

Calgary's minimum amenity space requirement is 5 sq.m per unit
 
5sqft is about enough room for a person to stand in.
If you imagine a 2ft by 2.5ft box on the floor, that's 5 sqft. It's definitely not a lot.
5sqm is more like 6ft by 8ft.
 
hqdefault.jpg
 
Is the height of the towers including the podium? If no then those towers gonna be real tall! 55 storeys on top a 36 meter podium!
 
LloydBraun said:
5 square metres, but it can be provided via common, private space, or a combination of both.
Click to expand...

Just say balconies. They belong to the strata with the unit owners only having exclusive rights to use them. They factor into the amenity space calculation.
 
Crazy, this project is massive. 1252 units is game changing for that area, at 1.5 ppl per unit that would add aroun 1900 ppl to the area, dayum. The east end of 17th and Mission would definitely feel it. Are these going to be rentals or condo?
 
Meikkhaell said:
It also says this:
"The towers are connected at the base of the building (podium) which has a height of approx 36 metres."

A 120ft podium, wow!
Click to expand...

As a usually pro-density person, this seems too much, particularly in the podium. I assume it is a response to an inability to put underground parking there in the flood plain or something (we might have already discussed that part). A 12 storey podium is very significant and will have an impact. Imagine the Metropolitan from 11th & 11th, now stick 3 45+ storey towers on-top. Impressive but oppressive as well. With such a mass, I would be curious (and worried) how they could possibly fit in the riverbank area as a natural one with a path or something.

That's a permanent shadow zone for a large swath of the area for much of the year. This single project would soak up a huge amount of demand for apartments in a format that isn't conducive for good street-life or vibrancy generation (expect for the sheer magnitude). As we see on many projects, other issues on the location aren't really the developers fault - e.g. anti-pedestrian Macleod Trail couplets - but this project's massing seems to be leaning into poor local planning. It's like they decided McLeod Trail is pretty unpleasant so they might as well add near permanent shadows. The river is not very usable there so block it off.

Is the site really so difficult that it needs this kind of density to make sense financially? Cut everything by 1/3 or a half and my objections could be reduced by 2/3. Is there any projects from other cities of this scale (and podium) that actually have enjoyable street interfaces? Can the density alone generate the pedestrian traffic to activate the area?

Cut every dimension by 1/3 or 1/2 and my objections could be reduced significantly.
 
Ya, lame. all your points are valid. That area, despite the river being there is bleak and this woukd seem to do nothing to improve it. I suppose you cant expect much between those two nasty roads. I would sure hate to be parking eight floors above ground every day. Thumbs down.
 
Cutting density or the podium's height in half doesn't address the length of the podium which is what creates the wall effect. The large block is a failure without public accessible private/ public spaces to the riverfront breaking up the block. Waterfront Condos, for example.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top