[Out of Towner]

Sure, it might decrease the property value of an adjacent house in very specific circumstances, but there's so many other factors involved with that and usually new development is an indicator that your area is desirable and sought after, which almost always means higher property values across the board.

The fact that these projects are being built in Belgravia is proof enough that being wealthy and throwing money at stopping infill isn't going to work anymore, at least with this current city council. And believe me, Glenora is going to see a lot more densification along Stoney Plain Road soon enough with the VLW being built.


Interesting way to phrase that! Trust me, these buildings aren't a threat to the wealthy residents of these areas. You can be assured that they'll still be relatively expensive and targeted towards a wealthier demographic of buyers/renters if that puts your mind at ease.

Disappointing is how I would characterize the development if the rendering is an accurate representation of the building. The corner windows look good but ground floor townhouses at street level and the front doors leading to the street without a front patios? A gable roof and landscaping that looks like the developer ran out of money? Those are cost cutting measures and the building does not reflect Belgravia fairly. I'm pro development but at the same there should be an obligation for developers to respect the financial commitment that existing residents have made to their communities. The "oh well, too bad, so sad" approach isn't the best one.

 

[David A]

Lest we forget the developer is not building this just to satisfy existing residents who btw already have homes.

The developer is building for new residents and needs to balance many factors to have a place both attractive to them and affordable for them.

 

[Out of Towner]

A developers primary goal is to build accommodation and to make money. A communities satisfaction for its project is secondary. On that we agree. The number of developers that will attempt to upgrade or improve a community by doing more than what the minimum standard allows can probably be counted on one hand Some developers know the minimum standards better than the back of their hand and then use the "goodwill" built up a community to market their product. And again. I'm not anti development. Just don't think that densification should be used as a reason to build junk on the backs of people who have worked hard to improve their communities.

 

[David A]

I realize there is a lot of bias against multi family developments by SFHs and rationalizations for them. Much of relates to fear of change, having lower income, having less desirable or people living in their area.

However, it doesn't sound so good to say that out loud so other obstacles and road blocks are put forward. I don't feel it is fair or accurate to use the word junk related to this project.

 

[Seamusmuldrew]

Disappointing is how I would characterize the development if the rendering is an accurate representation of the building. The corner windows look good but ground floor townhouses at street level and the front doors leading to the street without a front patios? A gable roof and landscaping that looks like the developer ran out of money? Those are cost cutting measures and the building does not reflect Belgravia fairly. I'm pro development but at the same there should be an obligation for developers to respect the financial commitment that existing residents have made to their communities. The "oh well, too bad, so sad" approach isn't the best one.

I am curious about how Belgravia is to be reflected. Not sure how much time you spend in the neighbourhood but the popularity of the neighbourhood isn’t architecture-based like Glenora or Westmount. The modern style of this development actually reflects the style of many infill homes built in Belgravia and will fit well. Also I don’t believe Metro 78 has a gable roof; are you referring to the McKernan project on 76 Av/114 St?

 

[Out of Towner]

I am curious about how Belgravia is to be reflected. Not sure how much time you spend in the neighbourhood but the popularity of the neighbourhood isn’t architecture-based like Glenora or Westmount. The modern style of this development actually reflects the style of many infill homes built in Belgravia and will fit well. Also I don’t believe Metro 78 has a gable roof; are you referring to the McKernan project on 76 Av/114 St?

The Metro project I'd argue is really quite good. Particularly given the challenge presented by the rail line. It's the 76 Ave / 114 St. project that's sub par. Not sure if the roof line is to accommodate an open to above but the main floor elevation that's the primary focus of everybody going past is terrible and there's zero landscaping.

 

[Seamusmuldrew]

The Metro project I'd argue is really quite good. Particularly given the challenge presented by the rail line. It's the 76 Ave / 114 St. project that's sub par. Not sure if the roof line is to accommodate an open to above but the main floor elevation that's the primary focus of everybody going past is terrible and there's zero landscaping.

Fair enough, I get where you’re coming from. Hopefully they add in some landscaping after construction, I can’t imagine they’d leave it like that

 

[northlands]

This project has seen concerningly little activity lately. Save us @Marcolangzi !!

 

[northlands]

Good news: excavation contractor on-site making some (pretty minor) progress. At least it’s not fully stalled.

 

[MacLac]

@Marcolangzi said that full on construction wouldn’t start until the new year anyway…..so we should be good