[ActiveTruth]

Some more mural magic. I can't say enough good things about what BUMP has done over the last few years

https://twitter.com/x/status/1442580144925839367

Amen!

 

[Disraeli]

Calgary sees 13 applications for first round of incentives for downtown office conversion

This article puts the problem in perspective: https://www.westerninvestor.com/bri...-space-leased-downtown-than-vancouver-4463482

We still have more leased office space than Vancouver and over 43million square feet of downtown inventory. That has to be the highest per capita in North America.

Getting some inventory off the market will help but this problem is really unheard of to have that much office space relative to population. Goes to show what a gravy train O&G was.

 

[Mountain Man]

That mural is dope!

 

[Calgcouver]

Due to climate, Calgary's trees are much more fragile than those in other cities. Attempts to move trees or keep them alive when doing work around their roots rarely succeed.

Which strengthens the case against tearing down 700 mature trees along the busiest and most well-used part of our river pathway. Find a flood mitigation strategy that isn't produced by engineers exclusively as they will want a barren landscape, generous useless/unplanted setbacks from the berm if they get there way. Keep the mature trees, we barely have enough tree canopy as it is and it takes forever for trees to get established the way they are here. This coming from someone who lived in and bailed out Sunnyside during the floods.

 

[darwink]

Which strengthens the case against tearing down 700 mature trees along the busiest and most well-used part of our river pathway. Find a flood mitigation strategy that isn't produced by engineers exclusively as they will want a barren landscape, generous useless/unplanted setbacks from the berm if they get there way. Keep the mature trees, we barely have enough tree canopy as it is and it takes forever for trees to get established the way they are here. This coming from someone who lived in and bailed out Sunnyside during the floods.

There isn't a great solution tbh. Upstream I bet is 15 years away at best. and even then, will only offer so much protection.

I wonder how much it would cost to flood proof every house as an alternative. lift the main level above the 200 year line, relocate utilities up, make basements 'recoverable'.

 

[Mountain Man]

Losing trees is the lesser evil here, Sunnyside needs to be protected from future floods.

 

[Beltline_B]

We will see which projects come to market. If you had even a early stage one, with how the program was designed, it makes sense to apply even if it was just something you were considering maybe doing.

If we see even half of those 13 applications come to fruition, I'll be thrilled.

 

[Chowda7]

ATCO plans two Calgary solar farms in bid to give customers 'decarbonization' options for electricity

The ATCO Group announced plans Wednesday to build two new solar installations in Calgary with the capacity to power more than 18,000 homes.

calgaryherald.com

 

[ThujaPlicata]

I’ve looked at the Calgary development map and can’t seem to find any development proposal for this site. I heard the houses are coming down on Monday and some condominiums are going up. Anyone has any information? The location is in mission close to 17th ave and 4th street
https://goo.gl/maps/12tfvkQ9BwQM1yUg9

 

[Duck Lightning]

I’ve looked at the Calgary development map and can’t seem to find any development proposal for this site. I heard the houses are coming down on Monday and some condominiums are going up. Anyone has any information? The location is in mission close to 17th ave and 4th street
https://goo.gl/maps/12tfvkQ9BwQM1yUg9
View attachment 352968View attachment 352969View attachment 352970View attachment 352971

Unless the project changed it should be this: https://www.gravityarchitecture.com/mission-19

 

[ThujaPlicata]

Unless the project changed it should be this: https://www.gravityarchitecture.com/mission-19

I believe you're right! I checked gravity architecture and they seem to focus on inner city filling also I'm glad to see it's not a rental build development..

 

[MichaelS]

Not exactly Calgary, but damn near close enough. I knew this project was in the works, but had no idea the commercial component was so big. Same size as Market Mall is huge!

Shopping centre on city's doorstep approved after 'backdoor' dealings: Rocky View County councillor

Rocky View councillors who voted against the proposal say they're alarmed by how that process played out.

calgaryherald.com

 

[CBBarnett]

Not exactly Calgary, but damn near close enough. I knew this project was in the works, but had no idea the commercial component was so big. Same size as Market Mall is huge!

Shopping centre on city's doorstep approved after 'backdoor' dealings: Rocky View County councillor

Rocky View councillors who voted against the proposal say they're alarmed by how that process played out.

calgaryherald.com

Interesting, but convoluted read. If I read the article correctly I think this is what happened?

• Proposal approved by Rockyview Council in Sept 2021, given the scale and proximity to Calgary it would require a Regional board approval.
• Calgary has a veto at the regional board and would have vetoed it on regional impact grounds, but the developer offered concessions not part of the original approval to pay for road, transit and recreation impacts. As a result Calgary didn't veto the proposal.
• Rockyview Council members who voted against the original proposal at Rockyview Council complaining of "backdoor dealings" of Calgary to approve it - even though their Council already approved it.

That all sounds fairly.... reasonable. Ultimately, sprawl-inducing and painfully car-oriented of course, but the process sounded like it actually extracted better public value and mitigated some of the impacts to the region that otherwise wouldn't have been compensated for. Am I understanding this correctly? I don't really get what the complaint is.

 

[JoeUrban]

Weird I'm getting a 404 for the article link

 

[Mountain Man]

Interesting, but convoluted read. If I read the article correctly I think this is what happened?

• Proposal approved by Rockyview Council in Sept 2021, given the scale and proximity to Calgary it would require a Regional board approval.
• Calgary has a veto at the regional board and would have vetoed it on regional impact grounds, but the developer offered concessions not part of the original approval to pay for road, transit and recreation impacts. As a result Calgary didn't veto the proposal.
• Rockyview Council members who voted against the original proposal at Rockyview Council complaining of "backdoor dealings" of Calgary to approve it - even though their Council already approved it.

That all sounds fairly.... reasonable. Ultimately, sprawl-inducing and painfully car-oriented of course, but the process sounded like it actually extracted better public value and mitigated some of the impacts to the region that otherwise wouldn't have been compensated for. Am I understanding this correctly? I don't really get what the complaint is.

Yeah, what's shady about this? Sounds like RVC Councilors trying to pander to their anti-development constituents to me. The Herald needs to do a better job in their articles too, they totally try to paint it as some sort of scandal with that headline.