News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

The designers for the new public washrooms in the East Village should take a look at Thompson Family Park in the Beltline. It's just dry dirt crumbling down an artificial hill. It might look like a nice healthy, stable green slope in a rendering but in reality.... nope
 
John Wick said:
The designers for the new public washrooms in the East Village should take a look at Thompson Family Park in the Beltline. It's just dry dirt crumbling down an artificial hill. It might look like a nice healthy, stable green slope in a rendering but in reality.... nope
Click to expand...
The hill with the slide isn't holding up? That's too bad.

I like going to that park with my kid, but it's an interesting dynamic - families and street people coexisting in a delicate balance.
 
John Wick said:
The designers for the new public washrooms in the East Village should take a look at Thompson Family Park in the Beltline. It's just dry dirt crumbling down an artificial hill. It might look like a nice healthy, stable green slope in a rendering but in reality.... nope
Click to expand...
A rare instance where artificial turf would be preferred.

I’d also go for a thick mat of moss/clover. But I think we’re too dry for it.
 
DiscoStu said:
Hopefully it's used more than that skating/hockey rink the City put up a little while ago. I know it's pretty new but I have yet to see one person on it.
Click to expand...
Another swing and a miss by CMLC, all that rink did was destroy what was left of the X-Country trails and also promptly flooded the pathways.
 
It probably didn't help that they build the rink in February, instead of you know, at the start of winter. I hope it's not temporary though, as that would be a bigger waste considering the timing.

I go for a daily walk after lunch (yeah, I'm like an old grandpa) and so far this winter there has been exactly one day where I saw anyone using the cross country trails. Granted, the snow conditions haven't been great there this year, but thats not getting much use either.
 
Surrealplaces said:
calgarysun.com

Leong: Calgary can learn from New Zealand's upzoning experience

Faced with insufficient housing stock, the New Zealand government relaxed zoning rules in 2021. Its largest city did the same in 2016.
calgarysun.com calgarysun.com
Click to expand...

I've been doing some thinking about what exactly the effect of the up-zoning will be. Some thoughts

Areas that currently are zoned for RC-2 and are planned to be up-zoned to R-CG I think there will be little effect. I doubt any applications to up-zone individual lots to allow for row-housing in those areas are being denied so the blanket up-zoning is mostly just a formality. If anything redevelopment pressures might be reduced due to new opportunities allowed in parts of the city where they weren't before

Areas that currently are zoned for RC-2 and are planned to be up-zoned to H-GO I think will have significantly increased redevelopment

Areas that currently are zoned for RC-1 and are planned to be up-zoned to R-CG and are in the inner-city I think might lead to minor increased redevelopment. I'm not sure if a rowhouse in Rosedale, Elbow park, Mount Royal can be 'luxury' enough to justify the price they will need to be sold for to recoup land and building cost. But a duplex might be.

Areas that currently are zoned for RC-1 and are planned to be up-zoned to R-CG and are not in the inner-city I think is a real question mark.
Partially because there's a big difference between say Willow Park and Southview.

The million dollar question is, is there a big pent up demand for duplexes and row houses in the RC-1 'outer city' that this will now satisfy, possibly even redirecting some redevelopment from the inner-city, or will it be a big nothing burger?


This is all just guesses, curious what others think.
 
Last edited:
JoeUrban said:
Areas that currently are zoned for RC-1 and are planned to be up-zoned to R-CG and are in the inner-city I think might lead to minor increased redevelopment. I'm not sure if a rowhouse in Rosedale, Elbow park, Mount Royal can be 'luxury' enough to justify the price they will need to be sold for to recoup land and building cost. But a duplex might be.
Click to expand...

As someone who technically lives in Rosedale (I say technically, as I'm in the steerage-class section of the neighbourhood about as far from the bluff as you can get), I agree that its probably not going to be a neighbourhood where you're going to see a ton of rowhouses and multiplexes, no matter what the zoning. The land value is probably just not going to make it very economical...unless prices go insane, there will most likely always be a more lucrative alternative for a developer to build on. This may not go over well on this site, but I actually would prefer it doesn't get inundated with development either...or if it does, atleast the quality remains high... there's a nice aesthetic character to this neighbourhood, and the last thing it needs is generic duplex boxes. I like that we have a variety of options in Calgary, and not every neighbourhood needs to turn into Bridgeland/Altadore.

Now having said that, what I do think would be interesting AND viable in this neighbourhood, is people building laneway houses. We are lucky to have some really nice alleys here, and most of the lots are fairly wide...so I think it's pretty ideally situated for laneways. With SAIT/ACAD nearby, they'd be perfect to rent out to students. It would be a nice way to add some density, without really disrupting the vibe of the neighbourhood. I imagine you'd also get a lot less neighbourhood pushback.
 
DiscoStu said:
As someone who technically lives in Rosedale (I say technically, as I'm in the steerage-class section of the neighbourhood about as far from the bluff as you can get), I agree that its probably not going to be a neighbourhood where you're going to see a ton of rowhouses and multiplexes, no matter what the zoning. The land value is probably just not going to make it very economical...unless prices go insane, there will most likely always be a more lucrative alternative for a developer to build on. This may not go over well on this site, but I actually would prefer it doesn't get inundated with development either...or if it does, atleast the quality remains high... there's a nice aesthetic character to this neighbourhood, and the last thing it needs is generic duplex boxes. I like that we have a variety of options in Calgary, and not every neighbourhood needs to turn into Bridgeland/Altadore.

Now having said that, what I do think would be interesting AND viable in this neighbourhood, is people building laneway houses. We are lucky to have some really nice alleys here, and most of the lots are fairly wide...so I think it's pretty ideally situated for laneways. With SAIT/ACAD nearby, they'd be perfect to rent out to students. It would be a nice way to add some density, without really disrupting the vibe of the neighbourhood. I imagine you'd also get a lot less neighbourhood pushback.
Click to expand...
Good call on laneway, that's often forgotten when discussing putting 2 units on a lot.
 
So from reading this thread, I understand it that the expectation is the city wide zoning change will pass based on peoples estimates on current councilors views.

I just saw a draft letter signed by 20ish community associations protesting this zoning change, which will go to council.

If council votes to approve the City wide zoning change, would the UCP have the legal power to nullify the City decision on the basis that the City didn't listen to the will of its people by ignoring the community association's will, in conjunction with choosing to not do a plebiscite?

Now, given how passionate people are about this issue, I want to say this isn't the outcome I am hoping for, I am aware we elect people to make choices on our behalf and I am not saying my argument for the UCP to take this action is strong/ethical. I wonder how much big money in Calgary would be against this change and how many strings they have with the UCP.

Therefore, I am curious on the legality of it and if people think the UCP might chose to do so if its legal?
 
Mull said:
So from reading this thread, I understand it that the expectation is the city wide zoning change will pass based on peoples estimates on current councilors views.

I just saw a draft letter signed by 20ish community associations protesting this zoning change, which will go to council.

If council votes to approve the City wide zoning change, would the UCP have the legal power to nullify the City decision on the basis that the City didn't listen to the will of its people by ignoring the community association's will, in conjunction with choosing to not do a plebiscite?

Now, given how passionate people are about this issue, I want to say this isn't the outcome I am hoping for and aware we elect people to make choices on our behalf - I am just very curious. I wonder how much big money in Calgary would be against this change and how many strings they have with the UCP.

Therefore, I am curious on the legality of it and if people think the UCP might chose to do so if its legal?
Click to expand...
I think UCP meddling once started will be permanent and constant, no matter the vote outcome that would be a disaster.
 
One unintended consequence of this zoning change I am concerned about is developers build R-CG on land that otherwise could use more density. Previously they had to apply for land use change anyways so may have applied for more density, like an MC1 or MC2. But now, they could apply for a DP immediately with R-CG, the barrier to higher density is greater. There should’ve been a concurrent plan to up zone neighbourhood corridors (beyond the Main Street program).

One example is 19th Street NW. Outside of existing retail, everything else is being proposed R-CG, including lots directly north of the 19+2 apartment building and the land near the Kensington intersection (this is being upzoned by RNDSQR in a separate application). There should be upzoning of at least the West side of the street from Kensington to 6th Ave, which is perfect for retail/mixed use by having a laneway (Dairy Lane) parallel to 19th.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top