[maestro]

Sprawl shouldn't be looked at as a product of density. It should be looked at from a design point of view. If it is only functional for driving, for example. Canadian developers are generally building denser than they have 60 years ago, however, different uses and different housing options which were integrated are now segregated. Walking to the store for milk is no longer a pleasant thing to do. We've seen progress or a reversal in the last ten years or so in subdivision planning. Hopefully, that will continue.

 

[Disraeli]

I'm going to be a devil's advocate for a bit. While I may not be a fan of suburban sprawl, I actually like cities that offer a variety of options, not just all density (Hong Kong or Cairo for example) or all sprawl (say...Phoenix, or Atlanta). A lot of people prefer to live in the burbs, and are happy there. The real issue with sprawl is cost and sustainability, and if new suburban development can continue to improve and address that, I see no issue with having both. The goal in the end is to have happy residents.

One thing that has been really improving in Calgary is the increasing number of urban nodes surrounding the Core-- neighborhoods like Bridgeland, Marda Loop, 16th ave NW. Areas like that are always what impresses me the most about cities such as Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal; that their urban areas are not confined to their immediate downtown cores.
Now of course Calgary doesn't have expansive pre-war neighborhoods to draw on like those cities but in a lot of cases (Marda Loop comes to mind), you can see how good mixed use development can alter what has historically been a car oriented neighborhood into something urban and walkable. It also gives greater diversity of choices to those who might not want to live directly downtown but don't want to live in the burbs either. It's a promising sign that Calgary is maturing when it comes to its urban form.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Interesting read

https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/08/21/Build-Better-Burbs/

 

[Disraeli]

Hi Folks,

I have a keen interest in architecture and particularly historic buildings. I come from Europe and I grew up with them all around me. Calgary is a young city and therefore has a decent but limited supply of old architecture. Of late, I have come to discover how much of Calgary has been demolished in the last 30 years to make room for redevelopment.

Here is a list of designated heritage buildings in Calgary which have been council approved to receive such designation.

http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/pd/Pages/Heritage-planning/Inventory-of-evaluated-historic-resources.aspx

Researching this list I have come to discover that very few of these buildings are actually protected from demolition. For example, the Palliser Hotel is one of the most beautiful buildings in the City. It is listed as a heritage building but has no protection. If a developer purchased the building tomorrow, they could turn it into a parking lot if they desired. The Calgary tower is the exact same. This is just two examples of many.


The list of designated heritage buildings is marked with heritage buildings that have been demolished. A soon to be causality of redevelopment is the Jalland Block Building (currently Wavves Coffee House) 17th Ave & 5th Street. This heritage building is scheduled to be demolished in the next couple of weeks.

It appears that cash is king in this City and in the words of the chief city planner Rollin Stanley himself: "density at any cost" I guess..

Sadly, Calgary's heritage has long suffered from a combination of never having had an extensive pre-war commercial core and myopic city planners in the 1970's to 2000's who viewed office development as a means to propel Calgary into a image of a "modern metropolis"-- an image which was the antithesis of modern mixed use planning. By the time Calgary began to acknowledge the value in preserving it's built heritage, a good portion of Calgary's pre-war commercial core had been razed for mega block developments such as Gulf Canada square; the greatest loss (in my opinion) being the strip of hotels along 9th ave near the Palliser Hotel. While It would be anachronistic to condemn planners of that generation for not seeing the value of heritage buildings as we see them today, the same cannot be said about contemporary planners. And while I see modern mixed use developments with a focus on pedestrian realm a night and day improvement over the wind swept plazas and non-descript office towers of the 80's, they cannot forget that there is a finite inventory of buildings such as the Wavves Coffee building, and when they are gone they are gone.

Images retrieved from from the Glenbow Archives

If you are interested, local historians Max Foran and Stephanie White have both published works featuring some interesting research on the unique nature of Calgary's boom time economies and it's effect on planning.

 

[Social Justice]

Incredible photos!!!

Thank you so much

 

[Social Justice]

Sadly, Calgary's heritage has long suffered from a combination of never having had an extensive pre-war commercial core and myopic city planners in the 1970's to 2000's who viewed office development as a means to propel Calgary into a image of a "modern metropolis"-- an image which was the antithesis of modern mixed use planning. By the time Calgary began to acknowledge the value in preserving it's built heritage, a good portion of Calgary's pre-war commercial core had been razed for mega block developments such as Gulf Canada square; the greatest loss (in my opinion) being the strip of hotels along 9th ave near the Palliser Hotel. While It would be anachronistic to condemn planners of that generation for not seeing the value of heritage buildings as we see them today, the same cannot be said about contemporary planners. And while I see modern mixed use developments with a focus on pedestrian realm a night and day improvement over the wind swept plazas and non-descript office towers of the 80's, they cannot forget that there is a finite inventory of buildings such as the Wavves Coffee building, and when they are gone they are gone.

I think it's funny when people talk about destroying brutalist buildings from the 60's. It's the same arguments planners made in the 60's when talking about pre-WWI buildings. People say the CBE building downtown is ugly, outdated and doesn't serve a purpose and the land should be used for a tower. I say it just needs more time in the cellar barrel to age

Once it's gone...it's gone.

 

[maestro]

Exactly. It's the rise in popularity of prewar than a greater appreciation of heritage.

 

[Always_Biking]

I think it's funny when people talk about destroying brutalist buildings from the 60's. It's the same arguments planners made in the 60's when talking about pre-WWI buildings. People say the CBE building downtown is ugly, outdated and doesn't serve a purpose and the land should be used for a tower. I say it just needs more time in the cellar barrel to age

Once it's gone...it's gone.

I like the CBE building, probably because it's one of the few brutalist structures around, but I still think it's worth keeping.

 

[Oddball]

I've already stumped for it repeatedly around these parts. I'm a huge fan of the Old CBE Building. I've even tried to make a case in my own limited way for some of the other brutalist buildings in town that aren't as easy to appreciate. Maybe I should up my engagement level for "schmuck on the internet" to "crotchety letter writer."

 

[Mountain Man]

Wow, those old pics really show how much we demolished in this city!

 

[Oddball]

The biggest shame to me has to be the loss of the train station. Aesthetically, I'm sure it was at least nice. I've only seen a few pictures of it and I can't say I have any complaints. More importantly however, I think we're getting back around to the point where we're going to need a downtown train station again. I really like Union Station in Toronto. I would be nice to be able to maintain that connection to our past. Sigh, progress.

Maybe someday they'll build a nice new one we can cherish along the vast dead stretches North and South of the tracks.

 

[CBBarnett]

Wow, those old pics really show how much we demolished in this city!

It's quite unfortunate. That era of building design allowed so many more uses and more flexibility, exactly what we need more of. However, economics of boom-town economies being what they are, what happened in Calgary was not particularly surprising.

I recently spent some time in Butte, Montana which has an interesting past thanks to a mid-1800s to mid-1900s mining boom. Although it has only 40,000 people today, Butte has several times the stock of the early 1900s era apartment buildings and houses than Calgary. Once Butte's mining bust hit in the 1960s and 1970s - continuing until today in most ways - they have this beautiful stock of heritage buildings sitting mostly empty. There is no incentive to tear them down if there is no market to build something else. Perhaps the best heritage building preservation strategy seems to be having no economic growth.

While preserving existing stock of heritage buildings - particularly buildings that are easily repurposed for any use - is a great idea, we should also look to emulate the fundamentals that make those heritage buildings so great to begin with. Easily repurposed and multi-use, human-scaled, architectural interesting, no parking. If every new buildings was built like that we would create a rolling stock of buildings that serve the same function as the classic buildings we all like.

 

[simster3]

I saw some city notice boards at the NE parcel at 14th St and 10th Ave SW. Any idea of what is going in there?

 

[MichaelS]

I saw some city notice boards at the NE parcel at 14th St and 10th Ave SW. Any idea of what is going in there?

https://developmentmap.calgary.ca/#property/DP2017-2218

Tough to tell based on the description. Not sure how much office, but with 2 buildings, I fear it may be just a couple of 1-2 storey buildings, with parking lots surrounding them.

 

[IanBray]

https://developmentmap.calgary.ca/#property/DP2017-2218

Tough to tell based on the description. Not sure how much office, but with 2 buildings, I fear it may be just a couple of 1-2 storey buildings, with parking lots surrounding them.

Interesting. I used to live around that area and always wondered why it wasn't developed. Will be disappointing if its only a single story. That area could use some mid size residential but I can see that happening as its next to the train. But then again, it's close to the river and Kensington.