The Brewery District

[Spring2008]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Yikes, do we really think the city is going to allow a parking lot directly on 9th? Seems counter to what the general direction they typically go.

I didn't initially notice this fronts right onto 9th ave, should build over the surface parking with a mid-rise, at least in the future phases.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Yikes, do we really think the city is going to allow a parking lot directly on 9th? Seems counter to what the general direction they typically go.

They allowed parking in the front for the starbucks and liquor store that was built a few years ago. I didn't think it was a very good design.

[DizzyEdge]

I'll have far more details about this time tomorrow.

[DizzyEdge]

Looks like demolition of the two large sandstone 1905 storage buildings is imminent.
The fate of the center area (1892 through the 60s) is unknown currently, but does apparently still have a legal hold on demolition by the Province, as these were the original buildings the owner wanted to demolish in 2009.

[DizzyEdge]

Revelopment of historic Inglewood brewery district to include demolition of historic buildings

ERIKA STARK, CALGARY HERALD
More from Erika Stark, Calgary Herald
Published on: November 26, 2014Last Updated: November 26, 2014 5:01 PM MST

The taps have long dried up, the kegs empty, and most of the buildings at Inglewood’s former Calgary Brewing plant sit empty.
Developers hope to resurrect what was once considered both an economic and cultural hub, but also plan to demolish some of the city’s oldest sandstone buildings, including ones from 1892 and 1905.

Led by Matco Developments, the first phase of the brewery’s redevelopment will transform the bottling plant into a mixed-use retail space. While the final plans for the brewery district remain to be seen, developers hope it will be comparable to Granville Island in Vancouver or Toronto’s Distillery District.

According to a site plan, many of the structures to the south of the bottling plant will be demolished, pending the approval of the site’s concurrent land use and development permit application, which is to be submitted by the end of the month.

more here: http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...oric-buildings

[Spring2008]

While I'd like to see as many buildings preserved as possible, can the developer apply for public funding? Sounds like there's structural issues and at least a few of these buildings are well past their physical lifespan. Just wouldn't want a situation where redevelopment becomes unfeasible and site left to sit and rot away.

Could become a very interesting district , liking the boldest parts below.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

SEARCH
Calgary Herald

Calgary thalidomide victim appeals to health minister for compensation

Gallery: Bar S Ranch cattle drive

Nenshi finalizes weighty wager with Hamilton mayor-elect

5 Family-Friendly Things To Do This Weekend in Calgary

Shyam Selvadurai uses Buddhism as cultural link
SECTIONS
NEWS
OPINION
SPORTS
BUSINESS
ARTS
LIFE
CAREERS
OBITS
CLASSIFIEDS
DRIVING

HOME
NEWS
LOCAL
NEWS
POLITICS CRIME NATIONAL WORLD TRAFFIC
Redevelopment of Inglewood brewery district threatens historic buildings

ERIKA STARK, CALGARY HERALD
More from Erika Stark, Calgary Herald
Published on: November 26, 2014Last Updated: November 26, 2014 6:33 PM MST


SHARE ADJUST COMMENT PRINT
The taps have long dried up, the kegs empty, and most of the buildings at Inglewood’s former Calgary Brewing plant sit empty.
Developers hope to resurrect what was once considered both an economic and cultural hub, but also plan to demolish some of the city’s oldest sandstone buildings, including ones from 1892 and 1905.

Led by Matco Developments, the first phase of the brewery’s redevelopment will transform the bottling plant into a mixed-use retail space. While the final plans for the brewery district remain to be seen, developers hope it will be comparable to Granville Island in Vancouver or Toronto’s Distillery District.

According to a site plan, many of the structures to the south of the bottling plant will be demolished, pending the approval of the site’s concurrent land use and development permit application, which is to be submitted by the end of the month.



Most of those buildings pre-date the Second World War, and some of them, such as the original brewhouse and some of the keg and bottle storage facilities, were constructed before the First World War.

“It was a focal point in the community,” says Chris Edwards, the vice-president of the Calgary Heritage Initiative. “There’s definitely a huge historic value.”

It’s the second time in five years that structures at the Brewery plant have faced the prospect of demolition.



Site owner Ron Mathison wanted to demolish some of those buildings in 2009, but it was halted after the province ordered a historic resource impact assessment and the demolition permit expired. At the time, there were no plans for redevelopment of the site, prompting concerns that the entire area could eventually be demolished. The historic resource impact assessment has never been made public.

“There was a roof collapse and that’s what initiated our concern for safety and wanting to take some of these buildings down,” says Eileen Stan, the development program manager for Matco. “Since then, we’ve had further structural failures within that group of buildings so the need for us to address safety for the community has just grown over time.”

The current plan for the site proposes the demolition of the buildings within the provincial impact assessment area, in addition to the structures directly south of the bottling plant.

“I can understand that safety is a concern,” says Edwards. But he’s more concerned about the fate of the other buildings that weren’t included in the initial demolition permit in 2009.



He says the site is the victim of what he calls “demolition by neglect,” which is when buildings don’t receive proper maintenance and eventually, there is no choice but to tear them down. That neglect started before Matco took over the brewery site, he adds.

Edwards says he’s looking forward to seeing the plans for the remaining buildings on the site, but wishes more buildings would be retained.

“I think now we need to have a conversation about what we can do with the site to come up with a resolution that retains the historic value of the site but is also somewhat amenable to the site owners,” he says, pointing to Toronto’s Distillery District as an example. The 5.2-hectare site in downtown Toronto contains more than 40 heritage buildings and has been designated a National Historic Site.

“I’d really like to see the same sort of treatment (at the brewery),” Edwards says.



Matco is working with the province regarding the buildings slated for demolition within the area assessed in 2009, says Stan.

“Our intent is to salvage as much of the existing material that is still in good condition as we can and reuse those on the site,” she says.

In addition to the bottling plant and loading dock, Matco plans to retain the new fermentation tower, the former Horseman’s Hall of Fame, the engine room, the smoke stack and boiler building and the administration building, as well as one of the brewery’s original water wells. Part of the former fish hatchery will also be kept.

Ward 9 Coun. Gian-Carlo Carra says the brewery was once the “heart of Inglewood,” and he’s hopeful Matco’s redevelopment will bring it back to life while also honouring its history.

“It was also a source of amazing culture, with the first salt-water aquarium nowhere near the ocean in North America, the Horseman’s Hall of Fame, the Inglewood Pool and the Brewery Gardens was one of the first public parks.”

“My feeling has always been that in its best future, it’s those things again,” says Carra. “It’s a heart of commerce and a heart of culture and a driver for the community, a driver for the city and a driver for the region.”

He acknowledged the tension the development would likely create in Calgary’s oldest neighbourhood.

“I think there’s going to be some angst,” he conceded. “But I think that the common bond that holds everything together is that no one wants to see this as a building museum.”

“Whether you’re a hardcore heritage advocate, whether you’re a hardcore capitalist, whether you’re a neighbourhood person or a developer, I think there is general agreement that the site must rise again and it must rise again in a powerful way.”

[DizzyEdge]

I don't have permission to post the underlying 1972 photo, so it's blurred, but here's something that gives a good idea of what's there, what might be kept, and what is likely to go



Green is either to be kept as part of current phase (G (and H which is a 1980s building) or from comments in the Herald (R,T,U,V,D and possibly I and S which is another 1980s building)

Red is either to be demo'd as part of current phase (E, B/C, or likely demo'd as the rest of the red section is from the owners 2009 demo permit application)

Plus I would say W (the 1930s brewery gardens) have an unknown fate.

I'd be interested in retaining maybe half of the red section, as that's where most of the 1892-1905 sandstone buildings are.

The two sandstone storage buildings, B/C and E are apparently going to be a 72 stall parking lot...

[DizzyEdge]

I'm specifically interested in these parts

The top photo is from the 1890s, and the next one 1905.



Purple in this photo from left to right are (possibly) N, and then O and then R.

The orange area, which is the 1890s original brewery, and some of which still remained in the 1905 photo (orange again) might still exist in area Q but I'm not sure.

Area J and an obscured building next to it apparently still have at least parts from the 1890s, not sure about Q. The uncoloured parts are already gone.

[Spring2008]

Ok thanks, I agree those highlighted buildings are worth preserving.

And about the 72 surface lot part wtf? If they 're going to redevelop , do it right. Large site with lots of potential.

[DizzyEdge]

One thing interesting about that pic with all the purple, that "4 story building" is much larger than it might initially seem, as each of those windows must be 15-20 feet tall

[DizzyEdge]

Here is the latest on the Calgary (Inglewood) Brewery site

(1972 photo is an inset of photos NA-4476-1017 & NA-4476-1025 from the Glenbow Museum)

Color coded as follows: (Yellow and green 'footprints' are 1980s buildings not shown in this 1972 aerial)

GREEN - Concrete plans to retain
YELLOW - Has verbally indicated plans to retain, but no current plans
ORANGE - No plans verbally or otherwise to retain
RED - Plans to demolish, includes most of the 1890s-19-teens portions of the brewery, and most of the sandstone portions of the brewery. The province ordered an assessment for most of the red area, but has decided to not proceed with any protection, except..
PURPLE - Province has asked the owner for more info on this portion, may still allow demolition

1972 aerials used because since then some buildings have been obscured with newer ones or with metal siding.

Current plans for the red zone south of the green zone (2 1905 sandstone buildings) is a parking lot.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Here is the latest on the Calgary (Inglewood) Brewery site

(1972 photo is an inset of photos NA-4476-1017 & NA-4476-1025 from the Glenbow Museum)

Color coded as follows: (Yellow and green 'footprints' are 1980s buildings not shown in this 1972 aerial)

GREEN - Concrete plans to retain
YELLOW - Has verbally indicated plans to retain, but no current plans
ORANGE - No plans verbally or otherwise to retain
RED - Plans to demolish, includes most of the 1890s-19-teens portions of the brewery, and most of the sandstone portions of the brewery. The province ordered an assessment for most of the red area, but has decided to not proceed with any protection, except..
PURPLE - Province has asked the owner for more info on this portion, may still allow demolition

1972 aerials used because since then some buildings have been obscured with newer ones or with metal siding.

Current plans for the red zone south of the green zone (2 1905 sandstone buildings) is a parking lot.

Would really like to see at least a portion of the red section retained, wonder how bad of condition it is in right now.

I have a really hard time that it'll end up as a parking lot, if there was a new building going up it would be a bit easier to take, still hard to lose that much heritage but better that it is replaced with a building than a parking lot.

Is there a way the developer could get the parking requirements waived for retaining the heritage buildings?

[DizzyEdge]

My first concern is that no trades of that nature might be possible of the owner demo's all of the heritage buildings before that negotiation starts.

[Design-mind]

Saw that demo permits were granted to take out the buildings in question.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by Design-mind

Saw that demo permits were granted to take out the buildings in question.

Devastating news, although we could all see it coming.

[DizzyEdge]

It was expected, talking to the heritage planning dept, they no longer had any ability to delay the signing.

[DizzyEdge]

So now it is 100% a combination of negotiation and public pressure which is needed.