AVLI on Atlantic condos - Inglewood

[atlas_inc]

Whats everyones take on this new Avli on Atlantic condo in Inglewood?

[Spring2008]

I really like it for Inglewood, apparently the nearby residents don't though.

[Jimby]

I must be dyslexic because I always read it as ADVIL!

[Cowtown_Tim]

I like it.

This proposal was also discussed a few pages back in the constriction section.

[DizzyEdge]

It's interesting how the west end is shaping up to be more 'downtowny', ie higher density.

[Calgarian]

I like it!

[J-D]

Looks like a solid addition - some pretty interesting floor plans on the website as well.

[monocle]

Looks like the CA is gunning for that Penthouse!
Could have a sweet patio in the summer

[VIce]

Is this what's replacing the autobody shop? That the community association is whining about over 2.5 meters? Why would anybody in the community association say "no, I think we should keep that autobody shop and all these used car lots where they are"?

Admitedly, I've only been in Inglewood since 2008 or 09 or so, but I keep getting these letters in the mail and all I read is "mrrrrrggg!"

[Design-mind]

I am going to go out on a limb, and beyond like, and say I love it!

[Full Mountain]

Definitely like the architecture, still have to side with the CA on the height though. Leaves me somewhere in the middle

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Definitely like the architecture, still have to side with the CA on the height though. Leaves me somewhere in the middle

In Gian-Carlo Carra's letter he said that the shadowing issues are equal to a 20m building because of the massing. Neighbours to the north won't see more shadow than if the building conformed to the height rules.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by MasterG

In Gian-Carlo Carra's letter he said that the shadowing issues are equal to a 20m building because of the massing. Neighbours to the north won't see more shadow than if the building conformed to the height rules.

Woah now, let's not let logic and facts get in the way of a good overreaction by a community association.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by MasterG

In Gian-Carlo Carra's letter he said that the shadowing issues are equal to a 20m building because of the massing. Neighbours to the north won't see more shadow than if the building conformed to the height rules.

I have a hard time believing this, it's not like this building slopes from the lane towards 9th. Does anyone have the link to the LOC/DP? Here's a follow up question, was this study ever presented to the CA? More often than not I find developers mention this sort of information and don't bother giving it for some reason. I've had a developer say the same thing about parking and never backed it up with an actual parking study.

The development industry needs to get it's act together on stakeholder management, I would suggest a significant portion of the problems you see coming out of CA's are a result of poor communication and lack of stakeholder engagement. Developers are coming forward with innovative ideas and simply throw them over the fence hoping to win support, if the developer took the time to walk the community (in particular the committees) through the project and opened the data to support their decisions to the community (shadowing studies, parking studies, demographics information, etc.). You can win a lot of hearts and minds, the vast majority of CA's are open to good development but have been burned by bad ones a few to many times.

Note the above won't solve all issues there will always be one or two dissenters to any matter, but managing their impact is much easier than if you get the whole CA on the other side.

[flipstah]

I think it looks good but if I was a resident and this is the place that suddenly blocks sunlight coming in, then I wouldn't be so happy.

[Spring2008]

If you work at City Hall, don't say I didn't warn you lol

Too tall for Inglewood? Proposed condo concerns neighbours
Ryan White , CTV Calgary
Published Thursday, October 30, 2014 4:54PM MDT
Last Updated Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:45PM MDT
Share this story:

7

A proposed 9 Ave. S.E. condominium complex has some Inglewood residents worried the project could cast an unfavourable shadow on the neighbourhood.
If approved, Avli on Atlantic will be the tallest building in the area and the 22.5 metre structure will exceed the Inglewood Development Plan’s current maximum height allowance.
Developers are asking Calgary City Council to grant an easement allowing for the condo building to be erected as planned, eclipsing the 20 metre height limit.
Some people who live in the shadow of the proposed building fear a height allowance exception could lead to further development.
“We do have a concern that if we do put in a height relaxation for one condominium building this could open up the floodgates,” said Bill Bakelaar, president of the Inglewood Community Association. “We could have all of 9 Avenue seeing the same sort of developments.”
On Monday, city council will debate the building proposal and the easement request. If approved, the developer plans to file paperwork the same day.
Inglewood residents have planned a march on city hall, prior to the council session, in the hope councilors will shoot down the proposal.

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/too...ours-1.2079947

[Jimby]

There are so many good causes in the world and so many causes that need support and here we have a bunch of loony selfish NIMBYs marching on city hall over 2.5 m???
The CA already set the precedent by allowing the Atlantic Avenue Art Block to be 2.5 m over the legal limit so spare me the outrage.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

If you work at City Hall, don't say I didn't warn you lol

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/mobile/too...ours-1.2079947

Will be interesting to see how many people they get.

Originally Posted by Jimby

There are so many good causes in the world and so many causes that need support and here we have a bunch of loony selfish NIMBYs marching on city hall over 2.5 m???
The CA already set the precedent by allowing the Atlantic Avenue Art Block to be 2.5 m over the legal limit so spare me the outrage.

Well then that does change things, seems their ship has sailed

[DizzyEdge]

“We could have all of 9 Avenue seeing the same sort of developments.”

Is that really a bad thing though? I would suggest that 9th ave between 11st and 13st remain relatively low height to maintain the mainstreet feel (Say 4 stories to match the tallest historic buildings), but the rest seems fair game for whatever.

[Bigtime]

Well "ruh roh" if they already let the Art Block bust the height limit.