Eight members of Calgary city council got it right on Thursday, voting against the redevelopment of the Glenmore Landing shopping plaza site on 14 St. at 90 Ave. S.W. A proposal from RioCan Management, which owns the plaza and adjacent green space called initially for six high-rise apartment towers on the green space, with an expansion to 15 towers in the coming years, for a total of close to 8,000 residents. Full build out was calculated to take between 15 and 20 years. Cllrs. who voted against the proposal were Peter Demong, Dan McLean, Jennifer Wyness, Raj Dhaliwal, Terry Wong, Sonya Sharp, Sean Chu and Andre Chabot. In favour were Mayor Jyoti Gondek and Cllrs. Kourtney Penner, Courtney Walcott, Gian-Carlo Carra, Jasmine Mian and Evan Spencer. Glenmore Landing is in Penner’s Ward 11 and she pleaded with her fellow councillors before the vote was taken, saying she was disappointed with those who said they would vote against the development and admonished them for not recognizing it was a perfect example of transit-oriented development and within the city’s priorities for higher densities. Well, not really. First, transit-oriented developments are defined as being at LRT stations or along LRT lines, close to stations. The closest Glenmore Landing comes to that definition is the bus rapid transit line that runs adjacent to the plaza, using standard size buses that accommodate 65 riders when full. The buses run at 10-minute intervals during peak hours and 20-to-30-minute intervals during down times. A standard light rail transit train car can sit up to 200 passengers and the trains are usually three or four cars long. A presenter at the public hearing who was in favour of the development said he was convinced people would move into the complex because of the BRT, which is doubtful. Cllr. Chabot, during Thursday’s deliberations, called it an “extravagant bus stop.” Certainly an apt description. The towers would include underground parking and residents who own cars would struggle to get onto 14th Street (the main north/south feeder route) from 90th Avenue which already has three turn lanes to accommodate vehicles going north on 14th Street, with an average of almost 40,000 cars travelling through the intersection each day. There might not be a worse location to be putting up high-density, towering apartment buildings. Public hearing presenters against the development cited the proximity of Glenmore Reservoir, which supplies half of Calgary’s water supply, saying they were concerned about potential contamination. Other presenters not in favour spoke about increased traffic, the height of the buildings and the shadowing effect they would have on neighbouring homes, as well as waterfowl smashing into the buildings while trying to land on the reservoir. They also spoke of the inconvenience of a potential15-year buildout and questioned whether the aging infrastructure in the area could handle the extra load. Presenters in favour of the development spoke about the housing crisis in Calgary and the growing homeless problem and how the development would help ease the problems, increasing the supply of homes in the city. But what was not discussed over the two and half days of deliberations and debates was whether the homes would be all rentals, all ownership or a combination of both. No mention of, and no questions asked about how much the rent would be or how much the homes would sell for. Increasing the supply of homes in the city will help ease the housing situation and may help bring down prices over the long term.But the real housing crisis in Calgary and across the country, is the lack of affordable housing and housing that is affordable. More emphasis needs to be focussed on affordability. It doesn’t matter how big the supply of homes is if the prices are out of reach.
Eight members of Calgary city council got it right on Thursday, voting against the redevelopment of the Glenmore Landing shopping plaza site on 14 St. at 90 Ave. S.W. A proposal from RioCan Management, which owns the plaza and adjacent green space called initially for six high-rise apartment towers on the green space, with an expansion to 15 towers in the coming years, for a total of close to 8,000 residents. Full build out was calculated to take between 15 and 20 years. Cllrs. who voted against the proposal were Peter Demong, Dan McLean, Jennifer Wyness, Raj Dhaliwal, Terry Wong, Sonya Sharp, Sean Chu and Andre Chabot. In favour were Mayor Jyoti Gondek and Cllrs. Kourtney Penner, Courtney Walcott, Gian-Carlo Carra, Jasmine Mian and Evan Spencer. Glenmore Landing is in Penner’s Ward 11 and she pleaded with her fellow councillors before the vote was taken, saying she was disappointed with those who said they would vote against the development and admonished them for not recognizing it was a perfect example of transit-oriented development and within the city’s priorities for higher densities. Well, not really. First, transit-oriented developments are defined as being at LRT stations or along LRT lines, close to stations. The closest Glenmore Landing comes to that definition is the bus rapid transit line that runs adjacent to the plaza, using standard size buses that accommodate 65 riders when full. The buses run at 10-minute intervals during peak hours and 20-to-30-minute intervals during down times. A standard light rail transit train car can sit up to 200 passengers and the trains are usually three or four cars long. A presenter at the public hearing who was in favour of the development said he was convinced people would move into the complex because of the BRT, which is doubtful. Cllr. Chabot, during Thursday’s deliberations, called it an “extravagant bus stop.” Certainly an apt description. The towers would include underground parking and residents who own cars would struggle to get onto 14th Street (the main north/south feeder route) from 90th Avenue which already has three turn lanes to accommodate vehicles going north on 14th Street, with an average of almost 40,000 cars travelling through the intersection each day. There might not be a worse location to be putting up high-density, towering apartment buildings. Public hearing presenters against the development cited the proximity of Glenmore Reservoir, which supplies half of Calgary’s water supply, saying they were concerned about potential contamination. Other presenters not in favour spoke about increased traffic, the height of the buildings and the shadowing effect they would have on neighbouring homes, as well as waterfowl smashing into the buildings while trying to land on the reservoir. They also spoke of the inconvenience of a potential15-year buildout and questioned whether the aging infrastructure in the area could handle the extra load. Presenters in favour of the development spoke about the housing crisis in Calgary and the growing homeless problem and how the development would help ease the problems, increasing the supply of homes in the city. But what was not discussed over the two and half days of deliberations and debates was whether the homes would be all rentals, all ownership or a combination of both. No mention of, and no questions asked about how much the rent would be or how much the homes would sell for. Increasing the supply of homes in the city will help ease the housing situation and may help bring down prices over the long term.But the real housing crisis in Calgary and across the country, is the lack of affordable housing and housing that is affordable. More emphasis needs to be focussed on affordability. It doesn’t matter how big the supply of homes is if the prices are out of reach.
