Calgary Infill Projects - Page 4

YYCguys · #61 Posted **Apr 5, 2011, 9:49 PM**

kw, I really love those modern infills! I need to win a lottery so I can have one of those for myself!

elconsulto · #62 Posted **Apr 6, 2011, 12:31 AM**

I'm waiting for Google to release some new satellite photos of Calgary, it will be neat to see how the density has changed since the most recent update, in 2008.

monocle · #63 Posted **Apr 6, 2011, 12:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by elconsulto

I'm waiting for Google to release some new satellite photos of Calgary, it will be neat to see how the density has changed since the most recent update, in 2008.

elconsulto · #64 Posted **Apr 10, 2011, 9:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by monocle

In Google Earth, there's an icon that looks like a clock or something that brings up a slider you can use to cycle through previous satellite images.

monocle · #65 Posted **Apr 10, 2011, 9:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by elconsulto

In Google Earth, there's an icon that looks like a clock or something that brings up a slider you can use to cycle through previous satellite images.

Awesome!. Neat to see how much the resolution has improved.
Thanks.

elconsulto · #66 Posted **Apr 10, 2011, 9:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by monocle

Awesome!. Neat to see how much the resolution has improved.
Thanks.

check out the current resolution of Vancouver, it looks like its around twice the resolution of Calgary and the surrounding area, it will be nice when we get a shot with the newer satellites. And aerial photos too, which will encourage people to make more 3D building models for the city.

RicoLance21 · #67 Posted **May 18, 2011, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonGoldenFlames

pm'd. but for the rest of you....

12m (6m per side) is the minimum width for a duplex in an rc-2 zoned area. take away the min. 4'-0" side yard, and you have a house 15'-8" wide.

example for rc-2 zoning:

lot size: 19'-8"(6m)x120'-0"(36.57m)
lot area: 2359.20 sq ft (219.42 m2)
maximum lot coverage (house + garage) = 45%
typical 21'-0"x20'-0" garage = 420 sq ft (39 m2)
remaining coverage allocated to house = 641.64 sq ft (59.61 m2)

I've been looking at new infill houses that are currently under construction. Why some of the new detached SF houses are about 6' apart (excl. protrusions) when a min. of 4' from property line is required?

MonctonGoldenFlames · #68 Posted **May 18, 2011, 4:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I've been looking at new infill houses that are currently under construction. Why some of the new detached SF houses are about 6' apart (excl. protrusions) when a min. of 4' from property line is required?

did you measure the 6'?

i believe there is no way you can build that close under current rules.

kw5150 · #69 Posted **May 18, 2011, 4:29 PM**

moved, wrong thread

RicoLance21 · #70 Posted **Jun 13, 2011, 10:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonGoldenFlames

did you measure the 6'?

i believe there is no way you can build that close under current rules.

I have the pic. I will post it a bit later.

Side topic: So developers who used to pay $8,000 are now paying $15,000 a lot. I heard it is only for suburbs. Does that mean new infill houses would not require paying $15000?

MichaelS · #71 Posted **Jun 14, 2011, 3:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I have the pic. I will post it a bit later.

Side topic: So developers who used to pay $8,000 are now paying $15,000 a lot. I heard it is only for suburbs. Does that mean new infill houses would not require paying $15000?

The $15000 that was in the media was really a breakdown of the per hectare rate that greenfield developers pay for new subdivisions. So no, it does not apply to new infill housing.

Having said that, The City is looking at creating a redevelopment levy (similar to the development levy that greenfield pays) to pay for the upgrade of infrastructure required as Plan-It densities are implemented. The form and amount hasn't been finalized, for instance does a developer pay based on the size of their lot, the amount of frontage (like the Centre City levy) or square feet of their development?

RicoLance21 · #72 Posted **Jun 14, 2011, 4:54 AM**

I didn't measure the width between these new houses, but that gap looks quite a bit shorter than 8 feet.

DizzyEdge · #73 Posted **Jun 14, 2011, 8:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelS

The $15000 that was in the media was really a breakdown of the per hectare rate that greenfield developers pay for new subdivisions. So no, it does not apply to new infill housing.

Having said that, The City is looking at creating a redevelopment levy (similar to the development levy that greenfield pays) to pay for the upgrade of infrastructure required as Plan-It densities are implemented. The form and amount hasn't been finalized, for instance does a developer pay based on the size of their lot, the amount of frontage (like the Centre City levy) or square feet of their development?

Hmm... isn't it financially advantageous though for newer higher taxed units to appear within the current built city where services and transportation is already established? You'd think no levy within current communities would encourage densification.

MichaelS · #74 Posted **Jun 14, 2011, 2:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Hmm... isn't it financially advantageous though for newer higher taxed units to appear within the current built city where services and transportation is already established? You'd think no levy within current communities would encourage densification.

Some of the services and transportation will need to be upgraded as a result of more people living there, so money will need to be spent to upgrade them. Just as we demand that suburban growth pay for itself, is it not fair that redevelopment growth also pay for itself? The greenfield developers certainly feel this way, otherwise there can be a case made that greenfield is subsidizing the redevelopment. When it was the other way around, people were outraged. There shouldn't be a double standard.

Of course, it is very difficult to determine what costs are attributed to redevelopment growth (for instance, if a pipe is at 80% of its life already and needs to be replaced in a few years anyway, is it fair to charge the entire replacement to a redevelopment levy, when normal lifecycle maintenance would have had to replace it soon?). It is a very difficult thing to answer, which is why the redevelopment levy is still being worked on, and hasn't been approved or rolled out yet.

MonctonGoldenFlames · #75 Posted **Jun 14, 2011, 3:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I didn't measure the width between these new houses, but that gap looks quite a bit shorter than 8 feet.

i think it's 8 feet. those cantilever are typically 1'-10" deep to provide a 2" overhang. if i am right, it looks like it could be 4 feet between the cantilevers.

sidenote; how the hell do you get out of that window well on the right house? it's directly below a cantilever with no room for any human to get out of. that appears to be a major oversight.

Deepstar · #76 Posted **Jul 29, 2011, 2:34 PM**

Vida is now up to the fourth floor.

Surrealplaces · #77 Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 5:25 PM**

Another one for Bridgeland

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radley77

There is a 2 building, 18 unit building in Bridgeland at 731 McDougall Road NE submitted by BKDI architects. Does BKDI do much smaller stuff and curious how much medium scale stuff may be occurring in other inner city neighbourhoods (smaller scale than say NEXT, McPherson Place or Arcadia)?

The last similar building in this area was Infinity with a rooftop garden and patio completed in 2009ish...

Surrealplaces · #78 Posted **Oct 19, 2012, 5:27 PM**

Next

Next 3 by Calgary Construction 7, on Flickr

Next 2 by Calgary Construction 7, on Flickr

Next 1 by Calgary Construction 7, on Flickr

Arcadia

Arcadia by Calgary Construction 7, on Flickr

ClaytonA · #79 Posted **Nov 21, 2012, 12:41 AM**

Pixel by Battistella has some photos of the 7th (of 8) floor RC slab on their website:

http://www.pixelcondos.ca/news/70/51/CONSTRUCTION-UPDATE-NOVEMBER-20-2012.html

Also cladding is going to start going on soon according to the website. It would have been interesting to see this project with at grade retail.

MichaelS · #80 Posted **Nov 21, 2012, 4:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

Pixel by Battistella has some photos of the 7th (of 8) floor RC slab on their website:

http://www.pixelcondos.ca/news/70/51/CONSTRUCTION-UPDATE-NOVEMBER-20-2012.html

Also cladding is going to start going on soon according to the website. It would have been interesting to see this project with at grade retail.

Wiat for their next one, which is going directly west of Pixel. The portion fronting 10th street will have retail at grade (and possibly the 2nd floor as well if I remember the land use application correctly).