An approval notice was published for this development in mid-April,
2014, but our community never received a copy of the approval notice, so
we are unable to post it.
————[from Dax Xenis (developer) to ECA Planning on December 10, 2013]
I’ve sent you a revised rough rendering of the front facade of our proposed 2 story 4 plex at 60, 34th ave SW.
There may still be a slight alteration to the upper windows in the middle, but it will stay in this style.
I appreciate your comments, and I’m not sure how this one slipped by me at the application stage, but I couldn’t agree with you more.
I think everything got a little jumbled when we changed the building from a 3 story to a 2 story and the update wasn’t added.
Again, we appreciate your insight into this development, and it’s the main reason we enjoy working with Community Associations from the very beginning.
I hope you find that it compliments the development at 54 34th ave much better.
————[from Rick Moses (neighbour) to City Planning on December 9, 2013]
As an affected party to this development permit application, I am not in favour of this plan in its current form.
The structure size, form and plan place a significant burden on current residents.
Parking along 34th Avenue is already a challenging issue, the addition of numerous new multi-residential buildings will make this situation untenable if new residences have insufficient parking for resident and visitor vehicles. The residences across 34th Ave from the Applicant have neither alley access or driveways, they must park their vehicles on the street in front of their property.
The front (south ) units of this proposal will have difficult access to the rear garage, these residents will very likely park their vehicles on 34th Avenue for ease of use, something they would surely be entitled to do, and I would do it in their position, but it won’t help the current difficult parking situation.
There is already an approved 4 unit building planned for the adjacent lot (east) which has no visitor parking. This east development is on a corner lot which prohibits parking for 5 meters from the corner in both directions, and also has a fire hydrant, which further removes 10 meters of available parking space.
And an approved 47 unit structure to the west and across the avenue, which will have insufficient on-site parking for owners and visitors, if built as approved.
34th Avenue at this location is also a posted snow removal route, where are these vehicle to be parked during Calgary’s (relatively infrequent, thankfully) snow events ?
I will submit photographs in a subsequent email, which illustrate the congested parking situation in this area.
Landscaping area and amenity space deficiency is also a concern for this application. As this neighborhood reshapes itself into higher density urban core community, over-development is a factor which needs to be monitored to ensure adequate personal space is available for current and future residents. Both of the adjacent approved applications have been granted relaxations to proceed in spite of not meeting City bylaws for both Amenity Space and Landscaped area. I consider this to be a disturbing trend, and cannot find words strong enough to condemn it.
In the case of this Application, the deficiencies are particularly egregious. The north units have undersized balconies. The south units have no outdoor space whatsoever. No patio, no balcony. These residents are going to be grilling hamburgers on the sidewalk in front of their homes? At least their cars will be conveniently right there too. I realize this may seem somewhat overly dramatic, but the impact of poor design is very long lasting indeed.
We have an opportunity to get this right. Let’s use it constructively.
—————[from ECA Planning to City Planning on December 3, 2013]
The Erlton Community Association’s comment is attached.
—————[from Ward 9 Admin to ECA Planning on December 2, 2013]
Gian-Carlo Carra wrote below (from my interpretation of his writing)
“1. There have been tremendous amounts of debate and discussion over how to achieve the multi-family allowed within the LUB while also achieving the protection of heritage character in Erlton discussed within the ARP. This typologically simplistic “4 pack” is safe, but the cheapness of the facade design and treatment open it up for a continuation of this debate. Therefore:
A. Correct the horrible design issues with the horizontal central windows
B. Treat the rear facade with much more respect”
—————[from ECA Planning to neighbours on November 25, 2013]
I received this Development Permit application and plans this afternoon. A PDF of some of it is attached:
I have the complete set of plans available for review. Please call if you would like to see or borrow them.
You can submit your individual comments directly via email to the following three addresses:
The deadline for comment is December 10th.
Please share and discuss this email with your neighbours, some of whom may not be community members, or may not have provided us with their email address.
Please do not hesitate to call or email should you have any concerns or require further information.