Calgary: 24th Avenue NW Messy Mega Makeover
While there are still lots of “tall” residential towers being built in our inner city communities, there are also dozens of “shorter” projects under construction or in the planning stages.
A mega makeover along 24th Avenue NW from 19th Street to Crowchild Trail in the community of Banff Trail is almost ready to go. This unassuming avenue has not one, not two, but six new mid-rise residential developments in the works. However, there is some good and bad news associated with this mega makeover. This week we will look at the good news and next week the bad news.
Hopefully “Coming Soon” to 24th Avenue!
Flosa Homes (2471 - 23rd Street NW)
29 new homes
All two bedroom
6-storeys building (20m)
Commercial along the street
Eagle Crest Construction 2460- 2468 23rd St. NW
69 new homes
29 studio, 33 two-bedroom, 7 live/work
6-storey building (23m)
Commercial along the street
Eagle Crest’s proposed development at 2460 to 2468 24th Ave NW.
Abanoub Development (2436, 2440 22nd St. NW)
45 new homes
Seniors Housing
Independent and Assisted Living
4-storeys building (12m)
No commercial along street
Stone West Homes (2103, 2107 24th Ave NW)
62 homes
53 one and two-bedroom, 9 live/work spaces
4-storey, 16 m high
Commercial along the street
Computer rendering of proposed development by Stone West Homes on 24th Ave NW.
Eagle Crest Construction (2022,2026 24th Ave NW)
45 new homes
3 studios, 12 one-bedroom, 27 two-bedroom and 3 live/work spaces
4-storey building (15.5m)
Commercial along the street
Apaar Homes (2504 -22nd St NW & 2240 24th Ave NW)
This project is still in the design stage so no details of the development are available.
The Good News
The good news is these home builders, recognizing the huge impact this will have on the immediate neighbours and community are working with the City and the community to maximize the cumulative benefits of the projects.
Lourdes Juan, a member of Calgary’s Planning Commission (CPC) is “really pleased to see these developments and even more pleased that they came to CPC as a package. Typically, developments are applied for ‘piece meal’, so to see a request for re-zoning several projects at one time helps show how 24th Ave NW can be revitalized with really good design and density. I find the architectural renderings striking while still fitting into a neighbourhood context.”
Indeed, the redevelopment of Calgary’s inner city communities from mostly detached single family homes, to communities with four to ten-storey residential buildings at key sites, some with retail along the street, especially near transit and employment centres are exactly what the City of Calgary wants to see.
“In the case of Banff Trail, the City wrote some good incentivizing policy that ensures the community’s continued vitality, and industry showed up” says Ben Bailey, Urban Planner with CivicWorks and lead applicant for three of the 24th Ave NW developments recently approved by City Council.
Ideal Site For Redevelopment
Banff Trail’s 24th Ave makeover is an ideal site for redevelopment as it is not only within walking distance to Banff Trail and University LRT stations, but also within easy walking and cycling distance to the University of Calgary and Foothills Medical Centre, two of the city’s largest employment centres. It is also close to Brentwood Village and North Hill shopping centres.
Kaleidoscope residential building with Higher Ground Cafe on the corner.
The transformation of the avenue began in 2011 with the development of the funky, triangular Kaleidoscope building at Crowchild Trail at 24th St. NW. This six-storey building has 70 small rental homes along with a 1,100 square foot commercial space.
The current occupant Calgary’s own Higher Ground has created an attractive community coffee/meeting space. Gareth Spicer, who lives close by and a former member of the Banff Trail Development Committee, says the project has had no negative impact (parking or traffic) on his life and he feels the café has created a bit of a community gathering place.
Streetscape Improvements
As a result of these six redevelopments along 24th Ave NW, the City has engaged the community in helping redesign 24th Ave to create a better shared walking, cycling and driving streetscape. The plan calls for two lanes of traffic, parking on one side of the avenue, protected bike lanes, a boulevard with trees and a 1.5m sidewalk on both sides for pedestrians.
One of the complaints many inner-city communities have had with infill development is they aren’t seeing the improvements to their aging public realm that is often promised, but rarely delivered by the City. In this case the improvements are happening before the development. That’s good news.
The Bad News
Not everyone agrees that the redevelopment of 24th Ave NW is a good thing. Several neighbours are taking the home builders to court as they don’t want any multi-family development along the south side of 24th Ave NW.
The 24th Ave NW mega makeover (from 19th Street NW to Crowchild Trail) – with its six proposed new multifamily residential developments - should be a slam dunk given it aligns with the City’s vision of densifying established communities like Banff Trail with infill projects that will diversify the housing options, especially near LRT Stations.
However, a 1952 caveat registered with no expiry date on the lots south of 24th Ave NW, restricts any future development to only single-detached homes or duplexes. This impacts three of the proposed, mixed-use projects on the southside of 24th Ave NW, but not those on the northside. Ironically, the caveat has no height or building size restrictions so, theoretically, all of these projects could be built under the caveat if they were a single family or duplex projects!
Let’s take a step back
Caveats registered against individual properties and entire subdivision plans were used as an early land-use planning tool before municipalities adopted land-use bylaws and other planning legislation to control land development across North America. While these caveats are not binding on Council or Administration in making land use or development permit decisions, they present a possible risk to landowners should a different landowner choose to enforce a particular caveat though the legal system and get the project stopped.
In 2013, Calgary City Council directed Administration to review the Banff Trail Area Redevelopment Plan (ARP) to identify areas for modest intensification. As a result, Council amended the ARP to allow for medium density low-rise (under 4 storeys) and medium density mid-rise (5 to 12 storeys) along 24 Avenue NW.
Six year later, Council adopted Bylaw 56P2019 to express support for densification in alignment with the goals and objectives of the Banff Trail ARP where it conflicts with the existing caveat restricting development to one or two dwelling units.
So the fate of the 24th Avenue Divide in the Banff Trail community will be left to the courts to determine what kind of redevelopment will be allowed.
FYI: Banff Trail is not the only Calgary community with extensive caveats that restrict development, there are similar caveats in established communities across the city.
Rendering of proposed Eagle Crest development on 24th Ave NW.
Councillor Is excited
Banff Trail Councillor Druh Farrell is super excited about this “extraordinary opportunity to transform 24th Ave NW from one of the worst streets in her Ward to one of the nicest.” She is pleased with how the home builders were willing to work with the City and contribute to enhancing the public realm as part of their projects. With respect to the conflict between the City’s policies and plans for Transit Oriented Development and the caveat, she says “Council makes decision on good planning principles as per the Municipal Government Act.”
And although, Farrell hopes the courts will rule in favour of the new developments, she acknowledges some home builders have already walked away from sites closer to the Banff Trail LRT Station because of the uncertainty of redevelopment associated with the caveats.
Diagram illustrating how much taller the proposed 24th Ave NW developments are compared to a new two infill home.
The Community Thinks
I sat down with three former members of the Banff Trail Community Association’s Development & Planning Committee (BTDPC), including former chair Kathryn Davies to get their thoughts on what has happened in the past and what they think will happen with the court challenge.
FYI: As a direct result of the six new proposals, a major change in the membership of Banff Trail’s Community Association’s Board occurred from one that supported the redevelopment of 24th Ave NW, to one that didn’t. As a result the old BTDPC was disbanded and a new one formed with members who were less supportive of the projects. Davies and past committee members who supported the new developments on 24th Avenue NW were not reappointed. (A very similar sequence of events happened with the West Hillhurst Community Association’s Board and Planning Committee over the controversial Kensington Legion site redevelopment in 2015).
A comprehensive community engagement process was implemented to inform the community, as well as to gather comments.
Davies thinks “when it comes to participation in the planning process, Calgary’s Community Association (CA) model is fundamentally flawed. In theory, CA planning committees are designed to be impartial arbiters of development projects, providing community context and feedback based on some degree of planning expertise. In practice though, there seems to be wide variation in how committees operate, and no mechanism to ensure committees remain objective. As a result, CAs can be co-opted by interest groups to advance niche agendas. In the inner city, any CA that pits themselves against municipal planning policy, of which moderate densification is a core principle, finds themselves fighting an upstream battle.”
She adds, “this is the case in Banff Trail - in shifting from a collaborative to a combative approach, the CA lost the opportunity to work as a partner with the City and developers to ensure the neighbourhood benefits from the public and private investment these projects will be realized.”
While trying to understand how the caveat worked, Davies reached out to Eliot Tretter, urban geographer at the University of Calgary. He responded with “To put it simply, restrictive covenants are a form of private zoning. They are everywhere in North America and are probably one of the most insidious and powerful land-use controls that nobody has ever heard of.”
The community engagement or stakeholder outreach for these developments was extensive.
In an email to me, Tretter reiterated caveats like the one limiting redevelopment in Banff Trail “are so insidious because they are so invisible and yet so powerful in shaping cities. They have also been used for pretty nefarious ends and are a very potent force in racial and class segregation. Even their enforceability is driven by class, as only those with money, time, and education have the resources to ensure restrictions remain intact and enforced.”
Wayne Howse, Chair of the BTPDC is also one of six people who are asking the court to enforce the 1952 restrictions that would prevent three developments on the south side of 24th Avenue NW from being built (the two on the northside and one on the south side are not restricted by caveats.) Several attempts were made to meet or talk with Howse, but he was unavailable.
Note: After Part One (The Good News) was published in the Caglary Herald on April 11th) Tracy Thomson a Banff Trail resident wrote a letter to the editor indicating that “it is a great illustration of the ongoing lack of of meaningful engagement by developers and the city with residents. We have become frustrated and despairing of any real discussion. We are told what is right for us with only lip service given to our efforts to participate in this extensive plan for where we live.”
Thomson’s comments are very familiar to what has been said in the past by residents opposed to major developments in their community - West Hillhurst, Inglewood or Shawnee/Evergreen.
Link: Community Engagement 101: You can’t make everyone happy!
Hedayat’s Letter to Editor appeared in the Calgary Herald on April 22, 2020. It is a good illustration of how important single family home communities are to many North Americans, not just Calgarians. The fear of infill developments is often driven by the fear that multifamily buildings will devalue their homes.
No development can satisfy everyone’s wants and expectations.
Here comes the judge
It is a sad commentary that after all the work by community members, the home builders, consultants and City of Calgary planners to create a modern 21st century street, over the past seven years, in the end one person – albeit, a judge - will decide the fate not only of these three projects, but set a precedent for future development in Banff Trail and other communities with restricted caveats in Calgary - and maybe even beyond.
The Alberta Land Titles Act 48.4 stipulates the courts can discharge the caveat "if the condition or covenant conflicts with the provisions of a land use bylaw or statutory plan under Part 17 of the Municipal Government Act" The approved Banff Trail Area Redevelopment Plan is such a statutory document. In the case of 24th Ave NW, the densities proscribed by the ARP are wholly incompatible with the stipulations of the covenant. The judge’s decision will be precedent setting.
C.E. emailed me after reading this blog to say “I’m often struck that no one talks about (a) RCs being real, live contracts that bind the parties, and (b) what the City needs to do to satisfy its own financial need for redevelopment and density (to fund infrastructure and services) – namely pay out the parties to those contracts. If the parties won’t consent to amendment or discharge in exchange for compensation, the City is fully entitled to expropriate the RC, and pay for that property interest under the Expropriation Act.It’s an error to say that there is no way to change the situation without resort to the Court. It could be argued that the City is attempting to use its statutory powers to sterilize (take) a property interest without paying for it. The parties to the RC may well have a viable de facto expropriation claim here. As an aside, as municipalities continue to require RCs, they really shouldn’t slag old RCs – which the City of Calgary often itself created.”
Last Word
The old caveats in Banff Trail and other established communities are going to add a whole new dimension to Calgary’s “not in my backyard” debate.
The prevalence of restricted covenants are yet another reason why Calgary home builders avoid established community developments, preferring instead to work in the new suburbs where the approval process is less complicated, less expensive and less controversial.
If you like this blog, you will be interested in these links:
Community Associations & Urban Development
Not All Community Associations Are Equal
Community Engagement: The Community’s Perspective