{ "segments": [ { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 961.385, "end": 969.765, "text": "Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to call the March 12, 2026 meeting of the Calgary Planning Commission to order. Clerks, would you please conduct a roll call?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 970.205, "end": 973.025, "text": "Yes, thank you, Chair. To confirm Quorum, Commissioner Beckler,", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 973.385, "end": 973.645, "text": "Here.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 974.765, "end": 999.605, "text": "Commissioner Campbell Walters, Commissioner Damiani, Commissioner Hardwick. Here. Commissioner Harlock? Here. Commissioner Montgomery. Commissioner Pink. Commissioner Remtula. Commissioner Small.", "segments_merged": 10 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 999.905, "end": 1000.185, "text": "Here.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1001.625, "end": 1002.345, "text": "Commissioner Wagner.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1002.965, "end": 1003.225, "text": "Yeah.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1004.745, "end": 1007.725, "text": "Vice Chair Mahler. Here. And Chair Lee.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1008.205, "end": 1008.645, "text": "I'm here.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1008.845, "end": 1009.705, "text": "We do have Quorum.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1010.405, "end": 1124.445, "text": "Thank you. Welcome everyone. My name is Christian Lee, Manager of Planning Advisory and Coordination Services and Chair of Calgary Planning Commission. A reminder to everyone on Teams and to the applicants on the bridge to please keep yourselves muted unless you are the one speaking. This ensures we can keep our full attention to the speaker. Before we begin, I would like to start with a land acknowledgement, as the matters before us have to do with land. The city of Calgary, where the bow and elbow rivers meet, was historically a place of confluence where the sharing of resources, ideas, and opportunities naturally come together. Long before Scottish settlers named it Calgary, the original indigenous nations of this area had their own names for the land. In the Blackfoot language, it is Kalmoginstis. The Ithaca Nokota Wichitabe First Nations refer to this place as Wachispa Oyade, and the people of the Sutina Nation call it Gutsis. The Metis called the Air Calgary area Otusquany. We'd like to take this opportunity to appreciate and acknowledge that we are gathered on the ancestral and traditional territory of the Blackfoot Confederacy, made up of the Sixika, Bigani, the Umska Bibigani, and the Gaina First Nations. The Ethicanakota Wichistabe First Nations comprised of the Chinniki, Bear's Paw, and Goodstoney First Nations, and Dusutina First Nation. The city of Calgary is also homeland to the historic Northwest Metis and to the Otippamisiwa Metis Government, Metis Nation Battle River Territory, Nosehill Metis District 5, and Elbo Metis District 6. We acknowledge all indigenous people who have made Calgary their home. Thank you. We will go to confirmation of the agenda. Director Mauler, would you move the agenda, please?", "segments_merged": 20 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 1124.925, "end": 1148.425, "text": "Uh yes, thank you, Chair. I'd like to uh move the agenda and make the motion uh that the agenda uh for the March 12th uh regular meeting of Calvary Planning Commission be confirmed after amendment by deleting item 7.2.3, which is the land use amendment in Eau Claire and Ward 7 at 728 Fourth Avenue Southwest from the agenda. We understand that that's at the request of the applicant.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1149.425, "end": 1150.885, "text": "Thank you. Commissioner Small.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_14", "start": 1152.525, "end": 1158.145, "text": "Thank you. I have a conflict with this item, so I'll step out while this is dealt with.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1159.465, "end": 1170.785, "text": "Thank you. Any Other debate on this. Alright, seeing none, clerks, would you please bring up the evote?", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1186.765, "end": 1188.145, "text": "Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1189.345, "end": 1189.845, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1193.805, "end": 1194.625, "text": "All votes are in, Chair.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1195.045, "end": 1219.605, "text": "Thank you. Please display the vote. And the motion to uh for the agenda is carried six to zero with Commissioner Small abstaining as he has a conflict. We will now go on to and that is carried. We'll go to declarations of conflicts of interest. Uh Commissioner Campbell Walters.", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 1221.885, "end": 1226.925, "text": "Thank you, Chair. I do have a conflict with item 7.2.2.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1228.205, "end": 1241.465, "text": "Thank you. Any other conflicts to announce, Commissioners? Seeing none, we will move on to uh confirmation of minutes. Commissioner Hardwick, would you mind moving confirmation of the minutes, please?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1242.265, "end": 1242.885, "text": "So moved.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1243.305, "end": 1247.085, "text": "Thank you, clerks or administration. Are there any errors or omissions to the minutes?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1247.545, "end": 1248.465, "text": "Nothing from clerks.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1249.645, "end": 1261.125, "text": "All right. And anyone opposed? Seeing none, that is also carried. We will now go to the consent agenda. Would any members of commission like to pull an item from consent? Commissioner Wagner.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1262.065, "end": 1267.165, "text": "I'd like to uh move item five point two off consent, please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1268.025, "end": 1297.525, "text": "Thank you. As that was the only item on consent, there is no consent items to vote on. So we will go on to item 5.2. Which is the first item that we will have a presentation for. Please uh come up, Mr. Conway. This is for policy amendment in Ogden at 8002 24th Street Southeast LOC 2025 0236. Uh Mr. Conway, when you're ready, please commence your presentation.", "segments_merged": 6 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1302.185, "end": 1480.925, "text": "Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Commission. My name is Sean Conway, and I'll be providing a brief overview of item 5.2, a proposed policy amendment in the community of Ogden. Next slide, please. Administration is recommending that the Calgary Planning Commission give three readings to the proposed bylaw for amendments to the Milken Ogden area redevelopment plan shown on attachment two. Next slide, please. The subject site is in the southeast community of Ogden and is located at the corner of 24th Street Southeast and 80th Avenue Southeast. The parcel is approximately 1.5 kilometers or a 20 minute walk east of the commercial node at the intersection of 18th Street Southeast and 76th Avenue Southeast. This commercial area provides a range of amenities, including a grocery store, a pharmacy, and other retail and service uses. Next slide, please. The parcel is a corner site and is approximately 0.05 hectares in size. It is currently developed with a single detached house and a rear detached garage. The site is accessed by a rear lane along the east property line. Next slide, please. This is a photo of the front of the subject property from 24th Street Southeast. Next slide, please. This is a photo of the site from 80th Avenue Southeast. Next slide, please. Surrounding land uses are designated as the residential grade oriented infill or the RCG district and are characterized by single detached dwellings and accessory residential buildings. Next slide, please. This application proposes to amend the Milliken Ogden area redevelopment plan to support the development of row houses, townhouses, and duplex dwellings on the subject site. Specifically, the amendment would revise Map 5 of the ARP by changing the land use classification for the site from low density conservation to low or medium density multi dwelling residential. In addition, it proposes to amend Section 3.4.3 of this ARP in order to allow a maximum density of 75 units per hectare consistent with the RCG district in the land use bylaw. The development permit application is currently under review for the site. It proposes the development of a four unit townhouse with rear lane access and a grade oriented design consistent with the intent of the proposed policy amendments. These proposed policy changes would align the ARP with the intent and regulations of the RCG district, which supports a variety of grade oriented housing forms. Next slide, please. For these reasons and those listed in the report, administration recommends approval of this application. This concludes my presentation and I'd be happy to answer any questions. The applicant is also in attendance for any questions as well. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 18 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1481.985, "end": 1488.105, "text": "Thank you very much for the presentation. We'll go to questions of administration. I believe uh Commissioner Wagner, you have questions for admin.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1491.205, "end": 1511.245, "text": "I do thank you. Um thank you for the presentation. I wonder if you could just comment on uh what role the current sorry, I'm just pulling it up. What role the current uh conservation area designation played in the proposed land use redesignation.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1512.565, "end": 1556.865, "text": "In terms of the current low density conservation area, it applies to the subject site in the current ARP. The intent of that land use designation was for the R2 district, which was formally applied to the site. As part of the citywide rezoning, the site was redesignated to the RCG district. So the proposed amendment is meant to align the policy with the current RCG RCG district that applies to the site. It also aligns the site with the MDP direction, which allows for intensification of inner city areas such as this. So it's just to bring the policy in alignment with the current land use district and current policy direction as per the MDP.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1558.465, "end": 1584.785, "text": "So if I understand your comments, the conservation Designation was existing, but there there wasn't significant review or conversation regarding the impact of that designation on how to move forward with the proposed designation. That the work undertaken by administration was more about alignment with current policy.", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1587.745, "end": 1628.665, "text": "Yes, so so as part of the citywide rezoning, there was consultation done on under that process. The ARP was not amended as per that process. What we're left with is a situation where we have a case-by-case amendments that are brought forward to CPC and Council to align the policy to align the RC the subject sites RCG RCG district with the policy in the ARP. So until we have an LAP that's that's brought forward to council, uh we're kind of left in this situation where we have to bring applications on a case by case uh such as this.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1629.825, "end": 1634.505, "text": "Thank you. Thank you. Uh Director Mahler.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 1635.685, "end": 1652.445, "text": "Yes, thank you, Chair. And if you could go back to slide nine, there's another parcel on the north side of 80th Ave Southeast that's also showing low or medium density multi-dwelling residential. Was that a site-specific amendment like this one? Or is that for some other reason?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1653.485, "end": 1655.685, "text": "Uh could we could we bring up that slide that's", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 1655.685, "end": 1659.385, "text": "Slide nine? It's uh it's the Milliken Ogden map five.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1659.745, "end": 1660.105, "text": "okay", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 1664.425, "end": 1680.105, "text": "Other way. There. Oh. There it is. Yeah, so just to kitty corner, really, to this this the subject site, there's another looks like four lots that are designated lower medium density multi dwelling.", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1681.225, "end": 1682.665, "text": "and and sorry your question was", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 1682.665, "end": 1689.505, "text": "Was that from another redesignation after the RCG? Was that a an ARP amendment that w had come through Planning Commission?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_13", "start": 1689.665, "end": 1693.505, "text": "that that would have been an ARP amendment that came to commission as well. That's correct.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 1693.565, "end": 1694.405, "text": "Okay, thanks for that.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1696.125, "end": 1733.825, "text": "Thank you. Any other questions for administration on this item? Seeing none, any questions for the app oh Commissioner Beckler? Do you are you are you good? Okay. Any questions for the applicant on this item? Also seeing none, can I please get a mover for the item? Commissioner Wagner.", "segments_merged": 7 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1735.265, "end": 1754.425, "text": "Thank you. I will move this item. I think this is, as we've heard, part of uh the growing development of Calgary and some of the areas that now moving forward with uh recent changes to policy we anticipate will be changing over time.", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1757.785, "end": 1759.565, "text": "Thank you. Commissioner Beckler to debate.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 1761.425, "end": 1794.125, "text": "Uh thank you. I thanks for pulling this off of consent. I while I struggle with the varying levels of policy that are sort of maybe not in sync at this time, I understand there's an LAP. I will be supporting this just because I think the the intent of of bringing more housing and staying within the the forms and the height of of RCG is comparable to to any other zoning that would be on the land. But this does does reflect it's nice to see an LAP coming forward, and hopefully we see more of those so that we're not running into these one by one. Little uh little changes.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1796.085, "end": 1805.685, "text": "Thank you. Any other debate on this item? Seeing none, back to Commissioner Wagner to close.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1808.065, "end": 1808.765, "text": "Close please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1809.225, "end": 1810.765, "text": "Thank you, clerks. Would you please bring up the e vote?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1824.305, "end": 1825.585, "text": "Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 1825.865, "end": 1826.285, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 1828.125, "end": 1828.965, "text": "All votes are in chair.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 1829.365, "end": 1862.625, "text": "Thank you. Please display the vote. And the motion is carried seven to zero. We'll carry on with the agenda. Item 7.2.1 is next. Land use amendment in Hillhurst Ward 7 at multiple addresses. LLC 2025 0133. Mr. Hall, once you are ready, thank you. Please commence your presentation.", "segments_merged": 8 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 1878.185, "end": 2029.525, "text": "Okay, thank you. Good afternoon, Chair, members of the Commission. I'm Jules Hall, and I'm presenting this first item on the second item on your agenda. Next slide, please. This application is for a land use amendment to change eight parcels from the current direct control district to the multi residential, high density, high rise MH3 district with modifiers for height and floor area ratio. Next slide, please. The site is located within the community of Hillhurst on Fifth Avenue Northwest, south of Riley Park. And west of 10th Street Northwest, within the 600 metre buffer of the Hillhurst Sunnyside LRT station. Next slide, please. This aerial photograph shows the eight properties forming the block between 11 and 11A Street, Northwest, on the north side of Fifth Avenue, Northwest. Riley Park is immediately to the north of the site and the Ezra on Riley Park building immediately to the west. Next slide, please. This photo shows the site looking west with Ezra beyond. Next slide. The rear lane interface with Riley Park. Sorry. My apologies. 11th Street Northwest, the eastern boundary of the site, next slide. And the rear lane in a very snowy and very sunny environment. And the interface with Riley Park. Next slide, please. This slide shows the surrounding land uses, including predominantly multi residential, with more commercial uses along 10th Street Northwest. Next slide. The proposed MH3 use maintains the character of multi residential land uses, albeit at a larger scale. Consistent with the approved Rider Community's local area plan. Next slide. The site is within the neighbourhood connector urban form category of the local area plan, which supports a higher frequency of mainly residential development in a broad range of housing types, unit structures, and forms, including live work units and local commercial uses. Next slide, please. The building scale map in the LAP places the site within the mid up to 12 stories category, meaning the proposed height modifier of 40 metres. Equating to 12 stories is compatible with the statutory policy. Next slide. Chair, members of commission, administration recommends approval of this land use redesignation application for the noted parcels from DC to MH3 and ask Planning Commission to endorse the application and forward to council for a public hearing. Thank you. That concludes my presentation. I should be happy to answer any questions. And the applicant is also in attendance.", "segments_merged": 51 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2030.225, "end": 2038.425, "text": "Thank you very much for the presentation. Commissioners, do we have any questions for administration on this item? Commissioner Beckler.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 2040.405, "end": 2070.605, "text": "Uh thank you. Uh thank you, Mr. Hall, for a great presentation. I guess looking at the information in the package, which is is very helpful, um, there is an element of compromise that's happened in terms of the background in the package that the district allows a bigger box. So, in terms of the feedback from community, um, can you just provide a little context into why you didn't stay within the DC district to allow to shape the box, um to acknowledge? The", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2071.065, "end": 2072.305, "text": "The existing DC, you mean?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 2072.685, "end": 2074.685, "text": "uh well or in a a revised DC.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2074.685, "end": 2153.245, "text": "Okay. So Yeah, thanks for the question. So this site is currently subject to a direct control district which covers this and the properties further to the east, all the way up to 10th Street. That DC is based on the MH1 land use, and it also has provision for density bonusing, which was a mechanism that was used in the previous local policy for Hillhurst and Sunning Side, the ARP, which is now no longer the statutory policy. Local area plans don't provide for density bonusing. This application originally when it was submitted was for a direct control district based on MH3 to take advantage of that density bonusing characteristic that's no longer relevant. And so that DC approach wasn't didn't satisfy section twenty of the land use bylaw. Which talks about the tests for when a direct control district is appropriate. There's an available stock land use, that's MH3, which accommodates what the applicant is seeking in terms of their application, which is a height of 12 stories, and an FAR of six. MH3 is entirely an appropriate land use, it's available, and that's why we are taking the approach rather than the direct control district.", "segments_merged": 13 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 2153.885, "end": 2185.685, "text": "Appreciate that response. The the reason for my question really is related to uh the fact that there is considerations for the park for the feedback from the community. Um And I guess I just asked because would we give approval of MH3? We don't we can't give conditional approval, right? The box becomes the box of MH3, and that would remove the opportunity to frame the community. So I appreciate the feedback on it being aligned around the density bonusing, but it removes that constraint once we've approved it, right?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2185.865, "end": 2269.705, "text": "So if I could ask clerks to bring up uh slide 13. Sorry, the next one, 14. Here we are. This is from the applicant's uh UDRP submission package, and this kind of explores their progression in terms of massing. With the very like the top left being the the box of the building can happen. They shape the building as we track to the right. Then they uh consider things like the impact of a 12-story development on the Ezra building next door. So they carve out a little bit of uh of that height there. And as we progress through, and the bottom right is kind of what they're ending up in terms of massing. Obviously, this is a land use application, so we don't know what the detail of the design is going to be, but this is the applicant's kind of thoughts. And they thought about things like you know, potential shadowing impacts and how to minimize those on the park. They thought about the uh the next door neighbours and and the impact of that maximum MH3 building in terms of you know being a good neighborly development and also accommodating what they want and what they obviously aspire to in terms of their particular performance. So I think they've thought about massing at this early stage. Obviously, when we get detailed design, we get development permit. That's when those discussions really hit the road.", "segments_merged": 9 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 2270.685, "end": 2306.205, "text": "Yeah, I think you're picking up exactly what I'm getting at. In terms of we're gonna approve the land use, and that's not going to come back here for us to align with what we've seen. Right. So I appreciate the feedback. I'm just gonna shift really quick if I can to um in your report, you mentioned that there's nothing done with this land use in particular to align with sustainability pathways. Um I I'm I'm curious as to if this doesn't help us bring more people with transit as an option. Is there a reason why that we don't have to align with any of the policies in the sustainability pathway?", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2307.125, "end": 2361.665, "text": "That's really a response to the applicants package. The site is located within 600 metres of the LRT. It's part of smack bang on the 5A network for cycling pedestrians. Riley Park is part of that 5A network as well. I think it is a sustainable location. It is a sustainable Former development, it's providing probably much needed housing in a variety of tenures and forms to serve the community and for those residents, new residents, to be able to have input into their local community and use local goods and services. So I think it is a sustainable location. Irrespective of what the pathways document says to 2050. You know, sustainability principles are obviously very much front and centre of our thought process when we look at these sorts these sorts of locations.", "segments_merged": 7 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 2362.345, "end": 2362.545, "text": "Okay.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2362.365, "end": 2366.705, "text": "Thank you very much. Thank you. Commissioner Campbell Walters.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 2370.965, "end": 2406.785, "text": "Chair. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Mr. Hall, for that presentation. I have a question. It's more of a clarifying one. You had mentioned in your presentation that the MH3 district and the 40 meters height align with the local area plan and the intended scale for this block. Could you just explain that in a little bit more detail? I really wanted to determine whether the site is specifically identified as appropriate for this high rise rather than the mid-scale that that the current land use was about.", "segments_merged": 6 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2407.985, "end": 2545.725, "text": "Okay, thanks for the question. Um we've already seen the the two maps, uh map three and map four of the LAP, which talk about the uh the urban form as a neighborhood uh connector site and the building height which is up to 12 stories. Could I ask maybe if we go to slide 17, please? So this is kind of a comparison between the three available MH districts in our land use bylaw. MH1, which is what the base uh the current direct control district is based on, obviously has uh potential maximum height of up to 26 metres. That's not consistent with the local area plan. MH2 has the potential for a modifier up to 50 metres, which would be consistent uh with the 12 story ask from the applicant. However, uh MH2 has a maximum FAR calculation of five. This application is for 12 stories and an FAR of six. The only available uh land use district to provide that in this context is MH3. Um with a modifier of 40 which is below the MH2, so that kind of characteristic falls through. Um to uh to uh enable an FAR6 we have to pick the MH3. Um Looking at the the minimum number of units, because the number of units is calculated in the in our bylaw as a minimum, 93 is the minimum. This application is seeking, or the development permit application ultimately has been suggested of a of a unican of about 175. So MH3 I think is an appropriate district for what the applicant has requested, but simply because we have no other mechanism to have that increased FAR. MH25 is the maximum, you cannot go beyond that. So I understand that you know that the purpose statements of MH3. kind of suggest a slightly different form of development, but with what the applicant is seeking to do on this site, the constraints of this site and the availability of a stock and use district, thought that MH3 was probably the most appropriate in this instance.", "segments_merged": 18 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 2549.525, "end": 2561.745, "text": "Thank you for that, for our explanation. But based on this comparison table that you showed here, MH3 could actually go up to 11 FAR.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2563.225, "end": 2565.525, "text": "Correct. It could.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 2565.965, "end": 2583.665, "text": "And how do how would one control because we're look, we're just at the land use stage. So once we move to the development proposal stage, what mechanism does the city have to ensure that the FAR remains within a certain um within the five to six?", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2583.965, "end": 2584.545, "text": "Because the", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 2584.545, "end": 2585.185, "text": "Would you", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2586.485, "end": 2609.805, "text": "sorry my response, yes. Um the actual application for this is MH3 F6.0 H40. So there are two modifiers one is for FAR and one is for height. The modifiers are not relaxable. So once the FAR of six is established, that is the maximum FAR that you could get on this site if this application is approved.", "segments_merged": 6 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 2611.265, "end": 2614.525, "text": "Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that, Mr. Hall. Thank you, Chair.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2616.505, "end": 2617.585, "text": "Thank you. Commissioner Small.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_14", "start": 2620.125, "end": 2638.445, "text": "Thank you. Can we go back to the building massing slide, please? Can you please clarify if uh number eight is that is fully built out at the 6 FAR?", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2639.585, "end": 2660.145, "text": "That would be a question I think you'd have to ask the applicant. That's what they've shown in terms of their massing study when they went to urban design review panel. My guess is yes, that would be the highest portion of that building is 12 stories, and they've declared that that would equate to a six FAR. So I'm guessing that the answer is yes.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2661.485, "end": 2664.665, "text": "Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Harlick.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 2666.165, "end": 2674.845, "text": "Um thank you for for working on this one. Uh does the local area plan include any guidance on interfaces with parks?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2675.985, "end": 2708.165, "text": "It does. Those are more kind of detailed design type policies. There's a whole section in the LAP which is for specifically for site design. Hasn't been specifically reviewed in terms of this because it's only a land use application, although we are very conscious of it, very conscious of the proximity of the park. And obviously, we wouldn't want to. Suggest a land use that would be significant conflict with that other interest of very great acknowledged importance.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 2708.285, "end": 2718.185, "text": "Yeah. Okay. Um Does the MH3 district have rules that support that good interface that the the policy wants?", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2718.305, "end": 2748.145, "text": "So again, if we we could go back to the slide 17, but basically the the rules for setbacks and stepbacks are the same for all MH districts. And it's a four meter setback where property line is shared with a street and six meters where shared with a lane. I believe the intent is to actually. Continue the same surface treatment in the lane that was done for ESRA to provide that consistency for the residents, and and I think it's a great interface to be honest.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 2749.285, "end": 2761.085, "text": "Okay. Um and I guess would there have was there any discussion of a direct control district to add stronger controls on that north side?", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_00", "start": 2762.285, "end": 2802.505, "text": "Because the the use of a direct control district wasn't satisfied in terms of section 20, we didn't have those um conversations because the DC is not appropriate in this instance, because we have the MH3, which is available. Again, when we come to detailed design, those are where we have those conversations, and I think we've got a fairly willing applicant who's uh who's who's gone quite some way already in recognizing like neighboring developments and the presence of the park and that sort of thing. So I I'm pretty confident that we can certainly come to a workable solution that's mutually benefit beneficial.", "segments_merged": 6 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 2802.905, "end": 2804.825, "text": "In the public and the private interest. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2806.605, "end": 2825.505, "text": "Thank you. Any other questions for administration on this item? Seeing none, if the applicant is in the room, would you please come forward? I believe commissioners will have questions for you. And introduce yourself, please.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_01", "start": 2829.105, "end": 2835.885, "text": "Hi there, my name is Jennifer Dobin with Dobbin Consulting. I'm the applicant and conducted all the public engagement as well. Happy to answer any questions.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2836.325, "end": 2838.285, "text": "Thank you for being here today. Uh Commissioner Small.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_14", "start": 2839.985, "end": 2855.385, "text": "Thank you. Same question I asked Mr. Hall is your massing modeling, you're using the maximum six to demonstrate that like number eight you're capping out at six FAR.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_01", "start": 2855.825, "end": 2856.265, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_14", "start": 2856.985, "end": 2857.465, "text": "Thank you.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 2859.205, "end": 2872.165, "text": "Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Commissioner Campbell Walters.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 2875.085, "end": 2894.545, "text": "Thank you, Chair. And thank you for being here, Ms. Dublin. Just a question. I don't think admin went into full detail, but could you just explain a little bit more context regarding the interfaces between the neighbors, especially those on the I think it's the East and the South?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_01", "start": 2896.265, "end": 3065.565, "text": "Certainly, through the chair, happy to answer those questions. We've had a lot of these conversations and as often happens on these larger developments, there's conflicting things to balance. And by going to UDRP, it was a really good opportunity to have you know professionals in the industry review how we're approaching the design, because some of those things are controlled by the development permit. But at this point and purpose, we're looking at circulation on the site and the how it interfaces with the park, how it interfaces with neighbors, with some consideration that there's potential for future development across 11th Street of those four or five houses that remain between VIC on 5th and this building. Some of the ways that you see that coming forward in the development permit consideration is UDRP had suggested the building move a little more to the west to push away from 11th Street because 11th Street is considered a heritage designation avenue, and they'd like to see improvements to access to Riley Park, so that becomes the primary south entrance to Riley Park. So changes like that that are on a building this big, they're pretty big changes, but pushing the mass away and pushing it to the south. I thought the questions on a DC were interesting because you are correct. It has come up many times with public engagement that we're what we're talking about right now is the envelope, which on this slide would be showed as A. And then the FAR controls how much mass can be within that envelope. And so you could push and pull and do different towers and different shapes and things within that envelope that MH3 is granting. And so in we're fortunate to be working with DAS, and they really understand as architects the importance of designing a building that's respectful to Ezra to the west and becomes a gateway building to Riley Park on the east and respects the setbacks and is actually more aggressive setback away from 11th Street to provide some breathing room for that gateway building. So there's a lot that can be done at the development permit stage, but uh it's been correctly identified that without a really prescriptive DC that you know perhaps said that one part was only eight stories and the rest could be 12, which we saw in effect on ESRA. It has a very interesting DC, the one that we're amending here and changing. It actually prescribes those sort of gateway sections on the front corners of both sides of ESRA. It's a very complicated DC. And so when we first applied, we did apply for a DC both for the opportunity to have more control over the massing, but also because we had to apply for uh the levy. But with that being removed out of the local area plan, we didn't no longer met the requirements because we wouldn't be seeking any relaxations under MH3. So there's nothing to really codify into a DC. uh beyond an MH three standard zoning. D does that answer your question?", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 3066.325, "end": 3071.265, "text": "Very much so. Thank you so much for that additional detail. Thank you, Chair.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3072.125, "end": 3073.565, "text": "Thank you. Commissioner Harlick.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3074.065, "end": 3089.405, "text": "Sure. Thanks for that answer. That helped with the uh the question about the north the interface to the park that that was going through my mind. Um the community association has brought up um the term they used was over parking. Um do you want to respond to that?", "segments_merged": 7 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_01", "start": 3089.705, "end": 3172.645, "text": "I'd be happy to. The intention of this is a purpose-built rental, and of we do have some affordable units in the building, but the intention is a high amenity, high value building that will attract people. The units that are not affordable will be pretty classy, expensive parcels, and those people are often expecting at least one parking stall. So we have to propose a balance between transit-oriented development and the expectation of the end user, which is a high-end end user, that they might have two or three vehicles and probably one's a truck kind of thing. So developers have to find a balance in the parking. So we went with, you know, what is a standard parquet? One level, two levels, how many parking stalls does that give us? It's 167. We've backed that down a little and are going to offer some visitor parking as requested in the parquet. So it's just a it's a it's trying to find a balance between marketability and and usability of the end user and and hopes for TD. And we you hope that people park their cars and don't use them. They are going to use the bus stop that's right there in the bike lane and walk to Kensington. So it's just a developer trying to find a balance between. Those two. There were some discussions about parking one to one and going a third layer in the parquet and that just doesn't make sense financially or to try and meet that need. So there'll be people who rent in here who won't have won't have a parking space.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3173.105, "end": 3173.365, "text": "Okay.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_01", "start": 3173.365, "end": 3173.705, "text": "Yeah.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3174.085, "end": 3174.445, "text": "Thank you.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3175.865, "end": 3194.725, "text": "Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Seeing none, thank you so much for being here today. Commissioners, I need a mover for the item, please. Commissioner Beckler.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 3196.585, "end": 3219.425, "text": "Thank you. Yeah, I'll I'll move the item and indicate my my willingness to support. I think it's a great response. I agree with staff that uh this does create enabling actions for our Calgary climate strategy, giving people a choice, right, to be able to use other modes. Um, and it shows the right amount of intention and the backup in the application to be respectful to the community.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3222.085, "end": 3224.565, "text": "Thank you. Any debate on this item? Commissioner Small.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_14", "start": 3226.965, "end": 3258.025, "text": "Thank you. I think the limiting factor of a 6 FAR helps that the building can take many different forms through the DP and therefore you can play around with how much of the building is going up to 12 stories versus is lower, and therefore you can mitigate the shadowing impacts and the relationship to adjacent buildings as well. And for those reasons, I'll be supporting this. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3258.805, "end": 3260.005, "text": "Thank you. Director Mahler.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_03", "start": 3260.925, "end": 3331.605, "text": "Thank you, Chair. I'll support the application as well. I'm a little attached to the old DC and the old policy, I'll confess. But that the reason I was attached to it was it was a very intentional desire to shape interesting buildings in a very special location within the city and a very important part of not just this neighborhood, but uh it's important to the whole region. But I think the lot through the line of questioning, I think through the applicant's description, and I went to your website as well, applicant, to see some of the discussion. The intent is still there to shape a very interesting building at a very strategic location. Um I think it would help if there was more specific direction in the local area plan to describe what we're trying to achieve. What are we trying to minimize shadow on? What kind of shape of building are we trying to form? The relationship with 11th Street. I'd actually forgot about that one. Thanks for flagging that. The how how it's treated there, I think it would benefit the file managers and the the applicant when the development permit comes in. There might be a different applicant by the time, who knows, you know, to prepare for it. But um, all that said, I think it's uh it's a really great opportunity, and uh I'll be supporting. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3333.465, "end": 3337.485, "text": "Thank you. Seeing no other debate, back to Commissioner Beckler to close.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 3337.965, "end": 3338.285, "text": "Close.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3338.845, "end": 3340.385, "text": "Thank you. Clerks, would you please bring up the evo?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 3354.625, "end": 3355.945, "text": "Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 3356.425, "end": 3356.925, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 3359.425, "end": 3360.345, "text": "All votes are in chair.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3361.485, "end": 3362.645, "text": "Thank you. Please display the vote.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 3389.445, "end": 3397.145, "text": "So it does not look like it's uh showing the casted vote here. Uh I can tell you that it is carried seven nothing on the screen here though.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3398.265, "end": 3413.785, "text": "Thank you. We'll consider the vote carried 7 to 0 as now displayed on the screen. So thank you very much. Yeah, before we move on to 7.2.2, uh Commissioner Campbell Walters, just confirming that you are recusing yourself from this item.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 3415.465, "end": 3423.045, "text": "Thank you, Chair. Yes, I'll be turning off my camera and I'll observe the live stream until this item is discussed and", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3423.965, "end": 3432.525, "text": "Thank you, Commissioner. We'll go to 7.2.2, land use amendment in Tuxedo Park at multiple addresses. Mr. Smith, when you're ready, please commence your presentation.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3433.925, "end": 3566.445, "text": "Good afternoon. Item 7.2.2 is for land use amendment in Tuxedo Park. Next slide, please. This application would facilitate construction of a grade oriented multi residential development. Administration's recommending approval. Next slide, please. Site's in Tuxedo Park. It's between Center Street and Edmonton Trail, Northeast. Next slide, please. Site is about 0.11 of a hectare. Currently contains three detached dwellings. Next slide, please. This is the view from the southwest. Next slide. The site's in the North Hill Communities Local Area Plan. It's in a neighborhood local area, supports building forms containing three or more residential units near main streets, such as Edmonton Trail, and where the parcel is lane and parking can be accommodated on site. So this site is close to Edmonton Trail, has lane access. Also, the applicant believes parking can be accommodated on site. Next slide, please. It's also in the building scale area of low modified, so up to four stories, which further supports the land use and concept for redeveloping for multi residential. Next slide, please. Proposed multi-residential contextual grade oriented or MCG districts would support a variety of building forms. This could include rowhouse townhouse forms. It would allow up to 12 dwelling units. It could include secondary suites, so up to 12 as well, and a maximum of 12 meters or four stories. In conclusion, administration recommends approval because it's shown in an area supported by the North Hill LAP. It supports moderately higher density and higher scale development in proximity of an urban main street where there is land access. Also, there's a future Green Line LRT station that's planned just to the west along 28th Avenue, Center Street, which is within 400 meters. And also Edmitton Trail is a primary transit service corridor, and that's within this site is within 200 meters of that. That concludes my presentation. Administration, the applicant are available to answer any questions. Thanks.", "segments_merged": 10 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3567.265, "end": 3575.885, "text": "Thank you very much for the presentation. Commissioners, do we have any questions for admin on this item? Commissioner Harleck.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3577.325, "end": 3589.165, "text": "Sure. Um uh it's a question about parking. Um is this within 200 meters of a of primary transit service? I'm wondering about the 25%.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3589.605, "end": 3589.765, "text": "Yeah.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3589.765, "end": 3590.445, "text": "Parking reduction.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3590.445, "end": 3596.245, "text": "This site does qualify for that 25% reduction. Admitted trail is like 110 ish", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3596.245, "end": 3596.505, "text": "Okay.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3596.505, "end": 3597.125, "text": "meters away.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3597.125, "end": 3604.445, "text": "And and it has because it's not primary transit network, it's primary transit service for the reduction.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3604.445, "end": 3607.125, "text": "That's the designation. It's like a designated corridor", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3607.125, "end": 3607.365, "text": "Okay.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3607.365, "end": 3608.025, "text": "on the MDP.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3608.485, "end": 3625.445, "text": "Got it. That's that is very helpful. I'm just looking at the number of units and the number of stalls, and it looks like they would still have to add more parking under the proposed district than they would under the current one. Was there any talk of going from RCG to RCG?", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3626.825, "end": 3630.265, "text": "No, my understanding is they they want MCG district", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3630.265, "end": 3630.585, "text": "Okay.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3630.925, "end": 3632.345, "text": "and they're gonna make it work.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3632.845, "end": 3656.525, "text": "Got it. Um my other question is about um attachment one. There's a comment that says the subject site is not located within an i within an identified urban main street, as shown in map two, community characteristics and attributes. This is because the LAP provides a more precise level of land use policy compared to the MDP. Can you expand on that?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3657.025, "end": 3685.985, "text": "Certainly. If administration could move to slide 14. So the reason I brought this up in the report is because somebody used a chubby marker on this map and it looks like the site is within an urban main street. If we go to the next slide, 15, you know, now we're looking at the North Hill Communities LAP. It's further defined. The site is not within an urban Main Street. So I just wanted to be clear about the distinction.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3686.385, "end": 3691.945, "text": "Because on the city's open data site, it shows it in the brown MDP Main Street.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3692.105, "end": 3693.245, "text": "My understanding is like", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3693.245, "end": 3693.885, "text": "Not the marker.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3694.205, "end": 3706.765, "text": "Yeah, the MDP is sort of your zoomed out, broad perspective at the LAP level. That's when we get into more detail specific to a geographical area. So this one carries more weight, it's more defined for this area.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3707.005, "end": 3730.265, "text": "Okay, and in section 4.2.a of the local area plan, it says the maps are not intended to define exact locations, except where um they are approximate only, not absolute, and will be interpreted as such. So your use of map two to say this is not part of a main street.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3732.845, "end": 3761.245, "text": "My understanding is it's flexible, purposefully flexible to be interpreted, depending on the context. I think in this case, this site being proposed for multi residential, it's within proximity of the urban main street. It's got primary transit service, it's within the whatever four or six hundred meters of the future LRT station. I think there's a lot of support across policy levels for what's proposed.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3761.705, "end": 3780.385, "text": "Agreed. I would also say I think that's the first time that I've heard this interpretation of a local area plan. That the main streets have been modified by map two in the local area plan? And if that is true, perhaps we should modify the municipal development plan to align with the maps.", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_06", "start": 3780.925, "end": 3783.405, "text": "I believe my coordinator, Kieran, would like to add something.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_09", "start": 3783.405, "end": 3821.805, "text": "Cheers, thank you very much. Um, if you look under that uh the same policy, uh section 2 uh1 in regards to main streets, uh it specific specifically identifies the following policies applied to development that have a frontage on one or more of the main area's main streets, including the 16th Ave, Center Street, Edmonton Trail, 4th Street. This one would be farther farther in as identified uh above. Uh so when we are providing the uh direction under the LAP under the main streets, this does provide some guidance as to where to interpret it and where to include the main streets information.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3823.365, "end": 3827.005, "text": "Okay. Is there a reason we haven't used that in the past?", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_09", "start": 3828.965, "end": 3830.205, "text": "Uh I can't speak to that.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3830.405, "end": 3836.065, "text": "Okay. Got it. I will have a question for the applicant.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3838.765, "end": 3856.125, "text": "Thank you. Any other questions for administration on this item? Seeing none, if the applicant is in the room, would you please come forward? Or if you're on the line, would you please introduce yourself?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_12", "start": 3858.565, "end": 3863.205, "text": "Yes, uh uh your chair, DJ Lee Wang from Verizon Line Development and Consulting Inc.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3863.845, "end": 3866.765, "text": "Thank you for being here today. Mr. Harleck. Uh Commissioner Harleck.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3867.525, "end": 3874.765, "text": "Um so I I just have one question. Why not just leave it as RCG so you don't have to build a pile of parking?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_12", "start": 3878.385, "end": 3942.845, "text": "uh uh so from the um chair to the commissioner, uh thanks for the question. So our initial goal is to uh go for the um edge call because uh the closing is the side to administer on the main street. But unfortunately, because there is existing local airplane, and loc airplanes defined a lot as uh Uh network local, so we are not qualified for edge code. Um, but we do want to uh not restrict it by the density factor under RCG, which is 75 units per hectare. Uh, we understand MCG will have higher parking requirements. Uh, however, because the close cleaning of the site to the main street, there is uh the uh relegation given by the bylaw to basically make the parking requirement uh at the same level as RCG. So uh we want to take advantage of the density uh MCG can bring uh while uh having the same parking requirement on RCG. That's why we are applying for MCG here.", "segments_merged": 11 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3949.365, "end": 3954.385, "text": "So you'll put up with you'll put up with the extra parking so you can get the extra homes. Have I got that right?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_12", "start": 3954.885, "end": 3955.205, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 3955.445, "end": 3955.785, "text": "Okay.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_12", "start": 3955.805, "end": 3956.125, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 3958.665, "end": 3984.225, "text": "Any other questions for the applicant on this item? Seeing none, can I please get a mover for the item? Commissioner Beckler.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 3985.985, "end": 4016.125, "text": "I'll I'll move the item. Um it seems to be the rookie thing to do here since I came on. Uh but uh I just uh when I move I will indicate that I I will not be supporting this. I think staff's done a great job, the proper review within the policies that you have. There's nothing wrong there. Um I Just not understanding the move to MCG. I don't um I don't think there's room for all the parking and all the units, so I'm not sure how moving it really helps the properties developability. So um I won't be supporting it, but that's", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4017.845, "end": 4028.645, "text": "Thank you. Any debate on this item? Seeing none, back to Commissioner Beckler to close.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_04", "start": 4029.905, "end": 4030.205, "text": "closed.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4030.565, "end": 4032.465, "text": "Thank you. Clerks, would you please open the e-vote?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 4046.025, "end": 4047.345, "text": "Commissioner Wagner, your vote please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 4047.565, "end": 4048.045, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 4052.445, "end": 4053.305, "text": "All votes are in chair.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4053.665, "end": 4082.285, "text": "Thank you. Please display the vote. And the motion is carried five to one with Commissioner Beckler against. As item 72.3 was pulled off the agenda, we'll move on to item 7.2.4. This is land use amendment in Midnipur, Ward 14, at 15307, uh 1st Street, Southeast. Ms. Horkin, when you're ready, please commence your presentation.", "segments_merged": 6 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_07", "start": 4088.885, "end": 4260.325, "text": "Good afternoon, Chair and Commission members. My name is Melanie Hawkin, and I'm here to present item 7.2.4, a land use amendment application in support of a multi-residential development. Next slide, please. Administration's recommendation is that Calgary Planning Commission recommend that Council give three readings to the proposed bylaw for the redesignation of the subject parcel from the special purpose future urban development or SFAD district to the multi residential contextual low profile or MC1 district. Next slide, please. The subject parcel is located in the southeast community of Midnepore, east of McLeod Trail South East, which is a major activity centre and on a primary transit network route, and north of Midlake Boulevard Southeast. The parcel is just outside the 600 metre radius of two red line LRT stations at Shawness and Fish Creek. Next slide, please. The subject parcel is 0.1 hectares in size and is currently occupied by single detached house and detached garage with front and rear lane access. The site is well served by Calgary Transit with the nearest bus stop within 100 metres to the west on Bannister Road South East. Next slide, please. This is a view looking west to the front of the subject parcel. Next slide, please. And this is a view looking east at the rear of the subject parcel. There is a three-story multi-residential development with 57 units directly north, shown here on the left side of the photograph. Next slide, please. The subject parcel is currently designated as the special purpose future urban development or SFAD district. Surrounding development consists of two additional SFAD parcels to the south, various multi residential and commercial parcels to the north, south, and west, and single detached or RCG district parcels to the east. Next slide, please. The proposal seeks to redesignate the subject parcel to the multi-residential, contextual, low profile or MC1 district. This district provides for multi residential development in a variety of forms of low height and medium density. The maximum building height is 14 metres, approximately three to four stories, and the maximum density is 148 units per hectare, which equates to 15 units on this parcel. Next slide, please. Members of Commission for the reasons contained in the report and those presented today, administration recommends approval of this application. I'm happy to answer any questions, and the applicant is also in attendance. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 31 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4261.265, "end": 4274.105, "text": "Thank you very much for the presentation. Commission, do we have any questions for administration on this item? Commissioner Harlick.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 4275.065, "end": 4291.585, "text": "Sure. Um well the first question is we're going from special purpose future urban development in an area that was uh the house is from fifty 1958 and the area was annexed in 1961. Why is this future air urban development?", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_07", "start": 4293.465, "end": 4299.485, "text": "I cannot answer that. Yeah, why it was that when the MDP was put in, I I don't know.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 4300.065, "end": 4300.825, "text": "It was worth a shot.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_07", "start": 4300.825, "end": 4301.125, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 4302.545, "end": 4313.345, "text": "Can you tell us a bit about the the design brief from 1975? Um the report comments about um height rules and two stories versus three. Can you expand on that?", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_07", "start": 4314.305, "end": 4359.825, "text": "So it is a design brief, as you say, so it's non statutory. So of course it doesn't hold the weight of an ARP, an ASP, or one of the new local area plans. So, administration have used that to guide our thought process when we reviewed the application, but we've also had to consider that development in the area has occurred since 1975 in most cases. And a lot of that development actually provides a greater height than is indicated in that design brief. So we're using it as a guide, but I think development in place now should be used more as the the context for how this site can develop.", "segments_merged": 3 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 4360.365, "end": 4364.885, "text": "Yeah, it looked like there were some site photos that suggest there are already three story things on that.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_07", "start": 4365.205, "end": 4370.805, "text": "Particularly all the way up on the north of this block, right to the the next corner is all three stories.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 4370.745, "end": 4373.745, "text": "Okay. That's that's very helpful. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4375.705, "end": 4405.885, "text": "Thank you. Any other questions for administration? Seeing none, any questions for the applicants on this item? Also seeing none, can I please get a mover for the item? Commissioner Campbell Walters.", "segments_merged": 4 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 4414.105, "end": 4443.305, "text": "thank you, Chair. I'm happy to remove this item. Um It proposes a relatively modest contextual multiresidential development in an area that already includes a mix of residential and commercial uses. The proposed district provides appropriate controls on heightened density and represents a reasonably good transition from the existing S Fod designation. Overall, it represents a compatible form of intensification within this area.", "segments_merged": 5 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4445.525, "end": 4458.725, "text": "Thank you. Any debates on this item? Seeing none, back to Commissioner Campbell Walters to close.", "segments_merged": 2 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_08", "start": 4459.845, "end": 4461.225, "text": "I'm closed, Chair. Thank you.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4461.325, "end": 4462.905, "text": "Thank you. Clerk, so would you please open the e vote?", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 4475.945, "end": 4477.225, "text": "Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_10", "start": 4477.625, "end": 4478.105, "text": "Yes.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_05", "start": 4479.805, "end": 4480.625, "text": "All votes are in chair.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4481.045, "end": 4507.365, "text": "Thank you. Please display the vote. And that is carried seven to zero. That brings us to the end of our agenda. So thank you everyone for your time and effort this afternoon. Before we adjourn, I would like to remind and ask commissioners to please submit your reasons for decision for land use amendments for inclusion in the reports to council. The reasons for your decisions are very valuable to councillors. Uh Commissioner Harleck, would you mind moving to adjourn?", "segments_merged": 6 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_02", "start": 4508.005, "end": 4508.445, "text": "So moved.", "segments_merged": 1 }, { "speaker": "SPEAKER_11", "start": 4509.125, "end": 4511.105, "text": "Any opposed? We are adjourned.", "segments_merged": 2 } ], "full_text": "Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to call the March 12, 2026 meeting of the Calgary Planning Commission to order. Clerks, would you please conduct a roll call? Yes, thank you, Chair. To confirm Quorum, Commissioner Beckler, Here. Commissioner Campbell Walters, Commissioner Damiani, Commissioner Hardwick. Here. Commissioner Harlock? Here. Commissioner Montgomery. Commissioner Pink. Commissioner Remtula. Commissioner Small. Here. Commissioner Wagner. Yeah. Vice Chair Mahler. Here. And Chair Lee. I'm here. We do have Quorum. Thank you. Welcome everyone. My name is Christian Lee, Manager of Planning Advisory and Coordination Services and Chair of Calgary Planning Commission. A reminder to everyone on Teams and to the applicants on the bridge to please keep yourselves muted unless you are the one speaking. This ensures we can keep our full attention to the speaker. Before we begin, I would like to start with a land acknowledgement, as the matters before us have to do with land. The city of Calgary, where the bow and elbow rivers meet, was historically a place of confluence where the sharing of resources, ideas, and opportunities naturally come together. Long before Scottish settlers named it Calgary, the original indigenous nations of this area had their own names for the land. In the Blackfoot language, it is Kalmoginstis. The Ithaca Nokota Wichitabe First Nations refer to this place as Wachispa Oyade, and the people of the Sutina Nation call it Gutsis. The Metis called the Air Calgary area Otusquany. We'd like to take this opportunity to appreciate and acknowledge that we are gathered on the ancestral and traditional territory of the Blackfoot Confederacy, made up of the Sixika, Bigani, the Umska Bibigani, and the Gaina First Nations. The Ethicanakota Wichistabe First Nations comprised of the Chinniki, Bear's Paw, and Goodstoney First Nations, and Dusutina First Nation. The city of Calgary is also homeland to the historic Northwest Metis and to the Otippamisiwa Metis Government, Metis Nation Battle River Territory, Nosehill Metis District 5, and Elbo Metis District 6. We acknowledge all indigenous people who have made Calgary their home. Thank you. We will go to confirmation of the agenda. Director Mauler, would you move the agenda, please? Uh yes, thank you, Chair. I'd like to uh move the agenda and make the motion uh that the agenda uh for the March 12th uh regular meeting of Calvary Planning Commission be confirmed after amendment by deleting item 7.2.3, which is the land use amendment in Eau Claire and Ward 7 at 728 Fourth Avenue Southwest from the agenda. We understand that that's at the request of the applicant. Thank you. Commissioner Small. Thank you. I have a conflict with this item, so I'll step out while this is dealt with. Thank you. Any Other debate on this. Alright, seeing none, clerks, would you please bring up the evote? Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please. Yes. All votes are in, Chair. Thank you. Please display the vote. And the motion to uh for the agenda is carried six to zero with Commissioner Small abstaining as he has a conflict. We will now go on to and that is carried. We'll go to declarations of conflicts of interest. Uh Commissioner Campbell Walters. Thank you, Chair. I do have a conflict with item 7.2.2. Thank you. Any other conflicts to announce, Commissioners? Seeing none, we will move on to uh confirmation of minutes. Commissioner Hardwick, would you mind moving confirmation of the minutes, please? So moved. Thank you, clerks or administration. Are there any errors or omissions to the minutes? Nothing from clerks. All right. And anyone opposed? Seeing none, that is also carried. We will now go to the consent agenda. Would any members of commission like to pull an item from consent? Commissioner Wagner. I'd like to uh move item five point two off consent, please. Thank you. As that was the only item on consent, there is no consent items to vote on. So we will go on to item 5.2. Which is the first item that we will have a presentation for. Please uh come up, Mr. Conway. This is for policy amendment in Ogden at 8002 24th Street Southeast LOC 2025 0236. Uh Mr. Conway, when you're ready, please commence your presentation. Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Commission. My name is Sean Conway, and I'll be providing a brief overview of item 5.2, a proposed policy amendment in the community of Ogden. Next slide, please. Administration is recommending that the Calgary Planning Commission give three readings to the proposed bylaw for amendments to the Milken Ogden area redevelopment plan shown on attachment two. Next slide, please. The subject site is in the southeast community of Ogden and is located at the corner of 24th Street Southeast and 80th Avenue Southeast. The parcel is approximately 1.5 kilometers or a 20 minute walk east of the commercial node at the intersection of 18th Street Southeast and 76th Avenue Southeast. This commercial area provides a range of amenities, including a grocery store, a pharmacy, and other retail and service uses. Next slide, please. The parcel is a corner site and is approximately 0.05 hectares in size. It is currently developed with a single detached house and a rear detached garage. The site is accessed by a rear lane along the east property line. Next slide, please. This is a photo of the front of the subject property from 24th Street Southeast. Next slide, please. This is a photo of the site from 80th Avenue Southeast. Next slide, please. Surrounding land uses are designated as the residential grade oriented infill or the RCG district and are characterized by single detached dwellings and accessory residential buildings. Next slide, please. This application proposes to amend the Milliken Ogden area redevelopment plan to support the development of row houses, townhouses, and duplex dwellings on the subject site. Specifically, the amendment would revise Map 5 of the ARP by changing the land use classification for the site from low density conservation to low or medium density multi dwelling residential. In addition, it proposes to amend Section 3.4.3 of this ARP in order to allow a maximum density of 75 units per hectare consistent with the RCG district in the land use bylaw. The development permit application is currently under review for the site. It proposes the development of a four unit townhouse with rear lane access and a grade oriented design consistent with the intent of the proposed policy amendments. These proposed policy changes would align the ARP with the intent and regulations of the RCG district, which supports a variety of grade oriented housing forms. Next slide, please. For these reasons and those listed in the report, administration recommends approval of this application. This concludes my presentation and I'd be happy to answer any questions. The applicant is also in attendance for any questions as well. Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentation. We'll go to questions of administration. I believe uh Commissioner Wagner, you have questions for admin. I do thank you. Um thank you for the presentation. I wonder if you could just comment on uh what role the current sorry, I'm just pulling it up. What role the current uh conservation area designation played in the proposed land use redesignation. In terms of the current low density conservation area, it applies to the subject site in the current ARP. The intent of that land use designation was for the R2 district, which was formally applied to the site. As part of the citywide rezoning, the site was redesignated to the RCG district. So the proposed amendment is meant to align the policy with the current RCG RCG district that applies to the site. It also aligns the site with the MDP direction, which allows for intensification of inner city areas such as this. So it's just to bring the policy in alignment with the current land use district and current policy direction as per the MDP. So if I understand your comments, the conservation Designation was existing, but there there wasn't significant review or conversation regarding the impact of that designation on how to move forward with the proposed designation. That the work undertaken by administration was more about alignment with current policy. Yes, so so as part of the citywide rezoning, there was consultation done on under that process. The ARP was not amended as per that process. What we're left with is a situation where we have a case-by-case amendments that are brought forward to CPC and Council to align the policy to align the RC the subject sites RCG RCG district with the policy in the ARP. So until we have an LAP that's that's brought forward to council, uh we're kind of left in this situation where we have to bring applications on a case by case uh such as this. Thank you. Thank you. Uh Director Mahler. Yes, thank you, Chair. And if you could go back to slide nine, there's another parcel on the north side of 80th Ave Southeast that's also showing low or medium density multi-dwelling residential. Was that a site-specific amendment like this one? Or is that for some other reason? Uh could we could we bring up that slide that's Slide nine? It's uh it's the Milliken Ogden map five. okay Other way. There. Oh. There it is. Yeah, so just to kitty corner, really, to this this the subject site, there's another looks like four lots that are designated lower medium density multi dwelling. and and sorry your question was Was that from another redesignation after the RCG? Was that a an ARP amendment that w had come through Planning Commission? that that would have been an ARP amendment that came to commission as well. That's correct. Okay, thanks for that. Thank you. Any other questions for administration on this item? Seeing none, any questions for the app oh Commissioner Beckler? Do you are you are you good? Okay. Any questions for the applicant on this item? Also seeing none, can I please get a mover for the item? Commissioner Wagner. Thank you. I will move this item. I think this is, as we've heard, part of uh the growing development of Calgary and some of the areas that now moving forward with uh recent changes to policy we anticipate will be changing over time. Thank you. Commissioner Beckler to debate. Uh thank you. I thanks for pulling this off of consent. I while I struggle with the varying levels of policy that are sort of maybe not in sync at this time, I understand there's an LAP. I will be supporting this just because I think the the intent of of bringing more housing and staying within the the forms and the height of of RCG is comparable to to any other zoning that would be on the land. But this does does reflect it's nice to see an LAP coming forward, and hopefully we see more of those so that we're not running into these one by one. Little uh little changes. Thank you. Any other debate on this item? Seeing none, back to Commissioner Wagner to close. Close please. Thank you, clerks. Would you please bring up the e vote? Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please. Yes. All votes are in chair. Thank you. Please display the vote. And the motion is carried seven to zero. We'll carry on with the agenda. Item 7.2.1 is next. Land use amendment in Hillhurst Ward 7 at multiple addresses. LLC 2025 0133. Mr. Hall, once you are ready, thank you. Please commence your presentation. Okay, thank you. Good afternoon, Chair, members of the Commission. I'm Jules Hall, and I'm presenting this first item on the second item on your agenda. Next slide, please. This application is for a land use amendment to change eight parcels from the current direct control district to the multi residential, high density, high rise MH3 district with modifiers for height and floor area ratio. Next slide, please. The site is located within the community of Hillhurst on Fifth Avenue Northwest, south of Riley Park. And west of 10th Street Northwest, within the 600 metre buffer of the Hillhurst Sunnyside LRT station. Next slide, please. This aerial photograph shows the eight properties forming the block between 11 and 11A Street, Northwest, on the north side of Fifth Avenue, Northwest. Riley Park is immediately to the north of the site and the Ezra on Riley Park building immediately to the west. Next slide, please. This photo shows the site looking west with Ezra beyond. Next slide. The rear lane interface with Riley Park. Sorry. My apologies. 11th Street Northwest, the eastern boundary of the site, next slide. And the rear lane in a very snowy and very sunny environment. And the interface with Riley Park. Next slide, please. This slide shows the surrounding land uses, including predominantly multi residential, with more commercial uses along 10th Street Northwest. Next slide. The proposed MH3 use maintains the character of multi residential land uses, albeit at a larger scale. Consistent with the approved Rider Community's local area plan. Next slide. The site is within the neighbourhood connector urban form category of the local area plan, which supports a higher frequency of mainly residential development in a broad range of housing types, unit structures, and forms, including live work units and local commercial uses. Next slide, please. The building scale map in the LAP places the site within the mid up to 12 stories category, meaning the proposed height modifier of 40 metres. Equating to 12 stories is compatible with the statutory policy. Next slide. Chair, members of commission, administration recommends approval of this land use redesignation application for the noted parcels from DC to MH3 and ask Planning Commission to endorse the application and forward to council for a public hearing. Thank you. That concludes my presentation. I should be happy to answer any questions. And the applicant is also in attendance. Thank you very much for the presentation. Commissioners, do we have any questions for administration on this item? Commissioner Beckler. Uh thank you. Uh thank you, Mr. Hall, for a great presentation. I guess looking at the information in the package, which is is very helpful, um, there is an element of compromise that's happened in terms of the background in the package that the district allows a bigger box. So, in terms of the feedback from community, um, can you just provide a little context into why you didn't stay within the DC district to allow to shape the box, um to acknowledge? The The existing DC, you mean? uh well or in a a revised DC. Okay. So Yeah, thanks for the question. So this site is currently subject to a direct control district which covers this and the properties further to the east, all the way up to 10th Street. That DC is based on the MH1 land use, and it also has provision for density bonusing, which was a mechanism that was used in the previous local policy for Hillhurst and Sunning Side, the ARP, which is now no longer the statutory policy. Local area plans don't provide for density bonusing. This application originally when it was submitted was for a direct control district based on MH3 to take advantage of that density bonusing characteristic that's no longer relevant. And so that DC approach wasn't didn't satisfy section twenty of the land use bylaw. Which talks about the tests for when a direct control district is appropriate. There's an available stock land use, that's MH3, which accommodates what the applicant is seeking in terms of their application, which is a height of 12 stories, and an FAR of six. MH3 is entirely an appropriate land use, it's available, and that's why we are taking the approach rather than the direct control district. Appreciate that response. The the reason for my question really is related to uh the fact that there is considerations for the park for the feedback from the community. Um And I guess I just asked because would we give approval of MH3? We don't we can't give conditional approval, right? The box becomes the box of MH3, and that would remove the opportunity to frame the community. So I appreciate the feedback on it being aligned around the density bonusing, but it removes that constraint once we've approved it, right? So if I could ask clerks to bring up uh slide 13. Sorry, the next one, 14. Here we are. This is from the applicant's uh UDRP submission package, and this kind of explores their progression in terms of massing. With the very like the top left being the the box of the building can happen. They shape the building as we track to the right. Then they uh consider things like the impact of a 12-story development on the Ezra building next door. So they carve out a little bit of uh of that height there. And as we progress through, and the bottom right is kind of what they're ending up in terms of massing. Obviously, this is a land use application, so we don't know what the detail of the design is going to be, but this is the applicant's kind of thoughts. And they thought about things like you know, potential shadowing impacts and how to minimize those on the park. They thought about the uh the next door neighbours and and the impact of that maximum MH3 building in terms of you know being a good neighborly development and also accommodating what they want and what they obviously aspire to in terms of their particular performance. So I think they've thought about massing at this early stage. Obviously, when we get detailed design, we get development permit. That's when those discussions really hit the road. Yeah, I think you're picking up exactly what I'm getting at. In terms of we're gonna approve the land use, and that's not going to come back here for us to align with what we've seen. Right. So I appreciate the feedback. I'm just gonna shift really quick if I can to um in your report, you mentioned that there's nothing done with this land use in particular to align with sustainability pathways. Um I I'm I'm curious as to if this doesn't help us bring more people with transit as an option. Is there a reason why that we don't have to align with any of the policies in the sustainability pathway? That's really a response to the applicants package. The site is located within 600 metres of the LRT. It's part of smack bang on the 5A network for cycling pedestrians. Riley Park is part of that 5A network as well. I think it is a sustainable location. It is a sustainable Former development, it's providing probably much needed housing in a variety of tenures and forms to serve the community and for those residents, new residents, to be able to have input into their local community and use local goods and services. So I think it is a sustainable location. Irrespective of what the pathways document says to 2050. You know, sustainability principles are obviously very much front and centre of our thought process when we look at these sorts these sorts of locations. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Commissioner Campbell Walters. Chair. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Mr. Hall, for that presentation. I have a question. It's more of a clarifying one. You had mentioned in your presentation that the MH3 district and the 40 meters height align with the local area plan and the intended scale for this block. Could you just explain that in a little bit more detail? I really wanted to determine whether the site is specifically identified as appropriate for this high rise rather than the mid-scale that that the current land use was about. Okay, thanks for the question. Um we've already seen the the two maps, uh map three and map four of the LAP, which talk about the uh the urban form as a neighborhood uh connector site and the building height which is up to 12 stories. Could I ask maybe if we go to slide 17, please? So this is kind of a comparison between the three available MH districts in our land use bylaw. MH1, which is what the base uh the current direct control district is based on, obviously has uh potential maximum height of up to 26 metres. That's not consistent with the local area plan. MH2 has the potential for a modifier up to 50 metres, which would be consistent uh with the 12 story ask from the applicant. However, uh MH2 has a maximum FAR calculation of five. This application is for 12 stories and an FAR of six. The only available uh land use district to provide that in this context is MH3. Um with a modifier of 40 which is below the MH2, so that kind of characteristic falls through. Um to uh to uh enable an FAR6 we have to pick the MH3. Um Looking at the the minimum number of units, because the number of units is calculated in the in our bylaw as a minimum, 93 is the minimum. This application is seeking, or the development permit application ultimately has been suggested of a of a unican of about 175. So MH3 I think is an appropriate district for what the applicant has requested, but simply because we have no other mechanism to have that increased FAR. MH25 is the maximum, you cannot go beyond that. So I understand that you know that the purpose statements of MH3. kind of suggest a slightly different form of development, but with what the applicant is seeking to do on this site, the constraints of this site and the availability of a stock and use district, thought that MH3 was probably the most appropriate in this instance. Thank you for that, for our explanation. But based on this comparison table that you showed here, MH3 could actually go up to 11 FAR. Correct. It could. And how do how would one control because we're look, we're just at the land use stage. So once we move to the development proposal stage, what mechanism does the city have to ensure that the FAR remains within a certain um within the five to six? Because the Would you sorry my response, yes. Um the actual application for this is MH3 F6.0 H40. So there are two modifiers one is for FAR and one is for height. The modifiers are not relaxable. So once the FAR of six is established, that is the maximum FAR that you could get on this site if this application is approved. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that, Mr. Hall. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Commissioner Small. Thank you. Can we go back to the building massing slide, please? Can you please clarify if uh number eight is that is fully built out at the 6 FAR? That would be a question I think you'd have to ask the applicant. That's what they've shown in terms of their massing study when they went to urban design review panel. My guess is yes, that would be the highest portion of that building is 12 stories, and they've declared that that would equate to a six FAR. So I'm guessing that the answer is yes. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Harlick. Um thank you for for working on this one. Uh does the local area plan include any guidance on interfaces with parks? It does. Those are more kind of detailed design type policies. There's a whole section in the LAP which is for specifically for site design. Hasn't been specifically reviewed in terms of this because it's only a land use application, although we are very conscious of it, very conscious of the proximity of the park. And obviously, we wouldn't want to. Suggest a land use that would be significant conflict with that other interest of very great acknowledged importance. Yeah. Okay. Um Does the MH3 district have rules that support that good interface that the the policy wants? So again, if we we could go back to the slide 17, but basically the the rules for setbacks and stepbacks are the same for all MH districts. And it's a four meter setback where property line is shared with a street and six meters where shared with a lane. I believe the intent is to actually. Continue the same surface treatment in the lane that was done for ESRA to provide that consistency for the residents, and and I think it's a great interface to be honest. Okay. Um and I guess would there have was there any discussion of a direct control district to add stronger controls on that north side? Because the the use of a direct control district wasn't satisfied in terms of section 20, we didn't have those um conversations because the DC is not appropriate in this instance, because we have the MH3, which is available. Again, when we come to detailed design, those are where we have those conversations, and I think we've got a fairly willing applicant who's uh who's who's gone quite some way already in recognizing like neighboring developments and the presence of the park and that sort of thing. So I I'm pretty confident that we can certainly come to a workable solution that's mutually benefit beneficial. In the public and the private interest. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for administration on this item? Seeing none, if the applicant is in the room, would you please come forward? I believe commissioners will have questions for you. And introduce yourself, please. Hi there, my name is Jennifer Dobin with Dobbin Consulting. I'm the applicant and conducted all the public engagement as well. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you for being here today. Uh Commissioner Small. Thank you. Same question I asked Mr. Hall is your massing modeling, you're using the maximum six to demonstrate that like number eight you're capping out at six FAR. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Commissioner Campbell Walters. Thank you, Chair. And thank you for being here, Ms. Dublin. Just a question. I don't think admin went into full detail, but could you just explain a little bit more context regarding the interfaces between the neighbors, especially those on the I think it's the East and the South? Certainly, through the chair, happy to answer those questions. We've had a lot of these conversations and as often happens on these larger developments, there's conflicting things to balance. And by going to UDRP, it was a really good opportunity to have you know professionals in the industry review how we're approaching the design, because some of those things are controlled by the development permit. But at this point and purpose, we're looking at circulation on the site and the how it interfaces with the park, how it interfaces with neighbors, with some consideration that there's potential for future development across 11th Street of those four or five houses that remain between VIC on 5th and this building. Some of the ways that you see that coming forward in the development permit consideration is UDRP had suggested the building move a little more to the west to push away from 11th Street because 11th Street is considered a heritage designation avenue, and they'd like to see improvements to access to Riley Park, so that becomes the primary south entrance to Riley Park. So changes like that that are on a building this big, they're pretty big changes, but pushing the mass away and pushing it to the south. I thought the questions on a DC were interesting because you are correct. It has come up many times with public engagement that we're what we're talking about right now is the envelope, which on this slide would be showed as A. And then the FAR controls how much mass can be within that envelope. And so you could push and pull and do different towers and different shapes and things within that envelope that MH3 is granting. And so in we're fortunate to be working with DAS, and they really understand as architects the importance of designing a building that's respectful to Ezra to the west and becomes a gateway building to Riley Park on the east and respects the setbacks and is actually more aggressive setback away from 11th Street to provide some breathing room for that gateway building. So there's a lot that can be done at the development permit stage, but uh it's been correctly identified that without a really prescriptive DC that you know perhaps said that one part was only eight stories and the rest could be 12, which we saw in effect on ESRA. It has a very interesting DC, the one that we're amending here and changing. It actually prescribes those sort of gateway sections on the front corners of both sides of ESRA. It's a very complicated DC. And so when we first applied, we did apply for a DC both for the opportunity to have more control over the massing, but also because we had to apply for uh the levy. But with that being removed out of the local area plan, we didn't no longer met the requirements because we wouldn't be seeking any relaxations under MH3. So there's nothing to really codify into a DC. uh beyond an MH three standard zoning. D does that answer your question? Very much so. Thank you so much for that additional detail. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Commissioner Harlick. Sure. Thanks for that answer. That helped with the uh the question about the north the interface to the park that that was going through my mind. Um the community association has brought up um the term they used was over parking. Um do you want to respond to that? I'd be happy to. The intention of this is a purpose-built rental, and of we do have some affordable units in the building, but the intention is a high amenity, high value building that will attract people. The units that are not affordable will be pretty classy, expensive parcels, and those people are often expecting at least one parking stall. So we have to propose a balance between transit-oriented development and the expectation of the end user, which is a high-end end user, that they might have two or three vehicles and probably one's a truck kind of thing. So developers have to find a balance in the parking. So we went with, you know, what is a standard parquet? One level, two levels, how many parking stalls does that give us? It's 167. We've backed that down a little and are going to offer some visitor parking as requested in the parquet. So it's just a it's a it's trying to find a balance between marketability and and usability of the end user and and hopes for TD. And we you hope that people park their cars and don't use them. They are going to use the bus stop that's right there in the bike lane and walk to Kensington. So it's just a developer trying to find a balance between. Those two. There were some discussions about parking one to one and going a third layer in the parquet and that just doesn't make sense financially or to try and meet that need. So there'll be people who rent in here who won't have won't have a parking space. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Seeing none, thank you so much for being here today. Commissioners, I need a mover for the item, please. Commissioner Beckler. Thank you. Yeah, I'll I'll move the item and indicate my my willingness to support. I think it's a great response. I agree with staff that uh this does create enabling actions for our Calgary climate strategy, giving people a choice, right, to be able to use other modes. Um, and it shows the right amount of intention and the backup in the application to be respectful to the community. Thank you. Any debate on this item? Commissioner Small. Thank you. I think the limiting factor of a 6 FAR helps that the building can take many different forms through the DP and therefore you can play around with how much of the building is going up to 12 stories versus is lower, and therefore you can mitigate the shadowing impacts and the relationship to adjacent buildings as well. And for those reasons, I'll be supporting this. Thank you. Thank you. Director Mahler. Thank you, Chair. I'll support the application as well. I'm a little attached to the old DC and the old policy, I'll confess. But that the reason I was attached to it was it was a very intentional desire to shape interesting buildings in a very special location within the city and a very important part of not just this neighborhood, but uh it's important to the whole region. But I think the lot through the line of questioning, I think through the applicant's description, and I went to your website as well, applicant, to see some of the discussion. The intent is still there to shape a very interesting building at a very strategic location. Um I think it would help if there was more specific direction in the local area plan to describe what we're trying to achieve. What are we trying to minimize shadow on? What kind of shape of building are we trying to form? The relationship with 11th Street. I'd actually forgot about that one. Thanks for flagging that. The how how it's treated there, I think it would benefit the file managers and the the applicant when the development permit comes in. There might be a different applicant by the time, who knows, you know, to prepare for it. But um, all that said, I think it's uh it's a really great opportunity, and uh I'll be supporting. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no other debate, back to Commissioner Beckler to close. Close. Thank you. Clerks, would you please bring up the evo? Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please. Yes. All votes are in chair. Thank you. Please display the vote. So it does not look like it's uh showing the casted vote here. Uh I can tell you that it is carried seven nothing on the screen here though. Thank you. We'll consider the vote carried 7 to 0 as now displayed on the screen. So thank you very much. Yeah, before we move on to 7.2.2, uh Commissioner Campbell Walters, just confirming that you are recusing yourself from this item. Thank you, Chair. Yes, I'll be turning off my camera and I'll observe the live stream until this item is discussed and Thank you, Commissioner. We'll go to 7.2.2, land use amendment in Tuxedo Park at multiple addresses. Mr. Smith, when you're ready, please commence your presentation. Good afternoon. Item 7.2.2 is for land use amendment in Tuxedo Park. Next slide, please. This application would facilitate construction of a grade oriented multi residential development. Administration's recommending approval. Next slide, please. Site's in Tuxedo Park. It's between Center Street and Edmonton Trail, Northeast. Next slide, please. Site is about 0.11 of a hectare. Currently contains three detached dwellings. Next slide, please. This is the view from the southwest. Next slide. The site's in the North Hill Communities Local Area Plan. It's in a neighborhood local area, supports building forms containing three or more residential units near main streets, such as Edmonton Trail, and where the parcel is lane and parking can be accommodated on site. So this site is close to Edmonton Trail, has lane access. Also, the applicant believes parking can be accommodated on site. Next slide, please. It's also in the building scale area of low modified, so up to four stories, which further supports the land use and concept for redeveloping for multi residential. Next slide, please. Proposed multi-residential contextual grade oriented or MCG districts would support a variety of building forms. This could include rowhouse townhouse forms. It would allow up to 12 dwelling units. It could include secondary suites, so up to 12 as well, and a maximum of 12 meters or four stories. In conclusion, administration recommends approval because it's shown in an area supported by the North Hill LAP. It supports moderately higher density and higher scale development in proximity of an urban main street where there is land access. Also, there's a future Green Line LRT station that's planned just to the west along 28th Avenue, Center Street, which is within 400 meters. And also Edmitton Trail is a primary transit service corridor, and that's within this site is within 200 meters of that. That concludes my presentation. Administration, the applicant are available to answer any questions. Thanks. Thank you very much for the presentation. Commissioners, do we have any questions for admin on this item? Commissioner Harleck. Sure. Um uh it's a question about parking. Um is this within 200 meters of a of primary transit service? I'm wondering about the 25%. Yeah. Parking reduction. This site does qualify for that 25% reduction. Admitted trail is like 110 ish Okay. meters away. And and it has because it's not primary transit network, it's primary transit service for the reduction. That's the designation. It's like a designated corridor Okay. on the MDP. Got it. That's that is very helpful. I'm just looking at the number of units and the number of stalls, and it looks like they would still have to add more parking under the proposed district than they would under the current one. Was there any talk of going from RCG to RCG? No, my understanding is they they want MCG district Okay. and they're gonna make it work. Got it. Um my other question is about um attachment one. There's a comment that says the subject site is not located within an i within an identified urban main street, as shown in map two, community characteristics and attributes. This is because the LAP provides a more precise level of land use policy compared to the MDP. Can you expand on that? Certainly. If administration could move to slide 14. So the reason I brought this up in the report is because somebody used a chubby marker on this map and it looks like the site is within an urban main street. If we go to the next slide, 15, you know, now we're looking at the North Hill Communities LAP. It's further defined. The site is not within an urban Main Street. So I just wanted to be clear about the distinction. Because on the city's open data site, it shows it in the brown MDP Main Street. My understanding is like Not the marker. Yeah, the MDP is sort of your zoomed out, broad perspective at the LAP level. That's when we get into more detail specific to a geographical area. So this one carries more weight, it's more defined for this area. Okay, and in section 4.2.a of the local area plan, it says the maps are not intended to define exact locations, except where um they are approximate only, not absolute, and will be interpreted as such. So your use of map two to say this is not part of a main street. My understanding is it's flexible, purposefully flexible to be interpreted, depending on the context. I think in this case, this site being proposed for multi residential, it's within proximity of the urban main street. It's got primary transit service, it's within the whatever four or six hundred meters of the future LRT station. I think there's a lot of support across policy levels for what's proposed. Agreed. I would also say I think that's the first time that I've heard this interpretation of a local area plan. That the main streets have been modified by map two in the local area plan? And if that is true, perhaps we should modify the municipal development plan to align with the maps. I believe my coordinator, Kieran, would like to add something. Cheers, thank you very much. Um, if you look under that uh the same policy, uh section 2 uh1 in regards to main streets, uh it specific specifically identifies the following policies applied to development that have a frontage on one or more of the main area's main streets, including the 16th Ave, Center Street, Edmonton Trail, 4th Street. This one would be farther farther in as identified uh above. Uh so when we are providing the uh direction under the LAP under the main streets, this does provide some guidance as to where to interpret it and where to include the main streets information. Okay. Is there a reason we haven't used that in the past? Uh I can't speak to that. Okay. Got it. I will have a question for the applicant. Thank you. Any other questions for administration on this item? Seeing none, if the applicant is in the room, would you please come forward? Or if you're on the line, would you please introduce yourself? Yes, uh uh your chair, DJ Lee Wang from Verizon Line Development and Consulting Inc. Thank you for being here today. Mr. Harleck. Uh Commissioner Harleck. Um so I I just have one question. Why not just leave it as RCG so you don't have to build a pile of parking? uh uh so from the um chair to the commissioner, uh thanks for the question. So our initial goal is to uh go for the um edge call because uh the closing is the side to administer on the main street. But unfortunately, because there is existing local airplane, and loc airplanes defined a lot as uh Uh network local, so we are not qualified for edge code. Um, but we do want to uh not restrict it by the density factor under RCG, which is 75 units per hectare. Uh, we understand MCG will have higher parking requirements. Uh, however, because the close cleaning of the site to the main street, there is uh the uh relegation given by the bylaw to basically make the parking requirement uh at the same level as RCG. So uh we want to take advantage of the density uh MCG can bring uh while uh having the same parking requirement on RCG. That's why we are applying for MCG here. So you'll put up with you'll put up with the extra parking so you can get the extra homes. Have I got that right? Yes. Okay. Yes. Any other questions for the applicant on this item? Seeing none, can I please get a mover for the item? Commissioner Beckler. I'll I'll move the item. Um it seems to be the rookie thing to do here since I came on. Uh but uh I just uh when I move I will indicate that I I will not be supporting this. I think staff's done a great job, the proper review within the policies that you have. There's nothing wrong there. Um I Just not understanding the move to MCG. I don't um I don't think there's room for all the parking and all the units, so I'm not sure how moving it really helps the properties developability. So um I won't be supporting it, but that's Thank you. Any debate on this item? Seeing none, back to Commissioner Beckler to close. closed. Thank you. Clerks, would you please open the e-vote? Commissioner Wagner, your vote please. Yes. All votes are in chair. Thank you. Please display the vote. And the motion is carried five to one with Commissioner Beckler against. As item 72.3 was pulled off the agenda, we'll move on to item 7.2.4. This is land use amendment in Midnipur, Ward 14, at 15307, uh 1st Street, Southeast. Ms. Horkin, when you're ready, please commence your presentation. Good afternoon, Chair and Commission members. My name is Melanie Hawkin, and I'm here to present item 7.2.4, a land use amendment application in support of a multi-residential development. Next slide, please. Administration's recommendation is that Calgary Planning Commission recommend that Council give three readings to the proposed bylaw for the redesignation of the subject parcel from the special purpose future urban development or SFAD district to the multi residential contextual low profile or MC1 district. Next slide, please. The subject parcel is located in the southeast community of Midnepore, east of McLeod Trail South East, which is a major activity centre and on a primary transit network route, and north of Midlake Boulevard Southeast. The parcel is just outside the 600 metre radius of two red line LRT stations at Shawness and Fish Creek. Next slide, please. The subject parcel is 0.1 hectares in size and is currently occupied by single detached house and detached garage with front and rear lane access. The site is well served by Calgary Transit with the nearest bus stop within 100 metres to the west on Bannister Road South East. Next slide, please. This is a view looking west to the front of the subject parcel. Next slide, please. And this is a view looking east at the rear of the subject parcel. There is a three-story multi-residential development with 57 units directly north, shown here on the left side of the photograph. Next slide, please. The subject parcel is currently designated as the special purpose future urban development or SFAD district. Surrounding development consists of two additional SFAD parcels to the south, various multi residential and commercial parcels to the north, south, and west, and single detached or RCG district parcels to the east. Next slide, please. The proposal seeks to redesignate the subject parcel to the multi-residential, contextual, low profile or MC1 district. This district provides for multi residential development in a variety of forms of low height and medium density. The maximum building height is 14 metres, approximately three to four stories, and the maximum density is 148 units per hectare, which equates to 15 units on this parcel. Next slide, please. Members of Commission for the reasons contained in the report and those presented today, administration recommends approval of this application. I'm happy to answer any questions, and the applicant is also in attendance. Thank you. Thank you very much for the presentation. Commission, do we have any questions for administration on this item? Commissioner Harlick. Sure. Um well the first question is we're going from special purpose future urban development in an area that was uh the house is from fifty 1958 and the area was annexed in 1961. Why is this future air urban development? I cannot answer that. Yeah, why it was that when the MDP was put in, I I don't know. It was worth a shot. Yes. Can you tell us a bit about the the design brief from 1975? Um the report comments about um height rules and two stories versus three. Can you expand on that? So it is a design brief, as you say, so it's non statutory. So of course it doesn't hold the weight of an ARP, an ASP, or one of the new local area plans. So, administration have used that to guide our thought process when we reviewed the application, but we've also had to consider that development in the area has occurred since 1975 in most cases. And a lot of that development actually provides a greater height than is indicated in that design brief. So we're using it as a guide, but I think development in place now should be used more as the the context for how this site can develop. Yeah, it looked like there were some site photos that suggest there are already three story things on that. Particularly all the way up on the north of this block, right to the the next corner is all three stories. Okay. That's that's very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for administration? Seeing none, any questions for the applicants on this item? Also seeing none, can I please get a mover for the item? Commissioner Campbell Walters. thank you, Chair. I'm happy to remove this item. Um It proposes a relatively modest contextual multiresidential development in an area that already includes a mix of residential and commercial uses. The proposed district provides appropriate controls on heightened density and represents a reasonably good transition from the existing S Fod designation. Overall, it represents a compatible form of intensification within this area. Thank you. Any debates on this item? Seeing none, back to Commissioner Campbell Walters to close. I'm closed, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Clerk, so would you please open the e vote? Commissioner Wagner, your vote, please. Yes. All votes are in chair. Thank you. Please display the vote. And that is carried seven to zero. That brings us to the end of our agenda. So thank you everyone for your time and effort this afternoon. Before we adjourn, I would like to remind and ask commissioners to please submit your reasons for decision for land use amendments for inclusion in the reports to council. The reasons for your decisions are very valuable to councillors. Uh Commissioner Harleck, would you mind moving to adjourn? So moved. Any opposed? We are adjourned.", "num_speakers": 15, "consolidated": true, "metadata": { "source_file": "e85eacc5-b8f9-4942-be3b-9aeb9c805ff7.json", "original_segment_count": 554, "consolidated_segment_count": 189, "max_gap_seconds": 150.0, "reduction_percentage": 65.88 }, "file": "/tmp/tmpt4r5n3yd/f2f5d470-e7b1-43e3-8985-5977b8fd453c.mkv" }