[riker]

Pakoshayimooh Village Feedback Survey
We want to hear your thoughts on Pakoshayimooh Village, an affordable sober-living housing development planned for Edmonton’s Blatchford neighbourhood. The project is designed to provide stable housing within a safe, well-managed, and community-oriented environment, rooted in wellness, connection, and thoughtful integration into the surrounding neighbourhood.

If you live, work, or own a business nearby, or are part of the broader Edmonton community, your feedback will help inform design considerations for common areas, commercial spaces, transportation, parking, safety during and after construction, and other on-site amenities.

To learn more about the project and review additional details before sharing your feedback, we encourage you to visit our website:
metishousing.ca/housing/hope-village

Residents and businesses located in Blatchford, Prince Charles, Prince Rupert, Westwood, and Spruce Avenue are eligible to be entered into a draw to win one of three $100 gift cards for completing this survey.

Please share your feedback by February 28, 2026.

West elevation:

Interior Courtyard:

 

[constance_chlore]

Pakoshayimooh Village Feedback Survey
We want to hear your thoughts on Pakoshayimooh Village, an affordable sober-living housing development planned for Edmonton’s Blatchford neighbourhood. The project is designed to provide stable housing within a safe, well-managed, and community-oriented environment, rooted in wellness, connection, and thoughtful integration into the surrounding neighbourhood.

If you live, work, or own a business nearby, or are part of the broader Edmonton community, your feedback will help inform design considerations for common areas, commercial spaces, transportation, parking, safety during and after construction, and other on-site amenities.

To learn more about the project and review additional details before sharing your feedback, we encourage you to visit our website:
metishousing.ca/housing/hope-village

Residents and businesses located in Blatchford, Prince Charles, Prince Rupert, Westwood, and Spruce Avenue are eligible to be entered into a draw to win one of three $100 gift cards for completing this survey.

Please share your feedback by February 28, 2026.

West elevation:
View attachment 716674
Interior Courtyard:

View attachment 716675

You love to see it!

 

[riker]

Pakoshayimooh Village Feedback Survey
We want to hear your thoughts on Pakoshayimooh Village, an affordable sober-living housing development planned for Edmonton’s Blatchford neighbourhood. The project is designed to provide stable housing within a safe, well-managed, and community-oriented environment, rooted in wellness, connection, and thoughtful integration into the surrounding neighbourhood.

If you live, work, or own a business nearby, or are part of the broader Edmonton community, your feedback will help inform design considerations for common areas, commercial spaces, transportation, parking, safety during and after construction, and other on-site amenities.

To learn more about the project and review additional details before sharing your feedback, we encourage you to visit our website:
metishousing.ca/housing/hope-village

Residents and businesses located in Blatchford, Prince Charles, Prince Rupert, Westwood, and Spruce Avenue are eligible to be entered into a draw to win one of three $100 gift cards for completing this survey.

Please share your feedback by February 28, 2026.

West elevation:
View attachment 716674
Interior Courtyard:

View attachment 716675

My personal thoughts:
I hope the west side of the building does a better job at interacting with the Fane Mews Pedestrian Street, especially if it will have commercial uses. The current rendering is underwhelming... Streetside really dropped the ball by not having ANY condo townhomes have front doors face Fane Mews.
The aesthetic of the building looks really nice though.

 

[CplKlinger]

My personal thoughts:
I hope the west side of the building does a better job at interacting with the Fane Mews Pedestrian Street, especially if it will have commercial uses. The current rendering is underwhelming... Streetside really dropped the ball by not having ANY condo townhomes have front doors face Fane Mews.
The aesthetic of the building looks really nice though.

There are a couple of Streetside units facing the Mews, but where they really dropped the ball was not installing a gate in the fence along the Mews. People using those doors need to go all the way around to the alley. Hopefully this is something the condo board will address when it is formed (which'll happen when the last townhouse is finished).

 

[CplKlinger]

Major Development Permit
Reference Id: Job No 571380992-002 Description: To construct a Residential Use building in the form of 90 Dwellings of Multi-unit Housing with main floor Commercial Use and underground Parkade 6655 - ALPHA BOULEVARD NW Plan 2320471 Blk 9 Lot 1 Applicant: BRIAN ALLSOPP ARCHITECT LTD. Status: Intake - More Info Requested Create Date: 2025/02/27 Neighbourhood: BLATCHFORD AREA	Add To Results
Reference Id: Job No 519631284-002 Description: To construct a Residential Use building in the form of 94 Dwellings of Multi-unit Housing with main floor Commercial Use and underground Parkade Location: 6655 - ALPHA BOULEVARD NW Plan 2320471 Blk 9 Lot 1 Applicant: ACI ARCHITECTS INC Status: Cancelled Create Date: 2024/07/15 Neighbourhood: BLATCHFORD AREA Approval Date: 2025/05/08

Just a refresher, here are the old permit applications for 6655 Alpha Blvd.

 

[scooterz]

From 4 - 7 pm tonight at the Edmonton Inn (11834 Kingsway Ave) there's a public engagement event on the Blatchford Area Parks and Open Spaces Master Plan.

I found this map from the engagement survey interesting:

 

[IanO]

https://www.edmonton.ca/business_economy/land_sales/blatchford-property-sales

 

[Coprolite]

From 4 - 7 pm tonight at the Edmonton Inn (11834 Kingsway Ave) there's a public engagement event on the Blatchford Area Parks and Open Spaces Master Plan.

I found this map from the engagement survey interesting:
View attachment 717456

Yes. One interesting tidbit I picked up from the engagement session is that the promenade portion is planned to start construction this year.

Also, I've noticed that the greenway by Kingsway seems to line up with the new crossing lights that have gone up for the Kingsway Ave/113 Street MUP.

 

[fjordgard]

Yes. One interesting tidbit I picked up from the engagement session is that the promenade portion is planned to start construction this year.

Also, I've noticed that the greenway by Kingsway seems to line up with the new crossing lights that have gone up for the Kingsway Ave/113 Street MUP.

Anything about the plaza just south of the promenade, beside the energy centre? I have no concept of what that might look like.

 

[kcantor]

The development is self funded; they pay for building out future stages with the proceeds from selling developed land to builders. The district energy system is funded by user fees and grants from other levels of government. So in order to speed this up with city money, we'd be putting an added burden on the tax roll that doesn't currently exist. Not to say it's a bad idea (I'd always love to see things move faster), but it's a tradeoff we need to consider.

…

I don’t think that’s entirely correct…

While the project is intended to be “self-funded”, that’s over the life of the project, not on an “as you go” basis and that includes the District Energy construction. We won’t really know until the end of the project how well it will have gone.

In the interim, the city is front ending all of the development costs including the District Energy plant and distribution, not just roads and sewers and ponds and parks etc. While some federal dollars have been allocated for the District Energy, they will only offset a portion of the actual costs and the fees will likely take half a century to pay off the rest (at which time it will likely need replacement).

To date, as near as I can ascertain, the city has front ended something in the range of $200 million (give or take 10% or so based on the timing of Phase 6 expenses) and I would expect that number to go up before it starts to come down.

 

[CplKlinger]

Yes. One interesting tidbit I picked up from the engagement session is that the promenade portion is planned to start construction this year.

That phase of the development went to the appeals board in July 2025 for some reason. It thankfully passed, but that did mean we have access to some details we otherwise wouldn't have gotten.

 

[CplKlinger]

I don’t think that’s entirely correct…

While the project is intended to be “self-funded”, that’s over the life of the project, not on an “as you go” basis and that includes the District Energy construction. We won’t really know until the end of the project how well it will have gone.

In the interim, the city is front ending all of the development costs including the District Energy plant and distribution, not just roads and sewers and ponds and parks etc. While some federal dollars have been allocated for the District Energy, they will only offset a portion of the actual costs and the fees will likely take half a century to pay off the rest (at which time it will likely need replacement).

To date, as near as I can ascertain, the city has front ended something in the range of $200 million (give or take 10% or so based on the timing of Phase 6 expenses) and I would expect that number to go up before it starts to come down.

I understand why you think that; one of my big gripes with the city is how it communicates this financial arrangement.

The development itself is self-funded through land sales, aside from a bit of dept from the early years.

Similarly, Blatchford Renewable Energy (the utility) does not draw directly from the tax levy. It does have some city-supported debt, but it pays interest for that. This could change after the post-carbon tax financial review is completed, but it's too early to say for sure.

 

[kcantor]

^
So pretty much what I said in more detail.

Whether the city is spending general revenue or spending money they have to borrow until project revenues - hopefully - repay them some day, the city is continuing to front end Blatchford's project costs, not self-funding those costs through project revenue (which implies there is sufficient revenue to meet expenses on a current basis).

 

[CplKlinger]

^
So pretty much what I said in more detail. Whether the city is spending general revenue or spending money they have to borrow until project revenues - hopefully - repay them some day, the city is continuing to front end Blatchford's project costs, not self-funding those costs through project revenue (which implies there is sufficient revenue to meet expenses on a current basis).

First off, I will say that your comment regarding the utility's ongoing loan is a fair point, and I think you're right that it equates to city funding. So you did convince me that the utility is partially city-funded, but I still think it is inaccurate to say that the city is front-ending all of its costs as you said. It may end up front-ending a great deal of it, or a small amount; I suspect we will have a better idea regarding the proportion of city funding required once that review wraps up later this year. Remember, one option on the table is to raise user fees above the amounts paid by other city residents.

Regarding the full development, and bearing in mind your claim is that the city is front-ending all costs, I think this portion of the screenshot I shared speaks for itself:

I'll also re-iterate the info in the other screenshot I shared:

 

[kcantor]

^
I believe those are projected current year expenses and projected current year revenues.

Those are not total expenses incurred to date and total revenues received to date and it’s those numbers that will show how much the city is currently in deficit on this self-funding project.