News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

archited said:
Significant enough to warrant its own thread?
Click to expand...
It has one already in the Design sub-forum:

Iron Works Building

The city is aggressively working to spare an historic property downtown from a date with the wrecking ball. Councillors voted in favour of a notice to designate the former Edmonton Iron Works building on 96 Street near 104 Avenue as a historic property last week, even though the owner wants to...
edmonton.skyrisecities.com edmonton.skyrisecities.com
 
Gronk! said:
edmonton.ctvnews.ca

Skiers, councillor want better access to public trails at Royal Mayfair Golf Club

Citizens and a city councillor are expressing concern over accessibility to public cross-country skiing trails at the Royal Mayfair Golf Club.
edmonton.ctvnews.ca edmonton.ctvnews.ca
Click to expand...
I loved this priceless line below (in red) quoting a second person:

""Another skier, Judy, told CTV News Edmonton it sends the wrong message. “It says, ‘We do not want you skiing here, do not come here, you are not welcome here.’ You can be certain they don’t tell their golfers in the summer to park at Hawrelak and carry their golf clubs.”"
 
EdmTrekker said:
I loved this priceless line below (in red) quoting a second person:

""Another skier, Judy, told CTV News Edmonton it sends the wrong message. “It says, ‘We do not want you skiing here, do not come here, you are not welcome here.’ You can be certain they don’t tell their golfers in the summer to park at Hawrelak and carry their golf clubs.”"
Click to expand...
So, essentially, people just want free parking as close to the trails as possible. Don't the trails connect between the course and the park? I mean, if you're showing up to cross country ski 10-15k, does it really matter if you have to park a bit further away? The course does groom the trails after all.
 
I have my grumbles about some of the best park space in Edm being used for a private golf course where the for-profit club pays way below fair market value on their lease of publicly owned land, but this is just a non-issue. Pretty valid to not want the parking lot open while they're doing a full $30m renovation where a good chunk of the parking lot is their laydown area.

That also said, they do have the more overflow north parking closer to the maintenance yard, not sure why that space can't be left open.
 

A six-storey, multi-unit housing complex pitched for the Westmount neighbourhood is getting pushback from some residents of the centrally located Edmonton community.

A public hearing is planned for Jan. 25 into the RedLine Construction proposal to build the medium-rise, multi-unit housing on the corner of Stony Plain Road and 128th Street.

The development requires the lot to be rezoned from its current single detached residential designation to one allowing a medium-rise apartment.

Coun. Anne Stevenson, whose O-day'min ward includes the area, said she's had letters from more than 30 residents concerned about the building's potential impact on the neighbourhood.

"It's very valid to not want to see a neighborhood that you love change in a way that you weren't anticipating," Stevenson said Friday.
Click to expand...

We may as well have a thread dedicated to Edmonton NIMBYism at this rate.
 
nv96 said:



We may as well have a thread dedicated to Edmonton NIMBYism at this rate.
Click to expand...
"A public hearing is planned for Jan. 25 into the RedLine Construction proposal to build the medium-rise, multi-unit housing" [...] "Stevenson said she expects many of the three dozen people who sent her letters will present their concerns at the Jan. 25 hearing."

Looks like I have some plans for Tuesday night. Anyone want to join me? You can register to speak here.
 
CplKlinger said:
"A public hearing is planned for Jan. 25 into the RedLine Construction proposal to build the medium-rise, multi-unit housing" [...] "Stevenson said she expects many of the three dozen people who sent her letters will present their concerns at the Jan. 25 hearing."

Looks like I have some plans for Tuesday night. Anyone want to join me? You can register to speak here.
Click to expand...
As a previous Westmount resident, I just might have to join you.
 
Reference ID:Job No 419926694-002
Description:To install (1) Projecting Off-Premises Sign(s) (CANADA PERMANENT BUILDING)
Location:10126 - 100 STREET NW
Plan F Lots 31-32
Applicant:BEHRENDS BRONZE INC.
Status:Intake Review
Create Date:1/11/2022 4:23:04 PM
Neighbourhood:DOWNTOWN
 
CplKlinger said:
"A public hearing is planned for Jan. 25 into the RedLine Construction proposal to build the medium-rise, multi-unit housing" [...] "Stevenson said she expects many of the three dozen people who sent her letters will present their concerns at the Jan. 25 hearing."

Looks like I have some plans for Tuesday night. Anyone want to join me? You can register to speak here.
Click to expand...
Heck yeah let's do this boi :cool:
 
I‘m a big fan of infill, but I think I’d be a little pissed if someone put up a 6 story building to the south of me. Sucks enough here in the winter, and having your sun blocked on top of that…I feel for those homeowners as this probably felt like it came out of nowhere considering it’s basically a fully single family neighbourhood. Closest multi level is the seniors centre? And at least that is on the south side of stony plain road. I don’t think calling this nimbyism is fair. The comments about traffic and parking are bullshit… but loss of light is fair. Could compensation for adjacent homeowners be Possible? Why should a developer be entitled to their profits at the expense of someone else?

We are building a garage suite and it’s surprising how much it has affected the sun that our garden and west wall of the house gets. But we are not dickheads so we made sure to position it in the yard in a way where it does not block the neighbours, especially during our already awful short growing season.

edit: btw I live no where near that neighbour just to clarify lol. Just trying to see it from their perspective.
 
MacLac said:
AB Major Projects….92.3M HS……doesn’t say what religious denomination….gotta be Catholic as they have been clamouring for at least a decade to get this thing built
Click to expand...
Imagine how many kids in those new developments will have to travel super far to get to their public high school even though there's a Catholic one just blocks away from their home. It just seems like such a colossal waste having two separate school systems that are a pain in the ass to switch between.
 
Mattyeg said:
I‘m a big fan of infill, but I think I’d be a little pissed if someone put up a 6 story building to the south of me. Sucks enough here in the winter, and having your sun blocked on top of that…I feel for those homeowners as this probably felt like it came out of nowhere considering it’s basically a fully single family neighbourhood. Closest multi level is the seniors centre? And at least that is on the south side of stony plain road. I don’t think calling this nimbyism is fair. The comments about traffic and parking are bullshit… but loss of light is fair. Could compensation for adjacent homeowners be Possible? Why should a developer be entitled to their profits at the expense of someone else?

We are building a garage suite and it’s surprising how much it has affected the sun that our garden and west wall of the house gets. But we are not dickheads so we made sure to position it in the yard in a way where it does not block the neighbours, especially during our already awful short growing season.

edit: btw I live no where near that neighbour just to clarify lol. Just trying to see it from their perspective.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and I mean I can understand that frustration for the 3-4 neighbouring properties that will have their sunlight really effected. Westmount has more low rise multi-fam than you think, albeit most of it is north of 107 and is 3-4 floors. Overall though, it's a six story lowrise, not a 20 floor high rise, and it comes to a point where folks need to realize that if you're living in a very convenient and centrally located neighbourhood in a growing city, there are going to be changes and densification that is going to include more vertical structures. Don't like it? Buy an acreage if you want to control all the space surrounding your house.

It reminds me of when I lived in Virginia Park, one guy sued his neighbour who was building his house to the plot directly west of his because it would "block his sunlight and view"--when all his neighbour was doing was building a pretty standard two storey next to another two storey. The entitlement and "f*** you, I got mine" mentality is just so insanely prevalent. Worse yet is it's going only to continue to get worse, as the more expensive properties get, the more folks are going to fear anything that could be perceived as even the smallest slight to their properties value.
 
Mattyeg said:
I‘m a big fan of infill, but I think I’d be a little pissed if someone put up a 6 story building to the south of me. Sucks enough here in the winter, and having your sun blocked on top of that…I feel for those homeowners as this probably felt like it came out of nowhere considering it’s basically a fully single family neighbourhood. Closest multi level is the seniors centre? And at least that is on the south side of stony plain road. I don’t think calling this nimbyism is fair. The comments about traffic and parking are bullshit… but loss of light is fair. Could compensation for adjacent homeowners be Possible? Why should a developer be entitled to their profits at the expense of someone else?

We are building a garage suite and it’s surprising how much it has affected the sun that our garden and west wall of the house gets. But we are not dickheads so we made sure to position it in the yard in a way where it does not block the neighbours, especially during our already awful short growing season.

edit: btw I live no where near that neighbour just to clarify lol. Just trying to see it from their perspective.
Click to expand...

-Site is essentially right in the center of the city
-An LRT line is being built right on its doorstep
-Along an arterial road (doesn't affect my opinion at all really but for others it does)
-Will add residents and potentially services to a growing inner-city area

You're right in saying that it is unfortunate for the surrounding property owners and that a building like this feels out of place atm, but those are honestly the growing pains of a densifying city that need to happen. Areas like Westmount are changing and will continue to change at an exponential rate as older SFHs and small multi-family are replaced by these larger projects, that's the future of a central neighborhood here in Edmonton. If there's people who really don't like the change then they have the right to speak against it (even if often there's no ground for their discourse other than personal inconvenience and taste).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top