Edmonton Construction 13 (November 2015)

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by Makenosmallplans

and it looks like there is light on the sidewalk (or am i wrong?)... this has always puzzled me... cars have lights. pedestrians don't. but streetlights tend to light only the roadway. if we want people walking on the street/sidewalk, the sidewalks need to be lit. i'm on board for that.

There is a second light for the sidewalk.

[Coldrsx]

Councillors pitch new pilot project for larger laneway houses

ELISE STOLTE

Councillors pitched a new pilot project for even larger laneway houses Wednesday, arguing more flexible rules could be introduced with upgrades to alleys and parks.

Those homes could go beyond the one- and two-bedroom suites currently being built under the city’s garage suite program and potentially transform the alleys near LRT stations.

Being just off one of Edmonton’s main streets such as Whyte Avenue or 124 Street could also count, suggested Coun. Michael Walters. “It’s one way to densify a city and use existing land a little more wisely. … I think there are lots of neighbourhoods that would be interested to talk about it.”

Edmonton is already working to deal with crumbling alleys in many parts of the city. Neighbourhoods that need the work badly could get pushed higher on the list if they’re also on great bus lines or LRT stations, suggested Mayor Don Iveson.

“A number of us on council have heard from many residents in our own communities about the desire to see more opportunities,” said Coun. Andrew Knack.

http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-ne...-pilot-project-for-larger-laneway-houses

[240glt]

All of that is good except making the zoning changes to make it an allowed use. It should remain discretionary to give residents a say, and to protect neighbourhoods from unscrupulous developers (of which there are plenty in this town). Aside for that, carry on

[noodlenoodle]

Originally Posted by 240glt

All of that is good except making the zoning changes to make it an allowed use. It should remain discretionary to give residents a say, and to protect neighbourhoods from unscrupulous developers (of which there are plenty in this town). Aside for that, carry on

Amen. This fallacious notion that developers know better than residents & should be given carte blanche is revolting. It's gotten to the point that I use the current infill lobby group membership as a "do not patronize" list for my future plans.

By all means, open up the discretionary uses to a cornucopia of options that aren't currently feasible in Edmonton, but leave the actual making of these decisions in the hands of those most impacted: the community that has to live with the outcomes, not some trend-hopping builder & their bottom line.

[240glt]

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

On my way home via 101 St I crossed Jasper Ave and I still saw the old concrete bins. So I don't know where you witnessed the new ones being installed.

Oh, and just one new light pole has gone up in front of Commerce Place.

Jasper & RHW

[Mikemike]

^^Other than the parking requirement reduction, I would have to agree. And more than just being discretionary, it should be clear what kind of criteria that discretion should be based on. Better design that respects the neighbour's privacy and sunlight gets you extra square footage, 2-story blank walls, and fully paved yards do not. An increased separation distance between the house and the garage/suite wouldn't be a bad idea either.

And they really, really need to get rid of the criteria that relates the garage's height to the house. Either make it based on the block average/adjacent property average, or not at all. The idea that having a taller house entitles you to a taller garage is absurd.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by 240glt

All of that is good except making the zoning changes to make it an allowed use. It should remain discretionary to give residents a say, and to protect neighbourhoods from unscrupulous developers (of which there are plenty in this town). Aside for that, carry on

Given these neighbourhoods for the most part had 2-3xs the population they have now decades ago, when the city was more car dependent, and survived just fine, what reason is there against increasing population density a bit closer to what it was? Besides people asserting influence over how their neighbours use their property?

[rapid_business]

Originally Posted by Hallsy's Toupee

Just walked by the ones infront of Commerce Place and here is some followup:

• The second arm is wired for a pedestrian light fixture. Don't panic.

• The oval shaped based is surrounded by a piece of stainless steel sheet metal held together by two self-tapping screw. It has electrical tape wrapped on the top edge of it because I imagine it is sharp. I cannot begin to tell you how temporary this will be. Touch it with your foot, and it moves around. It's two steps up from tinfoil. This has to be a temporary fix until something permanent gets installed, right?

[Mikemike]

Density isn't the problem. Design is.

The garbage front-back duplexes sprinkled through lower-cost neighbourhoods are a good (bad) example. They are long, so the back half of the 2-story duplex is next to the neighbour's back yard so there are significant shading and privacy issues, what remains of the back yard is mostly paved for parking so landscaping is nil, there's way more impermeable surfaces so runoff issues, and they tend to be cheaply finished (they're for envestors and their renters, no on would buy one of those to live in) so they're generally ugly and a drag on the neighbourhood that they are built in.

There are some garage suites being built around me that have some issues - one version has a single-slope roof that's highest (effectively 3 stories) at the lane, so it's a big visual impact in a bungalow street. Not the end of the world, but i don't think that's really what the city really wanted either.

[feepa]

Sounds like Mercers Tavern is expanding. Will be interesting to see if it gets the same reaction/outrage from the DECL and its leaders as the Sports Pub did a block down.

Mercers already exceeds the approved zoning and must've been grandfathered in, or a zoning discretion was allowed.

Scale/size not a problem here, but 1 block away...?

[240glt]

^ hehe.. That place has been surviving on hype and daddy's bank account for years now. I any other city it would have failed a long time ago. Somehow it always seems to get a pass despite mediocre food and awful service

[240glt]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Given these neighbourhoods for the most part had 2-3xs the population they have now decades ago, when the city was more car dependent, and survived just fine, what reason is there against increasing population density a bit closer to what it was? Besides people asserting influence over how their neighbours use their property?

The MGA has given neighbours protection from development that materially interferes with the use and enjoyment of their property. It could be argued that in some cases this could happen.

Also decades ago it was normal for one house to have one car. We know that has changed. There may have been more people under one roof, not more roofs for more bodies

Finally, many infill developers in Edmonton have proven themselves to be extremely untrustworthy and unethical when it comes to how they conduct business. Some of them whine that they are on too short a leash, but really they've brought that on themselves

Not against garage suites at all, in fact I'll put one in if I ever rebuild my garage. But I am against letting developers set the agenda and create their own rules, which is what some are trying to do

[Hallsy's Toupee]

Here's the story re: Mercer expansion plan - go to 1:40 of the clip
http://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=950471&binId=1.1203428&playlistPageNum=1

Doesn't sound like there's anything official just yet though. Are bleachers inside a bar even allowed by this province?

[Hallsy's Toupee]

Woman says police asked her why she lives in McCauley when calling to report vandalism
http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonton/20...ent-pushes-back-against-stereotypes.html

[240glt]

^ that it totally ridiculous, but it's an attitude that is endemic not just within the EPS but within the population of Edmonton itself. When I lived in Parkdale I heard the same thing, people would be baffled when I said I loved living there (even posters here and that cesspool C2E) and say "well what do you expect" when trying to make things better. It's an ugly trait that Edmontonians possess and is definitely a measure of this city's immaturity and one of the reasons I am much less enthralled about living here as of late

[Coldrsx]

^^
^absolutely ridiculous, unreal.

Fins look amazing.

[GreenSPACE]

New garbage cans:

[Coldrsx]

Those look great! Only concern is that those vertical bars on the old 104st ones got bent and broken easily.

[Hallsy's Toupee]

They look good, but I prefer the solar composting bins that are on Whyte Ave.
Still it's nice to see the complaints on here and C2E lead to this quick turnaround, if that was the case!

[Black Star]

Those fins give the COE tower more pop.


The new garbage receptacles