LDA20-0441 Prince Rupert

Slapping up a new building with the idea that we will fix it later, isn’t what I call successful plan. I have read that if the traffic is affected, we can make it a one way. Basically, try to deal with it after the fact. Meanwhile, the developer walks away and taxpayers/residents who are here for the long run pay the price. Better planning with resident engagement + collaboration = long term success.

My first question when considering our house was “what exposure does it face?” I’m sure many of you can relate to wanting/needing sunshine. A 6 storey dwelling not only changes this forever but also negatively impacts our privacy in a significant way. Why does the city not require builders to complete a privacy impact assessment? A building with 6 levels of windows/balconies being placed at the doorsteps of single dwelling homes is not what I call a good fit. I have noticed all the way down 111 Ave that new apartment buildings and older ones too are all 2-4 stories, this makes better sense and is a better fit into existing communities. Why not here?

My other concern is the general basket term of commercial developments. Its interesting to me that top of the list is always daycares but it could also very likely be liquor stores, cannabis stores and naughty massage establishments. NOT what our community needs. Please, when considering your decision, think of this as a community and not a major thoroughfare. Respect our land and our residents and make a decision that allows us all to live in harmony.In section 2.1, the road network claims that E/W alley and N/S alley are both paved alleys? This is not accurate as they are not 2 way. Any upgrades to the existing alley must be taken into consideration, whose expense?

Say goodbye to solar energy and many gardens, privacy and safety on pedestrians and cyclists due to increased traffic and poor infrastructure planning. Blatchford will finally be taking off and 116 st and 119 st will be flooded with extra traffic plus adding 160 apartments sandwiched in between these two streets will only add to the anticipated congestion, but “we’ll deal with that later attitude” is yet another example of poor planning. This type of a development approx. 23 meters or over 75 feet will negatively impact the residents now and in the future if it is built as is. We have an opportunity to get it right and make a neighborhood better, but it requires some more consideration and planning for what a good fit is.

I’m writing this note to share my reasons for opposing this new proposed development, mainly because of the height, 6 stories, the safety and traffic concerns as well as the concerning commercial. Apparently 111 Ave has been designated a primary corridor, you may see it that way but I see this block as part of a quiet family oriented community. I believe that all parties involved need to understand that 111 Ave will always back on to a community full of mostly bungalow style houses. Deeper within the neighborhood we have numerous apartment buildings, that all fit in very nicely within a community setting. Prince Rupert needs more young families, we have so much to offer them. Why not have a development geared to families?

Disappointed in this miscommunication about deadlines for engagement. The engagement card mailed out on this rezoning sent out by the City of Edmonton states that you can supply feedback until April 18 but this website states April 17. Missing out on peoples engagement, poor planning in details.

Moving ahead with this development as it is proposed, shows a clear lack of respect and consideration for the rights of surrounding households. We want to reiterate that we are not against development, perhaps the impact assessment should be done door to door by the City of Edmonton. Respect for this process is earned and I do not feel that the City of Edmonton has earned it.
Make this development 2 stories, 25 ft high vs 75ft high.
Post 4 of 4

I have been investigating the City of Edmonton information on Solar Power generation. Is this another initiative that the City of Edmonton is encouraging residents to take part in? The power of the sun is only going to work if sun is accessible at all hours. Was there any consideration for the rights of those individuals? By pushing this development through without considering this potential, the City of Edmonton has basically eliminated this option for a greener footprint. Is this not what we all want and need to do? Post 3 of 4

City planners need to do their homework on this project. The impact on our property value is still unknown, however if the value is reduced as a result of the neighbouring 6 story building, Is the City of Edmonton willing to compensate each household? Surely you have data on the value of properties that were severely impacted by buildings that overshadow others? Please tell me that you have done your homework. If the value of our property is reduced as a result of the new development, we may be forced to relocate outside the City of Edmonton, thus increasing commute time. Post 2 of 4

This new development is a direct infringement on our access to sunshine. I have reviewed the shading impact assessment as provided by Stantec Engineering, we are not pleased that this development will place our property in a shading situation at any time of the year. While we understand that upgrades are inevitable, we want to know why a 6 story development is in keeping with the character of the community. 2 stories is appropriate. Not 6 stories. Why does this development need to be this tall? Respecting the rights of current and future Prince Rupert constituents should be TOP priority for this newly elected administration. Post 1 of 4

Many of the issues raised in the fall of 2021 have not and cannot be addressed with the DC2: the eng controls proposed in the traffic study may mitigate but not prevent the vehicular and pedestrian safety issues caused by the development; signage will not ensure safe 2way traffic; dangers from bus stop proximity @ the east entrance with no sidewalk still exist; impacts on the function of 119st111Ave intersection and on strip mall patron parking availability not addressed. Also, there are already 2 coffee shops, 2 each of pharmacies, conv and liquor stores plus a Superstore and Can. Tire within walking distance. More are needed? How will this impact future development on 111? Home prices here are low - moving elsewhere isn't an option.

The TIA contains wording of "challenging; safety issue; unsafe movements; sightline deficiencies; conflict scenario and operational concern". There are issues identified and need to addressed not left for retrospective review following incidents. Narrow service road insufficient to service 160 suites and additional street level commercial spaces. Entry and exit from service road would be challenging and suggestion of u-turn is absurd. No consideration of traffic from surrounding developments such as Blatchford. Shadow study is also very concerning due to the negative impact to surrounding single family homes.
A smaller scale development that is compatible with current RF1 would be more appropriate for this site.

While City Plan identifies 111 Avenue as a primary corridor, and therefore 6 storeys should be possible eventually, Map 10A shows 111 Avenue with a very minimal density increase until 1.25 Million. It also says that new development would be phased incrementally over time, meaning that a four storeys max would be appropriate here at this time, however, 6 storeys is too much. Please wait for District Plan.
A well designed building up to 6 storeys may be appropriate here, but there is no information showing the building design, and without this we cannot suggest improvements - please provide elevation plans, and possibly another stepback on the north.
Will there be a community contribution? Please add a walkway from the lane to the street.

I don't think the height is currently appropriate for a neighbourhood like Prince Rupert, which is primarily single-unit zoning. There are not apartments on either side of 111 Avenue, and it would block sunlight as many have already mentioned. There is no infrastructure to support a whopping 160 units along this service road with no sidewalks and no proper access to 111 Avenue. I would suggest lowering the height to 3 floors, widening the sidewalk in this area, and reconfiguring the streets to be able to allow for access to 111 Avenue from the service road. If all three of these issues are not addressed, then this project will cause significant traffic problems and will be a precursor to more issues for the neighbourhood and the city.

Pedestrian access needs to be improved for the greater number of people added. There should be a public sidewalk from the alley to 111 Avenue through the property, and a public sidewalk added to the front of the property along 111 Avenue. Pedestrians must walk in the service road currently and this is dangerous, and there is no wheel chair or alternative access at all. If they want more people here we need the infrastructure to support them and the current residents.

This is over development. The shadow will still impact properties to the North which never expected this impact. The height of the abutting Zones are 10.0m. CB1 is a commercial Zone that might be considered which is a maximum of 12.0m, 26.0m is crazy at this location. The setbacks/Stepbacks do not contend with the impact of 23.0m and only a maximum of 7.5m. I have no issue with the increase density if servicing and access is upgraded, developer should pay to upgrade and repair the alley to ensure drainage and traffic is accommodated, and that proper loading is provided at the rear. Uses are too limited, need a neighbourhood pub, general retail store, brewery. Sidewalk must be added to 111 Ave, service road is dangerous/no pedestrian

I'm not supportive of this development, Why do you send these they don't work Edmonton does what it does regardless, send me examples where it does or did apply. Myself and children did not invest in the area to to Edmonton and a developer to rezone the area to congest. All I see hear is the start of something Edm had in mind. (get those permits and tax dollars show Edm the money).

I've lived in the neighbourhood for 24 years and love the status of single family homes as was planned by the city when Prince Rupert was envisioned by City Planners. Building a six story apartment block that will increase traffic flow along an already busy avenue (111 ave) and will block light to homes immediately north of the proposed site let alone infringe on the privacy of folks living across the alley is unacceptable. Home owners who purchased in the area immediately north of the proposed apartment block did not invest in their homes to have the City propose a re-zoning that would affect property value and make living in those homes without privacy. I am against the proposal as it is. Perhaps a two story building or leave as is.

It will be too tall for the surrounding homes with the sun it will block out and and all the congestion with increased traffic. Make it not quite so high and then it might be better. I like walkable neighbourhoods but there are some lovely homes that should be historically protected.

I take this road quite frequently when returning from shopping especially at Kingsway mall and Canadian tire stores so at least 3 times a week. I try very hard to miss the rush hours as it is already too busy and the rest of the time it just is busy with people who love to speed at the stretch of road from the pedestrian crosswalk at the bike/walk trails to the intersection at 124 street and 111 Ave. it is truly scary in summer and terrifying durning winter. The building does sound like a good idea but where are all the vehicles going to park. It is a predominantly residential area around this corner of the block and radiating out. And if underground parking, we’ll then the line up to access the underground parking will make it a jam.