LDA20-0314 T5M Connect DC2- North Glenora

I fully support this development. After digging into it, it looks like the developer is only required to provide a 3m side yard setback and they are providing 6m, so they are going above and beyond here. This project is also designed and built to net zero standards, which makes it an example of sustainable low carbon building – that’s the future. Furthermore, it looks like the design considers curb appeal that fits with the overall sentiment of the neighborhood. Sprawling suburbs increase costs for a city because they now need to pay for more snow removal, building additional fire halls, etc... not to mention the carbon footprint that comes along with transportation.

I am not in favour of this - not enough parking. With the infills and building at the moment it is quite difficult to get in and out of the crescent. Blocked in the alley, blocked on the street - having to make uturns to exit the crescent.

Multi-Unit residence--only two three bedroom units. Most singles or couples without children like to have two bedrooms--one to be used as a spare bedroom/office/den/TV room. By having the possibility of only two three bedroom units, I don't see too many children living in this building. Therefore, the number of children will have little impact on increasing the number of children attending the local schools. In the recent development of the housing complex that was built north of Coronation School, it has 3, 4 and 5 bedrooms and was built to be energy self-sustaining. Any new developments in North Glenora need to have the same standards as this housing complex if increasing the density of mature neighbourhoods is one of the goals.

The development will help to draw new families into the area and support the school nearby. The proximity to the school will mean that children in these homes will be able to safely walk to school rather than being dropped off by parents in a vehicle; they will represent one less vehicle at a time when there are more children out.

The development is attractive and will be a benefit to the aesthetics of the community.

I used to live in the neighbourhood and now live in an adjacent one. This is beautiful development that will help bring more younger people to the area and may allow older residents looking to stay in North Glenora the ability to have a smaller space with less maintenance in the neighbour they already know and love. This development looks to be pretty much the same in density and height as the current townhouses and garden houses that already surround the school (with some being kitty-corner to this proposed dev). The development by the church built by Habitat Studio looks great and this one will also add some well designed high quality residential units to NG.

The only way these 16 rental units make the neighbourhood more affordable is if they bring down the property values of the community. Is that the goal? Because it's starting to sound like the goal. As others have stated, there is middle housing in this neighbourhood. There are many single family homes on mls right now for well under $400k! The trouble isn't that middle housing doesn't exist here, it's that everyone wants a brand new home. This is what sends young people to the outskirts of town or a neighbourhood where they can afford an infill. And here is a proposal to tear down old homes to build another brand new structure. Talk about environmentally friendly. Consume, consume, consume - and then complain when you can't consume where you want to!

I live in the immediate vicinity of the proposal and I've spoken to a lot of the neighbours nearby and I can assure you that none of them are in favour of this project. Like me, they bought in this neighbourhood under the assumption that lots which were zoned for single family homes would remain zoned this way. I have serious safety concerns regarding all of the street parking making it more dangerous for young children to walk to school and the increased traffic around the school and playground, not to mention we won't know what type of people will be living in these cramped rental units, won't someone think of the children?

I live in the immediate vicinity of the proposal and I strongly support this project. I feel the developers have carefully considered privacy and light requirements of the neighbouring housing which is greatly appreciated. I have three young children and do not feel their safety will be at greater risk because of this development.

Climate change demands that we rethink architecture and unfortunately, projects like these are too few and far between. This is exactly the kind of development we need to see more of and I'm excited that North Glenora can be a leader in this respect, showcasing multi-unit housing that aspires towards net zero standards.

The design of this development encourages people to live car free or car light. Density is very important as encouraging people to live in the core of the City decreases carbon emissions and the need for the infrastructure required to supply more sprawling suburbs.

The design also aspires to meet Passive Housing standards, optimizing energy efficiency and minimizing the its footprint.

This project ticks all of the boxes: It's attractive, works to increase density, and seeks to do so in an environmentally sustainable way.

People are sharing concerns about the parking not making it family friendly, but fail to acknowledge that most young people can't afford to live in single family homes in this area. So unless the residents want it to only be older people who bought in early, they need to rethink what family friendly means. My wife and I just bought an infill in west jasper with a basement suite for 550 because we couldn't afford the 600-2mil prices in Glenora, north glenora, Westmount. Young people are being forced to new developments outside the henday because older residents are unwilling to allow for housing in the 300-600k range to be developed in mature neighborhoods. Rentals are needed and more affordable options are needed if they want vibrant communities. If you care about young people having the same opportunities as you, please recognize your privilege and give us a chance to live in mature neighborhoods.

This development is out of character for the adjacent lots. It is an increase in density that will have high impact on the community. The subject property is across from an elementary school & daycare, as well as on the corner of a 4 way stop that is already busy during peak times. There is proposed redevelopment to the south of the property that will increase density by 4 times of the current existing development. The on-site parking is inadequate and will have a negative impact on the single-family dwellings that are adjacent to the proposed development. Please do not approve the rezoning. RF1 allows for semi detached with suites, this would be more appropriate. I am for redevelopment in mature neighborhoods, but within reason.

As a young resident of this community, I whole-heartedly support this proposal. It's checks key boxes for me:

-Nicely designed
-Appropriate scale relative to surrounding properties
-Adds new infill density to an inner-city neighborhood
-Very walkable with many services + transit connections within a kilometer radius

I think when it comes to inner-city neighborhoods like ours, it needs to be understood that they go through periods of gradual change over time depending on social and economic shifts in the area or city as a whole. While I agree that, as a whole, the character of our neighborhood should be maintained and that not every street is suitable for this kind of densification, we need to understand that communities like North Glenora and surrounding areas will not stay predominantly single-family and car-oriented as they go through the redevelopment cycle, and that densification and transit-oriented development are inevitable if we want to keep our communities attractive and vibrant places to live. This project is really only a small example of what can be done on these larger thoroughfares through the neighborhood, with the patio homes redevelopment, Candian Manor and new narrow-lot homes being other examples. Concerns about the parking for this property and the proximity to a school are valid, but these issues can be solved or explained with multi-faceted thinking:
-Residents in this building will have nearby bus (and future LRT) connections for travel around the city, reducing the need for a car
-Essential services like schools, grocery, pharmacy, etc. are all in relative walking/biking distance or quickly accessible by bus, reducing the need for a car
-When continued densification happens, we'll see services come even closer and be set up inside the neighborhood, reducing the need for a car

In short, these unknown aspects of densification and new development may seem strange or even frightening to long-time residents, but I would like them to be assured that once new infill projects like this come online we'll start to see the logical and attractive benefits of gradual densification.

Overall, I love that the people developing this project are community residents who have a focus on engagement, environmental stewardship, social connectivity, and overall forward-thinking ideas. I wish them the best in seeing this project through to completion :)

As a long time resident, I’m not opposed to redevelopment but I do have some concerns. The parking is the most concerning to me. We already have parking issues on most of the streets & saying 8 stalls is adequate for 16 units is not acceptable. I would like to see more infills that look like they’ve always belonged in the neighbourhood versus the ultra modern looking ones you see most of the time. Finally, the surrounding neighbours homes need to be taken into consideration, living beside an infill that takes away your privacy & sun is not okay. Plus there is the added frustration of the infill being built as most builders are not considerate of the surrounding neighbours or their property.

I have been in this neighbourhood for over 30 yrs and with this infill that you promote only destroys thehood of its real nature. We have gardens, fruit trees and years of hard labour to kerp our little piece of serinity. If it's such an issue with council, maybe consult with the nieghbourhood. Infills should maybe used on north or south facing lots not east or west. I'm very conserned whst our councel is doing. Infrustucture is never discussed (power, water, drainage, frontage).

I am opposed to this development for the following reasons.
Safety Concerns:
• The properties in question are directly across the street from the front door of
Coronation Elementary School. The elementary school is a neighbourhood school
with significant pedestrian traffic to/from the school during daytime hours. There is
also a Child Day Care and Out of School Care centre located within Coronation
School. The proposed rezoning would create serious safety/traffic issues for the (1)
young children who attend this school (2) residents who live in the area and (3)
parents, volunteers and school support workers. The limited parking proposed (8
parking spots proposed for 16 residential units) would increase: - vehicle street parking which would block access for parents picking up/ dropping off
children and for emergency vehicles to reach residents’ homes;
- the number of vehicles idling on the street throughout the year and in
inclement weather;
- Commercial vehicles; and
- Truck traffic for snow removal in the winter as there is not adequate space for
storing of the snow.
Privacy, Noise and Visual
• Privacy for neighbouring houses will be significantly and negatively affected.
• Dumpsters will be located on a residential lane that is limited in size creating a
driving hazard for residents needing to utilize the lane to enter/exit from their
residences.
• Sixteen rental properties will generate moving trucks for incoming and outgoing
tenants.
• It is an error to assume that with the new parking regulations in the Zoning Bylaw,
which have no minimum parking requirements, would have no impact on
neighbouring residences. This will affect the use and enjoyment for neighbouring
properties by directing the parking to the street.
Density
• Sixteen residential rental units on two single family residential lots are too many for
this location in consideration of the size of the properties.
• Site coverage is too high (46%); the proposed plan lacks adequate green space and
landscaping.
• As per the “North Glenora Community Plan: A Vision for the Future”, approved by
Edmonton City Council, August 1998, whereby it states:
“Recommendation 1R: That the current residential zoning be retained to control
land use density unless it can be demonstrated to the community that a rezoning
would be in keeping with the Guiding Principles of this Plan as well as the goals and objectives of residents and property owners who might be affected” (p.18, 3.2
Guiding Principles and Recommendations, 3.2.1 Redevelopment Guiding Principle
1: Redevelopment and Zoning).
• Residential density will be increased with the future development of the Glenora
Patio Homes (109 Ave and 139 St) adjacent to this proposal, which is currently 14
residences. The current proposal for this site is for 45 suites with surface parking for
15 vehicles.
• This would not be a family friendly development as only two of the sixteen suites
would be three bedroom units.
Setbacks
• The proposed setbacks on the West (facing the lane) and South (facing 109 Avenue)
of this proposal are less than what is allowed in the Mature Neighbourhood Overlay,
which was created to ensure that development suits older communities. These
proposed setbacks would have an adverse effect on the existing character of the neighbourhood.

I actually think it's look pretty good. I nice modern design. Not everything needs to look thr same on a street. And this is NORTH Glenora we're talking about here...

This project looks amazing! There will finally be some affordable infill options instead of million dollar skinny homes. This kind of housing is something that a young family with kids can afford. What a beautiful way to fight climate change, and redevelop our area to achieve our city and community goals.

I don’t live in North Glenora but if I did I wouldn’t want this sort of drastic change to the makeup of my neighborhood.

Looks great! This is an excellent example of infill development that we need to see throughout our city. If this was proposed in my neighbourhood I would be ecstatic.

I think it's a beautiful addition to the neighborhood, and a good way to keep promoting the renovation of this community.

The amount of parking stalls provided is unacceptable. How can the developers state that this structure will be for families and then propose that each unit gets less than one parking stall? The City may hope to make Edmonton more walkable and transit friendly, but current infrastructure leaves too much to be desired. Regardless of what the City wants, most folks have a car and will need to for many more years by the looks of the LRT development timelines!