LDA20-0314 T5M Connect DC2- North Glenora

I am not happy about the possibility of these projects going through. I chose to live in a neighborhood with less care traffic and less congested parking on the streets. This is not what I want for my area.

Though I feel revitalizing the neighbouring and increasing population density within the core of Edmonton neighbourhoods is generally a positive thing, I feel it needs to be done strategically while keeping the current neighbourhoods charm, safety and overall family friendly environment. A HUGE issue I feel that would come along with this project is the parking situation and increased traffic. It is next to a school and park where children are constantly playing and crossing streets. I can’t imagine having such a large complex with NO underground parking. Where will all the tenants park? Where will their friends and visitors park? I picture cars up and down the roads infront of the park and overflowing in front of current homes. Not to mention the additional proposed rezoning and development directly across the intersection on the same street. Doing something like subdividing the lots and building skinny homes would be a much better fit for the area.

I am strongly opposed to this development and feel it will have a negative impact on the neighbourhood I love so much and want to raise my family in.

When this community was first planned and developed in the 1950's, the planners took in account the different kind of residences possible--bungalows, two storey homes, duplexes, patio homes(row housing), small apartment buildings to meet the needs of people purchasing lots. Now 70 years later, the plan is being changed. in the new developed areas, purchasers of lots need to follow the plan that has established by the city planners. Some of the owners of property in NG are original owners of the property. These owners bought the property and have developed the yard to meet their needs. Some of the owners have established gardens and trees that require sunlight to thrive. When that sunlight is no longer available because of the new proposed structure, how fair is that to the current owner? Does the current owner now move to a new development knowing that there will be no new structure being built beside them for some time? I don't think this should even be considered. When properties are being put in the "shade" all day long, I think that is wrong. Many people need sun to help with their mental health. Yesterday on the news, there is a study that to improve mental health, one should spend at least 2 hours a week in the outdoors. Our current owners of properties should be able to spend the time in their own yard but not in the "shade" of another building. I strongly suggest that new buildings should be built in areas where no property is in the "shade" all day long.

This is a fantastic development proposal and I highly support it. Frankly we need many, many more like it across the city, but I'm excited to see it proposed here. This is an attractive proposal that will add much needed housing mix and density into the area. The site coverage and setback variances are very minimal, and completely justified to get attractive, missing-middle housing into a desirable, central neighbourhood. As another commenter noted, this is the exactly the type of project that would entice me to be a prospective resident of the neighbourhood.

I'm all for revitalizing the neighbourhood and increasing population density within the core of Edmonton neighbourhoods, but in a measured way that doesn't sacrifice the family friendly atmosphere in the neighbourhood. The parking and increased traffic at the proposed sites intersection is concerning and will have a negative impact for the surrounding properties. Not to mention the additional proposed rezoning and development directly across the intersection on the same street.

I feel subdividing these lots and adding infill skinny homes would achieve the goal while keeping the greenery and aesthetic of the neighbourhood, while increasing population density in a positive way.

I am opposed to this development.

I am opposed to this development!

What concerns me most is safety and parking. The current reality is that people do own cars and are not car free or car lite - especially in North glenora. The city of Edmonton dropped the speed limit to 30 in a school zone so it seems counterintuitive to fill the street with parked cars blocking the sight lines. All you have to do is walk by two skinny homes in our community to see the street parking situation and to think this development would double that.
I can’t imagine anyone that would want to live next to this. I live down the street and cringe when I think about having to drive through a full street or needing to be extra cautious while walking my son to school. There is a four way stop there and with the decreased set backs this will only make the intersection more dangerous.

The nightmare of turning left onto 107ave during rush hour will only get worse. I have seen several near misses over the years. With increased traffic people tend to get more impatient.

I’m not sure how we are all supposed to jump on board with the abundant communities initiative when our neighbours will look like this development! One of the missions is safety after all.

Also, we can’t be naive in thinking this is an affordable housing option. Once again we can look to the skinny homes to see how developers like to maximize profits. They are a business after all.

I do support skinny homes and think that is all a lot in North glenora can accommodate.

Please listen to the people who live down this street and keep the zoning to what it currently is!

I strongly oppose this development for fear of having something like this built next door to my home.

I do not feel the development is in line with the North Glenora long term plan. There is insufficient parking and allowing 16 units will start the process of overwhelming the population of the area. Add to this the proposed redevelopment of the Glenora Patio Homes and the same problems are exacerbated. Neither project are welcome by the existing residents. I believe it is necessary to evaluate this project along with the changes being proposed to the Patio Homes.

I oppose. Once we let one of these developments go ahead we won’t have to worry about developers coming in and building more terrible skinny homes, we’ll have to worry about greedy developers buying up single family homes to build crammed rental units.

Bring back the common sense and thoughtful consideration of family that shaped Edmonton. Why the desire to cram so many into so small a space? It can only be greed.
We can’t build a front porch because of proximity to city sidewalk. Okay we accept it. They can build an apartment just because of changed letters in the zoning code. Something reeks.

This is not a family friendly development as only two suites are three bedroom units.

I oppose this rezoning. I would hate to have precedent set for future single family homes to be rezoned to DC2 in North glenora. The setbacks as well as the lack of parking really concerns me. Though the site is in a state of disrepair, to add 16 units where 2 residences currently are, adjacent to the patio homes which are also looking to be rezoned to accommodate 45 suites with little parking will create so much congestion in the neighbourhood, and when directly facing an elementary school I believe will cause safety issues as well. This does not follow the north glenora neighbourhood plan. The community already has plenty of medium and high density housing options, I believe these should remain zoned RF1

With the proposed redevelopment of the patio homes I don’t understand why this is necessary or why the city would approve this. As a long-standing resident of this neighborhood I feel we have more than enough high density rental properties. I’m very concerned what this will do for the property value of all the home owners that have their life savings invested into this neighborhood.

I vote no. The setback (or lack thereof) will cause problems in the future and the parking situation is going to be a huge problem with a school across the street. I can’t imagine what the neighboring properties think of this.

As a single person heading into retirement I'm looking for right-sizing affordable options close to the core. We need more developments like this - not single family homes on large lots. If you check out the website you can see that this proposal is an environmentally-conscious plan that invites community building through design. It's leading edge and looks darn good too.

This is ridiculous that two former community league presidents posted a sign asking for community feedback and received nothing but “no skinny homes” as feedback and they decide to go ahead with this. It’s gotten to this point because they clearly do not care about what their neighbors think.

I don’t think they should build this. As a young member of this community we need to protect the integrity of our Neighbourhood. And our neighbourhood In the past had no skinny houses.

As a resident of this neighbourhood I’m concerned about overdevelopment. The city is already approving the subdivision of many properties for skinny homes, homes which are not selling / remaining vacant for months. We also have other multi- family structures in the community with more proposals on the table. Also of note is the lack of parking, the set back issues, and introducing added traffic next to a school and park.

I oppose this project. I’m concerned about the setback, about the parking, and about the increase of this type of development in this neighborhood. Many folks bought here assuming it would be single family developments. If this proposed development goes through who’s to say I won’t end up with something like this next door.

I fully support this rezoning. It's near a school, making it a great place for young families and is situated in a great place for people to live car lite or car free. This is exactly the type of development the city should be encouraging.