LDA20-0314 T5M Connect DC2- North Glenora

Hello! Sorry, I can't agree with the application. Safety for the kids and pedestrians at and near the school is my main concern. We have a busy ETS bus schedule, yellow busses, Taxis, Uber, lot's of driver training vehicles and add to that through traffic for those trying to avoid 111 ave and 107 ave. Many who treat our stop signs and speed limits as mere suggestions. Yes, upgrading and tear down development is necessary and welcome in our beautiful North Glenora, however, too many new units (and it is alarming how many units are being proposed) will add substantial traffic, adding to the poor sight lines for our kids and pedestrians. Street parking challenges will increase, it will be extra taxing on our sewage system. I'm not a fan of the skinnies respectfully either. Buildings with any height adds to the loss of privacy for neighbours, sunlight and value. I am not a fan of the community league president being a developer as it is a conflict of interest in my opinion. At the end of the day and through this process, transparency of intent is key and the safety of our kids and our neighbours kids is paramount. Thank you for listening.

Ryan Young comments on this linked article mentioning the $1500-$1900 price point. Also worth mentioning he's a former North Glenora community league president.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/neighbours-become-business-partners-in-north-glenora-infill-project-1.5754031

There was a CBC article at the end of 2020 that featured this project. In the comments one of the developers noted what they planned to charge for a rental cost - $1500-$1900. I hope that clears up some of the confusion here. Regardless of the price, I am not in favour of this development or rezoning. This is not missing infrastructure. The noise, privacy, traffic, set backs, and parking area all concerning to me as a current resident. I'm also concerned that this rezoning will lead more of the same in this neighbourhood. I do not feel we have resisted change here, or resisted a diverse range of housing types. Just because a person or household is not in favour of this rezoning does not mean we are discriminatory, classist, or privileged. We deserve to have our voices and opinions heard, it's our back yard too. The desires of the few should not outweigh the concerns of the many.

As a North Glenora resident for 18 years, I am absolutely in support of this project and all the reasons behind it. We have a wonderful community that will continue to flourish with projects like this. I have to say, I am disheartened by the NIMBY elements of these comments. Change is nothing to be afraid of and especially when it contributes in so many ways. Higher density living reduces our taxes and infrastructure costs while contributing to our vibrant community.

People have mentioned that the cost of these rental suites is available on the T5M Connect website, could someone please provide a link to this information. I have been searching for it on the developer's site but have been unsuccessful. It would be appreciated if there was some evidence for this information before we make assumptions that we have "cracked the code" or that this a "money grab project". Although, it would be ironic for any developer to create a project that does not generate a profit. Could someone please provide a link to this documentation/information.

I got an interesting reply from Andrew Sherstone in regard to the DC2 rezoning conditions. If I understand what he said, it seems that the city has the option to purchase the finished product from the developer at "below market value", for the purpose of providing "affordable housing". If the developer does not wish to sell to the city, the developer has to pay the city the difference. That money that the developer would pay to the city is then supposed to be used to purchase other units elsewhere for the purpose of providing "affordable housing". T5M Connect has stated on their website that they intend on putting projects like this in many mature neighbourhoods, so I imagine they intend on selling to the city once this one is built, to free up funds to build another structure. I think, bylaws have changed in regard to no longer making parking mandatory for built units, in order to make housing cheaper. City Council and the Mayor make the final decision on all zoning applications. Mayor Iverson is not running for mayor this year. Our comments on this site "will be summarized and provided to Council to assist them in making a decision at a public hearing" (pandemic time-I guess that just means broadcast-ed). So in summary; land is bought and a building proposal is made under a DC2 zoning application; the ones that are in charge of approving the zoning change are also the ones that will decide if they want to purchase the finished project "at below market value". I wonder how much DC2 zoning will be considered too much in any one neighbourhood? I think the take away here is that if there are properties coming on the market and the neighbourhood doesn't want a monstrosity blocking out their neighbours sun, they need to form a company and build a DC2 structure they feel they can live with.

I am a long-time resident of North Glenora, and I am strongly in support of this development. Having a greater mix of housing types can only be a benefit to this neighbourhood. If I wanted to live in a low-density suburb with mostly single-family homes around me and little movement through the neighbourhood, I would live in a sprawling suburb. I live here precisely because I want to be in an urban neighbourhood, with higher densities and a healthy mix of housing types, including apartments for rent at different price points. Diversity is healthy. A mixed neighbourhood is a healthy neighbourhood. The development of the former church land next to the elementary school has been nothing but a boon to this neighbourhood. It is why we still have our neighbourhood school. As Jane Jacobs long ago argued, more eyes on the streets means a safer neighbourhood. Higher densities also make the provision of various services, including public transit, more feasible and practical. Edmonton needs to look to a lively, interesting urban future, and a development like this can help us move towards that future. Don't let fear of change get in the way of healthy, incremental development of a highly desirable neighbourhood. We love our neighbourhood, so let's make room for more people to benefit from it, too.

Bernie, it's not just 45 units, it's 200. It's 45 to start with and 15 parking spaces

We are long term residents in North Glenora (30 years), whose property lies about three doors down from the proposed development. We have been enjoying watching our community grow into a vibrant area during our time here.

We support the development of this corner site in principle. As the developers are NG residents they do se to be taking care to create a tasteful and creative development.
However, as residents, we have some concerns that we have brought up with the developers.

The primary concern for us is the number of units that the developers would like to have on the site.
Currently they would be allowed to have 12 units on this site. And we see that they would like to put 16. We are definitely opposed to this number of units.

Having 16 units, built on this corner, where there are currently two units on regular city lots, brings forth some concerns. This significantly increases the population of this corner site, and will increase the vehicle traffic at certain times of day significantly. Parking is also a concern, as we understand the developers will not be providing parking for all units, and no visitor parking. We understand this is not a requirement but this stands to impose on and impact the use, amenities, and enjoyment of our neighbouring properties.

It must be taken into consideration that this property is directly across the street from an elementary school where we have many parents dropping off children in the morning so the vehicle traffic is already elevated at that time and at the end of the school day. As well, with the growing turnover of the population in our community being younger parents with small children, we have increasing numbers of children from the neighbourhood walking across that corner where the development is proposed in order to get to school.

Please keep In mind as well that kitty corner to the proposed development is another Multi family housing unit, the developer of which has already received a redevelopment permit years ago, and has recently submitted a 2nd redevelopment proposal to the city of Edmonton to develop a potentially four-story, 40 unit apartment building.
Currently there are approximately 8-10 units.

When combined together, where there are currently 10 or 12 residential units on that corner, these two developers would like to increase that population to 56 units.
As near neighbours of these proposed sites it is concerning to us.
This is a significant increase in population density and we are concerned not only about our own use, amenities, and enjoyment of our property, but as well as for our neighbours, and those using the school.

We are also concerned about infrastructure, particularly water and sewage. That were perhaps not developed to withstand this amount of use. Could the city please speak to this?

We would like to know the rationale as to why the developer feels it necessary to have 16 units as opposed to the 12 allowable units currently.
There are definitely many rental suites in our small community; the School across the street and adjoining community fields are actually surrounded by multi family units already. 3 of which are part of the redevelopment patio home proposal so those will all increase in size and number of units. So we are confused as to why the request for the expansion has been proposed.

We feel our community is not opposed to development or redevelopment in principle at all, but we do seek a relationship with any developer who proposes to put multi family units in our community, to come up with a plan that satisfies as many as possible.

Our final concern is that we understand that one of the developers for the proposal in question is the president of our community league. We wonder if there is not a conflict of interest or at least a dual role here.
We do uderstand that the president has stated that she will not vote if certain decisions related to this property come to a vote, however, we feel that conflict of interest goes deeper than that. Executive committee members may feel like they cannot be objective, or may indeed feel obliged to vote in favour of this property specifically because they have a working relationship and/or friendship with the developer. This may not be a concern for the city, and we don’t actually know if it will end up being an issue, but as the community league as a whole or at least the planning and transportation committee may be providing a submission on this proposal, we wanted to add it as a subject of consideration for our community.

Thank you!

Maybe the developers should just stick with the existing zoning. Two duplexes, two secondary suites, and two garden suites per lot. Higher max height. Smaller setbacks on some sides. No variance required.

Just because you don’t think you want to live in a two bedroom condo, doesn’t mean many others don’t find this desirable.

I wonder how many of the objections raised ( on street parking, traffic in front of school, delivery parking, and drainage) in this forum have previously been sent to the City - or are they convenient topics just oppose a development?

Removed by moderator.

As a new immigrant to Canada, I could not have asked for a more welcoming community than North Glenora. However, I was lucky enough to live here with family, as I could never be able to afford renting in this neighborhood. That is why I am absolutely in support of this project, as it could provide affordable, modern and energy efficient housing for 
young families, working couples or students, which is lacking in this neighborhood.

I only recently found out about the T5MConnect project, which led me to read their website and planning documents. These are my main takeaways:
- The developers are residents of the neighborhood, who genuinely seem to care about their project, not just a random company looking to make a profit
- The building looks well planned and offers various types of units, with a potential to attract different sort of renters, which further contributes to the diversification of the neighborhood
- One of the priorities of this project is environmental sustainability, which breaks from the traditional building methods still being employed today. It is refreshing to see a project present these sort of modern ideas, which are extremely beneficial for the future of Edmonton and Alberta
- Looking at the current affordable rental options in North Glenora: basements, “patio homes” or mainstreet units, it is great to see how this project brings a completely different idea and will definitely increase the quality of housing opportunities in the neighborhood

One of the biggest problems with “fake news” is that they usually spread without any backing by facts, people read something and they repeat it without checking any sources. After reading through past comments it seems like there are many misconceptions, which are being repeated over and over again:
- Nowhere in the website nor documents is stated the rent the developers plan to charge, so any prices being written here are pure speculation
- The project is not proposing to build 18 units. Reading the summary of the proposal on this webpage clearly states 16 maximum dwellings
- The proposed building is not a monstrosity and it is not going to “block out the sun” for neighbors. The developers have commissioned a shadow study which can be read in their website where it can clearly be seen that the impact is second to none, and is comparatively much better than building “skinnies”

Almost all negative comments about this project mention increased traffic and problems with parking around the school. This notion is laughable, I wonder if any of those commenters actually read the traffic report on the developers webpage:
https://www.t5m.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/2020-11-13-North-Glenora-Rezoning-Traffic-Parking-Memo-signed.pdf

“The observed parking utilization was 26% at its highest, which leaves room for 119 additional vehicles to park on-street in the vicinity of 109 Avenue NW and 139 Street NW. As noted in the “Canadian Guide to Traffic Calming, 2nd Edition,” on-street parking is considered a traffic calming and speed management measure that narrows the effective roadway space to reduce vehicle speeds and reduce possible shortcutting and through traffic.“


I find this paragraph to be particularly enlightening, and simply can’t understand how anyone can believe this project will negatively impact traffic in the neighbourhood. One could hilariously assume 2 cars per unit for the 16 units, plus the proposed 45 units across the street (with 15 parking spaces), and there would STILL be more than enough parking available (119 + (8 - 16*2)+(15-45*2) = 20).

Many of the negative comments also seem to be worried about what the approval of this project might mean to future developments in North Glenora. DC2 zoning is proposal specific and always subject to community comment, so the assumption that this project being approved will open “pandora’s box” for other developers to buy and convert single family homes to multi-unit housing is inherently false.

In summary, taking into consideration all the REAL information available about the T5MConnect project, I wholeheartedly support it and hope to see it go ahead.

Forgive me if somebody has already mentioned this but I simply don't have the time to go through 13 pages of comments.

It seems to me that everything that is trying to be achieved by this project will be done effectively by the patio home project all without re-zoning single family properties.

What scares me most is that if this goes through I could end up with something like this next door to me.

A reminder to those advocating for density in mature neighbourhoods under the guise of inclusivity and avoidance of urban sprawl: anyone that is looking to move to Keswick and purchase a home is not going to instead consider a tiny rental basement suite in North Glenora with no parking. It's comparing apples to oranges. Those aren't the same 'customers'. The people that would like to rent an apartment in North Glenora already have the opportunity to do so with 4 rental buildings in the neighbourhood, and another 180 brand new and modern rental units coming to the market by way of patio home redevelopment. Another consideration: retirees that already live in the neighbourhood are generally not looking to move into a basement suite or any suite with STAIRS either. Please use some critical thinking when considering the developer's marketing campaign. This is not needed, wanted, or a reasonable rezoning to ask for. This is for money to go into the pockets of four individuals. This is not for anyone else's benefit. Plain and simple.

For all those concerned residents mentioning the North Glenora Community Plan, that plan was excellent when it was written. However, it was created in 1998 and the first paragraph states that it was only a 10 year plan. It is so out-date that it is no surprise that the city is currently proposing to repeal it.

As a 15 year resident of this community under the age of 30, I wholeheartedly support this development in North Glenora. I strongly believe it is a small change in the right direction. When my family and I first moved here, as renters, we were taken aback by how empty the neighbourhood streets were and how underdeveloped it felt. In the years since, we have seen it flourish by the arrival of many more families that have had the opportunity to rent, use our park spaces and take their children to our schools. We have been able to keep Coronation school open, which was at one time struggling to meet the minimum amount of students. I still think we can do more and grow more.

For all those that keep repeating how there will be enough rentals available through the patio homes, or that we currently have enough rentals available, I find it unfair how they feel they can dictate the rental opportunities this community should offer. This project will not only provide affordable suites, it will also be modern. Some potential renters, such as myself, appreciate the thought behind the project. It is not only about location but about quality as well. With the current rental climate in North Glenora, I have not been able to find a place I would want to live in and it saddens me that projects like these are called cash grabs when I find they are what we need. It is inevitable that these projects will and should happen. Our neighbourhood has never been better than it is now, and it will only keep getting better the more people we can attract. I don’t think it fair to reject projects like these based on fear of noise or congestion. This is a central neighbourhood and it should focus on bringing in more people rather than pushing them out in search of newer rentals elsewhere that live up to their standards or financial needs.

I also see commenters speculating about the price...I have tried to find out where they got their numbers from but it seems they were pulled out of thin air as nowhere in the website is there any mention of pricing. I urge people to please use facts and not misinformation, as it truly defeats the purpose of this platform.

Density adds so much quality of life to a neighbourhood. Urban sprawl is an environmental and economic disaster. Any time we can insert quality density into existing neighbourhoods is a win to me.

I oppose this development because of the loss of privacy for the neighboring houses. I find it ridiculous that neighbors will have this towering monstrosity with 16 units with all sorts of windows are looking into their backyards. The back alley will be so busy and the current neighbors are going to have to deal with dumpsters, garbage trucks, moving trucks, eight parked vehicles, delivery vehicles, service vehicles. This is terrible disservice by the city to even consider something like this.

I welcome density and new development in the city but after looking at this proposal I have some serious safety concerns. These properties are located directly across the street from an elementary school, this will create serious safety and traffic issues for the youngsters that go to this school. With all of the vehicles parked on the road where will parents dropping off their kiddos park? I am very terrified about the reduced visibility for all the kids walking to school. You won't be able to see kids because all of the cars are parked in the way. We all know that kids don't always use the crosswalk so kids jumping out from between cars is a very terrifying reality that scares me just to think about.

I have been a resident of North Glenora for 16 years and I would like to voice my support for this project. I’ve looked at the information available online regarding the development and can see that T5M Connect has taken a considered and careful approach, engaging the community throughout the entire process. I would like to thank them for having the vision to put forth a plan for an environmentally sustainable and beautiful complex that will enhance and benefit this community greatly, and open up North Glenora to more than just those who can afford a $300-$500K home or the even more expensive skinnies.

To those who worry about the increased density, I say hooray for density! We live in a city—our neighbourhoods should reflect this. I have often lamented that North Glenora (and other neighbourhoods of the same era), with its wide streets and single family homes on huge widely spaced lots often looks like a ghost town. I look forward to living in a more vibrant and diverse community, to seeing more and more families and individuals enjoying the playgrounds and parks, to children filling up our school so we don’t risk losing it, to being an example to other communities of what thoughtful, forward thinking development looks like.