LDA20-0299 Garneau UCRH Rezoning

Removed by moderator.

Removed by moderator.

Removed by moderator.

There is nothing to like about this application. It is essentially the same as the city was forced to reject less than a year ago. The previous application decision is SDAB-D-20-071. The size of the proposed building is again immense and dwarfs all the single family homes along 88th avenue. It will directly and very negatively impact the privacy and quality of life for at least the next three homeowners on the south side of 88th avenue. This is not a large building lot and this neighbourhood does not need any more rooming houses at this time. (I'm sure the proposal does not mention rooming house as a proposed use but because of the design and the total number of bedrooms and bathrooms, that is the quite clear intent). A very similar proposal was made for a lot at the NW corner of 84th ave and 110 street a few years ago and the SDAB at that time determined that it was not in keeping with the nature of that part of the neighbourhood. The developer in that case turned his plan so that the new development faced the Avenue (like all the other properties in the neighbourhood) and built a rather disappointing looking duplex instead. I'm sure they were disappointed that they lost a third of the rooms they were planning to rent but they still have a rooming house.

This is a second attempt by the developer to put a massive multi-unit building in an area that is all single family homes. If this building were being proposed for the west side of 110 st, where all the University residences are, it might fit but as it is, this proposed project is far too large and imposing for the proposed location. While it is clear that the City of Edmonton has encouraged developers to increase density at all costs in Garneau, the exponential growth nature of this proposal would have too great an impact on the adjoining properties resulting in a complete loss of privacy, any potential for continued enjoyment of their homes, and crush the value of their proprty, likely making it un-sellable to another family. Please, you can't let this go forward.

This application is not in keeping with the neighbourhood. The proposed building is far too large for the lot and would have a significant detrimental effect on the next door neighbours. To put this many new residents in one building will significantly increase traffic in an already tight neighbourhood - even if most of the residents do not have vehicles, they are likely to be the source of many more deliveries than currently enter this area. These roads are not intended for high density traffic. The design is completely out of place. The original proposal was turned down and now they have come back with another equally bad proposal, but with the request for rezoning. Why is it that these developers are not listening at all to the community? I hope the City listens.

I strongly oppose the rezoning of the property as I also feel that GARP should be respected, and that allowing these ongoing exceptions to zoning rules defeats the very purpose of them. The charm and character of this community is being continually eroded by higher density buildings which are largely unnecessary given the excess of available student housing. The city seems to be quick to approve these requests, but does very little to manage the disruptions that come with these new structures. I feel this would further destroy the unity and charm of our traditional neighborhood.

I strongly oppose the rezoning of the property as I also feel that GARP should be respected, and that allowing these ongoing exceptions to zoning rules defeats the very purpose of them. The charm and character of this community is being continually eroded by higher density buildings which are largely unnecessary given the excess of available student housing. The city seems to be quick to approve these requests, but does very little to manage the disruptions that come with these new structures. I feel this would further destroy the unity and charm of our traditional neighborhood.

We strongly oppose the spot rezoning of the property on the corner of 88 Avenue and 110 Street. Until the new zoning bylaw , part of the City Plan recently adopted by Council ,comes into being the RF3 and the GARP should be respected. Zoning rules should apply to everyone.
It is impossible to comment on the merits of the proposed building as no plans are available, but this rezoning would allow for a very tall, very long building with 6 units. Allowing a reorientation of the development to face 110 St. means the back doors and any windows or balconies overlook the gardens of homes to the east ,resulting in a loss of privacy and the right to quiet enjoyment of back gardens.
Thank you for you consideration,
Tony and Sheila Rich

I strongly oppose the rezoning of this property and the proposed construction which is unnecessary, unsightly and inappropriate. There is no need for more student housing here since many units in the area are often standing empty. Such an oversized building with its changed orientation would disrupt the historical unity and appearance of this part of Garneau which includes a number of houses built in the early 1900s, along with small businesses such as the bicycle shop, several cafés and the French bakery. You can build new low-cost housing near a university to bring in quick profit, but you can't create from scratch a traditional older neighbourhood. Once it's gone, it's gone! The excessive height and length allowed by the proposed zoning would result in a jarring contrast: construction that would stand out like a sore thumb, blocking light and sight and presenting increased traffic problems. Not a pretty picture.

I do not think this is an appropriate development for this lot. The avenue it is on is very short and the additional traffic in this area would be a nightmare. It is supposed to be a pedestrian friendly neighbourhood. Even if residents don't have cars, even taxis, other for hire vehicles and delivery vehicles would make the area troublesome to walk in. I know from experience that drivers who do not know the area often get lost.
The building would also be far bigger than anything else on the block. Garneau is pretty dense in terms of housing now, do you want it to lose its character altogether.

· The rezoning is unnecessary. The GARP already allows plenty of zones for multi-unit development.

· A consideration which is missing on the information chart is about suites. Including suites, the current zoning states a maximum of 4 units, but the new zoning would not be restricted, (so the 6-unit design proposed in the spring would be allowed).

· It is not appropriate to zone individual lots differently. The area plan has a well laid out structure for zones.

· The size of building and orientation of building that the rezoning would allow is intrusive to the block and the neighbours.

· Row housing that faces 110 St would have rear entrances facing adjacent houses, which would present noise, light, traffic, and privacy issues.

· The size of building, height and footprint on the block that this zone would permit is much larger than anything on the block, making it out of place and disruptive.

· North Garneau has already lost 70% of its historic houses. It should be a priority to preserve this section of family housing. If one oversized development is allowed, it will just lead to more.

I am opposed to the rezoning.

North Garneau has already lost 70% of its historic houses.
Allowing larger multi-units here would likely spiral into the loss of this vibrant, beautiful, diverse section of Garneau.

There are many other (undeveloped) locations in Garneau already designated for larger, denser multi unit housing. It is not appropriate here. This is why we have an area plan - please stick to it!

I object to the way this Notice misleads the pulic by omitting and misrepresenting crucial comparative information.
Specifically you state that the rezoning would allow up to 3 rowhousing units but neglect to point out that it would also allow for 3 additional secondary dwellings, for a total of 6 units, thereby underestimating the true development potential and denying the public the ability to understand the essential and accurate land use impact.
You also state that the existing zoning, like the proposed zoning, also allows row housing but mislead the public by ommitting that the existing zoning would be limited to 2 units plus 2 secondary dwellings for a total of 4 and not 6. By omitting that information, you lead the public to believe INCORRECTLY that the Use impact is the same and the only changes are to the built form and Site Coverage.
This understating of the maximum impact and misleading about the comparative impact is an abuse of professional responsibility, designed solely to benefit the applicant's position. I would expect the City to convey the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Removed by moderator.

The proposed rezoning contradicts our Garneau Area Redevelopment Plan (GARP), is incongruent with this historical block, is inconsistent and disruptive to surrounding properties and is simply not necessary. This rezoning is NOT supported by the neighbours (including myself) or community in general.

This form of development (“row housing”) was already strongly opposed in this location, in a previous application, which was denied by the SDAB on July 8, 2020 (ref SDAB-D-20-071).

• The attempt to fit row housing on this single lot, facing 110 is problematic, as per our submissions to the above SDAB hearing. Fitting an 18 bathroom multi-unit student housing complex (which just happens to be called “a row house”) backing onto family houses is disruptive and intrusive. Several neighbouring properties would experience a complete loss of privacy as windows, back doors and balconies overlook our private properties, and would also face noise light and traffic disruptions.
• The rezoning is not necessary or appropriate. There is plenty of allowance for multi-unit development in the current GARP, including on nearby 87 Ave. It is not appropriate to rezone an individual lot 88 Ave, which is single family, historic home block. Prior to COVID, there was plenty of vacancy in the area, including in the U of A’s student residences. Our block is in need of quality family housing, not multi-unit dwellings.

Please do not allow this rezoning.