[Out of Towner]

Yes please! I love how 99st is coming back and that enclave around 89-90 is taking off and returning to an amenity rich area.

The north end of 99th Street leading onto Scona Road and into the river valley is a very nice commuter road. It's kind of like driving through a park to get downtown. Scona Road up to 82 Avenue is a prime corridor that has the right feel for some upscale midrise urban development.

 

[JScott]

Calls for public engagement: Edmonton rezonings, policing in Strathcona County

Here are opportunities to inform municipal decision-making about rezoning, development, policing, and more. Please only answer surveys from the municipality where you live.

edmonton.taproot.news

• StrathconaBlok99 Rezoning — The City of Edmonton is considering an application to rezone the vacant lot on the northeast corner of 99 Street NW and 90 Avenue NW to allow for a mid-rise residential building of up to eight storeys. Residents can ask a question or share thoughts to a discussion board. Due to the recent Canada Post strike, engagement has been extended to Jan. 26.

 

[Offworld]

View attachment 615606

And the award for most random bike locking post goes to...

I can't wait to see how many bureaucrats come racing down the aisle high-fiving their win.

 

[JScott]

I regret to advise that above rendering for BLOK 99 is out of date and no longer formerly associated with the BLOK 99 site. Rather BLOK 99 is now the subject of a rezoning application from DC2 to RMh28. Not to presuppose the outcome of the rezoning but we are unlikely to see a proposal that looks anywhere near as good as this rendering. Click on the link and you’ll be able to make your feelings known on the City’s public engagemnt site…still active until January 26.

Please note: Rezoning from DC2 to RMh28 zoning makes commercial elements optional for any development and worse yet significantly relaxes the design and architectural requirements for any development. This is precisely what happened at the Bateman Lands. DC2 to RMh28 approved by the City last summer, and voila…the Pangman proposal…no commercial elements and a low standard of architecture …..that is completely inconsistent with urban design aesthetic expected for a highly prominent infill location. I’m formerly raising my objections with the City Admin and our ward councillor.

 

[Greenspace]

StrathconaBlok99. The City invites feedback on a land development application from The Consulting Source to rezone 9009 and 9013 - 99 Street NW and 9854 and 9860 - 90 Avenue NW from a Direct Control Zone (DC2.1225) to the Medium Scale Residential Zone (RM h28.0). The proposed RM h28.0 Zone would allow for a mid-rise residential development with a maximum height of eight storeys with limited commercial opportunities at ground level. Engagement on this proposal has been reopened to gather further feedback due to the disruption of the November 11 mailed notices caused by the Canada Post strike. Visit engaged.edmonton.ca/Blok99 to share comments until January 26.

 

[thommyjo]

Could the rm h28 zone be updated to include some features of the DC zones in terms of architectural standards and such?

Seems like a real issue that’ll continue to frustrate residents if we keep getting low quality projects.

 

[EtoV]

You'd think from a sales and marketing perspective, the city wouldn't need to goad developers into building buildings that at least don't look cheap. The outside is literally a buyers/renters first impression of the apartment, and if you cheaped out on the outside I'm going to assume you did the same in the interior, even if you didn't.

Developers should consider architecture as part of the advertising costs of their building.

 

[archited]

^ there seems to be a race to the bottom for some developers and that I, personally, continue to encourage a race to the top. There has never been a valid example of main-stream developers passing on low development costs to consumers (renters or purchasers) -- they feed their bottom line while mewing that costs are such that they have to cheapen their product in order to compete -- I call "el Toro poo-poo" on that reckoning. Edmontonians alert!!! Don't buy into it! In your own mind start making a list of who is "naughty" and who is "nice" -- don't believe me; don't believe anyone; figure it out on your own.

 

[constance_chlore]

Yeah, it's up to Edmontonians to vote with their feet. Some developers think we don't care about design (or at least exterior design)? Let's not prove them right.

 

[JMatt88]

Does anyone know what ended up happening with the rezoning application/future construction of the site?

 

[JScott]

The BLK99 rezoning application (DC2 to RMh28) was put before Council on March 17. They voted in favour of the rezoning ….which now provides the developer the option to exclude commercial elements and go with a single use residential. (I’ll mention that Michael Janz dissented - voting against the proposal, arguing that we need to push harder for mixed use development.).

For me, the biggest concern for rezoning to RMh28, is the lack of architectural design standards compared with DC2 zoning and this sentiment was expressed by at least 10 citizens that participated in the BLK 99 rezoning Engagement Forum…….the overriding highlight of the Engagement “What we heard Report” to Council was the communities strong appetite for high quality architectural design (I paraphrase) ....but alas, that doesn’t seem to matter to Council.

I had a chance to speak with the consultant representing the developer for BLK99 and he gave a pretty sincere indication that quality design aesthetics would be an important component of this project, I hope that’s the case….and we’ll see as they are proceeding with obtaining a development permit…not sure of the timing. I expect something will be presented through the Edmonton Design Committee? I certainly hope we don’t have a repeat of what happened kitty corner at the Bateman Lands.

 

[constance_chlore]

I don't mind Janz's frequent dissenting role on projects like this one, and I appreciate that he's one of few councillors who is clear about wanting to see improvements to design standards. That said, I'm not sure I understand the push for mixed-use here?

 

[JMatt88]

Maybe an overall desire for more vibrancy/commercial amenities in this area given what was lost on the Bateman Lands

 

[SarcasticMarmot]

Maybe an overall desire for more vibrancy/commercial amenities in this area given what was lost on the Bateman Lands

I love how we frame the community as most losing out when community opposition to redevelopment was a partial cause of the lack of new CRUs in the neighborhood.

 

[David A]

I love how we frame the community as most losing out when community opposition to redevelopment was a partial cause of the lack of new CRUs in the neighborhood.

I feel the development proposed was both economically unrealistic as well as much more than what the community wanted.

Lest we forget there was a very decent one/two storey building here with a grocery store and coffee shop that was torn down because someone was eager to make tons of money of a huge new project.

The people in the area are trying to replace what was needlessly lost a decade or so ago. IMO, it should have never been torn down on some pie in the sky fantasy until they developers got their act together.