What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    24
IanO said:
Spoke to Jim (family behind it) and David (Nearctic) today and am confident you will see things moving soon...
Click to expand...
I know this is the wrong thread but since you have a connection to the developer what is happening to their site on 121 Street just north of the Jameson open pit?
 
Address: 9518 - 87 STREET NW
9560 - 87 STREET NW
8720 - 95 AVENUE NW
8722 - 95 AVENUE NW
8724 - 95 AVENUE NW
Planner Description: The City has received a road closure application from GEC Architecture. The proposed closure is located between 95 Avenue NWand 96 Avenue NW and west of 87 Street NW. If closed, the closure area will be part of a larger land assembly under the Direct Control Zone (DC.21007) to allow for the development of high density, mixed- use, transit-oriented development and transit plaza.
Status: In Review
File Number: LDA20-0192

Another rezoning proposal for the area.

This makes me think that things may actually be going ahead… 🤞
 
I don't think there has been anything done with this site since it was cleared.

On the other hand, next door beside the church there's a midrise (I counted six storeys?) that has gone up since the LRT was opened.
 
That is true. But there have been two recent rezonings approved for the site so *hopefully* that means that things are moving ahead.

Address: 9504 - 87 STREET NW
8720 - 95 AVENUE NW
8722 - 95 AVENUE NW
8724 - 95 AVENUE NW
9508 - 87 STREET NW
Planner Description: The City has received a rezoning application from GEC Architecture. The current zone is a Direct Control Zone (DC2.1187) which allows for high-rise development in the form of towers. The purpose of the rezoning application is to amend the DC Zone to allow opportunities for smaller buildings in the form of mid-rise buildings as well. Specifically, the amendments will: - add wording to Appendix 1: Site Plan to reference both tower and mid rise opportunities; - minor adjustments to the configuration of buildings; and - the removal of Appendix 4: Elevations from the DC to allow for flexibility in building design. Changes are also proposed to the DC text, though these are administrative in nature; requiring uses, definition and references to align with the new Zoning Bylaw 20001.
Status: Approved
Council Public Hearing Date: Dec 09, 2024

Address: 9504 - 87 STREET NW
9560 - 87 STREET NW
8720 - 95 AVENUE NW
8722 - 95 AVENUE NW
8724 - 95 AVENUE NW
Planner Description: The City has received a road closure application from GEC Architecture. The proposed closure is located between 95 Avenue NWand 96 Avenue NW and west of 87 Street NW. If closed, the closure area will be part of a larger land assembly under the Direct Control Zone (DC.21007) to allow for the development of high density, mixed- use, transit-oriented development and transit plaza.
Status: Approved
Council Public Hearing Date: Jan 24, 2025
 
IMG_2836.png
IMG_2837.png
 
^
I think people do care. They may not understand or be able to articulate it but there are public and private spaces that they enjoy and return to by choice, there are others that “just are”, and some they consciously avoid where possible.

They do understand good design and connect to it because being there either makes them feel good or it doesn’t. Those are the spaces where there is a high degree of “public ownership and civic pride”, the spaces they take visitors to.

I don’t know about their current ones but the City of Edmonton used to have framed awards in some of their planning department meeting rooms for Best Unimplemented Plans. I always thought it was strange that they were in fact celebrating failure in doing so. It wasn’t inspirational, it was sad.

I remain a firm believer that “good enough” really isn’t good enough (which probably isn’t what Marcelo was advocating but is how too many are likely to interpret this).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top