What do you think of this project?


  • Total voters
    34
I understand that some of you have jobs in the field and are doing God's work and are sensitive to criticism. If advocating for an urban canopy is "concern trolling" than it's what I'm doing and I'm glad that you're completely open to planting some trees along that road. Good projects include attention to the surrounding streetscape and I'm 100% on board with that project if something was done to remedy its deficiency.
 
Where's the streetscape? Another free loading developer? Or maybe the developers pockets aren't deep enough to have included any. This is the type of developer that upsets people in the neighborhood. Take a look at that picture and consider what that street and neighborhood would look like if everybody did the same as that developer.

First of all, here's a hard reality which many seem to forget for some reason: Unless you live in an infill home completely built and financed by yourself, your house was built by a developer. Developers are who build the vast majority of our housing, no matter if its a single detached home or an apartment building. I'm not a fan of the extreme commodification of housing either, believe me, and I wish the provincial and federal governments would actually commit to a sustained and country-wide public housing program, but this is the reality of where we live.

Secondly, just like how there can be different styles, forms and orientations for houses, there can be the same for buildings. Windsor Terrace is going to look different than Westrich's project behind it and both look different than the Bentley beside them. Regarding the scale of the building, I'd like to point out that, due to restrictive zoning laws of the past, there is a lot of latent demand for housing in Windsor Park as it borders the largest institution in the entire city and what is essentially our second downtown. If a more natural increase of density happened over time in Windsor Park, projects like this could've panned out differently, but higher-density projects are the outcome of artificially suppressing growth in areas of high land value.

It's really unfortunate that a utility service corridor had to be run around what looks like around the entire building. Wonder if the developer could plant some trees in the boulevard across the street as a compromise? Also wonder if the development in the block to the east will rip out the trees and not replant any.

Unless there's an exception, like with Windsor Terrace specifically, every project has minimum landscaping requirements as set out in the Zoning Bylaw. Also, I'd personally blame lackluster road and street design for a lack of urban canopy in many areas around the city, especially along urban arterials like 87th avenue. Having well-landscaped boulevards and park spaces is critical in urban environments, I agree, but that's majorly the city's responsibility. I wish we could reconfigure/take lanes off of many large roads and make beautiful boulevards with large trees, wide sidewalks and cycle paths, but that would make too many people mad in the short term so it most likely won't happen.
 
The minimum landscaping requirement for the Windsor Park project was a sidewalk and the developer has complied with that standard as we can see. Fortunately there are some developers and people who can and will do more than a sidewalk.
 
There is probably the exception but generally speaking, the Windsor Park residents take pride in their community and do more than a sidewalk to landscape their property. I believe that it's why developers are attracted to some of the mature established inner city communities and will market their product accordingly.
 
The minimum landscaping requirement for the Windsor Park project was a sidewalk and the developer has complied with that standard as we can see. Fortunately there are some developers and people who can and will do more than a sidewalk.
Minimum wasn't just a sidewalk as many people have mentioned previously.

There were plans for trees along the sidewalk. Epcor said no due to their power lines running under the sidewalk for multiple reasons.

There were also plans for a bunch of planters to which the city said no.

So maybe before bashing a developer. Learn the facts
 
Minimum wasn't just a sidewalk as many people have mentioned previously.

There were plans for trees along the sidewalk. Epcor said no due to their power lines running under the sidewalk for multiple reasons.

There were also plans for a bunch of planters to which the city said no.

So maybe before bashing a developer. Learn the facts
The cost to move these isn't worth worrying about some landscaping either.
 
Minimum wasn't just a sidewalk as many people have mentioned previously.

There were plans for trees along the sidewalk. Epcor said no due to their power lines running under the sidewalk for multiple reasons.

There were also plans for a bunch of planters to which the city said no.

So maybe before bashing a developer. Learn the facts
A utility corridor could explain why the south side of the development isn't landscaped but if the pictures presented are still an accurate representation of the project, it appears that the west of the building is landscaped with only a sidewalk too. Strange that the utility corridor was not know about when the plans were drawn up. Is any of the flatwork done in anything more than concrete?
 
West side of the building has trees planted adjacent to the sidewalk, but just not in front of the CRU space.

@Vacs any idea why the City said no to planters?
 
West side of the building has trees planted adjacent to the sidewalk, but just not in front of the CRU space.

@Vacs any idea why the City said no to planters?
It is city property, they didn't want to be responsible for the maintenance, which the developer offered to take care of but it would have automatically gone to the city regardless
 
A utility corridor could explain why the south side of the development isn't landscaped but if the pictures presented are still an accurate representation of the project, it appears that the west of the building is landscaped with only a sidewalk too. Strange that the utility corridor was not know about when the plans were drawn up. Is any of the flatwork done in anything more than concrete?
There is landscaping to be done near the alley on the west side
 
It is city property, they didn't want to be responsible for the maintenance, which the developer offered to take care of but it would have automatically gone to the city regardless
In other words, the developer was unable to landscape its own property to the same or higher standard than that of most other community residents because of the city.
 
Last edited:
In other words, the developer was unable to landscape its own property to the same or higher standard than that of most other community residents because of the city.
Just to be clear…. By community residents you mean these homes that surround the park this building is next to…?

You’re right. Sooo well landscaped 😉. “wOnT sOmEbOdY tHiNk AbOuT nEiGhBoUrHoOd ChArAcTeR?!”

Not trying to be a jerk ahha. I just don’t think it’s factually true to say there’s a high standard of landscaping for all, or even most, homes in the area. Many, both new and old, are poorly landscaped and maintained.

5E8A1A20-84BF-4F13-BD1B-6649DCF026C4.png886047DB-CDCF-4CEA-AAC0-B43F702A2AA4.png852B8D95-5C2F-492E-9152-95D7B356C24C.png29E6D771-B7E4-4079-9FA6-C3FAC9F17AC0.png81D76DC2-0B11-4295-90CF-A3388C449595.png2C232B82-BD1B-46EA-B837-50D5CCAA9363.pngCC87D6ED-4EA7-4CC7-88B3-4FD0D25C96C8.pngBE3F404D-8FB8-40F3-9AE0-4776C96DC9E8.pngA0056998-049A-4C29-BEF4-CC1B2EF35FDD.png268EF54E-17A8-406B-90B8-2BE5E89ACBB4.png035DB005-A545-4AE5-AC84-BD2C931E7F56.png
 
Just to be clear…. By community residents you mean these homes that surround the park this building is next to…?

You’re right. Sooo well landscaped 😉. “wOnT sOmEbOdY tHiNk AbOuT nEiGhBoUrHoOd ChArAcTeR?!”

Not trying to be a jerk ahha. I just don’t think it’s factually true to say there’s a high standard of landscaping for all, or even most, homes in the area. Many, both new and old, are poorly landscaped and maintained.

View attachment 593822View attachment 593823View attachment 593824View attachment 593825View attachment 593826View attachment 593827View attachment 593828View attachment 593829View attachment 593830
 

Back
Top