[IanO]

98th and 79st.

 

[thommyjo]

More of this please and thank you.
View attachment 655809

A bit confused. This feels like one of the less attractive infills out there. So many better triplex and fourplexes being built. Huge setbacks too.

Are you just supportive of the density and celebrating that? Or anything in particular about this one?

 

[IanO]

I think it's a sharp looking project, good scale, material choices, overall design.

 

[policyenthusiast]

What road is that on?
Build looks pretty good and has fairly decent landscaping. That's another issue the city is having - some infills are not completing the required landscaping in a timely manner or at all.

This is why the City is going to start enforcing "landscape securities", which is essentially a deposit which gets returned when the requisite landscape maintenance has been completed for 2 years.

 

[MacLac]

This is why the City is going to start enforcing "landscape securities", which is essentially a deposit which gets returned when the requisite landscape maintenance has been completed for 2 years.

Wait what!? That's not a thing? I thought that security deposit has been a standard thing - as long as I have been alive...

 

[policyenthusiast]

Wait what!? That's not a thing? I thought that security deposit has been a standard thing - as long as I have been alive...

It was, for a very very long time. In a well-intentioned change a few years back, they decided the securities were "red tape" and stopped collecting them, which resulted in landscaping compliance dropping below 30% in new builds.

 

[TAS]

It was, for a very very long time. In a well-intentioned change a few years back, they decided the securities were "red tape" and stopped collecting them, which resulted in landscaping compliance dropping below 30% in new builds.

This multi unit infill in Ritchie on 76Ave still hasn't done any landscaping and people have been living in it for months.

 

[ADob]

Good lord, that's a block of ugliness and the "naturalized" lawn doesn't help it any.

 

[inclusion]

I think these are needed. There are some awesome rowhousing projects out there, and some really cheap, trashy, poorly designed ones going in. And with so many being rental, you don't get the same feedback loop as selling. If you design an ugly house, it's definitely harder to sell vs rent. So I fear builders won't upgrade designs as quickly on some of these rentals.

If ever, unfortunately. For every quality multi family build in Bonnie Doon, there seem to be two junk ones going up. It is too bad we had to have several terrible builds to get to these updates and now have to live with terribly designed buildings for 50 years.

 

[Coprolite]

The Council Agenda for tomorrow's ZBR 1-Year Report had an addendum stuck on, late last week. It details the proposed changes to the Zoning Bylaw, specifically introducing minimum design standards for row housing in RS zones. I'll link it below for the LUB-savvy folks, but for those who are just interested in the highlights:

• All row housing must use design techniques to provide visual interest and eliminate large, blank walls.
• All row housing must have a main entrance facing the street, with a covered entrance feature.
• All row housing must face the street, and the street-facing wall must have windows on 15% or more of the surface area.
• On corner lots, all principal building facades facing a street must include consistent finishing materials and features such as windows, doors, and porches.
• Sliding patio doors can no longer serve as main dwelling entrances.

Here's the full redline document.

Also one more pitch for the SRC folks to speak at the City Council meeting tomorrow, you can register to speak until 9:30AM tomorrow. Here's the link to register to speak.

Good luck to everyone participating in the public engagement tomorrow. It's going to be zesty.

This is very similar to the standards already in effect for the BRH - Blatchford Row Housing Zone, except for the minimum window area.

3.42 BRH - Blatchford Row Housing Zone | City of Edmonton Zoning Bylaw

zoningbylaw.edmonton.ca

 

[IanO]

https://pub-edmonton.escribemeetings.com/FileStream.ashx?DocumentId=259969

 

[fromyeg]

Where are the RL h65s and will these projects actually get built?

 

[IanO]

 

[thommyjo]

View attachment 656100

Would love us to use substantial completion to limit those southern areas being built out.

Kalen at BILD loves to claim people will just move to Leduc and Beaumont then.

Ok, sure, but is that bad? If the neighbourhoods are a net tax loss, why are we worried? They’ll likely still work and shop in the city, and the commutes aren’t much different. What am I missing?

 

[fromyeg]

View attachment 656100

Do the city planners expect a substantial amount of residential development along Calgary Trail/Gateway? I would not have predicted that.