Development Speed - Edmonton in the slow lane.

[IanO]

Ok...purely observation and purely based on nothing, but I visit Vancouver quiet often and from when i moved back to Edmonton in 2003 until now, approx 3yrs, I cannot get over how quickly they Propose, Approve, Build, and do it all again.

I find it takes developers, the city, et.al centuries to do a 2yr project in Edmonton. I know there are other reasons behind this and im not gonna spend tonight going into this fact, but it frustrates me to no end.

*before anyone starts on this, weather/climate is not the reason.

We need to get out of the baby chair, take off the training wheels, and learn to run.....KNEES UP.

...im going to bed...it is raining...still...


Goodnight and Goodluck.

[RichardS]

You'll come back to snow...that system will be here tomorrow...

I agree, if weather and climate come into this discussion as to why it CAN'T....

...becasue Helskini has no development...

[DanC]

I have been saying this for so long.

Projects just sweem to drag on and on before they even get started.

I brought up pro-active rezoning by the City, which essentially would be rezoning areas currently zoned for low-rise or low density development to higher level of both.
I think it would allow the developpers a better option as to what they can build on a parcel instead of applying for DC2 to upzone that property.

I know there are some challenges in this, but I just want to see faster progress.

[IanO]

we really need to streamline the application and approval process....for many many reasons. Im not just pro-developer, im prodevelopment.

Downtown still desperately needs another 5000-10,000 people over the next 5 yrs or so.

To facilitate that kind of influx we need to facilitate 20-30 storey towers with a quick approval process should they meet design and a few other key criteria.

...we need to speed this up.

[mick]

I agree. I'd love to see projects done quicker here. I did notice that Icon seemed to get going pretty quick. I know they made a point of abiding by all city regulations for 104St. and likely avoided any disputes. How much of this slow process is the result of developers proposing projects that don't fit with city by-laws etc. Seems like in Van the developers know that they have to propose projects within parameters set by the city. Here we often see developers try to get something extra from the city (e.g. Arlington or Hampton house etc).

[ThomasH]

I wonder if there are alot of developers who want to build outside of the development guidelines for the area? For example, are there alot of developers who want to build highrises taller than the height limit for downtown?

[Edmcowboy11]

Well the Arlington is one example I think that the develloper wanted to build something more than was allowed.

[IanO]

"How much of this slow process is the result of developers proposing projects that don't fit with city by-laws etc."

A LOT....mostly design related now.

[IanO]

Originally Posted by Edmcowboy11

Well the Arlington is one example I think that the develloper wanted to build something more than was allowed.

that was a mess..."more than being allowed" is a true understatement...i wont even touch this one...and i dont mean a bigger building.

[IanO]

Originally Posted by ThomasH

I wonder if there are alot of developers who want to build outside of the development guidelines for the area? For example, are there alot of developers who want to build highrises taller than the height limit for downtown?

developers want to make $$$ simple as that. If they can do a 20 storey versus 15 of the same shape...they make A LOT MORE...

this city is not very pro-development and developers run into many hurdles...however they do that to themselves much of the time.

with this said however, the city needs to facilitate an easier process from start to finish for good developments. Density bonusing and the such needs to come into play.

downtown zoning is another issue...it is terrible overall IMO.

[ThomasH]

More reasons to get rid of the Municipal Airport.

City Council, please do something about it.

[IanO]

Originally Posted by ThomasH

More reasons to get rid of the Municipal Airport.

City Council, please do something about it.

while it would be nice....

There are still plenty of land to do more infill at more then mid-rise. Id rather have 10 more 10-20s storey towers than 5 towers of 30.

[DanC]

Having listened to all the arguments about the Muni, I say close one runway, make the permanent race facility and focus highrise development in the core.

Allowing a mass redevelopment of the Muni may draw a large amount of potential investors out of Downtown or the North Edge and into the Muni lands. The City can only support so much development.

[IanO]

bingo....when north edge, east jasper, and the core of the core is lot less....then muni go.

[mick]

This city isn't very pro-development? I don't get this, if we're not pro-development why do we (or at least have we) let any old thing get thrown up, and nice old things get torn down?

[IanO]

Originally Posted by mick

This city isn't very pro-development? I don't get this, if we're not pro-development why do we (or at least have we) let any old thing get thrown up, and nice old things get torn down?

happens in most if not all cities, but times are a changing with the EDC.

[ChrisD]

Originally Posted by mick

I agree. I'd love to see projects done quicker here. I did notice that Icon seemed to get going pretty quick. I know they made a point of abiding by all city regulations for 104St. and likely avoided any disputes. How much of this slow process is the result of developers proposing projects that don't fit with city by-laws etc. Seems like in Van the developers know that they have to propose projects within parameters set by the city. Here we often see developers try to get something extra from the city (e.g. Arlington or Hampton house etc).

The Icon was approved relatively quickly. Another quick project that was approved in a short amount of time is Aurora, which was approved 2 weeks ago.

[IanO]

Originally Posted by ChrisD

The Icon was approved relatively quickly. Another quick project that was approved in a short amount of time is Aurora, which was approved 2 weeks ago.

^do things "right" and yee will be rewarded.

[ChrisD]

Originally Posted by IanO

^do things "right" and yee will be rewarded.

I agree, however, there are some that don't. Well, may they continue to spend more time and money bickering about BS only to get really nothing in return...shortsightedness kills baby.

[emdubya]

Originally Posted by mick

This city isn't very pro-development? I don't get this, if we're not pro-development why do we (or at least have we) let any old thing get thrown up, and nice old things get torn down?

The city has set up the worst possible development scenario. Community consultation is a long, slow process. Worse, because the process is so tedious, developers end up basically paying lip service to community wants. They make some minor aesthetic changes, it still looks like junk, but hey, at least the community was consulted and councillors can say the system works at election time.

But it doesn't work. People act selfishly and chase out good development, seniors homes and medical centres for crying out loud, because it will "hurt property values." And those same people gripe about our city lacking development. Sadly, we've got the city we deserve.

[RichardS]

Deserve, or inherited?

[IanO]

the thing people in this friggen city ignore is if you respect both sides and rationally work towards a mid-point, some great things can happen....but we are so


developer----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------city--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------community.

[ChrisD]

Originally Posted by IanO

the thing people in this friggen city ignore is if you respect both sides and rationally work towards a mid-point, some great things can happen....but we are so


developer----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------city--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------community.

If you can name a city, town, village where these three entities 'get along' in harmony, please tell me. Because I haven't found it. Ideally, it would be great for all three to reach a common ground, but it simply doesn't happen 90% of the time.

[RichardS]

Awh, c'mon Chris....Let's grab a Coke and teach the world to sing....in perfect harmony....

[IanO]

Originally Posted by ChrisD

If you can name a city, town, village where these three entities 'get along' in harmony, please tell me. Because I haven't found it. Ideally, it would be great for all three to reach a common ground, but it simply doesn't happen 90% of the time.

what i mean is that yes there is always a butting of heads, but if all parties work towards a rational common goal, better developments will happen.

[glasshead]

Originally Posted by DanC

Having listened to all the arguments about the Muni, I say close one runway, make the permanent race facility and focus highrise development in the core.

Allowing a mass redevelopment of the Muni may draw a large amount of potential investors out of Downtown or the North Edge and into the Muni lands. The City can only support so much development.

I think just closing the muni partially is a double-edged sword. Yes you maintain the track, but as long as there is air travel, is there not height restriction for buildings?; hence, high rise development would stall. Is that not one of the reasons the city doesn't allow taller buildings in the downtown core?

I apologize if I misunderstood you (i.e. is your idea to take air travel out and keep a portion of the runway for strictly the track?). Then I agree with you.

I say totally close the muni to air travel and start developing. In fact, our neighborhood was just involved for the proposed 121st corrider development. Perhaps that could be incorporated with an airport re-development.

[RichardS]

You live in Inglewood?...

[ThomasH]

Inglewood and Westmount are excellent neighbourhoods to live in.

[glasshead]

Originally Posted by RichardS

You live in Inglewood?...

Not sure if you were asking me, but I live in Westmount.