Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 601 to 700 of 1420

Thread: 'Hendrix' (9749 – 111 St) - 29 storeys-95m- Residential

  1. #601

    Default

    In my experience we could all learn from the disabled... many are better people than I could ever hope to be.

    I hope this building will be built using barrier free design.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  2. #602
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Wow...as a member of this demographic called disabled...I am pretty taken aback by some of the assumptions.
    .........
    You all want to talk massing, scale, even paid parking...fine. LEAVE THE DISABLED THE HELL OUT OF IT...obviously, many of you have no freaking clue.
    I'm not sure how much of this is a reaction to my post, but I apologize for the insensitive generalizations, it was not my intent to speak for disabled people, to imply that all disable people have the same needs, or that requesting reasonable accommodation for disabilities equates entitlement, or even that all drivers are healthy; but looking back I can see how my post can be read that way. I posted a knee-jerk reaction, and I'm sorry.
    Because you're right, I don't have a much of a clue.

  3. #603
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Thanks to the pious attitudes for confirming that for me. If I am not a latte drinking yuppie wanna be urbanite with my uber cycle and special walking shoes...if I dare own a car...I can go to hell if I want to live in the core. Screw me for ever thinking that downtown was supposed to be inclusive.
    Xactamundo !

    These are the useless cornholios who continue to drag the downtown away from its former awesomeness and into the emerging sewer it iz today.


  4. #604
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    My comment was not directed at any one person...I have seen these assumptions on those "blessed" with disabilities in many threads. This time, and after my wonderful day trying to be as transit friendly as I am supposed to be...only to slip, fall, have to crutch up several flights of stairs, slip again, get pushed on the Corona station stairs (oh look, the escalator is out AGAIN)...yeah...patience is zero.

    You try to recover from a slip when using crutches...not fun. Winter is a prison for me.
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  5. #605
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    4,141

    Default

    Oh, that waz you ?

    Sorry.




    Top_Dawg can just picture it.

    Hope your fall wasn't too bad.

  6. #606
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    who bated whom first.
    Well this thread seems to be full of master...

    ....nevermind :P
    OMG...thanks for the laugh...I needed that...

    ...story...that was my Johnny Fever moment...I didn't say booger...but in one of my interviews with a fishing expert I got on the topic of baiting hooks and how there was a mastery to it...so I grabbed the opportunity and called him a "master baiter".


    yeah...I thought it was funny! thanks for the laugh 240GLT...needed it...
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  7. #607

    Default

    Richard,

    Sorry I live with a severely disabled person so it's a common thread in my life and something I bring up often.

    it's the exact kind of disabled you describe..., On AISH, Poverty, Maginalized....

    It's hard sometimes and it hard to watch him try to be well and happy and others take so much for granted.
    Last edited by edmonton daily photo; 05-12-2013 at 03:10 PM.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  8. #608
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,211
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Thanks for the understanding all. Trust me, I'd give up my handy dandy parking pass and park in the furthest stall and scale the snow mountain gladly...or cycle in the snow...if I could have my leg back. After surgery in a few weeks, it will be even a bigger disability...

    ...please, go back to the topic at hand.
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  9. #609

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    My comment was not directed at any one person...I have seen these assumptions on those "blessed" with disabilities in many threads. This time, and after my wonderful day trying to be as transit friendly as I am supposed to be...only to slip, fall, have to crutch up several flights of stairs, slip again, get pushed on the Corona station stairs (oh look, the escalator is out AGAIN)...yeah...patience is zero.

    You try to recover from a slip when using crutches...not fun. Winter is a prison for me.
    Some of my friends are in the same predicament and your absolutely correct... it is jail in away. Don't let that get to you. They're the true blinds in society.

  10. #610

    Default

    So Jeff losing his ish (thank god for block lists), and those with disabilities being used as a tool in this debate.

    Well this thread went to hell..

    Seriously, why people have this hate on for people who rent and students is beyond me.. It's ageism and it's financial posturing bordering on downright bigotry. That's just a*****e behaviour. I can't wait to see the Hendrix built and those low income scum students and renters parking their cars every where and screwing up the neighbourhood -> SARCASM!

    The arguments I have seen against this tower are all BS!! People need to pull their F****** heads outta their asses and stop being such dicks to people..

    And to richard, though I didn't have a long term disability I did have some serous ankle and knee problems for a few years and getting around was tough (Thank god for the UofA's sports medicine facilities! WOOOO!!).. Try to be positive *as little as that helps* there is changes being made and accessibility is becoming more of a priority as time goes on.

  11. #611

    Default

    ^ Grandin is a gated community don'y you know with it's own Private LRT station.

    We can't have the ____________ and the ____________ moving in.

    (Fill in any racial profile you choose)

    And of course this post is in jest....... Anyone can use the LRT.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  12. #612
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,062

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The existing scale is due to outdated zoning/LUB/design choices. I would have loved to have seen a CRU or 2 in this, but will accept the townhouses given how desperately we need them in this area. A suspect given the size of this building, we will see a well rounded mix. I see this as supporting existing infrastructure in the area. Roads are there and under capacity in terms of use, LRT is there, parks are there, schools are there. Parking in central parts of cities is challenging at times, so be it.
    Whatever reason you attach to the existing scale, it is the existing scale. This proposal is not within a new area. Clearly, this proposal is within the existing area, the existing scale. Accordingly, it is not properly scaled to the existing community.

    You can "suspect" all you want on there being a well rounded mix. Your presumption is simply one you attach to the building/proposal given its large and improper scale to the existing community. Because "it's large", that's the basis for your presumption?

    You claim to be tapped in; given your comments throughout this thread, it reads as if you're simply fronting for the developer at times... I do believe it might have actually been you referring to him by a first name. And yet, somehow when I've just now asked you to detail the buildings unit makeup and size, you've ignored the request. The townhouses are an affront to design and street-level engagement; you've heard that from many within this thread - you yourself have stated you wished they offered more. Again, you make reference to including the heritage house - that is only being done by this developer to align with the covering bylaw. The integration of that house is being done by simply throwing up a column of bricks on the face of the townhouses! WhoopTeeDo!

    How flippant of you to throw out another "parking is tough, deal with it" comment. That parking is real world impacting on residents, particularly if deliveries and trades are compromised in trying to get to people living in the area. The earlier raised concerns over parking have been purposely trivialized by the likes of EDP and the Scotty guy. Who can't walk a few blocks, they say!
    emphasis added...

    at what point does "existing scale" become the fixed measure you would like to make sacrosanct? today? last year? a decade ago? when the area had nothing more than single family homes? how about when the existing scale of the area included nothing more than grass and trees?
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  13. #613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IdriveaSubaru View Post
    Seriously, why people have this hate on for people who rent and students is beyond me.. It's ageism and it's financial posturing bordering on downright bigotry. That's just a*****e behaviour. I can't wait to see the Hendrix built and those low income scum students and renters parking their cars every where and screwing up the neighbourhood -> SARCASM!
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    ^ Grandin is a gated community don'y you know with it's own Private LRT station.

    We can't have the ____________ and the ____________ moving in.

    (Fill in any racial profile you choose)

    And of course this post is in jest....... Anyone can use the LRT.
    And it continues! One guy adds the "SARCASM" tag... the other guy says, "just posting in jest, while throwing racial profiling into the mix"! When you purposely make up and falsely assign statements/positions to someone, directly or indirectly, do you get a free pass because you throw down a covering, "SARCASM... jest" attachment?

    Racial profiling? I don't recall any posts in this thread that even remotely lend themselves to this, yet another, implied false statement/claim. More fabrication. Who was throwing down the slander mantle a few posts back? Oh right, "just in jest"!

    As repeated many times over in the face of this continued fabrication, I've never disparaged renters - not once. Yes, there have been some in this thread who have laid down a couple of negative stereotypes associated with renters. I have not done so. Of course, that doesn't stop the fabricators.

    As stated several times now, the reference to students here, and I assume at the latest City initiated meeting, was done in the context of a disproportionate targeting intent associated with the building location proximity to the LRT & educational facilities and the proposal's unit type/size makeup. If you attach any credence to the community ARP, that disproportionate targeting is significant, and runs counter to the ARP and its diversified community enrichment emphasis. So, of course, as is their way, the fabricators turn this into, "being against low income scum students"! Of course they do. That's what fabricators do; that's what fabricators are about.

  14. #614

    Default

    As reported by someone who attended the meeting Jeff people were very clear that they were against renters and students. If you want to fill those blanks with racial profiles than that speaks more to your mindset than mine...
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  15. #615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    at what point does "existing scale" become the fixed measure you would like to make sacrosanct? today? last year? a decade ago? when the area had nothing more than single family homes? how about when the existing scale of the area included nothing more than grass and trees?
    Does a proposed development compromise or add benefit to a community? If compromise, is the scale associated with the proposed development a factor in that compromise? If 'YES', the existing scale is the benchmark, your "fixed measure", and it should be used to evaluate against the proposal's compromise and associating compromising scale factor. Again, this is not a new neighbourhood; this is not a proposal going up on a neighbourhood's periphery. As mentioned several times throughout this thread by those comparing this proposal to the Pearl, this proposal is not going up on a major Jasper Ave. thoroughfare (away from the inner-community). This proposal is intended to be built right in the midst of an existing inner-community.

  16. #616

    Default

    Your point?

  17. #617

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    As reported by someone who attended the meeting Jeff people were very clear that they were against renters and students. If you want to fill those blanks with racial profiles than that speaks more to your mindset than mine...
    You've acknowledged you weren't at the meeting. As is your fabricators way, you blindly accept the account provided; an account that had no accompanying context relative to your described renters and students reference. Fabricators don't need, don't want, context, right?

    and - you were the one that introduced racial profiling. That was you. Those were your words. That was your mindset, Mr. Fabricator!
    Last edited by Jeff; 06-12-2013 at 08:54 AM.

  18. #618

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Your point?
    Your point?

  19. #619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    As reported by someone who attended the meeting Jeff people were very clear that they were against renters and students. If you want to fill those blanks with racial profiles than that speaks more to your mindset than mine...

    OMG! "against renters and students". What's next? No one with blue eyes and blonde hair! If you choose to live in a condensed area of town, then you have chosen to live amongst.....people! If you cannot afford an acreage for privacy, then try getting a real job and move! The developer is wasting his time with these whining poor little inhabitants.

    SIMPLE little rule. Don't buy a house next to a vacant field. If you do, then suck it up for being an *****, if something is built there that you just don't like. It's either your smart with your investment money, or you like to gamble. There is no guarantee who your neighbor will be, no matter where you live....anyways.

  20. #620

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    at what point does "existing scale" become the fixed measure you would like to make sacrosanct? today? last year? a decade ago? when the area had nothing more than single family homes? how about when the existing scale of the area included nothing more than grass and trees?
    Does a proposed development compromise or add benefit to a community? If compromise, is the scale associated with the proposed development a factor in that compromise? If 'YES', the existing scale is the benchmark, your "fixed measure", and it should be used to evaluate against the proposal's compromise and associating compromising scale factor. Again, this is not a new neighbourhood; this is not a proposal going up on a neighbourhood's periphery. As mentioned several times throughout this thread by those comparing this proposal to the Pearl, this proposal is not going up on a major Jasper Ave. thoroughfare (away from the inner-community). This proposal is intended to be built right in the midst of an existing inner-community.
    Half a block from LRT Access?!

    Do you think that EVERY DT Toronto Condo is on a MAJOR road.

    this post is asinine.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  21. #621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stinger11 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    As reported by someone who attended the meeting Jeff people were very clear that they were against renters and students. If you want to fill those blanks with racial profiles than that speaks more to your mindset than mine...

    OMG! "against renters and students". What's next? No one with blue eyes and blonde hair! If you choose to live in a condensed area of town, then you have chosen to live amongst.....people! If you cannot afford an acreage for privacy, then try getting a real job and move! The developer is wasting his time with these whining poor little inhabitants.

    SIMPLE little rule. Don't buy a house next to a vacant field. If you do, then suck it up for being an *****, if something is built there that you just don't like. It's either your smart with your investment money, or you like to gamble. There is no guarantee who your neighbor will be, no matter where you live....anyways.
    I make it simple.. Don't buy into DT expecting that you own the 5 spots in front of your building, you wont have congestion and you expect to live eat sleep and breath your car.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  22. #622

    Default

    Furthermore, downtown will grow as time goes on so more highrises... this is just the reality of city living. Those that cannot comprehend to this logic is just trapped in a glass bowl. Their delussional grandeur will and should not supercede the general good of the city.

  23. #623

    Default

    I am going to be very frank..... and say something that may offend some people but it's opinion I share and one I have heard repeated. One person who first voiced this to me was an ex City council member.

    In regards to Oliver/Grandin. The old P&D group that the OCL backed largely was made up of grandinites who focused solely on this little area while ignoring the majority of the community.


    Where we have failed Grandin and Oliver. NO ONE on city council has the guts to be forward about the vision for the area. The ARP is useless. it is completely irrelevant. The outlines and guidlines largely are never upheld and the ones that are are counter intuitive to good urban aesthetics. (Fake Gables and BS) I largely feel there is a VERY VOCAL NIMBY group in grandin. What is needed to get infront of this issue is full disclosure of what Oliver is and what it will be.

    This will onl;y be done through community engagement and we really need to do some of that upfront.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  24. #624
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,161

    Default

    Formal presentation going before EDC on Feb 4.

    H. UPCOMING APPLICATIONS

    FEBRUARY 4, 2014

    FORMAL PRESENTATIONS

    SE + W LRT Corridor
    Dialog - Antonio Gomez-Palacio

    The Hendrix
    Dialog - Alan Boniface
    9749 - 111 Street NW
    Site legally described as:
    Lot 10, Block 10, Plan NB
    http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...ry21Agenda.pdf
    Don't feed the trolls!

  25. #625

    Default

    Good to know!

  26. #626
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  27. #627

    Default

    Move to a place (downtown) within a 5-10 min walk/LRT ride of multiple post-secondary institutions. Complain about students living in the area.

  28. #628
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    203

    Default

    ^ Thank you.

  29. #629
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    I've been quite impressed by the lengths that Edgar Development has gone to reach out to the community with this development. Looking forward to potentially hearing what you have to say (of what you're allowed to) about this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete7 View Post
    Move to a place (downtown) within a 5-10 min walk/LRT ride of multiple post-secondary institutions. Complain about students living in the area.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  30. #630
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    ^will report back. They have been very receptive to meet with various parties.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  31. #631
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Just met with them, slightly modified design, more glazing and the larger white walls broken up a bit more. Townhouse podium looks very good, as does the rooftop indoor/outdoor amenity space. There will also be a public pocket park on the north side as a community/building amenity.

    Unit sizes go from around 380sqft studios to 2 and 3 bedroom units, townhouses will be around 1200sqft.

    John T. Ross house will be leased office space.

    I really like this project after seeing the design package and more details on the building and its design.

    The developer was open and honest about the project, its intentions and their desire to ensure that they address a lot of little details to make the project as good as it can be.

    Rental it will be.

    If you like the project, please do submit a letter of support to Council, planning and transportation.
    Last edited by IanO; 22-01-2014 at 03:56 PM.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  32. #632

  33. #633
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,170

    Default

    Nice work IanO. If they end up allowing students it will be completed in time for my boy to attend university, it's an excellent location

  34. #634
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,170

    Default

    Then on weekends I could hang out, bring a couple of hoes over and smoke dope , throw beer bottles off the balcony and if we're high enough(no pun intended)we could watch folks jump off the high level (Just stirring the pot) lol
    Last edited by Drumbones; 22-01-2014 at 08:16 PM. Reason: Reword slightly

  35. #635
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,170

    Default

    Seriously though, my boy is academically gifted and no trouble. It's a spot that definitely sparks interest with us.
    Last edited by Drumbones; 22-01-2014 at 06:54 PM.

  36. #636

    Default

    Drumbones, are two people using the same profile?
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  37. #637
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,170

    Default

    No it's all me. Thoughts and afterthoughts and my attempts at humour I guess. Sorry

  38. #638
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,245

    Default

    I'm pleasantly surprised by the studios. I'm hoping these are well designed in the way that makes them efficient and cozy rather than cramped. And they probably will be.

    Eve

  39. #639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    I've been quite impressed by the lengths that Edgar Development has gone to reach out to the community with this development.
    What lengths are you speaking to - the lengths you're quite impressed by? I'm aware of a standard Dog&Pony meeting that was ostensibly a means for the developer to advertise - funny how the media showed up, right?

    What lengths? Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?

  40. #640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    Your personal friend, right? In what capacity are you meeting? You don't live in the area. It's not a part of downtown or within your DECL purview.

  41. #641

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Unit sizes go from around 380sqft studios to 2 and 3 bedroom units, townhouses will be around 1200sqft.

    The developer was open and honest about the project, its intentions and their desire to ensure that they address a lot of little details to make the project as good as it can be.
    Nice shoe-box size there! Do you have the sizes for other unit types? How many 2 and 3 bedrooms? What's the allotment per floor.

    Open and honest you say! Same question to you in your proxy role - your "open & honest" proxy role: "Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?"

  42. #642
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    5,245

    Default

    The project is in the Oliver community not Downtown. IanO should have stated his meeting was a private one - so as not to mislead given his name/handle are so associated with the DECL. Particularly so given he plugged the development. Has me wondering if MIA have a role (any role) in the Hendrix development.

  43. #643
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Unit sizes go from around 380sqft studios to 2 and 3 bedroom units, townhouses will be around 1200sqft.

    The developer was open and honest about the project, its intentions and their desire to ensure that they address a lot of little details to make the project as good as it can be.
    Nice shoe-box size there! Do you have the sizes for other unit types? How many 2 and 3 bedrooms? What's the allotment per floor.

    Open and honest you say! Same question to you in your proxy role - your "open & honest" proxy role: "Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?"
    Stop being so entitled. You as the community really have no right to demand changes to this project. We need the density. You are not permitted to rob us of that.

  44. #644

    Default

    Well said! Im not a downtown booster, but want it to grow. The city as a whole needs responsible growth an densification period!

  45. #645
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,170

    Default

    I think most people would agree to that. There will be many more such developments coming as the population increases.

  46. #646
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    Your personal friend, right? In what capacity are you meeting? You don't live in the area. It's not a part of downtown or within your DECL purview.
    Wow, Jeff. What's with the aggression? Did you extend a hand to meet with the developer? They aren't just going to call you you know. Your comments about the small unit size are also a bit derogatory. Off market and affordable housing is already faces the sitgma of bad attitudes toward it. No need to fling insults at housing you don't happen to personally need.

    I'm indifferent about Ian's supposed meeting, but you sound like you have a chip on your shoulder clouding your ability to be rational. Sounds like several grudges seeping through.
    Last edited by nick5150; 23-01-2014 at 10:05 PM.

  47. #647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    The project is in the Oliver community not Downtown. IanO should have stated his meeting was a private one - so as not to mislead given his name/handle are so associated with the DECL. Particularly so given he plugged the development. Has me wondering if MIA have a role (any role) in the Hendrix development.
    Clearly something is going on "behind the scenes" - that's been the case since day 1 of this thread. Shilling ain't easy, ya know!

  48. #648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AAAAE View Post
    Stop being so entitled. You as the community really have no right to demand changes to this project. We need the density. You are not permitted to rob us of that.
    Entitled? Raising personal questions and concerns, echoing community concerns - that's your entitlement?

    How entitled of you to state the community, a community, has no rights!

  49. #649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Well said! Im not a downtown booster, but want it to grow. The city as a whole needs responsible growth an densification period!
    What's your personal definition of "responsible growth"? One where the developer comes in and builds whatever it wants without regard to impacts on the adjacent community?

  50. #650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Wow, Jeff. What's with the aggression? Did you extend a hand to meet with the developer? They aren't just going to call you you know. Your comments about the small unit size are also a bit derogatory. Off market and affordable housing is already faces the sitgma of bad attitudes toward it. No need to fling insults at housing you don't happen to personally need.
    The developer (and friends) have had 2 official kicks at the can. It's own initiated Dog&Pony show and the official CofE led review. As I saw and as relayed to me, the developer has expressed no willingness to accommodate and adjust to raised concerns from the community. As for your most naive point, the (Vancouver) developer is most certainly not going to meet with individuals - well, at least not unless you're a personal friend fronting for the project!

    What's derogatory about calling 380 sq. ft. a shoebox? I've lived in a 480 sq. ft Vancouver gem until I could find something larger and actually liveable. If nothing else, try finding furniture sized to fit in that size of a unit, particularly in Edmonton. That size offering is simply another reflection of exactly what this developer appears to be all about. Maximum density at the expense of design, at the expense of impacting the adjacent community.

  51. #651
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,534

    Default

    Jeff, presenting a proposal to build a building, around some other buildings, is not a dog and pony show.

    Anyway , even if it was, what's wrong with dogs and ponies? They're pretty cute and friendly. Who doesn't like animals?

  52. #652

    Default

    This part of Oliver is a higher density location...... When a person is directly affected it is not hard to become a nimby! Behind all the aggression displayed by Jeff I understand some of his sentiments. BUT if you do not want high density move to an area like westmount/inglewood. Lots are 7500sq ft.

  53. #653
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    Your personal friend, right? In what capacity are you meeting? You don't live in the area. It's not a part of downtown or within your DECL purview.
    Oh hi Jeff.

    First time meeting him thank you very much, great guy though, very positive about Edmonton.

    I met him as a citizen of Edmonton and as an EFCL planning rep for the area, district F.

    But thanks
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  54. #654
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    The project is in the Oliver community not Downtown. IanO should have stated his meeting was a private one - so as not to mislead given his name/handle are so associated with the DECL. Particularly so given he plugged the development. Has me wondering if MIA have a role (any role) in the Hendrix development.
    Private meeting and EFCL as stated, no MIA role.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  55. #655
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Unit sizes go from around 380sqft studios to 2 and 3 bedroom units, townhouses will be around 1200sqft.

    The developer was open and honest about the project, its intentions and their desire to ensure that they address a lot of little details to make the project as good as it can be.
    Nice shoe-box size there! Do you have the sizes for other unit types? How many 2 and 3 bedrooms? What's the allotment per floor.

    Open and honest you say! Same question to you in your proxy role - your "open & honest" proxy role: "Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?"
    Great mix from 380ish to larger 2 and 3 bdrms along with 1200 sqft townhouses.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  56. #656
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Well said! Im not a downtown booster, but want it to grow. The city as a whole needs responsible growth an densification period!
    What's your personal definition of "responsible growth"? One where the developer comes in and builds whatever it wants without regard to impacts on the adjacent community?
    Impacts, you mean positive ones on the whole?
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  57. #657
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    The project is in the Oliver community not Downtown. IanO should have stated his meeting was a private one - so as not to mislead given his name/handle are so associated with the DECL. Particularly so given he plugged the development. Has me wondering if MIA have a role (any role) in the Hendrix development.
    Clearly something is going on "behind the scenes" - that's been the case since day 1 of this thread. Shilling ain't easy, ya know!
    Hardly
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  58. #658
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Updated Render with more glazing and pocket park for the community.


    (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7377/1...13a1c704_z.jpg)
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  59. #659
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Edmonton of course
    Posts
    1,188

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    The project is in the Oliver community not Downtown. IanO should have stated his meeting was a private one - so as not to mislead given his name/handle are so associated with the DECL. Particularly so given he plugged the development. Has me wondering if MIA have a role (any role) in the Hendrix development.
    Clearly something is going on "behind the scenes" - that's been the case since day 1 of this thread. Shilling ain't easy, ya know!
    Hardly
    Keep up the good work Ian O , you're the type of Edmonton booster this city needs a lot more of.
    live for happiness because without it everything seems ho hum

  60. #660
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    I've been quite impressed by the lengths that Edgar Development has gone to reach out to the community with this development.
    What lengths are you speaking to - the lengths you're quite impressed by? I'm aware of a standard Dog&Pony meeting that was ostensibly a means for the developer to advertise - funny how the media showed up, right?

    What lengths? Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?
    Dog and pony show? Ha! Thanks for my morning laugh, I needed it to wake up.

    Said meeting was not out of the norm for any sort of community engagement event regarding a project such as this. Developer went to the community with their proposal and said "here is what we're proposing for your neighbourhood and welcome your feedback into some potential improvements". There is no conceivable scenario where a company would turn their design over to a community and let them completely savage it to the point where the initial intent is lost.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  61. #661
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Updated Render with more glazing and pocket park for the community.


    (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7377/1...13a1c704_z.jpg)
    Simple but effective tweaks. Having more glazing on the N and S faces improves the design a lot. The park is great.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  62. #662
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    The rooftop amenity is awesome BTW, west side is a resident lounge, east is an outdoor rooftop patio!
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  63. #663
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Wow, Jeff. What's with the aggression? Did you extend a hand to meet with the developer? They aren't just going to call you you know. Your comments about the small unit size are also a bit derogatory. Off market and affordable housing is already faces the sitgma of bad attitudes toward it. No need to fling insults at housing you don't happen to personally need.
    The developer (and friends) have had 2 official kicks at the can. It's own initiated Dog&Pony show and the official CofE led review. As I saw and as relayed to me, the developer has expressed no willingness to accommodate and adjust to raised concerns from the community. As for your most naive point, the (Vancouver) developer is most certainly not going to meet with individuals - well, at least not unless you're a personal friend fronting for the project!

    What's derogatory about calling 380 sq. ft. a shoebox? I've lived in a 480 sq. ft Vancouver gem until I could find something larger and actually liveable. If nothing else, try finding furniture sized to fit in that size of a unit, particularly in Edmonton. That size offering is simply another reflection of exactly what this developer appears to be all about. Maximum density at the expense of design, at the expense of impacting the adjacent community.
    Frick Jeff, read a book about affordable housing.... and please never work in public relations.

  64. #664
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The rooftop amenity is awesome BTW, west side is a resident lounge, east is an outdoor rooftop patio!
    I'm glad to see the trend, at least from what i see, of amenity and gym floors moving up to the roofs in designs lately. When I was condo shopping a few years ago I was surprised how many great spaces were on the first couple floors of large buildings built in the 70's and 80 and even 90's. The views sucked. I'm a sucker for decent views though...
    Last edited by nick5150; 24-01-2014 at 09:36 AM.

  65. #665

    Default

    I like, Hopefully they keep some of the lime green. I quite liked it and is a great change from what we usually see! Getting some different colours on these buildings can do wonders to break up the skyline and also in winter when we have brown, grey, and white as our primary environmental colours a little chartreuse/lime green can do wonders!

    And by roof top amenity I hope you mean on top of the tower?!! Also what's happening with the roof top of the podium? Gardens perhaps (which would be awesome) or more traditional roofs or some sort of roof top balcony for each townhouse (which would still be really cool)??

  66. #666
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,418

    Default

    The only critique I can make here is that the park should be on the southside of the building for maximum sunshine exposure.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  67. #667
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IdriveaSubaru View Post
    I like, Hopefully they keep some of the lime green. I quite liked it and is a great change from what we usually see! Getting some different colours on these buildings can do wonders to break up the skyline and also in winter when we have brown, grey, and white as our primary environmental colours a little chartreuse/lime green can do wonders!

    And by roof top amenity I hope you mean on top of the tower?!! Also what's happening with the roof top of the podium? Gardens perhaps (which would be awesome) or more traditional roofs or some sort of roof top balcony for each townhouse (which would still be really cool)??
    Top of the tower. There will be extended patios for the 3rd floor and likely some sort of rooftop garden or planting boxes.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  68. #668
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Also, Jeff my offer still stands if you ever want to meet over a pint to chat more about both of our perspectives.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  69. #669

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    The only critique I can make here is that the park should be on the southside of the building for maximum sunshine exposure.
    I agree, but I'm guessing there is a layout reason that this might not be possible.

    Overall will be a good addition to that neighbourhood, given the amount of open and greenspace available in the area.

    What this thread highlights for me is the need to revisit or entirely redo the Oliver ARP.
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 24-01-2014 at 11:32 AM.
    www.decl.org

  70. #670
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The rooftop amenity is awesome BTW, west side is a resident lounge, east is an outdoor rooftop patio!
    Yup. Thats why this will be one of the best designed 'rental' towers around. In fact it from an amenity, design and quality perspective this will exceed many of the recent owner-occupied condo towers that have been built. Great work Edgar!

  71. #671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    Your personal friend, right? In what capacity are you meeting? You don't live in the area. It's not a part of downtown or within your DECL purview.
    First time meeting him thank you very much, great guy though, very positive about Edmonton.

    I met him as a citizen of Edmonton and as an EFCL planning rep for the area, district F.

    But thanks
    My mistake - the prior post to this (from ChrisD) reminds me of who actually, repeatedly, referred to the developer by his first name. Without checking back I improperly recalled it as being you, rather than ChrisD. Will your described "positive about Edmonton" see this Vancouver resident developer actually move to Edmonton?

  72. #672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Unit sizes go from around 380sqft studios to 2 and 3 bedroom units, townhouses will be around 1200sqft.

    The developer was open and honest about the project, its intentions and their desire to ensure that they address a lot of little details to make the project as good as it can be.
    Nice shoe-box size there! Do you have the sizes for other unit types? How many 2 and 3 bedrooms? What's the allotment per floor.

    Open and honest you say! Same question to you in your proxy role - your "open & honest" proxy role: "Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?"
    Great mix from 380ish to larger 2 and 3 bdrms along with 1200 sqft townhouses.
    "Great mix" doesn't say anything - if you know the mix, please advise. Particularly in the context of families, just how many 3 bedrooms in the proposal (separate from townhouses)?

  73. #673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Well said! Im not a downtown booster, but want it to grow. The city as a whole needs responsible growth an densification period!
    What's your personal definition of "responsible growth"? One where the developer comes in and builds whatever it wants without regard to impacts on the adjacent community?
    Impacts, you mean positive ones on the whole?
    Right. So long as, in your personal estimation, from someone not living in proximity to the proposal, your positive outweighs any negatives!

  74. #674
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    The only critique I can make here is that the park should be on the southside of the building for maximum sunshine exposure.
    I agree, but I'm guessing there is a layout reason that this might not be possible.

    Overall will be a good addition to that neighbourhood, given the amount of open and greenspace available in the area.

    What this thread highlights for me is the need to revisit or entirely redo the Oliver ARP.
    There's no room on the south side of the site as the Ross residence limits where the tower can be placed.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisD View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The rooftop amenity is awesome BTW, west side is a resident lounge, east is an outdoor rooftop patio!
    Yup. Thats why this will be one of the best designed 'rental' towers around. In fact it from an amenity, design and quality perspective this will exceed many of the recent owner-occupied condo towers that have been built. Great work Edgar!
    Yep, an excellent way of entering the market if they can pull it off.
    Last edited by ScottieA; 24-01-2014 at 01:47 PM.
    Don't feed the trolls!

  75. #675
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Meeting with the developer of the Hendrix today to get more information and insight into the project.
    Your personal friend, right? In what capacity are you meeting? You don't live in the area. It's not a part of downtown or within your DECL purview.
    First time meeting him thank you very much, great guy though, very positive about Edmonton.

    I met him as a citizen of Edmonton and as an EFCL planning rep for the area, district F.

    But thanks
    My mistake - the prior post to this (from ChrisD) reminds me of who actually, repeatedly, referred to the developer by his first name. Without checking back I improperly recalled it as being you, rather than ChrisD. Will your described "positive about Edmonton" see this Vancouver resident developer actually move to Edmonton?
    Much of his family lives here full or part time and they plan to open up an office here.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  76. #676

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Updated Render with more glazing and pocket park for the community.
    Since it appears several members have now commented on your referenced "pocket park", that area is less than half of the backyard of the heritage building lot. More to the point, cross 97ave, just a few steps away, and you have a rather ginormous park (spanning 110st-111 streets).

  77. #677
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Unit sizes go from around 380sqft studios to 2 and 3 bedroom units, townhouses will be around 1200sqft.

    The developer was open and honest about the project, its intentions and their desire to ensure that they address a lot of little details to make the project as good as it can be.
    Nice shoe-box size there! Do you have the sizes for other unit types? How many 2 and 3 bedrooms? What's the allotment per floor.

    Open and honest you say! Same question to you in your proxy role - your "open & honest" proxy role: "Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?"
    Great mix from 380ish to larger 2 and 3 bdrms along with 1200 sqft townhouses.
    "Great mix" doesn't say anything - if you know the mix, please advise. Particularly in the context of families, just how many 3 bedrooms in the proposal (separate from townhouses)?
    I don't recall all of the units and sizes, but it was a very good mix... maybe the best I have seen.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  78. #678
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Updated Render with more glazing and pocket park for the community.
    Since it appears several members have now commented on your referenced "pocket park", that area is less than half of the backyard of the heritage building lot. More to the point, cross 97ave, just a few steps away, and you have a rather ginormous park (spanning 110st-111 streets).
    Holy **** are developers damned if they do and damned if they don't.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  79. #679

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Much of his family lives here full or part time and they plan to open up an office here.
    So - I take that as a NO. This developer will not be moving from Vancouver to Edmonton. This developer will be foisting his "gem" upon the city from afar!

  80. #680
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Well said! Im not a downtown booster, but want it to grow. The city as a whole needs responsible growth an densification period!
    What's your personal definition of "responsible growth"? One where the developer comes in and builds whatever it wants without regard to impacts on the adjacent community?
    Impacts, you mean positive ones on the whole?
    Right. So long as, in your personal estimation, from someone not living in proximity to the proposal, your positive outweighs any negatives!
    I live down the street from it and while not in the immediate area, I am well aware of Grandin's situation thank you very much.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  81. #681
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Much of his family lives here full or part time and they plan to open up an office here.
    So - I take that as a NO. This developer will not be moving from Vancouver to Edmonton. This developer will be foisting his "gem" upon the city from afar!
    You are a real special type of person aren't you.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  82. #682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Updated Render with more glazing and pocket park for the community.
    Since it appears several members have now commented on your referenced "pocket park", that area is less than half of the backyard of the heritage building lot. More to the point, cross 97ave, just a few steps away, and you have a rather ginormous park (spanning 110st-111 streets).
    Holy **** are developers damned if they do and damned if they don't.
    The point was there's a massive park right across the street. The "pocket" doesn't offer anything to the community. Now, if that pocket was actually turned into a retail community offering, something the developer appears steadfast in not providing at the street-level (counter to the ARP), then that would be something new.

  83. #683
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    A publicly accessible pocket park 'offers nothing'... uh huh
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  84. #684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Much of his family lives here full or part time and they plan to open up an office here.
    So - I take that as a NO. This developer will not be moving from Vancouver to Edmonton. This developer will be foisting his "gem" upon the city from afar!
    You are a real special type of person aren't you.
    What? You danced around the question, so I answered it for you.

  85. #685

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    A publicly accessible pocket park 'offers nothing'... uh huh
    What does it offer the community? Again, the park across the street is a thousand pockets larger. And, of course, there's an even larger park just down the street in the opposite direction.

    But, again, no retail offerings at ground level - counter to the ARP. Just sayin.

  86. #686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I live down the street from it and while not in the immediate area, I am well aware of Grandin's situation thank you very much.
    You live no where near the proposal site - go shine someone else on.

  87. #687
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    The John T. Ross House will be commercial office.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  88. #688
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I live down the street from it and while not in the immediate area, I am well aware of Grandin's situation thank you very much.
    You live no where near the proposal site - go shine someone else on.
    I live on the same avenue 6 blocks east, but know the area very well as many friends live in and around it.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  89. #689

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    I've been quite impressed by the lengths that Edgar Development has gone to reach out to the community with this development.
    What lengths are you speaking to - the lengths you're quite impressed by? I'm aware of a standard Dog&Pony meeting that was ostensibly a means for the developer to advertise - funny how the media showed up, right?

    What lengths? Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?
    Dog and pony show? Ha! Thanks for my morning laugh, I needed it to wake up.

    Said meeting was not out of the norm for any sort of community engagement event regarding a project such as this. Developer went to the community with their proposal and said "here is what we're proposing for your neighbourhood and welcome your feedback into some potential improvements". There is no conceivable scenario where a company would turn their design over to a community and let them completely savage it to the point where the initial intent is lost.
    You're not answering the question put to you. Since you claim to be impressed, again, what improvements have been made in response to community feedback?

  90. #690

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I live down the street from it and while not in the immediate area, I am well aware of Grandin's situation thank you very much.
    You live no where near the proposal site - go shine someone else on.
    I live on the same avenue 6 blocks east, but know the area very well as many friends live in and around it.
    I know exactly where you live - since you've spoken of it and provided pictures of it, ad nauseum, through even the limited amount of time I've spent on this board. Don't let that ever stop you from posturing as if you live adjacent to the proposal, as if you would be personally affected and impacted by the proposl.

  91. #691

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The John T. Ross House will be commercial office.
    A "pocket park" directly adjacent to a commercial office? Oh my.

  92. #692
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    48,808

    Default

    Personally perhaps not, I am well aware of the potential impacts of this... mostly positive on the whole.

    Please do humour me with your reasons to oppose this project once again.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  93. #693

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Wow, Jeff. What's with the aggression? Did you extend a hand to meet with the developer? They aren't just going to call you you know. Your comments about the small unit size are also a bit derogatory. Off market and affordable housing is already faces the sitgma of bad attitudes toward it. No need to fling insults at housing you don't happen to personally need.
    The developer (and friends) have had 2 official kicks at the can. It's own initiated Dog&Pony show and the official CofE led review. As I saw and as relayed to me, the developer has expressed no willingness to accommodate and adjust to raised concerns from the community. As for your most naive point, the (Vancouver) developer is most certainly not going to meet with individuals - well, at least not unless you're a personal friend fronting for the project!

    What's derogatory about calling 380 sq. ft. a shoebox? I've lived in a 480 sq. ft Vancouver gem until I could find something larger and actually liveable. If nothing else, try finding furniture sized to fit in that size of a unit, particularly in Edmonton. That size offering is simply another reflection of exactly what this developer appears to be all about. Maximum density at the expense of design, at the expense of impacting the adjacent community.
    Frick Jeff, read a book about affordable housing.... and please never work in public relations.
    Pardon! Have you personal experience in living in a 380sq.ft sized shoebox?

  94. #694
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The John T. Ross House will be commercial office.
    A "pocket park" directly adjacent to a commercial office? Oh my.
    Then it will be a perfect place for the office workers to have lunch. Why are you opposed to it?

    Eve

  95. #695
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    I've been quite impressed by the lengths that Edgar Development has gone to reach out to the community with this development.
    What lengths are you speaking to - the lengths you're quite impressed by? I'm aware of a standard Dog&Pony meeting that was ostensibly a means for the developer to advertise - funny how the media showed up, right?

    What lengths? Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?
    Dog and pony show? Ha! Thanks for my morning laugh, I needed it to wake up.

    Said meeting was not out of the norm for any sort of community engagement event regarding a project such as this. Developer went to the community with their proposal and said "here is what we're proposing for your neighbourhood and welcome your feedback into some potential improvements". There is no conceivable scenario where a company would turn their design over to a community and let them completely savage it to the point where the initial intent is lost.
    You're not answering the question put to you. Since you claim to be impressed, again, what improvements have been made in response to community feedback?
    You noticed that didn't you?

    How does it feel to have one of your own tactics used against you in such a way?

    Firstly, the developer did not need to call an information session prior to the CoE-run one. Secondly, let me see: pocket park & improvements in design. Thirdly, the developed doesn't need to change the so-called "intent" of this project because of people like you. I'm assuming you're referring to that dreaded rental aspect of this project again...
    Don't feed the trolls!

  96. #696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Personally perhaps not, I am well aware of the potential impacts of this... mostly positive on the whole.

    Please do humour me with your reasons to oppose this project once again.
    Perhaps you could do the same in terms of your positive impacts statement; in terms of what this proposal offers the community - the adjacent affected community. For a start... along with other concerns previously raised by others throughout this thread:

    - Improperly sized/scaled in relation to the area. Not just slightly out of proportion; effectively twice the size of anything else. There is density gain/improvement and then there is this proposal which goes well beyond the status-quo.

    - Until you advise otherwise, in spite of your unsubstantiated claims of a 'good unit mix', the proposal does not appear to accommodate a rounded offering to complement an appropriate diversity, particularly family orientated. Clearly, with your confirmation that the intent is full rental, any suggestion of positioning for the long-term resident doesn't exist within this proposal. The proposal appears skewed toward students and seeks to leverage the position between UofA, NAIT & GM.

    - It gives nothing back to the community at large. Again, as I understand, the developer still refuses to provide any accommodation for street level retail - again, counter to the ARP.

    - As much as the usual suspects around here wish to denigrate any raised concerns over parking, this proposal will dramatically impact street level parking in the already seriously compromised vicinity.

  97. #697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The John T. Ross House will be commercial office.
    A "pocket park" directly adjacent to a commercial office? Oh my.
    Then it will be a perfect place for the office workers to have lunch. Why are you opposed to it?

    Eve
    Who said I'm opposed to it? I simply pointed out the ridiculous scale of it in relation to the park... 20 metres away! Of course, shortly after it was mentioned, there were posts that jumped on it, as if it offers anything of significance. Again, it certainly doesn't offer anything to the community at large. Again, more to the point, one you saw fit to ignore, that space could be turned into a retail offering for the community.

  98. #698

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieA View Post
    I've been quite impressed by the lengths that Edgar Development has gone to reach out to the community with this development.
    What lengths are you speaking to - the lengths you're quite impressed by? I'm aware of a standard Dog&Pony meeting that was ostensibly a means for the developer to advertise - funny how the media showed up, right?

    What lengths? Are you aware if the developer has changed the design/intent in regards to concerns raised by "the community"?
    Dog and pony show? Ha! Thanks for my morning laugh, I needed it to wake up.

    Said meeting was not out of the norm for any sort of community engagement event regarding a project such as this. Developer went to the community with their proposal and said "here is what we're proposing for your neighbourhood and welcome your feedback into some potential improvements". There is no conceivable scenario where a company would turn their design over to a community and let them completely savage it to the point where the initial intent is lost.
    You're not answering the question put to you. Since you claim to be impressed, again, what improvements have been made in response to community feedback?
    You noticed that didn't you?

    How does it feel to have one of your own tactics used against you in such a way?

    Firstly, the developer did not need to call an information session prior to the CoE-run one. Secondly, let me see: pocket park & improvements in design. Thirdly, the developed doesn't need to change the so-called "intent" of this project because of people like you. I'm assuming you're referring to that dreaded rental aspect of this project again...
    P*** off - you're the same A******, one of a couple here, that tried to label me as being against renters.

    Of course, you can't actually answer the question put to you. Your claimed impressed was prior to IanO's latest update from today. Your lameassed response includes references to today's IanO's comments. Timing is everything, right?

  99. #699
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    My mistake - the prior post to this (from ChrisD) reminds me of who actually, repeatedly, referred to the developer by his first name. Without checking back I improperly recalled it as being you, rather than ChrisD. Will your described "positive about Edmonton" see this Vancouver resident developer actually move to Edmonton?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff
    So - I take that as a NO. This developer will not be moving from Vancouver to Edmonton. This developer will be foisting his "gem" upon the city from afar!
    What difference does it make where the developer lives? He grew up in Edmonton and at some point moved to Vancouver, where he's built several projects. Does he have to move back and forth between cities so that he is always residing in the city in which he is currently building something? You're being ridiculous. This line of questioning has absolutely no bearing on the merits of the development.

  100. #700
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Wow, Jeff. What's with the aggression? Did you extend a hand to meet with the developer? They aren't just going to call you you know. Your comments about the small unit size are also a bit derogatory. Off market and affordable housing is already faces the sitgma of bad attitudes toward it. No need to fling insults at housing you don't happen to personally need.
    The developer (and friends) have had 2 official kicks at the can. It's own initiated Dog&Pony show and the official CofE led review. As I saw and as relayed to me, the developer has expressed no willingness to accommodate and adjust to raised concerns from the community. As for your most naive point, the (Vancouver) developer is most certainly not going to meet with individuals - well, at least not unless you're a personal friend fronting for the project!

    What's derogatory about calling 380 sq. ft. a shoebox? I've lived in a 480 sq. ft Vancouver gem until I could find something larger and actually liveable. If nothing else, try finding furniture sized to fit in that size of a unit, particularly in Edmonton. That size offering is simply another reflection of exactly what this developer appears to be all about. Maximum density at the expense of design, at the expense of impacting the adjacent community.
    Frick Jeff, read a book about affordable housing.... and please never work in public relations.
    Pardon! Have you personal experience in living in a 380sq.ft sized shoebox?
    You missed my point. Social, off-market, low income... whatever it might be branded housing is not designed for you! Or a family of 4. It is designed to house people who need it. Until you get that difference your going to come of as a smug entitled noise maker.

    Not that it matters, but yes I live in a 445sqf place now and it's rad. Location is awesome and big windows and ceilings make it quite airy. I paid a pittance to buy it almost outright, which helps as a graduate student to afford 12k a year tuition and have enough left to put into RRSP and savings. I now make more money and could afford to move up, but don't want to even though I am approved for oddles more.
    Last edited by nick5150; 24-01-2014 at 02:59 PM.

Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •