Edmonton Construction 11 (November 2011)

[BLACK STAR]

Interesting...........

Mr. Jerry

I am writing in response to your email of May 8, 2012 to members of City Council regarding the Mayfair North and South development proposals.

In regard to the Five Corners development (Corners Towers One and Two by GMH Architects), located at intersection of Jasper Avenue and 95 Street, this development proposal has been presented to the Edmonton Design Committee (EDC) on March 6, 2012, and again on May 15, 2012. On both occasions the EDC recommended non-support of the project, requiring additional information. Also, to-date no development permit application has been made.

In regard to the Mayfair North project, development permits were issued for both Mayfair South (10037 - 109 Street NW) and Mayfair north (10803 - Jasper Avenue NW) in August of 2009. The Mayfair South project is nearing completion, and the Mayfair North project proceeded as far as demolition of the existing building.

The development review of both of these projects followed due process including review by the EDC. The EDC in their letter of January 21, 2009 recommended support of both projects with conditions. In addition, the development decisions of both projects were Class B Discretionary approvals that required notification of the adjacent property owners. Both permits cleared the notification periods with no appeals.

On the Mayfair North site, a new development application has been made (project 83209561-007 was submitted on March 6, 2012) to revise the project (to reduce the number of Dwellings to 192 from 471 and to reduce the number of storeys to 10 from 16). This application also went before the EDC on March 6, 2012 and received support with conditions. This new development application is still under technical review and no decision has been made. Like the original permit, this application is a Class B Discretionary development and any approval would be subject to the right of appeal.

A copy of your email concerning the project's architecture has been attached to the current development file. Should the project be approved, you will have the opportunity at that time to make an appeal to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board.

Finally, for your reference, the EDC’s agendas and minutes are available on the City website at the following link:

http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...d-agendas.aspx
Should you have any questions regarding these development proposals, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards,

Peter Odinga, Senior Development Planner, Central Area
Sustainable Development, Current Planning Branch

[240glt]

A copy of your email concerning the project's architecture has been attached to the current development file. Should the project be approved, you will have the opportunity at that time to make an appeal to the Subdivision and Development Appeal Board.

I wonder what variances are being sought... You should spend the $72 and invest the 3 hours of your time just to get a first-hand experience of what a joke that process really is

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by 240glt

I wonder what variances are being sought... You should spend the $72 and invest the 3 hours of your time just to get a first-hand experience of what a joke that process really is

Mr.Jerry

240's experiences should not thwart your ambitions here, for SDAB can be quite productive and effective. That said, be sure to know who can appeal, on what grounds and what outcome this might have.

Cheers

Cold

[EdmTrekker]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Mr.Jerry

240's experiences should not thwart your ambitions here, for SDAB can be quite productive and effective. That said, be sure to know who can appeal, on what grounds and what outcome this might have.

Cheers

Cold

I would have thought the Downtown Community League would have this on its action list. Perhaps development and comment on it is not one of its mandates?

[240glt]

Dear Jerry,

Ian's continuous denials of the failures of the processes, despite embarassing court judgements to the contrary, should implore you to question why the board makes promises in it's literature that it cannot actually rule on, and why it is incapable of making any ruling above and beyond simple zoning matters.

Sincerely,

A seasoned SDAB atttendee

(AKA 240glt)

[BLACK STAR]

Ohhh the ball is in play! Now only if the ball has enough to get across the goal line and make a positive change to this ridiculous design proposal is another thing!

P.S I have found from years of personal and business experience...people or committees regardless of mandates policies or zoning can be influenced by the right kind of pressure at the right time by persistent individuals!

[240glt]

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

I would have thought the Downtown Community League would have this on its action list. Perhaps development and comment on it is not one of its mandates?

Hmm.... Cold is the Community development director for DECL, and a board member of the SDAB... and even with that conflict of interest cannot manage to influence the developers on this project. That should tell you all you need to know

[240glt]

Anyways.... some permits- lots of central row houses

Job No 126292002-001: To construct 38 dwelling units an Apartment Housing with an Under ground parkade.(Windsor Park)
11702 - 87 AVENUE NW
Plan 9221629 Blk 24 Lot 12A
BRINSMEAD KENNEDY ARCHITECTURE

Job No 124700522-002: To construct 3 dwellings of Stacked Row housing
11710 - 92 STREET NW
Plan RN43A Blk 47 Lot 28
BLAISCO LEDERSHIP SERVICES LTD
ALBERTA AVENUE

Job No 125983879-001: To construct 3 Dwellings of Row Housing with an Accessory Building (detached garage) and to demolish an existing single detached house and a rear detached garage.
7925 - 81 AVENUE NW
Plan 1738HW Blk 45 Lot 24
TECH VIEW HOMES LTD.
KING EDWARD PARK

Job No 125950871-001: To construct a 3-Dwelling Stacked Rowhousing units .
9662 - 72 AVENUE NW
Plan 426HW Blk 29 Lot Z
ALEX AND ALAN DOMNICH
RITCHIE

[Coldrsx]

Not sure how that is a conflict of interest exactly, for we disclose any potential conflicts at each hearing and it is a CITIZEN BOARD.

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by EdmTrekker

I would have thought the Downtown Community League would have this on its action list. Perhaps development and comment on it is not one of its mandates?

Trust me, it (along with others) is on our radar screen. We have had discussions directly (in person) with Procura on it.

[CMD UW]

Originally Posted by 240glt

^ It's funny.. the building still looks mostly empty.

Having the ground level devoid of any activity doesn't help, though

It still is mostly empty. Stantec has floors 2 and 3 and the United Nurses are on 6 and 7. That leaves floors 5, 8, 9 and 10 vacant.

[Coldrsx]

For you 240, for you.

[240glt]

^ Yes I've read the MGA one or two, or eight or so times, and no, the SDAB still does not have the ability to rule on anything above and beyond simple zoning matters becuase questions of "enjoyment" and such are too subjective and are therefore are vulnerable to influence, bad and inconsiderate judgements. Rulings will almost always fall back to zoning, becuase that's the only real guideline that the SDAB has.

The MGA itself is a flawed document. One of your senior members has told me that himself.

[CMD UW]

Originally Posted by 240glt

Dear Jerry,

Ian's continuous denials of the failures of the processes, despite embarassing court judgements to the contrary, should implore you to question why the board makes promises in it's literature that it cannot actually rule on, and why it is incapable of making any ruling above and beyond simple zoning matters.

Sincerely,

A seasoned SDAB atttendee

(AKA 240glt)

Well this paragraph is a bunch of BS. Yes, there are occasions where the board may have rendered a decision that was NOT within its mandate and the courts have had to intervene. The system is designed for that. But the SDAB is an important body that fulfills an important decision-making role.

[CMD UW]

Originally Posted by 240glt

^ Yes I've read the MGA one or two, or eight or so times, and no, the SDAB still does not have the ability to rule on anything above and beyond simple zoning matters becuase questions of "enjoyment" and such are too subjective and are therefore are vulnerable to influence, bad and inconsiderate judgements. Rulings will almost always fall back to zonig, becuase that's the only real guideline that the SDAB has.

The MGA itself is flawed.

While I would agree that the MGA needs to updated, it is far from being a 'flawed' piece of legislation. Where do you come up with this???

[Coldrsx]

'Yes, there are occasions where the board may have rendered a decision that was NOT within its mandate and the courts have had to intervene. The system is designed for that.'

This

[240glt]

^^ You just have to read the contradicting articles. Any lawyer would jump for joy at being able to litigate based on that document. It's swiss cheese.

I'm very worried that you'd sluff off bad decisions by the SDAB as something that was designed into the "system". In the time that I've been involved with these matters I have run into many individuals who have gone to the SDAB with unsatisfactory results. Myself, I have been lucky, and we keep meticulous documentation so we have been quite successful, but I have seen the SDAB hand an appellants' ass to them on a cracker becuase the appellant was to appeal based on some of the 'soft' clauses in the MGA

I would care a lot less if the SDAB was not so deceptive, and was honest about what they can & can't do. And in fact, the last time I talked with one of the administrators (can't remember her name) she outright admitted to me that I was basically correct. We are working with some people on that.

[CMD UW]

Originally Posted by 240glt

^^ You just have to read the contradicting articles. Any lawyer would jump for joy at being able to litigate based on that document. It's swiss cheese.

I'm very worried that you'd sluff off bad decisions by the SDAB as something that was designed into the "system". In the time that I've been involved with these matters I have run into many individuals who have gone to the SDAB with unsatisfactory results. Myself, I have been lucky, and we keep meticulous documentation so we have been quite successful, but I have seen the SDAB hand an appellants' ass to them on a cracker becuase the appellant was to appeal based on some of the 'soft' clauses in the MGA

I would care a lot less if the SDAB was not so deceptive, and was honest about what they can & can't do. We are working with some people on that.

Define a 'bad' decision. You have to ask yourself how many 'bad' decisions have been successfully appealed in court. What are the proportion of SDAB decisions that are taken to court.

All legislation can be interpreted differently. This is why we have lawyers.

[Coldrsx]

Hotel project called a cornerstone of Edmonton’s inner city revival


BY BILL MAH, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COM JUNE 29, 2012 3:02 PM



STORYPHOTOS ( 6 )



An artist’s conception of a new 12-storey hotel to be built in the Quarters.
Photograph by: Rick MacWilliam , edmontonjournal.com
EDMONTON - On a dusty lot, across the street from a minimum-security correctional facility, derelict buildings and a former peep show, developer Prem Singhmar broke ground Friday for an upscale $45-million hotel.

The hotel is the first to be built in central Edmonton in decades, but more importantly, supporters call it a catalyst project for the long-awaited Quarters redevelopment of the inner-city area east of downtown.

“It’s taken a long time to come up with a project that is worthy of developing in this neighbourhood,” Mayor Stephen Mandel said.

He called it a cornerstone project that will spur development in the area. Already, the city is working with the arts community to build an artists habitat nearby and with the Chinese community on other projects, he said.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...227/story.html

[EdmTrekker]

deleted intentionally