Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 135

Thread: Capilano Library | Planned

  1. #1

    Default Capilano Library | Planned

    Edmonton continues to maintain it's stellar reputation for openness and change:

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...237/story.html

    Residents throw the book at proposed Capilano library location

    BY GORDON KENT, EDMONTON JOURNAL APRIL 23, 2015 12:00 PM

    EDMONTON - A group of Terrace Heights residents is upset with plans to build a library on green space across the street from their homes.
    ...
    But Joanne Groot worries the facility will bring noise, traffic and troublemakers into what she says is a peaceful community.
    ...

  2. #2
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    I'm siding with the home owners on this one. The location on 101 Ave makes way more sense. It's more visible, it's on a busy road, there's lots of space there, it doesn't require changing a one-way road into two-way, and the reasons for it not there are very, very weak.

    But architects felt there wasnít enough room for parking close to the entrance and it would be overshadowed by a nearby apartment, Land says.
    Not enough room for parking close to the entrance? Overshadowed by a nearby apartment? Seriously?! Keep in mind that to get to the current location you have to park your car, walk into the mall entrance, go through part of the mall and then ride up an ancient elevator to the second floor. How is "not enough parking near the entrance" a valid reason for moving it onto a residential street?

    The ravine location should let patrons enjoy nature all year, and might allow the treed area to be extended, Land says.
    Excellent. How about building it where the fire station was and extend the treed area there? Win, win.

    The public consultation on this sounds pretty horrible. It's nice that they posted information at the library and on social media, but they didn't target the people in the neighbourhood at all. I'm going to be affected by the 83 Ave bike lane and I've received a number of flyers in my mailbox telling me about public consultations regarding the route. These people should have been shown the same respect.

    I normally really enjoy Gordon Kent's articles, but this one made the home owners sound a bit nutty when they had some very valid concerns.

    Here's a photo of the area, including the proposed location (roughly), and the former location of the firehall:

    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  3. #3
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    Who knew those residents represented all of Edmonton...
    be offended! figure out why later...

  4. #4

    Default

    It would probably be cheaper to give everyone in the City an IPAD rather than keep buliding libraries (oh, but the homeless might get cold then).

  5. #5

    Default

    Granted, maybe it's not the best location for the library, I don't know. The article may be biased, but I certainly did not get the impression it was for the best of the library that the residents don't want it there. Yes, they sound like a bunch of nuts.

    They should sell the land and put condos up instead. The residents will love that I'm sure.

  6. #6
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    Their issue is that the city had originally targeted a better location (the former fire station site), but then moved it to a residential street without doing any consultation. Moving the location creates issues for them, and they're speaking out about it.

    I don't live anywhere near the location being proposed, and I'm not affected by it, or know anyone who is, I just don't like that we constantly scream "NIMBY!!!" when people may have some very valid points. There is a much better location available to them, and the reasons for not using that location are extremely weak.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  7. #7
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    YEG: Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley | YLW: Shannon Lake | PHX: San Tan Valley
    Posts
    803

    Default

    Another case of living near something that is not currently in use, yet is zoned for other uses - it's all public knowledge and easily available - yes even if you've lived there for 50 years. Would they prefer the farm, campsite, EMS/police station, or carnival instead?

    http://webdocs.edmonton.ca/zoningbyl...?SearchFile=(A)

    540 (A) Metropolitan Recreation Zone

    540.1 General Purpose

    The purpose of this Zone is to preserve natural areas and parkland along the river, creeks, ravines and other designated areas for active and passive recreational uses and environment protection in conformance with Plan Edmonton and the North Saskatchewan River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan.

    540.2 Permitted Uses

    Farms
    Minor Home Based Business
    Public Park
    Fascia On-premises Signs
    Projecting On-premises Signs
    Temporary On-premises Signs

    540.3 Discretionary Uses

    Carnivals
    Child Care Services
    Community Recreation Services
    Exhibition and Convention Facilities
    Greenhouses, Plant Nurseries and Market Gardens
    Indoor Participant Recreation Services
    Major Home Based Business
    Minor Impact Utility Services
    Natural Resource Development
    Natural Science Exhibits
    Outdoor Participant Recreation Services
    Protective and Emergency Services
    Public Libraries and Cultural Exhibits
    Single Detached Dwelling
    Spectator Entertainment Establishments
    Spectator Sports Establishments
    Tourist Campsites
    Freestanding On-premises Signs

  8. #8

    Default

    First, can we change the thread title to "Capilano Library | Planned" so we can follow it?

    Second, I agree they are being NIMBY's, however, it is a rather stupid location. I don't know who owns all the vacant land in the area, but this seems to be the worst location of all available. What's wrong with the big empty patch right on 101 Ave? Or even better, why not across the ravine next to the skatepark? There's already lights at the end of (what I assume is) 98A Ave.

    I'm so confused by the city's location decision.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  9. #9

    Default

    I guess there are two sides to this story. The Journal states that:

    EDMONTON - A group of Terrace Heights residents is upset with plans to build a library on green space across the street from their homes.

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...237/story.html

    Having looked at the map I can see why a handful of people would be ticked off at a building being built were they now look onto a field with trees in the distance. Then again, this handful of people do not constitute a whole neighborhood. They just do not want to loose their view and are trying hard to not be NIMBY's but they are coming across just like that. Things like this happen all the time and most people have to suck it up. There are no guarantees in life.
    Then you have the argument that it should be built were the old fire hall used to be (it's also a good argument) as it has better access. The architect's reason for it not being built on the old fire hall site are rather weak also.
    The people opposing it are definitely NIMBY's but they do have a good argument about the old fire hall.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  10. #10
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    The old fire hall appears to be a much better site. You don't need to put a facility like this off on a side street where it's out of sight. It should be on 101Ave. These people are right.

  11. #11

    Default

    I know the location well and access from the east, south and southwest is terrible. Put it 100 meters north and watch the nimbyism disappear. In terms of location, location, location, it fails 3 times.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  12. #12

    Default

    There was one guy who commented in the Journal that if the library does go back to the site where the fire hall is located they might get something worse on the site they are against. If that land is up for sale or development they might wish they had took the library.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  13. #13
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    I think the main problem here is that the city lied to residents three years ago when they demolished the fire hall and told them that the whole package was being retained as green space with trees, benches, lighting and pathways added, then failed miserably in their consultation / information process on the library

    It's easy and lazy to call people NIMBY's without knowing all the facts
    Parkdale

  14. #14

    Default

    ^Please provide links so we can look up the facts.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  15. #15
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    YEG: Alberta Avenue, Boyle Street, McCauley | YLW: Shannon Lake | PHX: San Tan Valley
    Posts
    803

    Default

    The City - any City is not unlike a real estate agent. They'll spoon feed you best case scenarios of developments etc

    But good practice is until it's built, it's not a reality, and you have to go by the worst possible land use on a zoning of something. Kind of like the rub and tugs that keep getting approved in McCauley. Wish we got a library.

  16. #16
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    I'm hoping they pay attention to how transit riders are going to get there (and it doesn't seem they are).

    I joined a book club last winter at the Lois Hole and getting from the bus stop to the door was like taking my life in my hands. Either take controlled intersection and cross pasture, or get closer and cross busy uncontrolled road and then a very long sidewalk. I don't think it was maintained in the winter either because the assumption is you will *drive* to that library.

    Eve

  17. #17
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    ^^^Look it up yourself. I have very good friends who live adjacent to the green space, i know the facts. They are not opposed to the library fwiw, but upset with the poor city process and lack of communication

    Eve, the better location, right off 101ave is 30 feet from the #1

    That is the location residents prefer
    Parkdale

  18. #18

    Default

    The library isn't in the 100% most optimal location. Boo hoo, how horrible.

    It's reasonable to engage the city about it, reasonable to expect a consultation process, has it really been as bad as claimed? However I'd be distancing myself from the nutjobs going on about their view and dog walks. Ultimately, whatever happens, your community is getting a library and that's hardly a bad thing.
    Last edited by Snake Eyes; 23-04-2015 at 06:38 PM.

  19. #19
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    You have to understand how interviews are conducted. They probably spoke for 10-15 minutes and the reporter took a few pieces of what they sad and put it in an article, and who knows if the quotes are even correct (yes, I was misquoted in a Journal article years ago).

    I like Gordon Kent, but I don't think he did a very good job with this article.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  20. #20

    Default

    It's very unfortunate that a reasonable point got lost in a lot of noise.

    Ultimately, whatever location it ends up being in it's not going to be the end of the world.

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^^^Look it up yourself. I have very good friends who live adjacent to the green space, i know the facts. They are not opposed to the library fwiw, but upset with the poor city process and lack of communication

    Eve, the better location, right off 101ave is 30 feet from the #1

    That is the location residents prefer
    How things work on forums is that the person spouting 'the facts' normally has to provide the links to those 'facts'. Very good friends is not considered a viable source on a forum so I'll not believe those 'facts' until I see them from a viable source.
    From my own perspective I think this library should go where the old fire hall used to be. As for the good friends of yours and others living directly opposite the new proposed site. It seems all of a sudden they have become Eco Warriors, protectionist of the land, let's keep the land free for the deer and the buffalo to roam. Let's not have too much traffic down our street when we are used to peace and quite, yadda, yadda, yadda. If it were not for the fact that the fire hall site is the best alternative what these people are are NIMBY's. They don't want the library there because it will spoil their view. Even if the C of E had engaged them all the way it would still be their stance.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    ^ this is Connect2Edmonton. Get serious. I could care less if you don't believe me

    And ftr, as someone who came from a neighbourhood that had far greater issues to deal with than a library, I do have little sympathy for those who're complaining about riff-raff and traffic

    But that's not why many of them are complaining about, and you don't know what you're talking about
    Parkdale

  23. #23

    Default

    ^Oh getting testy because some one asked you to supply facts and not hearsay. What's C 2 E coming to. People on this forum asking for facts tsk. tsk. How uppity of them.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  24. #24

    Default

    One question. Why could they not build it on the land where the old fire hall stood on 101st ave a 120 meters to the north? Or is that where the new freeway is going thru?
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  25. #25

    Default

    Oh, Good Lawd, a freeway. The blue haired NIMBY's will be livid. I should imagine now that they are all Eco Warriors Greenpeace will be seeing a surge in donations.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  26. #26
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    It won't be nearly as fervent as some of the discussion about the colours and materials of building exteriors we have around here.

    I don't see the discussion about a better site for the library to be out of order. A library is a public resource and should be useful for the public (including transit riders like myself).

    I think there is a bit of a grieving period that happens when open space that one used to enjoy, especially if it hosts wildlife, is going to give way to development. I've gone through that myself even though I had no right to expect a particular apartment view in perpetuity. Eventually it will settle down.

    Eve

  27. #27
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    One question. Why could they not build it on the land where the old fire hall stood on 101st ave a 120 meters to the north? Or is that where the new freeway is going thru?
    My interpretation from the article is that the Architect who is/was involved thought that the fireball site would be an insufficient stage for his masterwork, as there would be an unsightly aging apartment building in the way of some of the best library viewing angles. Since that site was unable to contain the glorious manifestation of his superior creativity, the current proposed site off the main street was proposed. It's an ideal pastoral location where Frank Lloyd Wright can be channeled more effectively. Also, being away from the main street of the neighbourhood makes it less likely to be polluted by the kind of people that you just don't put in renders if you expect your design to win a prize.

  28. #28
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    And I expect an ungainly old lady getting off a bus isn't the sort of thing you like to put in prize-winning renders.

    Eve
    (readying her protest placard )

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    One question. Why could they not build it on the land where the old fire hall stood on 101st ave a 120 meters to the north? Or is that where the new freeway is going thru?
    My interpretation from the article is that the Architect who is/was involved thought that the fireball site would be an insufficient stage for his masterwork, as there would be an unsightly aging apartment building in the way of some of the best library viewing angles. Since that site was unable to contain the glorious manifestation of his superior creativity, the current proposed site off the main street was proposed. It's an ideal pastoral location where Frank Lloyd Wright can be channeled more effectively. Also, being away from the main street of the neighbourhood makes it less likely to be polluted by the kind of people that you just don't put in renders if you expect your design to win a prize.
    Building it where the architect has designed it to be built is not all that bad of an idea. Far more people will be able to enjoy the ravine from the library windows than the handful of people it will effect that live on the street. For the people who live on the street it's not their private ravine. The building is going to take up a partial place on that piece of land, the ravine is still going to be there.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  30. #30

    Default

    Looking at it from Google satellite view it looks like a field could hold a building on it. If it can be build without cutting down any of the trees and minimal impact on the wildlife why can't the library patrons not enjoy the view of the ravine.

    https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.53941.../data=!3m1!1e3
    Last edited by Gemini; 23-04-2015 at 11:19 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  31. #31
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Because they could enjoy a view of the ravine* from the firehall site, yet be in a place that's on the main street of the neighbourhood, super- accessible for transit users, in a building with a hope of being a visible heart of the community, and not just in a corner of an under-used park.

    *The ravine in this location is a low spot with trees, not a dramatic gorge.

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Looking at it from Google satellite view it looks like a field could hold a building on it. If it can be build without cutting down any of the trees and minimal impact on the wildlife why can't the library patrons not enjoy the view of the ravine.

    https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.53941.../data=!3m1!1e3
    We know the site. No doubt that the library will require that they remove trees and encroach into the shallow ravine. That is not the core of the concerns. It is a greenfield site on a one way residential street that has limited access and already has a church across the street that creates street parking issues. Lack of snow plowing on the street makes the site poorly accessible to seniors and the handicapped.

    120 meters away there is a brownfield site that the city owns that is directly on a well maintained arterial road that the City Administration refuses to consider. This is the intransigence that people have issues with. The Administration comes in with a preconceived plan and hold public meetings that are a one way lecture. The only input they want on the plan is what color of the brick and whee the trees go. They are literally insulted by the suggestion that they move the site a block over onto another site the City owns. Other suggestions are to put it beside the Capilano skateboard park or in Capilano mall or on the NW corner of 50th street and 101st. The community wants a library. Just in the right and accessible location.

    Instead, concerned taxpayers are labeled as NIMBY rather than listening to their legitimate concerns. I am surprised that the residents are not labeled terrorists who frighten the Administration and wreck their vision of what the community must accept.

    Makes one wonder what plans the City Administration has for the old Fire Hall site? Possible location of a Recycling Depot perhaps?
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 24-04-2015 at 08:49 AM. Reason: spelling
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  33. #33
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    ^ bingo
    Parkdale

  34. #34

    Default

    Looks like the perfect site to me...

    https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.54120...2AXXhWnxdQ!2e0

    Maybe put a bus bay right in front. No need to change the one way road, just use it to exit the library.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  35. #35
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    Makes infinitely more sense to put it there than tucked away at the back of the open area

    If anyone's at fault here it's the city for once again failing in their processes

    Lol.. And it's also clear that twitter is a breeding ground for stupidity
    Last edited by 240GLT; 24-04-2015 at 09:54 AM.
    Parkdale

  36. #36

    Default

    Keep in mind we're talking about a small community library and the only people who will be using this facility with any frequency are neighborhood residents. The other location was perfect, fine, it will be perfect for something else then too.

    The only lesson I think the city will get out of this is don't at all try to make brown space and undeveloped land zoned for other uses look nice, because the neghborhood might treat it like a neighborhood park when it isn't.

  37. #37
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    ^ Have you even been there ? They did not remediate the fire hall site, it still looks like a lot where a building once stood. complete with broken concrete and remenants of the parking apron. The city said years ago that they were going to remediate and landscape the site, which they never did. That's where residents want the library to go.

    The site where the library is proposed is tucked towards the back of the site, on land that has always been grass, much further from transit on a 1 way residential street.

    I cannot fathom why it is so difficult to understand the real issue here
    Last edited by 240GLT; 24-04-2015 at 10:17 AM.
    Parkdale

  38. #38
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    Also, whether or not it is a small community library, the events that are held there are often attended by people across the city. I mentioned the book club I tried to join at the Lois Hole which I have a hard time attending because of the lack of maintained paths in the winter.

    Eve

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Oh, Good Lawd, a freeway. The blue haired NIMBY's will be livid. I should imagine now that they are all Eco Warriors Greenpeace will be seeing a surge in donations.
    Yeah, they're all suddenly Eco-warriors and also suddenly concerned that the library might not get enough visibility and the poor transit commuters, all three of them, will have to walk a couple hundred yards.

  40. #40
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    LOL. And C2E once again proves to be a breeding ground for stupidity as well
    Parkdale

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    Also, whether or not it is a small community library, the events that are held there are often attended by people across the city. I mentioned the book club I tried to join at the Lois Hole which I have a hard time attending because of the lack of maintained paths in the winter.

    Eve
    Ok, but it's hardly a mass amount of transit users using it everday. It's fine to be concerned about these things, including the location. The library knew about meetings and had notices up. Did the community league know?

  42. #42
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    Community league? How would I know that? I don't even know what my own community league is up to.

    Eve

  43. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    Community league? How would I know that? I don't even know what my own community league is up to.

    Eve
    Neither do I, but I wouldn't be screaming if they built a library across from the street from me either.

  44. #44

    Default

    Snarky reply to snarky comment removed.
    Last edited by Snake Eyes; 24-04-2015 at 10:33 AM.

  45. #45
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    Neither would I and I don't think that this community is worried about the fact that it is a library. But wouldn't you be a little irritated if they built it in such a way that you had to navigate snow banks if you wanted to *walk* there?

    Eve

  46. #46
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    People here in C2E claim to want to promote active transportation, but then you want to place buildings in such a way that only drivers find them handy.

    Eve

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    Neither would I and I don't think that this community is worried about the fact that it is a library. But wouldn't you be a little irritated if they built it in such a way that you had to navigate snow banks if you wanted to *walk* there?

    Eve
    Yes, of course. The city should be building these facilities in line with their complete streets guidelines. This is a valid concern that should be brought up during community consultation processes. Maybe the community consultation process really was that bad. At least they got a new one.

  48. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^ Have you even been there ? They did not remediate the fire hall site, it still looks like a lot where a building once stood. complete with broken concrete and remenants of the parking apron. The city said years ago that they were going to remediate and landscape the site, which they never did. That's where residents want the library to go.

    The site where the library is proposed is tucked towards the back of the site, on land that has always been grass, much further from transit on a 1 way residential street.

    I cannot fathom why it is so difficult to understand the real issue here
    Why did the library and the community league not speak up about it? Has there not been consultation with them at all?

  49. #49
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    ^ probably because:

    1) Not everyone is, or wants to be involved in their community league.

    2) In typical fashion, the city came to the community with stamped, signed drawings and said "here's what you're getting! What color do you want the benches in front to be ?"

    3) From the sounds of things, the most direclty affected residents didn't even get notice of the consultation, which has also been a big challenge for the city
    Parkdale

  50. #50

    Default

    The old firehall site is the perfect location, from what I can see. Why was it not chosen? Any valid reasons given? The ones given in the journal article are BS.

  51. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 240GLT View Post
    ^ probably because:

    1) Not everyone is, or wants to be involved in their community league.

    2) In typical fashion, the city came to the community with stamped, signed drawings and said "here's what you're getting! What color do you want the benches in front to be ?"

    3) From the sounds of things, the most direclty affected residents didn't even get notice of the consultation, which has also been a big challenge for the city
    4) And because many community leagues are not set up to tackle community planning and zoning issues and don't think it is is their mandate.

    5) in contrast, the CEO insists that the community league is THE ONLY stakeholder in many community planning issues

    6) Community leagues are often only focused on sports and recreation programs. CL's rubber stamp CEO plans without consulting or informing the community and approve them at poorly attended meetings and move onto the next order of business, the need for new volleyball nets...

    7) most residents are not even aware where their community league is or does and have never been to a single meeting.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 24-04-2015 at 01:52 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    4) And because many community leagues are not set up to tackle community planning and zoning issues and don't think it is is their mandate.
    You mean the zoning "issue" of putting a facility in a place it was exactly zoned for?

    7) most residents are not even aware where their community league is or does.
    Again, citizen Joe not engaged with his CL, not engaged with his local library. But now that his view is changing a tiny bit and concerned about where his dog poops, he's a fully engaged citizen lobbying for the best interests of the library, the transit users, the poor people who have to walk, Mother Nature, the plight of the poor deer -- nothing selfish in this at all.

    Again, there's two issues. The community consultation. I don't know what happened or where the wheels fell off. There's things that should have been and still need to be discussed. The other, well the one we all groan about. People who think they own the neighborhood, own their street parking, own their view, that's the one that elicits the NIMBY reaction.

  53. #53
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    One of the reasons that people don't like Community Leagues (at least speaking for myself), is that the CL's use exactly the sort of the language you're using when referring to the general peasantry they oversee. Or at least when they don't adhere exactly to the group think.

    People have their priorities and if those priorities are things like dog parks (I don't own a dog) then that is a priority for them and should be respected.

    Eve

  54. #54

    Default

    ^ Except, it's not a dog park just because they used it that way. There's a vacant lot across the street from me. Should I assume that's my kids road hockey court and go fight with city council when something eventually gets built there?

  55. #55
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    No but you could mention the current use and expect to be treated with some measure of respect. In fact, showing respect is rarely a bad thing even with people you disagree with. It's the way to satisfactory compromises.

    Eve

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    No but you could mention the current use and expect to be treated with some measure of respect. In fact, showing respect is rarely a bad thing even with people you disagree with. It's the way to satisfactory compromises.

    Eve
    Yes, that's a fair point. The residents deserve to be treated with respect.

  57. #57

    Default

    Only going to make a short comment as a former resident of Capilano and having grandparents that lived in Fulton for years...

    This location is terrible and the former fire hall location is prime (transit, walkable - on the way to the mall even, easy car access, arterial road, and it's on a recently used/vacated lot. I do admit the City is having a better consulting residents/local stakeholders, but it's far from perfect. I do agree that moving the library away from the mall area is a good move due to general area design... but it could have been done right on mall lands (land negotiations aside).

    Visibility is key, and the old fire hall is much better for that and more reasons I wish to get into at this moment.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  58. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EveB View Post
    One of the reasons that people don't like Community Leagues (at least speaking for myself), is that the CL's use exactly the sort of the language you're using when referring to the general peasantry they oversee. Or at least when they don't adhere exactly to the group think.

    People have their priorities and if those priorities are things like dog parks (I don't own a dog) then that is a priority for them and should be respected.

    Eve
    Our community league rubber stamped a rezoning on a DC2 because the developer offered a $150,000 landscaping contract to...

    ...the community league president's company.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 24-04-2015 at 02:27 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  59. #59
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Parkdale - Goldbar - Downtown
    Posts
    5,244

    Default

    ^^ It doesn't help that you have ignorant people like Chris Buyze spouting out on twitter that the area is "ridiculously low density" (It's the same density as Westmount or Bonnie Doon), that you need ammenities like this to stay viable (The neighbourhood has a ton of ammenities, including a library) and that the proposed location is more "walkable" (The proposed location is actually further away from the higher density areas than the better fire hall location) not to mention that the proposed location is further from transit and othe neighbourhood ammenties

    With ignorance like that, how do people with ligitimate concerns even have a fighting chance of being taken seriously ?
    Parkdale

  60. #60

    Default

    What I would like to know

    • How a Council Decision to site a library wisely on the old Fire Hall location get changed by the administration to another site
    • Why was no one within 60 meters of the site was sent a notice of a new development.
    • Why does bait and switch seem to be the norm that the Administration gets one thing approved and then changes the game after getting Council approval.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  61. #61
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    I've noticed a lot of people on Twitter talking about this, then admitting they don't really know the area when they get called on their comments.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  62. #62

    Default

    If the skateboard park is any example there will be no thought given to how transit users or pedestrians will access this new library site. The firehall is the spot for it unquestionably.

    If it wasn't for the crappy elevator I would question why the area needs a new library at all. That second floor space has lots of nice windows with decent views. They could improve their programming area.

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snake Eyes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Oh, Good Lawd, a freeway. The blue haired NIMBY's will be livid. I should imagine now that they are all Eco Warriors Greenpeace will be seeing a surge in donations.
    Yeah, they're all suddenly Eco-warriors and also suddenly concerned that the library might not get enough visibility and the poor transit commuters, all three of them, will have to walk a couple hundred yards.
    Remarks from the Edmonton Journal:



    But Joanne Groot worries the facility will bring noise, traffic and troublemakers into what she says is a peaceful community.
    “For environmental purposes, I don’t want anything over there,” Groot says. “It should be kept as a ravine … The green space in this city is dwindling. Why do you put it in front of our houses?”
    One-way 67th Street might become a two-way road, which could increase shortcutting from 98th Avenue, she says.
    “People walk their dogs along there. You’re going to take all that away?” she asks. “You’re losing your quiet residential neighbourhood

    Jim Richardson, who lives nearby, says he and his wife sit out on summer mornings to watch deer and other animals using the ravine.
    The site doesn’t have bus service, so more parking will be needed, he says.
    “If they build a library there, me and my wife will be gone. It’s a shame. She has been there 40 years.”
    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...237/story.html

    I do sympathize and agree that the C of E should have consulted the citizens in the area of their intentions. Having said that the remarks above are typical of people who are trying to keep their little part of the world untouched. How many homes does this actually effect, on the map it looks like about 15 houses that face that piece of land. The very telling remark of 'why do you put it in front of our houses' rings of, if it goes elsewhere in front of other houses, but not ours, it will be just fine. The remark from the guy who said he lived there 40 years and if the library is built he will be gone. It's a library for cripes sake not a whore house.

    The question these people should be asking is can the library not be modified by the architect to fit on the old fire hall site or ask if the C of E has other plans for the firehall site.
    I fail to see why people think that because they have lived in one spot in a city for 40+ years they have a monopoly on how the area is developed.
    I lived on a property for 10 years that is now within spitting distance of the Henday so I do know things change.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  64. #64

    Default

    Some facts

    http://www.epl.ca/about-epl/building-projects

    The website states that the address of the location is 6225 101 Avenue NW which is not what the EJ reports and is depicted elsewhere near 67th Street and 99th Avenue.

    pretty fancy for an estimated 47 customers a day. Maybe they would have more visitors if they put it right on 101st ave, but that would spoil the architect's grand plan. Amazing that he seems to be running the show instead of City Council.
    Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 24-04-2015 at 07:22 PM.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  65. #65
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    That address is odd; it doesn't even come up as valid on the city maps site. The location of the fire hall is 6625 101 Abe; I wonder whether EPL got the address wrong on their site.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  66. #66

    Default

    It could be a typing error or not. If you look at the map look at where 62 Street is and 67 Street is on 101 Ave. There is no mention of the streets in between. On the satellite map it shows 62 St and 67 street but no other streets are show because of the field. Or it could be a typing error, it happens all the time, see if you can spot your own typing error.https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.53897.../data=!3m1!1e3
    Last edited by Gemini; 24-04-2015 at 11:03 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  67. #67

    Default

    Submitted a response on the EPL feedback page.

    Found here

    Recommended that they build it on the original Council approved site on 101st Ave, on a brownfield site rather than on a greenfield site.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  68. #68
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,876

    Default

    I too feel that it would make a whole lot more sense to build this on the old fire hall site. The visibility of the corner site would be far superior although the current proposed architecture would most likely have to be changed as the corner lot isn't what this design needs.

    Capilano Exterior Rendering
    by Edmonton Public LIbrary, on Flickr

    Capilano Interior Rendering
    by Edmonton Public LIbrary, on Flickr
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  69. #69
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    It could be a typing error or not. If you look at the map look at where 62 Street is and 67 Street is on 101 Ave. There is no mention of the streets in between. On the satellite map it shows 62 St and 67 street but no other streets are show because of the field. Or it could be a typing error, it happens all the time, see if you can spot your own typing error.https://www.google.ca/maps/@53.53897.../data=!3m1!1e3
    Well, the city maps site (maps.edmonton.ca) should have all the available addresses on it, and there's no record of that address. The address of the apartment building (that shows up as a diamond on Google maps) is 6205 101 Ave, and the apartment building to the West is 6425 101 Ave. There is no 6225 101 Ave address.

    My error was due to being on my iPad; it was an auto-correct problem. Thanks for pointing it out.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  70. #70

    Default

    Hmm... well, regardless of whether its 6625 or 6225, they are saying it is proposed for 101 Ave. So is this all a non-issue? Very odd...

  71. #71
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    No, I don't think it's a non-issue, it just furthers the point that the firehall location was selected, and then changed at a later date. The new location would be 9xxx 67 St.

    The former firehall is zoned US (Urban Services), while the rest of the land flanked by 67 st, Terrace Road, the apartments and 101 Ave is A (Agriculture). A library is a discretionary use of the land.

    The purpose of this Zone is to preserve natural areas and parkland along the river, creeks, ravines and other designated areas for active and passive recreational uses and environment protection in conformance with Plan Edmonton and the North Saskatchewan River Valley Area Redevelopment Plan.
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  72. #72

    Default

    ok, so they're not maintaining their website...

    The proposed new branch location is at 6225 101 Avenue NW.
    http://www.epl.ca/about-epl/building-projects

    Looks like another case of: "Either you are incompetent or corrupt. Pick one."

    We need far more transparency on this issue...

    EDIT:

    This plan would work fine if they just extended the firehall site further down 67 St. Have the parking lot accessible from 101 Ave. Done.


    Capilano Floor Plan by Edmonton Public LIbrary, on Flickr
    Last edited by lat; 25-04-2015 at 09:11 AM.

  73. #73
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Beverly
    Posts
    134

    Default

    last time I checked... troublemakers don't exactly go to a library

  74. #74

    Default

    Here is my merged rendering of the site.

    As proposed. I added a parking lot on the north end that was only partially shown on the EPL website. The exact placement of the building along the street is approximate.
    I can bet there will be parking conflicts with the Church across the street. And what is the plan for the old Fire Hall Site. Sell the land and build a Quicky Mart?

    Plan A (as proposed by the COE)

    on my Flickr

    Plan B
    My version that I prefer with a new bus stop

    on my Flickr

    Plan C
    Alternate version

    on my Flickr


    Which do you prefer? Plan A, B or C
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  75. #75

    Default

    I wonder if the site is in fact the old firehall, but is extended down 67 St., which will make the address 9xxx - 67 St. The site plan they provide doesn't show where the parking lot ends... Again, not enough information being provided by the EPL site...

  76. #76
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,408

    Default

    I prefer plan A.

  77. #77

    Default



    Edit:

    And later:
    Last edited by lat; 25-04-2015 at 10:29 AM.

  78. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lat View Post
    I wonder if the site is in fact the old firehall, but is extended down 67 St., which will make the address 9xxx - 67 St. The site plan they provide doesn't show where the parking lot ends... Again, not enough information being provided by the EPL site...

    Fire Hall June 2011
    my flickr
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  79. #79

    Default

    The building itself should be on the corner. The parking lot can be adjacent, and if the tenants in the apartment building object, along the curving street would be the logical place to put it.

    This is another one of those city decisions to wonder at.

  80. #80

    Default



    This is the proposed (approx) position that was provided in post #2 by Gord. It is south of the fire station. Personally I think for library patrons it is a more aesthetically pleasing spot. If the architect is building big windows so patrons have a view of the ravine and the natural setting of the ravine I think that is a plus. If the same design is build on the corner of 101 Ave & 67 St. patrons will be looking at a view of a parking lot shadowed by a high rise. It's a handful of people that live on the street opposite the proposed library that are squawking. They do not want their view obstructed. They want to stay in the same sleepy hollow framework they have be coddled with for the last 40+ years. A library (or any building) designed to take advantage of is natural surroundings sounds wonderful but NIMBY's don't want it.
    That's why Edmonton cannot have anything nice.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  81. #81

    Default

    There is some uncertainty as to the exact location. It could, and imo, should be further north...

  82. #82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post


    This is the proposed (approx) position that was provided in post #2 by Gord. It is south of the fire station. Personally I think for library patrons it is a more aesthetically pleasing spot. If the architect is building big windows so patrons have a view of the ravine and the natural setting of the ravine I think that is a plus. If the same design is build on the corner of 101 Ave & 67 St. patrons will be looking at a view of a parking lot shadowed by a high rise. It's a handful of people that live on the street opposite the proposed library that are squawking. They do not want their view obstructed. They want to stay in the same sleepy hollow framework they have be coddled with for the last 40+ years. A library (or any building) designed to take advantage of is natural surroundings sounds wonderful but NIMBY's don't want it.
    That's why Edmonton cannot have anything nice.
    The image posted is not an accurate representation of the footprint. You blame the residents but there are significant reasons aginst the changed plans including that they are going against City Council's decision, the access road is a residential street, it is on a one way road and it reduces greenspace unnecessarily.

    Since so many are mocking the residents I will take a shot that this architect is of limited skills in being unable to work with the site he was given.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  83. #83

    Default

    One would think the way some people are bleating that they are trying to put a massive landfill on a pristine protected national heritage site. It's a field with trees in the middle. It's hardly a walk on the wild side. The approximation of the site has not been nailed down yet but I cannot see why it could not go where ^this picture indicates. As for the street being a one way street, who cares except the handful of people that face this field. Are they really that stunned that they don't realize things change. Just because you have a certain view for 40+ years does not guarantee you will have the same view for the next 40+. They are trying to cover their indignation by saying its a greenfield where people walk their dogs, the deer, the antelope play there don't you know. It's NIMBY poorly disguised as environmental concerns.There will still be plenty of green space left for people to walk their dogs etc. There is absolutely nothing spectacular about the neighborhood that warrants any kind of don't build it there attitude or don't make it a two lane road in front of my place. Gawd forbid a bus, I said a bus drives by. Like I said, it's a library not a whore house. If it was that, I could see the objections.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  84. #84
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Strathcona - Mill Creek
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    So, you feel the city has adequately done community consultation when picking a location?
    They're going to park their car over there. You're going to park your car over here. Get it?

  85. #85

    Default

    ^No, it appears the C of E totally dropped the ball on this one. Nobody on the thread has provided links where the C of E said the old fire hall for sure was going to be the site of the new library, (except the link with an address typo in it) but I will take their word for it. When the C of E indicated the location might change that is when the people in the area should have been informed. Having said that, I still think the people that oppose the south location would still put up a fight and say it's to preserve wild life when it's a NIMBY issue. Their remarks in the Journal were more about how it would effect them than having a library in the neighborhood that would benefit the whole neighborhood. They are just so used to looking out their windows and seeing a field with trees in it it's frying their brains that a small library will be built there.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  86. #86

    Default

    You sure like distorting the many comments that said otherwise
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  87. #87

    Default

    ^What am I distorting?. I provided the Journal link to what people that live opposite the site were saying and eluding to. I've said the C of E should have been more informative. I've said I like the site further south as it would let the library patrons look out the windows enjoy the field with trees in it.
    Sure the people who live opposite this new proposal would rather have it closer to 101 Ave and not in front of their houses, but to try to pretend it's for environmental reasons is laughable. There's probably more wildlife seen on the David Letterman Show than wanders onto that field.
    Last edited by Gemini; 25-04-2015 at 04:57 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  88. #88

    Default

    Politics aside, I like the south location The renders look tasteful, and it activates an under-used space, letting people overlook the river valley. You'll never please everyone, but most of the neighbors will probably warm-up to it. For the library goers, it looks like a very nice addition.

    I get the whole conversation about visibility, it's important, but not the highest priority. Libraries, like community centres, churches, rec centres, these are placemakers and can stand more alone. Those who want to use the facity will know where to
    go.

    Accessibility is still vital, but this location is 200m to a bus route, has parking, and they are putting a sidewalk and boulevard in front.

    It will be a very nice place.

  89. #89

    Default

    According to the Journal this is a very close approximation of where this library location may be.

    https://www.google.com/maps/@53.5400...RRxg!2e0?hl=en

    9925 - 67 Street.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  90. #90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^What am I distorting?. I provided the Journal link to what people that live opposite the site were saying and eluding to. I've said the C of E should have been more informative. I've said I like the site further south as it would let the library patrons look out the windows enjoy the field with trees in it.
    Sure the people who live opposite this new proposal would rather have it closer to 101 Ave and not in front of their houses, but to try to pretend it's for environmental reasons is laughable. There's probably more wildlife seen on the David Letterman Show than wanders onto that field.
    The location was switched and this chronic bait-n-switch tactics by the administration and going against Council's decisions has got to stop.

    This is what was said in the article as well rather than just your cherry picking.

    The proposal has been in the works for years.

    A larger building was originally slated to go around the corner on 101st Avenue on the site of a demolished fire station.

    But architects felt there wasnít enough room for parking close to the entrance and it would be overshadowed by a nearby apartment, Land says.
    Maybe you should also read the comments section.

    we're not adverse to it being built just put it on 101 avenue and not in front of our houses. I invite you to come and what we're referring to, even the photographer saw our concerns.
    we just went through a urban renewal here and all we want is the library to go where Cit Council approved it, on 101 avenue and 67 street where it's on a bus route and easily accessible for all.
    Most of the comments here are off base. It is not about whether there should be a library or not, or what kind of people use it - those are all red herrings. The issue here, as I see it, is whether green space near a ravine should be used to build a stand-alone facility with parking. It shouldn't matter if there is a high rise or houses across the street. Anything abutting a ravine reduces access as one has to go around the facility.

    The silliest comment by far was Ms. Land's comment about people in the library enjoying the view. By that measure a road through Mackinnon Ravine would also allow more people to enjoy the view. The most appropriate place to locate the library would be closer to Capilano Mall and the commercial area around it - just take a look at the satellite view. For a city that wants to "build up" it is a poor way to plan. The extensive parking spaces in the area might also be an option - they could be replaced with underground parking. After all, we are a winter city trying to control urban sprawl, right?
    Regardless of the comments made by the residents, it makes way more sense to have this on 101 ave where the former fire station is. There's tons of room, it's a more visible location, you don't need to change one-way streets, and it would go over better with the neighbourhood.

    The city did a horrible job with the public consultation on the project; everyone near the site should have been notified of the meeting, and invited to attend. I've gotten numerous notices about bike lane meetings because I'm near the proposed location, and these people should have gotten library notices as well. The arguments on using the old fire station location are extremely weak. "Not enough room for parking near the entrance" and having it overshadowed by a nearby apartment building? Really?! How horrible... having to make people walk a little bit to get to the library doors. It's not like people are driving right up to the doors of the Capilano branch right now (it's on the second floor, meaning you have to park, walk to the mall doors, go into the ancient elevator, then walk into the library).

    While many are jumping on the people across the street from the project citing NIMBY, I think if you take a step back and look at it objectively you'll see that they have some strong points... just maybe lost a bit in the article.
    I don't have a horse in this race despite living reasonably close. That said, the argument about parking space requirements being the reason for not building on 101 ave where the old fire station was makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't you keep it on a current bus route? There is no more apparent space for parking on 99ave then there is on 101 ave. (unless the city really is considering cutting into the ravine and removing actual green space)

    Who are the architects who say there isn't room on 101ave? Could the city purchase some of the land belonging to the apartment to the east? What does the "overshadowing" argument actually mean? The apartment building would shadow the parking lot in the morning?

    The article portrays resistance to the proposed location as petty NIMBY arguments, but from an unbiased perspective, they are right that the location seems a poor choice. I am suspicious that influential/well connected developers have their eyes on the potentially more valuable 101ave location. Not that well connected developers influence city planners to their advantage...
    Erik Backstrom ∑ Senior Planner at City of Edmonton
    I love libraries but this model of building stand-alone libraries where parking considerations drive design has to stop. If public agencies don't lead by example in picking locations with great transit and mixing land uses, how can we expect anyone else to do it?
    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...237/story.html
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  91. #91
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,408

    Default

    That first comment is the definition of nimbyism.

  92. #92

    Default

    ^what, this one made by a homeowner near the proposed site:


    we're not adverse to it being built just put it on 101 avenue and not in front of our houses. I invite you to come and what we're referring to, even the photographer saw our concerns.

    ........no, no that's not NIMBY at all As for the photographer seeing their concerns, he might have seen them but it did not mention if he agreed with them. He's impartial, he's the photographer.
    Last edited by Gemini; 25-04-2015 at 08:45 PM.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  93. #93
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,408

    Default

    That is the one.

  94. #94
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    OK. So we have a revised definition of NIMBYism. NIMBY is whenever someone requests that Council or journalists actually look at the physical situation to see if compromises can be made. Or is it that nobody is allowed to talk to anyone but the established journalist? I'm confused.

    Eve

  95. #95
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,408

    Default

    Yes, this one would be "Not in my front yard."

  96. #96

    Default

    Your confused, you have company. The people in the immediate vicinity that are speaking out against this are saying they are not NIMBY's but when they open their mouths they are saying exactly what NIMBY's say then try to back track by stating it's for eco purposes, traffic purposes, visibility purposes. I get it, they don't want it to be in front of their places as they have been used to having a field with trees in front of them. If this library is moved from the 101 Ave and put further south there will still be lots of field for people to walk their dogs etc.That side of the street more than likely would get a pavement in front of it and I'm sure the bus could drop people off very close by. Very few people have a monopoly on what can and cannot be built over the road from them but I agree the C of E should have informed them every step of the way.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  97. #97
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    No. What SP59 seems to be saying is that we are not to have any say about developments in our neighborhoods at all. If we're too far away then we don't have a say because it's none of our business, if it's too close and we try to have a say then we're NIMBY's. Something I find strange because C2E seems to spend most of its time critiquing the outsides of buildings in neighborhoods they often don't even live in.

    Eve

  98. #98

    Default

    Well, it is Connect 2 Edmonton and not just the hoods we live in. Living in one areasand commenting on what goes on in others is not a bad thing. It can and does put a different perspective on it because we are not emotional involved.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  99. #99
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,408

    Default

    I said no such thing Eve.

  100. #100
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,221

    Default

    No, you said that a woman offering to show the journalist her concerns is a NIMBY. Because she lives next to the development, that's what she automatically is. Even if her point about accessibility, better options, etc. might be perfectly true. Her commenting on a development across the street from her house is in some way invalid.

    Eve

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •