Talk:Glenora, Edmonton

Untitled

My source for information on the proposed Glenora redevelopment is an article from the community newspaper, the Edmonton Examiner. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of the issue handy, so I can provide a more correct reference.

I expect there is probably a City of Edmonton document in electronic form with more details, which I will try and track down, and which will provide a better source for this information.

Johntwrl 07:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The proposed development you are referring to comprises 5 high rise towers of from 10 to 18 stories with 330 units plus 70,000 sq. ft. of commercial space on the first two floors. It is a massive high density proposed development on 4.1 acres, a relatively small site. As you note it is located in one of Edmonton's prime single family residential areas. Both adjacent community leagues are opposed to the development as it is a project that is more appropriate for a downtown Edmonton site where existing plans call for this type of development. The community leagues have proposed an alternate design for the site which meets the resident's needs for family oriented housing, seniors housing & generally more affordable housing all in a low rise & townhouse type of development.

Frankly this discussion should be part of a much wider city discussion on how Edmonton residents want their city to develop. At present development projects by & large are located to suit just the business objectives of developers. This approach is not in accordance with good community or city-wide planning. In a growth environment developers can secure profitable projects within good planning objectives if City Council is willing to establish basic planning ground rules & a level playing field. Bill Eadie. 86.131.251.101 21:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I did a little checking on the Depravity Waltz band, meaning a Google Search, and they do exist. The two musicians mentioned belong to the band (though I did correct the spelling to the name of one of them), and they do appear to have some connection with Edmonton. Haven't found anything, yet, to connect them with Westminster Junior High School. 66.48.175.23 02:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Schedule B to (DC2) SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PROVISION

This pretty much lays out the details of the proposed development for west Glenora. I stumbled across it quite by accident while looking for something else. And to think residents were less than happy when Crescent Place went up just to the east of the site for this development. (I remember my parents talking about that one.)

Johntwrl 04:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Glenora, Edmonton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140503100206/http://www.edmonton.ca/business_economy/documents/EdmontonWardNeighbourhoods.pdf to http://www.edmonton.ca/business_economy/documents/EdmontonWardNeighbourhoods.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130904040707/http://www.edmonton.ca/business_economy/documents/PDF/Developing_and_Planned_Neighbourhoods_2011_-_Final_Report.pdf to http://www.edmonton.ca/business_economy/documents/PDF/Developing_and_Planned_Neighbourhoods_2011_-_Final_Report.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)