Alex Decoteau Park - 105st / 102ave

[GreenSPACE]

^Very surprising, and as Cold says, a bit odd. I find them heavy-handed and overreaching.

[rapid_business]

Good that they can be with City projects as they can with private ones I suppose. Remember when they had non-support for the bridge in Terwillegar and the City went ahead anyways? Not a good precedent.

[itom 987]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

FORMAL PRESENTATION

B.3. Alex Decoteau Park City of Edmonton - Martina Gardiner 10204 - 105 Street NW Site legally described as:
Lots 178 - 182, Block 5, Plan B2

P. Odinga presented the comments of the Development Planner.
MOVED: A. Pantelimon

Motion of non-support.

• This design does not demonstrate an understanding of urban design principles in what will be a premier location within an urban context.
• This is a park for not only the community league, but for all residents of Edmonton and beyond. It needs to demonstrate an exemplary level of urban park design.
• This design does not relate to the surrounding urban fabric of Downtown Edmonton.
• The pedestrian circulation design is fragmented and does not follow natural desire lines.
• The five elements of the program could be accommodated within this site with a simplified and cohesive design.
• A rigorous review of site furnishings, plantings, and other materials and how they relate to one another is required.
• The level of design of this project needs to set a precedent of excellence for other projects within the city.
• Programming should consider winter activities.
• Planting design should include coniferous material with respect to City standards and Winter City Principles.
SECONDED: M. Nebozuk
CARRIED
FOR THE MOTION: C. Domanski, C. Craig, R. Labonte, M. Nebozuk, K. Pacheco, A. Pantelimon, G. Renwic

http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...nutesJan19.pdf

They forgot about the kids....

[Black Star]

Wow many swings and misses apparently! I didnt find the design horrible at all.

[Coldrsx]

Going back to EDC on March 15th with some changes to address their comments.

[Coldrsx]

Reminder - For those interested in a look at the slightly revised design, please come to DECL (10042-103st) at 530pm for a short presentation.

[McBoo]

Hrrm, so this meeting isn't to actually care what we might have to say? Rather just to tell us what is good for us?

Please tell me not.

[rapid_business]

<deleted>

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by McBoo

Hrrm, so this meeting isn't to actually care what we might have to say? Rather just to tell us what is good for us?

Please tell me not.

Sure it is, but input and feedback has been given all along... so this is to culminate that and head to EDC in 2 weeks.

Context is important, we are at the very end of a 7yr process with very minor changes in response to EDC. This is not the time for a redesign, simply small changes.

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by McBoo

Hrrm, so this meeting isn't to actually care what we might have to say? Rather just to tell us what is good for us?

Please tell me not.

You sound just like the folks that skip every public consultation on a project and ignore every public notice and news story, then attend the final presentation and act like it was totally sprung on them without the chance to provide input.

[McBoo]

Really?

I was at a planning session for design of this park(volunteered, gave my email address) - attended - gave my thoughts and haven't ever been told of any other meeting - which I would have gladly attended.

It was supposed to be a committee - but it apparently never met again as a committee.

I repeat - was never informed of any other meeting.

So, if this is a meeting to tell me as a committee member what was done behind my back ... well, something is broken.

Oh, did I mention that I knew about tonight's meeting because someone apparently, suddenly found my email address (that I gave at a "committee meeting) and sent me an invite two weeks ago?

Love your photography though.

[Coldrsx]

Over the last 7 or more years we have had numerous (more than any other project to date) open houses, RGMs, AGMs, park nights, committee nights for input and involvement. It has been on the DECL Facebook, Twitter, posted to SSP, C2E and it was advertised by the City of Edmonton in many places.

This final meeting was requested by DECL to review the minor changes to ensure nothing surprises us, not to start the process again or make significant changes.

[McBoo]

And the committee, which apparently met but once?

[Coldrsx]

Which one? There must have been 4 over the last decade.

That aside, there were more opportunities to keep up with this project than any other that I know of.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Over the last 7 or more years we have had numerous (more than any other project to date) open houses, RGMs, AGMs, park nights, committee nights for input and involvement. It has been on the DECL Facebook, Twitter, posted to SSP, C2E and it was advertised by the City of Edmonton in many places.

This final meeting was requested by DECL to review the minor changes to ensure nothing surprises us, not to start the process again or make significant changes.

never mind the last "7 or more years". on tuesday january 19, 2016, edc unanimously supported the following:

Motion of non-support.

• This design does not demonstrate an understanding of urban design principles in what will be a premier location within an urban context.
• This is a park for not only the community league, but for all residents of Edmonton and beyond. It needs to demonstrate an exemplary level of urban park design.
• This design does not relate to the surrounding urban fabric of Downtown Edmonton.
• The pedestrian circulation design is fragmented and does not follow natural desire lines.
• The five elements of the program could be accommodated within this site with a simplified and cohesive design.
• A rigorous review of site furnishings, plantings, and other materials and how they relate to one another is required.
• The level of design of this project needs to set a precedent of excellence for other projects within the city.
• Programming should consider winter activities.
• Planting design should include coniferous material with respect to City standards and Winter City Principles.

if you can solve all of that - particularly the first two - with "minor changes" you're more talented than i am.

[Coldrsx]

We believe that the majority of those can be with very minor changes, some we will decline on with reasons.

[McBoo]

Who is we?

[Coldrsx]

The senior landscape architect at the City, her staff, DECL, others who have been involved from the City/Ops/CRCs etc.

[McBoo]

I was at the meeting with the senior landscape architect and when we (as in DECL) gave formal support to naming of the park in honour of Alex Decoteau.

Don't remember that "we" decided how to respond to the city critique.

[rapid_business]

Let's give the project to McBoo to decide if it should move forward or not.

...or we can just drop this passive agressiveness internet bullshit and move on perhaps?