Re: the “New design for Riverbank Landing” article in the Nov. 25 issue of the Gazette.
Here we go again!
Boudreau Communities believes it has settled on a “final vision” for the Riverbank Landing development.
Boudreau Communities has resubmitted an application to the City to amend the Oakmont Area Structure Plan (ASP) and the Land Use Bylaw (LUB) for the purposes of changing, among other things, the land uses and zoning to suit their vision of a development.
Residents opposed the first application, citing several major issues. On June 22, 2020, City Council agreed with the residents and voted 7-0 to refuse the amendments to the ASP and LUB, thereby denying the development.
So, how does Boudreau Communities’ new vision for a development compare to the one voted down by Council?
Based on the information presented so far by Boudreau Communities, the request to amend the land uses in the ASP is exactly the same. So is the request to change the current zoning in the LUB from Direct Control to a mixed-use zoning. This is important because the Direct Control zoning gives Council the authority and flexibility to incorporate changes that reflect evolving community and economic needs, and that are in the best interests of St Albertans, especially residents living near a proposed development. It’s not hard to figure out why Boudreau Communities wants to strip that authority away from Council.
The differences from Boudreau Communities’ original plan are underwhelming. The high-rises are lower but still way too high for the vicinity – one and a half to two times taller than the Botanica condos. Fewer units are proposed but density will still be excessive – the number of units will increase by about 143 per cent within this confined area of Oakmont, including the Botanica condos.
The Gazette article implies that Boudreau Communities has somehow gained community support for a mixed-use, high-density development near the Shops at Boudreau. I totally disagree. I haven’t seen anything that shows the community supports such a massive development, especially the residents in the surrounding neighbourhoods.
Furthermore, the major issues and concerns raised by residents the first time still remain, including traffic congestion, excessive height, over-densification, lack of transition between types of buildings, incompatibility with surrounding neighbourhoods, pedestrian safety and a wall of buildings along the river valley and Bellerose Drive.
The article quotes Mr. Haut as saying, “As with most large projects, it took a few attempts to get it right.” The project is definitely large, and Mr. Haut is entitled to the opinion that they got it right, but I and many others completely disagree with the opinion, and it presupposes the City will approve the project.
To me, Boudreau Communities’ design proposal is not “new” and they did not get it right. The land was never intended for this scale of development – it is not suitable for the site and it is out of character for the area. Most importantly, I believe most citizens do not share or support Boudreau Communities’ “vision” – they can see through the smoke and mirrors.
Jerry Husar, St. Albert
