SJF school site development meeting June 10

The former Sir John Franklin School site is slated for development and several designs have been presented to the public by the developers through their 386beaverbrook.com website. There have been two public meetings, the second of which presented a significant change to the initial design similar to the existing bay character of Lanark Street.

The second design had a single road going east west, connecting Lanark and Beaverbrook streets, and a back lane that connected to the north lane, existing on Lanark just north of the traffic circle.

A third design, which has not been presented to the public as far as we know, was posted recently on the sign facing Westworth Church. This last design appears to have removed the green space in the south west corner and added a single east-west lane between Beaverbrook and Lanark, parallel to Grosvenor Ave.

The developer’s website does not appear to reflect this latest design, which will be discussed on June 10th at City Hall. A sheet was distributed by a resident to Lanark Street mailboxes today, but it appears to be accompanied by a copy of the second, not the current, design.

Those interested in the design of this development should contact Ryan Skrabyk, the developer, at 204-955-2910 or through the aforementioned website and/or attend the planning meeting at the City of Winnipeg on Tuesday, June 10th at 6 PM. Details of the meeting are also on the sign facing Westworth Church.

You can also contact Michael Robinson at the city planning office at 204-986-3213.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “SJF school site development meeting June 10

  1. We received this reply from the developer:

    Yes, for the most part you are correct.

    We agree with you that the SW corner as a public open space would be fantastic location for those new community mailboxes; and enable passage through the neighbourhood. This location was our original intent based on the public consultations where local residents favoured a park on the corner of Grosvenor and Beaverbrook instead of along Lanark.

    We were expecting the new homeowners would care for the existing trees along Lanark. However, the City’s Forester feels the trees along Lanark are too important to be left in the hands of people – – she fears the trees would not be cared for, which doesn’t make any sense to me since these trees are valuable amenities for any homeowner.

    So the City has instead proposed 3 little parks along Lanark that keep the trees in the City’s control to provide the maintenance & care. The City has also suggested they will be further “enhancing” those natural “park” spaces though there is no budget at this time dedicated for this.

    As for the back lane change – the previous plan had 2 back lanes, where only 1 was needed. It was a function of the city choosing to move the park space so we had to tweak the plan a little, where now less concrete is needed for the same purpose.

    Regards,
    Ryan

  2. On 2014-06-03, at 4:50 PM, Ryan Skrabyk wrote:

    The L shaped back lane would really have become a T shaped back lane with the removal of the SW park and would have added double the concrete both to build and maintain. It resulted from the community’s original idea of the park on the southwest corner which was then modified by the city’s request to move the park space to protect the trees.

    We’ve spent a pile of money on arborists trying to figure out a plan to protect the trees – our solution was having new property owners logically protecting the trees having just paid a premium for a treed lot. Nonetheless the city Forester was not in agreement, hence the park being moved to Lanark so the trees could be ‘protected’ by the city. The city is no longer interested in “pocket parks”.

    [snip]

    When the time comes, I have no doubt the”new” park spaces on Lanark would be able to accommodate Canada Post.

    I think the parks on Lanark will be nice – the city has mentioned they will be “enhancing” them.

    Regards, Ryan

  3. And I replied:

    Ryan,

    Thanks for your reply. It does seem logical that the new property owners along Lanark Street would value the trees, but I guess the only way to ensure that was to go with public maintenance, in the eyes of the city. I also think they are concerned about maintenance of smaller properties, and consider the Lanark corridor one that can be combined with their existing contiguous pattern.

    On the upside, I think the owners of the Lanark-exposed properties will get a larger de facto treed property without the responsibility of maintaining it.

    I’m glad you are also thinking about the position of the community mailboxes, as these have become considerations in all new developments as well as existing ones having to retrofit to find functional locations. I think that one on the inside of each existing bay would work well.

    We assume you are going to bury all your utilities in the new development. I suggest that you offer the residents bordering the new homes along the northern edge back lane the option to also taking the buried utilities, to give the new property owners back lanes without overhead wires.

    When do you foresee the first visible steps of development commencing, and have you sold any properties yet, or are there further steps required before a timeline can be predicted?

    Good luck with making the property the best it can be for the long term.

  4. CBC radio reported this morning on this topic, although without much detail. We will see whether the developer can post additional, up to date information on their website.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s