Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Moratorium on development outside the Ring Road?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Moratorium on development outside the Ring Road?

    With all of the emphasis on developing urban in-fill, skinny homes, and densifying and beautifying downtown as a place to live and work and play, why does the City keep approving new neighbourhoods for development outside of the Ring Road?

    I mean, we have Blatchford that needs to be filled up, and pretty soon Northlands will be ready to go for in-fill too. Roads, water, sewer, transit, police, fire, libraries, garbage, the more you build the more you need to pay for.

    So what about a moratorium on new neighbourhood development outside the ring road until we densify and fill in what we have already?

  • #2
    if you map most of those new neighborhoods and their density and edmonton's 5 key employment districts, you'll find that most of them are a lot more sensitive to good urban design objectives than you give them credit for. as just a couple of examples, noone is going to commute from blatchford to nisku or from downtown to fort saskatchewan. edmonton's job distribution is much different than calgary's where they really only have one major employment sector. the moratorium you're proposing wouldn't accomplish what you think it would.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

    Comment


    • #3
      Ahh yes, the old c2e mindset everyone works centrally so everyone should live centrally. Both equally false

      lets say we actually did stop greenfield development a decade ago. There is no way we would be able to build enough infill to keep up with the demand.

      Edmonton needs to continue to focus on building smart communities.
      A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

      Comment


      • #4
        ^we can focus on building smarter communities but we have to make sure we keep urban sprawl in check.

        I do want to see downtown density increase for sure, but I would like to see orher other areas in the city increase density long before new subdivisions get started. Century Park, Millwoods Town Center, Bonnie Doon are just three examples of southside nodes that could bring way more density to their respective areas first.
        LRT is our future, time to push forward.

        Comment


        • #5
          First? Or injunction with other stuff going on? I again remind you that infill wouldnt not have filled the housing demands that are or were being placed on this city in the last 10-15 years.
          A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Medwards View Post
            I again remind you that infill wouldnt not have filled the housing demands that are or were being placed on this city in the last 10-15 years.
            Maybe for low density suburbs with 3,000 sqft single family homes with 2 car garages and a driveway for 4 cars and a big assed yard

            Otherwise the COE has very low density and lots of brownfield space such as Old Fort Road (zero units) and tracts of 50-80 year old neighbourhoods and a very low urban density of 1,855.5/km2 less than half that of other Canadian cities


            Fraser Institute senior policy analyst Josef Filipowicz said because Canadian cities are less dense, places like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver can likely accommodate more housing supply.

            “What we found in our study is that there is a lot of room for Toronto to grow, notably upwards, through population density…When you compare Toronto to other North American or world cities in other high income countries, Toronto and other Canadian cities are not all that dense.”

            According to the study, Toronto has 4,457 people per square kilometre, Montreal has 4,916 people per square kilometre and Vancouver, Canada’s densest city, has 5,493 people per square kilometre.
            If you think that there is no room for infill, you are sadly mistaken or misinformed.
            Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Edmonton PRT View Post

              Maybe for low density suburbs with 3,000 sqft single family homes with 2 car garages and a driveway for 4 cars and a big assed yard

              Otherwise the COE has very low density and lots of brownfield space such as Old Fort Road (zero units) and tracts of 50-80 year old neighbourhoods and a very low urban density of 1,855.5/km2 less than half that of other Canadian cities




              If you think that there is no room for infill, you are sadly mistaken or misinformed.
              that “low urban density” number is bs.

              edmonton’s area includes more than 7,400 hectares (18,000 acres) of parkland. you haven’t forgotten our river valley and ravines already have you?

              edmonton’s area includes more than 7,000 hectares (17,000 acres) of industrial land for future development and probably a similar amount of developed industrial land.

              edmonton’s area includes an inner and outer transportation and utility corridor.

              edmonton’s area includes two major rail corridors and one trans-canada highway.

              edmonton’s area includes not just the previously mentioned large infill opportunities but a large agricultural research farm run by the university of alberta.

              edmonton’s area includes vast tracts of land at its outer edges that will remain farmland for decades to come.

              try deducting all of these from your denominator before you compare edmonton’s urban density with other jurisdictions.
              "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

              Comment


              • #8
                You don't think that other cities have vast tracts of parkland, rail yards or other areas as you describe them? Just look at the vast railyards 6km2, refineries ~10km2 and and an international airport 8km2 in Montreal plus a mountain park, Île Bizard and huge cemeteries. and industrial areas that are huge and yet has 250% greater density.

                "you haven’t forgotten our river valley and ravines already have you?" Nope, lived in edmonton most of my life. The River Valley Park system of 18,000 acres is about 9% of the area of Edmonton.

                Montreal's area includes industrial land for future development and developed industrial land.
                Montreal's area includes extensive transportation and utility corridors.
                Montreal's area includes two major rail corridors and one trans-canada highway, plus ports and an international airport
                Montreal's area includes not a large agricultural research farm run by McGill University.
                Edmonton’s area includes vast tracts of land at its outer edges that will remain farmland for decades to come that lies outside the Anthony Henday, which is the point of this thread

                try deducting all of these from your denominator before you compare edmonton’s urban density with other jurisdictions.. Actually, I did. If I used the entire areas withing the boundaries of Edmonton, the CITY density is only 1,360.9/km2 but I used URBAN density of 1,855.5/km2 as per
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmonton


                According to you, Edmonton's full and nothing can be done with low density. Every unit built outside the Anthony Henday is one unit not built in Strathern, Old Fort Road TOD, Blatchford, and all the low density areas along major corridors such as 137th avenue, 132nd Avenue, 66th Street, 127th street, 75th street, 107th Ave,, Stony Plain Road, 109th street and many others that still have single family homes with 50+ foot wide lots or two and three storey walk ups.

                Compare Edmonton to Montreal





                Griffintown, an old industrial center near the downtown area of Montréal, now being converted to very high density housing with 10 to 20 stories and a residential density of 40 000 people per square kilometer (over 100 000 per square mile) http://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2015/03/


                New developments in Pointe-Saint-Charles


                Rail lines within 50 feet of apartments
                Last edited by Edmonton PRT; 28-03-2020, 01:49 PM.
                Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

                Comment


                • #9
                  As interesting as it is to see the city keep sprawling further and further out, I would really like to see much higher density inside of the Henday. With projects like Valley Line happening I would love to see a much higher density of residential buildings in and around the Millwood's Town Center area. I can picture easily a dozen more high density residential buildings near the hospital, shopping mall and LRT line.
                  LRT is our future, time to push forward.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ^

                    i didn’t say other cities had no undeveloped or underdeveloped land, nor did i say edmonton has no room for infill.

                    i did say i don’t think the number you are using as a comparable is correct. it’s my understanding the city’s total area is approximately 625 sq. km which is a city density is about 1,600.

                    i don’t have an exact urban area handy but even if your source’s ratio between the two is correct, the urban ratio will still be a lot higher than the number you have quoted.

                    i have made some inquiries and will share the facts as they answered.
                    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Back in 1986, I moved away from Edmonton for 3 years and lived in Brampton, outside of Toronto. My apartment was a block away from the Bramalea City Centre




                      I lived in 6 Silver Maple Court in the top floor of the 29 storey Ritz Tower. (#107 on image) This complex of 20-31 storey buildings were west from the Bramalea City Centre, a major shopping mall and on the east side was a similar sized tower complex, all totalling two dozen towers. The area for the mall and the two dozen towers was about 1.0 km2



                      They are now planning to increase density further by adding towers to the existing mall property.


                      Located south of Queen Street East and east of Dixie Road, known as Bramalea City Centre, initial approvals were obtained to allow for a 300,000 square foot expansion to the existing mall in 2010. Ongoing approvals are intended to allow for the urbanization of the 85 acre site into a mixed use centre with an overall FSI of 3.5 (14 million square feet).

                      Planning approvals include Rezoning | Site Plan | Minor Variance http://korsiak.com/portfolio-items/b...a-city-centre/

                      Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by kcantor View Post
                        ^

                        i didn’t say other cities had no undeveloped or underdeveloped land, nor did i say edmonton has no room for infill.
                        .
                        Well golly, you sure made it sound like Edmonton was unique and had a litany of geographic and non-residential impediments that no other city has. You sounded like an Edmonton Urban Sprawl Apologist

                        It really was obvious that you think that nobody has studied Edmonton's density nor have been to or lived in other cities with far higher density. I study transit and mass transit such as LRT requires density, Density, DENSITY!. Otherwise you do not have a favorable cost benefit ratio nor can solve the first mile-last mile problem

                        This is what Edmonton is building. More urban sprawl

                        See gallery at http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/livingontheedge/gallery+aerial+photos+edmonton+suburbs/5353080/story.html

                        RYAN JACKSON, EDMONTONJOURNAL.COM 09.04.2011



                        Look at these older neighbourhoods with low density single family homes





















                        Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Monty Python

                          Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            well golly, if i didn’t know better it’s hard to tell a typical edmonton suburb from a typical montreal suburb: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.worl...e-to-rise.html
                            "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              or a mall redevelopment in edmonton vs one in brampton: http://connectbonniedoon.com/en/
                              "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X