Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

City of Edmonton announces annexation plans

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Brentk View Post
    I don't think it goes against the "anti-Sprawl" advocates as much as you may think. If Edmonton doesn't secure this land it is going to be developed in a very uniform and sprawl format similar to that in Nisku/Leduc. I think Edmonton will help keep this area from developing out of control. I also think it will help clean up the area. They are not going to develop the area over night, this is just securing land for the future.
    This area would secure lands to accommodate strong demand for residential, business and employment growth within the City
    In other words, urban sprawl.
    "The only really positive thing one could say about Vancouver is, it’s not the rest of Canada." Oink (britishexpats.com)

    Comment


    • #32
      This land is for housing that is 35 years away and more importantly also to be used for industrial uses, lets not get all too hysterical about sprawl arguments just yet (I know this is C2E and that's what it does best).

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Brentk View Post
        I don't think it goes against the "anti-Sprawl" advocates as much as you may think. If Edmonton doesn't secure this land it is going to be developed in a very uniform and sprawl format similar to that in Nisku/Leduc. I think Edmonton will help keep this area from developing out of control. I also think it will help clean up the area. They are not going to develop the area over night, this is just securing land for the future.
        I appreciate the point of view you are trying to put across BrentK and if was an LRT corridor with some industrial on the side while going after EIA I could ease my view, but it's not.

        It's for the most part green field (even noted in the City release on the link above) and look at the size of the area.

        It's sprawl
        It's the decimation of farmland
        which goes right back to my post above...

        This flies in the face of so much that is posted on this site it's unreal
        - Urban sprawl
        - Grow in not out
        - Grow up not out
        - Greenfield development
        - Local farming, local produce and food supply
        etc., etc., etc.

        This forum is getting so, hypocritical.

        Good luck City of Edmonton, as I said I really not opposed.

        In my highly biased personal opinion
        It also makes me laugh so much harder at expat's comment.

        If there's gonna be urban sprawl, it's gonna be our urban sprawl god-damn-it!!!
        As I said, I'm not opposed...go for it.

        But after all those threads on urban sprawl and blah, blah, blah, I just shake my head.

        In my highly biased personal opinion

        Comment


        • #34
          This is the first time an annexation has been attempted while Ive been paying attention to politics

          Is it a good thing or bad thing for Edmonton?
          youtube.com/BrothersGrim
          facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

          Comment


          • #35
            $3m in taxes from airport will shift from Leduc to Edmonton.
            www.decl.org

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
              Originally posted by Brentk View Post
              I don't think it goes against the "anti-Sprawl" advocates as much as you may think. If Edmonton doesn't secure this land it is going to be developed in a very uniform and sprawl format similar to that in Nisku/Leduc. I think Edmonton will help keep this area from developing out of control. I also think it will help clean up the area. They are not going to develop the area over night, this is just securing land for the future.
              I appreciate the point of view you are trying to put across BrentK and if was an LRT corridor with some industrial on the side while going after EIA I could ease my view, but it's not.

              It's for the most part green field (even noted in the City release on the link above) and look at the size of the area.

              It's sprawl
              It's the decimation of farmland
              which goes right back to my post above...

              This flies in the face of so much that is posted on this site it's unreal
              - Urban sprawl
              - Grow in not out
              - Grow up not out
              - Greenfield development
              - Local farming, local produce and food supply
              etc., etc., etc.

              This forum is getting so, hypocritical.

              Good luck City of Edmonton, as I said I really not opposed.

              In my highly biased personal opinion
              It also makes me laugh so much harder at expat's comment.

              If there's gonna be urban sprawl, it's gonna be our urban sprawl god-damn-it!!!
              As I said, I'm not opposed...go for it.

              But after all those threads on urban sprawl and blah, blah, blah, I just shake my head.

              In my highly biased personal opinion
              There is a practical reason for this I've already pointed out.
              www.decl.org

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by GreenSPACE View Post
                $3m in taxes from airport will shift from Leduc to Edmonton.
                So...sprawl is good if we get paid for it?

                Sorry GreenSpace not meant to be directed at you personally so please don't take it that way.

                I've made my points I am going away (shaking my head mind you) on this topic.

                In my highly biased personal opinion

                Comment


                • #38
                  Until the city includes LRT in all new development, and not a wedged-in afterthought at massive expense, it doesn't really matter if it's our sprawl or theirs.
                  "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
                    Originally posted by GreenSPACE View Post
                    $3m in taxes from airport will shift from Leduc to Edmonton.
                    So...sprawl is good if we get paid for it?

                    Sorry GreenSpace not meant to be directed at you personally so please don't take it that way.

                    I've made my points I am going away (shaking my head mind you) on this topic.

                    In my highly biased personal opinion
                    No, I don't take it that way, but thanks for clarifying.

                    I just know there are some complex political reasons for this. Yes, sprawl is sprawl, but I think we have a much better chance of curtailing with with our Council than leaving it to the County of Leduc. I know what they have proposed in the past and it was way, way worse.
                    www.decl.org

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      12-1 Council approval to move forward with the plan. The lone hold out of course being Sloan...
                      Don't feed the trolls!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        In fairness Tom, haven't seen any of the usual anti-sprawl suspects posting on this thread.

                        But yeah, a mite opposed to what we usually hear.

                        fwiw, I've never screamed high density, believing the most environmentally sound thing to do is live as close to work as possible (if you have to drive).

                        So, besides industrial uses, if this houses 20-30 thousand people who work in Nisku or at YEG - it's probably not so bad.
                        ... gobsmacked

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          McBoo
                          In fairness Tom, haven't seen any of the usual anti-sprawl suspects posting on this thread.
                          Ya know I can't agree on this, the number of times I saw anti sprawl posted by a huge range of posters from 2008 to 2011, all the nimby stuff etc...nah.

                          True, you haven't and a couple others on the thread can make the claim, but I've book marked this thread for the next time...
                          - Urban sprawl
                          - Grow in not out
                          - Grow up not out
                          - Greenfield development
                          - Local farming, local produce and food supply
                          Come up

                          Sorry sprawl is sprawl and after all I've seen on this forum over the years the forum is in justification mode.

                          It's not the annexation that bugs me, as I said I'm not opposed.

                          I have certainly not been a anti urban sprawl type, been consistent about how I feel on the topic (much like yourself).

                          But this bugs me to a whole new level and I can hardly wait to use it in another discussion.

                          But enough of my ranting, I've made my point.

                          Have a good day McBoo

                          In my highly biased personal opinion
                          Last edited by Thomas Hinderks; 05-03-2013, 02:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            And what do you think is going to happen to that farmland if Edmonton doesn't Annex it? It is scheduled to turn into Nisku #2. We have to look at the big picture also. Growing within works, but only for so long until property goes to high, and we are not competitive compared to other cities. Reality is that most people don't want to live in a highrise, or smaller rowhouse. Edmonton needs to make sure they are competitive with other cities. When you look at Areas like Summerside, you see a very dense community compared to sprawl in other cities. I'm not for American style sprawl, but I am for Edmonton being competitive so there are some trade offs. I also think they go west so that they can start pushing for Terwillagar road to turn into a freeway south to the airport.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              A huge part of this is the city finally gaining full control of the airport.
                              Don't feed the trolls!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Well I'm generally against sprawl and also feel that Edmonton's propensity to sprawl has not been good for the city. Ideally I'd prefer we develop as densely as possible on the land we already have. The irony here is that Edmonton annexing this land will likely lead to more of it remaining undeveloped for longer assuming that the Leduc County did indeed intend to develop less densely than Edmonton does.

                                So no, I don't like it; but I do recognize that it may be the best of two bad options.

                                "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X