[thommyjo]

If there is such demand then there should be no problem, really.

It’s cheap and easy to build 6 story stick frames with surface parking.

It’s harder to build truly urban integrated TOD. But the latter moves us towards all our city goals. The former literally pushes us farther from our goals. Which is why I can’t get my head around why we keep approving them and setting density limits in car dependent suburbs with bad transit.

Edgemont has hundreds and hundreds of apartments units built and being built. And it has literally no transit, and will never have transit that’s efficient even if they add 1-2 routes. It’s stupid planning to add so much density in areas with limit road access, no transit, no employment hubs, etc.

Meanwhile there’s hundreds of plots of land within the henday meeting those criteria. We need to better focus our growth or the city plan is pointless. Substantial completion standards could help.

 

[Oilers99]

It’s cheap and easy to build 6 story stick frames with surface parking.

It’s harder to build truly urban integrated TOD. But the latter moves us towards all our city goals. The former literally pushes us farther from our goals. Which is why I can’t get my head around why we keep approving them and setting density limits in car dependent suburbs with bad transit.

Edgemont has hundreds and hundreds of apartments units built and being built. And it has literally no transit, and will never have transit that’s efficient even if they add 1-2 routes. It’s stupid planning to add so much density in areas with limit road access, no transit, no employment hubs, etc.

Meanwhile there’s hundreds of plots of land within the henday meeting those criteria. We need to better focus our growth or the city plan is pointless. Substantial completion standards could help.

It is not easy to build 6 storey stick frame with surface parking, this is categorically false. It is very difficult for them to pencil in both greenfield and infill for major GCs as well as major integrated developer-builders who self manage/perform. It is a serious science in how to design a building then build said building for something that is profitable. Throwing out blind statements, like they are cheap and easy to build without having the background to further your agenda is stupid.

 

[NicolBolas]

People go where economic activity, growth and jobs are. We can't force people to live where those things are not.

If we want more people to live downtown we need to make it more attractive, not make other areas less attractive.

This is a true statement.

I lived and worked in Houston for quite awhile and really Edmonton is more like that city then we ever be similar to a New York or Chicago.

Houston has a pretty compact downtown and lots of the energy companies are in the suburbs.

 

[David A]

This is a true statement.

I lived and worked in Houston for quite awhile and really Edmonton is more like that city then we ever be similar to a New York or Chicago.

Houston has a pretty compact downtown and lots of the energy companies are in the suburbs.

We are certainly not New York. I am not so sure about Houston, but if we want to have a more vibrant downtown we have to work at it and focus in bringing more economic activity into the core.

 

[NicolBolas]

We are certainly not New York. I am not so sure about Houston, but if we want to have a more vibrant downtown we have to work at it and focus in bringing more economic activity into the core.

I mean that in the sense that we will always have a decentralized work force, not one concentrated in a downtown core.

 

[kcantor]

..,

Edgemont has hundreds and hundreds of apartments units built and being built. And it has literally no transit, and will never have transit that’s efficient even if they add 1-2 routes. It’s stupid planning to add so much density in areas with limit road access, no transit, no employment hubs, etc.

….

Where do you think the thousands of people that live in those hundreds and hundreds of apartment units work?

 

[thommyjo]

Where do you think the thousands of people that live in those hundreds and hundreds of apartment units work?

Based on traffic, inside the henday.

Knowing a few friends who have rented in those apartments, they worked downtown, at the UofA, at a school near the whitemud, at the Mis, at an industrial area near 75st.

Most didn’t choose those apartments because of proximity to jobs or even a high desirability to the area. They chose because of price, unit specs, and availability. I also have friends who live DT in new buildings, who chose those because they were new, lots of units/promos, and they don’t even work centrally.

I think people are more flexible in where they live than we sometimes act, which is why I think ensuring density is aligned with the city plan won’t suddenly see all these people end up in spruce grove just cause we didn’t build a 6 story apartment in west secord. People choose to live where we have availability of housing.

 

[David A]

I mean that in the sense that we will always have a decentralized work force, not one concentrated in a downtown core.

I understand your point, in some ways we probably are more similar to Houston. Although, there is a very significant difference in urban development between Canadian and US cities.

However, the type of city we are it is not totally predetermined and unchangeable either. It is also up to us to choose to develop how we want.

 

[NicolBolas]

I understand your point, in some ways we probably are more similar to Houston. Although, there is a very significant difference in urban development between Canadian and US cities.

However, the type of city we are it is not totally predetermined and unchangeable either. It is also up to us to choose to develop how we want.

What is the difference in urban development between the two countries? I'm not being snarky, just genuinely interested in your opinion on this.

 

[kcantor]

What is the difference in urban development between the two countries? I'm not being snarky, just genuinely interested in your opinion on this.

One of the biggest differences is in how they’re structured and how they’re financed. American cities have independent legal status. They’re not “creatures of the state” The way Canadian cities (except Vancouver) are “creatures of the province.

Mayors in US cities are more independent of councils in that they have their own budgets that they completely control without requiring council approval.

US cities are also able to directly secure federal support (ie money) for a host of things, some of them discretionary on the cities’ part, something that is not afforded to Canadian cities.

 

[CplKlinger]

I can’t get my head around why we keep approving them and setting density limits in car dependent suburbs with bad transit.

The City Plan (full document here) maps out a gradual transition toward infill as Edmonton reaches different population milestones, going off the decision not to annex any more land for development. The city website still has all of the technical reports and analyses that informed the city plan, if you want to learn more about how this phasing was developed.

 

[David A]

What is the difference in urban development between the two countries? I'm not being snarky, just genuinely interested in your opinion on this.

I had a relative who did property development in Texas and he commented to me on the very minimal municipal development regulation there as compared to here. He made it sound like you could basically built whatever you wanted, where ever you wanted. So, less regulation in the much of the US, particularly in certain states.

US also has much lower fuel taxes and so it is much more geared towards spread out low density suburban development in general both economically and culturally.

 

[constance_chlore]

I had a relative who did property development in Texas and he commented to me on the very minimal municipal development regulation there as compared to here. He made it sound like you could basically built whatever you wanted, where ever you wanted. So, less regulation in the much of the US, particularly in certain states.

US also has much lower fuel taxes and so it is much more geared towards spread out low density suburban development in general both economically and culturally.

Houston is notorious for a lack of zoning, and other parts of Texas might be similar, but in general I don't think it's true that major US cities have less regulation. For example, California cities are notorious for how tough it is to build anything.

I would say transit investment is considerably lower in the US. I lived for a long time in metro Detroit, which is easily more than double the Edmonton region but has almost no public transit. Detroit is especially bad, but in general Canadian cities have better transit than US cities of similar size/importance. US suburbs are also more sprawling—Americans often find it bizarre to drive through Mississauga or Surrey and see high-rises everywhere.

 

[policyenthusiast]

View attachment 669031

Weird that they didn't turn on any lights for these photos.

 

[thommyjo]

The City Plan (full document here) maps out a gradual transition toward infill as Edmonton reaches different population milestones, going off the decision not to annex any more land for development. The city website still has all of the technical reports and analyses that informed the city plan, if you want to learn more about how this phasing was developed.
View attachment 670103

View attachment 670102

Yeah, I’ve read through this a few times and really like a lot of it. Which is also why I feel like some of the current approach isn’t aligned. Even take, for example, none of our new city rec centres being integrated with LRT. Or nodes of significant density being built in areas with low transit service.

Meanwhile, areas with strong transit service see little growth. I know the redeveloping areas are a lot more complex and the city has less carrots/sticks to deploy to influence. But we need to keep working on it. If our goal is a 50% non car mode share for transportation, but the vast majority of new housing is car dependent (and much will never be able to shift away from that, unlike mature areas), then if doesn’t feel aligned.