Gronk!
Senior Member
If City Council votes "yes" to this proposal then it defeats the purpose of infill housing.
Besides, for all we know these properties will likely still remain vacant long after this proposal vote!
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
If City Council votes "yes" to this proposal then it defeats the purpose of infill housing.
Besides, for all we know these properties will likely still remain vacant long after this proposal vote!
David A
Senior Member
Filling a vacant lot or lots with something comparable to whats around is not a step backwards.
BrettB
Active Member
That's certainly one of the arguments a neighbour put forward in the comments
policyenthusiast
Active Member
SF detached are an important (albeit overrepresented) part of the housing mix. Anything is better than a vacant lot.
Infills are usually better suited to replace derelict/run-down homes on large lots anyway.
fromyeg
Active Member
View attachment 636375
Two lots on 76th Ave in Ritchie.
Public Engagement Session | Ritchie Rezoning
780-695-0245 Ritchie Rezoning Welcome! Welcome to the public engagement page for the rezoning application at 9703 and 9707 – 76 Avenue NW in Edmonton’s Ritchie neighbourhood. This page provides residents, businesses, and stakeholders with information about the proposed rezoning and a space to...timberhaus.ca
Not often that we see lots getting “down-zoned.”
View attachment 636376
The tree in question.
These are the lots in question.
Timberhaus plans to build a couple multifamily buildings (and save the tree) according to their website.
These lots have been empty for years, will be great to get something built.
The rezoning is okay.
PeterNotParker
New Member
To clarify, I believe you can still build a multiplex. They want to downzone from medium density (apartments) to small residential (which includes all the multiplexes).
BrettB
Active Member
Based on my read of the proposal, there could be up to 12 units on the two lots
Gronk!
Senior Member
Thanks guys. I can stop having my heart attack now!
PeterNotParker
New Member
Save the heart attack for the next municipal election when candidates campaign on reversing the zoning renewal
policyenthusiast
Active Member
Don't say it. Don't think it.Save the heart attack for the next municipal election when candidates campaign on reversing the zoning renewal
thommyjo
Senior Member
Interested to see if we get a lot of 3 story projects or not with the new bylaw. this looks to be a 4plex 2 front, 2 back.
policyenthusiast
Active Member
Was speaking to a member of Council and had it flagged for me that the Zoning Bylaw Renewal one-year report will be presented in June. Based on how it went when they were trying to pass the Bylaw, Council is expecting a great deal of NIMBY complainants to speak regarding the report presentation.
If you have a favourable perspective or are just well-educated regarding infill development, it might be a good idea to share your perspective. I'm sure they would appreciate some expert voices cutting through the noise.
You can register to speak here, either virtually or in-person: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfjK1JQOPRWVORUVKsSbRn3yLN5E9vcVLu3nifMO4N1ZfmgFg/viewform
The meeting will be on June 3rd, at the Urban Planning and Economy meeting.
If you have a favourable perspective or are just well-educated regarding infill development, it might be a good idea to share your perspective. I'm sure they would appreciate some expert voices cutting through the noise.
You can register to speak here, either virtually or in-person: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfjK1JQOPRWVORUVKsSbRn3yLN5E9vcVLu3nifMO4N1ZfmgFg/viewform
The meeting will be on June 3rd, at the Urban Planning and Economy meeting.
CplKlinger
Senior Member
The final drafts are up on their website. Below is the email they sent out:
Priority Growth Area Rezoning | City of Edmonton
Priority Growth Area Rezoning will target sites within priority nodes and corridors to incentivize demand and investment in these important areas.www.edmonton.ca
I saw a sign advertising this today.
The first I’d heard of Priority Growth Area Rezoning.
Three areas of focus: University/Garneau, Wîhkwêntôwin/124th and Stony Plain Road.
Essentially the City proactively rezoning properties to encourage development.
There is opportunity for engagement if anyone is interested!
Thank you again to those of you who took the time to provide feedback in November 2024 on the City-driven rezonings proposed for five key main street and urban centre areas in Edmonton - known as Priority Growth Area Rezonings.
The City evaluated the feedback received, along with technical and policy considerations, to inform a final set of rezoning proposals for each of the areas. The rezoning proposals and associated maps, as well as a What We Heard Report summarizing feedback and how it was used to inform the final proposals, is now available at edmonton.ca/PriorityGrowthAreaRezoning. Over the month of April, landowners, Edmontonians and businesses in the areas selected for rezoning will be notified through a variety of channels, including postcard mailers, lawn signs, and social media, to ensure they are aware of the final draft proposal.
The proposed rezonings will be brought to a City Council Public Hearing for a decision on May 20, 2025. Edmontonians can share their thoughts on the proposed rezonings directly with Council by requesting to speak when the Public Hearing agenda becomes available on May 1, 2025. The project team will also notify Edmontonians, businesses and its project email list when the agenda is available.
Should you like to discuss the proposed rezonings with City Staff or ask clarifying questions prior to the Public Hearing date, you may do so via email at pgarezoning@edmonton.ca or by visiting the project webpage and signing up for a Chat with a Planner.
There is also a form available on the project webpage to submit comments. Please be aware that comments collected at this stage will not inform any further changes to the proposed rezonings prior to Public Hearing. Comments collected will be summarized, along with other feedback collected throughout the duration of the project, as part of the City Council Public Hearing to ensure members of Council are aware of the public’s perspectives prior to making a decision.
kcantor
Senior Member
I have been thinking about the proliferation of infill which the new zoning has successfully encouraged and about the quality of the design of some of that infill. Some of it has been outstanding, some of it has been mediocre and some of it is an embarrassment. I know and support the ability to obtain permits with surety and in a timely manner but there is currently a disconnect here that I think we need to address and I would suggest the following:
1. If the density is the same as what currently exists on the site plus what could be added without demolishing the current density (something I think we should encourage more than we do but that’s perhaps a different discussion), then the DP and BP should be processed as we are currently processing them.
2. If the density is greater than (a), the DP process should include the additional step of obtaining the approval of a “Residential Urban Design Committee” similar to what is required from Urban Design Committee although possibly with a smaller panel that meets more frequently so as to minimize any potential project delay (noting that higher quality design will minimize any potential delay). This would also go a long way to minimizing neighbourhood objections over some of the butt ugly that is being imposed on them now.
1. If the density is the same as what currently exists on the site plus what could be added without demolishing the current density (something I think we should encourage more than we do but that’s perhaps a different discussion), then the DP and BP should be processed as we are currently processing them.
2. If the density is greater than (a), the DP process should include the additional step of obtaining the approval of a “Residential Urban Design Committee” similar to what is required from Urban Design Committee although possibly with a smaller panel that meets more frequently so as to minimize any potential project delay (noting that higher quality design will minimize any potential delay). This would also go a long way to minimizing neighbourhood objections over some of the butt ugly that is being imposed on them now.
policyenthusiast
Active Member
Minimum design standards are a hot button issue in the industry right now. The main criticism people have of it is that the ugly buildings are National Building Code compliant, and we have a shortage of housing. I'm not sure if it justifies having eyesore buildings in neighborhoods for the next 70 years.