[EtoV]

Here's the relevant section from the uses of the RS-1 zone, which is present in multiple residential zones in Vancouver:

or;

(technically this is up to 4 units on a lot, but the lot size required, means its on about the same footprint as what would be allowed to have 6 units (2 homes with 4 secondary suites))

I looked at the RF1 zone and this section of the Edmonton zoning, and it appears that the RF1 allows for both a garden suite, and a secondary suite on one lot, so the zoning in both Edmonton and Vancouvers main single family zoning appears to be functionally the same to me in terms of unit density, maybe I'm missing something though:
https://webdocs.edmonton.ca/infrapl...w/Part1/Special_Land/86__Secondary_Suites.htm

 

[IanO]

City building should happen in Edmonton's suburbs, too
Author of the article:Keren Tang

Opinion: City building should happen in Edmonton's suburbs, too

Given that a majority of Edmontonians, many new to Canada, are building their lives in suburban neighbourhoods, a question that I continually ask myself as a…

edmontonjournal.com

 

[TAS]

Does anybody know why the city moved away from the grid pattern of neighbourhood design? And when that started to happen?

 

[kcantor]

when it started to happen probably goes back to the 60's and 70's (mill woods, blue quill etc.) although you can see it in older subdivisions to a lesser degree (duggan, holyrood). some will say it coincides with the city delegating planning to the development community but that means overlooking mill woods and other city owned projects.

as for the why, some will say it was driven by a desire to create closed communities, others that it was driven by more efficient land use, others that it was driven by more efficient utility infrastructure, others that it focused too much on initial capital costs and not enough on operating costs while still others that it was driven by residential building codes and insufficient architectural input.

 

[TAS]

when it started to happen probably goes back to the 60's and 70's (mill woods, blue quill etc.) although you can see it in older subdivisions to a lesser degree (duggan, holyrood). some will say it coincides with the city delegating planning to the development community but that means overlooking mill woods and other city owned projects.

as for the why, some will say it was driven by a desire to create closed communities, others that it was driven by more efficient land use, others that it was driven by more efficient utility infrastructure, others that it focused too much on initial capital costs and not enough on operating costs while still others that it was driven by residential building codes and insufficient architectural input.

Thanks very much!

I lived for a short period of time in Griesbach but other than that I've always lived in a grid pattern neighbourhood including currently.

For the 15 minute city concept, I wonder if one has an advantage over the other. I definitely prefer grid pattern but that's what I'm most used to as well.

 

[trevorhayden]

Developers always falsely claim the City is making Edmonton less affordable (obviously a lie, what they really mean is it eats into their gargantuan profits). What are some good ideas to make Edmonton "less affordable"?

I will start the discussion:
- Solar panels required on all low density housing
- row housing shall be the primary housing form
- roads will primarily be for walking and biking and developers will need to pay for them
- mass transit and parks will be built before the houses

 

[thommyjo]

Developers always falsely claim the City is making Edmonton less affordable (obviously a lie, what they really mean is it eats into their gargantuan profits). What are some good ideas to make Edmonton "less affordable"?

I will start the discussion:
- Solar panels required on all low density housing
- row housing shall be the primary housing form
- roads will primarily be for walking and biking and developers will need to pay for them
- mass transit and parks will be built before the houses

Yeah, I don’t get why new suburbs don’t have MUPs and protected bike intersections as the default at this point. Make the developers cover these costs if they’re going to keep adding to our tax burden…

 

[Oilers99]

Developers always falsely claim the City is making Edmonton less affordable (obviously a lie, what they really mean is it eats into their gargantuan profits). What are some good ideas to make Edmonton "less affordable"?

I will start the discussion:
- Solar panels required on all low density housing
- row housing shall be the primary housing form
- roads will primarily be for walking and biking and developers will need to pay for them
- mass transit and parks will be built before the houses

you don't really know what you are talking about - 'gargantuan profits' are not in the greenfield development industry

 

[trevorhayden]

Sorry, I forgot those profits are already spent on reimbursing for corporate yachts and Mexican vacations before the money hits the balance sheets.

 

[jason403]

Sorry, I forgot those profits are already spent on reimbursing for corporate yachts and Mexican vacations before the money hits the balance sheets.

Simply not accurate.

 

[Oilers99]

Sorry, I forgot those profits are already spent on reimbursing for corporate yachts and Mexican vacations before the money hits the balance sheets.

you seem to have a bone to pick here. greenfield profits are not what you think they are and with the city layering on more and more requirements, it will be less so going forward further eroding affordability.

 

[thommyjo]

you seem to have a bone to pick here. greenfield profits are not what you think they are and with the city layering on more and more requirements, it will be less so going forward further eroding affordability.

Affordability? Or delaying/offloading true costs of utilities, infrastructure, and quality to other taxpayers?

 

[TAS]

Some numbers from Halifax to illustrate urban vs. suburban.

 

[TAS]

All about the amenities: 15-minute city concept in high demand in Edmonton

Despite conspiracy theorists trying to co-opt the concept, having most of life's necessities nearby simply makes sense to most people.

edmontonjournal.com

 

[thommyjo]

All about the amenities: 15-minute city concept in high demand in Edmonton

Despite conspiracy theorists trying to co-opt the concept, having most of life's necessities nearby simply makes sense to most people.

edmontonjournal.com

Glad to see a positive article on this. Although realtors consistently amaze me with how poor their knowledge is of our city and basically urban planning concepts. Here’s the great example he gave of….summerside… as a 15 min community (which it is not by any measure ahha).

Car dependent sprawl with 40min walks to the only grocery store. Where you cross a 6 lane by 7 lane intersection complete with slip lanes too! The trudge through a sea of asphalt to a storefront with no sidewalks. Totally walkable.