[thommyjo]

My bad. Those projects aren’t actually the primary booster (although there are many of them being made). Glenwood got a boost from 3 projects of 12 “microunits”. Supportive housing from jasper place wellness centre. Bit of a category cheat.

Elise Stolte: These tiny suites could be Edmonton's answer to affordable housing

The numbers are painful.

edmontonjournal.com

 

[EtoV]

My bad. Those projects aren’t actually the primary booster (although there are many of them being made). Glenwood got a boost from 3 projects of 12 “microunits”. Supportive housing from jasper place wellness centre. Bit of a category cheat.

Elise Stolte: These tiny suites could be Edmonton's answer to affordable housing

The numbers are painful.

edmontonjournal.com

Ah that makes sense, yes I've seen those row housing going up on corner lots, but it didn't make sense why there would be so many more of them in glenwood than other neighbourhoods haha. The ones you posted look pretty good though

 

[Oilers99]

I live in west jasper place, right next to glenwood. The trend in our neighbourhoods is to tear down corner lots to build 4 townhouses with legal basement suites. So 8 units. A lot of them look really great. I imagine many corners will become these. And because a lot more homes are run down in our area, it’s probably financially feasible to do these townhomes and sell for under 450k vs in an area like Crestwood.

I really like them! View attachment 408749View attachment 408750

Suites don't count for amount of units under the City's definition. Not sure why but it would also boost greenfield density numbers as new builds are frequently built with suites (or they are added after the homeowner moves in).

 

[thommyjo]

Suites don't count for amount of units under the City's definition. Not sure why but it would also boost greenfield density numbers as new builds are frequently built with suites (or they are added after the homeowner moves in).

The infill reported linked above by Ian showed a breakdown of garage suites and secondary suites. So they’re counted in that!

 

[IanO]

Mick Graham chats with Ryan and Mariah Infill Development Association of Edmonton about all things infill.

 

[God]

I’ve noticed “missing middle” housing has somewhat taken off in Edmonton compared to other cities.

 

[IanO]

I’ve noticed “missing middle” housing has somewhat taken off in Edmonton compared to other cities.

Calgary, Van, Vic, MTL, Tor, Ottawa all WELL ahead of us... but it is encouraging to see how much more Edmonton is now doing. That said, we need to double todays number to get to where we need/want to be.

 

[ChazYEG]

Calgary, Van, Vic, MTL, Tor, Ottawa all WELL ahead of us... but it is encouraging to see how much more Edmonton is now doing. That said, we need to double todays number to get to where we need/want to be.

I wonder where you get your numbers from, man...

 

[IanO]

IDEA just chatted about the need to double infill numbers as recently as last week.

As for being ahead of us, go for a bike or drive around any of those cities (Ottawa might be on par) and they are 2, 5, 10x compared to us and easily 10-15yrs ahead with general infill.

 

[archited]

All of Canada's "older" cities will have developed infill in the early 20th Century -- historical build-out -- and as they became land-scarce their densities will have necessarily increased, especially true for Vancouver, Toronto, and Victoria. Edmonton is a relatively "young" city with no physical boundaries and so has grown extremely quickly (also true for Canada's other young cities -- Red Deer, Lethbridge, Calgary, Saskatoon, etc.). Ergo, a pointless comparison. Edmonton's density will continue as demand dictates. Edmonton is in the catbird seat when it comes to affordable build-out whether examining density, expansion, economy, focus, opportunity or hinterland support.

 

[EtoV]

^Edmonton has a long way to go even compared to Calgary, which is a very comparable city. It's not really a debate that Calgary is seeing way more infill, and way more typologies. The architecture is much better as well.

I will disagree with Ian regarding Vancouver. Vancouver is seeing a decent amount of housing, but most of it is large scale projects in a small amount of the city. There isn't a lot of missing middle housing going up for the size of the City, because single family areas are still basically untouchable

 

[occidentalcapital]

Edmonton is doing well on skinny homes driven by small scale developers. Good architecture and a lot of activity. But the larger-scale developers who could put up a 6-8 story leave a lot to be desired. The architectural quality is not there, with a few exceptions. It just seems like that local expertise is underdeveloped.

 

[David A]

All of Canada's "older" cities will have developed infill in the early 20th Century -- historical build-out -- and as they became land-scarce their densities will have necessarily increased, especially true for Vancouver, Toronto, and Victoria. Edmonton is a relatively "young" city with no physical boundaries and so has grown extremely quickly (also true for Canada's other young cities -- Red Deer, Lethbridge, Calgary, Saskatoon, etc.). Ergo, a pointless comparison. Edmonton's density will continue as demand dictates. Edmonton is in the catbird seat when it comes to affordable build-out whether examining density, expansion, economy, focus, opportunity or hinterland support.

Yes, it is not a meaningful comparison with cities that have been around 50 to 150 years more. Cities that were built pre WWII were designed with more density as transportation methods were different.

Quite frankly, it doesn't matter how dense Victoria is or not as their downtown was developed a bit differently in 1862, similarly with Ottawa. When you look at cities at Toronto, yes they have an older dense core, but also a lot of suburban sprawl.

To its credit, I think Vancouver is recently trying to make some progress in more density outside the downtown core, which is the area more visible to visitors, although I gather the current Broadway plans are quite contentious.

However, my impression in NIMBY's still rule in T.O.

 

[thommyjo]

^Edmonton has a long way to go even compared to Calgary, which is a very comparable city. It's not really a debate that Calgary is seeing way more infill, and way more typologies. The architecture is much better as well.

I will disagree with Ian regarding Vancouver. Vancouver is seeing a decent amount of housing, but most of it is large scale projects in a small amount of the city. There isn't a lot of missing middle housing going up for the size of the City, because single family areas are still basically untouchable

What? Have you seen the Cambie corridor?? They might have more medium density on that one street than our entire city excluding the cheap henday 5 story wood builds.

Vancouver is building dozens of 4-8 story projects a year throughout the entire city. Yes DT peninsula is mostly big towers, but much of the arterials are becoming almost exclusively medium density.

 

[thommyjo]

This is one street in Vancouver. All of these are on just 1 road…

Edmontons not even in the ballpark friends. We shouldn’t lie to ourselves.