Wax
New Member
Like I agree when you say there is ugly infill, but I honestly have no clue how you could reasonably make it “nicer” without upping the costs for it.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Kosy123
Senior Member
7580 units out of 17,780 in 2025 were in the redeveloping area. That's 43 % of all units in the city. Kinda cool to see that the city's goal of 50% infill is already close to achievable, with not even 3 years since the zoning bylaw renewal was implemented.
ADob
Active Member
No cheap cladding like all the variants of siding we see all over the city for one. Some attempt to blend better into the neighbourhood, scale-wise, so that your yard isn't suddenly overlooked by a looming behemoth. I honestly don't think it would take more than some thoughtful design choices. Some developers are managing to do it and I doubt their housing product is somehow prohibitively expensive because they're not generating ugly crap.
trevorhayden
Active Member
Edmonton is a remote place. It's hard and expensive to bring in more aesthetic materials.
whattheheck
Active Member
minimum window sizes, use of only select materials etc. i mean, my goodness, it doesn't even have to be administratively bureaucratic. create an AI model with the minimum standards outlined, submit the design and have the AI determine if it gets the pass or not. If it does not, then have the AI correct it and make recommendations.
whattheheck
Active Member
Well, based on SO MANY of the original historic buildings that went up in this city (which were then all torn down), I'd say you're 100% wrong.
And in the current day, based for example, on how nice Stadium Yards worked out, it's another example where you're wrong with your statement.
kcantor
Senior Member
The following is a comparison of various siding options psf:
- Vinyl Siding: $4.50 – $12.00
- Engineered Wood (e.g., LP SmartSide, CanExel):$9.00 – $20.00
- Hardie Board / Fiber Cement: $10.00 – $18.00
- Stucco (Acrylic): $10.00 – $23.50+ CAD
- Wood Siding (Cedar/Pine): $10.00 – $25.00
- Brick Siding: $25.00 – $55.00
- Stone Veneer: $20.00 – $45.00
Going from smaller to larger windows would add a nominal premium to the cost of the windows but most of that would balanced off by the equivalent reduction in siding area.
Adding some articulation and some detailing might add a small premium but it would also facilitate transitions between materials.
So let’s assume a total of $5k per unit just to have a number. And let’s assume that 80% of that is additional mortgage debt at 5% and 20% is additional equity at 10%. That would add roughly $25 per month in rent or 1.3 - 1.5% of rents in the $1,600 - $1,800 per month range. The capitalized value of that additional rent would also be greater than the $5k incremental cost.
We’re getting crap not because it’s hard and expensive but because too many of the architects and developers involved simply don’t even remotely care about the aesthetics and some would say the city doesn’t either or they wouldn’t get away with it.
Attachments
ADob
Active Member
Case in point:
policyenthusiast
Senior Member
I was going to say "different cladding wouldn't have saved this one" and made an image to substantiate that point:
But I was wrong. This does look better.
ADob
Active Member
Maybe, but it still looms over the neighbour, is architecturally dull, and contributes nothing to the pleasantness of the area. My cousin's family lives down this street and it went from being a very cute, cozy place filled with character, to an area of gargantuan, hideous, inelegant blocks that make me understand NIMBYs like never before.
policyenthusiast
Senior Member
We need better support from CMHC, Land Titles, and the zoning bylaw in the development of cottage courts. It's the perfect happy medium, and it's what buyers actually want.
High density, low massing, possibly individually titled & sellable, with lower overall cost. I would be more than happy with 600 square feet if it came with privacy in the city.
thommyjo
Senior Member
These are great. But calling them high density isn’t honest.
They’re small houses, with a shared courtyard. But you can still only get 6-8 on 1-2 full sized lots. And those are tiny units… not the 1200-1800 most infills are getting currently. So they won’t appeal to everyone. Not really an apples to apples comparison.
policyenthusiast
Senior Member
Perhaps not, especially not when comparing to something like an apartment building. But nothing exists in the market for people who want an independent stucture at a lower cost.
thommyjo
Senior Member
We have swaths of 1200sqft or smaller bungalows and stacked townhomes in our city for under 300k. There’s plenty in the market. There’s also tons of garage suites.
I agree with you that the shared courtyard style housing is awesome and there’s tons of benefits to it. But let’s just not call it high density or compare to most infill. It’s low density, especially if you’re comparing sqft of living space and not just units. And the cost of the courtyard space is reflected in the housing costs.
You can have 8 units on a lots in the current 4x4 rowhouse style with 1200sqft main homes and 600sqft basements. 7200sqft plus garages.
Or you can have 4 units of courtyard homes that are 900sqft. No garages I’m assuming either? 3600sqft, or half the liveable space.
24 people can live in the row houses, likely 12 or less in the courtyard homes.
So they’re great for liveability, but they’re less dense and will cost more than standard infill built forms.
policyenthusiast
Senior Member
Yes, I'm agreeing with you about the density. Not exactly "swaths" of bungalows in this price category though.