News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

I'm seeing some of the online reaction to the district planning and 15 min city thing and I really want to bang my head against the wall.

And a lot of it are rural Canadians or non Edmontonians voicing their concerns lol
 
The_Cat said:
The future with 15-minute cities:
Click to expand...
I was thinking more…

IMG_6813.jpeg
 
Haven't explored it yet, but this could be a good way to follow trends pre and post-ZBR.
Screenshot_20240627_144558_Drive.png
Screenshot_20240628_100407_Drive.png
 
edmonton.taproot.news

Edmonton seeks input on core properties ripe for redevelopment

The City of Edmonton intends to proactively rezone properties in parts of the city that it has determined are ideal for increased density, and it's asking for resident feedback on where larger, multi-family residential buildings and other amenities would work best in these spots.
edmonton.taproot.news edmonton.taproot.news
 
EtoV said:
The Edmonton Journal published an opinion piece that claims the new ZBL has made affordability worse. It uses some questionable logic and cherry picked stats to back up it's claim.

https://edmontonjournal.com/opinion...w-zoning-infill-rules-are-making-things-worse
Click to expand...
I believe we should have more density in older areas, but also feel there is some truth here, in that changing zoning can lead to increased land prices, which benefits the current owners or developers but can impact affordability.
 
It's better for density to increase in already wealthy centrally located neighbourhoods than the alternative of jumping to new areas closer to the Henday.

It's also great for affordable areas to welcome an increase in the housing supply.

Why am I supposed to be bothered by new Glenora residents being a short walk away from 124th street and the new LRT line? Demand for this price point isn't going anywhere.
 
David A said:
I believe we should have more density in older areas, but also feel there is some truth here, in that changing zoning can lead to increased land prices, which benefits the current owners or developers but can impact affordability.
Click to expand...
The data from San fransico and San Jose vs Minneapolis or Auckland would tell a different story. Mass rezonings are better than artificially constraining it and then only releasing small amounts for redevelopment. Ex. Oakridge in vancouver…crazy prices. But a massive redevelopment that’s a product of a primarily SFH area that has high demand and low supply of housing.

Blanket rezoning keeps values more balanced vs just a few land parcels seeing massive spikes once rezoned.
 
^ Yup. Housing price increases are mostly attributed to the substantial increase in population here in Edmonton over the past 2-3 years + flight to affordability relative to literally every other major (1m+) metro area in Canada. Next question.
 
thommyjo said:
The data from San fransico and San Jose vs Minneapolis or Auckland would tell a different story. Mass rezonings are better than artificially constraining it and then only releasing small amounts for redevelopment. Ex. Oakridge in vancouver…crazy prices. But a massive redevelopment that’s a product of a primarily SFH area that has high demand and low supply of housing.

Blanket rezoning keeps values more balanced vs just a few land parcels seeing massive spikes once rezoned.
Click to expand...
San Fransisco is still far from being affordable although WFH in tech has decimated real estate there and it would be a shame if all those beautiful older buildings were torn down and replaced by high rises.

I actually feel less restrictive zoning here is probably a good thing on the whole, but some of the cheerleaders for it are so smug and dismissive I feel I have to point out it is not perfect.
 
Pretty sure that was their point. San Francisco is highly restrictive in their rezonings and the price reflects that
 
EtoV said:
Pretty sure that was their point. San Francisco is highly restrictive in their rezonings and the price reflects that
Click to expand...
I don't know the current state of zoning in San Francisco, but if no mass rezoning has happened there then how do we know it would reduce prices? Isn't that just using a hypothetical prediction to support an argument.

A good example would be places where there were mass rezonings and prices were then reduced, which is what I thought was what was being said, but perhaps not.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top