policyenthusiast
Senior Member
Picture doesn't quite do it justice, but what can you do. Fingers crossed they don't ruin it with cheap cladding.
|
|
|
General Infill Discussion
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Picture doesn't quite do it justice, but what can you do. Fingers crossed they don't ruin it with cheap cladding.
CplKlinger
Senior Member
"At 10.5 metres, a new building can comfortably accommodate four levels: a basement, main floor, and two additional storeys. In practice, this enables a pair of family-sized homes stacked atop one another. The lower unit is no longer just a basement suite; it includes its living space on the main floor with just the sleeping areas in the basement, while the upper unit spans two full storeys above. This configuration delivers higher density while providing functional, livable spaces in both homes.
[...]
"Take one metre out of this design to meet the proposed 9.5-metre limit, however, and the livability of one or both units is compromised. Either the lower unit gets pushed back underground, or the uppermost level is compressed into a partial storey that’s useful for storage, maybe, but less so for living. With just one metre lost, what had been a livable design to provide Edmontonians what they want becomes compromised, or just left unbuilt.
[...]
"This proposed change is not happening in a vacuum. In some established neighbourhoods, new multi-family housing developments are unwelcome. Council appears to be responding to that frustration with a visible, easy-to-understand change — a one-metre reduction in height — that signals action but doesn’t meaningfully address the underlying concerns. Will losing one metre substantially reduce shadows for existing residents? Likely not. Will it limit the types of housing designs that people are asking for? Likely yes. A frustrating part of this discussion is also the obvious contradictions. As council considers reducing housing height in established neighbourhoods to 9.5 metres, it is also working within a policy framework that aims to meet climate targets and limit property tax increases.
"Removing appealing housing options from the core will only make these targets harder to hit. Meanwhile, council allows housing as tall as 12 metres in new and developing neighbourhoods. It’s already easier to deliver desirable, functional housing on the edges of the city than within it, but council may double down and widen that gap."
edmontonjournal.com
[...]
"Take one metre out of this design to meet the proposed 9.5-metre limit, however, and the livability of one or both units is compromised. Either the lower unit gets pushed back underground, or the uppermost level is compressed into a partial storey that’s useful for storage, maybe, but less so for living. With just one metre lost, what had been a livable design to provide Edmontonians what they want becomes compromised, or just left unbuilt.
[...]
"This proposed change is not happening in a vacuum. In some established neighbourhoods, new multi-family housing developments are unwelcome. Council appears to be responding to that frustration with a visible, easy-to-understand change — a one-metre reduction in height — that signals action but doesn’t meaningfully address the underlying concerns. Will losing one metre substantially reduce shadows for existing residents? Likely not. Will it limit the types of housing designs that people are asking for? Likely yes. A frustrating part of this discussion is also the obvious contradictions. As council considers reducing housing height in established neighbourhoods to 9.5 metres, it is also working within a policy framework that aims to meet climate targets and limit property tax increases.
"Removing appealing housing options from the core will only make these targets harder to hit. Meanwhile, council allows housing as tall as 12 metres in new and developing neighbourhoods. It’s already easier to deliver desirable, functional housing on the edges of the city than within it, but council may double down and widen that gap."
Opinion: The one metre that could kill better housing
What could cutting just one metre from housing really do? In Edmonton, quite a lot.
edmontonjournal.com
Wax
New Member
Has anyone seen any infill go up in neighbourhoods with no alleys? (Driveway access only) im curious how some of the newer (1970s) culdesac neighbourhoods will infill.
