INTA iSkgrie,A. WI-11r;.-7rth
*PA
r4t L
TAT,
44, ,
ttri
Ntireate. "".4
jat
IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON DECEMBER 31, 1983
tiTz.
P.
TIC CITY OF
0
laril
PLAMONG [UNARY
ARCH INES 1983 - 21
DO NOT REMOVE FROM LOBRARY ,C4WPINgf kWaSgl.'S,
••• ••• ••••• •••••• .•• •••• ••••••• ••••••• • •••1
STATUS OF RESIDENTIAL LAND IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON DECEMBER 31,1983
PREPARED BY: CITY OF EDMONTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
11 1111 111111 11111/11 1D1111(1/11ID111111111161111111111
• • ••• • • • • • • •
Table of Contents
Page
Page
Executive Summary CHAPTER I SCOPE OF THE REPORT 1-1 Purpose 1-2 Report Organization 1-3 Note on Inventory
CHAPTER 6 CITY OWNED RESIDENTIAL LAND
2
CHAPTER 2 DATA, SOURCES AND DEFINITIONS 2-1 Data and Data Sources 2-2 Definitions
4 5
CHAPTER 3 POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS 3-1 Population Changes 3-2 Household Development
6 6
CHAPTER 4 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON 4-1 Housing Stock 4-2 Mix of New Development 4-3 Housing Starts and Completions
8 ID 11
CHAPTER 5 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN (ASP) AREAS 5-1 Supply of Unsubdivided (Raw) Land in Area Structure Plan Areas 5-2 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations 5-3 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land 5-4 Residential Land Servicing 5-5 Supply of Serviced Residential Land 5-6 Residential Building Permits 5-7 Housing Stock in the ASP Areas 5-8 Analysis of Unbuilt Single Family Lots 5-9 Revolving Trunk Fund 5-10 Redistricting Issue
2 13 14 15 16 17 20 22 26 27
6-1 The Supply of City Owned Raw Land 6-2 City Owned Subdivided Residential Land 6-3 Servicing Program for City Owned Lots 6-4 City Owned Serviced Residential Land 6-5 Sales of City Owned Residential Lots
28 28 29 30 31
CHAPTER 7 CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION
33
CHAPTER 8 CASTLE DOWNS
37
CHAPTER 9 CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS
45
CHAPTER 10 KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS
59
CHAPTER 11 LAKE DISTRICT
68
CHAPTER 12 THE MEADOWS
77
CHAPTER 13 MILL WOODS
78
CHAPTER 14 PILOT SOUND
87
CHAPTER 15 RIVERBEND
91
CHAPTER 16 WEST JASPER PLACE
100
• • • • • • •
• • •
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Status of Residential Land report 1983 is an inventory of the vacant residential land in the area structure plan (ASP) areas and a record of the annual absorption of serviced lots as measured by building permit approvals.
35000
Findings I.
There is now vacant, serviced residential land with a capacity of 28,695 potential dwelling units in the ASP areas of the city, down approximately 8% from 1982 (Table 1).
• • • • • •
Included in this figure is an adjustment of 939 units to the single family total, servicing of about 900 potential dwelling units in 1983 (Table 5-4) and actual 1983 absorption of 2,345 potential dwelling units as measured by building permit approvals (Table 5-6).
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
30000
Supply of Serviced Lots
• • • •
• • • • • •
YEAR—END SUPPLY OF VACANT SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS DECEMBER 1981-1983
25000
20000
777..
15000
Table I Supply of Serviced Lots (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units)
Single Family Row Housing Apartments TOTAL
1981
1982
1983
8,661 7,011 12,439 28,111
8,763 7,777 14,777 31,317
6,379 7,564 14,752 28,695
Twenty-five percent of the vacant serviced single family lots are in the north, northeast; 40% are in the south (Mill Woods and Kaskitayo) and 35% are in the southwest. Over 57% of the total apartment capacity for the ASP areas is in Mill Woods.
•
•••••••••
. . . . . .
.•.•.•.•.••
10000
.:.:•••••.•.
>i
. . . . . .
.•.'.•.•.•. .•.•••.•.•. .•••.'.•.•• .•.•••.•.•.
0
5000
1981
1
1982
1 Apartment Units Row Housing Units
?7,&Z
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
Building Permit Activity Building permit approvals for single family units in ASP areas were up 15% in 1983 to a total of 1,995 units, while multi-family approvals fell 83% from 1982 to a total of 350 potential dwelling units (Table 2).
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS AND BUILT UP AREAS OF EDMONTON 1981-1983
DWELLING UNITS
Table 2 Building Permit Activity (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units)
Single Family Row Housing Apartments TOTAL
1981
1982
1983
3,618 2,316 1,212 7,146
1,726 1,000 1,017 3,743
1,995 350 -
2,345
Three areas, West Jasper Place, Riverbend and the Lake District, showed significant increases in development activity over 1982. On the other hand, building permit approvals in Mill Woods were down 72% from 1982.
2000
1000
123 1981
I
I
Nn7.
123 1982
Area Structure Plan Areas Built—up Areas of the City
1 Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1 1
2
Row Housing Units
3
Apartment Units
1
Ig2 1983
64141 40 4, 4141 4140404141 40 41 41 41 II 41 40 41 41 41 414141 414141 lb4040 41 414041 41 41 41 41 ID
2.
•• •••• ••••• •• •• •• • •• ••••• •• •• •• ••• ••• • • ••••-
3.
4.
Subdivision Registrations
Servicing Activity Servicing in the ASP areas was down 84% from the 1982 levels. In 1983, land with a development potential of 907 units was serviced, including 494 single family lots (Table 4).
Subdivision registrations were down 81% in 1983. During 1983, land with a development potential of 1,069 units was registered as having received subdivision approval, compared with 5,740 units in 1982 (Table 3).
Table 4 Residential Land Servicing (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units)
Table 3 Residential Subdivision Plan Registration (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units)
Single Family Row Housing Apartments TOTAL
1981
1982
1983
2,775 619
1,447 I , 133 3 160 5,740
527 349
752 4,16
Single Family Row Housing Apartments TOTAL
193 1,069
1981
1982
1983
3,725 891
1,843 971 2,915 5,729
494 321 92 907
970 5,86
All of the servicing activity in 1983 was in the Lake District (336 p.d.u.), West Jasper Place (359 p.d.u.) and Castle Downs (212 p.d.u.).
Lake District and West Jasper Place showed the most single family subdivision activity, but the actual number of lots was modest.
ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELLING UNTTS 14000
12000
10000
I
1
(••
• - .1
Z71A
1981
1982
1983
Apartment Units Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
Il l
Raw Land Supply
6. City Owned Land
There are now about 3,900 hectares of raw land designated for residential uses in the ASP areas (Table 5). The raw land total increased about 8% in 1983. This reflects the addition of 345 hectares in the Castle Downs Extension ASP area and the subdivision of a total of about 70 hectares in four of the ASP areas. Table 5 Raw Land Supply 1981 ASP Areas Total
1982
Supply of Vacant Serviced City Owned LeFid The City owns 1,539 vacant, serviced, single family lots and land with a development potential of 7,745 multi-family units in the ASP areas. Most of this land is located in Mill Woods (Table 6). Table 6 Supply of City Owned Serviced Land (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units) 1981
1982
1983
I ,603 4,797 6,400
I , 643 8,089 9,732
1,539 7,745 9,284
1983
2,746 ha 3,567 ha 3,870 ha
Single Family Multi-Family TOTAL
The City owned total increased in 1982 with the inclusion of the Tawa subdivision in Mill Woods. The decline in 1983 reflected lot sales and greatly reduced servicing activity by the City.
iv
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
5.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■7
Servicing Program for City Owned Residential Land
Sales of City Owned Residential Land
The City serviced only 12 single family lots in 1983 (Table 7).
Serviced land with a potential of 460 dwelling units (including 116 single family lots) was sold by the City in 1983. Over 86% of this land (397 potential dwelling units) was in Mill Woods (Table 8).
Table 7 Servicing of City Owned Land (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units)
Single Family Multi-Family TOTAL
1981
1982
1983
158 129 287
57 3,431 3,488
12 12
The 1982 figures include the Tawa subdivision although it had been serviced previously. The 1983 figures reflect the City's policy not to service additional lands until its inventory is reduced.
Table 8 Sales of City Owned Land (Measured in Potential Dwelling Units) 1982
1983
637
273
740
896
1,373
1,169
116 344 460
1981 Single Family Multi-Family TOTAL
The Supply of City Owned Raw Land The City owns 475.8 hectares of raw land designated for residential uses, unchanged from 1982.
•
7.
Analysis of Unbuilt Lots The issue had been raised by the development industry whether all of the vacant serviced lots in the inventory were of marketable quality. A Planning Department study done in connection with this report found that quality appeared not to be the determining factor in whether a single family lot remained unbuilt (Section 5-8). It was also noticed that the rate of absorption of single family lots slowed about three years after development of the subdivisions commenced.
8.
Redistrictings The intensity with which residential land is developed is of immediate concern to the Corporation because municipal services are designed to accommodate a specific number of people. Of particular concern is the possibility that a significant number of redistrictings to less intense residential uses or to other non-residential uses may be increasing as landowners seek to convert multifamily tracts to more easily marketed, less intense residential uses. Only 6 redistrictings in all of 1983 (other than from agricultural uses) had an impact on the supply of subdivided residential land in the city. Of these, 3 resulted in a loss of potential dwelling units. The net impact of these redistrictings was a loss of 194 potential dwelling units.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• •
vi
• • • • •
•• •••• •••••• ••• ••• •• ••• •• •• •• •• ••• ••• • • ••••
I SCOPE OF THE REPORT
1.2
1.1 Purpose
Occasionally, reference to the "built up areas" of the city will appear. This refers to the older parts of the city and the mature suburbs developed before about 1970. Bergman and Petrolia, for example, fall into this category.
Every major corporation in Canada today is beset by increasing pressure on already scarce resources. The Corporation of the City of Edmonton is no exception. Land is one of our most valuable assets yet potentially one of our greatest liabilities. The paramount question today is how the Corporation should allocate its scarce resources to satisfy both the legitimate demands of a struggling land development industry and the evolving needs of a changing population base. Land development -- subdividing, servicing and holding -- is an immensely expensive proposition. And, because of the huge sums and complex guarantees involved, it is today especially risky for both the industry and the municipality. Our population is not growing at the explosive rates of the past decade and a half, so less serviced land is required for housing. The problem is to try to forecast when current serviced land inventories will be depleted and then how many and what kind of lots will be needed for tomorrow. The Status of Residential Land report, prepared annually since 1971 by the Planning Department, is an inventory of the vacant residential land in the newer suburban areas of the city (the area structure plan or ASP areas, see Map I) and a record of the annual demand for serviced lots as measured by the building permit approval totals.
Report Organization
Lot totals are aggregated on a neighbourhood and on an ASP area basis. For example, totals, for both Burnewood (the neighbourhood) and Mill Woods (the ASP area) are given. Subdivided land means that the land in question has not only received all City approvals but has been registered with the Alberta Land Titles Office. If the subdivision is not registered, for the purposes of this report it does not exist. The definition of serviced land in the report is also the strict legal definition used in the courts in Alberta. It is, essentially, that a single family lot is considered serviced when the servicing extensions are in place and a multi-family lot when the trunk passes in a street abutting the site. The supply of multi-family units is calculated by multiplying the size of the parcel in hectares by the permitted density for the districting (zoning) on the parcel. Row housing can be developed at 42 units per hectare and apartment housing at an average of about 125 units per hectare (although certain districts permit up to 325 units per hectare). More definitions and data sources are provided in Chapter 2. A map showing the boundaries of the ASP areas is provided at the end of this chapter. Maps showing neighbourhoods and districting are included with the analysis of each ASP area beginning in Chapter 7. A land use code is also attached, Appendix A.
•
1-3 Note on Inventory The present lot inventory can be calculated by subtracting either housing starts or building permits from the previous year's serviced lot inventory. Each method has its advantages and its drawbacks. Since a lot is effectively removed from the inventory once the building permit is issued, the Planning Department uses building permits as the measure. In growth times, the advantage to this method is that the inventory is not only up-to-date but it also anticipates development; in slow growth or no growth times, there is the possibility that some building permits might be issued to builders who are unable to exercise them. This has happened in the past and minor revisions to the tables of inventory have been necessary from time-to-time. Several hundred building permits which fall into this category were issued over the past two to three years. This year, the files have been revised using a combination of air photo reconnaissance, site inspection and reviewing the City's assessment rolls to ascertain a lot was actually vacant and had no current building permit outstanding. This double checking has not been done every year because until comparatively recently, once a building permit was issued, construction could, with a high degree of certainty, have been assumed to follow immediately.
• • • • • •
•
• •
• •
• •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • •
2
• • • •
I 41II IIII IIIIII/II IIIIII II II II IIIIIIIIIIIIII II 0 II II II II II II II 4k II II II II 0 41IIII IIII41'
MAP 1
CITY OF EDMONTON RESIDENTIAL AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS JANUARY 1, 1984 II
IMP OM IP
V=
MN •
&MALAWI
Castle Downs Extension
Lake istric
sio
ilot Soun
Castle Downs
Clareiew view j 1 I/ ermitage.1 1 •.1. :II
• NM •
1
1 1 West Jasper Place
i
i .• 1I
mlitsompaiist
sal 1
Riverbendr —
• • -
Naalliffisily4
1 1
-••-
MAW
The Meadows
Mill woo.s
••••• I I= • MO •
■ 1
IsessmONINImes
NM
• m e liesui
3
2-1 Data and Data Sources
Data for this report were obtained from City departments and Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). City data are the products of administrative data collection procedures of municipal departments. CMHC data are produced as part of an ongoing housing research program. Data from different sources may not be entirely comparable. Report users should be aware of this fact when using and interpreting the data. Data and data sources are listed below. CMHC is the source oU statistics on housing starts and completions. The Office of the City Assessor is the source of statistics used to produce estimates of the number of dwelling units by type of structure in the city. The civic census through the City Clerk's Office, is the source of statistics on population. The Bylaw Enforcement Section of the Planning Department is the source of all statistics on building permits issued. The Real Estate and Supply Services Department is the source of statistics on all City-owned residential land. The Planning Department is the source of data on municipal servicing and raw land. Calculations, using data from other sources, have been made by the Planning Department.
4
41 41 4141414O 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 0 6 4141414141 4141414141 41 41 641 I/4141 41 4141 41414141 41414141
2. DATA, SOURCES AND DEFINITIONS
5 5 IPIP• IP6 10 • 40 lb0 lb S 5 5 55 5 5 55
IP640APIP41• II IP40, 6
2-2 Definitions "Area structure plan areas" (ASP areas) include both designated outline plan areas and legally designated area structure plan areas in Edmonton. Some older outline plan areas that are fully or nearly fully developed (e.g. Petrolia) have not been included. All outline plan and area structure plan areas included in this report are listed on Table 3-1. "Built-up area" refers to the combined areas of Edmonton within the boundaries of the city, prior to annexation on 1982 01 01, that do not fall within an area structure plan area as defined above. "Dwelling units as measured by building permit approvals" refers to the number of dwelling units for which building permits have been issued by the Bylaw Enforcement Branch. It is stressed that issuance of a . building permit does not guarantee that the permit will be acted on. A small proportion of permits issued are allowed to lapse while others are superseded by new permits. "Potential dwelling units (P.D.U.)" refers to the maximum possible number of dwelling units that may be developed on residential land under the terms of the Land Use Bylaw. For single family dwellings, duplex and semi-detached dwellings in RF I, RF2, RF3, RF4 and RPL land use districts, this number is the same as the number of registered lots in a plan of subdivision. For row and apartment dwellings, an estimate is taken by multiplying the gross area of a parcel of land by the maximum number of dwelling units per hectare of land permitted in the appropriate land use district. For example, land districted under the Land Use Bylaw as RF5 has a maximum development potential of 42 dwelling units per hectare. Hence, a maximum of 84 dwelling units (2x42) may be built on a 2 hectare parcel. Normally, row housing is built on land with a land use district designation of RF5 or RF6 and apartment housing is built on land with a land use district designation of RA7, RA8 or RA9. It should be noted too, that many new developments contain fewer dwelling units than the maximum permitted under the Land Use Bylaw.
"Raw land" refers to land within an area structure plan area that is designated for residential development but for which there is not yet a registered plan of subdivision. "Vacant serviced land" refers to vacant registered parcels of residential land which have or could have been released by the Development Coordination Branch for the issuance of building permits. This means complete underground servicing to all lots and, as a minimum, gravelled access roads. Note that this definition has slightly different implications for single family and multi family sites. In the case of multi-family sites, services need only be provided in the road passing by the site. "Vacant subdivided land" refers to vacant registered parcels of residential land. Registered land refers to land legally established within a plan of subdivision as recorded in the Alberta Land Titles Office. The figures reported include vacant serviced land, as described above, as well as vacant unserviced land.
5
3-1 Population Changes
3 2 Household Development
The 1983 civic census showed a population growth for Edmonton of 1.6% for the period April 1982 to April 1983 as compared with an average annual growth rate of 2.6% for the period 1978-1982 (Table 3.1). The population in 1983 now stands at 560,085 (Table 3-1).
Although the stimulus may come from a number of different sources, demand in the medium (3 years) to longer term (5 years) for new housing is sustained by the formation of new households.
Growth in the ASP areas continued in 1983, but generally at a much slower pace than in the period 1978-1982 when it averaged over 31% per year (Table 3-1). In 1983, growth was just over 5%. Two areas showed an exceptional increase in growth rate in 1983: West Jasper Place and Lake District. In West Jasper Place, the growth rate was up 50% over the 1982 rate and in Lake District, beginning from a much smaller base, the increase in population was over 1,000 and the growth rate over 200% (Table 3-1). Mill Woods, continued to grow, but at about 60% of the 1982 rate. In the 1983 census period, the population increase in Mill Woods was about 6,000 whereas in 1982, it was almost 10,000. In the period covered by the 1983 civic census, the percentage of Edmonton's population living in ASP areas climbed to 32.8%, up .4% from 1982 (Table 3-1). The population of the built up areas of the city continued to decline in 1983 after a brief pause in 1982 (Table 3-1). In 1983, the rate of decline reached 2.1%. The average annual decline for the period 1978-82 was 1.6%.
6
-
During the period covered by the 1983 civic census net migration of people in those age groups that form most new households -- age 20 to 44 -- dropped below zero (Source: Corporate Forecasting Group, Planning Department, 1983). By contrast, in the period 1976 to 1981, the average net migration of men and women in the 20-44 age group was almost 8,000 (Source: Corporate Forecasting Group, Planning Department, 1982). This drop was reflected in the decline in residential construction activity in Edmonton in 1983 (Section 4).
41 41 41 4, 4141 40 414140 41404140 41 414141 41641 40414141414140 41 41 4164/ 41 41 41 41 4,
3 POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLDS
4141414141414111 4141 41 41 41 41 41 4141 40 41 41
TABLE 3-1 POPULATION OF THE CITY OF EDMONTON BY AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS AND THE BUILT-UP AREA OF THE CITY 1978-1983
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
11707
15725
18644
22030
25152
27234
Clareview Casselman
5689
8926
11727
14623
16975
18526
Hermitage
3394
4209
4589
5046
5997
6635
Kaskitayo
5012
8416
11387
14642
16953
17167
214
187
132
128
422
1298
—
—
—
—
—
21209
28872
37618
43999
53013
58678
141
134
131
134
Area Structure Plan Areas Castle Downs
Lake District Meadows Mill Woods
41 41 414141 4, 40 41 41 41 416 41 41 41 40 41414141
Pilot Sound * Riverbend
5793
5857
6068
6608
7373
8001
Steele Heights (North Part)
4894
5051
5115
5207
9911
9701
14
9
11
5
27027
31600
37065
Twin Brooks * West Jasper Place
16921
21492
24801
Area Structure Plan Population
74,833
98,735
119,954
139,453 167,538 184,449
Built-Up Area of City Population
403,233 392,624 385,819
381,752 383,776 375,636
City of Edmonton Total Population
478,066 491,359 505,773
521,205 551,314 560,085
* (Estimated Population) SOURCE: City of Edmonton Civic Census 1978-1983
4-I Housing Stock There are today about 222,000 dwelling units in the City. This figure includes not only those dwelling units for which property taxes are being paid, but also units owned by the government for use, for example, by armed forces personnel and those units owned by the City for future demolition and redevelopment (Table 4-1).
FIGURE 4-1 THE HOUSING MIX IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS AND IN THE BUILT—UP AREAS OF THE CITY, DECEMBER, 31 1983 BUILT—UP AREAS
There are about 2V2 times as many single family units and five times as many apartment units in the built up areas of the city as in the ASP areas. However, ground-related multiple units are strongly concentrated in the ASP areas, outnumbering those units in the built up area by almost three times (Figure 4-1).
Op
55%
Apartment Units 5% Row Housing Units
AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS
50%
11111111
• 19%
31%
8
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
I IIII II 6 II IP IIII II 410 ID 0 6IIIIII IIII II IIIII/II 40 II41II 41 II II II IP II IIII6 II II II 41 lb
4 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON
11 111111 11 1,41 1111114111114111 ft 11IP11 11 111111IP1111 111111 11 IP 11 11 11 11 11 11 4,11 1111 1'
TABLE 4-1 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS* IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON, DECEMBER 1983
Areas Structure Plan Areas • Built-Up Area City of Edmonton Total
Single, Semi & Duplex Units
Row Housing, Tri-Plex & Four-Plex Units
Apartment Units
Total Units
Number %
32878 50%
20247 31%
12400 19%
65525 100%
Number %
86098 55%
7153 5%
63418 40%
156669 100%
Number %
118976 54%
27400 12%
75818 34%
222194 100%
*Figures are for residential dwelling unit types indicated in column headings, other types of residences are not included. All numbers are estimates. SOURCE: City of Edmonton Departments *Data is from the property assessment files.
9
FIGURE 4
In 1983, there were 4,026 dwelling units approved in Edmonton, down almost 50% from 1982 as measured by building permit approvals, (Figure 4-2). Over 62% of the approvals this year were for single family dwellings compared with 27% in 1982.
MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS, BUILT UP AREAS AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE 1981-1983
Single family approvals were up in 1983, city-wide, by 15% over 1982 as measured by building permit approvals, (Figure 4-2). Multi-family approvals were down 75% from 1982 as measured by building permit approvals, (Figure 42). See also Section 5-6 and Table 5-6 for a discussion of the comparative rates of development in the ASP areas and the built up areas of the city.
-
2
14000 DWELLING UNITS
12000
10000
8000
6000
2000
1981
I
I MEM
Ezza
Apartment Units Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1 Area Structure Plan Areas
10
1982
2
Built—up Areas
3
Total City
1 2 3 1983
1111 41 1, 11 11 IP IP11 114111 4111 110 1111 1111 11 41ID1141 41 11 1111 11111111 1/1111 1111 11 111111 fib
4-2 Mix of New Development
D11611IP41111111I/11641I) 6 EP 11 6II 66 11111111111111111111111111f1I041II41II
FIGURE 4-3
4-3 Housing Starts and Completions
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT CONSTRUCTION STARTS IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON 1979-1983
There is a time lag between when a lot is removed from the serviced lot inventory and when the dwelling unit is ready for occupancy. That time lag may be a year or more. With extensions, a builder normally has about one year between the time he is issued a building permit and the time when construction is substantially underway. There may also be construction delays due to weather, strikes or other difficulties. This lag means that units which are recorded as completed in 1983 may have been issued with a building permit as long ago as 1981. The time factor partially accounts for the differences (Section 4-2) between the number of building permits issued and the active number of housing starts.
DWELLING UNIT STARTS 18000
14000 12000
10000
7
rr-oor
2000
A 1979
(ZZZA .
1980
1981
1982
1983
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) January 1984 figures show that there were about 3,000 single family starts in 1983 and about 2,500 completions. As well there were about 2,100 multi-family starts (682 row, 1,436 apartments), and about 5,300 multi-family completions (1,211 row, 4,071 apartments). See Figure 4-3.
SOURCE: CMHC — HOUSING STATISTICS.
Apartment Units
I..
::
Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
II
• 5 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 5-I
Supply of Unsubdivided (Raw) Land In Area Structure Plan Areas
For the purposes of this report, "raw land" is defined as unsubdivided land which is designated residential in an approved area structure plan (ASP) area. Districting (zoning) need not be in place nor need there be an approved neighbourhood structure plan. Once, however, an approved plan of subdivision is registered in that plan area, the amount of land covered by that plan of subdivision is subtracted from the raw land total for that area structure plan area. The definition also implies that these tracts are large and contiguous. Small parcels of unsubdivided land in relatively built up areas are not included in the raw land totals. The raw land totals also include land that would be required for circulation, parks and recreation, fire and police facilities or environmental reserves. Net developable land is typically about 60% of the raw land or gross developable area (GDA) in a residential subdivision. Raw land is located in every part of the city. In the north, north east there are more than 1,700 hectares; in the south, more than 1,300 hectares and in the south west, about 700 hectares. Moreover, there are many undeveloped parcels of less than one or two hectares scattered in the outlying areas of the city which are not counted in this inventory. At the present time, with more than 3,800 hectares in the inventory, (Table 5-1) there would appear to be sufficient land to satisfy almost any foreseeable demand for raw land in Edmonton for at least the remainder of this decade. The raw land total increased in 1983 reflecting the approval of the extension to the Castle Downs ASP.
12
TABLE 5-1 SUPPLY OF RAW LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS IN DECEMBER 1981 TO 1983
AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS CASTLE DOWNS
1981
1982 Hectares
10
10
142
115
CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS
1983
10
RAW LAND SUBDIVIDED IN 1983 ■•■■
345 145
30
23
11
12
LAKE DISTRICT
921
798
765
33
MEADOWS
—
1099
1095
4
MILL WOODS
127
62
62
PILOT SOUND
550
550
550
RIVERBEND
458
458
458
TWIN BROOKS
194
194
194
WEST 'ASPER PLACE
324
268
245
23
274 6
3567
3870
72
KASKITAYO
ASP AREAS TOTAL
•• •
• •
• • • • •
••
• • • • • • •
•• •• • •• •
•
•• • •
• • • • •
•
41 41 41 41 40 40 40 414140641 40 6IP 41 41 EP 414140 4140 40 41 41 41 6 4141II41414/414141414141414140
-
-
FIGURE 5-2
5-2 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations
ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983
Subdivision activity was down significantly in 1983 compared with the last few years (Table 5-2). During 1983, land with a development potential of 1,069 dwelling units was registered as having received subdivision approval, compared with 5,740 units (a decrease of 81%) in 1982.
POTF_N11AL DWELLING UNITS 12000
A first subdivision of land with a capacity of 40 potential dwelling units was registered for The Meadows this year.
10000
Land with a development potential of about 350 row units was subdivided this year. More than 300 of these potential dwelling units are in the north, and north east of the city (Table 5-2).
I 2000
I Apartment Units Row Housing Units
.•.•.•.•.•. .•.•.•.•.•.
1982
1983
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
z
/1/17/1 1981
1981-1983*
•AVERAGE ANNUAL DWELUNG UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN ASP AREAS.
TABLE 5-2 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION CASTLE DOWNS CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS KASKITAYO LAKE DISTRICT MEADOWS MILL WOODS PILOT SOUND RIVERBEND TWIN BROOKS WEST JASPER PLACE AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREA TOTAL
1982 Single, Semi Row Duplex Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Units Units
Single, Semi Row Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Units
0 64
105
169
14 1
223
57 484 619
318
1270
802
2703
688
— — — — 95 938
I 73
41
—
21 4
3160
527
349
193
1069
-
150
ISO
169
212
633 138 376
57 120 490
129
824
12 8
573
11 5
711
42
106
859
681
— — 162
2775
619
752
4146
1447
1133
Prepared by: City of Edmonton Planning Department
252 138 376
24
96
92
212
73 221 34
97 115 6
10 1
271 336 34
3505
5740
—
13
YEAR END SUPPLY OF VACANT RESIDENTIAL LAND (SERVICED AND UNSERVICED) IN AREA STRUCTURE
Since virtually all of the vacant subdivided lots in the ASP areas are also serviced, the discussion in section 5-5, below, applies here.
PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELUNG UNITS
35000
30000
25000
20000
.
15000
Apartment Units
.
. . .•. ' . ' . ' .•.•
10000
Row Housing Units
. . . .
.
. . .
.'.• .•.
. '.• . • .• . • .•
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
TABLE 5-3
CASTLE DOWNS CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS KASKITAYO LAKE DISTRICT MEADOWS MILL WOODS PILOT SOUND RIVER BEND TWIN BROOKS WEST 'ASPER PLACE
114
'.•
z
1982
1983
YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1981 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Units
AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREA TOTAL
0
.'.
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
955
864
575
2394
801
712
559
2072
431
793
513 1062 687
2319 769 71
1845 2554
4677 4385 758
2080 724 71
1041 2486
3769 4189 896
2325
6147
!MB
326
69
11620 — 1398
393 573 718 34 20 1 2
2026
3148
2292
887
2686
5865
648 979 825 — 2601 — 938 — 2199
9660
7561
13876 31097
8991
7607
Prepared by: City of Edmonton Planning Department
2840 8411 — 307 — — — 873 2485
131352 — 1245 5557
14982 31580
651
1875
704 — 1623
3460 1041 3841 794 2474 904 186 — 40 6 13190 2771 8407 — — IWO — 306 — — — 785 2485 4893
6490
7661
15058 29209
II40 II IIII4I II6IIIIII0066II lbIIIO6II40IDII6 II 0IIII fl II 40 II II II ID IIfP II II II IP 6
FIGURE 5-3
5-3 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land
6 lb lb 6 lb 6lb66lb
FIGURE 5-4
5-4 Residential Land Servicing
ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY
Single family lot servicing dropped 84% in 1983 (907 potential dwelling units) compared with 1982 (5,729 units). There was servicing activity in the Lake District, West Jasper Place and Castle Downs.
IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELIJNG UNITS
The numbers (Table 5-4) show the impact of the current recession in Alberta on residential development activity in Edmonton and the response of the building industry in terms of slowing servicing activity.
14000
12000
0lblb6II4)lbIDID II6ID6II II 6 0 II II lb 41 6 lb lb lb11 lbIIlb
10000
1
I
1..
2000
1981
1982
Apartment Units Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
TABLE 5-4 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS)
CASTLE DOWNS CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS KASKITAY0 LAKE DISTRICT MEADOWS MILLWOODS PILOT SOUND RIVERBEND TWIN BROOKS WEST 'ASPER PLACE AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREA TOTAL
72
64
—
—
75 120 875 — 1073 — 929 — 581
— 217 172 — 180 — 216 — 42
3725
891
Prepared by: C:ity of Ulmonliin Planning Department
1983
1982
1981 Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Units
Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Units
0
241
0
—
—
—
—
106
75 6511 1047 •---1691 — 1145 — 729
252 175 376 — — — — — 1040
169 — — — 802 — — — —
970
5586
1843
971
2915
185
321 — — 438 — _
Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
24
96
Apart. Total Units Units
92
212
— 212
— — 221
— — 115 —
— — — —
336 —
— — — 1040 —
— — 249
— — 110
— — —
359
5729
494
.321
92
907
2703
633 175 376 3505
15
hectares which can be developed with about 1,700 apartment units. There are about 20 hectares (2,500 potential apartment units) in West Jasper Place.
There are now a total of about 6,400 vacant subdivided, serviced, single family lots in the ten approved ASP areas in Edmonton. About 1,500 of these are in the north and north east, about 2,600 in the south and about 2,300 in the south west of the city (Table 5-5).
The single family portion of the supply of lots dropped in 1983 to 22.2% of all potential lots (Figure 5-5). By 1983, 51.4% of potential units were apartment units (up from 47.1% in 1982). The proportion of row units also increased in 1983.
The 1983 totals reflect both revisions to the 1982 figures -- 939 single family lots were deleted from the inventory in 1983 -- and actual absorption of 1995 single family lots in 1983.
FIGURE 5-5 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS DECEMBER 1981-1983
There are a total of about 180 hectares of subdivided, serviced land in the ASP areas of the city districted for row housing use. These can be developed with about 7,500 row housing units. About 75 hectares (3,100 potential row housing units) are in the north, north east and about 80 hectares (3,300 potential row housing units) in the south. About 25 hectares (1,000 potential row housing units) are in the south west.
POTENTIAL DWELLING OHM 15000
Apartment Units Row Housing Units E2M Single Family, Semi— Detached. Duplex Units
15000
'COCO
There are about 85 hectares in the south of the city (Mill Woods and Kaskitayo). These can be developed with about 10,600 apartment units. The north, north east has about 14
f 1982
lee,
16
AREA STRUCTURE I'LAN AREA TOTAL
1982 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
920
789
575
2284
766
712
513 1062 687 — 2997
1985 769 71 — 2184
1201 2554 —
3699 4385 758 — 10535
648 979 825
1003 — 1479
326 — 887
69
1398 — 5052
938
8661
7011
12439 28111
Prepared by: City of Edmonton Planning Department
5354
2686
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Unils Units
356
793
651
1800
393 573 718
2026 6'97 186
1041 2373 —
3460 3643 904
2012
27 71
8202
12985
704
30 6
—
1010
2006
3669 4189 896 71 — — — 2840 8206 13647 — — — — 307 1245 — 1043 24115 5534
1623
78 5
2485
•893
8763
7777
6379
7564
14752
28695
2601
2080 724
559
2037
1041 2486
14777 31317
II
CASTLE DOWNS CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS KASKITAYO LAKE DISTRICT MEADOWS MILL WOODS PILOT SOUND RIVERBEND TWIN BROOKS WEST 'ASPER PLACE
1981 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
IP10
YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS)
IP
TABLE 5-5
A
19E1.3
11 APII II 10 IP II
5-5 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
6!I6IIEP 40
-
414141416414141lb41 41041lb El 41 41 11 41 IP 41 41 6 ID 41 41 El 41 414141 416 414111 41 6 416 41 6 41
FIGURE 5-6
5 6
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS AND BUILT UP AREAS OF EDMONTON 1981-1983
Overall, in the City of Edmonton single family development was up 15% and multi-family down 75% from 1982 as measured by building permit approvals (Table 5-6).
-
Building permit approvals for single family units in ASP areas were up about 15% in 1983 over the,comparable 1982 figure but still down 45% from the 1981 figure. Riverbend showed the largest increase over 1982 in the rate of growth (230%) as measured by building permit approvals, (Table 5-6). West Jasper Place (up 42%) and Lake District (up 44%) also demonstrated significantly increased activity as measured by building permits approvals, (Table 5-6).
DWELLING UNITS 8000
Multi-family approvals in the ASP areas were down 83% from 1982 as measured by building permits approvals, (Table 5-6).
1111 ?op
2000
1000
Or A
I
1
zzz
Residential Building Permits
A
2 3 1982
Area Structure Plan • Areas Built—up Areas of the City
1
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
2
Row Housihg Units
3
Apartment Units
in •
•
our.
1 2 1983
40
Single family approvals in the built up areas were up 14% over the 1982 totals but still down 22% compared with the 1981 totals as measured by building permit approvals, (Table 5-6). Multi-family approvals in the built up areas of the city in 1983 were down 71% from 1982, as measured by building permit approvals, (Table 5-6). Because of the impact of government incentive programs' on housing production in Alberta, it is difficult to state categorically that one specific housing trend is gaining momentum over another. Several trends may, however, be discerned from the building permit totals of the past three or four years.
1
A 1983 study by the Planning Department "Inner City Residential Development" discovered that virtually all multi family development in the built up areas of the city since 1976 took advantage of one or another government incentive program. 17
Fifth, the impact of the recession on the single family housing market in 1983 was apparently greater in the ASP areas than the built-up areas of the city. Single family approvals in the built-up areas, though down from 1982 totals, remained at about the level of the average for the previous three years. Approvals in the ASP areas, though up slightly from 1982 levels, are down over 27% from the average for the previous three years (Figure 5-6).
Second, the trend to single family development has been gathering momentum in the ASP areas over the past few years. In 1980, the ratio of single family approvals to multi family (row and apartment) approvals was 60:40. In 1983, it was 85:15. The industry response to the cancellation of the Multiple Unit Residential Building (MURB) program in late 1981 tended to inflate the multi family figures for 1981 and 1982. Even so, the trend was perceptible during those two years. Third, the use of housing as an instrument of government policy, implicit in the Edmonton market in recent decades, became explicit in 1983. Multi family units flooded the market in late 1982 and 1983, not so much in response to popular demand for more or improved shelter, but in response to government financial incentive programs like Multiple Unit Residential Building (MURB) and Core Housing Incentive Program (CHIP). Single family building permit approvals held firm during the period when the $3,000 federal government grant was available and after the announcement of the Heritage Fund Mortgage Interest Reduction Program, but fell off when these programs had run their course. Fourth, a trend towards the development industry providing its own financial incentive programs to replace suspended or terminated government incentive programs seems to be gathering momentum. In Lake District in 1983, for example, developers aggressively cutting prices, marketed approximately 40% of the single family lot inventory which they owned at the start of the year. Their 1983 servicing program brought year end inventories back up to about the level that apparently signals confidence in this marketing strategy. 2 18
2
Sophisticated, aggressive marketing emphasizing lifestyle and amenities has been especially apparent in the multi family rental market for more than two years now. Agents for West Edmonton Village and Highland Centre (on Jasper Ave at 89 St) have successfully marketed their products in this way.
IIIIIIII6IPII 6IIIIII6II fl IIII6IDII6IIIDII6II IIII6II IIII6II !IID ID II II II IP II • II
First, the centrifugal trend in urban family settlement, predominant since the end of World War II, has continued virtually unabated since then in Edmonton. There were predictions in the 1970's that rising gasoline prices and the back-to-the-city movement by disaffected ex-suburbanites would tend to slow down or even reverse this trend. This has not yet happened in Edmonton.
1 40 40 41404) 414141414141410 fl 6 41 414141414141 41 41 41 41 6 41 41 41 40 41 4■41 41 41 41416414141
TABLE 5-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN THE CITY OF EDMONTON, 1981 TO 1983 1981 Single, Semi Row Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Units
1982 Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
Apart. Units
Total Units
1983 Single, Semi Row Duplex Units Units
Apart. Units
Total Units
156 (34%) — —
130 166 452 (29%) (34%) (100%) — — — — — —
140 (81%) — —
33 (19%) — —
— —
—
414 748 98 (55%) (13%) (100%) — — — — —
173 OM%) — —
No. Row %
435, (30%)
406 1432 591 (42%) (28%) (100%)
96
(17%)
100 361 557 (18%) (65%) (1007.)
114 (67%)
55 (31%)
— —
169 (100%)
No. Row % No. Row % No. Row % No. Row 'X, No. Row % No. Row % No. Row % No. Row %
168 (28%) 188 (65%) — — 1886 (71%) — — 217 (85%) — — 488 (40%)
110 593 315 (53%) (19%) (100%) — 289 101 (100%) (35%) — — — 206 261:3 521 (100%) (21%) (8%) — — — — 37 254 — (15%) (100%) — — — 1217 337 392 (32%) (100%) (28%)
153 (61%) 239 (100%)
229 (100%) 327 (100%)
67)) (77%)
— — — — — — — — — — 65 (18%) — — — — 1 — — (.5%) — — 196 — (237.) —
229 (100%) 327 (10)1%) —
545 (40%) — — 65 (62%) — — 472 (63%)
252 (1(10%) 239 — — (10(1'%) — — — — — — 451 1375 379 (32%) (100%) (28 7 .) — — — — 105 39 1 (37%) (100%) ( 1 %) — — - — 291 — 763 (1)10%1 (39%) —
AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREA TOTAL
No. Row %
3618 (51%)
2316 (327.)
1212 7146 (17%) (100%)
1 726 (46%)
1000 1017 3743 (27%) (27'X.) (10(1'%)
-1995 (85%)
350 (15%)
2345 (100%)
BUILT-UP AREA OF CITY TOTAL
No. Row %
692 (14%)
772 (16%)
3411 4875 (70%) (10(1%)
474 ( I 1%)
66 (2%)
3878 4418 (87%) (10)1%)
541 (32%)
153 (9%)
11,111 987 (59%) (100%)
CITY OF EDMONTON TOTAL
No. Row %
4310 (36%1
3088 (26%)
4623 12021 (38%) (100%)
2200 (27%)
8161 1066 4895 (13%) (6)1%) (100%)
25:36 (63%)
503 (12%)
4026 987 (25%) (100%)
CASTLE DOWNS CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS KASKITAYO LAKE DISTRICT MEADOWS MILL WOODS PILOT SOUND RIVERBEND TWIN BROOKS WEST JASPER PLACE
No. Row % No. Row %
236 (32%)
99 (39%)
_
— 300 (82%)
215 (99.5%)
— —
365 (100%) — — 216 (1(10%) — 866 (10)1%)
Prepared by: City of Edmonton Planning Department
19
V
5-7 Housing Stock in the Area Structure Plan Areas The housing mix is not constant throughout the plan areas (Table 5-7). The percent of single family to multi-family ranges from 36% in Kaskitayo to 88% in Lake District. The proportion overall in the ASP areas is 51%. Row housing comprises 27% of the dwelling units in all ASP areas. This percentage is not constant throughout, however; in most, it is well below 27% (Table 5-7). Apartment units comprise an average of 22% of all dwelling units in the ASP areas, but in Mill Woods the percentage is I I% (lowest of all ASP areas with these units) and in Castle Downs 15%. Table 5-7 demonstrates the tendency in ASP areas for single family lots to be developed before multi family sites.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
•• •• •• •• • ••• a 0
20
IIIIEP I/
ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS TO DECEMBER 1983
DIPID4,IDI/411ft la
Row Housing Units
Apartment Units
5418 (62%)
2013 (23%)
1323 (15%)
— ____
— —
Single Family and Semi-Detached Units
Area Structure Plan Areas
Total Units 8754 100%
Castle Downs
No.
Castle Downs Extension
No. %
Clareview, Hermitage Steele Hts.
No. %
3979 (41%)
3122 (32%)
2668 (27%)
9769 (100%)
Kaskitayo
No. %
2723 (37%)
1870 (25%)
2773 (38%)
7366 (100%)
Lake District
No. %
754 (88%)
101 (12%)
Meadows
No. 0/0
— —
— —
—
— —
Mill Woods
No. %
12329 (65%)
4616 (24%)
2160 (11%)
19105 (100%)
Pilot Sound
No. %
— —
Riverbend
No. To
1568 (53%)
482 (16%)
921 (31%)
2971 (100%)
Twin Brooks
No.
—
—
—
—
6
f/ II II
TABLE 5-7
'
_
— —
855 (100%)
0/0
West Jasper Place
No.
5233 (39(y0)
4476 (34%)
3566 (27%)
13275 (100%)
Area Structure Plan Area Total
No.
32004 (51%)
16680 (27%)
13411 (22%)
62095 (100%)
*Residential units in place prior to approval of the area structure plans. SOURCE: City of Edmonton Planning Department.
21
•• 5-8
Analysis of Unbuilt Single Family Lots
Findings
Scope of the Study
Size of Subdivision
This review assesses whether unbuilt I single family residential lots in ASP area subdivisions can be attributed to poor lot quality. The development industry has indicated that some of these lots may not be marketable in the present housing market because of intrinsic faults such as poor location or undesirable adjacent uses.
The data in Table 5-8-1 show a 12 to 13 percent unbuilt rate in the three subdivision size groups. This information indicates that the percentage of unbuilt lots is not related to subdivision size.
This project examined a sample of unbuilt serviced lots from each ASP area. The total number of lots reviewed was 648 out of a sample of 5,075 lots in 56 subdivisions. The following criteria were used: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5)
size of subdivision a five year carry over period for unbuilt lots in the subdivision adequate sample representation from each ASP area subdivisions that still had unbuilt lots in the 1983 residential inventory price was not considered.
The arrangement of the data to measure lot quality and issuance of building permits examined the following variables: I)
Subdivision Development on a Yearly Basis from 1976 to 1983 The review of unbuilt lots showed that three specific subdivision types were found: Type A) subdivisions having a large number of unbui It lots remaining in 1983 and showing some building activity over the last few years, but which still contained a large number of unbui It lots (Table 5-8-2); Type B) subdivisions having a large number of unbui It lots remaining in 1983 and showing very little building activity over the last few years (Table 5-8-2); Type C) subdivisions having relatively few unbuilt lots remaining in 1983 and showing very little building activity over the last few years (Table 5-8-4).
subdivision size was grouped by number of lots A) 1-50, B) 51-100, C) 101+ subdivision development was arranged on a yearly basis from the start date of 1976 to 1983. subdivision development was assessed by three year and five year periods from the start date. subdivision lot location was assessed by specific property variables including adjoining uses, mid-block site, corner block site, type of neighbourhood street and abutting uses. Price was not considered.
The percentage of unbuilt lots decreased from the subdivisions in type A to type C. The subdivisions in type A were started later than those in type C. The proportion of unbuilt lots reflects changed market conditions between the boom period beginning about 1976 and the slow growth period beginning about 1981.
Site inspection and aerial photos were used to confirm whether the selected lots were still vacant and to confirm lot characteristics.
Unbuilt lot means a lot for which no building permit has been issued.
2) 3) 4)
22
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• •• • • •
II0 II II 0 IP 0 II II IIII 60IIII II II 40 II 6 66II6 IIII II I40II6II41IIIIIIIIIPII6IIII1,
Subdivision Development Assessed at Time Intervals
Evaluation of Location of Unused Lots
A third variable considered was development over specific time periods. Subdivisions begun in 1976 and later were compared using three and five year time periods (Table 5-8-5).
Lot quality in relation to specific location variables which affect lot marketability (corner lots, mid block lots, etc.) were assessed. However, no specific variable emerged as the predominant reason why a lot remained unbuilt.
Subdivisions started during 1976 and 1977 were comparatively more built-out after three years than those started in 1978, 1979 and 1980 after a three year period (Figure 58-5). Furthermore, the earlier subdivisions have lower absolute numbers of unbuilt lots after five years compared with those started later.
The analysis of the adjoining uses of the unbuilt lots showed that in most cases the surrounding properties were also single family lots. In some cases, a few multi family uses were developed nearby and in a few other cases recreational open space was the adjoining use. In no instance could the adjacent uses be considered undesirable.
This seems to indicate that the absorption rate had changed for single family residences. Subdivisions which started three or four years ago (i.e. 1980, 1981) are now finding it difficult because of present low absorption rates in the housing market.
Most unbuilt lots in the sample were located on local or neighbourhood streets (62%). A few were on collector roads (34%). A very few unbuilt lots were located near an arterial road (4%). Pie-shaped lots found in cul-de-sacs accounted for 52 lots in the sample. None of these factors, however, appeared to have a determining effect on whether a lot remained unbuilt. Conclusions From this review, lot quality is not a significant factor in the rate of development of single family lots. Moreover, no particular land use variable emerged as a predominant reason for the lots remaining unbuilt. Price may have been a factor. However, since this study concentrated on land related factors, price was not considered. The information demonstrated that lots in the post-1980 subdivisions are being absorbed more slowly than lots in subdivisions started before 1979. In all subdivisions, the lot take-up is considerably faster in the first three years than in the next two years. In general, then, this review indicates that the quality of lots found in the inventory of unbuilt lots appears to be no different than that of adjacent lots for which building permits were issued. The Planning Department will continue to monitor this issue closely. 23
Subdivision Size
Total Number of Lots
Total Number of Unbuilt Lots
1-50 lots 51-100 lots 101+ lots
476 1,278 3,321
59 170 419
12% 13% 13%
Sample Total
5,075
648
13%
Unbuilt
TABLE 5-8-2 UN3UILT LOTS FOUND IN TYPE A SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT
AREA I. Millwoods, Crawford Plains, Block 31 2. Mil!woods, Minchaw, Block 18 3. Kaskitayo, Blue Quill, Block 20
Total Number of lots at Start Date 1976
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Unbuilt
239
165
109 147
40
158
132
90
73
55
23%
109
38
31
25
24
22%
51
34
29
26
18%
57 *
*Subdivision and servicing took place over 1978 and 1979.
TABLE 5-8-3 UNBUILT LOTS FOUND IN TYPE B SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT
AREA I. Riverbend, Ramsey Heights, Block 38 2. West Jasper Place Oleskiw, Block 1 3. Mil!woods, Tipaskan, Block 20
24
Total Number of lots at Start Date 1976
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Unbuilt
58
58
29
18
14
13
11
19%
60
49
13
10
10
9
9
15%
20
16
13
13
12
11
10%
Ill
95
46
41CP4041114/10 41041 641CP ft 41 1, 41 11 CP 414141 1141 41 CP 41 4141 414111 414041 64141 41 41 411, 41
TABLE 5-8-1 PERCENTAGE OF UNBUILT LOTS IN DIFFERENT SUBDIVISION SIZES
IP41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 6 414140 ID 41 41 40 40 41 41 41 41 40 4041 11 4141 41 41 11 641 41 41 41 414141 41414111
TABLE 5-8-4 UNBUILT LOTS FOUND IN TYPE C SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT Total aurnber of lots at Start Date 1976
AREA I. Steel Heights, McLeod, Block 45 2. Millwoods, Satoo, Block 3 3. Castle Downs, Dunluce, Block 50
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Unbuilt
50
23
22
10
8
6
6
6
5
10%
200
24
19
II
6
6
6
6
6
3%
194
104
18
3
25
5
5
5
3
1.5%
TABLE 5-8-5 SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT AFTER 3 AND 5 YEAR PERIODS Year of Start
Total Number of Lots at Start
Built Lots After 3 Years
Unbuilt
Built Lots After 5 Years
1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
1,922 922 1,292 422 517
166 153 397 125 116
8.2% 16.5% 31.0% 30.0% 22.0%
116 66 231 92 -
5.7% 7.0% 18.0% 22.0%
Sample Total
5,075
957
18.5%
505
9.8%
Unbuilt
FIGURE 5.8.5 ABSORPTION OF SINGLE FAMILY LOTS IN SUBDIVISIONS STARTED FROM 1976-1980 100
% OF LOTS WHERE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED 1976 1977
90
- 1978 1979
1980 •
70 60 •
50 40
20 10
2
3
4
5
YEARS SINCE SUBDIVISIONS STARTED
25
The, revolving trunk fund (R.T.F.) was set up by the provincial government in 1979 to provide an alternative method of financing the construction of major storm, sanitary and water facilities. Prior to the introduction of the R.T.F., the developers would front-end the cost of major facilities construction and would be paid back by subsequent developers in the benefiting area. The R.T.F. program attempted to shift the financing of the trunk facilities to the Alberta Home Mortgage Corporation (AHMC). Repayment of the loans would occur by AHMC receiving the principal plus interest as the benefiting land developed. AHMC required the City to guarantee that 50% of the loan plus interest would be repaid after 10 years. The City, in turn, required participating developers to cover the 50% guarantee with letters of credit. At the time the program started, the predicted growth for the 1980's and reasonable interest rates caused everyone to believe the program was a success. Unfortunately, the recession and high interest rates have created some concern about whether all or even 50% of the benefiting areas will develop in 10 years. If the 50% of the benefiting area is not developed in 10 years, the loan guarantee by the City could be invoked by AHMC, leaving the City to attempt to recover the monies for the unpaid loans from the developers.
26
However, the Alberta Planning Board decision (Pederson vs The City of Camrose, Board Order 472-S-83) has further complicated matters by questioning the City's ability to collect interest charges from developers. The possible implications of these circumstances could be to leave the City responsible for substantial interest payments on the unpaid loan on the major trunk facilities constructed under the R.T.F. program. The City and the Urban Development Institute have raised these concerns with the provincial government in an attempt to bring about positive changes which will allow for the continued use of the R.T.F. The recession has resulted in the City approving projects of a size which must fully pay back the loan plus interest in 10 years. This approach reflects the City's position that it is not prepared to accept the potential liability of the unpaid loans after 10 years.
41404141I/4041I, lb41 II41 414141416 41 0104110414141 41f0 4141 41 41 41 41 41lb 41414141 414141 41
5-9 Revolving Trunk Fund Issue
41414141 41 0 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 f1 41 41 11 41 41 41 41 41 41 0 641 6 4141 ID 41II 4, 41 41 41 414/ 11 41 41 41
5-10 Redistrictings The intensity with which residential land is developed is of immediate concern to the Corporation. Municipal services are designed to accommodate a specific number of people. Too many people and the quality of the service suffers; too few and providing the service becomes uneconomical. Redistrictings in ASP areas were carefully monitored in 1983 for this report. Only those redistrictings for which a subdivision was registered (for example, RF5 redistricted to RF I) or for which no resubdivision was necessary but which still resulted in a change to the lot count (for example, an RF5 site redistricted to RA7) are of concern to the report. Redistrictings from AGU to residential were not counted for this exercise. There were 6 redistrictings in 1983 which satisfied these criteria. Three resulted in more lots being created (total 76 potential dwelling units) and 3 in fewer lots being created (total 270 fewer potential dwelling units). The net effect was a loss of 194 potential dwelling units (Table 5- I 0). Planning Department records do not indicate any trend yet developing towards large scale redistricting to less intense residential uses. This issue will again be monitored during 1984.
TABLE 5-10 ASP
Neighbourhood Block
Kask itayo . West Jasper Place Castle Downs
Yellowbird Summerlea Beaumaris
West Jasper Place Kaskitayo Kaskitayo
Summer lea Erminesk in Yellowbird
Lot
2 51 35, 36, 37 53 1
28 20 12
1 23 181
Change
Effect
RA7 to CSC RF1 to AGU RFS to RFI
-191 - 53 - 26
SUB TOTAL
-270
RF4 to RF5 RFS to RA7(p) RF I to RF4
+41
SUB TOTAL
+76
TOTAL
-270 p.d.u.
+32 +3 +76 -194 p.d.u.
27
TABLE 6-1 CITY-OWNED RAW LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS, DECEMBER 1983
CITY OWNED RESIDENTIAL LAND
6-1 Supply of City Owned Raw Land HECTARES
The City owns 475.8 hectares of raw land designated for residential uses (Table 6-1). This total is unchanged from 1982.
Steele Hts.
11.9
Lake District
89.4 104.4
Meadows
Raw land is unsubdivided and unserviced. It may or it may not have districting (zoning) in place. Raw land can be developed as single family residential at about eight units per hectare, row housing at about 42 units per hectare or apartments at about 125 units per hectare.
Mill Woods (Burnewood)
95.4
Pilot Sound
90.0
Riverhend
63.2
West Jasper Place
21.5 475.8
Total City-Owned Raw Land in A.S.P. Areas
SOURCE: Real Estate and Supply Services Department. City of Edmonton
6-2 City Owned Subdivided Residential Land Since all of the City owned subdivided residential lots are serviced, the discussion in Section 6-4 applies here as well.
TABLE 6-2 SUPPLY OF CITY-OWNED VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND (SERVICED AND UNSERVICED) IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1981
TOTAL COMBINED PLAN AREAS
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
Total Units
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
Total Units
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
Total Units
1894
4797
6691
1643
8089
9732
1539
7745
9284
SOURCE: Real Estate and Supply Services Department, City of Edmonton NOTE: Revisions to figures published in 1981
28
1983
1982
1111I 611611111111lb1111611 1111 lb111111 1141114111lb11fP 11111111II011411141
6
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
6-3 Servicing Program for City Owned Lots The City serviced 12 single family lots in 1983. These lots were so located as to require their being serviced to permit other lots to be marketed. The low level of servicing activity was consistent with the 57 single family lots serviced in 1982 (Table 6-3).
TABLE 6-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SERVICING ACTIVITY FOR CITY-OWNED LAND, 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
• •
• • • • •
•
MILL WOODS
96
OTHER PLAN AREAS
62
TOTAL COMBINED PLAN AREAS
158
47
47
82
82
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
225
728
62
57
2117
57
728
2703
2703
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
3431 57
12
12
.1488
12
12
SOURCE: Real Estate and Supply Services Department, City of Edmonton
• • •
•
• ••
•
• ••
•
•
•
•
•• •
29
• • • 6-4 City Owned Serviced Residential Land
• •
Through its Real Estate and Supply Services Department, the City of Edmonton owns 1,539 vacant serviced single family lots. It also owns vacant, serviced land with a development potential of 7,745 multi family (row and apartment) units (Table 6-4). • Most of these lots are in Mill Woods.
• • • • • • • •
TABLE 6-4 SUPPLY OF CITY-OWNED VACANT SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1981 Single Family Units
•
Multi-family Units
1982 Total Units
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
• •
1983 Total Units
Single Family Units
Multi-family Units
• Total Units
• •
TOTAL COMBINED PLAN AREAS
1603
4797
6400
1643
8089
9732
1539
7745
92114
• •
SOURCE: Real Estate and Supply Services Department, City of Edmonton NOTE: Revisions to Figures Published in 1981
• • •
1111
411/
30
11111
041404141414141414141 11 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 • 41 41 ID41414141 41 4110 4141415•4141
6-5 Sales of City Owned Residential Lots The City sold 116 single family lots and multi family land with a development potential of 344 dwelling units in 1983 down 61% from 1982 (Table 6-5). A new marketing program for implementation in 1984 is currently being developed by the City's Real Estate and Supply Services Department. Features include a new advertising strategy and revised terms and conditions of sale.
TABLE 6-5 CITY-OWNED LAND SOLD FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT * 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1981 AREA STRUCTURE PLAN AREAS
1982
1983
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
Total Units
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
Total Units
Single Family Units
Multi-Family Units
Total Units
MILL WOODS
625
740
1365
264
896
I 160
88
309
397
OTHER PLAN AREAS
8
8
9
9
28
:45
63
1373
273
1169
116
344
460
TOTAL COMBINED PLAN AREAS
637
740
896
'Sales of a City-owned lot carried the obligation to begin construction on a residential unit within four months. SOURCE: Real Estate and Supply Services Department, City of Edmonton NOTE: Revisions to figures published in 1981
31
o -7'11...j-11111111.114;\ •
f.‘A"
1 I
Elsinore
Chambery
MN
I (..r)
MO
mi = =
t■ Os
11 1 1 11 1 11 1 111 11
11.1
111111111111111111
Cr)
sc),
167 AVE.
A
CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION
32
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
NG RO
III IIII IIII 110111111111141 11 11 11 10IP1111111111 11 111111111111111011 110111 11 4111IP 1111
7
CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION
7-I Description and Location The area structure plan for Castle Downs Extension covers the S.W. Y4 section 8-54-24-4, S.E. Y4 section 8-54-24-4, N. Y2 section 5-54-24-4, portions of N.E. V4 section 5-54-24-4 and portions of Section 6-54-24-4, located east of 127 Street, north of Dunluce and Baturyn neighbourhoods, west of 97 Street and south of the proposed outer ring road. (Approved by Council 83-11 15). 7-2 The Site Castle Downs Extension comprises 345 gross developable hectares of residential land. The area structure plan has been planned, based on the assumption that a portion of the restricted development area (RDA) may not be required for the transportation and utilities corridor and would be released by the Minister for urban development in the future. 7-3 The Development Concept The plan outlines a framework of general development guidelines for residential development in the Castle Downs Extension area based on a projected population of approximately 20,000 people.
33
000 41 0 0 41 41 04, 41 4141 4141414141 4141 41 41 41 0414011 4141 41
4-)
S4-) (1) 1".■
1 27Stre e t
CT)
167 Avenue
feet
I 441* 500
1000
0 100 200 300 900 500
metres
34
2000
3000
4000 1000 1 km
5000 1500
• • •• • • • • • • •
CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION
140 41 641 lb41 040404040641 0416414141414140 41 41 41 40 41 41 404141 41 4110 41 41 41 4141414141
Land Use District Codes AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE DISTRICT
US
URBAN
SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC
UTILITY DISTRICT
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
RFI
SINGLE
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
DENSITY
INFILL
DISTRICT
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RFS
MEDIUM
HOUSING
APO
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
DC)
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below)
DISTRICT
DENSITY MULTIPLE
For the use provisions and development criteria for DCI Districts. please refer lathe applicable Area Redevelopment or Area Structure Plan.
FAMILY DISTRICT
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA7
LOW RISE
RA8
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DC3
TEMPORARY
DC4
SPECIAL PUBLIC SERVICE
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations. please refer to Bylaw establishing District on the site)
1U1
Designation applied to Commonoly Housing sites in accordance with Seclion 92 Land Use Bylaw
HOME DISTRICT CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
CENTRE
INTENSITY
DISTRICT
CBI
LOW
CB2
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY CORRIDOR DISTRICT
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
*
BUSINESS DISTRICT
BUSINESS
DISTRICT'
USE
DISTRICT
ID
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS DISTRICT
IM
MEDIUM
IH
HEAVY
INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT DISTRICT
,.
DISTRICT
HOLDING DISTRICT DISTRICT
Designation applied to some RAB sites In accordance with Section 2205. . Land Use Bylaw Limit ol Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay
':,,i.., :: *
.
Restricted Development Area IR.D. A.I Designation applied to sites with altered or specified development regulations in accordance with Section 820. Land Use Bylaw
35
a 0
NI
WARWICK-
Caernarvon
<
< Dun luce
111151111111111111111111•111111111111IIIIIIII
Ec.r)
rni 167 AVE.
153 AVE.
GRIESBACH (f)
t,
137 AVE. -----
A
CASTLE DOWNS Castle Downs Plans Neighbourhoods
0 40 41 41 41 6 40 41 40 41 41414140 10 40 4141 41414141 4141 4141414041414140
■
10 40 10 41 411 f1
36 X 1 10111 11 11 111 1 11111 '
•
m os m oili m mammo m mum mom m ommq
r••
moommommmomom momm emmo n
•1 1111 11 1181 11 111 111 1 111 1
CASTLE DOWNS EXTENSION
•
••• •• ••• ••••• ••• •• ••• •••• ••• • •• ••• • •• • • •• ••
FIGURE 8-1
8 CASTLE DOWNS
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN CASTLE DOWNS 1981-1983
8-1 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations There were 24 single family lots subdivided in Beaumaris in 1983. (Table 8-1). This represents the first single family subdivision activity since 1980. About 190 multi family lots (that is, land with a capacity of 190 potential multi family dwelling units) were registered at the same time (Figure 8-1).
POTDMAL DWELLING UNITS 300
230
200
150
Apartment Units
100
50 NO AC r1VITY 1981
[1:1:1:v ol
1982
•
I
Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
TABLE 8-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN CASTLE DOWNS, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CASTLE DOWNS NEIGHBOURHOODS
BATURYN BEAUMARIS CAERNAR VON CARLISLE DUNLUCE LORELEI CASTLE DOWNS TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
—
— —
—
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
16 16 48 105 153 — — —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
64
105
169
—
— — 150' 150 — — —
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Units Duplex Units Units Units
24 —
•
96 —
— —
150
150
24
96
— 92 —
— 212 —
—
—
—
—
92
212
Result of redistricting
37
FIGURE 8-2
The inventory of single family lots in registered subdivisions was reduced in 1983 by 52% to a total of 388 lots. (Table 8-2). This reflects an adjustment of 297 units to the 1982 figure, servicing of 24 lots in Beaumaris (Table 8-3) and absorption of 140 lots as measured by building permit approvals (Table 8-5).
SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CASTLE DOWNS 1981-1983 POTENDAL DWELUNG =TS
There are still 35 subdivided lots in Lorelei that have not yet been serviced. Of the 1832 potential dwelling units of subdivided residential land in Castle Downs, 21% are single family lots, 43% are row housing and 36% are apartments units (Figure 8-2).
1500 . . . . .
.•.•.*.•.•. .
.
. . . .
.•.•.•.•.•.•.• . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
1000
1
1
1 •••••••1
.•.•.•.•.•.•.•
Apartment Units Row Housing Units
A
1981
=1 Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
198.3
1982
TABLE 8-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CASTLE DOWNS, 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CASTLE DOWNS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
BATURYN BEAUMARIS CAERNARVON CARLISLE DUNLUCE LORELEI
87 . 274 59 I 72 155 208
197 226 36 238 94 73
— 103
284 603 95
— 372 100
410
955
864
575
CASTLE DOWNS TOTAL
.
•Achustments to 1983 figures for singles total 297 units.
38
Actual absorption for singles in 1983 was 140 units shown in table 8-5.
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
197 157 36 199 94 29
— 165 — — 372 22
283 565 94 355 555 220
8 112
621 381
86 243 58 156 89 169
2394
801
712
559
2072
388
39 54 50 125
197 238 36
— 257
199 94
29
— 372 22
205 607 75 253 516 176
793
651
11132
41 0 41 41 41 0 41 04094166 41 0 41 41 6 41 0410 0 4141 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 0 41 41 41 0 41 41 414141
8-2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land
••• •• •••••• ••• •• •• ••• • ••• ••• • •• ••• • •• • ••• ••
FIGURE 8-3
8-3 Residential Land Servicing
RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN CASTLE DOWNS 1981-1983
This year there was no major servicing activity (Table 8-3). Only 24 single family lots were serviced in 1983; in 1982, there were none. About 190 multi family lots located on a site abutting those single family lots are now also considered serviced because the 24 single family lots were serviced (Figure 8-3).
POTEN11AL MAILING WITS 300
250
200
150
100
1
1 Apartment Units
1.• • • • • •
1
. . . . . . .
50
NO
.•.•.•.-.'.•.• .'.•.•.•.•.'.•
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
7
AMOY
1
0 1982
1981
Row Housing Units
1953
TABLE 8-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN CASTLE DOWNS, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CASTLE DOWNS NEIGBOURHOODS
BATURYN 13EAUMARIS CAERNARVON CARLISLE DUNL UCE LORELEI CASTLE DOWNS TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Duplex Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
— 51 —
— — —
— — — — — —
— 24 —
21
16 — 16 204 48 105 — — — — — — — — — — — 21
— II
— —
72
64
0
105
241
— —
— 96
— 92 —
— 212
92
212
— 0
24
39
FIGURE 8-4
The inventory of serviced single family lots was reduced in 1983 by 53% compared with the 1982 figure to a total of 353 lots (Table 8-4). This reflects an adjustment of 297 units to the 1982 figure, servicing of 24 lots in Beaumaris (Table 8-3) and absorption of 140 lots as measured by building permit approvals (Table 8-5).
SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CASTLE DOWNS 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 3000
2500
While every neighbourhood has some vacant serviced single family lots, Beaumaris with 112 seems to have the most capacity for new development in Castle Downs. (Table 8-4).
2000
1500 ' .
The total 1983 serviced lot inventory in this area is 1797 potential dwelling units, down 12% from 1982 (Figure 8-4).
.
. . . . .
.•.•.•.'.'.•..'.'.•.•.•.'.".
1000 .•.•.•.'.•.'.'. .
With a total of 238 potential dwelling units of row housing land and 257 potential dwelling units of apartment land, Beaumaris seems to have land with the greatest capacity for multi family development available in Castle Downs as well. There are also 372 potential dwelling units of serviced apartment land in Dunluce, unchanged from 1982.
I
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
500
A
1981
1982
Row Housing Units re
Apartment Units
1983
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
TABLE 8-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CASTLE DOWNS, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CASTLE DOWNS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
BATURYN BEAUMARIS CMRNARVON CARLISLE DUNLUCE LORE LEI
87 274 59 172 155 173
197 151 36 238 94 73
— 103 — — 372 100
284 528 95 410 621 346
86 243 58 156 89 134
197 157 36 199 94 29
— 165 — — 372 22
283 565 '14 355 555 1115
8 11 2
CASTLE DOWNS TOTAL
920
789
575
2284
766
712
559
2037
'Adjustments to 1983 figures for singles total 297 units.
40
Actual absorption for singles in 1983 was 140 units as shown in table 8-5.
— 257
90
197 238 36 199 94 29
— 372 22
205 1,117 75 253 516 141
353
793
651
1797
54
41414141 4141 41 41 41 41 0 41 4, 41141II41 41 41 41IP41414141 41 4141 EP 4141 414141 4111 4141 41 4141414,
8-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
I •••• • •• • •• •• • ••• • ••• •• •• •• • •• •• •• • •• • •• • • •
FIGURE 8-5
8-5 Residential Building Permits
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED EACH YEAR IN CASTLE DOWNS 1981-1983
Development is slowing in Castle Downs (Table 8-5). Single family development in 1983 was 50% below the average rate for the previous three years but about equal to the 1982 rate. (Table 8-5). Row housing growth for the past two years also has been less than 30% the 1981 rate. There have only been 264 apartment units approved since 1981. None were approved in 1983 (Figure 8-5).
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED 1200
1000
800
800
I
I
Row Housing Units
200
0
Apartment Units
A
1981
V• 1982
1983
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
TABLE 8-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN CASTLE DOWNS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 CASTLE DOWNS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Duplex Unils Units Units
BATURYN BEAUMARIS CAERNARVON CARLISLE DUNLUCE LORELEI
3 73 16 14 82 48
135 53 — 44 1132
78
1 166 1 55 611 161
— 45 2 15 32 46
CASTLE DOWNS TOTAL
236
414
166
452
14(1
— 98 — — — —
138 224 16 58 264 48
1 31 1 16 68 39
— 47 — 39 — 44
98
748
156
13(1
lilt — —
33 — —
— — — — —
33
78 2 15 :12 46
173
41
There are now approximately 8,700 dwelling units in Castle Downs. (Table 8-6). About 60% are single family, 23% row housing and 17% apartments (Figure 8-6).
FIGURE 8-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN CASTLE DOWNS, DECEMBER 31, 1983 TABLE 8-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN CASTLE DOWNS TO DECEMBER 31, 1983 DWELLING UNITS APPROVED CASTLE DOWNS NEIGHBOURHOODS
BATURYN BEAUMARIS CAERNARVON CARLISLE DUNLUCE LORELEI CASTLE DOWNS TOTAL
42
.
Single, Semi Duplex Units
Row Units
Apart. Units
Total Units
1252 611 888 729 1167 769
281 222 437 306 377 390
313 206 137 504 163
1533 1146 1531 1172 2050 1322
5418
2013
1323
8754
41 1010 III 11 1011 6 11 10 0 1,111040 1011101011 10116 6 10 ll 11 10 64010 6101040 Al 1,11lb10 11
8-6 Housing Stock
••••0 0000000 0900 0000004000 0 00 000 0 •0 •• ••• '
,Iff
US T
orkiiffir [4:11:11:1: it
ft
minium iiirstrallui%pvieviartle minium, ,-.4..
er,,,101 u IA. i irk igEdir‘,4
mo
t
••,„11,11 l TAR.
krici, 1 ' , 41
I
167 AVE
.41•111111111111111/11
I1111111 W111111191
rmffitlow
7—
i't
r
VE
V
ME12213
cn
110111 110,
4/ 1 ;11,1c viAV'
153 AVE lire
4111jZir
Sa eFS'\‘—'44
„;
I RA
_US_ US
:) •
CASTLE DOWNS A 1 m114
feet O O
500
1000
100 200 300 400
4000 500
5000
7;073
metres
SCALE 1:10.000
:!_ - 1137 AVE 1
43
AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE DISTRICT
US
URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
RF1
44
SINGLE DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT DENSITY
INFILL
DISTRICT
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI—DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RAT
LOW RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA8
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
CBI
LOW
CI32
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
18
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS DISTRICT
HOUSING
MEDIUM HEAVY
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below) For the use provisions and development criteria for DC1 Districts, please refer lathe applicable Area RedevelopmenI or Area Struclure Plan.
DC2 DC3
COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TEMPORARY HOLDING DISTRICT
0C4
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations, please refer to Bylaw establishing District on the site)
1P1
Designation applied to Communily Housing sites in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw
HOME DISTRICT CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL
CENTRE
INTENSITY
IH
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
DCI
FAMILY DISTRICT
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RESIDENTIAL
IM
APO
DISTRICT
DENSITY MULTIPLE
DISTRICT
DISTRICT *
BUSINESS DISTRICT
BUSINESS
DISTRICT
CORRIDOR DISTRICT
INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL
USE
DISTRICT
DISTRICT DISTRICT
UTILITY DISTRICT
SERVICE
DISTRICT
Designation applied to some RA8 sites in accordance with Section 2205. . Land Use Bylaw Limit 01 Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay
.:,:.,
Restricted Development Area i A.D. A.1 *
Designation applied to sites with altered or specified development regulations in accordance with Section 820. Land Use Bylaw
• • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Land Use District Codes
••••••••••••• •••••••••••• •• ••• • •••••• •• ••••
Clareview, Hermitage and Steele Heights Plan Neighbourhoods
1
1
PILOT
SOUND
tr)
153 AVE.
iiiiuu U uuInh I l
111111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIM•111111I
:r
M11111111•111111111
•
0 ... I..;
••••,,,,.
m- I --/ ,`• I, , • MSc - • •
McLeod
STEELE —A
Kirkness
Fraser
EC.
fir \-
IULLI.Womseme
AVE.
Hairsine ik CIareview Town I ; (..................................... .......... entre .....1............
137 AVE.
Bannerman
CLAREVIEW
1 : ft
ccS
so ' sr):
■\1_. KENNEDALE
NI >
Sifton Park (n i—14111 1111 .k. i‘et....
eedlm a toe rit a u . 1 .Y.
'..--------\... : -, KennB \ Homesteader 4)
_.ine
Kernohan
4'44 ._
"Iriesss
ipZ HERMITAGE ---/.....,,... if
5.
Portion SE 1/4
6.
113 Lot IR, 2R, 3R Block 20 Plan 2572R - S Block 17 Plan 3551 AD Parcel A, B Plan 3033 HW
35-53-24-W4
AG 5. I 2 Hectares
, c,
j I
1.
I—; cr)
%•-;
.
0:01: i 1 ",:, .f•.,1 I. ...') .1. ‘i
lott.,3.• ,i, •
Canon Ridge
in ce• i. le 0 z
Overlanders 1 1
AG 6.8 Hectares 17;
45
FIGURE 9-1
9-1 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS, 1981-1983
There were no subdivision registrations in 1983 in this area (Table 9-1). In 1982, by contrast, there was a total of 633 potential dwelling units approved of which 40% were single family (Figure 9-1).
DWOI.ING UNITS APPROVED 800
700
800
500
400 . . .
300
.
.
.•.•.• .• .• .'.•.•
V
200
.
.
.• .• .• .'
NO
100
A
0 1981
1
1
Apartment Units
f ••
1
Row Housing Units
1982
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
46
1983
• • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
9 CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS
I • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •9 • • • • • • • • • •• • •
TABLE 9-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOODS
CLAREVIEW BANNERMAN BELMONT FRAZER HAIRSINE KERNOHAN KIRKNESS SIFTON PARK TOWN CENTRE CLARE VIEW TOTAL
1981 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Unils Units
— 31 — — 26 — .
— — — — — —
31 — 26
57
57
1982 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Unils
_ — — — 252 —
252
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
— — — 169 —
69
— —
—
212
633 —
212
633
NO ACTIVITY
HERMITAGE CANNON RIDGE HOMESTEADER OVERLANDERS
NO ACTIVITY
HERMITAGE TOTAL STEELE HEIGHTS MCLEOD NEIGHBOURHOOD 2 NIEGHBOURHOOD 3 NEIGHBOURHOOD 5
— — — —
— — — —
— —
— —
— — —
— NO ACTIVITY — —
STEEI.E HEIGHTS TOTAL CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
57
57
252
169
212
633
47
• 9-2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land
FIGURE 9-2
The inventory of subdivided single family lots in this area
SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND
was reduced by 40% in 1983 to 393 lots (Table 9-2). This reflects an adjustment of 141 units to the 1982 figure and an absorption of 114 lots (Table 9-5). Most of these vacant single family lots are in Clareview; the majority of those (177 lots) are in Kirkness neighbourhood (Table 9-2).
IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS, 1981-1983
POTENTIAL DWEWNG UNITS
There are significant multi family sites in the Bannerman and Hairsine neighbourhoods of Clareview and in the Cannon Ridge and Over landers neighbourhoods of Hermitage. Table 9-2 indicates that these subdivided sites have been in the inventory for at least 3 years.
5000 4500 4000 3500 3000
The total of subdivided land in the inventory now stands at 3460 potential dwelling units, down 8% from ' 1982 (Figure 9-2). All of the single family lots and multi family sites in this area are serviced (Table 9-4).
2500 2000 1500
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'.•
.•.'.•.•.'.'.• .
•
,
.•.'.'.'.•.• .'.'.'.' .'.• .•
.• .
1000
.
.• .
.
.•
500 0 1981
WA 1982
. '.•
1983
*AVERAGE ANNUAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS.
Apartment Units Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
48
•• • ••• ••• •• • •• • •• •• •• ••
• •
•• • • • • •• • • ••• ••
41 41 4141 41 41 41 I/ 41 41 41 6 41 6 6 41 4141 41 41 41 41 4141414141414141040414141414041414141
TABLE 9-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
CLAREV1EW BANNERMAN BELMONT FRAZER FIAIRSINE KERNOHAN KIRKNESS SIFTON l'ARK TOWN CENTRE
32 1 88 44 43 116 7 —
263 — 108 100 110 56 —
CLAREVIEW TOTAL
301
HERMITAGE CANNON RIDGE HOMESTEADER OVERLANDERS HERMITAGE TOTAL
1982 Row Apart. Tolal Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Units
263 — 83 100 110 194 —
173 — 78 —
—
804
486
1735
280
750
486
1516
114 31 4
609 39 612
504 9
102 II 3
1,119 :19 612
504 9
42
1227 79 658
42
1215 56 657
2283
149
1260
555
1964
113
1260
555
1928
70
54
70 —
— —
16
—
—
16 — — —
54
16
648
2080
32 1 70 37 43 255 7
971
408
1680
122 32 4
667 39 626
504 100 1119
158
13:12
54
16
— —
—
STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
54
16
CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
513
2319
263 — 106 100 110 225 — —
— 173 — 78
445
1293 171 819
793
— — —
1201
501 I 142 300 123 44 1 1 — —
3 1 59 27 13 177 0 —
530 1 196 :117 153 142 7 —
STEELE HEIGHTS MCI:L(3D NEIGHBOURHOOD 2 NIEGHBOURHOOD 3 NEIGHBOURHOOD 5
2:15
530 1 176 310 153 558 7 —
235 — — 173 — — — —
235
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Duplex Units Units Units Units
— —
4033
— —
—
— 16
70
1041
3769
393
16 —
2026
16
11)41
3460
'Adjustments to 1983 figures for singles total 141 units. Actual absorption for singles in 1983 was 114 units as shown in table 9 - 5.
49
FIGURE 9-3
No residential lots were serviced in 1983. (Table 9-3). This compares with 1982 when 633 potential dwelling units were serviced, 40% of which were single family lots (Figure 9-3).
RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS, 1981-1983
POTENTIAL DIVELUNG UNITS 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 NO
200
1;777777A
0
1981
I
50
1
A
1982
Apartment Units
I. - •
Row Housing Units
EZZ7j
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
ACTMTY 1983
11111 11 4111 1111111111 111141 11111, 41116 41 111/1141 41 111111111 11 11 1111 101111 11 11 11 11 11
9-3 Residential Land Servicing
41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 ID41 41 4141041414141 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 4141 41 41 40 41 414141 4141ID
TABLE 9-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOODS
CLAREVIEW BANNERMAN BELMONT FRAZER HAIRSINE KERNOHAN KIRKNESS SIFTON PARK TOWN CENTRE CLAREVIEW TOTAL
1981 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Unils Units Duplex Units Units
— 49 — — 26 —
75
— — — — — —
—
— — —
— 49 — — 26
75
1982 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
— —
NO ACTIVITY
—
252 • —
— — 169 —
212 —
633
252
169
212
633
HERMITAGE CANNON RIDGE HOMESTEADER OVERLANDERS
NO ACTIVITY
HERMITAGE TOTAL STEELE HEIGHTS MCLEOD NEIGHBOURHOOD 2 NIEGH13OURFIOOD 3 NEIGHBOURHOOD 5
NO ACTIVITY
STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
75
75
252
169
212
633
51
FIGURE 9-4
The supply of serviced single family lots in this area was reduced by 40% in 1983 to 393 lots. This represents an adjustment of 141 units to the 1982 figures and absorption of 114 lots as measured by -building permit approvals, (Table 9-5). Most of these vacant single family lots are in Clareview; the majority of those (177 lots) are in the Kirkness neighbourhood (Table 9-4).
SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS, 1981-1983
There are also vacant serviced multi family sites with a capacity of 2026 row housing units and 1041 apartment units in these ASP areas (Table 9-4). The Bannerman and Hairsine neighbourhoods of Clareview and the Cannon Ridge and Overlanders neighbourhoods of Hermitage account 81% of this capacity (Table 9-4).
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
3500 3000 2500
The total of serviced land in the inventory now stands at 3460 potential dwelling units, down 8% from 1982 (Figure -
. . . . . . .
2000
"
• ' • • •
. . . . . . .
.•.•.•.•.•.•.•
1500
.•.•.•.•.•.•.•
.•.•.•.•.•.•.' .•.•.•.•.•.•.•
.•.•.•.•.•.•.• .•.•.•.•.•.•.•
.•.•.•.•.•.•.' .•.•.•.•.•.•.• .•.•.•.•.•.•.•
1000
.•.•.•.•.•.•.• .•.•.•.•.•.•.'
500
1981
1
1982
1 Apartment Units
1 . ...•.1
Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
52
1983
414041 41 41 41 41 40 40 40 41 41 41 41 41 4140 40 4141 41 41416 41 4, 41 0 11IS41 41 41 ft 41 41 41 41 40 41 4141 4,
9-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
••• ••• •••••• ••••• ••• •••• ■ •• •• •• ••• ••• • • •• ••
TABLE 9-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN CLARE VIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. ToIA Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Unils Units
CLAREVIEW BANNERMAN BELMONT FRAZER HAIRSINE KERNOHAN K1RKNESS SIFTON PARK TOWN CENTRE
32 1 88 44 43 86 7
— 173
530 1 196 317
32 1 70 37
263 — 106 100
235 — — 173
—
153
43
110
—
142 7
255 7
225 — —
CLAREVIEW TOTAL
301
637
408
1.346
445
HERMITAGE CANNON RIDGE HOMESTEADER OVERLANDERS
122 32 4
667 39 626
504 . 100 189
1293
114
171 1119
HERMITAGE TOTAL
1511
1332
793
16
—
STEELE HEIGHTS MCLEOD NEIGHBOURHOOD 2 NIEGFII3OURHOOp 3 NEIGFIBOURHOOD 5
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Unils Units Units Units
•
54 —
263 — 108 100 110 56 — —
.
STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
54
16
CLAREV1EW, HERMITAGE, Si EELE HEIGHTS I OTAL
513
1985
235
— —
1201
78 — —
530 1 176 310 153 558 7 —
3 1 59 27 13 177 —
804
4116
1735
280
31 4
609 39 612
504 9 42
1127 79 6511
2283
149
1260
555
70 —
54
16
— —
54
16
648
2080
3699
1041
263 — 83 100 110 194
235 — 173 _
501 1 142 300 123
78
449
—
— —
750
486
1516
102 8
6119 :19
504 g
121.5 50
3
612
42
657
1864
113
1260
555
1928
70 —
0 —
16
16
70
0
16
16
3769
393
2026
1041
3460
*Adjustments 10 1983 figures for singles 101;11 279 units. Acluarabsorption for singles in 1983 was I 14 units as shown in table 9-5.
53
FIGURE 9-5
Building permit approvals were down 70% from the 1982 totals which were in turn down about 60% from the 1981 totals (Figure 9-5). No apartment units and only 55 row units were approved in 1983. Kirkness in Clareview was the only neighbourhood in this area with any significant activity at all. In Kirkness, 64 single family and 31 row units were approved (Table 9-5).
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS, 1981-1983
Both single and multi family building permit approvals have fallen off significantly in this area in the past two years. The 1982 and 1983 single family approvals are each less than 25% of the previous two years totals. Multi family approvals have suffered similar drops (Table 9-5).
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 1600
1400
1200
1000
••
800 •• ••
600
400
200
21
0 1981
1
1
1982
Apartment Units Row Housing Units
?7/ZA
54
Single Family, Semi— Detached. Duplex Units
r A 1983
4041 4041 41 40 11 40 4141414141 41 41 IP 41 41 4141 41 41 41 4041 41 41 41 414141 41 414141414041 41 41 40 41 41
9-5 Residential Building Permits
S•• ••• •• ••• • ••••• •• • ••••9 •• •• •• •••• •• • ••• ••
TABLE 9-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOODS
CLAREVIEW 13ANNERMAN BELM( )NT FRAZER HAIRSINE KERNOFIAN KIRKNESS SIFTON PARK 'TOWN CENTRE
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Unils Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1
63
112 12 18 251 —
195 112
64 — 431 124 114 356
— — 18 7 — (,2
—
27 —
— — 124 — 714 — —
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
— — — — — 123
— — 46 7 — 185 — , — —
11 4 16 64
—
— — 28 — — — — ____
— — 24 — — :41 —
CLAREVIEW TOTAL
394
397
202
993
87
28
123
238
95
HERMITAGE CANNON RIDGE HOMESTEADER OVERLANDERS
1 40
_ — 33
— — 204
1 40 237
1
514 — 14
— 91 147
66 92 161
12 1 1
HERMITAGE TOTAL
41
33
204
278
¶1
72
238
319
14
STEELE HEIGHTS MCLEOD NEIGHBOURHOOD 2 NIEGHBOURHOOD NEIGH13OURFIOOD 5
_ _ _
16 I
_ _ _
16) _ _
___
5
____
114
55
STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE, STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
161
435
591
— 35 4 II,
— —
55
95 —
150
—
—
_ —
____ —
12 1 1 14
_
161
406
1432
96
100
361
557
1 69
55
There was very little growth in this area in 1983. Only 114 single family and 55 multi family units were added. (Table 9-5). There are now approximately 6,200 dwelling units in Clareview, more than half of which are single family units; approximately 2,300 in Hermitage about one third of which are single family units; and approximately 1,200 dwelling units in Steele Heights only twenty percent of which are single family units (Table 9-6). Figure 9-6 shows the mix of dwelling unit types in the three ASP areas combined.
FIGURE 9-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS, DECEMBER 31, 1983
TABLE 9-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE AND STEELE HEIGHTS TO DECEMBER 31, 1983
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE STEELE HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOODS
Single, Semi Duplex Units
Row Units
Apart. Units
Total Units
CLAREVIEW BANNERMAN BELMONT FRAZER HAIRSINE KERNOHAN KIRKNESS SIFTON PARK TOWN CENTRE
504 575 519 258 535 395 278
2:11 334 247 436 302 58 148
99 381 124 128 201 483
834 1290 890 822 837 654 909
CLARE VIEW TOTAL
3064
1756
1416
6236
HERMITAGE CANNON RIDGE HOMESTEADER OVERLANDERS
54 510 197
58 652 80
333 457
112 1495 734
HERMITAGE TOTAL
761
790
790
2341
154
576
4(,2
1192
154
576
462
1192
3979
3122
2668
9769
STEELE HEIGHTS MCLEOD NEIGHBOURHOOD 2 NEIGHBOURHOOD 3 NEIGHBOURHOOD 5 STEELE HE
TOTAL
CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE STEELE HEIGHTS TOTAL
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
56
•• ••• • • ••• • ••• • • •• ••• • • • •• • • •• •• • • •• •••• • • •
9-6 Housing Stock
••• •• • •••••• ••• •• •• • ••••• •• •• •• • ••••• • • •• ••
153 AVE
153 AVE
1 If 1 .44 AVE
co
, ==9*. 1
-.9.r ........... l ....,,,i NMI 11
''_
L
iilif :di .
Minn Milla
i 124.041". M ' Mell: _.; ' il. 'Wilt& MI_1 „„,......
...".,....?
'minima 04,4A. l ■ 4. ,--fi,
1
I - 1.a
I
IL". ...amar.2.7....: 111 P--;us g
ct-
vtluhtini
137 AVE
.cc
CC0
: ps (/)
CSC
P
-
,4111
1441
AGI PC.°
••■■`
A CLAREVIEW, HERMITAGE & STEELE HEIGHTS 57
AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AG)
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE DISTRICT
US
URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
RFI
SINGLE DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT
INFILL
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
DENSITY
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RA7
LOW RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA8
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
HOUSING
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
OCI
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below) For the use provisions and development criteria lor DC1 Dislricts, please reler to the applicable Area Redevelopment or Area Structure Plan.
FAMILY DISTRICT
.
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RESIDENTIAL
RR
RURAL
MIXED USE
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
CBI
LOW
CB2
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY_ CORRIDOR DISTRICT
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
RESIDENTIAL
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY
0C3
TEMPORARY
DC4
DISTRICT
RMX
58
APO
DISTRICT
DENSITY MULTIPLE
DC5
DISTRICT
HOME DISTRICT CONVENIENCE
CENTRE
INTENSITY
•P!
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
*
BUSINESS DISTRICT DISTRICT.
USE
IB
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS
IM
MEDIUM
IH
HEAVY INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT
DISTRICT DISTRICT
DISTRICT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
HOLDING DISTRICT SPECIAL PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT
• SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations, please refer to Bylaw establishing District on the Site) Designation applied to Commundy Housing sites
in accordance with Section 92 L and Use Bylaw
DISTRICT
BUSINESS
UTILITY DISTRICT
Designation applied to some RA8 sites in accordance with Section 2205 ., Land Use Bylaw Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection °valley .
...-:.: -.
Restricted Development Area )R.D.A.I *
Designation applied to sites with alleved or specified development regulations in accordance
Section 82D. Land Use Bylaw
with
41 4141 41 410 41 414141414141 4!41141414141414164164141141 41 41 6 4141 41 41 4141 4141 41 ID 41 41
Land Use District Codes
• •• • •••. ••• •••0 •••• •• • •••, •• 400 •• . •• ••• • • •• ••
KASKITAYO & TWIN BROOKS Kaskitayo and Twin Brooks Plan Neighbourhoods
PETROLIA
DUGGAN
34 AVE.
.a
4 tn i--: 11.EIL
4r
•
..
Sweet Grass
Steinhauer —.)
.
I
li BLUE QUILL
.IIIIIIIIIII. •
coo
SI: la a a
11111111111011111MIII
.1110311111111IMIIIIIMI a a a la a so a a
South.West Blue Quill 0 . fig". .....
. Blue Quill East
.41
23 AVE.
: ----\ I'm" 7.'1
1 I
1-; (r) — — -—
ERMINESKIN Ermineskin
1 1[ IIII
.me• •• '
■ .
.: ..
.• . . —.
11 Clr•Tro■ 411..-
.? : .. ..
IN a a a
Keheewin
''.....'\ 1. a
YELLOWBIRD **, **.
59
FIGURE 10-1
10-1 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN KASKITAYO 1981-1983
There were 73 single family lots subdivided in the Keheewin and Ermineskin neighbourhoods in 1983 (Table 10-1). Sites with a capacity of about 200 multi family units were subdivided at the same time. Subdivision registration in 1983 was up 96% over 1982 (Figure 10-1).
POTENTIAL DWELLING
upirrs
•
300
Apartment Units
200
. . . . . .
.'.•.•.•.•. .'.'.'.'.'.
.'.'.'.'.'.'.
Row Housing Units 100
V
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
A 1981
1983
1982
TABLE 10-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS, 1981 - 1983, (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) KASKITAY0TWIN BROOKS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart Total Duplex Unils Units Units Units
KASKITAYO BEARSVAW BLUE QUILL ERMINESKIN KEFIEEWIN SKYRATTLER STEINFIAUER SWEET GRASS
— — — 120 — — —
— 40
KASKITAY0 • TOTAL
120
141
— 101
40 — 223 — — —
223
343 101
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
— — 138 — —
484
— — — — — — —
19113 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Unils Unils Units Units
— —
— — —
138
— _ 138
— 17 5(4
— —
— —
— 97 — — —
1314
73
97
—
101 —
101
• Redistricting: RA7 to RF; (Block 22)
60
TWIN BROOKS TOTAL
NC) LOTS SUBDIVIDED
NO LO IS SUBDIVIDED
NO U )1 S SUBDIVIDE')
17 254 — —
• •••• • • •• • ••• * .• •• •••• • • •• •• .• •.• • •• *••• •• •
10 KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS
••• • ••••••••• •• •• •• •• • ••9 *. •••• • •• ••• • ••• •0
FIGURE 10-2
10 2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land -
SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN KASKITAYO, 1981-1983
The supply of subdivided single family lots in this area was reduced by 34% in 1983 to 646 lots (Table 10-2). This reflects an adjustment of 177 units, the subdivision of a total of 73 lots (Table 10-1) and an absorption of 229 lots, as measured by building permit approvals (Table 10-5).
POTENTIAL CAVEUJNG UNITS 5000 4500
With the exception of 60 single family lots and multi family sites in Keheewin with a capacity of 204 dwelling units, all of the subdivided land in this area has been serviced.
4000 3500 3000 2500
The total of subdivided land in the inventory now stands at 3914 potential dwelling units, down 7% from 1982 (Figure 10-2).
2000 1500 .•..•..:.:.:..• .
.
.
.
.
.
1000 .
.
.
roof,
500
1981
1
A
1982
1
Apartment Units I-'-'•••• I Row Housing Units
re
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
TABLE 10-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS, 1981 - 1983, (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) KASKITAY0TWIN BROOKS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
KASKITAYO BEARSPAW BLUE QUILL ERMINESKIN KEHEEW1N SKYRATTLER STEINHAUER SWEET CRASS
467 163 70 268 61 22 11
236 75 190 74 194 —
870 238 2025 682 537 22 II
413 153 63 269 49 22 10
KASKITAYO TOTAL
1062
769
4385
979
TWIN BROOKS TOTAL
167 1765 340 282 —
2554
NO VACANT SUBDIVIDED LOTS
-
246 47 140 144 147 — —
724
1983 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Units
—
805 200 1968 706 478 22 10
295 145 40 121 36 — u
113 24 I 147 — —
687 192 19 4 16 1843 203 565 465 282 — — — 9
2486
4189
646
794
2474
146 — 1765 293 282
NO VACANTI- SUBDIVIDED LOTS
246 47
146
—
3914
No vAr. ANT SUBI)IVIIJED 1.01 . S
'Adjustments to 1983 figures for singles total 177 units. Actual absorption for singles in 19143 was 229 units shown in table 111.5.
61
FIGURE 10-3
There was no servicing activity in these plan areas in 1983 (Table 10-3). For comparison, 175 single family lots were serviced here in 1982 (Figure 10-3).
RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN KASKITAYO, 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELLING UNIIS 800 700 600
500
400 . . . . . . .
.•.'.•.'.•.•.'
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
300
Apartment Units
.•.•.•.•.•.•.' .•.•.•.'.•.•.' .•.•.'.•.•.'.'
200
Row Housing Units . . . . . . .
100
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
NO ACTIVITY
0 1981
1983
1982
TABLE 10-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS, 1981 - 1983, (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) KASKITAY0TWIN BROOKS NEIGHBOURHOODS
KASKITAYO BEARSPAW BLUE QUILL ERMINESKIN KEHEEWIN SKYRATTLER STEINHAUER SWEET GRASS KASKITAYO TOTAL
TWIN BROOKS TOTAL
62
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Unils
1982 Row Apart. Tolal Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Unils
1983 Apart. Tolal Row Single, Semi Unils Units Duplex Units Units
— 39 120
120
39
30 — — 148
321
217
321
471
175
175
175
175
NO ACTIVITY
148
NO SERVICED LOTS
658
NO SERVICED LOTS
NO SERVICED LOTS
• • • • ■ • • • • • ••• • •• •• •• •• • • 6• •• • • •*• •• • ••• • ••
10-3 Residential Land Servicing
sa ** ••• • • •• • • •• • • • ••, •• •• • • • • • • •• • ••• • •
FIGURE 10-4
10-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN KASKITAYO 1981-1983
The supply of serviced single family lots in this area was reduced by 41% in 1983 to 573 lots (Table 10-4). This reflects an adjustment of 177 units to the 1982 serviced lot figures and the absorption of 229 lots as measured by building permit approvals (Table 10-5).
POTENTIAL DWELUNG UNITS
Serviced apartment sites with a total capacity of over 2000 dwelling units and row housing sites with a capacity of over 700 dwelling units have been in the serviced lot inventory for at least 3 years (Table 10-4). About 74% of this apartment capacity is located in the Erminesk in neighbourhood. 2300
The total of serviced residential land in the inventory now stands at 3643 potential dwelling units, down 13% from 1982 (Figure 10-4).
2000 1500 1000 500
Row Housing Units I
I Apartment Units
I
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1082
TABLE 10-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS, 1981 -1983, (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) KASKITAY0TWIN BROOKS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Units Units Duplex Units Units
KASKITAYO BEARSPAW BLUE QUILL ERMINESKIN KEHEEWIN SKYRATTLER STEINHAUER SWEET GRASS
467 16.1 70 268 61 22 11
236 75 190 74 194 —
167 — 1765 340 2112 — —
870 238 2025 682 537 22 II
413 153 63 269 49 22 10
KASKITAYO TOTAL
1062
769
2554
4385
979
TWIN BROOKS TOTAL
NO SERVICED LOTS
'Adjustments to 1983 figures for singles total 177 units. Actual absorption for singles in 1983 was 229 units shown in table 10.5 .
.
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
141,
246 47 140 144 147 —
146 — 1765 293 2112 — —
805 200 1968 706 478 22 10
295 145 2.1 65 :16 — 9
246 47 113 144 147 — —
1843 102 282
724
2486
4111!1
57.1
697
2373
NO SERVICED LOTS
687 192 1979
31 I 465 — 9
3643
No/ SERVICED U.)ES
63
FIGURE 10-5
Although development activity in Kaskitayo continued generally to decline in 1983 (Figure 10-5), building permit approvals for single family units were up about 50% from 1981 and 1982 levels.
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED EACH YEAR IN KASKITAYO 1981-1983 800 POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
Multi family building permit approvals here, however, dropped to zero this year from about 400 units in 1981 and about 100 units in 1982 (Table 10-5).
I
700
1 Apartment Units Row Housing Units
200
.•.'.•.'.•.'.'.
100
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units 1981
1982
1953
TABLE 10-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983
64
KASKITAY0TWIN BROOKS NEIGHBOURHOODS
19111 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
KASKITAYO BEARSPAW BLUE QUILL ERMINESKIN KEHEEWIN SKYRATTLER STEINHAUER SWEET GRASS
30 24 2 75 32 2 3
20 70 — — 77 148
KASKITAYO )TAL
168
315
TWIN BROOKS TOTAL
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
54
II ■) 11
—
11/
63 65 5') —
6 82 Ii —
— —
I
I
—
50 94 2 185 109 2
65 12 —
—
151
1
110
593
153
110
NC) PERMITS ISSUED
III II
— 52 — 47 —
54
-—
—
I Ig
—
8 6 82 13 — 1
229
NO PERMITS ISSUED
NO PERMITS ISSUED
11 111141 CA 11111411,11 1111 11 1P 4111CP11111141 111111 ib 1111 10 1111IP 1, 11 11 11 1111 11 11 11IP 41 111
10-5 Residential Building Permits
••• •• ••••••• • •• •••• •• •••• •• ••••• •• ••• • ••• •4
TABLE 10-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN KASKITAYO AND TWIN BROOKS TO DECEMBER 31, 1983
KASKITAY0TWIN BROOKS NEIGHBOURHOODS
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED Single, Semi Duplex Units
Row Units
Apart. Units
Total Units
KASKITAYO BEARSPAW BLUE QUILL ERMINESKIN KEHEEWIN SKYRATTLER STEINHAUER SWEET GRASS
264 663 336 317 157 548 438
46 409 237 128 468 211 371
—• .1297 743 110 386 — 237
310 2369 1316 555 1011 759 1046
KASKITAYO TOTAL
2723
1870
2773
7366
Building permits issued in 1980 expired. Site downzoned . TWIN BROOKS 10 [AL
NO PERMITS ISSUED
10-6 Housing Stock There are now approximately 7,400 dwelling units in Kaskitayo (Table 10-6) about two thirds of which are multi family (row and apartment) units (Figure 10-6). No multi family units were added in 1983. There were more than 200 new single family units added, however as measured by building permit approvals (Table 10-5). Kaskitayo with 38%, has the highest concentration of apartment units among all of the ASP areas (Table 5-7). No apartment units have been approved for the past 2 years, however and only 110 potential dwelling units were approved in 1981 (Table 10-5). With almost 2400 potential dwelling units in apartment sites still available in Kaskitayo (Table 10-4), the area appears to have lost its attractiveness to the industry for this type of development. Twin Brooks has still not yet been developed. Although districting (zoning) has been in place in the south central sector of this ASP area for about two years, no subdivision has yet been registered.
FIGURE 10-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN KASKITAYO DECEMBER 31, 1983 3 37%
1 Apartment Units
2
Row Housing Units
3
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
2 25%
65
A
beet 500
66 1000
0 100 200 300 •00 500 2000 3000 4000
10
5000 1 m114
metres 1500
R.D.A.
41041 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 4141 4141 41 0 41lb41 4140 41 41 40• S OS 41 0410 41 41 41 4040 41 41 4141 41 41
CA L GA RYT R
KASKITAYO & TWIN BROOKS
••• ••••• •••• • •• •••• •• •••• •• •• •• • ••••• • ••• ••
Land Use District Codes AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE DISTRICT
US
URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
RF1
SINGLE
RF2
LOW
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT INFILL
DENSITY
DISTRICT
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
HOUSING
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below)
APARTMENT
For the use provisions and development criteria for DC1 Districts. please refer to the applicable Area Redevelopment or Area Structure Plan.
FAMILY DISTRICT
RA7
LOW
RAE
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
DISTRICT
RMX
RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
CBI
LOW
C132
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RESIDENTIAL HOME
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
OCI
DISTRICT
DENSITY MULTIPLE
RISE
APO
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
DC3
TEMPORARY HOLDING DISTRICT
DC4
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations, please refer to Bylaw establishing District on the site)
gu
Designation applied to Comn 1 y Housing sites in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw
DISTRICT CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
CENTRE
INTENSITY
DISTRICT *
BUSINESS DISTRICT
BUSINESS
DISTRICT
CORRIDOR DISTRICT
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
IB
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS
IM
MEDIUM
IH
HEAVY
INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL
USE
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
Designation applied to some RA8 sites in accordance with Section 220-5, Land Use Bylaw
• Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay ,-; ::•: . .i,".
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
SERVICE
• *
Restricted Development Area (R.D.A.1 Designation applied to sites with altered or specified
development regulations in accordance Section B20. Land Use Bylaw
with
67
(including th the Lake District Plan Neighbourhoods (including Dickensfield - Londonderry Annex)
tr.) 0 0
: I67AVE.
Ozerna
LAND USE I. and 2.
68
Portion of Block C, Plan 2887 A.Q. part of E112 3-54-24-W4
AG
25.528 Hectares
4111 4161011611411414141414141 414141 41 41 611 4141 4141
LAKE DISTRICT
••• • •••• •••• •••• ••• •• •••• •• •• •• • ••••• • ••• ••
FIGURE 11-1
I I LAKE DISTRICT
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1981-1983
I I -I Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations Subdivision registration of single family lots continued in 1983 at about 60% of the 1982 level which was itself down 25% from 1981 (Table 11- I).
POTENTIAL. DWELLING UNITS 700
There was also land with a capacity of 115 row housing units subdivided in 1983. There was no land subdivided for apartments (Figure 1 I -I).
200
I
100
I. -• • •
1981
1982
I Apartment Units ••
I Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
TABLE 11-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) LAKE DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOODS
BELLE RIVE CRYSTALLINA NERA EAUX CLAIRES IOVIZ KLARVATTEN LAGO LINDO MAYLIE WAN OZERNA SCHONSEE TOWN CENTER LAKE DISTRICT TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
199 —
—
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
199
—
490
129
—
619
177
490
129
-
619
376
—
-
177
118 103
115
-
376
221
115
233 103
—
336
69
SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1981-1983
The addition of 221 single family lots and row housing sites with a capacity of 115 dwelling units in 1983 (Table 11-1) brought the supply of subdivided residential land in the area up to its highest level since the area was subdivided in 1981 (Table 11-2).
POTENTIAL DWEUJNG UNITS 1000 900
The proportion of row housing in the inventory increased in 1983 to 20% from 8% in 1982 (Figure I I -2).
800 700
500 400
I
1
Apartment Units 300
1-•. - . - - - .1 Row Housing Units
200
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
7
100
1981
1983
1982
TABLE 11-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) LAKE DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOODS
BELLE RIVE CRYSTALLINA NERA EAUX CLAIRES IOVIZ KLARVATTEN LAG() LINDO MAYLIE WAN OZERNA SCHONSEE TOWN CENTER LAKE DISTRICT TOTAL
70
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
687
71
758
687
71
758
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
198:1 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
131
79
876
1:11
71
765
71
896
— — ;40 99
718
79
726 99
186
186
—
9114
41414141 4111 414141 414141 41 40 41414041414141 4141 41 41 41 414140414141 41 4141 414141 4141414P4P
FIGURE 11-2
11-2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land
111 41 lb 4141 411111141 406 6 • SO lb 11 41 41 41 • 41 41 0 41 41 41 41 6 ft 41 41 41 41 IP f1 41 IP If 41 41 41 IP
FIGURE 11-3
1 1-3 Residential Land Servicing
RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1983
The servicing of single family lots continued in the Lake District in 1983 at about 60% of the 1982 rate (Figure 11-3). The 1982 rate was itself down considerably from the high levels established in 1981, the first year of development for this plan area. About 70% of the servicing activity centered in Lago Lindo (Table 11-3).
1200
POTENTIAL DWELUNG UNITS
1000
800
600
400
I
200
F . . - . - . - .1
Row Housing Units
r " 4
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1981
A.
(4 1982
1
1983
Apartment Units
TABLE 11-3 RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN THE LAKE DISTRICT 1981-1983 LAKE DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOODS
BELLE RIVE CRYSTALLINA NERA EAU X CLAIRES IOVIZ KLARVATTEN LAGO UNDO MAYL !EWAN OZERNA SCHONSEE TOWN CENTRE LAKE DISTRICT TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Duplex Units Units Units
199
875
172
1047
177
1047
376
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
199
— _
— —
177 — _
110 I 03 —
115
176
221
115
233 103
—
875
172
—
—
336
71
1000 POTENTIAL DWELUNC UNITS
The proportion of potential row housing units in the inventory increased in 1983 to 20% from 8% in 1982 (Figure 11-4). None were absorbed in 1982 or 1983 (Table 11-5).
900 800 700 800
About 80% of these potential dwelling units are located in the Lago Lindo neighbourhood (Table 11-4).
500 400
There are no serviced apartment sites in the inventory (Table 11-4).
I
I
300
Apartment Units
200
Row Housing Units
u-y7z
100
1983
1982
1981
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
TABLE 11-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1981-1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) LAKE DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOODS
BELLE RIVE CRYSTALLINA NERA EAUX CLAIRES IOVIZ KLARVATTEN LAGO UNDO MAYLIEWAN OZERNA SCHONSEE TOWN CENTRE LAKE DISTRICT TOTAL
72
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
198:1 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
131
131
79
79
687
— 71
758
694
71
765
5411 99
1116
726 99
687
71
758
825
71
896
718
186
904
ID0II 0 II6000 00II0II
SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, 1982-1983
The servicing of 221 single family lots and subdivided land with a capacity of 115 row housing units in 1983 (Table 11-3) brought the supply of serviced residential land up to its highest level since the area was opened in 1981 (Table 11-4).
006 IP 06666AI00606II 00III
FIGURE 11-4
I 1-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
•• • • •• ••••• • •••• ••• • • ••• ■ •• ••••• ••• •• • ••• ••
I 1 5 Residential Building Permits
FIGURE 11-5 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS
-
Building permit approvals continue to increase. The 1983 totals are up about 36% compared with the previous year (Figure 11-5). Most of the activity was in Logo Lindo (Table 11-5). All building permit approvals in 1983 (as in 1982) were single family (Table 11-5).
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
150 100
I
A
ri 1981
1. - . - .
•.••1
Apartment Units Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
1982
TABLE 11-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN LAKE DISTRICT IN EACH YEAR, 1981-1983 LAKE DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
BELLE RIVE CRYSTALLINA NERA EAUX CLAIRES 1OVIZ KLARVATTEN LAG() UNDO N1AYLIEWAN OZERNA SCHONSEE [OWN CENTRE
— — — — — 188 — — — —
LAKE DISTRICT "[DEAL
188
_ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 101 289 — — — — — — — — — — — — —
101
289
1982 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Duplex Units Units Units
68 — — — — 171 — — — —
239
— —
— —
— —
— —
68 — — — — — — — — 171 —
— — — — — — — — — — —
239
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
52 — — — — 271 4
_ — 52 — — — — — — — — — — — — 27 I — — _ — 4
— — _
— — — _ ___. — _ _ —
327
127
73
The relocation of 153 Avenue in 1983 300 m. north has meant that 68 lots in Belle Rive for which building permits had previously been issued are now in the Evansvale neighbourhood of Dickensfield. Table 11-6 has been adjusted to reflect this.
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED LAKE DISTRICT NEIGHBOURHOODS BELLE RIVE CRYSTALLINA NERA EAUX CLAIRES IOVIZ KLARVATIEN LAGO UNDO MAYLIEWAN OZERNA SCHONSEE TOWN CENTRE LAKE DISTRICT TOTAL
FIGURE 11-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN THE LAKE DISTRICT, DECEMBER 31, 1983
Single, Semi Duplex Units 52 — — — — 631) 4
Row Units
— — — MI
Apart. Units
Total Units
—
52
— — — — —
— —
— —
61 “ ,
1111
— 731 4 —
787
41 6 1P
41
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1, II 41 41 IP fa
Lake District continued to grow with the number of single family units almost doubling in 1983. The proportion of single family row housing units now stands at 88% (Figure 11-6). Most of the development is clustered in the north west corner of this ASP area in Logo Undo although some development is beginning in Belle Rive and May liewan (Table 11 -6).
TABLE 11-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN THE LAKE DISTRICT TO 1983
641 IP41416416410 4141IP41 4141 IIIP
I 1-6 Housing Stock
74
••• •• • •••••• • ••• ••• •• ••• ■ •• •• • •• ••• • ■ •• •• ••
-:-.•:-:-:-:•c-:---:-c-:-:••-•-:-.:-•-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.:4-:-:-:-:-:-:-:4-:-:-:::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::::-:*.e .:-:-:-:-:-.-:-:-:-:-:$:-:-:::::3:::----:-:-:-:-:•:-------------.-.....-... z.-.4.-4,-..------.4:,,----4*----:-.----------:-:•:-.1-:-.:-:- --:-:-:-.--:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-..-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.:-:-:•:•••:-:-..:1-:-.:4-pc-:-.N. ..-----:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-..-:---:-:-: :0:---.::-19:-:•:---:::-::;-- - -:4-:-:,:-.:-:-:-:---------------:-----------:-c-:-:-:-:---------:---:-:-:-•-:•:-:---:-:-:-:-:•:-:-----:-:-:-:-:-:-----:-:-:-:-:--------x0-z---:-:-:-:•:-:-:"c:: --c-:-:::-:-:-:-:-:-:-::*-:-:-:-:-:-::::-:-:-:-c-::::::-::::-:-:-:-:4:-.1:-:-:-:-:-:-:-*-: .7,--:4:::::,c-:-.:-:-.:-:-:-:-:-:-.:-:-••:•:-:-:-:-:--.-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-..-:-:-:-:-:-:.-:-:-:4-:-:-:-....-:-::c-:-:-:-c-:-:-:-:•:-.---:---:-:-:-:-:-------:•---------:-::c::-------------:------:-:-:•:•:-:-:-:-:•:-:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:- ----:-:-:-:-.1-:-:-:-:-:-:-:---0-:-:-:-:-------:-.:-:-:-.:-:-:-::::::-..:-:-:-:-:-: -...-.-.-,..-.-....---------.---.•:::::::-:-:-:-:-:-.,---:-:-:-:-:-:---:-:-:-..---.---..-..---.---.---------....-.-.---.---.-...-..::*.------:.:.-....----_-.-.::*----,..-:•:-:-----..---------------..-.-.-----.-.. --------:-:-:---Nc,----.:-.:--- -...- 4---:4-:-.:-:-:-:-:4-:-.:---:-:-----.---.---.. -:-:•:---:-:-c-:-..-..-..*:-:-----:-:-:-:-;. --:-...-----:-:-:-:-:-:-:-..:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: •-:-c-:-.-----:-:-.-:-:----1 -,..-.-------..---.:.----:-:.:4:41.:.:.c..:.-........-.:4:. :.:.:K.---...-.---.,-....-.- -----------.-..-.......,.......-.. ::.--:-:-:-c-:-:-:-:-:-..cc4:------:---:-:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:::c.:::-:-:-:•:-:-:-:-..-:-:-.---.-.---.---------:4-:-:-..-.-.-....---:*:::-.:-:-:-:---:-:::8:: ::::-:-:-:4-:-:$-:-:-:-:44-: :-.1=:-:-.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-c::-:-$6,:-414.-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-......-.-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.:-..-..---:-:-: :::;16,:-:-..-----:-:-:-:---:-..c-:-:-.:-:-.:-:*c-:-:-:-:-:-:--:-:-------:-:-:-:-.. ..-----:x-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-x-:-:-:-:-.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:•c-:-:-:---.-----.-..-------.-.-:-.-.-:44-_---..-.....-----. 4.-:-.•.-......-.-... -:-..*-------:-:-z-:-:::::::-------:-::c_::-:-:-.••••:---:-:.---:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.: 4-:---:-:-:-:-:-.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:4-:-:-z-:-•-•-•-:-:-:-:-:-:-:4---:-:-:-:-:-:---:-:4-.7.-:-.:-.:-:-:-:-----:-:-:-zo.--:-:----...c:::::•-•-:---:-:-:-:-::::-::-:-:-;-:-:--?..>:::-:-:-:-:•:-:-:-:-.:*:-:...--:-,--"-"-:-----:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:-:-:-:--:*;:-.4-:-:-:-:-:-$:-:-:-.....:-:-::.-:-..:-:---.*-:-:-:-:-:-$:-:-: •:::::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.:0:-----4:0-0---v---------------------:~-1.---------.:**Ett::;:;:;:;:gilt;t5,E;i:::1-c,AIEV:k1:;:::::::::-::::::
•-::::::_-:::::::::::::::::_s-re__.;:%-:•.: _-:.-•:.••:::.*::.::-..:•-•:•-•:.-E.-•:::..-.::::::-*_-.2* RD ---,:-.-----.-.----- -.- • --- - - ---.- •.."...•.. -...-....•.-...•..-.•.....-.•
A
1-••••,...-----------.-:- :- :- -: -: -:-:-.:- :- :- :•:-: • • -.....c-.:-:-:-:-:-: ..k.r.-:-:-:-:---:-:-:-:-.-:-.:-...... .n.-1.-:::-..-.:-: : ..-----------... ..-------. ---c--- ...... . • -------,--------......--------- - - - - - - - - - -
- -
-
-
-
- - —
-"---:,...-:-:.:•:-----:-:•••••••:-:•:---,:•:•:•"4.:,--:.:,,O,,,,,CC::-:-:-NC-:•:•:.:-:-:-.-:•:4--
•:•:-:-:-2-:-:-:-:-:-:• :-S,C.-:-X-:•:-:•:-.100.:-.:-:-:-:44.:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-X-:•:-.:44-:-:•:-1,:•:-:•:.-:-:-.•.•.-..-..-..-----.•••-•.•..-.-.-.-....--.0...,..---..:-:,---........c.---..-..-..•..4•-•.---2-.S.: • "-----°•.•-- ","-'-',"*-----%",•"---------------,,,•%,-----,,,,,,,,,:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:-:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:-:-:-:•:•:•:-:•:-:-.:• °•°•"•-•:-:-:-.,".4..,--..-:•..-: .-,0...-?::::::::::::::::?::::;:::::::::::::::: . :::::::::::::::::-X-:•:•:,:-:•:-:•:-:•Y:s.,:-:•:-.:-:•:•:•:•:-:-:-:::::::::•VS:::::::%°• - %."-:-.,e -::-:::-:-■-°•:•.-:•:•.-----:•:•...... ::::::::•:•:,:•:•:-:-:-:•:f• ::-:-:•%"-"-7.::•:•:•:•:4•:•:-:-:•:•:•:SC-X4C-X-:-:-:-:-:-.:-:-:---,O.::.A.•:-:-:-:-:-:.:-:-:::::::-:-::.--,:.**4.0.:-.;*:-:-."-:-:-::-:-:-:•:•:•:•:-:•:e.--:-.?' •VI:•:_•••:•:‘,:, :•::::::*6•:,.. •,:•••••:•••••••:,•:••••:,:•:,:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:,_ °40,1C.:::40:•:•:•:•"•••:•:•:•:•:-..0.,..•:•:•:•:•:•OO:=:•:•:::•:••=4":•:•%•:•014:•:•••••:•:•:•:•:,0%,•:4.: •••••••"".." " • ••• ...ito,:e:Pat:•::::SO•rdeOr.:•:!:
IMMO011p1111. 1111Irliwarfilllog. .
■:•?::,:?:Dr:ICtO,:.:1:•:•:•:•:•:•••:•:•:: 21•:•:•:•:•:•0•:•.1.,Z.O.:•:•:•:•:•••••••• ■,■'•:•••:• •....•:,,,,,,,:*•••••••,••••,:. • •
_=-11111.31:mi unim-0,44/47
:mil
/
(
IttrWP1 =E
VA In ,,
tz;\lulu, "iii-31 ItreNta
'
Ria 21.1InifillIM, -'
. ii..11 • ',WI/115Ni 1,- bitifili
III
_ Rrs v
te..04 1.,....s....,
410 4, -••,,
AO
AGU
-.A=TEU
_____
--------- - -
A 1 onlle
feet 0 ... _500
0
1000
2000
4000
3000
100 300 300 400 500
Metres
1000
MOO 150C1
1 IL rn
1:53=A-V
AG cn c
co
LAKE DISTRICT
I 711 co CD
75
AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE
RF1
76
SINGLE
DISTRICT
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT INFILL
DENSITY
DISTRICT
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RAY
LOW RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
HOUSING
US
URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
APO
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
DC1
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below/ For me use provisions and development criteria for DCI Districts, please refer to the applicable Area Redevelopment or Area Structure Plan.
DISTRICT
DENSITY MULTIPLE
FAMILY DISTRICT
RAII
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
CBI
LOW
C82
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY
CO
COMMERCIAL
CMX
COMMERCIAL
IB
INDUSTRIAL
IM
MEDIUM
IN
HEAVY
APARTMENT DISTRICT MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY
DC3
TEMPORARY
DC4
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations, please reler to Bylaw establishing District on the site)
10
Designation applied to Conn, ;;;;;; iy Housing siles in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw
*
Designation applied to some RA8 sites
HOME DISTRICT CONVENIENCE
CENTRE
INTENSITY
COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT
BUSINESS DISTRICT
BUSINESS
DISTRICT
CORRIDOR DISTRICT USE
DISTRICT
INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT DISTRICT
SERVICE
DISTRICT
Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay
OFFICE DISTRICT MIXED
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOLDING DISTRICT
in accordance with Section 220-5, Land Use Bylaw
DISTRICT
BUSINESS DISTRICT
UTILITY DISTRICT
7.. ..i,,.: .4:,; *
Restricted Development Area I R. D. A. I Designation applied to sites with altered or specified development regulations in accordance with Section 820. Land Use Bylaw
••• •• •• • •• •• • •• • •• •• • •41• •• ••• •• • •• ••• • •• ■
Land Use District Codes
• •• •• •• ••411 • • ••• ••• • • ••• ■ •• •• • •• ••• •• • • •• • •
THE MEADOWS
12
THE MEADOWS
Although 34 single family lots and land with a capacity of six rowhousing units were subdivided in the Larkspur neighbourhood, development of The Meadows proceeded slowly in 1983. No building permits were issued and no lots serviced. Two neighbourhood structure plans have been approved, however, Larkspur with 107 gross developable hectares and Wild Rose with 104 gross developable hectares. Both were approved in 1982. In total, there are almost 1,100 gross developable hectares designated for residential uses in The Meadows.
A
N
77
(1)
;cri SOUTH • EAST INDUSTRIAL •
I-; Ln
Ln c,
(I)
SO SO
MILL WOODS
In
•0 1,
WI IITEMUD DRIVE
Mill Woods Plan Neighbourhoods
SSSSSSSSSSS
Tipaskan
1(1)
Kameyosek
Weinlos
LAKEWOOD Mill Woods Park
1—
1
RIDGE WOOD J 0 HNSONWOOD 11T—, Town Centr
Bisset
THEMEA DOWS
SS SS
cr) Pollard 1 Meadows
23 AVE.
Daly GroNre
SOUTH WOOD
Sato°
KNOTTWOOD
j
I
Men i sa
88
.= •
;.
PROPOSED OUTER RING ROAD • ■
---
78
• t-
-
;
41 40 41 41 40 41 40 40 104140IP 404111641641 404064141ID4041 404140 6 401110 40 40
I"
(11
•• • •••• ••••••• ••• ••• • • •••• •• .• .•• ••• •• • ••• ••
-
FIGURE 13-1 RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN MILL WOODS , 1981-1983
13 MILL WOODS 13-1 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations
PO1017141. [MELLING UNITS
4000
No subdivisions were registered in Mill Woods in 1983 (Figure 13-1).
In 1982, 3431 potential multi family dwelling units in the Tawa neighbourhood were registered (Table 13-1). 1500
L
1
1
Apartment Units
The last major single family subdivisions were in 1981 in the Kiniski Gardens neighbourhood. Smaller subdivisions in Bisset and Meyokumin were also registered in 1981 (Table 13-1).
1000
Row Housing Units NO ACTIVITY
E2222] Single Family. Semi—
A 1961
Detached. Duplex Units 1962
1963
TABLE 13-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN MILL WOODS, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) MILL WOODS NEIGHBOURHOODS
BISSET CRAWFORD PLAINS DALY GROVE EKOTA FLYNN DELL GREENVIEW HILLVIEW IACKSON HEIGHTS KAMEYOSEK KINISKI GARDENS LEE RIDGE MEN ISA MEYOKUMIN MEYONOHK MICHAELS PARK MINCHAU POLLARD MEADOWS RICHFIELD SAKAW SATOO TAWA Tll'ISKAN TOWN CENTRE TWEEDLE PLACE WIEN LOS MILL WOODS TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Unils
1982 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
198:1 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Duplex Unils Units Units
32 49
32 49 —
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
69 5
—
—
—
_ _ ___
74 — _ — _ —
—
—
_
— — 728 2703 — — — —
1 I:1
808
— 97 —
_ — — ___ — 07 I — I
—
78
— —
— — — — — —
—
— — — —
824
128
205
318
283
1270
— _
802
— 74 NC) ACTIVEVY
—
27113
1431
3505
79
An adjustment of 289 single family units and absorption of 300 single family units and 65 row housing units as measured by building permits approvals (Table 13-5) brought the 1983 supply of subdivided residential land in Mill Woods to a total of 13,190 potential dwelling units of which 15% are single family units and 21% row housing units (Table 13-2).
FIGURE 13-2 SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN MILL WOODS 1981-1983 POlINTIAL DWELLING U1'115 16000 14000 12000 10020
With subdivided land with a capacity of over 11,000 multifamily dwelling units (Figure 13-2), Mill Woods has again in 1983 substantially more potential multi family units than any other ASP area (Table 5-3).
I 2000
I
Apartment Units Row Housing Units
e is, r
EZZ2) , •,
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
902
*AVERAGE ANNUAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED 04 BUILDING PERMITS.
TABLE 13-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN MILL WOODS, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) MILL WOODS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi ' Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
BISSET CRAWFORD PLAINS DALY GROVE EKOTA FLYNN DELL GREENVIEW HILL VIEW IACKSON HEIGHTS KAMEYOSEK KINISKI GARDENS LEE RIDGE MEN1SA MEYOKUMIN MEYONOHK MICHAELS PARK MINCHAU POLLARD MEADOWS RICHFIELD SAKAW SATO() TAWA Tll'ISKAN TOWN CENTRE TWEEDLE PLACE WIENLOS
459 375 198 12 — 87 85 — 34 350 19 61 98 67 10 309 150 2 328 28 — 40 — 10 426
MILL WOODS TOTAL
3148
178 856 1493 1174 115 1664 251 387 836 — — 12 — — — 10 I 18 206 680 91 856 — — — 37 71 — 8 184 542 — — 19 127 — 1148 437 334 869 1 249 317 102 — 112 443 50 802 274 1077 1501 — — 2 280 150 758 2 — 30 — — — '15 — 135 — — — 73 321 404 1115 1303 272
2325
6147
I 1620
'Adjustments to 1983 figures for singles total 289 units.
80
Actual absorption for singles in (983 was 300 units as shown in table 13-5.
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
406 340 172 12 — 83 /12 — 34 225 I9 56 90 60 10 234 138 2 244 28 — 36 — 10 320
345 260 145 2 — 46 55 — 9
2601
17/1 836 1420 1629 115 1174 698 192 334 — — 12 — — — 18 176 75 66/1 815 65 — — — 37 — 71 (3 96 32') — — I') — 158 102 40.4 334 827 166 239 465 61 — 71 3 662 425 1205 210 857 — — 1 150 674 280 — 2 :01 728 2707 3435 — 75 39 — — — 73 404 321 105 250 675
2840
8411
13852
151 I 27 83 49 0 1/17 110 2 211 •/ — 16 — 3 308
.2012
'
1359 836 178 1174 1549 115 671 192 334 — — 2 — — — I.In I8 75 65 1,1 4 1 7118 — — — 37 — 46 155 8 96 — — I 1111 74 — 411.4 334 820 166 23'1 454 61 61 — 615 3 425 169 857 1136 — 2 — 150 641 280 4 2 — 2703 3431 728 55 39 — — — — 397 321 73 WO 1115 150
2771
8407
13190
41 41 41 4110 41 4V 41411141ill 414141IP11IIlb40 4041fb OPII 4010 411 41140 ID 41 II IP 41
13-2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land
• • ••• ••••• •• ••• ••• •• •• •• •• •• •• • ••• •• • ••• ••
FIGURE 13-3 RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN MILL WOODS, 1981-1983
13-3 Residential Land Servicing There was no servicing activity in Mill Woods in 1983 (Figure 13-3).
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 4000
In 1982, land with a capacity of 3431 multi family units in Tawa neighbourhood was serviced (Table 13-3).
3300 3000 2500 2000 1500
L_____I
Apartment Units
1000
fj Row Housing Units NO
300
ACTTATY
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
0 1981
1982
1983
TABLE 13-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN MILL WOODS 1981 -1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) 1982
19111
MILL WOODS NEIGHBOURHOODS
Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
BISSET CRAWFORD PLAINS DALY GROVE EKOTA FLYNN DELL GREENVIEW HILLVIEW IACKSON HEIGHTS KAMEYOSEK KINISKI GARDENS LEE RIDGE MENISA MEYOKUMIN MEYONOHK MICHAELS PARK MINCHAU POLLARD MEADOWS RICHFIELD SAKAW SATO° TAWA TIPISKAN TOWN CENTRE TWEEDLE PLACE WIENLOS
32
MILL WOODS TOTAL
— — — — — — 944 — 97 — — — — — — — — —
1073
— 49 — — — 45 —
Apart. Total Units Units
— — — — — 9 254 —
32 49 — — — 9 299 — — 1136
184 — — — 97 — — — — — — 78 — 78 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
8 — — — —
180
447
1700
Row . Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Unils
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— —
— — — 74
— —
— —
— — — 74 No ACTIVEFY
—
—
— — — — — — 728 — —
802
— — — —
2703 3431 — — — —
2703
3505
81
13-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
FIGURE 13-4 SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN MILLWOODS, 1981-1983
An adjustment of 289 units and absorption of 300 single family units and 65 row housing units (Table 13-5) reduced the supply of serviced residential land in Mill Woods to 1295 potential dwelling units, down 5% from 1982 (Figure 13-4). About 15% of the supply are single family lots and 20% are row housing units (Figure 13-4) with apartment units accounting for 65% of the potential supply.
POTEHI1AL OWEILDIG UNITS 16000
14000
12000
I
See also Table 5-5 for the comparison with other ASP areas with respect to supply.
I
Apartment Units Row Housing Units
2000
EZM Single Family, Semi— 1981
1982
Detached, Duplex Units
1983
TABLE 13-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN MILL WOODS, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) MILL WOODS NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
BISSET CRAWFORD PLAINS DALY GROVE EKOTA FLYNN DELI. GREENVIEW HILLVIEW IACKSON HEIGHTS KAMEYOSEK KINISKI GARDENS LEE RIDGE MENISA MEYOKUMIN MEYONOFIK MICHAELS PARK MINCHAU POLLARD MEADOWS RICHFIELD SAKAW SATOO TAWA TIPISKAN TC)WN CENTRE TWEEDLE PLACE VVIENLOS
459 375 1911 2 — 87 76 — 34 350 19 61 98 67 10 206 150 2 328 28 — 40 — 10 387
178 1I5 251 — — 27 24 — 37 11 — 127 437 1 102 50 274 — 280 — — 95 — 73 105
MILL WOODS TOTAL 2997 2184 •AdjustmcnIs to 1983 figures for singles total 289 units.
82
856 1174 387 — — 18 261 — — 1114 — — 334 151 — 372 1172 — 150 2 — — — 321 272
5354
149.1 I 664 836 12 — 132 361 — 71 542 19 188 869 219 112 628 1296 2 758 30 — 135 — 404 764
10535
Actual absorption for singles in 1983 was 300 UlliiS as shown in table I 3.5.
1982 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
406 :140 I 71 12 — 83 82 — 34 225 19 56 90 60 10 234 138 2 244 28 — 36 — I() 3211
260 I
836 178 1174 I 15 334 192 — — — — 75 Ill 668 65 — — 37 — 96 8 — — — 102 403 334 166 239 — 61 425 3 210 652 — — 150 280 —_ 7211 2703 — 39 — — 73 321 105 250
2840
8206
1421) 1629 698 12 — I 76 7115 ___ 71 32') 19 158 1127 465 71 662 14100 2 674 30 3431 75 — 40.I 675
13647
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
345 260 I-IS 2 — 46 55 — 9 151 1 27 83 4') — 1117 1 I (1 2 211 2 — 16 — 3 308
21)1 2
178 115 192 — — 75 65 — 37 8 — 74 403 11,6 61 :i 1),9 — 280 — 728 39 — 73 105
2771
71.16 1)74 :134 — — 111 668 _ — 96 — — 334 239 — 425 652 — 151)
1359 154') 671 2 — 13') 788 — 46 255 I 10 1 820 454 61 615 931 2 641
7
•I
2703 — — 321 250
:1-131 55 — 397 663
8202
I 29115
IP 41 4141 414141 6 6 410 41 41 41lb41 41414141 41 6 ft 41 41 4141
10000
• • • • •
•• • • • • • • • • • •
13-5 Residential Building Permits
FIGURE 13-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED EACH YEAR IN MILLWOODS 1981-1983
Residential lot absorption (as measured by building permit approvals) in 1983 was down over 75% compared with 1982 (Figure 13-5).
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 3000
I
I
Apartment Units
2500
Row Housing Units
2000
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
Single family lot absorption (as measured by building permit approvals) in 1983 was down 45% from 1982 and 84% compared with 1981 (Table 13-5).
150D
In 1983, single family lots constituted almost 80% of all approvals in Mill Woods. In 1982, by comparison, they constituted 40% (Figure 13-5).
1000
1981
1982
Multi family lot absorption (as measured by building permit approvals) in 1983 was .65 row housing units and no apartment units. By comparison a total of 830 multi family units (as measured by building permit approvals) were absorbed in 1982 (Table 13-5). The 1982 multi family building permit totals were probably inflated by builders hoping to take advantage of the Multiple Unit Residential building (MURB) program before it expired.
1983
•
•• • • • S
• • • • • • 40
• •
• •
TABLE 13-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN MILL WOODS IN EACH YEAR, 1981 -1983 1981 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
MILL WOODS NEIGHBOURHOODS
BISSET CRAWFORD PLAINS DALY GROVE EKOTA FL YNN DILL GREENVIEW !REVIEW JACKSON FIEIC;HT5 KAMEYOSEK KINI5KI GARDENS LEE RIDGE MEN1SA MEYOKUMIN MEYONOFIK MICIIALLS l'ARK mINCHAU l'( ILLARD MEADOWS RICHFIELD SAKAW SATOO TAWA TIPISKAN TOWN CENTRE TWEEDLE I'LACE WIENLO5 MILL WOODS TOTAL
'
251, 149 89 — — 211 22 — I 59), 1 6 102 19 — 142 30
1
— 90 341, 4'/ I I99 — — 89 — — — — — — — — 28 III 45 44 — — — 94 — 95 59), — — — — 1 6 — — 173 71 — — 31 12 — — — 6 — 148 131, I III, — —
—
i
69 1 — .1 — — 371
4 121 48 — — 1 — — — — — 3 — — — — — — — 157 528
1881,
521
1982 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
55 35 27, — — 4 3 — — 125 — 5 8 5 — 73 12
75 20 — 1,1 147 — — — — — — 311 21, — 41 III 12 — — — — — — 21.4 1113 — -— — .411 25 — .14 — .12 — III 15 41 — 41 171 1311 47 293, 1,4 220 — — 7,0
—
—
84 — — 4 — — III),
— 114 — — — — — — — 1,0 51, — — — — — — — 1271 12 —
—
—
545
379
1983 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
1 110 27 — — .1 9 — — 73 — 8 9 II — 27 —
— — 3 — 80 — 27 — — — — — — — — 3 — — ') — — — — — — — — 73 — — — — — -12 2.1 9 — — _ _ II — — — — — 17 — 41 41
— —
— — — — —
— IS
_ —
.400
1,5
—
34
I
—
IS
83 2111,
21,13
451
1375
31,5
-
Approximately 19,000 dwelling units have now been built in Mill Woods (Table 13-6). About two-thirds of these (12,300) are single family units. Apartment units constitute only about 10% of the total (Figure 13-6).
FIGURE 13-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN MILL WOODS, DECEMBER 31, 1983
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED
84
Apart. Unils
Total Units
20 143 123 105
452 938 92') 928 — 911 1105
MILL WOODS NEIGHBOURHOODS
Single, Semi Duplex Units
BISSET CRAWFORD PLAINS DALY GROVE EKOTA FLYNNDELL GREENVIEW HILLVIEW JACKSON HEIGHTS KAMEYOSEK KINISKI GARDENS LEE RIDGE MENISA MEYOKUMIN MEYONOHK MICHAELS l'ARK MINCHAU POLLARD MEADOWS RICHFIELD SAKAW SAT)))) TAWA TIPISKAN TOWN CENTRE TWEEDL E PLACE WIENLOS
342 672 605 561 — 669 715
90 123 201 262 . — 150 272
277 793 5011 714 560 524 450 654 634 597
379 405 125 258 525 211 108 211 402
92 118 — 19 118 123 14 12 19 150 66 220 143
756
226
18
11100
782 — 415
212
13
257
561
199
342 — 153 17')
1007 — 1014 — 913 719
2160
191115
MILL WOE )DS TOTAL
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN MILL WOODS TO DECEMBER 31, 1983
Row Units
540
12329
4616
675 881 1036 853 830 1068 811 828 1065 I 142
11 I 11 6 41, 41 41 60 1100 IP 1141 11 641111111 1166III11 11 41 41 41 4141 1)0 110• 006
TABLE 13 6
13-6 Housing Stock
1.111finnitne EP
0 ft
qo
I I 111111111111%
11 4, 4
fin stied MIR= MDT
EE cc
Lu ID
0
Vlii gt N 11.14 gi Cipli" 4..Air. im0.4 (21
- lma,
i
1/3
A IT
kg; kill u
i
1
u uttg,a _,
OM!
v.
co 0 0 CC
WHI TEM UD D RIVE
•• ••••• • • ••• ••0 ••••• • • •• ••••• •• • II • •• • •
34 ST
MILLWOODS N 91 ST
I
feet
1003
0-I metres
0 0.300 0 07:00
0000
7000
4000 .900
85
4, 4P AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE
US
URBAN
SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC
UTILITY DISTRICT
MA
MUNICIPAL
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
RFI
SINGLE
RF2
LOW
DISTRICT
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL
DENSITY
DISTRICT
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF9
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RA7
LOW RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA8
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CRC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
HOUSING
MULTIPLE
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
DCI
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below) For the use provisions and development criteria for DCI Districts. please refer to the
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY
DC3
TEMPORARY
DC4
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations, please refer to Bylaw eslablishing District on the site)
un
Designation applied to Community Housing sites in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw
.*
Designation applied to some RA8 sites in accordance with Section 2205, . Land Use BYlaw
FAMILY DISTRICT
applicable Area Redevelopment or Area Structure Plan.
APARTMENT DISTRICT MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL HOME
APO
DISTRICT
DENSITY
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DISTRICT CONVENIENCE
CENTRE
LOW
CB2
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
INTENSITY
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
DISTRICT
CBI
AIRPORT DISTRICT
DISTRICT
INFILL
BUSINESS DISTRICT
BUSINESS
DISTRICT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOLDING DISTRICT SERVICE
DISTRICT
CORRIDOR DISTRICT
IB
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS
IM
MEDIUM
IH
HEAVY
INDUSTRIAL
INDUSTRIAL
Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay
DISTRICT USE
DISTRICT
:i:-,:7
DISTRICT DISTRICT
DISTRICT
*
Restricted Development Area IR.D.A.1 Designation applied to sites with altered Or specified development regulations in accordance with Section 820. Land Use Bylaw
6 6 fl IP IP 4P 41 6 6ID41 4, ft
86
AG AGU
66 66641fP 4166 4, ID 40 41 0 41 41 II 40 40 0 4P40 4, 4,
Land Use District Codes
-1
CITY OWNED 3.
PILOT SOUND Pilot Sound Plan Neighbourhoods
A o
Lot I, Plan 2736 F.T.
AG
4.047 Hectares
Lot 2, Plan 2736 E.T.
AG
4.047 Hectares
Lot 3, Plan 2736 E.T.
AG
4.926 Hectares
Block Z, Plan 8474 A.H.
AG
4.33 Hectares
Portion of Plan 8474 A.H. Port of SE 35-53-24-W4
AG
8.053 Hectares
I
4.
64.566 Hectares
AG
SW 36-53-24-W4
,
2s
i•
,
1 .;
,•'
)
2
`'. — fs ,
P /:
—
■ ,•
•
-
r--. -
s‘, 's
—
er:
U_ •
7 ,% !. ...S ▪
I S
: s'S ‘
/
167AV1 7
•
I
0'
•
;";
■
.!
„ -
a I eo
i-.....1-67::,....x..-........... /
153 AVI :
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IMO IIIIIIIIII:
SBI
SS .17 £.,
4.) , Z2
_ in I
r
87
• • • •
14 PILOT SOUND Gross developable residential land in Pilot Sound totals 550 hectares. By the end of 1983 however, no residential plans of subdivision had yet been registered for Pilot Sound. All land is therefore raw land. The approved area structure plan for Pilot Sound designates 2 neighbourhoods, Cy Becker and Gorman, for light industrial development and 5 other neighbourhoods for residential development. Neighbourhood structure plans for all 7 of these neighbourhoods have been approved by Council. Listed below are those neighbourhoods designated for residential development.
Neighbourhood
Gross Developable
Name
Hectares
Brintnell Hollick-Kenyon Matt Berry McConachie North Sawle
88
122 95 110 103 120
• • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
•• • ••• •• • •• •• •
•
PILOT SOUND
•• • • •
•
•• •
• • • • • • • • • • • •
AO US
• • • • • • • • •
•
•
A feet 500
■ 000
7000
3000
4000
metres
5000
Iaoo
0 WO 200 300 400 500 I at
89
41 4P 90
AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE DISTRICT
RF1
SINGLE
.
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL
DENSITY
!NEILL
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC
US
URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RA?
LOW RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA8
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL . MIXED USE
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
PUBLIC
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
APO
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
DC1
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below) For the use provisions and development ciileria for DC1 Districts, please refer to the applicable Area Redevelopment 01 Area Structure Plan.
DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RESIDENTIAL HOME
DISTRICT
CONVENIENCE
INTENSITY
CHY
HIGHWAY
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
IB
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS DISTRICT MEDIUM
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
0C4
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations, please refer to Bylaw establishing District on the site)
93 ,
Designation applied to Cormumuly Mousing sites in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw
*
BUSINESS DISTRICT
LOW
GENERAL
HEAVY
TEMPORARY
DISTRICT
CB2
IN
COMPREHENSIVELY
DISTRICT
CI31
1M
0C2 DC3
DISTRICT
CENTRE BUSINESS CORRIDOR
INDUSTRIAL
INDUS 1 RIAL
DISTRICT DISTRICT USE
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DIS 1 RICT
UTILITY DISTRICT
PU MA
DISTRICT
HOUSING
PARKS DISTRICT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOLDING DISTRICT SERVICE
DISTRICT
Designation applied to some RA8 sites in accordance with Section 2205, . Land Use Bylaw Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay
:.. ;:7. :
Restricted Development Area IR.D.A.I
*
Designation applied to sites with altered 01 specified development regulations in accordance with Section 820. Land Use Bylaw
41 41f1 41II 40 64141641 4O 41 41 416414141414141IP41II414041 41 I/ 41 6 41 414141 41
Land Use District Codes
• RIVERBEND
• • • • •
uesne1111Bridge Fox Drive
•
• • • • • • • • • • • •
E
Brander Gardens 1
WEST JASPER PLACE
ru se ft
1.40,
2
Brookside
Terwillegar Park
Ramsay Heights 3 samosas
• •
.•$$$$$ e e
• • • • • • • • • • • • •
:
• •
Riverbend Plan Neighbourhoods
WH I TEMUD DRIVE
ra-
C
'
Rhatigan Ridge 5
6
• Henderso Estate :
Falconer Heights 7
8 Carter Ogilvie Crest Ridge 9 sommossismomisonannomuloses
91
15-1 Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN RIVERBEND, 1981-1983
No residential subdivisions were registered in Riverbend in 1983. This marked the second consecutive year in which there was no new subdivision activity (Table 15-1).
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED
By comparison, in 1981, land with a capacity of 688 dwelling units was subdivided (Figure 15-1).
I
I
1
.••••••• I
700,
Apartment Units 200
Row Housing Units 100
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units 1981
NO
NO
ACTIVITY
ACTIVITY
1982
1983
TABLE 15-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN RIVERBEND, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) RIVERBEND NEIGHBOURHOODS
BRANDER GARDENS 13ROOKSIDE 13ULYEA HEIGHTS FALCONER HEIGHTS HENDERSON ESTATE NEIGFIBOURHOOD 9 OGILVIE RIDGE RAMSAY HEIGHTS RHATIGAN RIDGE RIVERBEND TOTAL
92
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
—
— — —
— — 364
115 —
— 182 27
573
— —
—
115
—
479 — — 182 27
688
' Resubdivision resulted in a loss of potential dwelling units ' Redistricting for a portion of RA7 to CSC resulted in a loss of 30 potential dwelling
— 1451
(181 — —
— —
(45)
Lillits
—
— —
-—
— (63) .
— — (3( 1 )
— IIiit"
IMO
I931 —
— —
(181
1983 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Units
NU ACTIVITY
• •• •• • • (• • • • ••• ••• • •• •• • • •• •• • • ••• •• • •••• •• •
FIGURE 15-1
15 RIVERBEND
141 414140 41414141404140•40 41 I/ 4041 41 404141•41qp 41 41 40 41 41 4141 41 4141 41 41 4,41 4140 41 41
-
FIGURE 15-2
15-2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land
SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN RIVERBEND, 1981-1983
An adjustment of 19 single family lots and absorption of 215 single family lots plus 1 row housing unit as measured by building permit approvals (Table 15-5) brought the supply of subdivided residential land in Riverbend in 1983 to 1010 potential dwelling units (Table 15-2). About 70% of these units are single family lots; 30% are row housing.
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 1800 1400
Virtually all of these units are located in 3 neighbourhoods: Henderson Estate, Ramsay Heights and Rhatigan Ridge (Table 15-2).
1200 1000
I
r
••••••••1
Apartment Units Row Housing Units
200
7777 1981
Single Family. Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1983
1982
TABLE 15-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN RIVERBEND, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) RIVERBEND NEIGHBOURHOODS
liRANDER GARDENS BROOKSIDE 13ULYEA HEIGHTS FALCONER HEIGHTS FIENDERSON ESTATE NEIGHBOURHOOD 9 OGILVIE RIDGE RAMSAY HEIGHTS RHATIGAN RIDGE RIVERBEND TO FAL
1981 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
401 222
1003
115 — 110
326
1983 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi Units Units Duplex Units Units
13
1.4 4
1.4 4
-
478
316
96
41 2
293
95
388
69 -
580 323
407 198
1111 1(11
51 7 2)9
296 108
11 0
406 209
69
1398
938
3(17
1245
704
306
1010
13 4
363
1982 Apart. Total Row Single, Semi UMIs Units Duplex Units Units
2
4
*Adjustments to 1 983 figures f(ff singles total 19 units. Actual absorption for singles in 19/33 was 215 units as shown in table 15.5.
93
FIGURE 15-3
No residential servicing occurred in 1983 or in 1982 (Table 15-3). By comparison, land with a capacity of 1146 potential dwelling units was serviced in 1981 (Figure 15-3).
RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN RIVERBEND, 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 1200
1000
800
600
1
I
I .••••••
-1
Apartment Units
400
Row Housing Units 200
12:= Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units 1981
NO
NO
ACTIVITY
ACTINAlY
1982
1983
TABLE 15-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN RIVERBEND 1981 -1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) RIVERBEND NEIGHBOURHOODS
BRANDER GARDENS BROOKSIDE BULYEA HEIGHTS FLACONER HEIGHTS FIENDERSON ESTATE NEIGHBOURHOOD 9 OGILVIE RIDGE RAMSAY HEIGHTS RHATIGAN RIDGE
94
RIVERBEND TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 ' Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
—
364
115
—
479
182 383
101
—
1112 484
929
216
—
1145
NO ACTIVITY
NO AC VIVI TY
4141416IP 4b 4141IP 416 6IP 40 4141 lb 40 611141416 0•4041 lb 6IP414I4141 414,414, 41 41 lb 6 411
15-3 Residential Land Servicing
• • • • • • • •
FIGURE 15-4
15-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN R1VERBEND, 1981-1983
An adjustment of 19 single family lots, and absorption of 215 single family lots plus one row housing unit as measured by building permit approvals (Table 15-5) brought the supply of serviced residential land in Riverbend in 1983 to 1010 potential dwelling units (Table 15-4). About 70% of these units are single family lots; 30% are row housing. There is no more apartment land in Riverbend (Figure 15-4).
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
• 1600 • •
1400
• • •
• • •
12001_ 1000
Virtually all of these units are located in 3 neighbourhoods: Henderson Estate, Ramsay Heights and Rhatigan Ridge (Table 15-4).
..•.•.•.•.•...
L
800 600
I
• • •
Apartment Units
400
Row Housing Units
200
• •
1
0
•
19;1
V19 2 A V
V
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
A
1983
• 0 • • • •
TABLE 15-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN RIVERBEND 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS)
• •
Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
BRANDER GARENS BROOKSIDE BULYEA HEIGHTS FALCONER HEIGHTS HENDERSON ESTATE
13 4 — — 363
1983
19112
1981
RIVERBEND NEIGHBOURHOODS
Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Units
13
5 2
— —
—
4
5 2
—
388
—
406
Apart. Total Units Units
Row Single, Semi Duplex Units Units
Apart. Total Units Units
— - 13 — 4 — — 470 —
13 4
—
—
—
412
• • • • •
NEIGHBOURHOOD 9 OGILVIE RIDGE
•
RAMSAY HEIGHTS RHATIGAN RIDGE RIVERBEND TOTAL
—
115
— 3I6
—
96
— —
— —
—
401 222
110 101
69 —
580 323
407 1 90
110 WI
1003
326
69
1398
9313
307
— '—
293
95
—
—
517 299
— 296 hM
110
1245
704
.1116
—
209
011
• •
—
11110
• • • •
'Adjustments to 1983 figures for singles total 489 units Actual absorption for singles in 1983 was 215 units as shown in table 15-5.
95
15-5 Residential Building Permits
FIGURE 15-5
Building permit approvals for single family units were up this year to above average levels for that area for the past few years (Table 15-5).
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED EACH YEAR IN RIVERBEND, 1981-1983
There was virtually no multi family activity again this year (Table 15-5). Land with a capacity of 306 row housing units is still in the inventory.
POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 300
250
200
150
1
I
Apartment Units
MEM
100
Row Housing Units Single Family, Semiâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; Detached, Duplex Units 1981
1982
1983
TABLE 15-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN RIVERBEND IN EACH YEAR, 1981 -1983 RIVERBEND NEIGHBOURHOODS
96
19111 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
BRANDER GARDENS BROOKSIDE BULYEA HEIGHTS FLACONER FIEIGHTS HENDERSON ESTATE NEIGHBOURHOOD 9 OGILVIE RIDGE RAMSAY HEIGHTS RHATIGAN RIDGE
55 161
37
RIVERBEND TOTAL
217
37
1982 Single, Semi Row Duplex Units Units
1
Apart. Total Units Units
1
92 161
41 22
254
65
3
23
24
22
Ill BI
III 81
105
21 5
216
39
1
39
1983 Row Apart. Total Single, Semi Duplex Units Units Units Units
•• • • • • •
TABLE 15-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN RIVERBEND TO DECEMBER 31, 1983 Apart. Units
Total Units
RIVERBEND NEIGHBOURHOODS
Single, Semi Duplex Unils
Row Units
BRANDER GARDENS BROOKSIDE 13ULYEA FIEIGHTS FALCONER HEIGHTS HENDERS ON ESTATE NEIGI 113OURHOOD 9 OGILVIE RIDGE RAMSAY I-II:IGHTS RHATIGAN RIDGE
277 577
— 424 264
:119 114 — — 2 — — 77 —
• 757 45 — — — — _ 119
1:153 706 — _ 28 — _ 620 • ■ ,. 1 264
1568
482
921
2971
15-6 Housing Stock About 3,000 dwelling units have now been built in Riverbend (Table 15-6). More than half are single family (Figure 15-6).
• •
0 • • •
— 26
About 900 apartment units have been built here to date. Most are in Brander Gardens in the north west quadrant of the area.
• •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
•••
RIVERBEND TarAL
FIGURE 15-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN RIVERBEND, DECEMBER 31, 1983
1 Apartment Units
2
Row Housing Units
3
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
3 53% 1
31%
97
AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC
US
URBAN
SERVICE
PU
PUBLIC
UTILITY DISTRICT
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
AGI
â&#x20AC;¢
98
DISTRICT
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
AFT
SINGLE
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
FIF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RAT
LOW RISE
RA8
MEDIUM RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
DENSITY
MULTIPLE
APARTMENT DISTRICT MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL HOME
AIRPORT PROTECTION
DC1
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below) For the use provisions and development criteria lot DC1 Districts. please refer to the applicable Area Redevelopment or Area Structure Plan.
FAMILY DISTRICT
APARTMENT DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY
DC3
TEMPORARY HOLDING DISTRICT
0C4
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
DISTRICT CONVENIENCE
CENTRE
INTENSITY
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
iii
DISTRICT
BUSINESS DISTRICT
CBI
LOW
C82
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
BUSINESS
OVERLAY
APO
DISTRICT
DENSITY
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
!WILL
HOUSING
PARKS DISTRICT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT
SERVICE DISTRICT SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations. please refer to Bylaw establishing District on the sile) Designation applied to Community Housing sites in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw Designation applied to some RA8 sites in accordance with Section 2205, . Land Use Bylaw
DISTRICT'
CORRIDOR DISTRICT
113
INDUSTRIAL 'BUSINESS
IM
MEDIUM
IN
HEAVY
INDUS1 RIM. INDUSTRIAL
Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay
DISTRICT USE
DISTRICT
. .:-:./:::::
DISTRICT DISTRICT
DISTRICT
*
Restricted Development Area IR.D.A.I Designation applied to sites with altered or specified development regulations in accordance with Section 820, Land Use Bylaw
414141414141414141414141414140414141 41 4141414141414141 404141 41 4141 41 41414141 41 41 lb 41 41
Land Use District Codes
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
RIVERBEND
NO. 0, 5 A. NIVIegvion
WHITEMUD DRIVE
•
•• • •
•
• • • •
A feet
•
• •
KO
Ivo we
Mee .0 .0 .0
wee
*a*
woo 1200
moire.
• • •• •• •
99
WEST JASPER PLACE
1--: (J)
•
■
■ •:• :•.. ...
.; ■ •-", i
-
(1)
--./,-.
Stony Plain Road 1
‘7,
PLACE LAI RUE
•
A
v--I
•
I i‘ .%
1
• ` t*** %
;■ ■-•.;9
95 AVE. ,_••%-.,://
;: • 4
• -. ■
-
Belmead
sie
)
•••
■
‘; ;ce . Lir ..1%•
R.D.A.
:87 AVE.
s.
Y, „
;
J
Aldergrove
7- / —I V./ \•":
' sl
■- IS.ft ;
i I:
4
■
:WHITEMUD DRIVE 79 AVE.
r
WESTRIDCA, •--• " l•
Lvniburn
%—/
11w Ctii r 1
• /
••••
Rd %/...
.1. ,...
-
,•: • ,
‘f-
Gariepy
OLESIUW ".• .• le
-
„
Siksk .0.#
1-
, \.• I is
-11/
. 0 . = .. .. = .. 4. .. se
1, 4' ,
'••• f_i /s,s • "• ;,—
• /s %..
2'1.
• -..\//
rie s /Z- r • 1.
• •t'1' /". /ZVI
,%;
• ,•••• /_••• • ./.••• ./__
100
•
%.:
— • I 1,-. ,;10011..,,,../I s. / •.7.1111•• .•
RIVERBEND
41 41 41 41 41 4, 41 41 41 41 41414141 40 4141 41 41II 41 4, 11 4) II 11 41 4, 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41,
•
104041f, 4,041ft41 41 04)414141ftlb11, 414141 41 41 41 41 6 41 f0 0 0 41110414141 41 4141 40 41 41 40
-
16 WEST JASPER PLACE
FIGURE 16-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN WEST JASPER PLACE 1981-1983
16-I Residential Subdivision Plan Registrations Subdivision activity in West Jasper Place in 1983 was down 80% from 1982 (Figure 16-1).
POTENTIAL CAYELUNG UNITS 1000
There was some subdivision activity in West Jasper Place in the Lymburn and Oleskiw neighbourhoods. This created 120 single family lots and 41 new row housing lots (Table 16-1).
900 800 700 800
The West Edmonton Mall Phase 3 redistricting in October, 1983, in which land originally districted for residential uses was redistricted to AGU, resulted in a loss from inventory of about 53 subdivided (but not serviced) single family lots (Table 16-1).
500 400 300 200 100
Apartment Units
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
Row Housing Units
1983
1982
1981
1 ••••••••1
TABLE 16-1 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION PLAN REGISTRATION ACTIVITY IN WEST JASPER PLACE 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) WEST JASPER PLACE NEIGHBOURHOODS
ALDERGROVE 13ELMEAD CALLINGW(()D DECHENE DONSDALE GARIEPY IAMIESON PLACE LA PERU_ LYNIBURN OLESKIW ORMSBY PLACE SUMMERLEA TERRA [USA TERRA [USA THORNCLIFE WEDGEWOOD HEIGHTS WESTRIDGF. WEST 'ASPER PLACE TOTAL
1981 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
• —
1982 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
294
294
— 18 —
1903 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Duplex Units Units Units
II)
— — — 1.34 434 248
434 248
17 5
133
18
32
-
184
95
102
34
-
140
1531'•
1138
120
41
— 3
24 —
106
711
" 1533 loss of 53 units due to redistricting Co AGU.
(5.)1
26
26
' Increase due to redistricting.
75 86
42
106
859
681
162
41
161
101
••
FIGURE 16-2
16-2 Supply of Subdivided Residential Land Absorption of 866 potential dwelling units as measured by building permit approvals (Table 16-5) and the addition of 161 potential dwelling units by subdivision registration in 1983, (Table 16-1) brought the total remaining capacity of West Jasper Place to potential dwelling units (Table 16-2), down 12% from 1982 totals (Figure 16-2).
SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN WEST JASPER PLACE 1981-1983 POTENTIAL ETWELUN6 UNITS 7000
Single family lots constitute 33% of the present inventory; row housing units 16%; apartment units 51%. The proportion of apartment units in the inventory increased 7% in 1983 while the proportion of single family decreased 6% (Table 16-2).
4000
3000
Cil=
Apartment Units
z
2000
Row Housing Units 1000
Ki/Z4
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units 19131
1983
1082
TABLE 16-2 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF VACANT SUBDIVIDED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN WEST JASPER PLACE, 1981 - 1983 (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS)
102
WEST JASPER PLACE NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1982 Single, Semi Row - Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Units Units
ALDERGROVE BELMEAD CALLINGWOOD DECHENE DONSDALE GARIEPY IAMIESON PLACE LA PERLE LYMBURN OLESKIW ORN-1SBY PLACE SUMMERLEA TERRA LOSA THORNCLIFF WEDGEWOOD HEIGHTS WESTRIDGE
77 9 — 195 — 101 191 960 313 17') 59 130 — 18 — 60
163 39 279 18 — . 27 146 1776 1922 — 195 — — — — 60 — 161 — — 191 120 — IOW 33 — 346 417 325 921 — 23 82 399 553 24 — — — — 18 — — — — — 30 90
321 9 — 1119 — 85 269 493 402 175 49 132 — 18 — 57
3.4 163 523 9 — — 1575 11,70 95 — 189 — — — — 60 — 145 269 736 243 — 65 — 467 687 187 325 — 72 23 6/15 154 399 — — — — — 18 — — — — 30 87
241 ' — 172 — 63 140 298 .150 248 37 26 — 2 — 53
WEST JASPER PLACE TOTAL
2292
887
2199
873
2686
5865
2485
5557
16.12
5 163 409 — — 2 95 11,70 1575 — — 172 — — — — 60 12.1 — — 140 _ 418 120 415 65 — 760 187 125 WI — 23 399 1)48 22.1 _ — — 1 — — — -– — 1)) — 81
785
2485
4902
• • •
•• •
• • • • • • • • • • • • •• ••
• • • • • • • • • • • • •
• • • •
FIGURE 16-3
16-3 Residential Land Servicing
RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN WEST JASPER PLACE, 1981-1983
Two hundred and fifty single family lots were serviced in West Jasper Place in 1983 down 80% from the level established in 1982 (Figure 16-3).
POTENTWL DWELUNG UNITS 1200
West Jasper Place and Lake District were the only ASP areas in which there was significant underground servicing activity in 1983 (Table 5-4).
1000
800
600
I
1
200
I ••••••• -1
Apartment Units Row Housing Units Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1982
1981
1983
TABLE 16-3 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL LAND SERVICING ACTIVITY IN WEST JASPER PLACE, 1981 - 1983, (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS) WEST JASPER PLACE NEIGHBOURHOODS
ALL)ERGROVE BELMEAD CA 1.1.INGWOOD DECHENE DONS DALE GARIEPY JAMIESON PLACE LA PERLE LYMBURN OLESKIW ORMSBY PLACE SUMMEREEA TERRA LOSA THORNCLIFF WEDGEWOOD HEIGHTS WESTRIDGE WEST JASPER PLACE TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
-
1982 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
294
294
3 II
31 I
417
417
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
18
18
-
11(1
64 389 .—
64 389
I 29 34
I 2') 75 86
41
81)
22
24
1 06
26
581
I 52
18
18
1040
11141)
69
26
42
106
729
249
It))
—
359
103
16-4 Supply of Serviced Residential Land
FIGURE 16-4
Absorption of 866 potential dwelling units as measured by building permit approvals (Table 16-5) and the servicing of 359 potential dwelling units (Table 16-3) brought the 1983 supply of serviced land to a total of 4893, down 12% from the 1982 total (Figure 16-4).
SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN WEST JASPER PLACE, 1981-1983 POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 6000
Several points from Table 16-4 should be noted: the apartment totals have remained virtually unchanged for 3 years; the proportion of single family lots in the inventory has remained about one third for the past three years; with the exception of Callingwood's 1575 potential apartment units, the supply seems to be distributed relatively evenly over the entire area.
I
I
5000
4000
3000 . ' . ' . • . ' . . • . • . • .•. . . . .
Apartment Units.,
.•..• .•
1 - .• • ••I Row Housing Units
.
.
.•.•.•.•. . . . . .
'
.
0 1981
198
1983
TABLE 16-4 YEAR-END SUPPLY OF SERVICED RESIDENTIAL LAND IN WEST JASPER PLACE, 1981 - 1983, (MEASURED BY POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS)
104
WEST JASPER PLACE NEIGHBOURHOODS
1981 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1'1112 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
ALDERGROVE BELMEAD CALL INGWOOD DECHENE DONSDALE GARIEPY JAMIESON PLACE LA PERLE LYMBURN OLESK1W ORMSBY PLACE SUMMERLEA TERRA LOSA THORNCLIFF WEDGEWOOD HEIGHTS WESTR1DGE
77 9 — 195 — 101 86 543 65 179 50 96 — 18 — 60
39 163 279 18 — 27 146 1776 1922 — — 195 — — — 60 — 161 — — 86 120 — 663 33 — 98 417 325 921 — 23 73 24 399 519 — — — 18 — — — — — 30 — 90
:121 9 — 189 — 63 269 364 402 175 41 98 — 18 — 57
:19 163 523 11 _ — 95 1575 1670 — — 189 — — — 63 — — — — 269 — 607 243 — 65 467 417 325 917 64 — 23 154 399 651 — — — — — 18 — — — 87 30 —
241
WEST JASPER I'LACE TOTAL
1479
887
2006
104.1
2686
5052
. • .'
24115
5534
.
tA
1000
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
P'
. .• •
2000
2
— 172
— 63 140 298 350 248 28 26
— 2
— 53
1623
5
163
—
—
785
2485
409 2 95 1670 1575 — — 172 — — — -123 " — 1411 — — 120 418 — 415 65 187 325 760 23 51 — 399 648 223 — — — 2 — — — — — 30 113 —
4893
4041 41 40 40 4041404041 4141 40 41 40 4041414040 40 41 ID 4140 41 4, 41 41 41 40IA4010lb41IPIPIP IP 10 lb
FIGURE 16-5 16-5 Residential Building Permits
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED EACH YEAR IN WEST JASPER PLACE 1981-1983
Single family development continued to demonstrate its vitality in West Jasper Place in 1983 (Table 16-5). It was up 42% from 1982. Significantly, too, 10 of the 16 neighbourhoods in the area showed some activity. However, Jamieson Place and La Perle alone received 60% of the single family development (Table 16-5).
DWELLING UNITS APPROVED 1400
1200
Row housing development was relatively strong in West Jasper Place for the third consecutive year (Table 16-5). La Per le received 62% of this (row housing) development in 1983 (Table 16-5).
1000
There has been no apartment development in West Jasper Place for 2 years as measured by building permit approvals (Table 16-5).
V* / /
Apartment Units
200
Row Housing Units
A 1981
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1982
TABLE 16-5 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN WEST JASPER PLACE IN EACH YEAR, 1981 - 1983 WEST JASPER PLACE NEIGHBOURHOODS
ALDERGROVE 13ELMEAD CALLINGWOOD DECFIENE DONSDALE GARIEPY JAMIESON PLACE LA PERLE LYMBURN OLESK1W ORMS13Y PLACE SUMMERLEA TERRA LOSA THORNCLIFF WE DGEWOOD HEIGHTS WESTRIDGE WEST JASI'ER PLACE TOTAL
1981 Single, Semi Row Aparl. Total Duplex Unils Units Units Units
— — — 14 — 10 44 :340 17 9 9 42 —
— — — — — — 109 392 501 — — 14 — — — — — 10 — — 44 116 456 — 73 56 — — — 9 33 — 42 23 — 05 — — —
3
41413
1902 Single, Semi Row Apart. Total Duplex Units Units Units Units
1983 Apart. Total Single, Semi Row Units Units Duplex Unils Units
50 — — 6 — 10 116 47 193 4 10 27 —
— — 50 — — — 252 252 — — — 0 — — — — — 16 — — - 116 — 47 — — 19:4 — 39 — 43 1(1 — — — — 27 — — —
811 3 — 17 — 22 1.42 271 91 1:1 12 29 —
472
201
670
34 — I 14 3 — — — — — 17 — — — — — — — 22 132 — — 392 121 — 41 — 132 13 — — 12 — — 29 — — — — —
3
337
392
1217
76.4
196
—
1166
105
16-6 Housing Stock There are now over 13,000 dwelling units in West Jasper Place (Table 16-6).
TABLE 16-6 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS APPROVED BY BUILDING PERMITS IN WEST JASPER PLACE TO DECEMBER 31, 1983 DWELLING UNITS APPROVED
Because there has been very little apartment development in this area for the past 3-4 years and yet fairly high levels of single family and row housing development as measured by building permit approvals (Table 16-5) the relative proportion of apartments in West Jasper Place has declined from 30% in 1982 to 27% in 1983 (Figure 16-6). The highest concentration of multi family is in the Callingwood neighbourhood where West Edmonton Village is located. La Perle and Lymburn neighbourhoods contain the highest proportion of single family development (Table 16-6). There are now about 13,000 dwelling units in West Jasper Place. Rowhousing, apartments and single family dwellings are each strongly represented (Figure 16-6).
FIGURE 16-6 MIX OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS IN WEST JASPER PLACE, DECEMBER 31, 1983
3 39%
1
Apartment Units
2
Row Housing Units
3
Single Family, Semi— Detached, Duplex Units
1 27%
34% 106
WEST JASPER PLACE NEIGFIBOURHOODS AIDERGRC)VE.
BELMEAD CALLINGW( )01) 1)ISCHENE I)( )NS1)ALE GAKILI'Y JAMIESON PLACE LA l'ERLE LYMBURN OLESKIW ORMSBY PLACE SUMMERLEA TERRA LOSA THORNCLI1T WEDGEWO( )1) HEIGHTS WESTRIDGE WEST JASPER PLACE TOTAL
Single, Semi Duplex Units
Row Units
Apart. Units
Total Units
665 536 1211 37
402 570 1065 —
:183 213 1580 —
1450 1339 2773 37
44') 292 726 718 1(12 4311 252
179
32
561 371 3') 576 2(1')
412 152 — 321
660 292 I 699 1241 221 1335 461
41:4
486
438
3'17
111
15
1.137 — 430
5233
4476
3566
13275
• • • • • •
WEST JASPER PLACE
mi ittirmipl -ler muar7 E.4
-
J '
1.-i'
411111./
CM 1 H HM 100
uginnninnron
.
ff
LI
=
-
MON -alitiMilo
5
/
108
AG
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT
A
METROPOLITAN
AGU
URBAN RESERVE DISTRICT
AP
PUBLIC PARKS DISTRICT
AGI
INDUSTRIAL RESERVE DISTRICT
US
URBAN SERVICE DISTRICT
PU
PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT
MA
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT DISTRICT
SPO
STATUTORY PLAN OVERLAY
DETACHED RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT
RF1
SINGLE
RF2
LOW
RPL
PLANNED LOT RESIDENTIAL
RF3
LOW DENSITY REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
RF4
SEMI-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
RF5
ROW
RF6
MEDIUM
RA7
LOW RISE APARTMENT DISTRICT
INFILL
DENSITY
HOUSING
DISTRICT DISTRICT
AIRPORT PROTECTION OVERLAY
DC)
DIRECT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL DISTRICT (see below) FO/ the use provisions and development criteria
for DC1 Districts. please refer to the applicable Area Redevelopment 01 Area Structure Plan.
FAMILY DISTRICT
APARTMENT DISTRICT
RATI
MEDIUM RISE
RA9
HIGH RISE
RMX
RESIDENTIAL
RR
RURAL
RMH
MOBILE
CNC
NEIGHBOURHOOD
CSC
SHOPPING
CBI
LOW
CB2
GENERAL
CHY
HIGHWAY
APARTMENT DISTRICT MIXED USE
RESIDENTIAL HOME
APO
DISTRICT
DENSITY MULTIPLE
DISTRICT
DISTRICT
DC2
COMPREHENSIVELY
DC3
TEMPORARY
DC4
SPECIAL PUBLIC
DC5
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (For the uses and regulations. please refer to Bylaw establishing District on Ihe site)
ipi
Designalion applied to Community Housing sites in accordance with Section 92 Land Use Bylaw
*
Designation applied to some RA8 sites
DISTRICT CONVENIENCE
CENTRE
INTENSITY
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
DISTRICT
BUSINESS DISTRICT
BUSINESS
CORRIDOR DISTRICT
CO
COMMERCIAL
OFFICE DISTRICT
CMX
COMMERCIAL
MIXED
IB
INDUSTRIAL
IM
MEDIUM
IH
HEAVY
DISTRICT
INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT DISTRICT
SERVICE
DISTRICT
Limit of Edmonton Municipal Airport Protection Overlay -
-T-'
BUSINESS DISTRICT
INDUSTRIAL
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HOLDING DISTRICT
in accordance with Section 220-5, Land Use Bylaw
DISTRICT
USE
RECREATION DISTRICT
*
ricted Development Area I R. D. A.1 Designation applied to sites with altered or specified development regulations in accordance with
Section 820, Land Use Bylaw
4041 4140 041 640 41 66 41 41 ID 4141 41 41 41 41 40 41 6 414141 41 41 41 41 41041 6 41 41 41 41 40 41 4141 40
Land Use District Codes