Edmonton (Alta.) - 1971-1992 - Status of residential land in the city of edmonton (1984)

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