LDA21-0078 Horse Hill NSP

Consultation has concluded

***The discussion has concluded and a What We Heard Report will be posted here when available.***

Thank you for participating in engagement activities for this rezoning application. The application is expected to go to City Council Public Hearing for a decision, with the exact date still to be determined. For more information, please visit these FAQs (External link) for Council meetings.


A Land Development Application has been submitted to the City of Edmonton.



This application has two components: An amendment to the Horse Hills Area Structure Plan and a new neighbourhood plan for the east portion of “Neighbourhood 1”.


The first component is an amendment to the Horse Hill Area Structure Plan (ASP). The proposed amendment area is located south of Horsehills Creek, east of Meridian Street NE, and north of 153 Avenue NE.


The Horse Hill ASP divides the area into five neighbourhood units, numbered one through five. The amendment proposes to divide neighbourhood 1 into two areas along Meridian Street NE to create Neighbourhood 1A to the east of Meridian Street NE and Neighbourhood 1B west of Meridian Street NE.



The second component of the application proposes to introduce a new Neighbourhood Structure Plan (NSP) - “Neighbourhood 1A.” This neighbourhood would be located in northeast Edmonton, east of Meridian Street NE and north of 153 Avenue NE.


Neighbourhood Structure Plans (NSPs) describe the general pattern of development for a new residential neighbourhood. The policies of the NSP guide the next stages of development, including zoning, subdivision, and infrastructure design.

The proposed Neighbourhood 1A NSP outlines:

  • Type and location of residential, commercial, and other land uses

  • Estimated population densities

  • The location of major roads and utilities (water, storm and sanitary sewers)

  • Future park space and school sites

  • Preservation of natural areas

  • General staging pattern for development


Key Goals of the Neighbourhood Plan


  • Provide a complete community with a diversity of land uses in which to live, work and play.

  • Retain existing residential and agricultural uses through appropriate urban design (i.e. transitional land use, site planning and design).

  • Establish a variety of housing and residential densities to meet consumer needs, encourage diversity and support aging in place.

  • Promote connectivity and accessibility within the community and encourage a pedestrian-oriented environment through the development of an integrated network of diverse public parks, open spaces, natural areas and stormwater management facilities, with connections to the North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System.

  • Preserve high-priority natural areas and integrate them into the neighbourhood.

  • Establish safe and complete neighbourhood streets that are walkable, attractive, and comfortable for residents and which are designed to accommodate winter transportation issues.

  • Provide a balanced transportation system that connects major inter-and-intra neighbourhood focal points.

  • Provide efficient, contiguous and staged infrastructure and urban development.


***The discussion has concluded and a What We Heard Report will be posted here when available.***

Thank you for participating in engagement activities for this rezoning application. The application is expected to go to City Council Public Hearing for a decision, with the exact date still to be determined. For more information, please visit these FAQs (External link) for Council meetings.


A Land Development Application has been submitted to the City of Edmonton.



This application has two components: An amendment to the Horse Hills Area Structure Plan and a new neighbourhood plan for the east portion of “Neighbourhood 1”.


The first component is an amendment to the Horse Hill Area Structure Plan (ASP). The proposed amendment area is located south of Horsehills Creek, east of Meridian Street NE, and north of 153 Avenue NE.


The Horse Hill ASP divides the area into five neighbourhood units, numbered one through five. The amendment proposes to divide neighbourhood 1 into two areas along Meridian Street NE to create Neighbourhood 1A to the east of Meridian Street NE and Neighbourhood 1B west of Meridian Street NE.



The second component of the application proposes to introduce a new Neighbourhood Structure Plan (NSP) - “Neighbourhood 1A.” This neighbourhood would be located in northeast Edmonton, east of Meridian Street NE and north of 153 Avenue NE.


Neighbourhood Structure Plans (NSPs) describe the general pattern of development for a new residential neighbourhood. The policies of the NSP guide the next stages of development, including zoning, subdivision, and infrastructure design.

The proposed Neighbourhood 1A NSP outlines:

  • Type and location of residential, commercial, and other land uses

  • Estimated population densities

  • The location of major roads and utilities (water, storm and sanitary sewers)

  • Future park space and school sites

  • Preservation of natural areas

  • General staging pattern for development


Key Goals of the Neighbourhood Plan


  • Provide a complete community with a diversity of land uses in which to live, work and play.

  • Retain existing residential and agricultural uses through appropriate urban design (i.e. transitional land use, site planning and design).

  • Establish a variety of housing and residential densities to meet consumer needs, encourage diversity and support aging in place.

  • Promote connectivity and accessibility within the community and encourage a pedestrian-oriented environment through the development of an integrated network of diverse public parks, open spaces, natural areas and stormwater management facilities, with connections to the North Saskatchewan River Valley and Ravine System.

  • Preserve high-priority natural areas and integrate them into the neighbourhood.

  • Establish safe and complete neighbourhood streets that are walkable, attractive, and comfortable for residents and which are designed to accommodate winter transportation issues.

  • Provide a balanced transportation system that connects major inter-and-intra neighbourhood focal points.

  • Provide efficient, contiguous and staged infrastructure and urban development.


Tell us what you think about the Application

Please let us know what you like and what could be better about this application. What should Council know as they decide whether or not to approve the rezoning? Other people that visit this part of the site will be able to see your comments.

Consultation has concluded
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

General Comments

The city should provide the neighbourhood design report to the public. We are currently being engaged on parts of the plan, but many actual details of the plan are determined by the local neighbourhood design, which is not available during consultation. Although the local level design may change, it is important to provide the complete concept to the public so that key tradeoffs and perspectives can be incorporated as the neighbourhood grows over time. For example, local road connectivity might greatly impact the function, sustainability, walkability and future redevelopment of the community.

The proponent should provide a market study that provides proof as to why this NSP needs to be planned and developed right now. There are many developing communities or brownfield sites that have not fully developed. Approving this NSP may negatively impact such developments.

City Plan Anticipated growth from 1-1.25 million does not support significant development in this area. This NSP should be put on hold until key growth areas in 1-1.25 million see more development.

Many of the policies in this NSP are too broad, and do not provide specific implementation or policy measures and examples of how they will be achieved. This NSP can and must be held to a higher standard.

The UPMP needs to be updated, as it currently promotes large park spaces that disconnect communities. Park space should be small, intentional and locally oriented. There should be minimal large fields that disconnect communities, and such fields should provide high connectivity and lighting to support resident safety. Park design should be held to the same standard as urban parks within the City.

Specific Comments

Page 2 – There was no date mentioned for when the open house was held. Is this the current online engagement? If so, please make sure community feedback is implemented prior to taking the NSP to council.

5.3 neighbourhood commercial – It is great that there are objectives to orient commercial sites along arterial roadways. However, there needs to be wording that states how the actual commercial buildings should be oriented, and the position of parking. Parking should be situated behind or to the side of the building, with minimal setbacks between the building and the arterial road. Commercial should be in a corridor orientation, with key nodes that have more area of commercial. All commercial nodes should be in a grid street design, with buildings situated towards each street. Commercial areas should be designed to transition over time, through how parking and buildings are situated. There is minimal conversation regarding this in the NSP and we need to change this if we want this area to be adaptive to change and transition over time.
• Objective 17-19 need to be updated with stronger wording that provides more guarantee that commercial sites will be street oriented, designed for pedestrians, and provide guidance on the orientation of parking.

8 - Transportation

• Objective 46 - The planned active transport network should provide an additional E/W connection through the existing developed area, on either 161 Ave NW or 162 A Ave NE. In addition, the S/W bike connection along the utility right of way should be extended all the way to 167 avenue. The existing pathway from the valley should connect to 9 street NW up to 167 avenue as well; as it is currently a dead end. Also, it is important to ensure the top of bank path connects to the southern secondary bike network; right now, it seems to barely touch it. Please ensure intersections are designed to accommodate cyclists, including dedicated lights, bike activated signals, and the limited use of slip lane islands.

• Objective 47 - There are not enough details regarding how the road network should be designed. The NSP should ensure that there are no dead-end streets, that there are maximum block lengths, that mid-block ‘turns/curves’ are discourages, and general wording encouraging ‘grid’ street networks whenever possible. Grids support easier navigation and better support community transition over time. Provisions in the NSP can be provided to limit cut throughs. There should be more connections to the arterial roads in this development, otherwise there will be speeding issues on the arterial, leading to an unsafe environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
• Objective 49 – There are not enough details regarding what an appropriate block size is. Block sizes should be encouraged to be less than 200 m, with minimal turns. Turns can be incorporated through a new block.
• Objective 50 – There should be no noise attenuation fences on arterial roadways. Arterials are also a part of our community, and development should in general face onto an arterial roadway. Noise issues can be accommodated through trees, reduced road widths, and lower speeds. Designing the arterials to actually limit noise through good design can limit the need for noise fences along these streets while supporting the goals of Vision Zero. Development such as row housing, multi unit residential can also be placed on arterials, situated towards the street, as seen in our mature neighborhoods.

Figure 5 – Land use concept comments – Low rise/medium density development is too concentrated throughout the community. Effort should be made to orient these developments along key roadways such as arterials. There is minimal commercial in this NSP, and the proposed commercial area seems to be planned in a ‘power centre/strip mall design’, where there is a large node of commercial with minimal details regarding the urban design of such areas. Having details and plans for local street networks would allow the public to better determine the vision for these high density/commercial nodes. Right now, there is not enough details regarding the interaction between land use and transportation to support this NSP.

d19953 almost 3 years ago

General Comments
The city should provide the neighbourhood design report to the public. We are currently being engaged on parts of the plan, but many actual details of the plan are determined by the local neighbourhood design, which is not available during consultation. Although the local level design may change, it is important to provide the complete concept to the public so that key tradeoffs and perspectives can be incorporated as the neighbourhood grows over time. For example, local road connectivity might greatly impact the function, sustainability, walkability and future redevelopment of the community.
The proponent should provide a market study that provides proof as to why this NSP needs to be planned and developed right now. There are many developing communities or brownfield sites that have not fully developed. Approving this NSP may negatively impact such developments.
City Plan Anticipated growth from 1-1.25 million does not support significant development in this area. This NSP should be put on hold until key growth areas in 1-1.25 million see more development.
Many of the policies in this NSP are too broad, and do not provide specific implementation or policy measures and examples of how they will be achieved. This NSP can and must be held to a higher standard.
The UPMP needs to be updated, as it currently promotes large park spaces that disconnect communities. Park space should be small, intentional and locally oriented. There should be minimal large fields that disconnect communities, and such fields should provide high connectivity and lighting to support resident safety. Park design should be held to the same standard as urban parks within the City.
Specific Comments
Page 2 – There was no date mentioned for when the open house was held. Is this the current online engagement? If so, please make sure community feedback is implemented prior to taking the NSP to council.
5.3 neighbourhood commercial – It is great that there are objectives to orient commercial sites along arterial roadways. However, there needs to be wording that states how the actual commercial buildings should be oriented, and the position of parking. Parking should be situated behind or to the side of the building, with minimal setbacks between the building and the arterial road. Commercial should be in a corridor orientation, with key nodes that have more area of commercial. All commercial nodes should be in a grid street design, with buildings situated towards each street. Commercial areas should be designed to transition over time, through how parking and buildings are situated. There is minimal conversation regarding this in the NSP and we need to change this if we want this area to be adaptive to change and transition over time.
• Objective 17-19 need to be updated with stronger wording that provides more guarantee that commercial sites will be street oriented, designed for pedestrians, and provide guidance on the orientation of parking.
8 - Transportation
• Objective 46 - The planned active transport network should provide an additional E/W connection through the existing developed area, on either 161 Ave NW or 162 A Ave NE. In addition, the S/W bike connection along the utility right of way should be extended all the way to 167 avenue. The existing pathway from the valley should connect to 9 street NW up to 167 avenue as well; as it is currently a dead end. Also, it is important to ensure the top of bank path connects to the southern secondary bike network; right now, it seems to barely touch it. Please ensure intersections are designed to accommodate cyclists, including dedicated lights, bike activated signals, and the limited use of slip lane islands.
• Objective 47 - There are not enough details regarding how the road network should be designed. The NSP should ensure that there are no dead-end streets, that there are maximum block lengths, that mid-block ‘turns/curves’ are discourages, and general wording encouraging ‘grid’ street networks whenever possible. Grids support easier navigation and better support community transition over time. Provisions in the NSP can be provided to limit cut throughs. There should be more connections to the arterial roads in this development, otherwise there will be speeding issues on the arterial, leading to an unsafe environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
• Objective 29 – There are not enough details regarding what an appropriate block size is. Block sizes should be encouraged to be less than 200 m, with minimal turns. Turns can be incorporated through a new block.
• Objective 50 – There should be no noise attenuation fences on arterial roadways. Arterials are also a part of our community, and development should in general face onto an arterial roadway. Noise issues can be accommodated through trees, reduced road widths, and lower speeds. Designing the arterials to actually limit noise through good design can limit the need for noise fences along these streets while supporting the goals of Vision Zero. Development such as row housing, multi unit residential can also be placed on arterials, situated towards the street, as seen in our mature neighborhoods.
Figure 5 – Land use concept comments – Low rise/medium density development is too concentrated throughout the community. Effort should be made to orient these developments along key roadways such as arterials. There is minimal commercial in this NSP, and the proposed commercial area seems to be planned in a ‘power centre/strip mall design’, where there is a large node of commercial with minimal details regarding the urban design of such areas. Having details and plans for local street networks would allow the public to better determine the vision for these high density/commercial nodes. Right now, there is not enough details regarding the interaction between land use and transportation to support this NSP.

d19953 almost 3 years ago

Removed by moderator.

George almost 3 years ago

Please address the following issues for a 3000 - 4000 population community. Please compare this community to Brintnell, Hollick Kenyon, Hermitage, Fraser, Miller, York... etc. Distance to
location of Fire Rescue Station, Emergency Medical Services, and or Police Department
Station(s). These must be adjacent to major arterial roadway to ensure response coverage is achieved.

Access to the community through multiple roadways. MULTIPLE ROADWAY ACCESS. There is only one way in or out of this community, 153rd to Meridian road. This is a serious problem as this roadway is consistently under construction due to over use from the existing population. "Fire Rescue Services operates under City Council direction for response time targets which are identified in Fire Rescue Master Plan, Goal 1, Administrative Guideline 1.1 Fire Response Time Service Level Targets as specified in National Fire Protection Association1710. Emergency Medical Services will meet response time targets as endorsed by City Council."

Look at a simple map of any community's transportation network and you will see that EVERY neighbourhood has multiple roadways access points in and out. Many have primary transit routes, park and ride facilities, and transit centres. Meridian to 153 is a single lane, seasonally "paved", steep shouldered, tooth shattering roadway and is the only way in or out of this community. I thought that we would see a detailed Local Roadway ‘Shadow’ Plan as part of this formal application. The proposed plan should be reviewed in the context of the NSP by the Transportation Department? No?

You mentioned the proportion of future neighbourhood population within walking distance (400m) of transit service, but I don't see it anywhere, maybe I missed it.
Tell me how does your plan support universal or inclusive design that promotes equal opportunity for use by individuals with or without disability?
Has any thought been put towards Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design to enhance public safety, security and prevention of crime?
Has there been any study on consideration of potential ecological and environmental impacts having regard for animal habitat and migration patterns? Has this been missed or is it still to come?

George almost 3 years ago

Looking at the proposed development plan, there seems to be no plan to "retain existing agricultural uses" except to keep Sunstar as a private tree nursery business. This is in defiance of the zoning bylaw that is supposed to support more urban agriculture and local food production in the area.

In addition, Meridian street in front of the main entrances to Quarry Ridge 1 and 2 is repaired several times per year due to the traffic in this area. The existing road access would not be able to sustain transportation to more neighborhoods.

There are other areas close to the proposed development that are conducive to new neighborhoods with amenities close by. Please consider those areas before developing the rich agricultural land that is the beauty of the Horse Hills community.

ST almost 3 years ago

This neighbourhood structure plan is designed to bring as many residents into the area as possible, with little concern for the environmental and human impacts of the development. It fails to take into consideration the uniqueness of the soil, landscape, and existing community. The NSP area is also disconnected from existing developments and amenities, so developing here in the near future would represent the worst kind of urban sprawl.

The majority of the proposed development area is currently urban farmland. From what we understand, it is the highest grade soil for growing vegetables and crops. “fresh: Edmonton’s Food and Urban Agriculture Strategy” has been guiding our city’s agricultural activities since 2012. It includes recommendations for conserving existing farmland and reducing unsustainable development to provide balance for our growing city. The proposed development is in conflict with these municipal strategies and priorities. The NSP proposes to “retain existing agricultural uses”, but uses Sunstar Nurseries, a longstanding private tree nursery, to check that box. When looking at a map, it appears that a large section of agricultural land is preserved, but in reality, the development eliminates all usable land for farming.

Some parts of the proposed development are also forested areas that provide habitats for wildlife, while also forming nature corridors connecting with the river valley and nearby ravine. There is rich birdlife making their home here and Quarry Ridge residents have regularly seen animals such a deer, coyotes, and moose traversing the area. The Horse Hills Area Structure Plan calls for any development to conserve and integrate with areas of high ecological significance within the land use concept. Clearcutting large stands of trees is in conflict with this direction.

The NSP does not take into consideration the unique type of residential offering Quarry Ridge currently provides. Considering its distance from existing communities and service, as well as the lack of a Neighbourhood Structure Plan, it could be argued that the Quarry Ridge development should not have been approved two decades ago from a municipal planning perspective. But we cannot go back. Quarry Ridge has been built and provides a unique lifestyle for residents who choose to forgo traditional urban amenities and live in the community. Over half of the homes back onto some form of greenspace. The proposed residential areas that are immediately adjacent to Quarry Ridge takes this away from over 40 properties, most of which have been architecturally designed to connect with the surrounding land. Residents will lose an important part of what brought them to the area and their homes, while also experiencing a negative impact on their property value. This does not align with the Horse Hills Area Structure Plan’s direction to integrate future development with existing residential.

Existing developments and amenities in Edmonton have not yet come close to connecting with the proposed NSP area. Significant areas to the west remain undeveloped, so it is logical that this NSP and associated rezoning applications should wait until they would create well-designed urban connections. The ASP does not put any specific timeline to the development of the Horse Hills area, but it estimates that the area would be built out in 30–40 years. Expediating development to begin in the near future would be an example of the type of urban sprawl that city council and administration have committed to reducing.

On the surface, this Neighbourhood Structure Plan may appear to be sound urban planning. But when one fully considers the points above, and the objections of others, this NSP should not be supported by administration when it is brought before council.

R Kenny almost 3 years ago

Although the proposed development plan on the surface tries to tie the proposed land use change in to the larger Horse Hill area structure plan, it falls short in many ways. There is no consideration to connecting the new road network into the existing one. Already, the single road access in to the area is repaired multiple times each year and adding traffic congestion would only worsen the problem. At minimum, there should be a second access point from 167 ave, traffic lights at existing intersections, signalized pedestrian crossing on the arterials and sidewalks added to the existing streats. There is no viable transit access in the area to support increased density and the proposed development is far away from any LRT line. The small park proposed would be the only park that services the 6 proposed neighbourhoods.

Another example of how the current infrastructure would fail to support the higher density residential area is the over-capacity school that this area feeds in to. Horse Hill School was never designed to meet the needs of the existing community, let alone the proposed expansion. Many of the community residents including myself have chosen to send our children elsewhere because the school is over-burdened.

When the proposal is examined, it is clear that the nod to agriculture is tokenistic. The area that is stated to "retain existing agricultural uses" is Sunstar nurseries, a private tree nursery, not agriculture. This proposal therefore eliminates all usuable grade A agricultural land. This is in clear opposition to the zoning bylaw changes allowing for more urban agriculture and local food production as of February 2106. As per Edmonton's Food and Urban Agriculture Strategy, we are to "expect to see beautification of vacant and underutilized lots" and "more community gardens".

We understand that this area of the city is under focus for development. However, there remains large areas closer to amenities around this proposed development that are undeveloped. Rushing to develop this small area on the outskirt of the city would not allow well thought out urban connections with the larger Horse Hills area and should be delayed until a more thoughtful and integrated plan can be developed.

We understand that it could be construed as hypocritical for us to be opposed to this development as we currently live in this community. However, we argue that this development should have never been allowed in the first place due to the multiple reasons stated above. We are looking to you to not make another mistake because one was allowed in the past.

D Thomas almost 3 years ago

This proposed NSP goes against the newly adopted Edmonton City Plan in several ways and should not be allowed to proceed. Briefly, this amendment aligns with neither the Edmonton City Plan nor with “fresh:Edmonton’s Food and Urban Agriculture Strategy”.

One of the main goals of the new city plan is to aim to create 15-minute districts that allow people to easily complete their daily needs within a smaller community within a community. In this regard, the proposed NSP simply continues to allow additional urban sprawl without focusing on building up a community within a community. I suppose the damage was begun long ago with the original approvals for the Quarry Ridge community, but the new City Plan should give us pause to reflect on more sustainable and well-designed plans.
This NSP is a small bolt-on amendment that, when inevitably followed by additional bolt-on amendments in years to come, will create another poorly planned section of the city. To ensure that the Horsehills region is developed within the framework of the city plan, this single proposed land use change should be halted and brought into a larger framework.
Some items to note:
the current road access is poorly maintained and inadequate for additional development
the proposed district node, Horse Hills Centre, is located much further north with access seemingly planned to tie into Manning Drive while the increasing urban sprawl in the proposed NSP will have its access tied in through 153rd Ave. This also is a misalignment with the “Community within a community” goal of the new City Plan.
Further, this amendment does not align with fresh: Edmonton’s Food and Urban Agriculture Strategy. fresh recommends conserving existing farmland and reducing unsustainable development to provide balance for our growing city; however, the proposed NSP removes land with some of the highest grade soil for agriculture. Hypocritically, the NSP proposes to “retain existing agricultural uses” but uses a tree farm, Sunstar Nurseries, as evidence of this while rezoning the actual farmed land.

rj almost 3 years ago

Why is there not a survey for the NSP? Having that would enable more specific feedback regarding perspectives for this development. This is done for a bunch of other city initiatives, why not for this?

d19953 almost 3 years ago

Why proceed with development at the outskirts of the city while Blatchford is still undeveloped? The area described is not within walking distance of the LRT or proposed LRT. Shouldn't the city be focusing on those areas first?

PV almost 3 years ago

The boundary of N1A does not make sense. It should include "S.E. 1/4 Sec. 32-53-23-4" in the southwest corner. i.e. the primary separation between N1A and N1B is the main artery, so N1A should include everything east of meridian, but also SE and S of meridian as it transitions into the re-aligned 153 avenue on its way to the Anthony Henday interchange.

PV almost 3 years ago

I find it hard to understand that NSP map, but it doesn't look like there are very many green spaces and but there does seem to be a whole lot of single family homes. It sure would be encouraging to see an innovative plan of development one of these days, hopefully soon, that really took into consideration that we really do need to find a new way to live sustainably - a plan that took into account environmental and social justice. Wouldn't that be amazing?!?! Couldn't developers also make money with a NSP that had affordable, higher density, green technology housing with large tracts of local agricultural lands? Couldn't they try that just once, to see how people would flock to live in a place like that?

Kelly Mills almost 3 years ago

This redoing shouldn’t go ahead as the area has zero access to the Henday just 153 ave which is already congested. As the city has proven that their tax along with road use which has proven to be poor at best. All you need to look at is how the southwest is currently congested and this will be the same development. So no to his appplication until there is better road access to major routes

KS almost 3 years ago

I think that thorough consideration must be made with existing owners in the area before rezoning. Many people buy there for the expansive green space and the quiet life that green space offers. This area still allows them to be close to the city and its amenities. I think it necessary to run appropriate assessments regarding costs associated to maintain the infrastructure and charge the existing owners accordingly rather than rezone. The existing owner's opinion do matter and should weigh heavily if they are willing to sustain their neighborhood. This is just my opinion.

WM almost 3 years ago

We simply cannot keep accepting new green-field sprawl, particularly on prime agriculture land as others have noted. I suppose the damage was done long ago with approvals at the ASP level, but that doesn't mean we should blindly accept new sprawl and I cannot support this NSP proposal.

We seriously need to start forcing long-term financial implications of new developments to be included in the ASP/NSP approval process. I want to see tax projections compared to long-term servicing and infrastructure renewal costs. Every new neighborhood that doesn't support itself financially will only drive up property taxes for everyone in the long-term.

New car-centric development is not the answer - every one of these new neighborhoods inhibits our infill goals, undermines our environmental commitments, and stretches the city's finances a little bit more.

GG almost 3 years ago

Although I appreciate the efforts the city is making in modifying existing lands, I don’t think this proposal suits this area very well. As other commenters have mentioned, there will be a loss of agricultural and green space, and there will be much more traffic than the roads can handle (especially since there is only one road i.e. 153 Ave that connects this area directly to the city). If the plans were to go ahead, at least keep as much green space as possible and keep the density of housing low. Thanks

FG almost 3 years ago

Phase one of 5 new neighborhoods. According to the plan, a lot of agricultural area will be claimed as well as LRT line, transit centers, schools ( a school located across from Kulmans? What a bad idea. There is a lot of wildlife in this area that returns every year.
With very few routes to access major roadways, the influx of 3600 extra commuters will congest 153 ave, let alone the extra traffic during seasonal golf season. This is just phase 1A. Wait until all phases are complete and there will be road congestion, accidents.

Patg almost 3 years ago

This area is prime agricultural land. Stop the sprawl and preserve our agriculture areas for quality food production.

Meloney Patterson almost 3 years ago

This was one of the most terrible presentations and very difficult to actually determine what was changing from the powerpoint and where it was actually take place.

CM Britnell almost 3 years ago

You are planning houses and businesses on #1 agricultural land. Preserve the area for the use in greenhouse, small garden plots and nature area.

Hans almost 3 years ago