LDA20-0343 Stoneriver Woodcroft
Engagement has concluded
***The discussion has concluded and a What We Heard Report is 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 for Council meetings.
***The discussion has concluded and a What We Heard Report is 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 for Council meetings.
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. Please don't include any personal information that you don't want to be seen by others.
Engagement has concluded
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.
Tell us how we did!
Provide your feedback on digital public engagement activities.
Stay Informed
Click here to share your email address to stay up to date on this application! Your email will be used to inform you about this zoning application in the future.
For more information about registering to stay engaged with other City projects and initiatives, visit the Engaged Edmonton FAQ page.
Who's Listening
-
Planner
JBPhone 780-496-5672 Email jeff.booth@edmonton.ca
ADVISE
ADVISE
This means the City asks the public to share feedback and perspectives that are considered for policies, programs, projects, or services.
ROLE OF THE PUBLIC
Timelines
-
November 2, 2020
LDA20-0343 Stoneriver Woodcroft has finished this stageComplete application proposing RA8 zoning accepted for processing.
-
November 9, 2020
LDA20-0343 Stoneriver Woodcroft has finished this stageNotification postcard mailed out to property owners within 20 metres of the site and the Community League providing information about the application and inviting feedback.
-
November 22, 2020
LDA20-0343 Stoneriver Woodcroft has finished this stageApplication revised to propose RA7 zoning rather than RA8.
-
January 18, 2021
LDA20-0343 Stoneriver Woodcroft has finished this stageLaunch of Engaged Edmonton webpage. Feedback accepted until January 31, 2021.
-
To Be Determined
LDA20-0343 Stoneriver Woodcroft is currently at this stageTarget date for City Council Public Hearing and decision by City Council is still to be determined.
How Your Feedback Will Be Used
We appreciate your feedback and will use it to:
- inform the City’s planning analysis and ensure all factors are taken into consideration;
- help inform conversations with the applicant about making revisions to address concerns; and
- summarize feedback for City Council so that they know your perspective prior to making a decision.
A summary of what we hear from this engagement will be posted on this webpage and provided to City Council when the application advances to Public Hearing for a decision. When the applicant is ready to take the application to Council, notices of the Public Hearing date will be sent to surrounding property owners. You can register to speak at the City Council Public Hearing or listen online. Click here for more information about how to speak to Council. You can also submit written comments to City Council through the Office of the City Clerk (city.clerk@edmonton.ca).
Information about Rezonings
Zoning regulates what types of buildings are allowed on a site (eg. residential or commercial) and the basic size and shape of those buildings. It does not control who can live or work in the buildings or whether the property is rented or owned.
The City's Development Services Branch reviews the rezoning application based on:
- Approved policies, plans and guidelines;
- Planning analysis (how the proposed zone fits into the neighbourhood);
- Technical information (traffic impacts, water and sewer capacity, etc.); and
- Public input (feedback from the public will be summarized in the final report to Council)
We oppose this rezoning. People already park in the neighborhood to go visit loved ones at the Matheson senior centre. There is a huge parking issue and the city of Edmonton never addressed this when the community brought it to their attention years ago. Woodcroft is a fairly small community and there are enough apartments around. We have plenty spaces for commercial opportunities in Westmount already. This area would be best for a duplex or single detached home. This development only serves the developer.
We oppose this rezoning. People already park within the neighbourhood to go visit loved ones at the Matheson senior centre because there is a huge parking issue. This issue was never addressed by the city when the community brought it up years ago. Woodcroft is a small community and we already have four apartment style complexes in the neighbourhood. For the issue of parking alone this rezoning should not go through and a duplex or single detached home should remain. Commercial use is not needed as the mall is less than a few blocks away. This rezoning only benefits the developer
I am opposed to this rezoning. My number one concern is the parking situation. We already have a terrible situation on 135Street and 115Ave with parking from The Matheson. To do the same to 136Street and 115Ave raises flags for me. You simply need to drive down Woodcroft Avenue when the learning centre is in session to see how congested our narrow roads are with on street parking.
Woodcroft is a lovely walkable neighbourhood and creating more traffic doesn’t fit well. The integrity of our neighbourhood will be compromised with another apartment building. Woodcroft is friendly, small town-ish. We have enough townhouses and low rise apartments, and I don’t see infringing onto the residential side of 115Ave with an apartment building keeping with the current neighbourhood style. Also, how about some due consideration for the surrounding residents. I’d be very unhappy if it was beside my home. Please don’t rezone this property. New single family dwellings or duplexes would be a better fit for Woodcroft in my opinion.
Removed by moderator.
Removed by moderator.
I see no benefit to the neighbourhood from this development. As many others have said, increased traffic, noise, parking issues and potentially crime are the most likely outcomes for us. The only benefit here is to the developer. I am tired of the city prioritizing developers over everything else. We chose this neighbourhood because it is small, quiet and cozy. We'd like to see that maintained. Small residential infill (no commercial component) is OK, but not an apartment building. We have plenty of multi-family units and commercial in the neighbourhood as it is.
Removed by moderator.
Removed by moderator.
I’m a woodcroft homeowner and I support this rezoning and the proposed development. Increasing density benefits all of us because it makes our city more efficient and keeps taxes lower. I do hope the proponent understands residents concerns about parking and incorporates it into their design.
I am not opposed to the addition of an apartment building. I do think we need to know how parking will be incorporated into the development. I do not agree with the recent changes to parking allocations for development adopted by the city. There must be sufficient parking allocated on the lot. I would also like small commercial spaces for local businesses such as a neighborhood pub.
I oppose this proposal and agree with most of the other comments here. Parking and increased traffic will be a major issue. I also sympathize with neighbours adjacent to the lots in consideration as they would lose privacy and quiet. I would be ok with an attractive duplex or four townhouses that have parking space included on the lot.
As a homeowner in woodcroft I oppose this rezoning. Woodcroft has a large proportion of high density housing including townhomes, low rise apartments, and 2 high rise seniors building. The community benefits from development of single family housing as well as high density to balance the community and maintain the communication that comes from community networks. In addition, the focus on density without infrastructure of parking will create resentment in the community.
We oppose the idea of another multi unit complex in Woodcroft. There is already a parking issue along 115 avenue and this unit would add to the problem. The parcel of land should remain as a single family dwelling or a duplex. The residents living in close proximity to this land should be considered as they will lose sunlight and privacy.
I absolutely OPPOSE the rezoning of these parcels of land. There will be zero benefit to the community but there will be detriments as pointed out by others’ feedback. I’d like to know on what basis might this change be approved?
What arguments need to be put forth to ensure this proposal does not get approved??
I’ve never seen a proposal put forth that includes the Wholistic approach of considering the neighborhood as a whole: widening of streets for increased traffic and parking .... installation of additional safety measures for pedestrians .... street lighting needs .... additional sewer and sanitation are but a few.
Woodcroft is already highly walkable for most ammenities and does NOT need any commercial space right in the middle of our residential portion. We have Westmount Mall and plenty of commercial space flanking us and walkable on 142 street and 111 Ave
These parcels need to be maintained as either single family or duplexes period.
Apartment style buildings close to other housing would ruin the privacy people have in they’re backyards and would make Parking a nightmare for the people living close to the apartments and ruin the aesthetic of the neighbourhood we oppose the plans!
As a home owner in woodcroft I oppose this rezoning. I feel that there is not enough space for parking as this is already an issue in this area. Furthermore building an apartment so near people’s homes does not make sense aesthetically and would remove privacy for those living right next door. This street and area should remain as single family homes or duplex housing. There is already a variety of housing options in the area and I feel duplex or single family is best for the lots in question.
The neighbourhood doesn’t have a lot of parking as it is and already has apartments and row housing we oppose the plans!
The neighbourhood doesn’t have a lot of parking as it is and already has apartments and row housing we oppose the plans!
No in fills!
Are we able to see what the developer actually plans to build here and how it looks?