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)
I am not opposed to dense neighbourhoods. The physical infrastructure in this neighbourhood makes the addition of an apartment building desirable. I do think about parking and how this will be incorporated into the development planning. I would also like to know what something like this will add to our community in terms of beautification and social infrastructure. Small commercial spaces for local businesses such as coffee shops, art hives, bicycle repair shops have the ability to transform a neighbourhood. Commercial use on the ground level can also add to the overall safety of the neighbourhood. The condo building at the end of 136 street and Woodcroft ave is well maintained and adds to the street.
I am not opposed to dense neighbourhoods. The physical infrastructure in this neighbourhood makes the addition of an apartment building desirable. I do think about parking and how this will be incorporated into the development planning. I would also like to know what something like this will add to our community in terms of beautification and social infrastructure. Small commercial spaces for local businesses such as coffee shops, art hives, bicycle repair shops have the ability to transform a neighbourhood. Commercial use on the ground level can also add to the overall safety of the neighbourhood. The condo building at the end of 136 street and Woodcroft ave is well maintained and adds to the street.
We are opposed to this change. Parking in this area is already very busy difficult for people that live in the single family dwellings around there and since the requirement for developers to ensure there is space for parking has been removed, that will just exacerbate the problem. Also when there is a bus coming one way on 115 ave, a car going the other way has to find a place to move over. The area is already high enough density and there is sufficient commercial space available in nearby areas that are appropriate for it. The zoning should remain at the current RF3.
We oppose the idea. No need for more infill housing or buildings in the neighbourhood - there area lot of those in the neighbourhood already. However the thought of a single story small coffee shop would be appealing, provided that off-street parking was available.
We already have more then enough row housing in our neighbourhood! No thank you.
There is already many multi unit buildings in the immediate vicinity, but I think a 4 story building would have little impact on the sunlight in the area as the large condo complexes nearby have already cast their shadows. I would appreciate a commercial space for a small coffee shop or something similar for the neighbourhood. While there is a lot of commercial space in Westmount, there isn’t a lot of walkable amenities right in woodcroft. However a parking plan should be considered (ie underground parking for residents) as the street parking around the area is busy already and the lot may not be large enough to accommodate a sufficient parking lot for residents and commercial traffic
There is already many multi unit buildings in the immediate vicinity, but I think a 4 story building would have little impact on the sunlight in the area as the large condo complexes nearby have already cast their shadows. I would appreciate a commercial space for a small coffee shop or something similar for the neighbourhood. While there is a lot of commercial space in Westmount, there isn’t a lot of walkable amenities right in woodcroft. However a parking plan should be considered (ie underground parking for residents) as the street parking around the area is busy already and the lot may not be large enough to accommodate a sufficient parking lot for residents and commercial traffic
I am opposed to this rezoning. The zoning sought is too broad and the neighbourhood will not be bettered by another apartment building. We already have diverse housing options in our area nothing about this proposal is meant to appeal to current members of the community. It ONLY serves this interest of the developer!
As a home owner in the Woodcroft community, the last thing I want is an apartment style building. I feel and apartment building in that location would be so out of place in the neighborhood. An infill duplex or something along those lines would make a lot more sense. Throwing up an apartment style building in thst area would ruin the esthetic of Woodcroft neighborhood. I am also concerned about the apartment style building breeding more crime in our neighborhood as these types of buildings have shown bring more crime to to area they're located.
I am opposed to the proposed rezoning re: low rise apartment development with concerns over traffic congestion and the negative impact on the neighbourhood.
I would approve of quality side by side duplex units/home owners with designated parking stalls within the property site.
We already have 2 massive buildings to the south of us with the Christenson Developments and the Matheson Building which has made parking on the streets around it near impossible for household residents. This development will likely add to the parking problem.
In addition the shadow cast by the aforementioned properties and now a building to the west will impact the amount of sunlight in the surrounding neighbourhood.
115 ave is already starting to show increased car, bus, truck and bike traffic which is unsafe for children playing in the area. Another multi-storey building would increase the traffic and thus decrease the safety for pedestrian and bike traffic.
A single family detached home would be more desirable in the proposed properties.
There is a lot of commercial land around this area particularly near and around Westmount mall. Having this directly in the neighbourhood when there is already a large building/senior centre will cause for impacts on shadowing/sun/ wind. I personally am opposed to this development because of the location within the neighbourhood.
We already have 2 massive buildings to the south of us with the Christenson Developments and the Matheson Building which has made parking on the streets around it near impossible for household residents. This development will likely add to the parking problem.
In addition the shadow cast by the aforementioned properties and now a building to the west will impact the amount of sunlight in the surrounding neighbourhood.
I oppose this development, if I wanted to live around more tall buildings I would have moved downtown.
The community would be better served with detached homes.
Removed by moderator.
Removed by moderator.
Density increase is not in the best interest of the area.
I don't think this location is appropriate for the proposed rezoning. The neighbourhood does not lack commercial space, and there are already high-density housing developments in the area and adjacent neighbourhoods. The increased traffic poses a safety risk as well as potential congestion, noise, and pollution. The community would ve much better served by smaller, detached or semi-detached single-family homes or a park/green space for everyone to enjoy.
I don't believe this location is best for multi unit housing. 115 ave is used by cars, bikes and buses. There are already cars parked on the one side of the street where the apartments are. I think with this rezoning there will be too much congestion on that road.
This is already a very busy area in Woodcroft. In my opinion, a duplex is the largest housing option that should be considered, as parking is already becoming an issue.
I am opposed to this re-zoning. Woodcroft is already a very busy area, with parking becoming an issue, especially near this area. An apartment with multiple families/people/vehicles is not something that will help these issues. There shouldn't be anything bigger than a duplex in that area.