keep them as green spaces

Parcel 3 should remain green space as it ties into the Community Centre land. Parcel 5 should be developed and Parcel 1 residential.

3 is a hub of activity both canine and human! Keep 3 as an off leash area, add more dog friendly features, trees around the perimeter.

Leave as much needed dog/park space. These are well used by the members within the community as they are.

I still like to have parcel 3 left alone as a off leash dog park and green space.

1. Seems to make sense to have houses there. 3. Should be kept as a greens pace. 4. I bike on it. But townhouses or retail.

P1 - single or duplex residence. P3 - keep greenspace since some will be lost with new Jack Long development. P5 - more active retail space

Green space, park, playing fields

For Parcel 5, I would like to see a walk-thru park or small retail to go along with future development plans on those corners. Not resident.

Though I don't use the park (I am a dog owner) I do like it on Parcel 3. Maybe not necessarily an off-leash park. Nice for Elder House too!

I would like to see affordable (not sure if that should also mean low-income, government assisted homes) on Parcel 1. Access to route 411.

P3 Affordable housing development consistent with existing uses and density on east edge, passie park space in cul-de-sac to west laneway.

1 and 5 are perfect for developing. 5 for work/live and/or retail and 1 for housing.

P1 low-rise affordable housing. P3 greenspace. P5-park with pathway and fruit trees.

P1 or part of P3 low-rise housing or townhomes. The rest of P3 a park not just dogs. P5 treed, lit park with path a gateway off 9th.

Integration and opportunties to compliment approved or existing services such as school & seniors' housing. Keep park/social meeting space

Ensure 3 parking spots per residence. Too much high density already - single family only. Need more retail on 9th

This area of Inglewood is lacking usable green space. Improve it rather than develop it. This is The City's only opportunity do this.

P3 - We lack off leash dog areas in E Inglewood. I do not want to loose this space (unless another alt. provided). Lack of parking.

(5) is a heavily used walking route from the bus stops into the community south of 9th

Density. Already too crowded. Can't park in front of my own home.

We have a high percentage of 'affordable housing' compared to other neighbourhoods: Sheriff King, Elder House, Habitat, Alice Bisset, etc.

Many of the streets in this area experience on-street parking congestion. Let's not add to it.

This corner of the community is dealing with the flight path, the trains and the traffic on Blackfoot. We need any/all green space.

More trash bins in 3; plant more perimeter trees to border the off leash area; thoughtful natural path network; central gazebo to anchor!

These green spaces provide wildlife corridor to the Inglewood Wildlands, Inglewood. Rid Sanctuary, Bow River at night. Preserve.No buildings

P1- community garden. P5 cul-de-sac to laneway passive park - if remains off-leash must ensure safety for dogs & non-dog owners

Develop a garden with plots for rent integrated with a simple park area with trees

This area should be transformed into a meaningful green corridor that links the community with 9th Avenue and the Blackfoot BRT station.

P3- could add fencing, picnic tables, benches, durable shrubs. P5 - nice to keep pedestrian access, if kept more vegetation.

Angle parking south of the dog park (3) and along 16th south should be considered. Road is wide and drivers too fast and parking congested

We are a community that likes to commute by bike and/or foot. Parcel #3 is well-used but could use some light.

Add fencing. (closed off-leash)

Parcel #3. Re-zone to MR. Keep open. Community meeting space. Perhaps some small enhancements.

If lot #1 is going to stay undeveloped, a high fence or some trees to create a wind break/sound barrier, from Alyth Road and Blackfoot Tr.

Perhaps some benches or additional garbage bins. Nothing too costly.

Keep P3 green but no fencing! Open pathways for max walkability through area. Enhance P3 as space for all with lighting, shrubs, seating.

Balancing concerns raised that not all people feel safe with dogs and the advantages of keeping a dog park for those who use it.

Many dog owners are irresponsible and do not clean up after their pets.

Open space should be completed in a manner that improves pedestrian connectivity, promotes walking and provides space for local residents.

Don't want to loose off leash area. For new developments would they work P5 space? And how not to loose pedestrian access.

Fencing for the park, a picnic bench and lighting would enhance this well used community off leash area

Let's not allow the cost of enhancing these spaces be a deterrent; it is difficult to put a dollar figure on quality of life.

In this pocket (high density), flight path, trains, and major roadway we don't have enough open space. Any/all we have is of great value.

Why are the two areas “exempt”? Is it because it’s worth money to the city, when there are empty condos all over the east village?

The only kind of affordable housing that is appropriate would be something for seniors. P. #5 near transit.

Respect existing community standards. No McMansions. Development should be inline with neighbouring homes.

Respect existing density & style. Engage and connect residents to existing. Compliment and further existing services ie school, seniors

If any development single family detached to support families and the school.

I don't support development of these parcels of any kind. Open space is critical and a green corridor should be the only use considered.

Agreed more is needed. P1 may be a good fit as its noisy with blackfoot in the back, leaving the P3 as green space (more quiet).

Yes, more affordable housing is needed in this city, period.

We have Habitat for Humanity, Alice B and soon Elder House. Perhaps Elbow Park or Sunnyside or other inner city areas have spots available.

The Jack Long Foundation would be better suited close to transit. Sell them Lot #5 and turn Lot #2 into MR.

No more affordable housing; there is plenty in this part of the community.

Town homes or semi-detached mixed family housing would be nice.

Affordable housing in area 5, could be 3 or 4 stories. Townhome Style in any other areas where housing goes in.

We don't need a 'project' such as what exists at 17 Street & 17 Avenue SE. The City of Calgary does not make for a good landlord.

Affordable housing has proven to lower nearby property values. Yes, that does sound like NIMBYism, but it is the truth. Ask any realtor.

No condos or apartments on P1 or P3.

Sensitive to existing & opportunity to join existing Habitat residents with the rest of area residents.

Higher density just drives up land costs which makes it un-affordable - opposite effect of what is desired.

Development will eliminate the only chance the city has to create a green corridor like the one south of New Street - it's wonderful.

Parking and traffic flow. Taller buildings may shade neighbours.

There is a lot of affordable housing in-place already. (Compare these with other communities or other sections of Inglewood.)

Condos might feel overly crowded in such small space and encroach on existing homes.

No highrises!

Visibility, traffic flow, the existing residences and visual congruity. Stop abusing Inglewood for your own ends.