Do you support the proposal for the new arena?

  • Yes

    Votes: 100 67.6%

  • No

    Votes: 38 25.7%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 10 6.8%
  • Total voters
    148
Urb said:
I tend to agree. Funny enough - they seriously considered relocating the tree, but were told it would cost $1M.
Click to expand...
“ planted at the intersection of four backyards…..Though it will be removed this spring, a commitment to honouring its legacy and significance persists. Several preservation efforts, both completed and underway, will ensure the essence of the Victoria Park Elm will live on into future generations.”

Word salad gobblygoop. Someone decided, for no reason at all, a backyard tree has a legacy and significance. How many trees over the past 50 years have been cut down in the beltline, mission, mt royal. Many. Can’t believe this is even a discussion
 
Tothewest said:
“ planted at the intersection of four backyards…..Though it will be removed this spring, a commitment to honouring its legacy and significance persists. Several preservation efforts, both completed and underway, will ensure the essence of the Victoria Park Elm will live on into future generations.”

Word salad gobblygoop. Someone decided, for no reason at all, a backyard tree has a legacy and significance. How many trees over the past 50 years have been cut down in the beltline, mission, mt royal. Many. Can’t believe this is even a discussion
Click to expand...
It’s literally seeing a tree while missing the forest. Like the idiom, but actually about a literal tree and a metaphoric forest.

The area was a functioning neighbourhood torn down over a several decades to enable a poorly utilitized and planned out publicly-sponsor stadium and event district.

The goal is not to preserve the tree, the tree is immaterial. The goal is to replant a functioning neighbourhood and correct for the mistake of tearing down the “forest” in the first place.
 
CBBarnett said:
It’s literally seeing a tree while missing the forest. Like the idiom, but actually about a literal tree and a metaphoric forest.

The area was a functioning neighbourhood torn down over a several decades to enable a poorly utilitized and planned out publicly-sponsor stadium and event district.

The goal is not to preserve the tree, the tree is immaterial. The goal is to replant a functioning neighbourhood and correct for the mistake of tearing down the “forest” in the first
Click to expand...
u can say tearing down “functioning” Victoria park was a mistake…i won’t. Area was a dilapidated slumtown
 
Tothewest said:
Actions? A decaying low income neighborhood bordering the stampede, rife with crime or 70 years....it sounds like the inner city citizens of Calgary chose to live/invest in inglewood, kensington, mission, beltline, ect.. instead. I'd call that a natural evolution
Click to expand...
I dunno. 70 years ago it looks like it was a vibrant working neighbourhood.
1711125554004.png


Before judging neighbourhoods, I try to check the perspective I had as a suburban west hill kid thinking Crescent Heights was run down and not nice. It was a pretty limiting perspective then, and I suspect those in a position to write for the Herald, or present at City Council in the 50s, 60s and 70s had their perspectives coloured similarly.
 
Tothewest said:
Actions? A decaying low income neighborhood bordering the stampede, rife with crime or 70 years....it sounds like the inner city citizens of Calgary chose to live/invest in inglewood, kensington, mission, beltline, ect.. instead. I'd call that a natural evolution
Click to expand...

Saved you the trouble and found my post from 5 years ago that goes through some of the history here:
https://calgary.skyrisecities.com/f...centre-36-85m-11s-csec-hok.29262/post-1469503

TL/DR:
What Victoria Park as a community was, was distorted and ultimately destroyed over a series of political and policy decisions spanning decades. This would not have happened in the same way had it not been for the massive amounts of public dollars and unstable Stampede expansion plans uniquely focused on the area that destabilized and destroyed it. There's nothing natural about it's evolution.
 
I can't remember if it was in the Hiller article or somewhere else, but I remember reading about how Victoria Park's transformation from a working class/immigrant neighbourhood into a decaying, high-crime zone was essentially engineered by the powers that be (the City, Stampede, absentee landlords, the police, etc.). The City began demolishing houses and left empty lots that attracted illicit activity. IIRC the police also tried to keep crime confined to Victoria Park. I know there were fights over whether Victoria Park should get funds for rehabilitation, which pitted residents (most of whom were renters) against the Stampede, who wanted the land at dirt cheap prices, and landlords, who wanted low income residents out so they could profit off redevelopment schemes.

This same story played out in so many other cities across North America during this time. The same thing would have happened to Chinatown if the Chinese community hadn't organized and fought back in the 1960s and '70s.
 
CBBarnett said:
It’s literally seeing a tree while missing the forest. Like the idiom, but actually about a literal tree and a metaphoric forest.

The area was a functioning neighbourhood torn down over a several decades to enable a poorly utilitized and planned out publicly-sponsor stadium and event district.

The goal is not to preserve the tree, the tree is immaterial. The goal is to replant a functioning neighbourhood and correct for the mistake of tearing down the “forest” in the first place.
Click to expand...
Someone planted that tree at the turn of the century.

I wonder what that same person would think if they could see that tree today. What would they think If they saw the asphalt parking lots in lieu of all the houses that once lined the streets. Or if they could see the current skyline.
 
I don't know if any one thing can be attributed to Victoria Park's decline, but I would say the unlucky position of being next to the Stampede was probably the biggest single part of it, whether politicians and the Stampede purposely pushed for its decline or not, just being near a large fairground isn't great for any neighborhood. Property values struggle and the cycle starts, and of course Stampede expansion plans would have had a big effect.
My grandfather lived in Victoria Park in the 30's as a child and attended Victoria Park school. It was already considered the roughest neighborhood even that far back and Victoria Park school already had a reputation for being a rough school.
 
Tothewest said:
Area was a dilapidated slumtown
Click to expand...
MissingMiddle said:
... and what actions caused it to get to that point?
Click to expand...
CBBarnett said:
What Victoria Park as a community was, was distorted and ultimately destroyed over a series of political and policy decisions spanning decades. This would not have happened in the same way had it not been for the massive amounts of public dollars and unstable Stampede expansion plans uniquely focused on the area that destabilized and destroyed it. There's nothing natural about it's evolution.
Click to expand...
Bingo.

Here's my rant about why the Elm tree matters, and why we should tear it down anyway.

Entire neighborhoods don't magically turn into "rough areas" or "slum towns" naturally over time. I also can't deny that Vic Park decayed into a very rough area. But asking ourselves why reveals that there are decades of policy and urban planning decisions that resulted in a sea of parking lots we're trying to revitalize into our Entertainment District. Like it or not, that's over a century history that includes plenty of oppression, crime, death, assault, drugs, etc. that directly resulted from the choices we made on how to build our city.

That tree in a sea of empty parking lots is - quite literally - the only remaining part of a vibrant urban community that was systematically destroyed by bad policy and planning. It could have just as easily been a lamp post or garden shed, but it's a symbol of what happened. It's a symbol against systematic oppression, but it's also just a tree.

We've learned quite a lot about urban design and planning since then, and that tree is literally standing in the way of revitalizing the neighborhood and fixing those mistakes.

Moving it is hard, so take the pictures, chop it down, and use the wood for a cool art piece about the history. But don't be ignorant to what the tree means to the area, plant a new elm tree somewhere else as a symbol of regrowth for the next 100 years of good policy and good planning.
 
Every city in the world has an undesirable neighbourhood (or several) and the decline is always the same story. They were once nice neighborhoods, but series of different factors started some decline, and once it was in decline, it’s was vicious circle.
Whatever the causes were for Victoria Park’s decline, if it wasn’t Victoria Park, it would been another inner city neighborhood.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top