Clearshades
Senior Member
It is a shame to waste a good solid build MAKING WAYS FOR TENT CITY. I agree with both Ian and Ken and other solid concepts...
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
David A
Senior Member
Those are really good ideas. It would be a good location for the new court house, free up space for AGA expansion and allow for an expansion of the park.If the Remand is to be demolished, I want them to replace it with a swanky new courthouse and an expansion of Mary Burlie Park. Then they can repurpose the current law courts building with an expansion of the AGA and maybe a mixed-use tower with a park.
Speaking of which:
Study on future of Edmonton Law Courts due in October now pushed to spring: Alberta Infrastructure
The study due this month but now delayed to spring is to include options to expand or renovate the 1972 court centre or construction of a new one.edmontonjournal.com
northlands
Senior Member
Once again, UCP dragging their feet with studies and planning when this has been a dire need for over a decade now. We'll be lucky if the new court house opens before the calendar turns 2030.Budget 2023: $3M to study future of Edmonton Law Courts
"We do see the need for a new courthouse in Edmonton," said Justice Minister Tyler Shandro.
Budget 2023: $3M to study future of Edmonton Law Courts
"We do see the need for a new courthouse in Edmonton," said Justice Minister Tyler Shandro.
David A
Senior Member
Maybe its too optimistic, but I hope this site becoming available will help the process move along a bit faster
Rapperswill
New Member
Anyone been inside the Old Remand Centre yet?? As a visitor of course 
.
I remember training there for a couple of months. It's rough inside for sure but years of HGTV viewing with my wife have taught me that Bryan Beaumler can make anything look nice.
. I remember training there for a couple of months. It's rough inside for sure but years of HGTV viewing with my wife have taught me that Bryan Beaumler can make anything look nice.
kcantor
Senior Member
^
i toured it roof to parkade some dozen or so years ago and, other than its basic bones, it was in pretty rough shape even then. It certainly wasn’t habitable, even as shelter space.
the bones, however (as well as the neighbourhoods whose cross-roads it occupies) certainly deserve a better fate than demolition.
i toured it roof to parkade some dozen or so years ago and, other than its basic bones, it was in pretty rough shape even then. It certainly wasn’t habitable, even as shelter space.
the bones, however (as well as the neighbourhoods whose cross-roads it occupies) certainly deserve a better fate than demolition.
Vacs
Active Member
The problem with the bones (structure) being in such good shape, the cost to bring the electrical, mechanical, sprinkler and HVAC up to current code is not reasonable. Thus demolition is the way to go
kcantor
Senior Member
in general and on this one in particular we will have to agree to disagree. you don’t scrap your 5 year old car because it needs new tires, a battery, and recharging the a/c. if it’s accident and rust free - ie if it has good bones - it will run forever.
our penchant for demolition “because the cost to keep it is too high” cost us both the tegler building and its replacement. think about what that means.
it’s not the cost, it’s the lack of will and imagination. with more of both, we would still have warehouses in the warehouse district, the carnegie library, the old courthouse etc etc etc and we wouldn’t be moaning and complaining about what to do with all those surface parking lots.
Gronk!
Senior Member
northlands
Senior Member
I don't think that's really the point. Whether we want to consider the old remand as architecturally significant or a blight for eyesight, we need to move away from this mindset of failing to maintain existing buildings and then immediately turning to demolition rather than repurposing/other viable options. Edmonton overall has a bizarre fascination with new and shiny while failing to prioritize what we already have.
It's both extremely wasteful and is going to continue to leave us with a deficit of interesting historical inventory.
Tropical
Active Member
Through a lens of decolonization/reconciliation, I would like to see the building disappeared from the neighbourhood.
SarcasticMarmot
Active Member
My first instinct is to agree with you. But then I remember that the new remand is merely an "out of sight out of mind" continuation of the same abuse. Its the largest prison in Canada with nearly 2,000 inmates, the vast majority of which have not been convicted of a crime. Most of which are Indigenous. Having the rotting hulk of old remand to remind us of what we are still doing may be closer to the spirit of Truth and Reconciliation than demolishing it.
David A
Senior Member
I agree. A structure with a lot of concrete and small spaces is not easy to change or fix up.
If there was something particularly redeeming or wonderful about this building (ex. interesting historical facade), it might be worthwhile to keep, but in this case I see no reason to be sentimental about this or to hang on to it.
Having an empty unused, very difficult to adapt, building sitting around is not going to any good and may actually hold back more positive development of the area.
JuliallThat
Active Member
My hope with this redevelopment as well regardless of what it is, that it will treat the multi-use path with respect, as well as the to-be cleaned up pigeon bridge with the Stationlands development.
Have like, part of the building open up onto the MUP, maybe a little seating area or plaza or whatever, just so it feels like part of a connected piece of infrastructure.
Maybe a nice broad stepped plaza that connects the MUP down to 97 St creating a unique transition.
Maybe we could even go so far as to convert this part of the trail into a "pedestrian street"? For the moment it's nothing but a continuation of the existing MUP, but in the future it could make for a unique spot.
Eventually some of those parking lots could theoretically be ripe for developments of their own, so let's not pass up the opportunity.
Have like, part of the building open up onto the MUP, maybe a little seating area or plaza or whatever, just so it feels like part of a connected piece of infrastructure.
Maybe a nice broad stepped plaza that connects the MUP down to 97 St creating a unique transition.
Maybe we could even go so far as to convert this part of the trail into a "pedestrian street"? For the moment it's nothing but a continuation of the existing MUP, but in the future it could make for a unique spot.
Eventually some of those parking lots could theoretically be ripe for developments of their own, so let's not pass up the opportunity.
Clearshades
Senior Member
From your professional and observational point of view, with the bone intact, would the cost be reasonable to renovate into living space for marginal income?