Glenco
Senior Member
Okay 430 units x 1.3 people per unit equals 559.
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
Those people are only going to live downtown because of a pedway?
God
Active Member
I think he more so means 300 people in the specific area. The project will play a roll in Chinatown revitalisation and pushing development north of 104 Ave. The project is being built because of the pedway as far as I understand.
IanO
Superstar
Every unit and person adds to the Downtown, but we need to concentrate it or it will take 20-25yrs more to have any regular density and increase in street traffic.
occidentalcapital
Senior Member
How many residential units will Stationlands have at full build out?
Glenco
Senior Member
Let’s be honest this area is very challenging to develop A pedway isn’t the reason people move in but it will help some people to allay some anxiety. This project if successful will act as a catalyst for further development in that area.
thommyjo
Senior Member
I do feel this is a challenge we have and why the quarters and even stadium yards are almost a bittersweet thing. We have a lot of towers through DT and Oliver, but it’s so spread out. And even still, ice district pushes north, “grandin” is pushing south, west Oliver is really building up. But between 116st and 105st there are 30+ towers that still need to be filled in to really have vibrancy across the core. So many holes.
occidentalcapital
Senior Member
I agree. Edmonton has a surprisingly large inner/core area. Many unique districts with their own history. Perhaps a legacy of earlier development patterns compared to some peer cities.
David A
Senior Member
Yes, legacy is a good word. For a long time, the historic rail lines on 104 Ave and 109 St served as a boundary between what was mostly a commercial/business district and residential area. They are gone now and mostly filled in, so we don't think about them so much now, but they had a huge effect on past development patterns.
One could argue the residents wouldn't go outside if there was no pedway and would simply drive elsewhere out of downtown instead of walking through the pedway system to other parts of downtown. The pedway may encourage them to venture to the City Market. Is that worth $26M? Probably not; however, there is an argument to be made that it will increase people contributing to the downtown economy.
IanO
Superstar
Keep in mind, as KC has pointed out before, that the annual tax contributions of EPCOR Tower and future residential towers will offset the initial capital cost and then some over the years.
MattPT
Active Member
My initial question about the 26million was not so much about value and more about transparency. Do these projects have a publicly available breakdown of where the money is going? Or at least, is it too much to hope that there is a someone at the city that scrutinizes these things? Competition and privacy are bullshit excuses that seem to be often used to complicate and slip these things through unchallenged? …like arena…
A large residential project is only being built "because of" the pedway? How much weight did that factor have on the decision to build? By how much does it affect projected rental income? Is the market that much softer for projects without pedways, or is the CRL now just going to be used to build pedways for new residential projects from here on?
Sorry, I don't buy that Qualico would simply not go ahead with this project without it, and Council should have called their bluff. I'm sure the city could attract much more than 430 units by spending that $26M in ways that actually benefit downtown revitalization goals.
Adding residents and then keeping them off the streets won't do anything to relieve that anxiety. We need more people out and about and visible with eyes on the street, not fewer. And that's not even considering that the pedways often feel less safe, given reduced visibility and fewer escape routes from potential threats.
The bigger picture is those challenges won't go away because of an expensive pedway. If we're serious about solving those challenges, we need to address them head-on and stop trying to literally and figuratively reroute people around them.
For how many people do you really think the existence of a pedway is the go/no-go factor in their decision to visit the Downtown Farmer's Market? At least people going outside would have an opportunity to find out what other businesses and restaurants and amenities exist around them. Seems to me that would be a bigger benefit to the downtown economy.
Is the lack of pedways causing people in existing downtown residential buildings without pedways to just drive out everywhere and never explore their neighbourhood on foot? If that's what people want, why would they move into a place downtown to begin with, when there's far better (and cheaper) options elsewhere in the city that don't have the same safety perceptions?
Again, not buying it that people would only live in this development because of a pedway.
And even if it were the case, $26M to attract 430 market-rate units? That's $60,500 per unit. For comparison, the City of Edmonton in September announced that it would build 258 affordable units for $17.6M, or $68,220 per unit. In other words, the city could spend that $26M to add 300 or so affordable housing units to downtown instead of a pedway that is by and large to keep future residents of a private development from having to see the reality of the neighbourhood they live in, let alone participate in any aspect of it.
That is NOT what the CRL is for, and it is NOT what downtown residents were promised it would be used for.
buildings
Active Member
^yes
Gronk!
Senior Member
After reading @Daveography's latest post and pondering a bit more, I'm wondering if that $26M CRL could have been used for buying that park in front of the Hotel Mac, or for funding the proposed new Warehouse Park?