Jarodsc17
Active Member
Do you think it will eventually happen though?
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
archited
Senior Member
And the NIMBYs in Riverdale were worried about the Quarters Hotel and Residences. 15 years, maybe not -- I would suspect more like 25.
@Jarodsc17 Maybe not exactly like that, probably with a lot more variation in density (I think that model was meant to show what is allowed under the new zoning), but I think it will fill in over time.
archited
Senior Member
Alldritt should fly a stationary drone at the height apex of the tower so the Riverdale people can chill out -- it will have no effect on their views or their back yards or their misguided psyches. This is a bold, smart project and is good for Edmonton.
Jarodsc17
Active Member
I strongly despise people like that, they just need to accept change and get on with it!
That's what you get for living near... wait for it... downtown!!!! 
archited
Senior Member
How can you "kill" something that is already "dead"? If anything, projects like this would bring this part of the (downtown) City back to life. I know there are lots of developer-type landowners who own 'parking lots' in the Quarters just waiting for someone to make a bold move. This project would spur all kinds of development -- the counter-argument is simply ridiculous!
seamusmcuffs
New Member
I have a sense that people that complain about this gentrifying the area and killing the river valley connection haven't frequented the area often. They hear Boyle and think of the homeless shelters and low income housing, but don't realize there's about 5 blocks of parking lots between the two areas. Then with the park they think that it's like any other piece of the riverbank, when in reality it is cut off from the river valley by Greirson Hill Road. If this was east of Grierson on the river bank, or a few blocks in to Quarters I completely agree. The way it is I see that podium as the best thing that could ever be done for that useless part of the embankment, as long as much of it remains open to the public.
archited
Senior Member
I disagree -- surface parking is a symptom not a cause. If one were somehow able to wave a magic wand over the area that banned all surface parking, nothing, development-wise, would shift. The area needs a game changer (and I don't mean a misguided effort to add street paving tiles and nifty benches and public art). The Alldritt tower, I believe, is just such a game-changer. It will bring loads of people to the Quarters along Jasper Avenue. And, once this section of Jasper Avenue gains gentrification, it will encourage other developers to follow suit. The point that many of the detractors miss is that the Alldritt scheme is a QUALITY development. It is sure to attract a four-star hotel (proximity to the Convention Centre and the river valley views). Hotel patrons will bring a demand for retail and hospitality in the form of restaurants, bistros, and bars. The development will actually add impetus to the business model for the Convention Centre (you can bet that the backroom chatter between politicians and convention managers and EEDC is all positive re this development).
Even the Riverdale folks should realise that this development will usher in a new vibrancy to the area that will surely increase the livability of their community, not to mention increased property values.
A big reason for the sustainability of surface parking in the northern part of the Quarters is the proximity of the Law Courts buildings and the daily comings and goings of law suit provenders. This was true 50 years ago and is even more relevant today. Instead of spending millions on street face lifts for the "Armature", if the city had built a long parking structure under that appendage and subsidized it, the rationale for surface parking would have disappeared and forced landholders to consider other alternatives for their land (certainly their "bravery quotient" would have gone up). I had made this case to the City's Walter Trocenko back when the Quarters was in the ideation stage, but the concept went past him (presumably because it was not glamorous enough).
Two projects that I believe will gain immediate impetus when the permits for the Alldritt tower are fact are the historically relevant... 1. Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. Barbara property (101o5 - 96th St. NW) and 2. the Grierson Centre (formerly the RCMP headquarters and barracks in downtown Edmonton).
The Cathedral of St. Barbara property, as well as retaining the architecturally significant cathedral, has sufficient property adjacent to the church for a mixed-use development that could include a Russian settlers museum, a themed shopping centre and a residential tower, especially if it were to encompass the adjacent brick walk-up -- talk about river valley views!
The Grierson Centre I envision as a hip, vibrant shopping mecca composed of one-of-a-kind retail, pubs, eateries, and art galleries.
And -- I say it again -- the City should focus on this section of Jasper Avenue as a significant pedestrian mecca, what with the historical structures that have been preserved added to those that should be preserved. Maybe we could have an arced canopy over the motor way with pedestrian-oriented encroachments that encourage outdoor seating, entertainment and musings of one sort or another.
The Alldritt project can instigate and propel all of this development immediately.
Even the Riverdale folks should realise that this development will usher in a new vibrancy to the area that will surely increase the livability of their community, not to mention increased property values.
A big reason for the sustainability of surface parking in the northern part of the Quarters is the proximity of the Law Courts buildings and the daily comings and goings of law suit provenders. This was true 50 years ago and is even more relevant today. Instead of spending millions on street face lifts for the "Armature", if the city had built a long parking structure under that appendage and subsidized it, the rationale for surface parking would have disappeared and forced landholders to consider other alternatives for their land (certainly their "bravery quotient" would have gone up). I had made this case to the City's Walter Trocenko back when the Quarters was in the ideation stage, but the concept went past him (presumably because it was not glamorous enough).
Two projects that I believe will gain immediate impetus when the permits for the Alldritt tower are fact are the historically relevant... 1. Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. Barbara property (101o5 - 96th St. NW) and 2. the Grierson Centre (formerly the RCMP headquarters and barracks in downtown Edmonton).
The Cathedral of St. Barbara property, as well as retaining the architecturally significant cathedral, has sufficient property adjacent to the church for a mixed-use development that could include a Russian settlers museum, a themed shopping centre and a residential tower, especially if it were to encompass the adjacent brick walk-up -- talk about river valley views!
The Grierson Centre I envision as a hip, vibrant shopping mecca composed of one-of-a-kind retail, pubs, eateries, and art galleries.
And -- I say it again -- the City should focus on this section of Jasper Avenue as a significant pedestrian mecca, what with the historical structures that have been preserved added to those that should be preserved. Maybe we could have an arced canopy over the motor way with pedestrian-oriented encroachments that encourage outdoor seating, entertainment and musings of one sort or another.
The Alldritt project can instigate and propel all of this development immediately.
Last edited:
I think Tim's point is valid, though; there seems to be a pent up demand attempting to be fulfilled by a single, massively tall project. It's not unreasonable to imagine if it weren't so easy to make a mint off a gravel parking lot, those landowners might have been more inclined to sell or redevelop to fulfill more of that demand in smaller-scaled projects filling in more of the land.
archited
Senior Member
Oh, I agree that there is demand for the parking space, but I believe that it is driven by the law courts and to some lesser extent City Hall and the cultural enclave on 99th street. I once owned property in the Boyle street area -- a beautiful two-storey Victorian with a turreted feature facing the street. I actually moved into the house for a year while -- I was excited about renovating it to standards of past glory -- I refurbished and rebuilt. While there, I saw the neighbourhood deteriorate around me -- there were a few old-timers who grew up in the area when times were better; but, mostly, the population consisted of transients who were renting out rooms at rock-bottom prices. As these -- let's call them tenements -- grew more and more downfallen, languishing in a near-constant state of disrepair, they began to be shuttered and demolished. Eventually, I was disheartened to the point that when an outsized offer came along for my property, I sold. And it, too, was demolished. There may have been some thought on the part of the developer who purchased my property to consolidate lots and do a new development, but that was soon superseded by a practical need to earn an income that was subtended by something less risky -- succumbing to the demand for parking.
Now I know that there are some extremely wealthy landowners in the area (one of them is even a well-known and respected Edmonton Architect). And there will come a day when all of these parking lots will vanish -- not because some planner at City Hall has mapped out what he/she deems to be the ideal community, not because a major investment has been made in beautification and public realm infrastructure, and certainly not because of hyped-up superficial demand. More simply, it will be because some significant major development starts to "turn" the area. Let me make this more personal -- would you @Daveography, if I were to build a (say) 20-storey condo on 96th street and 102nd avenue, consider purchasing a unit to move into. I suspect that your answer would be "no", especially if I was asking market rates for the unit. The Alldritt concept is a game changer -- it is big enough, bold enough and has the design cachet to, first and foremost, change the eastern end of Jasper Avenue, and, like other bold developments, usher in a massive neighbourhood structural change that will see the surface lots disappear.
Now I know that there are some extremely wealthy landowners in the area (one of them is even a well-known and respected Edmonton Architect). And there will come a day when all of these parking lots will vanish -- not because some planner at City Hall has mapped out what he/she deems to be the ideal community, not because a major investment has been made in beautification and public realm infrastructure, and certainly not because of hyped-up superficial demand. More simply, it will be because some significant major development starts to "turn" the area. Let me make this more personal -- would you @Daveography, if I were to build a (say) 20-storey condo on 96th street and 102nd avenue, consider purchasing a unit to move into. I suspect that your answer would be "no", especially if I was asking market rates for the unit. The Alldritt concept is a game changer -- it is big enough, bold enough and has the design cachet to, first and foremost, change the eastern end of Jasper Avenue, and, like other bold developments, usher in a massive neighbourhood structural change that will see the surface lots disappear.