[Social Justice]

Calgary the next Detroit. Lol. Give your cousin a smack in the head for me would you.

No kidding!

We just need a race riot and cartoonish levels of corruption in city hall...then maybe....maybe we might come close after 20-30 years.

 

[retrofiturbanism]

https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/community_social_statistics/beltline.pdf?noredirect=1
Heres the point I'm trying to get at, the cities centre communities don't draw nearly enough young folks as it should. If you look at the link and pick an age group optimal to live in the Beltline, 25-34, we have a total of 9205 females and males living in the Beltline in 2014 vs 210851 overall population for the 25-34 age group in the city. Thats barely 4.36% of the overall population of 24-35 year olds living in the Beltline which is suppose to be the leading youth driven area in the city. Moreover adding all sections of the Downtown and Mission, I still don't think the calculations would get close enough to reach 10% of the overall population living in the city centre. I understand many choose to live at home longer now due to economic circumstances or other outlying factors such as having a children at an early age. But from what I see in the data, those are pretty weak numbers. I know many other inner city neighbourhoods are drawing the younger folks like Kensington but too say the Beltline is doing enough to attract youth, I don't think so, I'm just reading the stats and the numbers look pretty mediocre. There's a lot of room for improvement, and if this age group is expected to decline over the years then we're going to need to do more to draw other demographic groups in as well. There was a time when I was younger and almost everything important use to be in Downtown but unlike Vancouver and Toronto, this isn't the case anymore. If you want the best shopping experience you go to Chinook Mall, if you want diverse cuisine you go to the NE, etc. The suburbs have everything that the core offers and much more. I'm not being pessimistic, Im trying to be critical, we can do a much better job other than just sticking up highrises everywhere.

This is just weird statistics. Yes, the Centre City doesn't include a majority of the 25-34 year olds, is that the point? I'm not sure.

Since 2009, Centre City has grown by 9,693 people. That is an increase of 29%, and a growth rate of 2.84% per year. The City as a whole grew up 215K people in that same period, or 20% in total and 2.09% per year. So Centre City is growing ~35% faster than the city as a whole. Most of this growth is in the 25-34 age category. Beltline makes up about 2% of the Citywide population, yet has 4.36% of the 25-34 year olds. That's pretty significant. Put simply, Centre City growth is actually quite staggering in Calgary, and a large part of that is driven by the Beltline.

How about actually coming down to the Centre City sometime? It may surprise you.

 

[gsunnyg]

I don't think we have to look much further than the failed reconstruction of 17th Avenue to show where priorities lie. It's basically a glorified utility replacement scheme with no actual improvement in sidewalk width. The sidewalk that was widened by 30 cm was in the largely unusable space between trees and curbs.

Sidewalk definitely needs to be widened, two people can't even walk side by side at certain parts. On top of that nothing was done about the trees, some of them are just hideous, they could have made an organized row on both sides using some proper tall trees that could actually given some shade and beautified the street instead of the lazy twig trees that developers place which end up dying or looking awkward after 5 years

 

[Cowtown]

No kidding!

We just need a race riot and cartoonish levels of corruption in city hall...then maybe....maybe we might come close after 20-30 years.

And a few decades of white flight lol. Yeah, it's kind of ridiculous. I've heard other people (on SSP) draw parallels to Detroit before, using the analogy of Booming auto industry = flourishing city, Downturn in auto industry = city in a spiral, and that the same could be said about oil and gas. It's a little more complicated than that.

 

[gsunnyg]

This is just weird statistics. Yes, the Centre City doesn't include a majority of the 25-34 year olds, is that the point? I'm not sure.

Since 2009, Centre City has grown by 9,693 people. That is an increase of 29%, and a growth rate of 2.84% per year. The City as a whole grew up 215K people in that same period, or 20% in total and 2.09% per year. So Centre City is growing ~35% faster than the city as a whole. Most of this growth is in the 25-34 age category. Beltline makes up about 2% of the Citywide population, yet has 4.36% of the 25-34 year olds. That's pretty significant. Put simply, Centre City growth is actually quite staggering in Calgary, and a large part of that is driven by the Beltline.

How about actually coming down to the Centre City sometime? It may surprise you.

LOL I worked for years in the city centre at different construction sites during uni summers, most recently a month ago. IMO I see it ur looking at those numbers in a bias favour. If Beltline makes up 2% of the overall population and 24-34 age group, 4.36 % of the overall population of the city, how is that significant if u claim that the Beltline is geared towards the youth enough? Shouldn't the number be significantly higher if we've already established that the Beltline is unfavourable for families and and children? And are we not considering the years of building boom? I was clearly talking about their effectiveness at attracting more demographics such as youth and families. The density front has been increasing steadily. I would be curious to see an age and gender breakdown for the beltline in the past year to get a better picture of growth for this age group. Also Im going to try find something close to how Toronto's and Montreals downtown population is represented by the youth to get a bigger picture, but IMO those numbers are still mediocre for all the hype.

 

[Cowtown]

Hey, I'd like to see more youth in the core too, I'm just not sure those numbers are that bad, I bet the stats for that age group are probably similar in Vancouver - people from that age group residing in the Vancouver's core.
As the inner city's market moves more back in the direction of rental, we should see the number of young people increase slightly. Most of the towers built in recent years were condos, and they tend to attract a higher age group. Also, I'm not sure if the 25-34 year old population matters. 35-50 year olds are just as important. I would like to see more children, but it is what it is. You don't see large amounts of children in any dense urban neighborhoods.

As far as diverse cuisine, I would say the NE offer more options for Asian food, but it's not as diverse as the core if you look at diversity from a global perspective (Greek, Hungarian, Brazilian, Ethiopian, Russian, etc... The core offers food from pretty much everywhere around the globe, whereas the NE is strong on Asian, and not even in the same areas. The NE is a large area, and some parts are very strong for Indian food.....no place between Toronto and Vancouver beats the far northeast for Indian, 36th street is great for Chinese/Vietnamese. but they are very spread out. The core offers everything everything and it's all within walking distance.

As for shopping, I would also argue that Chinook isn't the best shopping experience. It's the best from a mall perspective, and has about 50 or so stores not found in the core, but the core has about 300 stores not found in Chinook. There are a number of other businesses in the Chinook area, but an extremely unfriendly pedestrian environment, and a general lack of resto/retail mixed together.

I'm not trying to be pedantic, or difficult. I just don't know that the core is as bad off as it seems. There is definitely room for improvement...which I think will comes as time goes along, but I think we are on a good path.

https://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Documents/community_social_statistics/beltline.pdf?noredirect=1
Heres the point I'm trying to get at, the cities centre communities don't draw nearly enough young folks as it should. If you look at the link and pick an age group optimal to live in the Beltline, 25-34, we have a total of 9205 females and males living in the Beltline in 2014 vs 210851 overall population for the 25-34 age group in the city. Thats barely 4.36% of the overall population of 24-35 year olds living in the Beltline which is suppose to be the leading youth driven area in the city. Moreover adding all sections of the Downtown and Mission, I still don't think the calculations would get close enough to reach 10% of the overall population living in the city centre. I understand many choose to live at home longer now due to economic circumstances or other outlying factors such as having a children at an early age. But from what I see in the data, those are pretty weak numbers. I know many other inner city neighbourhoods are drawing the younger folks like Kensington but too say the Beltline is doing enough to attract youth, I don't think so, I'm just reading the stats and the numbers look pretty mediocre. There's a lot of room for improvement, and if this age group is expected to decline over the years then we're going to need to do more to draw other demographic groups in as well. There was a time when I was younger and almost everything important use to be in Downtown but unlike Vancouver and Toronto, this isn't the case anymore. If you want the best shopping experience you go to Chinook Mall, if you want diverse cuisine you go to the NE, etc. The suburbs have everything that the core offers and much more. I'm not being pessimistic, Im trying to be critical, we can do a much better job other than just sticking up highrises everywhere.

 

[retrofiturbanism]

Sidewalk definitely needs to be widened, two people can't even walk side by side at certain parts. On top of that nothing was done about the trees, some of them are just hideous, they could have made an organized row on both sides using some proper tall trees that could actually given some shade and beautified the street instead of the lazy twig trees that developers place which end up dying or looking awkward after 5 years

Sad but true. 17th Ave. was already fine as it is, they could’ve spent the money fixing up an avenue that really needed it like 10th Ave.

In fairness, the City had to upgrade the water line, (sewer maybe) so since they were ripping up the street, might as well fix the street as well. That doesn't mean that 10th avenue doesn't need some mad love. I agree it could have been more bold. Monteal is redoing St. Catherines and they are reducing it to a single lane one-way driving lane, and massively expanding sidewalks.

 

[retrofiturbanism]

LOL I worked for years in the city centre at different construction sites during uni summers, most recently a month ago. IMO I see it ur looking at those numbers in a bias favour. If Beltline makes up 2% of the overall population and 24-34 age group, 4.36 % of the overall population of the city, how is that significant if u claim that the Beltline is geared towards the youth enough? Shouldn't the number be significantly higher if we've already established that the Beltline is unfavourable for families and and children? And are we not considering the years of building boom? I was clearly talking about their effectiveness at attracting more demographics such as youth and families. The density front has been increasing steadily. I would be curious to see an age and gender breakdown for the beltline in the past year to get a better picture of growth for this age group. Also Im going to try find something close to how Toronto's and Montreals downtown population is represented by the youth to get a bigger picture, but IMO those numbers are still mediocre for all the hype.

I've lost you.

 

[CBBarnett]

Sidewalk definitely needs to be widened, two people can't even walk side by side at certain parts. On top of that nothing was done about the trees, some of them are just hideous, they could have made an organized row on both sides using some proper tall trees that could actually given some shade and beautified the street instead of the lazy twig trees that developers place which end up dying or looking awkward after 5 years

Or the pointless, sidewalk-space-consuming visual interest poles - built to the same standards as a traffic signal of an unnecessarily wide base, but only supporting a flag on top. Look for those to inconvenience your walking - or pushing strollers if we want to think about another reason why families find it more difficult to live in the city centre - at 1st Street, 4th Street and 14th Street for generations to come. Seriously; if anything, why not a bike rack? at least it's functional and takes up less valuable sidewalk space.

Next time I go by 4th Street SW, I will post a picture. The pointless "gateway" flag poles seems like a small deal if you don't walk often or drive by. Walking regularly is a different story. It's another small example of exactly what I am talking about: there is a lack of understanding in all levels of decision-making on what makes the centre city urban areas livable or walkable. Unnecessary sidewalk obstructions are an obvious anti-urban, anti-walkable design choice, exacerbated by an unwillingness to expand the sidewalks nearly at all.

 

[darwink]

What would you suggest the city do to attract more young people to the City Centre?

Moving another post-secondary downtown. Hopefully the province, SAIT, The City and ACAD can arrange this to happen when ACAD's lease is up at SAIT. Maybe to the Telus Convention Centre?

 

[gsunnyg]

I've lost you.

LOL K imma try one time and then we can move on. Im saying given the building boom and population growth during boom years especially of young workers and young families, the beltline experienced really healthy growth. However the start of my argument was that Calgary's core could do a much better job at attracting families but it also doesn't do a well enough job to attract more youth, which I think they're gonna run into troubles in the future seeing that this city is going to see a decline in the youth population. U said that the beltline does a good job at attracting youth but Im saying relative to the city, the numbers don't look that great. the only way we can solve this would be to pull up the neighbourhood profiles of something like Toronto (which I have) and calculate how much of their 25-34 age group lives in downtown and compare it too Calgarys. It would give us a rough idea but not a perfect one (but Im too lazy to calculate each and every neighbourhood right now). All Im trying to say is, that more younger folks should be running to the core proportionate to the cities population.

 

[gsunnyg]

Hey, I'd like to see more youth in the core too, I'm just not sure those numbers are that bad, I bet the stats for that age group are probably similar in Vancouver - people from that age group residing in the Vancouver's core.
As the inner city's market moves more back in the direction of rental, we should see the number of young people increase slightly. Most of the towers built in recent years were condos, and they tend to attract a higher age group. Also, I'm not sure if the 25-34 year old population matters. 35-50 year olds are just as important. I would like to see more children, but it is what it is. You don't see large amounts of children in any dense urban neighborhoods.

As far as diverse cuisine, I would say the NE offer more options for Asian food, but it's not as diverse as the core if you look at diversity from a global perspective (Greek, Hungarian, Brazilian, Ethiopian, Russian, etc... The core offers food from pretty much everywhere around the globe, whereas the NE is strong on Asian, and not even in the same areas. The NE is a large area, and some parts are very strong for Indian food.....no place between Toronto and Vancouver beats the far northeast for Indian, 36th street is great for Chinese/Vietnamese. but they are very spread out. The core offers everything everything and it's all within walking distance.

As for shopping, I would also argue that Chinook isn't the best shopping experience. It's the best from a mall perspective, and has about 50 or so stores not found in the core, but the core has about 300 stores not found in Chinook. There are a number of other businesses in the Chinook area, but an extremely unfriendly pedestrian environment, and a general lack of resto/retail mixed together.

I'm not trying to be pedantic, or difficult. I just don't know that the core is as bad off as it seems. There is definitely room for improvement...which I think will comes as time goes along, but I think we are on a good path.

Im sorry Im gonna have to disagree with the core and Chinook statement. Especially since I read a lot of retail insider, the Core is running into a lot of problems of prominent shops fleeing to the suburb malls. The Louis Vuttion is a good example because it tends to bring a lot of tourist traffic, what retailer insider was suggesting that if Louis leaves the Core, other brands like Hermes will flee too because of its draw. Also numbers suggest Chinook mall is far more profitable per sq. ft then the Core. Especially looking at the trends right now, the only people surviving the internet wave of online shopping are luxury retailers or extremely low cost retailers. The in between guys are getting screwed hard. Most of the recognizable shops in the core are already in Market and chinook mall, most of the 300 stores ur mentioning that the suburb malls don't really have are most likely niche retailers, im sure there are a few expectations like Simons. BTW when I mean niche Im talking about stores that aren't globally or atleast prominently available in other major Canadian cities. The Core really is facing a daunting future ahead unless they turn around the way Cadillac Fairview turned around Chinook into a top end mall.

 

[Cowtown]

Im sorry Im gonna have to disagree with the core and Chinook statement. Especially since I read a lot of retail insider, the Core is running into a lot of problems of prominent shops fleeing to the suburb malls. The Louis Vuttion is a good example because it tends to bring a lot of tourist traffic, what retailer insider was suggesting that if Louis leaves the Core, other brands like Hermes will flee too because of its draw. Also numbers suggest Chinook mall is far more profitable per sq. ft then the Core. Especially looking at the trends right now, the only people surviving the internet wave of online shopping are luxury retailers or extremely low cost retailers. The in between guys are getting screwed hard. Most of the recognizable shops in the core are already in Market and chinook mall, most of the 300 stores ur mentioning that the suburb malls don't really have are most likely niche retailers, im sure there are a few expectations like Simons. BTW when I mean niche Im talking about stores that aren't globally or atleast prominently available in other major Canadian cities. The Core really is facing a daunting future ahead unless they turn around the way Cadillac Fairview turned around Chinook into a top end mall.

I should clarify that by 'core' I meant downtown and Beltline. It's a much bigger area than Chinook of course, but it's a doable walk between any points of The Core/Stephen ave/1st street/8th street/11th ave/12th ave/17th ave. As a mall goes, yeah, Chinook beats all...though Crossiron is coming on strong.

 

[gsunnyg]

I should clarify that by 'core' I meant downtown and Beltline. It's a much bigger area than Chinook of course, but it's a doable walk between any points of The Core/Stephen ave/1st street/8th street/11th ave/12th ave/17th ave. As a mall goes, yeah, Chinook beats all...though Crossiron is coming on strong.

Oh haha K, I was like 300 shops

 

[gsunnyg]

I've lost you.

K so I hope this proves what Im saying. I took Calgarys Downtown neighbourhood populations of 25-34 age group added it with the beltline from 2014 got 14443 people between the ages of 25-34 living in the core (excluding Mission), the only outlier was East Village which was under construction in 2014. Now I found Toronto's core population figures from 2011. 58 k people in the 25-34 age group live in the Toronto core, out of the overall population of 413k for this age group. So basically Calgary has 6.85% of its 25-34 age group living in the Core while Toronto has 14% of its 25-34 age group in the city living in the core. Thats just over double! I know Toronto is flanked by other cities so its not perfect to compare the two but this should paint a descent picture. We do have a problem!
https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/u...rhood-population-profiles-aoda-07-04-2016.pdf

Edit* forgot to mention i realize Toronto core can hold a greater population, but what we're looking at here is how much of that youth population chooses to live in the core proportionately to the overall population