What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    46
Yeah I wonder what the trajectory of downtown in general would’ve been if the U of A was on the same bank of the river as the downtown core.

I know that would’ve been politically impossible at the time (The U of A was supposed to be in Calgary but was put in Strathcona which was annexed by Edmonton), but it’s something to ponder I guess.

I’m still of the opinion that just because of geography, we got stuck with two downtown cores. Could that be a boon in the long run? Sure. But it’s a weird quirky detriment for a city of our size and density.
 
Kosy123 said:
Yeah I wonder what the trajectory of downtown in general would’ve been if the U of A was on the same bank of the river as the downtown core.

I know that would’ve been politically impossible at the time (The U of A was supposed to be in Calgary but was put in Strathcona which was annexed by Edmonton), but it’s something to ponder I guess.

I’m still of the opinion that just because of geography, we got stuck with two downtown cores. Could that be a boon in the long run? Sure. But it’s a weird quirky detriment for a city of our size and density.
Click to expand...
I sometimes think about if whyte ave was actually jasper ave and what that’d do to our downtown.
 
thommyjo said:
I sometimes think about if whyte ave was actually jasper ave and what that’d do to our downtown.
Click to expand...
The what-ifs seem like excuses to me. MacEwan University is smack downtown, and the LRT makes downtown ridiculously easy to access from the U of A (speaking from experience as someone who goes to the Seoul Fried Chicken in downtown by Bay Station instead of Whyte Ave because the train makes it easier to go there). We have the pieces in place to encourage lots of activity downtown, and we just need to put in the work to keep the area safe and clean until there's a critical mass of businesses and interesting things to do there to keep attracting residents and visitors.
 
yeggator said:
The what-ifs seem like excuses to me. MacEwan University is smack downtown, and the LRT makes downtown ridiculously easy to access from the U of A (speaking from experience as someone who goes to the Seoul Fried Chicken in downtown by Bay Station instead of Whyte Ave because the train makes it easier to go there). We have the pieces in place to encourage lots of activity downtown, and we just need to put in the work to keep the area safe and clean until there's a critical mass of businesses and interesting things to do there to keep attracting residents and visitors.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. I think it’s just a critical mass thing. Would you rather be on a street with 20 bars and thousands of people on a Friday night? Or have 4 different streets with a few bars each and maybe 100 people walking around outside them?

Makes a big difference for safety, sense of excitement, and even marketing/promotion. Most large North American cities can really only have a few super popular streets for retail, nightlife, or culture.

Broadway in Vancouver is alright. But it’s never got the momentum of downtown streets despite being dense. Right down the b-99 from UBC and filled with restaurants, residential, and tons of shops.
 
Kosy123 said:
Yeah I wonder what the trajectory of downtown in general would’ve been if the U of A was on the same bank of the river as the downtown core.

I know that would’ve been politically impossible at the time (The U of A was supposed to be in Calgary but was put in Strathcona which was annexed by Edmonton), but it’s something to ponder I guess.

I’m still of the opinion that just because of geography, we got stuck with two downtown cores. Could that be a boon in the long run? Sure. But it’s a weird quirky detriment for a city of our size and density.
Click to expand...
Where does this perpetual myth come from? U of A was never "supposed " to be in Calg. It was promised to a city south of the north Saskatchewan River and Strathcona was always in the running... there was a huge rivalry between Edmonton and Strathcona similar to the rivalry between Edmonton and Calgary today. Strathcona wasn't Edmonton back then.
 
occidentalcapital said:
Where does this perpetual myth come from? U of A was never "supposed " to be in Calg. It was promised to a city south of the north Saskatchewan River and Strathcona was always in the running... there was a huge rivalry between Edmonton and Strathcona similar to the rivalry between Edmonton and Calgary today. Strathcona wasn't Edmonton back then.
Click to expand...
My mistake. I've always assumed that south of the North Sask river was an allegory towards Calgary.
 
U of A is not that far from downtown when compared to UBC or U of C. Also, Strathcona is vibrant due to its ability to maintain fine grained street front retail through its history. Would it be beneficial if strathcona was more accessible and contiguous to downtown? Yes, but it's not that unheard of for a node to be located away from the downtown.

Downtown could be in a much better position but with historical development decisions and lack of maintenance and safety it has become a place of pockets. I think everyone agrees that a critical mass that creates exciting atmospheres is missing, but it will take focused efforts to prioritize singular streets and downtown safety overall.
 
Kosy123 said:
My mistake. I've always assumed that south of the North Sask river was an allegory towards Calgary.
Click to expand...
I used to teach school groups at the leg, and I was told about this story. As it was explained to me, this was supposed to be a compromise. Premier Rutherford made that promise because there was a lot of opposition in Calgary to Edmonton getting the provincial university. After all, it got to be the capital, and so Calgary wanted to be the university town. Rutherford promised that it wouldn't be in Edmonton, it would instead be placed "south of the North Saskatchewan River"; that meant that even if Calgary couldn't get it, it could be Red Deer, Banff, etc. So it would still be closer to them than if it was in Edmonton, and the latter wouldn't keep getting showered with all the nice things.

However, Rutherford was passionate about education, and made himself Minister of Education with the goal of getting Alberta this new university that could rival the ones out east despite the frontier nature of the province. Being a pet project of his, he wanted it somewhere near and dear to him. He was from the area (Strathcona I believe), and putting it on the south bank of the North Saskatchewan River across from Edmonton was very much a way of maliciously complying with this promise to the letter, while completely missing the spirit of it haha.
 
Thanks, there is nuance to the history. It was not just a case of Edmonton getting everything. Although if you are the ones aggrieved by it, I suppose your case sounds stronger by leaving some of the details out, or maybe you don't really care about the details.

In any event, other cities have universities that are not downtown and that works fine (ex. Vancouver). Some have the provinces major university in provincial capitals (Winnipeg, Toronto, St. John's), so that is also not unheard of.
 
occidentalcapital said:
Where does this perpetual myth come from? U of A was never "supposed " to be in Calg. It was promised to a city south of the north Saskatchewan River and Strathcona was always in the running... there was a huge rivalry between Edmonton and Strathcona similar to the rivalry between Edmonton and Calgary today. Strathcona wasn't Edmonton back then.
Click to expand...
Both cities vied for the he post but Edmonton was the logical place for it was central.
 
I am really liking the frosted glass balconies with the black background on the condo tower.
20231020_155028.jpg
 
Most of the barriers and fencing have been removed from the west side and south side of the buildings. Much nicer for pedestrians. Any one have info on what is going in their CRUs?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top