SarcasticMarmot
Active Member
I'm afraid there also just isn't any money for grand ideas at the moment. And the public doesn't seem to be interested in paying more for grand ideas.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Airboy
- Start date
David A
Senior Member
I understand this, but if the public is not interested in paying more for something better, they are even less interested in paying more for the same or even less.
I feel the key to success for our future city council will be how to figure out how to do more with less (and not just by increasing other fees) and get funding elsewhere for other beneficial new things.
I don't think the current bunch is up to this and most people know that.
Whattagame
Active Member
The reason that the city is in the financial position it is in is because of decades of unsustainable outward growth. This council is the one that took a major step towards correcting that with the new zoning bylaws, but it will take decades to show meaningful results.
kcantor
Senior Member
It’s not nearly as simplistic as that…
The reason is a cumulative misallocation of priorities and resources.
It’s the delayed timing of transit to new developments - industrial as well as commercial - that generates an early reliance on cars.
It’s the focus on high-end multi purpose recreational facilities at the expense of community based options.
It’s decades of ignoring or postponing maintenance, all while costs continue to rise.
It’s insisting on “made in Edmonton” solutions when proven off the shelf solutions are readily available.
It’s too happily taking on ventures before they’re proven economically viable (composting, recycling sand, electric buses, experimental bridge decks etc.).
It’s taking on expensive projects where there is little expertise in delivering them successfully (Station Pointe, Blatchford, Northlands, the Quarters, Rossdale etc.).
It’s taking economic drivers like downtown for granted until the golden goose is on life support.
It has not only allowed demolition by neglect, it has participated in it (everything from the Oliver pool to the Aviation Museum to the Citadel).
It’s projects that are overly complex (Jasper Avenue), projects that take forever (Ortona), projects that are overdone (the NE police building), projects that are underdone (the downtown library).
This is just an impromptu partial list and I’m sure others could contribute similar ones.
Last edited:
Whattagame
Active Member
There is obviously more than just a single contributing factor, but sprawl is still likely the largest factor, and some of your points are symptoms of sprawl.
thommyjo
Senior Member
This all feels very true. And I think is all closely tied to sprawl too. The rec centres are a sprawl symptom. Blatchford is hurt and uncompetitive due to sprawl. Undervaluing downtown is a symptom of sprawl.
kcantor
Senior Member
The rec centres are a result of the “bigger and better syndrome” as opposed to neighbourhood/community facilities that you can walk to.
While the City does undervalue downtown, if you look at major employment centres in the region, many of the new residential areas are closer to work for many Edmontonians than downtown. Not recognizing that in transportation design and partnership with other communities in the region is a bigger culprit in how things work or don’t work than sprawl. Sorawl is leapfrog development over land and servicing that is left vacant or fallow/underutilized and we have little of that.
Blatchford is indeed hurt and uncompetitive but that - like Station Pointe and Northlands and The Quarters etc. - has little to do with urban sprawl.
Last edited:
kcantor
Senior Member
And then there’s just ongoing general operating inefficiencies…
epaper.edmontonjournal.com
Edmonton Journal ePaper
Edmonton Journal ePaper offers current issues of Edmonton Journal ePaper.
epaper.edmontonjournal.com
David A
Senior Member
Yes, many of the problems are self created. For instance, the lengthy delay of the Valley Line created a construction mess downtown for years without any benefit, at a time it was already struggling with other problems.
Deadlines and doing things on a timely basis matters and is important. The delay and disruption kills areas and businesses there.
I don't think the city had or has the capacity to take on large scale projects and even seems to have problems with getting smaller ones right.
thommyjo
Senior Member
This doesn’t show job density though. Like sure, lots of industrial jobs spread out in our city. But also our concentration in a few more central jobs is still super high.
And you can say there’s not “vacant land” or exurban sprawl…like the GTA has more of. But there’s also sprawl where we have 1/5th the density of a city like Vancouver.
Streets like stony plain road could be built like the Cambie corridor in Vancouver. Tens of thousands of people living along it in 4-8 story buildings. Instead we have crappy quality 6 story wood framed, car dependent, surface parking apartments all around the henday. We have so much underutilized land inside the henday, it’s crazy. But sprawl makes the prices so low for new greenfield that areas like blatchford/quarters/exhibition, etc are competitive to build in.
David A
Senior Member
Yes there is definitely more concentration of central jobs, but I suspect if you track numbers over the last decade or two there hasn't been a lot of growth in the number of these jobs here, whereas the industrial jobs spread out have probably grown a lot more.
There is not going to be a lot of new industrial or warehouse space added downtown these days. The concentrated downtown jobs in the private sector are in the financial business sector but no government here has really had much interest in attracting more head offices here over the last decade or more and it shows and the stagnation of downtown jobs is a big part of the underlying problem.
There is not going to be a lot of new industrial or warehouse space added downtown these days. The concentrated downtown jobs in the private sector are in the financial business sector but no government here has really had much interest in attracting more head offices here over the last decade or more and it shows and the stagnation of downtown jobs is a big part of the underlying problem.
Greenspace
Senior Member
I can confirm that actual job growth Downtown has been stagnant. It's virtually the same as 20-30 years ago.
Toronto saw a correlation in the growth of Downtown jobs with people moving there, aka condo and rental development. While residential growth is said to be how we fix things Downtown (and I agree somewhat), actually attracting more jobs would have a more positive effect on people's decision to live close to where they work. I believe this the main thing dragging on condo prices since the pandemic with less people or reason for people to live centrally. We do see a bit of a reverse commute from Downtown for some people who want a more urban lifestyle.
Toronto saw a correlation in the growth of Downtown jobs with people moving there, aka condo and rental development. While residential growth is said to be how we fix things Downtown (and I agree somewhat), actually attracting more jobs would have a more positive effect on people's decision to live close to where they work. I believe this the main thing dragging on condo prices since the pandemic with less people or reason for people to live centrally. We do see a bit of a reverse commute from Downtown for some people who want a more urban lifestyle.
archited
Senior Member
SarcasticMarmot
Active Member
I appreciated what the Journalist at 5:36 had to say:
"It turned out most of these condos were actually built with investors in mind. That meant they were small and basically bought to be rented out. They became the de facto source of most of the rental stuff in the city for decades. But because they were so small, they weren’t the kinds of places families would want to live, or that people would want to live permanently. It means they’ve taken on a temporary feel."
As we have talked about before, its amazing that the condo market can be so bad while in the middle of a superheated housing crisis. It's because we have built investment vehicles not homes. Hopefully that changes with new zoning, but I worry the construction price for multi-family is now forcing tiny units. Which will keep driving people towards suburban sfh.
policyenthusiast
Active Member
From the City of Edmonton:
Tell us how the Single-use Item Reduction Bylaw has impacted your day-to-day decisions and share your thoughts on how it should evolve in the future.
This bylaw places restrictions on certain single-use items used for convenience. The bylaw mandates reusable cups for dine-in beverages, and minimum fees for paper and new reusable bags. Fees were increased on July 1, 2024 to encourage waste reduction.
Shareable Link
Note: The survey isn't really a "yes/no I do/don't like the bylaw", it just asks about how the bylaw affects your purchasing habits.
Tell us how the Single-use Item Reduction Bylaw has impacted your day-to-day decisions and share your thoughts on how it should evolve in the future.
This bylaw places restrictions on certain single-use items used for convenience. The bylaw mandates reusable cups for dine-in beverages, and minimum fees for paper and new reusable bags. Fees were increased on July 1, 2024 to encourage waste reduction.
Shareable Link
Note: The survey isn't really a "yes/no I do/don't like the bylaw", it just asks about how the bylaw affects your purchasing habits.