Blatchford Development | ?m | ?s | City of Edmonton

He actually lost his off leash privileges the last time we were there when he dove into the lake lol. The old runway on the east side is kept really clean, so we let him run around there for a bit but otherwise kept him on leash. Good to know about the fox tail though!
 
I think Blatchford is many things, but I sense the focus is really not on affordability.

I get there is a trade off in trying to maximize the return on the asset and there are also significant infrastructure costs that need to be covered.

However, that means there is not going to be a rush of buyers and development will proceed at a slower, but hopefully steady pace.

I suspect some of this it at least a bit politically sensitive, so the City really didn't go into it and some people are frustrated and wondering why it is not being developed faster.
 
Taken September 29, 2021
20210929_084308.jpg
 
Keep in mind that the East Village was double that.

You appear to suggest they are comparable - when they are not. That premise is not helping your argument which I will try to support. So let me start to flesh out why Blatchford may need more time to develop compared to East Village. Others may point out other rationale. first, sheer size difference alone is not comparable. East Village: 0.5 km2 (0.2 sq mi) and Blatchford: 2.17 km2 (0.84 sq mi) with East Village 1/4 the size of Blatchford. Blatchford had no or very few existing services (water, electrical, gas lines, sewage), without any planning for roads, sidewalks and functionality - while East Village had an existing city grid established making it easier to develop and redevelop some of the sites. Blatchford had nothing but concrete runways that had to be removed and is essentially a greenfield site. Blatchford was envisioned as an opportunity to build and showcase a district energy supply, waste water and human waste management, energy efficient design and with a goal to accommodate up to 30,000 people in new family housing. East Village accomplishes none of this. East Villa is more comparable to our Quarters District in terms of proximity to the very core of downtown, both are inner city areas, and both ripe for redevelopment. To your argument that East Village has taken more time - that is true but irrelevant to Blatchford. You would need to find another city comarable project like the now closed Berlin downtown Tegel Airport redevelopment project for a more direct comparison.

This from an article but there is an official site. "The Tegel Project is certainly ambitious. It aims to provide 5,000 new homes accommodating 10,000 people, space for 1,000 large and small businesses, a new campus for Berlin's Beuth University for Applied Sciences and an array of other projects.

A rendering of the Tegel Project's plans bird's-eye view
A rendering of the Tegel Project, which consists of an industry park and the residential Schumacher Quartier
The first residential buildings are to be finished by 2026, but the project in its entirety has a lifespan of 20 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blatchford,_Edmonton2.17 km2 (0.84 sq mi)
 
1. They are comparable in multiple ways and very different in others.
2. Blatchford will not ever achieve 30,000 people with many industry professionals believing that 15,000 is a much more realistic number.
3. The East Village razed 85% of it, broke the grid/redid the streets and had to add servicing to much of the lands again.
4. The Quarters is more akin to the East Village but an absolute failure on so many accounts that here's hoping Blatchford will observe and not repeat.
 
You appear to suggest they are comparable - when they are not. That premise is not helping your argument which I will try to support. So let me start to flesh out why Blatchford may need more time to develop compared to East Village. Others may point out other rationale. first, sheer size difference alone is not comparable. East Village: 0.5 km2 (0.2 sq mi) and Blatchford: 2.17 km2 (0.84 sq mi) with East Village 1/4 the size of Blatchford. Blatchford had no or very few existing services (water, electrical, gas lines, sewage), without any planning for roads, sidewalks and functionality - while East Village had an existing city grid established making it easier to develop and redevelop some of the sites. Blatchford had nothing but concrete runways that had to be removed and is essentially a greenfield site. Blatchford was envisioned as an opportunity to build and showcase a district energy supply, waste water and human waste management, energy efficient design and with a goal to accommodate up to 30,000 people in new family housing. East Village accomplishes none of this. East Villa is more comparable to our Quarters District in terms of proximity to the very core of downtown, both are inner city areas, and both ripe for redevelopment. To your argument that East Village has taken more time - that is true but irrelevant to Blatchford. You would need to find another city comarable project like the now closed Berlin downtown Tegel Airport redevelopment project for a more direct comparison.

This from an article but there is an official site. "The Tegel Project is certainly ambitious. It aims to provide 5,000 new homes accommodating 10,000 people, space for 1,000 large and small businesses, a new campus for Berlin's Beuth University for Applied Sciences and an array of other projects.

A rendering of the Tegel Project's plans bird's-eye view's plans bird's-eye view
A rendering of the Tegel Project, which consists of an industry park and the residential Schumacher Quartier
The first residential buildings are to be finished by 2026, but the project in its entirety has a lifespan of 20 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blatchford,_Edmonton2.17 km2 (0.84 sq mi)
Using timing of the Tegel example isn't entirely fair, in my opinion, as it's comparing a plan vs Edmonton's actual experience. A bit unfair until we see how Tegel actually plays out.

Keep in mind, the last runway at Blatchford closed in late 2013, so we are 8 years after actual work could begin and are seeing people move in. The Tegel project received the land in August 2021, and expects phase 1 construction to finalize around 2027 (per their website). So 6 years vs 8, and that's just a plan which can certainly still go astray (see the new Berlin airport as the most extreme example of this lol).
 
Using timing of the Tegel example isn't entirely fair, in my opinion, as it's comparing a plan vs Edmonton's actual experience. A bit unfair until we see how Tegel actually plays out.

Keep in mind, the last runway at Blatchford closed in late 2013, so we are 8 years after actual work could begin and are seeing people move in. The Tegel project received the land in August 2021, and expects phase 1 construction to finalize around 2027 (per their website). So 6 years vs 8, and that's just a plan which can certainly still go astray (see the new Berlin airport as the most extreme example of this lol).
I think it's also important to emphasise that biggest thing holding this back was the bold nature of it. Like others have alrewdy said, a lot of innovative things were done here; namely the geothermal heating/cooling/water heating. Not only did developers have to buy into this with no idea of what the payoff would be, but people had to buy these homes sight unseen while knowing that the area was decades away from being fully realized.

Now that the developers know there's demand, they're branching out into larger density builds (like the recently announced condos, and the mixed use building Mutti is currently designing). As phase one further develops, we'll see people buying these homes because they're good homes in a good neighbourhood. In contrast, the people who had to pre-buy their homes with not even a showhome to look at had did so because they believed in the green vision of Blatchford.

So, I think the future for Blatchford will be a good one so long as we stay the course and don't try to change anything drastically. I wish the permits for the condos would get approved more quickly sure, but I don't think we should look at making any major changes that would introduce major uncertainty for developers right when we finally hit a nice point of stability.
 

Back
Top