News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 7.4K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.5K     0 

Downtown

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Pretty sure I've read a similar article in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2011 and 2015.

While we have seen some progress (Rogers/ICE being the main driver), the reality is that Downtown has been caught in a fairly repetitive cycle of stagnation and moving a lot of chairs around versus actual or 'real' growth.

Edmonton needs to break this cycle and really push residential growth as the main driver for all things good Downtown.
 
^^^^ Simple solution... the problems are far more complex and the possibilities require deeper thought. At least Gerein's article addresses some of the hopefulness needed.
 
Lather, rinse, repeat.

Pretty sure I've read a similar article in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2011 and 2015.

While we have seen some progress (Rogers/ICE being the main driver), the reality is that Downtown has been caught in a fairly repetitive cycle of stagnation and moving a lot of chairs around versus actual or 'real' growth.

Edmonton needs to break this cycle and really push residential growth as the main driver for all things good Downtown.

I fully agree that this cycle is rinse and repeat.

These articles always need to start with a "let's say something positive to soften the what I am about to say negative."

Truth is we need to have some hard conversations about downtown to break said cycle. The small step forward and two large steps back is not good enough. The way our councils and administration neglect or do not prioritize our downtown is not good enough. Whether one visits or cares about downtown is irrelevant because we are all paying for the neglect of downtown through taxes.
 
Yes, there are problems, but I don't think the exaggeration such as in this letter is at all helpful. Our downtown core is not "overrun" with squatters’ shelters. There are none in any of the areas I regularly go to, and I go to a lot of areas downtown often.

Agree. I live downtown and you may see the occasional tent but it's nowhere near overrun. Where you do see them is next to shelters and services for obvious reasons.

The discourse on this always seems to be around just making the problem go away and not actually fixing the issue. Don't like seeing tent cities or homeless wandering downtown? That's a position you can take, sure. But where are these people supposed to go? As mentioned by others shelters kick people out during the day, and there's not enough space for everyone even if they were open.
 
Address safety. I always advise my tenants to be cautious after hours downtown. Other areas of the city need to carry their weight when it comes to community support services and a smaller, decentralized support network should be laid out.

Address affordability. Rent rates are pretty high downtown considering businesses have suburban options. Our mass transit options, amenities, and general overall prestige do not justify being non-competitive on pricing vs. the suburbs

Address amenities. You want an attractive downtown? It's gonna take time. The city has made great strides here with expanding the Winspear, The RAM, ice district, the upcoming downtown park, etc. Amenity rich downtowns only come with time, and we must not stop developing things like parks, bowling alleys, aquariums, museums, concert venues, etc.

Address accessibility. Face it, we are automobile-centric prairie city with a downtown that competes with places such as WEM, South Edmonton Common, and Currents for "nights out on the town". Every person I know who used to come down to the core for hockey nights at OTR no longer do ever since the new parking restrictions came into effect. They are convoluted, confusing, and people do not feel like being penalized with a ticket for taking a cab home when they've been drinking. Free street "24 hour limit" street parking would be revolutionary for a downtown core with downtown residents being issued parking passes for longer term parking. This would make renting units such as mine much more attractive, with tenants being able to sublet a room to students without concern or consequences of having a second vehicle. Think of the potential that would have in creating population density - especially in a time where people are huddling to save money.
 

I dunno guys I think the stats on violent crimes and the dramatic increase in property crime can be associated to higher levels of drug addiction, poverty, and homelessness. I don't think we have the same scale of homelessness that places like East Van have persay, but I would argue I've had probably twice as many high danger encounters in Edmonton than I did when I lived in the Lower mainland. Anecdotal? Yes, but I can definitely sympathize with the stories you read online and feel we need to better address these issues by investing in them.
 
This is a fairly good, balanced article, however there is some nuance here to add. Much of the problem with Jasper Avenue is at the street level. For instance, two banks that had large branches on Jasper Ave closed them and moved to Ice District or nearby. They didn't actually leave downtown.

There are two big street level construction projects going on, the former Enbridge/IPL building mentioned in the article and nearby CWB Place, which when done soon will help.

The completion of Ice District took away some of the focus from Jasper Ave, but as that fills up there will be a chance for Jasper Ave to recover.

Interestingly, Commerce Place seems to be doing better than Manulife or City Centre and has filled some of its empty space recently, so it can be done.
 
Lather, rinse, repeat.

Pretty sure I've read a similar article in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2011 and 2015.

While we have seen some progress (Rogers/ICE being the main driver), the reality is that Downtown has been caught in a fairly repetitive cycle of stagnation and moving a lot of chairs around versus actual or 'real' growth.

Edmonton needs to break this cycle and really push residential growth as the main driver for all things good Downtown.
If you have to drive to a power center or far away shopping mall to buy a tshirt or a pair of shoes, it is not really going to be that attractive to live downtown.

The whole point of living downtown is to be able to easily walk to a variety of places nearby for goods or services and we don't really have that now.
 
You also don't need residential density for services like a shoe store to follow. In fact, you don't necessarily need the residential density at all. If Downtown is made into enough of a destination where various actors are bullish on maximizing attractiveness to Edmontonians and tourists, it can be vibrant. Inglewood in Calgary has less population than Old Strathcona and is just as vibrant as Whyte on average. The neighbourhoods around WEM have less people than the neighbourhoods around Downtown and yet that hasn't stopped it from drawing in people. Plus, if Downtown successfully becomes a "destination" then it'll have no trouble building housing.

But I do think the focus of housing policy right now should be on those who can't otherwise afford it rather than filling more condos.

104th Street also had a lot of momentum that really fizzled out. It was probably the other big "progress" of the last 15-20 years for Downtown. It's not dead like City Centre but it didn't continue to become more exciting and vibrant, despite all the investments.
 
Address safety. I always advise my tenants to be cautious after hours downtown. Other areas of the city need to carry their weight when it comes to community support services and a smaller, decentralized support network should be laid out.

Address affordability. Rent rates are pretty high downtown considering businesses have suburban options. Our mass transit options, amenities, and general overall prestige do not justify being non-competitive on pricing vs. the suburbs

Address amenities. You want an attractive downtown? It's gonna take time. The city has made great strides here with expanding the Winspear, The RAM, ice district, the upcoming downtown park, etc. Amenity rich downtowns only come with time, and we must not stop developing things like parks, bowling alleys, aquariums, museums, concert venues, etc.

Address accessibility. Face it, we are automobile-centric prairie city with a downtown that competes with places such as WEM, South Edmonton Common, and Currents for "nights out on the town". Every person I know who used to come down to the core for hockey nights at OTR no longer do ever since the new parking restrictions came into effect. They are convoluted, confusing, and people do not feel like being penalized with a ticket for taking a cab home when they've been drinking. Free street "24 hour limit" street parking would be revolutionary for a downtown core with downtown residents being issued parking passes for longer term parking. This would make renting units such as mine much more attractive, with tenants being able to sublet a room to students without concern or consequences of having a second vehicle. Think of the potential that would have in creating population density - especially in a time where people are huddling to save money.

If dt parking is free for 24 hours or even longer for dt residents, I can see people not even using their parkade spaces and just parking on the street more often similar to most neighbourhoods where many people don't use their garage and park on the street. It might even encourage a one car dt household with 2 adults to get a second car adding more cars to mix or deciding to buy a car if they didn't have one.
I can also see street parking filling up fast with cars parked longer (less turnover) and businesses complaining that street parking in front of their business is being taken up by non customers (residents, their guests or people who work downtown 9-5pm who used to pay for parking in a paid lot).
 
You also don't need residential density for services like a shoe store to follow. In fact, you don't necessarily need the residential density at all. If Downtown is made into enough of a destination where various actors are bullish on maximizing attractiveness to Edmontonians and tourists, it can be vibrant. Inglewood in Calgary has less population than Old Strathcona and is just as vibrant as Whyte on average. The neighbourhoods around WEM have less people than the neighbourhoods around Downtown and yet that hasn't stopped it from drawing in people. Plus, if Downtown successfully becomes a "destination" then it'll have no trouble building housing.

But I do think the focus of housing policy right now should be on those who can't otherwise afford it rather than filling more condos.

104th Street also had a lot of momentum that really fizzled out. It was probably the other big "progress" of the last 15-20 years for Downtown. It's not dead like City Centre but it didn't continue to become more exciting and vibrant, despite all the investments.
I don't think turning it into even more of a low income ghetto is the solution. Social housing needs to be spread throughout the city, despite some of the NIMBY push back, plus the land cost downtown is higher making it harder to build affordable housing there.

However, I don't think all luxury condos are the way to go either. Honestly, the current state of downtown with its lack of nearby shops and services, it really wouldn't have much appeal for those looking for that anyways. If you have to drive to other places for most necessities, better to live elsewhere.

If we can learn something from Inglewood or Old Strathcona, people are not going to come to visit empty store fronts, plus a few chain fast food places or chain drug stores. It would probably be better to focus on getting a number of good unique local stores as well as places that may have a broad appeal to nearby residents like Old Navy.

I think that was sort of how Old Strathcona rebuilt itself from being a run down neglected area in the 1970's, with the addition of a lot of interesting and good local stores.
 
Fiery debate between Coun. Paquette and Coun. Hamilton (who is on provincial task force) about what downtown needs on Ryan Jespersen show today.

I like the part where Paquette's wife texted him during the show and told him to calm down.

 
Last edited:
In the Simpsons they just packed up town and moved 10 miles away when things got too bad. My hometown Stony Plain did it once too.

Maybe we can move Downtown to a nicer part of the city? Would Terwilleger Town be acceptable?
 

Back
Top