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

^The City has no money. Council needs to be more picky and choosy about what we spend it on. A station that's decades away from being used isn't a good use of money right now, no matter the long term planning if we want to get away from 5-8% tax increases. It's just one thing but a symptom of a bigger problem is I guess why I'm questioning why it was built.
 
Probably as a springboard for future Metro line expansion. Blatchford Gate being built could have also been a provision for federal and provincial funding, similar to the Capital Line extension. (which makes sense considering the Feds/Provincials contributed almost $250 million to this compared to the city's $62 million contribution)
 
Greenspace said:
^The City has no money. Council needs to be more picky and choosy about what we spend it on. A station that's decades away from being used isn't a good use of money right now, no matter the long term planning if we want to get away from 5-8% tax increases. It's just one thing but a symptom of a bigger problem is I guess why I'm questioning why it was built.
Click to expand...

You do realize that the Metro Line extension is being paid for by the federal, provincial and municipal governments, right? Moreover, the extension had begun a few years ago before the City started whining about no money.
 
Most of our provincial money ($900m) went into LRT. Which is what we told them our priorities are. That is to build Valley Line, as well as LRT extensions, however there are other capital expenditures that could be happening as our infrastructure deficit as a city continues to grow. We didn't need to have the province pay for this extension when there are other priorities imo. There may have been strings tied to the federal dollars, that could be the reason we did it 20 years early, I don't know about that money.

I don't know where the City got that $62m from but could be debt financing. If it's tax supported, the annual increase in the tax levy is $558m/year for next 4 years (27%). $62m is just one thing amongst a whole host of ideas of where we could re-evaluate our spending priorities.

I'm not even sure what year they chose to fund the $62m, and if I was in their shoes not sure if I'd say yes or no when I had all the information in front of me. It's just not easy to say 3 levels of gov't paid for it so it must be fine, it's more nuanced than that. I'm not sure we didn't need to start thinking about how we're spending already years ago when Council ask admin to start finding savings, but you could be right.
 
Last edited:
Took a walk with the other half last week by drainage pond in Blatchford. It seems much better done in terms of making it into a recreational space than most such features usually are. There were a couple of birders out there with binoculars and there was a decent diversity of them being drawn to the place.
 
Greenspace said:
^The City has no money. Council needs to be more picky and choosy about what we spend it on. A station that's decades away from being used isn't a good use of money right now, no matter the long term planning if we want to get away from 5-8% tax increases. It's just one thing but a symptom of a bigger problem is I guess why I'm questioning why it was built.
Click to expand...

We know that this will be the long term alignment for the Metro line. Since we had the money, it makes a lot of sense to build now for a few reasons. First, because large scale infrastructure projects costs have been outpacing inflation for a while so it will only be more expensive in the future. Second, because even with the ROW set aside, once development and roads surround the ROW it will be more time consuming, complicated, and ultimately more expensive to build (think needing to worry about traffic/pedestians at crossings, needing to tear up roads at crossings to lay rail, less lay down space, and more constraints in moving around equipment and machinery).
 
I do think the lack of coordination for the stations and development plans are idiotic.

Seeing the townhomes and the closer station being so far away is just wild to me. 0 effort to make this a not car dependent neighborhood. 0 integration of transit. 0 TOD thinking.

This plus the Lewis farms terminus/rec centre/library/high school not being integrated either shows a real lack of leadership by our city planners.

Translink is killing the game in BC. Meanwhile we’re purposely building density far away from LRTs and putting LRTs in places without density. Make it make sense.

And yes…. Eventually it’ll get better. But I’m with @Greenspace. There’s an opportunity cost.
 
Greenspace said:
Most of our provincial money ($900m) went into LRT. Which is what we told them our priorities are. That is to build Valley Line, as well as LRT extensions, however there are other capital expenditures that could be happening as our infrastructure deficit as a city continues to grow. We didn't need to have the province pay for this extension when there are other priorities imo. There may have been strings tied to the federal dollars, that could be the reason we did it 20 years early, I don't know about that money.

I don't know where the City got that $62m from but could be debt financing. If it's tax supported, the annual increase in the tax levy is $558m/year for next 4 years (27%). $62m is just one thing amongst a whole host of ideas of where we could re-evaluate our spending priorities.

I'm not even sure what year they chose to fund the $62m, and if I was in their shoes not sure if I'd say yes or no when I had all the information in front of me. It's just not easy to say 3 levels of gov't paid for it so it must be fine, it's more nuanced than that. I'm not sure we didn't need to start thinking about how we're spending already years ago when Council ask admin to start finding savings, but you could be right.
Click to expand...
Sorry. Where are you getting that it's 20 years early?
 
thommyjo said:
I do think the lack of coordination for the stations and development plans are idiotic.

Seeing the townhomes and the closer station being so far away is just wild to me. 0 effort to make this a not car dependent neighborhood. 0 integration of transit. 0 TOD thinking.

This plus the Lewis farms terminus/rec centre/library/high school not being integrated either shows a real lack of leadership by our city planners.

Translink is killing the game in BC. Meanwhile we’re purposely building density far away from LRTs and putting LRTs in places without density. Make it make sense.

And yes…. Eventually it’ll get better. But I’m with @Greenspace. There’s an opportunity cost.
Click to expand...

Basically sums it up.

The lack of coordination, complimentary nature and connections is odd, if not rookie.
 
IanO said:
Basically sums it up.

The lack of coordination, complimentary nature and connections is odd, if not rookie.
Click to expand...

Thing is, the closest space to the LRT stations was always going to be reserved for the highest density, and I can't picture anyone wanting to go ahead and start with that as the first project for the entire development. Starting where they did made sense because Encore seems to have been the partner that jumped on things first, and they don't seem to build towers. And the townhouses also make sense from the perspective of getting something built in the face of showing what the neighbourhood can be because they're a quicker build and the subsurface infrastructure is easier to prepare.

As someone who is currently moving in there, it does bother me a bit that getting to the LRT is a bit of an experience, but on the other hand when I walk out to the eastern extent of the pavement, it really is almost there. Getting in and out by bicycle has thus far proven much easier than I anticipated, though I am looking forward to a good eastern connection.
 
Maybe one of the problems is that there is no one interested on council in Championing TOD'S and proper LRT as a combined effort.

If it were up to me (which I know it isn't) I would have our LRT, bus system, and future BRT work all together to feed and benefit from developments in our city.
 
People need to go read about how university district in Calgary got built. That’s how you anchor a new development. And it’s not even a true TOD. Just a large scale infill.

same with our 500mil dollar rec centres. Imagine instead of a Walmart style approach we went:

Central Park/plaza that directly connects to LRT. All car free area. Then connected to that is Rec Centre, EPL branch, High School. Then have a Main Street that’s medium density housing, ground floor retail. Then have density decrease out from there.

But instead we have SFHs and freeways next to rec centres, apartments 1km away that are good density, but too far to be convienent. And LRT/BRT also a 10-25min walk away (Lewis, terwillegar, meadows).

Coordinating all those city/province funded projects could be magical. High schools and Rec Centres are probably the best trip generators that can be publicly funded besides unis (maybe hospitals?). That catalyzed the whole thing for private parties to come contribute to.

In blatchford the city went: here’s roads, a pond, and an LRT 10+mins away. And surprise surprise that didn’t get stuff moving.
 
thommyjo said:
People need to go read about how university district in Calgary got built. That’s how you anchor a new development. And it’s not even a true TOD. Just a large scale infill.

same with our 500mil dollar rec centres. Imagine instead of a Walmart style approach we went:

Central Park/plaza that directly connects to LRT. All car free area. Then connected to that is Rec Centre, EPL branch, High School. Then have a Main Street that’s medium density housing, ground floor retail. Then have density decrease out from there.

But instead we have SFHs and freeways next to rec centres, apartments 1km away that are good density, but too far to be convienent. And LRT/BRT also a 10-25min walk away (Lewis, terwillegar, meadows).

Coordinating all those city/province funded projects could be magical. High schools and Rec Centres are probably the best trip generators that can be publicly funded besides unis (maybe hospitals?). That catalyzed the whole thing for private parties to come contribute to.

In blatchford the city went: here’s roads, a pond, and an LRT 10+mins away. And surprise surprise that didn’t get stuff moving.
Click to expand...
I wish Blatchford was going a rate like Calgary's University district. It is quite impressive how its been nonstop building there for years. I hope the lrt line encourages similar development right up close to it
 
It is an interesting comparison between Calgary's University district and Blatchford, but while both have proximity to post secondary institutions, those institutions are certainly quite different and I think that has a big impact.

Of course, the more relevant education institution comparison for the U of C would be the U of A, but that is already an older denser area.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top