News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 8.3K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 9.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.1K     0 

Edmonton Real Estate Market

Exposure is great, but I still think we're missing the forest for the trees. This isn't an issue of poor marketing or just needing that next big event to prove how great we are.

Edmonton is ugly in many central areas and there is often a failure to improve and maintain the public realm. It doesn't matter how hard you try to get people here if the city is ugly, desolate or dangerous.

As a city, we need to focus on livability for people who are already here. I'd hit the brakes on some of the projects in the far flung burbs and accelerate major renewal projects in the core. I also wonder whether the city needs to double-down on tax incentives to encourage more residential projects centrally. Make it so that downtown is the first choice for new projects and leverage the billions in infrastructure we already have.
 
jason403 said:
The exposure is about the games though, not really about the city. Event is huge, absolutely agree. But as far as my understanding, Edmonton is getting 3 games potentially? Am I missing something, or are we hosting a group now? I mean if there are World Cup games that end up going to Cincinnati or Cleveland for example, and that would have minimal impact, what makes Edmonton so different?
Click to expand...

1 - no, the exposure is not just about the games. For at least one year before the event, there is a big hype up from the media. Outlets from all around the world send reporters to cities, have reviews, articles, etc, done. Once the games are decided, the local media of the teams who will be playing usually have heavy coverage. This usually gives the city a short term tourist boom and generates interest and, especially nowadays, with social media playing a major role in the spread of information, this brings some extra attention.
There has been talk about Edmonton hosting Canada's opening match, which is, in itself, a whole event and will have extra coverage.

2 - We might have up to 5 games. The deal, in the bid, was 10 games for Canada, 10 for Mexico and the rest in the US. Initially we'd have 3 in Edmonton, 3 in Montreal and 4 in Toronto. It is logistically impossible for a city to host more than 5 games in the cup, considering that there is a really high standard for the playing field quality (meaning that the grass needs to recover between games, usually 2~3 days) and, since Montreal gave up on their bid, either FIFA will screw Canada (unlikely, as one of their goals is to develop the sport in countries where it is not as popular and professionalized) or distribute the games between Edmonton and Toronto, with each getting 5 (I'd bet in Edmonton getting 4 group phase games and 1 round of 16, Toronto getting 3 group phase, 1 round of 8 and a semifinal).

3 - The way things will probably work, due to geographic challenges, with groups being played in specific regions, might see Edmonton get more than one game from the same national teams, which means it will likely become a trading camp city as well, bringing some extra interest from one (or more) countries. It also increases the stay of many tourists during that period and, if those have a good experience here, they tend to spread the word. Every single Brazil and South Africa city that hosted the World Cup in 2014 and 2010, respectively, saw an increase in tourism, even years after the event. Might not have been big enough to turn the city into a tourist hotspot, but was positive nonetheless.

4 - I have no freaking clue about how this will impact Cleveland or Cincinnati, I don't live there and could care less. It might have minimal impact, it might not.
 
tkoe_ said:
Exposure is great, but I still think we're missing the forest for the trees. This isn't an issue of poor marketing or just needing that next big event to prove how great we are.

Edmonton is ugly in many central areas and there is often a failure to improve and maintain the public realm. It doesn't matter how hard you try to get people here if the city is ugly, desolate or dangerous.

As a city, we need to focus on livability for people who are already here. I'd hit the brakes on some of the projects in the far flung burbs and accelerate major renewal projects in the core. I also wonder whether the city needs to double-down on tax incentives to encourage more residential projects centrally. Make it so that downtown is the first choice for new projects and leverage the billions in infrastructure we already have.
Click to expand...
I agree on all accounts, that we need to improve Edmonton for Edmontonians, but these things don't exclude each other.

I had the chance of visiting South Africa In 2009, during the preparations for the 2010 World Cup, and the effort being put in the two cities I visited (Cape Town and Johannesburg, so that their central areas and the areas around the stadiums were inviting and good looking, were off the charts.
Same with every single city in Brazil, before 2014. And even in Germany, for the 2006 World Cup, if you go online and browse through some forums, you'll see major investment in renewal of these areas.

I'd expect the stadium region to get a major revamp (and a certain construction boom between now and then), as well as DT, as it is the likely venue for the FIFA Fan Fest, as well as other events that happen throughout the month.

I won't be surprised if we see extra cash going towards speeding the LRT construction (VLW and Capital Line), coming from the feds (think elections in 2024~5 and the boost it'll give them), which should make a huge difference for locals and tourists alike. We also have a few major projects going on in the DT area that should keep the momentum going up until 2026, including the Winspear, the Warehouse District park and the many residential developments currently under construction.

Of course, all of this is for nothing if the many spheres of society don't come together to work. We need the CoE to put a lot of effort into using the momentum created by this to solve (or address in a more efficient way) some of the issues that plague out DT, such as crime and homelessness (which are not always necessarily related). We need the GoA to turn their eyes to Edmonton for a bit, instead of being a Calgary-centric government, put in some effort in promoting the whole province as a destination, not just the Rockies, like they did in a presentation earlier this year.

Bottom line, the World Cup is not a silver bullet that will solve all of our problems, but it certainly is the best chance we'll get to get some traction in decades, and we should be VERY eager to jump into this and make the best out of it.
 
Thank you @EtoV, all posts that are directed towards any member(s) in a negative way will be deleted. We don't have to agree with someone's opinion but be respectful of all forum members.
Let's move on and let go of any negativity and keep the discussions on point, please and thank you. Enough is enough.
And Happy Solstice everyone :)
 
I know there's a lot criticism of large spotting events like the Olympics and data showing the inflated belief that they provide benefits. But it does seem like Vancouver did very well in hosting in 2010, along with the expo. They really leveraged them as ways to showcase the city and transform whole areas (skytrain, false creek, Olympic village).

If edmonton, by hosting a few larger events, can find the right balance of not putting all their eggs in one basket, overspending, etc, and can ensure long term benefits for locals, that seems like a win. Olympic village is a home run imo.
 
Nice focus on Edmonton and our 2026 bid just came out in Inside World Football.

www.insideworldfootball.com

World Cup 2026 will be a game changer. Edmonton wants to be part of it - Inside World Football

By Paul Nicholson December 22 – Talk of a biennial World Cup has overshadowed some of the crucial decision making to be made around the 2026 World Cup, and event that in itself will be groundbreaking, both for FIFA and football. It will be the first FIFA World Cup to be co-hosted by three...
www.insideworldfootball.com www.insideworldfootball.com

The city has certainly gained a lot of traction out of those two November world cup qualifying matches - all the images, tweets and Instagram pics of soccer in the snow was more publicity the city has received for anything in a while. I like how we made being in the cold, cool!

Screenshot_20211222-152959_Samsung Internet.jpg


From article:
"Scratch the surface of the city and you see a very special place, and in a host city bid environment led predominantly by male bid teams and the macho flexing of infrastructure capabilities, Edmonton comes over as having the understanding and sympathy for the sport that is required to be a truly great, memorable and ‘contributing’ World Cup city."
 
Last edited:
Edmonton has been building up a strong case for itself with event hosting over the years. World cup is a different scale and don't want to undersell the importance it would have in civic pride.

We all reference the '88 winter Olympics in Calgary because it was such a huge deal and left an incredible legacy for the city. Granted this event will be spread across several host cities but being one of two host cities in Canada (hopefully) alongside Toronto says something and will be noticed.

If nothing else it can be used as an incentive to get a few housekeeping items done around the city by the time we host.
 
Yeah when it comes to first world countries (with some exceptions of course), the investment in events like the Olympics and World Cup are much more likely to be a net benefit for the City. It usually ends up as a justification to fund infrastructure that should have been built already anyways.

I can't think of a major facility in Vancouver that isn't still used, or at least converted into another use. Canada Line, Sea to Sky Highway, Richmond Oval, Whistler Olympic Park, Olympic Village, Jack poole plaza etc.
 
tkoe_ said:
Exposure is great, but I still think we're missing the forest for the trees. This isn't an issue of poor marketing or just needing that next big event to prove how great we are.

Edmonton is ugly in many central areas and there is often a failure to improve and maintain the public realm. It doesn't matter how hard you try to get people here if the city is ugly, desolate or dangerous.

As a city, we need to focus on livability for people who are already here. I'd hit the brakes on some of the projects in the far flung burbs and accelerate major renewal projects in the core. I also wonder whether the city needs to double-down on tax incentives to encourage more residential projects centrally. Make it so that downtown is the first choice for new projects and leverage the billions in infrastructure we already have.
Click to expand...
I can't like this post enough. Edmonton needs to clean up it's act and it should be priority one and accelerated. Not in decades time.. Beautify this city's core and you do it for your residents first and foremost. Shouldn't need a major sporting event to be thinking about this. There's been talk about this since the early 80s.

I never understood the mindset here. It's like a lot of people here are just satisfied with existing in a town with barely adequate functionality and nothing more. Core beautification is essential. Sorry, some need to travel a bit more and raise their standards a bit. Proper snow removal ,landscaping in the summer and less tacky business signage could also do wonders for the city as a whole. Enough of the mediocrity...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top