The Clancey | 103.02m | 28s | Wexford Developments | DIALOG

[erudyk_29]

I will add Calgary often see’s volatility while Edmonton tends to just be more constant and measured, forgoing the large swings Calgary is prone to.

This is likely due to Calgary's oil dependency. Not that Edmonton doesn't have it as well, but as the capital, we have important institutions that provide greater economic stability in times when oil prices are unfavorable (like the provincial government and the U of A). Things that Calgary doesn't have, leaving them more vulnerable to changing oil prices. So when things are good for Calgary and the Alberta oil industry, Calgary does very well, Edmonton does slightly less well. Likewise when things go bad in the oil industry, things get worse in Calgary than in Edmonton.

 

[erudyk_29]

There are a number of false narratives that continue to exist. Yes we have dispersed employment centres but Dt remains a major if not the largest employment area of the region.

100% agreed, I think that the perception of downtown as place full of crime and homelessness makes people think that it is generally a very deserted and declining area with little employment options. The truth is though that actually if you come to downtown when people are around (i.e. work time during the summer and warmer months) it's very much a bustling area with a lot of people working in the offices and such. During the winter and late at night it becomes very different however. Sometimes people think we have an LA style of development where downtown is not really a very important part of the city outside of city government and some big office towers. Downtown (and I would lump Strathcona in here too) is the cultural, political, geographical and employment center of the city and region.

 

[Greenspace]

Regardless of all the comments here about the state of Downtown good or bad or perception or otherwise, the main reason projects like this aren't going ahead is the numbers don't work. They can't reconcile the cost of construction with rents they'll get. Which is why to get any projects moving the City may need to step in to incentivize, per the discussion October 31 at Urban Planning Committee.

 

[Yeggy]

Regardless of all the comments here about the state of Downtown good or bad or perception or otherwise, the main reason projects like this aren't going ahead is the numbers don't work. They can't reconcile the cost of construction with rents they'll get. Which is why to get any projects moving the City may need to step in to incentivize, per the discussion October 31 at Urban Planning Committee.

I think thats overly naive/simplistic. Developers also engage in land speculation. More over the numbers may work just fine, but also may work BETTER in a different location.
An organization is going to throw is resources towards its best return. I feel this is why Edmonton has often best been served by local/regional developers.

 

[Greenspace]

I don't see my comment being contrary to what you just said given I'm having these conversations with some of these developers all the time. Your comments may very well be the situation in Wexford's case, just there is a notion in that they're leaving cause of the state of Downtown, which I'm not finding to be the case in any of my discussions. The numbers simply don't work. And the rents or demand aren't the much lower Downtown than elsewhere.

 

[Yeggy]

I don't see my comment being contrary to what you just said given I'm having these conversations with some of these developers all the time. Your comments may very well be the situation in Wexford's case, just there is a notion in that they're leaving cause of the state of Downtown, which I'm not finding to be the case in any of my discussions. The numbers simply don't work. And the rents or demand aren't the much lower Downtown than elsewhere.

I dont disagree with ya, I just dislike singular reasoning when there are various circles that need squaring. Given the interest rate environment atm, its not surprising to see cancelation after cancelation.

A lot also depends if an organization wants to build then operate or build just to sell.

But you clearly have a finger on all this and know the pulse yourself.

 

[northlands]

I think you are grossly mistaken. Pre pandemic there were over 90,000 jobs dt with Nearly 75% of people working in the core coming by car as a driver or passenger.

Last time i was involved in the communities of oliver/dt a number of people moved in and out of the core equivalent to that of over 2 x the population of Devon.

There are a number of false narratives that continue to exist. Yes we have dispersed employment centres but Dt remains a major if not the largest employment area of the region.View attachment 523252
From the EMRB

My take away from that (absolutely horrifically bad) chart: Downtown Edmonton's employment density is 38% of what it was 10 years ago.

Woof.

 

[Yeggy]

My take away from that (absolutely horrifically bad) chart: Downtown Edmonton's employment density is 38% of what it was 10 years ago.

Woof.

Please note the date year of 2021.

Also note.. that the pandemic most effected the core, and even given that fact it still is the largest employment centre in the region.

 

[Oilers99]

Please note the date year of 2021.

Also note.. that the pandemic most effected the core, and even given that fact it still is the largest employment centre in the region.

You are putting a lot of positive spin on Edmonton's employment distribution. I did not discuss homelessness or crime of downtown Edmonton. It remains a factor that are there are significant employment nodes throughout Edmonton that are not downtown. I am also not comparing to Calgary in any way. I have stated that due to a number of factors but not solely on downtown employment, it is difficult to make downtown projects work here. You can disagree all you want, but there are very few downtown developers.

 

[ys11]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[David A]

Current high interest interest rates and economic uncertainty (aka economic fundamentals) have led to a number of projects being put on hold or cancelled in cities throughout Canada and North America.

I realize news from elsewhere sometimes takes a while to get here, but lets not be too myopic, this is not unique to this site or our city. For instance, one of the largest projects in Toronto is recently bankrupt.

Iconic Toronto condo project placed into receivership due to $1.6B in unpaid debt​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/toronto-condo-1-bloor-mizrahi-1.7002651

 

[ChazYEG]

My take away from that (absolutely horrifically bad) chart: Downtown Edmonton's employment density is 38% of what it was 10 years ago.

As someone else pointed out, it's data from 2021, and it's averaged out. We were still in the thick of the pandemic, back then.
Base on the numbers regarding the workforce returning to DT over the last 2 years, I'd say out employment density DT is probably at around 70-75% of what it was 10 years ago. It's bad, but it's not THAT bad.

I also believe that this brings an opportunity to refocus the long-term goals of DT, from being primarily an employment destination, to being more residential/retail/entertainment focused.

 

[archited]

I also believe that this brings an opportunity to refocus the long-term goals of DT, from being primarily an employment destination, to being more residential/retail/entertainment focused.

And a post-secondary build-out. Offices never were a good fit for downtown activation -- 9 to 5 and then home to the suburbs. We don't need to discourage office structural build-out but neither should we obsess over it. Other avenues -- sports, entertainment, university fulfillment -- are better routes to pursue for a happy, healthy downtown. Office build-out will come as a secondary or tertiary happenstance without focusing on it as a primary need.

 

[Edmontonium]

Imho as my visiting friends from Europe summed it up "something is missing" in downtown. It is hard to point exactly at one thing. I believe it needs to be safe, green, accessible. Not sure about the first one but some positive dev to mention for the other two: new park, legislation grounds redevelopment (hope they will keep the fountain), valley line LRT. On a bad side: people who decided to keep admin building blocking the most beautiful building in the city from riverside are farmers at best or just idiots. People who can't imagine city having gondolas are one of the two and so on. So Ian is right that most problems start with thinking.. although I believe that eventually the city will turn out just fine, river will always be here, water etc. and thinking will gradually change.

 

[David A]

And a post-secondary build-out. Offices never were a good fit for downtown activation -- 9 to 5 and then home to the suburbs. We don't need to discourage office structural build-out but neither should we obsess over it. Other avenues -- sports, entertainment, university fulfillment -- are better routes to pursue for a happy, healthy downtown. Office build-out will come as a secondary or tertiary happenstance without focusing on it as a primary need.

Yes. I believe it would be much easier to repurpose some of the currently surplus office and commercial space for post secondary, rather than residential use.

Compared to many other cities, we do have a lot of empty lots in or near the downtown core, that and the empty office, commercial/retail space is what I feel mostly leads to the feeling "something is missing". I believe as we continue to fill in the empty lots, with mostly new residential and office/retail continues to recover from COVID, it will begin to feel less like something is missing.

As for sports and entertainment, ICE district and the arena already also helps to bring people downtown regularly at times it is not as busy. I feel we are generally on the right track, but it will take time and continued effort to improve.