Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 249

Thread: Downtown Parks - to build, what to build, why build...

  1. #1
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,508

    Default Downtown Parks - to build, what to build, why build...

    No need to worry missing green space there and there is a few green space in downtown where people should be happy with.

    {ADMIN EDIT This topic is a split from the procura tower thread http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/showt...Proposed/page8}
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  2. #2
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jagators63 View Post
    No need to worry missing green space there and there is a few green space in downtown where people should be happy with.
    Absolutely wrong perspective.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  3. #3
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,508

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jagators63 View Post
    No need to worry missing green space there and there is a few green space in downtown where people should be happy with.
    Absolutely wrong perspective.
    Ok fine, I just hands off
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jagators63 View Post
    No need to worry missing green space there and there is a few green space in downtown where people should be happy with.
    Absolutely wrong perspective.
    Apparently the proper perspective is that the rest of the city will end up paying for more green space downtown based on the concept of "what's good for downtown is good for the city. We'll just shuffle some funds from the parks budget from an outlying neighbourhood to pay for it. Downtown parks good, neighbourhood parks bad"

  5. #5
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    ^Downtown has a lack of park/green space vis a vis other neighbourhoods. Hence why we are working on the new central park.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  6. #6

    Default

    Is that park by where Jasper House was to be built still a go?

  7. #7

    Default

    This green space was always temporary so I do not lament the loss as much as some others. However, always hate the loss of trees in downtown. I also do not think this space was used that much especially when you consider you have the river valley right next door and now easier to reach more than ever. How fantastic would it not be to extend the number of rooms in that hotel in a prime access site to the river valley and to the convention centre.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmontonsKindaGuy View Post
    Is that park by where Jasper House was to be built still a go?
    No...but close by...

  9. #9

    Default

    I don't know anything about trees, but is it feasible to relocate big trees presently there?

  10. #10
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,603

    Default

    ^The bigger the tree the more risky it is to move it. It takes years of preparation pruning the branches and the roots to adapt the tree to a smaller footprint so it is manageable and then when it is relocated it takes years to recover. Great expense for very little benefits.
    Edit. Coniferous evergreen trees are particularly hard to transplant as it is difficult to prune them in a manner that will not destroy their development.
    Last edited by Glenco; 21-03-2018 at 12:54 PM.
    ďCanada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,Ē-Marshall McLuhan

  11. #11

    Default

    It's a privately piece of held land. Yea parks are great, but the river valley is literally 1 minute walk away...with a funicular to boot.

    Should the city step in and buy this park? No. I would hope my tax money doesn't go towards that.

    Let's just hope Procura and co. will come up with a pleasing design. But let's just be glad the Hotel Mac annex doesn't exist today and I can be sure that this proposal will be 100x better than what was there before.

  12. #12
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    The river valley is not the same as an urban park.

    The City did try to work out a deal for purchase or land swap, to no avail.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The river valley is not the same as an urban park.

    The City did try to work out a deal for purchase or land swap, to no avail.
    Calling you out on this. How is it different? Your comment just reinforce my belief that we are too spoiled in this society.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  14. #14
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctzn-Ed View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The river valley is not the same as an urban park.

    The City did try to work out a deal for purchase or land swap, to no avail.
    Calling you out on this. How is it different? Your comment just reinforce my belief that we are too spoiled in this society.
    The river valley serves a purpose, but having urban green space for residents, workers, visitors, etc. mixed amongst the 'concrete jungle' is not only needed, but critical for urban living.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The river valley is not the same as an urban park.

    The City did try to work out a deal for purchase or land swap, to no avail.
    Yes, but there are also already a number of existing parks downtown outside of the river valley too and more planned to be added on 105, 106 and 107 Streets downtown. Successful downtowns thrive by increasing density, mostly by building on empty lots, not by turning most of those parking lots into parks.

  16. #16
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    Density does not work without amenity placed throughout.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  17. #17

    Default

    ^^^^
    In this case that concrete jungle is a 3 minute walk down for me at age 48. If your average walkable person cannot make this simple effort, im not willing to have my tax dollars wasted on the lazy population either. For those with mobility issues, the funnicular is there. If we are wasting money on parks, give me that beach that has already formed thanks to our new bridge.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  18. #18
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,620

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Density does not work without amenity placed throughout.
    A strong, healthy and sustainable 'community' needs a mix of uses, proper density, good urban design and public spaces and amenities (plazas, parks, etc.).

  19. #19

    Default

    At lest the annex didn't block the view of the hotel except on one short side. This will literally be in the Hotel Mac's front yard.

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    ^Downtown has a lack of park/green space vis a vis other neighbourhoods. Hence why we are working on the new central park.
    Louise McKinney Park is 12.9 hectares (32 acres). Also, Churchill Square used to have grass and trees but millions have been spent to remove it. Downtown still has the use of the square. You can't blame the rest of the city that you prefer a paved surface. There's also Alex Decoteau Park, 0.35 ha (0.86 acres). And the Legislature grounds that you have called "my backyard".

    Do you want the paved squares or do you want green space?

  20. #20

    Default

    When density comes, that is when you built. I would assume the city has viable land already? As per right now, we are going crazy with downtown parks when the population is not even there yet. The notion of a concrete jungle also has me scratching my head a little. We just built a concrete park on 105st so we can avoid a concrete jungle?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  21. #21

    Default

    There is a saying, "if a tree falls in the wood and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" This phrase can be applied to parks, like this: "there is park in the city but no one uses it, is it still a park?"
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  22. #22
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,766

    Default

    We've known this parcel wasn't public and the possibility of something like this happening - so not going to waste time fretting about it.
    ... gobsmacked

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasH View Post
    There is a saying, "if a tree falls in the wood and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" This phrase can be applied to parks, like this: "there is park in the city but no one uses it, is it still a park?"
    Maybe in addition to the term urban park, we could label some parks, "placeholder" parks because that is what this one really was. There was a large empty space when they tore down the Mac box and no one was in a hurry to build anything there for decades. It looks quite nice and was improved over the years, as I am sure the hotel did not want an empty gravel lot in front of it, but it was there more because of circumstance rather than intent. There are a few such other spaces downtown too, not every park is permanent or there because of citizen demand.

  24. #24

    Default

    There's also the Telus pocket park half a block away.

    Granted, the Procura Park is probably the nicest looking one in the downtown...Flower beds and mature trees. Only other place I can think of is the Legislature. Beaver Hills has the largest potential but nowadays just looks like an abandoned child.

    Also maybe the design can incorporate a small pocket park. wins across the board.

  25. #25
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Iíd hate to lose that park but ultimately itís private land and it is their right to do with it as they please. A compromise may be the city offering a land swap with equal valued land and taking over the park.

    Iím okay with a development, but Iíd also not like seeing the Mac get hidden away from our most prominent avenue.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The river valley is not the same as an urban park.

    The City did try to work out a deal for purchase or land swap, to no avail.
    Yes, but there are also already a number of existing parks downtown outside of the river valley too and more planned to be added on 105, 106 and 107 Streets downtown. Successful downtowns thrive by increasing density, mostly by building on empty lots, not by turning most of those parking lots into parks.
    In my opinion there are not nearly enough parks downtown. The river valley does not count because it's in a deep valley, which is not convenient in any way and the parks at the bottom of that valley are not within a quick walk for most of downtown.
    Last edited by Vincent; 21-03-2018 at 06:50 PM.

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Do you want the paved squares or do you want green space?
    We need both. Churchill square has always been a gathering place for large crowds during festivals. Grass just doesn't work there, hence why it was never considered a park.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The river valley is not the same as an urban park.

    The City did try to work out a deal for purchase or land swap, to no avail.
    Yes, but there are also already a number of existing parks downtown outside of the river valley too and more planned to be added on 105, 106 and 107 Streets downtown. Successful downtowns thrive by increasing density, mostly by building on empty lots, not by turning most of those parking lots into parks.
    In my opinion there are not nearly enough parks downtown. The river valley does not count because it's in a deep valley, which is not convenient in any way and the parks at the bottom of that valley are not within a quick walk for most of downtown.
    If only there was one or two mechanical methods of getting into the valley. Like an inclined elevator inside some sort of convention centre or a funicular recently opened next to a signature downtown hotel.

    Or even stairs at both locations.

    Did the recent Red Bull Crashed Ice event realize they were so far out of downtown that it wasn't convenient?

  29. #29

    Default

    Oh look, IanO just posted this in the Edmonton Photo thread with the comment "I love my hood". More green space. Fancy that.


  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Oh look, IanO just posted this in the Edmonton Photo thread with the comment "I love my hood". More green space. Fancy that.

    That's nice it has apparently been recently and officially discovered. Apparently there was a shortage of downtown parks earlier today. Oh but maybe this one doesn't count as an urban park because its to close to the river bank.

  31. #31
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    That is across from my house and a wonderful 'front-yard' for us.

    If you go to Paris, Van, Toronto, NYC, Tokyo the best parts are the wonderful little parks everywhere.

    Edmonton needs more central, urban, green, spaces.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  32. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    That is across from my house and a wonderful 'front-yard' for us.

    If you go to Paris, Van, Toronto, NYC, Tokyo the best parts are the wonderful little parks everywhere.

    Edmonton needs more central, urban, green, spaces.
    Only so much of a budget for parks, unless you want your taxes to increase. I suppose a "modest proposal" is we could sell off some of the huge space of river valley land that some people turn their noses up at and don't seem to use much and use that money to buy up lots downtown and put more parks in there.

  33. #33
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    If downtown is to become a place with a better quality of life for its residents (and more attractive to developers), there must be more emphasis on park spaces in closer proximity to where people live.

    Of course the valley is iconic and a natural gift to central Edmonton, but for those of us living north of Jasper ave, itís just too far for a quick walk with a dog or to hang out at for a lunch break. Properly integrated community parks that mature over decades do a huge service for a marginal capital cost in comparison to most civic projects.

    It was something that really stood out to me about my favourite city Buenos Aires. Every district had a park or plaza space for the community to gather. People would tango, create art, kids were playing in the playgrounds. Then I came back to Edmonton and realized how severely crippled our the fabric of the core actually is. If itís to improve fast and soon, parks offer a great catalyst at a small price.

  34. #34

    Default

    So the city should provide parks to everyone that are close enough for a quick walk with the dog and a quick lunch at work? Everywhere or just for the privileged few downtown? What about the people that work in industrial areas? Do they deserve a park within a quick walk for their lunch?

    Churchill Square doesn't count, not enough green. Beaver Hills doesn't count, not central enough. Louise McKinney doesn't count, too far.

    Etc, etc, etc.

  35. #35
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Valid opinion. However, in comparison to other cities we do lack these spaces. And considering how much tax revenue the city generates out of the core, it is in everyoneís interest to see downtown flourish and grow. Park spaces can do that for a relatively reasonable amount of investment. And they can quickly become a cash positive venture if they attract a developer or two to a location.

    For me, I live in the warehouse district, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. That said, my philosophy on what makes a healthy and productive downtown has been created by going to a bunch of different cities, seeing what actually works and doesnít work, what attracts people/businesses, and what makes me (a tourist) spend thousands of dollars to go look at their downtowns.

    I agree with Ian, having park spaces strategically integrated throughout a downtown can promote development and help make the place more liveable and loveable. And Iím willing to see my already high taxes increase to make it happen. But thatís just my two cents.

  36. #36
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    This reminds me how we are still very much going through puberty as a city. Awkward, unsure, questioning, naive, exploratory.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  37. #37
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Which is fine. I love to see the debate on the pros and cons of how tax dollars are used. Thereís a great deal of knowledge on this site from all different walks of life and so long as the debate is kept tasteful and professional then Iíll be happy to engage and discuss.

  38. #38
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    Paris

    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  39. #39

    Default

    So now downtown deserves a carousel? And a creek with a bridge?

    What is the cost of land downtown as opposed to in the outlying neighbourhoods? And how much park can you buy in each location for the same money?

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    So now downtown deserves a carousel? And a creek with a bridge?

    What is the cost of land downtown as opposed to in the outlying neighbourhoods? And how much park can you buy in each location for the same money?
    Well of course, a carousel to go with the gondola! We'll just spend, spend, spend until daddy takes the credit card away.

    Isn't that city the capital of a country with abundant resources but a reknown financial mess? At least they have a nice carousel. Hope calling them a financial mess is not considered distasteful, wouldn't want to offend anyone by pointing out harsh reality.

  41. #41

    Default

    Here is my solution for the park and visibility of the Hotel McD... have the city work with developer where they built a skeleton form up to the peak of the Hotel. Built columns and horizontal beams without floor slabs; every 3 or 4 floors attach a walk path along the horizontal beams then wrap that with all glazings. Inside would be a park/ flower garden with some bigger exotic trees. In compensation to this, the city grants them the extended height to recover the area lost. This is a win win for all including size queens lol.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmontonsKindaGuy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Met with Stantec briefly on this yesterday. Not much to report yet, very early stages.
    Likely hood of this moving forward...30...50%? Or is it too early to even make that guess?
    The rezoning is certainly moving ahead, there should be more details in the coming months. If they did build, guessing it wouldn't be until late 2019 or early 2020.

    Slim tower on 2-storey podium. Current access to Fairmont to be maintained and probably shared or improved somewhat. Will still be an open space, plaza or parklet of some sort.

    Robbie Burns sculpture will be moved, but not too far from Hotel Mac, as they've hosted a Robbie Burns celebration for over 95 years.
    Thanks for the update GreenSPACE. Much appreciated.

  43. #43
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    So now downtown deserves a carousel? And a creek with a bridge?

    What is the cost of land downtown as opposed to in the outlying neighbourhoods? And how much park can you buy in each location for the same money?
    The intent of the photo was to show what is needed for urban living. Green space, open space, greenery, places to socialize etc. These are absolutely critical to living in density.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  44. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    If downtown is to become a place with a better quality of life for its residents (and more attractive to developers), there must be more emphasis on park spaces in closer proximity to where people live.
    Looks like that's already well-covered, as Downtown seems pretty well-served when it comes to park access.



    https://www.edmonton.ca/city_governm...ort_Stage2.pdf

    (Apologies for the cut off snippet, wanted to get the legend & Downtown in while keeping it large.)
    Giving less of a damn than everÖ Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The intent of the photo was to show what is needed for urban living. Green space, open space, greenery, places to socialize etc. These are absolutely critical to living in density.
    You realize that Paris has been dealing with its own flight to the suburbs since WW2, right? Everything Paris has & does & is isn't enough to keep Parisians in their core.
    Giving less of a damn than everÖ Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  46. #46
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    Point being, we need more of, diversity of use and better quality public spaces in our Downtown.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Point being, we need more of, diversity of use and better quality public spaces in our Downtown.
    Perhaps diversity and better quality are as important or more important than quantity. It may not be so much that we need a lot more parks, but need to improve some of the existing ones, such as the Beaver Hills space. I think you are also right to refer to public spaces, rather than just parks. Its not just about grass and trees, although that is part of it. There are a lot of public spaces, but we have cut back on trees and grass in some of the downtown public spaces and maybe that doesn't work as well for people living there. We also have a four seasons climate here, so comparing to cities with a somewhat different climate may not be the best comparison.

  48. #48

    Default

    Amazing how you're a fiscal hawk when it comes to healthcare for all Albertans but are all systems go for spending on parks in the core. Parks which cost money to build, operate & maintain while simultaneously shrinking the tax rolls.

    If it's not the time to be spending to increase the level of healthcare for all Albertans it can't possibly be the time to be spending money on parks & public spaces.
    Giving less of a damn than everÖ Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  49. #49

    Default

    But it's for downtown so it's much, MUCH more important than people's heath or even their lives. IanO has said that "as goes your downtown, so goes your city" so if you spend money anywhere except downtown, you're actually harming the city. Everything must be downtown centric or you hate your city and want it to fail. Haven't you been paying attention?

    Just look at this from the DBA mission statement:

    Our role and mandate are to ensure that you focus on your Downtown business’s success, while we advocate on your behalf to make Downtown a more attractive place to be.

    http://www.edmontondowntown.com/abou...e-our-members/
    Nothing about the people. They're secondary if not tertiary. It's all about getting as much money from everyone else's pocket and putting into the pockets of the downtown businesses.

  50. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But it's for downtown so it's much, MUCH more important than people's heath or even their lives. IanO has said that "as goes your downtown, so goes your city" so if you spend money anywhere except downtown, you're actually harming the city. Everything must be downtown centric or you hate your city and want it to fail. Haven't you been paying attention?

    Just look at this from the DBA mission statement:

    Our role and mandate are to ensure that you focus on your Downtown businessís success, while we advocate on your behalf to make Downtown a more attractive place to be.

    http://www.edmontondowntown.com/abou...e-our-members/
    Nothing about the people. They're secondary if not tertiary. It's all about getting as much money from everyone else's pocket and putting into the pockets of the downtown businesses.
    So now we're criticizing the Downtown Business Association for having a primary focus on downtown businesses? The pedantry in here is becoming nauseating.

    The news regarding this property is wonderful, and full of potential. This thread could be about proper execution, and coming up with a real win-win for all stakeholders, yet once again, it's devolved into a ridiculous argument stemming from someone having the audacity to say that they would like to have parks in their neighbourhood. Why exactly is this so controversial?

  51. #51
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    11,011

    Default

    This site is less than one block away from the River Valley and two blocks away from Churchill Square. It’s also close to Rice Howard Way and many other public spaces.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  52. #52
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    ...and yet provides a very important and different experience to all of those.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  53. #53
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    7,620

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Cat View Post
    This site is less than one block away from the River Valley and two blocks away from Churchill Square. It’s also close to Rice Howard Way and many other public spaces.
    Agreed. There's a variety of public amenities/open spaces within a 5 minute walk of this site. Case close imo.

  54. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But it's for downtown so it's much, MUCH more important than people's heath or even their lives. IanO has said that "as goes your downtown, so goes your city" so if you spend money anywhere except downtown, you're actually harming the city. Everything must be downtown centric or you hate your city and want it to fail. Haven't you been paying attention?

    Just look at this from the DBA mission statement:

    Our role and mandate are to ensure that you focus on your Downtown businessís success, while we advocate on your behalf to make Downtown a more attractive place to be.

    http://www.edmontondowntown.com/abou...e-our-members/
    Nothing about the people. They're secondary if not tertiary. It's all about getting as much money from everyone else's pocket and putting into the pockets of the downtown businesses.
    Why are you barking this at him? Take that to the politicians with those concerns. Ian is correct that parks are required downtown or any corner of the city. My belief is that build as needed. For this space, it is not poignant; so, please stick to the topic and stop this crap that has nothing to do with this site. You are taking your anger tone on someone who is discussing issues on this park. What does hospital have any matter in this? Our government allot fundings for parks, school, and so forth. How does park fundings take away any thing from the hospitals? PPPPffffffff!!!
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  55. #55

    Default

    I don't think it is a build it and hope they will come approach. I think the development of public spaces/amenities and increasing density downtown happens together. As more people live or work downtown, that increases the tax base of the area to support more amenities and improvements to existing public spaces so downtown then shouldn't be taking funds away from elsewhere. That would only happen if you put the cart before the horse so to speak.

    If the Procura developments can retain part of the existing park space and integrate well with them, that would be nice.

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    ...and yet provides a very important and different experience to all of those.
    Important? Howso?
    Giving less of a damn than everÖ Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  57. #57

    Default

    Telus park is half a block away.
    The CKUA park is a block away.
    The funicular is half a block away.
    The McDougall Hill promenade is a block away.
    Melcor park is 2 blocks away.
    Citadel indoor garden is 2 blocks away.
    Memorial Plaza sis 2.5 blocks away.
    Louise McKinley is 3 blocks away.

    I think we could afford to lose this park.

    Yes, I know the old saying...

    First they came for the parks
    Then they came for the gravel parking lots
    Finally they came for...came to visit a vibrant and built out Jasper Avenue?

  58. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whattagame View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But it's for downtown so it's much, MUCH more important than people's heath or even their lives. IanO has said that "as goes your downtown, so goes your city" so if you spend money anywhere except downtown, you're actually harming the city. Everything must be downtown centric or you hate your city and want it to fail. Haven't you been paying attention?

    Just look at this from the DBA mission statement:

    Our role and mandate are to ensure that you focus on your Downtown business’s success, while we advocate on your behalf to make Downtown a more attractive place to be.

    http://www.edmontondowntown.com/abou...e-our-members/
    Nothing about the people. They're secondary if not tertiary. It's all about getting as much money from everyone else's pocket and putting into the pockets of the downtown businesses.
    So now we're criticizing the Downtown Business Association for having a primary focus on downtown businesses? The pedantry in here is becoming nauseating.

    The news regarding this property is wonderful, and full of potential. This thread could be about proper execution, and coming up with a real win-win for all stakeholders, yet once again, it's devolved into a ridiculous argument stemming from someone having the audacity to say that they would like to have parks in their neighbourhood. Why exactly is this so controversial?
    because this is the same organization that is lobbying the provincial government to cancel or delay the new super lab because, depending on which day it is, it will move the current downtown lab out of a building that it's not suited to or it'll cost too much money.

    The executive director of this same group is also calling for the city to spend millions of dollars on new downtown parks, partly to replace Paul Kane Park, that this would be built on.

    So the city and the province should not spend any money on a lab that will serve half the population of Alberta but it's imperative that new parks be built downtown immediately.

    Screw you and your sick kids, I want a place to eat my lunch.

  59. #59

    Default

    You think he makes this decission alone?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  60. #60

    Default

    Nope, but he does speak for them and I don't see anyone from the DBA stepping in to contradict him.

  61. #61

    Default

    Are you kidding with that statement. Have you ever heard of the title 'spokes person?" Do you interject and correct your boss on such matter?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    But it's for downtown so it's much, MUCH more important than people's heath or even their lives. IanO has said that "as goes your downtown, so goes your city" so if you spend money anywhere except downtown, you're actually harming the city. Everything must be downtown centric or you hate your city and want it to fail. Haven't you been paying attention?

    Just look at this from the DBA mission statement:

    Our role and mandate are to ensure that you focus on your Downtown business’s success, while we advocate on your behalf to make Downtown a more attractive place to be.

    http://www.edmontondowntown.com/abou...e-our-members/
    Nothing about the people. They're secondary if not tertiary. It's all about getting as much money from everyone else's pocket and putting into the pockets of the downtown businesses.
    Give me a break. Don't you have anything real to complain about?

  63. #63

    Default

    The property being discussed is not a park space. It has never been park space, and unless the city bites the bullet and pays proper market value for the property, it will never be a park space.

    I certainly do not want my city or provincial government spending money on this if we can't spend money on making healthcare better first

    Like how on bloody earth do you advocate for financial prudence on a healthcare project that is actually working to save Albertans money, but then come out and ask for monies to be spent on purchasing a privately owned property and turning it into public park space with public money when there is plenty of park space around...

    and some of us need to quit hiding behind our profession when its personal, and taking it personal when its professional.
    Last edited by Medwards; 22-03-2018 at 03:36 PM.

  64. #64

    Default

    Procura area doesn't need more greenspace. Plenty of stuff 1-2 blocks from there. To give perspective...I live in the north side, if I wanted to go to a "park" it is a 20 minute walk for me (unless you count my lawn which I want to turn into a concrete driveway). So...why is 5 minutes a problem for those of you downtown?

    I propose developers should now be forced via City By-laws to include sunroom/inner garden/rooftop garden so those that wish to live downtown, can have a greenspace. You can pay for it via your condo fees and not force the rest of Edmonton to pay for lifestyle.

    Now...for those that work downtown and want to enjoy your lunch outdoors in a greenspace, I support the idea of sprucing up current park / open areas. And I would really like some water fountains at these park/greenspace.


  65. #65
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Meo do you understand how much of my property taxes already go to your sewers and schools?

  66. #66
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,766

    Default

    That corner could be a park?

    Seriously?

    A flower bed maybe.

    DT has too few parks? Jeez Louise. You want concrete jungles go to those not-at-all-world-class cities like, oh Vancouver (outside Stanley Park), Calgary, San Francisco.

    Indeed, outside Central Park that dreery hicksville called, what-is-it-again? Oh yeah, NYC has but pocket parks here and there. And no, the High Line is NOT DT NYC.

    Yeah, I'll miss the grand view of the Hotel Mac, but DT Edmonton does NOT lack for parks and public spaces.
    ... gobsmacked

  67. #67

    Default

    "Edmonton developer seeks to turn Frank Oliver Park into residential tower"
    http://www.metronews.ca/news/edmonto...ial-tower.html

    "Why Some Edmonton Parks Are on the Chopping BlockFRANK OLIVER PARK IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL MACDONALD IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY POSING AS A PUBLIC SPACE.
    http://www.theyardsyeg.ca/parks-for-sale

    "Tall tower could go up next to historic Edmonton Hotel Macdonald
    In a joint venture, ProCura and Great Gulf propose to build a mixed-use tower up to 55 storeys high on the privately owned lot to the north of the hotel, which is now Frank Oliver Park."
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...nton-1.4583599


  68. #68

    Default

    ^^^No...but I'm sure a chunk of my property tax goes towards downtown revitalization.

    I'm done school now and I'm childless, if you want to complain about paying for schools (don't direct that at me). BTW, I'm not against paying taxes (social programs, roads, school, etc). But no...I don't want to pay for some park downtown because the river valley isn't good enough cause it's 2 blocks away.

  69. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    Meo do you understand how much of my property taxes already go to your sewers and schools?
    Everyones sewers and schools....

  70. #70
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    And everyoneís parks as well itís only natural for downtowns to evolve and build plazas, parks, and places of gathering. And itís in the interests of the common good that downtown become a more attractive option for yuppies and businesses to live. Considering the amount of tax revenue that comes out of a core, the healthier it is, the less people have to pay for their sewers in the burbs.

    Weíre all one community which is sometimes easy to forget sometimes.

  71. #71
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,568

    Default

    Are you confusing your taxes with the property taxes paid by large commercial developments?

  72. #72
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Are you confusing your taxes with the property taxes paid by large commercial developments?
    Nope, I'm speaking of my own assessment as well as the large commercial developments you speak of. I'm talking about the community as a sum being a major revenue generator for the city.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  73. #73
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Are you confusing your taxes with the property taxes paid by large commercial developments?
    To be fair, large commercial developments benefit from functional park systems too. Although faceless corporations pay much of the tax base, they employ people with faces who enjoy parks during and after work. Obviously intangibles like this are a bit harder to quantify, but to ignore them is antiquated design with less desirable leaseable space.

  74. #74
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nick5150 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SP59 View Post
    Are you confusing your taxes with the property taxes paid by large commercial developments?
    To be fair, large commercial developments benefit from functional park systems too. Although faceless corporations pay much of the tax base, they employ people with faces who enjoy parks during and after work. Obviously intangibles like this are a bit harder to quantify, but to ignore them is antiquated design with less desirable leaseable space.
    Ergo, an attractive downtown core is more than just the selfish desires of us residents. It is my opinion that park-space is the best, most affordable catalyst for developments to encompass. Not to mention that as you said, making downtown more attractive for businesses is also good for the entire city.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  75. #75

    Default

    Exactly. Businesses are made up of people, not robots. And most of those people who work downtown actually live in the burbs, so the argument against using city wide tax dollars to spend downtown is short sighted.

    Not that this private development has anything to do with tax dollars, but whatever. Somehow this is what this thread has turned into.

  76. #76

    Default

    By that same argument though, where's the public park space for people that work in the industrial areas? Or do they not count?

    IanO is using the possible loss of the greenspace as a reason that a new park should be constructed nearby. If it's not actually a park, dispite the name Frank Oliver Park, then it's not up to the city to replace it. If a tower goes up on the SE corner of 102 street and Jasper, is it up to the city to replace that as well?

    If it's private property that's being used, then let the businesses buy and maintain a new park for their employees. With the River Valley close by, Churchill Square and the space in front of City Hall (they really should just remove the road between them and make it one actual space.), Beaver Hills, the Legislature and Alex Decoteau Park, the people that work downtown have access to a lot more recreational space than most workers in the city.

  77. #77
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,539

    Default

    Iíd challenge that an industrial zone has amenities that the core doesnít which makes them appealing for businesses to situate on campuses. They are more cost effective, tend to have easy access, cheaper taxes, and tend to develop near transportation corridors making them automobile convenient. Iíll admit that if I lived anywhere BUT downtown, that Iíd prefer working in one over working downtown.

    Which is why itís a good idea to make downtown a more attractive upscale option for businesses to migrate to. Companies and residents may be more inclined to pay the higher costs of living and working downtown if they had more perks to go with it.

    Thatís just my opinion.

  78. #78

    Default

    The difference is industrial sites don't have people living there.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  79. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    I’d challenge that an industrial zone has amenities that the core doesn’t which makes them appealing for businesses to situate on campuses. They are more cost effective, tend to have easy access, cheaper taxes, and tend to develop near transportation corridors making them automobile convenient. I’ll admit that if I lived anywhere BUT downtown, that I’d prefer working in one over working downtown.

    Which is why it’s a good idea to make downtown a more attractive upscale option for businesses to migrate to. Companies and residents may be more inclined to pay the higher costs of living and working downtown if they had more perks to go with it.

    That’s just my opinion.
    The problem is, the tower workers go to food courts. The few that bring baggies will eat outside. While parks are important for physical, mental, and spiritual health, we can't have 5 or six parks within a very small paradigm. I hear comparisons of Tokyo, Hong Kong and so forth. I was in those cities 3 time last year; the difference is they do not have places like Hawrelak park or Rundle park; they do not have the river valley park system - 20 times the size of Central Park. They don't have the school FIELDS we have, they don't have soccer fields like we have. Tokyo has 30 million people, and their cities are inter connected hence the small pocket parks. Hong Kong has no land and squeeze 8/9 million into the size of Man Hatten hence Ian's fixation on that. We have a population of 900k in an area that fits the entire NYC's population. Build as we need, but dont built to clutter either as that is bad energy. There has to he a balance and this spot would just add more park clutter to the paradigm. We are NOWHERE near Tokyo or Hong Kong's level and our population dont all reside in highrises like the two above cities.
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 22-03-2018 at 08:15 PM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  80. #80
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    358

    Default

    from the study noodle cited... (https://www.edmonton.ca/city_governm...ort_Stage2.pdf page 27), the downtown core has the least amount of parkland/open space per capita in the city. . Add to this that suburbanites quite often have large back yards vs downtown dwellers, why be so mean spirited with this issue? in fact the data shows that the industrial north and south sectors have 30 to 40 TIMES the per capita parkland/open space. (that's for kkozoriz)
    Last edited by buildings; 22-03-2018 at 09:41 PM.

  81. #81
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    By that same argument though, where's the public park space for people that work in the industrial areas? Or do they not count?

    IanO is using the possible loss of the greenspace as a reason that a new park should be constructed nearby. If it's not actually a park, dispite the name Frank Oliver Park, then it's not up to the city to replace it. If a tower goes up on the SE corner of 102 street and Jasper, is it up to the city to replace that as well?

    If it's private property that's being used, then let the businesses buy and maintain a new park for their employees. With the River Valley close by, Churchill Square and the space in front of City Hall (they really should just remove the road between them and make it one actual space.), Beaver Hills, the Legislature and Alex Decoteau Park, the people that work downtown have access to a lot more recreational space than most workers in the city.
    Ian's job is to be an advocate for Downtown - not sure why that is so hard to understand. Is it so far fetched that he would put forward arguments that support his position?


    I think a podium-less tower here would actually be perfect, since it would maintain a partial view corridor to Hotel Mac. A tall tower works well here.

  82. #82

    Default

    As long as you ignore the fact that the river valley parks are literally right there. You can stand on Jasper ave in places and look down on them. Churchill square used to be a park but people wanted a paved square. Oh, and now we want a park to replace the park that we wanted replaced. Sorry, you decided that a paved square better suited your needs.

    When people are talking about the benefits of living downtown, you'll hear them talk about the rive valley, the leg grounds, Churchill Square. But when they want another park, suddenly none of that counts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    Companies and residents may be more inclined to pay the higher costs of living and working downtown if they had more perks to go with it.


    That’s just my opinion.
    You mean amenities besides these, all within walking distance? The library, the Citadel, the Winspear, the Art Gallery, the new museum, a shopping centre that actually used to be two shopping centres, the arena, the new Oilers plaza that's coming up, the crossroads of the entire LRT system, the river valley, the legislature grounds with the new plaza and the YMCA.

    You mean other than amenities like that? Most people don't live nearly as close to even one attraction that comes close to those downtown. But downtown is suffering from a last of amenities. Right.

    Also, a lot of the so called "parkland" in the outlying neighbourhoods is actually connected to schools. How many schools downtown?
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 22-03-2018 at 10:52 PM.

  83. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    As long as you ignore the fact that the river valley parks are literally right there. You can stand on Jasper ave in places and look down on them. Churchill square used to be a park but people wanted a paved square. Oh, and now we want a park to replace the park that we wanted replaced. Sorry, you decided that a paved square better suited your needs.

    When people are talking about the benefits of living downtown, you'll hear them talk about the rive valley, the leg grounds, Churchill Square. But when they want another park, suddenly none of that counts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    Companies and residents may be more inclined to pay the higher costs of living and working downtown if they had more perks to go with it.


    That’s just my opinion.
    You mean amenities besides these, all within walking distance? The library, the Citadel, the Winspear, the Art Gallery, the new museum, a shopping centre that actually used to be two shopping centres, the arena, the new Oilers plaza that's coming up, the crossroads of the entire LRT system, the river valley, the legislature grounds with the new plaza and the YMCA.

    You mean other than amenities like that? Most people don't live nearly as close to even one attraction that comes close to those downtown. But downtown is suffering from a last of amenities. Right.

    Also, a lot of the so called "parkland" in the outlying neighbourhoods is actually connected to schools. How many schools downtown?
    You don't know what fact is. I didn't realize Ian had so much power where he could "FORCE" the Lab to stay downtown. Would this be like you forcing us to be compassionate to your loving family member who chose a drug addicting lifestyle and that our money should be allocated to helping he or she; then you turn around and call addicted gamblers losers on the WEM forum during the discussion of their casino Reno. Not only are you a HYPOCRITE, you are so much more... but i'll refrain from being a low class.
    Last edited by ctzn-Ed; 23-03-2018 at 12:24 PM.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  84. #84

    Default

    Where did I say that Ian was trying to "force" the lab to stay downtown? He's lobbying against it. It's not like he's in the Legislature holding a gun on the health minister.

    He'd rather see the lab cancelled than move it out of downtown. Despite the fact that the DBA has literally years yo line up replacement tenants for the current lab location, he's spoken out against it. And since the DBA is funded by every business downtown, regardless of whether they want to or not, they too are working against the new lab.

    Was there a vote by the membership about this or is it simply the executive deciding that Edmonton should not have a new, state of the art medical lab?

    They've got years to replace the lab. Get out there and actually try to bring in something more appropriate for the podium that the lab is currently in and stop fighting against something that will be a major improvement for the city, the region and the province.

    And I'd like to see the post where I called gamblers "losers". I did a search with my user name and the word losers and came up with no posts where I used that word. Unless the search function isn't working correctly, you've just made that up.

    So lying about someone makes you "high class" i'd imagine.

  85. #85

    Default

    Through you tone of usage. What does hospitals of the Lab have any association of this. It was mentioned to you multiple times that his job is to advocate for downtown; yet you continue to add rubbish to this conversation. I'll reiterate again for you... parks have allocated finance by the government like hospitals do. Do you get that! He has some reasoning, but not at this location imo.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  86. #86
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    ...

    And I'd like to see the post where I called gamblers "losers". I did a search with my user name and the word losers and came up with no posts where I used that word. Unless the search function isn't working correctly, you've just made that up.

    So lying about someone makes you "high class" i'd imagine.
    he wasn’t “lying”... he said “it would be like you saying”, not “you said”.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  87. #87

    Default

    Kkozoriz, I dont know the exact page, but it was under the WEM forum when we were discussing the renovation of the casinos -2 years ago? You stated, " gamblers are losers." I interjected immediately and expound that gambling is also addictive like drugs. I purposely mentioned that to you because you went on a rampage about your love one being an addict and should be looked at with compassion in the thread of the McDonald Lofts in which we talked about where those current tenmants would go when Katz purchased that building. Be careful how you speak as some remember the smallest word. I have no reason to lie or admonish anyone, but I will call out anyone who is not fair or civil with their self- serving interests.
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  88. #88

    Default

    I worked at the Mirage Hotel in Las Vegas for over a decade. If such a comment was made (search didn't turn anything up), it would be because casinos are built by the losers. i.e. - People that lose more money than they make. Casinos don't become successful by paying out more than they make. It would simply mean people that lose more than they win and not intended as a person slight on their character.

  89. #89

    Default

    The exact words were, "gamblers are losers." Tell me what that means then? Just end the crap charade and talk about the topic that we discuss at hand. Also, explain to me how and what the hospital and the Lab have any association with the discussion of the Procura's lot pertaining to a mix-used tower that some prefer it to be a park there?
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  90. #90

    Default

    The connection is that IanO was lamenting the loss of this greenspace and advocating that the city provide more downtown while, at the same time, saying that the lab should not be built because of costs (a change from his original premise that it was about keeping the lab downtown).

    This park, despite the fact that it's called Frank Oliver Park is private space and the city should not be responsible for replacing the lost green space.

  91. #91

    Default

    Oh look, another derailed thread. Some of you guys are hopeless

  92. #92
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,231

    Default

    Please. Unless they're installing a casino in this Procura tower or they're planning to move the super lab there, this is totally off topic.

  93. #93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    The connection is that IanO was lamenting the loss of this greenspace and advocating that the city provide more downtown while, at the same time, saying that the lab should not be built because of costs (a change from his original premise that it was about keeping the lab downtown).

    This park, despite the fact that it's called Frank Oliver Park is private space and the city should not be responsible for replacing the lost green space.
    He is not entitle to an opinion, but you are entitled to bring topics not associated into this aspect of the thread in an attempt to embarrass and assassinate his character? Wow! (removed personal attack). Get back to this topic at hand!

    Now, if we want the hotel to be visible, we should contact them and ask to see how they could incorporate the design to accommodate that. The juxtaposition of old and new could really compliment and enhance each other imo.
    Last edited by Admin; 25-03-2018 at 07:57 PM. Reason: removed personal attack
    " The strength of a man is in the stride he walks."

  94. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buildings View Post
    from the study noodle cited... (https://www.edmonton.ca/city_governm...ort_Stage2.pdf page 27), the downtown core has the least amount of parkland/open space per capita in the city. . Add to this that suburbanites quite often have large back yards vs downtown dwellers, why be so mean spirited with this issue? in fact the data shows that the industrial north and south sectors have 30 to 40 TIMES the per capita parkland/open space. (that's for kkozoriz)
    If open space is a farmers field that is only there because it hasn't been developed yet, is it adding to quality of the area. We already have a lot of parkland that is not well utilized by the admission of those that want more, adding more quantity isn't necessarily going to solve what is a quality problem. We could build 12 more Churchill Squares downtown and that would not make anyone happy.

  95. #95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by buildings View Post
    from the study noodle cited... (https://www.edmonton.ca/city_governm...ort_Stage2.pdf page 27), the downtown core has the least amount of parkland/open space per capita in the city. . Add to this that suburbanites quite often have large back yards vs downtown dwellers, why be so mean spirited with this issue? in fact the data shows that the industrial north and south sectors have 30 to 40 TIMES the per capita parkland/open space. (that's for kkozoriz)
    If open space is a farmers field that is only there because it hasn't been developed yet, is it adding to quality of the area. We already have a lot of parkland that is not well utilized by the admission of those that want more, adding more quantity isn't necessarily going to solve what is a quality problem. We could build 12 more Churchill Squares downtown and that would not make anyone happy.

    Agree Completely. There are too many parks in Edmonton in general that are an empty field and a parking lot. Although these parks have their own merits, there needs to be more parks in downtown which have stuff like basketball courts, tennis, volleyball, usable picnic space (with barbecues maybe), playgrounds and fenced off dog parks as well as community gardens. Aesthetically pleasing parks are nice to have a quick lunch in, but in order for parks to be sticky and have people using them throughout the day (and not an area to be avoided after dark), these amenities are needed imo.

    For this site specifically, if the has a great design and tried to keep the hotel as visible as possible, and maybe provide some park like services like benches and trees around the site, I would be in support of this development.

  96. #96
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    'There needs to be more parks in downtown which have stuff like basketball courts, tennis, volleyball, usable picnic space (with barbecues maybe), playgrounds and fenced off dog parks as well as community gardens.'

    Bingo.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  97. #97
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    'There needs to be more parks in downtown which have stuff like basketball courts, tennis, volleyball, usable picnic space (with barbecues maybe), playgrounds and fenced off dog parks as well as community gardens.'

    Bingo.
    Not in my downtown. I like it downtown-urban without suburban living. Parks are all that is required and those are for office workers as much as highrise dwellers. I tell my young friends to move to the suburbs if you want amenities like IanO is pandering for.

  98. #98

    Default

    Procura site definitely isn't capable of this outdoor rec centre + BBQ park.

    And do people really think an outdoor rec centre with basketball court/volleyball court/tennis court is a good/great idea? Basketball courts are usually found in association with school parks. Tennis/basketball/volleyball court, these will only be used about 4 months out of the whole year (minus the cold/snowy/rainy days).
    Last edited by Meo; 26-03-2018 at 04:11 PM.

  99. #99

    Default

    I agree that this park may not be needed and that it may not be the best place for the amenities I listed above. I also think that downtown doesn't necessarily need more park space, especially when the proposed 3 block park near the boston pizza is built, but I do think there needs to be an increases in usages of these parks. Services such as sports amenities and recreation opportunities, especially on a small scale, are not exclusive to a suburb, and should be implemented in downtown especially the west side where there are much more residential towers and people. These could be used well above 4 months per year. Based off the thinking that there shouldn't be outdoor amenities as there is winter here, then that means that there should be no soccer fields or golf courses in the city, as, they can only be used for 4 months of the year. It is a reality we face that as a winter city, some amenities that are outdoors may not be used to to as high an extent as a summer city due to the cold and snow, but it does not mean that they should not be built, as we still have a season suitable to outdoor activities upwards of 6 months a year.

  100. #100
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    47,240

    Default

    In larger cities there most certainly are recreational activities/amenities provided throughout their Downtowns/cores. NYC is a great example with tons of pocket parks that include a half court or hand ball or outdoor fitness stations. Shanghai no different. Toronto no different. These are as important there as they are beside schools and demonstrate that we are maturing as an urban centre.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •