Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 162223242526
Results 2,501 to 2,592 of 2592

Thread: Blatchford | Neighbourhood Master Plan | Discussion/Rumours

  1. #2501
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,536

    Default

    Ready to build? They finally have the geothermal kinks ironed out and ready to go?

    Pardon my sarcasm but wasn't that supposed to be the big sexy for Blatchford and Station Pointe? I know 2 separate issues. My point is these geothermal claims have yet to pan out anywhere in the Edmonton area.

    I'm all in favour of Blatchford and i hope they left enough room for a connecting bridge over the tracks and room for the lrt. Measure twice cut once, i know but at least city planners thought ahead back in the early 1970's with Metro at Churchill station.

    Yes i saw the news item last night. I hope they keep the traffic control tower there though. Enough geothermal claims already.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  2. #2502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spudly View Post
    What I've wondered is how long it will take until Blatchford residents get up in arms about traffic noise from the Yellowhead and noise from CN's shunting yard just to the north and demand (expensive) fixes to abate that noise.
    They can always put up some windmills to make even more noise to drown out the other noise.

  3. #2503
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    I thought the argument was whether or not the development will succeed. It is my opinion that it will, because it provides something that home buyers cannot find anywhere else: brand new homes close to the core at a lower cost than infill housing.
    I don't think that is a conclusion anyone can be certain of at this point.

    As a matter of fact, I strongly feel that the cost of a townhouse in Blatchford will exceed the cost of a new infill townhouse in a neighborhood like Jasper Place (that is a similar distance from the core, and also is said to eventually have LRT service coming through the neighborhood)

  4. #2504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    I thought the argument was whether or not the development will succeed. It is my opinion that it will, because it provides something that home buyers cannot find anywhere else: brand new homes close to the core at a lower cost than infill housing.
    I don't think that is a conclusion anyone can be certain of at this point.

    As a matter of fact, I strongly feel that the cost of a townhouse in Blatchford will exceed the cost of a new infill townhouse in a neighborhood like Jasper Place (that is a similar distance from the core, and also is said to eventually have LRT service coming through the neighborhood)
    Time will tell I guess
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" - Einstein

  5. #2505
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    4,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    I thought the argument was whether or not the development will succeed. It is my opinion that it will, because it provides something that home buyers cannot find anywhere else: brand new homes close to the core at a lower cost than infill housing.
    I don't think that is a conclusion anyone can be certain of at this point.

    As a matter of fact, I strongly feel that the cost of a townhouse in Blatchford will exceed the cost of a new infill townhouse in a neighborhood like Jasper Place (that is a similar distance from the core, and also is said to eventually have LRT service coming through the neighborhood)
    Assuming the price of houses will remain static in Jasper Place once the LRT comes through.
    “Canada is the only country in the world that knows how to live without an identity,”-Marshall McLuhan

  6. #2506
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,043

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    ^^ So what you're saying is that if you want a brand new home (as many buyers do) and you want to stay close to the core, your options are very limited. You can buy an infill property, but those start at $650k, or you can look at Blatchford where, if your estimate is accurate, you can buy a 'decent 3 bedroom' starting at $500k. I think you just made a very good case for Blatchford.

    Sure you can buy a home in the burbs for perhaps $100k less, but once you add in the cost of a second car (which most people would have to have, living that far out) and the stress of the commute you're not really ahead. Again anecdotal, but most of my friends would never consider moving south of the Whitemud or north of the Yellowhead, but still like the idea of a brand new home.

    There's a market for Blatchford. I have no doubt about it.
    the only caveat to that would be whether it's the city and taxpayers in general subsidizing the cost of that house in blatchford from 650,000 to 500,000.

    because if that's the case it's not a very good one.
    Would anyone necessarily have to subsidize this potential drop in price? One of the biggest costs of infill is the fact that you have to buy an existing property and demolish it. Infill also doesn't have the same economies of scale that a project like this will have. At this point it's essentially a greenfield development with a few extra things added on to make it a little pricier, but I would still think the price would be closer to that of a greenfield development than to that of a typical infill home.

  7. #2507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    ^^ So what you're saying is that if you want a brand new home (as many buyers do) and you want to stay close to the core, your options are very limited. You can buy an infill property, but those start at $650k, or you can look at Blatchford where, if your estimate is accurate, you can buy a 'decent 3 bedroom' starting at $500k. I think you just made a very good case for Blatchford.

    Sure you can buy a home in the burbs for perhaps $100k less, but once you add in the cost of a second car (which most people would have to have, living that far out) and the stress of the commute you're not really ahead. Again anecdotal, but most of my friends would never consider moving south of the Whitemud or north of the Yellowhead, but still like the idea of a brand new home.

    There's a market for Blatchford. I have no doubt about it.
    the only caveat to that would be whether it's the city and taxpayers in general subsidizing the cost of that house in blatchford from 650,000 to 500,000.

    because if that's the case it's not a very good one.
    Would anyone necessarily have to subsidize this potential drop in price? One of the biggest costs of infill is the fact that you have to buy an existing property and demolish it. Infill also doesn't have the same economies of scale that a project like this will have. At this point it's essentially a greenfield development with a few extra things added on to make it a little pricier, but I would still think the price would be closer to that of a greenfield development than to that of a typical infill home.
    The strict environmental standards required does not make the pricer closer to greenfield though.

  8. #2508

    Default

    https://www.edmonton.ca/projects_pla...ssessment.aspx

    Millions spent on remediation kinda squashes the whole "greenfield" schtick.

    Blatchford is brownfield.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  9. #2509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seamusmcduffs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    ^^ So what you're saying is that if you want a brand new home (as many buyers do) and you want to stay close to the core, your options are very limited. You can buy an infill property, but those start at $650k, or you can look at Blatchford where, if your estimate is accurate, you can buy a 'decent 3 bedroom' starting at $500k. I think you just made a very good case for Blatchford.

    Sure you can buy a home in the burbs for perhaps $100k less, but once you add in the cost of a second car (which most people would have to have, living that far out) and the stress of the commute you're not really ahead. Again anecdotal, but most of my friends would never consider moving south of the Whitemud or north of the Yellowhead, but still like the idea of a brand new home.

    There's a market for Blatchford. I have no doubt about it.
    the only caveat to that would be whether it's the city and taxpayers in general subsidizing the cost of that house in blatchford from 650,000 to 500,000.

    because if that's the case it's not a very good one.
    Would anyone necessarily have to subsidize this potential drop in price? One of the biggest costs of infill is the fact that you have to buy an existing property and demolish it. Infill also doesn't have the same economies of scale that a project like this will have. At this point it's essentially a greenfield development with a few extra things added on to make it a little pricier, but I would still think the price would be closer to that of a greenfield development than to that of a typical infill home.
    I think its the same logic that lead to Century Park failing, which is the reason why. There isn't that big of a market of people willing to plop down 400 or 500k on a townhome or apartment in an area surrounded by cheap single family homes and low priced multi family homes. At 350k though, like that Bowness project I posted (which was careful re the design / costs), this could roar. You aren't going to have fancy underground parking, and expensive net zero technology, in that, though. In fact, you aren't even going to get granite or quartz, but you can still have a really nice place that's affordable to a lot of people.

  10. #2510
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I think Blatchford is going to be very slow progress, very. I think its going to be expensive and quite likely behind schedule.

    Short 180 million? * whaaat*
    from the article:

    "Officials also need to get the district energy sharing system up and running for those first families. They haven’t signed a drilling contract yet, but hope to have 570 shallow geothermal holes drilled under the storm water pond starting in January.


    "The holes will allow Blatchford residents to use geothermal heat for homes and businesses. It will be the largest geothermal-based neighbourhood of its kind.


    "The city looked at contracting a third party to build the geothermal system and take the risk. but decided to get it up and running first themselves, said branch manager Brian Latte.


    “From the city’s perspective, they want to put their foot in the ground here, recognize that it’s a proven thing,” Latte said. “From there, (maybe we’ll) get a broader cross-section of utility companies interested.”


    "Latte estimated the utility will need grants of $80 million and $100 million to build out for future phases. Those grant applications are still before the provincial and federal governments."

    emphasis added...

    the reported $180 million that is not secured yet also assumes the city can complete the construction of that geothermal system for the costs they're budgeted for it (a price level that the private sector declined to participate in given the risks involved).

    i wish them every success because it's my tax dollars being spent too so i'm still hopeful but i'm far from optimistic about the outcome.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  11. #2511

    Default

    Can someone tell me why the City is so hellbent on doing this over the private sector?

  12. #2512
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    I thought the argument was whether or not the development will succeed. It is my opinion that it will, because it provides something that home buyers cannot find anywhere else: brand new homes close to the core at a lower cost than infill housing.
    I don't think that is a conclusion anyone can be certain of at this point.

    As a matter of fact, I strongly feel that the cost of a townhouse in Blatchford will exceed the cost of a new infill townhouse in a neighborhood like Jasper Place (that is a similar distance from the core, and also is said to eventually have LRT service coming through the neighborhood)
    Assuming the price of houses will remain static in Jasper Place once the LRT comes through.
    I don't think they will remain static, but the increase of sale price along the Valley Line currently under construction hasn't been drastic...so I think it is reasonable to assume the bump when it goes west will be similar

  13. #2513
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oilers99 View Post
    Can someone tell me why the City is so hellbent on doing this over the private sector?
    i think partly because at the current costs for utilities being purchased from the grid, there is a shortfall on what is required to pay for utilities produced from the central system at blatchford:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/business/...rd-development

    and partly because there is still some disagreement on whether the chosen delivery system for the on-site distribution system at blatchford is the most appropriate one. there are valid engineering opinions supporting both but if the private sector doesn't believe in the one selected by the city, they are less likely to participate going forward:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...ver-blatchford
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  14. #2514

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Oilers99 View Post
    Can someone tell me why the City is so hellbent on doing this over the private sector?
    i think partly because at the current costs for utilities being purchased from the grid, there is a shortfall on what is required to pay for utilities produced from the central system at blatchford:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/business/...rd-development

    and partly because there is still some disagreement on whether the chosen delivery system for the on-site distribution system at blatchford is the most appropriate one. there are valid engineering opinions supporting both but if the private sector doesn't believe in the one selected by the city, they are less likely to participate going forward:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...ver-blatchford
    Qualico, Melcor, Brookfield, MLC, etc. would have figured this out and made it a success. I have zero trust in the City being able to execute.

  15. #2515
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattyw View Post
    If I recall, prices for these row houses are going to be really low, as the intent is affordable housing. As in the $200ks I read a few years ago. And the neighbourhood is being designed to be car free, since the LRT will be there. So no driveways are allowed I believe. These are not hipsters buying $500k houses, it'll be lower income people who don't have cars in general.
    I'll believe it when I see it. Nothing about the built form and intended goals of this development promotes affordability, from where I stand. We're going to see price-points starting at $400/ft at a minimum, I would think. It is very difficult to profitably build the kind of buildings that the city wants to see for less than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor
    if most of the infrastructure is done, why is the central utility plant still short at least 180 million dollars?


    Excellent question!

  16. #2516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oilers99 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Oilers99 View Post
    Can someone tell me why the City is so hellbent on doing this over the private sector?
    i think partly because at the current costs for utilities being purchased from the grid, there is a shortfall on what is required to pay for utilities produced from the central system at blatchford:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/business/...rd-development

    and partly because there is still some disagreement on whether the chosen delivery system for the on-site distribution system at blatchford is the most appropriate one. there are valid engineering opinions supporting both but if the private sector doesn't believe in the one selected by the city, they are less likely to participate going forward:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...ver-blatchford
    Qualico, Melcor, Brookfield, MLC, etc. would have figured this out and made it a success. I have zero trust in the City being able to execute.
    Yet it’s all based on the expertise of the private sector engineering firms that each dispute the most basic design assumptions.
    Last edited by KC; 05-12-2017 at 06:20 PM.

  17. #2517
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,994

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmontonsKindaGuy View Post
    Saw a little blurb on the news this morning that the city said construction of residence will start in Blatchford in 2018 and residents should be moving in for 2019.
    Well, that makes it 5 years after it closed. WOW what progress. God help us if the city demos Northlands and we end up with the same farce that is Blatchford twice.
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  18. #2518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oilers99 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Oilers99 View Post
    Can someone tell me why the City is so hellbent on doing this over the private sector?
    i think partly because at the current costs for utilities being purchased from the grid, there is a shortfall on what is required to pay for utilities produced from the central system at blatchford:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/business/...rd-development

    and partly because there is still some disagreement on whether the chosen delivery system for the on-site distribution system at blatchford is the most appropriate one. there are valid engineering opinions supporting both but if the private sector doesn't believe in the one selected by the city, they are less likely to participate going forward:

    http://edmontonjournal.com/news/loca...ver-blatchford
    Qualico, Melcor, Brookfield, MLC, etc. would have figured this out and made it a success. I have zero trust in the City being able to execute.
    From what I've heard there really isn't much of a chance of getting good geothermal potential in that location, and the private sector really doesn't want anything to do with it. Why the City is still putting $180 million into this is beyond me. It's a nice idea, but it likely won't produce any meaningful energy in the enday, which they've already been told by the private sector and many experts.

  19. #2519
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,339

    Default

    Why doesn't the city just K.I.S.S. I know Iveson has pie in the sky ideas, but for once, couldn't he tone it down...

  20. #2520

    Default

    Unfortunately following the KISS principle hasn’t done much for Edmonton over the decades.

  21. #2521
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    4,339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Unfortunately following the KISS principle hasn’t done much for Edmonton over the decades.
    Just for the start, he or anyone can add on later., so it doesn't get behind, just a thought.

  22. #2522

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cnr67 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmontonsKindaGuy View Post
    Saw a little blurb on the news this morning that the city said construction of residence will start in Blatchford in 2018 and residents should be moving in for 2019.
    Well, that makes it 5 years after it closed. WOW what progress. God help us if the city demos Northlands and we end up with the same farce that is Blatchford twice.
    Blatchford was always intended to be a long-term project, in order to minimize the impact of dumping huge numbers of product into the market and tanking prices...

  23. #2523

    Default

    ^That adds risk for purchasers though - they personally take on the possibility of a Century Park type scenario if they buy into it, all sorts of wonderful things are promised, but might never get built or converted into a parking lot.

  24. #2524
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cnr67 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmontonsKindaGuy View Post
    Saw a little blurb on the news this morning that the city said construction of residence will start in Blatchford in 2018 and residents should be moving in for 2019.
    Well, that makes it 5 years after it closed. WOW what progress. God help us if the city demos Northlands and we end up with the same farce that is Blatchford twice.
    Blatchford was always intended to be a long-term project, in order to minimize the impact of dumping huge numbers of product into the market and tanking prices...
    ???

    whatever else i think about the progress and choices surrounding blatchford, i don’t think that the delivery of more affordable housing is being purposefully delayed in order to maintain and achieve higher prices...
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  25. #2525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenco View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GizmoForMayor View Post
    I thought the argument was whether or not the development will succeed. It is my opinion that it will, because it provides something that home buyers cannot find anywhere else: brand new homes close to the core at a lower cost than infill housing.
    I don't think that is a conclusion anyone can be certain of at this point.

    As a matter of fact, I strongly feel that the cost of a townhouse in Blatchford will exceed the cost of a new infill townhouse in a neighborhood like Jasper Place (that is a similar distance from the core, and also is said to eventually have LRT service coming through the neighborhood)
    Assuming the price of houses will remain static in Jasper Place once the LRT comes through.
    Have you spent anytime in Jasper Place? Its going to take a lot more than an LRT line to change that place which has festered for decades.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  26. #2526
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I think Blatchford is going to be very slow progress, very. I think its going to be expensive and quite likely behind schedule.

    Short 180 million? * whaaat*
    from the article:

    "Officials also need to get the district energy sharing system up and running for those first families. They haven’t signed a drilling contract yet, but hope to have 570 shallow geothermal holes drilled under the storm water pond starting in January.


    "The holes will allow Blatchford residents to use geothermal heat for homes and businesses. It will be the largest geothermal-based neighbourhood of its kind.


    "The city looked at contracting a third party to build the geothermal system and take the risk. but decided to get it up and running first themselves, said branch manager Brian Latte.


    “From the city’s perspective, they want to put their foot in the ground here, recognize that it’s a proven thing,” Latte said. “From there, (maybe we’ll) get a broader cross-section of utility companies interested.”


    "Latte estimated the utility will need grants of $80 million and $100 million to build out for future phases. Those grant applications are still before the provincial and federal governments."

    emphasis added...

    the reported $180 million that is not secured yet also assumes the city can complete the construction of that geothermal system for the costs they're budgeted for it (a price level that the private sector declined to participate in given the risks involved).

    i wish them every success because it's my tax dollars being spent too so i'm still hopeful but i'm far from optimistic about the outcome.
    Setting up a separate utility to do the geothermal seems very risky especially if Epcor (which operates at arms length but is City-owned) did not want to be involved. Counting on $180 million in provincial and federal grants suggests the underlying economics are just not there especially with the low cost of natural gas for the forseeable future.

    Why doesn't the City abandon what seems more and more like a geothermal pipe dream, hook Blatchford up to the City grid, and build with proven technologies like high building insulation standards, high efficiency furnaces, even rooftop solar. The selected builders should still be able to offer competitively priced townhomes considering the zero cost of the land, compared to private developers elsewhere who have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars per hectare for developable land?

    Plus building at Blatchford could start more quickly rather than having to wait for the wells to be drilled and all the related infrastructure to be installed.
    Last edited by East McCauley; 06-12-2017 at 10:07 AM.

  27. #2527

    Default

    ^I'm guessing they have already sunk so much cost in, they feel they are committed, but the sunk costs shouldn't influence the decision.

  28. #2528

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by cnr67 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EdmontonsKindaGuy View Post
    Saw a little blurb on the news this morning that the city said construction of residence will start in Blatchford in 2018 and residents should be moving in for 2019.
    Well, that makes it 5 years after it closed. WOW what progress. God help us if the city demos Northlands and we end up with the same farce that is Blatchford twice.
    Blatchford was always intended to be a long-term project, in order to minimize the impact of dumping huge numbers of product into the market and tanking prices...
    ???

    whatever else i think about the progress and choices surrounding blatchford, i don’t think that the delivery of more affordable housing is being purposefully delayed in order to maintain and achieve higher prices...
    One of the arguments from the Envision Edmonton camp was that it would tank property values in the City. A response (I believe it was from Mandel, a councillor or senior administrator) was that the project would be spread out over many years in order to reduce the risk of flooding the market. I will try to find a link to back up my admittedly less than reliable memory.

  29. #2529

    Default

    Here's this one for starters...

    2.2 Timeframe
    It is anticipated that City Centre ARP lands will be redeveloped within a 25 – 30 year period through public and private sector initiatives. The first stages of the development are anticipated to begin in 2013 or 2014.
    https://www.edmonton.ca/documents/pl...solidation.pdf

  30. #2530

    Default district energy

    They should have just got ENMAX, or EPCOR, to do a proven technology district energy system - perhaps not as theoretically perfect as geothermal could be, but pretty darn good:

    https://www.enmax.com/generation-wir...-energy-centre

    Our Downtown District Energy Centre is a shining example of how ENMAX Corporation and its subsidiaries applies fresh thinking that results in local solutions. Situated on the southwest corner of 4 Street and 9 Avenue – the gateway to one of Calgary’s most exciting upcoming developments, the East Village – the Downtown District Energy Centre is capable of supplying heat for up to ten​ million square feet of new and existing residential and commercial properties.

    District energy, or district heating, traces its roots as far back as the popular hot water-heated baths and greenhouses of ancient Rome. It’s more efficient, has fewer emissions and is more cost-effective than conventional heating systems. Underground hot water pipes connect to a heat exchange interface between the piping system and the customer’s heating system, creating a closed-loop system that takes up much less space in the building and is more energy efficient than traditional commercial boilers.​


    It always seemed like a missed opportunity to me that something like that couldn't have been done with Rosedale power plant (it was considered). These sort of systems are popular in Scandinavia where they use waste incinerators to power the heating (I saw in operation in the 1990's), but natural gas makes sense in Alberta.
    Last edited by moahunter; 06-12-2017 at 12:05 PM.

  31. #2531

    Default

    We don't need Enmax, neither does Edmonton need to subsidize Calgary.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  32. #2532

    Default

    The CoE has been an Enmax customer for years & I think there's 2 years left on the contract.

    https://www.enmax.com/business/on-for-edmonton
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  33. #2533

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThomasH View Post
    We don't need Enmax, neither does Edmonton need to subsidize Calgary.
    My point was that ENMAX or EPCOR could do a project like that for Blatchford, whereas it "seems" there was no interest in being involved in geothermal. ENMAX and EPCOR seem to work quite closely together on a lot of projects, so it could have even been a joint thing, leveraging off the experience already gained.

  34. #2534
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Development of Phase 1 overlay

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ly-tToHcpAI
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  35. #2535

    Default

    I wish they would connect 118 avenue east-west. I wouldn't have to drive through that #%^$^& Metro line **** twice a day.

  36. #2536
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,254

    Default

    118 Ave isn’t built for that kind of traffic. It’s part of a relatively dense residential neighbourhood and college campus.

  37. #2537

    Default

    It wouldn't have to carry much traffic. IT could be one lane each way with a 40km/hr limit and it would still be worthwhile, especially when Blatchford is actually filled in. It's supposed to be TOD but there's no rational route for a crosstown bus to get through and deliver passengers from this first stage to the LRT.
    There can only be one.

  38. #2538
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,254

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    It wouldn't have to carry much traffic. IT could be one lane each way with a 40km/hr limit and it would still be worthwhile, especially when Blatchford is actually filled in. It's supposed to be TOD but there's no rational route for a crosstown bus to get through and deliver passengers from this first stage to the LRT.
    That’s what 122 Avenue is supposed to do i think, and meet up at the north end of the new NAIT LRT station.

  39. #2539

    Default

    The air traffic control tower looks terrible in context. Can't they at least re-skin it so it doesn't look like an industrial piece of garbage in the middle of it?
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  40. #2540
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    6,549

    Default

    Just tear it down. If you can tear down Northlands Coliseum and all the other beautiful historic buildings they've torn down why keep this?

  41. #2541
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,711
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Symbolism...nothing more.
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  42. #2542
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,536

    Default

    I'm ok with the tower if coe can repurpose it for retail etc.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  43. #2543
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    I don't think the tower would look so out of place. The render on the video shows everything one dimensional and the tower as 3D.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  44. #2544
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,711
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    I'm ok with the tower if coe can repurpose it for retail etc.

    You can't. It is purpose built.

    I invite you to take a tour one day. The reality is that the building was in desperate need of repair before the closure, and was cited as one of the major cost factors in keeping the airport open.

    I wasn't being trite about the symbolism/tribute comment. That is the main reason. Sure, it could be a sales centre for the development, and maybe a small, unique restaurant/bar, but that's it. It is small inside, wouldn't meet code for commercial, and is not that efficient of a building.
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  45. #2545
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,536

    Default

    ^ Actually i think I was in the tower for all of abt 5 minutes back in 1978 when I was doing some security guard work for Whackenhut doing parking control before the parkade was built days. For the reasons you cited above, then I'm mixed on keeping the tower. It might add character to the new neighborhood when its built though. Thanks for the reply.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  46. #2546
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    I don't even know anymore :/
    Posts
    1,043

    Default

    It's a good building to keep around as a symbol of the history of the area.

  47. #2547
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South Beverly Heights in a small house with a large lot!!
    Posts
    1,994

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    The air traffic control tower looks terrible in context. Can't they at least re-skin it so it doesn't look like an industrial piece of garbage in the middle of it?
    And so your rational for removal is that it was industrial and cannot fit into anything future planned? It's that kind of thinking that has destroyed a vast list of structures that should have been incorporated. Vision...this city lacks it. A simple building by comparison to many. Here is an example of what could be done with the the right individuals in charge. https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/d...ant/index.html
    Make the RIGHT choice before you take your last breath......

  48. #2548
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,711
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I've been in Stapleton's tower, both during operations and after. It is significantly more voluminous than YXD's, but Stapleton was also significantly larger than YXD.

    Yes, this could be surrounded by something a la Stapleton. I for one am glad it was kept, but if people think the tower itself can be something large, I hesitate to encourage dreaming v visioning. Incorporate it into something else, let it be a viewpoint of some kind...but anything exciting would be an addition to the existing structure.
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  49. #2549
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Construction update
    Last year was another productive year of construction at Blatchford and we are gearing up for a busy 2018!

    The construction work in 2017 was focused on getting the site ready for homebuilders in the first phase of development on the west side of the community. Work included connecting Blatchford to existing utilities outside the site and installing underground utilities, including the piping for the District Energy Sharing System, which will provide environmentally-friendly heating, cooling and hot water to the homes. The first portion of paving also began last year with the very first road in Blatchford now complete!

    Here are just a few construction highlights from 2017:

    8,400 metres of water mains, storm and sanitary sewers and distribution piping for the District Energy Sharing System were installed
    1,400 metres of curb and gutter were constructed
    121,000 tonnes of concrete and asphalt was recycled for re-use on the site
    175 metres of road was paved

    What's Next?
    The chance to live in Blatchford is getting closer as we continue our builder selection process. Last year, we started a two step competitive process to find builders who share our vision and can deliver beautiful and energy-efficient buildings. We are excited to announce that 27 builders expressed interest in being a part of the first phase of the community. We are now preparing to move forward with the second part of the selection process to secure builders for the very first homes.


    Learn more about the first stage of development

    At the same time as we move forward with builder selection, we will be continuing construction at the site. This year, work includes installing the geo-exchange field under the future stormwater pond and the construction of the first Energy Centre for the District Energy Sharing System. We will also complete installing utilities, paving roads and building sidewalks in the first stage and will start on the landscaping work.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZOL...ature=youtu.be
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  50. #2550

    Default

    252745970-006
    11-Apr-2018
    101 - AIRPORT ROAD NW
    Plan 9220135 Blk 6A Lot 2

    To construct a Major Impact Utility Service building with Accessory Renewable Energy Devices (Solar Collectors) (Blatchford District Energy Centre).

    CITY OF EDMONTON

  51. #2551
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,305

    Default

    What I would love to see is a connecting corridor for 109st to the yellow head involving a free flow Interchange and right of way for the LRT.

    Imagine the relief it would provide by giving northbound traffic a direct route to the yellowhead rather than left right lefting to places like St. Albert.

  52. #2552

    Default

    I would have like to see 118ave as a through street, even if only one lane each way. even a 40 limit, just so there's another option to Kingsway/ PE Ave.

    Yes to some kind of N-S route too. Too late for 109, I guess. I still think making 121 the default continuation of Kingsway, and then joining 121st south of YH to 127 N of YH via an elongated interchange would be great for traffic going that way.
    There can only be one.

  53. #2553

    Default

    Is the builder selection process finished? I want to see construction on the buildings this summer.
    Last edited by ThomasH; 05-05-2018 at 03:05 PM.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  54. #2554
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    ^ LOL.

    No.

  55. #2555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlander II View Post
    I would have like to see 118ave as a through street, even if only one lane each way. even a 40 limit, just so there's another option to Kingsway/ PE Ave.

    Yes to some kind of N-S route too. Too late for 109, I guess. I still think making 121 the default continuation of Kingsway, and then joining 121st south of YH to 127 N of YH via an elongated interchange would be great for traffic going that way.
    Just another missed opportunity. Add it to the list.

  56. #2556

    Default

    I am glad that old airport is gone, but it's becoming clearer every year that it was a mistake to let that hippie firm from Vancouver design this area with their dumb impractical ideas, and have the city remain the developer.

  57. #2557
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Expect a new leader for this project from the City to be announced soon.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  58. #2558
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,367

    Default

    Will the new leader have a basic understanding of project scheduling, and not make promises that were completely idiotic like Mark Hall had been? See here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    That article says that they still have yet to engage with any actual developers or builders. No one will be living in Blatchford until 2020, at this rate. Which is why it was so laughable last year when they were claiming that move-ins would be happening in 2017.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Journal Article
    Blatchford Redevelopment Project's executive director Mark Hall said the timeline to have the first residents and businesses in by the fall and winter was ambitious. The first buildings won't be occupied before mid-to-late 2017.
    Quote Originally Posted by Journal Article
    Much like the rest of the Blatchford development, the timeline to have the first residents and businesses moving in by the fall and winter was ambitious, said the redevelopment project’s executive director, Mark Hall.

    “The earliest we could begin putting the infrastructure into Blatchford would be May 1, 2016,” Hall said.

    “I think we’re probably looking at land sales to builders in 2017. Sales of built units to the first residence in Blatchford would probably be looking at mid-to-late 2017.”
    Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how residents will be moving in to the first finished projects in mid to late 2017 if they are not even contemplating land sales to developers until early 2017. Maybe if the developers were building single family homes that would be possible. But my understanding is that everything at Blatchford is going to me rowhousing, townhomes, and multi-unit residential. I don't see how it's realistic to assume that a developer will purchase land, design a project, and build it in 9 months. The types of projects the city expects to be built at Blatchford take 12+ months just to build from when you put a shovel in the dirt, let alone purchase land, design, get approvals, etc etc. Not to mention that the city itself doesn't seem to yet know what the district energy system is going to be. That's a huge question mark if they're expecting developers to start building things in less than a year.

    Again, maybe I'm missing something.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Really disappointed with how this was sold to the citizens of Edmonton, and how it's actually going to turn out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Another one:

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    They didn't address why they cut back on the park space, but did state another reason for going with more townhouses and mid-rise buildings and removing high rises; speed of construction. They want have the first people in the community by 2016, and have the neighbourhood complete by 2023. I don't know why they couldn't start some high rises at the beginning and have them finish midway through, but mid-rise/townhouse seems to be the cities direction on this.
    That is sheer idiocy, in my opinion. Not necessarily the debate about townhomes vs. mid-rise vs. high-rise. But the timelines for this are completely unrealistic, and changing the built form of the development will do nothing to change that. What happens if there's another bust between now and 2023, which is incredibly likely? What happens if migration to the city slows to a crawl, or reverses? They're just going to build it all anyway and let it sit vacant? A 20-30,000 person ghost community?

    This whole thing is mind boggling. Administration is running this thing straight in to the ground.
    The way this whole project has been handled by City Administration is a complete farce. To be clear, I was 100% supportive of closing the airport and redeveloping it, that's not what my concern is. However the City sold this project as being this amazing, groundbreaking, futuristic vision that would accomplish all these amazing goals, while being super profitable for the city and being completely built out in the blink of an eye. Turns out that all of that was completely false. None of the major goals are going to be accomplished, because they will cost money. Like anyone with any common sense would have known. And the City didn't and doesn't have the courage to try to sell the public on them being worthwhile. So now that the bills are coming due, they're dropping features left right and center. And the completely unrealistic timelines established at the start are also flying by the wayside, again as anyone with common sense would have known. This is a project that should have been planned to take 20-30 years to fully build out, not 10.

    This whole thing is a complete and utter boondoggle. It's like the entire thing was handled by some junior project manager who thought they were playing SimCity.
    The City of Edmonton in my opinion has completely squandered the opportunity that Blatchford represented, in so many different ways. They were incredibly unrealistic in what they asked the design competition to come forward with, have cut and hacked the winning vision down to a development not much better than what's already being built on the fringes of the city (or around Festival Way in Sherwood Park), and have their head in the sand about how long it will take to build and sell the project. I really don't see how it's going to be a success at this point.
    I'll also be curious to know what disciplinary actions have been taken. Perhaps it's unfair to single out Hall and he was doing as told, I don't pretend to know what the organization structure here is, but someone or several should be losing their job(s) considering how massively over promised and under delivered this project has been.
    Last edited by Marcel Petrin; 07-05-2018 at 03:50 PM.

  59. #2559

    Default

    What the hell is going on here?
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  60. #2560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Will the new leader have a basic understanding of project scheduling, and not make promises that were completely idiotic like Mark Hall had been? See here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    That article says that they still have yet to engage with any actual developers or builders. No one will be living in Blatchford until 2020, at this rate. Which is why it was so laughable last year when they were claiming that move-ins would be happening in 2017.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Journal Article
    Blatchford Redevelopment Project's executive director Mark Hall said the timeline to have the first residents and businesses in by the fall and winter was ambitious. The first buildings won't be occupied before mid-to-late 2017.
    Quote Originally Posted by Journal Article
    Much like the rest of the Blatchford development, the timeline to have the first residents and businesses moving in by the fall and winter was ambitious, said the redevelopment project’s executive director, Mark Hall.

    “The earliest we could begin putting the infrastructure into Blatchford would be May 1, 2016,” Hall said.

    “I think we’re probably looking at land sales to builders in 2017. Sales of built units to the first residence in Blatchford would probably be looking at mid-to-late 2017.”
    Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how residents will be moving in to the first finished projects in mid to late 2017 if they are not even contemplating land sales to developers until early 2017. Maybe if the developers were building single family homes that would be possible. But my understanding is that everything at Blatchford is going to me rowhousing, townhomes, and multi-unit residential. I don't see how it's realistic to assume that a developer will purchase land, design a project, and build it in 9 months. The types of projects the city expects to be built at Blatchford take 12+ months just to build from when you put a shovel in the dirt, let alone purchase land, design, get approvals, etc etc. Not to mention that the city itself doesn't seem to yet know what the district energy system is going to be. That's a huge question mark if they're expecting developers to start building things in less than a year.

    Again, maybe I'm missing something.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Really disappointed with how this was sold to the citizens of Edmonton, and how it's actually going to turn out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Another one:

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Ustauk View Post
    They didn't address why they cut back on the park space, but did state another reason for going with more townhouses and mid-rise buildings and removing high rises; speed of construction. They want have the first people in the community by 2016, and have the neighbourhood complete by 2023. I don't know why they couldn't start some high rises at the beginning and have them finish midway through, but mid-rise/townhouse seems to be the cities direction on this.
    That is sheer idiocy, in my opinion. Not necessarily the debate about townhomes vs. mid-rise vs. high-rise. But the timelines for this are completely unrealistic, and changing the built form of the development will do nothing to change that. What happens if there's another bust between now and 2023, which is incredibly likely? What happens if migration to the city slows to a crawl, or reverses? They're just going to build it all anyway and let it sit vacant? A 20-30,000 person ghost community?

    This whole thing is mind boggling. Administration is running this thing straight in to the ground.
    The way this whole project has been handled by City Administration is a complete farce. To be clear, I was 100% supportive of closing the airport and redeveloping it, that's not what my concern is. However the City sold this project as being this amazing, groundbreaking, futuristic vision that would accomplish all these amazing goals, while being super profitable for the city and being completely built out in the blink of an eye. Turns out that all of that was completely false. None of the major goals are going to be accomplished, because they will cost money. Like anyone with any common sense would have known. And the City didn't and doesn't have the courage to try to sell the public on them being worthwhile. So now that the bills are coming due, they're dropping features left right and center. And the completely unrealistic timelines established at the start are also flying by the wayside, again as anyone with common sense would have known. This is a project that should have been planned to take 20-30 years to fully build out, not 10.

    This whole thing is a complete and utter boondoggle. It's like the entire thing was handled by some junior project manager who thought they were playing SimCity.
    The City of Edmonton in my opinion has completely squandered the opportunity that Blatchford represented, in so many different ways. They were incredibly unrealistic in what they asked the design competition to come forward with, have cut and hacked the winning vision down to a development not much better than what's already being built on the fringes of the city (or around Festival Way in Sherwood Park), and have their head in the sand about how long it will take to build and sell the project. I really don't see how it's going to be a success at this point.
    I'll also be curious to know what disciplinary actions have been taken. Perhaps it's unfair to single out Hall and he was doing as told, I don't pretend to know what the organization structure here is, but someone or several should be losing their job(s) considering how massively over promised and under delivered this project has been.
    Maybe for disciplinary action, the council and mayor can take terms spanking each other on live TV. It seems to me a recurring theme of large projects run by the City of Edmonton, everything is way behind schedule.

    Really it starts at the top and the Mayor and Council don't really seem to hold people to account or stay on top of things, at least not until it is too late and its clear things are totally bungled up.

  61. #2561
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    11,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Expect a new leader for this project from the City to be announced soon.
    with an ability to actually revisit anything of substance (i.e. to lead going forward) or simply to implement what's already been decided upon which, for better or for worse, is following, not leading.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  62. #2562

    Default

    A leader would be to fix the god-damned lake.
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  63. #2563
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Edmonton Downtown Core
    Posts
    4,510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Expect a new leader for this project from the City to be announced soon.
    This is another City fookedup project. We need a doer not a dreamer. Private sector should be driving this development.

  64. #2564

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Expect a new leader for this project from the City to be announced soon.
    This is another City fookedup project. We need a doer not a dreamer. Private sector should be driving this development.
    Quite frankly it's time for the city manager to be ousted. Too many screw ups and she has been with the city for decades. Simon Fairbrother was the scapegoat when he got canned, clearly the rot is pervasive.

  65. #2565
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    I am sorry all, but the new 'head' of Blatchford will be a leader from what I am hearing...
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  66. #2566
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,711
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    (...)

    I'll also be curious to know what disciplinary actions have been taken. Perhaps it's unfair to single out Hall and he was doing as told, I don't pretend to know what the organization structure here is, but someone or several should be losing their job(s) considering how massively over promised and under delivered this project has been.
    It is a bit unfair to single out Mark. He was simply taking a project, with a set of parameters and political pressures from promises made, and trying to make it something. I won't speak for him on many aspects, but given the witch's brew he was handed, well, I don't think I would be more successful. Blatchford is overburdened with ready, fire, aim deliverables born out of political and social engineering fervour.
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  67. #2567
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,305

    Default

    Two words: Giant Park

  68. #2568
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,536

    Default

    If I understand it properly, wasn't Blatchford supposed to be originally billed (like Station Pointe) a state of the art eco friendly, geo thermally run community?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  69. #2569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    If I understand it properly, wasn't Blatchford supposed to be originally billed (like Station Pointe) a state of the art eco friendly, geo thermally run community?
    Under the old council in the past. Several years BC - Before Comprehension.

    Times change.

    Cars with fins, fake wood grain, black wheels, etc were also once in vogue. Just like living in communes and building eco-communities, everyone loves a good fad to help the otherwise mundane stand out.
    Last edited by KC; 08-05-2018 at 11:41 AM.

  70. #2570

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    (...)

    I'll also be curious to know what disciplinary actions have been taken. Perhaps it's unfair to single out Hall and he was doing as told, I don't pretend to know what the organization structure here is, but someone or several should be losing their job(s) considering how massively over promised and under delivered this project has been.
    It is a bit unfair to single out Mark. He was simply taking a project, with a set of parameters and political pressures from promises made, and trying to make it something. I won't speak for him on many aspects, but given the witch's brew he was handed, well, I don't think I would be more successful. Blatchford is overburdened with ready, fire, aim deliverables born out of political and social engineering fervour.
    Exactly! Change is good especially for someone else first. We’re settlers not explorers or pioneers. The rest of us sit back and let others experiment and jump on bandwagons.

    Politicians are great at spotting the next bandwagon to come along and push that for a year or two until they move on or get pushed out. Some leave new wonders behind and some leave carnage..
    Last edited by KC; 08-05-2018 at 11:47 AM.

  71. #2571
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,536

    Default

    ^ Translation: Thermal energy (at least here in Canada) isn't quite there, yet.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  72. #2572

    Default

    I got a response back from the city: "The builder selection process for the first stage of development is still underway. This summer, builders will be putting together proposals to purchase land and we are hoping to have the selected builders on site by next year."
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  73. #2573
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,206

    Default

    If the builders are going to be purchasing the land, does this mean that the City is getting out of the retail real estate business?

  74. #2574
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,367

    Default

    So no one living in Blatchford until 2021 now. At least Metro will be running properly by then. Right?

  75. #2575
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    ^

    I would be surprised if anyone moved in there by 2021.

    I would be surprised if the District Energy technology wasn't already obsolete by the time people are moving in

  76. #2576

    Default

    Here is a recent photo of Blatchford.

    [IMG]Blatchford by Mack Male, on Flickr[/IMG]
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  77. #2577

    Default

    That tower looks so alone and forgotten in the big empty field that was our historic airport. I wish that we could have at least allowed the police to continue to use it for their helicopters as Villeneuve must be so inconvenient. Even still I wonder how it is that a small plot of land can't be cut out for helicopter use, both city police and others. I suppose that ship has already sailed.

  78. #2578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    ^

    I would be surprised if anyone moved in there by 2021.

    I would be surprised if the District Energy technology wasn't already obsolete by the time people are moving in
    I hope people are in by 2021. It was very expensive for the city to put in all the utilities, and they'll start to need upkeep and maintenance by then.

  79. #2579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Voice View Post
    That tower looks so alone and forgotten in the big empty field that was our historic airport. I wish that we could have at least allowed the police to continue to use it for their helicopters as Villeneuve must be so inconvenient. Even still I wonder how it is that a small plot of land can't be cut out for helicopter use, both city police and others. I suppose that ship has already sailed.
    The helicopters will be based at the new station being built around the Henday & 127 st.

  80. #2580
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mattyw View Post
    I hope people are in by 2021. It was very expensive for the city to put in all the utilities, and they'll start to need upkeep and maintenance by then.
    If this project was subject to the same financing costs that any project from a private developer has, I think the city may have already sold the entire thing. As much as people are being critical of how the project is being ran now, it would be exponentially worse.
    Last edited by AUsenik; 11-05-2018 at 06:32 AM. Reason: quotebox

  81. #2581
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    13,711
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I will say this. Whether as an airport or as a dystopian/utopian dream, this parcel of land is an amazing case study on change management, social engineering blunders, over promising & under delivering, setting people up for failure, and seeing some people rise to the challenge. It would make a fascinating thesis.

    I can't quite put my finger on why this piece is so simultaneously haunted, cursed, blessed, and valued. There are so many intersecting priorities and concerns to make this land the jumbled drama queen it is.
    Since calm logic doesn't work, I guess it is time to employ sarcasm. ...and before you call me an a-hole...remember, I am a Dick.

  82. #2582
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    ...I can't quite put my finger on why this piece is so simultaneously haunted, cursed, blessed, and valued.
    I'm saying this as a former CoE project manager... I can say (in my most humble opinion) that if this wasn't being managed by the CoE, there would very likely be a whole lot more population density on these hectares than the current 0. The CoE wants to be developer - this is what happens when you tie in all that bureaucracy into a process that private industries do so well. I remember sitting in the Shaw theatre at NAIT long before the airport actually closed and the presenter stating that "by 2014 the first residents will be living on the former airport!" I am not being over critical of my former employer, but it's a HUGE machine that doesn't move like private developers can and therefore development should be left to the developers.

  83. #2583
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    8,536

    Default

    I'm surprised Habitat for Humanity hasn't their fingerprint in this project somehow.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  84. #2584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stonecutter099 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RichardS View Post
    ...I can't quite put my finger on why this piece is so simultaneously haunted, cursed, blessed, and valued.
    I'm saying this as a former CoE project manager... I can say (in my most humble opinion) that if this wasn't being managed by the CoE, there would very likely be a whole lot more population density on these hectares than the current 0. The CoE wants to be developer - this is what happens when you tie in all that bureaucracy into a process that private industries do so well. I remember sitting in the Shaw theatre at NAIT long before the airport actually closed and the presenter stating that "by 2014 the first residents will be living on the former airport!" I am not being over critical of my former employer, but it's a HUGE machine that doesn't move like private developers can and therefore development should be left to the developers.
    Developers tend to only build the same as what they built before - which makes sense if you want efficiency, cost control, profitability, speed and the like. If you want something different, new, unique, creative and the like would you go to them?

    That said, ironically I’d say that the City is pretty much the last place I’d see as taking risks.

  85. #2585
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    38

    Default

    I agree. Here's the thing though... If you want to set a standard for a neighbourhood set it and then put it out to the market. If no developers want to be your partner - maybe it tells you that what you want isn't viable. Through the zoning bylaw they can very succinctly set the requirements for a given area, including all the fancy things they want to do with district energy, etc... if there's no developers on board because they can't make their money back - what makes the city think they can? In the end - the market drives the need not the imagineers.

  86. #2586

    Default

    Good points.

    I’m not sure what led the City to its current position.

  87. #2587
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stonecutter099 View Post
    I agree. Here's the thing though... If you want to set a standard for a neighbourhood set it and then put it out to the market. If no developers want to be your partner - maybe it tells you that what you want isn't viable. Through the zoning bylaw they can very succinctly set the requirements for a given area, including all the fancy things they want to do with district energy, etc... if there's no developers on board because they can't make their money back - what makes the city think they can? In the end - the market drives the need not the imagineers.
    There are no private developers on board because the city did not and would not offer that opportunity. Every developer in town would have loved to be a part of this because it is an amazingly positioned piece of dirt and the economics going into it were overwhelmingly favorable. After all of the site remediation and Stage 1 grading, they were sitting at $150,000/Acre. Some developers are paying double that out in Keswick for raw farm land. So there was (is) still lots of meat on the bone to invest in creating a once in a lifetime neighborhood.

    There was also a Blatchford Advisory Committee that had several private developers on it, and then it fell apart because basically the city refused to accept any of the advice or guidance they were trying to provide.

  88. #2588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AUsenik View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonecutter099 View Post
    I agree. Here's the thing though... If you want to set a standard for a neighbourhood set it and then put it out to the market. If no developers want to be your partner - maybe it tells you that what you want isn't viable. Through the zoning bylaw they can very succinctly set the requirements for a given area, including all the fancy things they want to do with district energy, etc... if there's no developers on board because they can't make their money back - what makes the city think they can? In the end - the market drives the need not the imagineers.
    There are no private developers on board because the city did not and would not offer that opportunity. Every developer in town would have loved to be a part of this because it is an amazingly positioned piece of dirt and the economics going into it were overwhelmingly favorable. After all of the site remediation and Stage 1 grading, they were sitting at $150,000/Acre. Some developers are paying double that out in Keswick for raw farm land. So there was (is) still lots of meat on the bone to invest in creating a once in a lifetime neighborhood.

    There was also a Blatchford Advisory Committee that had several private developers on it, and then it fell apart because basically the city refused to accept any of the advice or guidance they were trying to provide.
    But the developers regularly promise the sky and deliver mediocre watered down designs. (Much like the City seems to be doing but maybe they thought they could actually pull off some of the things in their original dream design.)

  89. #2589
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    ^ Can't say I agree with that.

    There is only so much people are willing to pay for a visionary design. And then you lose even more of the market with the people who are willing to pay it...but simply can't afford it.


    This is legacy land for the city, you can consider it $0 in the budget. I bet if you gave a developer (let's use Brookfield as an example) a piece of land positioned like this for the price of $0, they wouldn't just deliver mediocre. I think they would try to deliver the most spectacular community they could that still gets their margin and delivers an end price to the home buyer similar to the other options in new communities. That way they would grab the majority of the market for people looking to buy a new home because those people would feel like they are getting so much more value buying in Brookfield's Blatchford instead of the other 'mediocre' options you described.

  90. #2590
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Do they still only have phase 1 environmental assessment done or have they moved up to a 2 or 3 all over the place?

  91. #2591
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    I am sorry all, but the new 'head' of Blatchford will be a leader from what I am hearing...
    As one of the more pessimistic people on this forum when it comes to Blatchford, upon learning who is becoming the new 'head', I will say that I am slightly more optimistic that they will be able to at least get this thing moving in a better trajectory.

  92. #2592
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,201

    Default

    ^Whodat?
    “Son, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmonton’s skyline.”

Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 162223242526

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
  •