Page 3 of 26 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 300 of 2592

Thread: Blatchford | Neighbourhood Master Plan | Discussion/Rumours

  1. #201
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,726

    Default

    Can the city narrow it down to say, two bids?
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  2. #202
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    Well it makes me wonder which one or two are more favored.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  3. #203
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,642

    Default

    I can't help but wonder if it's the usual 1 or 2 councillors who are screwing around with this.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  4. #204
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    I can't help but wonder if it's the usual 1 or 2 councillors who are screwing around with this.
    Oh gee, I can't imagine who that might be...

  5. #205

    Default

    1 or 2 councilors does not make for indecision.
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  6. #206
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,726

    Default

    Perhaps if it's narrowed down to 2 or 3 choices, ask these parties to provide more info.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  7. #207
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    The success of whatever plan will be adopted, assuming closere and adoption will actually happen, will hinge so much on actual rather than projected future population growth and the demands of the next demographic generation that I wouldn't want at this stage either to condemn or cheerlead anything at all.

    Please acknowledge, however, that the risk of creating a one-mile-wide black hole is not zero.

    I suggest once theairport is actually closed, the entire area is turned to grass as quickly as possible, much like the approaches that once graced the south side of Kingsway before being built over with strip malls in the late 80s and early 90s. Gradual development, if it must be gradual -- and I suspect it'll have to be -- is a lot less offensive if the parts waiting for do-overs are not concrete ruins.

  8. #208
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,368

    Default

    Good news regarding population growth: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/stor...migration.html

    That's net migration within the country. Add in population growth and immigration and it's likely that population growth in Alberta will return to a 2-3% annual rate.

    Actually here's a handy report: http://www.finance.alberta.ca/abouta...rojections.pdf

    The Edmonton area under the medium growth projection (page 23) is expected to grow from around 1.2m to 1.4m by 2020. Of course that includes outlying communities, but Edmonton is likely to see a significant portion of that growth. Somewhere around 100k people in the next 10 years, give or take.

    How much of that growth is channeled to infill/densification, Quarters, CCA and new neighborhoods is the question.

  9. #209
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    As per mastermaq on Twitter: Confirmed, the final #ecca three as selected by #yegcc: Perkins, Foster, KCAP. #yeg

    City link, http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...nd-videos.aspx
    Last edited by Hilman; 19-05-2011 at 12:41 PM.

  10. #210
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    501

    Default

    All council had to do was pick a firm to design a master plan, they were not actually picking a final design. All the submitted materials were supposed to be conceptual designs showing visions for each submitting firm, not a final plan. The selection committee made their recommendation, and still city council couldn't pick a winner after having access to the submitted materials for more than 3 months?

    The city invited representatives from leading design firms around the world so that they could announce the winning team, and they end up being turned around with the message that our city council couldn't make a decision...embarrassing.

  11. #211
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Big deal, they are picking the winner in a few weeks and will have ZERO effect on the timelines of this massive and long term project.

  12. #212
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,485

    Default

    Councillors have cut the number of companies vying to plan the redevelopment of City Centre Airport to three from five, but a final decision is still a month away. Perkins + Will of Vancouver, London-based Foster and Partners, and KCAP Architects and Planners from Rotterdam, the Netherlands, remain in the running, the city said Thursday.
    That means Sweden’s Sweco and BNIM of Kansas City, Mo., are out. The winner of the contract will be picked June 22.
    “They were all fantastic. We had 33 (originally), narrowed that down to five, now three,” Coun. Ed Gibbons said.






    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...413/story.html
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  13. #213

    Default

    its gotta be the rotterdam one!
    "Do you give people who already use transit a better service, or do you build it where they don't use it in the hopes they might start to use it?" Nenshi

  14. #214
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    I had to look at the proposals again and I'm a bit surprised with Foster and Partners bid still in there. With that said, from what I remember my two favorites were KCAP and Perkins + Will so that is a bit of a relief. I do like how both bids that I like show the LRT quite prominantly in their designs as well as integrating with the rest of the city fairly well with their designs. I'm curious to see who is finally picked.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  15. #215

    Default

    City will make a decision on June 22 in ragards to the Airport Lands.

    http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...b=EdmontonHome
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  16. #216
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo View Post
    its gotta be the rotterdam one!
    My thoughts as well.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  17. #217
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    Mine too since the Sweco bid was quashed.

  18. #218
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    411

    Default

    The Shire-inspired concept from Kansas City still makes me laugh though.

  19. #219
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,642

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megatron View Post
    The Shire-inspired concept from Kansas City still makes me laugh though.
    Hey, they could have called the CCA land "Hobbiton"!
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  20. #220

    Default

    We can't lose with any of the remaining three.

    However, I am happy to see my favorite concept (the Rotterdam one) is still in the running.

  21. #221
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    10,788

    Default

    I like the windmills at the northern edge of the development in the Rotterdam plan. Could be a very interesting landmark if they were lit up at night. I would like to see further integration of the NAIT campus into the plans.
    LRT is our future, time to push forward.

  22. #222
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    501

    Default

    Comments from Mack Male on his blog about the unusual events that changed a winner announcement to a short-listing of final candidates. I concur with his points.

    City Centre Redevelopment ‘shorter-listing’ reveals problems that must be addressed
    By Mack D. Male · May 24, 2011 at 4:30pm

    Last week City Council shorter-listed three of the five finalists in the City Centre Redevelopment Master Plan Design Competition, with the winner set to be named on June 22. The decision to narrow the field to three after a botched media conference was unexpected and was largely overshadowed by last week’s arena news.
    Full post: http://blog.mastermaq.ca/2011/05/24/...-be-addressed/

  23. #223
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    Too many of these discussions are being held in camera.

    OK, maybe -- maybe, I'm not convinced, but maybe -- some part of arena funding discussions with private investors might be in camera (Although private capital that partners with public money should generally be treated like public money.)

    But I don't understand why "discussions" a decision that is or should be based purely on land use, demographics, aesthetics, and extremely preliminary cost projections should be conducted in private until the announcement is made. Cause from Leendert's link above, that's what's going on, no?

    The more these things go private, the more reasonable becomes a presumption of corruption.

    Which is not something impossible in Canada. In case you missed the news this week, the OECD has called us the most corrupt nation in the G8, and nearly the worst in a set of 23.

    We're not clean, and all indications are we are getting worse.

    Hiding public discussion does not help.

  24. #224
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    In Camera is an important aspect of deliberation and process.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  25. #225
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    ^ Public business is public business. What might they possibly be legitimately discussing that is sensitive enough not to be revealed? What, concretely?

    Because it certainly isn't population projections, land use suitability, economic development, aesthetic and architectural plans or even the estimates as they might stand now. Not even the potentially available developers.

  26. #226

    Default

    ..
    Last edited by christopherj; 27-05-2011 at 02:35 PM. Reason: wrong thread...

  27. #227
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    ^These are conceptual plans, for god's sake.

    There's no timeline for development.

    No established population projection and economic projection that might spell out how long development of the parcel might take.

    No detailed building plans.

    No detailed orders on which to make plans.

    There is a purely public competition in which so far three finalists have been decided.

    It is reasonable to expect that the three finalists are paid something for their efforts, and the winner a bit more.

    Usually such conditions are announced well before the competition is announced.

    Even if they have not been, they can be discussed in public.

    But, forgive me, any discussion of "contributions" when none of the basic questions have been decided is corruption, pure and simple.

    What contributions? Why?

    And, in case all you incipient little totalitarians have forgotten it, even contributions are supposed to be discussed in public.

    It's public money.

  28. #228
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    As someone who worked on one of five finalist plans, there was good and bad with this competion, but overall it was reasonably presented and some of your assumptions above had rough numbers so you know.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  29. #229
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    Rough numbers are a matter of public discussion.

    The availability or not of suppliers with the necessary skills of whatever kind to implement any special features of any of the conceptual plans are a matter of public discussion.

    Everything until a conceptual plan is approved, and a lot of things afterwards, too, are a matter of public discussion.

    Unless they are already playing let's make a deal.

    The nice name for that is contributions.

    The proper name is corruption.

    I have no idea what they are discussing in private, obviously, but the more they go in camera, the more suspicions are provoked.

  30. #230
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Typically you review, discuss, and decide on competitions like this in private dude, get over it.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  31. #231
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    ^Actually, no. A public competition is typically public.

    Relenting on my earlier stand a bit, I suppose it's just barely possible that the one question of "this'll cost $X billion, so far we can count on/expect/negotiate/beg for $Y from government level A and $Z from government level B" might be private.

    But then they should announce they'll go in camera to discuss that or any other question specifically.

    In other words, the citizens have a right to know the topic of private discussion even if the contents are too sensitive.

    Anything else just provokes unpleasant suspicions.

    And worse, it creates a culture in which more and more things are hidden and corruption becomes easier and easier.

    "Damn government $%^$^%$^". That's all this comes to, in the end. Which is a very destructive opinion to take hold in the population.

  32. #232
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    ^IT WAS PUBLIC... did you attend the open houses, the discussions/presentations? There was plenty of opportunity for feedback, thoughts, and discussion.

    You must be a conspiracy theorist, for a closed door is not always filled with black helicopters.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  33. #233
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    ^To mess up on announcing the winners because council is "in private discussions" (see the link Leedert gave) abnegates all the openness prior.

    Because the most important part of the deal, untlimately -- the decision being taken -- does not get the airing it absolutely requires.

  34. #234
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    PS. Just to make clear what I'm getting at: public consultations are fine, but the deliberations of the elected council that makes the decision must be public.

  35. #235
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    I guess we can agree to disagree.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  36. #236
    In Guantanamo (Banned)
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    645

    Default

    Fair enough.

  37. #237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alex69 View Post
    ^These are conceptual plans, for god's sake.

    There's no timeline for development.

    No established population projection and economic projection that might spell out how long development of the parcel might take.
    ..
    I have to apologize... for some reason, I thought this was the arena thread... my mistake, sorry! :/

  38. #238
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,201

    Default

    Already mentioned in the "Greater Ideas" forum, but it's also a good idea to bump this thread.

    http://edmonton.ca/city_government/n...velopment.aspx

    Perkins + Will Chosen to Lead City Centre Redevelopment, Transform Airport Lands

    June 22, 2011
    Team to develop a master plan for a world-leading sustainable community

    Perkins + Will, from Vancouver, BC will lead one of Edmonton’s largest land transformations in decades.

    The firm was chosen from three international finalists to develop a master plan to redevelop the City Centre Airport lands into a sustainable, transit-oriented, family friendly community for up to approximately 30,000 residents.

    “This is a historic day for our city and a significant milestone for this project,” says City Manager Simon Farbrother. “We’re excited to move the project forward – this is just another step in the transformation of our downtown area. As the developer for the site, the City will ensure Council’s vision is met to make this development world-leading ecologically, economically and socially.”

  39. #239
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,642

    Default

    Perkins was my 2nd choice behind KCAP. Acceptable!
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  40. #240

    Default

    Great choice, it was my favourite (along with Sweco).

    I just hope it happens this time, this article lamants all the various plans Edmonton keeps putting in place then never implementing:

    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/City+...141/story.html

    EDMONTON - There is no shortage of wonderful architectural drawings and plans for the redevelopment and improvement of Edmonton's city core.

    Today, we'll see a few more. This afternoon, the winning design team will be announced for the redevelopment of the City Centre Airport lands.

    I like to dream big as much as the next person, so such plans fire my imagination. My question, though, is whether or not anything will ever come of the airport redevelopment plan or any of these plans.

    Will some of the brilliant downtown buildings and neighbourhoods get built?
    Nice touch to show the Aviation museum on Board 6 (low floor LRT on grass looks cool too), this proposal is sensitive to the history:

    http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...tionPanel6.pdf
    Last edited by moahunter; 22-06-2011 at 05:07 PM.

  41. #241
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    413

    Default

    This was my favorite proposal. Very exciting!!! Now, it starts. As long as the city can keep with it. We don't want this development to be half-assed. The citizens are expecting big things with the ECCA redevelopment.

  42. #242
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    3,713

    Default

    good choice, it was my top pic BUT looking through the screens and layouts and designs i am horrified that there does not seem to be a main street with retail below some housing. the runway that runs north south right beside the proposed lake MUST have a seawall type look with a wide wide sidewalk, and 1 lane each way traffic, next to that needs to be retail with 3-4 stories of housing above it. if this isn't part of the plan then forget the whole thing.

    maybe i should sketch out what i'm proposing but i'm sure most of you know what i'm talking about.
    be offended! figure out why later...

  43. #243

    Default

    I hope the final design has a main street with some cafes, restaurants, and outdoor patios that overlook some water and trees.

    This city has almost none of that, which is ridiculous considering all the restaurants and parkland we have.

  44. #244

  45. #245

    Default

    The end result likely won't have much resemblance to what was on the boards. The city didn't just point at the boards and decide "ok, build that".

    They're impressions. Design concepts. I like the styling and vision, and I'm sure the city did as well, but the in the end it's the team's willingness to work with the city to build the best neighborhood that fits with our needs, not cram in some strange concept that won't mesh with the rest of the city. It's not a large walled resort that's mutually exclusive to the rest of the city.

    Roads will integrate this to the rest of the city. There will likely be nothing less than a full on overpass somewhere on the north edge, probably running right down to 109st. There'll be LRT.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  46. #246

    Default

    It would be nice if the Mall of Museums could be worked in somehow.

  47. #247

    Default

    Nice touch to show the Aviation museum on Board 6 (low floor LRT on grass looks cool too), this proposal is sensitive to the history:
    Gotta hear how you justify that statement

  48. #248

    Default

    ^they could have ignored it altogether Tom, but they have two boards, one that discuss the history and one that shows an aviation museum. This suggests that at least there will be an acknowledgment of the past. Is it as good as an operating airport? No. Is it the next best thing? I think so.

  49. #249

    Default

    First of all...

    The design submitted and the actual master plan will most likely be extremely different and may not even be visually close.

    The rest is basically an urban wish list and subject heavily to personal taste so I have little interest in that side of things.

    My concern is the history and the museum and the message sent not the details.

    Second...
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^they could have ignored it altogether Tom
    No they could not as both the history and the museum were part of the RFP

    Third...
    but they have two boards, one that discuss the history and one that shows an aviation museum. This suggests that at least there will be an acknowledgment of the past.
    The design shown concerns me several ways regarding the museum...

    - As show the modifications to the museum site and building are in breach of both Edmonton and Provincial historic sites regulations. You would think with this information readily available there would have been an effort to comply.

    - This proposal shrinks the site of the museum facility and considering we cannot currently display the complete collection on site let alone meet the expansion needs for our educational programming it is a concern.

    - A climbing wall? Basketball court? really?...in itself so what its just a design. My personal concern...they are not taking it seriously.

    Fourth...
    Is it as good as an operating airport?
    Never part of the discussion.

    Fifth...
    Is it the next best thing? I think so.
    Considering all of the faults noted above...no its not the next best thing, at least IanO's team actually came on site to get an understanding of what they were dealing with.

    But to the point....it is not the detail, it is the message sent in the design and the choice by the City.

    It is a token gesture at best.

    My personal opinion

    Tom Hinderks

  50. #250
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It would be nice if the Mall of Museums could be worked in somehow.
    no

    we have sites for museums and are not Washington
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  51. #251
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Best proposal by far! Great selection Edmonton - it's going to be quite the development if/when it finally gets completed

  52. #252

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    It would be nice if the Mall of Museums could be worked in somehow.
    no

    we have sites for museums and are not Washington
    We're not Ottawa either and yet the proposal has canals.

    The civiv museums are spread across the city and not in very visible locations. Bringing them together to showcase Edmonton's history would raise their profile. This is for the civic museums only. I'm not suggesting that RAM be moved to the site. I'd love to see even more museums in the city but they should all be showcases in their own way.

  53. #253
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    We have an arts district, keep museums and there to make it easier for tourists. Add major museums elsewhere and we'll end up with acres of parking lots.
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  54. #254

    Default

    The Mall concept included the Transit Museum. Are you suggesting it be moved to the Arts District?

    The proposal was to bering the CIVIC museums into one spot. They can share parking. Transit will be a major part of the airport redevelopment as well.

    Major museums such as the RAM should be downtown. Combining the civic museums into one complex with space to display the larger items like vehicles gives them the critical mass to become more of an attraction. Off the top of your head can you name the civic museums and where they are?

  55. #255
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Capital Region
    Posts
    1,224

    Default

    Off the top of my head I can't think that i'd ever want to visit a civic museum, so why waste space in a very good medium to high density residential area. Maybe ECC should look to combine all civic museums to a green belt area just off the Henday where they can have lots of large things.
    Edmonton, Capital of Alberta

  56. #256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chmilz View Post
    The end result likely won't have much resemblance to what was on the boards. The city didn't just point at the boards and decide "ok, build that".

    They're impressions. Design concepts. I like the styling and vision, and I'm sure the city did as well, but the in the end it's the team's willingness to work with the city to build the best neighborhood that fits with our needs, not cram in some strange concept that won't mesh with the rest of the city. It's not a large walled resort that's mutually exclusive to the rest of the city.

    Roads will integrate this to the rest of the city. There will likely be nothing less than a full on overpass somewhere on the north edge, probably running right down to 109st. There'll be LRT.
    Although the details of this plan will surely be different than what these boards show, I suspect the general layout of the streets, park and lake will be as shown. The concept plan has established park space, primary streets, secondary streets and neighbourhood streets, and I don't see that changing significantly because that is core to the concept. As much as they won the bid based on their team, I can't believe that the concept as presented will be completely thrown out.

    So that being the case, and envisioning the "main street" fronting the lake and to be a pedestrian friendly, bicycle friendly, shopping street with restaurants, coffee shops and patios enjoying the view of the lake and park it seems pretty obvious that, unless city council directs them to go back to the drawing board, there is no room here for 109st to be extended up to Yellowhead Trail, as a major through route.

  57. #257
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6

    Default

    This is my personal taste and opinion.

    This design does not grab me AT ALL and make me say Wow, that's stunning!!!
    I liked the Dutch design. I think it's just beautiful!

    So we possibly get more BORING boxy rats nest condos, a lake and a park, big deal.

    Europe is always miles ahead of North America. Why can't they ever pick
    something different for once.

    So thoroughly disappointed!

  58. #258
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    The drawings are conceptual and will most likely not look like the finished product, especially the finer details like building shapes. Let's wait for the actual renderings before getting too excited.

  59. #259

    Default

    I think i got it. Let's put the headquarters of envision edmonton in a the middle of the old airport in a pink stucco strip mall with a kentucky *ucky chicken next door with a drive through looking onto a 5 lane highway to big box neverland. Long live large american SUVs and Ms Leibovici!

  60. #260
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Absolutely love the idea of the 'city-view pavilion' on the park hill which overlooks the lakes and downtown. Such a great idea to have an area that focuses on creating a place to take in vistas of the skyline - something the northside of the city seriously lacks. Hope this idea doesn't get lost.

  61. #261

    Default

    Love the hill. Love the lake. Love the rowing club idea.

  62. #262
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    5,547

    Default

    Whatever other merits this design has, I love that instead of expending huge amounts of money and energy (not to mention GHG emmissions), ripping up the two runways, they will instead be kept and incorporated into the street design.

    That, and the hill will doubtlessly come from the excavation for the lake.

    That, and the community gardens, and the district heating.

    I think the design well meets the sustainable criteria in the RFP.

    Not worrying about what the condos, townhouses, etc will ultimately look like - except that they'll probably be nothing like the drawings we've seen.

    Great start. Now, let's begin planning the next LRT stop beyond NAIT.
    ... gobsmacked

  63. #263

    Default

    "City councillor slams winning airport redevelopment bid"

    Before you click on the link ... guess who?

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2011/06/2...evelopment-bid

  64. #264
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,726

    Default

    ^ Really? I would have never guessed it.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  65. #265

    Default

    “We already have a river valley,” Caterina said.

    River valley? How in the world does this plan resemble the river valley? Just because there's water doesn't make it the same as the river valley.

    I guess this was the best criticism he could come up with and that's pretty lame.

  66. #266

    Default

    Tony will only be happy if it's left as an airport. I doubt he even looked at the submissions.
    “Give us something else, something different we don’t already have that we can add to the city’s resume,” Caterina said, adding he was displeased with all the finalists’ designs.

    None of the five had anything creative,” he said.
    What an insult to the whole process and the work that has gone behind these very creative bids. *****. How did you ever get re-elected? It's a shame to have you representing the City of Edmonton, as you only represent your personal interests.

  67. #267

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deedub35 View Post
    "City councillor slams winning airport redevelopment bid"

    Before you click on the link ... guess who?

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2011/06/2...evelopment-bid
    Whatever you do, do not read the comments at the end.

  68. #268

    Default

    ? o.k. Now you've made me want to read the comments at the end...

  69. #269

    Default

    Its the sun comment section... if you really feel like beating your head against the wall, go for. I suggest you medicate yourself first though.

  70. #270

    Default

    You're right. I wish I hadn't read those comments.

  71. #271

    Default

    then i guess according to caterina, hawrelak park should not have been built. i mean, it's just a man made lake surrounded by green space. we have the river valley for that. besides, the city isn't a better place for that park, right?

    p.s and yes the sun comments and the comments i see in the local rags make it seem edmonton is full of a bunch of hillbillies scared of change. i'm just thankful the silent majority for the most part voted for an overhelmingly progressive city council!
    Last edited by thatguy; 26-06-2011 at 11:10 AM.

  72. #272
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    45,896

    Default

    Wow... Simply wow.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  73. #273
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Sherwood Park, AB
    Posts
    10,726

    Default

    I think that a neighbourhood like this is needed in North Edmonton. North central Edmonton has a lot of grid streets in neighbourhoods about 100 years old. Sure, it's high density, but it's right next to NAIT and Kingsway Mall, and it's in close proximity to the Royal Alex and downtown. For anybody living there, the LRT will reach downtown in five minutes, and the U of A in about 10.
    "Talk minus action equals zero." - Joe Keithley, D. O. A.

  74. #274
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    10,368

    Default

    If Caterina wants to see something new and innovate and thinks all five submissions failed to deliver, perhaps he'd care to offer his own suggestions?

  75. #275
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Albert, Alberta
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    ^ sad thing is that he'll get voted right back in next election!
    Thank You For Finally Going Higher!

  76. #276

    Default

    There's always room for a couple of sour apples at City Hall. Let's just be thankful he's in the minority.

  77. #277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OilTastic/BigCityDude View Post
    ^ sad thing is that he'll get voted right back in next election!
    I told you guys! Him and Peter Goldring know excatly what perogie dinners to go to each year. Votes in the bag in the NE YEG!
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  78. #278
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Ozerna, North Edmonton
    Posts
    8,961

    Default

    ^ Isn't Cat in the NW? Dave Loken was elected last year for the North Central/NE and has been really good, the old vote would have been for Demers (Hayters assistant).

  79. #279

    Default

    I think he's a little bitter that the airport's demise and redevelopment of the land all started with him and his push for expanded service. It was the farthest thing from everyone's mind until he brought it up after he got elected. But once he did, the push for closure began. He has nobody to blame but himself.

  80. #280

    Default

    Ha ha. That's true. Serves him right. I wonder if he can appreciate the irony.
    Last edited by Vincent; 27-06-2011 at 04:43 PM.

  81. #281

    Default

    I'm very pleased with how things went when I asked all candidates when the airport would close on Caterina's first election. Caterina did a great job of bringing the issue into the spotlight. Thank you Caterina!
    Edmonton first, everything else second.

  82. #282
    First One is Always Free
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Oliver
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Some terribly unenlightened comment by Edmonton - Calder MLA Doug Elinski in the latest Envision Edmonton newsletter.

    http://www.envisionedmonton.ca/index...2012.01.01.pdf

    "“If you look around, you will realize that the vast majority of people in this city do not ride bicycles to work in the wintertime. They do not drive Prius’, they drive F150’s, they own boats. To think that 30,000 of them are suddenly going to want to live in a vanilla cube, attached to how many other vanilla cubes, with limited, if any parking, so that they can ride the LRT to do whatever they need to do....."

  83. #283

    Default

    ^First, 98% of the people that purchase boats in this province are idiots.

    I don't have a second.
    "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" - Blaise Pascal

  84. #284

    Default

    I've met Doug Elniski. After talking to him for 5 minutes I came to the conclusion that he's a fool.

  85. #285

    Default

    He's entitled to his opinion.

  86. #286
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    5,169

    Default

    Yup. He is a *****. He states that because the Municipal will close, patients from across the province will not come to the enhanced and sophisticated medical facilites that Edmonton now has that rivals anywhere else in North America. So people needing emergency care from Fort McMurray, Grande Prairie, even Calgary and BC, Saskatchewan, Manitoba in regard to heart care (for example) will request not to come to the rapidly expanded Walter MacKenzie Health Science Centre or the Royal Alexandra Hospital because the air ambulance will only land at YEG in a few years???? Does he think they will have to drive instead?

    So does he also say the provincial regional hospitals in much smaller centres across Alberta will each become "major" Canadian medical hubs with pioneering medical facilities that now have global reputations? Because an airport in the centre of a city closes?????? (ie) the Grande Prairie Clinic, Red Deer Clinic, Saskatoon Clinic, Stettler Clinic, Manning Clinic, Again what a *****.

  87. #287
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,679

    Default

    MLAs comments are irrelevant now.
    Decision has been made to close the airport.
    The world is full of kings and queens, who blind your eyes then steal your dreams.
    It's heaven and hell!

  88. #288

    Default

    OMG they have a Newsletter. Good to see all the companies that support Envison so I can vote with my dollars and never support them again.
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  89. #289

    Default

    Ok

    I just read the article (didn't know they had a newsletter) and I would like to know where he said this...

    He states that because the Municipal will close, patients from across the province will not come to the enhanced and sophisticated medical facilites that Edmonton now has that rivals anywhere else in North America
    Unless I drastically missed something he said
    While agreeing that there are issues affecting quality of healthcare
    surrounding the potential airport closure, Elniski believes that Alberta Health Services has to work with the circumstances it is given.
    “We can’t be critical of those people if their plans include dealing with a
    necessary reality, because everyone is saying that this airport is going to close.”
    this

    He states that their preference would be to continue to use the ECCA, but they are forced to make contingency plans based on the decisions of the Municipal
    Government.
    and this

    Elniski believes that people will simply adapt to the circumstances that they are given. The question then posed is this:
    How much adapting should Edmontonians or Albertans have to do to circumvent this airport closure, and do these adaptations affect quality of life in our province? If so, who is to be held responsible?
    Now I don't care what your position on the airport is, if you like the guy or not.

    But burn him for what he said...not for something made up.

    That is simply not right or fair.

    After reading the article the one quote that caught my eye was this...
    “The people that are most upset about this are the people in Grande Prairie and Fort MacMurray, and places like that.
    Those are the people that understand the impact. And those are the people that
    sadly, in this whole issue, are the easiest ones to ignore, because the reality is that
    they don’t vote in Edmonton.”
    Why did it catch my eye...because it's true.

    Tom

  90. #290

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jarrettcam View Post
    Some terribly unenlightened comment by Edmonton - Calder MLA Doug Elinski in the latest Envision Edmonton newsletter.

    http://www.envisionedmonton.ca/index...2012.01.01.pdf

    "“If you look around, you will realize that the vast majority of people in this city do not ride bicycles to work in the wintertime. They do not drive Prius’, they drive F150’s, they own boats. To think that 30,000 of them are suddenly going to want to live in a vanilla cube, attached to how many other vanilla cubes, with limited, if any parking, so that they can ride the LRT to do whatever they need to do....."

    On top of that, the front page indicates there is going to be an automated message campaign over the winter months. At least they say there is an option to be connected to an Envision member so you can tell them exactly what you think of their organization.

    According to the article, 'These calls will continue over the next few months'.




    Going to be interesting if they ever call my home. Naturally, because this is a political issue, it won't fall under the 'do not call registry'. I can't wait for complaints about the automated calls to start coming out, and EE being villified the same way when they were petitioning at city events.

  91. #291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    After reading the article the one quote that caught my eye was this...
    “The people that are most upset about this are the people in Grande Prairie and Fort MacMurray, and places like that.
    Those are the people that understand the impact. And those are the people that
    sadly, in this whole issue, are the easiest ones to ignore, because the reality is that
    they don’t vote in Edmonton.”
    Why did it catch my eye...because it's true.

    Tom
    They are picking the wrong battle. Northern Alberta needs to fight for emergency care closer to where they live, not fight another city to keep an old airport open to make up for a lack of poor health care in their own neck of the woods.

  92. #292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Hinderks View Post
    After reading the article the one quote that caught my eye was this...
    “The people that are most upset about this are the people in Grande Prairie and Fort MacMurray, and places like that.
    Those are the people that understand the impact. And those are the people that
    sadly, in this whole issue, are the easiest ones to ignore, because the reality is that
    they don’t vote in Edmonton.”
    Why did it catch my eye...because it's true.

    Tom
    They are picking the wrong battle. Northern Alberta needs to fight for emergency care closer to where they live, not fight another city to keep an old airport open to make up for a lack of poor health care in their own neck of the woods.

    Two points to this Mr Oilers

    1) Most important...it applies to much more than the ECCA discussion and related to everything from health care in general to transportation and education.

    Easy to ignore the people you don't see or directly interact with...especially when they are the numerical minority.

    2) Your comment
    Northern Alberta needs to fight for emergency care closer to where they live
    Again this is not an ECCA discussion but a response to your comment:

    So every town of 20,000 should have a heart centre and specialized care?

    What are we willing to add to our Provincial Income tax to make that happen?

    Where are we going to get the professionals to staff them?

    They don't want to live in the rural environment, they want to be centralized in the metro areas for the revenue and lifestyle.

    Tom

  93. #293

    Default

    Again, what's wrong with using YEG to transport people from the north? Nothing? I can't believe we are rehashing these arguments again.
    Envision Edmonton isn't fighting for northern Alberta's health and well being. They are fighting to save their private businesses, using heart-strings that someone is going to die somehow because the airport is at most 5 minutes further away to the nearest trauma center? Good grief.

    The people most upset about this ? Grande Prairie and Fort Mac already have a trauma center where patients get stablized before they fly.

  94. #294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Again, what's wrong with using YEG to transport people from the north? Nothing? I can't believe we are rehashing these arguments again.
    Envision Edmonton isn't fighting for northern Alberta's health and well being. They are fighting to save their private businesses, using heart-strings that someone is going to die somehow because the airport is at most 5 minutes further away to the nearest trauma center? Good grief.

    The people most upset about this ? Grande Prairie and Fort Mac already have a trauma center where patients get stablized before they fly.
    Medwards you're missing my point continue to argue ECCA, my point is attitude in general.

    In the last number of posts I have seen words put into peoples mouths and an organization (I do not belong to) getting slagged for having a newsletter and using their rights to take a stand against a political decision.

    Strange it seems to me that while many other organizations do the same things it's ok...but not for some I guess.

    As far as the phone thing...at least they give an immediate option of getting you off their list...wish a whole bunch of others would extend the courtesy.

    As far as ignoring Northern residents...where is my comment wrong?
    It's done on transportation (Ft. Mac highway should have been twinned long ago as well as much more), Education...they do not get many services offered in both Metro and in general southern areas...they do not have equivelant health care in terms of both facilities or the ability to attract/retain personnel.

    So the attitude seems to be too bad...but keep the oil moving.

    Tom

  95. #295

    Default

    I dont get what northern health care, or schools have to do with ECCA. Closing this airport doesn't close the door to Edmonton.

    Envision Edmonton has every right to attempt to lie, cheat and steal their time in the limelight. It's up to folks like me to expose them for the lies they sign, and expose their cheats (Nathan Black), and take back some of the over exposure they get in the media by tooting that health care of norhterns will be affected, when they are only trying to save their businesses and have no real care about people in the north. It's just an attempt to grab your heart strings.

  96. #296

    Default

    Medwards

    I was responding to the comments/attitudes expressed in the posts I was responding to.

    How you feel about Envision....don't care and not my problem.

    Tom

  97. #297

    Default

    According to Google Maps. YYC to Foothills Hospital, southern Alberta's trauma centre is 20.8 km

    YEG to University hospital is 28 km

    6 km will not make a difference if the patient is stable. Should they need faster access, there will be a helicopter available to fly them directly to the hospital from the airport.

    Perhaps, in the future, all trauma centres should have their own private airstrips right next door. Of course, that will mean locating major medical facilities away from the centre of the cities. </sarcasm>

  98. #298
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    411

    Default

    The vast majority of emergency trauma cases come in via S.T.A.R.S. which land directly at hospitals like the U of A so this red herring being rehashed is absolutely frustrating.

    As for Mr. Elniski, I have me him several times since he became elected and can genuinely say that he has changed for the worse.

  99. #299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megatron View Post
    The vast majority of emergency trauma cases come in via S.T.A.R.S. which land directly at hospitals like the U of A so this red herring being rehashed is absolutely frustrating.

    As for Mr. Elniski, I have me him several times since he became elected and can genuinely say that he has changed for the worse.
    What I consider is frustrating is the mis information that continues to spread.

    That said this is all on the previous ECCA threads and can be read there.

    As the title of this one is "New Airport Lands" I am not going to discuss it here and for that matter if we don't get on topic or can't get on topic (and yes that includes me) the thread should be locked.

    My opinion

    Tom

  100. #300
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    30,642

    Default

    http://www.630ched.com/Channels/Reg/...spx?ID=1641506

    Another Tory MLA wants "to pursue other opportunities"

    A local MLA is joining the ranks of about a dozen other Alberta Tories who won't seek re-election.

    Edmonton-Calder Progressive Conservative MLA Doug Elniski has decided not to run in the next provincial election. He was first elected to the seat in 2008.
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

Page 3 of 26 FirstFirst 123456713 ... 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
  •