HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Buildings & Architecture, Urban Design & Heritage Issues


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 10:58 PM
mersar's Avatar
mersar mersar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 10,083
West Village Concept Plan

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CITYBEAT - CITY OF CALGARY PRESS RELEASE
-----------------------------------------------------------------

- Expo 2017 Not Financially Feasible Under Plan

(Calgary) The West End of Calgary’s Downtown will see a major transformation over the next 25 years, as City Council today approved moving forward with a comprehensive redevelopment plan. The area, comprised of 111 acres and scattered with light industrial uses such as car lots and bus terminals, will eventually become a new downtown mixed-use community and home to more than 12,000 people. “West Village” as the area is now known is located between 11th Street S.W. and Crowchild Trail, and the Bow River south to the CPR tracks.

Mayor Dave Bronconnier announced Council’s decision to redevelop West Village utilizing a financing mechanism called a Community Revitalization Levy (CRL). CRLs are enabled through provincial legislation, and allow for new property tax revenues in a redevelopment area to be pooled for up to 20 years to pay for “up-front” infrastructure improvements that “kick-start” private sector re-development. A CRL is necessary for West Village as the area has significant environmental contamination and major transportation networks would need to be re-routed and re-constructed.

In addition to re-routing the road network and environmental remediation, the West Village Concept Plan calls for enhanced parks and open space, a land bridge connecting a new SunAlta LRT station and users to the river park system, and sites for institutional facilities such as a new Alberta College of Art and Design and a Global Energy Centre.

Mayor Bronconnier noted, “This is some of the most valuable and strategically important land in Calgary: Downtown real estate, right on the Bow River, right next to a new LRT station. It’s a prime location for re-development, but that won’t happen without a comprehensive plan and a CRL – the upfront infrastructure costs are just too large.”

The West Village Concept Plan was unveiled during an Expo Media Update held this afternoon.

In May, The City of Calgary expressed an interest in hosting the 2017 World Expo, with the desire to not only locate the Expo site in West Village but to “lever” both projects. The concept, which has been extensively investigated over the last 5 months, was to use Expo as a means to accelerate redevelopment of West Village, and use land redevelopment to pay for hosting the 2017 Expo. From a planning and development perspective, the two projects were an ideal fit.

Turning to the financial estimates however, a very different perspective emerged.

Mayor Bronconnier said, “As a stand-alone project, using a CRL, West village is viable, and would provide for a net return of somewhere between $72 and $470 Million. However, even with that favourable return, it would not cover the costs of hosting Expo 2017. As a combined project, Expo and West Village, the result would be a net deficit of somewhere between $380 Million and $1 Billion. Therefore, today Council approved moving forward with a redevelopment plan for West village, but that will not include hosting an Expo as we are not prepared to ask taxpayers to cover a potential $1 Billion shortfall.”
Source
__________________

Live or work in the Beltline? Check out the Official Beltline web site here
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:19 PM
frinkprof's Avatar
frinkprof frinkprof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Gary
Posts: 4,869
Nice. It will be interesting to see more information on this, including the boundaries of the CRL area and what public improvements may be in store. This "land bridge" sounds intriguing.

Awesome to see that this area will be primed for redevelopment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:20 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 24,072
Interesting. The East village should give us an idea what we can expect. I very much look forward to the commercial desert that is the CBD surrounded by walkable mixed use neighbourhoods.
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:23 PM
Bigtime's Avatar
Bigtime Bigtime is offline
Very tall. Such Scrape.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 17,731
I have a concern, let me know if I am completely off my rocker here.

Are we spreading ourselves to thin with all of these new "villages"?

East Village, West Village, TOD's. We are still only a city of just over a million people, can we really support all of these giant neighbourhoods?

I'd rather see the focus on the East Village first, and let that develop and strengthen the Beltline as a result. Once we have achieved critical mass move onto the next area. Because if all of these projects go ahead simultaneously I don't think we will achieve the desired vision for all these neighbourhoods. Now dump an extra 500,000 people into our population right now and I think my concern would be less.

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:29 PM
frinkprof's Avatar
frinkprof frinkprof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Gary
Posts: 4,869
^I see your line of thinking. However, on the flip side I was of the opinion that I didn't want to see East Village build out over too short a time. If there is another upswing in the market, I could have seen it being built out in 5-10 years which is incredibly fast for that area. I think having multiple sites for urban development can draw the growth of any one of them out a little longer. This helps the community to grow a little more organically and also for infrastructure upgrades to be staged over a longer time so it is more manageable.

As for the scale of the city, the fact remains that despite the downturn of the last year or so, people continue to move here in droves, compared to the rest of the country.

I'd like to see a different word than "village" though. East Village makes sense, but there is also Westbrook Village and now West Village as well. This is more of a minor quibble though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:44 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtime View Post
I have a concern, let me know if I am completely off my rocker here.

Are we spreading ourselves to thin with all of these new "villages"?

East Village, West Village, TOD's. We are still only a city of just over a million people, can we really support all of these giant neighbourhoods?

I'd rather see the focus on the East Village first, and let that develop and strengthen the Beltline as a result. Once we have achieved critical mass move onto the next area. Because if all of these projects go ahead simultaneously I don't think we will achieve the desired vision for all these neighbourhoods. Now dump an extra 500,000 people into our population right now and I think my concern would be less.

Thoughts?
I share some of your concerns. Was just in Edmonton this weekend staying in a hotel on Whyte, and of course that's one urban street (well actually a few streets) that's pretty well developed. Lots of small commercial development creating a large number of shops per block, cool historic buildings, and of course a captive audience being the U of A down the street. Now one might argue that Edm has only Whyte, and that Jasper and the terribly named "124th Street Area" districts aren't particularly interesting and they may be right. Calgary however I find that although it has more cool districts, none of them can hold a candle to Whyte, and I believe it's because we lack the population to fill them. We have 17th Ave, 4th St, 1st St, Stephen Ave, Kensington, Marda loop, the redeveloping Vic park, eventually Ramsay Exchange, eventually East Village, and now the West Village etc.. I fear it will take 3 million people to really get these areas hopping, and do wonder if we should be focusing exclusively on the 'low hanging fruit' so to speak.
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:53 PM
DizzyEdge's Avatar
DizzyEdge DizzyEdge is offline
My Spoon Is Too Big
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 9,191
One thing I'm curious about as far as the West Village (I think we need a new name), is the mention of a future location of an ACAD campus. Since this will be a village built from scratch, right adjacent to downtown, I'm curious if the housing and commercial establishments can be of an appropriate cost level for a captive population of 'starving art students'.
__________________
Concerned about protecting Calgary's built heritage?
www.CalgaryHeritage.org
News - Heritage Watch - Forums
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2009, 11:59 PM
Radley77's Avatar
Radley77 Radley77 is offline
The City That Moves
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bridgeland, Calgary
Posts: 1,450
I had come across these some time ago in the Sunalta ARP on the West LRT website and believe it is speaking to the same lands as the newly coined "West Village":

Bing Thom Architects, Sunalta 2035: Community Planning and Urban Design Study - Final Report July 2009

Part 1: Pages 1-23 (2.5MB)

Part 2: Pages 24-39 (6MB)

Part 3: Pages 40-61 (2.2MB)

Part 4: Pages 62-93 (3MB)

Part 5: Pages 94-164 (5.2MB)

I like the concept of using a CRL to spur revitalization. Hopefully, the East Village land sales go through in early 2010, when the LRT is completed in December 2012, likely East Village will already have some plans underway and starting execution. Once the SunAlta LRT station is built, it'll be a lot easier to increase the walkability and density from it's current low-rise commercial use. I think the city should make sure there is going to be ample inventory and land supply for increasing density as proposed in Plan It. I view increasing the location choices available for urban developers to go at larger scale developments as a good thing (increases creativity of designs, and affordability as developers can execute projects that they believe will deliver the best returns instead of being limited by smaller land supply).

More information located here:

http://www.westlrt.ca/stationareas/sunalta_arp.cfm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 12:23 AM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 24,072
The earliest I see anything happening in West Village is 10 years. There has to be a lot of planning and public consultation involved if they are going to move any infrastructure, and we all know how long that can take in this city. I think the East Village should really get going in the next 5 years as our economy picks up. There are still about 20 000 people moving here every year, so I doubt it will take too long before the market tightens up again, unless everyone gets greedy again, then who knows.
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 1:39 AM
Bassic Lab Bassic Lab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
The earliest I see anything happening in West Village is 10 years. There has to be a lot of planning and public consultation involved if they are going to move any infrastructure, and we all know how long that can take in this city. I think the East Village should really get going in the next 5 years as our economy picks up. There are still about 20 000 people moving here every year, so I doubt it will take too long before the market tightens up again, unless everyone gets greedy again, then who knows.
I'd say another significant difference with the East Village that could really delay this plan is the structure of land ownership in the two areas. The city owns a great deal of land in the East Village and it is mostly all vacant. Which means it is ripe for development and the city can exert a great deal of influence. I'm curious as to how well the city can really push for change in an area with private land owners that are actually utilizing it for something other than parking.

I'm really wondering about the ACAD campus as well. Is this just the city throwing ideas around or is there some level of actual planning being put into ACAD relocating to this area. I'd have thought that if something like that was being worked out we'd hear about independently of a throwaway line in an article like this. I had favoured the old Molson Brewery site and some of the vacant lots along 9th Ave in Inglewood myself. Like DizzyEdge I;m not sure how well it would fit in a yuppy dominated condo development like this is bound to become.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 1:58 AM
devonb devonb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Crescent Heights
Posts: 471
When I read the article, it said they can front load the money for up to 20 years. I figured it was 10+ years away. Could ACAD wait that long? I'd prefer to see it in the East Village to help create traffic/density.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 2:05 AM
kap384's Avatar
kap384 kap384 is offline
Littering and............
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassic Lab View Post
I'd say another significant difference with the East Village that could really delay this plan is the structure of land ownership in the two areas. The city owns a great deal of land in the East Village and it is mostly all vacant. Which means it is ripe for development and the city can exert a great deal of influence. I'm curious as to how well the city can really push for change in an area with private land owners that are actually utilizing it for something other than parking.

Exactly. Lot's of private land owners and some existing businesses, not to mention a significant environmental remediation problem. East Village has a huge head start.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 2:22 AM
frinkprof's Avatar
frinkprof frinkprof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Gary
Posts: 4,869
Here's some screen captures from the CTV news story:











Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 4:12 AM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtime View Post
Because if all of these projects go ahead simultaneously I don't think we will achieve the desired vision for all these neighbourhoods. Now dump an extra 500,000 people into our population right now and I think my concern would be less.
Wait 20 years (absolute maximum) and you'll have your 500,000 people. If even 10% of those people choose to live inner city, I think that'd be more than enough to fill in these areas. The comment on Global tonight was that the city envisions 12,000 or so in the West Village. Obviously the Beltline can take several multiples of that, but still... the WV just isn't *that* large a parcel of land to make things too spread out.

I dunno, 20 years doesn't sound too far out to really mature the core areas. Sure it'd be great to see it overnight, but I just don't see it happening short of halting all suburban development immediately.

A lot of this depends on Calgary's future growth compared to today. I suspect today's plans are lined up for a lot higher growth, or a lot further down the road (5-10 years before shovels in ground). I do sometimes wonder what things would be like if we actually saw a sustained boom here - you know, one not destroyed by a global economic meltdown. Imagine 5 or even 10 years of the insanity of 2005-7.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 4:49 AM
fusili's Avatar
fusili fusili is offline
Retrofit Urbanist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,692
I remember a few of us having this conversation quite some time ago. Using a TIF to fund development in this area. But I agree with Bigtime. We seem to be spending a lot of money creating these new "urban villages" but we seem to be neglecting existing areas that can handle a significant amount of increased density with nowhere near the infrastructure costs. Redesigning 1st street, or 8th Street, or 10th Avenue is a fraction of the cost of rerouting Bow Trail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 5:05 AM
YYCguys YYCguys is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,520
Speaking of rerouting Bow Trail, do you think that Bow Trail will be rerouted concurrent with the WestLRT construction? And if so, that'll require the Greyhound Depot to relocate, which, as stated in the West Village Plan referenced by Radley, above, is to the LRT station in order to create a Transit Hub. I assume that the Transit Hub being referenced is Sunalta Station?

Last edited by YYCguys; Nov 3, 2009 at 6:03 AM. Reason: Clarification
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 5:17 AM
frinkprof's Avatar
frinkprof frinkprof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The Gary
Posts: 4,869
^Bow Trail will not be rerouted/realigned as part of West LRT, and likely not concurrently. It is being realigned further west as part of the West LRT project though.

The LRT station being referenced is indeed Sunalta Station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 7:16 AM
fusili's Avatar
fusili fusili is offline
Retrofit Urbanist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,692
I would imagine that Bow Trail would be rerouted as per Bing Thom's Sunalta Plan (ARP?). Probably reroute it so that both east and west lanes are closer to the river and modified into a boulevard-type street. The 14th street intersection would also have to be redone, which I think is long overdue.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 1:37 PM
CorporateWhore's Avatar
CorporateWhore CorporateWhore is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Purgatory
Posts: 4,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof View Post
Is that a fancy new foreign pedestrian bridge I see? I better not be paying for that!

Also, why has ACAD become the prison bitch of Calgary development? It's used and passed around to justify half the new neighborhoods in he city it seems....all without any firm basis in reality. Having gone there, I still think the current location is fantastic, but if SAIT really needs the location badly (they've been saying this for decades now), I would prefer to see it built into the actual hillside, in stepped form. As a student, Riley Park and Kensington provide plenty of action.....way more than the East Village could for decades.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2009, 2:01 PM
Riise's Avatar
Riise Riise is offline
City Maker
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary | London
Posts: 3,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by mersar View Post
(Calgary) The West End of Calgary’s Downtown will see a major transformation over the next 25 years, as City Council today approved moving forward with a comprehensive redevelopment plan. The area, comprised of 111 acres and scattered with light industrial uses such as car lots and bus terminals, will eventually become a new downtown mixed-use community and home to more than 12,000 people. “West Village” as the area is now known is located between 11th Street S.W. and Crowchild Trail, and the Bow River south to the CPR tracks.
Wow, this sounds promising! I think these kinds of plans go well with the plans for making Calgary a potential home to global finance operations. Also, I think it would be a good location for that footy park Innersoul and I dream about!



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtime View Post
I have a concern, let me know if I am completely off my rocker here.

Are we spreading ourselves to thin with all of these new "villages"?

Thoughts?
This is a great question Bigtime! Like others have said, the timeline for this Village compared to others' are rather different. If the West Village has to wait as long as for a Master Plan as the EV did, it might not even start before most of the EV is built out. However, if it doesn't take as long I think it will help provide opportunities for small development companies. If the whole Urban Village concept catches on with local developers, smaller development companies might get pushed out if we have too few Villages to develop. With the City taking a proactive role and really jumping on the bandwagon, I think they are forming a path for organic growth to be fueled by a variety of developers.



Quote:
Originally Posted by fusili View Post
I remember a few of us having this conversation quite some time ago. Using a TIF to fund development in this area. But I agree with Bigtime. We seem to be spending a lot of money creating these new "urban villages" but we seem to be neglecting existing areas that can handle a significant amount of increased density with nowhere near the infrastructure costs. Redesigning 1st street, or 8th Street, or 10th Avenue is a fraction of the cost of rerouting Bow Trail.
I believe that brown and greyfield development on larger and open plots like the EV and WV are more appealing to developers; they are much easier and less risky to develop. The way I see it is that this is how the City is selling infill development to developers. It may be more expensive than piecemeal development in the Beltline but if this is how we are going to get developers buy into the 'it doesn't have to be all about greenfield development' mentality, so be it. I think we can all admit that any high-quality brownfield development is better than no brownfield development.
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Buildings & Architecture, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.