News   Apr 03, 2020
 4.6K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 6.5K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 3.7K     0 

Victoria Park Master Plan | CMLC |

Surrealplaces

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 24, 2015
Messages
12,634
Reaction score
72,766
Location
Calgary
That is awesome. I smell an Opera House proposal coming over the next 10 years! :D
 
So this would compete with the CalgaryNEXT proposal, as far as the location of a potential new arena for the Flames?
 
It looks like it will include a location for the "Plan B" arena location. From the website:

The Master Plan for East Victoria Park will honour and integrate previous and future plans and projects, including Calgary Stampede’s envisioned expansion, the City’s quest for a viable site for a new arena facility, the Green Line extension of Calgary’s LRT and, of course, the East Village master plan.
 
Fantastic news for Victoria Park. I would rather see a new arena integrated into a plan like this instead of the West Village site.
With CMLC running the master plan, it seems much more likely that a proper arena plan will happen.
 
I'm pretty pumped for this. There's a lot of potential. My dream for the extension of 17th Ave would be to have it lined with mock early 20th century stone and brick store fronts with restaurents and shops that during Stampede week become incorporated into the grounds. If fully realized to it's potential it would make for a really cool connection between the Beltline and East Village.

I also hope that work on elevating or tunneling the Red Line under 25th Ave is taken into account for this project as well so that we can avoid a potentially snarling at grade crossing.


EDIT: Re: CalgaryNEXT Plan B

If they do ultimately go with the Stampede Grounds as the site of the new arena, I'd prefer that they tear down the Big 4 rather than rip up all the parking that's used for fairground space. Then they can work on repurposing the Dome. Maybe convert some of it into fairground space to account for the fact that some of it will ultimately be lost for a new arena. It would be cool to see an outdoor ampatheatre or something though. It would fit in with the arts and culture mission of the Stampede and it might be a good way to pay tribute to the Dome's iconic (not a work I throw aorund lightly) roof design which would otherwise be lost.
 
Last edited:
I see there is already a thread for this but of great news. This is a total win for the Beltline and for Victoria Park, and for Calgary.

I see also, that the city is looking at putting the LRT under 25th Ave., which means maybe they will put it under the whole stretch and we can have that 17th Ave. opening that they are talking about .
 
I wonder if a boring machine would be required to go beneath the Elbow - or if they could dam up half the river, and sort of "cut & cover" an encapsulated tunnel. Pretty small stretch to bring in a TBM if this goes ahead at a different time than the Green Line.
 
So, just to spur some discussion, does anyone else thing $150 million is a lot of money? On top of the reportedly $600 million already spent in east village? I know a large chunk of that includes the library, NMC, etc.. so difficult to tell how much was actual infrastructure required prior to development. Isn't one of the main reasons behind the push for redevelopment the fact that it is more cost efficient for cities? I cant' think of a suburban neighbourhood that required $150 million in city investment (capital) before people could occupy it. I know a lot of money needs to be spent on a new suburban community, but most of the costs (anything within the neighbourhood boundaries) are paid for by the land developer, and they pay a levy on top of those costs to cover the larger system infrastructure like interchanges and skeletal road network. I know the levy doesn't cover 100%, but typically there isn't a $150 million hole for new communities.

From a fiscally sustainable stand point, if we have literally dozens of tower infill sites in the Beltline already, that don't require investment to bring online, why should this money be spent now?
 
Interesting points. Something I hadn't thought about as the $150 million dollar figure didn't seem high at the time I read about it. My take on it would be that it is a high cost, but perhaps would pay off in the long run, due to the tax base. It's a lot of money for a small area, but I would expect that there would be a high number of businesses and residential units paying taxes over the long haul. Compared to a suburban district over the long run, there wouldn't likely be any new schools needed for this area, and less maintenance work such as, street lights, snow snowplowing or water main breaks etc.. Same for transit considerations. Over the long haul, I think it makes sense, but how long would it take to pay off? Hard to say.

So, just to spur some discussion, does anyone else thing $150 million is a lot of money? On top of the reportedly $600 million already spent in east village? I know a large chunk of that includes the library, NMC, etc.. so difficult to tell how much was actual infrastructure required prior to development. Isn't one of the main reasons behind the push for redevelopment the fact that it is more cost efficient for cities? I cant' think of a suburban neighbourhood that required $150 million in city investment (capital) before people could occupy it. I know a lot of money needs to be spent on a new suburban community, but most of the costs (anything within the neighbourhood boundaries) are paid for by the land developer, and they pay a levy on top of those costs to cover the larger system infrastructure like interchanges and skeletal road network. I know the levy doesn't cover 100%, but typically there isn't a $150 million hole for new communities.

From a fiscally sustainable stand point, if we have literally dozens of tower infill sites in the Beltline already, that don't require investment to bring online, why should this money be spent now?
 
And further to it the conversation, is it not a fair assumption that the development would take place, even without the $150 million investment? So, we get all of the benefits you outlined (not sure on the timeline) without the cost? It is not like Victoria Park has been without development these past 10 years. In fact, it has probably seen more than any other neighbourhood, except maybe East Village (and that is only maybe, it might be more). So again, why spend the money if development is already happening?

Things like sidewalk upgrades, utility lines, etc.. are typically the responsibility of the developers who build the tower anyway. Sure, the sidewalk may not be continuous if there is a gap in development, but is that benefit worth the cost?
 
I'd have to see what the $150 million is to be spent on. It is a lot of money, but of course it depends on what they plan to spend it on. Could it be part of burying the LRT at 25th ave?
 

Back
Top