|
|
|
Calgary's Downtown Dilemma
- Thread starter Alex_YYC
- Start date
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Downtown Calgary, including the Beltline and the East Village, is significantly smaller than the downtown peninsula of Vancouver, even when including Fort Calgary and Stampede Park.
Downtown (CBD, Chinatown, Eau Claire, West End, East Village) - 1.8 km2
Beltline (West Connaught, Connaught Centre, Victoria Park, East Victoria Park, Stampede Park) - 2.9 km2
Total Downtown Calgary: 4.7 km, total population 50,000
Downtown (CBD, Coal Harbour, Gastown, Chinatown, Japantown, Yaletown) - 3.8 km2
West End: 2 km2
Total Downtown Vancouver: 5.8 km2, total population 110,000
I generously didn't include Stanley Park or the Downtown East Side for Van, despite including Stampede Park and Fort Calgary in my calculations. Either way, the point is, Calgary's downtown isn't actually that shockingly large, it is just much larger than virtually every other city our size.
Downtown (CBD, Chinatown, Eau Claire, West End, East Village) - 1.8 km2
Beltline (West Connaught, Connaught Centre, Victoria Park, East Victoria Park, Stampede Park) - 2.9 km2
Total Downtown Calgary: 4.7 km, total population 50,000
Downtown (CBD, Coal Harbour, Gastown, Chinatown, Japantown, Yaletown) - 3.8 km2
West End: 2 km2
Total Downtown Vancouver: 5.8 km2, total population 110,000
I generously didn't include Stanley Park or the Downtown East Side for Van, despite including Stampede Park and Fort Calgary in my calculations. Either way, the point is, Calgary's downtown isn't actually that shockingly large, it is just much larger than virtually every other city our size.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
My main point was comparing the central business districts in terms of geographic area. Here, we can define the CBD as the area dominated by office buildings. In Calgary that would be 2 Ave to the rail line (800m), and 9 St SW to Macleod Trail (1.8km) = 1.44 km2. If you draw a 1800x800m square in the Vancouver peninsula, you get way more than just the areas that are predominantly office buildings. 1.8 km stretches from BC Place up well than more than half way into the West End.
The CBD of Toronto, which has clearer boundaries than Vancouver's is basically Simcoe to Victoria (800m) and Queen to Front (700m) = 0.56 km2.
The CBD of Toronto, which has clearer boundaries than Vancouver's is basically Simcoe to Victoria (800m) and Queen to Front (700m) = 0.56 km2.
Urban Outdoorsman
Active Member
LiveWire Calgary: Next Calgary's Downtown Strategy: 'Doing nothing is not an option.'.
livewirecalgary.com
Calgary's Downtown Strategy: 'Doing nothing is not an option.' - LiveWire Calgary
When Thom Mahler wrote the 2007 Centre City plan, Calgary was focused on making the downtown a hub of global oil and gas head offices. “I remember distinctly when we were doing the plan, the
livewirecalgary.com
Why Calgary's betting $450M it can convince owners of empty towers to change
City wants to incentivize the owners of downtown towers to change, part of a plan to save hollowed out core
YourBoy007
Active Member
I really don't think this is the way to reduce office vacancies downtown. These vacancies will fill naturally over time without the taxpayer's dime. And 450M could've been spent a whole lot better.
DougB
Senior Member
Horrible idea. Government never excels at finding innovative solutions to complex problems. The idea of repurposing office buildings to residential is naive. If it made sense, it would already be happening.
At some point the value of those buildings will fall to the point where someone will figure out ways to make them viable. The City needs to wake up and signifcantly adjust its spending levels to the new reality of not being able to milk the cash cow of dt office tower property taxes.
JTron
Active Member
They might eventually, fill up, or maybe not. It could go the other way. The problem with leaving it to happen naturally, is if there is even more decline, becomes a spiral of decline, that becomes difficult to turn around. You 'll end up spending that money or more in the end.
JTron
Active Member
If the city had to subsidize converting a couple of building conversions, I'd be okay with that. Make them into affordable housing, or some sort of student housing, etc.. Other uses such as educational facilities etc.. are also being considered.
boreal96
New Member
How expensive is to demolish these buildings and sell the land to developpers, compared to this $450M plan?
darwink
Senior Member
The city doesn't own these sites.
Mountain Man
Senior Member
Some of the older, less maintained buildings will probably come down eventually, but I don't think a vacant lot will do anything to help downtown.
darwink
Senior Member
Some sites will probably make sense as new parks. But those will be really expensive and few and far between.
adamyyc
Active Member
Bit of a radical idea - the City should buy up all of the lands that are between 9 Ave SW and the rail line and convert it to park space. Would be great for the downtown to have a long, contiguous “mini Central Park.
It’ll be tough to get the landowners to sell those lands, but those lands aren’t going to be developed any time soon, and downtown parking lots continue to struggle.
It’ll be tough to get the landowners to sell those lands, but those lands aren’t going to be developed any time soon, and downtown parking lots continue to struggle.
If you could convert those parcels into a large contiguous park, you could potentially see a lot of residential development in the immediate area including some development on those parcels south of 9th ave. The ultimate boost for downtown would be if the CP tracks went away. Amazing potential if that ever happened.