News   Apr 03, 2020
Pastel Morning
 4.7K     1 
News   Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 6.6K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Soon to be Gone
 3.8K     0 

The Greater Downtown Plan

UrbanWarrior

UrbanWarrior

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 28, 2016
Messages
5,852
Reaction score
38,621
Location
Mission
Since the plan has been drafted and is going to council on Monday, might as well have a thread for it to discuss. The city is spending an initial $200 million on the first phase (total for first phase is $1 billion) to encourage transformation of the core areas. The first phase will focus on improving cultural institutions and the conversion of office space to residential. $77 million of the first 200 will come from the federal infrastructure fund, mostly directed toward Arts Commons, and the rest coming from city reserves and will go toward incentivizing office conversion and affordable housing.

"City officials say Calgary’s core needs about $500 million for “downtown vibrancy infrastructure and amenities” and another $500 million to address office vacancy over the next decade."

News story here… https://calgaryherald.com/news/loca...estment-to-transform-calgarys-ailing-downtown

The 115 page report here… https://www.calgary.ca/pda/pd/downt...ntown-plan.html?redirect=/greaterdowntownplan

greater-downtown-map.jpeg
 
I like that there's talk of affordable rental units and space for post-secondary education. However, I think this is going to be a failure unless the City massively redesigns the streets, including removing lanes.

One of the controversial elements of the plan is "enhancing" the Plus 15 network, which includes adding more connections. While I wouldn't go quite as far as some people who advocate for the dismantling of the Plus 15, I'm a little worried that doubling-down on the Plus 15 might be indicative of a larger mindset of just throwing money at preserving the status quo.
 
Last edited:
A minor nitpick but I see the put the downtown west boundary as 9th Street. I always thought it was 8th Street. But, looking at some other city maps, I see they show it as 9th as well. Huh, learn something new each day.
 
Some good ideas in there, but I agree with @Silence&Motion, putting more into the +15 is not the way to go. The biggest single failure of downtown is not having enough retail frontage, and the +15 is a big reason for that.

Same for the streets and avenues being improved. I’m hoping this isn’t going to be another mistake.
 
Last edited:
We know there is a glut of office space and one of the solutions is to convert some buildings to residential. The emphasis is on 'some' as not all office buildings can be converted to residential or doing so would be so cost prohibitive. Depending on where these designated office buildings are located, a conversion to residential is unlikely to lead to other development around it. For example if there was a office building on 5 or 6th Ave that was converted to residential, would that motivate anyone to open a store or restaurant nearby (assuming there was any street level space available) just because there a few hundred residents in a building nearby? Conversely, would you buy or rent in a building when it is alone in a canyon of office buildings with few amenities around? This has to be carefully planned out before municipal money is just randomly thrown out there.
 
I think it's safe to say that 5th and 6th Ave will be the last streets to really gain a critical mass of residential and retail spaces. It's really quite striking that the geographic centre of Downtown (say 5th Ave and 4th St.) is such an amenity desert (and also happens to be an intersection of two 5-lane one-way streets).

In the interim, I do wonder if some of these massive floor plates in the lower-end buildings, which cannot easily be converted to residential, could instead be taken over for unconventional uses: nightclubs, flea markets, art studios and galleries, used book stores, etc. Basically the kinds of things that typically have to locate way out in some far flung suburban industrial zone because that's the only place you can find big enough spaces that are affordable. I'd love to see an informal nightclub district emerge in one of the more rundown corners of downtown, taking over empty office buildings, similar to what occurred in Toronto to abandoned warehouses in the 1990s.
 
Silence&Motion said:
I think it's safe to say that 5th and 6th Ave will be the last streets to really gain a critical mass of residential and retail spaces. It's really quite striking that the geographic centre of Downtown (say 5th Ave and 4th St.) is such an amenity desert (and also happens to be an intersection of two 5-lane one-way streets).

In the interim, I do wonder if some of these massive floor plates in the lower-end buildings, which cannot easily be converted to residential, could instead be taken over for unconventional uses: nightclubs, flea markets, art studios and galleries, used book stores, etc. Basically the kinds of things that typically have to locate way out in some far flung suburban industrial zone because that's the only place you can find big enough spaces that are affordable. I'd love to see an informal nightclub district emerge in one of the more rundown corners of downtown, taking over empty office buildings, similar to what occurred in Toronto to abandoned warehouses in the 1990s.
Click to expand...
A big part of the strategy, and far more important IMO, is getting the regulatory part out of the way, so that not only can someone do an innovative use - they can do so in 3 months, instead of 6 months, or 18 months if it required a hearing. Which saves so much money and enables a business plan way more than a 5% of construction costs subsidy.

Because yeah, I think an entire floor of DOME or HOME would be a great nightclub. Maybe it would be a massive fiasco? But lets learn that instead of assuming it would be.
 
darwink said:
A big part of the strategy, and far more important IMO, is getting the regulatory part out of the way, so that not only can someone do an innovative use - they can do so in 3 months, instead of 6 months, or 18 months if it required a hearing. Which saves so much money and enables a business plan way more than a 5% of construction costs subsidy.

Because yeah, I think an entire floor of DOME or HOME would be a great nightclub. Maybe it would be a massive fiasco? But lets learn that instead of assuming it would be.
Click to expand...

Totally agree! That was Toronto's strategy in the 1990s (look up the "two Kings" policy). They basically just ripped up zoning laws in the former industrial areas along King Streets East and West. The areas around King and Spadina filled up with nightclubs within a few years. Some people were upset by it and crime did rise, but the nightclubs gave the neighbourhood a reputation as an "entertainment district" and that reputation eventually attracted exactly the kinds of residential and retail development that people want to see in Downtown Calgary.
 
Something I recently learned about was Camden Collective, a group in Camden Town, London, who take over vacant spaces over the short term and convert them into co-working spaces for startups, with free hot desk space and cheap small office rental; in some cases they've put together pop-up retail spaces that host a bunch of startup retailers. Something like this would be great in the downtown.
 
Last edited:
Silence&Motion said:
Totally agree! That was Toronto's strategy in the 1990s (look up the "two Kings" policy). They basically just ripped up zoning laws in the former industrial areas along King Streets East and West. The areas around King and Spadina filled up with nightclubs within a few years. Some people were upset by it and crime did rise, but the nightclubs gave the neighbourhood a reputation as an "entertainment district" and that reputation eventually attracted exactly the kinds of residential and retail development that people want to see in Downtown Calgary.
Click to expand...
I was living in Toronto at the time things started to come together. Part of the draw to those blocks was that they were near Skydome and the theatre district is also there. Those are pretty good anchors to develop around. Also, the surrounding clubs & restaurants were located in older buildings and as a result there is a lot of street front variation.
Unfortunately what we have in Calgary is a lot of newer, stark looking office towers with plenty of space available above street level. Not the same opportunity in my mind.
 
Yeah, agreed with Jonny, the two situations are not similar at all. I mean, in a perfect world it would happen, but I don’t see even one tower let alone a dozen+ filling up with clubs, galleries, and the like all in one building.

We need the residential density first, that’s when demand for retail and amenities - and therefore innovation - comes.
 
JonnyCanuck said:
I was living in Toronto at the time things started to come together. Part of the draw to those blocks was that they were near Skydome and the theatre district is also there. Those are pretty good anchors to develop around. Also, the surrounding clubs & restaurants were located in older buildings and as a result there is a lot of street front variation.
Unfortunately what we have in Calgary is a lot of newer, stark looking office towers with plenty of space available above street level. Not the same opportunity in my mind.
Click to expand...

I don't think we should focus on the end result, but rather the method. It's not about trying to turn Downtown Calgary into Clubland Toronto circa 2001. It's about letting creative new uses emerge rather than doubling-down on the status quo. Manufacturing in Toronto had been declining for decades before the City of Toronto finally decided to let those neighbourhoods be used for other purposes. Certainly no one ways trying to create an entertainment district.

That said, I don't think it's obvious that Downtown Calgary is less suited for entertainment uses than King-Spadina was in the late-80s, early-90s. The area suffered from exactly the same problems you identify in Downtown Calgary: stark street fronts with little variation, most space available above (or below) street level. Check out these photos of the area from around 1990. They make Downtown Calgary look like a walker's paradise. I remember in those days you often had to walk up two flights of stairs to get to the club (after lining up outside against a brick wall waiting for the bouncer to let you in). Lining up in an office building lobby to take an elevator ride up would be an absolute luxury by contrast.

s1465_fl0051_id0061.jpg


s1465_fl0532_it0001.jpg


As for anchor amenities like the Skydome and the Mirvish theatres, those probably helped, but clearly they served a very different demographic than the club kids. I think the CHUM-City (Much Music) building was a major factor as well. There does seem to be widespread agreement that Downtown Calgary needs anchor amenities like theatres which is one area where direct government funding could make a difference. We also already have Stephen Avenue, Arts Commons, and the Core. So there are some anchors that already exist.
 
UrbanWarrior said:
Yeah, agreed with Jonny, the two situations are not similar at all. I mean, in a perfect world it would happen, but I don’t see even one tower let alone a dozen+ filling up with clubs, galleries, and the like all in one building.

We need the residential density first, that’s when demand for retail and amenities - and therefore innovation - comes.
Click to expand...

Those Toronto warehouses didn't have clubs on every single floor either. All it took was a few dozen clubs to give the neighbourhood its reputation. Residential density will not be achieved for decades. We should let this space be used for other things in the meantime. And once downtown is filled with residents, there will be no more room for innovation, because of higher property values and NIMBYism.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top