DougB
Senior Member
No mention of the primary disadvantage of that site
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
Albertasaurus
Active Member
Doug, are you referring to the DI?
Ramsayite
Active Member
Great, now let's house them too.
Habanero
Active Member
That’s 100% what it is. It’s nice to list East Village as an advantage, but from an investors point of view, the DIC kills it as a potential development site.
Strictly from an investors point of view, you’d have to be brain dead to invest in something in that location.
MichaelS
Senior Member
Sure gives me hope about the CRL to read this ...
trtcttc
Active Member
There are issues with the DI for sure, but this blows it way out of proportion. I’m sure the largest grocer and bank in the country wouldn’t have opened locations if it’s the absolute hellscape you describe.
outoftheice
Active Member
One of the biggest examples of the DI being an issue that I most often hear is the amount of theft and anti-social behaviour that occurs around the East Village Superstore. I agree with this criticism as I witness it every time I go to that Superstore. That being said, the Superstore has faced those issues since Day 1 of opening and yet despite all of that Loblaw's just recently signed a lease to open a Shopper's Drug Mart on the ground floor. So yes, I agree with your point. The DI might be an issue, but not enough of one to scare off Canada's largest grocers and I doubt large enough to scare off the size of institutional developer/investor that would be interested in purchasing a large block of land in that area.
In all fairness, those tenants signed on way back when EV was starting out. The thought was that by now EV would be built out and the full of people. In the time since then EV stalled out to some degree and the area around the DI seems to have gotten worse and has made the old YWCA site more of a challenge today. It's not that it can't be done, but not surprising investors aren't as bullish on the parcel as they once were.
Albertasaurus
Active Member
The DI is, unfortunately, ground zero in Calgary for both the homelessness and opioid/fentanyl crises. I have a relative who used to work there and whatever you may have heard about the DI, it's likely even worse. And obviously, it continues to worsen since Covid so I can see how it's a turnoff to many investors.
One challenge is that other large cities tend to have multiple facilities in different areas that serve the purpose of the DI, rather than concentrating all of it in one very large building.
One challenge is that other large cities tend to have multiple facilities in different areas that serve the purpose of the DI, rather than concentrating all of it in one very large building.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
I still can't believe it was renewed. One central place doesn't serve the city well or the people who need the DIC.
trtcttc
Active Member
Probably out of convenience. Would be extremely hard to create a new space and the amount of community opposition it'd receive. There will be nearby residential if it's going to be accessible to the people that need it.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Very true, people fall all over themselves to prevent renters! Imagine low/no income people!
A direct quote from someone in the Marda Loop area when confronted with the idea of a rental development: "Things like this are going to turn this community into a slum".
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Calgary like any city is not uniform in opinions or good/bad takes, but one issue it will increasingly wrestle with that as a big city different people and different incomes live here.
For a generation or two many Calgarians, particularly in the wealthier areas, were somewhat insulated from the idea that there's income diversity in this city. And things like "apartment buildings" or "transit" or "affordable housing" is needed in more places than just a few blocks from downtown when a region grows to 2 million+ people. They are in for a rude awakening as reality hits them.
Turns out that the people that work in their cafes and grocery stores need places to live too. And to really stretch the imagination - all types of social and community services are required to support people in lots of places, not only downtown
Old stereotypes die hard, but there has been improvement over the past decade or so. I recall when I first moved into my neighborhood 20 years ago, there was a house on my street that was converted into two rental units (one in the basement). Some of the neighbors were treating it like the scandal of the century. The elderly lady across the street from me actually said "This is the beginning of the end, you watch my words. Someday there will be another house with renters, and this street will become hell in a handbasket" lol.
Today there are a few renters around, and multiple secondary suites around the neighborhood, and I would say the neighborhood is better than it used to be. There are quite a few young people now, and people with young families. The school down the street has seen enrollment rise for about 10 straight years now. Business are thriving. It's all good.
Today there are a few renters around, and multiple secondary suites around the neighborhood, and I would say the neighborhood is better than it used to be. There are quite a few young people now, and people with young families. The school down the street has seen enrollment rise for about 10 straight years now. Business are thriving. It's all good.
Urban4Lyfe
New Member
Imagine thinking people paying 2500+ a month for rent are "poor".
It's the same people who decry row housing being built in established neighborhoods when the units are selling for 650k+.
Slums indeed.
It's the same people who decry row housing being built in established neighborhoods when the units are selling for 650k+.
Slums indeed.