Downtown Calgary: Where are we at in 2014?

[freeweed]

No, I think people are just being too "modern" in their use of the term.

I've seen people describe how Manhattan's density "sprawls" all over the island, and it's a fitting description. Spawl != suburban sprawl, contrary to recent usage.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by onanewday

White does know what urban sprawl is. He was trying out in a different context. I got his intended meaning, but probably not the best usage of words.

True, kinda interesting how he turned what is typically a bad word into something that is desirable for most on the urban end of the scale.

Originally Posted by freeweed

No, I think people are just being too "modern" in their use of the term.

I've seen people describe how Manhattan's density "sprawls" all over the island, and it's a fitting description. Spawl != suburban sprawl, contrary to recent usage.

True, but many words have changed their meanings over the years maybe this is one of those that will change over the next while.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

True, but many words have changed their meanings over the years maybe this is one of those that will change over the next while.

It's less a change in meaning and more of a field-specific usage. Other than Arcade Fire songs, I can't really think of many times outside of SSP that I hear the word "sprawl" to mean anything but the generic sense. People talk about how Banff sprawls across the mountains - I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean SFH is going up with cul-de-sacs everywhere.

This isn't like "organic" where only chemists used the term before, so a re-definition in the common vernacular was easy enough. Sprawl is a word that everyone already knows, and uses.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by freeweed

It's less a change in meaning and more of a field-specific usage. Other than Arcade Fire songs, I can't really think of many times outside of SSP that I hear the word "sprawl" to mean anything but the generic sense. People talk about how Banff sprawls across the mountains - I'm pretty sure that doesn't mean SFH is going up with cul-de-sacs everywhere.

This isn't like "organic" where only chemists used the term before, so a re-definition in the common vernacular was easy enough. Sprawl is a word that everyone already knows, and uses.

By generic do you mean urban growth into previously undeveloped areas?

[Spring2008]

Another article covering our massive urban sprawl movement

Looks like Bucci's next project - Kensington will be 73 units.

Community profile: Experience inner-city evolution


Calgary Herald June 24, 2014


A stone’s throw from downtown, Hillhurst/Sunnyside — and its marquee shopping and residential hub, Kensington...


By Alex Frazer-Harrison

A stone’s throw from downtown, Hillhurst/Sunnyside – and its marquee shopping and residential hub, Kensington – has been a Calgary landmark for generations.

The current wave of new condo developments on or near 10th Street N.W. is testament to the area’s continued evolution.

“There is change coming to Kensington,” says Annie MacInnis, executive director of the Kensington Business Revitalization Zone. “Kensington has been a shopping district for over 100 years, and it has been discovered or rediscovered on numerous occasions.

“It was settled by CP Rail workers; there was a farm where Riley Park is now. That was before World War I and investors started looking here.”

The arrival of condos such as Pixel by Battistella Developments and VEN by Vancouver-based Bucci Developments Ltd., with more on the way, suggests increased densification for the area, but MacInnis says this trend has been ongoing since the LRT arrived.

From some of Calgary’s oldest homes in Sunnyside, nestled below McHugh Bluff, to the single- and multi-family homes of Hillhurst, the area offers amenities including parks (including wedding-photo hotspot Riley Park), a major stretch of the Bow River Pathway system, and no less than three pedestrian crossings into downtown including the Peace Bridge. The area is just below SAIT Polytechnic, Southern Alberta Jubilee Auditorium and North Hill Mall.

A number of multi-family developers are lining up to transform the area, including Streetside Developments’ St. John’s Tenth St. in Kensington, Truman Homes’ Savoy on 19th Street, and the soon-to-launch Ezra on Riley Park by Birchwood Properties.

“People like the fact it’s an established community – they don’t have to wait 10 years for amenities,” says Traci Wilson, director of sales and marketing for Battistella, whose 100-unit Pixel at 2nd Avenue and 9A Street has completed sales. Next up for this developer is Lido, to be built on the Anthill Building site right next door and named for the iconic diner that recently closed. Wilson says the eight-storey Lido will feature a mix of residential and main-floor retail.

“I think there’s a trend to move inner city and people are wanting more free time,” she says. “There are a lot of baby boomers and empty nesters downsizing, too. But they don’t want to downgrade.”

Bucci’s VEN, nestled next to McHugh Bluff and a short walk to the LRT stattion in Sunnyside, will feature 114 condos, of which three-quarters have sold. This fall, Bucci plans to launch sales for Kensington, a 73-home development with lower-level retail (including a restaurant), where the Carpenter’s Hall on 10th Street now stands.

“It’s such a great community with its access to downtown, and the real estate is so sought-after because of the shops, restaurants, and access to transit,” says Craig Anderson, Bucci’s director of sales and marketing, who compares the area to the Commercial Drive-Kitsilano hub of Vancouver. “If you drive by at noon any day of the week you’ll see a thousand people running along the river.

“We (Bucci) specifically go into neighbourhoods that are just ahead of the path of progress.”

Despite the changes, the area continues to retain the feel that has made it a good place to live for years.

“I don’t see the demographics changing that much,” says Quentin Sinclair, executive director of the Hillhurst Sunnyside Community Association, which hosts popular weekly farmers’ and flea markets off 5th Avenue N.W. “There’s something in the range of a 10-per cent increase in housing slated for this community over the next five years. I think new faces are always welcome – I’m pretty sure it’ll be great that more people are joining the community.”

Sinclair says he’d like to encourage new residents to become involved in their neighbourhood. “Bring your ideas about how you can get involved and get your neighbours involved,” he says

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Communi...791/story.html

[onanewday]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'where we are at', but here's my read:

Where are we at in 2014? I think Calgary has successfully reversed the trend of urban decay that was worst in the 70's and 80's (though probably extended from the 1950s to the 2000s). Early-century houses, shops, and apartments have made way for mid-century parking lot after parking lot after parking lot. FINALLY, I think the tide has turned and people are investing in even our most dilapidated hoods.

Calgary is not unique in that regard (Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, and Montreal all had the same issue and all reversed it; Edmonton, some areas of Toronto, Hamilton, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, and two dozen American cities are lagging a bit IMO but are just on the verge of reversing urban decay), but Calgary, I think, is perhaps unique in that it may have jumped a weight-class in the renewal. To compare us to Toronto, Calgary used to feel like the harbourfront (rundown parking lots with a few scattered, sterile office developments), and now certain areas of Calgary feel like Queen Street or Midtown, albeit smaller. In fact, perhaps other cities are becoming less useful as comparators as Calgary's own character develops - one that has increasing focus on our greenspaces, street life, and urban culture.

What's the next step? One of the biggest and most visible changes I've seen lately in North American cities is BIKES. Bike lanes and bikesharing has popped up even towns and small cities I did not expect. Last week I visited Madison WI and was blown away by their bike infrastructure. Wisconsin is one of the coldest states with the most snow! Given the relatively minuscule cost of improving bike infrastructure, it's a no brainer. Another thing that Calgary is doing great at and should continue to do is improving green spaces. The Bow and Elbow are assets that other cities ought to envy. Toronto and Montreal have nothing like it. Let's embrace our parks and improve green streetscape. The last thing that Calgary will have to do in the future, in my opinion, is to be openminded/flexible with zoning and land use. If we can enable privately-developed inner-city lofts for 200k by reducing parking requirements, let's do that, and let's make sure those people have access to other options like cycling and Car2Go. If relaxing a bylaw gets us Festival Hall, "temporary" (actually permanent) curbside bikeracks, and block parties like the one at Lukes Drug Mart, let's relax. Let's plan development that can adapt to include new uses as new industries and technologies arise. Let's give people as much choice as we can - about how they get around, where they live, what they do for entertainment, and where they work. From 2014, the future of Calgary looks very, very bright.

I am trying to understand the characterization of urban decay in Calgary in the 70's and 80's. The 70's through the 80's saw a massive boom in the inner city. The parking lots you saw were as a result of the boom and not necessarily urban decay in the classic sense. Things went quiet after the boom of the 70's and 80's but not really for long. And honestly, people have been building infills in the inner city since at least the late 70's. So I not sure that I agree with this characterization.

I appreciate that we had specific areas had issues, but urban decay might go a little far. And maybe this compared to other cities and the urban decay they have experienced.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by onanewday

I am trying to understand the characterization of urban decay in Calgary in the 70's and 80's. The 70's through the 80's saw a massive boom in the inner city. The parking lots you saw were as a result of the boom and not necessarily urban decay in the classic sense. Things went quiet after the boom of the 70's and 80's but not really for long. And honestly, people have been building infills in the inner city since at least the late 70's. So I not sure that I agree with this characterization.

I appreciate that we had specific areas had issues, but urban decay might go a little far. And maybe this compared to other cities and the urban decay they have experienced.

I think it was a bit of both. The East Village was already on the demolition hit list as far back as the 60s are far as I know, and then of course the boom hit and land speculation caused blocks to be demo's on spec, some which are still empty lots.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

What's the next step? One of the biggest and most visible changes I've seen lately in North American cities is BIKES. Bike lanes and bikesharing has popped up even towns and small cities I did not expect. Last week I visited Madison WI and was blown away by their bike infrastructure. Wisconsin is one of the coldest states with the most snow! Given the relatively minuscule cost of improving bike infrastructure, it's a no brainer.

I agree with your comments but particularly this: I am in Ottawa for a trip and the amount of bike-lanes, pathways and bicycles on the streets rivals Calgary during the hours of Sled Island, which is possibly the most cycle-heavy our streets get in a year. Big difference: Ottawa seems to have dedicated slivers of many major roads to bicycle lanes. Shoulders are signed to give the "thumbs-up" to use by bicycles. See the recent hilarity and over response a few cyclists get when they do the same thing at rush-hour on Crowchild Trail known as the "CrowBomb" meant to show cars how much easier it is to get around on a bike. Pandemonium ensues and calls of "unsafe" driving on the part of the cyclist who used to shoulder lanes to pass ~400 odd cars gridlocked on Crowchild in rush hour. Complete with Global helicopter coverage. Unreal. Link to twitter

I don't know if they have more space and they definitely have a much calmer, less aggressive auto commuter wave existing downtown every day than we do; but the point is they blow Calgary away on physical evidence of promoting cycling. Until the cycle-track network is complete, Calgary is - quite frankly - far behind on promoting the idea that cycling is a real thing except for the thousands who use the river pathway system. Not talking mode share or usage, I am talking on the cultural norm that cycling is a thing. This will change but not soon enough.

If the CrowBomb coverage gives a perfect example of EXACTLY the opposite of your thought on Calgary loosing up regulation and attitudes. It could not be more of an example of how far divided this city can be between the inner core sharing more similarities to Queen West, and everywhere else, which shares more similarities to Houston than the inner city or Queen West. I don't mean in built form, I mean in attitude and culture.

This latest boom does offer signs of hope though. Calgary needs to broaden the base that supports inner city development and the changes that you laud. Secondary nodes, corridors and other focus areas should be incentivized to slide towards urbanity (Marda Loop, Inglewood, Renfrew, University City, Westbrook TOD etc.) rather than suburban-gated model, zoned and sealed as if to protect against a rising tide (Elbow Park, Mount Royal, parts of Hillhurst, Rosedale etc.).

The core inner city area needs more allies to better down-shift from high- speed, fifth-gear urbanism this forum loves and the puttering, first-gear suburbia of the far flung burbs drowning this city on all sides.

The danger is not immediately sprawl itself, but the culture of sprawl that seeks to claw back any of the adventurous, bold and innovative ideas that are being born in Calgary's urban core.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I agree with your comments but particularly this: I am in Ottawa for a trip and the amount of bike-lanes, pathways and bicycles on the streets rivals Calgary during the hours of Sled Island, which is possibly the most cycle-heavy our streets get in a year. Big difference: Ottawa seems to have dedicated slivers of many major roads to bicycle lanes. Shoulders are signed to give the "thumbs-up" to use by bicycles. See the recent hilarity and over response a few cyclists get when they do the same thing at rush-hour on Crowchild Trail known as the "CrowBomb" meant to show cars how much easier it is to get around on a bike. Pandemonium ensues and calls of "unsafe" driving on the part of the cyclist who used to shoulder lanes to pass ~400 odd cars gridlocked on Crowchild in rush hour. Complete with Global helicopter coverage. Unreal. Link to twitter

I don't know if they have more space and they definitely have a much calmer, less aggressive auto commuter wave existing downtown every day than we do; but the point is they blow Calgary away on physical evidence of promoting cycling. Until the cycle-track network is complete, Calgary is - quite frankly - far behind on promoting the idea that cycling is a real thing except for the thousands who use the river pathway system. Not talking mode share or usage, I am talking on the cultural norm that cycling is a thing. This will change but not soon enough.

If the CrowBomb coverage gives a perfect example of EXACTLY the opposite of your thought on Calgary loosing up regulation and attitudes. It could not be more of an example of how far divided this city can be between the inner core sharing more similarities to Queen West, and everywhere else, which shares more similarities to Houston than the inner city or Queen West. I don't mean in built form, I mean in attitude and culture.

This latest boom does offer signs of hope though. Calgary needs to broaden the base that supports inner city development and the changes that you laud. Secondary nodes, corridors and other focus areas should be incentivized to slide towards urbanity (Marda Loop, Inglewood, Renfrew, University City, Westbrook TOD etc.) rather than suburban-gated model, zoned and sealed as if to protect against a rising tide (Elbow Park, Mount Royal, parts of Hillhurst, Rosedale etc.).

The core inner city area needs more allies to better down-shift from high- speed, fifth-gear urbanism this forum loves and the puttering, first-gear suburbia of the far flung burbs drowning this city on all sides.

The danger is not immediately sprawl itself, but the culture of sprawl that seeks to claw back any of the adventurous, bold and innovative ideas that are being born in Calgary's urban core.

This bolded part is so important.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by onanewday

I am trying to understand the characterization of urban decay in Calgary in the 70's and 80's. The 70's through the 80's saw a massive boom in the inner city. The parking lots you saw were as a result of the boom and not necessarily urban decay in the classic sense. Things went quiet after the boom of the 70's and 80's but not really for long. And honestly, people have been building infills in the inner city since at least the late 70's. So I not sure that I agree with this characterization.

I appreciate that we had specific areas had issues, but urban decay might go a little far. And maybe this compared to other cities and the urban decay they have experienced.

There was a huge office boom in the 70's-80's, but the thousands of residents and small businesses that exists in Downtown Calgary pre-1950 moved away, their buildings torn down, and paved over. I'm not trying to fear monger or anything, just speaking realistically about the communities I grew up in and love. Fortunately, Calgary never had the kind of drugs and violence that existed in other cities, but the loss of interest in inner-city culture is urban decay none the less. When a parking lot makes more revenue that a residential block, your city is deeply sick.

Today you see more pedestrian traffic, food culture, and live music that you probably have in 65 years (even per capita). Sure, there were many areas (Sunalta, Kensington, Mission, etc) that remained livable the whole century, but other areas (East Village, Victoria Park, even Eau Claire and Bridgeland) have become shadows of their former selves and only now have regained what was lost in the decay.

[DizzyEdge]

This might be an appropriate pic to even see how recently there was still life in some of the paved over communities. This is Vic Park in the 1970s, the buildings marked in red were ones still extant
and even now that is out of date as some of those have gone in the past few years

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

...
What's the next step? One of the biggest and most visible changes I've seen lately in North American cities is BIKES. Bike lanes and bikesharing has popped up even towns and small cities I did not expect. Last week I visited Madison WI and was blown away by their bike infrastructure. Wisconsin is one of the coldest states with the most snow! Given the relatively minuscule cost of improving bike infrastructure, it's a no brainer. ...

Madison, Wisconsin has always been an urban, progressive small city/university town. Just ask Rusty as I believe he earned a degree there.

even cold/snowy Buffalo, NY has a "complete streets" policy where they implement bike lanes on major roads that get repaved or reconstructed.

from Go Bike Buffalo

2013 DEVELOPMENTS:
1. The Department of Public Works (DPW) installed 11.3 miles (18.2 km) of bike lanes and ended the year with 18.5 miles (29.8km) of planned projects already funded and proposals for over 45 miles (72.4km) more.

There's no reason that Calgary couldn't do the same

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Madison, Wisconsin has always been an urban, progressive small city/university town. Just ask Rusty as I believe he earned a degree there.

Two degrees, MS (MSc in Canadian) and PhD. Spent 7 years there, biked the entire time, never owned a car and only took the bus when I was on crutches for a ruptured Achilles tendon.

Bike paradise even in 1986 when I started. Massive (45,000 student) university in the centre of town and a university that was overwhelmingly residential- almost no students lived "at home." More than 90% in dorms, off campus apartments and house shares (5 bedroom apartments abound Madison, the only city I've ever encountered that routinely has listing for 5 bedrooms- for students, not families with children), and in Greek houses. Most bikes per capita in the US when I was there. It was even better than Portland for cycling, in the 80s at least.

[onanewday]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

There was a huge office boom in the 70's-80's, but the thousands of residents and small businesses that exists in Downtown Calgary pre-1950 moved away, their buildings torn down, and paved over. I'm not trying to fear monger or anything, just speaking realistically about the communities I grew up in and love. Fortunately, Calgary never had the kind of drugs and violence that existed in other cities, but the loss of interest in inner-city culture is urban decay none the less. When a parking lot makes more revenue that a residential block, your city is deeply sick.

Today you see more pedestrian traffic, food culture, and live music that you probably have in 65 years (even per capita). Sure, there were many areas (Sunalta, Kensington, Mission, etc) that remained livable the whole century, but other areas (East Village, Victoria Park, even Eau Claire and Bridgeland) have become shadows of their former selves and only now have regained what was lost in the decay.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree to an extent. There was never loss of interest in our inner city. I just don't see that in the 70's or 80's. Either from a business or residential perspective. You just have to walk around and see that dates that building were being constructed.

Eau Claire was cleared in anticipation of construction. Like the original Eau Claire estates. That was to be the first. Victoria Park always had a tension with Stampede ground expansion. It was cleared after the Stampede bought it out. Most of the legacy in the inner city was of a boom gone bust. So if you want to characterize that as urban decay - I can agree. I think you have to remember the parking lots weren't meant to stay that way.

I think we sometimes have to look at the effects of the boom and bust of the time. Did this lead to a form of urban decay?

But one thing to point out... you can't compare a city of 400,000 with today for life on the streets. It is very hard to do. Calgary was a very different world in the 70's.

The reality is that Calgary's inner city would never stay as houses and small two story buildings. We are continuing to see that transformation to this day.

[Trans Canada]

With hindsight, demolishing neighbourhoods is seen as urban decay, and thankfully we have learned that lesson. However demolishing neighbourhoods to build parking lots was at the time not urban decay but urban renewal. They were a tool to support office towers, stampede grounds, etc. Back in the day towers were THE thing, and brick buildings were out, so it made perfect sense to demolish the outdated (and run down) buildings to support the new.

[onanewday]

Originally Posted by Trans Canada

With hindsight, demolishing neighbourhoods is seen as urban decay, and thankfully we have learned that lesson. However demolishing neighbourhoods to build parking lots was at the time not urban decay but urban renewal. They were a tool to support office towers, stampede grounds, etc. Back in the day towers were THE thing, and brick buildings were out, so it made perfect sense to demolish the outdated (and run down) buildings to support the new.

Yes in hindsight I would agree, but I think we have to put in perspective. Maybe I thinking about urban decay on a much larger scale.

At the time of the boom, people weren't using the words urban renewal. It was just plain a boom and our city centre was getting rebuilt in the process.

I associate urban decay with whole centre being burnt out and everyone fleeing to the suburbs. And people were always lining up to put money into projects in our urban centre. The bust just delayed everything. There was a lot of loss, but that we due to the idea it was all going to be replaced with shiny new building. People had no idea the bust would come crashing down like it did.

Have we learned that lesson entirely... about clearing for parking lots before developing... not 100% sure. We will know in 20 years after the current boom.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by onanewday

I guess we will have to agree to disagree to an extent. There was never loss of interest in our inner city. I just don't see that in the 70's or 80's. Either from a business or residential perspective. You just have to walk around and see that dates that building were being constructed.

Eau Claire was cleared in anticipation of construction. Like the original Eau Claire estates. That was to be the first. Victoria Park always had a tension with Stampede ground expansion. It was cleared after the Stampede bought it out. Most of the legacy in the inner city was of a boom gone bust. So if you want to characterize that as urban decay - I can agree. I think you have to remember the parking lots weren't meant to stay that way.

I think we sometimes have to look at the effects of the boom and bust of the time. Did this lead to a form of urban decay?

But one thing to point out... you can't compare a city of 400,000 with today for life on the streets. It is very hard to do. Calgary was a very different world in the 70's.

The reality is that Calgary's inner city would never stay as houses and small two story buildings. We are continuing to see that transformation to this day.

I think where we disagree is mainly semantics. We don't have to use the term "urban decay"; we can just call it "replacing neighbourhoods with 50 years of lifeless parking lots" or something less blunt. Essentially I'm talking about areas in Vic Park, East Village, Eau Claire, and Downtown. In my understanding, a typical simplified trajectory of what happened in these areas is that they were bought up by developers, proprietors, the stampede, etc, ill-maintained, population plummeted, businesses moved out, public perceives crime and undesirability, city allows demolition, market optimism is gone, real estate investment trusts and whoeverelse picks up the land sells parking. Land had more economic value as office parking than residential rent. There's certainly more than one way to spin it, but to me the result is negative - not in all areas of Calgary, but certainly in Vic Park, East Village, Eau Claire, and Downtown. Only now, in 2014, we are seeing these areas regain their livelihoods and desirablity, which to me signals the a reversal of the trends that occurred last century. It will still be years before Vic Park regains its neighbourhood feel, but it is now within sight.

Compare those neighbourhoods to ones like Sunnyside and Mission that did not experience decay and maintained their populations for the entire century. Single family homes still exist, and are today being replaced with high-density dwellings.

In 2014, we've begun to heal the neighbourhoods that were broken.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

Two degrees, MS (MSc in Canadian) and PhD. Spent 7 years there, biked the entire time, never owned a car and only took the bus when I was on crutches for a ruptured Achilles tendon.

Bike paradise even in 1986 when I started. Massive (45,000 student) university in the centre of town and a university that was overwhelmingly residential- almost no students lived "at home." More than 90% in dorms, off campus apartments and house shares (5 bedroom apartments abound Madison, the only city I've ever encountered that routinely has listing for 5 bedrooms- for students, not families with children), and in Greek houses. Most bikes per capita in the US when I was there. It was even better than Portland for cycling, in the 80s at least.

Awesome. I knew very little about Madison before I visited last week. Having been to both Madison and Portland in the last year, I'll confirm that Madison still has an upper hand at cycle infrastructure.

[Calgarian]

Article in the Herald regarding the amount of surface parking downtown. Big up to bigtime for getting a mention!

http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2014/...ntown-calgary/

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

This might be an appropriate pic to even see how recently there was still life in some of the paved over communities. This is Vic Park in the 1970s, the buildings marked in red were ones still extant
and even now that is out of date as some of those have gone in the past few years

Wicked picture Dizzy! Sorry for bumping this, I know it's kind of an old post but today was the first time I had a chance to see it.


It makes me fucking sick to my stomach to see what the area has developed into today. Nothing but Casinos and parking lots. They could have just ran the LRT on Macleod trail tram style and kept all the houses. We lost the area between 12th ave and 17th ave to the Stampede, something like this must never happen in Calgary again.