CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Trains? Easier access? No massive infrastructure redevelopment (roads)? No contamination clean up?

I don't actually know but that would be my guesses

- I think train access to the WV is actually superior to EV, as there is no station in the EV itself (residents forced to walk to City Hall), whereas the WV has direct access to Sunalta Station.
- Debatable - I'd argue that access to the EV was comparable to WV prior to the 4 Street underpass.
- But there were massive infrastructure costs associated with the EV development. These include replacement of ancient utility lines, elevating the entire neighbourhood (49 acres) by a few feet to bring it above the floodplain, building an underpass at the CP tracks, installing a new street grid with sidewalks and streetscaping, building the riverwalk, building the St. Patricks island bridge and completing the park redevelopment etc.

Originally Posted by nik-

First, it was a ####ing blight. Second, it didn't have the massive unknown of cleanup costs.

Personally, I think the contamination aspect provides greater incentive for us to act on redevelopment of the west village, which is indeed now the most blighted area near downtown.

Private developers are not going to touch the WV due to the environmental liability and the scale of improvements required. The other areas suggested for this sports complex (Railtown, Stampede), do not have the same challenges to development and are attractive to private developers as evidenced by the plans currently in place for those sites. It doesn't make sense to locate a project of this scale there due to the opportunity cost of using prime redevelopment land for such a large scale facility.

If we want to see any improvements to the WV, there needs to be a contribution of public dollars. I think that this project, despite the obvious shortcomings of the current proposal, will ultimately be a good way to kickstart the redevelopment of this blighted area. I don't mind the use of public dollars, just as I didn't mind the public funding of the EV, because I believe that having a vibrant and attractive inner city is a benefit to all Calgarians.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by nik-

But it didn't, so we are where we are. If the acceleration of cleanup should happen, it should be because there's danger, not because Ken King made a youtube video so the Flames can maximize their revenue in the guise of helping the city.

But the fact that it gets worse every year is still valid, no?

Isn't it better to deal with it earlier, and let that slow things in EV a bit, than let the problem, and the costs, continue to escalate?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by nik-

As such, EV went first and it's still not filled out, so why would the city pay to possibly negatively affect the development.

Seriously? Why pave roads in the NW when we're paving roads in the SW? Wait until the SW is completely paved over, then we can focus on other areas. Brilliant!!!

You do know that if you provide incentives, like an anchor that draws people, that investment will come? This is why some malls are successful and some are not. If you have a high traffic anchor, or an attraction that will keep people coming in, you are going to have businesses follow the people and take advantage of that traffic.

I also don't understand the griping over the financing. As a first pass in negotiations this makes a lot of sense and is a pretty practical approach to financing the project. There is likely some room for negotiation, with the Flames kicking in more money and reducing the long term tax based payoff, but I think a deal is there to be done. I think the City should approach it with a target of a 10-15 year amortization of the tax money to payoff that end of the financing instead of the 30 years the Flames are talking about. That would mean the Flames kick in more money, or they increase the tax on use and event tickets. I would think the Flames are prepared to kick in more cash to get this deal done. I would also think that behind closed doors that the City would like to get this going to lessen the impact of the economic downturn. That would be a couple years worth of jobs for a lot of trades in the city, which means people staying in Calgary and spending their money there. This is also a great time to get these big scale projects going because money can be borrowed at a very attractive interest rate. Timing is crucial and there are a lot of benefits to getting this going as soon as possible. Time for both sides to put on their big boy pants and start negotiating.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Reneeee

This... Can anybody explain the rationale that East Village was the spot to develop aside from it being close to city Hall.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

I think the rationale was that when you are starting a new area from the ground up, the City figured it was best to add incentives so the area is developed quickly creating demand.

Slow development of that area will not make it desireable. You want to live downtown, you want to be close to amenities.

It was also good to start development quickly to force out the nefarious activities that went along around it.

The Beltline doesn't have that issue. When i moved to the Beltline I was already surrounded by a ton of amenities. It is the reason the area is desirable.


Victoria Park was the last area that attempted to gentrify or build up. It was poorly thought out though and after Torode built one tower, the associated development never happened. It took its bankruptcy and the subsequent cheap sale of its land (somewhat subsidizing the Guradian) for more development.

I don't think the rationale for controlled and focused development in blighted areas is a bad thing, and I feel like most of the people on CP would feel the same way if it wasn't an argument for holding the new arena back.

One of the last things that the City needs is a underwhelming development of the West Village. The last thing they need is an underwhelming development of WV, EV, and a 400 million dollar debt from CalgaryNEXT.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by New Era

Seriously? Why pave roads in the NW when we're paving roads in the SW? Wait until the SW is completely paved over, then we can focus on other areas. Brilliant!!!

You do know that if you provide incentives, like an anchor that draws people, that investment will come? This is why some malls are successful and some are not. If you have a high traffic anchor, or an attraction that will keep people coming in, you are going to have businesses follow the people and take advantage of that traffic.

I also don't understand the griping over the financing. As a first pass in negotiations this makes a lot of sense and is a pretty practical approach to financing the project. There is likely some room for negotiation, with the Flames kicking in more money and reducing the long term tax based payoff, but I think a deal is there to be done. I think the City should approach it with a target of a 10-15 year amortization of the tax money to payoff that end of the financing instead of the 30 years the Flames are talking about. That would mean the Flames kick in more money, or they increase the tax on use and event tickets. I would think the Flames are prepared to kick in more cash to get this deal done. I would also think that behind closed doors that the City would like to get this going to lessen the impact of the economic downturn. That would be a couple years worth of jobs for a lot of trades in the city, which means people staying in Calgary and spending their money there. This is also a great time to get these big scale projects going because money can be borrowed at a very attractive interest rate. Timing is crucial and there are a lot of benefits to getting this going as soon as possible. Time for both sides to put on their big boy pants and start negotiating.

come on, you're not silly enough to think these are actually valid comparables. So stop, please.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

But the fact that it gets worse every year is still valid, no?

Isn't it better to deal with it earlier, and let that slow things in EV a bit, than let the problem, and the costs, continue to escalate?

I would suspect since the containment was built the costs wouldn't be escalating outside of inflation.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by New Era

Seriously? Why pave roads in the NW when we're paving roads in the SW? Wait until the SW is completely paved over, then we can focus on other areas. Brilliant!!!

You do know that if you provide incentives, like an anchor that draws people, that investment will come? This is why some malls are successful and some are not. If you have a high traffic anchor, or an attraction that will keep people coming in, you are going to have businesses follow the people and take advantage of that traffic.

Are you guys all reading the same newspapers?

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2015/0...eap-headlines/

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

But the fact that it gets worse every year is still valid, no?

Isn't it better to deal with it earlier, and let that slow things in EV a bit, than let the problem, and the costs, continue to escalate?

Is it getting worse though? Or is that just conjecture?

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Dude, do you ever read the page?

This has been discussed. The seepage was from the 80's which was contained by the building of the cement containment.

Please stop spreading misinformation. Here is the Alberta Government page regarding the contamination on site. Creosote has indeed seeped past the barrier installed in the mid 90s and elevated levels have been detected across the river. It is a problem that needs to be dealt with because the contamination will continue to spread via the below ground water table.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I would suspect since the containment was built the costs wouldn't be escalating outside of inflation.

Originally Posted by nik-

Is it getting worse though? Or is that just conjecture?

Let's hope you guys are right and it's not getting worse.

Not how I would plan a city, but sure.

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

People hate on the location in Glendale Arizona, but compare the area today to what was there prior (in was mostly fields)

I have been to Phoenix during a non game night for Diamondbacks or Suns (Both DT arenas are next door to each other). What I do remember was the area around the baseball stadium was a ghost town when the game wasn't on.

We did end up dining at Nobuo nearby, but I wouldn't say the area was bumping by any stretch. It was easy to get a reso, and the area felt quite deserted. Again, may have been an off night. The place just felt uninviting except for that little oasis a few blocks away.

You know where was bumping? Scottsdale, Tempe near ASU, basically anywhere not downtown and they have two stadiums.

Maybe my story is not accurate but Phoenix always holds up as why spending money on a downtown stadium may not be a catalyst everyone expects.

Jury is still out on Edmonton and Detroit BTW, those places aren't even up and running yet. Give it 5 years and see if the place ends up being a ghost town after high rent and inconstant patronage cause places to pack up and move out.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

I have been to Phoenix during a non game night for Diamondbacks or Suns (Both DT arenas are next door to each other). What I do remember was the area around the baseball stadium was a ghost town when the game wasn't on.

We did end up dining at Nobuo nearby, but I wouldn't say the area was bumping by any stretch. It was easy to get a reso, and the area felt quite deserted. Again, may have been an off night. The place just felt uninviting except for that little oasis a few blocks away.

You know where was bumping? Scottsdale, Tempe near ASU, basically anywhere not downtown and they have two stadiums.

Maybe my story is not accurate but Phoenix always holds up as why spending money on a downtown stadium may not be a catalyst everyone expects.

Jury is still out on Edmonton and Detroit BTW, those places aren't even up and running yet. Give it 5 years and see if the place ends up being a ghost town after high rent and inconstant patronage cause places to pack up and move out.

Well, Glendale isn't a downtown location, so it doesn't apply to that discussion.

However, it is undeniable that there is a tremendous amount of development around it (that almost certainly wouldn't be there without the arena and stadiums' presence).

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Please stop spreading misinformation. Here is the Alberta Government page regarding the contamination on site. Creosote has indeed seeped past the barrier installed in the mid 90s and elevated levels have been detected across the river. It is a problem that needs to be dealt with because the contamination will continue to spread via the below ground water table.

In the early 1990s, environmental monitoring determined that contaminants from the former Canada Creosote site (south of the Bow River) had migrated under the Bow River and into the community of West Hillhurst.
Since this discovery, the Government of Alberta has taken action to prevent further migration of contaminants off of the source site and, more recently, has been actively monitoring the migration of existing contaminants in West Hillhurst by drilling and monitoring approximately 30 wells throughout the community on an on-going basis. Environmental sampling has taken place in the community to continue monitoring the possible environmental and health impacts.

That is from the website. The barrier was installed in 95. Where does it say that the migration has continued???

Sorry, I said 80's. It was the early 90's that it was discovered.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Well, Glendale isn't a downtown location, so it doesn't apply to that discussion.

However, it is undeniable that there is a tremendous amount of development around it (that almost certainly wouldn't be there without the arena and stadiums' presence).

Does the amount of Moxies and Senor Frogs around Jobbing.com Arena justify the hundreds of million in taxpayer money?

I'm sure Glendale would rather have that area be a field.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Cappy

That is from the website. The barrier was installed in 95. Where does it say that the migration has continued???

Sorry, I said 80's. It was the early 90's that it was discovered.

It's right there on the page I linked:

Originally Posted by AB Gov

What is the current situation?

Since 2010, 30 monitoring wells have been drilled in the West Hillhurst community as part of an ongoing testing program. While recent monitoring results are in line with an initial Human Health Risk Assessment study from 2010, a higher amount of creosote has been detected in one of the wells.
Based on these recent monitoring results, the Government of Alberta has asked Golder Associates to undertake further monitoring of existing wells and drill additional monitoring wells. Additionally, Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) would like to take environmental samples from inside six homes in the vicinity of the well where creosote was detected. Staff will be in contact with those residents to discuss this further.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Zarley

This seems to be the position of you and the mayor, however it is incongruent with the rationale to develop the East Village, which enjoys the support of the mayor's office. Why is it okay to subsidize private developers in the East Village, drawing unsubsidized development activity away from the Beltline, Kensington, Bridges, etc., but not for the West Village?

One could certainly have made that argument at the onset of East Village, sure. It was initiated before this current mayor. Also you could argue it was a more pressing area to rejuvenate by virtue of its immediate proximity to the built up core, as well as the acute social issues the area was facing.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Zarley

It's right there on the page I linked:

One of the 30 wells has reported higher concentration. It is not stated that this was caused by more seepage from across the river.

Also, the site states that no health effects are present.

I didn't realize so many people on this site were such massive proponents of the creosote clean-up until the CalgaryNEXT announcement.

It's a similar argument to the ones proposed that we shouldn't accept Syrian refugees because we have so many homeless people

[getbak]

Originally Posted by nik-

Is it getting worse though? Or is that just conjecture?

Creosote has been found in the soil north of the river.

We should find out sometime in the next few weeks how bad it is, and what needs to be done to fix it. Once that report comes back, we'll have a better idea of how much the cleanup will cost ... and then can start figuring out who's going to pay for it.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by getbak

Creosote has been found in the soil north of the river.

We should find out sometime in the next few weeks how bad it is, and what needs to be done to fix it. Once that report comes back, we'll have a better idea of how much the cleanup will cost ... and then can start figuring out who's going to pay for it.

Yes it has, but is it continuing to worsen or did remediation efforts stop the spread?

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Cappy

One of the 30 wells has reported higher concentration. It is not stated that this was caused by more seepage from across the river.

Also, the site states that no health effects are present.

I didn't realize so many people on this site were such massive proponents of the creosote clean-up until the CalgaryNEXT announcement.

It's a similar argument to the ones proposed that we shouldn't accept Syrian refugees because we have so many homeless people

You are a very irrational person to debate with. Instead of admitting your ignorance on the issue, you choose to deflect with some silly comparison to Syrian refugees?

If you would've read the page I've linked, you would have learned that the well in question is across the river on Westmount Road, suggesting seepage across the river, which has concerned AB Enrvironment to the point that they have ordered further monitoring of the problem.