Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 801 to 874 of 874

Thread: Edmonton Central Park

  1. #801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    I'm not aware of this happening at all. No one at OCL has talked about this. In fact, Downtown Division, which includes Oliver, got 44 new officers approved in 2017.
    I've heard quite different from my condo board, which is presided over by an EPS Downtown Division officer. While Downtown Division got a lot of new officers, they, along with others from surrounding neighbourhoods have been allocated to Downtown proper to attempt to stop the slide in public safety (both perceived & actual) Downtown since Ice District opened.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  2. #802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Now that the CRL is providing for 51 Million dollar luxury parks, its a clear sign that the Downtown won't be asking or needing the city for anything beyond the basic services. Seeing that the CRL is taking tax money away from general revenues of the city, why should the city and the rest of it's citizens be expected to be on the hook for anything else when it clearly won't benefit them.

    Let them have their park, and eat it too.
    It's only the increase in the tax assessment that goes to pay off the CRL, which is great in this case cause only Downtown is on the hook for paying for Downtown stuff, not the whole city (that's been the issue in the past, unwillingness to pay for Downtown infrastructure over the rest of the City has gotten us into this situation). The rest of your taxes is still going to general revenues to pay for all the other stuff.

    https://www.edmonton.ca/residential_...sment/crl.aspx

    so in summary, all tax revenue beyond what was already being collected goes to the CRL. So glad to hear you and the rest of the downtowners wont be asking for any extra hands outs, ever.
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  3. #803

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    None of the suites above Stantec or the JW were occupied last time a population count was done. I'm not even sure if possessions have started in Legends or Sky Residences. No kidding that partially complete buildings haven't goosed the numbers. You've put the goal posts across the street from the field, let alone moved them.
    The population is basically flat over the last 10 years.

    2019: 12,423
    2016: 12,768
    2014: 13,148
    2012: 12,199
    2009: 11,572

    I'm prreeeeettttty sure there's been a fair few projects built & occupied in the last 10 years, but I'm not "in the industry", so I may be thinking in layman's terms.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  4. #804

    Default

    Besides 104 st and at the corner of 109 st and Jasper what has there been in Downtown to shift to population since 2009?
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  5. #805

    Default

    Besides the multiple hundreds of units you're discounting there's Ultima & Quest.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  6. #806
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,703

    Default

    You could also throw in Dwayne's Home -- a hostel to low-income housing conversion.

    Perhaps more substantially, there's the Alberta Place Suite Hotel and Coast Edmonton House conversions to apartments. That's at least a couple hundred more units, which makes DT's population bleed all the more curious, doesn't it?
    “Son, one day this will be an iconic structure shaping Edmonton’s skyline.”

  7. #807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    It's only the increase in the tax assessment that goes to pay off the CRL, which is great in this case cause only Downtown is on the hook for paying for Downtown stuff, not the whole city
    If Downtown is paying for Downtown stuff, why did they need to slash the police presence in Oliver & reallocate it Downtown?
    I'm not aware of this happening at all. No one at OCL has talked about this. In fact, Downtown Division, which includes Oliver, got 44 new officers approved in 2017.
    Which was specifically targeted at the area around the arena.

    From 2017

    Edmonton Police Service data indicates crimes of violence and property crimes in the area immediately around the arena have decreased 24 per cent since Rogers Place opened.


    Police tracked eight major crime types in the area bounded by 106 Avenue to the north and 102 Avenue to the south, and between 105 Street to the west and 101 Street to the east. From September to December 2016, 50 people were charged with assault in that area, versus 71 in 2015, a reduction of almost 30 per cent. Break-and-enters were slightly up, but thefts from vehicles were slightly down.


    Of course, the arena, as a building, hasn’t led to peace, order and good governance.


    Crime is down in part because there are far more police officers patrolling the area.

    https://edmontonjournal.com/business...eason-positive
    And a year earlier.

    Police chief says Edmonton doesn't have enough officers to police downtown when arena opens

    The Edmonton Police Service now has 66 downtown beat officers, double the number from a year ago, in addition to regular patrols. The officers will be responsible for roughly a 20-by-20 block area.


    But Knecht said that only equates to about seven or eight new officers on shift at a time. The strain on police officers will only grow as more bars, hotels and condos are built in the core, he said.

    https://ca.news.yahoo.com/police-chi...020659370.html
    And yet, this happened in 2015



    Edmonton Police Service response time performance worsening

    On Tuesday, Edmonton council approved 49 new officers – 40 downtown and nine for transit – to help deal with the growth pressures.


    "It’s going to help us for sure downtown," Harder said. "We’re dealing with the issues of the development of the arena. It’s a busy division." Proactive work has helped deal with the volume, Harder said and by visiting problem locations, police can deal with problems before they turn into bigger issues.

    https://calgarysun.com/2015/04/16/ed...8-0be2e0591f4b
    And yet, arena advocates claimed that simply having more people downtown would make it safer. The reverse seems to be true.

  8. #808

    Default

    ^ Basically, more drunk patrons in the arena district just requires more police and makes DT less appealing for residents.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  9. #809
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    None of the suites above Stantec or the JW were occupied last time a population count was done. I'm not even sure if possessions have started in Legends or Sky Residences. No kidding that partially complete buildings haven't goosed the numbers. You've put the goal posts across the street from the field, let alone moved them.
    The population is basically flat over the last 10 years.

    2019: 12,423
    2016: 12,768
    2014: 13,148
    2012: 12,199
    2009: 11,572

    I'm prreeeeettttty sure there's been a fair few projects built & occupied in the last 10 years, but I'm not "in the industry", so I may be thinking in layman's terms.
    Why would the arena or district have impacted downtown population prior to it's opening in 2016? Not sure why mention the last 10 years, when the point of my post was that it's still too early to assess the impact of Ice District on people living downtown, because most or all of the district's residential units are yet to be occupied. As far as other projects go in that timeframe, I'd have to go do some digging, but the only four that come to mind are Symphony, Mayfair North, Fox 2 and Ultima. Pretty sure Fox 1 was occupied prior. Granted, those 3 projects represent probably 700 units. Maybe there's one or two others that I'm forgetting.

    I agree that it's disappointing to see the downtown population stagnating over the last few years. But it also coincides with a sustained downturn in the economy that certainly hasn't helped. But it's way too early to say whether the arena district is a failure in terms of driving downtown population growth, when we're only a few years past the opening of it and it's still very much under construction.

  10. #810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Why would the arena or district have impacted downtown population prior to it's opening in 2016? Not sure why mention the last 10 years, when the point of my post was that it's still too early to assess the impact of Ice District on people living downtown, because most or all of the district's residential units are yet to be occupied.
    Because the Ice District doesn't comprise all of the big money "Downtown revitalization" projects, like the park. I used a 10-year timeframe because A) I had the statistical data & B) it's not all about Ice District.

    Not sure why you're fixating on the Ice District buildout & timeline in a thread about a mostly-separate (CRL financing excluded) big-ticket Downtown revitalization project. You're the one that injected Ice District into the conversation only to use it as the foundation of your snarky condescension.

    Pleasure interacting with you as always, Marcel.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  11. #811
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,603

    Default

    Be the change you want to see in the world, noodle.

  12. #812

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Be the change you want to see in the world, noodle.
    Already am, thanks!
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  13. #813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    It's only the increase in the tax assessment that goes to pay off the CRL, which is great in this case cause only Downtown is on the hook for paying for Downtown stuff, not the whole city
    If Downtown is paying for Downtown stuff, why did they need to slash the police presence in Oliver & reallocate it Downtown?
    I'm not aware of this happening at all. No one at OCL has talked about this. In fact, Downtown Division, which includes Oliver, got 44 new officers approved in 2017.
    Which was specifically targeted at the area around the arena.

    From 2017

    Edmonton Police Service data indicates crimes of violence and property crimes in the area immediately around the arena have decreased 24 per cent since Rogers Place opened.


    Police tracked eight major crime types in the area bounded by 106 Avenue to the north and 102 Avenue to the south, and between 105 Street to the west and 101 Street to the east. From September to December 2016, 50 people were charged with assault in that area, versus 71 in 2015, a reduction of almost 30 per cent. Break-and-enters were slightly up, but thefts from vehicles were slightly down.


    Of course, the arena, as a building, hasn’t led to peace, order and good governance.


    Crime is down in part because there are far more police officers patrolling the area.

    https://edmontonjournal.com/business...eason-positive
    And a year earlier.

    Police chief says Edmonton doesn't have enough officers to police downtown when arena opens

    The Edmonton Police Service now has 66 downtown beat officers, double the number from a year ago, in addition to regular patrols. The officers will be responsible for roughly a 20-by-20 block area.


    But Knecht said that only equates to about seven or eight new officers on shift at a time. The strain on police officers will only grow as more bars, hotels and condos are built in the core, he said.

    https://ca.news.yahoo.com/police-chi...020659370.html
    And yet, this happened in 2015



    Edmonton Police Service response time performance worsening

    On Tuesday, Edmonton council approved 49 new officers – 40 downtown and nine for transit – to help deal with the growth pressures.


    "It’s going to help us for sure downtown," Harder said. "We’re dealing with the issues of the development of the arena. It’s a busy division." Proactive work has helped deal with the volume, Harder said and by visiting problem locations, police can deal with problems before they turn into bigger issues.

    https://calgarysun.com/2015/04/16/ed...8-0be2e0591f4b
    And yet, arena advocates claimed that simply having more people downtown would make it safer. The reverse seems to be true.
    I thought 'downtown' was all of the core? Haven't we had that fight already? :P

    Downtown will become safer with more urban fabric and more people working, living, etc. Small dip in population due to economic issues. The residential units are still there, development will continue to move forward, taxes paid.
    www.decl.org

  14. #814

    Default

    Time to change the name of that neighbourhood!

    Give it a decent name and all by itself it becomes a value adding moniker.




    If we haven’t done it already, let’s start a thread on finding a new name for the downtown neighbourhood*: Downtown.


    * or whatever technically it is.
    Last edited by KC; 29-10-2019 at 12:40 PM.

  15. #815
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    49,112
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  16. #816

    Default

    No one has mentioned a lack of parking in a while...
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  17. #817
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Again, there would be no development without the catalyst projects. And again, the CRL is way ahead of schedule with more than $2B in development.
    Would be interested in knowing the source for the claim that the CRL is way ahead of schedule b/c all the information I've been able to find shows the CRL being way behind schedule.

    When Council adopted the CRL in 2015 Administration estimated that the levy would generate $1.15 billion in revenues and generate $560.9 million in cumulative net income for Downtown capital projects over the 20 year period (p. 416 of the Approved 2015 Operating Budget). The most recent Approved 2019-22 Operating Budget (p. 537) lowers CRL revenues to $786.1 million and cumulative net income to pay for capital projects over the 20 year period to $172.6 million.

    And as I pointed out in a previous post, in its first four years of operation, the Downtown CRL has a cumulative net loss at the end of 2018 of over $26 million the carrying costs of which are being borne by City taxpayers as a whole.

  18. #818
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    So, what I'm reading is that this park is going to take half of the net revenue that is estimated to be generated by the CRL. So far the CRL is burdening the entire city and that if the CRL is not making positive contributions by the time the park is under construction the whole city will be paying the carrying cost on that as well.

  19. #819
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,102

    Default

    ^The CRL is paying the debt servicing costs (interest and principal) for past borrowing and will also be responsible for repaying the additional $82 million that will be borrowed from the Alberta Capital Finance Authority for the Central Park and Jasper Avenue improvements.

    Defenders of the CRL will argue that the tax uplift from the incremental increase in assessment from the 2015 base level within the CRL boundary area will turn the current cumulative net loss (the carrying costs of which are being covered by the City as a whole) into cumulative net income sufficient to cover the cost of the Downtown improvements over the 20 year time period that ends in 2034. My quarrel with GreenSpace was his claim that the CRL is way ahead of schedule. The most recent financial information from the City to the end of 2018 suggests otherwise.

    If GreenSpace has more up to date or better information on how the Downtown CRL is performing, he should post and source it. I also happen to think his statement that there would be no new developments without the catalyst projects is ridiculous but there is really no way of proving or disproving what the pace of development would have been in the absence of the CRL.

  20. #820
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    Or borrowed from the successor to the Alberta Capital Finance Authority (Treasury?).

  21. #821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^The CRL is paying the debt servicing costs (interest and principal) for past borrowing and will also be responsible for repaying the additional $82 million that will be borrowed from the Alberta Capital Finance Authority for the Central Park and Jasper Avenue improvements.

    Defenders of the CRL will argue that the tax uplift from the incremental increase in assessment from the 2015 base level within the CRL boundary area will turn the current cumulative net loss (the carrying costs of which are being covered by the City as a whole) into cumulative net income sufficient to cover the cost of the Downtown improvements over the 20 year time period that ends in 2034. My quarrel with GreenSpace was his claim that the CRL is way ahead of schedule. The most recent financial information from the City to the end of 2018 suggests otherwise.

    If GreenSpace has more up to date or better information on how the Downtown CRL is performing, he should post and source it. I also happen to think his statement that there would be no new developments without the catalyst projects is ridiculous but there is really no way of proving or disproving what the pace of development would have been in the absence of the CRL.
    The pace before the CRL was in place was faster than now. We had several condo towers all proposed and many in the ground... now we can't even get the Ice District Phase I complete.
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  22. #822

    Default

    Budget passed. The CRL borrowing also includes money for Jasper Avenue 102 to 106 Streets (2023), green and walkable downtown (streetscaping), and renovations to Centennial Plaza and associated sidewalks.
    www.decl.org

  23. #823

    Default

    If they order the fancy new light standards now they might only be a little late to meet the 2023 streetscaping timeline.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  24. #824

    Default

    Because that's what I notice in all the major, international cities I've visited. Fancy light standards and sidewalks.

  25. #825
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Budget passed. The CRL borrowing also includes money for Jasper Avenue 102 to 106 Streets (2023), green and walkable downtown (streetscaping), and renovations to Centennial Plaza and associated sidewalks.
    Really? I just find this funny..
    Animals are my passion.

  26. #826

    Default

    ^why?
    www.decl.org

  27. #827
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    49,112

    Default

    Good to hear.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  28. #828

    Default

    Of course you'd think that. SuperLab killed. Hospital in SW delayed. WLRT on life support. ASIH deindexed. Cuts everywhere. City facing difficult budget choices due to cuts.

    But at least their priorities are in the right place for fancy sidewalks and lights.

  29. #829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Of course you'd think that. SuperLab killed. Hospital in SW delayed. WLRT on life support. ASIH deindexed. Cuts everywhere. City facing difficult budget choices due to cuts.

    But at least their priorities are in the right place for fancy sidewalks and lights.
    The priority is to have the hobosexuals have heart attaqs.

  30. #830
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,989

    Default

    Provincial responsibility:
    Superlab
    Hospital in SW
    WLRT funding (portion)
    AISH

    Municipal responsibility:
    Sidewalks & lights

  31. #831
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,861

    Default

    Cities have been so stupid with money, it's time to tighten their belts , right Donny?
    Animals are my passion.

  32. #832

    Default

    And yet, the city is facing funding cutbacks as a direct result of the provincial budget. Unless you believe that the provincial budget has zero effect on the city. It would make more sense to use this money to look at extending the valley line, as some in the city have suggested. But sure, let's do fancy sidewalks and lights. After all, that's what people really want as opposed to LRT.

    And IanO and the DBA were huge boosters of killing the SuperLab,

    But at least we've got our priorities straight.

  33. #833

    Default

    CRL is being paid by Downtown taxpayers. If you don't live Downtown, doesn't even effect you. Normally things like Jasper Avenue would come from the overall infrastructure budget. In this case they're getting Downtown to pay for it directly, freeing up money for other projects. Or it wouldn't happen at all.
    www.decl.org

  34. #834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Cities have been so stupid with money, it's time to tighten their belts , right Donny?
    Agree. Development fees on new developments are not nearly high enough.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  35. #835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    CRL is being paid by Downtown taxpayers. If you don't live Downtown, doesn't even effect you.
    Sure it does.

    All of the required infrastructure changes & additional resources the developments Downtown take are borne by other taxpayers in Edmonton, as the contributions to general revenue are capped at the historic value. All of the uplift goes to pay for the shiny stuff.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  36. #836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    CRL is being paid by Downtown taxpayers. If you don't live Downtown, doesn't even effect you. Normally things like Jasper Avenue would come from the overall infrastructure budget. In this case they're getting Downtown to pay for it directly, freeing up money for other projects. Or it wouldn't happen at all.
    Wrong. The money is being borrowed and then repaid by the CRL, thus tying up available borrowing power for the city. You even mentioned it in your own post.

    The CRL borrowing also includes money for Jasper Avenue 102 to 106 Streets (2023), green and walkable downtown (streetscaping), and renovations to Centennial Plaza and associated sidewalks.
    And here


    Edmonton could be borrowing another $82.4 million to cover multiple big-ticket projects in the Downtown core, including a large park in the Warehouse Campus area and more improvements to Jasper Avenue.


    Before Edmonton can take on more debt, city council has to give approval through a bylaw. First reading of the bylaw passed on Sept. 10 with second and third scheduled to take place on Nov. 5.


    City council previously approved the downtown projects within the 2019-2022 capital budget for an estimated total cost of $83.5 million. The city confirmed on Friday that some projects don’t qualify for borrowing and will be paid out of pocket through other revenue sources, thus the $1.1 million difference. The city has a policy to only take on debt for infrastructure projects, which is why art projects aren’t covered while something like sidewalk improvements would be eligible.


    If the borrowing bylaw is approved, the $82.4 million will be paid off over a period of 20 years at a rate not exceeding nine per cent, according to budget documents coming to city council next month.

    https://edmontonjournal.com/news/loc...revitalization
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 05-11-2019 at 03:37 PM.

  37. #837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    CRL is being paid by Downtown taxpayers. If you don't live Downtown, doesn't even effect you. Normally things like Jasper Avenue would come from the overall infrastructure budget. In this case they're getting Downtown to pay for it directly, freeing up money for other projects. Or it wouldn't happen at all.
    Can you stop saying this non-sense? The CRL affects the rest of the city because taxes that WOULD'VE went to general revenues are now only going to pay for stupid pet projects like the Downtown Park, and other stupid ****....

    It's especially stupid to proceed right now as the rest of the city and province are dealing with cut backs, and funding withdrawals,

    but hey - downtown wants a new park. Full steam ahead with 100 million dollars here.

    Money diverted to the CRL does not go to general revenues anymore. The rest of Edmonton suffers when Downtown makes a gain.
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  38. #838

    Default

    Pot holes.
    Live and love... your neighbourhood.

  39. #839

    Default

    Given that the CRL also takes the uplift portion of school taxes & given the dismal state of education funding in Alberta under the UCP, it's especially egregious to say that the CRL only affects Downtown.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  40. #840

    Default

    ^You're wrong. The CRL portion is money from Education taxes that would normally go to the province.

    And these taxes wouldn't exist without the catalyst projects going ahead. Talk to any developer. The ROI on this is pretty amazing, and Council understands this.

    The park is also an opportunity that only exists now and will be there for future generations as a 'district park' for many surrounding communities.
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 05-11-2019 at 03:46 PM.
    www.decl.org

  41. #841

    Default

    If the COE has to raise borrowing limits, that explains it all.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  42. #842

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    The ROI on this is pretty amazing, and Council understands this.
    If so, why have the projections of CRL revenue been cut so heavily as East McCauley pointed out & you seemingly ignored?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  43. #843

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    CRL is being paid by Downtown taxpayers. If you don't live Downtown, doesn't even effect you. Normally things like Jasper Avenue would come from the overall infrastructure budget. In this case they're getting Downtown to pay for it directly, freeing up money for other projects. Or it wouldn't happen at all.
    Can you stop saying this non-sense? The CRL affects the rest of the city because taxes that WOULD'VE went to general revenues are now only going to pay for stupid pet projects like the Downtown Park, and other stupid ****....

    It's especially stupid to proceed right now as the rest of the city and province are dealing with cut backs, and funding withdrawals,

    but hey - downtown wants a new park. Full steam ahead with 100 million dollars here.

    Money diverted to the CRL does not go to general revenues anymore. The rest of Edmonton suffers when Downtown makes a gain.
    My thoughts - made up on the fly:

    The CRL seemingly created synergistic benefits, enhancing the combined tax revenue stream. That combined total would be composed of a massive jump in the tax base within the CRL territory.

    The impact on the non-CRL territory could be a mixed bag. The CRL likely poached occupancy from the non-CRL and that might put downward pressure on o-CRL commercial and residential valuations for tax purposes.

    Offsetting that downward pressure would be the ever desired and elusive getting-on-the-map effect where magic (aka synergy), as they say: “Lifts all boats” because we now have a downtown arena.

    All this happens with varying lags.
    Last edited by KC; 05-11-2019 at 04:47 PM.

  44. #844

    Default

    IanO & GreenSPACE visit the secret CRL vault.


  45. #845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Cities have been so stupid with money, it's time to tighten their belts , right Donny?
    Hasn’t everyone been stupid with money? Foreign travel, imported goods, importing services... w’re trading off a non-renewable resource for travel and trinkets. The City expenditures put food on the table for a lot of people.
    Last edited by KC; 05-11-2019 at 09:57 PM.

  46. #846
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Cities have been so stupid with money, it's time to tighten their belts , right Donny?
    Hasn’t everyone been stupid with money? Foreign travel, imported goods, importing services... we trading off a non-renewable resource for travel and trinkets. The City expenditures out food on the table for a lot of people.
    I budget, do you?

    I think Donny needs to stop spending, that's why I posted in this thread.
    Animals are my passion.

  47. #847

    Default

    Let's see. The city is borrowing $82 million for downtown sidewalks, park & lights. Meanwhile...

    Council scrambles to save Terwillegar Drive, Stadium LRT station in wake of grant cut

    City council is hoping to salvage funding for turning Terwillegar Drive into an expressway after losing a provincial transit grant.


    Some of the cash for work on the southwest artery, along with several other projects such as Stadium LRT station upgrades, was expected to come through the Alberta Community Transit (ACT) Fund, which was axed in the provincial budget last month.


    It amounts to a loss of about $89.3 million, of which $24.6 million earmarked for Terwillegar.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmon...-cut-1.5349227

  48. #848
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    ^You're wrong. The CRL portion is money from Education taxes that would normally go to the province.

    And these taxes wouldn't exist without the catalyst projects going ahead. Talk to any developer. The ROI on this is pretty amazing, and Council understands this.

    The park is also an opportunity that only exists now and will be there for future generations as a 'district park' for many surrounding communities.
    The city could always sit on the land and collect revenue as a parking lot for a bit until better times. There is zero need to rush for this park.

  49. #849

    Default

    I'm not wrong. I disagree about these projects not going ahead without this park. If there's money to be made, these projects will go ahead. It's already a bad place for the city to be offering large sums of money to land speculators of have sat on these vacant decrepit lots for decades!! In these times none the less.

    The city has now borrowed a large sum of money that as you say, will be paid back including interest, but that money hasn't even been paid back yet, and you are now borrowing against the money the CRL will generate after if finishes paying off it's portion of the arena? As so developers will develop in downtown edmonton? Wasn't that what the initial ask was about? How many 'catalyst projects' is it going to take? What sort of ROI is the city actually seeing on this?

    and has many have stated why now? What's the rush? We haven't even finished building the first district that will finance this district in a time of austerity? Just the optics of continuing this really shove a big certain finger up at the rest of Alberta suffering away with all sorts of cuts. Let Downtown have their park, and eat it too. What's the next ask after this one?
    Last edited by Medwards; 05-11-2019 at 08:12 PM. Reason: changing downtown to Downtown
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  50. #850

    Default

    I would not object to this huge area being transformed into Beaver Hills 2.0 (with hills, water ways, tree canopies, and brick laid paths)
    Last edited by ronron; 05-11-2019 at 09:10 PM.

  51. #851
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ronron View Post
    I would not object to this huge area being transformed into Beaver Hills 2.0 (with hills, water ways, tree canopies, and brick laid paths)
    Sure one day, but no rush.

  52. #852
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    49,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    IanO & GreenSPACE visit the secret CRL vault.

    Basically.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  53. #853

    Default

    If development doesn’t continue Downtown there’s no way the CRL will meet even the lowered projections that it’s somehow “ahead of”.

    Continuous growth is a prerequisite. It’s what the whole scheme is predicated on. It’s like a shark, if it stops moving it dies, so we will keep on chumming the water out with the rest of Edmonton.

    Proponents say that whatever next big ticket item will finally be the catalyst to get the ball rolling without public funding, as if supply side voodoo economics works when there’s a middling hockey team or overhyped park involved.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  54. #854
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    49,112

    Default

    The CRL was exceptionally conservative in its assumptions and was significantly ahead of predictions. Last time I checked, it had $127million in 'unallocated' funds and that was after the ~40mil in parking shortfall was removed from it.

    That is the entire premise though, investment, growth, replenishment, investment, growth replenishment...

    What am I missing here?
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  55. #855

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IanO View Post
    The CRL was exceptionally conservative in its assumptions and was significantly ahead of predictions. Last time I checked, it had $127million in 'unallocated' funds and that was after the ~40mil in parking shortfall was removed from it.

    That is the entire premise though, investment, growth, replenishment, investment, growth replenishment...

    What am I missing here?
    I've verified EM's numbers from his post below. What you're saying is incongruous with the financial information released by the City of Edmonton.

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Would be interested in knowing the source for the claim that the CRL is way ahead of schedule b/c all the information I've been able to find shows the CRL being way behind schedule.

    When Council adopted the CRL in 2015 Administration estimated that the levy would generate $1.15 billion in revenues and generate $560.9 million in cumulative net income for Downtown capital projects over the 20 year period (p. 416 of the Approved 2015 Operating Budget). The most recent Approved 2019-22 Operating Budget (p. 537) lowers CRL revenues to $786.1 million and cumulative net income to pay for capital projects over the 20 year period to $172.6 million.

    And as I pointed out in a previous post, in its first four years of operation, the Downtown CRL has a cumulative net loss at the end of 2018 of over $26 million the carrying costs of which are being borne by City taxpayers as a whole.
    ~$360M has been removed from the projected cumulative net income (-30%) & a whopping ~$388M removed from the projections for capital projects (-$69%).

    How can the predictions be revised downward so heavily yet be conservative?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  56. #856
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    49,112

    Default

    ^I very possibly could have old numbers, but this was from earlier in 2019.

    'cumulative net income to pay for capital projects over the 20 year period to $172.6 million'

    172.6 - 40 =
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  57. #857

    Default

    Here's the numbers taken straight from the documents East mentioned.

    2015:



    2019:


    628,342+35,272+31,979+28,814+21,122+16,974+15,757*=741,381

    1,152,170-741,381=410,789 difference between projections. 35% decline.


    *: I used 2/3 of the 2015-2017 figure to approximate 2016-2017 to make it line up date-wise.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  58. #858

    Default

    /theydidthemath
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  59. #859

    Default

    New logo for the CRL:

    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  60. #860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    ^You're wrong. The CRL portion is money from Education taxes that would normally go to the province.

    And these taxes wouldn't exist without the catalyst projects going ahead. Talk to any developer. The ROI on this is pretty amazing, and Council understands this.

    The park is also an opportunity that only exists now and will be there for future generations as a 'district park' for many surrounding communities.
    The city could always sit on the land and collect revenue as a parking lot for a bit until better times. There is zero need to rush for this park.
    There is an existing contract with AHS that is being honoured until the park starts construction 2021-ish.

    Developers who have purchased land and rezoned around the park have expectations that the park is going ahead and the City is holding up it's end of the deal.
    www.decl.org

  61. #861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    If development doesn’t continue Downtown there’s no way the CRL will meet even the lowered projections that it’s somehow “ahead of”.

    Continuous growth is a prerequisite. It’s what the whole scheme is predicated on. It’s like a shark, if it stops moving it dies, so we will keep on chumming the water out with the rest of Edmonton.

    Proponents say that whatever next big ticket item will finally be the catalyst to get the ball rolling without public funding, as if supply side voodoo economics works when there’s a middling hockey team or overhyped park involved.
    Edmonton does this all the time, so do other cities. They put in infrastructure and assume some risk to encourage development and investment. Take Muttart Lands for example, City put $12m towards that as their part in that project. This is really no different.
    www.decl.org

  62. #862

    Default

    Gotta reward those land speculators for creating the conditions where the City can both lower supply & increase demand, thereby maximizing their return on investment for doing nothing for basically decades.

    If market conditions aren't favourable then the City of Edmonton will put its publicly funded thumb on the scale to make it so.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  63. #863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    I'm not wrong. I disagree about these projects not going ahead without this park. If there's money to be made, these projects will go ahead. It's already a bad place for the city to be offering large sums of money to land speculators of have sat on these vacant decrepit lots for decades!! In these times none the less.

    The city has now borrowed a large sum of money that as you say, will be paid back including interest, but that money hasn't even been paid back yet, and you are now borrowing against the money the CRL will generate after if finishes paying off it's portion of the arena? As so developers will develop in downtown edmonton? Wasn't that what the initial ask was about? How many 'catalyst projects' is it going to take? What sort of ROI is the city actually seeing on this?

    and has many have stated why now? What's the rush? We haven't even finished building the first district that will finance this district in a time of austerity? Just the optics of continuing this really shove a big certain finger up at the rest of Alberta suffering away with all sorts of cuts. Let Downtown have their park, and eat it too. What's the next ask after this one?
    That's not true. Developers will not just develop anywhere. Their business case takes into account desirability of an area, and for the Warehouse Central Area to move ahead, this park needs to go ahead. It's been part of the discussion about Downtown development for at least 10 years and is part of the Capital City Downtown Plan.

    Interest has been factored into the debt financing the City is taking on. They're not stupid. There is a risk development will stall or not happen, yes for sure. But without the park there will be no development. Again, developers are saying this, not me.

    The Warehouse Central Park has always been part of the CRL discussion and it's timing contemplated from when the CRL was debated back in 2015. It's not a new thing. I don't know why you wouldn't want to create hundreds of construction jobs and other economic activity, as well as new taxes, from these private projects. Downtown Edmonton is part of Alberta's economy.
    Last edited by GreenSPACE; 06-11-2019 at 12:38 PM.
    www.decl.org

  64. #864

    Default

    Still waiting for any evidence the CRL is 'ahead of schedule' especially if it can incorporate an explanation for the 35% downgrade in projected revenues.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  65. #865

    Default

    I dont know man, there's plenty of examples where developers have developed the properties they own without a 51 million dollar park being promised all over downtown.
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  66. #866
    Plug C2E into my veins!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Westwood
    Posts
    16,589

    Default

    And the park doesn’t have to be cancelled... just delayed.

  67. #867
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    And the park doesn’t have to be cancelled... just delayed.
    If it comes down to money and priorities, I agree.
    Animals are my passion.

  68. #868
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    13,334

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by etownboarder View Post
    And the park doesn’t have to be cancelled... just delayed.
    If it comes down to money and priorities, I agree.
    true enough...

    although that's also true for any other potential expenditure isn't it?

    as for prioritizing, based on existing use/demand, there are more people using the single intersection at terwilligar road and rabbit hill every day than live downtown.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  69. #869

    Default

    Borrowing for the park won't happen until construction starts, so we have 2-3 years to see where the economy goes.

    My guess is Council will find a way to move the Terwilligar overpass along during budget deliberations this fall.
    www.decl.org

  70. #870
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,861

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenSPACE View Post
    Borrowing for the park won't happen until construction starts, so we have 2-3 years to see where the economy goes.

    My guess is Council will find a way to move the Terwilligar overpass along during budget deliberations this fall.
    I think Terwilligar has to happen..
    Animals are my passion.

  71. #871

    Default

    No overpasses being built along terwillegar. Only adding a third and sometimes fourth/bus only lane. Same sets of lights. Stupid if you ask me, and a waste of money. We will just rip it out and restore what was there in 20 years when we actual realise what a foolish mistake it was and should've just started building the overpasses as was the plan.
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  72. #872

    Default

    Run a spur of the LRT from Century Park to Leger. That would take care of most of the buses along the Whitemud with no need for the bus lanes. The majority of buses from that area either go to Century Park or South Campus anyway.

  73. #873

    Default

    Theres no need for a bus lane! Theres really not many buses running along terwillegar!! Now or in the future transit plans!!
    A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

  74. #874
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    49,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    No overpasses being built along terwillegar. Only adding a third and sometimes fourth/bus only lane. Same sets of lights. Stupid if you ask me, and a waste of money. We will just rip it out and restore what was there in 20 years when we actual realise what a foolish mistake it was and should've just started building the overpasses as was the plan.
    Bingo, but other thread.
    www.decl.org

    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •