What do you think of this project?

  • I like it a lot

    Votes: 28 51.9%

  • I like it

    Votes: 25 46.3%

  • I neither like nor dislike it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I dislike it

    Votes: 1 1.9%

  • I dislike it a lot

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    54
JuliallThat said:
I've been really hopeful that, should the Stadium Yards development go well that it might spur the parking lots on the West side of the station to be infilled as well. I know it's part of the city's plan for the area for it to happen eventually someday.
Click to expand...

I think you will eventually see redevelopment on the west wide, especially along 112 avenue, but I believe this area will benefit more right now from renewal and re-investment on the east side of the tracks first. Clean up the old bits first, then build out and upwards on the empty land on the other side. I think with the stadium LRT station renewal and relocation there's an opportunity for some serious momentum to be gained here in this regards. Until we improve that side of the tracks, this area will always have a low-income look, and with that, the stigma that comes with it
 
Last edited:
JuliallThat said:
I've been really hopeful that, should the Stadium Yards development go well that it might spur the parking lots on the West side of the station to be infilled as well. I know it's part of the city's plan for the area for it to happen eventually someday.
Click to expand...
Those parking lots are heavily contaminated (or so I am told) hence why they haven't been redeveloped. I think a bunch of unclean fill was used to fill in Rat Creek there back in the day.
 
Avenuer said:
Those parking lots are heavily contaminated (or so I am told) hence why they haven't been redeveloped. I think a bunch of unclean fill was used to fill in Rat Creek there back in the day.
Click to expand...
Is there any discussion about rehabilitating and restoring rat creek? If it's possible to do, it'd definitely be a big draw in for potential residents to have a creek and natural area right there.
 
CplKlinger said:
Is there any discussion about rehabilitating and restoring rat creek? If it's possible to do, it'd definitely be a big draw in for potential residents to have a creek and natural area right there.
Click to expand...
Given the train is in the way it'd really be an incomplete restoration at best, but now that you say it, I'd really like a hardscape plaza with a water feature along the course of the original on that parking lot. It'd be a really nice gesture to the original creek while accepting how things are now.
 
I always figured they haven't done anything to the parking lots on the west side of the station because it's very convenient as a park-and-ride and a bus staging area during football games.

Sure would make sense if it was all contaminated. That would have taken a lot of fill to level Rat Creek... probably had it supplied for way under budget by a numbered company that subsequently dissolved itself shortly after.

After all, what's cheaper than dirt cheap? Contaminated dirt cheap. lol
 
CplKlinger said:
Is there any discussion about rehabilitating and restoring rat creek? If it's possible to do, it'd definitely be a big draw in for potential residents to have a creek and natural area right there.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, it’s pretty much impossible for Rat Creek to be properly restored. If you go way, way back in time, Rat Creek use to run basically up until 97th Street. In about 1905, when Norwood was being built, they filled it in up until 90th Street to make 111th Avenue — hence that road's really weird shape. The section of Rat Creek east of 90th then sat more-or-less untouched until 1974, when it was paved in to build Commonwealth Stadium and the LRT station. If you look at the aerial below, you can see the extent of the ravine that Commonwealth paved over. Stadium Station now sits right about where the railway crossing is on the upper right hand side.

That pretty much only leaves the area immediately to the west of Stadium and I'd doubt it would ever happen since, like JuliallThat says, it sits right in the way. Plus, to have it faithfully restored to its pre-'70s look you'd need to recreate its original depth, which was comparable to how deep it is under the Kinnaird Bridge at 82nd Street. I do agree though. Having the parking lot removed for some kind of hardscaped features that evoke the form of what was there would be really cool.

Commonwealth Area, 1930 Aerial.jpg
 
Last edited:
i mean, in regards to Stadium Yards, extending the path that runs in the ravine under 82nd to the LRT would drastically improve access to greenspace and the river valley (that ravine is a favourite of mine, what's left is -or looks to be- natural). That area in general has really good connectivity to the river, downtown, and the potential mainstreet of 112 ave. someone just has to glue the existing bits together a bit better lol
 
cliffapotamus said:
i mean, in regards to Stadium Yards, extending the path that runs in the ravine under 82nd to the LRT would drastically improve access to greenspace and the river valley (that ravine is a favourite of mine, what's left is -or looks to be- natural). That area in general has really good connectivity to the river, downtown, and the potential mainstreet of 112 ave. someone just has to glue the existing bits together a bit better lol
Click to expand...
Luckily there is a plan to extend the path like you said in the Dawson Park and Kinnaird Ravine Master Plan, but it's not currently funded so who knows when it'll begin construction.
 
Despite starting a few years behind, this project has already surpassed Blatchford in my opinion.

I think that both projects will be competing for similar buyers/renters, and it will be tough for Blatchford to compete (at a higher cost) with what looks to be a project on a higher trajectory.
 
strata said:
Despite starting a few years behind, this project has already surpassed Blatchford in my opinion.

I think that both projects will be competing for similar buyers/renters, and it will be tough for Blatchford to compete (at a higher cost) with what looks to be a project on a higher trajectory.
Click to expand...
I'm very excited for both projects, but I think Blatchford is a bit different since it's supposed to be carbon neutral, incorporate environmentally friendly designs, etc. There's a lot of uncertainty and risk in being the first developer of such a unique project, and I can understand why it's more expensive - especially considering the building codes that need to be followed there. Hopefully now that the first residents moved in, it'll pick up even more steam. I can definitely understand why you think that though; a few townhouses surrounded by dirt aren't that impressive on their own.
 
Last edited:
strata said:
Despite starting a few years behind, this project has already surpassed Blatchford in my opinion.

I think that both projects will be competing for similar buyers/renters, and it will be tough for Blatchford to compete (at a higher cost) with what looks to be a project on a higher trajectory.
Click to expand...

This phase of Stadium Yards is purely rental so a much different demographic compared to the current two Phases of Blatchford (luxury townhouse ownership).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top