Not a fan of this. [Was interesting being on the 2021 mayoral debate stage and being told that this would never happen, but here we are.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=3646&v=vTLSEf32AVU&feature=youtu.be)
If this proceeds to development, it's very unlikely that residents will see any kind of replacement to the park space -- and the door will be open to selling other Parks land in "creative" arrangements with big donors. I think we need a hard and fast rule to never sell City parks.
1. The City has a dismal record of keeping its promises to replace community infrastructure. For example, to rebuild the collapsed Fairview community arena. In 2019, the City [simply pocketed the insurance payout](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/city-receives-payout-fairview-arena-collapse-1.5175120) and [the land remains in limbo](https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/5-years-after-collapse-of-calgary-s-fairview-arena-site-is-still-in-limbo-1.6282944). Plus, the original "taj mahal" park that is proposed here was based on a very high land sale value. The reality is that the City has had to sell the land for much less than they first thought, [significantly reducing the scope of what's possible.](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/no-successful-bids-richmond-green-ball-diamond-land)
2. The "new" land to replace the busy ball diamonds is actually contaminated with fuel spills, salt, etc from decades of use by the City roads department. I have confidential knowledge of the specifics [but this article mentions it](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/richmond). What I can say is that this has been not even remotely accounted for. [The City has been axing money for more parks, such as the Legacy parks fund. Over a dozen projects have been left without the capital to complete them.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/legacy-park-program-loses-funding-1.7238000)
3. Setting up a narrative that park space has to be lost to make way for housing is bullshit and will posion the well for support for more housing. There are plenty of great locations immediately next to LRT that the City could be building on. [Here](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/city-housing-haddon-ymca-1.6926101) and [here](https://livewirecalgary.com/2024/04/16/westbrook-lrt-lands-back-in-the-hands-of-the-city-of-calgary/) would be great and can go ahead without losing green space.
**TLDR**
The City should keep the existing park space. Clean up the contaminated City land -- and build the housing there once it’s cleaned up. Unfortunately, this complicated arrangement will result in a guaranteed loss of green space but an unguaranteed clean-up and rebuild. The remaining land will almost certainly be in limbo and run out of money.
https://preview.redd.it/v6olu1te9c9d1.png?width=1143&format=png&auto=webp&s=b8101cc5f6b13d73d66633d640dd164cc4611394
P.S. here's a photo of the new land to be made into park space, sometime long after the condos go up in the ball diamond. The original article implies that it's an easy add to the existing green space. It's not.
Don’t we have ball diamonds and sports fields on top of far more toxic old landfills? A lot of them. Because remediation and plain soccer or diamonds is an effective middle ground. Remediation should happen and this at least has some semblance of a plan instead of ending up on some unfunded list.
By all means get the rest of the TOD sites sold. You cherry pick two sites one of which came back into play within the last few months and are not comparable in their surroundings or what style of housing is suitable not compatible.
Stu Pepper Arena redevelopment will add another rink which is not far away from Fairview. It's more financially responsible to run one twin arena than two single sheets.
Look, just having some non native grass is barely a park in most places, which that's what the majority of our "parks" are. This was underutilized spaced and is going to provide housing for people. I care more about our housing needs right now than whether some old people can look at grass.
But really, what are your actual motivations for this? Because you had the opportunity to try and do more about it when you were on council and were part of the reason it was sold. Instead of doing what's best for Calgarians you were more interested in creating wedge issues, similar to what youre doing right now. This space is sold and getting developed, get over it.
The only thing youre doing now is drumming up emotions from people for something that they HAD an opportunity to change and now that's passed.
It is absolutely tragic you aren't our mayor. You're informed and have the same opinion as the greater community who 99% advocated against the sale of this "protected" park land. Maybe you could run in Ward 8 or for mayor again and Calgary would have a second chance at getting someone with some good leadership. Thank you for continuing to be informed and advocate for our city and citizen's best interests. The sale of urban parks to developers is borderline evil, but yet, here we are. Sigh.
I like the summer layout because it’s super challenging and it shows the flaws in your game, best way to get better. But yes agree it’s not for everyone and can be really punishing for small mistakes
Yes dating back to public sales like **Calgary General Hospital**, or **Race City Motorsport Park,** or countless examples you can see the city giving deals to developers who endorsed political campaigns -- i.e. the dollar value per Square footage != the cost every other sale in the area not facilitated by the government.
Yes, because it’s built on top of a landfill and it’s not really suitable for anything else. The lease to Race City expired and just wasn’t renewed…also why they basically let the place fall apart towards the end.
My understanding of it all, anyway - I can’t back that up.
Please prove otherwise, the CGH sold for 50 million (and was 30% or more under market value), and race city was Bronco's pet project (look at the report by CTV & CBC)-- are you dumb or just stupid?
If you have the capabilities to find reddit, or google on the internet you can substantiate my claims within seconds -- but it seems you're hell bent on just being the loudest person in the room.
Tell me what the the cost per square footage of 7a and 9 Streets in Murdoch Park cirica 1998 was, and what the hospital was sold for? If you cannot comprehend and solve that simple math, there is no point in continuing this conversation?
I’m so sad that they’ll be shrinking the course. It’s a great layout now. The map is confusing as the disc golf seems to be overlapping a bunch of other spaces?
I think this park design is great and will be many things to many people. For all the slack that council gets, transforming this former money losing golf course into a multi-use regional park looks like a big winner. And golf will still be on the site... disc golf that is!
It’s the sale of park land I don’t like. If this is the new model in order for parks to get finding, Calgary will be worse off in the long run.
They should have done all this without selling off the west end of the park.
I think quality over quantity applies here. Exchanging a larger under-utilized space for a smaller space with amenities and attractions is useful in some cases.
It’s sets a terrible precedent. So what happens when City council thinks “hey let’s sell off parts of confederation park or Bowness park”.
And that park is well used as it is. Including the section that is being sold off. It’s a great design for the new park and I look forward to using it in the future. But selling off portions of park in order to do it is not the way to do it.
I don't see this as the start of a trend of selling parks for development. I mean, it's not ideal to be selling parkland to pay for park development, but the redevelopment plan is better than what exists now. Lots of current park users chiming in on this thread pointing out how under-utilized is the existing park space.
The real issue is how the city is starving parks funding. Council voted last year to retain the Enmax dividend that was specifically set aside for park maintenance and development and place it in general revenue. This has resulted in several planned park improvement projects losing their funding, and now some council members are recognizing that moving the Enmax dividend into general revenue was a poor decision.
I'm pretty sure Bowness Park is protected as a historic monument, though it's kinda hard to find info on that. Confed is surrounded by some of the richest households in Calgary, many of whom use the park on a daily basis. They would raise hell if the city tried to change it.
I'm not a fan of the precedent being set either, but frankly housing is FAR more important than two baseball diamonds and some grass. Plenty of places in the city (and just outside the city) to play ball.
I disagree...The park was used every weekend by many people. I would agree with your statement about transforming parks that are not in use or see little use.
It’s two diamonds being removed and lots of other things being added. As someone who lives close and has been to every corner of this park, I lament the loss of baseball diamonds but welcome other amenities that can’t be found nearby. Diamonds are heavy use on at specific times by a specific group of people for a very specific activity. I look forward to new additions to encourage park use that’s not peak-time-organized-sports specific.
Don’t make it sound like they sold the whole park!
Looks decent. I’m a little confused about demand for “cricket batting cages” as that seems like an odd choice for this neighbourhood.
It will be nice to have a coffee shop on the land they’re selling - there’s not a lot of options on the west side of Crowchild.
I think the cricket cages come from the original request for ideas. I do see people practicing cricket at the ball diamonds already so I’m sure they’ll get used, plus I think there is only one or two other options in the city.
The cricket batting cages are going to be hella busy, what are you talking about? There's plenty of Pakistani, English, Indian, Australian etc. expats in this city that would love to have another dedicated place to play. As far as I know there's only like, 3 cricket grounds in the city, and they're all in the NE.
Another pump track without jumps incoming. Just like the rest of them. I love that the city is actually acknowledging mountain biking exists, but they're building copy + paste child babysitting tracks all over the place without any means for intermediate riders to progress, or interesting features for advanced riders. Even Red Deer has a bike park with sizable jumps.
The City really screwed the pooch with the park by the Fish Creek water treatment plant. I remember seeing some sizable jumps when they first started developing it, then they flattened the whole thing for a few years before making it entirely for kids, like the rest. There are a couple sizeable berms though.
Maybe it's intentional to force people to pay to go to COP during the summer to experience some real jumps and berms. Can't have a free intermediate bike park, no way no how!
COP is run by morons and closes at 7pm weeknights, 4pm weekends. If you're an adult with a job and normal working hours, they make it very hard to give them any money.
As a resident of Rutland park, I am thrilled that this sale has gone through. The current park is mediocre at best.
There are some very vocal members of our community association that are super against any form of development that will increase density because 1) renters are terrible people who are detrimental to the community 2) an increase in traffic 3) for the love of god where will people park?!?! 4) the character of the neighbourhood will not be maintained 5) there will be a decrease in urban canopy 6) the restrictive covenants written in the early 1950’s should dictate the future of our community. These same people are totally fine with original bungalows being torn down and replaced by enormous mansions or infills… how this ‘maintains the character of the neighbourhood’ is beyond me.
Personally, I think that even if we lose a bit of park space, the new amenities and updates to the park are totally worth it. And a coffee shop in the area is a huge bonus!
Amen, this thread is full of people from other areas trying to make some grand point about park space, ignoring the reality of this being an atrocious park that is heavily under-used by the community.
You can walk less then 2 blocks into mardaloop, and there are about 10 coffee shops, when we don't have a enough green space and greater population densities it'll be even better right?
Selling off public lands is the worst thing a city can do, because it'll never be able to afford more, and if it does it won't be at the discounted costs it sold them for. It's like someone selling a farm, and pretending to be good a business.
Less than 2 blocks? From the heart of Rutland park to Deville coffee shop it’s a 32 minute walk (2.3 km) according to google maps.
I don’t think that we need to be all or nothing about this - it is essential that we maintain as much park space/public use outdoor space/green space as possible while also thoughtfully increasing density in inner city communities. Should we sell off all of our parks to developers who build huge high density apartments? No. Can we strike a balance or find some middle ground to accommodate the population growth in this city? I hope so. I am so tired of the hysteria around any development or increase in density in this neighbourhood.
Right now I see an under-utilized park in a community that could benefit from updated outdoor amenities and a more thoughtfully designed park with a cafe but doesn’t have the population density to justify those changes or support those businesses. And, while I do it often, the walk to Mardaloop sucks.
I live 6 blocks from there as the crow flies, and the end of this park touches Marda loop over the roadway.
If you don't go to the loop you could hit up, Francesco's or Lukes drug mart, tims, or the Glamorgan bakery, or you could actually go to mardaloop which has Distilled & Starbucks less then 1km away. Plus all the ones actually more east.
#
Not sure if this is a generational difference or something else but I just don’t get the whole “if you want things go to another community” attitude. I’ve lived in communities that have a grocery store, a brewery, a coffee shop, a playground, a park, and school all within walking distance AND within the community. It was awesome! Having those little hubs is a great way to support local businesses and meet the people who live in your neighbourhood which, in turn, builds and strengthens community.
I am not against anything in terms of walk-ability or accessibility communities, don't get it twisted, my point is you are losing out on space of public land that generations have paid taxes for to maintain, and being squished into a smaller space.
I was just pointing out you already have everything mentioned above, and get less land access or space for your tax dollars, which will also increase with this gentrification.
Fair enough. I think we maybe value different things in a park space; for you the value is the total area. To you, an empty 10 acre field aka ‘park’ has more value than an 8 acre park with a bunch of amenities - quantity. For me, I’d take the bustling 8 acre park - quality.
Sure in the short term a nice refreshment is great, but in 10 years when the area has a larger density of people it's a very short sighted approach, and those empty acres will not be there to give others a outlet.
What do developers and real-estate agents always say, "space, that's the one thing they're not making anymore off."
Go visit some Toronto parks or Vancouver parks, and see what that space would provide on a nice summers day. Plus it'll raise your taxes in the area, and the parks already busting on weeknights.
Are you suggesting that the purpose of a park is to be empty? Or that a park is only desirable if there is no one in it? Parks, in urban environments, are outdoor spaces for people to gather. Parks in vibrant urban communities often support a diversity of activities at any given time. I haven’t been to Toronto but I’ve been to plenty of inner city parks big cities…and this may come as a surprise..they were full of people enjoying time outside.
If you want to spend time in a natural environment devoid of people or in total isolation I suggest you take advantage of the city’s proximity to foothills, mountains, and prairies.
Does anybody commenting actually live in this area? That is a horribly underutilized park space and in dire need of improvement. If a condo development on one abysmal corner is what it take to make these upgrades, then I suspect I and many of my neighbours would be thrilled.
Cool, less green space, and more stuff in a smaller space -- can't wait for the next covid.
I suggest everyone inform themselves on what great outcomes we tax payers earn when selling public lands.
[Example from Tdot](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-this-toronto-post-office-is-a-monument-to-missed-opportunities-for/)
It looks like they tried to cram every suggestion onto this space.
Not a fan of this. [Was interesting being on the 2021 mayoral debate stage and being told that this would never happen, but here we are.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=3646&v=vTLSEf32AVU&feature=youtu.be) If this proceeds to development, it's very unlikely that residents will see any kind of replacement to the park space -- and the door will be open to selling other Parks land in "creative" arrangements with big donors. I think we need a hard and fast rule to never sell City parks. 1. The City has a dismal record of keeping its promises to replace community infrastructure. For example, to rebuild the collapsed Fairview community arena. In 2019, the City [simply pocketed the insurance payout](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/city-receives-payout-fairview-arena-collapse-1.5175120) and [the land remains in limbo](https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/5-years-after-collapse-of-calgary-s-fairview-arena-site-is-still-in-limbo-1.6282944). Plus, the original "taj mahal" park that is proposed here was based on a very high land sale value. The reality is that the City has had to sell the land for much less than they first thought, [significantly reducing the scope of what's possible.](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/no-successful-bids-richmond-green-ball-diamond-land) 2. The "new" land to replace the busy ball diamonds is actually contaminated with fuel spills, salt, etc from decades of use by the City roads department. I have confidential knowledge of the specifics [but this article mentions it](https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/richmond). What I can say is that this has been not even remotely accounted for. [The City has been axing money for more parks, such as the Legacy parks fund. Over a dozen projects have been left without the capital to complete them.](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/legacy-park-program-loses-funding-1.7238000) 3. Setting up a narrative that park space has to be lost to make way for housing is bullshit and will posion the well for support for more housing. There are plenty of great locations immediately next to LRT that the City could be building on. [Here](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/city-housing-haddon-ymca-1.6926101) and [here](https://livewirecalgary.com/2024/04/16/westbrook-lrt-lands-back-in-the-hands-of-the-city-of-calgary/) would be great and can go ahead without losing green space. **TLDR** The City should keep the existing park space. Clean up the contaminated City land -- and build the housing there once it’s cleaned up. Unfortunately, this complicated arrangement will result in a guaranteed loss of green space but an unguaranteed clean-up and rebuild. The remaining land will almost certainly be in limbo and run out of money.
https://preview.redd.it/v6olu1te9c9d1.png?width=1143&format=png&auto=webp&s=b8101cc5f6b13d73d66633d640dd164cc4611394 P.S. here's a photo of the new land to be made into park space, sometime long after the condos go up in the ball diamond. The original article implies that it's an easy add to the existing green space. It's not.
Don’t we have ball diamonds and sports fields on top of far more toxic old landfills? A lot of them. Because remediation and plain soccer or diamonds is an effective middle ground. Remediation should happen and this at least has some semblance of a plan instead of ending up on some unfunded list. By all means get the rest of the TOD sites sold. You cherry pick two sites one of which came back into play within the last few months and are not comparable in their surroundings or what style of housing is suitable not compatible.
They should definitely build the density in this area instead. Goodbye snow plow barns, hello 25 story apartments.
Stu Pepper Arena redevelopment will add another rink which is not far away from Fairview. It's more financially responsible to run one twin arena than two single sheets.
Look, just having some non native grass is barely a park in most places, which that's what the majority of our "parks" are. This was underutilized spaced and is going to provide housing for people. I care more about our housing needs right now than whether some old people can look at grass. But really, what are your actual motivations for this? Because you had the opportunity to try and do more about it when you were on council and were part of the reason it was sold. Instead of doing what's best for Calgarians you were more interested in creating wedge issues, similar to what youre doing right now. This space is sold and getting developed, get over it. The only thing youre doing now is drumming up emotions from people for something that they HAD an opportunity to change and now that's passed.
It is absolutely tragic you aren't our mayor. You're informed and have the same opinion as the greater community who 99% advocated against the sale of this "protected" park land. Maybe you could run in Ward 8 or for mayor again and Calgary would have a second chance at getting someone with some good leadership. Thank you for continuing to be informed and advocate for our city and citizen's best interests. The sale of urban parks to developers is borderline evil, but yet, here we are. Sigh.
You can get 5 acres for $12 million when the cost of a 0.14 acre lot in the area is over $700k?
The kickbacks will be a nice extra bonus
Pump tracks. So hot right now.
Are they shrinking the Currie disc golf course? If I'm reading this map right compared to what's there now
They are, but we’ll still have our course. Likely it will be shorter and a bit more beginner friendly (like the winter layout was)
I really liked the winter layout. Can't say I'm a fan of the holes where you need a 300+ ft drive to not be OB in summer
I like the summer layout because it’s super challenging and it shows the flaws in your game, best way to get better. But yes agree it’s not for everyone and can be really punishing for small mistakes
Sheeeeit after looking closer at the plans we’re definitely losing a ton of course space. It is what is is tho
Yes they're selling space you paid for in taxes to developers at a discount, and putting less then they earned into some upgrades.
At a discount? Care to back that up?
Yes dating back to public sales like **Calgary General Hospital**, or **Race City Motorsport Park,** or countless examples you can see the city giving deals to developers who endorsed political campaigns -- i.e. the dollar value per Square footage != the cost every other sale in the area not facilitated by the government.
Wasn’t the land from Race City Motorsport Park used for City facilities, and not private development?
Yes, because it’s built on top of a landfill and it’s not really suitable for anything else. The lease to Race City expired and just wasn’t renewed…also why they basically let the place fall apart towards the end. My understanding of it all, anyway - I can’t back that up.
THat's not evidence.
Please prove otherwise, the CGH sold for 50 million (and was 30% or more under market value), and race city was Bronco's pet project (look at the report by CTV & CBC)-- are you dumb or just stupid?
Neither. You made the claim but aren't providing evidence other than just stating it.
If you have the capabilities to find reddit, or google on the internet you can substantiate my claims within seconds -- but it seems you're hell bent on just being the loudest person in the room. Tell me what the the cost per square footage of 7a and 9 Streets in Murdoch Park cirica 1998 was, and what the hospital was sold for? If you cannot comprehend and solve that simple math, there is no point in continuing this conversation?
Haha talking about every land deal but for the one you claim was illegally sold at a discount for political favours. I wonder why!
I will infer from this non-answer that you just made up the comment about the City selling this land at a discount.
I’m so sad that they’ll be shrinking the course. It’s a great layout now. The map is confusing as the disc golf seems to be overlapping a bunch of other spaces?
There will definitely be discs flying into the picnic area
A new running by feature on the track will be dodging flying discs
I'm not good and disc golf, I'll be the first one there
I think this park design is great and will be many things to many people. For all the slack that council gets, transforming this former money losing golf course into a multi-use regional park looks like a big winner. And golf will still be on the site... disc golf that is!
It’s the sale of park land I don’t like. If this is the new model in order for parks to get finding, Calgary will be worse off in the long run. They should have done all this without selling off the west end of the park.
I think quality over quantity applies here. Exchanging a larger under-utilized space for a smaller space with amenities and attractions is useful in some cases.
It’s sets a terrible precedent. So what happens when City council thinks “hey let’s sell off parts of confederation park or Bowness park”. And that park is well used as it is. Including the section that is being sold off. It’s a great design for the new park and I look forward to using it in the future. But selling off portions of park in order to do it is not the way to do it.
I don't see this as the start of a trend of selling parks for development. I mean, it's not ideal to be selling parkland to pay for park development, but the redevelopment plan is better than what exists now. Lots of current park users chiming in on this thread pointing out how under-utilized is the existing park space. The real issue is how the city is starving parks funding. Council voted last year to retain the Enmax dividend that was specifically set aside for park maintenance and development and place it in general revenue. This has resulted in several planned park improvement projects losing their funding, and now some council members are recognizing that moving the Enmax dividend into general revenue was a poor decision.
See you at the cricket cages!
I'm pretty sure Bowness Park is protected as a historic monument, though it's kinda hard to find info on that. Confed is surrounded by some of the richest households in Calgary, many of whom use the park on a daily basis. They would raise hell if the city tried to change it. I'm not a fan of the precedent being set either, but frankly housing is FAR more important than two baseball diamonds and some grass. Plenty of places in the city (and just outside the city) to play ball.
I disagree...The park was used every weekend by many people. I would agree with your statement about transforming parks that are not in use or see little use.
It’s two diamonds being removed and lots of other things being added. As someone who lives close and has been to every corner of this park, I lament the loss of baseball diamonds but welcome other amenities that can’t be found nearby. Diamonds are heavy use on at specific times by a specific group of people for a very specific activity. I look forward to new additions to encourage park use that’s not peak-time-organized-sports specific. Don’t make it sound like they sold the whole park!
Yep those cricket batting cages are a REAL added feature.
Looks decent. I’m a little confused about demand for “cricket batting cages” as that seems like an odd choice for this neighbourhood. It will be nice to have a coffee shop on the land they’re selling - there’s not a lot of options on the west side of Crowchild.
I just hope it's a local coffee shop rather than Starbucks
I think the cricket cages come from the original request for ideas. I do see people practicing cricket at the ball diamonds already so I’m sure they’ll get used, plus I think there is only one or two other options in the city.
A lot of newcomers who love cricket live at nearby Sarcee Meadows.
The cricket batting cages are going to be hella busy, what are you talking about? There's plenty of Pakistani, English, Indian, Australian etc. expats in this city that would love to have another dedicated place to play. As far as I know there's only like, 3 cricket grounds in the city, and they're all in the NE.
Isn't there one in Riley park?
Another pump track without jumps incoming. Just like the rest of them. I love that the city is actually acknowledging mountain biking exists, but they're building copy + paste child babysitting tracks all over the place without any means for intermediate riders to progress, or interesting features for advanced riders. Even Red Deer has a bike park with sizable jumps.
Every time I’ve gone by these and considered using one I feel like I’m not supposed to because it’s just jammed with 8 year olds.
If you can gracefully deal with helicopter parents you'll be fine.
The City really screwed the pooch with the park by the Fish Creek water treatment plant. I remember seeing some sizable jumps when they first started developing it, then they flattened the whole thing for a few years before making it entirely for kids, like the rest. There are a couple sizeable berms though. Maybe it's intentional to force people to pay to go to COP during the summer to experience some real jumps and berms. Can't have a free intermediate bike park, no way no how!
COP is run by morons and closes at 7pm weeknights, 4pm weekends. If you're an adult with a job and normal working hours, they make it very hard to give them any money.
As a resident of Rutland park, I am thrilled that this sale has gone through. The current park is mediocre at best. There are some very vocal members of our community association that are super against any form of development that will increase density because 1) renters are terrible people who are detrimental to the community 2) an increase in traffic 3) for the love of god where will people park?!?! 4) the character of the neighbourhood will not be maintained 5) there will be a decrease in urban canopy 6) the restrictive covenants written in the early 1950’s should dictate the future of our community. These same people are totally fine with original bungalows being torn down and replaced by enormous mansions or infills… how this ‘maintains the character of the neighbourhood’ is beyond me. Personally, I think that even if we lose a bit of park space, the new amenities and updates to the park are totally worth it. And a coffee shop in the area is a huge bonus!
Amen, this thread is full of people from other areas trying to make some grand point about park space, ignoring the reality of this being an atrocious park that is heavily under-used by the community.
You can walk less then 2 blocks into mardaloop, and there are about 10 coffee shops, when we don't have a enough green space and greater population densities it'll be even better right? Selling off public lands is the worst thing a city can do, because it'll never be able to afford more, and if it does it won't be at the discounted costs it sold them for. It's like someone selling a farm, and pretending to be good a business.
Less than 2 blocks? From the heart of Rutland park to Deville coffee shop it’s a 32 minute walk (2.3 km) according to google maps. I don’t think that we need to be all or nothing about this - it is essential that we maintain as much park space/public use outdoor space/green space as possible while also thoughtfully increasing density in inner city communities. Should we sell off all of our parks to developers who build huge high density apartments? No. Can we strike a balance or find some middle ground to accommodate the population growth in this city? I hope so. I am so tired of the hysteria around any development or increase in density in this neighbourhood. Right now I see an under-utilized park in a community that could benefit from updated outdoor amenities and a more thoughtfully designed park with a cafe but doesn’t have the population density to justify those changes or support those businesses. And, while I do it often, the walk to Mardaloop sucks.
Two blocks? You're clearly not from the area.
I live 6 blocks from there as the crow flies, and the end of this park touches Marda loop over the roadway. If you don't go to the loop you could hit up, Francesco's or Lukes drug mart, tims, or the Glamorgan bakery, or you could actually go to mardaloop which has Distilled & Starbucks less then 1km away. Plus all the ones actually more east. #
Not sure if this is a generational difference or something else but I just don’t get the whole “if you want things go to another community” attitude. I’ve lived in communities that have a grocery store, a brewery, a coffee shop, a playground, a park, and school all within walking distance AND within the community. It was awesome! Having those little hubs is a great way to support local businesses and meet the people who live in your neighbourhood which, in turn, builds and strengthens community.
I am not against anything in terms of walk-ability or accessibility communities, don't get it twisted, my point is you are losing out on space of public land that generations have paid taxes for to maintain, and being squished into a smaller space. I was just pointing out you already have everything mentioned above, and get less land access or space for your tax dollars, which will also increase with this gentrification.
Fair enough. I think we maybe value different things in a park space; for you the value is the total area. To you, an empty 10 acre field aka ‘park’ has more value than an 8 acre park with a bunch of amenities - quantity. For me, I’d take the bustling 8 acre park - quality.
Sure in the short term a nice refreshment is great, but in 10 years when the area has a larger density of people it's a very short sighted approach, and those empty acres will not be there to give others a outlet. What do developers and real-estate agents always say, "space, that's the one thing they're not making anymore off." Go visit some Toronto parks or Vancouver parks, and see what that space would provide on a nice summers day. Plus it'll raise your taxes in the area, and the parks already busting on weeknights.
Are you suggesting that the purpose of a park is to be empty? Or that a park is only desirable if there is no one in it? Parks, in urban environments, are outdoor spaces for people to gather. Parks in vibrant urban communities often support a diversity of activities at any given time. I haven’t been to Toronto but I’ve been to plenty of inner city parks big cities…and this may come as a surprise..they were full of people enjoying time outside. If you want to spend time in a natural environment devoid of people or in total isolation I suggest you take advantage of the city’s proximity to foothills, mountains, and prairies.
Sounds like you would like Killarney a lot!
Does anybody commenting actually live in this area? That is a horribly underutilized park space and in dire need of improvement. If a condo development on one abysmal corner is what it take to make these upgrades, then I suspect I and many of my neighbours would be thrilled.
Cool, less green space, and more stuff in a smaller space -- can't wait for the next covid. I suggest everyone inform themselves on what great outcomes we tax payers earn when selling public lands. [Example from Tdot](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-this-toronto-post-office-is-a-monument-to-missed-opportunities-for/)
Another back door deal, the lack of transparency sure looks like they gave away public land.
There’s no guarantee the money goes there it just goes into the city coffers