[Grendel]

I'm interested to hear what everyone thinks about this new low-income housing tower that the Mustard Seed is planning to build behind the Calgary Tower; conceptually, aesthetically, politically, philosophically, etc.

I know there's already a discussion underway on this topic in the Construction page, but I thought that this was a big enough issue that it probably deserves its own thread.

[Calgarian]

Good idea, but it looks thrown together. The building itself is really ugly, and will add to the concentration of working poor in the area. I hope it doesn't detract from the revitalization of 10th Ave.

[CorporateWhore]

Good idea

that's highly debatable. read the calgary thread for details.

[Calgarian]

that's highly debatable. read the calgary thread for details.

It is a good idea, it will depend greatly on how the Mustard Seed runs the place.

[CorporateWhore]

how is herding the poor and homeless in one small location a good idea? give me one example that proves this to be anything but a total disaster.

[Grendel]

This might seem like a slightly facile observation, but it seems to me that the real disaster is having poor and homeless in the first place. Having them all the the same place under the same administration has the obvious benefit of keeping needy people in a place where they have ready access to social services, rather than spreading them willy-nilly behind dumpsters and in roach hotels.

[Coldrsx]

how is herding the poor and homeless in one small location a good idea? give me one example that proves this to be anything but a total disaster.

here they are thinking of allowing alcohol in shelters now...:koko:

[Bad Grizzly]

I see a 28 storey tower to shelter the homeless as being a disaster for that block and anywhere within a 3 block radius. We should learn from mistakes made in Chicago, etc...

[Calgarian]

how is herding the poor and homeless in one small location a good idea? give me one example that proves this to be anything but a total disaster.

It beats having them on the street. How can you argue that?

[Wooster]

The Community Association, which I work for is very aware of this project.

Of course this is the first we've seen of the architecture. Of which we were all appalled. There will be some very interesting meetings on this in the near future. Personally, I will be actively seeking out best practices and models for how a development like this can be successfully pulled off. Simple clean design does not have to be expensive at all. People moving into this place need to have pride in it.

Its current design is not worthy of human habitation, and not worthy of the community it is going in.

Like the BRZ, the community is not opposed to this project in principle. The type of project is far from ideal in its location and design. There is a recognition however, that the devil is in the details. There is some benefit to concentrating it so that services can be provided. Even in an ideal situation, it is very difficult to meet the service needs of this population, if spread out all over the place it becomes that much more difficult. The success and failure of this place will determined by its management and level of service.

Keep in mind that this is still a mixed income community. Although it will be all in one building, for every one person living in this project there will be 10 people moving in in market projects in 5-6 blocks in any direction. The problem with big american style or something like Regent Park was that it is concentrated, isolated ghettos on super-blocks of tens of thousands of people. Even the new regent park, an exemplar of affordable housing will many more off-market units than this building.

Ideally, we'd have a fair share doctrine that would mandate that social services and housing be distributed in mixed income areas across the city. and individualized services provided.

In the absence of a more sophisticated program, the Seed, which is a very good organization is responding to a dire situation. The issue then is making it as good as it can be while working towards a better program moving into the future (not too hopeful on that).

From a lot of people's perspectives, the people this is meant to serve are concentrated ANYWAY - on the street, in this community. To have any chance to of transitioning to stable work and housing a facility with some resemblance to this (although maybe not on one highrise tower) is badly needed.

Perhaps if you are concerned about this project you could assist me in looking for examples of how it can be done better so that if we want to criticize the architecture and planning there are viable alternatives presented. I will be very involved in the evolution of this project.

It is also my understanding that this project will be in conjunction with a major upgrade of centre street (Volunteer Way) that will address this development, the rest of the Mustard Seed (getting the line ups off the sidewalk) Cash Corner etc.

[WhipperSnapper]

Even the new regent park, an exemplar of affordable housing will many more off-market units than this building.


quite true - I believe the first planned block will have 'more bedrooms' of non-market housing than this one however there is a subtle but distinct different between non-market housing and transitional accomodations and I just don't see transitional housing of this concentration being all that successful

not sure why they couldn't get a decent architect to come up with a decent design as the industry tends to be extremely generous to these type of proposals

[Aegis]

While I think this project has the potential to make a positive contribution, the design is hideous. It looks like a combination of Vantage Point and that apartment building with 12 stories of parking (corner of 10 Ave & 4 ST SW, Mount Royal Place??)..and what the hell is with that giant "The Seed" sign up top? That is just not necessary.

I believe this project has major potential.the spir it of the project is good. When people have a place to live, sleep, use their own bathroom, etc.. it can really "open doors" for them to move up and join the rest of productive society.. Our city just doesn't have any opportunities like this.. right now.

There's always going to be street people, drug addicts, and general scummy people wandering the streets. The problem with homeless "shelters" such as the drop in centre, is that the people who are refused entry (for obvious and important reasons) then go and camp out in the nearby river area, as people have described. That is a major nuisance to the rest of us who might want to enjoy the river valley for something other than drinking, getting high, panhandling, and prostitution.

At least with the Seed Tower, it's permanent residences.. not boarding facilities.. but does it have to be so damned ugly? Could they not make it a showcase project by hiring an architect and coming up with an original design? Would that not be a source of inspiration in and of itself?

This is exactly why NIMBYs complain.. because of stuff like this.

[Aegis]

This might seem like a slightly facile observation, but it seems to me that the real disaster is having poor and homeless in the first place. Having them all the the same place under the same administration has the obvious benefit of keeping needy people in a place where they have ready access to social services, rather than spreading them willy-nilly behind dumpsters and in roach hotels.

Speaking of roach hotels... how the f#ck is the Cecil Hotel still allowed to be in business? There's no way that piece of $hit passes a health inspection..and its feeding all the alcohol related problems of the downtrodden/homeless in that area. I mean.. when you sell beer for $1.75/pint.. that's not a good deal..that's predatory on those people who are helpless against it.

[e909]

This will turn out to be a complete disaster, not to mention a waste of resources.

Room for room, it's much more expensive to build a tower.

[Wooster]

Some examples I found of affordable and transitional housing projects. Some are mixed with market housing:

Toronto
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/affordablehousingtoronto.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/regentparktoronto.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/torontoaffordable.jpg

Seattle
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/affordablehousingseattle2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/Affordableseattle.jpg

Portland
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/affordableportland.jpg

San Diego
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/affordablesandiego.jpg

San Francisco
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/affordablesanfran.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/affordablesanfran2.jpg

[Xelebes]

Some of Edmonton's affordable housing is a lot better than most of our market highrises, lol.

[YYCguys]

Josh, those San Fran designs are pretty neat! If the Mustard Seed can accomplish as classy a design as those are, then I think we could all rest easy. The second SF example looks like it could be a mix of market and non market housing, offices and retail. The non market housing is incorporated into the community seamlessly! I think this would go over well here!

Would it be possible for someone, perhaps from this forum, to communicate with the Mustard Seed, and speak of the benefits of their initiative, but also politely suggest alternative designs to the architecture, using examples that you and others have collected? Do you think they would listen and take action on a redesign based on community input? Worth a try, I s'pose!

[Wooster]

I work for the community, so I will be meeting with the Mustard Seed. If you want to collect some more good precedents I can communicate it to them. Also showing up at the public hearing whenever that comes, with a united message, would be helpful.

[canucklehead2]

This maybe a stupid question but is there a rendering of the project yet? I don't think its an ideal solution but its certainly a step in the right direction. Any new affordable or emergency housing in Alberta is good news. To borrow the TINA phase from neo-cons, but what are the other options? At this point I don't see any private developers catering to the low/no income market, and why would they when there is profit to me made in producing luxury condo towers downtown and McMansions in Springbank?

A better solution in the long term is a mandated mixed income projects. If the building is over a certain size, 25% of the units should be sold, leased or rented at cost, or even a bit below market if the suppliers could be convinced of the need to give back to the community.. A little pie in the sky perhaps but who knows...

[Bokimon]

I agree with all statements posted.
The principle or idea for this is something I would support 100%.
I think affordable housing is of utmost importance in a city growing as fast of ours to help out with the people who are hanging by a thread.
By no means I would be supporting this place as a shelter for the homeless or the drug addicts, prostitues and other transient types.

There are many legitimate citizens out there who are trying their best to make money but are being bogged down by the expensive cost of living in this city. For them a project like this is greatly helpful to get these guys back on their feets and perhaps someday have enough saved to move into a market home.

Design wise, it's grotesque in every conceivable and inconceivable way..
Those examples posted above are perfect for a city like ours. SUre maybe the amount of detail in the design can be toned down a slight since this is afterall a project for affordable housing and not for high end living.

[Aegis]

I agree with all statements posted.
The principle or idea for this is something I would support 100%.
I think affordable housing is of utmost importance in a city growing as fast of ours to help out with the people who are hanging by a thread.
By no means I would be supporting this place as a shelter for the homeless or the drug addicts, prostitues and other transient types.

There are many legitimate citizens out there who are trying their best to make money but are being bogged down by the expensive cost of living in this city. For them a project like this is greatly helpful to get these guys back on their feets and perhaps someday have enough saved to move into a market home.

Design wise, it's grotesque in every conceivable and inconceivable way..
Those examples posted above are perfect for a city like ours. SUre maybe the amount of detail in the design can be toned down a slight since this is afterall a project for affordable housing and not for high end living.

I wonder if it would be better for them to build this tower on a different site, so that it's not directly attached to the shelter. For the working poor, trying to get ahead (and stay ahead), having to come home to your apartment overlooking the homeless shelter would be seriously depressing..

This project might not look so bad if it were integrated better with market housing in another part of the beltline. As it stands now, it's in kind of a "dead zone" where there's no friendly street presence (no decent shops, no outdoor vendors, no public spaces, no market housing, and no decent parks within view.

Again, talk is cheap.. I guess they're set on building this tower next to their current spot, and that won't change..

[Aegis]

I work for the community, so I will be meeting with the Mustard Seed. If you want to collect some more good precedents I can communicate it to them. Also showing up at the public hearing whenever that comes, with a united message, would be helpful.

Does the community share the views expressed in this forum? Or do they say "we;re not opposed to this project in principle" because they don't want to seem too gentrified?

Seems to me that we've expressed so many legitimate concerns that shouldn't even come up if this project were properly planned/designed in the first place.

[Lady Willi]

This may not be the best place to start with my first post, but I just have to come out and ask... does anyone else find it very ironic that they are considering a seedy-looking building in a seedy part of town and calling it "The Seed"? And putting it in a huge sign on the top of the building (it actually reads 'the SEED'- yes, let's emphasize the SEED...)?

Don't get me wrong- I'm all for low-income housing *anywhere* in Alberta right now- goodness knows we need it! I am under the impression that this entire development will be made up of studio suites- It would be nice if there were some suites for families.

Ah, well anyway hi and nice to meet you all. :blush:

(edited)

[mersar]

I don't really find it that ironic. 'The Seed' is what the vast majority of people (who use their services or not), and the organization itself, call it. When they were operating the shelter at the old brick store on 16th the signs in the parking lot said 'the seed parking only'.

I do hope that they are held to being required to do a strict design revision though.

[Aegis]

I don't really find it that ironic. 'The Seed' is what the vast majority of people (who use their services or not), and the organization itself, call it. When they were operating the shelter at the old brick store on 16th the signs in the parking lot said 'the seed parking only'.

I do hope that they are held to being required to do a strict design revision though.

We must do everything we can to prevent the forming of a ghetto of social agencies all concentrated in East downtown....

[YYCguys]

Lady Willi, welcome to SSP. And yes, I agree with you on your point about the irony of it all!

[m0nkyman]

Wow. Bad idea in a box.

28 stories of misery. Whose brain fart was this?

Mixed income developments are how you fight poverty. Creating ghettos is how you institutionalize generation bridging poverty. This is an instant ghetto.

[1ajs]

Wow. Bad idea in a box.

28 stories of misery. Whose brain fart was this?

Mixed income developments are how you fight poverty. Creating ghettos is how you institutionalize generation bridging poverty. This is an instant ghetto.

afordable house bleh thats such a vag term......

[Boris2k7]

Does the community share the views expressed in this forum? Or do they say "we;re not opposed to this project in principle" because they don't want to seem too gentrified?

Seems to me that we've expressed so many legitimate concerns that shouldn't even come up if this project were properly planned/designed in the first place.

Based on my own observations and interactions with the Beltline Communities (yay, I'm an associate member now), they probably will put on that "not opposed in principle" face, as Josh stated on the last page (see post 10). Not because they want to seem to gentrified, but rather the opposite, they know that it would be a bad political move to oppose such a development. And for good reason, I've heard people actually praising this monstrosity in public! Of course, none of these people live in the area and can't possibly understand the existing social ills in the area.

From what I have seen, the Beltline Communities would like to accomodate much more affordable housing, just not all concentrated in one location like that, particularly in the east end where other social services are so close by. I'm expecting that they will focus mostly on the design and intensity and/or massing of the development in their response. Then again, Josh is working for them and can give us updates.

[Aegis]

Based on my own observations and interactions with the Beltline Communities (yay, I'm an associate member now), they probably will put on that "not opposed in principle" face. Not because they want to seem to gentrified, but rather the opposite, they know that it would be a bad political move to oppose such a development. And for good reason, I've heard people actually praising this monstrosity in public! Of course, none of these people live in the area and can't possibly understand the existing social ills in the area.

From what I have seen, the Beltline Communities would like to accomodate much more affordable housing, just not all concentrated in one location like that, particularly in the east end where other social services are so close by. I'm expecting that they will focus mostly on the design and intensity and/or massing of the development in their response. Then again, Josh is working for them and can tell us what the official response will be.

Man.. I hope politics is set aside in favor of good judgement. If I were a potential tenant of this new building.. I would not want to live adjacent to a homeless shelter.. actually I'd want to get as far from that place as possible. Heck, building something like this in a desirable area of downtown would really enhance the project: it would get us away from the whole "affordable housing = shoddy quality construction" rut that our city has been in.

[fengshui]

Don't forget Winnipeg's contribution - Pocket Houses, a great concept that hopes to reduce the rooming house blight in our city. BTW, Mustard Seed is a great organization, had some experience with them in Edmonton.

http://www.mts.net/%7Efengshui/images/Untitled.jpg

[ssiguy]

Vancouver is building a lot of low-cost housing/social services in the Downtown Eastside. Its' helping the poor but now the area is just becoming a nicer looking slum.
Housing for the disadvantaged must be part of the community not stand apart from it. Several smaller building scattered thru out the downtown/beltline etc area is far more effective and more cost-effective.

As far as hotels not meeting health standards Vancouver a whole slew of them in the Downtown Eastside but it is the residents that want to stay or the renos will force them out with rents skyrocketing or to condo convertions.
For the poor the best remedy is low cost rent backed with rent subsidies for others but due to no rent control that is impossible in Alberta.