Quote:
Originally Posted by Addick
While there are many things that are not black and white, some things are pretty clear and there is a right/wrong answer. When you consider the role of local government, you cannot justify things like the urban/suburban infrastructure subsidy and unorganized/free-for-all fringe development. ...
|
If you keep using the terms like I've hightlighted, your arguments become no better than SebC's - aggressive statements based on blind, albeit sincere, beliefs. You seem to understand the planning system and should know better - nothing's free in Calgary, especially the fringe developments. Both greenfield and brownfield developments are paying to the ying-yang. If anything, it is the inner-city infill developments that have not to-date been paying enough based on their impact on existing infrastructure (it is being reviewed; see our earlier exchange with Bunk on this topic in another thread; I don't want to repeat everything).
You raised a very good point that led to a valid question: what should city planners be allowed to do? I thought you're going to come up with your view on their role in more detail, so that we can discuss it further. I offered my thoughts on the review process, but that is just the tip of the iceberg. It is much more convoluted. Matthias Tita spoke this afternoon at the CMHC conference on how the city growth-related planning challenges are being attacked internally by the Administration and I couldn't stop thinking - they've created and imposed at least half of these challengers themselves!
BTW, he did show Rollin's favourite slide about the amount of taxes collected from an acre of land at different densities; always makes me laugh. I immediately think of all barely used inner-city school sites and the amount of land they occupy. Why not consolidate some of the schools, re-designate the remainder to the high density use and then sell all of the remaining land at a public auction for intensification? Simple sales to the highest bidders, no useless nepotic review boards stacked-up with retired bureaucrats. Did you know that The Province and The City were considering this move since the early 90's? Nope, no go, how can we allow the Bel-Aire, Maifair, Britannia, Elboya etc. residents be disturbed while they're sipping their lattes in piece and bitc..ing about suburbs.
In the mean time, all Calgary Satellite communities are showing double-and triple-digit growth while Calgary shows declines (I will post some of the charts later, they are quite striking).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Addick
...There is a bit of subjectivity when it comes to accomplishing goals and objectives but I'd rather the discretion of a judge than most Councillors.
|
If you've invested millions in developable land that by all accounts should and could be developed, any delay beyond reasonably anticipated approval timeframe results in sgnificant cost overruns, market timeouts, financing refusals etc. Just imagine the delay imposed by the addition of the legal review process. It is there now by the way, but it is hardly used for that reason and also for the reason of applicants not wanting to create enemies at the administration and political levels.