The top city in Canada? Calgary

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Muta

I'm not saying crime isn't a problem, it definitely is, especially such as places like the river pathways these days.

But, it also seems like some people like to let crime and fear control their lives. Some people are blowing the whole crime thing in the inner city waaaaay out of proportion. Crime is evident everywhere these days; and I'm pretty sure it's growing in the suburbs.

Unless it's TERRIBLY bad in a certain location, letting fear and crime dictate the way one lives is sad, IMO.

Some people sure do. Some people let every little thing dominate their lives.

Personally, I like being able to go about my daily routine without being asked for change, watching some crackhead shoot up/freak out, or see some homeless guy taking a dump. Would I live downtown if those things didn't exist (or were at say, 1995 levels of prevalence)? Maybe, but I still like being away from the density. I'm not really concerned about the crime... but its definitely not a selling point, that's for sure.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

On the other hand, I have feared for my safety while dealing with all the suburban commuters driving along Deerfoot and Crowchild during rush hour.

For me it's not my safety that I fear for on Deerfoot during rush hour, it's moreso the boredom that comes when being absorbed into the traffic...

[Matata]

Has anyone else noticed that Calgary will quickly compare itself to Vancouver, but will have nothing to do with Edmonton?

Theres a reason all the Oil Companies are based in Calgary...

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Some people sure do. Some people let every little thing dominate their lives.

Personally, I like being able to go about my daily routine without being asked for change, watching some crackhead shoot up/freak out, or see some homeless guy taking a dump. Would I live downtown if those things didn't exist (or were at say, 1995 levels of prevalence)? Maybe, but I still like being away from the density.

You say this like it happens frequently, and assumedly right in front of you.

I've lived in the inner city for most of my life, and while I've been asked for change and have seen the odd person shoot up, that rarely happens and when it does, it's not anything to be afraid of and these types will rarely disturb you. Plus, Calgary's hardly a blip on that specific radar when it comes to those problems; try going to downtown San Francisco or Los Angeles.

I've had infinitely more positive experiences walking around downtown and the inner-city core than negative ones. Can you get randomly mugged or whatever? Sure, crap happens. But that can also happen in the 'burbs.

Now seeing a person take a dump, well I've never seen it personally.. but it sure as hell won't influence my decisions when I choose to walk out my door every morning.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by Matata

Has anyone else noticed that Calgary will quickly compare itself to Vancouver, but will have nothing to do with Edmonton?

Theres a reason all the Oil Companies are based in Calgary...

What reason? Because Calgary is so sweet???

[moon]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

See my above post. Is it more affordable for a family to:

A) Own a home in the inner city and not own a vehicle
B) Own a home in the suburbs and require two vehicles

I can see the argument that families want yards for the kids to play in (although honestly, the tiny little lots in suburban Calgary hardly make decent play areas), but I don't necessarily think it's more affordable to live in the suburbs, since transportation issues become a huge concern. Inner-city living can mean vehicle-free living.

Living vehicle free is definitely not an option for me now or prior to having a kid.

If it works for you great but I think you are really undervaluing the role that a vehicle has for the majority of people in NA.

I don't care how close I live to work or the inner core there is no way that I would ever consider not having a car and probably no way that I would consider not having two for my family.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

True. Money is a big thing, and it's not everybody's cup of tea.

However, because I have grown up surrounded by the architecture industry in Calgary, it is pain-stakingly obvious of just how cheap and unartistic Calgarians can be. They'd rather save a few bucks to use cheaper materials than create a marquee building that puts Calgary on the map. In comparison, the companies I know based in Calgary get way more excited to do work outside of Calgary and Canada, because it seems everywhere else, good architecture is the forefront of a good city. Not here. As long as it stands and can hold people, it's good enough.

For a city with a wealth of money, it's perplexing to see architecture, and more broadly speaking, art, treated this way.

For me and I am sure many others there is not much more overrated than supposedly "great" or "beautiful" architecture. Obviously to you it is very important but I can't imagine that there are many people who would want to sacrifice cost, functionality and/or safety to get something that supposedly looks cool.

Personally I would much rather see things built that are cost effective, safe and functional much more than something that is "weird" but cutting edge. If you can build it for the same money, safety and functionality and then make it so it satisfies your artist needs than go ahead if not, build me the best building I can get for my money and leave your artist dreams to your paintings you do on your own time.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by moon

For me and I am sure many others there is not much more overrated than supposedly "great" or "beautiful" architecture. Obviously to you it is very important but I can't imagine that there are many people who would want to sacrifice cost, functionality and/or safety to get something that supposedly looks cool.

Personally I would much rather see things built that are cost effective, safe and functional much more than something that is "weird" but cutting edge. If you can build it for the same money, safety and functionality and then make it so it satisfies your artist needs than go ahead if not, build me the best building I can get for my money and leave your artist dreams to your paintings you do on your own time.

Well I agree, the overarching goal for architects is a good balance of art vs. functionality, and there are many, MANY examples of these buildings all over the world.

I want to point something out though - with Calgary developers, there is a difference between being 'cost-effective', and being cheap. Cutting back on quality materials (such as replacing rock with fake rock) is a step backwards. While houses can get away with this, too many commerical developers are applying this treatment to projects where the public has access to and will be using. As a result, they are limited in how they can build structures, which often results in flat, unoriginal buildings that for some reason, people are satisfied with.

I would rather live in a house with character, history, and needing a little TLC than a square box with all the fixin's. How boring.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by moon

For me and I am sure many others there is not much more overrated than supposedly "great" or "beautiful" architecture. Obviously to you it is very important but I can't imagine that there are many people who would want to sacrifice cost, functionality and/or safety to get something that supposedly looks cool.

Personally I would much rather see things built that are cost effective, safe and functional much more than something that is "weird" but cutting edge. If you can build it for the same money, safety and functionality and then make it so it satisfies your artist needs than go ahead if not, build me the best building I can get for my money and leave your artist dreams to your paintings you do on your own time.

So you'd rather not add a creative element to the design process? That's pretty boring, IMO.

Architecture doesn't have to be 'weird' or 'cutting edge'. In fact, architecture includes all the qualities you value in a building - cost effectiveness, safety and functionality - while making it a beautiful, well constructed building from the start. In fact, architecture is becoming an essential component of the marketing / branding of thousands of firms these days.

Good architecture, inlcuding within residential and industrial components, is what seperates good cities from great ones. And I would hope Calgary would strive to become a GREAT city.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Muta

Good architecture, inlcuding within residential and industrial components, is what seperates good cities from great ones. And I would hope Calgary would strive to become a GREAT city.

And bearing that, Calgary is NOT a great city. It is a safe, clean city that satisfies your typical 'steak and potatoes' crowd, but doesn't do anything for contemporary thinkers. That trend is starting to turn, but very slowly, and with much resistance.

I remember Death Cab for Cutie coming to town last year, and commenting that it was the most boring place they've ever visited. No culture whatsoever. Architecture obviously included.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Muta

So you'd rather not add a creative element to the design process? That's pretty boring, IMO.

Architecture doesn't have to be 'weird' or 'cutting edge'. In fact, architecture includes all the qualities you value in a building - cost effectiveness, safety and functionality - while making it a beautiful, well constructed building from the start. In fact, architecture is becoming an essential component of the marketing / branding of thousands of firms these days.

Good architecture, inlcuding within residential and industrial components, is what seperates good cities from great ones. And I would hope Calgary would strive to become a GREAT city.

From what I have seen what passes for good architecture nowdays looks like crap. That would be the main problem I have with it.

However, as I said if it can be incorporated without a hit to functionality or safety and without an increase in cost than I see no major problem with it.

I don't see how architecture would or should play any role into how great a city is or isn't.

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Well I agree, the overarching goal for architects is a good balance of art vs. functionality, and there are many, MANY examples of these buildings all over the world.

I would rather live in a house with character, history, and needing a little TLC than a square box with all the fixin's. How boring.

Personally I see nothing exciting in a house that needs work and is not built as well as another. I also don't see anything boring in a so-called "cookie-cutter" house. However, if the weirder house is built using better quality than that would change my opinion. If these new developments are using inferior products than I see that as a bigger issue and concern than how they look externally.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

And bearing that, Calgary is NOT a great city. It is a safe, clean city that satisfies your typical 'steak and potatoes' crowd, but doesn't do anything for contemporary thinkers. That trend is starting to turn, but very slowly, and with much resistance.

I remember Death Cab for Cutie coming to town last year, and commenting that it was the most boring place they've ever visited. No culture whatsoever. Architecture obviously included.

Well if such luminaries as Death Cab for Cutie thought the town was boring we had better do something quickly to change it around!

Heavan forbid some mindless rock band doesn't think the city has enough culture!

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by moon

I don't see how architecture would or should play any role into how great a city is or isn't.

You're telling me Edmonton is no different than Madrid, Dubai, or Shanghai?

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by moon

Well if such luminaries as Death Cab for Cutie thought the town was boring we had better do something quickly to change it around!

Heavan forbid some mindless rock band doesn't think the city has enough culture!

Well i am sure they were here long enough to make a good judgement...

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by moon

Well if such luminaries as Death Cab for Cutie thought the town was boring we had better do something quickly to change it around!

Heavan forbid some mindless rock band doesn't think the city has enough culture!

Give me an artist that thought Calgary was a creative utopia, and I'll eat my hat. DCFC's sentiments probably echo alot of other artists, which is why they tend to leave or avoid this city in the first place.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

You're telling me Edmonton is no different than Madrid, Dubai, or Shanghai?

Of course it is different, but it isn't because they have better or worse architecture.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Give me an artist that thought Calgary was a creative utopia, and I'll eat my hat. DCFC's sentiments probably echo alot of other artists, which is why they tend to leave or avoid this city in the first place.

My point is who cares what artists think?

I don't know if most artists agree with Death Cab for Cutie because I don't really care what artists think about the city of Calgary. Just like am not too concerned with what engineers as a group think about it or doctors or lawyers.

I am not too worried if artists tend to leave or avoid the city anyways.

[MelBridgeman]

meh..."boring" is pretty subjective....next time DBFC is in town, maybe they should do some research, instead of expecting something to entertain them...

here is a good start
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...629#post963629

plenty of things to do..if some of it isnt your bag of tea, well than your just boring yourself

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by moon

I am not too worried if artists tend to leave or avoid the city anyways.

Then you are, as a prime example, one of the complacent citizens of Calgary that will forever keep artistic culture away from this city. It is that kind of attitude that prevents grassroots artistic thinking that's needed to build a young city into a mature one with a unique identity.

But I suppose as long as the City is fueled by money and oil and puts a shelter over your head, it's good enough, right?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

meh..."boring" is pretty subjective....next time DBFC is in town, maybe they should do some research, instead of expecting something to entertain them...

here is a good start
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...629#post963629

Minus COP, the Oval, and possibly the Zoo, how is any of that stuff different from any other city's entertainment? Seems like a standard list to me. Nothing special offered here, and certainly not the list that a Montreal or Toronto could come up with, let alone a New York or Tokyo.