David Suzuki calls Calgary an "ecological disaster"

[Thunderball]

While one can't play team sports in the average Calgary backyard, there's still room for a swing-set or a kiddie pool, and enough running space for a small child. Anything more, and there's usually a park within a few blocks.

[The Yen Man]

Less driving? Not for me, I like driving. Sometimes I just drive for fun, without an actual destination.

I prefer suburbs because I like having my own house with a double garage rather than share a condo with a bunch of people and having one parking stall. Yes, I realize I'd have to drive more to get anywhere, but I really don't mind. Besides, I don't even work downtown, so the commute to work really isn't even an issue for me.

[Resolute 14]

Fanatics of any breed should be ignored. I stopped caring about anything Suzuki had to say a very long time ago.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Funny comment from that article...

"Ok David. How about explaining why commuting from Abbotsford every day is so great. Vancouver transit system is a joke and those clean electric buses are powered by that huge gas fired plant east of the 2nd narrows bridge. How long does it take for you to drive your car from that 3 million dollar mansion in Kitsilano (suburb) to downtown. Hybrid still uses gas. I live in Calgary and I live closer to work than him."

funny comment, but is Suzuki saying that Abbotsford is great? This guys kind of missing the point, and Kitsilano is a bridge apart from DT Vancouver. Hardly a suburb, it's like Mission is to Calgary. Does Suzuki even work DT anyway?

[MarchHare]

But even a 20 square foot backyard is bigger than a patio hanging off the side of an apartment suite.

That's true, but tiny backyards are not bigger than the parks and other recreational areas found every few blocks in the city. The same is true for the suburbs, for that matter. Since the yards are so miniscule, kids need to go to the parks (or schoolyards, etc.) found in every suburban community to play anyway. It's really no different than the situation in the core.

[4X4]

Ok, March Hare. Now you're deciding how much space is ample for child play? A swingset and a sandbox will fit in the yards in your picture. And whatever the reason for people to ues their yard is not up to you or that blowhard Suzuki. Maybe people want to store a camper back there. Maybe they want a garden. Urban sprawl is clearly demonstrated in your picture of the maritimes. Calgary's "urban sprawl" is nothing more than a reaction to all the people moving here.
Suzuki's comments sound like whining hate for the rich province. Typical eastern attitude of throwing Alberta under the bus.
Octothorp made a great comment a few posts back of what our ecological footprint is really like. Sure there's room for improvement, but a disaster? Give it up, David.

[Table 5]

typical eastern attitude? suzuki is west of you.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Table 5

typical eastern attitude? suzuki is west of you.

Great. The left coast too.

[Table 5]

so every place is evil except for the one you happen to live in.

[Hack&Lube]

Back and front yards are useless and just isolate families into their own lots. I agree with David Suzuki. Calgary's urban sprawl is disgraceful. Look at Europe. Build apartments with commercial space on the street level and have large parks and squares for communual use. You defeat disgusting urban sprawl and you concentrate people so we all meet more people and interact more in daily life.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Great. The left coast too.

It's actually neither. Urban sprawl is an issue facing every metropolitan area in North America. Ottawa, Montreal, the GTA, and (to a slightly lesser extent) Vancouver are all just as bad as Calgary when it comes to sprawl. The biggest mistake Suzuki made is that he singled out Calgary. It gives the impression that he's picking on Alberta, so naturally people here are going to get defensive when they read this. In reality, he could have made the exact same comments about Toronto or most anywhere else.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

This is a Google Maps satellite view of a typical suburban neighbourhood in South Calgary. The houses are packed as tightly together as sardines in a can, and none of them have a backyard sizable enough for kids to play in:

My point though, is that the argument that a single family detached home in the suburbs is necessary so "the kids have a backyard to play in" is a complete red herring.

Or the red herring is the myth of urban sprawl in calgary.

[Table 5]

Hack and Lube, i spent half my childhood in the exact euro community you describe. Lived in an crapbox commie block with no yard, but basically spend my childhood outside in the public squares, parks and forests surrounding it. And those places were packed with children. I had way more play time outside than anybody on my suburban Calgary street ever did. I barely ever even saw children playing in my neighborhood in Calgary....they all had to be drive to the rink or field!

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

The Suncor Oil Sands tailing pond is the second biggest dam in the world (by volume) next to the Three Gorges Dam.

I don't buy that for a second.

[The Ditch]

Is it even possible to compare Europe to Calgary? They have very little space compared and centuries to build and rebuild their cities.

[Muta]

Just for comparison's sake... here's some population densities of similar-sized cities (in terms of population), and their city area (just the city; not any metro areas and densities):

Area:

1. Ottawa: 2,778.64 km²
2. Jacksonville: 2,264.5 km²
3. Phoenix: 1,334.1 km²
4. San Antonio: 1,067.3 km²
5. Dallas: 997.1 km²
6. San Diego: 963.6 km²
7. Calgary: 726.50 km²
8. Edmonton: 684.37 km²
9. San Jose: 461.5 km²
10. Detroit: 370.2 km²

Population Density:

1. Detroit: 2,647/km²
2. San Jose: 2,014.4/km²
3. San Diego: 1,494.7/km²
4. Dallas: 1,391.9/km²
5. Calgary: 1,360.2/km²
6. Phoenix: 1,188.4/km²
7. Edmonton: 1,099.4/km²
8. San Antonio: 1,084.4/km²
9. Jacksonville: 409.89/km²
10. Ottawa: 219.8/km²

Keep in mind, the only thing similar about these cities are their populations.

First off, completely disregard Ottawa, as it is the capital city of Canada and due to the sheer number of federal and government buildings, it understandably is a large area in size; however, it is the exception and not the rule.

Other than that, it appears that Calgary is middle of the pack when it comes to area and density; metro area and desnity, however, may be another story.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Back and front yards are useless and just isolate families into their own lots. I agree with David Suzuki. Calgary's urban sprawl is disgraceful. Look at Europe. Build apartments with commercial space on the street level and have large parks and squares for communual use. You defeat disgusting urban sprawl and you concentrate people so we all meet more people and interact more in daily life.

That's hippy talk, you filthy commie. Here in freedom-loving Alberta, we have our 20sqft backyards, and that's the way we likes it.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

In reality, he could have made the exact same comments about Toronto or most anywhere else.

Absolutely, he couldve. The fact that there is thruth behind the comments though can't be disputed however. Just because everyone is doing it, doesnt make it right.

[Muta]

I see nothing wrong with having kids play in a park; people in cities all over the world do it. In fact, they get more usage than a backyard does and takes up ALOT less space (per person).

Backyards are a big contributing factor to urban sprawl. Always have been.

[FFR]

I grew up in one of those "taboo" houses with a large backyard and large front yard. Now I live in a townhouse with no backyard...there's a common green space, but its small. If I could afford to move back into a house with a large backyard I'd do it in a second.