....and as soon as you list a couple there will be people against it. We will never unanimously agree on where that kind of money should be spent.
This bridge is something for all Calgarians and helps a bit more with tourism. I like the bridge and I don't live anywhere near downtown.
As a matter of fact, seeing this bridge now makes me want to vote against any alderman that had opposed it.
Is it really going to help tourism? Are more people going to come here to see a bridge?
I don't buy it. I get it helps the overall look of the city - but that's about it.
Again part of the problem is not the price tag but also how the worked was doled out.
You said it. Nobody will come here to see just the bridge or just the calgary tower or just the saddledome. It's just one more thing that makes our city standout.
Nobody goes to Ottawa for the Rideau Canal. Nobody goes to Toronto for the CN tower.
The Following User Says Thank You to stampsx2 For This Useful Post:
Is it really going to help tourism? Are more people going to come here to see a bridge?
I'm not a tourist, but the development of international-level projects like the Peace Bridge and the Bow did play a part in me moving my wife and I back here. It showed me that the city is maturing and there is a growing market for some higher-level design in Calgary, something that's important to me in attainting work. Obviously it wasn't the only decision, but the maturation of Calgary beyond just a city of power-centers and suburbs is important to me. Even 5-6 years ago, there is no way I would've thought of coming back.
Quote:
Again part of the problem is not the price tag but also how the worked was doled out.
Don't think you will find a lot of issues with that statement, clearly the processes was bungled. But at the end of the day it still got Calgary one of the best architects in the world. As big of a mess as it was, it probably just side-stepped a lot of time wasting and lead us to the inevitable.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
I'm going to wait and see what the final budget numbers are on this bridge. I don't believe that a bridge that is 13 months behind is going to be budget neutral, and good luck recouping from any of the contractors.
I don't buy that tourists are going to flock to the city for the bridge, I would be curious to see if during Stampede people flock to the bridge just to take a picture.
To me looking at that bridge, its just a sore thumb, I don't thinks its pretty or artistic or anything like that.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
The lack of facilities in this city is embarrassing.
The lack of funds coming in from Development Levies, Developer Contributions, and Development Surcharges to fund the construction of these new facilities in new neighbourhoods is truly embarrassing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiriHrdina
Is it really going to help tourism? Are more people going to come here to see a bridge?
I don't buy it. I get it helps the overall look of the city - but that's about it.
The bridge will not tip a tourist's scale by itself but when it is joined by other World-Class venues, facilities, and pieces of infrastructure they surely will be able to tip the scale.
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
The lack of funds coming in from Development Levies, Developer Contributions, and Development Surcharges to fund the construction of these new facilities in new neighbourhoods is truly embarrassing.
The bridge will not tip a tourist's scale by itself but when it is joined by other World-Class venues, facilities, and pieces of infrastructure they surely will be able to tip the scale.
I have my doubts, Calgary is a tourist destination city once a year, most people that travel here leave the airport, go straight down 16th and head to banff and don't stop to snap photo's of bridges.
If you want to increase tourism in this city, then you need to bring in or create more cultural event.
A bridge over a river or a museum isn't going to significantly increase tourism.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
I'm going to wait and see what the final budget numbers are on this bridge. I don't believe that a bridge that is 13 months behind is going to be budget neutral, and good luck recouping from any of the contractors.
I don't buy that tourists are going to flock to the city for the bridge, I would be curious to see if during Stampede people flock to the bridge just to take a picture.
But like Table5 said, it's projects like this, combined with other projects that make a city more attractive to tourists in the long run. You're right that nobody's going to say "hey let's go to Calgary and look at the bridge". But the average person who may be planning a weekend trip to Edmonton or Calgary may say "Well, we've been to Edmonton and done the whole WEM thing before, and it would be neat to see the downtown Calgary with the Calgary Tower, Bow Tower, Saddledome, Peace Bridge" "Yeah, you're right, it's a cool skyline, and the city has a lot to do, as well. Let's go!"
Quote:
To me looking at that bridge, its just a sore thumb, I don't thinks its pretty or artistic or anything like that
But that shouldn't take away from the points people are trying to make, as now that the bridge is complete, yours seems to be a minority opinion. MOst people have been surprised by how stunning it looks in person.
To me, the significance of the bridge is less about it being a tourist destination, and more about an evolving mind-set of the city itself. It hints at Calgary maturing a little bit beyond the typical "the cheapest, quickest, approach is best" bean-counter mentality and that it's starting to view quality as an asset. 20 years ago, the city would've thrown up some craptacular concrete bridge and thought nothing of it.
Although with the ridiculous amount of debate about this teensy bridge (and especially the vitriol about the bridge being done by a "foreigner"), I might be giving the city more credit than appropriate.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
Keep in mind the bridge though was just the boiling point -there have been a series of projects over the last few years that people haven't been happy with.
Given the economic times fiscal restraint isn't a bad thing. It is about setting priorities - and I don't think a fancy bridge in an area with many other bridges is a priority.
To me, the significance of the bridge is less about it being a tourist destination, and more about an evolving mind-set of the city itself. It hints at Calgary maturing a little bit beyond the typical "the cheapest, quickest, approach is best" bean-counter mentality and that it's starting to view quality as an asset. 20 years ago, the city would've thrown up some craptacular concrete bridge and thought nothing of it.
Although with the ridiculous amount of debate about this teensy bridge (and especially the vitriol about the bridge being done by a "foreigner"), I might be giving the city more credit than appropriate.
The Following User Says Thank You to burn_this_city For This Useful Post:
Keep in mind the bridge though was just the boiling point -there have been a series of projects over the last few years that people haven't been happy with.
Given the economic times fiscal restraint isn't a bad thing. It is about setting priorities - and I don't think a fancy bridge in an area with many other bridges is a priority.
I'd love to hear this list of projects people have been unhappy with?
Ditto goes for the list of ways to better spend the money (and be covered under the same provincial grant), you can't just say we should have spent the money on rinks if rinks wouldn't be eligible for the money anyways.
Obviously a majority of council thought it was a high priority; and the "many other bridges" comment......come on
I'd love to hear this list of projects people have been unhappy with?
A couple that come to mind
- Purchase of the Cecil
- Project to re-brand Calgary
- Artwork project for water treatment facility
- Ill-fated bid to try and get the Expo (didn't cost a lot of money but still was dumb)
Given the economic times fiscal restraint isn't a bad thing. It is about setting priorities - and I don't think a fancy bridge in an area with many other bridges is a priority.
I think given the economic climate, the timing for this project was great. It definitely kept a bunch of welders/inspectors employed for a couple years.
I think given the economic climate, the timing for this project was great. It definitely kept a bunch of welders/inspectors employed for a couple years.
Depends on who's paying for those welders and inspectors to be employed for two years right?
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
A couple that come to mind
- Purchase of the Cecil
- Project to re-brand Calgary
- Artwork project for water treatment facility
- Ill-fated bid to try and get the Expo (didn't cost a lot of money but still was dumb)
Don't forget the city workers gym.
The repurchase of new furniture at city hall.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Depends on who's paying for those welders and inspectors to be employed for two years right?
And it would have been nice if local designers had been given a chance to get the work too. Infrastructure projects during economic downturns are great - but not when you send the work out of the country.
Chalk that up to "they took our jobs" talk - but an already questionable project is made more questionable when the local community doesn't get the full economic benefits of the work.
Yes but remember Jiri, in the name of artful expression only European's could build the bridge and properly weld it and then we'd have to ship it over here.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
