Ongoing Calgarians complaining about pedestrian bridges thread

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by ranchlandsselling

He did have a good point about the lot size and even if it's in the core you might have to consider the opportunity cost of the land your lot occupies. Whether or not you are at the edge of the city or the middle your lot size contributes to sprawl the same amount as anyone else's lot of the same size.

Agree with some of your gas/road taxes/tolls comments.

Who cares? I think the economic penalty of buying a lot should be the price of the land. If I want to buy two lots side by side and use one as a playground for my kids, great. If land is worth so much that you have people knocking down houses and sub-dividing lots (happening tons now at current land prices) then the economics of it are taking care of themselves. There are fewer and fewer 50' lots in the inner city with single family dwellings on them, so I don't feel a huge need for reform in that area.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Wait a minute. That is completely false. Neither Cory or I dislike any group of people.

Your husband seems to have a big problem with occupiers, but I digress.

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

To be fair, First Lady's sarcasm was difficult to detect due to history of getting facts about this project wrong, misunderstanding concepts used in discussing it (such as what "walkability" is and why it matters), and unwillingness to reassess her positions based on the previous two.

Sarcasm or not, it (and SeoulFire's post above) helps to illustrate part of why and to what scale people are so up in arms about this project (and other things too, such as Bow River Flow). It goes beyond the process and administrative problems. It's simply a matter of the fact that people like First Lady and her husband (and others) don't particularly like the types of people that would use and enjoy these projects, to the point where facts (Peace Bridge), process (Bow River Flow) and similarity to other things they do not have the same inherent disdain for are ignored in an attempt to justify it.

A have zero problems with the bridge at all - I am probably one of the few that think it looks good and is useful.

My disdain stems from how every thread with a remote connection to central/suburban development get hijacked and the same arguments are put forth. Start an 'ongoing' thread if you like.

Personally I thought about buying near the core but what eventually made the decision for me is that downtown Calgary is a lifeless void that offers very little of the things that I enjoy. I chose not to pay a premium for something that may or may not improve in the future.

If I cannot have real density (if I choose to stay in Calgary) then I might as well have comfort. If I truly wanted urban living/density with a vibrant feel I would leave Calgary as it does not exist here.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Wait a minute. That is completely false. Neither Cory or I dislike any group of people.

Figured that was coming. For the record, I'm aware that my above post was overstepping in this regard, nevermind impossible to prove and a bit of a departure from my usual posting style.

I will, however put forth that while you may not necessarily dislike the types of people that would use and enjoy the bridge, you would dislike and vehemently oppose the political parties those people probably support. That is something that is detectable in your track record. That is, opposing any and all projects and actions associated with people that don't happen to be aligned you with on partisan grounds (and often exclusively those projects and actions despite the existence of any that are associated with those people you align with on partisan grounds or them turning out to not have been the best solution, see Occupy). This is sometimes under the guise of "looking out and caring for my community."

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Your husband seems to have a big problem with occupiers, but I digress.

Those aren't people...they are hippies.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by kermitology

It's also just frustrating dealing with the city at times. The counter girl, pretty as she was, forgot to include a basement BP when it was in the package submitted so we had to go back and get that, and our garage BP was expired without any notice delivered to us or the site foreman.

all expiry dates are clearly identified on your approval documents. the city can't babysit everybody who doesn't read their permits or notice of approvals.

[trew]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

A have zero problems with the bridge at all - I am probably one of the few that think it looks good and is useful.

My disdain stems from how every thread with a remote connection to central/suburban development get hijacked and the same arguments are put forth. Start an 'ongoing' thread if you like.

Personally I thought about buying near the core but what eventually made the decision for me is that downtown Calgary is a lifeless void that offers very little of the things that I enjoy. I chose not to pay a premium for something that may or may not improve in the future.

If I cannot have real density (if I choose to stay in Calgary) then I might as well have comfort. If I truly wanted urban living/density with a vibrant feel I would leave Calgary as it does not exist here.

Three years ago, I would have agreed with you.

Lately I have been surprised with how much is going on downtown on weekends and after hours. Full restaurants, hard to find parking, visible people, you know, doing things.

(It still has a long way to go, but certainly no longer lifeless).

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Figured that was coming. For the record, I'm aware that my above post was overstepping in this regard, nevermind impossible to prove and a bit of a departure from my usual posting style.

I will, however put forth that while you may not necessarily dislike the types of people that would use and enjoy the bridge, you would dislike and vehemently oppose the political parties those people probably support. That is something that is detectable in your track record. That is, opposing any and all projects and actions associated with people that don't happen to be aligned you with on partisan grounds (and often exclusively those projects and actions despite the existence of any that are associated with those people you align with on partisan grounds or them turning out to not have been the best solution, see Occupy). This is sometimes under the guise of "looking out and caring for my community."

I won't disagree with the bulk of this. However, there is a very clear distinction between disliking people and disliking political parties and/or their positions. Cory and I have close friends of every political stripe (well, don't think we have any communist friends).

In fact I have 3 children, they all support different political parties. One of them very likely will use the bridge on a semi-regular basis.

We are both able to distinguish between individuals and party positions.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by trew

The city just put up four "crosswalk closed" signs around 8th street this morning, and they have a Bylaw officer on the bridge. It looks like they are trying to tighten the legalities so they can ticket people.

Now, if you still want to cross on Memorial, and would like to avoid getting a ticket, I would suggest crossing one block to the west on 9th street.

Good gawd haha.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I won't disagree with the bulk of this. However, there is a very clear distinction between disliking people and disliking political parties and/or their positions. Cory and I have close friends of every political stripe (well, don't think we have any communist friends).

In fact I have 3 children, they all support different political parties. One of them very likely will use the bridge on a semi-regular basis.

We are both able to distinguish between individuals and party positions.

Fair enough and I will fully retract the allegations of disliking individuals. I was aware at the time of that post that it was really stepping out on a tenuous limb. Probably should have went with the hardcore partisan angle from the start.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by DFO

I'm also in the middle of a build in Renfrew. In our case the development permit process was fairly smooth but the 25k it took to hook up the water/sewer last week felt like a kick in the junk.

I just got my bill.. $28k with tax.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

all expiry dates are clearly identified on your approval documents. the city can't babysit everybody who doesn't read their permits or notice of approvals.

The building regulations require that notice is given to the applicant of the impending expiry of a permit, that notice was not given. The permit was reinstated because it was expired incorrectly.

But it's slightly different based on what kind of BP you have. A garage BP must have an inspection within 180 days of issue before it can be expired, where a house BP has two years.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

A have zero problems with the bridge at all - I am probably one of the few that think it looks good and is useful.

My disdain stems from how every thread with a remote connection to central/suburban development get hijacked and the same arguments are put forth. Start an 'ongoing' thread if you like.

The problem here is that this thread is however many pages it is because the bridge was turned into a symbol for this twisted war between "suburbs and inner city." I too think it has turned into a bit of a monster all its own. Does the "inner city" "side" have a persecution complex? Does the "suburb" "side" have a false sense of entitlement and dislike for a misplaced perception of elitism? I would say it's a little of both.

Stepping back a bit, I think it is illustrative of where Calgary is as a city within the context of greater North American and international trends in 2012. Where Calgary is at in terms of size and direction has really produced that divergence of opinions on where we have been, where we are, and where we should go and how to get there.

Anyway, I know I was stepping out a bit in calling you out and really shouldn't have given our conversations in the past (where I think we have reached understanding).

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by trew

Three years ago, I would have agreed with you.

Lately I have been surprised with how much is going on downtown on weekends and after hours. Full restaurants, hard to find parking, visible people, you know, doing things.

(It still has a long way to go, but certainly no longer lifeless).

Interesting in that 3 years ago was when I returned to Calgary and was making the decision on where to buy my house.

Also, to be fair, a lot of this is relative to experience. As stated in the other threads about this I lived ten years in a city with a population density of 17 473/sq km (not hard to guess where). Calgary is listed at 1 329/sq km so I don't think it will ever be busy enough for me.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

The problem here is that this thread is however many pages it is because the bridge was turned into a symbol for this twisted war between "suburbs and inner city." I too think it has turned into a bit of a monster all its own. Does the "inner city" "side" have a persecution complex? Does the "suburb" "side" have a false sense of entitlement and dislike for a misplaced perception of elitism? I would say it's a little of both.

I actaully haven't noticed a destinctive anti-bridge but live in the suburbs group.

Nor have I seen an anti-inner city group.

I've mostly seen an anti-suburbs group that is pro-bridge.

I've debated vs. the pro-bridge group not on the basis of the bridge but on the basis of them being anti-suburbs. Or on the basis of them feeling they are treated unfairly.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by ranchlandsselling

I actaully haven't noticed a destinctive anti-bridge but live in the suburbs group.

Nor have I seen an anti-inner city group.

I've mostly seen an anti-suburbs group that is pro-bridge.

I've debated vs. the pro-bridge group not on the basis of the bridge but on the basis of them being anti-suburbs. Or on the basis of them feeling they are treated unfairly.

The anti-inner city crowd definitely does exist on this board. Previous threads over the years have indicated as such. Perhaps the inner-city crowd is vocal now because of the monster this bridge debate has, indeed, become. I'll be honest, it was alot of vocal outlets like the Calgary Sun's fault - they continually swatted the hornet's nest because their articles were anti-bridge, and they're able to reach a large majority of residents.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by Muta

The anti-inner city crowd definitely does exist on this board. Previous threads over the years have indicated as such. Perhaps the inner-city crowd is vocal now because of the monster this bridge debate has, indeed, become. I'll be honest, it was alot of vocal outlets like the Calgary Sun's fault - they continually swatted the hornet's nest because their articles were anti-bridge, and they're able to reach a large majority of residents.

Oh, totally agree with you. Just (and the length and history of thread might be too long) I haven't noticed/remember it in this particular thread.

I liken it much like I do religious people trying to convert the non-religious. Being told how wrong I am and how their way is so much better annoys me to no end. I'm all up for some debate with an open mind (or at least I like to think I'll try) but the elitist right and wrong crap is just brutal. And it comes from both sides. I can't believe how upset some people are over a bridge... and even if everything proves the bridge was a bad idea or too costly in the end the vitriol and anger is just too excessive.

[Boblobla]

I live in Chaparral but I park in Kensington and walk to work. I am a parasite community dweller and I used the peace bridge. Is that like dividing by zero or am I just maximizing my tax dollars.

[jar_e]

Regarding the cross walk thing...

Buzz Bishop ‏ @buzzbishop

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite
• · Open

RT @markusoff: Peace Br / Memorial UPDATE: City staff erred in saying unmarked crosswalk at 8 St is legal crossing. It's not, Police say.

[ranchlandsselling]

http://calgary.openfile.ca/blog/cura...ge-haters-sort

A Calgary cycling advocate is offering a refund to all remaining Peace Bridge haters. Oh, but there are a couple of calculations necessary before Al Fedoruk will write that checque for you.
In his blog, Fedoruk, who is also a Mount Royal University professor, breaks down some of the costs of infrastructure in the city. It's inspired by his worry that the link is dividing our city for petty reasons. He writes:

Alan is a mountaineer, a skier, an environmentalist, a barefoot hiker and an urban cyclist. Alan is currently serving on the board of directors for Bike Calgary, Calgary’s commuter cycling advocacy group. While riding his bike to work, Alan likes to fantasize about living in a city without cars.