2013 Calgary Best Neigbourhoods

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Sliver

I maintain the following is objectively true: All things being equal, it is preferable to live by an amenity-rich lake than to not.

But I don't care for an amenity-rich lake. A lot of people don't care for amenity-rich lakes. You care about amenity-rich lakes. Thus, caring or not caring about an amenity-rich lake seems to be a personal bias... an opinion. But as per the definition of objective...

not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased

The only way your statement would be correct is, like I said before, if every non-lake community had a black hole in the middle instead of some other amenity.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by freakinsaprikin

A few things going on in this tread that I want to comment on, so I won't go through the exercise of quoting a bunch of different posters:

- Sliver is getting pilled on in this thread just because he is Sliver, not because he isn't make a valid point.

- Objective Value would be the recognition that certain things add value to a neighborhood. That would include "Lakes", Location, Amenities that aren't lakes, Size of house for Cost, Size of yard for cost, etc...

- Subjective Value would be the amount of value an individual or family would place on any of the items from objective Value based on their perspective.

- Locke, Option 4 - Increase in quality of life because of the lake in exchange for an increased commute time. Having the ability to go for a swim away from the general rift raft whenever we feel like(weather permitting) has increased my quality of life.

No, because lakes don't add objective value, they add subjective value. A community with a lake is not inherently better or more valuable than a community without a lake. It may hold more value to some people, making it something of subjective value. Location is another subjective measure, downtown holds more value for some while others would prefer the tranquility of Bragg Creek. The same goes for size of house, size of yard etc. I'd rather have a small yard than a big yard, and a compact home than a sprawling one. Each of these things requires personal desires to be called upon in determining it's value, which makes it quite obviously a subjective measure.

[freakinsaprikin]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yes.

Sorry Sliver, not much to defend after seeing that quote.

[freakinsaprikin]

Originally Posted by valo403

No, because lakes don't add objective value, they add subjective value. A community with a lake is not inherently better or more valuable than a community without a lake. It may hold more value to some people, making it something of subjective value. Location is another subjective measure, downtown holds more value for some while others would prefer the tranquility of Bragg Creek. The same goes for size of house, size of yard etc. I'd rather have a small yard than a big yard, and a compact home than a sprawling one. Each of these things requires personal desires to be called upon in determining it's value, which makes it quite obviously a subjective measure.

A lake would be one of many attributes in which value could/or couldn't be derived from. To say that lakes don't add objective value, would not be true. The fact that at least two people(in this thread) have moved to a community because of the existence of a lake, and a few people wouldn't move to a community because of the lake, would be proof of objective or intrinsic value (how ever you want to describe it).

[valo403]

Originally Posted by freakinsaprikin

A lake would be one of many attributes in which value could/or couldn't be derived from. To say that lakes don't add objective value, would not be true. The fact that at least two people(in this thread) have moved to a community because of the existence of a lake, and a few people wouldn't move to a community because of the lake, would be proof of objective or intrinsic value (how ever you want to describe it).

Huh? No, that is proof of subjective value. People have made a personal determination of what a certain characteristic means to them based upon their own personal biases. Something of objective value has it's value based in fact, not personal desires.

[Acey]

Objectively, Deerfoot Trail has more vehicular traffic than Stoney Trail. Objectively, Calgary has more people than Edmonton. Objectively, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. Objectively, a lake is better than no lake.

Hmm... one of these statements is not like the others.

Because no matter how much I love or hate the city of Edmonton it's still going to have less people than Calgary; no matter how much I personally love or hate the sun, it's still going to rise in the east and set in the west.

But what if I hate the fact that a lake becomes a mosquito breeding ground every year? What if I have a fear of drowning? What if I prefer a big strip club in the middle of my community instead of a lake? I then am going to argue that no lake is better than having a lake, and my reasons are just as valid as those who have moved to said community because they like the lake.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by freakinsaprikin

Off subject, but most man made lakes in the city are not still water. They are fed and circulated by water sources.

I was just joking as well, playing off the "riff-raff" comment. Although there are slough dwellers in Rocky Ridge. Pretty to look at, but man the mosquitos!

[flamesfever]

The value of a property is probably based on the sum total of all attributes, which as you say can be quite subjective, and the shifting preferences with time.

My emphasis on location, and what comes to mind when I first see it, like "I want this property", has always served me well. I guess my thinking is if I have that feeling, then when it comes time to sell it, likely a fair number of others will have the same feeling.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by freakinsaprikin

Sorry Sliver, not much to defend after seeing that quote.

I appreciate you nonetheless. I did clarify my position as best I could in a couple of dozen subsequent posts FWIW.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by sliver

i appreciate you nonetheless. I did attempt to back pedal and change my position as best i could in a couple of dozen subsequent posts fwiw.

fyp

[Kybosh]

I think my old logic professor would have an aneurysm if he saw this thread.

[Sainters7]

Just moved to Acadia, while it's a lot nicer than expected, I didn't consider it at 2nd best neighbourhood in Calgary status. And as a guy, having to do "nice little Saturdays" @ Deerfoot Meadows gives me heartburn. Traffic down there is like being at the circus.
Posted from Calgarypuck.com App for Android

EDIT: I do appreciate the Five Guys / Fatburger combo in the same parking lot though. That was a difficult choice

[Peanut]

I can't wait to do this all again in 2014.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

I live in Canyon Meadows, other than access to Fish Creek park there's really nothing "great" here. I mean it's quite (which I like) and the access is pretty good. But it's pretty dry as far as shopping/restaurants go. There's basically 1 pub & 2 corner stores within walking distance, nothing else too exciting.

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Dude, two liquor stores in a 5 minute walk. And one of them has a racist owner who wants to tell you how much he hates native people. Paradise.

Yep, same here. I like Canyon Meadows (shocking, I chose to live here), seemed affordable at the time, trees are nice and big and grown, decent proximity to many things, downtown drive is a bit long but not horrific. People take care of their properties for the most part. Guess you could say that about anywhere though. Family is close.

But I recently had reason to suspect some hooligans were going to break into my home and I hopped on Calgary police's little crime hunting website thing- Canyon Meadows seems to be quite the criminal hotbed, or at least last I checked it seemed to be! Maybe that retired cop mentioned earlier is gone.

Also there are 3 liquor stores here. You got Surrinder the guilt tripper down by the Macs, then pricey booze place up by Scarlett, but the other one by the Husky aint bad... you should find that 3rd spot to test your comfort zones.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Going through a stroll through surface parking sounds wonderful.



VS.




I know which one I'd rather wander through for the pub or groceries.

There is a reason people drive down to Kensington on the weekends and not the Lake Bonavista mini-mall.

To be fair, that isn't Lake Bonavista, though it ain't far off from the mall parking lot.

Also to be fair, that isn't Kensington, and it is very far off. Maybe it's Kensington in London?

[MrMastodonFarm]

I'm honestly a little confused by this thread. Didn't Sliver go on about how some of his neighbours are nothing but beer guzzling red necks with their back yard fire pits and the guy who lives across the street roams the night with his pack of killer Pit bulls.

Does he have two different homes? Certainly the above isn't his precious Lake Bonavista.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Having lived in both communities, I'm amazed that Huntington Hills is on the list and Edgemont is not.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

I'm honestly a little confused by this thread. Didn't Sliver go on about how some of his neighbours are nothing but beer guzzling red necks with their back yard fire pits and the guy who lives across the street roams the night with his pack of killer Pit bulls.

Does he have two different homes? Certainly the above isn't his precious Lake Bonavista.

All of that is outweighed by the lake. The objectively greatest thing in the history of the universe lake.

[troutman]

Lakes dirtier than pools, but still safe

Swimmers at even the dirtiest city pools are exposed to far fewer disease-causing bacteria than beach-bathers at Calgary's nine private lakes, show tests commissioned by the Herald.

http://www.canada.com/story_print.ht...4ec96&sponsor=

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

To be fair, that isn't Lake Bonavista, though it ain't far off from the mall parking lot.

Also to be fair, that isn't Kensington, and it is very far off. Maybe it's Kensington in London?

I just took two examles of the general idea. I'd say the second one isn't very far off of Stephen Avenue at all. In fact, I think Stephen Avenue might be a little nicer.