Sw brt

[MrMastodonFarm]

No one in this thread has turned these guys into cartoons, they did that themselves.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

No one in this thread has turned these guys into cartoons, they did that themselves.

Yeah well just because some of the people are complete morons doesn't mean that they all are, and that they don't have legitimate concerns.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by 4X4

You guys are being pretty hard on these people. I heard the guy interviewed on QR this morning, and he's well spoken, with some legit questions. The way the City is handling this is actually pretty poor. The guy brought up a few valid points that the City had no answers for at their Q&A. As if anyone of you guys wouldn't want to know where people are going to park if it was your house that was going to have this heavily used bus stop near. I live near a widely used bus stop and I regularly see people park in front of my house and walk to the bus stop. No big deal because it's not like it's every day, but if it was a BRT station? Would I ever be able to park again?

Y'all need to stop chirping them for having legitimate questions that need to be answered. There are quite a few details that are either not answered, or else pretty outdated, as this project was written in 2011. The guy made a very good point about that as well. Lots has changed in the 5 years since this was proposed. Why is it not being at least looked at again, and how come the communities were not consulted?

I know it's cool to love transit and hate rich white guys, but there's quite a bit more to it here. I'd go find the link to the interview, but something tells me that the internet has already ruled on this, and the verdict is NIMBY. I can't believe that anyone that owns a house doesn't have the time of day to look more closely at this. I can't believe that all of you people actually wouldn't give a crap if the city put a bus stop that would attract hundreds of people from other neighbourhoods right by your house without a plan for where people would park.

Good post. I support more transit for the most part, but to ask what seem like legitimate questions doesn't seem crazy to me. I live sort of near an LRT station and even at that distance there are people parked throughout the neighbourhood.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by 4X4

You guys are being pretty hard on these people. I heard the guy interviewed on QR this morning, and he's well spoken, with some legit questions. The way the City is handling this is actually pretty poor. The guy brought up a few valid points that the City had no answers for at their Q&A. As if anyone of you guys wouldn't want to know where people are going to park if it was your house that was going to have this heavily used bus stop near. I live near a widely used bus stop and I regularly see people park in front of my house and walk to the bus stop. No big deal because it's not like it's every day, but if it was a BRT station? Would I ever be able to park again?

Y'all need to stop chirping them for having legitimate questions that need to be answered. There are quite a few details that are either not answered, or else pretty outdated, as this project was written in 2011. The guy made a very good point about that as well. Lots has changed in the 5 years since this was proposed. Why is it not being at least looked at again, and how come the communities were not consulted?

I know it's cool to love transit and hate rich white guys, but there's quite a bit more to it here. I'd go find the link to the interview, but something tells me that the internet has already ruled on this, and the verdict is NIMBY. I can't believe that anyone that owns a house doesn't have the time of day to look more closely at this. I can't believe that all of you people actually wouldn't give a crap if the city put a bus stop that would attract hundreds of people from other neighbourhoods right by your house without a plan for where people would park.

Permit zones are patrolled regularly. Permits are free to people that can prove they live there.

Communities are ALWAYS consulted. There were consultations done in 2011 in the planning stage. Some of those people may not have been living there at the time, but the hilarious part is that I'm sure they just ignored the hundreds of signs and newsletters passed around. They can go and claim that "THEY DIDN'T CONSULT US" but there's literal proof of both the design, and the meetings on the internet:

https://www.calgarytransit.com/sites...y_20110802.pdf

https://twitter.com/klaszus/status/694931156152619008

From city of calgary website:

Since 2010, public engagement on the SW BRT project, in addition to the engagement conducted as part of RouteAhead (2012) and other long-term planning programs, has included:
Major Stakeholder Meetings – 25 Meetings
Community Association Meetings – 15 Meetings
Ward 11 & 13 President Meetings – 2 Meetings
Public Information Sessions – 10 Sessions
Pop-up Information Sessions – 6 Sessions

The fact that people didn't care enough until it is actually happening doesn't mean that they weren't consulted. The fact that the answers (based on evidence and science) doesn't jive with what their worldview is (ruffians at the BRT stations) doesn't mean they weren't consulted.

It's 100% NIMBYism.

[cam_wmh]

What could have possibly changed in one of those most static areas of town, between 2011 and present? "well, the Southland 7-11 got new management again"

[Wiggum_PI]

Originally Posted by Slava

Good post. I support more transit for the most part, but to ask what seem like legitimate questions doesn't seem crazy to me. I live sort of near an LRT station and even at that distance there are people parked throughout the neighbourhood.

The guy on the radio even said he wasn't against improving transit in the city, but he feels that the cost of the project (now $57M to $65) and the impact on the communities need to be re-evaluated by City Hall.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Permit zones are patrolled regularly. Permits are free to people that can prove they live there.

Communities are ALWAYS consulted. There were consultations done in 2011 in the planning stage. Some of those people may not have been living there at the time, but the hilarious part is that I'm sure they just ignored the hundreds of signs and newsletters passed around. They can go and claim that "THEY DIDN'T CONSULT US" but there's literal proof of both the design, and the meetings on the internet:

https://www.calgarytransit.com/sites...y_20110802.pdf

https://twitter.com/klaszus/status/694931156152619008

From city of calgary website:



The fact that people didn't care enough until it is actually happening doesn't mean that they weren't consulted. The fact that the answers (based on evidence and science) doesn't jive with what their worldview is (ruffians at the BRT stations) doesn't mean they weren't consulted.

It's 100% NIMBYism.

That bolded part is just spotty at best. In front of my office we have a permit zone and directly behind that one hour parking. People park all day and walk downtown and there have been basically no patrols and no tickets. That's even after what was probably a stolen vehicle being parked for over a week.

I think that you mean these zones are supposed to be patrolled. What ends up happening though is that people park wherever they can with the justification that they need to catch transit to get to work. Sometimes they get tickets. In my neighbourhood (not a permit zone), people park in front of a fire hydrant during the week to walk to the LRT. Its a legitimate concern for residents I think.

[Fuzz]

My god. There was less fuss when the West LRT line went in, taknig out a school, lots of houses, major roadway changes.....These people need to get over it. Parking problems? Welcome to any community within 5km of downtown, and near any LRT. They have parking zones. It's not rocket science. Sorry, you live in a city. No one has ever guaranteed you the right to a static existence. Things are gonna change. Deal with it.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Permit zones are patrolled regularly. Permits are free to people that can prove they live there.

Communities are ALWAYS consulted. There were consultations done in 2011 in the planning stage. Some of those people may not have been living there at the time, but the hilarious part is that I'm sure they just ignored the hundreds of signs and newsletters passed around. They can go and claim that "THEY DIDN'T CONSULT US" but there's literal proof of both the design, and the meetings on the internet:

https://www.calgarytransit.com/sites...y_20110802.pdf

https://twitter.com/klaszus/status/694931156152619008

From city of calgary website:



The fact that people didn't care enough until it is actually happening doesn't mean that they weren't consulted. The fact that the answers (based on evidence and science) doesn't jive with what their worldview is (ruffians at the BRT stations) doesn't mean they weren't consulted.

It's 100% NIMBYism.

Well a whole bunch of meetings and info sessions where (according to that guy) the poeple on hand didn't have answers to a bunch of questions, as well as them being info sessions, and not consultations kind of was his point. They made a plan, they told the community, the community wants to know this and that, they diodn;t have an answer, community is pissed off, City is building it anyway. That's how they're framing it. The City is saying something else. There are two sides to it. You've decided that they're NIMBYs. Fair enough. I think they have some points. Lots of those people owned their house long before this plan came along. I think they have a right to object to a plan that could substantially affect their property values.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Slava

That bolded part is just spotty at best. In front of my office we have a permit zone and directly behind that one hour parking. People park all day and walk downtown and there have been basically no patrols and no tickets. That's even after what was probably a stolen vehicle being parked for over a week.

I think that you mean these zones are supposed to be patrolled. What ends up happening though is that people park wherever they can with the justification that they need to catch transit to get to work. Sometimes they get tickets. In my neighbourhood (not a permit zone), people park in front of a fire hydrant during the week to walk to the LRT. Its a legitimate concern for residents I think.

Looks like you should be calling 311 on a couple issues.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Wiggum_PI

The guy on the radio even said he wasn't against improving transit in the city, but he feels that the cost of the project (now $57M to $65) and the impact on the communities need to be re-evaluated by City Hall.

It's these statements that sound plausible at the start, but are absolute garbage when you even take more than a cursory glance at the available information.

The original cost estimate in 2011 was 40 million +/- 40%, because they hadn't done a lot of the studies that were required. 65 million dollars is really a drop in the bucket for adding a whole new lane to 14th street. Consider that the proposed green line LRT is going to cost somewhere int he realm of 3 billion dollars - which is supposed to replace the 301 (the most heavily used BRT in the city). The incremental impact of the green line isn't even that high. Basically I'm saying that a 65 million dollar investment in a BRT is about the most cost efficient solution to transit per ridership.

Impact on the communities? What does that even mean? The impact is that for a lot of people, it enables them to get to work cheaply, sustainably, and quickly. For some people, it might bring the hooligans out to the SW, because that's what we all really like to do in our spare time - go out to the suburbs and cause havoc which we would only do with a BRT connection there.

[Fuzz]

It's a freakin bus stop, not a kitten murdering shelter. I think their property values will be just fine.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by 4X4

You guys are being pretty hard on these people. I heard the guy interviewed on QR this morning, and he's well spoken, with some legit questions. The way the City is handling this is actually pretty poor. The guy brought up a few valid points that the City had no answers for at their Q&A. As if anyone of you guys wouldn't want to know where people are going to park if it was your house that was going to have this heavily used bus stop near. I live near a widely used bus stop and I regularly see people park in front of my house and walk to the bus stop. No big deal because it's not like it's every day, but if it was a BRT station? Would I ever be able to park again?

Y'all need to stop chirping them for having legitimate questions that need to be answered. There are quite a few details that are either not answered, or else pretty outdated, as this project was written in 2011. The guy made a very good point about that as well. Lots has changed in the 5 years since this was proposed. Why is it not being at least looked at again, and how come the communities were not consulted?

I know it's cool to love transit and hate rich white guys, but there's quite a bit more to it here. I'd go find the link to the interview, but something tells me that the internet has already ruled on this, and the verdict is NIMBY. I can't believe that anyone that owns a house doesn't have the time of day to look more closely at this. I can't believe that all of you people actually wouldn't give a crap if the city put a bus stop that would attract hundreds of people from other neighbourhoods right by your house without a plan for where people would park.

The only actual issue you touched on in this post is parking.

Parking was addressed in the project overview, and clearly explains that permit only areas can be setup if residents want it.

There are no plans to include Park and Rides with any of the four new BRT projects. The projects are intended to serve local communities and will primarily be accessed from within the community via feeder buses, walking and cycling.
Project teams will work with communities to implement residential parking restrictions if that is of interest to residents. There are different options for permitted parking in communities, including two-hour restrictions, residential parking permits, and others. Learn more about The City’s Residential Parking Permit Program.

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...ransitway.aspx

Parking concerns are a convenient target for opposition groups to key on. Reality is that these are now inner city communities, and with that comes more restrictions on where you can leave you car. Parking issues always make me laugh, it's as if people think they own the city street in front of their house.

Also... These signs are hilarious.

The bus stop is taking away my community!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Looks like you should be calling 311 on a couple issues.

Probably, but I have better things to do than call in about problem parking. To me it's public property (like no one owns the place in front of the house, even if they prefer to think so!) At the same time though, for residents to want to address these issues doesn't seem unreasonable. The city should have some kind of solution to the concern before they build the project.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Well a whole bunch of meetings and info sessions where (according to that guy) the poeple on hand didn't have answers to a bunch of questions, as well as them being info sessions, and not consultations kind of was his point. They made a plan, they told the community, the community wants to know this and that, they diodn;t have an answer, community is pissed off, City is building it anyway. That's how they're framing it. The City is saying something else. There are two sides to it. You've decided that they're NIMBYs. Fair enough. I think they have some points. Lots of those people owned their house long before this plan came along. I think they have a right to object to a plan that could substantially affect their property values.

They are information sessions. The community has no actual say in what the city wants to do (much like provinces about pipelines, but that's another can of worms). The city actually takes people's rational opinions into consideration a lot of the time.

Again, your issue is that the city isn't stopping everything for these people. My answer is once again, just because the answer from the city isn't what these people want to hear, it doesn't mean that the questions were not answered.

For example, I used 3-4 posts in this very thread to explain the complete non-issue of the pipeline crossing. However, whiteoutII continues to believe that it is an issue. The answers are there, and are complete, but people don't want to hear it unless it results in the project getting canceled.

I also just said the parking issue is based on permits and you can get a free one. That's not the answer you want to hear though, so you somehow still think that there's an issue that's not resolved and that "I don't have an answer for you."

Also, the BRT will most likely increase their property values.

For these reasons, that's why I'm saying NIMBY.

[4X4]

Whatever. It's not my community, and I'm wiling to bet it's none of you guys that are disregarding these people either. Pretty easy to say that everyone else can suck it up, but I bet that if it was your house being affected, you'd have concerns.

Carry on with your verdict and execution.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by Regorium

They are information sessions. The community has no actual say in what the city wants to do (much like provinces about pipelines, but that's another can of worms). The city actually takes people's rational opinions into consideration a lot of the time.

Again, your issue is that the city isn't stopping everything for these people. My answer is once again, just because the answer from the city isn't what these people want to hear, it doesn't mean that the questions were not answered.

For example, I used 3-4 posts in this very thread to explain the complete non-issue of the pipeline crossing. However, whiteoutII continues to believe that it is an issue. The answers are there, and are complete, but people don't want to hear it unless it results in the project getting canceled.

I also just said the parking issue is based on permits and you can get a free one. That's not the answer you want to hear though, so you somehow still think that there's an issue that's not resolved and that "I don't have an answer for you."

Also, the BRT will most likely increase their property values.

For these reasons, that's why I'm saying NIMBY.

Okie then.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Okie then.

I'm sorry that it wasn't what you wanted to hear, but it's the truth.

Go ahead and continue to say how there were no consultations done a couple months later whenever the next media flare-up is and you'll still be wrong.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Whatever. It's not my community, and I'm wiling to bet it's none of you guys that are disregarding these people either. Pretty easy to say that everyone else can suck it up, but I bet that if it was your house being affected, you'd have concerns.

Carry on with your verdict and execution.

It's not like my house hasn't been affected by various cities decisions over the years either, but I haven't acted like any of these guys with my concerns. The only true concern at the moment is the cost increase. That only surfaced this week and everyone is upset over it.

The two things, parking and that pipe under the street(?), are scrapping the bottom of the barrel trying to create concerns. I've lived in a place a stones throw away from a ctrain station, you deal with the parking and the daily patrols. Laugh at the daily tickets and move on. Residents will get permits, just like every other inner city neighborhood in the city.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Didn't the pipeline issue get solved and explained that it'd be more worthwhile to worry about an asteroid hitting the planet than any problems with the pipelines?

Parking, like people who would park on the street to use the bus? If there aren't permits needed to park on the street there, what would you like them to do? If there are permits needed, why do you need more enforcement than there already is?

Not sure about the cost increases.

If the need to case the pipe from north of 75th to Southland is identified, it will drive the cost up fast. So it is a legitimate risk to the project that the xirdoes not seem to have an answer to.

Parking is already an issue with the schools and the hospital. These areas are already permit parking and patrols are non-existant, adding bus stops will just exacerbate the issue.

If this was any other area of the city, people would be agreeing that these questions need answers. But because the residents here have more money, bashing them and trivializing concerns is the in vogue thing to do.