MF YYC Politics - there, I mega did it

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Exactly. If everything came down to a discussion with the community, then the Slavas of the world would shut down literally everything.

Hilariously, I suspect there is a very strong overlap of folks who believe this, while also proclaiming "you can't build anything [big infrastructure] in this country anymore due to never ending consultation/resistance!"

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Hilariously, I suspect there is a very strong overlap of folks who believe this, while also proclaiming "you can't build anything [big infrastructure] in this country anymore due to never ending consultation/resistance!"

The overlap I often see is the loudest people against increases in property taxes are strongly against densification measures.

[MoneyGuy]

Many people would like all major issues to go to the public but would be a disaster. Huge issues (arena, hosting an Olympics) could go to a plebiscite but that should be rare - maybe once every couple of council terms. If you want to make those decisions, run for office otherwise you can talk to your councillor or council as a whole.

[PepsiFree]

It’d be nice if people just shut the #### up about the legal things their neighbours want to do, for the most part.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Slava

Haha, “the Slavas of the world”. This is hilarious because my position on this is much more middle of the road than a lot of people. I’m not even opposing the citywide rezoning or anything like that at this point.

It really is hilarious. Just shows how unrepresentative these sorts of issues become online.

[PepsiFree]

The nice thing about online is you can just pretend everything you see is only online and that it isn’t real life.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The nice thing about online is you can just pretend everything you see is only online and that it isn’t real life.

Do you honestly think this thread is representative of the breadth of opinions held by Calgary’s population on the subject of rezoning? And do you think Slava falls into the camp of hardcore NIMBY?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Do you honestly think this thread is representative of the breadth of opinions held by Calgary’s population on the subject of rezoning? And do you think Slava falls into the camp of hardcore NIMBY?

Considering it includes opinions from people for, against, and undecided around the rezoning, yes, I would definitely say it’s more than “unrepresentative” even if less than entirely representative. Considering Slava complains about every vague “undesirable” thing any neighbourhood could have, and has literary uttered phrases synonymous with “I wouldn’t want that in my backyard,” yes.

Do you honestly believe that the opinions you read on a community message board are completely unrepresentative of that community?

I mean, we all live here. So, using my brain for a second, I’m guessing this thread is at least partially representative. Now you try.

I understand that it seems “hilarious” when you’ve compartmentalized opinions that run counter to your own into a vaguely discreditable category like “online” but let’s not take the leap of pretending people who complain about every development are “middle of the road” types. We can be honest here, it’s low pressure.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Considering it includes opinions from people for, against, and undecided around the rezoning, yes, I would definitely say it’s more than “unrepresentative” even if less than entirely representative. Considering Slava complains about every vague “undesirable” thing any neighbourhood could have, and has literary uttered phrases synonymous with “I wouldn’t want that in my backyard,” yes.

Do you honestly believe that the opinions you read on a community message board are completely unrepresentative of that community?

I mean, we all live here. So, using my brain for a second, I’m guessing this thread is at least partially representative. Now you try.

I understand that it seems “hilarious” when you’ve compartmentalized opinions that run counter to your own into a vaguely discreditable category like “online” but let’s not take the leap of pretending people who complain about every development are “middle of the road” types. We can be honest here, it’s low pressure.

I do think that this thread, and many others, is represented by more left wing, progressive NDP types that discourage many posters from expressing their views.

just my opinion

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Considering it includes opinions from people for, against, and undecided around the rezoning, yes, I would definitely say it’s more than “unrepresentative” even if less than entirely representative. Considering Slava complains about every vague “undesirable” thing any neighbourhood could have, and has literary uttered phrases synonymous with “I wouldn’t want that in my backyard,” yes.

Do you honestly believe that the opinions you read on a community message board are completely unrepresentative of that community?

I mean, we all live here. So, using my brain for a second, I’m guessing this thread is at least partially representative. Now you try.

I understand that it seems “hilarious” when you’ve compartmentalized opinions that run counter to your own into a vaguely discreditable category like “online” but let’s not take the leap of pretending people who complain about every development are “middle of the road” types. We can be honest here, it’s low pressure.

No, the reason you're wrong here is that there is nuance to these topics and seemingly none in the discussion. Like density, sure sounds good. 6 towers on the Glenmore Landing site? Just fataing stupid. I don't think that because that project is dumb and poorly thought out that I'm automatically some hardcore NIMBY. There are other projects in the same proximity to me that I didn't/don't oppose at all.

But, I'm sure I'll get over the heartbreak that some people that I don't know characterize me in that vein.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I do think that this thread, and many others, is represented by more left wing, progressive NDP types that discourage many posters from expressing their views.

just my opinion

Is having agency and domain over your private property, reducing red tape, and being pro-let-capitalism decide, considered a left-wing view point?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Do you honestly think this thread is representative of the breadth of opinions held by Calgary’s population on the subject of rezoning? And do you think Slava falls into the camp of hardcore NIMBY?

These threads do filter to some degree to people willing to engage some critical thought on the issue. There are a lot of otherwise intelligent people (I'd put my Dad in this category) who do not do this, and their opinions are therefore incredibly basic.

Originally Posted by Slava

No, the reason you're wrong here is that there is nuance to these topics and seemingly none in the discussion. Like density, sure sounds good. 6 towers on the Glenmore Landing site? Just fataing stupid. I don't think that because that project is dumb and poorly thought out that I'm automatically some hardcore NIMBY. There are other projects in the same proximity to me that I didn't/don't oppose at all.

But, I'm sure I'll get over the heartbreak that some people that I don't know characterize me in that vein.

Will it still be stupid in 2060? Because that is probably about when you can start worrying about towers #5 and 6 (if ever).

I'll acknowledge that this logic doesn't entirely assuage all concerns (though the exceptions are really just inevitable in a growing city), but things really are self regulating: who in their right mind wants to live in a neighbourhood that gets ruined because so many people want to live there?!?!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

These threads do filter to some degree to people willing to engage some critical thought on the issue. There are a lot of otherwise intelligent people (I'd put my Dad in this category) who do not do this, and their opinions are therefore incredibly basic.



Will it still be stupid in 2060? Because that is probably about when you can start worrying about towers #5 and 6 (if ever).

I'll acknowledge that this logic doesn't entirely assuage all concerns (though the exceptions are really just inevitable in a growing city), but things really are self regulating: who in their right mind wants to live in a neighbourhood that gets ruined because so many people want to live there?!?!

Sure, and that sounds logical. The pessimistic view from me, is that the towers get built (so the developer gets their money), and the redevelopment piece of Glenmore Landing is what gets stalled when the inevitable bust hits.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Slava

No, the reason you're wrong here is that there is nuance to these topics and seemingly none in the discussion. Like density, sure sounds good. 6 towers on the Glenmore Landing site? Just fataing stupid. I don't think that because that project is dumb and poorly thought out that I'm automatically some hardcore NIMBY. There are other projects in the same proximity to me that I didn't/don't oppose at all.

But, I'm sure I'll get over the heartbreak that some people that I don't know characterize me in that vein.

Well, you’re part of the discussion, so if there’s no nuance even with you included then what are you bitching about? Guess we’re all in the same club.

What major developments that have positively improved issues in the sphere of adding density/reducing home prices/supporting homelessness in your neighbourhood have you supported?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Well, you’re part of the discussion, so if there’s no nuance even with you included then what are you bitching about? Guess we’re all in the same club.

What major developments that have positively improved issues in the sphere of adding density/reducing home prices/supporting homelessness in your neighbourhood have you supported?

Haha, I’m hardly bitching. “You’ve” got me pegged as some hardline NIMBY, and I disagree. I also don’t really care about it though. And as far as other developments, there’s a development nearby through Coop that I’m good with. I have no idea of that will reduce homelessness. I also have no issue with the probable buildings that the JCC has talked about and when Age-Care moves I expect that will go the same way. The reality is, this are has several higher density properties and I’m completely fine with all of those.

As far as the qualifier of whether all these things reduced home prices or homelessness, I have no idea. But I’m not convinced that a lot of these projects do that in the short-term either.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Slava

But I’m not convinced that a lot of these projects do that in the short-term either.

I agree. If you look around for cheap units, they are all old. We're more building affordable housing for decades from now. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, but we'll need some stop gaps in between as well.

If the market gets flooded with nice, new condos, I'd also expect it will play out like office space once enough demand is met. The class B and class C office spaces were climbing all over each other to try attract tenants via renovations/incentives etc. Hopefully the less-new condos get some price relief because people move on to nicer buildings.

Regarding Glenmore Landing, I'd way way rather have row houses all over the city and mid-rise in places like Glenmore landing adding up to the same number of units. The podium/tower form factor makes pretty crappy neighbourhoods compared to mid-rise/row housing IMO.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Regarding Glenmore Landing, I'd way way rather have row houses all over the city and mid-rise in places like Glenmore landing adding up to the same number of units. The podium/tower form factor makes pretty crappy neighbourhoods compared to mid-rise/row housing IMO.

Could you have imagined a European style midrise East Village? Would have been incredible.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Slava

There’s a limit to this though. A few years ago a guy in our neighbourhood wanted to run his electrical business from his house (all the vans and employees coming and going kind of thing, not just him running his business). I don’t think that we should allow that kind of thing without the community having some input.

A situation like this would not fall under the proposed rezoning would it? That seems more like a business permit decision. I have not looked at the proposed changes in detail so stand to be corrected but I would think residential changes and commercial permitting/zoning would remain separate?

[Bigtime]

This hearing just keeps getting bigger and bigger...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1782417652310491511

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

A situation like this would not fall under the proposed rezoning would it? That seems more like a business permit decision. I have not looked at the proposed changes in detail so stand to be corrected but I would think residential changes and commercial permitting/zoning would remain separate?

Oh no, it's totally separate and I didn't mean to imply that they were included. I just meant that as an example of limits to the idea that " I own this and no one can tell me what to do with it" kind of thing. I just think that applies to a point, but at some stage the broader community gets input (and rightly so).