2010 Mayors Race

[Jordan!]

Someone write in Darryl Janz for me please.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Bouw N Arrow

Someone write in Darryl Janz for me please.

Turkey Gobbler for mayor!

[Bunk]

What REALLY costs taxpayers money and is real waste is endless amounts of this. Unfortunately, the so-called fiscal conservatives such as Ric McIver and Joe Connelly fought hard on the developers side to allow the business as usual approach to growth to continue. The so-called liberals were fighting for a plan that is estimated to save taxpayers $11 billion in infrastructure costs over 60 years. But McIver fought to stop a $24 million foot bridge, so I guess he's the fiscally responsible one.

[Jordan!]

[kermitology]

I think I've asked you this before Bunk, but you're an urban planner right?

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by troutman

Slow down?

Come on now, that was a pretty obvious exageration. I do take it really easy across that bridge, but people are constantly darting one way or the other trying to pass people. On a nice day you can't ride any faster than people are walking and you'll still get someone stopping dead to tie their shoe and have to hammer the brakes. And that bridge is much wider than 10th street...

It's not like it's a huge deal, but anything that makes our city look cooler and encourages park/pathway use is alright by me. I'm sure all these get pretty heavy lunch use too by the joggers/walkers.

[kermitology]

It's honestly sickening how developers are able to do whatever they want.

If something is an issue between the city planners and the developers, one call the the general manager of the planners and the developers get their way.

And thanks to people like Joe Connelly the East Springbank area of the city is the only area in the city that has an urban density cap lower than the MINIMUM everywhere else in the city. With people like him or McIver as mayor you can bet that you'll have so much urban sprawl that we'll need to annex Strathmore in 5 years.

[CaptainCrunch]

Those s in Strathmore don't deserve their own city. I look east and I see a rich supply of cheap slave labor to be conquered.

Go Calgary, devour that town.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Seriously, that bridge is so awesome. Even if I never use it it's worth the $20-$40 it cost me just to get wicket pictures of the Calgary skyline with that in it.

As an Albertan (funding source is a Province of Alberta grant), it costs you an average of about $7, mortgaged over something like 80 years.

Originally Posted by troutman

I'm not sure why a bridge was needed so close to the 10th st bridge.

I'm not sure why an interchange at 32nd Ave. and Deerfoot Trail is needed so close to the one at 16th Ave.

I'm not sure why an underpass on 5th Street beneath the CP tracks was needed so close to the one at 8th Street.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I think I've asked you this before Bunk, but you're an urban planner right?

Yes.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

It's not like it's a huge deal, but anything that makes our city look cooler and encourages park/pathway use is alright by me. I'm sure all these get pretty heavy lunch use too by the joggers/walkers.

Agreed. I don't understand all the hate for the bridge. One can argue that it's ugly, but that's kind of subjective. One thing that's not up for debate is that it looks unique. Beats the crap out of the dozens and dozens of square, brown concrete buildings that dominated the skyline until just recently when developers discovered that all things in Calgary need not be plain and ugly.

The whole whinefest attached to the bridge is the price tag. How much would a plain jane bridge cost? A couple million less? A few million? Can't anything have character in this city? I mean, I'm not a huge fan of the jumping fish on the Glenmore underpass, but it's unique and it adds a bit of colour to what would otherwise be plain concrete.

Gimme someone who thinks in colour for mayor. I can just imagine what a city run by McIver would look like - plain and brown. We've got enough of that around here (grass).

[Slava]

The bridge issue is kind of hilarious to me in the sense that I was in Omaha a couple of weeks ago. They have a new bridge there and the whole thing sounded similar; costs sounded about the same, some people thought it was a huge waste of money,etc. That bridge goes over the Missouri River and its kind of cool because you cross from Nebraska into Iowa.

Anyway to get to the point the bridge was full of people the day I was there. There were a lot of people young and old, families and of course people running/biking and just enjoying a nice day. Given the big fight here in Calgary it really made me take note of fact that although they were ahead of us in this process and I think are past the fighting, it was giving the citizens a lot of enjoyment.

[CaptainCrunch]

I still believe that the bridge is a underwhelming, goofy lazy design. I don't like the city processes for single source awarding this, and I have a strong belief that by the time this is said and done a 25 million dollar price tag will look reasonable compared to what we're going to pay for it.

I have problems with a design that forced it to be basically built in Spain, shipped across the ocean, and then driven across this country.

I don't have problems with pedestrian bridges at all, I think its great, I think that this thing is ridiculous.

I am more then curious about the final results of the Audit of City of Calgary purchasing processes that was to be released today.

[Ducay]

Generally speaking, the people who are against the bridge are McIvor-voting, Sun reading, Ranchmans going folk who live in Cranston and drive an F-150.

How dare the inner-city get something that wasn't done for the cheapest it could! Where's my fancy spanish designed on-ramp for 198th Ave?

[CaptainCrunch]

Seriously, I'm against the bridge, I haven't decided who I'm voting for, I read the sun, but I also read multiple other papers, I don't go to the Ranchmans, I don't live in cranston and I don't drive an F-150.

Nice post trying to stereo type people that don't agree with your viewpoint.

I have no problem with a pedestrian bridge. i have lots of problems with this particular bridge.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Seriously, I'm against the bridge, I haven't decided who I'm voting for, I read the sun, but I also read multiple other papers, I don't go to the Ranchmans, I don't live in cranston and I don't drive an F-150.

Nice post trying to stereo type people that don't agree with your viewpoint.

I have no problem with a pedestrian bridge. i have lots of problems with this particular bridge.

The only problem I had with your post was the 'goofy lazy' part. I guarentee this design is neither goofy, nor lazily done.

Single-source procurement, on the other hand, is both goofy and lazy.


I just hate McIvor in general. The guy encompasses everything that is wrong with municipal politics.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Ducay

The only problem I had with your post was the 'goofy lazy' part. I guarentee this design is neither goofy, nor lazily done.

Single-source procurement, on the other hand, is both goofy and lazy.


I just hate McIvor in general. The guy encompasses everything that is wrong with municipal politics.

Pretty much every member of the current city council to me is whats wrong with municipal politics.

And I stand by my opinion on that design. I'm not a fan, I think its ugly, I think it took 0 effort for the concept, and I think its a step down from the designers usual work. Not to say that I'm all that fond of any of the other designs that he's done.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Azure

Supporting taxes doesn't make you socialist. Only a fool thinks that a city can run efficiently without taxes and such.

I consider myself fiscally conservative and I approve of a well-placed tax.

I do not approve of stupid taxes that are levied against the population because the government can't control its spending.

If we're still talking about new developments paying for themselves and instituting a toll for those who use municipal resources but don't contribute to the tax base, how are those "stupid taxes that are levied against the population because the government can't control its spending"? They're smart taxes that fix specific problems. Subsidizing new developments and suburbs in general creates a city that expands more than it would naturally, thus lowering density and increasing the required infrastructure per capita, increasing overall tax rates. Sleeper communities (and the likes of CrossIron Mills) are even worse. They create traffic for Calgary without contributing to the tax base at all.

IMO a stupid tax that is levied against the population because the government can't control it's spending is when the city can't stop expanding and uses the existing tax base to pay for those expansions.

[Rhettzky]

I find it funny how much of a focal point this bridge has been. I mean if people seriously think that this is a big enough issue that it would swing their vote in one direction or another then they really have to open their eyes a bit. Ric was on the news last night patting himself on the back over this fiasco and if for some reason he gets voted in partly due to this ped bridge then something is truly wrong here.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I have problems with a design that forced it to be basically built in Spain, shipped across the ocean, and then driven across this country.

Wrong, the tender was put out for any steel companies to quote the work. Guess what? The Canadian company that bid was more expensive than the European one that was awarded the contract!

But hey, we'll just take digs at anything that isn't built right here in Canada ("they took 'er jerbs!). Even though the world has clearly moved beyond such infantile concepts (David Parker of the Herald is another terrible offender of this).