Latte Sipping, YOP Gobbling Urban Planning Megathread

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Slava

Uh oh. Looks like building up is as bad as building out. http://www.ffwdweekly.com/article/ne...-cities-12478/

I see lots of drawbacks to building up. I do not see a comparison of net effects vs. those of sprawl (which is what's needed for any kind of case that "building up is as bad as building out").

[SebC]

I'm not usually the type who cares about expenses. I don't think the public needs to cheap out when paying for our leaders. I think far too much attention is given to expenses that are, frankly, a drop in the bucket.

Since joining council last fall, Joe Magliocca has often said he wants to find savings and “trim the fat” at City Hall. He has also billed taxpayers $350 for espresso-making equipment and expensed several meals at upscale restaurants, including one lunch that was more expensive than his new office Nespresso machine.

At Kensington’s Osteria de Medici, Magliocca laid down his corporate MasterCard in January for a $398 chef’s special off-the-menu lunch shared by five people, including himself. The table was never shown prices for the antipasti, angel hair pasta, veal parmigiana and more.

It’s by far the priciest meal that any of Calgary’s 14 city councillors expensed in the first half of 2014, according to expense disclosures.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...777/story.html

Blah, blah, blah. Big deal.

“I can tell you the food was awesome. But I can tell you we don’t talk about the price,” recalled [Airdrie Mayor Peter] Brown, who sat at the table with Magliocca, an executive from suburban builder Shane Homes, another guest whose name the city councillor said he can’t recall and, for part of the afternoon, the restaurant owner’s son.

... but when you're paying for a Shane Homes executive and a parasite community mayor, well talk about adding insults to injuries!

[TorqueDog]

$398 / 5 people = $79.60 a person. And presumably, that's including the gratuity as well. Assuming a gratuity of 15-20% (most places require six or more patrons before a 15-18% auto-gratuity is included), that's anywhere from $66 to $69 per person.

For a high-end restaurant, that is nothing out of the ordinary, especially if there's wine involved (and it's an Italian restaurant, so there better be wine involved).

[ranchlandsselling]

I'm annoyed they spent money at "that" restaurant.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

$398 / 5 people = $79.60 a person. And presumably, that's including the gratuity as well. Assuming a gratuity of 15-20% (most places require six or more patrons before a 15-18% auto-gratuity is included), that's anywhere from $66 to $69 per person.

For a high-end restaurant, that is nothing out of the ordinary, especially if there's wine involved (and it's an Italian restaurant, so there better be wine involved).

Which is all fine if you're paying for it out of your own pocket.

When you're an elected official who ran on a platform of reducing government waste, you might be perceived as a hypocrite when you have lunch meetings at high-end restaurants and expense the bills.


It looks like Mr. "give it back, it's not your money" Rick Bell was also in attendance at one of Magliocca's lunch meetings. I'm sure they shared a nice hearty outrage over the way our tax dollars are being wasted.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

$398 / 5 people = $79.60 a person. And presumably, that's including the gratuity as well. Assuming a gratuity of 15-20% (most places require six or more patrons before a 15-18% auto-gratuity is included), that's anywhere from $66 to $69 per person.

For a high-end restaurant, that is nothing out of the ordinary, especially if there's wine involved (and it's an Italian restaurant, so there better be wine involved).

$66-69 per person for dinner is entirely reasonable, but for lunch? That seems a bit much to me.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by getbak

It looks like Mr. "give it back, it's not your money" Rick Bell was also in attendance at one of Magliocca's lunch meetings. I'm sure they shared a nice hearty outrage over the way our tax dollars are being wasted.

Is it just me, or is starting to become obvious that Councillors who play ball with Rick Bell get the heartfelt and praising write-ups, and those that don't are vilified and torn apart in the Sun at every opportunity?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by getbak

Which is all fine if you're paying for it out of your own pocket.

When you're an elected official who ran on a platform of reducing government waste, you might be perceived as a hypocrite when you have lunch meetings at high-end restaurants and expense the bills.


It looks like Mr. "give it back, it's not your money" Rick Bell was also in attendance at one of Magliocca's lunch meetings. I'm sure they shared a nice hearty outrage over the way our tax dollars are being wasted.

The worst part the shane homes guy should be paying for lunch.

[OldDutch]

I am not against the amounts, but the attitude. It is pretty clear in the herald article that 2 junior councllors love to wine and dine much more than many of their peers. $1400 is not a lot by any means but when most of the others are running $800 then we start to see a problem.

Compound that with:

1. Dining with Rick Bell, his 4th grade, one sentence paragraphs aside, no jounalist should be dinning on taxpayers.
2. Joe bought a coffee maker cause he's too good for the provided coffee.
3. He bought a fancy lunch because the provided lunch at city hall was "gross"
4. He guilts everyone into saying "well I guess I have to buy my own lunches even when I am on business". No Joe, how about dining at a less fancy restaurant?
5. Again, dines with developers, and pays THEIR bill.
6. Had to be said again, seriously spending that coin at a garbage place. I would have been more comfortable with Chili's than that joint.

Again, it is not the amount but their platform and attitude. They attack Nenshi et al for waste, and take their portly butts for mid-tier over priced Italian fare on my dime. They have the nerve to say they are too good for standard food all through that article.

Funny side story bro, but I have seen Nenshi dining out twice now. Where? McDonald's. He didn't pay either time either some with him did. So although purely anecdotal, I do feel more comfortable with Nenshi spending my money than these "conservative" councilors.

[billybob123]

I work for a "branch" of the provincial government (I. E. Funded by the province, all expenses public) and our entertainment guidelines specifically exclude claiming alcohol. I fail to see why city, provincial, or federal government employees should be able to claim alcohol as entertainment expenses. It's very clear for us: alcohol must be on a separate bill paid by the attendees. When you go somewhere like Osteria, the wine will easily be 25% of the bill.

Am I the only one working somewhere publicly funded that does restrict expensing booze?

[taco.vidal]

With respect to point 5, why is he not meeting with developers during business hours at his own office? And if they need to meet outside of business hours, I agree, why would he pay the developers bill? Best practise would be that they each pay their own bills to avoid any impropriety or appearance of impropriety.

Originally Posted by OldDutch

I am not against the amounts, but the attitude. It is pretty clear in the herald article that 2 junior councllors love to wine and dine much more than many of their peers. $1400 is not a lot by any means but when most of the others are running $800 then we start to see a problem.

Compound that with:

1. Dining with Rick Bell, his 4th grade, one sentence paragraphs aside, no jounalist should be dinning on taxpayers.
2. Joe bought a coffee maker cause he's too good for the provided coffee.
3. He bought a fancy lunch because the provided lunch at city hall was "gross"
4. He guilts everyone into saying "well I guess I have to buy my own lunches even when I am on business". No Joe, how about dining at a less fancy restaurant?
5. Again, dines with developers, and pays THEIR bill.
6. Had to be said again, seriously spending that coin at a garbage place. I would have been more comfortable with Chili's than that joint.

Again, it is not the amount but their platform and attitude. They attack Nenshi et al for waste, and take their portly butts for mid-tier over priced Italian fare on my dime. They have the nerve to say they are too good for standard food all through that article.

Funny side story bro, but I have seen Nenshi dining out twice now. Where? McDonald's. He didn't pay either time either some with him did. So although purely anecdotal, I do feel more comfortable with Nenshi spending my money than these "conservative" councilors.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

$66-69 per person for dinner is entirely reasonable, but for lunch? That seems a bit much to me.

Derp. Missed where it said it was for lunch.

Although to reflect upon that purely as an aside, why do we expect that lunch will always cost less than dinner? Is it because we have less time for lunch so pick things that are faster to eat, order fewer items, etc? I've never really thought about it before, but you could spend the same amount at The Keg for lunch as you could for dinner, as an example, so where does the expectation come from?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Derp. Missed where it said it was for lunch.

Although to reflect upon that purely as an aside, why do we expect that lunch will always cost less than dinner? Is it because we have less time for lunch so pick things that are faster to eat, order fewer items, etc? I've never really thought about it before, but you could spend the same amount at The Keg for lunch as you could for dinner, as an example, so where does the expectation come from?

I think it is twofold, one is the time factor as mentioned so you don't order all of the courses you would do at supper. The second is portion size - while you can order a 12 oz NY strip for lunch and 8 oz NY strip is still a pretty big portion for lunch. So as food cost of the meal decreases so does the menu cost. Also having to go back to work should reduce alcohol consumption at bit.

Restraunts will also charge less for the same thing at lunch likely based on our perception that lunch should be cheaper.

[Ozy_Flame]

Bump. Don't want to open up old wounds, but its probably the best place to post it.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...286/story.html

"CALGARY - A new report released Tuesday by PwC and the Urban Land Institute says Calgary and Edmonton are the top two real estate markets in Canada.

Both Calgary and Edmonton scored well for investment, development and housing, said the Emerging Trends in Real Estate 2015 study.

The report said urbanization is now considered the ‘new normal’ rather than an emerging trend itself.

“Looking ahead into 2015, a common trend among all industry players will be the search for opportunities in and around the city cores. With more people moving into city centres for work and lifestyle purposes, companies and retailers are following them and driving new office and commercial developments,” said the report."