Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firebot
Were Gondek's actions even "well-intentioned"? Nearly everything she did was reactive political virtue signaling theatre meant for social media grandstanding.
Cancelling Canada Day fireworks to be sensitive to Truth and Reconciliation
More recently, there's the Marda Loop construction fiasco that became a PR nightmare with businesses suing the city for 75$ million, only to be gaslit again.
That's not counting the CSEC debacle and voicing the dirty laundry on Twitter and just the top of my head of notable ones (city declaring climate emergency doesn't fall in that list even though it certainly could).
I can't really think of much that she has had a hand in that I could go and think "good job, this was made better by her involvement". That is a stark contrast from Nenshi, who for good or worse, was very active and I thought was a very good effective mayor.
It's always felt like she's been campaigning for a federal political job using her position to do so, not acting as a municipal mayor or in the best interest of Calgarians. It's also debatable on if housing rezoning is overall more beneficial.
You're forgetting the worst part.
We have a mayor that has only done 6 things?
That's it. That's the entirely of her tenure as Mayor?
She's only done those 6 things?
Man, no wonder people like you are so mad!
You'd think she could have done at least a dozen things in almost 4 years.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
You know that blanket rezoning doesn’t mean that everywhere can have an 8 plex on it. All of the development rules still apply. There also have been very few re-zoning applications ever rejected by the city.
Re-Zoning becomes a costly time consuming process that is unnessary within the current developement process.
Anyone not for blanket re-zoning immediately loses my vote.
My hot take is that I disagree with your assertion. Buying in a former RC1 neighbourhood was an intentional decision to avoid living crammed with other people or having trouble finding a parking spot around my home. Now there is a developer trying to convert a bungalow into an 8 or 9 plex around the corner without enough parking or yard space. I expect that design will get shot down by the development process but they will probably come back with a 4 plex that will get approved, which (IMO) does not fit at all with the rest of the neighbourhood.
A part of my issue is that the city was already struggling to try and execute the Main Streets initiative. They put together their mock ups and drawings of these amazing walkable streets with retail and condos above and "15 minute city" concepts but once it was approved to go ahead they immediately let the developers cut corners and cheap out on the delivery. Now instead of a unified vision for "main streets" we are getting a hodgepodge of poorly executed density, but at least they built some sidewalks...
Instead of blanket rezoning, I would have rather seen a more planful strategy with zoning that is tailored to Calgary so that they could build neighbourhoods that fit together and stayed within the aging infrastructure and service capacity.
- If the schools in the neighbourhood are already bursting beyond what they can handle, adding another 500+ houses worth of density in the area is only going to make it worse.
- If they are already needing annual trips to 1950s neighbourhoods to maintain the crumbling sewer lines in the area then piling on more homes is only going to cause more problems.
In my opinion, a better solution would be to have the city have a firmer hand on developers to get the density and style that they want. Looking around the city there are massively wasted opportunities for development that would yield faster and more significant housing numbers than this blanket rezoning strategy that will give the city nickel and dime density increases.
- Ogden and the industrial SE section of town could have huge gains if they would push the corporations out and built a high density "inner city" 15 minute city there instead
- Kick the rail yard out of the inner city to further enhance that inner SE development opportunity
- West village is a mess and at some point they need to deal with that bus depot and the land remediation there... but they could take that whole waste of space of car dealerships and instead put a pile of 40+ story condo buildings with thousands of units in the downtown core (like everything else, remediation is only going to get more expensive with time)
- Westbrook is an empty field (on top of a c-train station) and they let a developer just sit on it until the land rights reverted to the city and now they are waiting on some other developer to step up and build the thousands of unit density that they envision on that land.
In each of these situations you have corporations mucking about and getting away with whatever they want for "profits" while the blanket rezoning puts a lot of individuals at risk of having the most expensive asset in their lives become devalued by hodgepodge cash grabs for "density".
I would much rather see the city take a more aggressive stance with corporations and start buying and developing land internally (and maybe even make profit in the process). At least then when they pitch a huge idea like main streets there would be a chance that they execute it to the vision and ensure the results that the people need... namely thoughtful housing inventory that meets the diverse needs of people in all walks of life and lowers the cost of housing but also maintains the infrastructure and services requirements of a growing population.
My hot take is that I disagree with your assertion. Buying in a former RC1 neighbourhood was an intentional decision to avoid living crammed with other people or having trouble finding a parking spot around my home. Now there is a developer trying to convert a bungalow into an 8 or 9 plex around the corner without enough parking or yard space. I expect that design will get shot down by the development process but they will probably come back with a 4 plex that will get approved, which (IMO) does not fit at all with the rest of the neighbourhood.
A part of my issue is that the city was already struggling to try and execute the Main Streets initiative. They put together their mock ups and drawings of these amazing walkable streets with retail and condos above and "15 minute city" concepts but once it was approved to go ahead they immediately let the developers cut corners and cheap out on the delivery. Now instead of a unified vision for "main streets" we are getting a hodgepodge of poorly executed density, but at least they built some sidewalks...
Instead of blanket rezoning, I would have rather seen a more planful strategy with zoning that is tailored to Calgary so that they could build neighbourhoods that fit together and stayed within the aging infrastructure and service capacity.
- If the schools in the neighbourhood are already bursting beyond what they can handle, adding another 500+ houses worth of density in the area is only going to make it worse.
- If they are already needing annual trips to 1950s neighbourhoods to maintain the crumbling sewer lines in the area then piling on more homes is only going to cause more problems.
In my opinion, a better solution would be to have the city have a firmer hand on developers to get the density and style that they want. Looking around the city there are massively wasted opportunities for development that would yield faster and more significant housing numbers than this blanket rezoning strategy that will give the city nickel and dime density increases.
- Ogden and the industrial SE section of town could have huge gains if they would push the corporations out and built a high density "inner city" 15 minute city there instead
- Kick the rail yard out of the inner city to further enhance that inner SE development opportunity
- West village is a mess and at some point they need to deal with that bus depot and the land remediation there... but they could take that whole waste of space of car dealerships and instead put a pile of 40+ story condo buildings with thousands of units in the downtown core (like everything else, remediation is only going to get more expensive with time)
- Westbrook is an empty field (on top of a c-train station) and they let a developer just sit on it until the land rights reverted to the city and now they are waiting on some other developer to step up and build the thousands of unit density that they envision on that land.
In each of these situations you have corporations mucking about and getting away with whatever they want for "profits" while the blanket rezoning puts a lot of individuals at risk of having the most expensive asset in their lives become devalued by hodgepodge cash grabs for "density".
I would much rather see the city take a more aggressive stance with corporations and start buying and developing land internally (and maybe even make profit in the process). At least then when they pitch a huge idea like main streets there would be a chance that they execute it to the vision and ensure the results that the people need... namely thoughtful housing inventory that meets the diverse needs of people in all walks of life and lowers the cost of housing but also maintains the infrastructure and services requirements of a growing population.
I will tell you right now...if they tried that Ogden would be like an old-timey Frankenstein movie, I mean the villagers would be out with torches and pitchforks...and of course trucks and guns.
And secondly...
CPKC >>> City of Calgary (<- might even need more 'greater thans')
The City isnt telling them what to do with their railyards. Not gonna happen.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
You're forgetting the worst part.
We have a mayor that has only done 6 things?
That's it. That's the entirely of her tenure as Mayor?
She's only done those 6 things?
Man, no wonder people like you are so mad!
You'd think she could have done at least a dozen things in almost 4 years.
Ok...enlighten on what has been done that you would mark as a positive Gondek✔ action where you would qualify her as an effective mayor based on those actions since she was elected?
Green Line fight against the province? ✔?
Water emergency? Would that get a ✔?
CESC? ✔ or no?
Downtown office conversion program? ✔
Rezoning. ✔?
We know of the actions listed because they are the ones she directly spoke on and made statements on (see her feed and webpage). They weren't obscure under the radar actions or statements.
There's going to be some positives or small wins to be found if you dig enough.
Does that make an effective mayor, or an effective leader? If someone has the time to create a comprehensive list of positives that you can attribute to Gondek, go right ahead. It's probably the best time to do so considering the election especially if someone is unhappy with the other candidate choices.
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firebot
Ok...enlighten on what has been done that you would mark as a positive Gondek✔ action where you would qualify her as an effective mayor based on those actions since she was elected?
Green Line fight against the province? ✔?
Water emergency? Would that get a ✔?
CESC? ✔ or no?
Downtown office conversion program? ✔
Rezoning. ✔?
We know of the actions listed because they are the ones she directly spoke on and made statements on (see her feed and webpage). They weren't obscure under the radar actions or statements.
There's going to be some positives or small wins to be found if you dig enough.
Does that make an effective mayor, or an effective leader? If someone has the time to create a comprehensive list of positives that you can attribute to Gondek, go right ahead. It's probably the best time to do so considering the election especially if someone is unhappy with the other candidate choices.
Make a case on why she should be reelected.
My point was that you made a dumb statement:
"Nearly everything she did was reactive political virtue signaling theatre meant for social media grandstanding."
Yet with relative ease you were able to list just as many things she did that were not "Political virtue signaling" or "Social media grandstanding".
I hate when people call something "Virtue Signaling" just because they don't agree with something, it's lazy and shows you don't actually want to discuss the policy.
You may not agree with her policy choices, or her votes on council (remember, she's just 1 vote), but she did a lot more than Grandstand and Virtue signal.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
I'm in Ward 14 now (phew, no more Dan McLean) so I did a review of my thoughts on all the councilor candidates' websites. Like the Oilers, it was no good.
Spoiler!
Chima Akuchie
Pros: Independent, seems to have a community focused background
Cons: Wants to repeal rezoning (but also wants more affordable housing), generic platitudes about improving things without explaining how he would achieve them, and the website is a mess
A Quote: "Asbestos in water may be an invisible risk, but it’s one we can’t afford to ignore."
Erin Averbukh
Pros: Independent, has more detailed breakdowns of what she wants to do
Cons: Wants to repeal rezoning, wants plebiscites for any large expenditures, wants to can environmental measures, claims to have no political agenda (lol)
A Quote: "If I am the only City Councillor without a political agenda, I believe that would make me the Leader."
Devin Elkin
Pros: Independent, has experience in politics and council
Cons: Worked for Demong so probably shares all his views, isn't critical of his boss at all, wants to further complicate council hearings
A Quote: "Having strong personal relationships with current MLA for Calgary Fish Creek, Minister Myles McDougal and Calgary Shaw MLA Minister Rebecca Schultz" (emphasis mine )
Keener Hachey
Pros: The website loads quickly
Cons: Is a full-on UCP shill, parrots all the UCP talking points on his website, signed his name in Comic Sans font
A Quote: "The bureaucrats appear to run the show and there are arguably only 3 conservatives on council."
Landon Johnson
Pros: Independent, has the most complete website compared to the others
Cons: It's the Recall Gondek guy, wants to repeal rezoning, wants endless plebiscites on everything
A Quote: "We will focus on priority items that you can see and feel every day like properly aligned traffic lights"
Sunjiv Raval
Pros: Independent, has a big focus on volunteering throughout his life
Cons: The only things talked about on the site are a road interchange study that's already underway and a LRT extension, and the website is pretty rough
A Quote: "WORKING HOURS: Monday – Sat 09:00 am – 09:00 pm, Sunday – Closed"
Ryan Stutt
Pros: Nicest looking website of them all, talks a lot about communication
Cons: Says so little with so many words, full of generic platitudes about improving things without explaining how he would achieve them
A Quote: "We need to fix what’s broken."
After reading that, I still have no idea who to vote for.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mazrim For This Useful Post:
My hot take is that I disagree with your assertion. Buying in a former RC1 neighbourhood was an intentional decision to avoid living crammed with other people or having trouble finding a parking spot around my home. Now there is a developer trying to convert a bungalow into an 8 or 9 plex around the corner without enough parking or yard space. I expect that design will get shot down by the development process but they will probably come back with a 4 plex that will get approved, which (IMO) does not fit at all with the rest of the neighbourhood.
A part of my issue is that the city was already struggling to try and execute the Main Streets initiative. They put together their mock ups and drawings of these amazing walkable streets with retail and condos above and "15 minute city" concepts but once it was approved to go ahead they immediately let the developers cut corners and cheap out on the delivery. Now instead of a unified vision for "main streets" we are getting a hodgepodge of poorly executed density, but at least they built some sidewalks...
I agree wholeheartedly. I said this in the Calgary SSP thread, but allow me to express it slightly differently to better fit the discussion:
People in this city -- and especially those who have or want kids -- repeatedly reject the type of housing that this inner city rezoning is going to produce. (Sure, there's DINKs like us who love inner city condo life, but we're not a majority.) Adding more condos or townhomes expands supply, but it mostly increases the stock of housing types people raising families aren’t shopping for in the first place; it doesn't eliminate the underlying demand for low‑density living. Hell, you found exactly what you wanted in an area zoned for what you wanted where you wanted it. I'd be annoyed too if I bought into a neighbourhood I loved, only to have it transformed into something I specifically tried to avoid when I was house shopping.
A huge contingent of the population wants detached single family homes with reasonably-sized yards, space to park their boat or trailer, and they've shown they're willing to live on the outskirts of town -- if not go to Airdrie, Okotoks, Chestermere, Cochrane, etc. -- to get it. And since we aren't living in an urban area with a lack of room for outward expansion, they will get it.
I have to stop short of saying the zoning is an example of Gondek's "champions stupid ideas that won't solve the problems for which they are proposed as solutions" because -- as bizaro86 pointed out -- it really can't be credited for or against her, since the Federal government basically forced it on major cities lest they lose federal funding for housing development.
We're gonna have an awesome selection of $1m+ executive townhomes in the inner city once everything is said and done, though, let me tell you.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
Last edited by TorqueDog; 09-02-2025 at 05:10 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
Densification of suburbs can free up single-family homes. Calgary’s mature suburbs are full of empty-nest seniors living in 2,000+ sq ft houses with four bedrooms. They don’t need homes that big.
But they also tend to be attached to their neighbourhoods, and typically don’t want to move across the city to a 14-story apartment building in an unfamiliar neighbourhood. If we can build more townhouses, walkups, and modest 2-story apartment buildings in established neighbourhoods, local seniors can move in and free up those detached homes. The trick is to do it in a way that doesn’t hurt the quality of life of the empty-nesters still living in those homes.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
Lots of my millenial friends that want to live inner city and not in the deep suburbs are buying townhouses and semi detacheds because it's all they can afford and they seem to like them just fine.
The Following User Says Thank You to Torture For This Useful Post:
Densification of suburbs can free up single-family homes. Calgary’s mature suburbs are full of empty-nest seniors living in 2,000+ sq ft houses with four bedrooms. They don’t need homes that big.
But they also tend to be attached to their neighbourhoods, and typically don’t want to move across the city to a 14-story apartment building in an unfamiliar neighbourhood. If we can build more townhouses, walkups, and modest 2-story apartment buildings in established neighbourhoods, local seniors can move in and free up those detached homes. The trick is to do it in a way that doesn’t hurt the quality of life of the empty-nesters still living in those homes.
Our citizens having things as big as they do is less about 'need' and a lot more about their preference for those things.
When you say 'mature suburbs', can you give an example of a neighbourhood you're thinking of?
I will tell you right now...if they tried that Ogden would be like an old-timey Frankenstein movie, I mean the villagers would be out with torches and pitchforks...and of course trucks and guns.
And secondly...
CPKC >>> City of Calgary (<- might even need more 'greater thans')
The City isnt telling them what to do with their railyards. Not gonna happen.
Yup, that was the same thing said when I last brought it up.
I would still want the city to test that. The Alberta Expropriation Act gives municipalities the authority to expropriate land. In the days of old, CP rail was granted huge power... but now that it is merged with an American corporation I do not think Canadian laws should protect it as much as they used to.
Besides, they may even agree to it. For the amount of money they could get selling that inner city land, they could easily stand up a new yard on the edge of town.
Yup, that was the same thing said when I last brought it up.
I would still want the city to test that. The Alberta Expropriation Act gives municipalities the authority to expropriate land. In the days of old, CP rail was granted huge power... but now that it is merged with an American corporation I do not think Canadian laws should protect it as much as they used to.
Besides, they may even agree to it. For the amount of money they could get selling that inner city land, they could easily stand up a new yard on the edge of town.
I understand what you're saying, and I'm not disagreeing with your points, but I work in Ogden and deal with a lot of the locals frequently and they are vocal locals. They are incredible passionate about their community...just the way it is.
The City already did the Land Expropriation scheme for the original Green Line Plan and it was like WWIII between them and the locals and the City eventually gave up and did something else.
And if you really, really want to go Nuclear? Change a Bus Route. The amount of anger and vitriol I've heard from the changing of Bus Routes? You genuinely wouldn't believe it.
As for CPKC, again, I dont disagree with you that maybe as a merged entity they should cede some of their protections, but its not going to happen...ain't nobody gonna fight the Railroad. They have what they have and they're damned well going to keep it. Come Hell or High Water.
They think its still the 1880s where if anyone messes with them or their stuff they release the Railyard Bulls to crack skulls.
And now that they're the single largest Railway Concern in the Western Hemisphere nobody is going to take on the Railroad.
As I recall during the Flood when the City needed Rail cars moved it was a borderline miracle that Nenshi managed to get them to do it and it was a polite request followed by a 'Pretty Please' and even then they largely only complied to protect their own assets.
You'd have better luck relocating the Brooklyn Bridge across the river.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
