Community Development - Blatchford

[Airboy]

My take after todays flight into YEG from Grande Prairie.

Jazz, Westjet, Airco all have scheduled service. Jazz YEG and Jazz YYZ were full Westjet YEG full. Airco 2 persons.

Of the users on my flight to YEG-30. 20 continued on to other destinations. Only 10 of us walked into arrivals hall. There were as many in the hold room at GP heading to Calgary that were continuing on to else where.

My point is these people would have to hop a cap to YEG from YXD which used to happen since the runways at YXD were to short for adequate sized trans Canada aircraft.

PWA, CP, AC, NWTAir and TimeAir all flew out of YXD before consolidation only Time Air and AC who flew DC 9s could leave with a full load.

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by 240glt

Typcial arrogance from our southern neighbor who seem to think they know what's best for us

The sense of entitlement is pretty astounding, isn't it? If Montreal decided to consolidate their passenger traffic at Mirabel and close Dorval, would Calgarians be equally up in arms? If they tried to fight it and stop it to the degree that they have tried to meddle in our airport affairs, they would become the laughing stock of Canada. This seems to be lost on our southern neighbors like P.W. here.

[vid]

Toronto has also debated closing City Centre Airport. Almost did until Porter jumped in but it's still discussed quite frequently, especially with so many people living on their waterfront now. It could still happen.

Although Toronto is, arguably, a more important city than Edmonton.

[Policy Wonk]

The city of Toronto couldn't close YTZ if they wanted to, it isn't in their jurisdiction.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by RTA

Ok I'm done arguing with you if you're going to keep trying to tell me what I care and don't care about. You clearly have no idea what I care and don't care about, and efforts to explain it to you are being met with shifting goalposts.

Fight all you want, it's not your decision to make.

I cannot understand what distinction you are attempting to draw. Policy Wonk is clearly correct here; you do not care about the service that is, and could be, provided by the YXD. That is not a bad thing. I do not particularly care about said service. In my opinion the airport is too small to be especially useful and the land it sits on is too valuable to let it just go to waste. If it was on a bigger or cheaper parcel of land it might be different. What does not help is the number of people, for example you, making entirely irrational arguments. These seem to be based on wishful thinking and an odd mixture of hate for and envy of Calgary. Closing the Airport will not give you Calgary's skyline or turn YEG into YYC. I have no idea why you think buildings taller than the current height limit would be more economical. It is painfully clear to anyone with sense that Edmonton is not one of the places where a building must be more than five hundred feet tall for it to be worth constructing.

[bulliver]

These seem to be based on wishful thinking and an odd mixture of hate for and envy of Calgary. Closing the Airport will not give you Calgary's skyline or turn YEG into YYC.

Wow, just wow. I am truly astounded you managed to best Policy Wonk for the most retarded thing said in this thread. Bravo! Well done sir...

I can't even begin to argue against such asshattery.

[240glt]

^ I agree. what a total douchebag

I especially liked the part where Bassic claims that the whole debate is some sort of veiled hate-fest for his town. Talk about arrogance, & just goes to show you how scared some people are of the progress we are making here in Edmonton

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

In my opinion the airport is too small to be especially useful and the land it sits on is too valuable to let it just go to waste. If it was on a bigger or cheaper parcel of land it might be different.

I think the rest of your post is wrong, but this part is dead on, and why it should've been closed and redeveloped decades ago.

[Daveography]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

I cannot understand what distinction you are attempting to draw. Policy Wonk is clearly correct here; you do not care about the service that is, and could be, provided by the YXD. That is not a bad thing. I do not particularly care about said service. In my opinion the airport is too small to be especially useful and the land it sits on is too valuable to let it just go to waste. If it was on a bigger or cheaper parcel of land it might be different. What does not help is the number of people, for example you, making entirely irrational arguments. These seem to be based on wishful thinking and an odd mixture of hate for and envy of Calgary.

You're drawing conclusions that were not there to draw from.

You and P.W. are right about one thing: I'm not interested in the service that YXD could maybe possibly provide, because that possible service is not a better use for that land than redevelopment, and it is not the panacea to improved air/transportation service in the region that its proponents make it out to be. YEG is our airport, our gateway, and where our air transportation growth is occurring and slated to continue to occur. There's nothing irrational about any of that.

But that's not what P.W. was talking about. First he said we don't care about YXD. I explained why he was wrong. Then he said what he meant was we don't care about is the history and what it once was. I explained how he was still wrong. Oh but what he really meant was that we don't care about the potential of YXD as an airport with potential. Shifting goalposts much?

The hate for Calgary that you seem to be receiving is really a frustration and anger at P.W. and others like him, and business and political interests in Calgary meddling and attempting to interfere in what is ultimately a civic matter. If the roles were reversed, the anger and frustration would be the same, just targeted in the opposite direction.

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

Closing the Airport will not give you Calgary's skyline or turn YEG into YYC. I have no idea why you think buildings taller than the current height limit would be more economical. It is painfully clear to anyone with sense that Edmonton is not one of the places where a building must be more than five hundred feet tall for it to be worth constructing.

And with this you've clearly demonstrated that you've wandered into a discussion that you know nothing about. Like for example, how a vast swath of our downtown has buildings limited to just 12-15 stories because of that airport. When we talk about height restrictions, we're not (just) talking about buildings taller than 150m in our CBD, but also being able to break that ~70m barrier in all of our central neighborhoods.

If you want to talk about irrational arguments, you might want to start by not reading "Calgary hate/envy" where it doesn't exist, and you might also want to educate yourself on the matter a little more before wading into discussions on it.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by 240glt

^ I agree. what a total douchebag

I especially liked the part where Bassic claims that the whole debate is some sort of veiled hate-fest for his town. Talk about arrogance, & just goes to show you how scared some people are of the progress we are making here in Edmonton

No I'm claiming that there are two or three Edmonton posters here that, instead of making rational arguments for why the airport land is better suited to other uses, are irrationally basing it on wanting taller buildings. I simply became tired of tribalism that took over the thread. Instead of a sensible debate with Policy Wonk (who, admittedly, comes across overly harsh) they have latched on to conspiratorial diatribes against a Calgary that apparently wants to hold them back. I am in no way scared of progress that Edmonton is making; I am, instead, thrilled for the city. The fact that someone, for instance myself, does not live in Edmonton should not mean that they cannot comment on issues relevant to it. Am I to be barred from advocating that Alberta invest in LRT systems for both cities, keeping my mouth shut because I live in Calgary?

The Airport is an issue that, while ultimately up to Edmonton to decide on, affects a great many more people. I firmly believe that they should be free to express their views on the matter. There is plenty of room to disagree with Policy Wonk and others like him without denouncing his right to speak on the topic because he is from Calgary. Arguments about bulldozing inner city communities so that Calgary can have an airport marginally closer to the core than the current one are simply without merit. They, along with talk of height limits and the generally hostile tone of this thread to Calgarians, only detract from the sensible case for redeveloping YXD.

RTA, of course the hostility to Calgary is a reaction but it is a choice between two reactions. It sadly shows that those posters engaging in it do not believe the case for closing YXD can stand on its own merits. They are instead attempting to demonize the opposition with links to some kind of nefarious cabal of Calgarians hellbent on holding Edmonton back. I have no doubt, from reading a number of his posts on the general subject of transportation, that Policy Wonk honestly believes that keeping YXD open is in Edmonton's best interest. That does not mean he is right. To reiterate my view, I think he is wrong. It would be much better for all involved if those who agree attempt to prove that instead of bashing Calgary.

I understand the issue of height limits. My point is that midrises of 12 to 15 floors can be just as dense as any skyscraper district. If the demand was there the development would occur. Of course on this site we are bound to have people that like height for the sake of height. There is nothing inherently wrong with liking tall buildings but the preference should not trump other concerns.

[MrOilers]

In my opinion, the fact that Calgary-based interests have a proven history of funding previous campaigns to keep the City Center Airport open to scheduled service (against the will of almost 4/5 of Edmontonains), makes any animosity towards what Calgarians think about this airport completely understandable.

Calgarians have meddled with this issue too much in the past for Edmontonians to simply think of them as objective observers.

[bulliver]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

No I'm claiming that there are two or three Edmonton posters here that, instead of making rational arguments for why the airport land is better suited to other uses, are irrationally basing it on wanting taller buildings.

Strongly disagree, I think we have all made rational arguments pro-closure, and if we seem a bit tense it's because we've been making these arguments for 15 years now.

I think RTA showed quite well that there is zero point in arguing PW's opinions, because if you read this thread through from the beginning you will find that once someone had discredited (or at least made a very strong counter point to) one of his arguments he just goes ahead and changes it.

And your contention that Edmonton wants to be just like Calgary is really quite offensive and just reeks of your own inflated sense of self-importance.

[Policy Wonk]

Which of my points has been discredited? Or even coherently addressed?

The argument seems to boil down to that it doesn't matter what the short-comings of YEG are - or the total absence of any planning in the closing of YXD. This is taking a stand against a junta of Monopoly Men conspiring in the bowels of the Petroleum Club against Edmonton.

[bulliver]

^ All Of Them!

[240glt]

Agree 100% with Bulliver. Bassic, It's clear what PW's agenda is, And it is also obcvious that there is a vested interest in keeping that airport open that benefits Calgary oil companies, southern MP's and YYC more than Edmontonians. And I lived in Calgary for years too, and I know first hand the contempt and disdain that many Calgarians hold towards Edmonton, so you'll excuse us if we take a firm stand on what's best for OUR city

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by bulliver

Strongly disagree, I think we have all made rational arguments pro-closure, and if we seem a bit tense it's because we've been making these arguments for 15 years now.

I think RTA showed quite well that there is zero point in arguing PW's opinions, because if you read this thread through from the beginning you will find that once someone had discredited (or at least made a very strong counter point to) one of his arguments he just goes ahead and changes it.

And your contention that Edmonton wants to be just like Calgary is really quite offensive and just reeks of your own inflated sense of self-importance.

You are right, no statement in this thread came anywhere near expressing envy at elements of Calgary. No one wanted YEG to have YYC's connections or downtown Edmonton to have Calgary sized skyscrapers and then blamed YXD, and by extension the nefarious cabal of Calgarians hell bent on maintaining it, for keeping those glorious things away.

Of course you want some of the flights that go to YYC. You have every right to want an airport that is more than a feeder to Calgary's. Envy is inherent in this line of thinking. It can be a subdued byproduct of a quest to improve Edmonton or it can cause people to lash out against Calgary with delusions that we are trying to hold you back. The latter has been far too prevalent thus far. I am not the city of Edmonton's enemy; you should not allow circumstance to convince you otherwise.

[bulliver]

^ There are airports all over the world with great connections. There are cities all over the world with tall buildings. What makes Calgary so special?

Quite frankly, personally I could give a rat's ass about YEG. People want the muni closed for a great many diverse reasons. Here are some of mine:

1. A large plot of centrally located land that makes money for the city, rather than one that can't raise enough funds to cover it's own operational costs.

2. 30,000 - 60,000 new residents in said central location

3. A 118 ave that can be made continuous rather than needing to jog around the muni lands.

4. A yellowhead trail that will have enough room to be properly configured with interchanges.

5. An LRT right of way that can pass by said density, and a Nait campus that can expand on site rather than being built at satellite campuses all over the city.

6. And yes, being a skyscraper geek, the possibility of more and taller buildings in Edmonton's core is attractive.

[freeweed]

You guys might be a bit more persuasive if you stuck to arguing your side of the case, instead of "Calgarians have meddled with this issue too much" and "I know first hand the contempt and disdain that many Calgarians hold towards Edmonton", amongst other choice quotes.

You're basically proving Bassic's point.

Count me as a Calgarian that is 100% IN FAVOUR of shutting down the muni. I'd appreciate not painting us all with the same brush. Call PW a douche, but don't turn this into some sort of "Calgary hates Edmonton and wants to tell it what to do". Nothing could be further from the truth.

A select few asshat Calgarians do not a city make.

This public service announcement has been brought to you by the department of dispelling stereotypes.

[bulliver]

^ Fair enough, but speaking personally, I didn't once say Calgary until Bassic told me that the only reason I want the muni closed is so Edmonton could be like Calgary.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by bulliver

^ Fair enough, but speaking personally, I didn't once say Calgary until Bassic told me that the only reason I want the muni closed is so Edmonton could be like Calgary.

Please do not put words in my mouth. If you were not mentioning Calgary prior to my post then I clearly was not referring to you. I never said every one was guilty of my complaints. I was speaking to the two or three posters that were replying to Policy Wonk by trying to turn the issue into some kind of nefarious attack by Calgary against their city. In doing so they were making irrational points and yes, some jealousy definitely was apparent. Your six points in favour of closing YXD make sense and generally match my views on the subject but if you think that was where this discussion was at prior to my entry than you were not paying attention.