Municipal Politics - Page 76

Calgarian · #**1501** Posted **Mar 28, 2014, 3:14 AM**

I was pretty shocked to hear this, way too young for a heart attack, and he seemed like a fairly healthy guy. Condolences to his family!

suburbia · #**1502** Posted **Mar 28, 2014, 5:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

I was pretty shocked to hear this, way too young for a heart attack, and he seemed like a fairly healthy guy. Condolences to his family!

Shocking & too young, but not completely uncommon. For almost half of people who dies of a cardiac issue, their first heart related symptom is death. We should all be paying more attention - it is not an old man's disease.

kw5150 · #**1503** Posted **Mar 28, 2014, 3:55 PM**

My dad passed away at 59 in 2012. Its pretty common.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fusili

Condolences to his friends and family. He was a really good-natured guy and had a good sense of humour. 57 is a really young age to pass away.

DizzyEdge · #**1504** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:34 PM**

Should Calgary have boroughs? Probably seems a dumb suggestion, but as Calgary gets bigger and bigger and the suburban population outnumbers the innercity population more and more, I can see increased conflict between the spending priorities of suburbanites and the innercity residents. Wondering if it would make sense to divide calgary into quadrants + innercity and have some formula to divide funding between them. Something like "basic services" for all, and then anything a particular borough wants that's more "Cadillac" that specific borough can be taxed appropriately.

Or maybe that model could be done without boroughs, basic services but if a specific community wants something fancier they can be taxed accordingly.

I could also see something like, for example, if borough #1 wants bike lanes they're taxed accordingly, but if at some point all boroughs (or a majority perhaps) put in bike lanes, then at that point bike lanes gets added to 'basic services'.

Thoughts?

Calgarian · #**1505** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:38 PM**

I think Calgary needs to stop expanding, keep the current city limits and leave all new suburban growth to be the domain of whatever municipality they are part of. This would be best served with toll roads on major roads into the city (only during rush hour) so as to avoid having city roads beat to shit by people that don't use them. If suburbanites want to pretend this isn't a major city they they can live that fallacy in Okotoks or Langdon and leave the citizens of Calgary to focus on city priorities.

DizzyEdge · #**1506** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:44 PM**

I feel like fixed borders will lead to a) suburban developments right across the border and b) is something that a majority of Calgarians will never support. Not that I disagree with the idea.

Calgarian · #**1507** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:46 PM**

We need to do something, we can't just expand out into forever.

DizzyEdge · #**1508** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:53 PM**

Maybe we need something where as we expand tax rates go up, so at some point the market will restrict.

MichaelS · #**1509** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

We need to do something, we can't just expand out into forever.

http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/DBA/Pages/...nd-Change.aspx

Calgarian · #**1510** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Maybe we need something where as we expand tax rates go up, so at some point the market will restrict.

Read the comments section on this article to gauge the reaction people will have. I'm really starting to think Calgarians are becoming mindless sheep who just tow the line their favourite newspaper tells them to.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...850/story.html

Calgarian · #**1511** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelS

http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/DBA/Pages/...nd-Change.aspx

It's nice to have a policy guideline, it's another thing to actually enforce it, especially when citizens start losing their minds about "social engineering" and the like.

MichaelS · #**1512** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 6:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

It's nice to have a policy guideline, it's another thing to actually enforce it, especially when citizens start losing their minds about "social engineering" and the like.

It will be interesting to see how much teeth this maintains, as it gets implemented.

Calgarian · #**1513** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 7:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelS

It will be interesting to see how much teeth this maintains, as it gets implemented.

Very interesting! I'm going to stay in my nice inner city community with all the servicing we will need already taken care of, and watch the shit hit the fan in the burbs!

fusili · #**1514** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 7:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Read the comments section on this article to gauge the reaction people will have. I'm really starting to think Calgarians are becoming mindless sheep who just tow the line their favourite newspaper tells them to.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ca...850/story.html

Don't read the comments section. Those are reserved for humanity's rejects and pariahs.

Calgarian · #**1515** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 7:34 PM**

While that's true, it does reflect the opinions of a lot of Calgarians. Most people I talk to are more inclined to agree with them than you or me...

MasterG · #**1516** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 7:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Very interesting! I'm going to stay in my nice inner city community with all the servicing we will need already taken care of, and watch the shit hit the fan in the burbs!

The big challenge is finding balance in the suburban /urban viewpoints. Largely this is not possible. Why should I support bike lanes if I live on the outskirts and drive to downtown? the perception is that this has zero benefit to me, all I get is a perceived cost (traffic, tax dollars etc.) whether this is a fair viewpoint to have is debatable for sure; as every other form of spending has the same exact problem. But it is an intractable viewpoint. Drivers who spend 10 minutes per day downtown cannot possibly understand what it is like for those that live here. And vice versa.

However, as the city gets bigger and bigger, both sides get more and more support for their respective viewpoints and they both get what they want, without conquering the other. No one is happy, but no one folds either. Less and less car commutes downtown mean that that mode has less and less defense against being re-purposed for other modes that are supported by the inner city. Bike-lanes are the start, bus-lanes to follow.

Inner Toronto is case-in-point. They failed to come to terms with the growing gap in lifestyles that became so opposed to each other. Now inner Toronto is one of the most ped-friendly, transit heavy walking cities in North America surrounded by a wasteland of suburbia the likes of which the world has never seen.

MalcolmTucker · #**1517** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 8:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Maybe we need something where as we expand tax rates go up, so at some point the market will restrict.

It is called transportation economics. Most people try to avoid insane commutes, though since it isn't costed in credit worthiness it can lead to awful situations like being house rich but fuel poor.

DizzyEdge · #**1518** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 8:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It is called transportation economics. Most people try to avoid insane commutes, though since it isn't costed in credit worthiness it can lead to awful situations like being house rich but fuel poor.

I wonder where that really starts to have an effect. Currently (according to google maps) LRT/Centre Street BRT trip times from the terminus to downtown is 20-37 minutes. it feels like other than south the city could expand 50% or more before people will refuse to commute that long, and that 50% expansion could take a lot of decades. You're right though, at some point people won't want to bother, perhaps once the city reaches the satellite cities of Airdrie, Cochrane and Okotoks.

I wonder if a 1 hr commute is a magic 'ok that is too long' number.

Calgarian · #**1519** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 8:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterG

The big challenge is finding balance in the suburban /urban viewpoints. Largely this is not possible. Why should I support bike lanes if I live on the outskirts and drive to downtown? the perception is that this has zero benefit to me, all I get is a perceived cost (traffic, tax dollars etc.) whether this is a fair viewpoint to have is debatable for sure; as every other form of spending has the same exact problem. But it is an intractable viewpoint. Drivers who spend 10 minutes per day downtown cannot possibly understand what it is like for those that live here. And vice versa.

However, as the city gets bigger and bigger, both sides get more and more support for their respective viewpoints and they both get what they want, without conquering the other. No one is happy, but no one folds either. Less and less car commutes downtown mean that that mode has less and less defense against being re-purposed for other modes that are supported by the inner city. Bike-lanes are the start, bus-lanes to follow.

Inner Toronto is case-in-point. They failed to come to terms with the growing gap in lifestyles that became so opposed to each other. Now inner Toronto is one of the most ped-friendly, transit heavy walking cities in North America surrounded by a wasteland of suburbia the likes of which the world has never seen.

Oh I agree that there needs to be a balance, but there is always going to be a disconnect between those who want more efficient higher density communities and those who want as much land and as many vehicles as possible.

DizzyEdge · #**1520** Posted **Apr 21, 2014, 9:06 PM**

Looks like these would be the approximate borders of 1 hour LRT service