Plan|it|Calgary Draft Municipal Development Plan and Transportation Plan - Page 8

frinkprof · #**141** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 7:03 AM**

I missed all the presentations after mine, #94 as I had something else to go to. Good to hear that Riise and Bigtime spoke too. The SSPers I did see, Beltliner and fusili did well.

I was a bit surprised that Connelly, McIver, nor Chabot asked me a question as I think I served up a couple things that were in their wheelhouse for twisting to support their talking points. Ceci was the only one with a question.

Bigtime · #**142** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 1:02 PM**

That was good fun last night! Sorry I couldn't stay after my quick 'n' dirty talk.

For those that didn't catch Riise and myself around 7:20pm last night, here is what brought me down to council.

I got home with my wife around 5:45 or so, and we put on the council hearings on Shaw channel 89. The mayor started calling names of speakers, unfortunately it appeared a lot were not there anymore. So the mayor then started asking for anyone else there to speak in favour. When one lady came up my wife looked at me and said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs. Bigtime

She has 5 minutes plus any questions, run down there and speak.

So I bolted out the door and ran over to city hall. I arrived a heavily breathing sweaty mess, and hoped I could use it to my advantage. But no sooner did the last speaker finish up the mayor called for the break until 7:20!

So I had a chance to meet up with Riise, Beltliner, and quite a few members of the CivicCamp group and grab a quick bite to eat before Riise and I spoke after the break.

I thought it was a really great experience, and I was able to give a perspective to council of a family that is CHOOSING to live in a condo even with a child.

mooky · #**143** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 2:01 PM**

I'm sorry I missed that Bigtime, but I'm glad you got a chance to speak. I just wish I could convince my wife to stay living in a condo after we have a kid.

Unfortunately given our situation that we are going to immigrate in one of her relatives as a full time caregiver we'll be required to have a 3 bedroom which might just price us out of a condo downtown/beltline. I'm still hoping to find something inner city in our price range.

Bigtime · #**144** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 2:13 PM**

I mentioned in my talk last night the problem of affordability in the inner city Mooky. How Plan-It could expand those options and help lower prices by making residences other than single family detached more affordable.

Bigtime · #**145** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 3:57 PM**

Council is in session again, the opposed parties are speaking.

Dennis Little with the UDI is proposing a joint City/Developer task force, do they forget that there are actually people living in this city? If business cannot adapt to survive that is their problem, we still need to live in the city that Calgary chooses to become.

Connelly spoon feeding the speaker questions and misinterpreting the affordability stats between Calgary and Vancouver.

Edit: Gord "Ballbuster" Lowe is taking Little to task about this taskforce ignoring the citizens of Calgary.

Bigtime · #**146** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 4:39 PM**

Druh is going for the throat on this little twirp from the UDI.

shreddog · #**147** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 4:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigtime

I mentioned in my talk last night the problem of affordability in the inner city Mooky. How Plan-It could expand those options and help lower prices by making residences other than single family detached more affordable.

Thanks Bigtime. I wasn't able to attend, but if I had, that would have been my primary point. Currently I live in a duplex infill in Tuxedo and hate it that nowadays, the only other people who afford to move into the other infills on my street (all >700K) are DINKs or retirees while most of the old housing stock is rented as the owners wait for the land to appreciate even more.

It sucks that there aren't as many families with kids in the immediate vincity as you have in the 'burbs since it is such a kid friendly naighbourhood.

My hope is that with greater options, people who currently can only buy into Panor-woods-arado can afford to live inner city.

KrisYYC · #**148** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 5:27 PM**

^is "DINK" an acronym for something?

Wooster · #**149** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 5:30 PM**

Dual Income No Kids.

In other words, the best time of life.

fusili · #**150** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 6:12 PM**

Hey thanks for speaking Riise and Bigtime. I didn't know you guys were speaking. Too bad I couldn't catch what you guys said. Did anybody else get any questions?

I was really surprised at Chabot. My presentation was on lower-income households and how their expenditures on housing and transportation change based on residential location. Basically I was making the argument that suburban housing is in fact, more expensive than living in the inner city for low-income households, when transportation expenditures are taken into account, and that the cost of owning an automobile is a significant burden on lower-income households. I argued that creating a city with improved transit can lessen this burden. Chabot basically asked me a question so he could state that transit doesn't serve all the needs of lower income households and basically implied that automobile ownership was the solution. He completely missed the point. He basically suggested that the problem (automobile ownership) was the solution. I should sit him down one day and explain to him who his constituency is.

Speaking of which, does anybody know if there will be a recorded version of the hearing available?

Beltliner · #**151** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 6:23 PM**

^^^ Connelly took a swing at Bigtime to try to shore up his argument for families wanting white picket fences, but that was pretty much par for the course for the Ward Sixer this week. Pity it didn't occur to Connelly to ask the new version of Mr Spock about his mother, though.

Got some sotto voce attaboys from Kanga Druh and Holy Joe after my turn at the podium, but no questions. Maybe they didn't want to draw on folks who quote Pushkin?

Bigtime · #**152** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 6:49 PM**

Was it really a swing at me? He asked if the inner-city was currently supplying a mutliple variety of housing choices, to which I responded yes.

Unfortunately I wish I could have elaborated on my answer to point out that although those options do exist the price becomes a factor, since supply is so low for those "family" homes (townhomes, single detached, 3 bedroom condos, etc) the prices are ridiculous. However I'm pretty sure in my statement I make reference to Plan-It's ability to bring more choices and thus affordability into the equation. (Mrs. Bigtime PVR'd it, so I'll have to watch again to see if I made that clear)

If anything the one point I wanted to hammer home was that families like Mrs. Bigtime, Littletime and myself do exist in this city, and we don't covet the 'white picket fence' like they assume we do.

Fusili: Druh did ask me the first question, making it very clear that we were going against public perceptions of where people with a child should live.

mooky · #**153** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 7:46 PM**

Wow, Bronco got the last guy (with the english? accent) at the very end to stipulate about risk and make the point its not JUST the industry taking risk that the public takes risk through investment in utilities for new development areas. Good going Bronco!

frinkprof · #**154** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 7:49 PM**

^Yeah I agree, that was a very good point.

mooky · #**155** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 7:51 PM**

I don't get the developers arguments, saying they will respond to the market, argh! Don't they know if we have no choice (which beside a very few limited alternatives we don't) it's not like we can just build the new walkable subdivisions as we don't have the capital. Yeah we can vote with our wallets, but in reality, what choice do we really have . . . Vancouver?

frinkprof · #**156** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 7:58 PM**

Has anyone kept a tally of how many times McIver has said "I don't want to put words in your mouth, but..."

He should wear a sign or something with that written on it, in the interest of time.

Bigtime · #**157** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 8:08 PM**

At the beginning of the supper break yesterday I overheard Ric McIver saying this to a gentleman in regards to Plan-It:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ric McIver

Evolution, not revolution.

I really fail to see how one can refer to Plan-It as revolution, since it is over a 60 year timeframe (and will be revised as we progress) it pretty much fits what evolution means.

In his defense he has asked some good questions to both the supports and opponents of Plan-It, perhaps there is hope for him as well!

Riise · #**158** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 8:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Connelly spoon feeding the speaker questions and misinterpreting the affordability stats between Calgary and Vancouver.

This Council debate has taught me that Connelly is a fucking cunt. Wow, I may dislike him more than McIvor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fusili

Hey thanks for speaking Riise and Bigtime. I didn't know you guys were speaking. Too bad I couldn't catch what you guys said. Did anybody else get any questions?

I wasn't asked any questions which partially led to my disappointment with my speech. I had originally intended to debunk certain arguments of the Industry lobby but after hearing some of the questions on Tuesday changed my speech to answer some the questions Council directed at past speakers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by frinkprof

^Yeah I agree, that was a very good point.

I think the best point made so far was by Gian Carlo last night. His differentiation between Urbanism and Suburbanism is vital to the successful implementation of Plan It, which should be called 'Do It!'. If I can talk to Gian Carlo before I leave I'd like to recommend that he change the terminology from Urbanism/Suburbanism to People-Oriented Development/Auto-Oriented Development.

fusili · #**159** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 8:40 PM**

After hearing some of those opposed, I have to say I have a lot of sympathy for their arguments. One fellow from Ronmor (retail development) pointed to the difficultly of getting projects in the inner city approved. I would totally agree.

I really wish that the direction of Plan-It was more in line with "If you want to build something in the inner-city, you will get your plans approved in two weeks" kind of thing. What is really needed is to reduce regulatory constraints and delays to development in the existing communities.

Bigtime · #**160** Posted **Jun 25, 2009, 8:42 PM**

Couldn't agree more Fusili, of course it is easier for a developer to build and make money on single family when the process is so quick. Look at what has happened to these higher density projects, the build time is so much longer that they can't help but get exposed at some point.