Quote:
Originally Posted by EastVanMark
1).When you are measuring from zero, (there was very little by way of infrastructure back in 2006) it's easy to get percentage increases.
Lets wait a decade or so until we really can judge things based on a percentage. I suspect that things will start to even out (I believe this is starting already).
Regardless, people like to use the basis for tearing down the viaducts when there's even the slightest usage drop, but yet when they drop for the bike infrastructure, not a peep.
Can't have it both ways.
|
Bikes being a joke aside, bus ridership's steadily gaining despite little to no extra roadspace. Combined with the SkyTrain, it's more or less competitive with driving nowadays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastVanMark
What a far out, crazy concept.
Who knew you could be good at 2 things at the same time
And exactly. Nevermind, New York,  lets start off by designing a better entertainment district than noted metropolis Edmonton, Alberta shall we before we worry about NYC mkay? |
Probably not the best idea to agree with a user whose only yardstick is building height.
We've got Granville, Robson and Davie busy all year, with NEFC soon to follow once the viaducts come down. With due respect to Edmonton, it's the only Canadian metro I know where downtown is
cheaper than the suburbs; much of the entertainment is short festivals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastVanMark
While you can't control what entities do, you certainly can do enough to entice them to stay/set up shop here (btw we never had F1). Right now, we do a horrible job at those. Amenities come and go? Is the Eiffel Tower, Roman Coliseum, Roppongi District, Piccadiliy Circus Vegas strip leaving us anytime soon?
Again, never claimed it wasn't a city; its just that is a boring one that isn't living up to its full potential.
Also, where does it say that you can't be good at BOTH (natural & manmade attractions)?
And it wasn't just me laughing at the elementary school in our "entertainment" district, but rather planners from some of the liveliest cities on earth.
|
Indy, my mistake. Point remains - if you're upset with the city's traffic now, can you imagine the disruption if we'd kept the races?
Paris: had a World's Fair in the Victorian era, and a visionary local; was almost shot down by NIMBYs. We got Science World.
Rome: capital of a giant ancient empire that got their kicks through conquest and slave fights. We could try restoring the First Nations villages in Stanley Park? That's the only ancient ruin we've got.
Tokyo: the one part of the city that was open to
nanban. '89 market crash temporarily killed it, which is kind of where Granville is now, so give the GED another 10+ years.
London: major throughfare in a major city. Almost got torn down and replaced with a highway (hint hint hint).
Vegas: started as a mafia hideout. I don't want any more money laundering than we have now, TYVM.
Several centuries, even millennia, of random global events and Big Money. Trying to reach historical/cultural/economic parity is a pipe dream. Spending money (which we don't have) building something like Brasilia or the Cairo replacement would be equally wasted.
In terms of civilization, Vancouver's in the ass-end of the planet; it's been around as a city less than two hundred years, and half of that was spent being a forest. Sure, we can become good at cultural attractions, but since we don't
have culture to begin with, maybe we start by playing to our strengths? Got
a few ideas in the last post.
At any rate, we are WAY off-topic here. Maybe we should set up a separate amenities thread.
Prev
Linear Mode
