Urban vs Suburban - 2 styles enter, one style leaves! - Page 44

fusili · #**861** Posted **Dec 16, 2014, 10:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

This reminds me of a debate I had with someone on facebook this week. He was comparing the map of NYC proper to Calgary, and showing that one had 1.2 million and the other 11 million.

I agree Calgary needs to densify, but the thing is that super dense NYC is the middle of a gigantic metro. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/New_York_Metropolitan_Area_Counties_2013.png

A lot of cities get a bye with density because the lowest density portions are 'across the street' in a differently named municipality.

Agreed. When you talk about NYC, you should really be talking about the entire metro area- all the way from Montauk to White Plains to Essex county. While NYC itself is dense, the metro area is not that dense. Good commuter transit though with LIRR and Metro north and New Jersey rail.

Rusty van Reddick · #**862** Posted **Dec 16, 2014, 11:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

This reminds me of a debate I had with someone on facebook this week. He was comparing the map of NYC proper to Calgary, and showing that one had 1.2 million and the other 11 million.

NYC is 8.4 million in an area slightly bigger than Calgary. We always hear this- "Calgary is the same size as NYC with one-tenth the population" but we're more like one-seventh the density of NYC. Which sounds terrible until you consider how remarkably dense NYC proper is and how almost every city in North America looks non-dense compared to it. There are HUNDREDS of municipalities in North America less dense than Calgary.

DizzyEdge · #**863** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 12:01 AM**

Exactly. Compared to the NYC metro we're 1/3 as dense. Similar with the GTA. Matching those metros are a more reasonable city-wide goal I think than trying to make all of Calgary as dense as NYC proper.

suburbia · #**864** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 1:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Exactly. Compared to the NYC metro we're 1/3 as dense. Similar with the GTA. Matching those metros are a more reasonable city-wide goal I think than trying to make all of Calgary as dense as NYC proper.

I think even comparing metro to metro with something like an NYC is not fair, as they can construct more expensive ultra-high density that a city our size cannot match. I'm not saying we should not strive, but comparing apples to apples is more complex than we sometimes think.

Bigtime · #**865** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 1:38 PM**

Soooooooooo...did anyone read the article? It really isn't about comparing densities and such, was curious what you all thought about it.

dazzlingdave88 · #**866** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 2:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Soooooooooo...did anyone read the article? It really isn't about comparing densities and such, was curious what you all thought about it.

I did. It was interesting. There was definitely an agenda that was being pushed.

I think it had some merits, but not everyone wants to live in suburbia. I think they key that they don't emphasize enough is that suburbs that are growing are becoming more like urban areas. It is kind of coming to a similar conclusion as the book Happy City, but from a different angle. Basically saying that everyone living in high rises or everyone living in suburbia is not the answer, but something like Italian or European cities is the most desirable city.

Bigtime · #**867** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 2:17 PM**

Yeah, they kind of touched on it a little when discussing that new development in the Phoenix area, but other than that you kind of had to read between the lines on it.

UofC.engineer · #**868** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 3:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

I'll need more time to read the entire article, but it looks interesting and the economist is always quite thoughtful about its coverage so I'm looking forward to it. Flipping through quickly, man that photo of Phoenix is sad!

Anyway - a major point I'd like to raise (again, sadly) is that we really need to set terms of reference in discussions like this. Arguably, anything within the ring-road or even the municipal boundary depending on whom you talk to is not suburb in the global sense. When you look at reports from the US, you're generally talking about places an hour out - maybe 40 km from centre. The Chennai example in the report is no different. The suburb they are talking about is Thiruvallur, which is actually not Chennai. Our touchstone would be Cochrane. We speak of these as commuter communities. In the global sense, Calgary would be seen as largely a success, having (till now) limited numbers and magnitude of those commuter communities, what others call suburbs. This is of course changing now, and that's a real shame. I'm within the same ring road that you're within.

I think Calgary has an unfair reputation when it comes to sprawl. The satellite communities around the city are more or less "compact" and the boundaries of the city are well defined.

When I went to Orlando it is impossible to tell if you are in the city, the country side, a town or just an unincorporated community in a local county. These were all connected by impressive freeways.

Don't get me wrong, Calgary could do many things better such as increasing the density in ageing communities and reverting to a grid street pattern in green field developments. But we do not have nearly the same level of suburban sprawl as many American cities.

DizzyEdge · #**869** Posted **Dec 17, 2014, 5:59 PM**

ok i finally read the article

It was interesting, but I'm curious about this:

Quote:

Look at Phoenix in satellite pictures taken at night and its bright blobbiness has a sharp edge quite unlike those of cities such as Boston and New York. There, dense suburbs slowly give way to loose, forested suburbs and eventually to rural hamlets (albeit occupied by people who tend to spreadsheets rather than the back 40). At the edge of Phoenix, suburb turns to desert about a block from where the mains-water supply stops. Phoenix is suburban in its heart, suburban at its extremities and suburban in between.

In my opinion that hard stop is a positive, thing, but maybe it's a difference of what's good for tax payers, and what's good for 'the soul', the article's argument being that the suburbia is all homogeneous.

suburbia · #**870** Posted **Dec 23, 2014, 5:57 AM**

This is probably misplaced on this specific thread, but with lack of a better one, posting this article here. It is about Paris, a city often cited for its density, and how it has whole heartedly rejected skyscrapers. The article is written within the context of the latest rejection of a skyscraper:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/12/19/how-...isible-paris-eiffel-tower-tour-triangle/

DizzyEdge · #**871** Posted **Dec 23, 2014, 4:21 PM**

I'd be fine with a city with skyscrapers in the CBD and not necessarily elsewhere

suburbia · #**872** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 1:13 AM**

Interesting article. Written by Beltline resident Rick Bell. Don't write him off on this front.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/27/con...ins-on-party-scene-mischief-homelessness

Lyle Aspinall/Calgary Sun/QMI Agency, via Sun Media

dazzlingdave88 · #**873** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 2:07 AM**

I didn't know where to put this, but I'm assuming we have all had to deal with these ridiculous people. I don't have to as much anymore because I live in neighbourhood with mostly townhouses in the inner city and not suburbia.

http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/1387905...reminder-from-calgary-parking-authority/

milomilo · #**874** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 2:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbia

Interesting article. Written by Beltline resident Rick Bell. Don't write him off on this front.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/07/27/con...ins-on-party-scene-mischief-homelessness

Lyle Aspinall/Calgary Sun/QMI Agency, via Sun Media

Rick Bell's articles are literally impossible to read. I would have thought a requirement for working for a newspaper would be basic written English skills. I can't comment on the subject matter because of that.

Fuzz · #**875** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 3:35 AM**

Did I miss something? I saw 7 "paragraphs" and I use that term very loosely. Seriously, he gets paid for that? Const. Mike Otto? I guess "Const." goes to his word count, so why bother typing Constable.

suburbia · #**876** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 3:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by milomilo

Rick Bell's articles are literally impossible to read. I would have thought a requirement for working for a newspaper would be basic written English skills. I can't comment on the subject matter because of that.

For those who are having a challenge reading, there is a very nice photo gallery that goes along with the article. It may help.

Fuzz · #**877** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:09 PM**

Ah, my script blockers seam to have disabled it.

CalgaryAlex · #**878** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 2:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Did I miss something? I saw 7 "paragraphs" and I use that term very loosely. Seriously, he gets paid for that? Const. Mike Otto? I guess "Const." goes to his word count, so why bother typing Constable.

It looks like he copy-pasted some tweets into MS Word and sent it to his publisher. What a clown.

simster3 · #**879** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 3:38 PM**

I thought he may have trying to be poetic, like a haiku.

simster3 · #**880** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 3:43 PM**

The parking article really gets my blood boiling. I had the same argument with my brother in Edmonton while we were looking for street parking around the stadium before the World Cup game. I understand that some restrictions are necessary but residents should know that a few times a year they will have parking issues, as the stadium has been there longer than most. In this case, I would probably just keep parking in front of his house to see what his warning was for. He has no legal recourse.