Calgary plans to battle suburban sprawl; developors bitch and moan

[broken_legs]

Higher Density More Affordable Housing Please.



When Gas hits 3.00/Liter North America just isn't going to work.

Instead of building infrastructure and mass transport around poorly planned cities, lets build cities around infrastructure.


Calgary is ridiculous.

[canuckcarguy]

How many people in this thread live in the city core? It's pretty hypocritical to live on the outskirts of town, but oppose urban sprawl - you live in urban sprawl.

Everybody thinks urban sprawl is bad, but most people want a house with a double garage and a yard. Something's got to give. How many people actually want to raise their family in a condo? Or even a tiny townhouse with a 100 s.f. back yard?

If you eliminate development of new land, then you've got to begin converting mature neighbourhoods for higher density. If you have a house in one of those neighbourhoods, you'll shit bricks when you find out they're building a highrise next door to you. And if single-family houses become even less affordable, there will come a point when families are forced to live elsewhere if they don't want to live in a condo.

[Speed_Dreams]

If you look at all the other BIG cities in Canada they all have there outter suburbs where people live in and travel into , take Vancouver , people drive in from Richmond and surrey almost an hour one way to get to work , Even in this city people live in Cochrane and Okatoks and airdrie. People WANT to live in a single family home , its not a bad thing but in a city of over a million people you have to have a HUGE land area to accommodate.

Personaly i think if you don't want to drive 20-30kms to work , than buy a house closer to work. there are HUndreds of inner city infills being built in this city that we can't keep up with hooking them up to utilities.

[Antonito]

^Speaking of Vancouver, that city is a pretty good indicator of how crazy people will get in order to own a house. People are living in Chilliwack and driving 2-3 hours each way for work, people are spending 70% of their income to buy a house that's only a half-hour drive from work.....that's Calgarys future unless there is some foresight by the city, because God knows people aren't going to do the smart thing for themselves.

Originally posted by Thaco
The more dense the population the dirtier and more crime the communities have, look at the "undesirable" communities, they are so because they all have basement suites and duplexes/fourplexes, making higher density, more crime, more dirty... as much as i dislike the urban sprawl, I'd prefer that over nastiness and crime, honestly, 90% of what i do is 10 minutes from me with the exception of specialty shops.

I understand why you think this, because it's what you see when you go to high density places. However, you are not thinking this through. Crime isn't simply because there are too many people. Come on, think about it, how does that even make sense?

What's happening in high density areas that look like shit is that high-density = cheaper, therefore it's the less desireable people that live there, who are responsible for the crime, the filth, etc. It's not a product of the number of people, but the quality.

Look at high density developments that are high priced. They look just fine. There are ways to have high density housing that doesn't lead to shit, you just have to have a cohesive plan and money.

[rc2002]

Originally posted by broken_legs
When Gas hits 3.00/Liter North America just isn't going to work.

I beg to differ. I can't wait for gas to hit $3.00/L, hell even $5.00/L. That'll force city planners to start making changes, and it'll force people to actually consider their driving habits and choice of vehicles. Right now, people have enough disposable income that even $2.00/L gas would be little more than an annoyance.

Let's not forget that the government's share of tax grows with gas prices. They could put that money into developing good transit systems instead of giving it away to their friends (read sponsorship scandal) and wasting it in useless programs (read gun registry).

[98type_r]

It's already too late to force city planners to make a change. So many North American cities are so far behind infrastructure that they just can't cope with increased gas prices, urban sprawl, etc.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by canuckcarguy
How many people in this thread live in the city core? It's pretty hypocritical to live on the outskirts of town, but oppose urban sprawl - you live in urban sprawl.

I don't oppose to urban sprawl. I just want people who support the sprawl REALLY pays for it.

[Super_Geo]

Originally posted by canuckcarguy
How many people in this thread live in the city core?

I started this one, and I live in the core (Eau Claire). I bought there cause it's 5 blocks from where I work and I wouldn't need to drive.

Originally posted by canuckcarguy
Everybody thinks urban sprawl is bad, but most people want a house with a double garage and a yard. Something's got to give. How many people actually want to raise their family in a condo? Or even a tiny townhouse with a 100 s.f. back yard?

Sure there are cheap apartment condos out there, but if Calgary becomes serious about going through a re-urbanization program then there will be bigger condos built. I saw a couple of 1500 sqft condos when I was shopping around and they were niiiice. I don't think anyone would have an issue with raising their family in one of those. And if Calgary was serious about developing denser living spaces then family-sized condos would definately come down in (relative) price.

As for the backyard... you know suburbia and the beginning of middle class double-garage-with-backyard-home ownership is something that started after WWII... it's barely 60 years (or 2-3 generations) old.

Originally posted by canuckcarguy
If you eliminate development of new land, then you've got to begin converting mature neighbourhoods for higher density. If you have a house in one of those neighbourhoods, you'll shit bricks when you find out they're building a highrise next door to you. And if single-family houses become even less affordable, there will come a point when families are forced to live elsewhere if they don't want to live in a condo.

So you're saying that, as the city with Canada's most suburban sprawl, if we cut down on it then people will flock elsewhere (where there's even less suburbia than Calgary)?

[Eleanor]

With the extensive parks in Calgary, I don't think a back yard is really a necessity. My parents didn't want to buy a walk out house when we moved here cause they wanted a back yard, but there's a soccer field like a 2min walk away, so the back yard never gets used.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
They could put that money into developing good transit systems instead of giving it away to their friends (read sponsorship scandal) and wasting it in useless programs (read gun registry).

hahahahhahahah

The government putting road taxes back into transportation, that's a good one. I'll have to steal that joke for work

[Speed_Dreams]

Originally posted by richardchan2002


I beg to differ. I can't wait for gas to hit $3.00/L, hell even $5.00/L. That'll force city planners to start making changes, and it'll force people to actually consider their driving habits and choice of vehicles. Right now, people have enough disposable income that even $2.00/L gas would be little more than an annoyance.

Let's not forget that the government's share of tax grows with gas prices. They could put that money into developing good transit systems instead of giving it away to their friends (read sponsorship scandal) and wasting it in useless programs (read gun registry).

i wanna know what you do to have extra money to buy $2/L gas?

[rc2002]

Originally posted by Speed_Dreams


i wanna know what you do to have extra money to buy $2/L gas?

Does it really matter? I could be working at Superstore making $45k/year and $2/L gas still wouldn't cripple me. The point is that gas should be expensive enough that people will think when choosing their vehicle, and consider carpooling or other alternatives.

The number of single occupant cars in Calgary is ridiculous.

[JoniBoy]

^^ I'm a student and $2/L gas would hardly effect my driving habits

[ercchry]

its crazy seeing how we live compared to places in europe, when we were on the train from amsterdam to paris you can see a lot of country side and even the small towns are condensed haha its pretty crazy looking

and amsterdam was pretty cool with all the areas that had shops and houses that were on 'streets' that were bike/walking only and there was no large parking areas for cars, just tons and tons of bikes EVERYWHERE haha i think something like 80,000 bikes are stolen there each year, hell i dont even think that many people ride a bike in calgary (over the age of 12)

[sexualbanana]

Originally posted by Toma


Calgary only SEEMS crowded cause sprawl is so bad, and everyone has to drive..... Drive to shop, drive to get your hair cut, drive 30km to go to work, drive to schools etc... its TOO BIG.

Go out at nights.... compared to other "big" cities, this place is a ghost town after midnight. Hell, we only have one 24 hour walmart lol

It just seems crowded because some people still think we're a city of 500,000

[Odysseyus]

Ironically, I think part of the problem is that the City of Calgary allows developers to create single family home lots that are too small. I have heard that Calgary allows the smallest lot size in new subdivisions of any city in North America. Lots in the new burbs are actually smaller than the older neighbourhoods and density is actually higher in the new suburbs. This is another reason these burbs look so ugly, the homes are packed in like fish in a tuna can. Now that raw land cost is escalating, the developers are pushing the city to let them cram even more small lots into their new subdivisions. (Which allows them to undercut the price of condos and townhomes in the inner city.)

If the city were to increase lot size, it would totally change the economics of real estate in Calgary and would make condos and townhomes much more attractive options. Instead, the city tries to make the new subdivisions denser and denser and all you have is more and more people who have to drive longer distances to work, not less.

[ianmcc]

Smaller lots are OK if you ban bungalows and instead start building three story homes. An 600 sq.ft. home then becomes 1800 sq.ft. You can pack more 600 sq.ft. homes in a community rather than 1800 sq.ft. homes.

[canuckcarguy]

Originally posted by richardchan2002


I beg to differ. I can't wait for gas to hit $3.00/L, hell even $5.00/L. That'll force city planners to start making changes, and it'll force people to actually consider their driving habits and choice of vehicles. Right now, people have enough disposable income that even $2.00/L gas would be little more than an annoyance.

Yeah, $5/Litre gas ftw. that would be awesome. I don't know about you, but I'm really tired of people on fixed incomes being able to buy affordable produce and food, I'm tired of cab drivers making so much GD money, and nothing pisses me off more than having an affordable mail service. Plus, it would be awesome to finally wean people off their gas-guzzling SUVs and put them into electric cars. Coal-fired electricity FTMFW!!!

I love it when people think the gas price only impacts those oh-so-bad people who don't car-pool, or who drive SUVs. The truth is that higher gas prices hammer lower income Canadians, even those who don't drive. Everything we have in our homes and businesses arrives by truck. It's totally ignorant to think that passing on hugely higher costs to consumers on the items they need to live their lives is a good thing. Sure, higher gas prices would make people consider their driving habits. And their eating habits, clothing habits, children's education habits, etc, etc, etc.

Originally posted by ianmcc


Smaller lots are OK if you ban bungalows and instead start building three story homes. An 600 sq.ft. home then becomes 1800 sq.ft. You can pack more 600 sq.ft. homes in a community rather than 1800 sq.ft. homes.

People definitely want houses bigger than they need. Our first house, an 1100 s.f. bungalow with one bathroom and a partially finished basement, had been previously owned by a couple who raised their 4 kids there. When we "outgrew" it, it was bought by a single guy who, 6 years later, still lives there alone, even though the basement is now developed and there's clearly plenty of room for more people. Nowadays, most of us want bigger houses than that, and for smaller families. Sure, there are exceptions. And some people raise their families without a backyard. But not usually by choice. Obviously, the average consumer wants to buy a house, or else the developers would be happy to build us more high-density housing.

My only concern with building smaller-footprint multi-level houses is that as our population ages (not a problem in Alberta currently, but a general North American trend) older people will have a tough time in anything other than single-level accomodations.

[kenny]

Originally posted by Speed_Dreams
i wanna know what you do to have extra money to buy $2/L gas?

I wanna know what you do to NOT have money to buy $2/L gas?

[Supa Dexta]

I enjoy spending on other things rather then just "burning up" money..

Lot of tough talk.. yeah yeah bring on 5$!!.. we'll see what you say when it even hits 1.50...

I forgot about all the millionaires on here though...