ChazYEG
Senior Member
Ditto. Today I walked to Bar Oro from Norquest, and on my way, I took Jasper Ave. Stopped at both lights, and decided to walk back on 102 Ave (much quicker because I didn't have to stop at all).
Stantec Tower | 250.84m | 66s | ICE District Prop.
- Thread starter SRC Admin
- Start date
Clearshades
Senior Member
That is city living. The more we grow, the more problematic as Edmonton, like all other NA cities, are design for car-centric. It is frustrating,.
jason403
Active Member
Frustrating for those who can't drive. Is great for people who drive, which is the large majority of the working population.
ChazYEG
Senior Member
The difference is that those who drive are comfortably safe and warm in their cars.
It is absolutely egregious the amount of priority we keep giving to cars, even in our most urban areas and yet, every single time someone complains about this, there's one to cry as if cars don't already have WAAAAAY more privilege than any other mode of transportation, from how much we spend on car infrastructure, to how much of the public real is dedicated to them, be it for parking or travel.
Also, one of the reasons why the vast majority of people choose to drive, even Downtown, is because of how pedestrian unfriendly this city is. While I won't be advocating for European utopia in suburbia, neighbourhoods like DT, Oliver, Garneau and Old Strathcona should definitely be more pedestrian friendly.
Not to mention that several of these people who "can't drive" REALLY CAN'T. Elderly people, disabled people, kids, etc. are still part of society and should have their needs accommodated. Not to mention the huge swaths of new immigrants, who can't afford cars, or don't have licenses, etc (and these could very well become a much more permanent presence in our urban neighbourhoods if we made them more family friendly, instead of simply living there for a few years and then move to a car infested suburban hellscape).
Dubas
Active Member
Any attempt to get this thread & The Connect Centre one back on track? this has been multiple pages about traffic and whatnot on both threads.
Clearshades
Senior Member
They're ancillaries issues to the topic, so it is warranted. STANTEC IS COMPLETED, AND SITUATIONS HAVE RISEN THAT WERE NEVER GIVEN COMPLETED DIAGNOSTICS. Discussing these issues are good, so we can be prepared going forward. How would we know how to mitigate these issues going forward if they're not discussed.
How many times can we express a pub here or there, the food court, what other businesses can go into this or that space?
How many times can we express a pub here or there, the food court, what other businesses can go into this or that space?
jason403
Active Member
People love cars, and love roads. We love being able to get across the city, access to deliveries, emergency services, etc.
Pedestrian improvements are nice, but not a necessity, especially at the expense of transportation infrastructure. Taking something such as road access away for the masses to allow for elitists to play simcity seems like a dangerous precedent.
IanO
Superstar
Looks like there is still room available...
David A
Senior Member
Exactly, the minute or two more delay while you are comfortably in a warm car is not a big problem. Waiting for the light to change outside at -20 it is.
We keep on talking about making a more walkable city, then coming up with excuses not to to it and moaning about how it is not happening.
It really starts with a few simple, inexpensive changes to make it more pedestrian friendly. It does not require millions to be spent on infrastructure and configurations, which will probably end up being a waste of money, if the simple things are not done first.
Seamusmuldrew
Active Member
I'm obsessed with the implication here that elitists have pedestrians as their priority or that those who don't or can't drive are themselves the elitists. As for how much people "love" driving, I don't think anyone I've spoken to in my life has expressed joy about driving downtown; it is a poor situation for everyone involved. I personally don't think it should be the inherent right of suburban commuters to speed in and back out of downtown just because they like driving a car, at the expense of the quality of life of core residents. This attitude towards transportation is so, so tired.
David A
Senior Member
Maybe unlike many other cities, our downtown is not generally an expensive place to live. So the people walking around are probably not rich elitists.
However, the people driving through in fancy SUV's or paying for parking and then driving back to Riverbend - that might be a different story.
In any event, if we want to make downtown more attractive, we do need to make it more appealing for people to live and walk around.
Gus Haynes
Active Member
Don't forget the implication that pedestrian infrastructure is somehow separate entirely from the concept of "transportation infrastructure". I've read some hot takes on this forum, but rarely have I guffawed so hard.
ChazYEG
Senior Member
Funny you'd say that.
"People love cars" is a hilarious statement. The vast majority of the folks I know actually hate driving routinely. What they do love is the illusion of convenience that having a car in a car-centric city gives. Never, in my entire life, I've ever heard ANYONE say: "Oh, I love commuting" or "Oh, I love having to drive for everything because I want to spend almost every waking second in my car". Even in the suburbs.
What you'll always hear is "I couldn't live with our a car here, it's so much more convenient than taking the bus/train" or "it's so convenient, because it would be a 30min walk. Who has time for that?".
People who actually love cars, car guys like Ian or me, HATE commuting or having to hop on a 3 min drive just to buy toothpaste. We love long drives, actually enjoying the cruising experience, etc. You ask me to cross the country driving on back roads and taking my time, just for the enjoyment, and I'll say yes every time. But I've gone days without bread because the very though of having to hop on my car to drive 5 min and back makes me roll my eyes.
Pedestrian improvements ARE a necessity and THEY ARE transportation infrastructure. Active transportation is also transportation. Cars already have the vast majority of the dedicated infrastructure, it's time to give some back to others, and make the city livable for EVERYONE, where driving is a choice, not a necessity. The cause-effect relation here is not "we need more road infrastructure because there are so many cars" but "we'll keep getting more cars because the only pieces of infrastructure that make moving around in a remotely convenient way are roads".
Also, it's kind of hilarious that you'd mention deliveries and emergency services... Europe, Asia, Latin America... All have these. Some of the places there have it WAY more efficient than we do, as a matter of fact, and yet they mostly have much better transportation infrastructure that is NOT car-centric. Care to explain how they're able to make such miracle happen? Flying firetrucks? Ambulance teleportation? Cop-in-a-box?
But the funniest thing is you saying the people wanting to put pedestrians first are elitists. That actually made me question my whole understanding of what elitism means. I've always thought that elitism was intrinsically related to money, so it would make more sense for me that elitists are those privileged ones who are spending huge swaths of money on the latests truck, suv or whatever other big mobile monstrosity (that are despised even by ACTUAL car lovers) and want to keep their privileges, because they HAVE to parade their $100k shiny new toy around, at the expense of the people who can't drive (either for physical reasons, or financial ones).
archited
Senior Member
I believe you are mistaken if you think that car-loving Ian wouldn't purchase a top-end Maserati, Ferrari, or Lamborghini if it was within his comfortable financial reach to do so -- not necessarily elitist just fanitist (coin). I have an idea, let's ask him. Some people and their respective chosen profession, together, demand a car in a City like Edmonton (or L.A.) just to be able to perform duties efficiently. A so-called "15-minute City" which is in Edmonton's sights will allow people to walk to basics (at least those within the dense core of that kind of build-out). One of the biggest fallacies in a utopian neighborhood in North America stems from the persistent need to order "stuff" online so that Amazon or Amazon-like providers can deliver (by almost anything but a bicycle) in an oversized cardboard container one's "stuff" buried discretely inside. The fallacy is the notion that this is "environmentally friendly" and it completely obviates the no-automobile vehicle modes that harbor such angst. There is a saving in having someone else do the driving for you (the generic "you" not the "you" you)? That is a rhetorical question. Until -- as a society -- we can go back to supporting brick-and-mortar retail as a mainstay we will not see the neighborhoods that we so desperately yearn for.
ChazYEG
Senior Member
My point went right over your head, didn't it? I am not unlike him (or any car enthusiast) and, if money was no object, I would buy any of these cars myself (as happy as I am with my small sportscar). But if anything can be said, He also advocates for more (and better) pedestrian infrastructure, and I very much doubt you'd ever hear from any of us that we want to spend hours commuting by car every day, and that we should prioritize cars in our urban areas. You might not like the guy, or have many disagreements with him (as I do), but these are things I have never heard from him.
The point, if it wasn't clear, is that calling people who advocate for pedestrian infrastructure "elitist" doesn't make sense AT ALL. Neither does implying that people who prefer pedestrian oriented streets in our urban neighbourhoods are elitist. And that has a lot to do with people who want to live in their big-ass suburban McMansions, drive their $120k F-150 King Ranch downtown everyday to work, at the expense of the people who either can't afford to drive, or can't drive due to physical or legal limitations. THAT is elitist. It has to do with privilege, and not just money.
As per your comment regarding online shopping, while I agree (and personally, I HATE online shopping. I'll do everything in my power to avoid it, unless it is substantially cheaper), I don't see this trend changing anytime soon, especially in North America. The "illusion of convenience" I alluded to includes this, and in our sprawling cities, where people don really like to drive (they just don't have any other more convenient way of going around), having someone do it for them, and deliver it at their doors is the way to go. This is a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation: do we need to change the mindset so that brick and mortar come back to life, or do we need public policy to somewhat "bankroll" brick and mortar and re-insert them into people's lives (changing zoning laws, reducing the power of HOAs, adding requirements for street oriented commercial units in suburban neighborhoods, etc...) so that people can start feeling what it is like to not HAVE to drive everywhere?