News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 8.3K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 9.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.1K     0 

Misc. Infrastructure Projects

That is literally the most pathetic thing I’ve seen in a while.

You don’t need Jasper Ave sized roads in DUNLUCE FFS.

Why are these NIMBY’s absolute morons? Like I NEED to know what they’re on. Narrower roads aren’t going to kill you. No one’s using the sidewalks because they fucking suck.

As someone who’s known people who’ve been hit by vehicles and could’ve been saved with traffic calming measures in residential neighbourhoods, I hate these people so much. I want these people to keep crying and for every complaint, a larger sidewalk is built. /end rant
 
Yeah, it's great that some of these 1970s-1990s-built suburbs are finally coming up to renewal... some those collector roads are in dire need of a road diet.

Neighbourhood renewal makes so much of a difference, too. The 1950s and 60s era ones in south-central Edmonton that have recently gone through it are much nicer now.
 
I get the desire to dunk on this lady, and while I don't necessarily agree with her ideas about reducing the scope of renewals--if sidewalks and roads are torn out, it's not like there's a dramatic cost difference in rebuilding the sidewalks wider and roads slimmer--but I can understand her overarching frustration with property taxes increasing year over year in seemingly perpetuity while Council seemingly cannot make hard choices to cut spending (OP12 aside).
 
Its called feedback and our city administration and council should listen carefully to it rather than dismiss it.

I don't know if this person represents the opinion of most of the people in the area or not, but she does have the right to be critical of changes that will affect her and her neighbourhood and should not be attacked for doing so.

If people in the area really would prefer a less expensive option that mostly replaced but did not significantly change the existing infrastructure, wouldn't it be better for everyone if that was what was done?
 
David A said:
Its called feedback and our city administration and council should listen carefully to it rather than dismiss it.

I don't know if this person represents the opinion of most of the people in the area or not, but she does have the right to be critical of changes that will affect her and her neighbourhood and should not be attacked for doing so.

If people in the area really would prefer a less expensive option that mostly replaced but did not significantly change the existing infrastructure, wouldn't it be better for everyone if that was what was done?
Click to expand...
Can we see the articles the Edmonton journal, global, and CTV publish on the great appreciation for and support of 1) bike lanes 2) neighborhood renewal 3) any urbanist type decision in the city?

Also, can news agencies fact check these “opinion” pieces of misinformed boomers?

Good reporting and news should be more balanced and should seek to inform/educate. Not to platform rage bait…

I get that complaining and negativity always wins for media/clicks. And I get that people speak out more when mad than happy. So reporters hear from those frustrated more than happy. But they should seek to do their homework and to share varied opinions.
 
thommyjo said:
Can we see the articles the Edmonton journal, global, and CTV publish on the great appreciation for and support of 1) bike lanes 2) neighborhood renewal 3) any urbanist type decision in the city?

Also, can news agencies fact check these “opinion” pieces of misinformed boomers?

Good reporting and news should be more balanced and should seek to inform/educate. Not to platform rage bait…

I get that complaining and negativity always wins for media/clicks. And I get that people speak out more when mad than happy. So reporters hear from those frustrated more than happy. But they should seek to do their homework and to share varied opinions.
Click to expand...
So misinformered Xer's, Y's, Z's is ok? Not by a long shot, not only boomers are misinformed given the state of the media these days...
 
Habibfazil said:
So misinformered Xer's, Y's, Z's is ok? Not by a long shot, not only boomers are misinformed given the state of the media these days...
Click to expand...
…of course everyone can be misinformed. But objectively, the vast majority of “nimby” and complaining content in our local media is featuring people 60+ (boomers).

Go to any “better infill” or zoning renewal or public engagement type thing and the trend is very obvious.

And the reason I mention boomers is because it’s part of my critique of local media not having balanced reporting. Where are the voices of 25-35 year olds who are moving in neighborhoods and looking for things like bike lanes, wider sidewalks, safety for young kids, slow traffic, nicer public spaces?? Why only feature the voices of people who won’t even live in those communities in 10 years? Who don’t have kids they’re worried about safely getting to school? We over value the voices of those least impacted by 30+ year decisions
 
David A said:
Its called feedback and our city administration and council should listen carefully to it rather than dismiss it.

I don't know if this person represents the opinion of most of the people in the area or not, but she does have the right to be critical of changes that will affect her and her neighbourhood and should not be attacked for doing so.

If people in the area really would prefer a less expensive option that mostly replaced but did not significantly change the existing infrastructure, wouldn't it be better for everyone if that was what was done?
Click to expand...
I’m sure this kind of feedback was provided ad nauseam during the engagement for this renewal, and I’m sure it was heard, but this kind of feedback is akin to the opposition to the new zoning bylaw; almost wholly concerned with the present reality and misinformed assumptions rather than what these renewals are meant to do: prepare the neighbourhood’s infrastructure for the future, which will without doubt involve higher density and more active transportation. It would not be better to cave to reactionary pushback rather than go through with the original plans that are based on successful design methods.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top