ADob
Active Member
Is he speaking out against... fluoride? 
(I'll see myself out.)
(I'll see myself out.)
|
|
|
- Thread starter Airboy
- Start date
policyenthusiast
Active Member
Got a link? All I found was a picture of him at Shen Yun in 2022.
https://www.shenyuncreations.com/zh-TW/news/NYu9Z2TFaR92M
Not sure why this is an article.
The_Cat
Senior Member
Edmonton faces $1.5B capital funding budget shortfall — which is set to grow - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca
The City of Edmonton doesn't have enough money to maintain its existing infrastructure, let alone build anything new.
globalnews.ca
trevorhayden
Active Member
Then don't build more sprawl!
policyenthusiast
Active Member
We also have an extremely top-heavy City administration and insane police budgets, getting a few thousand per middle housing project each year isn't going to keep up.
BASE
Active Member
Making this statement without numbers but I think sprawl takes more blame than it should. New greenfield development is being built at much higher density levels than have been seen historically. I think the complaint would be more reasonable if sprawl was happening in the more traditional sense of larger estate type lots. New areas are really building out what existing residential areas are trying to become but what may take 50+ years to achieve in many cases.
Edmonton has a strong affordability advantage and I think if you completely eliminate sprawl that would be wiped out. I would suggest the question that needs to be handled is figure out what kind of density is needed to match the level of tax people are willing to pay to maintain desired service and infrastructure demands of the city.
Edmonton has a strong affordability advantage and I think if you completely eliminate sprawl that would be wiped out. I would suggest the question that needs to be handled is figure out what kind of density is needed to match the level of tax people are willing to pay to maintain desired service and infrastructure demands of the city.
ADob
Active Member
Wait a minute, are you trying to make a nuanced argument that takes all sorts of things into consideration instead of just angrily yelling? Keep it coming, please.
policyenthusiast
Active Member
Coffee hasn't kicked in so I'm too lazy to get more numbers, but historically accepted averages for SF density are around 8-10 dwelling units per hectare (du/ha), while Edmonton's new build neighborhoods are closer to 30-35 du/ha. An all-townhome neighborhood is closer to 58-65 du/ha.
This is to say you're right imo, we are building a lot of SF and that's where the most demand is, but it doesn't hurt the tax base in the way it used to.
thommyjo
Senior Member
Our new suburbs are very dense and a huge improvement to older ones.
AND
I’d argue they’re limiting the densification of more central areas which already have amenities like rec centres, libraries, fire halls, schools, roads, transit, etc.
The dead horse I’ll keep beating is the thousands and thousands of new apartments in these sprawl areas. Glenridding heights, chapelle, secord. Edgemont. With 0 transit, no amenities, and overrun roads/schools.
Build those in century park, blatchford, SPR, Millwoods, WVLRT areas, Strathcona, main streets and our city is much, much better off by most measures (tax revenue, transit use, Main Street vibrancy, emergency response times, etc).
AND
I’d argue they’re limiting the densification of more central areas which already have amenities like rec centres, libraries, fire halls, schools, roads, transit, etc.
The dead horse I’ll keep beating is the thousands and thousands of new apartments in these sprawl areas. Glenridding heights, chapelle, secord. Edgemont. With 0 transit, no amenities, and overrun roads/schools.
Build those in century park, blatchford, SPR, Millwoods, WVLRT areas, Strathcona, main streets and our city is much, much better off by most measures (tax revenue, transit use, Main Street vibrancy, emergency response times, etc).
David A
Senior Member
I don't like the either or approach. We need to maintain our existing infrastructure and build new infrastructure too particularly for growing areas of the city.Edmonton faces $1.5B capital funding budget shortfall — which is set to grow - Edmonton | Globalnews.ca
The City of Edmonton doesn't have enough money to maintain its existing infrastructure, let alone build anything new.
However, it frustrates me when we don't maintain existing things they deteriorate quickly and something is replaced because "new" infrastructure is easier to get funding for.
Although, I feel the days of that easy funding is ending so we probably will finally need to put more effort into maintaining things better.
yeggator
Active Member
Huge gender divide among young people. Young men are more conservative and young women are very liberal
YEG Bus Rider
Active Member
Edmcowboy11
Senior Member
Posted June 11, 2025 on his Facebook feed
policyenthusiast
Active Member
kcantor
Senior Member
Well, sort of…
54% of Edmontonians do cycle but two thirds of them (35% of all Edmontonians) only cycle once a week and only 1.8-3.8% of them (1-2% of all Edmontonians) commute to work and not all of them do so year round. Overall, less than 17% of people who ride a bike in the summer do so in the winter.
Your own education and preferences seem to be leading you to some rather careless use of statistics. For what it’s worth, I support well integrated bike routes as part of our transportation infrastructure but looking elsewhere in the world that comes from a build it and they will come approach. Trying to build it by misrepresenting current usage will only backfire.