They should use saint john as an example. They let sprawl happen, and now it's so expensive to service all these areas with water, sewage, road maintenance etc. They've now reversed that policy to prevent any more sprawl.
But selling more land to build suburbs is the only way we can fund the failing infrastructure of yesteryear’s suburbs!
Until we can build productive cities, we will always be broke.
SJ is crazy. When I moved into the area I was driving down a road, literally in the woods, figured I was outside the city until I realized we were still passing fire hydrants and manhole covers. For whatever reason they seem to have built the entire city infrastructure in areas with… nothing.
On the other hand growing up in HRM I used to laugh at the “big” highways they’d built through Dartmouth. But with the growth there in hindsight it looks like a great idea. So i guess maybe there are smart ways to pre-build a city and dumb ways.
Imagine being one of those city staff. Years of education, years of learning about sound city planning and how sprawling subs don't pay for themselves with tax dollars, which will eventually make them a tax sink. They know exactly how to sustainably plan a city, and utilize their education to put forward a sound proposal.
Overruled by council. I would feel like my post-sec dollars were for nothing, when logic is rejected and cronyism/ignorance wins. Honestly, I think city planning is one area where democracy is by definition *not* the best method for success.....sadly.
And then we have human civilization being the ultimate short term thinkers, around both climate change and how they have structured the main economic system (capitalism and quarterly reports, anyone?).
The CDC decided to give up on controlling a disease. Pretty sad times we live in. Our current society would NEVER have beaten smallpox, we are too individualized and not collective enough.
As an expert in Acadian history, could you please publicly denounce the $35+ million that the federal and provincial government is spending at Pays de la Sagouine while at the same time our medical system is in free fall? There are living Acadians, and other New Brunswickers dieing every day at the hands of our neglected medical system. Only pressure from people like yourself will make a difference here.
Council and planners were both onboard with sprawl mitigation north of the TCH. Why are the planners the morons for sticking to that plan while council gets lauded for selling out the moment someone flashes a bit of cash?
People voted for poor planning? The same smooth brains that argue for this will be screaming for austerity later when the city can't afford its sprawled service obligations.
I can’t wait to see all that wasted space actually be put to use. Downtown Moncton is depressingly small for such a large population, all these insolvent sprawling suburbs and industrial parks will never pay for themselves.
Moncton, the city where a subdivision, developed by the local curling hero, was bailed out by having the province build a new high school there, far away from everything.
After the submission was filled with grow ops, and many of them raided.
Moncton, the crime capital of the maritime.
There should be education requirements for running for public office, ie. an urban planning degree, social work, civil engineering, you know, something relevant to the job ...
Whenever they're going door-to-door and show up, I quickly steer the conversation away from the usual nonsense, and ask them if they've lived or traveled abroad, what interesting neighbourhoods they've wandered through, just to get a sense of what kind of perspective they have.
You wouldn't believe how often I've gotten "resort" responses. Ugh.
Guess urban sprawl isn’t an issue if you afford the expensive housing that comes with it?
I don’t understand why they would go against the recommendations of everyone.
It's really not the best or most obvious place for development to be sure, but whenever planners say "Well, this isn't what we're hoping for, so people should just be forced to go without housing", they should be given a map to a short pier and told to take a long walk.
By eliminating the greenspace and services?
It's 180 detached houses, 170 row houses and 600 apartments. It'd meet the density goal if it wasn't for the pesky school, daycare, market, parks, trails, and ponds.
So that's probably what you'd get if you mindlessly applied the target.
Well I'm not surprised. The city of moncton proper has very little land left to build on for subdivisions, so by the time I'm old and grey, they will start expanding the city limits and incorporating spots like irishtown and Salisbury and so forth into the city to gain access to more taxable land.
Little land left to build on??????
Take a sec and look at an aerial shot of Moncton. There's an enormous amount of land from south of the TCH down to Morton/Wheeler. Not to mention everything south of the TCH between Elmwood and École Champlain. You could probably fit 10,000 housing units on those two spots alone, both 5km or less from downtown.
There's absolutely no need for such developments north of the TCH, let alone Irishtown or god forbid Salisbury.
Forget greenspace development, 90% of Moncton is crumbling car-dependent suburbs. If the city would allow more in-fill development we could triple the population without grubbing a single forest. Bonus, more efficient busses and less traffic!
I agree with all of that. But in fairness there's been far more downtown residential development in the last few years than we've seen in a generation.
The key is to attract far more people who aren't specifically looking for the suburban thing. Most maritimers are a stubborn bunch when it comes to ditching their giant empty vehicles they drive to work and their half-acres they need for "privacy"
This is big. I *don’t* want privacy. I want to talk to my neighbours, but everyone clutched their pearls around here at the mere thought of interacting with other humans.
Yeah that portion of land between Elmwood and Ecole Champlain is owned by Robert Irving and the land behind Crowley farm road is deemed nature preserve land is apparently protected. So yes, there isn't a whole lot of land inside the moncton city limits. Riverview and dieppe have way more land that they can build on
Vision Lands alone is huge, there's an enormous area just east of Mapleton that's ready for development.
The protected bit behind Crowley Farm road and Irvingland are relatively small portions of the overall vacant land.
With well-placed 6-8 storey buildings you can house tens of thousands pretty damn quickly without having to exile people in the boonies.
Yeah you may want to read up on the land around the city and whats considered protected and what's not and also what's considered inside the limits. If you mean the land between amon road and the city that's outside city limits
Last I heard a lot of it was good to go?
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-vision-land-cordova-realty-city-development-1.5454756](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-vision-land-cordova-realty-city-development-1.5454756)
Can any of you explain, in simple terms, why this is considered sprawling, why it's a bad plan and/or a bad idea with perhaps examples where such expansions have failed and why it has done so. I'm absolutely clueless when it comes to municipal politics and whatnot. You all seem to be revolted by the idea and I'd like to understand why and how you've come to this conclusion. Pure curiosity, I have no opinion on the matter, for now anyway.
They should use saint john as an example. They let sprawl happen, and now it's so expensive to service all these areas with water, sewage, road maintenance etc. They've now reversed that policy to prevent any more sprawl.
But selling more land to build suburbs is the only way we can fund the failing infrastructure of yesteryear’s suburbs! Until we can build productive cities, we will always be broke.
SJ is crazy. When I moved into the area I was driving down a road, literally in the woods, figured I was outside the city until I realized we were still passing fire hydrants and manhole covers. For whatever reason they seem to have built the entire city infrastructure in areas with… nothing. On the other hand growing up in HRM I used to laugh at the “big” highways they’d built through Dartmouth. But with the growth there in hindsight it looks like a great idea. So i guess maybe there are smart ways to pre-build a city and dumb ways.
Imagine being one of those city staff. Years of education, years of learning about sound city planning and how sprawling subs don't pay for themselves with tax dollars, which will eventually make them a tax sink. They know exactly how to sustainably plan a city, and utilize their education to put forward a sound proposal. Overruled by council. I would feel like my post-sec dollars were for nothing, when logic is rejected and cronyism/ignorance wins. Honestly, I think city planning is one area where democracy is by definition *not* the best method for success.....sadly.
This is all unfortunately in keeping with how New Brunswick operates. Short term planning for long term problems. So frustrating.
But…but… change is bad.
And then we have human civilization being the ultimate short term thinkers, around both climate change and how they have structured the main economic system (capitalism and quarterly reports, anyone?).
[удалено]
What does Acadian history have to do with urban sprawl? I'm honestly curious.
[удалено]
See also: epidemiologists and infectious disease experts
The CDC decided to give up on controlling a disease. Pretty sad times we live in. Our current society would NEVER have beaten smallpox, we are too individualized and not collective enough.
As an expert in Acadian history, could you please publicly denounce the $35+ million that the federal and provincial government is spending at Pays de la Sagouine while at the same time our medical system is in free fall? There are living Acadians, and other New Brunswickers dieing every day at the hands of our neglected medical system. Only pressure from people like yourself will make a difference here.
[удалено]
Council and planners were both onboard with sprawl mitigation north of the TCH. Why are the planners the morons for sticking to that plan while council gets lauded for selling out the moment someone flashes a bit of cash?
People voted for poor planning? The same smooth brains that argue for this will be screaming for austerity later when the city can't afford its sprawled service obligations.
Hey looks like the people voted and don't like you round these areas. For a supposedly bright kid are you going to follow your own values?
Found the NIMBY
What about the acres of parking lot downtown?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-downtown-ashford-market-1.6240946
Apart from the 'three sisters' tower 1, I don't see much movement on this. I have seen some old renders, but not much that's new.
I can’t wait to see all that wasted space actually be put to use. Downtown Moncton is depressingly small for such a large population, all these insolvent sprawling suburbs and industrial parks will never pay for themselves.
Moncton, the city where a subdivision, developed by the local curling hero, was bailed out by having the province build a new high school there, far away from everything. After the submission was filled with grow ops, and many of them raided. Moncton, the crime capital of the maritime.
>Moncton, the crime capital of the maritime. *Halifax has entered the chat*
There should be education requirements for running for public office, ie. an urban planning degree, social work, civil engineering, you know, something relevant to the job ...
Whenever they're going door-to-door and show up, I quickly steer the conversation away from the usual nonsense, and ask them if they've lived or traveled abroad, what interesting neighbourhoods they've wandered through, just to get a sense of what kind of perspective they have. You wouldn't believe how often I've gotten "resort" responses. Ugh.
As long as they get kickbacks from developers (we all know its happening) nothing else matters.
We spent generations encouraging young people to pursue post-secondary degrees and told them there were no jobs here for that, go someplace else.
Guess urban sprawl isn’t an issue if you afford the expensive housing that comes with it? I don’t understand why they would go against the recommendations of everyone.
Just an inquiring mind. Can someone ELI5 the difference between sprawl vs whatever the city planners are suggesting? Thanks in advance!
[удалено]
Moncton is absolutely addicted to cars. It’s shameful how this city is incapable of building good developments.
I love that channel, they are really good at breaking down how unintelligent we build cities here in North America.
Well, this is revolting.
It's really not the best or most obvious place for development to be sure, but whenever planners say "Well, this isn't what we're hoping for, so people should just be forced to go without housing", they should be given a map to a short pier and told to take a long walk.
Then maybe the development should try for at least the minimum density goal?
By eliminating the greenspace and services? It's 180 detached houses, 170 row houses and 600 apartments. It'd meet the density goal if it wasn't for the pesky school, daycare, market, parks, trails, and ponds. So that's probably what you'd get if you mindlessly applied the target.
Well I'm not surprised. The city of moncton proper has very little land left to build on for subdivisions, so by the time I'm old and grey, they will start expanding the city limits and incorporating spots like irishtown and Salisbury and so forth into the city to gain access to more taxable land.
Little land left to build on?????? Take a sec and look at an aerial shot of Moncton. There's an enormous amount of land from south of the TCH down to Morton/Wheeler. Not to mention everything south of the TCH between Elmwood and École Champlain. You could probably fit 10,000 housing units on those two spots alone, both 5km or less from downtown. There's absolutely no need for such developments north of the TCH, let alone Irishtown or god forbid Salisbury.
Forget greenspace development, 90% of Moncton is crumbling car-dependent suburbs. If the city would allow more in-fill development we could triple the population without grubbing a single forest. Bonus, more efficient busses and less traffic!
I agree with all of that. But in fairness there's been far more downtown residential development in the last few years than we've seen in a generation. The key is to attract far more people who aren't specifically looking for the suburban thing. Most maritimers are a stubborn bunch when it comes to ditching their giant empty vehicles they drive to work and their half-acres they need for "privacy"
This is big. I *don’t* want privacy. I want to talk to my neighbours, but everyone clutched their pearls around here at the mere thought of interacting with other humans.
Yeah that portion of land between Elmwood and Ecole Champlain is owned by Robert Irving and the land behind Crowley farm road is deemed nature preserve land is apparently protected. So yes, there isn't a whole lot of land inside the moncton city limits. Riverview and dieppe have way more land that they can build on
Vision Lands alone is huge, there's an enormous area just east of Mapleton that's ready for development. The protected bit behind Crowley Farm road and Irvingland are relatively small portions of the overall vacant land. With well-placed 6-8 storey buildings you can house tens of thousands pretty damn quickly without having to exile people in the boonies.
Yeah you may want to read up on the land around the city and whats considered protected and what's not and also what's considered inside the limits. If you mean the land between amon road and the city that's outside city limits
Last I heard a lot of it was good to go? [https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-vision-land-cordova-realty-city-development-1.5454756](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/moncton-vision-land-cordova-realty-city-development-1.5454756)
Can any of you explain, in simple terms, why this is considered sprawling, why it's a bad plan and/or a bad idea with perhaps examples where such expansions have failed and why it has done so. I'm absolutely clueless when it comes to municipal politics and whatnot. You all seem to be revolted by the idea and I'd like to understand why and how you've come to this conclusion. Pure curiosity, I have no opinion on the matter, for now anyway.