Editor:
In response to Mr. Christou’s letter last week:
The pedestrian bridge decision was not about where to put it, but whether a sewer line should be attached to a bridge over the river or drilled below. With government grants, the bridge option was cheaper while the drilling alternatives faced engineering concerns, uncertainties about approval from Parks, and left us without a second bridge. Most citizens are now very happy with the bridge (i.e. “Best use of taxpayer dollars” in the Outlook’s survey).
As for the preference of winter river crossings by Central Park relative to the end of Muskrat Street before the bridge – it may have had something to do with the fact that the river doesn’t freeze all the way across east of the main bridge.
The outdoor merchandise “debacle” was two years ago now and resulted in a total of about $650 of fines after warnings had been issued. Businesses that paid the $250 fine had made a conscious decision to do so by that point. Council agreed that things were badly implemented and the enforcement policy lasted all of three weeks, with most businesses not being fined at all.
Since both those decisions were made, all incumbents have been re-elected by the residents of Banff.
You mention that there are more “community-friendly solutions” to the housing shortage. I have yet to hear what any of these are. Land is hard to come by for businesses willing to develop and if a business is willing to build staff accommodations, they have to use the land that is available to them. Short of expropriation, new developments can’t be built just anywhere.
Personally, I like the scramble intersections. On the busiest days, which is what they were designed for, they work much better than the old system as cars can now turn right, which was virtually impossible before. Plus, it’s insanely more efficient for cyclists as they can now bike or walk through the intersection depending on the light cycle. Sure, in some circumstances it can take slightly longer to cross – but it’s not like the scenery sucks while you’re waiting.
During the election, all but one councillor indicated that they either support or were willing to consider paid-parking (RMO, 10/17/13). All candidates opposed to paid-parking were defeated. The trial to consider paid parking, as per the election mandate, was going to end after three months under any circumstance so that results could be reviewed – BRAPP managed to shorten the trial by four weeks and likely cost the Town’s taxpayers more than most of them paid in parking fees during the trial in the first place.
As for the thought police, brainwashing, and banning of clapping and freedom of expression, please point me to the bylaws effecting these changes – I must have missed something.
If these issues are that upsetting to you, may I suggest that you run for council in 2017?
Ben Berci,
Banff
