I apologize in advance for the crap formatting. Which means that I’m sorry, but not sorry enough to format it properly in the first place.

Page 30 is background information about the Broadway Area Plan. It’s rather interesting, if you care about the Broadway Area Plan. (I do.) I think it’s a rather difficult act to try and preserve an existing area through careful regulation, after it’s sprung up into a desirable area through reasonable planning. I have a stake in this as I would like to see the same thing happen to Central Avenue (although not the exact same thing, that would be boring). The gentleman earlier who was bitching about density doesn’t get it – people want density! Look at all the people who want to live around Broadway, want to walk to stores and restaurants and entertainment. Also, it’s still not horribly overpriced for rent in the surrounding area (at least compared with the rest of Saskatoon), so the people who work at these destinations can live reasonably close. Which is my beef with suburbs: you have to import your lower income service workers in order to pretend you have a viable little commercial district. Anyways, with the recent (and ongoing) improvements to Central, I like to think the real estate value and desirability will increase, so that we get a couple more destinations (and less used car lots/empty lots.) It has a lot of potential, and right now it’s not overrun with people double-parking in Lexi.

And yes, rent is horribly overpriced everywhere in this city, but hey, the invisible hand of the market has deemed it so. I mean, nobody wants to be a landlord eh? Which is kind of funny, I thought one of the roles of government was to take over and provide needed services where the private sector was unwilling or unable, since tax breaks can only make some things attractive and not every thing. But hey, that’s just me.  As others are fond of reminding me, if I don’t like it, I can move.

Hmm, they are outlawing car lots, car washes, garages and service stations along Broadway in the proposal. I forget where I read it (Jane Jacobs?) but car lots are a good indicator that the area is not thriving or that property tax/value is too low. Basically they are one step up from an empty lot, and belong on the outskirts of a city, where people can go there as needed, instead of taking up valuable space downtown. They add very little to an area, and obviously don’t account for a lot of foot traffic. Anyways. I saw a terrific Toyota sales lot/service station combo cleverly tucked into a busy street. Here it is, If I remember correctly, the service bays were across the street and opened onto a side street.

Looks like one of the main concerns (again) is water and sewer capacity. I suppose one of the luxuries of living in the city is not having to worry about what happens after you flush your toilet. Unless you work in the Infrastructure Services Department. I grew up on a farm, so every once in a while you would be forced to deal with the septic tank. (And the cistern, which was also surprisingly gross.) My bedroom was over the cistern, so the one year Dad decided to empty it out and scrape (buckets and buckets) of black sludge off the bottom, I was traumatized. Imagine sleeping over a giant concrete tank full of water and sludge. (And then showering in that water.)

Anyways, Page 39 has a list of all of the permitted uses. I like that “Duplicating or copying centres” has its own category.

Page 42 is the start of the Broadway Area Plan (Broadway 360 or 360 Broadway or something like that). Ironic that it was established as a temperance colony. I think there are 6 bars in the area? Anyways, change is tasty and refreshing. Although too much change will make you drunk-text your ex.

Hm, they’re encouraging sidewalk cafes.  Related: I’m rather excited for Parking Day. Also I saw lots of bars using a parking spot or two for an outdoor patio after 5 pm in Montreal. I mean, weigh the costs: parking for 1 or possibly 4 cars in an hour, with 85% of cars only having one occupant, or a patio for 8 people per hour? Same goes for food trucks. Much better ROI. If businesses were serious about this, they’d want increased rates or less parking, to encourage turnover. And also much better transit. Sorry, I’ll stop thinking about this since it just makes my brain hurt.

p. 66 is list of comments submitted by people at the open house. Some of these are rather get-off-my-lawny but the majority are positive. Saskatoon: still kind of nice!

page 76 is a repeat of the list of comments. Get it together, anonymous peon who has to collate 400+ pages of assorted shit!

then we come to some Kensington visuals. Kensington map doesn’t look like anything funny, unfortunately.

p. 92 is proposed Evergreen rezoning. Related: who named these streets? Kloppenburg? Glacial Shores Manor? Although nothing beats Budz Green in Arbor Creek.
[This is where I took 2 hours to read the phone book, pick out the best names and create the list you read earlier]

p. 98 is more zoning proposals, so if you live in Evergreen, Rosewood,
Willis Crescent, Brand Court, Main Street (hey, I know those people), Cruise Street or Carleton Drive you may be interested. No details on proposed changes.

p. 100 is the start of the 2011 Annual Report and Financial Reports. Summary of all the large projects going on, and a shout-out to Saskatoon Speaks.

Surplus is just a hair over three million. There’s also deficits in the fuel reserve and the Snow and Ice Management Program.

Oh, the list of employees making over $50k a year is also attached, or so they claim here, so I’m sure some of you have been waiting with bated breath.

Page 103 is about the creation of an open-data catalogue. That sound you hear is all the app developers in Saskatoon letting out a collective whoop.

p 107 is proposed removal of O’Brien Court and Terrace from Residential Parking Permit Program. Parking party, commence. A cursory glance at the area on Google Maps leaves me wondering why there is a permit program there, but the City moves in mysterious ways.

p 108 is about Mairin Loewen’s enquiry into traffic calming on Galloway Road. Yikes, you people are driving like you’re going to kill someone down there. Here, have a curb extension.

p 111 is a request to award an engineering contract to Golder for inspecting the east riverbank slope mess or, as I like to call it, The Day the Earth Moved 1.5 Metres. Anyways, Golder is billing you (us) $138,700.

p 112: Central Paving and Asphalt wants us to pay them more money since the City added 300 metres of roadway to Rosewood blah blah. I do like using this inflammatory rhetoric, it’s fun to imply that it’s coming out of your pocket directly. I can see why some people enjoy doing it.  Anyways this is Rosewood, so it gets the “BORING” stamp and we move on. Except that I would like to note that adding just 300 metres of roadway costs over $800,000. Why we are not dropping proportionate coin on bike infrastructure is beyond me. I hope you like your stupid road, Rosewood. Don’t speed on it or we’ll be forced to spend more money on curb extensions.

p 114 is annual budget report. It outlines some problem areas, er, priorities, for the City to address. I am thinking that you can probably guess what these areas are. Also, the 2013 property re-evaluation is on target, so brace yourselves for changes in your tax rate. Relax, you’re still not paying tax on anywhere close to what you can sell your house for, so if you’re angry, sell your house. I mean, if you’re staying in your house while paying too much for taxes, you’re throwing off the invisible hand of the market by not behaving in your own rational best interest and moving to a smaller house or different area. Why yes, I do rent, and I’m tired of hearing this rhetoric every time someone brings up high rental prices.

Anyways, there’s a nice little summary there on all the projects and initiatives the City is doing, so have a butcher’s at that page.

Ooh, apparently some DART buses have traffic signal priority systems. Just on College Drive for now, but I’m sure this will change.

p. 116 is the first and only recorded instance of “prosperity” in this document.

Now we get into some maps for the proposed zoning changes, as referred to above. It would be nice to have these maps immediately after the section bringing the changes forward. Since I’m not intimately familiar with the zoning restrictions currently applicable to these areas, I’m going to reject all their applications. Most of them are for duplexes anyways, a cheesy blight upon this city. (Related: I live in a duplex.)

p. 129 is the 2012 Corporate Business Plan 2nd Quarter Report. I can feel the prosperity-heads breathing down my neck. Anyways it’s full of manager-speak, like “aligning parameters” and such. There’s a reference to introducing “electronic agenda management” but I suppose it’s too much to think this will apply to the Mayor as well. Anyways, you should probably read this too, it hits on most areas of interest for council-heads.

Can I just say how much I dislike the word “youth”, especially in the context that it’s used on p 134? A lot of the problems “youth” are having comes from this other demographic called “adults”. I realize this doesn’t really make sense. I just hate the word youth.

Advertisements