This April, the City of Lethbridge conducted it’s annual census. Yesterday, they published the results.
Here is a summary:
The new population as of April was 85,492. At 30,489, the Westside now has the most people of the three areas.
Growth for the city over 2008 was 1.8%. The Westside growth rate was the highest at 2.75%.
This week, I received the most current issue of the London Road Neighbourhood Association newsletter. On the front page was a short article reporting on a recent meeting where members discussed the hypothetical widening of 6 Avenue South.
The City is studying the feasibility of building a third bridge between the Westside and Southside. A part of the study, they are considering to different locations, as well as what would happen if no bridge is built. One of the scenarios that has popped up in the case that no bridge is built is the widening of 6 Av S.
This roadway is an extension of Whoop-Up Drive, the city’s heaviest used freeway. It consists of two lanes in both directions, light-controlled intersections every block until Stafford Drive, left-hand turning lanes at each of those intersections, and a parking lane on the south side of the street.
Naturally, nearby residents are concerned that a widening of the roadway would have several negative effects, especially endangerment of pedestrians and closer proximity to front yards.
A solution exists that can provide a six-lane roadway without actually making the roadway any wider.
1. Eliminate left-hand turning.
2. Eliminate on-street parking.
While this does address safety issue, it means drivers will have to change their driving habits. Those travelling east who need to turn north will have to do so at Scenic Drive or Stafford. Those travelling west who want to turn south will have to do so at Stafford Drive. They could do it at Scenic, but it would be pretty convoluted. Likewise, parking will have to be done off the back lanes.
A recent conversation while waiting to turn right at a red light in Lethbridge.
Me: You can turn right, you know.
Woman in front of me who refuses to turn: It’s a red light.
Me: This isn’t Québec.
Woman: Your car’s a piece of crap.
Lethbridge is in a state of emergency today after 42 mm of rain fell over a 4-hour period.
Wikipedia featured Lethbridge on its home page today.
I am so excited. I made a significant (if not a majority) contribution to the article and it’s a testament to the work so many people have put into it in the last 2 years.
What this city really needs is another newspaper.
It has a daily and a weekly, and both are provided by the same company. That isn’t too much of a bad thing, but the Herald has a poor track record for on-time delivery and providing timely international news.
The problem though is if one wants to leave the Herald, one’s choices are to get more international news and next to no local news, or get no newspaper at all.
Besides, the Herald seems to have any lack of a visual style guide. Their articles (particularly the headlines) are all sorts of font faces and sizes.
I wish there was a newspaper (even if it were a weekly) that provided good local news and was nice to look at.
Ted Stilson, et al, had the right idea when they started the precursor to the Lethbridge Sun Times years ago. I wish someone else would come along and start a newspaper. If I had the resources, I’d be half tempted to do it myself.
There was a homicide in Lethbridge this weekend. Lethbridge’s homicide rate has now jumped form 1 per 2 years to 2 per 1 year.
Over the last year or two, I have noticed an increase of Africans and Caribbeanians (?) in the Lethbridge area. They seem to have taken over Heritage Day. A few months ago, an Ethiopian restaurant opened downtown. Just today, I came across an African/Caribbean store on 9 Avenue.
I welcome my African/Caribbean brother and sisters. I hope one day Lethbridge may even have a Little Africa like Dublin. It’s nice to bring in such diversity in a city still under 100,000 people.
I just don’t understand what’s attracting them. I mean, why not more South Americans. Or for that matter more of the Chinese and Japanese who have been here for generations? What could Africans and Caribbeanians possible see in Lethbridge that they don’t see in the larger centres or say Kamloops or Hamilton?
A property developer in Lethbridge has applied for a bylaw amendment in order to rewrite the Hardieville/Legacy Ridge/Uplands Area Structure Plan. They intend to rezone some undeveloped commercial property to direct control in order to build multi-family housing. This would allow them to avoid the hassle of dealing with public outcry twice (first by rezoning to multi-family, then once it’s rejected, rezoning to direct control).
I oppose this move, and here is the response I sent to the mayor.
Your Worship Mayor Tarleck,
I am responding to the public notices regarding bylaws 5462 and 5463.
While I do support the intent to build additional higher density structures in Lethbridge (particularly outside of the downtown core), I am strongly opposed to developing them at the expense of commercial development.
While campaigning in the Hardieville area during the 2001 municipal election, one of the most common issues brought to my attention was the lack of convenient commercial and retail spaces to the far north. Granted, since then Uplands Common has been developed and the new centre anchored by Wal-Mart is under construction. Nevertheless, the solution for addressing a lack of commercial/retail space is not removing lands zoned for commercial use.
If Classic Communities Ltd. needs space for multi-family housing, perhaps a better alternative would be replacing some of the sprawling single-family housing.
Sincerely,
Mr. Kim Siever
Apparently the City of Lethbridge requested public comments regarding their Growth Management review. I missed it, so I sent the following letter to Tom Wickersham, who was acting mayor at the time.
Dear Mr. Wickersham,
I apologise for the lateness of me message. I heard about the request for comments on the Growth Management Review only yesterday in the Lethbridge Herald. I check the city’s website frequently and had failed to notice any requests posted there. I am not sure if my comments will still be regarded given the timeframe, but I think they are still valid.
I welcome manageable growth. I am not opposed to growth in Lethbridge per se, but I do feel, it should not be unmanageable as we have seen in other Alberta centres.
That being said, I also think as stewards of the city’s resources (financial and physical), city council is ultimately responsible for judicious use of these resources. As such, I think it behooves city council to seriously consider the current trend of having the bulk of development being low density, single-family homes.
Lethbridge has one of the lowest high-density housing start rates among the province’s cities.
This is unfortunate. The City has plenty of opportunity to address many of the growing concerns that come with urban sprawl. By encouraging higher density developments, all of the following concerns can be addressed:
- Lower off-site levies
- Lower infrastructure costs
- Increased use of transit (leading to reduced cost to run transit)
- Decrease in traffic
- Revitilisation of downtown
- Lower crime
- Improved emergency response times (again, leading to lower operating costs)
- Increased use of public facilities (arts, library, etc)
- Decreased air pollution
The list, frankly, goes on.
Obviously, Lethbridge isn’t in a position where it needs to build 30-storey residential and office towers downtown. Nevertheless, it is apparent that if the City does not address the above mentioned trend soon, we will find ourselves in the midst of many problems that will be very difficult to eliminate.
One of the things I have loved about city councils (and city administration) past and present is their foresight in managing growth. I honestly hope Council will continue to uphold this expectation I, and many other fellow Lethbridgians, have for them.