Lethbridge Growth Management Review

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 my 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.

Commenting Policy, again

Sigh.

Since it seems too difficult to either find the Commenting Policy, to read it, or to follow it, I thought I’d post it again as a reminder. Hopefully, this can serve as a way to once again bring civil discussion back to this blog and bring back the traffic all the infighting keeps driving away.

  1. Contrary opinions are welcome. Trolling is not. If you are going to post a comment contrary to what has been stated in a post’s thread, do not do so with an intent to defame the LDS church, Our Thoughts or any of the posters.
  2. No threadjacking. It is difficult to have an intelligent discussion that follows a logical flow if completely unrelated comments keep popping up.
  3. Avoid cyclical arguments. If you find you are repeating yourself, please stop. Cyclical arguments lead to discussions being between two or three people and discourages other comments.
  4. Please avoid personal attacks (i.e. ad hominem). If you don’t agree with an idea presented, address the idea, not the presenter.
  5. Please do not use Our Thoughts as your personal blog. Please see www.blogger.com if you would like your own blog.
  6. Please refrain from using profane and vulgar language. The blog is “Our Thoughts” not “Outhouse”.
  7. Comments not adhering to the above guidelines will be deleted at the discretion of blog administrators. Repeat offenders may be put on moderation.
  8. All comments are prone to review and may be deleted at the discretion of blog administrators.
  9. Additional policies may be implemented in the future.

I would think, being as all of us are adults, that we could be self policing. I honestly don’t have the time or desire to start moderating every comment. I have my own children to deal with.

What Kind of Mormon Are You?

Over on the Sunstone Blog, Stephen Carter writes, “Right now we have four kinds of Mormons: active, inactive, jack, and ex.” He goes on to say that he would like to see two new kinds of Mormons:

New Mormon #1: Emeritus Mormon. We have general authority emeriti right? Why can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t we have Mormon emeriti? Why can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t someone come through, serve us as brilliantly as Richard [Dutcher] did, and then move on?

and new mormon #2:

New Mormon #2: (Sorry, I can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t think of a name for them yet.) These Mormons take their religion seriously. It gives their life meaning and purpose. They believe that it will perpetuate itself into eternity. They have faith in their fellow Mormons. So much so, that when a fellow Mormon leaves, New Mormon #2s treat it as a farewell to a friend who is about to tour the world.

Can you think of any others that should be added to the list? Here, along with the basic four, are a few off the top of my head. Some are more serious than others, and there is some crossover between items but I’m hoping they will get you thinking.

  • Active-Mormon
  • Inactive-Mormon
  • Jack-Mormon
  • Ex-Mormon
  • Less-active-Mormon*
  • Feminist-Mormon
  • Intellectual-Mormon
  • Anti-Mormon
  • Molly-Mormon / Peter Priesthood
  • Apathetic Mormon
  • Post-Mormon
  • Dry-Mormon
  • Catholic-Mormon
  • Fundamentalist-Mormon
  • Black-Mormon
  • Gay-Mormon
  • Social-Mormon
  • Genetic-Mormon (Mormon by family or birth)
  • New convert-Mormon
  • Disillusioned-Mormon
  • Married to a Mormon
  • Non-Mormon

*in case there is some difference between less-active and inactive.

Do you know any of these Mormons? What kind of Mormon are you?