Welcome, Guest

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

1. •  
     CommentAuthorTriniman
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   <a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/virgin/311814_virgin17.html" >There was a discussion about this in Seattle.</a>
   
   The final line in the article. "If you have to tell everyone you're world-class, maybe you really aren't.
   
   <a href="http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/art/2006/11/what_makes_a_world_class_city.html" >What makes a 'world class' city?.</a>
   
   Here's a comment at the end of the article.
   "The rust belt city, Spain's Pittsburgh, needed a postcard image comparable to the Eiffel Tower and the Sydney Opera House to symbolize its emergence as a player on the chessboard of a united Europe and a globalized economy. It needed a monument. One building and $110 million later, Bilbao is now a contender as a world city, and many of the world's second- and third-tier cities have called Mr. Gehry's office, hoping for a comparable Cinderella transformation.
   
   The Spanish have a word, capitalidad, to describe that special urban quality possessed by Madrid, Spain; Paris; and Washington, D.C., where colonnaded embassies, treasuries, mansions, and palaces add up to the kind of stately cityscape that eludes most noncapital cities.
   
   The only trouble is Bilbao has not figured how to become more than just a museum city. Thus it still eludes a place on the world stage. That is the real lesson to be taken away from such token gestures at instant status.
   
   Cities need to play to their distinct advantages whatever they may be and accept the limitations and possibilities afforded to them. Anything else is artificial and will not end up reaping success beyond the superficial."

   Thankful People: alex
2. •  
     CommentAuthorSputnik
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   For anything (city, museum, waterpark...) to be truly considered "world class" it must receive the title from those that do not live within the city and preferably not even the same county.

   Thankful People: Triniman
3. •  
     CommentAuthorcancelbot
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   Moderator

   Posted By: SputnikFor anything (city, museum, waterpark...) to be truly considered "world class" it must receive the title from those that do not live within the city and preferably not even the same county.

   
   
   True. Every mayor in every two-bit town likes to bandy about the phrase "world class" when it comes to various projects, but it doesn't mean much if the project is unknown outside city limits.
4. •  
     CommentAuthorJimmytufish
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   So. Museums have become status symbols eh.
   
   Can it be that some people are embarrassed about where they come from and are attempting to make Winnipeg into something it can never really be?
   
   It's important to know your limitations. Accept them and don't pretend that they don't exist.
   
   We should be building our city for ourselves, and not for the benefit of some absurd "reputation" or for "show" to others. We are the ones to satisfy no?

   Thankful People: Goth_chic, EastSider
5. •  
     CommentAuthorcancelbot
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   Moderator
   What are you saying, J2F? That we shouldn't be trying to improve our city/province/country/world for fear that it won't receive external recognition? Bollocks to that.
   
   Do what you can to make the place you live better. Go big. Just don't give an ounce of thought to what critics make of it. If you do it right, you won't have to worry about what they say.
6. •  
     CommentAuthorSputnik
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   Build a city that people want to call home... not a city that people want to visit for a week.

   Thankful People: Jimmytufish, Triniman
7. •  
     CommentAuthorTriniman
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   <blockquote><cite>Posted By: cancelbot</cite>What are you saying, J2F? That we shouldn't be trying to improve our city/province/country/world for fear that it won't receive external recognition? Bollocks to that.
   
   Do what you can to make the place you live better. Go big. Just don't give an ounce of thought to what critics make of it. If you do it right, you won't have to worry about what they say.</blockquote>
   
   Instead of just going "big" and sinking ourselves in endless debt thus jeopardizing infrastructure renewal, why not just go "big enough" and let others tax and spend themselves to death? No blank cheque for going "big."

   Thankful People: Jimmytufish
8. •  
     CommentAuthorSputnik
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   Most of the time cities that "go big" see rather small returns and often end up with big white elephants.

   Thankful People: Jimmytufish
9. •  
     CommentAuthorStBPegger
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

    
   I'll agree with questioning the importance of needing to impress others by becoming "world class".
   
   However, that doesn't necessarily mean we go the other direction and just focus on potholes and roads.
   I'd rather focus a step above and focus on livability.

   Thankful People: grumpy old man
10. •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    Potholes and roads are a part of "livability".
    
    But I agree. Perhaps building better communities, transit systems, schools, and community centres along with downtown revitalization should trump and water park or museum.

    Thankful People: Triniman
11. •  
      CommentAuthorStBPegger
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    Yes, but I think if you built better, more sustainable communities, there wouldn't be such a need to focus on potholes and hiring more cops.
12. •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    It all goes hand in hand in focusing on creating a city that is better for the residents than it is for the tourists.
    
    When you focus properly on building a better sustainable city, things like potholes and police officers get prioritized and handled in a better manner.
13. • CommentAuthorumcrouc0
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    <blockquote><cite>Posted By: Sputnik</cite>It all goes hand in hand in focusing on creating a city that is better for the residents than it is for the tourists.
    
    When you focus properly on building a better sustainable city, things like potholes and police officers get prioritized and handled in a better manner.</blockquote>
    
    If you're a tourism city public safety or at least perception of public safety becomes a huge issue. If we actually had a lot of tourist dollars coming into the city (enough that we would consider it a pretty good chunk of the municipal income) I think we would see a larger focus on public safety in downtown. Don't want to lose tourist dollars due to bad press.
14. •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    I agree that public safety is important.
    
    However the focus should be driven at keeping residents and communities safer thus lowering the number of crimes that end up being picked up by the national and international news agencies.
    
    Having a couple of cops wandering downtown while neglecting the North End or West Broadway simply masks the larger underlying problems.
15. • CommentAuthorumcrouc0
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    Depends on what problem you're trying to solve and how you go about it. Shifting patrols away from the north end or west broadway wouldn't be the correct way to increase safety downtown. If there actually was a 'touristy' area you could use money from the hotel tax to fund additional security patrols (not necessarily actual police) for the area. It wouldn't solve the city's crime but could solve the perception that downtown is a dangerous place. I think downtown BIZ and the exchange BIZ should currently put a lot more into that type of program. A lot of residents don't feel safe in their own downtown.
16. •  
      CommentAuthorgrumpy old man
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    I read that tourism brings more than $1billion into Winnipeg. That big enough? That surprise anyone?
    
    I think we have to protect that revenue and work to grow it.
    
    http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/story/4195939p-4787364c.html
17. •  
      CommentAuthorJimmytufish
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    Free gas to all the Americans coming here perhaps?
    
    (And YES, I had no idea we took in that amount from tourism.)
18. • CommentAuthorumcrouc0
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    That sounds like quite a bit. But I don't really know the scale of tourism dollars in other cities.
19. •  
      CommentAuthorSputnik
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008 edited

     
    How much of that one billion in revenue actually goes to Manitoba business and how much of it goes to national companies like WestJet and AirCanada?
    
    What does that one billion equate to in terms of provincial and civic taxes?
20. • CommentAuthorumcrouc0
    • CommentTimeJul 16th 2008

     
    Good question. It would seem strange to include airfare in a city's tourism income but you never know. The number could also just be a complete guess that someone tossed out when put on the spot. It's a very round number.