Agree completely.
Calgary's has a pretty dense core, and then a ring of extremely low density suburbs surrounded by a ring of newer much more dense neighborhoods. Outside of the river pathways, nothing connects to anything. In the most recent subdivisions there are bike paths, but they're only partially good within the neighborhood, and don't connect up to much else. In the low density middle ring neighborhoods there is almost nothing for cycling infrastructure, and then the core/inner city that has good connectivity. The 'inner core' as I'll call it (Kensington/Bridgeland/Mission/EV/Inglewood/DT/Beltline/Sunalta) all have good connectivity to the river paths and good connectivity to each other. All we need to do is keep pushing harder on improving the connectivity even more. For example extending the 5th street cycle lane or extending 12th ave lane to Ramsay. I'd like to see a pedestrian/cycle only bridge cross from Sunalta to Hillhurst. I'd also like to see 2nd street carry on through northward under the tracks and into DT. Another E=W cycle track in the DT core would be great.
Because the inner core is surrounded by all these mid ring low density sprawl neighborhoods, it already is a city within a city, and we should put more effort into it. The next phase will be tying the inner core to adjacent neighborhoods via Centre Street, Elbow drive, Edmonton Trail, 17th ave west etc..
I agree with this thinking. Along these lines, one thing the city needs to start thinking about more but has always struggled with is the general expansion of this inner core area. To me, the "lack of effort and focus" has been less about the effort within the immediate city centre - but an inconsistency when acknowledging that things immediately outside this boundary are starting to act a lot more like the inner city than they were 20 or 30 years ago.
Density and populations are steadily increasing, there's more walkable and interesting places there than before - University District, Brentwood, Marda Loop, Montgomery, Edmonton Trail - many good and less good examples of a new urban development patterns are emerging all over the place, not just the traditional core areas. Often the success of these places is in the development and the city both agreeing that they should change from a sleepy, empty suburban model to something more like the current inner core.
Bot the infrastructure and decisions don't align to this expanding urban vision consistently. Take the main streets infrastructure work. Some has been good, some less so - often the issue seems to be the degree in which designers, engineers, developers and the public can agree on how much a street should reflect a newer more urban reality. In the world of trade-offs, we created a pretty nice future urban place on Bowness Road in Montgomery and a more residential/urban vibe on 37 Street SW, while also locking in too much car-sewerness and anti-pedestrian design into 17th Avenue SW as the status quo auto-commuter vision seemed to win that one.
As we have seen in the recent posts, concrete towers are possible in Calgary - not just in the core. Similarly, high pedestrian traffic areas are more possible outside the immediate core
It's okay if parts of the city start looking, feeling and acting like the Beltline but aren't the Beltline. That is not a bad thing, likely a good thing, and quite possibly an inevitable thing - but the infrastructure and policy needs to acknowledge that.
In conclusion - better sidewalks, pathways and urban places everywhere, including downtown. But not only in downtown