Plus 15 – Envisioning Calgary’s Cultural Backbone ( breakout presentation )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Love it or hate it, the Calgary Plus 15 System is an inherent part of Calgary’s identity. It opened in 1970 and was conceived as a solution for the provision of a safe pedestrian network in the making for a livable winter city. Over the life and expansion of this network, its circuitous path of 18 kilometres and 62 bridges through downtown Calgary has been heavily criticized as a contributing factor in the decline of walkability and the vitality of life on the street. Given this reality, the probability of dismantling the Plus 15 network to force life back into the street is highly unlikely in consideration of monies already invested in its implementation. Aim The study seeks to examine the Plus 15 System and challenges its role beyond a transportation network to uncover its unrealized potential as the cultural backbone of the city. How can we envision the system as a comprehensive urban experience conducive to social engagement and individual well being? How can we address the deficiencies of the network and strengthen its connection to public life of the street? Method The study will explore a series of urban interventions within the Plus 15 System through analytical diagrams, drawings and models that speak to the following categories: Connection to public life of the street; Wayfinding; Integration of nature and well being; Event spaces and art installations, and; Alternate modes of transportation. Results At minimum, five interventions will be explored and analyzed. Movement patterns, bylaw restrictions, constructability and aesthetic impact will provide the lens from which interventions can be assessed. Conclusions Instead of encouraging further development of the Plus 15 system, the study illustrates the potential avenues for improvement that can be undertaken by redirecting the monies of the Plus 15 Fund to contribute instead towards the Downtown Improvement Fund.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".