Calgary Civic Election Discussion

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by surferguy

Nothing wrong with that. But why AL Noor? What is your vote based on, outside of a dislike for Brono? What is it about AL Noor that you draws your vote?

I think he is the only one that has a chance to beat bronco.

And some of his policies seem alright.

Example, change the 60/40 road/transit split to 40/60

Spend 3 mil a year over 10 years from cuts for arena's vs bronco's complaining to the province to give him 30 mil to build rinks.

The whole get wth CP or CN to do a pilot GoTrain project (seems a bit far fetched to me but at least its a fresh idea).

Also, I think a more friendly relationship with the province could get more done on that side.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Actually if you ride the train regularily the real reason they can't run trains properly is actually due to level crossings downtown. They wait at lights and during times of congestion it takes a full 5-10 minutes to get from Sunnyside station to 8th street and an addtional 5-10 minutes to get out of downtown wating for signals between stops, at times trains get log-jammed waiting their turn to get into downtown. They can run 6 cars on one train and it'll make no difference timewise or efficiencywise and only provide minor capacity additions. The multiplier effect will work on capacity if they tunnel underground or go above ground with it like Chicago and make it less than 5 minutes to get into, through, and out of downtown. At that point they can just send more trains at even tighter intervals improving efficiency. I understand the massive costs (Quite possibly in the billions of doing this) but this is the ONLY way to make transit work properly. Anything short of that is posturing and dithering and completely unacceptable for a city our size.

I agree with you on this; the worst part of the train ride is the downtown core due to the stop lights. But also continually running 3 cars when clearly more are needed is not helping to alleviate this stress on the system.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Also, I think a more friendly relationship with the province could get more done on that side.

Just ask Al Duerr how that went. Never said a word to get after Klein, city is a solid 10-15 years behind in infrastructure.

The only reason the municipalities got anything from Stelmach is because Bronconnier thoroughly embarassed him and exposed Calgary's large disapproval for the rural Premier. Squeaky wheels get the grease, and right now, Calgary needs quite a bit of it from the province (who incidentally has a lot to spare, even without a royalty increase)

[ken0042]

I have to agree with Thunderball- as much as it makes me cringe to see Bronco on TV whining about money; the bottom line is he's making it happen.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I have to agree with Thunderball- as much as it makes me cringe to see Bronco on TV whining about money; the bottom line is he's making it happen.

It seems strange when Bronco is crying for money yet the province keeps announcing record surpluses.

I hate to keep spending when the construction industry is already overloaded, but it sure seems a shame when kids need to be bused miles away to the nearest school because there either isn't one nearby or the roof has been deemed unsafe because of lack of maintenance.

This city seems to remind me of the old Fram oil filter commercial. "You can pay me now (looking at a new filter) or you can pay me later (pointing at an engine being lifted out of a car)". We are now in the "Later" category with a huge influx of population at the same time. I don't think there is any mayor that could have handled the recent few years without problems.

[surferguy]

It's been my idea for a while to use two systems for getting around the DT issue with trains.

Ok try and picture this: A DT tunnel under eighth for the W/NE trainline and an elevated train line through the core built above the CP rail tracks, connecting the S/NW line.
Furthermore in a perfect world... all of the empty lots on either side of CPR tracks are built up into 5 level parkades, the entire length of DT. The city could make some bylaw stating that any new building the goes up on these current surface lots must have retail at street front, 5 levels of parkade and the city pays to bridge the parkade over the tracks. Myabe they can offer some denisty bonusing to allow for the lost space on the first 5 levels. So essentially you now have one giant parkade DT with a tube for the c-train going right through the middle of it.

Lots of parking for commuters, who will always find a need to drive DT and a train that is now freed up from surface lights in the core.

I further propose that the top of the parkade is then made into a giant park, running the stretch of DT. It woul dbe unique to teh world and a solution to some of teh cities problems. 7th ave would then be used as a tramway (free) for people to move back and forth DT.

THat's how I would try and solve the issues with transit at least. It's kind of far fetched and would be expensive as hell but not all that unfeasible.

[urban1]

Poor transit planning is adding more stations to ends of the lines but not adding more cars. This is great for suburban commuters but has made the train almost unrideable for those living nearer the centre of the city. Good luck getting during rush hour on a train at a station a few stops away from downtown. This adds to the battle between the innercity and the suburbs when it comes to receiving money and resources. But from a planning perspective, what do you expect to happen when your going to have thousands more riding the train without increasing capacity?

[ken0042]

The one thing with going underground; isn't the reason it was stopped in the 80's was because of the layers of bedrock? The very thing that allows us to build super tall skyscrapers is also what prevents us from building an underground subway.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The one thing with going underground; isn't the reason it was stopped in the 80's was because of the layers of bedrock? The very thing that allows us to build super tall skyscrapers is also what prevents us from building an underground subway.

You might be right. I thought it was due more to the high water table downtown, and the city being too cheap to install a pump system for the groundwater (like in NYC).

[surferguy]

Why because of the fluvial sediments? I don't buy into that... ITHe ground is stable it is not shifting, so if we can built super towers then we can go underground. It is feasible just not easy peasy.

[North East Goon]

For my fellow ward 3 voters, I will be going with Jim Peterson. I have sent numerous questions and suggestions to all three candidates and the only one who ever responds is Jim Peterson. Besides Chahal is for legalizing basement suites which just would not work in my community. Too much of a car congestion problem as is.

[Bobblehead]

If they are building The Bow down 6 stories then a subway should be possible.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The one thing with going underground; isn't the reason it was stopped in the 80's was because of the layers of bedrock? The very thing that allows us to build super tall skyscrapers is also what prevents us from building an underground subway.

Not sure what bedrock would do to slow stop tunnelling.....there's all kinds of technology in existence that would allow people to get through most anything.

I'm in the "rock" industry so to speak (I sell rock crusher parts all over NA), and the hardest, most abrasion resistant rock you'll likely come up against is quartz, and for the most part all you'll find in DT calgary is sandstone, which is considerably softer.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

For my fellow ward 3 voters, I will be going with Jim Peterson. I have sent numerous questions and suggestions to all three candidates and the only one who ever responds is Jim Peterson. Besides Chahal is for legalizing basement suites which just would not work in my community. Too much of a car congestion problem as is.

Yeah, the on street parking situation is the source (or the start) of most of the issues in my neigbourhood.

Peterson seems to have pretty good knowledge of the issues since he was (is?) head of Coral Springs community assoc. as well as a few other committees. I won't count Chahal out yet, but Peterson seems to have impressed me so far.

[ken0042]

Good info Tron- thanks. I guess whoever told me otherwise didn't know what they were talking about.

[Burninator]

I thought the issue of basement suites is primary a Building Code problem (fire rating) not so much the bylaw aspect. I'd be interested to see how that suppose to work, because you can't make exceptions to the Building Code like that.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

Not sure what bedrock would do to slow stop tunnelling.....there's all kinds of technology in existence that would allow people to get through most anything.

I'm in the "rock" industry so to speak (I sell rock crusher parts all over NA), and the hardest, most abrasion resistant rock you'll likely come up against is quartz, and for the most part all you'll find in DT calgary is sandstone, which is considerably softer.

###. If they can dig and build the chunnel between France and England, going underground in downtown Calgary (Which they have no problems technically doing before the Stampede park station) Should be easy technically. That's just what the politicians said to save face in the 1980s when they ran out of money tunneling initially. BTW there is an unfinished tunnel dug that lies somewhere underneath near city hall. CFCN did a special on it way back when and actually showed pictures of it (and it didn't look flooded from the water table). Someone with more time can find the pictures on google (I saw them once).

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The one thing with going underground; isn't the reason it was stopped in the 80's was because of the layers of bedrock? The very thing that allows us to build super tall skyscrapers is also what prevents us from building an underground subway.

Calgary Transit has it going under ground on 8th ave for a different line.

I assume the reason was cost, its cheaper to put it above gound, also wasnt it buit for/before the olympics - that way trying to maximize the dollars to reach as many people as possible?

I cant see why the water level would be the problem, Edmonton is using this weird cirlce shaped thing that digs and pours councrete at the same time.

[Cube Inmate]

Just read through the thread, and it's pretty clear that the city's problems with rapid growth ("stretch marks?") are the main issue here. There are a whole host of things that are in the domain of municipal government and are very important though.

• Infrastructure (roads & transit)
• Infrastructure (other, e.g. recreation)
• "Affordable housing" (incl. illegal suites)
• Taxes & user fees
• Municipal-provincial relations
• Crime & policing
• Fiscal management
• Labour relations
• Miscellaneous By-laws (e.g. smoking, pet licenses)

I find it nearly impossible to choose who gets my vote when their views on all of the above might range from totally in agreement with mine to diametrically opposed. Furthermore, it's very difficult to keep track of what the council members actually DO when they're in office because the media doesn't have the time to report on 15 different views...unlike in party politics where the parties' views on each issue are reported in depth. I don't have the time or energy to look up an alderman's voting record on every issue.

All in all, the result is that municipal government is the least important level of gov't in the voters' eyes, but it should really be the most important since it's the one that's closest to the people. The City of Calgary is a corporation with a $2 Billion/year budget and over 13,000 employees...yet we have a habit of electing high-school graduates to act as chairman of the board (Klein, Bronco). Something ain't right here.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

[*]Taxes & user fees

Question for the rest of you guys- are taxes really an issue for any of us? Don't get me wrong; I'd rather pay less- who wouldn't. But if they said "we are raising taxes by 20%, and plan to have all the infastructure improvements done by 2010"- would any of us complain too loudly?

I just keep hearing all these candidates talk about taxes, and for me that isn't an issue. Obviously the example I gave above is a little extreme, but for me I'm in a position where I would rather pay a little more to get more.