Calgary Civic Election Poll #2: Who do you support for Mayor?

[mykalberta]

I also dont see the tunnel being built unless there is some 50 year growth plan to severely increase the growth in the NE so that it surrounds the airport. From all indications (at least from my perspective) Calgary is growing away from the NE, not towards it.

[kermitology]

OK, so this is the map of the proposed Tunnel:

http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/...ropsal_map.pdf

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I also dont see the tunnel being built unless there is some 50 year growth plan to severely increase the growth in the NE so that it surrounds the airport. From all indications (at least from my perspective) Calgary is growing away from the NE, not towards it.

The SE is being packed so tightly with starter homes and the city is expanding exponentially South. Doesn't that have to curb eventually unless we continue to upgrade access corridors to the deep south? Currently it's McLeod and Deerfoot right? As it stands it's pretty brutal trying to drive from downtown to places like Silverado. That can only get worse if we expand all the way down to De Winton. But we have this empty pocket of land that Stoney trail outlines bordered between Martindale, Saddleridge and the airport. That's going to be filled with something. Then the city probably has to expand East.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by kermitology

McIver still being a grumpy pants, boycotting the Bow River Flow street festival. I wonder if anyone was truly inconvenienced by closing down part of Memorial Drive.

http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alber.../15106436.html

How many people did they get out this year? I heard at the peak of the event the attendance numbered in the hundreds.

It's a dumb festival that was poorly conceived.

I'm all for shutting down roads for fests (like Lilac) but only if the demand is there.

Basing an event around the idea of shutting down a main road for no reason is dumb.

[SebC]

I went to the Bow River Flow and unless you're a hippy on a bicycle, it's really really lame. But is it an election issue?

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by SebC

I went to the Bow River Flow and unless you're a hippy on a bicycle, it's really really lame. But is it an election issue?

Probably more of a secondary issue based around a larger perception (by some) that council was operating on their own and rather willy nilly at that.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

How many people did they get out this year? I heard at the peak of the event the attendance numbered in the hundreds.

It's a dumb festival that was poorly conceived.

I'm all for shutting down roads for fests (like Lilac) but only if the demand is there.

Basing an event around the idea of shutting down a main road for no reason is dumb.

I still don't get the disdain for this. They're trying to start a new festival (or whatever you want to call this "flow" of people not driving). What the heck is the big deal? A Sunday in August. OMFG, my SUNDAY commute down Memorial is going to take an extra couple of minutes.
C'mon, when the resident road rager is ok with a road closure, you've really got to think about what you're getting upset about.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by SebC

I went to the Bow River Flow and unless you're a hippy on a bicycle, it's really really lame. But is it an election issue?

Why would it be? Council made no decisions on this road closure nor should they. Why would we want council to vote on every single one of the hundreds of annual road closures? That's the precedent the (formal) politicization of this road closure would set. The transportation department has a set of standards which road closure applicants must meet in order to have the closure granted. The standards were met so the closure was granted. Simple.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I still don't get the disdain for this. They're trying to start a new festival (or whatever you want to call this "flow" of people not driving). What the heck is the big deal? A Sunday in August. OMFG, my SUNDAY commute down Memorial is going to take an extra couple of minutes.
C'mon, when the resident road rager is ok with a road closure, you've really got to think about what you're getting upset about.

There was no concept for the festival. Just someone who wanted to flex their aldermanic muscles.

Anytime you are shutting down a major road it should be for a good reason - an idea beyond just "hey let's shut down this street".

Roads are built for cars. That's what they are for. Again - I'm all for shutting them down from time to time but for a good reason.

The entire concept was poorly planned and a bad idea from the start. A community like Ramsay is dieing for an event like this (or Inglewood). Sticking it on Memorial just for the sake of doing so was silly.

And do be clear - I'm not upset about this specifically but it is more evidence about what is wrong with how this city has been run for the last few years. No real thought. Willy nilly decisions, and a lack of proper consultation.

The fact that attendance has been underwhelming 2 years running (if true) shows Calgarians don't care about this one.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

There was no concept for the festival. Just someone who wanted to flex their aldermanic muscles.

Anytime you are shutting down a major road it should be for a good reason - an idea beyond just "hey let's shut down this street".

Roads are built for cars. That's what they are for. Again - I'm all for shutting them down from time to time but for a good reason.

The entire concept was poorly planned and a bad idea from the start. A community like Ramsay is dieing for an event like this (or Inglewood). Sticking it on Memorial just for the sake of doing so was silly.

And do be clear - I'm not upset about this specifically but it is more evidence about what is wrong with how this city has been run for the last few years. No real thought. Willy nilly decisions, and a lack of proper consultation.

The fact that attendance has been underwhelming 2 years running (if true) shows Calgarians don't care about this one.

I dunno. They claim it mimics similar festivals in a bunch of other cities. From what I can tell, it's only problem is that it hasn't caught on (yet?). Since Farrell was the one that championed it (with endorsement from her ward), it makes sense that it would be on Memorial Dr. Besides that, Memorial Dr. is a pretty nice street to do something like this on. If Inglewood and Ramsay are so sorely lacking a festival, maybe the residents of Inglewood and Ramsay need to figure something out to rectify that. Either spearhead a festival, or elect a Farrell-esque alderman.

At the end of the day, I don't buy your reasoning for why this is so ill conceived. I don't disagree that there are problems at City Hall, but allowing a new festival to grow roots doesn't sound like one of it's problems. In fact, judging by the amount of "culture" debates this fine messageboard has had, it's quite the contrary. And how much money does it cost the CoC to shut down the south side of Memorial? It doesn't affect any businesses, and it really doesn't affect traffic (being on a Sunday). The City probably makes money on it if anything.

The yuppies in Sunnyside decided they wanted a fancy yoga party. They got it. If the fine folks in Inglewood or Ramsay want their own party, they can damn well go start one. It's not the city's job to ration out festivals to neighbourhoods like it's NFL parity.

Whether the thing flops or becomes a huge success makes no difference to me personally, but as a resident of Calgary, I hope it becomes a big success, like the aforementioned Lilac Festival. I'm not totally up to snuff on all my Calgary history, but I'm willing to bet that in it's infancy, the Lilac Festival was nowhere close to what it is today. And today it's quite something. I attend almost every year, and I'm glad that some starry eyed whoever-the-hell figured on starting it whenever the hell he or she did. Ditto for all the other cool festivals we have. I'm glad that there are a few neat things to check out during our annoyingly short summer. How anyone can complain about a festival on an easily road is beyond me. Just sounds like whining for no reason, IMO. And with that in mind, at least Memorial remains open. Lilac festival kills 4th street and 17th ave. Salsa festival kills Kensington rd and 10th street. Marda Gras kills 33rd and 34th. But it's all in the name of good times, so why the long face?

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

There was no concept for the festival. Just someone who wanted to flex their aldermanic muscles.

How were "aldermanic muscles" flexed? Road closure decisions aren't made by the elected officials on council, including this one. The only "aldermanic muscle" there is, is to vote on motions to council. This did not happen.

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Roads are built for cars. That's what they are for.

Plus bicycles, motorcycles, buses, and some roads for transport trucks, and for the occasional closure when the space they take up is used for other purposes.

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Anytime you are shutting down a major road it should be for a good reason - an idea beyond just "hey let's shut down this street".

Again - I'm all for shutting them down from time to time but for a good reason.

The entire concept was poorly planned and a bad idea from the start. A community like Ramsay is dieing for an event like this (or Inglewood). Sticking it on Memorial just for the sake of doing so was silly.

So what is your solution? Have every road closure application go through a screening process to determine if there are "good reasons?" Is a crane erection a good reason? Is an adjacent building demolition good reason? Tree removal, and if so, what species and size of trees are okay, and which ones aren't to warrant a closure for an afternoon? Work on overhead wires? Community block party?

Assuming a screening process, how do you propose it works? Does every one of the hundreds of road closure applications annually go to council, or are we going to draw up a list of what are and are not "good reasons" for closing lanes of a road and have the transportation department continue to deal with it? It would have to be every single road closure application, as it would be an unfair process any other way. If you politicize one by determining whether the reasons for them are good or not, you have to politicize them all.

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

And do be clear - I'm not upset about this specifically but it is more evidence about what is wrong with how this city has been run for the last few years. No real thought. Willy nilly decisions, and a lack of proper consultation.

How is this evidence of a "willy nilly decision?"

Decision breaks down as follows:

1. Application received and all information fields filled out correctly?

2. Application received "X" days before date of proposed closure?

3. Do traffic counts for duration of proposed closure meet current standards for allowing lane closures?

If answer is "no" to any of the above, closure denied. Otherwise, closure granted.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

How were "aldermanic muscles" flexed? Road closure decisions aren't made by the elected officials on council, including this one. The only "aldermanic muscle" there is, is to vote on motions to council. This did not happen.

Plus bicycles, motorcycles, buses, and some roads for transport trucks, and for the occasional closure when the space they take up is used for other purposes.

So what is your solution? Have every road closure application go through a screening process to determine if there are "good reasons?" Is a crane erection a good reason? Is an adjacent building demolition good reason? Tree removal, and if so, what species and size of trees are okay, and which ones aren't to warrant a closure for an afternoon? Work on overhead wires? Community block party?

Assuming a screening process, how do you propose it works? Does every one of the hundreds of road closure applications annually go to council, or are we going to draw up a list of what are and are not "good reasons" for closing lanes of a road and have the transportation department continue to deal with it? It would have to be every single road closure application, as it would be an unfair process any other way. If you politicize one by determining whether the reasons for them are good or not, you have to politicize them all.

How is this evidence of a "willy nilly decision?"

Decision breaks down as follows:

1. Application received and all information fields filled out correctly?

2. Application received "X" days before date of proposed closure?

3. Do traffic counts for duration of proposed closure meet current standards for allowing lane closures?

If answer is "no" to any of the above, closure denied. Otherwise, closure granted.

I can still disagree with the decision. I don't think the rationale to close the roads was good enough. I don't care what was decided. Based on the information provided before, and the lack of success of the event itself - it wasn't a good enough reason in my opinion.

I'm not suggesting every road closure goes to a council vote - but I am suggesting that city administration made a bad call in this case - and are as much of a problem at city hall as council itself.

In my opinion an alderman had a dumb idea - pushed it through - and got the road closed. And now we have this silly event that know one really understands what it's for, why it exists and for the most part don't attend.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Whether the thing flops or becomes a huge success makes no difference to me personally, but as a resident of Calgary, I hope it becomes a big success, like the aforementioned Lilac Festival. I'm not totally up to snuff on all my Calgary history, but I'm willing to bet that in it's infancy, the Lilac Festival was nowhere close to what it is today.?

Yup exactly - and as it grew the road closures grew to accommodate it. In it's infancy the required street closures were minimal - they only requested additional closures as attendance demanded it - not the either way around.
Right now the Bow River Flow could exist entirely in it's current state without the road closure. If enough people showed up - then fine - next year shut it down.

The Lilac Festival is a perfect example of how it is actually supposed to work. The Bow River Flow didn't follow this model.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I can still disagree with the decision. I don't think the rationale to close the roads was good enough. I don't care what was decided. Based on the information provided before, and the lack of success of the event itself - it wasn't a good enough reason in my opinion.

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

I'm not suggesting every road closure goes to a council vote - but I am suggesting that city administration made a bad call in this case - and are as much of a problem at city hall than city council itself.

We've established that you think it was a "bad call" based largely on a lack of what you call "good reasons." Again, do you have a solution for weeding out what you deem "bad calls" that is equitible, efficient, minimizes negative consequences and is a reasonable use of public resources?

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

In my opinion an alderman had a dumb idea - pushed it through - and got the road closed.

If by "alderman" you mean "group of citizens from Hillhurst/Sunnyside community" and by "pushed it through" you mean "filled out an application to the City for a lane closure which was granted based on City of Calgary transportation department criteria for lane closures," then yes. Unless, of course, the alderman were themselves the applicant. In that case, at least on paper it was their "idea." I do not know for sure if that is the case, but I would put money on it being just someone from the community who is heading up or otherwise involved with the event team and/or community association.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

It's not a shortcut to the airport, it's a shortcut to get further south when they could backtrack and take Metis, or take the other loop to Deerfoot.

The more I look at maps the more I think that money could be spent in much better ways.

In the long term, it's just not a shortcut to the airport. It's an E-W expressway that connects Harvest Hills blvd to Stoney Trail east and beyond when city develops east of current limits. The primary fucntion of the road is to connect to the airport, but it's also an important route for industrial transportation and also reducing congestion on other roads. It won't effect those that live west and south of the aiport, but will effect those that live east and east-northeast.

This has been mention in the primary airport tunnel thread, but a comparison for the impact of the airport tunnel would be what Anderson Road is to the SW. Right now Anderson road is an expressway with lights, but in the long term should be an expressway with only interchanges. If Anderson road was cut off in the middle and couldn't be used as a E-W expressway anymore, then that cuts one of the primary routes between Glenmore and Canyon Meadows Drive. From Glenmore to 22X, there is no E-W expressway and all major roads in between are suited to have light intersections only for community access. Due to high traffic demand for that region and the absence of Anderson now, the other roads such as Canyon Meadows, Bow Bottom Trail and Soutland would require road classification upgrades (major road with lights -> expressway with interchanges) that would cost a lot of money which could've been saved if Anderson road was in placed to handle the capacity required.

The same effect occurs for the NE when the area gets develop if the tunnel is not built. All the open space on the inside of Stoney is going to residential areas with a mix of industrial areas near the airport vicinity. If the tunnel is not built, then the mixture of traffic demand to get to the airport along with getting across the NE will require infrastructure and road classification upgrades to Country Hills Blvd, Metis Trail, and McKnight Blvd to handle capacity. Country Hills is suppose to be used to access communities, but since it will warrant heavy traffic it will have to change to an expressway and have more lanes and build interchanges that it wouldn't need in the first place. In the end it will cost a lot of money to do all the necessary upgrades. Either way, we're going to be paying our tax dollars towards this region with or without the tunnel. We can save money by building it, or we can waste money we could've avoid spending in the future.

Now ultimately it's a given that the tunnel WILL get built sometime, but we don't want to screw ourselves in the future and end up pay much more to build the tunnel when it should be done now and has been in plans for +30 years. Don't screw around with the NE more and give them the short end of the stick in this ordeal. The region will need it. It's also beneficial to those that live in the SE as they would have alternate option. Airport Trail will go to Stoney Trail NE, (interchange already built, just need road to build to it now) so you can commute from Stoney Trail SE up to airport trail and just keep going west to the airport or some community in NE.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

There was no concept for the festival. Just someone who wanted to flex their aldermanic muscles.



The entire concept was poorly planned and a bad idea from the start. A community like Ramsay is dieing for an event like this (or Inglewood). Sticking it on Memorial just for the sake of doing so was silly.

Inglewood and Ramsay already have their own festivals. They're Sunfest and Ramsay Rocks. Sunfest is mildly busy and Ramsay Rocks attracts about as many people as The Bow Flow. Mind you, that's without City sponsored advertising.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I dunno. They claim it mimics similar festivals in a bunch of other cities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciclov%C3%ADa

The idea was started in Bogota, Colombia to help motivate people to go outside in a city that contained a lot of roadways and little park space. It's grown to a point where over 120km of roads are closed every Sunday in Bogota.

The problem with how it was decided to run it in Calgary was that they chose to hold it right beside one of the best cycle paths in the city, and it's so short, that there's really no reason for anyone who's using the pathways to leave the paths only to go back onto it a few blocks later.

If you look at a map of downtown Calgary, they chose to hold this at probably the worst location they could have. There is so much park space and extensive pathways in the immediate vicinity, that it's completely ridiculous to close a couple of blocks of Memorial for this event, which could easily be held on Prince's Island and the surrounding pathways.

It seems like someone saw a news story about the growing popularity of these Ciclovia events and thought, "we should do that in Calgary", without ever giving any thought as to why they're held in these other cities, if Calgary needs such a thing at all, and if we do, where the best place to hold it would be.

If it was decided that something like this would make sense in Calgary, they should have closed one or more of the north-south roads into downtown to make it easier for people to get to the very good pathways that already exist around Prince's Island, Eau Claire, and Kensington. A good road to choose would have been First St SW, close it from the area around the Talisman Centre and the Elbow River Pathway up to Riverfront Avenue, where it connects to the Bow River Pathway. They could have a Tai Chi demonstration in the park there by Chinatown, with other activities scattered around Prince's Island and Eau Claire. Calgary has the most extensive pathway systems in North America, with over 500km of paths and trails within the city limits. We don't need to close streets in order to create more paths, especially immediately beside better dedicated paths.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Yup exactly - and as it grew the road closures grew to accommodate it. In it's infancy the required street closures were minimal - they only requested additional closures as attendance demanded it - not the either way around.

Minimal, but existent nonetheless. So far I haven't seen detractors say they would be okay with even minimal closures for The Bow River Flow (that is, even more minimal than 2 lanes on a Sunday in August).

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Right now the Bow River Flow could exist entirely in it's current state without the road closure.

Except, of course, the part where the road is partially closed, which is an integral feature of the festival.

If you had to apply to sell/provide salsa, t-shirts, trinkets, etc. other event organizers would go through the application process because they are integral features of their events. The beer gardens are a big part of lots of events (I'll pick Folk Fest as an example). You need to apply, get a licence and jump through other hoops to make the beer gardens happen.

Saying the Bow River Flow could exist entirely in its current state without the road closure is like saying the Winter Classic hockey game could exist in its current state in a domed stadium. Same number of seats, same sport, same teams, same date, same tv coverage. It doesn't really matter whether it's covered by a roof or open air right?

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

The Lilac Festival is a perfect example of how it is actually supposed to work. The Bow River Flow didn't follow this model.

The Lilac Festival is a perfect example of how the Lilac Festival is supposed to work. Indeed, The Bow River Flow didn't follow this model. It could perhaps be because The Bow River Flow is not the Lilac Festival and obviously doesn't aim to be.

Those Harley Davidson conventions are a great success. Very popular, well organized, good for local economy, attendees have lots of fun. I'd say it's a perfect example of an event. The Lilac Festival didn't follow this model. You have to wonder what they were thinking.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Except, of course, the part where the road is partially closed, which is an integral feature of the festival.

Is it? Why? My understanding is that both years people haven't even really spent much time on the road itself choosing to spend their time on the existing pathway that is nearby.

Originally Posted by frinkprof

The Lilac Festival is a perfect example of how the Lilac Festival is supposed to work. Indeed, The Bow River Flow didn't follow this model. It could perhaps be because The Bow River Flow is not the Lilac Festival and obviously doesn't aim to be.

So what exactly does the Bow River Flow want to be then? Perhaps I don't understand what it is supposed to be - which if true - is still their failing for not getting their message out.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Fair enough.

We've established that you think it was a "bad call" based largely on a lack of what you call "good reasons." Again, do you have a solution for weeding out what you deem "bad calls" that is equitible, efficient, minimizes negative consequences and is a reasonable use of public resources?

I think a lot of it is the people in place at City Hall making the decision. I think it is for the most part a poorly run organization that has made a series of bad decisions. I'm not an expert on what is happening day to day there - perhaps it's a case of bad processes or perhaps it's a case of the wrong people in place (both on council and in administration).

The system itself may not be the problem.

As a voter though and a citizen of Calgary I don't have to have a fully flushed out solution to the problem - I can still state my unhappiness with the current state of affairs.