Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 01-02-2013, 02:21 PM   #41
Bigtime
Franchise Player
 
Bigtime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda View Post
if anything deserves an answer, it's this. does the city not realize that they're actively encouraging people to drink and drive when it's virtually impossible to get a cab on a weekend or holiday?
I can't stand that line of thinking. Ultimately you as your own being of flesh, blood, and mind decides if you are going to drink and drive. And since the cab shortage is notoriously well known in Calgary I can argue it should actually force people to think about how they are getting home if they plan on having a few.
Bigtime is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:22 PM   #42
Senator Clay Davis
Franchise Player
 
Senator Clay Davis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Maryland State House, Annapolis
Exp:
Default

Why are city golf courses not profitable? Whenever I used to try and book a time at either Maple Ridge or Shaganappi it would be impossible to get a good time if you booked more than 10 minutes after booking commenced. Seems like the courses are decently full, but the results aren't there. Poor budgeting? Fees aren't high enough?
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Senator Clay Davis is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:23 PM   #43
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Mile-DJ View Post
Here's my question: why is it that other cities can have a "bare pavement" policy, within 24 hours of a snow fall, but we can't? Why does Calgary have to always seem to depend on the chinook to melt it away? "Oh, wait a day or two. A chinook is coming and it'll be dry then."

Don't tell me to get snow tires, because it isn't happening. I'm tired of the city dumping SALT on SNOW, when it should be dumped on ICE. Get the plows out, and clear the dang snow!
I would gladly pay more in my taxes(I believe a report from Global said somewhere in the range of $40 per person, per year) to have clear roads in the winter. This depending on the chinook is a joke.
Council increased the Snow Removal budget from about $24 million to $36 million last year. The City also implemented a bunch of different policies and new methods with snow removal such as the parking ban, which has led to clearing of those streets about 30% faster than before.

The City does have a snow removal policy that sets out time-frames for the plowing of snow within certain amounts of time on the various types of streets.

Priority 1 routes within 24 hours, Priority 2 routes within 48 hours, etc.

http://www.calgary.ca/CA/city-clerks...rary/tp004.pdf

Of course, the level of service could always be better. Montreal has a snow removal budget of $150 million per year for roughly the same number of lane km. We could have that level of service too if we wanted to, it would just mean a property tax increase of equivalent of 12%. There's always a balance between people's tolerance for tax increases and the levels of service they get. If you feel you'd like to pay more taxes for even greater levels of service in this area - definitely let your Councillor know and indicate that in budget consultations!
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:23 PM   #44
Bertuzzied
Lifetime Suspension
 
Bertuzzied's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Market Mall Food Court
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Mile-DJ View Post
Here's my question: why is it that other cities can have a "bare pavement" policy, within 24 hours of a snow fall, but we can't? Why does Calgary have to always seem to depend on the chinook to melt it away? "Oh, wait a day or two. A chinook is coming and it'll be dry then."

Don't tell me to get snow tires, because it isn't happening. I'm tired of the city dumping SALT on SNOW, when it should be dumped on ICE. Get the plows out, and clear the dang snow!

I would gladly pay more in my taxes (I believe a report from Global said somewhere in the range of $40 per person, per year) to have clear roads in the winter. This depending on the chinook is a joke.
Good luck with that. Calgary is one of the largest area size cities in the world. It's like why does our transit system suck compared to other big cities.

Only solution. Stop building out! and start building up! that or the ideal plan is incrementally increasing property taxes the further you live from the core. Suck it Auburn bay or whatever it's called.
Bertuzzied is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Bertuzzied For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:26 PM   #45
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5 View Post
Yeah, I don't understand why we need to regulate cab numbers at all. Why not just let basic market forces figure out how many cabs we needs and at what times? And that whole thing with only one company getting access to the airport, that smacks of a payoff at some level.

Not sure who makes the decisions for this type of stuff, but it would definitely be a great question to address.
Like a lot of things the system developed the way it is for a lot of different reasons - it's difficult to undo. For instance, because we have a license system, which brokers and individual drivers own (and have huge value) it would cost a lot of money to buy them out to turn it into a true market system.

In any event, improving the taxi system is a priority for the Mayor. The proposals he's put forth will lead to change.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:28 PM   #46
Table 5
Franchise Player
 
Table 5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NYYC
Exp:
Default

I'm perfectly fine with how the city handles snow removal. We live in Canada, and there's a reasonable expectation for people to know how to drive in those conditions, and I've rarely been in situations where the response has been totally unreasonable. There are only 2, maybe 3, big snow storms here a year anyway, so why waste resources? We don't have a weekly dump like they do out east, and we don't need to have 500 trucks at the ready at all times.

Want better bank for your snow clearing buck? Stop building the city out to effin Montana.
Table 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:30 PM   #47
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang View Post
Do you have any information about the Eamon's Camp building? Is the city waiting for a proposal from an investor to pay for the restoration of the building AND the operation of a new venture, or simply for a business to say "sure, I'll open a cafe in that nicely restored heritage building."

Personally, I think that a cafe would be a slam dunk there, both for commuters and for local residents that can walk there on evenings and weekends. But I don't have a bunch of money to throw at it.
This is something I've been involved in. Council has set aside $500,000 to save, move and store the building (if necessary). It has also given Administration some more time to figure out what to do with the building. At first, The City put out a Request for expressions of interest in the building to private operators. It got zero response, I think mostly because of the uncertaintly about final location, but also about the condition of the building and how much would be required to put into the building to make it useful. It's only 1500 square feet, so putting a half million into restoration to run a small cafe isn't economical.

The heritage staff at the City is working on other possibilities. It may be that the City would have to put in the money to restore it before any other operator would take it on. We'll see in the next two months or so what the next steps are. This is a building the Mayor cares a lot about, and probably would not have been saved at all if it weren't for his effort.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:33 PM   #48
CaramonLS
Retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5 View Post
Sounds like things are starting to move in a positive direction....but I guess my question is, and pardon my callousness, but why should the City care about that?

If cab drivers are only needed at night time and on weekends, maybe it needs to be considered a part-time job. It seems like a waste of gas and resources for a cab driver to be driving around half the week just so he can say he has a full-time job.

Knowing that they don't have to work the full week might even make them more efficient. If I know that I'm going to only be working on Fridays-Saturday (and probably make the majority of my pay then anyway), I'm going to find something else to do Sunday to Thursday.
Sorry Bunk, but this is what I don't understand either.

When I have 10 people at my work who say they cannot work on certain days of the week, I start hiring more people.

One of two things happen - people magically become available on those days I was hiring for, because when I start adding bodies it reduces the total number of hours those people were getting.

Or, they do not open up their availability and someone takes a large chunk of their hours.

You may find those day only cabbies (specifically the ones who own their own car), are more open to working nights.
CaramonLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:34 PM   #49
RedMileDJ
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: blow me
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertuzzied View Post
Good luck with that. Calgary is one of the largest area size cities in the world. It's like why does our transit system suck compared to other big cities.

Only solution. Stop building out! and start building up! that or the ideal plan is incrementally increasing property taxes the further you live from the core. Suck it Auburn bay or whatever it's called.
I'll drive any day, over taking Calgary transit.

And it's Martindale.

Hopefully Renfrew soon!
RedMileDJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:34 PM   #50
Huntingwhale
Franchise Player
 
Huntingwhale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Mayor Nenshi seems like someone who enjoys a variety of hot sauces. What is his favorite kind?
Huntingwhale is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Huntingwhale For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:36 PM   #51
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Mile-DJ View Post
One more question: How involved is the city, and the mayor, in the talks with the SW ring-road? Seems like things are kind of...Idle...right now

Is this all on McIver now, or what's going on?
The City/Mayor is not directly involved in the main negotiation - it is truly between the Tsuu T'ina and Province - but is providing information/data (relating to utilities, etc) as is required. Yes, Ric's the main man on this.

Negotiations are ongoing, but as you know there is a new Chief who is just getting his feet under him. All signals from him though is that he's very interested in a deal.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:38 PM   #52
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nixon45 View Post
Bunk,

Why are the Broncos vastly superior to the Patriots??

You did say ask me anything!
Denver is more like Calgary than Boston is.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:39 PM   #53
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze View Post
Why can't there be part-time licenses. Judging by the airport, doesn't seem a lot of cabs are hugely concerned at maximizing their capacity?

Allow a few peak time companies to start up. Get a bunch of underemployed mormons to make some dough on weekends. Someone should rent a car2go and pick up drunks.
and ya, put me in the don't want any more taxes to go to snow removal.

Also, how about peak time surcharges. Prices go higher in the high utilization times, drop when no one is using them at noon.
Agree, those seem like viable solutions. I'm not an expert on the taxi industry though.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:40 PM   #54
Rathji
Franchise Player
 
Rathji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Supporting Urban Sprawl
Exp:
Default

Does the Mayor's Office consider the food truck initiative a success? Are there stats about these trucks that are showing anything notable/interesting? Rate of startups, trucks going uinder etc.

Also, which truck is his favourite?
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Rathji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:41 PM   #55
Hockeyguy15
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

With the talk of a North C-Train line the two ideas being knocked around were up Centre Street, or up Edmonton Trail. Does council really see either of these two options as viable ideas? I would assume the cost of land alone would be huge. I believe they are doing a study to see their options, where does the Mayor stand on this?
Hockeyguy15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:44 PM   #56
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by morgin View Post
How involved has the city been with car2go and has the success impacted future transit strategy at all? Was anyone at city hall suprised by how readily Calgary embraced the concept?
The City's Transportation Planning department as well as the Calgary Parking Authority worked with Car2Go when they approached the City in late 2011.

I don't think Car2Go specifically has affected transit strategy (RouteAhead - the 30 year plan for Calgary Transit is being finalized right now). I think Car-shares are a logical part of the transportation mix in a city like Calgary. It helps reduce the need to own a car, or own 2 or more cars in this city. If one does not need to own a car, they then can use transit for certain trips and car-share for others. I see them as complementary.

Personally, I'm not surprised by its success at all - I've seen various car-sharing services grow dramatically in other cities - their very flexible model seems to work well for Calgary. I only wish they had a little more variety of vehicles for say going to the hardware store. Another good choice for carshare is Calgary Carshare.
__________________
Trust the snake.

Last edited by Bunk; 01-02-2013 at 04:03 PM.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:47 PM   #57
Bertuzzied
Lifetime Suspension
 
Bertuzzied's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Market Mall Food Court
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Mile-DJ View Post
I'll drive any day, over taking Calgary transit.

And it's Martindale.

Hopefully Renfrew soon!
I'm going to bet that we won't hear again from you about the plowing after you get into Renfrew! hehe

that said Martindale homeowners should be paying 12% more for property taxes than Renfrew home owners.

Auburn Bay people should pay 25% more taxes than people who live in Varisty village also! hehe

Last edited by Bertuzzied; 01-02-2013 at 02:49 PM.
Bertuzzied is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:47 PM   #58
Jimmy Stang
#1 Goaltender
 
Jimmy Stang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk View Post
This is something I've been involved in. Council has set aside $500,000 to save, move and store the building (if necessary). It has also given Administration some more time to figure out what to do with the building. At first, The City put out a Request for expressions of interest in the building to private operators. It got zero response, I think mostly because of the uncertaintly about final location, but also about the condition of the building and how much would be required to put into the building to make it useful. It's only 1500 square feet, so putting a half million into restoration to run a small cafe isn't economical.

The heritage staff at the City is working on other possibilities. It may be that the City would have to put in the money to restore it before any other operator would take it on. We'll see in the next two months or so what the next steps are. This is a building the Mayor cares a lot about, and probably would not have been saved at all if it weren't for his effort.
Thanks for the information. I am hoping that a suitable use can be found for the building, but I also understand that funds aren't unlimited.

Along the same lines, has any thought been given to allowing small kiosks at LRT stations (like they used to have)? A place to buy small convenience items, tickets, etc.? Many other cities have such places in their subways, etc. and, assuming they can turn a profit, it might be a good opportunity for small business owners and bring in a little coin for the city too (in rent). Plus it adds a little bit of life to otherwise sterile environments.
Jimmy Stang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2013, 02:49 PM   #59
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis View Post
Why are city golf courses not profitable? Whenever I used to try and book a time at either Maple Ridge or Shaganappi it would be impossible to get a good time if you booked more than 10 minutes after booking commenced. Seems like the courses are decently full, but the results aren't there. Poor budgeting? Fees aren't high enough?
Courses like Maple Ridge and Shaganappi are profitable. However, smaller course like Lakeview, Richmond Green, Confederation are less so.

I believe the City's Recreation department is currently doing a strategic review of what to do with the various City golf courses. They may keep some, renovate others, perhaps close a couple for other recreational purposes - but it's hard to say now.
__________________
Trust the snake.

Last edited by Bunk; 01-02-2013 at 04:04 PM.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
Old 01-02-2013, 02:49 PM   #60
Dion
Not a casual user
 
Dion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis View Post
Why are city golf courses not profitable? Whenever I used to try and book a time at either Maple Ridge or Shaganappi it would be impossible to get a good time if you booked more than 10 minutes after booking commenced. Seems like the courses are decently full, but the results aren't there. Poor budgeting? Fees aren't high enough?
Damn unions make it almost impossible to run a profitable golf course. Especially since the private and semi privates ones in and around Calgary aren't unionised.
__________________
Dion is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ask me anything , nenshiisashill , purple

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:42 PM.

Calgary Flames
2017-18




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016