[5seconds]

If the province wants a bigger stick, they need to announce that they have selected the 37 St option and are proceeding with design work which will include no other access to the reserve other than Anderson Road. If they remain wishy-washy, the natives will still think they have the bigger stick.
:rolleyes:

I think that's essentially where we are now.

The riverbed/bedrock testing was conducted in March in the weaselhead, the 2 selected alignment options (both along 37th street as is my understanding) are to be presented in openhouses in the fall.

I agree that if the Province blinks, it will be bad, but so far, everything is moving along with 37th street as the main target. If the Nation wants to change the target, they need to move quickly, as I believe the province will actually build it along 37th if need be.

(Also, the carrot is usually more motivational than the stick. I think that there are enough carrots that the province does not need a 'bigger stick')

[Seadood]

(Also, the carrot is usually more motivational than the stick. I think that there are enough carrots that the province does not need a 'bigger stick')

The whole commercial development of the reserve lands is a great carrot for the band.
As far as power centres are concerned, I don't think Westhills can cut it, there is no more room for development. I could see the band doing a "Crossiron Mills" along the ring road. Awesome access.

[suburb]

As for their 'demands', it IS their land, and they CAN ask for whatever they want for it. If they want their land more than any deal we are offering, then they can go right ahead and turn down the deal.

Absolutely - and that is the point the Calgary Airport Nation was saying, highlighting that they honoured public with their generosity by providing $50M of land for the underpass (which provides access to the airport, or was it a casino?).

[5seconds]

The whole commercial development of the reserve lands is a great carrot for the band.
As far as power centres are concerned, I don't think Westhills can cut it, there is no more room for development. I could see the band doing a "Crossiron Mills" along the ring road. Awesome access.

Absolutely. Did you seen the map I posted a few pages ago? They already have the plans on paper and the leadership really wants this access, it's just a matter of convincing the people of the benefits.

The decision about the ring road is actually 2 separate issues: 1) is having the increased access to develop for themselves, and 2) is about not losing the access they already have.

If the Nation was convinced that the access they currently enjoy was to remain untouched, they might not be that bothered about this deal. However, by not accepting the deal, they not only loose any potential development, they also loose the access they depend on at the Casino. This alone is worth the deal to them, I think.

[kw5150]

Yah, I would laugh if the Tsuu Tina nation folows this thread silently. Then you guys will never get a ring road. Some of these comments are unnessary, and seemed motivated by racism. I would love to see the alberta government try to plow a ring road throug the western edge of the city where all of the mansions are.....im sure they would resist just as much. Stop calling them "The natives", they are just people.

[5seconds]

Also, I didn't really know that the deal included provisions for an LRT. I know people talked about it, but I hadn't seen it in writing until today.

I don't know if there would ever be a station there, but if they are serious about attracting 20,000 jobs on-reserve (as stated in their plan-development brochure in 2007) it might happen? I wonder who would pay for a station in that instance.

[5seconds]

Yah, I would laugh if the Tsuu Tina nation folows this thread silently. Then you guys will never get a ring road. Some of these comments are unnessary, and seemed motivated by racism. I would love to see the alberta government try to plow a ring road throug the western edge of the city where all of the mansions are.....im sure they would resist just as much. Stop calling them "The natives", they are just people.

Compared to the Calgary Sun or the Herald, this place is a refuge of sanity!

I can't tell everyone here how much I appreciate the comments I read here. I realise that my views on the road and saving my neighbourhood and local parks from it's effects might run counter to the general consensus here, but even those who have totally opposite views to me have always been great about allowing alternative views. I have never felt attacked here, and even posters who I don't agree with have well-reasoned arguments, and are talking from an educated point of view. You don't see that very often with this topic. I appreciate it.

I would love to see the alberta government try to plow a ring road throug the western edge of the city where all of the mansions are...
Where do you mean? It looks like only Glamorgan and Lakeview would be 'plowed', and there are no mansions there.

[kw5150]

Compared to the Calgary Sun or the Herald, this place is a refuge of sanity!

I can't tell everyone here how much I appreciate the comments I read here. I realise that my views on the road and saving my neighbourhood and local parks from it's effects might run counter to the general consensus here, but even those who have totally opposite views to me have always been great about allowing alternative views. I have never felt attacked here, and even posters who I don't agree with have well-reasoned arguments, and are talking from an educated point of view. You don't see that very often with this topic. I appreciate it.


Where do you mean? It looks like only Glamorgan and Lakeview would be 'plowed', and there are no mansions there.

Im using a theoretical scenario involving a ring road going through a very wealthy area that the rictchies have become very attached to. Im sure they would want the best deal as well. Im sorry, but I dont generally find native people to be greedy and some of the comments I hear regarding their greed are innapropriate. If you know any of them personally, they are more likely to give you the shirt of their back.......or make you laugh for hours on end.

It's no wonder why they turned down the deal before with all of the ignorance and intolerance in Alberta. But, thankfully, with the intolerance in Alberta, there is also the other educated side that realizes the crap attitudes out there and refuse to follow based on someones "parroted" statements.

I think people need to see the bigger picture here......we live in excess and much of this pain from expanding too quickly is directly proportional. The battle that has ensued with this ring road needs to ease off before anyone can make a sound negotiation. I suggest that any references to "greedy natives" just be left alone. We cant just expect to plow progress through everything with no effect on the human aspect of things.

[5seconds]

Im using a theoretical scenario involving a ring road going through a very wealthy area that the rictchies have become very attached to. Im sure they would want the best deal as well. Im sorry, but I dont generally find native people to be greedy and some of the comments I hear regarding their greed are innapropriate. If you know any of them personally, they are more likely to give you the shirt of their back.......or make you laugh for hours on end.

It's no wonder why they turned down the deal before with all of the ignorance and intolerance in Alberta. But, thankfully, with the intolerance in Alberta, there is also the other educated side that realizes the crap attitudes out there and refuse to follow based on someones "parroted" statements.

I think people need to see the bigger picture here......we live in excess and much of this pain from expanding too quickly is directly proportional. The battle that has ensued with this ring road needs to ease off before anyone can make a sound negotiation. I suggest that any references to "greedy natives" just be left alone. We cant just expect to plow progress through everything with no effect on the human aspect of things.

I couldn't agree more.

If I owned a house, and I wasn't interested in selling, but someone came to my door to ask about buying it, I would ask for as much as possible, just to make it worth my while. If that fee was too high to the other party, I would thank them and close my door. It's not greed, it's just negotiating from a position of power, and genuinely not being bothered if the deal falls through.

[Seadood]

Absolutely. Did you seen the map I posted a few pages ago? They already have the plans on paper and the leadership really wants this access, it's just a matter of convincing the people of the benefits.


I wonder if the rejection in 2009 was really about the ring road or if it was more a referendum on developing the land.

[freeweed]

Yah, I would laugh if the Tsuu Tina nation folows this thread silently. Then you guys will never get a ring road. Some of these comments are unnessary, and seemed motivated by racism. I would love to see the alberta government try to plow a ring road throug the western edge of the city where all of the mansions are.....im sure they would resist just as much. Stop calling them "The natives", they are just people.

While some comments seem motivated by racism, and I'm sure some legitimately are, there are a lot of comments motivated by political and economic factors completely beyond our control.

That happen to completely coincidentally be based on race.

There's a difference, and I'm not sure I agree that it's inappropriate to describe them as a group. Would "the Band" seem more applicable then?

[freeweed]

If I owned a house, and I wasn't interested in selling, but someone came to my door to ask about buying it, I would ask for as much as possible, just to make it worth my while. If that fee was too high to the other party, I would thank them and close my door.

And if the City/Province/Feds wanted your land badly enough, by law they're entitled to take it if it's for the betterment of society as a whole. Regardless of whether or not you think you're getting a "good deal" or not. It's called expropriation.

Something that cannot be done here. But it can and has been done to Canadians countless times in the past. Witness GE5 for recent occurrences.

[5seconds]

I'm not sure I agree that it's inappropriate to describe them as a group. Would "the Band" seem more applicable then?

I think referring to them as a group is fine (they are negotiating as a group after all) and it is, naturally, a racial grouping as well. I think KW is objecting to the term 'Native' (or Indian, seen elsewhere) I use 'Band' or 'Nation' or 'Tsuu T'ina'. Saying that, is 'Native' offensive now? They are native North Americans, and native to this part of the world... I don't know.

And if the City/Province/Feds wanted your land badly enough, by law they're entitled to take it if it's for the betterment of society as a whole. Regardless of whether or not you think you're getting a "good deal" or not. It's called expropriation.

Something that cannot be done here. But it can and has been done to Canadians countless times in the past. Witness GE5 for recent occurrences.

Oh, I am well versed in the concept! I meant an individual coming to my house. Someone without the power to take the land (as is analogous to the SWRR situation)

[fusili]

While some comments seem motivated by racism, and I'm sure some legitimately are, there are a lot of comments motivated by political and economic factors completely beyond our control.

That happen to completely coincidentally be based on race.

There's a difference, and I'm not sure I agree that it's inappropriate to describe them as a group. Would "the Band" seem more applicable then?

The correct term is "Nation" or "T'suu T'ina Nation" or "First Nation". Politically, "nation" is a lot more accurate than reserve. Their legal rights are closer to that of a sovereign nation than anything else.

[fusili]

And if the City/Province/Feds wanted your land badly enough, by law they're entitled to take it if it's for the betterment of society as a whole. Regardless of whether or not you think you're getting a "good deal" or not. It's called expropriation.

Something that cannot be done here. But it can and has been done to Canadians countless times in the past. Witness GE5 for recent occurrences.

Although I can understand people's gripes with expropriation, when people talk about how it is unfair how we cannot expropriate land in the T'suu T'ina First Nation (not pointing at you Freeweed, your comment just made me think of it), it really irks me. If others want to organize themselves into a political group, settle a piece of land for several generations, arm themselves and then negotiate a treaty with the federal government for sovereign rights, they can do that. But until they do that, claiming that Treaty Rights are unfair is a bit much.

[5seconds]

Although I can understand people's gripes with expropriation, when people talk about how it is unfair how we cannot expropriate land in the T'suu T'ina First Nation (not pointing at you Freeweed, your comment just made me think of it), it really irks me. If others want to organize themselves into a political group, settle a piece of land for several generations, arm themselves and then negotiate a treaty with the federal government for sovereign rights, they can do that. But until they do that, claiming that Treaty Rights are unfair is a bit much.

In my mind, I just regard it as a foreign country, and then everything we are talking about makes so much more sense. If British Columbia wanted to put a highway through their Province, but wanted to cross 10 km of property in Alaska for a more convenient route, we all would accept that Alaska has the right to tell the BC government to shove it, and any thought of expropriating land from the USA is simply crazy.

Same rules (rightly or wrongly) apply.

(Same goes for those that complain that you shouldn't be allowed to smoke in the Casino on the reserve, and that it's anti-competitive to those casinos that cannot allow it because of Alberta law. If theirs were a casino on the other side of the US border, there wouldn't be a single thought of trying to get them to abide by laws that don't apply to their jurisdiction)

[5seconds]

Transportation Alberta has confirmed that they will re-word the contract to guarantee land transfer:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Ring+road+contract+will+reworded+Transportation+minister/5090770/story.html

[fusili]

In my mind, I just regard it as a foreign country, and then everything we are talking about makes so much more sense. If British Columbia wanted to put a highway through their Province, but wanted to cross 10 km of property in Alaska for a more convenient route, we all would accept that Alaska has the right to tell the BC government to shove it, and any thought of expropriating land from the USA is simply crazy.

Same rules (rightly or wrongly) apply.

(Same goes for those that complain that you shouldn't be allowed to smoke in the Casino on the reserve, and that it's anti-competitive to those casinos that cannot allow it because of Alberta law. If theirs were a casino on the other side of the US border, there wouldn't be a single thought of trying to get them to abide by laws that don't apply to their jurisdiction)

Yup, that is pretty much how it works. Not exactly of course, but more or less. Someone who know more about constitutional law and treaty rights would know more about the intricacies of it, but that is pretty much how it works. My very poor (and probably incorrect) understanding is that Federal Criminal law applies to Nation lands, but other laws do not (provincial legislation). I.E. you cannot murder someone on nation land and be protected. Other than that, it is pretty much a separate country.

[freeweed]

Although I can understand people's gripes with expropriation, when people talk about how it is unfair how we cannot expropriate land in the T'suu T'ina First Nation (not pointing at you Freeweed, your comment just made me think of it), it really irks me. If others want to organize themselves into a political group, settle a piece of land for several generations, arm themselves and then negotiate a treaty with the federal government for sovereign rights, they can do that. But until they do that, claiming that Treaty Rights are unfair is a bit much.

I don't think it's too much to use the word "unfair" - it is unfair. It's a historical legal construct based solely on race and hereditary rights that is almost unprecedented in the modern world. And it's something that is literally impossible for anyone to do/obtain every again. Where exactly do you think I could settle land and claim rights to it? If I try to do that here, and retain it for generations - oops, sorry, the government can claim it whenever they so choose. As is the case with every single settler in Canada going back to the 16th century. I have family in Canada going back well over 300 years, do you think that's enough generations that we could retain ownership of our land if push came to shove?

It's not the current Band members' FAULT, sure. But it's certainly not inaccurate to describe it as unfair. It is unfair, to both parties. And that's a whole different discussion. The whole thing has been a mess from basically day one. The treaties were terrible concepts and are inherently racist (which makes sense, the Victorian era was the last great gasp of legally institutionalized racism).

Incidentally, if the word "native" is now non-PC, we're running out of terms to describe them. Seeing as we have no choice but to use a racial term (after all, they're legally separate but equal, or however we want to dance around the situation), I wonder what the next flavour will be. I believe "aboriginal" is a bit awkward still. "Band member" is too busy (not all natives are members of a particular band). I've always loathed the term "First Nation". It's just too darn PC for my tongue.

I should addendum this post: due to a bizarre quirk in the law, I am someone who has full legal right to claim "status", in whatever flavour that works out to be these days. So I'm certainly not coming at this from a racial angle.

[fusili]

I don't think it's too much to use the word "unfair" - it is unfair. It's a historical legal construct based solely on race and hereditary rights that is almost unprecedented in the modern world. And it's something that is literally impossible for anyone to do/obtain every again. Where exactly do you think I could settle land and claim rights to it? If I try to do that here, and retain it for generations - oops, sorry, the government can claim it whenever they so choose. As is the case with every single settler in Canada going back to the 16th century. I have family in Canada going back well over 300 years, do you think that's enough generations that we could retain ownership of our land if push came to shove?
.

Unprecedented? How about the Tibetan, Xinjiang, Mongolian, Guangxi, or Ningxia Autonomous Region in China? Or the Catalonian, Valencian, Basque or Galician regions of Spain? Corsica in France? The Kurdish Autonomous Zone in Iraq? I don't see how you think this legal arrangement is unprecedented. There are numerous, numerous examples of ethnic minorities have different legal rights in their lands in numerous countries thoughout the world.

[5seconds]

Unprecedented? How about the Tibetan, Xinjiang, Mongolian, Guangxi, or Ningxia Autonomous Region in China? Or the Catalonian, Valencian, Basque or Galician regions of Spain? Corsica in France? The Kurdish Autonomous Zone in Iraq? I don't see how you think this legal arrangement is unprecedented. There are numerous, numerous examples of ethnic minorities have different legal rights in their lands in numerous countries thoughout the world.

See: Quebec (To a lesser degree)

[Cage]

Getting back to the new tentative agreement with Alberta and Tsu Tina. There are three things being redrawn
1. ...the proposed land swap was a major concern because the province wouldn’t guarantee all the land in play.
2.The First Nation also wanted access to the city through interchanges connecting the reserve to the ring road, and
3. to have the land reverted back to the band if it was not used for road purposes.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Ring+road+contract+will+reworded+Transportation+minister/5090770/story.html#ixzz1RvN7rdjQ

1. This item can be resolved without much concern for today or the future. Actually the province should have gone to Tsu Tina with a better agreement WRT land swap way back in 2009.

2. I have heard various news orgs mention that Tsu Tina want access from RR onto their land. Some articles mention this would be provided through existing interchanges and others are silent on where and how the access would be provided. Succintly I am concerned that the Tsu Tina might get provisions to put up traffic lights, uncontrolled atgrade intersections, or have the province building interchanges at the Nations will/desired location. Hopewfully the province does not stick their head up the a** and gets a fair deal for the RR users. I would hate to have the Tsu Tina decide to run an uncontrolled intersection through 8 lanes of traffic.

3. Requirement to turn back land to Tsu Tina should also include a provision for return of an equal portion of the funds. Additionally the land should only be returned if there is no furture road use contemplated. I am concerned that a future band council could decide to enact this provision and take back any piece of land that does not have a road on it (or use this provision to get more cash out of the Province). This is a very unique provision that the Nation is requesting, hopefully the "what if" analysis has been completed to ensure the Province gets a fair deal.

[freeweed]

Unprecedented? How about the Tibetan, Xinjiang, Mongolian, Guangxi, or Ningxia Autonomous Region in China? Or the Catalonian, Valencian, Basque or Galician regions of Spain? Corsica in France? The Kurdish Autonomous Zone in Iraq? I don't see how you think this legal arrangement is unprecedented. There are numerous, numerous examples of ethnic minorities have different legal rights in their lands in numerous countries thoughout the world.

Modern world. I don't think China and Iraq are exactly pillars of how we run representative democratic states in the 21st century.

Plenty of ethnic groups have had different rights in North America in the past, too - and we spent decades getting rid of those forms of legal segregation for a reason. I don't think there's anything in the modern world that quite compares to our treaty system (other than perhaps Australia, and they have similar problems).

Quebec is nothing whatsoever like the situation with our reserve system, that's almost an insult to Quebecers to imply that they somehow receive different rights and obligations solely due to an individual's ancestry.

Is Corsica an ethnically segregated zone? Or just a different semi-autonomous region? Could your average French citizen move there and live under their laws, or is it entirely controlled based on ancestry?

However - my point was that the word "unfair" when describing the treaty system is more than apt. If you honestly are going to bring up the Kurds in Iraq as a counter-argument... wow. I think we're on 2 different books, let alone pages here.

[5seconds]

1. This item can be resolved without much concern for today or the future. Actually the province should have gone to Tsu Tina with a better agreement WRT land swap way back in 2009.


Yup, Luke Ouellette just today said that the contract IS being rewritten to guarantee land. So this will be done. I agree, it should have been done last time around.

2. I have heard various news orgs mention that Tsu Tina want access from RR onto their land. Some articles mention this would be provided through existing interchanges and others are silent on where and how the access would be provided. Succintly I am concerned that the Tsu Tina might get provisions to put up traffic lights, uncontrolled atgrade intersections, or have the province building interchanges at the Nations will/desired location. Hopewfully the province does not stick their head up the a** and gets a fair deal for the RR users. I would hate to have the Tsu Tina decide to run an uncontrolled intersection through 8 lanes of traffic.


I was confused about this one until yesterday. The plans clearly show no less than 5 interchanges on Tsuu T'ina land, and they are all apparently going in straight away. So from the Provinces point of view, this was never an issue. The problem, as I understand it, is that the purchased land will be folded into the City of Calgary, and as City land, the City could always block the interchanges if it wanted to. I think that the Nation is looking for some wording that would prevent this (even though it will never happen, I guess you might as well get that in writing). As for the nation building an interchange or lights, it won't happen. The lands surrounding the Ring Road will be provincial land, so they cannot just build on land that they do not own.


3. Requirement to turn back land to Tsu Tina should also include a provision for return of an equal portion of the funds. Additionally the land should only be returned if there is no furture road use contemplated. I am concerned that a future band council could decide to enact this provision and take back any piece of land that does not have a road on it (or use this provision to get more cash out of the Province). This is a very unique provision that the Nation is requesting, hopefully the "what if" analysis has been completed to ensure the Province gets a fair deal.

This clause is not to return the unused portion of land to the Nation once the road is built. It is to return all 400 hectars in the event that no road at all goes through. It is to ensure that the Nation either gets a road with good access, or they get the land back. As long as the Ring Road goes in, even if it only uses a fraction of the available land (as is planned), then the entire tract of land still remains the property of Alberta (or Calgary)

[kw5150]

Yes, but there is a reason for the treaty system, and there is definately a reason for the problems......and the problems aren't all from the agreement, its also the turmoil that the people were put through. They were born, raised, cheerful......then told that they were dirty, savages, evil and wrong. Getting over abuse like that doesn't happen overnight. Anyone that thinks that human psychology is as simple as "get over it" is an idiot. It may take another hundred years to undo the white european evil that was inflicted on these people. We best be patient!

I prefer to listen to peoples struggles and that is how you learn from them, not by pretending they dont exist. No one is born bitter..........

[fusili]

Modern world. I don't think China and Iraq are exactly pillars of how we run representative democratic states in the 21st century.

Plenty of ethnic groups have had different rights in North America in the past, too - and we spent decades getting rid of those forms of legal segregation for a reason. I don't think there's anything in the modern world that quite compares to our treaty system (other than perhaps Australia, and they have similar problems).

Quebec is nothing whatsoever like the situation with our reserve system, that's almost an insult to Quebecers to imply that they somehow receive different rights and obligations solely due to an individual's ancestry.

Is Corsica an ethnically segregated zone? Or just a different semi-autonomous region? Could your average French citizen move there and live under their laws, or is it entirely controlled based on ancestry?

However - my point was that the word "unfair" when describing the treaty system is more than apt. If you honestly are going to bring up the Kurds in Iraq as a counter-argument... wow. I think we're on 2 different books, let alone pages here.

My point was that there are many examples of different arrangements of sovereignty in our modern world. As well, nearly every single country in the entire world grants citizenship rights based on ancestry. My eligibility for German or Dutch citizenship is much stronger considering my grandparents were citizens there. Japanese citizenship is based almost exclusively on Japanese ancestry. Perhaps you can name me a country that does not recognize rights of ancestry, at least in part?

I am just arguing against your claim that this arrangement is "unprecedented" in the modern world. It is anything but. This situation exists in many, many countries in many forms and is in no way unusual or in my opinion, unfair.

[fusili]

If you honestly are going to bring up the Kurds in Iraq as a counter-argument... wow. I think we're on 2 different books, let alone pages here.

Considering Kurdish independence movements and Turkish irridentism in Iraq under British occupation from 1918-1932 was my undergraduate honours thesis topic, I am interested in your point here.

Are you saying Kurdish Autonomy is a bad thing? Should the Kurds be brought completely under Iraqi rule? Shoud Kurdish language and cultural rights be rescinded, the autonomous region dismantled and the Peshmerga disbanded?

[5seconds]

Back on topic: What are the odds on a deal even being ready for end of September? I think the deal will be ready, but I'm not sure about a vote before then. And I cannot even begin to predict the outcome.

Obviously I think the deal is a good one for both sides, and is the better route for a road, regardless of where I personally live, but is the enhanced deal going to be enough?

If this isn't enough, I suspect that nothing would be, and that any potential rejection would be ideological rather than financial.

[freeweed]

My point was that there are many examples of different arrangements of sovereignty in our modern world. As well, nearly every single country in the entire world grants citizenship rights based on ancestry. My eligibility for German or Dutch citizenship is much stronger considering my grandparents were citizens there. Japanese citizenship is based almost exclusively on Japanese ancestry. Perhaps you can name me a country that does not recognize rights of ancestry, at least in part?

Perhaps you can explain to me what process a European (or Asian, or African) descended Canadian goes about applying for residency, citizenship, and full legal rights in a Canadian first nation.

You're talking apples and oranges. You can't seriously compare the treaty system to the concept of sovereign nations. Yes, no shit there are different sovereignty concepts in the world. However, ours is pretty much unique in its history and execution. Hence the term ALMOST unprecedented.

Incidentally, recognizing rights of ancestry is a far cry from formulating an entire legal system based solely on ancestry. As I mentioned before, we tried that in North America before. And the British did for a long while as well. Hell, most everywhere has TRIED it. The point is we've moved beyond that, in almost every single case - except Canada. And countries that freely admit they practice open racism, like Iraq.

[freeweed]

Are you saying Kurdish Autonomy is a bad thing? Should the Kurds be brought completely under Iraqi rule? Shoud Kurdish language and cultural rights be rescinded, the autonomous region dismantled and the Peshmerga disbanded?

I'm saying that when I describe Canada's situation with its native peoples as "unfair", and you bring up the Kurds of all groups as a counter-point... I don't think there's been a more unfairly treated group in modern memory. Except perhaps the Jews. But I don't want to Godwin this conversation anymore than is already being done.

I find it telling that everyone here seems to think I'm coming from this from a racial perspective, at least anti-native language and culture. You might want to just take a breath for a second and very carefully re-read one of my earlier posts here.

[fusili]

I'm saying that when I describe Canada's situation with its native peoples as "unfair", and you bring up the Kurds of all groups as a counter-point... I don't think there's been a more unfairly treated group in modern memory. Except perhaps the Jews. But I don't want to Godwin this conversation anymore than is already being done.

I find it telling that everyone here seems to think I'm coming from this from a racial perspective, at least anti-native language and culture. You might want to just take a breath for a second and very carefully re-read one of my earlier posts here.

I brought up the Kurds because the Kurdish Autonomous Region is how the conflict came to a resolution. Prior to autonomy, Kurdish separatist desires met with brutal reprisals from the Iraqi government, including the gasing in Halabja. The autonomous region arrangement has mostly reduced violence in the region, satisfied Kurdish desires for sovereignty while also alleviating Iraqi fears of separatism and increasing Turkish or Iranian influence in the region.

So, in the same vein were the treaty rights not a resolution to violent conflict between British/Canadian settlers and military and the first nations? Of course the history is more complex than that, but wasn't sovereignty more or less the price for peace?

[MalcolmTucker]

Basically treaties exist due to the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which in your words was to bring
resolution to violent conflict British settlers and military and the first nations
It forbade private purchase of aboriginal lands. Basically it recognized that aboriginals exercised sovereignty over their lands, and the only way to extinguish that sovereignty was treaties between aboriginal nations and the crown. The legal foundation was upheld by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (Canada's and the Empire/Commonwealth's final appeal court before the Supreme Court of Canada existed) on a case involving the ownership of resources in the Nigerian Delta and whether local tribes had surrendered sovereignty.

Because of exceptional even for the time local prejudice against aboriginals in British Columbia, treaties were not signed on the mainland under the justification that the nations there were not really nations, hence the huge problems with treaties and ongoing attempts to sign them in the province to extinguish historical sovereignty in the province.

All of this makes it likely that any land swap agreement could be held up in the courts for years if any group wishes to challenge it, since it requires a modification of a treaty, and there is a recent legal precedent that reserves cannot undertake developments that extinguish the ability of future generations of the nation to exercise traditional rights over their treaty territories.

[freeweed]

All of this makes it likely that any land swap agreement could be held up in the courts for years if any group wishes to challenge it, since it requires a modification of a treaty, and there is a recent legal precedent that reserves cannot undertake developments that extinguish the ability of future generations of the nation to exercise traditional rights over their treaty territories.

And this is part of where the treaty system fails miserably. We (Canada) claims that treaties give the native peoples full rights to their (much diminished) land, but of course nothing could be further from the truth. It's just more European arrogance, in a sense re-affirming the old beliefs that these ignorant savages cannot do anything for themselves. Their land is by many measures worthless if they do not have the ability to sell/trade/develop it.

It reminds me of when one of the original Indian commissioners up and decided one day that them damn savages needed to learn how to farm the old fashioned way, so they were denied any modern tools or equipment or grain crops in the west (according to some fad sociological theory of the time, this would turn them into "better farmers"). We pretty much from day one a) put them in ghettos, b) denied them the ability to rise from abject poverty, and even in the so-called enlightened today c) insist that alone out of any existing culture, the native people's would completely disintegrate without the ghettos err I mean reserve system, and d) label any attempt to radically alter (or even discuss) the system as racism. Which is the height of irony.

Note: the above wording may have been used for ironic or humourous intent. Plus I'm re-taking the word.

Global had a piece on the SWRR tonight, I only caught the tail end - I assume it's what's been discussed here... new/revised land swap possibilities?

[5seconds]

The most detailed and quote-filled article on todays comments

http://www.calgarysun.com/2011/07/12/bell-great-expectations-for-ring-road

[freeweed]

I like Ouellette's comment here:

Ouellette seems surprised by this apparent turnaround in fortune.

“I don’t know how all of a sudden everybody is realizing it’s a great deal for everyone,” he says.

“Everyone knows it’s the best place to put it without interfering so much with communities’ lifestyles.”

$275 million in cash, eh? How many band members split that? Or would this be a case of the chief and his cronies getting the lion's share of the money?

[5seconds]

I like Ouellette's comment here:

$275 million in cash, eh? How many band members split that? Or would this be a case of the chief and his cronies getting the lion's share of the money?

I believe the Nation gets a percentage right away ($35 million), and then the rest, $240m, is held in trust. There are about 1600 members total if I'm not mistaken, but they are not distributing cash, they are investing it into the community and the developments.

The irony of his quote is that it was the province that walked away in 2009, so presumably the only people who are now 'realizing it’s a great deal for everyone' is actually himself and his colleagues. When the last deal was shot down, the nation was very quick (within a week) to say that the problem was the land guarantee, and that they were willing to work through those points in 2009 to come to an agreement back then.

In fact, from what the Chief has said, the original deal did guarantee land initially, but it was the Provinces lawyers that changed the language to 'best efforts' at the last minute. By the time it was ready to be presented to the Nation, the wording was changed, and the Chief suspected it would not pass and accused to government of going back on the agreed deal.

[Bassic Lab]

And this is part of where the treaty system fails miserably. We (Canada) claims that treaties give the native peoples full rights to their (much diminished) land, but of course nothing could be further from the truth. It's just more European arrogance, in a sense re-affirming the old beliefs that these ignorant savages cannot do anything for themselves. Their land is by many measures worthless if they do not have the ability to sell/trade/develop it.

It reminds me of when one of the original Indian commissioners up and decided one day that them damn savages needed to learn how to farm the old fashioned way, so they were denied any modern tools or equipment or grain crops in the west (according to some fad sociological theory of the time, this would turn them into "better farmers"). We pretty much from day one a) put them in ghettos, b) denied them the ability to rise from abject poverty, and even in the so-called enlightened today c) insist that alone out of any existing culture, the native people's would completely disintegrate without the ghettos err I mean reserve system, and d) label any attempt to radically alter (or even discuss) the system as racism. Which is the height of irony.

Note: the above wording may have been used for ironic or humourous intent. Plus I'm re-taking the word.

Global had a piece on the SWRR tonight, I only caught the tail end - I assume it's what's been discussed here... new/revised land swap possibilities?

They do have the right to sell/trade/develop it to a similar extent that anyone else does. You realistically have no right to sell/trade/develop "your" land. Canada and Alberta, the two bodies that hold sovereignty over the land, might allow you to do so but that is quite different from a right. The T'suu T'ina have "sold" land in the form of long term leases to residents of Redwood Meadows, as they presumably plan to for the commercial developments the ring road would allow, and they have developed land, like the casino. Whether individual members can do those things is really an issue between them and their government, just as it is for us with our different government.

Band members don't really have special rights above other Canadians. The reality is more akin to a form of dual citizenship. They are both Canadian and band citizens. Other Canadians who hold dual citizenship also have rights/privileges that normal Canadians do not, those that citizens of that sovereign power do. They can typically reside in that country and vote in its elections. Mexico only allows citizens to purchase certain lands. Hell, Canada doesn't allow foreign citizens and corporations access or ownership of certain key assets. The fact that band citizenship is based on ancestry, so there is a racial component, is hardly unique. Most countries base citizenship on jus
sanguinis and some of them, like Japan, essentially do not allow immigration making citizenship a de facto race based characteristic.

This is not to say that you are wrong about the existence of a paternalistic relationship. There is one and it is problematic but that has little to do with the issues of sovereignty that you are taking issue with. I for one would favour a greater degree of self government for reserves and the introduction, if the reserve members so choose, of more private property allowances. Of course, that would not change the nature of the reserve's sovereignty; residency would not confer citizenship so non-band members "owning" a house on the reserve could not vote for the band's government; the band could, like any other sovereign government, expropriate property with or without compensation, depending on their own laws, unless prohibited by their constitution.

[Calgarian]

So does this mean a deal is pretty much imminent now?

[mersar]

So does this mean a deal is pretty much imminent now?

That's my take, definitely before the end of the summer I would expect to see something made official.

[5seconds]

So does this mean a deal is pretty much imminent now?

The problems that the Nation had with the contract are being fixed, and both sides say they are happy with the deal, so if you ask the Province or the Tsuu T'ina leadership, they would say that, yes, a deal will happen by the end of September.

However, it still has to go to the people of the Nation for a vote, and that could still go either way.

[5seconds]

Someone on the Herald comments has mentioned about having the new lands that would be part of the reserve mapped so we can see what they are getting. I have the legal descriptions of the lands, but I can't seem to find any maps that show Alberta divided into Sections or Quarter sections or anything like that.

Does anyone have access to maps like this, or does anyone know how to do this if I provide the land descriptions?

The lands are:

CROWN LANDS:

Section 20,
W1/2 and NE Section 21,
Section 28,
Section 29,
Section 32,
Section 33,
N1/2 Section 34,
LSD 5-8 Section 34,
LSD 5-8 Section 35,
N1/2 Section 36, LSD 5-8 Section 36-23-5-W5M,

and

Range Roads 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and Township Road 235 within or adjacent to the foregoing lands.



PRIVATE LAND (FEE SIMPLE):

N1/2 Section 35-23-5-W5M

[Calgarian]

Good news, this really is the best deal for everyone.

Does anyone have a map showing the proposed route?

[You Need A Thneed]

Good news, this really is the best deal for everyone.

Does anyone have a map showing the proposed route?

Scroll to nearly the end of this. (8Mb file) (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType52/Production/Tsuu_Tina_Final_Agreement_with_Schedules.pdf) It shows the ultimate and opening day plans.

The agreement from 2009 has always stayed on the Alberta Transportation website.

[MalcolmTucker]

http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/gis/map_converters/conversion_tools.html
for conversion to long, lat


http://gis.energy.gov.ab.ca/imf/imf.jsp?site=PNGPublic
turn on the township layer to get what may be th eonly interactive map on the internet with the toqwnship system.

[fusili]

Someone on the Herald comments has mentioned about having the new lands that would be part of the reserve mapped so we can see what they are getting. I have the legal descriptions of the lands, but I can't seem to find any maps that show Alberta divided into Sections or Quarter sections or anything like that.


Spin2Host is the government website that has all the property titles. Each section is 640 acres, which gives you an idea of the size of the land being discussed. I am sure there are maps showing Alberta using the Township Survey system. Frink would know more about this being a surveyor and such.

[Calgarian]

Man that Interchange at Glenmore / Sarcee looks complicated!

[5seconds]

http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/gis/map_converters/conversion_tools.html
for conversion to long, lat


http://gis.energy.gov.ab.ca/imf/imf.jsp?site=PNGPublic
turn on the township layer to get what may be th eonly interactive map on the internet with the toqwnship system.

Awesome! Thank you. That's exactly what I needed.

Here is my map as I understand the data. The purple is the new reserve from Crown land, and the small green section is from private lands:

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a400/jessesalus/new_reserve_lands.jpg

One thing that concerns me is that we are now totally ruling out a true bypass option west around the reserve. Unless we negotiate for a little more ROW along 22, I think a bypass around the west will never happen now.

[suburb]

One thing that concerns me is that we are now totally ruling out a true bypass option west around the reserve. Unless we negotiate for a little more ROW along 22, I think a bypass around the west will never happen now.

Sure it will - for a price.

This makes the deal with the CAA for the underpass in the North look like a steal of a deal!

[fusili]

Awesome! Thank you. That's exactly what I needed.

Here is my map as I understand the data. The purple is the new reserve from Crown land, and the small green section is from private lands:

One thing that concerns me is that we are now totally ruling out a true bypass option west around the reserve. Unless we negotiate for a little more ROW along 22, I think a bypass around the west will never happen now.

You are pretty much on with the map. Regarding a bypass in the West, why do we need one? Isn't that what the ring road is for?

[5seconds]

You are pretty much on with the map. Regarding a bypass in the West, why do we need one? Isn't that what the ring road is for?

Thanks.

I just thought that in 20-50 years, we will want a bypass solution that allows vehicles to avoid the city rather than interacting with the general city traffic that the Ring Road will probably carry. Even the Tsuu T'ina option is not a real bypass, and will carry increasing numbers of commuters as the city expands. I just thought that a TRUE bypass might still be a good idea.

We rarely think far enough ahead, so even without a clear need for such an option right now, I can see it being a good idea in the (near?) future.

[bookermorgan]

Same Map but using SPIN

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo196/dj_drakstar/Untitled.jpg

Purple shows Untitled Parcels (Crown Land)

[5seconds]

Same Map but using SPIN

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo196/dj_drakstar/Untitled.jpg

Purple shows Untitled Parcels (Crown Land)

Thanks! Strange that the 2009 deal states that "LSD 5-8 Section 35" is crown land, but not on the map you just posted.

[fusili]

Thanks.

I just thought that in 20-50 years, we will want a bypass solution that allows vehicles to avoid the city rather than interacting with the general city traffic that the Ring Road will probably carry. Even the Tsuu T'ina option is not a real bypass, and will carry increasing numbers of commuters as the city expands. I just thought that a TRUE bypass might still be a good idea.

We rarely think far enough ahead, so even without a clear need for such an option right now, I can see it being a good idea in the (near?) future.

Sounds like a classic case of induced demand to me.

Build a ring road to reduce congestion and allow people to bypass the city. People start moving close to and using ring road for commuter trips because it bypasses existing traffic. Ring road becomes congested. Build another ring road to bypass that traffic. That ring road induces development and is used more. Build another ring road. There is a reason Houston has 3 ring roads.

[5seconds]

Sounds like a classic case of induced demand to me.

Build a ring road to reduce congestion and allow people to bypass the city. People start moving close to and using ring road for commuter trips because it bypasses existing traffic. Ring road becomes congested. Build another ring road to bypass that traffic. That ring road induces development and is used more. Build another ring road. There is a reason Houston has 3 ring roads.

You could well be right. In fact, by providing good transportation to the Bragg Creek area, you might begin attracting many more commuters to Priddis/Bragg Creek, as the commute into Calgary is no longer as daunting to more and more people. You fill that area up, the traffic becomes congested, and we need another road.

I wonder if there are any bypass options that cannot be co-opted for commuting? Probably not.

[Mazrim]

But if people are trying to commute, then the Ring Road does not help either. If anything, it moves the congestion to another location, while attracting more traffic to the area (like adding 80,000 people into Providence)

In talking with people in the south recently, I got the distinct feeling that some of the people who were most in favour of the SWRR were the least likely to use it. I was told point-blank by some people that the reason they wanted the road was so that 'everyone else' can take the new SWRR and leave 14th (and 90th and Southland etc) clear for them to use to get downtown. It makes some sense, unless everyone feels this way too!
And I know many people who would use the Ring Road in their daily commutes to get to and from work. While I did move away from the area myself to avoid the current problems, I would have used it every day. I still travel up 14th to Glenmore, then Sarcee to Bow Trail once or twice a week. The Ring Road would save me a ton of time getting there, as I could get on at Anderson and travel up North in free-flowing peace.

I wonder how many people in the NW use Stoney Trail to get downtown?

The bottleneck appears to be the route towards Glenmore Trail (14th), a badly designed causeway (the 2 lanes of 14th street North merging into a single lane up crowchild for example), and backups caused by neglected infrastructure to the west (Sarcee interchange etc)

The reservoir need not be a bottleneck if the roads that go through the area are up to a certain standard.
Badly designed? I think you're misunderstanding here. What you're imagining is some incredibly expensive freeway-level design for the causeway or something, because what they did was quite acceptable considering the constraints and keeping costs under control. I don't know if you remember the incredible amount of work that was done on the causeway during construction, but I think what is there now is about as you can do.

[5seconds]

And I know many people who would use the Ring Road in their daily commutes to get to and from work. While I did move away from the area myself to avoid the current problems, I would have used it every day. I still travel up 14th to Glenmore, then Sarcee to Bow Trail once or twice a week. The Ring Road would save me a ton of time getting there, as I could get on at Anderson and travel up North in free-flowing peace.


Where do you commute from/to, if you don't mind me asking?

Badly designed? I think you're misunderstanding here. What you're imagining is some incredibly expensive freeway-level design for the causeway or something, because what they did was quite acceptable considering the constraints and keeping costs under control. I don't know if you remember the incredible amount of work that was done on the causeway during construction, but I think what is there now is about as you can do.

I guess 'Badly designed' was not the right way of putting it.

My comment was more about the narrowing of the 2 lanes of 14th into 1 lane going north. That, plus the weave that happens in both directions, is a frequent cause of slowdown on the Causeway (plus the Glenmore narrowing and the highway 8 backup). Since the causeway already accommodates the 2 lanes of 14th street, and the Crowchild interchange was altered to accommodate the 3rd lane of Glenmore going west, I just assumed that keeping both lanes of 14th flowing onto Crowchild would have made sense.

I know there are always constraints and compromises in every project, but I think getting 14th street moving is a priority, and there are ways to do that. Perhaps nothing can be done about the weaving (education?), but getting 14th better transitioned into Crowchild seems like a missed opportunity.

To that end, I would argue that the Crowchild crossing of the Bow is also badly designed. Crowchild essentially narrows to 1 lane, and there is a bad weave section to get from Downtown to Memorial. You could argue that what they did with the resources and constraints they had was acceptable, but it is clear that it isn't working as well as it could be with more investment.

What you're imagining is some incredibly expensive freeway-level design for the causeway or something...

The Causeway is the 2nd busiest piece of infrastructure in this city, second only to the section of Deerfoot between Blackfoot and McKnight. (And 14th street is 1 of only 6 roads in Calgary that gets more than 80,000 daily car trips) If there was any road in Calgary that was deserving of a better design (even with increased investment) I would argue that this would be it. I'm sure the people in the south would agree.

[MalcolmTucker]

Thanks.

I just thought that in 20-50 years, we will want a bypass solution that allows vehicles to avoid the city rather than interacting with the general city traffic that the Ring Road will probably carry. Even the Tsuu T'ina option is not a real bypass, and will carry increasing numbers of commuters as the city expands. I just thought that a TRUE bypass might still be a good idea.

We rarely think far enough ahead, so even without a clear need for such an option right now, I can see it being a good idea in the (near?) future.

The bypass you talk about is the now on hold outer ring road which stopped corridor studies since after a corridor is designated the province has only 3 years to buy land. The outer ring ring was to use the inner ringroad in the SW quadrent, which is why the ultimate phase had 16 lanes. The principle behind it was the Tsuu T'ina would likely not want a second cross of their land effectively cutting the reserve in two, and why not solve all the problems out at once.

As for the block of private land it will command an insane price as I don't believe the government can expropriate land with the express intent to transfer it to another level of government as a form of payment.

[Oliver Klozov]

....The principle behind it was the Tsuu T'ina would likely not want a second cross of their land effectively cutting the reserve in two, .....

Which is exactly why we never heard about what would be the best place for an 'outer ring road'. That is a new alignment for Hwy 22 from the junction with Hwy 8, south and southeasterly, crossing the reserve literally cutting it in 2, to the junction of Hwy 22 and 22X just east of Priddis.

[MalcolmTucker]

Which is exactly why we never heard about what would be the best place for an 'outer ring road'. That is a new alignment for Hwy 22 from the junction with Hwy 8, south and southeasterly, crossing the reserve literally cutting it in 2, to the junction of Hwy 22 and 22X just east of Priddis.
Except we have seen where it is planned. From earlier in the thread:

Here is a scanned image of a photocopy of a handout I received at an Alberta Infrastructure & Transportation open house showing the proposed (at the time) location of the outer ring road. It corresponds with info I received at one of the SWRR open houses. This is the first time I've tried this so forgive me if it doesn't immediately work.

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/3476/orrsmall.jpg

It's my understanding that this concept has been dropped. The Highway 791 Functional Planning Study shows a "Regional Ring Road" two miles east of Hwy 791 at Range Road 275. I'm guessing that a regional ring road would run north of Airdrie, west of Cochrane, around the Tsuu Tina and somewhere in the vicinity of Okotoks.

[fusili]

Except we have seen where it is planned. From earlier in the thread:

That is already incorrect. The eastern portion is going to be east of Highway 791 and west of Highway 9.

[MalcolmTucker]

At an open house in March I was told the entire outer ring road was put on indefinet hold, mostly due to the lack of a SW corridor. Also, there was no money to acquire land that would sit unused for 40 years.

[5seconds]

Except we have seen where it is planned. From earlier in the thread:

Thanks for that. I know I saw that before, but I forgot about it. It still seems weird that the 2 ring roads would touch like that, but I guess it's as good as it could be without negotiating for more land.

I suspect that if the deal falls apart and we end up with a 37th street RR, then the Bragg Creek bypass would eventually happen.

[Mazrim]

At an open house in March I was told the entire outer ring road was put on indefinet hold, mostly due to the lack of a SW corridor. Also, there was no money to acquire land that would sit unused for 40 years.
I can tell you with confidence that planning work is still being done on the outer ring road.

[Mazrim]

Where do you commute from/to, if you don't mind me asking?
I used to commute from Signal Hill to Midnapore, then it was Canyon Meadows to Midnapore, now it's Canyon Meadows to Deerfoot Meadows.

My comment was more about the narrowing of the 2 lanes of 14th into 1 lane going north. That, plus the weave that happens in both directions, is a frequent cause of slowdown on the Causeway (plus the Glenmore narrowing and the highway 8 backup).
Theoretically, everyone coming on from 14th should be merging before they hit Glenmore, or merging at speed since the lane ends after 14th traffic has hit Glenmore. If people were a little smoother at merging then it wouldn't be a problem, but you have idiots slamming on their brakes, trying to merge as soon as possible, instead of accelerating to speed and then merging. There's enough time to do it. Congestion just freaks out people. Outside a couple hours of the day, going from 14th onto Glenmore works out pretty well.

I know there are always constraints and compromises in every project, but I think getting 14th street moving is a priority, and there are ways to do that.
Keeping Glenmore and Crowchild moving is a bigger priority than 14th Street, therefore lane balance tips in their favor. That being said, lane balance is not an issue here compared to.... (see below)

To that end, I would argue that the Crowchild crossing of the Bow is also badly designed. Crowchild essentially narrows to 1 lane, and there is a bad weave section to get from Downtown to Memorial. You could argue that what they did with the resources and constraints they had was acceptable, but it is clear that it isn't working as well as it could be with more investment.
Crowchild/Bow Trail/Memorial was designed badly, yes. The worst mistake they made was that only one lane SB gets through the whole area. That is bad lane balance, and the number 1 reason the interchange plugs up all the time (the second reason is the Bow Trail entrance being on the left, and the people who switch over lanes to exit onto Memorial). From a design perspective the interchange was set to fail and they went with it anyway. Glenmore does not fail because of the causeway design, and the traffic design reports will show you that.

[5seconds]

Glenmore does not fail because of the causeway design, and the traffic design reports will show you that.

I don't think it fails as an interchange at all, But in terms of north-south travel, I still think that both 14th street NB lanes should continue on to Crowchild. I agree about your comment about people not merging smoothly, and that's why the weave sections of the causeway can be a problem in rush hour.

Saying all of that, the causeway was only one (relatively minor) part of the breakdown of 14th street. I genuinely believe that free-flowing 14th from Glenmore to Anderson, even without touching the causeway, would bring a huge relief to the congestion that has most people calling for a ring road.

Also: Crowchild over the bow is terrible.


Keeping Glenmore and Crowchild moving is a bigger priority than 14th Street, therefore lane balance tips in their favor.

14th street is essentially a extension of Crowchild, and they share a very similar amount of traffic, so if Crowchild is a priority, then so should be 14th. Providing good commuting to downtown is important to the SW, and I feel that this is as important as Crowchild was when they removed the lights in the south. They already have 2 flowing lanes from Crowchild to 14th southbound, so to do the same northbound makes sense; lane balance in favour of 2 flowing lanes from 14th to crowchild has already been established in one direction, and there is nothing to suggest that the volumes should be different in different directions, unless I'm not aware of some specific patterns there.

I'm not saying that I am necessarily right, just that these seemed like obvious limitations that could be implemented faster and cheaper than a ring road, and would address the issues that the majority of those in the south want addressing. Probably things that should have been done a long time ago. Just some observations, really.

[5seconds]

"Mayor Nenshi says no plan B for S.W. ring road"

http://www.globalwinnipeg.com/Mayor+Nenshi+says+plan+ring+road/5097784/story.html

While his stance is nothing new, I would have thought that he would recognise the benefit of have a Plan B on the table. Even if it's unpalatable, it would be there to potentially motivate the Nation. I don't want the 37th street route any more than he does, but sometimes you have to play the game a little bit...

[freeweed]

Sounds like a classic case of induced demand to me.

Build a ring road to reduce congestion and allow people to bypass the city. People start moving close to and using ring road for commuter trips because it bypasses existing traffic. Ring road becomes congested. Build another ring road to bypass that traffic. That ring road induces development and is used more. Build another ring road. There is a reason Houston has 3 ring roads.

Sounds like all transportation infrastructure induces demand, pretty much by design.

When are we getting our 4 car C-Trains again? ;)

[freeweed]

I wonder how many people in the NW use Stoney Trail to get downtown?

I suspect, very, very few. If you mean by heading to Deerfoot and going into downtown that way... I suspect only the masochists.

The NWRR really goes nowhere near downtown, and there isn't really any neighbourhood that it would make sense to use it from when heading downtown. It's just really not placed to facilitate that sort of movement whatsoever.

Tons of people use it to commute to work, however. It's taken huge loads off of E-W routes like John Laurie/McKnight and CHB. I'd love to see some actual traffic counts sometime, but purely anecdotally it's made these roads usable again.

[eggbert]

I suspect, very, very few. If you mean by heading to Deerfoot and going into downtown that way... I suspect only the masochists.

The NWRR really goes nowhere near downtown, and there isn't really any neighbourhood that it would make sense to use it from when heading downtown. It's just really not placed to facilitate that sort of movement whatsoever.

Tons of people use it to commute to work, however. It's taken huge loads off of E-W routes like John Laurie/McKnight and CHB. I'd love to see some actual traffic counts sometime, but purely anecdotally it's made these roads usable again.

I'd have to disagree with your statements after using the road for 3+ years living in Royal Oak and working downtown. Crowchild is so bad around McMahon, Kensington, and the Bow River area I found it much easier to use Stoney. This doesn't even include the constant construction on Crowchild for that entire time up by Nosehill and Stoney. I didn't use it as much going to work but I did use it tons coming home from work. Trying to use Bow Trail onto Crowchild is practically impossible as it backs up quite a bit. I found using Bow, Sacree, 16th Ave, and Stoney to be incredible fast way to get home. I can tell you a lot of other people used this same route based upon the long line of cars I travelled with each and every day.

[lubicon]

I'd have to disagree with your statements after using the road for 3+ years living in Royal Oak and working downtown. Crowchild is so bad around McMahon, Kensington, and the Bow River area I found it much easier to use Stoney. This doesn't even include the constant construction on Crowchild for that entire time up by Nosehill and Stoney. I didn't use it as much going to work but I did use it tons coming home from work. Trying to use Bow Trail onto Crowchild is practically impossible as it backs up quite a bit. I found using Bow, Sacree, 16th Ave, and Stoney to be incredible fast way to get home. I can tell you a lot of other people used this same route based upon the long line of cars I travelled with each and every day.

Same with me. I avoid Crowchild like the plague for my commute from Tuscany to DT. Morning's it is Stoney-16 Ave-Memorial-Crowchild (across the river)-Bow. Coming home it's Bow-Sarcee-16 Ave-Stoney. Crowchild is just not worth the headaches.

I'm really hoping they can get this deal done as the SWRR will make getting from NW Calgary to south Calgary much easier. My commute will change this fall when our office moves from DT down to near Blackfoot/Glenmore and I am absolutely dreading that drive. The new ring road would go a long way in making it a little better.

[AgentGibb]

I suspect, very, very few. If you mean by heading to Deerfoot and going into downtown that way... I suspect only the masochists.


I'm not a masochist, but I also don't commute downtown. I use Stoney and Deerfoot to commute every day from Sarcee/Stoney to Deerfoot/64th and can make the following (admittedly anecdotal) observations:
1. Taking Stoney out to Deerfoot then south generally works out better than using Beddington Trail to "cut the corner" -- no lights and less congestion, so the travel time ends up slightly shorter despite the longer distance.
2. Traffic on Stoney is substantially heavier during rush hour, though not heavy enough to result in much reduction of speed (~90-100km/h at worst). I don't know where everyone is going on Stoney during rush hour, but clearly people are using it to commute *somewhere* if not downtown.

[Stang]

Same with me. I avoid Crowchild like the plague for my commute from Tuscany to DT. Morning's it is Stoney-16 Ave-Memorial-Crowchild (across the river)-Bow. Coming home it's Bow-Sarcee-16 Ave-Stoney. Crowchild is just not worth the headaches.

I too live in Tuscany, but I work just off of Crowchild on the Currie Barracks. You would think that living and working a stones throw from the same major road would make it the obvious choice, but I typically use Stoney, 16th, Sarcee, etc.

Sometimes, if I'm leaving early for one reason or another, I'll take Crowchild home. But generally after 15:00 I don't even consider it. I can honestly say that I have never taken Crowchild to work in the morning.

[fusili]

Sounds like all transportation infrastructure induces demand, pretty much by design.

When are we getting our 4 car C-Trains again? ;)

Induced demand on the train is a good thing. More riders on public transit generally make transit more efficient (increased headways), while more drivers make driving less efficient (congestion). Bring on the induced transit demand!

[freeweed]

I'd have to disagree with your statements after using the road for 3+ years living in Royal Oak and working downtown. Crowchild is so bad around McMahon, Kensington, and the Bow River area I found it much easier to use Stoney. This doesn't even include the constant construction on Crowchild for that entire time up by Nosehill and Stoney. I didn't use it as much going to work but I did use it tons coming home from work. Trying to use Bow Trail onto Crowchild is practically impossible as it backs up quite a bit. I found using Bow, Sacree, 16th Ave, and Stoney to be incredible fast way to get home. I can tell you a lot of other people used this same route based upon the long line of cars I travelled with each and every day.

Good point. I guess when I think "NWRR" I forget the portion of Stoney that's existed since the 90s. Yes, it's the Ring Road.. but it's "always been there" for me. When someone asks if anyone uses the new Ring Road to get downtown, I imagined the stretch from CHB to Deerfoot.

So yeah.. even I've used Stoney to head into downtown at times. It's not exactly up to Ring Road standards yet, with the lights and 60 zone and all. So call this a perception difference. ;)

[freeweed]

1. Taking Stoney out to Deerfoot then south generally works out better than using Beddington Trail to "cut the corner" -- no lights and less congestion, so the travel time ends up slightly shorter despite the longer distance.

I do this pretty much all the time, regardless of traffic. I just find continual driving feels easier even if it takes a couple of minutes longer.

2. Traffic on Stoney is substantially heavier during rush hour, though not heavy enough to result in much reduction of speed (~90-100km/h at worst). I don't know where everyone is going on Stoney during rush hour, but clearly people are using it to commute *somewhere* if not downtown.

As I said, they're commuting E-W. Basically to all of the commercial/industrial in the NE. It's the traffic that used to be on John Laurie/McKnight and CHB. You're right in that for now, there's not enough traffic to slow things down. Except when some jackass dump truck driver sits in the left lane doing 80 (I can't believe CPS or the RCMP doesn't try to ticket these jerks - maybe "slower traffic keep right" isn't codified into law yet).

[freeweed]

Induced demand on the train is a good thing. More riders on public transit generally make transit more efficient (increased headways), while more drivers make driving less efficient (congestion). Bring on the induced transit demand!

Er... more riders make the trains slower (longer stops as people shuffle through doors) and less pleasant (more congested). Until more infrastructure is built. Like more lines, longer cars, longer stations, more trains, fewer level crossings, etc.

Exactly like roads. More traffic makes things less efficient and less pleasant, until such time as more road capacity is built.

The train is a hell of a lot slower during rush hour than it is in the middle of the day. Just like roads. And alleviating the rush hour crush takes a lot of time (how long has 7th Ave been under continual construction?) and money. Just like roads.

[Stang]

The first two pieces of the Tuscany-Scenic Acres pedestrian bridge over Stoney are now laying on the ground near the abutments. It doesn't appear that the abutments are actually finished anyway, so they may be laying there for a while. Regardless, it is good to see something happening there.

[You Need A Thneed]

The first two pieces of the Tuscany-Scenic Acres pedestrian bridge over Stoney are now laying on the ground near the abutments. It doesn't appear that the abutments are actually finished anyway, so they may be laying there for a while. Regardless, it is good to see something happening there.

The pieces for the bridge over Metis Trail by MKWW station were sitting on site plenty ahead of time as well. The two bridges have a quite similar look. They might need to do some onsite work on them before before erecting them, I believe they did some for the Metis bridge.

[kw5150]

Er... more riders make the trains slower (longer stops as people shuffle through doors) and less pleasant (more congested). Until more infrastructure is built. Like more lines, longer cars, longer stations, more trains, fewer level crossings, etc.

Exactly like roads. More traffic makes things less efficient and less pleasant, until such time as more road capacity is built.

The train is a hell of a lot slower during rush hour than it is in the middle of the day. Just like roads. And alleviating the rush hour crush takes a lot of time (how long has 7th Ave been under continual construction?) and money. Just like roads.

You always forget to mention that the train takes gas-using cars off the road and keeps our skies 5% cleaner. Many people dont mind the "sacrifice" of taking the train. I personally dont like stop / start driving and especially cant stand traffic jams from collisions or the stong smell of exhaust when I try to open my window.

[Mazrim]

You always forget to mention that the train takes gas-using cars off the road and keeps our skies 5% cleaner. Many people dont mind the "sacrifice" of taking the train. I personally dont like stop / start driving and especially cant stand traffic jams from collisions or the stong smell of exhaust when I try to open my window.
Being stuff like a canned sardine into a train is probably the least appealing form of commuting I can think of. I'll take my quiet, comfortable driver's seat any day. Sorry.

[kw5150]

Being stuff like a canned sardine into a train is probably the least appealing form of commuting I can think of. I'll take my quiet, comfortable driver's seat any day. Sorry.

I cant wait until electric cars are solar / wind power stations are mainstream. Ill keep taking the train, im not afraid of people and a little bit of crowding.

[freeweed]

You always forget to mention that the train takes gas-using cars off the road and keeps our skies 5% cleaner. Many people dont mind the "sacrifice" of taking the train. I personally dont like stop / start driving and especially cant stand traffic jams from collisions or the stong smell of exhaust when I try to open my window.

I wasn't talking about the environment, the skies, or the price of tea in China. I was quite specifically (and obviously) talking about how the concept of "induced demand" works equally well for both trains and cars.

You might be interested to note that I'm a lifelong transit user, and a daily LRT rider in this city. I wasn't challenging the benefits of transit - hell, I take advantage every day!

[Oliver Klozov]

I cant wait until electric cars are solar / wind power stations are mainstream....


Even if you were born yesterday, you will be long dead by the time that happens.
:D

[freeweed]

Crowchild ramps are moving fast now. The NB-WB got a preliminary layer of asphalt a couple of days ago. A lot of gravel bed has been placed for many other lanes.

[5seconds]

Am I right in thinking that a 37th street alignment would require either a 1.2km bridge or a tunnel?

Since it's a flood plain and wetland, I just assumed that they could not build an at-grade road.

[mersar]

Am I right in thinking that a 37th street alignment would require either a 1.2km bridge or a tunnel?

Since it's a flood plain and wetland, I just assumed that they could not build an at-grade road.

Pretty much.

[kw5150]

Even if you were born yesterday, you will be long dead by the time that happens.
:D

Yeah right, I already invest in solar at it is a growing industry. I think you were just being funny though.....It will happen sooner than you think.

[5seconds]

Pretty much.

Thanks, I should really know by now not to read the Herald and Sun comments section!

[lubicon]

Crowchild ramps are moving fast now. The NB-WB got a preliminary layer of asphalt a couple of days ago. A lot of gravel bed has been placed for many other lanes.

There is a sign up on NB Stoney, south of the Tuscany interchagne indicating 'Crowchild Trail access changing July 17'. I am presuming the new NB>WB ramp will open up which should mean the removal of the lights for EB traffic on Crowchild.

[freeweed]

There is a sign up on NB Stoney, south of the Tuscany interchagne indicating 'Crowchild Trail access changing July 17'. I am presuming the new NB>WB ramp will open up which should mean the removal of the lights for EB traffic on Crowchild.

Wow, they must have a busy weekend planned. No way did it look ready yesterday. I guess just a top coat and line painting might do it.

[lubicon]

Wow, they must have a busy weekend planned. No way did it look ready yesterday. I guess just a top coat and line painting might do it.

I was surprised too given the amount of work that appears to still be needed. But you are right - a quick top coat and line painting and they could be good to go. I'm asuming the final paving will wait until the entire project is finished when they will go back and pave everything one more time - much like they do on other projects it seems.

[freeweed]

I was surprised too given the amount of work that appears to still be needed. But you are right - a quick top coat and line painting and they could be good to go. I'm asuming the final paving will wait until the entire project is finished when they will go back and pave everything one more time - much like they do on other projects it seems.

It looks like this afternoon they've half-paved what is likely the "final" layer for now. If they keep this up, yeah, I could see a Sunday opening. You're right, they'll certainly do a "final final" in a few years once the ground settles.

[freeweed]

Welp, the NB->WB ramp on Crowchild opened this afternoon as planned. The EB lights are no more, but there's already been a collision as a result. I swear, people really cannot drive. I've not seen a single accident there until today - it's like removing the lights also removed some people's brains.

WB lanes on Crowchild have been shifted around to some new paving as well.

[lubicon]

The other part that has changed is how the road works coming out of Tuscany onto NB Stoney. To get onto Crowchild (EB or WB) you no longer come out onto Stoney and then exit again a few hundred metres later. You stay on the collector road/offramp the entire time now. There is now a new merge onto Stoney if you are heading that direction, and an exit off Stoney if you are going onto Crowchild. I have not driven it yet (was not open when I drove it early yesterday afternoon) so it will be interesting to see how the weave onto/off Stoney is going to work- even if it is just temporary.

[lubicon]

Well, I'm not sure if somethign has changed or if I just missed it before. I'm looking at the Stage 5 diagram and from here on until the interchange is completed, there is NO direct access to Crowchild from NB Stoney. All traffic heading to Crowshild will have to exit at the Tuscany interchange, go through the lights and back up onto the collector road that takes you to Crowchild. Now I realize this is only temporary and it actually makes sense until they can tie in the road properly but man this is going to catch a lot of people off guard. Not to mention really plug up the intersection coming out of tuscany.

[mersar]

Well, I'm not sure if somethign has changed or if I just missed it before. I'm looking at the Stage 5 diagram and from here on until the interchange is completed, there is NO direct access to Crowchild from NB Stoney. All traffic heading to Crowshild will have to exit at the Tuscany interchange, go through the lights and back up onto the collector road that takes you to Crowchild. Now I realize this is only temporary and it actually makes sense until they can tie in the road properly but man this is going to catch a lot of people off guard. Not to mention really plug up the intersection coming out of tuscany.

Yep, that caught me last night. Didn't notice any signage indicating you had to turn and when I go to where the old exit was I realized what they did.

[freeweed]

Well, I'm not sure if somethign has changed or if I just missed it before. I'm looking at the Stage 5 diagram and from here on until the interchange is completed, there is NO direct access to Crowchild from NB Stoney. All traffic heading to Crowshild will have to exit at the Tuscany interchange, go through the lights and back up onto the collector road that takes you to Crowchild. Now I realize this is only temporary and it actually makes sense until they can tie in the road properly but man this is going to catch a lot of people off guard. Not to mention really plug up the intersection coming out of tuscany.

Just did a jaunt into Tuscany and I see what you're saying now (took me a while). Stoney NB just continues through Crowchild entirely, and the only way to hit it is to exit as if you're going through Tuscany and hit the collector road. Yeah, it will completely fubar that intersection this summer/fall.

The merge onto Stoney NB is damned short, this is certainly one place where a construction zone is more than warranted.

I wonder if things are still on track to be completed this year. The NB Stoney lanes are just starting work from the looks of things. Mind you, this stuff goes quick once work actually commences. They were working solid all weekend long to make the changeover.

[lubicon]

Yep, that caught me last night. Didn't notice any signage indicating you had to turn and when I go to where the old exit was I realized what they did.

They actually do have some signage. One regular sign and one of those electronic black and orange signs that says something like 'Crowchild traffic exit here'. It's pretty well done actually but if you are used to the 'old' access then I can see missing it simply from force of habit.

Now that this switch has been made they can put the final stage into high gear. They were held up a little in that the old NB>WB roadway was in teh way of the last offramp to be constructed as well as the collector lanes etc. Now they can remove it (probably pretty quickly) and get on with the final portion. If the weather holds they should be able to do it all by this fall.

[freeweed]

Remember the accident I mentioned earlier, that happened pretty much immediately after they opened EB Crowchild as freeflow? It was a rear-ending.

Today there is a large electronic sign: "Through Traffic - NO STOPPING".

:haha:

[mersar]

Lots of work in the SE recently, several more piers at 22x and they've setup what looks to be an asphalt plant just north of Shepard (north of the CPR tracks but south of the canal)