[DizzyEdge]

No, no, no! Keep the airplanes at the airport. It's too bad the Aerospace Museum didn't front directly onto one of the runways, they could have incorporated a sweet viewing area (like in YWG).

What year are the planes from? They're WWII right?

[You Need A Thneed]

Time to build a new Areospace Museum! They can't fit all the plane into the heated building anyway.

[MalcolmTucker]

What year are the planes from? They're WWII right?

Time to build a new Areospace Museum! They can't fit all the plane into the heated building anyway.

Both from WWII.

If any good hangar space is ever disused and the current museum site is worth enough due to its location (turned into offices perhaps?) I'm sure the board would be quick to work out a deal to move.

I can't see the government supporting it very much in the near future, especially with what we have spent or pledged in the years past on the cultural sector in total (Science Centre, Heritage Park, Sports Hall of Fame, Cantos, Military Mueseums) and how long of a wish list we still have (Central Library, new Glenbow / contemporary art, Epcor Centre rebuild).

Those three projects on the wishlist are crazy large ones, I doubt all three will be done within 20 years without a significant change to how Calgarian's authorize spending and raising money.

[DizzyEdge]

Both from WWII.

If any good hangar space is ever disused and the current museum site is worth enough due to its location (turned into offices perhaps?) I'm sure the board would be quick to work out a deal to move.

I can't see the government supporting it very much in the near future, especially with what we have spent or pledged in the years past on the cultural sector in total (Science Centre, Heritage Park, Sports Hall of Fame, Cantos, Military Mueseums) and how long of a wish list we still have (Central Library, new Glenbow / contemporary art, Epcor Centre rebuild).

Those three projects on the wishlist are crazy large ones, I doubt all three will be done within 20 years without a significant change to how Calgarian's authorize spending and raising money.

I asked because if they're from WWII they would have flown out of what is now MRU.

[MalcolmTucker]

I asked because if they're from WWII they would have flown out of what is now MRU.
Some might have been around for familiarization, but the Calgary bases were training focused and had Ansons, Cranes, Oxfords, Forts and Harvards.

I'm sure Glenbow would have some photos in their database with aircraft names tagged so one could check (I may do that later, no time now)

[Cabbage]

Is anyone else concerned that a few of the old aldermen are playing too much politics and not representing the people correctly?

Example… I watched most of the secondary suite debate yesterday.

- The report that was presented to the committee showed large support, debunked lots of the concerns brought up.
- Twitter was almost 100% support for approving
- The public presentations were all in support except 2 people.
- Web polls that are out there are all in support

With so much support how can an alderman state that there is no support… Or even worse Ald. Gord Lowe stated that there was no public consultation.

Chris

[suburb]

With so much support how can an alderman state that there is no support… Or even worse Ald. Gord Lowe stated that there was no public consultation.

I've shared my suspicions before about Gord Lowe. I'm very disappointed with his political maneuvering.

[MichaelS]

Is anyone else concerned that a few of the old aldermen are playing too much politics and not representing the people correctly?

Example… I watched most of the secondary suite debate yesterday.

- The report that was presented to the committee showed large support, debunked lots of the concerns brought up.
- Twitter was almost 100% support for approving
- The public presentations were all in support except 2 people.
- Web polls that are out there are all in support

With so much support how can an alderman state that there is no support… Or even worse Ald. Gord Lowe stated that there was no public consultation.

Chris

I watched a bit of the meeting as well. During the debates, Aldermen were saying they were getting a lot of calls and e-mails into their offices, with about 99% of them being opposed to the suites. Just because it isn't as vocal, doesn't mean the opposition isn't there.

[Radley77]

Is anyone else concerned that a few of the old aldermen are playing too much politics and not representing the people correctly?

Example… I watched most of the secondary suite debate yesterday.

- The report that was presented to the committee showed large support, debunked lots of the concerns brought up.
- Twitter was almost 100% support for approving
- The public presentations were all in support except 2 people.
- Web polls that are out there are all in support

With so much support how can an alderman state that there is no support… Or even worse Ald. Gord Lowe stated that there was no public consultation.

Chris

I found the following public consultation with the City of Calgary.

In a random probability method telephone survey undertaken in 2009, it mentioned that 84% support development of secondary suites.

http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/olsh/affordable_housing/infosheet2_what_did_you_tell_us.pdf


I had heard some of the arguments being made in favour as well as the risks of secondary suites. I agree that there is a lot of compelling reasons for making this legal.

[suburb]

I watched a bit of the meeting as well. During the debates, Aldermen were saying they were getting a lot of calls and e-mails into their offices, with about 99% of them being opposed to the suites. Just because it isn't as vocal, doesn't mean the opposition isn't there.

This is a generally dubious method of assessment as it is largely dominated by minority squeaky wheels. A randomized survey, which would include the majority of Calgarians that are not special interest group members, is a much better method. Additionally, my understanding is that a vast number of the squeaky wheel inputs are uneducated about the safeguards and subtleties of the specific thoughtful proposal. As an example, the idea that areas would deteriorate because people would not care for the home they lived in as it was not theres - is absolutely ridiculous given that the proposal is that the owner needs to be living in the home. If anything, this type of legislation would hopefully take a bite out of the two or three renters in one home (up, down and sideways) scenarios, which do cause uncontrolled and unpredictable deterioration.

[fusili]

Well, I would disagree with the owner requirement, as it is nearly impossible to enforce and would probably face legal challenges. But to say that upkeep of houses would deteriorate with additional income generated by secondary suites is absolutely ridiculous. When income increases, so does maintenance (generally). Who in their right mind would get more money from rent due to a secondary suite and then spend LESS on repair and maintenance. I could see spending the same amount, but less makes no sense.

[You Need A Thneed]

The city lawyer at the committee meeting yesterday, pretty much said that the owner occupied rule was completely unenforcable (something along those lines). I don't think that part has a chance to make it into the final bylaw.

[Cabbage]

I wasn't trying to refer to the secondary suite issue directly, it seems like every issue they debate now. The older aldermen (Not Age) seem to be grumpy that things have changed and they can't run the show like they used to.

Ald Pootmans had heard concerns from the citizens in his ridings, brought up there concerns made them known, but it the end after listening to all the sides made a decision.... That is good.

Ald Chabot, Lowe, Hodges were so closed minded that someone could of provided them a stat that 100% of the citzens they represented were in favor they would of still voted against it.

That is just how it seemed.

Chris

[Bassic Lab]

I wasn't trying to refer to the secondary suite issue directly, it seems like every issue they debate now. The older aldermen (Not Age) seem to be grumpy that things have changed and they can't run the show like they used to.

Ald Pootmans had heard concerns from the citizens in his ridings, brought up there concerns made them known, but it the end after listening to all the sides made a decision.... That is good.

Ald Chabot, Lowe, Hodges were so closed minded that someone could of provided them a stat that 100% of the citzens they represented were in favor they would of still voted against it.

That is just how it seemed.

Chris

I know what you're talking about. Mar, along with others, was particularly guilty of this during the Airport Tunnel debate. MacLeod, Pincott, and others voted against it based on values and what they thought was best. Mar spent his time grandstanding, making an ass out of himself, and trying to imply conspiracy theories over being told not to destroy the city's bargaining position. I really can't wait for him to lose a provincial election in Buffalo or Currie.

[srperrycgy]

2010 Municipal Election Financial Disclosure Statements:

http://bit.ly/eEj94P

[The Fisher Account]

The Mayor's new website is now live:

http://www.calgarymayor.ca/

Interested to hear your thoughts

[suburb]

Naheed Nenshi was recently interviewed by TheIsmaili.org. Before you read the interview, it is important to note that Naheed himself is an Ismaili Muslim and that one of the main target audiences of the web-site is the global Ismaili community. Naheed is of course overtly transparent - and his messages are consistent. It is an interesting read actually.

http://www.theismaili.org/cms/1194/Calgary-Mayor-Naheed-Nenshi-on-community-building-and-the-pursuit-of-passions

[shogged]

2010 Municipal Election Financial Disclosure Statements:

http://bit.ly/eEj94P

took the time to read through a good chunk of those statements. The developers threw around ALOT of cash this past election!

[Wooster]

It's amazing that Nenshi won with $400k mostly comprised of small individual rather than corporate donations against a man that raised $1 million over three years with buckets of corporate money and 100x more name recognition.

[shogged]

It's amazing that Nenshi won with $400k mostly comprised of small individual rather than corporate donations against a man that raised $1 million over three years with buckets of corporate money and 100x more name recognition.

true that!

Another stand out for me was ward 11! Brian Pincott was the incumbent yet didn't even raise half of what James Maxim brought in, again mostly from developer donations. Ironic, considering ward 11 has what, zero new development? Unless garrison woods counts, I'm not sure!

[Wooster]

For you political junkies - Video Archives of Council and Standing Policy Committee meetings are now available - as per Nenshi Campaign promise Better Idea #8

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/05/better-idea-achieved-council-videos-are.html

[DizzyEdge]

For you political junkies - Video Archives of Council and Standing Policy Committee meetings are now available - as per Nenshi Campaign promise Better Idea #8

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/05/better-idea-achieved-council-videos-are.html

He should try to get some press on that.

[Wooster]

He should try to get some press on that.

You'll probably see some stories tomorrow.

[artvandelay]

City continuing to enforce pointless rules:
Public drinking illegal, city reminds weekend athletes
By CBC News
CBC News
The city is trying to get the beer out of beer-league sports this summer.

The city is trying to get the beer out of beer league sports this summer.

In a letter sent to team organizers last week, officials reminded them that it is illegal to drink alcohol in public places.

"Rules are rules and this is actually governed by the Alberta Liquor and Gaming Commission," said city spokesman Craig McGeachie.

But some of Calgary's recreational athletes are calling foul ball.

"Having a few beers and just sitting out here and having fun is just part of baseball," said player Jen Park.
...
Full Story (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/05/11/calgary-beer-baseball-city-fines.html)

My (beer league) hockey team was fined last winter for this type of thing at a city arena, our mistake was neatly placing our empties in a recycling bin - ridiculous. Fix this Nenshi! :order:

[nick.flood]

City continuing to enforce pointless rules:

Full Story (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/05/11/calgary-beer-baseball-city-fines.html)

My (beer league) hockey team was fined last winter for this type of thing at a city arena, our mistake was neatly placing our empties in a recycling bin - ridiculous. Fix this Nenshi! :order:

Provincial legislation.

[DizzyEdge]

Geeze, don't they have some burlesque girls to harass?

[freeweed]

I loathe the stupidity of public drunks as much as the next person, but why exactly is drinking in public illegal? It's not like you can't just drink at home or in a bar and then stumble around drunk. Hello, 17th Ave.

[fusili]

Alcohol legislation in this province is incredibly behind the times. Allowing people to drink in public, drink past 2:00 am or hell, drink on patios that are not attached physically to a restaurant doesn't cause people to become delinquents and start punching babies. In fact, in many places that have deregulated drinking hours, crimes and disturbances related to drinking have fallen considerably. We need to change this.

[Bassic Lab]

Alcohol legislation in this province is incredibly behind the times. Allowing people to drink in public, drink past 2:00 am or hell, drink on patios that are not attached physically to a restaurant doesn't cause people to become delinquents and start punching babies. In fact, in many places that have deregulated drinking hours, crimes and disturbances related to drinking have fallen considerably. We need to change this.

I have always found that if drinking is treated as an activity that causes irresponsible behaviour then drunks will act irresponsibly. I think the vast majority of the impairment to judgement is entirely social as opposed to chemical. People just blame booze because they have been conditioned to think that it is a legitimate excuse for acting like an asshole.

[fusili]

I have always found that if drinking is treated as an activity that causes irresponsible behaviour then drunks will act irresponsibly. I think the vast majority of the impairment to judgement is entirely social as opposed to chemical. People just blame booze because they have been conditioned to think that it is a legitimate excuse for acting like an asshole.

Totally agree. When I was in Madrid staying with a friend who lives there (and married a rich Spanish girl, lucky bastard) going out is totally different then it is here. The streets are full of people of all ages, people in the 20s, 30s and 40s, but also grandparents with their kids or grandkids going for a coffee or just to eat. You can have a bar full of 20 somethings all standing around outside drinking on the "patio" right next to a little restaurant where old couples are eating. People are outside and it is busy, but nobody is yelling or breaking glasses, because that is just rude and people will chastise you for it. The night life there (well, not the clubs, but that is a different story) is for everyone, not just drunk 20 somethings.

Here on the other hand, people yell and scream at each other when they get drunk because somehow that is thought to be ok behavior. It is disgusting.

[freeweed]

Here on the other hand, people yell and scream at each other when they get drunk because somehow that is thought to be ok behavior. It is disgusting.

I think a lot of it is that the only experience with open containers most people have would be Vegas or New Orleans during Mardi Gras. Needless to say, these are NOT the role models we should be examining, but that's what we do.

[Bigtime]

Diane Colley-Urquhart has some explaining to do:

http://www.ffwdweekly.com/article/news-views/news/why-calgarys-auditor-general-got-the-boot-7448/

[lubicon]

Not sure if community arenas look the other way, or if the City just enforces things differently, but you can still have a beer in the dressing rooms of most community owned and operated arenas, but it is strictly verboten in City arenas (and institutional ones too - SAIT etc.)

And yes, out liquor laws are incredibly antiquated.

[kw5150]

Alcohol legislation in this province is incredibly behind the times. Allowing people to drink in public, drink past 2:00 am or hell, drink on patios that are not attached physically to a restaurant doesn't cause people to become delinquents and start punching babies. In fact, in many places that have deregulated drinking hours, crimes and disturbances related to drinking have fallen considerably. We need to change this.

In fact, shutting down patios early does make people want to punch babies............I can only imagine what tourists think. I think it is time that we stop letting one person that gets drunk ruin everything. They should announce on TV that bars are extending patio hours only on a condition that people dont abuse it...... if they do, it gets taken away again...... :)

[kw5150]

We could have loud speakers all over the city that go off every half hour reminding people of common courtesy....... joking....lol. Kind of like the 1984 book and movie......lol but in a good way.

[freeweed]

I think it is time that we stop letting one person that gets drunk ruin everything.

I read your comment not 30 seconds after finishing a conversation with a cow-orker about Parks Canada continuing in their ridiculous "no fires or drinking after 11pm" and "no alcohol on long weekends" policy. And trumpeting its success, because now the campgrounds are "family friendly".

Yes, because the instant you have children, you go to bed before 11pm on weekends and you NEVER drink anymore. :rolleyes:

[DizzyEdge]

I read your comment not 30 seconds after finishing a conversation with a cow-orker about Parks Canada continuing in their ridiculous "no fires or drinking after 11pm" and "no alcohol on long weekends" policy. And trumpeting its success, because now the campgrounds are "family friendly".

Yes, because the instant you have children, you go to bed before 11pm on weekends and you NEVER drink anymore. :rolleyes:

There's a situation where i would support 'letting the market decide'. Have some sites allow long weekend drinking, and some disallow it, and see which ones fill up.

[MalcolmTucker]

I read your comment not 30 seconds after finishing a conversation with a cow-orker about Parks Canada continuing in their ridiculous "no fires or drinking after 11pm" and "no alcohol on long weekends" policy. And trumpeting its success, because now the campgrounds are "family friendly".

Yes, because the instant you have children, you go to bed before 11pm on weekends and you NEVER drink anymore. :rolleyes:

The province does the same, but I don't remember who started this policy. It is unfortunate there seems little ability to differentiate between out of control bush parties and standard campping libation.

[freeweed]

There's a situation where i would support 'letting the market decide'. Have some sites allow long weekend drinking, and some disallow it, and see which ones fill up.

I'd love it, except for one effect I could see that's related to the public drinking behaviour we discussed above. I could easily see people saying "hey, this is the drinking campground" and just going all apeshit. Which is not anything I'm interested in being around.

Banff used to do it perfectly at Tunnel Mountain. They had a "quiet" section and a "noisy" section. Want to party? Ask for "noisy". Want to actually sleep, but *GASP* have a beer or 2 on the long weekend? Ask for "quiet". And everyone was happy.

My real issue with your idea is that it still has the implication that drinking=wild out of control partying. I'm an old fuck, all I want to be able to do is quietly sit with a buddy having a few beers at 1am. We're quieter than most of the families anyway (ever hear kids at 6am?). I wish we could instead have "regular folk" campgrounds and "insane 19 year old" campgrounds.

[DizzyEdge]

I'd love it, except for one effect I could see that's related to the public drinking behaviour we discussed above. I could easily see people saying "hey, this is the drinking campground" and just going all apeshit. Which is not anything I'm interested in being around.

Banff used to do it perfectly at Tunnel Mountain. They had a "quiet" section and a "noisy" section. Want to party? Ask for "noisy". Want to actually sleep, but *GASP* have a beer or 2 on the long weekend? Ask for "quiet". And everyone was happy.

My real issue with your idea is that it still has the implication that drinking=wild out of control partying. I'm an old fuck, all I want to be able to do is quietly sit with a buddy having a few beers at 1am. We're quieter than most of the families anyway (ever hear kids at 6am?). I wish we could instead have "regular folk" campgrounds and "insane 19 year old" campgrounds.

Quiet and noisy would probably work better.

Unfortunately the big downfall of the "drinking" campsite (vs the dry one) is people will ruin it for themselves, like you indicated.

[DizzyEdge]

I wish we could instead have "regular folk" campgrounds and "insane 19 year old" campgrounds.

PartyBus(tm) campsites.

[Bigtime]

This is why my buddies and I would always find spots on crown land that we could camp on, with nobody around for miles. Good times, good times.

[lubicon]

I'd love it, except for one effect I could see that's related to the public drinking behaviour we discussed above. I could easily see people saying "hey, this is the drinking campground" and just going all apeshit. Which is not anything I'm interested in being around.

Banff used to do it perfectly at Tunnel Mountain. They had a "quiet" section and a "noisy" section. Want to party? Ask for "noisy". Want to actually sleep, but *GASP* have a beer or 2 on the long weekend? Ask for "quiet". And everyone was happy.

My real issue with your idea is that it still has the implication that drinking=wild out of control partying. I'm an old fuck, all I want to be able to do is quietly sit with a buddy having a few beers at 1am. We're quieter than most of the families anyway (ever hear kids at 6am?). I wish we could instead have "regular folk" campgrounds and "insane 19 year old" campgrounds.

Or all the 'old' people firing up their diesels at 7AM to break camp and start moving on to their next destination. These are the same folks who probably complain about the noise at 11:02 PM but think nothing of getting up at 6AM to start their day (and every one else's too).

[Radley77]

When I was in Sydney recently, they have decriminalized alcohol in public but there is also defined zoning where it is alcohol free. Seemed to work pretty good.

http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/community/documents/Homelessness/StreetDrinkingStrategyMay07.pdf

My preference is for legislation is mindful of the context of drinking.

[Dado]

Alcohol legislation in this province is incredibly behind the times. Allowing people to drink in public, drink past 2:00 am or hell, drink on patios that are not attached physically to a restaurant doesn't cause people to become delinquents and start punching babies. In fact, in many places that have deregulated drinking hours, crimes and disturbances related to drinking have fallen considerably. We need to change this.

It's not just Alberta - as far as I can tell it's the entire country. We have the exact same rules in Ontario and Jon Montgomery's infamous beer swilling stroll in Whistler along with police in Vancouver vainly trying to prevent foreigners from drinking in the streets during the Olympics shows that BC has the same rules too. Even Quebec has much the same nonsense regarding restaurant patios being surrounded by fencing.

Personally, I think these rules on fencing patios destroy the development of any kind of café culture.

[freeweed]

Or all the 'old' people firing up their diesels at 7AM to break camp and start moving on to their next destination. These are the same folks who probably complain about the noise at 11:02 PM but think nothing of getting up at 6AM to start their day (and every one else's too).

Oh yeah, them too. Part of me wishes Parks Canada would outright ban generators. I'm sorry, but it's a bloody campground. Not an outdoor rock concert, and not an RV park. You don't need to run a freaking genny to enjoy nature. They're noisy, they're polluting, and they're just about the exact opposite of what a park is supposed to be about. It's too bad so many backcountry areas are fire-free, because otherwise I'd just be doing that.

[suburb]

Hope you guys don't mind me putting us onto a tangent topic IE municipal politics and related items ...

One of the areas I'm particularly pleased about is Mayor Nenshi doubling up efforts in his role as ambassador for the City. He is really helping Calgary garner a fantastic International profile! Some of these trips and the like cost a pinch of money, but it is quite worth while in the long run. Looking forward to hearing more about the trade delegation he is leading on a trip to China.

[lubicon]

Going OT again (maybe we should start a new topic about liquor laws??)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/05/13/bc-terry-mulligan-wine-laws.html

[freeweed]

Going OT again (maybe we should start a new topic about liquor laws??)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/05/13/bc-terry-mulligan-wine-laws.html

Obviously this law is more complicated than the story implies, but I buy BC wine all the time in Alberta stores. Clearly it's not illegal to transport wine across the border.

But yeah, someone at work told me a while ago about this. Apparently I can actually have alcohol confiscated if I cross a provincial border. What the fuck is this, California? (Anyone who's ever driven into that state knows what I'm talking about)

[fusili]

Obviously this law is more complicated than the story implies, but I buy BC wine all the time in Alberta stores. Clearly it's not illegal to transport wine across the border.

But yeah, someone at work told me a while ago about this. Apparently I can actually have alcohol confiscated if I cross a provincial border. What the fuck is this, California? (Anyone who's ever driven into that state knows what I'm talking about)

All I know is that when we drive out to BC to go camping, we always have to be careful about the BC police pulling you over and making you dump out all your alcohol. I heard of a few guys who had to dump out a keg. :(

[mooky]

OT, but since we got into the Calgary/Toronto (Nenshi/Ford) comparisons so much during the election, I'll just leave this here:

Audit ordered into Mayor Ford’s campaign financing (http://www.thestar.com/news/article/990960--audit-ordered-into-mayor-ford-s-campaign-financing?bn=1)

[Wooster]

Accountability moves from the Mayor.

As promised the Mayor is publishing his meetings with people external to the City of Calgary.

Read about it here:
http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/05/mayor-nenshis-meetings-may-2010.html

Also, in the next few weeks he'll be publishing all his expenses online:

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/05/highlighting-accountability-at-mayors.html

[MalcolmTucker]

This is good, we have it (some what) for the federal government, it is time for Canada to be as accountable as post Watergate USA, and get into the 1970s.

[srperrycgy]

Accountability moves from the Mayor.

As promised the Mayor is publishing his meetings with people external to the City of Calgary.

Read about it here:
http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/05/mayor-nenshis-meetings-may-2010.html


May 2010 Josh? Typo there.

[Wooster]

^ ah thanks. We'll get that fixed.

[Bigtime]

Nenshi's a time traveler!

[Bigtime]

Zak Pashak just tweeted this:

Congratulations on deciding to run provincially @aldjohnmar - so you spent $250,000 of others people's money to win a seat you didn't want?

Can't find official confirmation of it anywhere yet.

[fusili]

This may be where Zak is getting it from:

FFWD Weekly (http://www.ffwdweekly.com/calgary-blogs/politics/2011/06/01/guess-which-calgary-alderman-may-jump-to-provincial-politics-760/)

[Calgarian]

I voted for Pashak, too bad he didn't win. I bet he is very much against the licensed restaurant limits Mar seems to support.

[Bigtime]

Ugh, our favorite alderman (Mar) decided to put forth a motion to have a plebiscite on the secondary suite issue for 2013. It looks as though council voted in favour of this.

So this issue could become the "it" issue for the 2013 election.

[You Need A Thneed]

Ugh, our favorite alderman (Mar) decided to put forth a motion to have a plebiscite on the secondary suite issue for 2013. It looks as though council voted in favour of this.

So this issue could become the "it" issue for the 2013 election.

I think the vote was to study the idea of a plebiscite. It passed 8-5, (Stevenson and Jones were away - would have likely been 10-5 with them there).

I don't like plebiscites in general, except for very specific cases. We pay council to educate themselves on issues, then make the decisions. Referring questions back to the public in general is nothing but getting a more uneducated decision.

Something that voting on the name of a park, that's where a plebiscite could be useful. Where there aren't really positives or negatives to any choice over another, it's purely a matter of preference.

[Radley77]

Agreed with You Need a Thneed that secondary suites aren't suitable for a plebiscite. I would prefer a study to be done on this issue, followed by a survey, then further policy recommendations to be done, followed by a vote by council. I think this would have a better result than just doing a plebiscite.

A survey could identify which areas of the city are in general support of secondary suites and which aren't. I live close to a major activity centre, so I think having secondary suites is important as it improves affordability, helps introduce a mix of different incomes to the neighbourhood as well as supports local businesses.

I think if a survey helped identified common areas where there is general support and where there isn't it might help create a secondary suite policy that is more tailored to the desires of Calgarians rather than treating this issue like a broad brush.

[MalcolmTucker]

The problem is that some councillors can't square the circle that surveys show widespread high levels of support for suites yet people complain about them to their offices. Even with support in the high 70s people some were saying that the surveys had to be wrong, that people in R-1s must somehow be underrepresented in phone surveys (when they are most likely overrepresented due to older demographics and likelyhood of having a land line).

[fusili]

The problem is that some councillors can't square the circle that surveys show widespread high levels of support for suites yet people complain about them to their offices. Even with support in the high 70s people some were saying that the surveys had to be wrong, that people in R-1s must somehow be underrepresented in phone surveys (when they are most likely overrepresented due to older demographics and likelyhood of having a land line).

A lot of councillors are still of the opinion that "one phone complaint represents a hundred angry voters." It doesn't, it represents one. Basic polling and statistics should be taught to all councillors, I am amazed at what they think passes for a scientific survey or a representative sample. DCU is the worst with her survey monkey surveys.

[monocle]

Has anyone brought up the Sound Bylaw vote?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/06/20/calgary-bylwaw-noise-test.html

What's Chabot's angle?

[DizzyEdge]

What do you think about this:

Contemporary art museum missing piece of Calgary’s art puzzle

http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/Contemporary+museum+missing+piece+Calgary+puzzle/5020193/story.html

----


I want an art gallery/reuse of the old science centre as much as anyone, but with the recent articles about a big property tax hit and the water treatment debt, discussing a "Property tax windfall" to be used for a new library seems like a guaranteed single-term for Nenshi.

[fusili]

What do you think about this:

Contemporary art museum missing piece of Calgary’s art puzzle

http://www.calgaryherald.com/travel/Contemporary+museum+missing+piece+Calgary+puzzle/5020193/story.html

----


I want an art gallery/reuse of the old science centre as much as anyone, but with the recent articles about a big property tax hit and the water treatment debt, discussing a "Property tax windfall" to be used for a new library seems like a guaranteed single-term for Nenshi.

Nenshi got saddled with crazy infrastructure debt and poor decision making from previous councils. Our greatest debt load is due to water infrastructure which was purely a matter of subsidizing greenfield subdivision. Other decisions like the airport tunnel, which many I believe have wrongly used as a lightning rod for anti-roads spending, are issues that previous councils dropped the ball on and now Nenshi has to fix.

The level of short term thinking on our City Council is atrocious. DCU is the worst in my opinion.

[MalcolmTucker]

At council apparently DCU atoned for her past sins, saying her rhetoric fighting taxes was misguided.

[DizzyEdge]

Nenshi got saddled with crazy infrastructure debt and poor decision making from previous councils. Our greatest debt load is due to water infrastructure which was purely a matter of subsidizing greenfield subdivision. Other decisions like the airport tunnel, which many I believe have wrongly used as a lightning rod for anti-roads spending, are issues that previous councils dropped the ball on and now Nenshi has to fix.

The level of short term thinking on our City Council is atrocious. DCU is the worst in my opinion.

I agree on all counts, but even so, when extra property tax money then appears during this fixing of problems created by past councils, it should probably be directed to fixing those problems.

[MichaelS]

Nenshi got saddled with crazy infrastructure debt and poor decision making from previous councils. Our greatest debt load is due to water infrastructure which was purely a matter of subsidizing greenfield subdivision. Other decisions like the airport tunnel, which many I believe have wrongly used as a lightning rod for anti-roads spending, are issues that previous councils dropped the ball on and now Nenshi has to fix.

The level of short term thinking on our City Council is atrocious. DCU is the worst in my opinion.

The water debt was more caused by previous council's not raising utility rates high enough to cover the actual costs. When the water and sanitary levies were dropped in 1999 in favour of higher transportation levies, the agreement with industry was this was possible because the utilities could be self funding, transportation could not. It led to higher overall acreage assessments (the loss of water and sanitary was less than the gain in transportation) paid by industry. After this agreement, when administration brought forward to Council what the resultant utility rates would need to be, council did not want to raise them that high, and hence deficit spending occurred.

[Boris2k7]

I want an art gallery/reuse of the old science centre as much as anyone, but with the recent articles about a big property tax hit and the water treatment debt, discussing a "Property tax windfall" to be used for a new library seems like a guaranteed single-term for Nenshi.

I certainly agree on the tax angle. I think Nenshi might be stretching his political capital a bit thin, which is dangerous in this kind of economic environment. The property tax is pretty much a "do-anything" tax for the city, so they can use it for pretty much anything they want, but it would be best to probably focus on bread and butter issues for a while after such a controversial decision like the airport tunnel.

On a cultural side, I do appreciate the efforts and big changes that have been in the works for a while. The upgrades to the zoo over time have been fantastic, and Calgary will soon have a new science centre. People attend cultural events downtown at places like the Jack Singer or the Grand Theatre in surprising numbers (not that I have any, just going by observation here). The plans for the Glenbow sound exciting. The Sports Hall of Fame is something I want to check out sometime, and the National Music Centre could transform a district.

But... BUT... we are not "there" yet. Not nearly. Not even close.

There's a large gap between where Calgary is and the cultural additions having impact on the city's profile. Certainly not to the point of encouraging people to visit Calgary for its amazing cultural institutions. For the most part, I'm finding that many people here, in Paris, have absolutely no idea what Calgary is, let alone where.

Okay, so let me take a step back here. Let's suppose I take the opposite position and say "but Boris, you have to start somewhere, and if you don't take some risks the city will never get very far." And I'd say "yes, that's true." And indeed, many of the performers and theatre troupes and musicians and artists have all shouldered the risk of taking their work to Calgary and for many of them it's paid off.

My concern, then, is that by funding an art gallery or museum entirely with public money, the city could fuel an expectation or belief that a public investment in arts in the short term will pay dividends -- in the form of increased tourism -- in the near future.

Which I don't think will happen.

... and with the taxpayer holding the bag, of course.

On the other hand, bold initiatives and cultural spending are actually quite popular, in spite of angry letters to the editor. And if projects come in under budget and on time, that could boost an image of sound fiscal management. But that's a bit of a gamble.

P.S. There are two things that Calgary has that are distinct from Paris and which are somewhat relevant to this conversation. One is natural, green spaces. Paris is absolutely devoid of greenery, sans the mature trees that line the streets. The embankments and plazas and courtyards are virtually all hard surfaces here. So that's one thing that Calgary should protect and nurture. The other thing is that Calgary has an amazing culture of philanthropism (from both private individuals and from corporations) that it can take advantage of.

P.P.S. I doubt anyone is going to be impressed by the re-use of a decades-old, brutalist bunker, but I've also never liked the Science Centre (and I like brutalism!). The West End isn't an appealing area and the buildings near the Science Centre (sans Mewata Armoury) are absolutely brutal.

EDIT: Holy crap, wall of text. Maybe I should have put this on my blog. :\

[freeweed]

P.S. There are two things that Calgary has that are distinct from Paris and which are somewhat relevant to this conversation. One is natural, green spaces. Paris is absolutely devoid of greenery, sans the mature trees that line the streets. The embankments and plazas and courtyards are virtually all hard surfaces here. So that's one thing that Calgary should protect and nurture. The other thing is that Calgary has an amazing culture of philanthropism (from both private individuals and from corporations) that it can take advantage of.

The dog shit & cigarette butts everywhere, and sand/dirt medians as opposed to grass were also notable distinctions. You're right though - there's definitely a lack of greenspace in a lot of other places. Calgary may be semi-arid, but we do at least manage to retain a lot of vegetation (for 2 months out of the year anyway). It's something I wish we'd invest even more in - because once established, it doesn't "brown up" as quickly. Older areas like Mount Royal stay green for 4-5 months every year.

[Stang]

On the topic of urban vegetation, I was musing during my commute that perhaps the city should consider using wild grasses beside major roadways (and in medians) instead of trying to make everything look too neat an manicured. I know nothing about gasses and the like, so please interject any knowledge that you've got. But I would think that by letting wild grasses thrive, we would see a reduction in maintenance costs (or at least a shift to other green areas, like actual parks), reduced weeds, and it would actually look nicer to have wild grass than poorly maintained and weedy grass.

Given our semi-arid climate, I'm not sure why we (as a city) try and keep manicured boulevards and rights-of-way when, quite honestly, native wild grass would require next to no maintenance and actually looks quite nice.

[fusili]

On the topic of urban vegetation, I was musing during my commute that perhaps the city should consider using wild grasses beside major roadways (and in medians) instead of trying to make everything look too neat an manicured. I know nothing about gasses and the like, so please interject any knowledge that you've got. But I would think that by letting wild grasses thrive, we would see a reduction in maintenance costs (or at least a shift to other green areas, like actual parks), reduced weeds, and it would actually look nicer to have wild grass than poorly maintained and weedy grass.

Given our semi-arid climate, I'm not sure why we (as a city) try and keep manicured boulevards and rights-of-way when, quite honestly, native wild grass would require next to no maintenance and actually looks quite nice.

I think I posted something very similar a week or so back, but maybe in a different thread. I would be all about natural flowers, shrubs and grasses. Fescue, crocuses etc. etc.

[Stang]

I think I posted something very similar a week or so back, but maybe in a different thread. I would be all about natural flowers, shrubs and grasses. Fescue, crocuses etc. etc.

My apologies - I didn't see that one. But in that case: I agree! ;) I'd love an assortment of things that thrive in this climate on their own.

[freeweed]

On the topic of urban vegetation, I was musing during my commute that perhaps the city should consider using wild grasses beside major roadways (and in medians) instead of trying to make everything look too neat an manicured. I know nothing about gasses and the like, so please interject any knowledge that you've got. But I would think that by letting wild grasses thrive, we would see a reduction in maintenance costs (or at least a shift to other green areas, like actual parks), reduced weeds, and it would actually look nicer to have wild grass than poorly maintained and weedy grass.

Given our semi-arid climate, I'm not sure why we (as a city) try and keep manicured boulevards and rights-of-way when, quite honestly, native wild grass would require next to no maintenance and actually looks quite nice.

I'm no horticulturalist, but... the "grassy" areas on the embankments around Stoney trail seem to be seeded with what looks like natural-ish grasses. Combine that with the inevitable thistle/dandelion invasion and after a few years you have what appears to be somewhat "native" looking greenspace. And the stuff grows like mad. It has to be mowed vigorously or it becomes almost a road hazard. Certainly unsightly by modern standards.

I think what a lot of people forget is that "wild grass" is pretty much the very definition of weeds. Weeds, after all, are just anything that grows on its own without maintenance. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of dandelions and other weeds (although I hate thistles, nasty things). But your average person is going to loathe the natural look. Honestly, ask the person next to you sometime to explain why dandelions are weeds and roses are considered beautiful. It all comes down to how much work it takes to grow it.

[Stang]

^ I too am no horticulturalist either. Just look at my lawn!

I agree that the grasses around Stoney seem to be more wild in nature, which is sort of what I am thinking for the city. Big, wide roads like Sarcee, John Laurie, etc. could all do fine with wild grasses.

I could be wrong, but I think that wild grasses are more resistant to weeds. And by weeds I'm referring to thistles, dandelions, etc. On places like Nose Hill it seems that there are fewer weeds, although they may be there but just hidden in the grass.

And I fully agree that a portion of the population wouldn't like it. But a portion of the population doesn't like pesticides, or using city resources to manicure boulevards, etc. But I can see the Sun comments section already. :rolleyes:

It is a similar situation to the annual snow removal debate. "I'd like my cul-de-sac cleared to pavement within 3 hours of a major snowfall" followed by "Nenshi better not increase my taxes this year" followed by "my cul-de-sac is still covered in gravel - I demand better street sweeping" and so on...

[kw5150]

Has anyone brought up the Sound Bylaw vote?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2011/06/20/calgary-bylwaw-noise-test.html

What's Chabot's angle?

Was just reading the comments.........not too bad actually. It is a good debate; BUT, I still cant stand when people say "you knew where you were moving, so deal with the noise" Guess what? I moved downtown because it was in my price range! I really wish people would stop being so selfish. Bike mufflers are loud enough from the factory. Anything louder is unnaceptable, especially at 2 in the morning.

It seems like if you want to win a debate about anything these days, you just say "Its for safety". Accidents on the road happen, loud pipes or not! When you are on a bike, you need to be extra careful, not extra loud! I say we keep pushing this enforcement.......the bikers with the straight pipes really are ruining it for everyone and giving motorbikes a bad name.

Dont even get me started on the massive jacked up trucks with the loud pipes.........It is time that we all just started to respect everyone.

I remeber a time when I saw a harley, I thought it was a good thing. Now they just piss me off.

[Radley77]

Was just reading the comments.........not too bad actually. It is a good debate; BUT, I still cant stand when people say "you knew where you were moving, so deal with the noise" Guess what? I moved downtown because it was in my price range! I really wish people would stop being so selfish. Bike mufflers are loud enough from the factory. Anything louder is unnaceptable, especially at 2 in the morning.

It seems like if you want to win a debate about anything these days, you just say "Its for safety". Accidents on the road happen, loud pipes or not! When you are on a bike, you need to be extra careful, not extra loud! I say we keep pushing this enforcement.......the bikers with the straight pipes really are ruining it for everyone and giving motorbikes a bad name.

Dont even get me started on the massive jacked up trucks with the loud pipes.........It is time that we all just started to respect everyone.

I remeber a time when I saw a harley, I thought it was a good thing. Now they just piss me off.

One of the things I was thinking about was that I understand motorcyclists safety concerns.

I was wondering what the minimum distance is for tailgating, and whether this has been quantified to a specific distance? I saw a awful mess of a crash yesterday and obvious it was from driver inattention while tailgating. When I am out driving I allow the motorist in front of me about a 3 second window, whereas with a motorbike it's a 5+ second window because am aware that it is increased safety risk.

Overall, I wish that Calgary pedestrian, motorists, biker and motorcyclists would try to adopt a philosophy of everyone getting home safely.

I don't think that loud vehichles are desirable in populated areas, especially densely populated areas. This is just being courteous and neighbourly.

[fusili]

I was wondering what the minimum distance is for tailgating, and whether this has been quantified to a specific distance? I saw a awful mess of a crash yesterday and obvious it was from driver inattention while tailgating. When I am out driving I allow the motorist in front of me about a 3 second window, whereas with a motorbike it's a 5+ second window because am aware that it is increased safety risk.


Don't get me started on tailgating or just bad driving in general. Driving out on the TransCanada this weekend out to Canmore I was constantly amazed at how much people use their brakes when highway driving. If you have to use your brakes, you are probably following too close. Leave a comfortable cushion for the car in front of you, and if they slow down, just take your foot off the gas and wait to see what happens.

I hate drivers, who at any sign of a change on the road, hit their brakes and cause a ridiculous chain reaction. There was one point we slowed down to 20km, not because of an accident or anything like that, but probably because a bunch of people were driving too close and one person made a dangerous lane change, sending the whole line of traffic behind them into a chain reaction of braking until it got to the point traffic actually slowed to 20km. :koko::koko::koko:

[Bigtime]

So true Fusili, the QE2 south from Red Deer to Calgary was like that yesterday afternoon. Cruising along at 120 and then all of a sudden everyone is down to 60, then back up to 120, then down again. Rinse and repeat all the way until Airdrie where the third lane opened up the traffic that had been yo-yo'ing southbound.

[Ramsayfarian]

Was just reading the comments.........not too bad actually. It is a good debate; BUT, I still cant stand when people say "you knew where you were moving, so deal with the noise" Guess what? I moved downtown because it was in my price range! I really wish people would stop being so selfish. Bike mufflers are loud enough from the factory. Anything louder is unnaceptable, especially at 2 in the morning.

It seems like if you want to win a debate about anything these days, you just say "Its for safety". Accidents on the road happen, loud pipes or not! When you are on a bike, you need to be extra careful, not extra loud! I say we keep pushing this enforcement.......the bikers with the straight pipes really are ruining it for everyone and giving motorbikes a bad name.

Dont even get me started on the massive jacked up trucks with the loud pipes.........It is time that we all just started to respect everyone.

I remeber a time when I saw a harley, I thought it was a good thing. Now they just piss me off.

I have to agree with you there. Anyone who relies on loud pipes to save them shouldn't be driving. If anything loud pipes can cause accidents. I once saw a buddy pass a car on the right who was stuck behind someone who decided to come to a complete stop instead of merging. The sound of the bike startled the driver so much the guy rear ended the car infront of him.

I think the city should also add remote car entry onto the sound bylaw. Do we really need to activate the horn every time you lock or unlock your vehicle. Can't the blinking of one's lights suffice?

[fusili]

I think the city should also add remote car entry onto the sound bylaw. Do we really need to activate the horn every time you lock or unlock your vehicle. Can't the blinking of one's lights suffice?

Or how about car alarms? Why have a car alarm that honks and beeps and annoys everyone in the neighbourhood. Good car anti-theft systems simply shut the car down and alert the security company. If a car alarm goes off in my neighbourhood I would rather the person steal it, just to stop the noise.

[Ramsayfarian]

Or how about car alarms? Why have a car alarm that honks and beeps and annoys everyone in the neighbourhood. Good car anti-theft systems simply shut the car down and alert the security company. If a car alarm goes off in my neighbourhood I would rather the person steal it, just to stop the noise.

Those people should have their cars crushed by wrecker. When I used to have a Harley, I loved setting off car alarms with my loud pipes. Gulf Canada Square Parkade was great for that.

[monocle]

I hate drivers, who at any sign of a change on the road, hit their brakes and cause a ridiculous chain reaction.

OMFuckingG, this.

This is them main reason for congestion on Deerfoot at places like the Calf Robe IMO. I'd like to see a 10' tall solid fence built down the centre of Deerfoot to limit the impact of the rubberneckers, who simply must see what's going on over there, in the nothing-to-do-with-me oncoming lanes.

I wonder how much this premature, unnecessary braking is due to people driving automatics? A good tip that the person ahead is a twit is the two hand steering wheel clench. I find it often betrays the driver's lack of confidence and skill.

[Radley77]

Don't get me started on tailgating or just bad driving in general. Driving out on the TransCanada this weekend out to Canmore I was constantly amazed at how much people use their brakes when highway driving. If you have to use your brakes, you are probably following too close. Leave a comfortable cushion for the car in front of you, and if they slow down, just take your foot off the gas and wait to see what happens.

I hate drivers, who at any sign of a change on the road, hit their brakes and cause a ridiculous chain reaction. There was one point we slowed down to 20km, not because of an accident or anything like that, but probably because a bunch of people were driving too close and one person made a dangerous lane change, sending the whole line of traffic behind them into a chain reaction of braking until it got to the point traffic actually slowed to 20km. :koko::koko::koko:

I was on TransCanada as well this weekend and saw a good share of poor driving... IMO, of overly agressive drivers, inattentive drivers, and overly timid drivers I find the worst for physical safety is the inattentive driver.

The other day I was listening to my radio in the car and saw a scrolling text ad (RDS?) from the radio station. IMO, radio stations shouldn't be allowed to sell media that is a distraction from having eyes on the road. That couple milliseconds of inattention is the difference between having a smooth transition to a slower pace and selfpropogating traffic wave or worse a traffic accident.

[Ferreth]

The other day I was listening to my radio in the car and saw a scrolling text ad (RDS?) from the radio station. IMO, radio stations shouldn't be allowed to sell media that is a distraction from having eyes on the road. That couple milliseconds of inattention is the difference between having a smooth transition to a slower pace and selfpropogating traffic wave or worse a traffic accident.

Ugh. You can't take your eyes off the road for a second on NB Deerfoot between Glenmore and the bridge construction. Constant 0>30>0km/hr driving. I'd love for someone to sue the radio station for distraction causing an accident on scrolling ads. Should be banned as part of the distracted driving laws.

[kw5150]

I have to agree with you there. Anyone who relies on loud pipes to save them shouldn't be driving. If anything loud pipes can cause accidents. I once saw a buddy pass a car on the right who was stuck behind someone who decided to come to a complete stop instead of merging. The sound of the bike startled the driver so much the guy rear ended the car infront of him.

I think the city should also add remote car entry onto the sound bylaw. Do we really need to activate the horn every time you lock or unlock your vehicle. Can't the blinking of one's lights suffice?

I also think the horn thing when you lock your car is uneccessary. Aren't car companies trying to phase that out? I think that GM may have been the worst offender for a while. My car does it on the second click and I try to never let that happen.

[kw5150]

Don't get me started on tailgating or just bad driving in general. Driving out on the TransCanada this weekend out to Canmore I was constantly amazed at how much people use their brakes when highway driving. If you have to use your brakes, you are probably following too close. Leave a comfortable cushion for the car in front of you, and if they slow down, just take your foot off the gas and wait to see what happens.

I hate drivers, who at any sign of a change on the road, hit their brakes and cause a ridiculous chain reaction. There was one point we slowed down to 20km, not because of an accident or anything like that, but probably because a bunch of people were driving too close and one person made a dangerous lane change, sending the whole line of traffic behind them into a chain reaction of braking until it got to the point traffic actually slowed to 20km. :koko::koko::koko:

What are brakes? I dont think my car has those.......:)

[Stang]

OMFuckingG, this.

This is them main reason for congestion on Deerfoot at places like the Calf Robe IMO. I'd like to see a 10' tall solid fence built down the centre of Deerfoot to limit the impact of the rubberneckers, who simply must see what's going on over there, in the nothing-to-do-with-me oncoming lanes.

To a higher barrier in the median: absolutely, that would be great. In Italy on the autostradas (main highways) you can't even see the other side. Just a nice, high steel barrier. There could be a zombie apocalypse on the other side and I wouldn't be the wiser.

[Bassic Lab]

OMFuckingG, this.

This is them main reason for congestion on Deerfoot at places like the Calf Robe IMO. I'd like to see a 10' tall solid fence built down the centre of Deerfoot to limit the impact of the rubberneckers, who simply must see what's going on over there, in the nothing-to-do-with-me oncoming lanes.

I wonder how much this premature, unnecessary braking is due to people driving automatics? A good tip that the person ahead is a twit is the two hand steering wheel clench. I find it often betrays the driver's lack of confidence and skill.

I think the problem with the Calf Robe bridge has more to do with some drivers fearing the curves as opposed to them watching what happens on the other side. People seem to slow down even in light to non-existant traffic. It makes sense during parts of the winter when, quite frankly, it is not safe to travel on it at high speed. Of course, during the summer it is just annoying.

[monocle]

I think the problem with the Calf Robe bridge has more to do with some drivers fearing the curves as opposed to them watching what happens on the other side. People seem to slow down even in light to non-existant traffic. It makes sense during parts of the winter when, quite frankly, it is not safe to travel on it at high speed. Of course, during the summer it is just annoying.


I don't disagree about the curve causing slowdowns, but throw in a set of flashing cherries on the other side, and it's down to 40 immediately.

Down in the States, I've seen vertical louvers on top of the median. They make it hard to see on coming traffic unless you look backwards. Maybe something like that could be a compromise?

[Stang]

^ The big problem would be funding the project. It took years and numerous bad accidents to get a simple post and cable system installed on the grassy sections of median, for example. Rubbernecking, and the associated delays and accidents, are here to stay I'm afraid.

[freeweed]

Don't get me started on tailgating or just bad driving in general. Driving out on the TransCanada this weekend out to Canmore I was constantly amazed at how much people use their brakes when highway driving. If you have to use your brakes, you are probably following too close. Leave a comfortable cushion for the car in front of you, and if they slow down, just take your foot off the gas and wait to see what happens.

I hate drivers, who at any sign of a change on the road, hit their brakes and cause a ridiculous chain reaction. There was one point we slowed down to 20km, not because of an accident or anything like that, but probably because a bunch of people were driving too close and one person made a dangerous lane change, sending the whole line of traffic behind them into a chain reaction of braking until it got to the point traffic actually slowed to 20km. :koko::koko::koko:

I find quite a lot of this is a direct result of drivers trundling along in the left lane not going any faster than the right. People attempt to pass, and the left lane bottlenecks something fierce. If we enforced our damn "slower traffic keep right" laws, it would help this immensely.

I drive the TCH a freaking ton and it basically has 2 states - one in which all traffic is spread out and moving safely, and one where some jackass is in the left lane when they shouldn't be. Which ends up screwing up BOTH lanes (half of the right lane then moves into the left) and leading to panic braking all over the place.

[Wooster]

Mayor Nenshi posted his office expenses - part of his Accountability campaign platform.

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/06/...-may-2011.html

Today at Council - the big item is the Cycling Strategy.

[freeweed]

I think the city should also add remote car entry onto the sound bylaw. Do we really need to activate the horn every time you lock or unlock your vehicle. Can't the blinking of one's lights suffice?

While I like the idea, it's virtually impossible to disable this on many vehicles. It's the first thing I do when I buy a new car and I also try to do it on any rental I get, but sometimes I cannot figure out how.

The worst, by far, is the idiot "panic alarm" that every single goddamn new car comes with. On my SUV, it's the exact size and shape of the "unlock" button, just on the other side of a perfectly symmetrical key fob. So if you use it in pocket, you have a 50% chance of turning on the goddamn car alarm. Most useless invention ever, and I can't believe a couple of panicky whiners managed to get these things standard. The worst part is that the natural way of holding the key fob and pressing "unlock" often triggers it by accident - and it's not just me. Several friends have done this as well, once rather late at night while camping. I felt like a total tool.

They should be illegal to put in vehicles, period. They serve no purpose other than to make scared people feel "safe". I've never heard of a single instance of one saving anyone. But I sure as hell hear a lot of them going off by accident (at least once a week in my experience).

[freeweed]

I wonder how much this premature, unnecessary braking is due to people driving automatics? A good tip that the person ahead is a twit is the two hand steering wheel clench. I find it often betrays the driver's lack of confidence and skill.

It's fun to be a car snob and blame the transmission but there are poor drivers of all types of vehicles. It's perfectly possible to drive an automatic without panic braking, and hell, virtually any modern automatic will smoothly and safely let you down-shift at speed to avoid braking period. Just as it's very possible to watch manual transmission drivers ride their brakes constantly on the highway (you don't use a clutch much at speed).

[fusili]

I find quite a lot of this is a direct result of drivers trundling along in the left lane not going any faster than the right. People attempt to pass, and the left lane bottlenecks something fierce. If we enforced our damn "slower traffic keep right" laws, it would help this immensely.

I drive the TCH a freaking ton and it basically has 2 states - one in which all traffic is spread out and moving safely, and one where some jackass is in the left lane when they shouldn't be. Which ends up screwing up BOTH lanes (half of the right lane then moves into the left) and leading to panic braking all over the place.

Don't get me started on that. You should be in the right lane at all times, unless you are passing. Even if you are going faster than traffic in front of you, unless you are passing them, you should be in the right lane. Once you pass someone and there is room to move back over to the right, move back over to the right!! ARGHH!!!!! HULK SMASH!!!!

[freeweed]

Don't get me started on that. You should be in the right lane at all times, unless you are passing. Even if you are going faster than traffic in front of you, unless you are passing them, you should be in the right lane. Once you pass someone and there is room to move back over to the right, move back over to the right!! ARGHH!!!!! HULK SMASH!!!!

Technically no. If you're going faster than the average flow of traffic in the right lane, AND YOU'RE NOT IMPEDING ANYONE, sticking in the left lane is not only perfectly legal in almost any jurisdiction, it's much safer. Needless lane changes every single time you pass a car are incredibly dangerous and can lead to a lot of cutting people off. The constant weaving in and out of the left lane can and does cause serious accidents for a variety of reasons (basically, because any lane change is dangerous). When the highway isn't terribly busy, I sit in the left lane for hours - BUT I WATCH MY REARVIEW MIRROR VERY CLOSELY. Which you're supposed to do while driving anyway. I get the hell out of the way when anyone comes up behind me.

My sister-in-law drives this way. Bless her heart for getting out of the left lane, but she's so hell-bent on getting back to the right that she does it WAY too soon. And too often. She's convinced that it's illegal to remain in the left lane, which even in highly regulated Washington (they have some of the stricter laws on this I've read) is not the case.

[Radley77]

Mayor Nenshi posted his office expenses - part of his Accountability campaign platform.

http://blog.calgarymayor.ca/2011/06/...-may-2011.html

Today at Council - the big item is the Cycling Strategy.

Do you know how to find out what time for the cycling strategy? I was at city council last nite to hang out and watch and it was delayed...