Thoughts on the Peace Bridge
————————————————————————–
Of the core issues in the coming election it seems that the Peace Bridge has left the strongest mark on voter’s minds.
As someone looking to unseat an incumbent Alderman the outrage over Peace Bridge could be seen as something to score some easy points on. I find something uncomfortable about this though.
I am excited for the Peace Bridge. I think it looks interesting, and I like that there will be lots of ways for cyclists and pedestrians to get back and forth across the Bow river near downtown. I think our rivers in Calgary are one of our best assets and that they should be as accessible as possible.
Why I am disappointed in city council about the Peace Bridge is that no one seems to have made efforts to explain the positives, or some truths of the situation to the people of Calgary. They seem to be hiding from this issue and I think its the lack of clarification that makes council look guilty. Councillors may blame the local media for this situation, but I think we need to find a way to better step over the local media and explain these issues to Calgarians directly.
Here is what I understand of the situation.
The City of Calgary was given access to a one time chunk of money from the province (i.e. the Peace Bridge was not paid for by your municipal tax dollars) that was ‘earmarked’ to be used for a project meant to increase and support sustainable forms of transportation (like walking and cycling). The procurement of the design contract was not handled very well, and wasn’t as open as it should have been (for example- to some of our Calgarian designers), and ended up going to a famous international designer. The bridge is located very closely to two other bridges which seems like overkill to some people. The announcement of the project was made at a tough time financially for a lot of Calgarians and the whole project seemed lavish and wasteful. The city instantly seemed to backpedal and almost hide behind the military by naming it the Peace Bridge and trying to tie veterans to it. This made veterans angry.
The price tag on the bridge seemed very high to people and became a focus- despite being a relatively realistic number for this type of project and a small fraction of the money the city spends building ways for cars to get around in our growing footprint.
But then somehow the Peace Bridge became the prime example of a flailing city council. The first question I hear when I start to discuss local issues is often “what do you think of the Peace Bridge?”. I don’t think that a 25 million dollar public works project, paid for by the province, making an effort to support sustainable transportation and bringing interesting new design work to Calgary should really take the focus in this election though. And shame on Rick Bell and other local media who manipulated public opinion so much on this issue- seemingly just to prove that they could. Yes Rick- I do still want your vote, I just want you to stop hating this city so much.
The Peace Bridge, and some issues around it, do bring light to certain problems in Calgary- but I feel like it should not be an election focus. Calgarians have not been given a clear picture of the actual story of the Peace Bridge and it has become a red herring taking away focus from the bigger picture issues that need to be addressed in our city.
After reading this I felt like I was sitting in front of your podium, and after the last sentence, I stood up and applauded you as hard as I could for 5 minutes!
I 100% agree with your direction. I’m excited to see and hear your ideas for Ward 8!
Thanks for the write up, Zak. I enjoyed it.
The famous international designer you mention, the guy that designed the bridge, is Santiago Calatrava. Here’s a link to his wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiago_Calatrava
It would be great if the newspaper could do a feature piece on Calatrava to help Calgarians understand who he is and what impact his designs are having in the world. Once you know who he is and see his work, it’s hard not to be excited about the whole thing.
Zak,
I live in, and own a small business in your ward and after reading this post – you have my vote! I totally agree with your perspective on sprawl and hope that our city can get it under control going forward.
Keep it up!
An issue vital to voters is HOW we spend taxpayer dollars. A bridge that could have cost $2.5M with standard design criteria, grew by 1000%. Calgary received 1 bridge, when we should have gotten 10, a decision that would have been a huge boost to our efforts to create a sustainable infrastructure system focused on Human Powered Transit. Voters don’t like that politicians/admin/bureaucrats (Hubbel) went on a spending spree & we will see some of their dissatisfaction on 18Oct10.
The debate has become embarrasingly simplistic, similar to the Afghanistan/Support the troops debacle.
Cost effective Pedestrian/Bike Bridges are important to the sustainable infrastructure of Calgary. $25M bridges are not.
There is more on this issue here:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=364261529302&topic=15281
Good post, Zak.
The statement “i.e. the Peace Bridge was not paid for by your municipal tax dollars” is only just barely true. I believe that it should have been a priority for council and administration to find creative ways to spend this money INSTEAD of municipal tax dollars on things that NEEDED to be done.
In the end, though, it doesn’t matter that it wasn’t paid for by “municpal tax dollars”. All taxes, municipal, provincial and federal are paid by you and me. They shouldn’t be spent on unnecessary things.
My concerns are:
PEACE BRIDGE
The issue of the bridge for me is that:
a) it wasn’t tendered for architectural design – failing to include our Calgary and Alberta designers, who incidentally pay heavy taxes-business/property/personal in Calgary and Alberta, is an insult to the citizens and professions of Calgary and Alberta;
b) decision to award was apparently made by a lone employee and enough current city aldermen stood back and didn’t veto it or turn it down. That employee who overstepped their boundary should have been stopped by their boss before it went that far but any “fee” because of the cancellation should have been paid by insurance (we do have wrongful action by employees in our policy, I would hope) and policy stated in black and white for any bureaucrats that think they run the City rather than the citizens;
c) the extra cost in construction was not addressed at the time and there is that issue due to the “wow” factor and, as well, little consideration was given to Calgary’s climate and the cost to maintain the structure in operating costs;
d) we did not need another bridge so close to the others and there were other areas I’m sure that could have benefited for a crossing or two (IF that in truth was the real reason bridge needed to be built) that was modest in nature but viable for our needs.
e) has current council done anything to show that there have been lessons learned from the “whoops” – of which there have been far too many under their watch.
I strongly suggest that no infrastructure/park etc should have a plaque that states the mayor and council or provincial MLA’s, MP’s etc on the structure. It should say citizens of Calgary, Alberta or whatever area that it is in and whose monies were used to pay for it.
DENSITY
I agree that more interest in inner city living is desirable however –
a) can it be made affordable given the land and building costs;
b) without safe and interesting green area for children, why would parents want to live in high rises to raise a family;
c) who would have to deal with children issues – many of who would probably end up riding tricycles up and down halls? How do we incorporate and maintain low cost units/housing?
A bigger question is how do we make urban sprawl affordable and yet viable without utilizing so much land and having green spaces (either inner or outer areas) that parents don’t feel their children are safe alone in doesn’t help.
TRANSIT
Building up transit use is good but it has to be realistic and creating bus/bike routes that literally cause traffic jams (see Crowchild/17th and 9th Ave) is short sighted and a “feel good” project only. Making traffic flow easier does not create more use of cars – it does tone down anxiety / road rage as well as more productive use of time and there are people that need a car to do their job. Get the businesses involved in how transit will work better for them and therefore more acceptable for their employees. Taking buses and LRT and an hour and a half to get back and forth to your job doesn’t work for many.
SKILLS/EXPERIENCE-
What skills does an alderman bring to the table is one that everyone should be asking. These are necessary BEFORE applying for the position and not learning at citizen’s expense once elected. Once elected, any training/upgrading of knowledge needed should be at the Alderman’s expense. It is part of the job and, more often than not, it is for future job prospects? Also, council needs to stop thinking of their own ward all the time and consider the city as a whole, trading favors is out as well as constantly considering how your actions get you re-elected in your ward during your term is unacceptable. There should be term limits with those terms staggered so that there are experienced alderman on council at all times.
Excess Campaign funds should be donated to charity or returned to the donor. All contributions over $100. should be published BEFORE Voting Day. Easy to do with web sites these days and spreadsheets. Surely any competent candidate would have this information at their fingertips so they know where they stand financially. If not, they better withdraw as they certainly wouldn’t be qualified to run a city.
Nice post regarding the bridge. I too think the reality of it has been blown out of proportion and the negative points of it over discussed. The positives to me outweigh the negatives. (Although Paul Hughes does have a great point)
I too am excited to hear your ideas for Ward 8 downtown. Hopefully they include the recycling program extended to apartment and condo complexes.
Hi Zak,
As Paul Hughes said:
“…Cost effective Pedestrian/Bike Bridges are important to the sustainable infrastructure of Calgary.$25M bridges are not.”
To put it into perspective, the city of Denver is building a(nother) Calatrava designed high level LRT bridge over a major roadway that leads to DIA. Total cost (at double the initial price) is currently at $60M. The interesting thing is, a similar bridge in downtown Denver which is made of precast cost just under $11M:
“The basic, prefab, roll-out light-rail bridge RTD just erected above the Sixth Avenue freeway cost all of $10.8 million, so a Calatrava could hardly cost less than $60 million.”
taken from:
http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/07/santiago_calatravas_dia_project_a_bridge_too_far.php
A little more light reading on Calatrava:
“…The commuter-rail crossing, located about a mile and a half from the airport, is a symmetrical, tied-arch, steel-and-concrete suspension bridge with a 620-foot span (overall length: 720 feet). A box girder deck hangs from a single arch by cables and supports flanking orthotropic decks on steel ribs, which carry the east- and west-bound rail traffic. The distance from the roadway to the top of the bridge is 144 feet. According to engineer Gabriel Calatrava, Santiago Calatrava’s son, the bridge’s deck—without train tracks—will most likely be manufactured off-site and then “launched” into place, using temporary supports to limit traffic disruptions on Peña Boulevard.”
taken from:
http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/2010/07/100730calatrava.asp
Zak, I appreciate your perspective, but when you compare two current Calatrava projects… the timing and the costs involved is just wrong. Our Peace Bridge should be gilded in gold.
Zak, I think you are right on. I cross the river everyday on my bicycle on one of the adjacent bridges. I can certainly tell you that the current bridges are over capacity and not designed for pedestrian and cycling traffic at the same time. With the core and adjacent communities intensifying, this deficiency will only get worse.
The thing that bothers me the most though, is why people only complain about the pedestrian bridge. Why is it we can’t spend 25 million on a bridge for pedestrians and cyclists, but no one bats an eye when we blow $100+ million on the infamous GE5 intersection, or the multiple billions spent on a ring road that has turned into a giant C?
Living in the inner city, I would like my taxes, which btw are higher than the suburbs, to be spent here, not on endless highways and interchanges in the sticks, where I will never use them. Good on you for standing up for us.
Peace bridge – tendering would have produced a non-entity bridge like the one going downstream.
Encana, when choosing an architect for the Bow building, didn’t tender, but went to Norman Foster, world class, world known, just like Calatrava.
There will be intangible benefits from choosing him, in raising the profile of the city.
Not enough bicycle traffic to justify multiple bridges, so more is better argument, while interesting at first, doesn’t stand up.
I live in Ward 8 and have lived downtown for 12 years.
I find it really funny how we can spend 100 million dollars on an interchange and there is more howling over this bridge.
I have followed the Peace Bridge a lot because I find it interesting. I am STUNNED at most people’s lack of interest in having something different.
I for one can’t wait to go across it and see it lit up at night.
I’ll give you this over John Mar’s website.
No where on his website can you provide and read feedback (whether positive or negative) like your site Zak. Kudos for letting people vent and provide their thoughts on you and your campaign…and not filtering it. Good luck.
GW
PS – my 2 cents
City council’s #1 focus should be on moving people in the most effective/efficient/clean manner (and get a C-train to the airport already!). They should not be increasing our taxes to pay for infrastructure out in the burbs where new development occurs. That cost should be 100% with the developers who ‘choose’ to develop out there. Incentives for developers to build “up” and within the inner city should be encouraged. This will provide those with more access to city transportation due to limited or no means of commuting in a vehicle, as well as provide affordable housing closer to the core. It’ll also increase the tax base within the core, which can then be used to further enhance the core’s appeal and safety
Our tax dollars should not be going to wards/communities to build hockey rinks and other leisure facilities! I’m all in favour of sporting activities, however it should be 100% up to each individual community to decide, pay, and manage these (ie: not with tax dollars). I am in favour of my tax dollars being used to pay for green space development and expanding paths and walkways for all to use.
Finally, what ever happened to plebiscites during elections? It seems to me that most of our current contentious issues could have been democratically voiced by us all, and likely increased the number of people coming to vote if they knew plebiscites were on the ballot. Perhaps council needs to work harder at getting these onto future ballots.
Plebiscites that could have been on this vote…
a) Should we have built the “Druh Farrell” bridge to no-where?
b) Should an airport tunnel be built to mitigate traffic congestion?
c) Should a no-brainer C-train be built to the airport? Heck, how about if we put the C-train right down the middle of that airport tunnel road?
How did John Mar vote on the Peace Bridge issue?
He approved it.