Calgary: '80s-style insanity makes a comeback

Behind boom lurks a bust
'80s-style insanity makes a comeback

Don Martin
Calgary Herald

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

There's a residential demolition derby happening in Calgary's most prestigious community.

Dozens of houses have been blown up in ultra-posh Mount Royal. OK, houses is probably an understatement. More like mansions. And not just old run-of-the-mill mansions. At least one dream home was barely a decade old when it was rendered into rubble under new ownership earlier this year.

In the frantic pursuit of bigger and better lifestyles, the cream of Calgary is snapping up Mount Royal's prized inner-city addresses for millions per lot, tearing down perfectly outstanding dwellings and erecting their own customized palatial abodes. One businessman bought the house next door for seven figures and levelled it into grass so his kids would have space for playground equipment.

If there's a reflection of the insanity gripping Calgary's superheated economy, that's it.

A visit to Calgary these days is an eerie reflection of the early 1980s just before the economy collapsed with a devastating crash, collapsing real estate values and turning downtown office towers into "see-through buildings" abandoned by tenants.

That's when a notorious bumper sticker appeared on city streets: "Lord," it bemoaned, "please give me another boom and I promise I won't piss it away."

If they're not pissing it away yet, there are signs Calgary's collective bladder is getting mighty full. And I apologize for that analogy over breakfast.

Remind people about the sudden reversal of fortunes that tend to haunt one-industry towns and they make reassuring noises that the oilpatch is leaner and meaner than those giddy fat-cat days of the early '80s.

But my visit to Calgary last weekend was a head-spinning tour of a city roaring at a frantically unsustainable pace.

You see the first evidence from the air, where the brown smudge circling the city is filled with earthmovers levelling the surrounding prairie for 1,100 new homes per month to handle the 2.5 new Calgarians (including those in maternity wards) who arrive every hour on the 24/7 clock.

Four new office towers are under construction downtown, part of the $1.8-billion-in-new-construction boom started last year, an amount greater than the total of the next 10 Alberta cities combined.

Mayor Dave Bronconnier is bracing for an unprecedented $3 billion in new construction this year, which means another 300 kilometre lanes of road will be paved to feed traffic into the core.

It's even crazier at the provincial level, where energy royalties are threatening to drive the surplus to almost $10 billion.

I gave a lift to a senior member of the provincial bureaucracy on the weekend and asked what was next on the spending spree list, given Premier Ralph Klein had just announced a $1.4-billion hospital upgrade and construction program.

He shrugged: "We're almost running out of ideas."

Sadly, that much was obvious when Advanced Education Minister Dave Hancock suggested the province blow a billion on waiving tuition for the first two years of Alberta university or college education.

As those of us who attended a post-secondary program can attest, those first two years are usually written off to partying and related misbehaviour with very little attention paid to schooling.

If the government wants to effectively reward its students, it should wait for graduation to refund their loans or a give them a future tax credit on Alberta earnings.

But if today's oil and natural gas price spike turns into a sustained plateau, a billion dollars wasted on such a silly scheme would barely be noticed in a spring budget featuring deep tax cuts and even more program spending.

It's all becoming a bit much and there's a serious worry in Ottawa that Alberta's runaway wealth threatens to strain the Confederation concept of 10 equal provinces.

It's a no-brainer given that the federal Liberals will try to turn Alberta into a election campaign target next spring.

That's partly why Premier Ralph Klein will tour Ottawa, Quebec City and Halifax in late November with an explanation and a warning.

He'll promote the spillover effects of his energy windfalls for central Canadian industry, but warn that Alberta takes its territorial claim to natural resource revenue extremely seriously.

But he might also note that behind every Calgary boom is a bust. And when that happens, those existing Mount Royal houses will look mighty fine to owners caught in the collapse. Perhaps they shouldn't piss today's opportunity away.

dmartin@cns.canwest.com
© The Calgary Herald 2005

I think Calgary's boom will eventually slowdown, just the way of the world. I don not, however, believe that is will ever bust the way it did in the 80s.
I think this is much more of a long haul good times era.

Ya, Calgary is growing at 20 - 25k a year but that is still nothing near Toronto. Infact, that is less than Montreal. Everyear Calgary becomes smaller than Montreal in real numbers.
The economy is very hot but considering the economy its population growth is still 4th in the country and its the 5th largest city. Lets keep things in perspective.

According to the latest StatsCan report Alberta is only growing by 1.5% /year.

During the 1980's crash, does anyone know the Alberta debt at this time?

I do.

During the 1980's crash, does anyone know the Alberta debt at this time?

This is from 1986- 2005. By 1986, Alberta had already gone through several years of depression. Oil had fallen to $10/barrel by 1986.

http://www.finance.gov.ab.ca/publications/annual_repts/govt/ganrep05/graphic16.gif

This graph is for the 90s.

http://www.finance.gov.ab.ca/publications/annual_repts/govt/ganrep05/graphic13.gif

And this is where we are now... :)

http://www.alberta-canada.com/economy/positiveBusinessClimate/graphics/chart_pfnd.jpg

^
Thanks for the graphs and info.
One thing thou, I have a real hard time beleiving Quebecs debt is only 21% of GDP.
As I understood things it was the second highest in the country, second only to NFLD.

Thanks for the infor guys. What I was trying to find out was the extent of debt at the START (figures unfortunatly dont go far enough, but very close) of the oil price crash, compared to the next (lets say present for worst case scenario).
We can use the $10 Bill in 1987.
Based on this, I see it as quite unlikely that Alberta will be slammed as it did in the 80's for several reasons:
1. NEP is not around this time. Enough said.
2. Alberta (I presume) had to deal with a debt which is no longer the case. As well, Alberta has some reserve funds available for rainy days which it did'nt back then.
3. Oil prices dropped much more (in inflation adjusted terms) than present.
4. The last oil crisis was artificial (OPEC crisis & Iran revolution) whereas this is based on worldwide supply and demand, which means it's less susceptable to drops without alternatives in place (or a global recession, which would not just affect Alberta).

So, while the good times must come to an end in Alberta, and I think the people are prepared for the inevitability of this (excpept for the foolish), I don't think this will be an all out crash.

^
Thanks for the graphs and info.
One thing thou, I have a real hard time beleiving Quebecs debt is only 21% of GDP.
As I understood things it was the second highest in the country, second only to NFLD.

According to Statistics Canada, you are correct.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050912/d050912a.htm

From Statscan:

The financial assets of Alberta, Northwest Territories and Yukon continued to exceed their liabilities in 2004. Per capita net debt was highest in Newfoundland and Labrador ($19,185), Quebec ($12,973) and Nova Scotia ($12,519).

On topic of oil, but more in relation to NEP, here are two interesting set of articles from the Toronto Star in regards to the matter.
Only thing I don't like is how the media and individuals are all saying that NEP II will be coming, when not one politician, gov't dept or even NGO has talked about it. I think the media is trying to stir shit up.

And ironically by me posting these articles I'm doing the same thing. I'll bang my head against a wall to make everyone feel better....lol.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1130449805235&call_pageid=971358637177&col=Columnist1003746427150

Battle brews over Alberta oil riches
25 years after the infamous NEP was launched, Albertans have reason to worry about a second assault on their oil wealth


DAVID OLIVE
TORONTO STAR

The infamous National Energy Program, one of the most ambitious and poorly thought out federal intrusions into provincial affairs ever attempted, has lost none of its ferocity as a topic of debate since its introduction 25 years ago today.

And with good reason. Should oil prices continue to rise — some experts see oil at $100 (U.S.) a barrel within a year or two — a renewed confrontation between Ottawa and Alberta seems inevitable.

"If Alberta sits tight and keeps collecting all these revenues, Ottawa's going to step in," interprovincial affairs expert Thomas Courchene of Queen's University said in a newspaper interview a week before releasing a controversial paper on redistributing Alberta's energy wealth last month.

Referring to Alberta's projected surplus, since restated upward to $8.8 billion (Canadian), Courchene said, "I don't think Ottawa can tolerate $7 billion a year. The pressures on the rest of the country will be too great."

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, one of many premiers and prime ministers Courchene has advised over the years, is struggling with what he claims to be a $23 billion gap between Ontario's contributions and receipts under Canada's equalization system.

Speaking for the growing unease in provincial capitals across the country about Alberta's emergence as a provincial superpower, McGuinty has called Alberta's vast fossil-fuel wealth "the elephant in the room" — an overwhelming reality that everyone's afraid to talk about.


In an interview with the Toronto Star, the premier said, "Albertans understand, as we do in Ontario, our responsibility to help strengthen the country" — leaving unclear exactly how he wants Alberta to meet its national obligations.

Courchene, more blunt, expresses a view becoming widespread beyond Edmonton, that a giant sucking sound from an ever-richer Alberta will enable it to recruit the best and brightest minds to its university faculties, teaching hospitals and industrial R&D centres. "If that happens, Confederation is gone."

The National Energy Program, or NEP, unveiled Oct. 28, 1980, was a complicated set of taxes, subsidies and incentives designed to ease the burden on energy consumers, Canadianize a foreign-controlled oil patch and spur exploration in remote regions of the country. Alberta — then and now the principal fossil fuel producer in Canada — was incensed at what it saw as a federal cash grab of its natural resource windfall.

To be sure, Alberta is still recovering from the severe budget cuts by which Premier Ralph Klein rescued the province from the fiscal recklessness of the DonGetty regime of the late 1980s. But the selective provincial investments in what Klein calls the "Alberta advantage" — his marketing slogan in speeches across North America to lure business to his province — are already making their mark.

University of Toronto history professor Michael Bliss, a critic of the NEP since its inception, told the Star that his contacts at Yale University complain they can no longer offer better guarantees of funding for faculty than Alberta's top schools.

Even blunter than Courchene, Jean Lapierre, the federal transport minister and Prime Minister Paul Martin's powerful Quebec lieutenant, told the Sherbrooke Tribune in August that, "We have to redistribute the wealth. After all, the good fortune of the West could become a disaster for the East. That is why we need a pact to even things out."

At an Alberta centennial event last month, Lapierre's boss seemed befuddled by the talk of a Son of NEP. "There will be no NEP, the NEP was a mistake," said Martin. "The question I have is — why keep asking it?" A better question, though, is why Martin has yet to repudiate Lapierre's comments.

Klein has told McGuinty and Martin to "keep your hands off" Alberta's oil and gas wealth. The 1970s rallying cry, "Let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark," has given way to a new crop of bumper stickers, including "100 years is enough" (a bow to the province's centenary) and "I'm not a separatist — yet."

University of Calgary professors Barry Cooper and Robert Mansell, advisers to Conservative Party of Canada leader Stephen Harper, are giving voice to a suddenly more virulent strain of western grievance. "It may seem to Canadians outside Alberta that their interests can be served by forcefully taking what is not theirs," Cooper wrote early this month in a Winnipeg Free Press essay.

The more soft-spoken Mansell is not yet convinced Ottawa will return to its predatory ways — which, in fact, began in the 1970s with the OPEC oil shocks and culminated in the NEP, a 14-year period still known in Alberta as the "energy wars."

But, Mansell told the Star, the Liberals "have already painted Alberta as an evil empire on health care to win votes elsewhere (in last year's federal election). I have no doubt that if pushed into a corner again by an opportunistic government in Ottawa, Alberta would walk away from Confederation. It's one of the few places in Canada able to do so."

In the immediate aftermath of the NEP's dismantling in 1986, a prescient Ron Graham wrote that nothing had been resolved by the attempt at revenue sharing or its inglorious failure. "If world prices rose either sharply or steeply (as logic and most analysts expected them to do before the end of the century), then the old problems would resurface," the veteran political journalist wrote. "Conflicts over fairness, sharing and the national interest would return to the fore because the growth would not be distributed evenly. ... Ottawa would have to launch a new raid on the (energy-producing) provinces or lose the ability to govern."

Another periodic oil-price slump might dampen Alberta fears of a second NEP. While energy bulls see the world oil price surpassing $100 (U.S.) by year-end, bears note that futures contracts for 2007 delivery have been priced much lower in recent months, and the Toronto Dominion Bank has forecast an early 2007 price of just $45 — down 25 per cent from the current $60. After all, just six years ago, the price was mired at $9 to $11 barrel.

A fatalistic Mansell says, "Living as we do with volatility — world markets for energy and agriculture can turn at any moment — there's an underlying angst in Alberta that no sooner will we be blessed with good news than someone or something will put an end to it. Our energy boom is based on a finite resource, and a prudent investor would say, `Make the most of this, because you can't count on the boom continuing.'"

That is an aspect of the Alberta reality that perhaps too few Canadians outside the province have grasped, especially when the most consistent cries of grievance seem to originate from the richest kid on the block. At times it even seems that policy makers in Ottawa, especially, give full rein to an arrogance directed at a jurisdiction that seems ungrateful that it is so able to punch above the weight accorded to it by its small, remotepopulation.

Most ordinary Canadians have no truck with this nonsense. In 2002, hundreds of central and eastern Canadian farmers banded together to donate 8,000 tonnes of hay to Western farmers and ranchers hit by drought. And two years later, there was a patriotic run on Alberta beef in Toronto meat shops during the mad-cow scare.

And the patriotism runs both ways. Even at the height of the "energy wars" a quarter-century ago, polls found that Westerners were as likely as other Canadians to say their first loyalty was to their country, ahead of their province. A September poll by Léger Marketing found that 49 per cent of respondents favoured nationalizing the country's petroleum resources — about what you'd expect at a time when pump prices are soaring. But asked in another survey that month by pollsters Peter Donolo and Allan Gregg if resource royalties should be shared with other Canadians, 60 per cent of Albertans said yes.

In truth, a Son of NEP is unlikely. It would require opting out of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which mandates no change in the status quo of energy export pricing to the United States. It would require the advocacy of a former tycoon prime minister whose sorry lot in the early 1980s was to recruit Liberal sacrificial lamb candidates in the West. It would likely prompt the resignation of deputy prime minister Anne McLellan, the government's lone Alberta MP, a powerful figure regarded with affection in both Edmonton and Ottawa, whose departure would not go down easily with a prime minister who has said that he will consider his tenure to have failed if he cannot improve relations between Ottawa and the West.

Canada, no less than the U.S., suffers from the lack of a coherent energy policy focused on self-sufficiency and rehabilitation of the environment. Among ideas worth considering are a revival of Ottawa-sponsored exploration on federal lands in the Far North and Courchene's notion of a revenue-sharing program in which provinces would determine how energy revenues are divvied up among themselves by way of the dormant Council of the Federation.

Bliss, a kindred spirit of westerners aggrieved by Ottawa decrees, regards the original NEP as something of an anomaly.

"The adjective `Stalinist' comes to mind in looking back at the NEP, whereas the Canadian way usually is to whittle away at problems — to address resource revenue-sharing, for instance, in a more pragmatic, incremental way," Bliss says.

"We have to accept that wealth has traditionally moved west on this continent, from Halifax and Saint John to Montreal and then Toronto and now Calgary, and from the U.S. Northeast to Texas and California," he adds. "So just accept the fact that we're going to have wealthier provinces.

"And if you're envious of Alberta, move there."

and Part two of the above article:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1130536204591&call_pageid=971358637177&col=Columnist1003746427150



Idea in nation's best interest
Ottawa's oil revenue sharing plan of a quarter-century ago was reviled by Alberta, but it was well intentioned, writes business columnist David Olive


DAVID OLIVE

In speeches across North America in recent years to attract investment dollars to his province, Alberta Premier Ralph Klein sometimes includes a potted history of the Canadian oil patch.

In Klein's telling, Alberta fought Ottawa tooth and nail in the 1930s for control of its resource wealth, then went cap in hand to foreigners to build its oil and gas industry, since easterners showed no interest in financing the fledgling Calgary oil patch. Come the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries' oil shocks of the 1970s, Ottawa suddenly took an interest in Alberta's energy windfall by expropriating it with a series of arbitrary measures culminating in the loathed National Energy Program, introduced 25 years ago yesterday.

The NEP was the culmination of a decade of "energy wars" between Alberta and Ottawa over energy revenue sharing. It was a short-lived set of taxes, rebates, subsidies and expropriation provisions that were designed to give Ottawa a larger share of the windfall of the energy-producing provinces; to Canadianize a foreign-controlled oil patch; and to promote national self-sufficiency in energy through conservation measures and incentives to spur exploration on federal lands in the remote Far North and offshore regions.

The NEP alone, Klein told a business audience in Halifax in 2001, "drained 50,000 jobs and $100 billion in revenue out of the province." It was a searing indictment, and Alberta nationalists give voice to it today with no less vehemence than they did a quarter-century ago.

"As signs out of Ottawa make it look like NEP II might be coming down the pipe," Calgary Sun editor Licia Corbella wrote Thursday, without citing evidence of renewed Ottawa predations, "many Albertans are wondering why this province stays in Canada."

"The NEP and its predecessors had adverse economic consequences," oil-industry historian Earle Gray writes in The Great Canadian Oil Patch (2004). "And where they were not the cause of tough economic conditions, they made them worse."

Anyone proposing an alternative to the detractors' NEP narrative is accused of revisionism. But here goes.

Poorly conceived though it was, the NEP was driven by real enough fears outside Alberta that 10 per cent of the country's population was getting richer while the rest of Canada would soon be impoverished by oil prices expected to hit $60 (U.S.) to $100 per barrel by the end of the century, if not sooner. The tangible proof of Ottawa's quandary was that Alberta's nest-egg Heritage Fund was projected to exceed $150 billion in assets by the mid-1980s, while Ottawa's outlays for subsidizing energy prices in Central and Atlantic Canada had already quadrupled by 1980 to $4 billion. Corbella of the Calgary Sun quotes a veteran Alberta oilman recalling that "The federal government started taking the lion's share" of the province's oil and gas revenues. Not true. ANEP renegotiated more to then-premier Peter Lougheed's liking and signed in September 1981 called for Alberta to rake in $64.3 billion over the next five years, and Ottawa would get $54.3 billion. "People forget," then-federal energy minister Marc Lalonde told the Toronto Star, "that an agreement was reached with Alberta in 1981 which Lougheed called `good for Canada and good for Alberta.'"

A devil's brew of factors conspired to make the NEP dead on arrival even before the renegotiated deal was signed (oil prices had begun an eight-year slide in the spring of 1981)."What killed the industry," Lalonde now says, "is that the price of oil fell from $30 (U.S.), to $12 (U.S.), rather than rising to $60 (U.S.), as most people had anticipated." Historian Gray adds that, "The period of supply glut in the 1980s would have reduced industry activity regardless of the NEP; in fact, drilling continued to fall after the NEP was dead." And the Texas oil patch was equally devastated with no assist from Ottawa.

The energy crisis of the 1970s and early 1980s vanished in the blink of an eye, as new discoveries came on stream worldwide. OPEC producers re-opened their spigots. Conservation was all the rage among consumers, and industries embraced oil-substitution programs.

Meanwhile, the industrialized world was succumbing to the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, accompanied by interest rates hitting a modern record high of 22 per cent. The world was suddenly glutted with oil during a recession that prompted a collapse in demand. "We couldn't do anything about OPEC's decision," University of Calgary economist Robert Mansell says now, "but we could get mad at Ottawa."

There was plenty of pain to go around. Tens of thousands of people were laid off elsewhere in Canada in the financial, auto and technology sectors, in addition to layoffs among suppliers to the oil patch.

Ontario, as it happens, helped grubstake the modern Canadian oil and gas industry. Klein's oil patch history skips over Ottawa's 10-year National Oil Policy of the 1960s, which laid the foundation for a viable Alberta industry by forcing refiners west of Ottawa to buy crude from Alberta rather than cheaper sources, a subsidy that cost consumers in Ontario alone some $15 billion in current dollars. At that time, the global industry was glutted with cheap, high-quality crude from the Middle East, and needed a new, high-cost oil patch like a cat needs two tails.

So what was the true cost of the NEP to Albertans? Premier Klein's office told the Star last week that his source on the 50,000 lost jobs is Statistics Canada. But that agency does not calculate job-loss attributable to specific events such as the NEP.

Undeniably there was significant economic hardship in Alberta in the early 1980s. But Alberta's employment growth from 1979 to 1984, at roughly twice the national average according to Statistics Canada, outpaced all provinces, with net employment increasing by 136,000 jobs in that period.

On the question of revenue loss, precision is impossible given the conflicting methodology used by those who attempt to calculate it. Alberta's excess equalization payments, for instance, have been variously placed between $165 billion from 1961 to 1991 (by Robert Mansell, Klein's source on NEP-related revenue loss) and $32.9 billion between 1977 and 1992. (by the Canadian Tax Journal). How much of that loss resulted from the NEP, which lasted a mere four years, is anyone's guess. As Mansell told the Star, "There are always corrections associated with booms, and we were also in a period of double-digit interest rates. How much of the damage was attributable to the NEP and how much to those other factors, I don't have the answer to that."

The most strident voices of Alberta discontent see the province as a victim of ingratitude. "Do easterners need charity?" University of Calgary professor Barry Cooper asked in an op-ed essay this month. "Have they not received enough already? Have Albertans ever been thanked for their generosity?"

Without Ottawa, the emergence of a dynamic Calgary oil patch would have been delayed by a decade or two, and maitre chez nous for the Canadian industry might never have been achieved. In 1980, the oil patch was dominated by a quartet of foreign multinationals with Canadian head offices in Toronto. Today, six of Canada's 10 biggest oil producers are locally owned, thanks largely to Ottawa-mandated acquisitions by Petro-Canada; and 18 of today's top 20 Canadian oil companies are Calgary based, with a 19th headquartered in Fort McMurray, Alta.

Nor would there be a pair of Ottawa-backed pipelines to carry Alberta oil and gas to markets in Central Canada and the U.S. And there wouldn't be a Syncrude oil-sands colossus, bailed out by Ottawa when its original U.S. sponsors balked at the construction cost. That was a precedent for Mobil Corp.'s successful shakedown of Ottawa in getting Hibernia built — an historical grace note that must have slipped the mind of Premier Williams during his flag-lowering stunt earlier this year.

There would also be no 1989 free trade agreement, over the objections of Ontario, to secure the U.S. market for Western energy exports. No knuckling under by then-prime minister Jean Chrétien to the oil patch's demands to be excluded from the most onerous aspects of the Kyoto Accord. And no continuing federal tax subsidies to Canada's oil industry, amounting to $8 billion between 1996 and 2002 alone. You don't have to be a patronizing federalist to entertain the notion that the architects of the NEP were at least trying to do the right thing. Just an everyday Canadian who appreciates that governing in the best interest of disparate regions is a challenge that is eventually met by people of goodwill — a truism that Alberta's current prosperity would appear to bear out.

and just so I can bring up my post numbers for no apparant reasons:
(But it is a good read, even if a bit biased)

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1130017813621&call_pageid=971358637177&col=Columnist1003746427150

Alberta's dubious dividend
Despite a laundry list of items demanding fiscal attention, Alberta Premier Klein plans to send a $400 `resource rebate' to all 3.2 million Albertans


DAVID OLIVE

Are there better uses for the $1.4 billion worth of "resource rebates" that Ralph Klein unveiled last month — $400 cheques to be distributed by January to all 3.2 million Albertans, excluding guests of the penal system?

Can Albertans even afford to treat themselves to this bonus?

It seems an absurd question, since Alberta appears, by most measures of economic performance, to be in the midst of stupendous prosperity.

By 2003, even before the more than doubling in world oil prices of the past two years, Alberta's standard of living already led the nation. Its gross national income per capita of $33,083 was 13.3 per cent above the national average.

Alberta has no deficit. It has no debt. It has no retail sales tax, and enjoys the lowest rate of provincial income tax in the country. And if oil prices remain high, Alberta's budget surplus for the year could reach $8.8 billion — more than four times the size of Ottawa's projected surplus.

So why not celebrate with a prosperity bonus? After all, residents of Alaska, who this year will pocket $1,003 as their share of the state's oil revenues, have been collecting annual oil bonuses for a quarter century.

The problem is that Klein is something of a fabulist in depicting his province as an oasis of fiscal tranquility. The reality is that Alberta is deficit-free because it continues to under-invest in schools, health care, transportation, environmental rehabilitation and other key elements of its social and physical infrastructure. The province has yet to recover from the severe budget cuts of the 1990s, by which Klein rescued Alberta from the fiscal debauchery of the Getty regime.

That may explain why public opinion polls in Alberta have been the most conspicuous in suggesting other uses for the bonus money. Klein's rebate scheme has also received a thumbs-down from both the Canada West Foundation, a respected centre-right think tank; and the conservative Calgary Chamber of Commerce, the latter finding that the bonus "simply reinforces an expectation for government handouts."

The misgivings are justified. It's understandable that as his anticipated retirement draws closer, Klein is tempted to polish his legacy by playing Santa Claus. But this won't help his successors as they confront major calls on the provincial treasury.

Already there is pressure to boost social-service expenditures in Alberta, to accommodate a much-needed influx of about 30,000 skilled immigrants to build and run the dozen or so new and existing oilsands projects, and to close the nation's largest gap between rich and poor. (The 2001 census found that 396,000 Albertans live below the poverty line.)

The gap between haves and have-nots is perhaps most poignantly evident in Fort McMurray, epicentre of Alberta's hectic oilsands development. In this city of 60,000 people, a favoured few earn as much as $95,000 as engineers. But almost everyone else — auto mechanics, nurses, teachers, grocery store managers — struggles to make a living in a town lacking sufficient schools, hospital beds, sewers and even traffic lights, and where the average new house sells for $423,000 and a one-bedroom apartment can rent for as much as $2,000 a month.

A planned $550 million hospital for Calgary languishes on the drawing boards for lack of provincial funding. And communities throughout the province, including medium-sized cities like Red Deer, are in need of long-delayed funding to upgrade hospitals and clinics.

By Alberta's own acknowledgment, the rapidly growing province is some $8 billion behind on school and road upgrading and rehabilitation of water systems. Alberta's per capita spending on education trails that of Newfoundland and Labrador. And Alberta's university tuition fees are the fourth highest in the nation (an average of $4,700 in Alberta, compared with Quebec's $1,675).

Even the University of Calgary, Stephen Harper's alma mater and home of his free-market brain trust, has its hand out for $700 million in provincial assistance — some $100 million of that sum just for deferred maintenance.

"Alberta has dealt with its debt, but there has been no growth in our physical or social infrastructure," says U of C economist Robert Mansell, the man who proposed Harper, one of his brightest students, when future Reform Party leader Preston Manning was hunting for a policy-wonk wunderkind. "We have one of the lowest university participation rates in the country," says Mansell, "because we simply don't have the space."

Also overdue is a $9 billion bill for rehabilitating Alberta's oil wells and natural gas processing facilities. And that's a mere fraction of the clean-up costs ahead, as the portion of boreal forest and wetlands claimed by oilsands projects — a region the size of Florida — expands from the current 82,000 acres to 230,000 acres.

With only 10 per cent of Canada's population, Alberta is already the source of one-quarter of the nation's air pollution. That problem will be compounded if Alberta oilsands production sextuples, as currently anticipated, to 6 million barrels a day by 2030 — equal to about 30 per cent of current U.S. crude-oil consumption.

Heralded by energy policy makers in Edmonton, Ottawa and Washington as the eighth wonder of the energy world, Alberta's oilsands are processed using methods recently described by Fortune as "environmentally brutal." The oil of Alberta's tar sands is surface-mined, not sipped through steel straws as in the Mideast or the Gulf of Mexico.

Even with a GOP-controlled White House and Congress, U.S. lawmakers continue to withhold approval for oil development in Alaska's environmentally sensitive Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWAR). Meanwhile, the northeastern corner of Alberta is becoming a world-class cluster of strip mines and toxic lakes that will soon be visible from the moon, if not Mars.

No one is asking whether the producers and the province can afford to restore that land to its earlier pristine state. It may not even be possible to do so. The National Energy Board said in a report last year that there is no technological evidence that the vast tailing ponds created from waste water generated by oilsands processing can ever be reclaimed.

Klein has been working overtime to depict his jurisdiction as a Republic of Greedheads. Not long ago he was warning neighbouring Saskatchewan to stanch an imagined exodus of low-income people seeking a place on the welfare rolls in Lethbridge. More recently the premier has repeatedly warned the rest of Canada to "keep your hands off" Alberta's oil windfall.

Last week, as Bill Clinton was endorsing Paul Martin's linkage of Alberta's U.S. oil and gas exports with the interminable software lumber dispute ("If I were the Canadian prime minister, that's what I'd say"), Klein went into a rant against Ottawa daring to use Alberta's petroleum wealth as a bargaining chip on behalf of struggling lumber producers in next-door B.C.

But then, Klein has never been much of a champion of provincial rights, only Alberta's. His loyalties are with the petroleum giants, who are charged far less for Alberta oil than they pay Alaska and Norway; and with a U.S. administration headed by a man Klein reveres for "leadership and courage that have been lessons in statesmanship."

Just the same, the locally based Pembina Institute, the Alberta branches of the Sierra Legal Defence Fund and other environmental groups — as well as a great many ordinary Albertans — are asking why Klein proceeded with his bonus idea without consulting his own caucus, whose members might have suggested a hard-nosed assessment of Alberta's looming fiscal challenges was in order before committing to the giveaway.

Besides, it costs money to give away money — in this case, $10 million in administration charges, much of it paid to the Canada Revenue Agency, which is to cut and distribute the rebate cheques.

And if Klein can't find deserving causes at home to assist, why not use the money to generate national and global goodwill? The Victoria- Times Colonist has editorialized, "If Mr. Klein were to set up a trust fund for struggling communities across the country, he would do more for Confederation than any federal politician has done in recent memory."

To mark its 75th anniversary as a province, at the height of Ottawa-Edmonton tensions over the loathed National Energy Program in 1980, Alberta nonetheless made possible the publication of The Canadian Encyclopedia with a $4 million provincial grant. Brainchild of Edmonton publisher Mel Hurtig, it was practically given away by bookshops and department stores across the country. The original edition and its subsequent CD versions have found their way into tens of thousands of Canadian households — the most comprehensive work on Canada and its peoples ever published.

To mark the province's centenary, Alberta could use the $1.4 billion in planned bonuses to instead:

provide treatment for more than half the 1.2 million Kenyans infected with HIV;

cover the entire cost of the $1.1 billion (U.S.), five-year UNICEF program unveiled this month to curb the number of African children born with HIV, to support orphans, and launch prevention programs among young women;

donate a laptop computer to each of the 990,400 students enrolled in Canadian universities;

create 70,000 daycare spaces, almost 30 per cent of Ottawa's latest commitment of 250,000 units by 2009 — accomplishing something that Ottawa has repeatedly promised and failed to do since 1984;

replace Canada's entire fleet of roughly 10,000 taxicabs and limousines with the Toyota Prius or Honda Insight, and offer $1,000 rebates to the first one million Canadian buyers of these fuel-sipping, eco-friendly vehicles (except in provinces such as B.C. and Ontario where such programs are already in place); or

treat 2.8 million Canadians to a VIA Rail Canrailpass — 12 days of unlimited travel in economy class everywhere VIA serves, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean to Hudson's Bay.

Four hundred dollars amounts to a piddling 1.2 per cent of the average Albertan's annual income. Klein could learn from his friend Mike Harris's experiment with a similar gimmick in the 1990s how quickly such gestures are forgotten.

As an investment in the image and values of Albertans, there are better uses for the money — although it might take a premier with imagination to grasp that.

I certainly don't have the time to properly tear Olive's article apart (there are just way too many mistakes, errors, half-truths and/or blatant lies in it), however this one certainly does take the cake ...

No knuckling under by then-prime minister Jean Chrétien to the oil patch's demands to be excluded from the most onerous aspects of the Kyoto Accord.
He does know, doesn't he, that the only industry given any exemption in Canada's Kyoto Accord commitment whatsoever is the auto manufacturing industry. The Oil Patch are not excluded from meeting reductions, just like every other industry, except one which just happens to be based solely in Ontario. Hmmmm.

A couple of points:
1. While the NEP may have had some good intentions behind it, there is absolutely no question that it was totally unconstitutional and caused a lot of serious damage to the Alberta economy. Anyone who tries to minimize the damage it caused is engaging in historical revisionism.
2. The Federal Government has completely dropped the ball on the Kyoto Accord. Giving the Ontario auto plants an exemption from emissions reductions while planning to impose large fines on Alberta oil facilities is crass politics at its absolute worst - and plays into the hands of those here in Alberta that want to play the 'Ottawa is out to get us' card. I have little faith that the Federal government will get any kind of plan in place to substantially reduce our emissions - something they should have had in place BEFORE the Accord was ratified in this country.
3. Should the Federal Government attempt another resource grab as they did in 1980 with the NEP, they'll find that a lot of people in Alberta, who were formally federalists, will join a broad-based separatist movement. Alberta contributes a hell of a lot to this country, and most people here are sick and tired of being demonized by the rest of the country while at the same time contributing huge amounts of money to the rest of the country in transfer payments.
4. A lot of the criticism of the Alberta government's decision to give rebate cheques to all Albertans smacks of jealousy, pure and simple.

I agree with your above 3 points, but your wrong on your last point. Speaking as an Ontarian who vividly remembers (Fmr Premier) Mike Harris's $200 rebates, I realize just how stupid that was. It was simply an expensive and wasteful way to bring up the numbers for his party.
Now I don't necessarily agree with the articles suggestions of how to spend the money (mainly to give it to the rest of Canada). This is Alberta's choice in the end. But if the main concern of Klein is that this is one time surplus and not suitable for increased spending, fine. Spend it on Capital as opposed to operational expenditure.
Take advantage of all this extra (but only temporary) surplus to build transit, highways, and any other large scale infrasctracture.
$1.2 Billion would have been enough to build a subway line in Calgary/Edmonton, an small LRT system in those cities, or an extension of a highway.
Or barring all that, at least have a referendum rather than blowing it by sending out cheques.

Partybits, while I do agree with you about the prosperity cheques not being the best use of this money, I think what Chemist and others are trying to say (myself included) is that this is Alberta's money to do with as it sees fit. If the people of the province don't like Ralph doing this, we will let him know (though I really doubt that the average person will be pissed with getting this money).

That said, as an Albertan I really don't like it, however it's going happen, so I will do what I think is best with the money (savings + charity).

And as for what could have/should have been done with that 1.4 Billion, there is probably much that you are not aware of when providing your suggestions.

First off, since the surplus will likely be about 9 Billion, the province is distributing a roughly7.5B surplus as such: ~3 Billion to sustainability funds (like the heritage fund, but whose interest is used differently) ~2 Billion for various infrastructure 1 time expendatures, ~1 Billion each for Healthcare and Education capitial projects - all told, nearly 4 Billion for infrastructure type things. Overall, not a bad use of the money, though I do feel that the 1.4B should have gon into the HTF.

One more thing, concerning infrastructure expendatures: unless you lived in Alberta you cannot imagine what is going on here and you wouldn't realize that we just can't spend more on infrastructure right now. Case in point, Ontario is spending 3B province wide this year on infrastructure, the same Alberta had budgeted (with 1/4 the population!), but now with these top ups, province of Alberta is spending more than twice as much as all of Ontario - or 8 times as much per capitia!

In Calgary alone, we are currently undergoing 2 expansions to the existing LRT lines, rebuilding all the DT stations and starting the planning for a new line - all fully funded. In the next 3 years there will be roughly 700M spent on LRT work alone - per capitia that would be comparible to over 3B worth of PT work in the GTA. Plus there is more highway/road construction currently underway in Calgary than the entire GTA. And construction out here is crazy - you just can't find enough workers, plus material costs are thru the roof. In DT Calgary there is currently over 2M sq ft of office space u/c - comparable to building 5 FCP's at the same time - before the Encana building even starts. Per capitia building permits are 50% higher than the GTA. And don't forget the Oil Sands. The amount of work that is currently u/c there is comparable to building 6 new Terminal 1's all at once.

The truth is that the province just can't afford any more infrastructure right now.

Again, while I disagree with the prosperity cheques, it really is up to Albertan's to decide how to disburse their energy royalties. As Chemist said, for non-Albertans to tell the province what to do with it, simply smacks of petty jealousy.

I don't think other provinces are telling Alberta what to do. They are disagreeing with the concept, but nobody is putting a gun to your head.
I think Alberta has such a mistrust for the ROC that whenever any comment is made by anybody outside of the Province, it's percieved as being authoritative rather than suggestive. Can't blame Alberta though due to the history with the federation and NEP. But the past is the past, it's best to move on.
Finally, it's media that does this more than anything else. The average Canadian really does'nt care how the surplus is spent, but if you ask them, most would say cheques are stupid....whether they are issued in Alberta, Ontario or Quebec.

On the point of Infrastracture, I heard there is a hospital/school shortage in some cities due to the huge growth. Could the money not be spent here?

On the point of Infrastracture, I heard there is a hospital/school shortage in some cities due to the huge growth. Could the money not be spent here?
Already doing that: In Calgary they already doing multi-hundred Million dollar expansions to the 3 big hospitals, building a new Children's Hospital, starting the construction of a new hospital and major medical complex in the south, preparing for the conversion of the existing Childrens hospital to a long term, palliative care centre and constructing 2 new health centres (like a hospital with no long term beds). And it's pretty much the same thing in E-town and elsewhere in the province.

Again, it sounds funny, but the biggest problem Alberta has right now is that it really can't spend the money fast enough - though my solution would be to save as much as possible including an extra 1.4 Billion in the HTF.

? how do you do a search here for topics on "deep sea oil off East Coast"
? is there an existing thread (or threads) and anyone remember the links

Am wondering why the oilmen on the east are not as rich as those from the rockies.

The east coast oil industry is new and small. The oil company head offices are in Calgary or elsewhere - not in the east.

HAha, wow, they actually got to claim something.

Already doing that: In Calgary they already doing multi-hundred Million dollar expansions to the 3 big hospitals, building a new Children's Hospital, starting the construction of a new hospital and major medical complex in the south, preparing for the conversion of the existing Childrens hospital to a long term, palliative care centre and constructing 2 new health centres (like a hospital with no long term beds). And it's pretty much the same thing in E-town and elsewhere in the province.

Again, it sounds funny, but the biggest problem Alberta has right now is that it really can't spend the money fast enough - though my solution would be to save as much as possible including an extra 1.4 Billion in the HTF.

well shit, you got everything covered don't you....lol.
Okay, how about giving some to me....not to much. Just a couple million is all!

Again, as funny as it sounds, they really can't spend any faster - they're doing alot already and there is only so much labour around to get things done.

That said, the provincial government is rudderless wrt our future. Just about anyone with half a brain is saying that we must focus on the long term - whether it be through more savings, more diversification, whatever - but Ralph, with his long good-bye, is just letting us flop in the wind. Yes the province is doing right by focusing on a number of short/medium term fixes, but they're dropping the ball on the long term stuff. Fortunately Ralph will be gone soon and his likely successor - Jim Dinning - at least talks about vision.

Already doing that: In Calgary they already doing multi-hundred Million dollar expansions to the 3 big hospitals, building a new Children's Hospital, starting the construction of a new hospital and major medical complex in the south, preparing for the conversion of the existing Childrens hospital to a long term, palliative care centre and constructing 2 new health centres (like a hospital with no long term beds). And it's pretty much the same thing in E-town and elsewhere in the province.
In regards to hospitals and medical research institutes, it's even larger in Edmonton. The U of A alone has over 1-billion in construction on the table.

The Anthony Henday, an entire highway is being constructed around the entire southern part of the city.

The thing is, labour shortages is what is really holding many of these projects back. Couple that with a decreasing in-migration from other provinces as their economies are also performing well, and we have a situation.

^^ Yes, the new Institute of Nanotechnology building (UofA) was supposed to open in September, but due to labour shortages, it won't open until next spring.

Thanks Oceanmdx :)

If KingRalph wanted to really do something that gives money back to the people then he should get rid of the damn monthly healthcare premiums.
Thats one of the few things that the Chamber of Commerce and regular Albertans strongly support.
As stated "its the vision thing" and Klein simply doesn't have one. Its time for Ralphy to go.

In regards to hospitals and medical research institutes, it's even larger in Edmonton. The U of A alone has over 1-billion in construction on the table.

Hmmm ... though I'm aware of the amazing growth at the UofA (particularly as part of the Alumni myself) I do not believe there is 1-billion in construction on the table for the campus. Keep in mind that when there is X-hundred million for lets say, a new centre for the study of Y, only a portion of the X-hundred million is for construction, as there are various other costs to start new centres of research at universities. As an example, see the following excerpt from the official web-site in context of the National Institute of Nanotechnology, being built at the UofA.

"The $40 million cost of the building is one third of the $120 million that will be spent on the Institute during its first five years."

All this being said, I agree that there is a whack of construction on the table for the UofA, and the UofC pales in comparison [save, perhaps, the new $253M 750,000 sqft. Alberta Children's Hospital construction at the west-end of UofC's campus]. A few renderings for your visual enjoyment:

http://www.calgaryhealthregion.ca/ACH/NewACH/details/Rendering_ChildrensCircle.pdf
http://www.calgaryhealthregion.ca/ACH/NewACH/details/Rendering_WCampus.pdf
http://www.calgaryhealthregion.ca/ACH/NewACH/details/Rendering_FrontDoor.pdf

With respect to the new Calgary South Hospital [not sure what the name is / will be], the first phase alone will be $500M.

http://www.crha-health.ab.ca/newslink/nl_071304southhospital.html
http://www.calgaryhealthregion.ca/frontlines/Frontlines114.pdf

Other significant construction on the table in Calgary includes major road projects - various interchanges / over-passes [deerfoot, glenmore, crowchild, McKnight, etc.] all in addition to the ring-road project, major projects in downtown, including a large number of office buildings such as the $540M EnCana complex. A large number of residential towers also, including the tallest condo construction in Alberta with two 34 floor and two 43 floor buildings [just North of the Stampede grounds]. Also, there is the expansion of the Stampede grounds, with expansion of the Round-up centre already in the works - total project cost is ~$500M. And then, of course, there are extensions along three legs of the LRT network, with plans for a huge SE leg all the way to the new hospital, along with a West leg in the planning stages.

Stampede development:
http://corporate.calgarystampede.com/client/media/3/4/expansion_map_2004-08-06.pdf
http://corporate.calgarystampede.com/client/media/1/2/public_info_booklet-aug10.pdf
http://corporate.calgarystampede.com/client/news/1/3/news_release_08102004.pdf
http://corporate.calgarystampede.com/client/news/49/50/new_funding_for_roundup_release_10-19-05.pdf

If KingRalph wanted to really do something that gives money back to the people then he should get rid of the damn monthly healthcare premiums.
Thats one of the few things that the Chamber of Commerce and regular Albertans strongly support.
As stated "its the vision thing" and Klein simply doesn't have one. Its time for Ralphy to go.

Given that most employers actually flip the bill, and the common joe simply has to pay tax on the taxible benefit, doing what you're suggesting would simply take money out of the tax bucket (read "the people's money") and give it to the corporations. No wonder that the Chamber of Commerce "strongly" supports such a move. If we really want to take care of the disadvantaged, it's better to simply have a process for them, where the charge is subsidized.

With respect to what to do with surplus, no doubt areas of neglect need to be infused with cash, however, given Alberta's finite source of income [oil or otherwise], the province needs to have a multi-decade plan. This would likely include further endowment, but also strategic investment in areas that will diversify the economy. Being an energy leader, I think the Post Secondary institutions, backed by the province, need to focus more on sustainable energy. That way we can continue to be leaders in the area after the oil is gone.

Hmmm ... though I'm aware of the amazing growth at the UofA (particularly as part of the Alumni myself) I do not believe there is 1-billion in construction on the table for the campus. Keep in mind that when there is X-hundred million for lets say, a new centre for the study of Y, only a portion of the X-hundred million is for construction, as there are various other costs to start new centres of research at universities. As an example, see the following excerpt from the official web-site in context of the National Institute of Nanotechnology, being built at the UofA.

"The $40 million cost of the building is one third of the $120 million that will be spent on the Institute during its first five years."

All this being said, I agree that there is a whack of construction on the table for the UofA, and the UofC pales in comparison [save, perhaps, the new $253M 750,000 sqft. Alberta Children's Hospital construction at the west-end of UofC's campus]. A few renderings for your visual enjoyment:


Trust me, there is over 1 billion in projects at the U of A

From the U of A website:

The total value of construction projects now underway is over $1 billion, including major new facilities dedicated to health sciences, engineering, and interdisciplinary science.
http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/pi/nav02.cfm?nav02=23447&nav01=22192

Upcoming:
Ambulatory Learning Center - $500 million
http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=6543

Major Capital Projects:
Centennial Center for Interdisciplinary Science - $295 million
Mazankowski Heart Institute - $193 million
Health Research Innovation Facility - $168,095,000
National Institute for Nanotechnology (NINT) - $52 million
Agri-food Discovery Place - $18,211,000
Zedler Ledcor Center - $7,257,007

^^^^ Thank-you - I wasn't aware.

It's excellent news, really. Quite the story for Alberta!

UofA is truly becoming the 2nd downtown...now i am waiting for the influx of condos.

I'm already seeing the U of A along with the southside skyline competing with Saskatoon & Regina's downtown.

Though this is supposed to be a Calgary thread, I'll round out the UofA discussion with a link to a UofA campus map (which includes current projects):
http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/pi//pdfs/Campus20038.5x11.pdf

Their web-enabled map shows 103 buildings/locations on campus [not as easy to see new projects on this one]:
http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/UALBERTA/layout/

Keep in mind that the UofA surroundings include several appartment towers / complexes, and beyond the UofA area, this line of appartments extends along the south shore of the river.

Note - none of these buildings are massively tall, however, many of them are architecturally interesting and very significant in their own right. Old structures like the Pembina Hall triplets, the arts building, south rutherford library and the dentistry/pharmacy building, modern/minimalist structures like the massive butterdome, and complex/unique structures like the heritage medical research building, the hospital (inside is like a mall), mechanical engineering, the Timms centre, etc.

FYI ... current construction (major projects only) according to Emporis:

Calgary - projects under construction (25)
http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/cs/?id=100992

Edmonton - projects under construction (13)
http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/cs/?id=100995

FYI ... current construction (major projects only) according to Emporis:

Calgary - projects under construction (25)
http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/cs/?id=100992

Edmonton - projects under construction (13)
http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/cs/?id=100995
Emporis isn't exactly up to date. For example, in Edmonton; Peregrine Pointe, The Century, Legacy Manor, The Omega, Mary Schaffer Hall and Grant MacEwan Residence have all been completed.

In regards to hospitals and medical research institutes, it's even larger in Edmonton. The U of A alone has over 1-billion in construction on the table.

The Anthony Henday, an entire highway is being constructed around the entire southern part of the city.

The thing is, labour shortages is what is really holding many of these projects back. Couple that with a decreasing in-migration from other provinces as their economies are also performing well, and we have a situation.

I didn't know The Anthony Henday was a hospital or medical facility...You wouldn't want to compare development permits for Calgary and Ed...might be somewhat unbalanced.

/\ As CMD pointed out already, Edmonton has a very large number of projects on the books right now that doesnt include Henday. Not included in his UofA list are two new hospitals in the Edmonton Metro as well.

Meanwhile, back in Calgary................
When are they going to start the EastVillage?

Heh, the East Village probably won't go ahead for years. I think that a most conservative start date would be 2010.

I didn't know The Anthony Henday was a hospital or medical facility...You wouldn't want to compare development permits for Calgary and Ed...might be somewhat unbalanced.
/\ My point was that Edmonton also has alot of private and public infrastructure/ development. There is 1-billion alone going on at the U of A.

It would be unbalanced as Calgary is larger than Edmonton first and foremost.

Anthony Henday is not a hospital , its a high way ...

Anthony Henday is not a hospital , its a high way ...\
Correcto!

I'm already seeing the U of A along with the southside skyline competing with Saskatoon & Regina's downtown.
lol $1b in development is impressive, but I think it has a long way to go before it'll be competing with downtown Regina and Saskatoon

Meanwhile, back in Calgary................
When are they going to start the EastVillage?

Well, who knows. The city is in the process of deciding whether to form a corporation of the city to govern the improvement of the district and implement the plans, control the money, review proposal etc.

There is also some other activity happening in terms of U of C putting together its massive urban campus project for the East Village. THat could happen rather soon.

In terms of actual construction of amenities rebuilding of the roads, parks, sidewalks etc. I'd say actual diging will probably start in about two years. But who knows really.

how many years until its projected completion should it start in 2 years time

^ The neighborhood itself will consist of about 8000 or more condo units, so build out will depend on demand. Currently the central city is seeing about 2000 units per year absorbed give or take. Most of that is happening in the Beltline. Once the East Village gets going I am assuming it will get upto half of the demand, meaning it would at current rates atleast take a decade.

I hope its nice just high rises like downtown Vancouver. I hope it has a healthy mix of housing types and is at the same time pedestrian friendly.

I hope its nice just high rises like downtown Vancouver. I hope it has a healthy mix of housing types and is at the same time pedestrian friendly.

The University of Calgary component will be critical - and if I'm not mistaken, some of their urban planning / sustainable planning areas will be re-located to this new "urban campus". The entire East Village will be something the University itself, along with its students, can observe and learn from, while contributing to it at the same time. UofC's "urban campus" web-page can be reviewed at:
http://www.calgaryurbancampus.ucalgary.ca/index.html
And their "urban campus" backgrounder can be reviewed at:
http://www.ucalgary.ca/news/sept05/Urban_campus_backgrounder.pdf

The latest update from the city on this project can be reviewed at:
http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/planning/pdf/east_village_revitalization_update_august_05.pdf

Another possibly interesting development in Calgary will be the new Calgary Science Centre. It will be located on 15 acres of land along the West side Deerfoot trail. between Memorial Drive and 16th Ave N [IE immediately North of the Zoo / Zoo Parking / Zoo Vet Clinic]. The project is expected to cost in the region of $100M. Land has already been purchased and allocated. This will create a band of interest extending from this project, down to the zoo, down to Inglewood, across to East village, down to a cleaned up victoria park, and then the extended Stampede grounds. Very exciting, and I can't wait to see how this whole area will look and work in ten years time!

HAha, somebody mistook a highway for a hospital, excellent.

HAha, somebody mistook a highway for a hospital, excellent.

Shouldn't this Calgary thread actually stick to Calgary?

I think the tangent comparing Calgary and Edmonton development was reasonable, however, posts commenting on the clarity of a prior post discussing an Edmonton highway project is a little much.

ADDISONWESE:LY HAha, somebody mistook a highway for a hospital, excellent.

LOL

The SkyTower in Calgary sold out [220 units from $150K to $450K; 30 floors] in four hours! Wow!

http://www.calgarysun.com/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?p=111349&x=articles&s=homes

http://www.calgarysun.com/photos/111349.jpg

Their web-site is www.skytowerliving.com

Then there is the unioncondos project [2 X 26 floors]:

http://www.vcrossing.com/images/unionsquare.jpg

http://www.unioncondos.com/

Then there is the Vetro [larger tower being 35 floors]:

http://www.vcrossing.com/images/vetro.jpg

www.vetrolife.com

And then of course the Arriva complex [2 X 34 floors and 2 X 42 floors - tallest residential towers in Alberta]

http://www.vcrossing.com/images/arriva.jpg

www.arrivacondos.com

Then there is the Sasso project [24 floors]

http://www.vcrossing.com/images/sassoplaza.jpg

www.sassolife.com

And then there is "chocolate" [20 floors]

http://www.vcrossing.com/business_in_the_zone/develop/images/chocolate_construction.jpg

www.chocolatecondo.com

La Caille Five West

http://www.lacaille.ca/condos/five/images/photos/main.jpg

http://www.lacaille.ca/condos/five/

The SkyTower in Calgary sold out [220 units from $150K to $450K; 30 floors] in four hours! Wow!

http://www.calgarysun.com/cgi-bin/publish.cgi?p=111349&x=articles&s=homes

http://www.calgarysun.com/photos/111349.jpg

Their web-site is www.skytowerliving.com

$150,000 !!!! Wow no wounder it sold so fast. In Vancouver condos start around 450k & go as high as 7.5million.

$150,000 !!!! Wow no wounder it sold so fast. In Vancouver condos start around 450k & go as high as 7.5million.

I hear ya!. This project starts with rather itty-bitty units in the 500 sqft range, but still is on the cheap side at only $300/sqft. Calgary's condos top out around $4M. I wouldn't use skytower as an average project.

Looking at MLS, there are several condo units in Calgary for sale in access of $2M:

http://www.mls.ca/PropertyDetails.aspx?vd=&SearchURL=%3fMode%3d0%26Page%3d1%26vs%3d1%26rlt%3d%26cp%3d%26pt%3d0%26mp%3d0-0-0%26mrt%3d-1-0-0%26Beds%3d0-0%26Baths%3d0-0%26f%3d%26ft%3dall%26o%3dD%26of%3d1%26ps%3d10%26ptgid%3d1%26aid%3d4791%252c4792%252c4793%252c4796%252c4798%252c4799%252c4802%26MapURL%3d%253fAreaID%253d6401&Mode=0&PropertyID=4000681

http://www.mls.ca/PropertyDetails.aspx?vd=&SearchURL=%3fMode%3d0%26Page%3d1%26vs%3d1%26rlt%3d%26cp%3d%26pt%3d0%26mp%3d0-0-0%26mrt%3d-1-0-0%26Beds%3d0-0%26Baths%3d0-0%26f%3d%26ft%3dall%26o%3dD%26of%3d1%26ps%3d10%26ptgid%3d1%26aid%3d4791%252c4792%252c4793%252c4796%252c4798%252c4799%252c4802%26MapURL%3d%253fAreaID%253d6401&Mode=0&PropertyID=3944956

http://www.mls.ca/PropertyDetails.aspx?vd=&SearchURL=%3fMode%3d0%26Page%3d1%26vs%3d1%26rlt%3d%26cp%3d%26pt%3d0%26mp%3d0-0-0%26mrt%3d-1-0-0%26Beds%3d0-0%26Baths%3d0-0%26f%3d%26ft%3dall%26o%3dD%26of%3d1%26ps%3d10%26ptgid%3d1%26aid%3d4791%252c4792%252c4793%252c4796%252c4798%252c4799%252c4802%26MapURL%3d%253fAreaID%253d6401&Mode=0&PropertyID=4000682

And then of course the Arriva complex [2 X 34 floors and 2 X 42 floors - tallest residential towers in Alberta]

http://www.vcrossing.com/images/arriva.jpg

www.arrivacondos.com

One of the Arriva buildings has been scrapped. It is now 1 x 34 (128m) and 2 x 42 (156m).

Shouldn't this Calgary thread actually stick to Calgary?

I think the tangent comparing Calgary and Edmonton development was reasonable, however, posts commenting on the clarity of a prior post discussing an Edmonton highway project is a little much.
Why? The Anthony Henday is a huge infrastructure project. In fact, I am willing to bet that it is currently one of the largest highway projects in the country.

I hear ya!. This project starts with rather itty-bitty units in the 500 sqft range, but still is on the cheap side at only $300/sqft. Calgary's condos top out around $4M. I wouldn't use skytower as an average project.

Looking at MLS, there are several condo units in Calgary for sale in access of $2M:
Don't fool yourself, you can't even compare real estate in Calgary to Vancouver. Vancouver has it beat by a looong shot.

Why? The Anthony Henday is a huge infrastructure project. In fact, I am willing to bet that it is currently one of the largest highway projects in the country.

I don't doubt it. It's just that this thread is entitled "Calgary: '80s-style insanity makes a comeback".

Don't fool yourself, you can't even compare real estate in Calgary to Vancouver. Vancouver has it beat by a looong shot.

I agree, in context of downtown Vancouver.

That being said, even with a higher population, BC housing starts lagged Alberta in 2004 and 2005. So there are different ways to look at things.

No - don't want to compare Calgary condos to Vancouver condos. Vancouver can keep the high prices.

^^^^^^^^
No kidding. That is why Vancouver has the lowest rate of home ownership in the country, the largest gap between the rich and poor {WestVan vs DowntownEastside}, and spending, byfar, the most oof their post-tax income on housing in the country resulting in significantly lower disposable income.
Vancouver is a lovly city but you pay dearly for the priviledge.

Seems like the Palliser Square Redevelopment got the thumbs up last month - here are some pictures. I believe phase 1 will include building to the West of the tower only, with the second following on later.

http://www3.telus.net/doubrown/Palliser/South.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/doubrown/Palliser/North.jpg

Various street views
http://www3.telus.net/doubrown/Palliser/Street.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/doubrown/Palliser/Street2.jpg
http://www3.telus.net/doubrown/Palliser/9th.jpg

Anyway, each of the two buildings is a pinch less than 400 feet. I don't think city council would have allowed anything taller, as the tower needs to be treated in a respectful way.

BTW - the EnCana project is not too far from this, so we'll have to see what a combined rendering looks like once the EnCana project provides drawings.

Anyone have any news about the Centannial Place proposal? I believe it's supposed to be 40 floors.

Penny Lane - 43 floors. This one is quite far along the process, from what I understand. Taller building is over 600 feet. Should help with the small gap between most of the buildings and the Husky headquarters.

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/539/28calgary-pennypale04.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/539/28calgary-pennylane13.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/539/28calgary-pennylane12.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/539/28calgary-pennylane10.jpg

This thread should be stickied and retitled as "Calgary developments" or something. It will give it some permanence and maybe more Calgary forumers will be inclined to post news there. As of now, SSC is only has a few Calgary forumers - everyone justs posts at SSP.

As for Penny Lane. It is a very nice development, I just wish it was elimintating a parking lot rather than the very charming facade of Penny Lane mall.

Walli - you mention this is quite far along in the process. What do you mean by that. Are they close to going ahead with it. It has been sitting at the proposed stage for over 3 years. Did they find a tenent? May they go ahead on Spec?

Other Developments (taken from one of my posts on SSP):

Livingston Place (U/C):
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/1599/gglivingstonplace9pd.jpg

Centrium Place (U/C):
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/9901/ggcentriumplace6ap.jpg

Centennial Place:
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/2620/ggcentennialplace8hr.jpg

Palliser Square:
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/2320/ggpallisersquare3se.jpg

Sheldon Chumir Health Centre:
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/638/ggsheldonchumir2hm.jpg

Southland Park:
http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/4993/ggsouthlandpark9re.jpg

EDIT: A few more while I'm at it:

Rockyview Hospital Addition (might look better than this... the older section will probably be redone to match):
http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/5422/cpvrockyviewhospital5yr.jpg

Montana:
http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/8679/montana3gb.jpg

Some more proposed office and Condo:


Bankers Court: proposed

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/bankerscourt.jpg

8th and 8th Torode: proposed

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/8thand8th.jpg

Kai Mortensen condo: 35/27? proposed

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/development/Homburg11and11.jpg

Riverfront Pointe: 25/9? proposed

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/RiverfrontPointe.jpg

Midtown: proposed

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/Midtown_Rendering.jpg

Others:

Montana - 27 floors - proposed
Laugheed house - two condos about 25,17
Batistella Colours 23 floors - this one is awesome: proposed
"Twin Sisters" 10th ave and 14th st. 2 x 48 - rumour/proposed
Greyhound Site (1000 Units, condo/hotel)
Castella: 20 floors 5th st, 12 ave proposed
5th street, 13th ave - rumoured/proposed
16th ave, 10th street - condo 25 flrs - rumoured/proposed
Eau Claire Market - condo and hotel towers - rumoured
Princeton - phase 3 and 4 (2 x 20-25) In design phase

In terms of office towers, what is it with Calgary and twin towers? Everything in Calgary seems to have a twin, why not one taller building?
Is it something in the zoning I'm not aware of?

wow.. nice office proposals calgary... =D

In terms of office towers, what is it with Calgary and twin towers? Everything in Calgary seems to have a twin, why not one taller building?
Is it something in the zoning I'm not aware of?

It is safer to build twins because the demand tends to jump all over the place. What developers require here is a leap of faith in the office market.

wow.. nice office proposals calgary... =D

Man that's just the tip of the iceberg. While not as many as Toronto, Calgary has it's own impressive list of projects going on right now. :)

Here is the most updated list we have on SSP:
http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/4943/calgarydevsum1pf.jpg

HAha, somebody mistook a highway for a hospital, excellent.
I'm well aware that it's a freeway (not a highway), I was pointing out why he would mention it in the same sentence regarding medical facilities. Or is Henday the only comparable Edmonton project to Calgary's highrise development?

Rendering for "Colours" from Batistella. located on the site of the Chocolate Sales Centre at 13ave and 1st st SW

http://www.itsaboutliving.com/index_1.asp

Looks awesome I think.

I'm well aware that it's a freeway (not a highway), I was pointing out why he would mention it in the same sentence regarding medical facilities. Or is Henday the only comparable Edmonton project to Calgary's highrise development?
Because it is a major construction project.

Hahah....yes Calgary has alot, but don't under estimate what's going up in that city to the north.

? how do you do a search here for topics on "deep sea oil off East Coast"
? is there an existing thread (or threads) and anyone remember the links

Am wondering why the oilmen on the east are not as rich as those from the rockies.
The great majority of oil industry control is concentrated in Calgary. Regions do not have full control of their corporate resources. Calgary's downtown trophy's of accomplishment (towers) are filled with decision makers for the provincial, national and international corporate interests in the industry.

....yes Calgary has alot, but don't under estimate what's going up in that city to the north.

I think Airdrie is considered part of the Metro Calgary Area - and I think most of the people who live there commute to Calgary anyway.

Airdrie is considered part of the Calgary metro, however Okotoks isn't... :bash:

Most of the population of Okotoks probably commutes to the city every day, yet they aren't considered part of our CMA, it's stupid. And Okotoks is only like a 20 minute drive.

EDIT: BTW he was referring to Edmonton, unless you are kidding and I missed the humour... ;)

Airdrie is considered part of the Calgary metro, however Okotoks isn't...

Okotoks is not North of Calgary.

BTW he was referring to Edmonton, unless you are kidding and I missed the humour... ;)

I couldn't help it :) The Edmonton folks have been strung quite tight lately.

Okotoks is not North of Calgary.

LOL, I know. I was just venting my frustrations about it not being part of the metro.

I couldn't help it The Edmonton folks have been strung quite tight lately.

I'm pretty sure it's the Flame's winning streak that's getting to them... :D

Who can blame them? The Flames are rockin these days and the RedWings are in town tonight. Can't wait to see the Flames kick their asses.

Airdrie is considered part of the Calgary metro, however Okotoks isn't... :bash:

Most of the population of Okotoks probably commutes to the city every day, yet they aren't considered part of our CMA, it's stupid. And Okotoks is only like a 20 minute drive.

EDIT: BTW he was referring to Edmonton, unless you are kidding and I missed the humour... ;)
Calgary's CMA boundary is retarded. It SHOULD include Okotoks as there thousands that commute to Calgary on a daily basis.

It should include Okotoks and maybe even High River. Kitchener's CMA is even more retarded - it doesn't even include Wellesley or Wilmot counties which abutt the cities.

Who can blame them? The Flames are rockin these days and the RedWings are in town tonight. Can't wait to see the Flames kick their asses.
Calgary GP20 W11 L7 OT2 PTS24
Edmonton GP20 W10 L9 OT1 PTS21

Neck in neck kids....

Because it is a major construction project.

Hahah....yes Calgary has alot, but don't under estimate what's going up in that city to the north.


Agreed!!, our province is definetly firing on all cylinders. :)

Some of Winnipeg's CensusMetro doesn't even include towns that literally border the city boundary.

http://img487.imageshack.us/img487/9901/ggcentriumplace6ap.jpg

Can anyone show or tell me more about Centrium Place? We really need seperate threads for individual Calgary developments!!! better for outsiders that way

^ What would you like to know? For one, I can tell you that it is currently under construction. Last I saw there was a lot of work going on inside the whole.

Aren't they building a second building or is this the second tower?

Aren't they building a second building or is this the second tower?

I can't recall there being a second tower in the first place. This is a stand-alone building, in Calgary! *shock*

Where can I get more info on Centennial Place?

Ummmm... I think that SSP might be the only place with a little more information.

This thread perhaps:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?threadid=90233&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

NOTE - I've posted this here in addition to the EnCana thread, as the article talks about a lot more than EnCana ...

-----
EnCana project expands Calgary downtown
By CRAIG SAUNDERS
00:00 EST Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Special to The Globe and Mail
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servle...lug=PRCALGARY22

Fuelled by high oil prices, downtown Calgary is enjoying its biggest growth spurt since the early 1980s. Dominating a pack of new office tower projects is EnCana Corp.'s massive new headquarters, expected to exceed two million square feet.

"The office market in downtown Calgary is just on fire," says Randy Fennessey, president of Colliers International's Calgary office. The vacancy rate for single-A and double-A buildings downtown is a low 3.15 per cent, and rents are rising quickly.

"It's hard to even track," he says of rents, noting that achievable net effective rates -- rent minus any incentives or allowances -- have risen 20 to 25 per cent in the past year.

The EnCana project will likely be the city's largest office complex when its doors open around 2009. It will occupy four parcels of land on the east side of Centre Street between 5th and 7th avenues.

Before it goes up, however, at least four other major projects are likely to be built, and an additional half-dozen are on the drawing boards.

The Homburg-Harris Centre, a redevelopment of the old post office on 9th Avenue, will have two towers totalling about 400,000 square feet.

Centrium Place will have 225,000 square feet, and Opus 8 will have 230,000.

On the north end of downtown, Livingston Place will have two towers with about 420,000 square feet each. It is being developed by Bentall Real Estate for its client, British Columbia Investment Management Corp., a B.C. pension fund.

Livingston Place's location, in the Eau Claire district along the Bow River, is Calgary's next big growth area, with "a lot of great office sites," says Mr. Fennessey, the listing agent for Livingston. Calgary began trying to encourage development there in the early '90s, but just as the landmark Eau Claire Market was built, the oil patch went sour and development came to a halt.

Today, the City of Calgary is focusing its efforts on a part of downtown that has largely been ignored.

Commercial development has traditionally clustered west of Centre Street, leaving the east end between Centre and City Hall embarrassingly quiet.

The EnCana project will go a long way to making this area a vital part of the downtown core, city officials say.

"It will facilitate a new urban feel east of Centre Street," says Gillian Lawrence, the acting manager in charge of capital works for the City of Calgary.

City officials hope that having so prominent a project go up east of Centre Street will eventually lead to growth in the East Village area behind City Hall, as well.

East Village is a notorious dead zone of abandoned industrial land, railway tracks and seedy taverns. It's cut off from downtown by City Hall, which blocks 8th Avenue, the area's natural access route.

The city, which owns roughly half the land in East Village, will spend $70-million to $100-million on infrastructure there, improving flood control, building an underpass to connect the area to the Beltline neighbourhood to the south, and extending the Eau Claire River Walk trail system.

Another draw in the East Village will be the new Urban Campus, a joint project of the University of Calgary and other institutions. The university expects the cluster of buildings to house at least 2,500 of its students by 2010. Bow Valley College is also redeveloping its existing East Village campus and will acquire an adjacent block of land when the old courthouse is demolished.

EnCana made the jump across Centre Street because the site offers easy access and had few restrictions on development, says Craig Reardon, administrative vice-president for EnCana.

"It allows us to build whatever type of complex works best for us," he says.

The building also could be linked to the city's overhead walkway system, which connects downtown office buildings; from its Centre Street site, EnCana could link to the Telus Corp. and Petro-Canada buildings, as well as the city's convention centre. The site was also attractive because it's on the light-rail C-Train line.

EnCana has not decided whether it will build a single tower, which would be the largest in Calgary, or two or three smaller buildings. The development will house more than 3,500 EnCana employees currently working in other structures.

Mr. Reardon says EnCana will bring the company's employees under one roof "to achieve more collaboration and less wasted time walking back and forth." The new structure will also help attract and retain staff, he says.

At two million square feet, the EnCana building's size alone will make it a landmark. Downtown is dominated by Banker's Hall, with 800,000 square feet in each of two towers. EnCana will also dwarf the Petro-Canada and TransCanada Corp. buildings, which both have about one million square feet.

The EnCana project is being managed by Matthews Southwest, a Texas company headed by Jack Matthews, a graduate of the University of Western Ontario's Ivey School of Business. His company recently completed a one-million-square-foot office complex for Bell Mobility Inc. near Toronto's Pearson International Airport.

Because the EnCana project is in the planning stages, few details are available. "The intention is to create a village," says Mr. Matthews. It likely will include features standard in triple-A office buildings, Mr. Reardon says, such as a fitness centre, restaurants and shops.

Despite its prominence, the building is not likely to be a major departure architecturally. "We expect it to be distinctive, but 'unusual' is a scary word to me," Mr. Matthews says.

A lead architect has not yet been selected. A request for proposals was sent to eight "firms of international reputation or of major national reputation here in Canada who have experience in major commercial developments," Mr. Reardon says. That list has since been cut to three firms, and a decision is expected at the end of November.

Including EnCana, the next few years will see five to seven million square feet added to Calgary's office inventory, Mr. Fennessey says. That's the most development since the 1979-84 spurt that resulted in the creation of Calgary's modern downtown core.

In the meantime, demand for office space will ease slightly in 2007, as new towers open, tenants move in and existing space is freed up, Mr. Fennessey says. But it won't ease significantly until 2009, when EnCana and other downtown projects are completed.

Information about the new Calgary Public Library main branch. Note - this might have implications for the EnCana project, as the currently library is on the block up for redevelopment, to include the new Police Station HQ.

http://calgarypubliclibrary.com/library/newlibrary.htm

"Mayor Dave Bronconnier’s quality-of-life proposal earmarks $40 million for the construction of a new central library, pending approval of the Calgary Public Library’s Plans by City Council.

The Calgary Public Library is in the preliminary planning stages for a new central library that will replace the outdated current central library. The new central library will act as the hub, heart, and pillar of support for the 16 branches, and future community locations.

The new central library will be a civic landmark, an outstanding example of sustainable public architecture, and source of community pride in a growing city. The new central library will be a valued community asset, helping make Calgary and its downtown a special place where people want to be and do business.

This is the largest project ever undertaken by the Calgary Public Library, and the Library is taking the time to ensure it is done properly. Firm details of the project (site, size, features, budget, etc.) will begin to emerge in late 2005, but the Library is many years away from beginning construction on the project. "

Calgary Zoo development news:

http://www.cbc.ca/calgary/story/ca-zoo-discovery20051110.html

"Zoo gets $35 million for discovery project
Last updated Nov 10 2005 08:43 AM MST
CBC News

An arctic animal exhibit and a new home for the elephants are two projects that will benefit from the province's $35-million grant to the Calgary Zoo.

The money, from this year's estimated provincial surplus of about $8 billion and a one-time investment, will allow the zoo to proceed with its $120-million Project Discovery expansion."

http://www.mtroyal.ab.ca/ADC/media_services/exp_vr_site/images/expmap_2.gif

http://www.mtroyal.ab.ca/ADC/media_services/exp_vr_site/exp_vrmap.html

Visiting the site, you can pull up construction updates for each project indicated on the map. Projects include the NW campus, a new PhysEd buiding, Environmental Sciences, residence improvements, etc.

http://www.lookingforward.ucalgary.ca/

Child Development Centre

Site Plan:
http://www.lookingforward.ucalgary.ca/ci/projects/cdc/images/site01.jpg

Renderings
http://www.lookingforward.ucalgary.ca/ci/projects/cdc/images/render01.jpg
http://www.lookingforward.ucalgary.ca/ci/projects/cdc/images/render05.jpg

West Campus

http://www.lookingforward.ucalgary.ca/ci/projects/westcampus/pdf/eoi.pdf

The West Campus includes a gross area of approximately 74 hectares (183 acres) and currently only contains the Children's Hospital project. Over the next while, it is slated to be built out extensively. Can't want to see what comes up, as this is a virtually blank slate.

I've already previously posted details of the Children's hospital project.

Wow! Calgary Airport looks to be hitting 10M passengers this year with a GDP impact of ~$5B to the city. It has already matched the total 2003 number in just 10 months! Web-site says it is going to post a new ten year plan soon, but don't know exactly when that will happen. The 20 year plan document is a little older, and the 10 year one will be more accurate and granular.

I'm still trying to figure out how the LRT will service the airport in the future. We know that the new North-Centre line [don't know its official name] will run along the West side of deerfoot till almost Airport Trail (96th Ave), and then jog West along the North border of the new Aurora business park and up Harvest Hills Blvd to around the Coventry Superstore. Perhaps the line can be split two ways at airport trail and the East branch can come over to the Airport? Also, I believe an expansion of Airport Trail to the West is on the books ... will go West along the North of the Aurora business park till it hits Harvest Hills Blvd. This should de-load Beddington Trail a pinch [man it was packed this morning - and those darn folks driving on the shoulder!]. Anyway, this LRT piece is about 15 years away, so we'll see what happens.

Great news about the airport - we almost have the same voume of passengers as Montreal at less than a third of the metro area!

As for the LRT line into the airport - you should check out this site by a poster at SSP. He has a really extensive history and data on the C-Train system. If you click on the "future north line" link at the bottom of the page it shows aa potential alignment of spur line to the airport from the north line

http://members.shaw.ca/lrtincalgary/Index.html

That is the link - it is a great site.

As for the west campus -those plans look awesome!

^^^^ The LRT link is a good one, however, with respect to the proposed North line, I don't believe the line will jog at Beddington (South of the Aurora Business Park) rather, I think it will jog at 96th (North of the Aurora Business Park). The web-site aligns with the prior vision (see the 2004 Feb strategic plan <http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/CT_strategic_development.pdf>) however, this has been changed more recently.

The following is from the City of Calgary documents regarding the Aurora Business Park. The dashed blue line is the latest view of the LRT path - it is North of the business park. To have it along Beddington Trail (as suggested in the web-site you directed us to, and in the 2004 Feb Strategic Plan) the tracks would have to be built along/on-top of West Nose Creek ... a BIG no-no.

http://content.calgary.ca/NR/rdonlyres/eaczg4nj6dahc4ru2pntah7btdxp7awpn4vvx6mr7wfuneoamerliaicwxdghuksfcpeer7onhroshnjcba2hr5pk6f/2004+Aurora+panel+-+Site+areas+option+2.jpg

Now, the below drawing covers a larger area, so you can see what I meant when suggesting that the train branch two ways around 96th ... the East side goes directly to the airport! This suggestion is not much different from what is suggested at the web-site you brought to our attention. I believe 96th already has enough land reserved for future tracks.

http://content.calgary.ca/NR/rdonlyres/euh6go34neiwdnry5ycji5pxzmjmtqtfzedynwrhtzbz7eqqrj52xwfgdswvgmulhg64t2dt6isy6fzv33gbwmudz5a/aurora_map.jpg

Interesting. All they need to do now is construct the bloody line! Damnit I hate these timelines for expansion of the system. why wait 10-15-20 years? the population is there now to support both the North and West lines. In 5-10 year, the SE line will have enough population to support it. For our province, the 2 billion or so dollars it would cost to fund all this is a drop in the bucket over a 10 year period. Come on, $200 million per year to complete what would be one of the best rapid transit systems in North America could easily be done.

The new colonade on 4th street...
http://picserver.student.utwente.nl/i/V664RQ18R258

Thank Cushboy over at SSP for the image.

Hmmm.... how much has it changed from before? Let me go check...

EDIT: Wow, quite a bit!

Original:
http://img386.imageshack.us/img386/1521/3055il.jpg

I don't know whether I should feel happy or sad. On one hand, it's nice that it's going to start construction again. On the other hand, I prefer the original design.

Then again, it might start growing on me.

Oh screw it. The new one is pretty good. It has nice large windows!

Nice new building with some character...........I like.

IMO the new design is more Calgary than that of the old. A Classical, and elegant building.

Question: Do you think sandstone is part of the facade? Now THAT would make it very Calgary.

I like it a lot. Better than the original in my opinion. It will fit in well with the Mission neighborhood.

Any new 2005numbers for CalgaryTransit ridership.
Most systems have released their first 6 month results by now.

^^^^
The Calgary Transit site still lists 2004 data as its latest.
There were 80.6M passengers in that year:
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/annual_ridership.html

This compares with 47.5M for Edmonton in 2004:
http://www.edmonton.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_280_218_0_43/http%3B/CMSServer/COEWeb/getting+around/about+ets/ETS_Statistics_for_2001_2002_2003_and_2004.htm

No idea why Edmonton's is so low relatively.

^^^^
The Calgary Transit site still lists 2004 data as its latest.
There were 80.6M passengers in that year:
http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/annual_ridership.html

This compares with 47.5M for Edmonton in 2004:
http://www.edmonton.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_280_218_0_43/http%3B/CMSServer/COEWeb/getting+around/about+ets/ETS_Statistics_for_2001_2002_2003_and_2004.htm

No idea why Edmonton's is so low relatively.
Ahhh, lemme think, Calgary has a larger population, Calgary has a more extensive LRT system, parking is more expensive in Calgary versus Edmonton,
Sherwood Park and St. Alberta have their own transit system that serves Edmonton....

Ahhh, lemme think, Calgary has a larger population, Calgary has a more extensive LRT system, parking is more expensive in Calgary versus Edmonton,
Sherwood Park and St. Alberta have their own transit system that serves Edmonton....

Good point about Sherwood Park and St. Albert. Regarding the other stuff you mentioned ...

The population isn't *that much* larger in Calgary, and though Calgary's LRT is more extensive, one would think that Edmonton's bus network would be more extensive to satisfy the needs of a similar population and similar footprint [implying same distances for people to cover]. I fully expected a difference, but not that the Calgary number would be 70% more! Makes me a prouder Calgarian, that we're helping the environment by hopping on the system, but makes me sad for our little neighbours.

Don't know how many of you are engaged with imagineCALGARY, or have already participated in their survey.

http://www.imaginecalgary.ca/

From the site ...

"18,000 people answered these questions:

* What do you value about Calgary?
* What is it like for you to live here?
* What are your hopes and dreams for Calgary in 100 years?
* What changes would you most like to see?
* How could you help make this happen?

The answers express Calgary's community values and provide the foundation for the Round Table to distill and discern the vision and 30 year targets and strategies toward the vision. The 38 members of the RT have read through the responses and studied trend analysis of the answers plus statistical and other information about the city. They will have a draft vision soon. When it's ready we'll post it here."

I'll post the report summary when it becomes available. It clearly looks like something that could directly impact how Calgary develops over the next decades.

Does anyone know of development plans for Fire Park / Firestone Park? This large plot was one of the sites targetted before the '88 Olympics, however, the Stempede Board nexed that idea, and the Saddledome was build in Stampede Park. Anyway, one of the things I've mentioned in the past is that Calgary needs a good stadium [instead of aging and small McMahon]. Perhaps this spot can be discussed again.

- large enough land
- beside LRT station
- good access via Memorial, Barlow and Deerfoot
- great views
- good spot to build as the area could use some renewal ... will help 17th ave / International Avenue

^ Not sure exactly where it is, any cross streets to help me find it on my Calgary map?

Walli, thanks for the info but I already have seen those numbers before.
I am looking for any new 2005 numbers for the first half of the year or even any estimates.

^^

I was searching several sites and I guess the name has been changed to century park.

Bordered on the South by Memorial Drive
Bordered on the East by Barlow Trail
Bordered on the West by 19th Street SE
Bordered on the North by 2nd Ave SE

http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=calgary,+ab&ll=51.047559,-114.009933&spn=0.007254,0.019243&t=h&hl=en
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=calgary,+ab&ll=51.047559,-114.004869&spn=0.003627,0.009622&t=h&hl=en

Basically on the eastern slope overlooking Deerfoot Trail, due East of Downtown. Great view of the city and the mountains behind.

Currently a large plot of un-utilized land with a big under-utilized warehouse style structure.

Also - Maxbell Arena is across Memorial from this site [this site has a much higher elevation than Maxbell]. The train station is called Barlow/Maxbell. The development plan for the Barlow/Maxbell station talks about this area also ... I guess part of the land is currently being used for park & ride, however, having been there, I assure you that the park & ride is just a small piece (the land is ~2.25M sq ft:
http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/lrt_station_information_brochures/barlow.pdf

Further comments:
- I also found that this was one of the potential sites for the Children's hospital, but the UofC West Campus was chosen:
http://jonah.crha-health.ab.ca/achsite/1_PUBLIC_NOTICE.htm

Ahhh, lemme think, Calgary has a larger population, Calgary has a more extensive LRT system, parking is more expensive in Calgary versus Edmonton,
Sherwood Park and St. Alberta have their own transit system that serves Edmonton....

I was reading many of cmd uw responses regarding Calgary developments and topics, as a result a hint of defeatist or defensive attitude surfaces.
My advice to you cmd uw is that both Calgary and Edmonton have sucessfully developed this province, both cities instrumental in it's design. As it stands now, Calgary is leading the province economically and Edmonton contributing a close second. Both cities need each other ,or should I say the province, as always in the past. This province wouldn't be what it is today without the strict competative nature involving both cities contributing their gains to our pains of growth.
I myself have grown to accept Edmonton's successes over Calgary's( as I'm a Calgary booster)linking them to better our province.
You will learn that only one city will be the greater and I believe that to be Calgary as we see it to be evedent more and more.

regards :)

I was reading many of cmd uw responses regarding Calgary developments and topics, as a result a hint of defeatist attitude surfaces.
My advice to you cmd uw is that both Calgary and Edmonton have sucessfully developed this province, both cities instrumental in it's design. As it stands now, Calgary is leading the province economically and Edmonton contributing a close second. Both cities need each other ,or should I say the province, as always in the past. This province wouldn't be today without the strict competative nature involving both cities contributing their gains to our pains of growth.
I myself have grown to accept Edmonton's successes over Calgary's( as I'm a Calgary booster)linking them to better our province.
You will learn that only one city will be the greater and I believe that to be Calgary as we see that to be evedent more and more.

regards :)

Come now, if you really knew cmd uw you would know that he has no such attitude. He is just another one of us guys who is tired of the bickering between us and them. Each city has its own faults. He has meant well in all the threads he has posted in, and there has been some rather arrogant comments made by forumers on both sides.

BTW that last line of yours is really a bait. Best to keep such comments offline. :)

Come now, if you really knew cmd uw you would know that he has no such attitude. He is just another one of us guys who is tired of the bickering between us and them. Each city has its own faults. He has meant well in all the threads he has posted in, and there has been some rather arrogant comments made by forumers on both sides.

BTW that last line of yours is really a bait. Best to keep such comments offline. :)
Attitude understood, which I was well aware of. But " "Meant Well" includes equal and diverse comments for all cities not just targeting specific cities for negative coment

I was reading many of cmd uw responses regarding Calgary developments and topics, as a result a hint of defeatist or defensive attitude surfaces.
My advice to you cmd uw is that both Calgary and Edmonton have sucessfully developed this province, both cities instrumental in it's design. As it stands now, Calgary is leading the province economically and Edmonton contributing a close second. Both cities need each other ,or should I say the province, as always in the past. This province wouldn't be what it is today without the strict competative nature involving both cities contributing their gains to our pains of growth.
I myself have grown to accept Edmonton's successes over Calgary's( as I'm a Calgary booster)linking them to better our province.
You will learn that only one city will be the greater and I believe that to be Calgary as we see it to be evedent more and more.

regards :)
I agree, Alberta on the whole is still small potatoes. Both cities need to utilize each others to really stand out against other major economic powerhouses with triple the population.

If you read many of the previous posts, you'll notice that a certain forumer always tends to make these 'comparisons' and then concludes with a comment about how poorer Edmonton is and the whatnot.

If you spend some serious time on this forum and Skyscraperpage, you'll realize that I don't start flame wars. So please don't misjudge me.

Battistella's new project on 1st street SW and 13th ave. "colours"

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/joshwhit/colours2.jpg