Calgary Stoney Trail [Ring Road]

[Cage]

I believe changes in the Indian Act that were introduced as part of the fall omnibus budget implementation act would allow for the land transfer to get approval from Tsu Tina Band Council and not require a full band referendum (which was required under old act).

However given the Idle No More and related movement the budget implementation act caused, and the the divided nature of the band memebers, I would not want the test case for the new provisions to be SWRR. Best to wait for some BC band in the sticks to get band council approval for a retail outlet.

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by Cage

I believe changes in the Indian Act that were introduced as part of the fall omnibus budget implementation act would allow for the land transfer to get approval from Tsu Tina Band Council and not require a full band referendum (which was required under old act).

However given the Idle No More and related movement the budget implementation act caused, and the the divided nature of the band memebers, I would not want the test case for the new provisions to be SWRR. Best to wait for some BC band in the sticks to get band council approval for a retail outlet.

The C-45 changes were for leased lands only, not land sales. Even leasing still required a referendum, but the rules were to change regarding what was considered a majority for consent. Any new SWCRR deal will still need a referendum to go forward.

Saying that, if a new agreement addresses the issues identified in 2009 as being a problem, I think there is a very good chance of a deal being accepted. The leadership of the Nation has been driving the negotiations for 15 years, so there is some good support for a deal as long as the deal is the right one. I would also hope that a deal would also be the start of better relations between the City, Province and the Nation. It's amazing that the City and the reserve can be in direct contact, but that so few relationships and collaborations seem to have been built.

Originally Posted by DoubleK

The same way we are supposed to justify burying powerlines.

Right. Because the price difference of 1 km of 8 lane freeway vs 1 km of 8 lane tunnel, is comparable to the difference between 1 km of power lines on poles vs buried lines?

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by Acey

Right. Because the price difference of 1 km of 8 lane freeway vs 1 km of 8 lane tunnel, is comparable to the difference between 1 km of power lines on poles vs buried lines?

It's a 6~7 times multiplier for powerlines, so yes.

So that $7 billion project you're talking about. Where are we getting the money for this?

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

The same way we are supposed to justify burying powerlines.

Powerlines aren't buried because of lack of land. If anything, buried utilities can take up MORE (because you can't always just build overtop).

Utilities are buried because of maintenance, and aesthetics. Completely different reason than why we bury freeways.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Powerlines aren't buried because of lack of land. If anything, buried utilities can take up MORE (because you can't always just build overtop).

Utilities are buried because of maintenance, and aesthetics. Completely different reason than why we bury freeways.

Powerlines in urban areas are absolutely buried due to lack of land. That is the primary reason for doing so.

The other reasons are aesthetics, as you have pointed out, and environmental. Maintenance on underground powerlines is way more difficult than overhead lines.

I should point out that I'm not talking about distribution voltage powerlines. I am talking about transmission lines, which is analogous to freeways.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Powerlines in urban areas are absolutely buried due to lack of land. That is the primary reason for doing so.

The other reasons are aesthetics, as you have pointed out, and environmental. Maintenance on underground powerlines is way more difficult than overhead lines.

I should point out that I'm not talking about distribution voltage powerlines. I am talking about transmission lines, which is analogous to freeways.

Maintenance is more difficult - but it's not required anywhere near as often. Ice storms and wind don't tend to do much damage to buried utilities. The cost savings of not having to replace overhead wires every 5 years can more than make up for the cost of burying them (and the extra expense of dealing with them every few decades).

I guess I was thinking more of the distribution lines. I'm not aware that we bury many transmission lines - they seem to keep building them above ground anywhere I go.

[DizzyEdge]

I've often been curious of the pros and cons of burying vs Vancouver-style alley poles.
Although I've just read that Vancouver is going to bury them all in short order.

[lineman]

Just gonna chime in here:

- There is up to a 10x multiplier for underground vs overhead. A couple of studies done a few years pegged the average cost of O/H 3 phase distribution about $100k/mile, transmission $500k/mile

- Overhead wires are not replaced every five years. There is plenty of wire up in the air that has been around since the 40s/50s. The cost of reconductoring overhead lines in urban areas increases due to having to do it all hot (customers don't like outages).

- While more reliable (50% less outage frequency) due to being removed from the elements, when underground cables do fail, finding and repairing the fault takes much longer, increasing outage times (58% longer outages).

- Storms have wreaked havoc on underground installations. Uprooted trees uproot cables. Pad-mounted equipment gets damaged from falling objects.

- While I'm not sure if there has been studies done, I suspect the abundance of alkali in our local ground might further reduce the service life of underground installs.

- Underground transmission installations over 50 or so km are not feasible unless converted to DC, requiring rectifier and inverter substations

Meanwhile, on Stoney Trail, the province doesn't care about powerlines and we don't have $7B to tunnel.

[lineman]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I've often been curious of the pros and cons of burying vs Vancouver-style alley poles.
Although I've just read that Vancouver is going to bury them all in short order.

Calgary's downtown network system is very reliable and there are many redundancies built-in. That and all the equipment is hiding in vaults. In dense areas, underground is the way to go.

Interesting trivia: Those footprints on the network vault grates were thought up of by City of Calgary Electric System employee back in the fifties (or sixties; I don't remember) so women wouldn't have to worry about their heels getting caught in-between the grates.

[lineman]

Originally Posted by Acey

Meanwhile, on Stoney Trail, the province doesn't care about powerlines and we don't have $7B to tunnel.

Stoney is on a provincial transportation utility corridor.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by lineman

- Overhead wires are not replaced every five years.

Perhaps not in Calgary, but then again Calgary is also not known for regular, long-duration power outages. I think I've lost power for more than a few minutes once in my 10 years here. Contrast that to people who live in severe weather areas, where outages are pretty much expected almost annually.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by lineman

Interesting trivia: Those footprints on the network vault grates were thought up of by City of Calgary Electric System employee back in the fifties (or sixties; I don't remember) so women wouldn't have to worry about their heels getting caught in-between the grates.

I've always wondered about those. I'm sure I've seen them in other cities by now, but they're definitely more widespread in Calgary than anywhere else. Brilliant invention, btw. The guys or gals who came up with them should be awarded a medal.

[DizzyEdge]

It occurred to me that although google maps says both are 25 mins (16th ave vs Stoney Trail), it might actually be faster for big trucks to use Stoney as google maps times wouldn't account for the slow acceleration after a stoplight on 16th.

Went through the construction area today. Really not much new to report, tons of grading still going at 22X/Deerfoot, old signs are coming down and a few more new ones have gone up. They were paving the EB-NB curve of mainline Stoney at 88 St today. The other side (the SB-WB curve) looks very much ready for paving as well. Status-quo at 52 St and McKenzie/Cranston.

Just over 16 weeks until opening day.

[shogged]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

It occurred to me that although google maps says both are 25 mins (16th ave vs Stoney Trail), it might actually be faster for big trucks to use Stoney as google maps times wouldn't account for the slow acceleration after a stoplight on 16th.

I have personally never had an accurate google maps eta. As a rule, I take off at least 15%.

Only in the middle of the night or on a holiday would 16 Ave be faster. Between ~3-6 pm on a weekday Stoney would be like 50% faster, or more. I still seen a ton of trucks on 16th though, and they can't all be intra-city.

[Ferreth]

New pictures are up on the SE Ring Road Construction website. You'll have to go through the set to find all the new images; they are sorted by interchange then date.