HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Edmonton


View Poll Results: Would you vote for a ETS Rapid Transit masterplan scheme?
Yes, I'd vote for more BRT/LRT 301 82.92%
No, what we have is fine. 34 9.37%
I dunno, maybe, yes, no, whatever. 28 7.71%
Voters: 363. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7601  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 3:42 PM
CMD UW's Avatar
CMD UW CMD UW is offline
Urbis Maximus
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 12,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
You did not lie - you were seeing what you hoped and thought was happening. What is more interesting from your intel is that TransEd Partners is now taking soil samples. You would have thought geo would have been done before or early on in the P3 competition. Otherwise the Proponents had added risk in their bid prices.
I believe this is a more detailed geotechnical investigation which is common prior to proceeding with detailed design. There was likely a preliminary geotechnical report completed during the concept design stage.
__________________
"Call me sir, goddammit!"
     
     
  #7602  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 3:46 PM
noodlenoodle noodlenoodle is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocket252 View Post
^ these facilities are hidden gems and something we need to promote in the Edmonton metro area as are other areas like the Devinian Gardens. What we are lacking is a regional transportation strategy that incorporates the surrounding communities. The city and local municipalities need to work as a team to sell our region in this fashion.
Good thing the surrounding municipalities just voted down density targets that'd make regional transit viable.

:\
     
     
  #7603  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 3:55 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 69,138
^yup...
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
     
     
  #7604  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 4:43 PM
Black Star Black Star is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,259
Amalgamation of surrounding Municipalities already! To many 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 Chiefs.
     
     
  #7605  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:00 PM
Hallsy's Toupee's Avatar
Hallsy's Toupee Hallsy's Toupee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,895
I've never saw the point of amalgamation. Edmonton takes over St. Albert, Morinville takes its place; Edmonton takes over Sherwood Park, Ardrossan takes its place, and so on.
     
     
  #7606  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:06 PM
hilman's Avatar
hilman hilman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,763
The population differences between St. Albert and Morinville and Sherwood Park and Ardrossan should tell you the answer. Does a region of 1.4 million need 24+ mayors, councils, etc with duplicated services and cost?
     
     
  #7607  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:16 PM
Daveography's Avatar
Daveography Daveography is offline
Klatuu Barada Nikto
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Island of Misfit Architecture
Posts: 4,483
Careful what you wish for; amalgamation would very likely result in future city councils being far less progressive than currently, and expectations & standards of infrastructure and services being raised across the entire region.

Focus should be on sharing costs, services, and planning for the region as a whole, which is the direction things are going now. It's not always going to go our way, but there is far, far more cooperation now than there was 5-10 years ago.
     
     
  #7608  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:19 PM
Hallsy's Toupee's Avatar
Hallsy's Toupee Hallsy's Toupee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,895
What I meant by "replacing" is that if St. Albert and Sherwood Park are absorbed into the city, the populations of Morinville and Ardrossan will start increasing to the point of becoming cities themselves. Then what - does Edmonton amalgamate with them too? Then repeat the same scenario with Westlock and Vegreville? Where does it end?

Last edited by Hallsy's Toupee; Jul 15, 2016 at 7:47 PM.
     
     
  #7609  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:33 PM
Jasper and one o nin's Avatar
Jasper and one o nin Jasper and one o nin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Лесные Высоты
Posts: 3,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilman View Post
The population differences between St. Albert and Morinville and Sherwood Park and Ardrossan should tell you the answer. Does a region of 1.4 million need 24+ mayors, councils, etc with duplicated services and cost?
St Albert pays higher taxes. Edmonton swallows St. Albert, Edmonton needs to therefore adjust its millrate - Edmonton pays higher taxes.

People don't realize (but it is never brought up) Edmonton benefits from it's surrounding communities. Something like 80% of working age St Albert residents commute to Edmonton to work. The commercial land use in St Albert is disproportionate to its population. The difference is absorbed in Edmonton. Therefore, Edmonton benefits from the additional non-residential tax revenue - but does not need to service the suburban low density residential land use. The money spent by those "visitors" benefits businesses and residents of Edmonton. The cost to service suburban residential use is higher than the revenue it receives whereas revenue from the urban core exceeds the cost to service. So WHY would Edmonton want to absorb more low density suburban-style residential land use?
__________________
"Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know." And he says, "Oh, uh, there won't be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness." So I got that goin' for me, which is nice. Carl Spackler, 1980
     
     
  #7610  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:38 PM
Jasper and one o nin's Avatar
Jasper and one o nin Jasper and one o nin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Лесные Высоты
Posts: 3,345
The current regional model is not working. It needs to be fixed (and changes are coming), but amalgamation is not the answer.
__________________
"Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know." And he says, "Oh, uh, there won't be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness." So I got that goin' for me, which is nice. Carl Spackler, 1980
     
     
  #7611  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 5:45 PM
hilman's Avatar
hilman hilman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,763
1.3 million people swallowing up the 60,000 St. Albertans isn't really going to change your taxes that much. Acquiring the commercial and business taxes of districts like Sherwood Park and Leduc/Nisku would offset that anyways.

The "benefit" we get from St. Albert commuters is them tearing up our roads, requiring the City to add more transit, fire, police, homelessness, etc., seems like a fantastic deal!!
Newsflash, being from St. Albert, Sherwood Park or any other region doesn't make you special, time to start acting like a team player instead of leeching off of the host.

So again I ask, why do we need 24+ mayors to govern a city of 1.4 million people. Think of the cost duplication in salaries, equipment, etc that the region is wasting.
     
     
  #7612  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 6:27 PM
Black Star Black Star is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,259
^ Bingo.....
     
     
  #7613  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 7:13 PM
Jasper and one o nin's Avatar
Jasper and one o nin Jasper and one o nin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Лесные Высоты
Posts: 3,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilman View Post
1.3 million people swallowing up the 60,000 St. Albertans isn't really going to change your taxes that much. Acquiring the commercial and business taxes of districts like Sherwood Park and Leduc/Nisku would offset that anyways.

The "benefit" we get from St. Albert commuters is them tearing up our roads, requiring the City to add more transit, fire, police, homelessness, etc., seems like a fantastic deal!!
Newsflash, being from St. Albert, Sherwood Park or any other region doesn't make you special, time to start acting like a team player instead of leeching off of the host.

So again I ask, why do we need 24+ mayors to govern a city of 1.4 million people. Think of the cost duplication in salaries, equipment, etc that the region is wasting.
I do agree that based the make up of Edmonton's region, the governance models is really not good. The CRB is not set up to deal with the issues from both an urban and rural perspective. Edmonton's regional hierarchy is unique to most medium sized Canadian cities. But there are studies out there that demonstrates that one municipal government for the entire region does not benefit the central city. (I remember this from my municipal finance course during my undergrad - it was based on both Halifax and Toronto after they became super cities). The reasons all related to cost. There were savings in many areas - such as reduced duplication in certain areas - however the additional costs outweighed the savings. Another finding was that once a city gets to be a certain size, it creates many of its own redundancies. For example, the City of Edmonton has about 14 employees per 1000 residents whereas St. Albert is about 8; Fort Sask 8; Spruce Grove 8. The other findings were related to the central city having non-residential (higher paying) properties that serve the region. The costs associated with most infrastructure was almost nil - for example, once roads hit a certain volumn, the additional traffic has very little to do with its deterioration. Decision making doesn't work very well either - especially in Toronto. St. Albert, Sherwood Park, etc.. have a very distinct autonomy and the interests of its residents are much different than the residents of the City of Edmonton. They are still going to want their representation on Council. How effective is a Council with 30+ politicians? I think for the Edmonton region, we can learn from what is not working in the region and what doesn't work in other regions and look at creative ways to fixing the problems.
__________________
"Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know." And he says, "Oh, uh, there won't be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness." So I got that goin' for me, which is nice. Carl Spackler, 1980
     
     
  #7614  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 7:18 PM
EdmTrekker EdmTrekker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin View Post
I do agree that based the make up of Edmonton's region, the governance models is really not good. The CRB is not set up to deal with the issues from both an urban and rural perspective. Edmonton's regional hierarchy is unique to most medium sized Canadian cities. But there are studies out there that demonstrates that one municipal government for the entire region does not benefit the central city. (I remember this from my municipal finance course during my undergrad - it was based on both Halifax and Toronto after they became super cities). The reasons all related to cost. There were savings in many areas - such as reduced duplication in certain areas - however the additional costs outweighed the savings. Another finding was that once a city gets to be a certain size, it creates many of its own redundancies. For example, the City of Edmonton has about 14 employees per 1000 residents whereas St. Albert is about 8; Fort Sask 8; Spruce Grove 8. The other findings were related to the central city having non-residential (higher paying) properties that serve the region. The costs associated with most infrastructure was almost nil - for example, once roads hit a certain volumn, the additional traffic has very little to do with its deterioration.
St. Alberta does not appear in the last Federal Census stats from StasCan. Not listed at all for Alberta or Edm Metro. No one missed them...boo hoo. Maybe its just an error and StasCan have the data...but its not showing up now.
     
     
  #7615  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 7:26 PM
noodlenoodle noodlenoodle is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,148
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdmTrekker View Post
St. Alberta does not appear in the last Federal Census stats from StasCan. Not listed at all for Alberta or Edm Metro. No one missed them...boo hoo. Maybe its just an error and StasCan have the data...but its not showing up now.
St Albert is located here, unless you're looking for info from the Statistical Dark Ages when the Conservatives decided they didn't want numbers & facts getting in the way of their gut feelings.

Or were you looking for a specific piece of data that's not on the general page?
     
     
  #7616  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 7:37 PM
Mikemike Mikemike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasper and one o nin View Post
I do agree that based the make up of Edmonton's region, the governance models is really not good. The CRB is not set up to deal with the issues from both an urban and rural perspective. Edmonton's regional hierarchy is unique to most medium sized Canadian cities. But there are studies out there that demonstrates that one municipal government for the entire region does not benefit the central city. (I remember this from my municipal finance course during my undergrad - it was based on both Halifax and Toronto after they became super cities). The reasons all related to cost. There were savings in many areas - such as reduced duplication in certain areas - however the additional costs outweighed the savings. Another finding was that once a city gets to be a certain size, it creates many of its own redundancies. For example, the City of Edmonton has about 14 employees per 1000 residents whereas St. Albert is about 8; Fort Sask 8; Spruce Grove 8. The other findings were related to the central city having non-residential (higher paying) properties that serve the region. The costs associated with most infrastructure was almost nil - for example, once roads hit a certain volumn, the additional traffic has very little to do with its deterioration. Decision making doesn't work very well either - especially in Toronto. St. Albert, Sherwood Park, etc.. have a very distinct autonomy and the interests of its residents are much different than the residents of the City of Edmonton. They are still going to want their representation on Council. How effective is a Council with 30+ politicians? I think for the Edmonton region, we can learn from what is not working in the region and what doesn't work in other regions and look at creative ways to fixing the problems.
Where are the employees numbers from, and do they account for the higher number of contract/arms length "employees" in other places? Edmonton is the only one with directly employed police in their own police force, St. albert transit outsources operations, and Edmonton has directly employed waste management that (most? Some?) others do not.

Quick figures get me EPS having 3 employees per 1000 Edmontonians, Guessing ETS as around 2 (double the # of buses?) and there's most of your gap.
     
     
  #7617  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2016, 11:02 PM
Harrison's Avatar
Harrison Harrison is offline
A Better Place
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,089
Maybe a two-tier system of government is needed for the Capital Region. The Regional Government can take care of transit, policing, major roads, sanitation etc. while the local governments can focus on municipal-scale items such as planning, libraries, parks, local roads etc. - not unlike in certain Ontario municipalities.
__________________
Bingo bango bongo
     
     
  #7618  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 5:35 PM
Landlocked Landlocked is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilman View Post
The "benefit" we get from St. Albert commuters is them tearing up our roads, requiring the City to add more transit, fire, police, homelessness, etc., seems like a fantastic deal!!

Newsflash, being from St. Albert, Sherwood Park or any other region doesn't make you special, time to start acting like a team player instead of leeching off of the host.
Holy hyperbole, batman! Anything else you want to blame on St. Albert? How Trumpish. Better build a wall.
     
     
  #7619  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 5:59 PM
hilman's Avatar
hilman hilman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,763
Hyperbole? Are you trying to say that all those commuters cost the COE $0 for them to use our roads, police, fire, transit, etc? If so, you are even more out to lunch than I previously thought. Typical bedroom community mentality and thinking. Time for a wall and toll gates
     
     
  #7620  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2016, 6:51 PM
Jasper and one o nin's Avatar
Jasper and one o nin Jasper and one o nin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Лесные Высоты
Posts: 3,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilman View Post
Hyperbole? Are you trying to say that all those commuters cost the COE $0 for them to use our roads, police, fire, transit, etc? If so, you are even more out to lunch than I previously thought. Typical bedroom community mentality and thinking. Time for a wall and toll gates
and an outright ban on St. Albertianites from entering the City of Edmonton. They're not sending their best. They're taking our jobs, they're murderers, ther're rapists, our pet's heads are falling off!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi33KkhKRWs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULUiV_tj1DI
__________________
"Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know." And he says, "Oh, uh, there won't be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness." So I got that goin' for me, which is nice. Carl Spackler, 1980
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Edmonton
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:32 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.