"This is a city where people make things happen."

Ticket Tax Could Close Arena Gap posted May 8th, 2013 in 2010-2013 Term, Arena, Taxation

CRL Catalyst Project List

CRL Catalyst Project List.

There are three camps on this question. There are those who believe the Oilers are priceless, and would pay anything. There are those who believe pro sports are worthless to Edmonton and/or who really don’t want to see any investment downtown; and consequently don’t want to see any city dollars whatsoever going into a new arena (and might or might not support putting money into the existing arena, which will need some work eventually).

Then there’s the rest of us: open to the idea of a new arena downtown, aware that it could spark new investment, but not too happy about how the negotiations have played out and concerned that the City is being asked to put a lot on the line to make it happen. Read more

Energy and Climate Citizen Panel posted April 16th, 2013 in 2010-2013 Term, Education & Innovation, Environment

I was very impressed with the presentations from the Citizen Panelists who spoke to Executive Committee yesterday. They were some of the 57 Edmontonians of diverse backgrounds who came together last fall to deliberate over six weekends on tough questions of climate and energy facing Edmoton. Read more

Potholes 2013: Triage and Beyond posted April 14th, 2013 in 2010-2013 Term, Road Maintenance

This example is from Allendale on 108 Street. There are many places like this that need more than just patching but are a long way from scheduled repaving.

It’s a perfect storm for potholes. And City Council is taking short-term action while continuing to advance longer-term solutions.

To demystify the pothole: water infiltrates under the roadway surface through cracks but doesn’t drain because of our soil conditions. That water expands as it freezes and exerts pressure on the roadway material. This happens over and over, and combined with the pounding of vehicle traffic, you get a pothole.

But the compounding factor is that we are behind on maintenance. Like most cities we are better at building new things than looking after old ones. So we have more cracks and more patchwork than we should.

We are still way behind on arterial (main) road maintenance. Last month Council diverted $13 million more into a ‘mill and fill’ program to get caught up on some of the worst stretches of road. That work will run all summer. We will need to commit more funds in future years too. Read more

Mayor’s 2013 State of the City Address posted April 4th, 2013 in 2010-2013 Term, Capital Region, Education & Innovation, Smarter Planning

Mayor Mandel never fails to get the City’s attention with his annual State of the City address. This one was noteworthy as much for what wasn’t said as what was.

The most complex issue the Mayor raised was regional planning and equity. Elise Stolte from the Journal wrote a blog post which includes the text of the regional section.

I’ve been working with the region on one of the few files that’s made some genuine progress, which is regional transit. I brokered a consensus to jointly purchase a smart card system for handling fares, including sharing the cost with St. Albert and Strathcona County – just working on the paperwork now. And we’re midway through a project looking at whether delivering transit in the region would be more effective and efficient if united together in a regional services commission. It took two years to get to this point, but as Chair of the Regional Transit Committee I’ve been proud to show that diplomacy and cooperation can work in the region. It’s the kind of thing that we couldn’t have imagined when Mayor Mandel first made the call for a formal Capital Region in his 2007 State-of-the-City speech.

That said, I support the Mayor’s call for the province to take renewed interest in strengthening the region’s framework for cooperation, planning for growth, clearer prioritization of regional infrastructure and a way to achieve fair sharing of the costs and benefits of growth. He made the case that Edmonton is disadvantaged, and I think he’s right – for example, in the counties the major roads and interchanges are built and maintained by the province – in Edmonton developers and the City pay for this infrastructure. Examples like this go on, from inequitable policing grants to shouldering disproportionate burdens like homelessness. The City Charter work with the province is supposed to address some of these special circumstances, and Tuesday’s speech should create new urgency for the province to show results on the City Charter. Diplomacy will be required to deliver results in the long run.

Unexpectedly, the Mayor blasted the province for cuts to Post-Secondary Education, a key sector of Edmonton’s economy. I’ve long argued that the quality of learning and research happening here is an under-emphasized key competitive advantage for our city. It was wonderful to hear him speak so eloquently about our schools’ importance to creativity and human advancement, as well as the economic importance of research and technology commercialization. I too am very concerned about what these deep cuts could mean for Edmonton – and for our whole province. The ideas and solutions developed at our Post Secondaries are key to sustaining our progress as a city. They support improved resource development, spur investment and guide us in addressing social issues, just to name a few. His advocacy was consistent with the work I’ve spearheaded with our Post Secondaries, School Boards, EPL and others toward positioning Edmonton as a “City of Learners”. It was great to see learning and discovery emphasized with the full force of the Mayor’s influence.

As for the deferral of the mayor’s announcement of his intentions for this fall, it’s a shrewd move. It will put a lid on succession jockeying for a while, which is probably a good thing as Council works through arena details, budget revisions and government relations strategy over the coming weeks. Plus, standing for public office is a big decision for anyone, and so I respect that the mayor may need some more time to decide.

As for my own decision making, since I got asked a lot about it this week: yes, I continue to give strong consideration to running for mayor. I have already decided I won’t run for my Ward 10 Council seat again, and that stands. I have also said I won’t run against the mayor if he runs again. There are many factors in play, so this delay provides some more time to weigh them all carefully.

Horse Hills North East ASP Decision posted February 28th, 2013 in 2010-2013 Term, Capital Region, Smarter Planning

On Wednesday Council decided to approve 40 years of new supply of predominantly low-density residential development in the Horse Hills area in North East Edmonton. The reports and bylaw can be accessed here.

Horse Hills ASP Map. Click to enlarge.

It was inevitable. It was more than 30 years in the making. And yes, it’s fair to help landowners on all sides of the issue know what’s planned.

It’s true that land supply is becoming scarce in that quadrant of the city and though estimates vary, there are fewer than 5-10 years of existing supply. It is prudent to bring on more supply, especially given the job growth expected nearby in the Edmonton Energy and Technology Park, which will create new demand.

Meanwhile, demand is still strong for suburban low-density housing. And why not? The land is cheaper and the infrastructure and structures are new. With my 59-year-old fixer-upper house and crumbling uneven sidewalks, even I can see the appeal. And yes, many of the new and existing jobs are closer to these proposed neighbourhoods. So, no doubt, there is a market for the proposed housing.

I can’t deny that those are today’s economic realities for urban development. Given today’s realities, much of this plan makes sense. In fact, it has some really promising possibilities for integrating small-scale community food production, innovative ‘low-impact’ servicing and the potential for a proper town centre, hopefully linked with LRT.

For the first time, we did get some high level information about the costs to the City of supporting this growth (Mack Male’s offered some highlights of the report here). I think it was probably low on costs and high on the revenue forecast. Nevertheless, it showed what is the case for each of our low-density neighbourhoods, including mine, which is that we collect less in revenues than we face in costs. This isn’t particular to Edmonton – it is like this in most Alberta communities. We offset this either by subsidy from the non-residential tax base, other general revenues like the EPCOR dividend, or by delaying investments in infrastructure construction or repair.

It follows that denser communities make more efficient use of infrastructure, and therefore are more cost efficient. And we’ve made gains – these neighbourhoods are much denser than older Edmonton neighbourhoods, again, including mine. But the City is talking about adding density in my neighbourhood, which I agree with, and on the airport lands and other sites, and one of the strongest arguments is that it makes for a more efficient and affordable city.

On the food and agriculture question, while I am sympathetic in principle to the calls for preserving agricultural lands, the economics don’t support it unless you have a willing landowner, ready to forego the potential gains of development. Some advocates were calling for a large swath of land to be permanently protected; however, for the City to impose this or negotiate this would have meant compensation in the tens or hundreds of millions to landowners intent on development – so that was a non-starter. I still do think there is opportunity to look at long-term agricultural land preservation, and building a local food economy – but this should be in a regional context, where the lands are still affordable and the economics stands a chance. I encourage food security advocates to not lose heart, and to consider rallying around this as a regional issue.

But the remaining agricultural and market garden land owners who wanted to continue to operate their businesses have been significantly impeded by this plan. I had initially hoped this ASP would cerate some exciting opportunities to work with the cluster along 197 Avenue near the river to plan a neighbourhood and that integrated them. And even though there was significant public support for their protection and sustainability, the plan doesn’t protect them. At best it tolerates them. And because of the conceptual provincial road alignment, their long-term future is in doubt.

I could have supported the southern half of this (neighbourhoods 1-3), because that’s today’s housing market reality. We are only at the beginning of offering more city-wide choice in our housing market. There is work ahead to encourage a supply of more jobs in the core to support infill housing demand. And while the LRT network to support better mobility is growing, it is moving slowly.

But this is not only today’s decision; this is at least a 40-year decision (and beyond as we service and repair approved areas). Thinking ahead, I think we could have done better.

I think we could have found a way to better accommodate the cluster of remaining farmers, even perhaps around the provincial road. I don’t have the answer, but I’m not sure we tried hard enough to find one.

And I think that in less than forty years (if cost continue to rise, as distances grow, as demographics change, as traffic gets worse, and if tastes change as a result) that the communities we’re building then will be different from the ones approved yesterday – moderately denser, more efficient, more walkable, better connected to great transit, and with more mixed employment.

There is room for the plan to change and evolve over time so I have hope that as it is implemented its ambitions can rise.