According to the study Calgarians are actually quite well off in comparison to other major urban centres around the world. Here are some of the Calgary stats:

• Calgary drivers spent 15.7 hours in peak hour traffic last year. Calgary ranks 159^th of all cities surveyed for the amount of congestion that driver’s experience.
• Calgary is the 9^th most congested city in Canada behind Montreal, Toronto, St. John’s, Ottawa, Vancouver, Quebec City, Victoria, Edmonton and Hamilton.

View the full scorecard HERE

While this information paints a positive picture on Calgary’s congestion issues, we cannot be complacent on our need to make meaningful investments in our transportation network. A comparative study gives us an idea how we stack up against other cities – it does not suggest we aren’t without problems.

There are a lot of ideas out there on how to tackle congestion issues. Earlier this week I read an interesting article that provided some ideas on how to encourage a more sustainable transportation network: http://driving.ca/auto-news/news/how-it-works-road-congestion-and-design

This article talks about how modern traffic engineering principles can be appropriately applied to address congestion issues. The article states that nearly all experts agree that simply adding new lanes can actually cause more congestion problems. How? It’s called induced demand. Induced demand points to a marked increase in the consumption of a good after supply is increased. If all we do is build roads, all we will likely do is attract more traffic. Adding more capacity on our roadways can be part of a solution, but it cannot be the only action. Adding more lanes to a roadway and expecting congestion to reduce is like buying a larger pair of pants and expecting to lose weight. I’ve tried it – it doesn’t work!

If we really want to see meaningful reductions in congestion we need to establish greater efficiency in our transportation network. This means having robust infrastructure that can stand the test of time, offering diverse transportation options and embracing innovative new approaches to traffic flow management. Calgary is often referred to as an auto-centric city. This characterization is often cited as a negative, but I don’t see it that way. What we need to come to terms with is that providing additional transportation options can enhance the transportation experience for everybody – especially motorists. We must always be mindful that transportation is not about moving trains or buses or vehicles – it’s about moving people. I fundamentally believe that people will choose the path of least resistance to get to where they need to go. That path could be in a vehicle, on a bus, on a bike or even on a train. That diversity of options is critically important.

I talk a lot about the need to improve our public transit infrastructure, but I am also a big proponent of continued investments in our roadways. Let’s look at the current Deerfoot Trail Study as an example. We are looking at some engineering solutions to address some of the pinch points that contribute to some of our congestion issues – that’s great! But that isn’t all we are doing. The study isn’t just about looking for ways to make Deerfoot wider; it’s about finding ways to make Deerfoot better. That means looking into things like real-time digital traffic updates, variable speed limits and high-occupancy vehicle lanes. These are all components that could contribute to ensuring we have a transportation network that is efficient, convenient and safe.

When we think about our congestion issues, we need to look to the future. One of the biggest parts of our future is the Green Line LRT. Green Line LRT offers commuters with a choice. An option like the Green Line could remove significant numbers of vehicles from Deerfoot every day while freeing up road capacity for people still make the decision to drive. That is potential for a significant reduction in congestion without building a single new lane on Deerfoot.

I believe that our existing LRT network has played a big role with how our congestion compares to other major cities. We have one of the highest performing LRT networks in North American and it is certainly the gold standard here in Canada. We designed a network that focused on moving as many as people as possible in a way that was quick, safe and convenient. We made getting the LRT out to where people live a significant priority. The Green Line will double our LRT network and reduce city-wide congestion by 10-15%. That’s a huge win for Calgarians!

Your time is valuable. Time spent stuck in traffic is dead time. It has an economic cost, an environmental cost and it has a cost on your quality of life. As a city we have done a decent job managing our congestion issues, but we still have room to improve. By making strategic investments in our transportation network we can ensure that you get to decide how best to use your time – that’s an idea that I will always support.

I cannot think of a more pressing issue facing southeast Calgary than transportation. Southeast Calgary is home to some of the fastest growing communities in Alberta. Growth has put additional strain on the limited transportation infrastructure that many of these communities have access to. These new communities are expanding rapidly, and I believe that is a good thing. These are areas that make for a more complete city by offering more housing options for all income levels. With the addition of appropriate public investments we can ensure these areas reach their full potential.

Given the budgetary realities facing our Municipal and Provincial governments right now, finding value for money is incredibly important. There is a limited amount of funds available, and we need to ensure they are allocated appropriately. This means finding ways to cut costs and even exploring partnerships with the private sector.

The 212th Avenue/Deerfoot Trail interchange is one project that offers a tremendous amount of value for public dollars. This interchange would connect south Cranston to south Seton with access to Deerfoot Trail. I have outlined the general location of the interchange in the map below:

This project offers a number of benefits:

• Support for existing communities. South Cranston has seen a lot of development in the last number of years. Currently residents in south Cranston need to drive north to the Cranston Ave/Seton Blvd interchange in order to access Deerfoot Trail or Stoney Trail. This creates an undesirable situation where drivers cross through residential streets in order to find an access point. The 212 interchange would provide some much needed traffic calming for Cranston.

• Unlocking Seton. Seton is going to be one of the most exciting areas in Calgary. Very large public and private investments have been made in this area. These investments will make Seton an area of tremendous regional importance. We recently broke ground on the Seton recreation centre (opening in 2018) which is in close proximity to the site of the new Southeast Public High School (opening fall of 2018). Both of these facilities are in the shadow of the biggest public investment in the area; the South Health Campus. As it currently stands there is only a single interchange that services this area. Without the addition of a new interchange at 212^th Avenue, Seton will take much longer to reach full potential.

• Improving Access. Stoney Trail is an asset to southeast Calgary, but due to the area master-plan there are some challenges with the interchanges between Deerfoot Trail and Cranston, specifically headed westbound. Vehicles headed west on Stoney are not able to access Cranston and vehicles attempting to get to the South Health Campus by exiting onto Deerfoot Trail from Stoney Trail need to use a U-Turn Route at the Dunbow Road overpass that tacks on an extra 10.5 km to their trip. In an emergency situation, this could be the difference between life and death. Adding the 212^th Avenue interchange would greatly improve access to these areas.

• Job creation. It is estimated that Alberta lost 19,600 jobs in 2015. The Provincial Government made it clear that they intended to move forward on “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects to help stimulate the economy and get Albertans back to work. The construction of the “shovel-ready” 212^th Avenue interchange and the subsequent development of south Seton could create as many as 28,800 jobs and lead to $465M in total economic impact.

• Cost Sharing. This project has an estimated price tag of $50M. The City of Calgary is willing to commit $10M in funds. A developer group led by Brookfield Residential is willing to contribute an additional $10M. Embracing this partnership would put the Province in a position where they only have to cover 60% of the project costs. It should be noted that the developer has no obligation whatsoever to contribute funding to this project.

Over the last number of months there have been a series of discussions between the developer, The City and the Province on this project. The City made it clear that we would front-end the funding for this project as long as the Province made a commitment to pay back their portion within a reasonable amount of time. This would allow this “shove-ready” project to be delivered without immediately impacting Provincial finances.

After numerous discussions, the City finally received a definitive answer from Alberta Transportation:

“Although the Province understands that this project is a high priority for Calgary, it is not a high priority for the Province at this time. Given the challenging economic environment, the Province is not in a position to provide any funding at this time or make a funding commitment into the future. Should the City wish to move ahead and fully fund the project (along with Brookfield), the Province will allow the project to proceed; further, the Province would be receptive to managing the project (tendering and delivery of the project) on behalf of the City.”

In short, Calgary can do the project if they want, but do not count on support from the Province.

I am very disappointed in this decision by Alberta Transportation. This is a project that connects Albertans to major pieces of public infrastructure and provides a more complete transportation network to the 100,000 residents that live in the area. By deferring on this partnership today, the Province has guaranteed that this project will cost taxpayers more in the future.

The Transportation Minister’s office stated, “the Province is not in a position to provide any funding at this time or make a funding commitment into the future”. This suggests to me that the Province feels that this project is not their responsibility. Deerfoot Trail will be handed back over to The City in the not so distant future. The transfer agreement will impact the area between the north Stoney Trail interchange and the south Stoney Trail interchange. The 212^th Ave interchange would fall outside of this area. This interchange would connect major pieces of regional infrastructure to a provincial highway. From my perspective, this interchange is very clearly a provincial responsibility.

This decision really makes me wonder if Alberta Transportation has the best interests of southeast Calgary in mind. I strongly urge residents in Ward 12 to write into Transportation Minister Mason’s office and ask that he reconsider this decision. He can be reached here:

Honourable Brian Mason
Infrastructure Minister
and Transportation Minister
Room 320 Legislature Building
10800 – 97 Avenue
Edmonton, AB T5K 2B6

Phone: 780-427-5041 
Fax: 780-422-2002 
Email: [email protected]

The City of Calgary and Alberta Transportation are currently taking forward a comprehensive study to explore what improvements are needed on Deerfoot to better serve motorists.  A study of this scope hasn’t been done in 20 years, and Calgarians are ready for some meaningful solutions.  This isn’t a study solely focused on making Deerfoot bigger, it’s also about making Deerfoot better.  Addressing pinch points at Anderson, Southland and Glenmore is critical, but we also need to identify how to better manage traffic flows and move Calgarians.

More information about the study can be found at Calgary.ca/Deerfoot

There are numerous public engagement opportunities coming in June.  To supplement these sessions, I have partnered with my south Calgary MLA and Council colleagues for a town hall event:

The Deerfoot study team and the Green Line team will be giving presentations, and then we will turn it over to the public for their questions.

Deerfoot really matters, and I hope that many of you can join us for this great engagement opportunity!

I do want to make a few things clear.  There is currently a lot of misinformation regarding The City’s position on this issue.  This is not a referendum on whether or not Uber is a good thing.  I think my colleagues on Council would agree that Uber has the potential to provide a tremendous amount of benefit to Calgarians.  What is up for debate is the regulatory framework that will allow Uber to legally operate in Calgary.  We have an obligation to make sure we create a framework that is fair for Uber, fair for other transportation services and safe for Calgarians.

Building the Regulatory Framework

On February 22, 2016 City administration will present proposed bylaw amendments to Council.  These amendments would create an environment where Uber could legally operate in Calgary.

Uber has a number of concerns with these amendments:

• Fees:
  • Uber has indicated the fee structure is prohibitive.
  • The amendment would see a $220/driver per year fee for an acceptable licence.
    • This fee makes sure that Calgarian tax payers are not paying the costs of the administrative fees required to process licences.
    • I believe most Calgarians would agree that The City should not be subsidizing very profitable private businesses.
  • Calgary Police Service would conduct a criminal history check for $30.
    • If there is a flag there may be an additional check for $25.
    • The CPS checks for things like previous pardons for sexual offenders. The Uber check does not include this.
• Police Checks/Driver Safety Screening:
  • Uber is opposed to the comprehensive Calgary Police Service (CPS) criminal history check and would like to perform its own background checks through a third-party company.
  • Uber insists that the 8-day turnaround required for a CPS check is unreasonable.
  • CPS checks are the most comprehensive available and look into pardons for previous sexual offences as well as national police information.
    • Private third-party checks (like the ones done by Uber) have limited access to many criminal history databases.
• Vehicle Inspections:
  • Uber opposes the proposal for provincially-approved vehicle inspections every six months.
  • The proposed inspection process is available throughout Calgary.
  • Mechanical inspections ensure the safety of passengers, drivers and citizens.
  • The proposed inspection is a 134 point inspection which is far more comprehensive than the Uber inspection. I have included a link to both inspection safety forms for your reference:

Government of Alberta Auto Check List                                                          

Uber Auto Check List

• Uber would like to see a one-month delay from the time of licensing to the requirement of an inspection being conducted.
  • If a vehicle is unsafe, this would open up Calgarians to unneeded risk.
• A comprehensive safety inspection fee that ranges from $140 to $179. This would be conducted by a mechanic.  The less comprehensive Uber safety check costs between $69 and $100 and can be conducted by a technician.

The City elaborated further on Uber’s comments in a recent blog which you can find here: http://www.calgarycitynews.com/2016/02/safe-transportation-options-on-way.html

Uber would like to see The City remove as many barriers as possible for prospective drivers.  Removing barriers and red tape to allow business to prosper is a great thing.  With that being said, there needs to be an appropriate balance between ease of access for drivers and safety for Calgarians.

I remain very disappointed that Uber began operations in Calgary knowing full well that they were in violation of the bylaws that The City had in place.  If Uber was truly interested in partnering with The City, this was not the right way to kick off that relationship.

The Battle of Alberta

Uber has suggested that Calgary should consider the same regulatory framework that Edmonton recently put in place.  Here is a comparative breakdown between the Edmonton framework and what is being proposed by The City of Calgary:

(Note that TNC stands for Transportation Network Companies which applies to Uber and companies similar to Uber)

Uber has suggested that The City’s proposal is unworkable for their business model.  After looking at the differences between the two jurisdictions, I’m having a hard time coming to that same conclusion.  There are certainly differences between the two frameworks, but what Calgary has proposed is certainly workable.

I Support Making Calgary Better

I support Uber.  Calgarians should absolutely be asking The City what they plan on doing to allow for services like Uber to improve their lives.  With that being said, Calgarians should also be asking Uber what they plan on doing to offer a fair and safe service.

I have an open door policy when it comes to these kinds of issues.  I have met with cab drivers, I have met with taxi companies and I have met with Uber.  I go into these meetings with an open mind, and I plan on doing the same at Council on February 22.

I have also actively sought feedback from the residents of Ward 12.  These are the stakeholders that I am most accountable to.  My decision will be based on what is best for Ward 12 and what is best for Calgary as a whole.  Letters from cab companies, cab drivers or Uber will do nothing to change that.

I have heard loud and clear from many residents of Ward 12 that Uber is important to them.  Many residents have pointed out that it can be difficult and costly to get a cab to and from the deep southeast.  There have been numerous reports of cabs refusing to accept trips for residents that are looking to go into the deep southeast.  This is unacceptable and not fair for the residents of Ward 12.  Uber could certainly help with that situation.

I’m committed to finding a way to make Uber’s service work well for Calgarians.  If everyone has a chance to win, why should anyone have to lose?

You may also be interested in my previous blog on Uber:

Calgary Takes Steps That Would Allow Uber to Legally Operate