Blog

The mysterious Plan It amendments

By DJ Kelly July 7, 2009

There was a great amount of mystery following the Calgary City Council’s public hearing on Plan It (the Calgary Transportation Plan and the Municipal Development Plan). Mainly the mystery was regarding the “omnibus motion” of 76 (or so) amendments suggested by the alderman and referred back to administration.

I still don’t know what they all mean, but now that the minutes are out we can at least see what the proposed changes are to the arguably most important document in the history of Calgary’s development.

Here they are. (Warning it’s a LONG list.) Pick your favourite. Or least favourite.

That with respect to Report CPC2009-082, the Proposed Amendments and Motions Arising to the Municipal Development Plan (MDP) and the Calgary Transportation Plan (CTP) be referred to the Administration for a report back to Council no later than 2009 December:

Alderman Ceci

Appendix F – Transportation Maps, that Map 7 Road and Street Network, in the Calgary Transportation Plan and Part 7 – Maps, Map 4 Road and Street Network in the MDP, be amended by reclassifying 61st Avenue S (between MacLeod Trail and Centre Street) as an Urban Boulevard, in order to align with the Chinook Station Area Plan approved June 2008.

Alderman Chabot

1. In the MDP, Part 7 – Maps, Map 1 Urban Structure be amended in the legend, under “developing” to add a new category entitled “Planned Greenfield with Regional Policy Plan (RPP) or Regional Context Study (RCS)” to reflect previously approved regional policy plans or regional context studies following the category “Unplanned Greenfield”.

2. In the MDP, Part 7 – Maps, Map 2 Growth and Change in the Municipal Development Plan by deleting the Map in its entirety and by renumbering the maps accordingly.

3. In the MDP, Section 3.3.4, Neighbourhood Activity Centres, Land use policies, page 78 be amended by deleting letter e in its entirety and by re-lettering the sections accordingly.

4. In the MDP, Section 3.4.3, Neighbourhood Corridors, Land use policies, page 83 be amended by deleting letter g in its entirety and by re-lettering the sections accordingly.

5. In the MDP, Section 3.5.1, General Developed Residential Area Policies, page 84, paragraph one, be amended by adding the words “unless prohibited by provincial or federal legislation” following the words “Development Residential Areas”.

6. In the MDP, Section 3.6.2, Land use policies, page 89, letter c be amended by deleting the word “gross” following the words “70 people per” and substituting with the word “net”.

7. In the MDP, Section Amend 2.2.1 Vibrant, transit-supportive, mixed-use Activity Centres and Corridors, Policies, page 20, letter a be amended by adding the words “in established neighbourhoods” following the words “Direct a greater share of new growth”.

8. In the MDP, Section Under 2.2.4 Complete communities, page 25, paragraph one be amended, by adding the words “that is respectful of adjacent communities and provides transitional development.” following the words “compact urban form”.

9. In the MDP, Section 3.7.1 Standard Industrial Area, page 91, letter d be amended, by adding the words “uses in industrial areas” following the words “stand alone office”.

10. In the MDP, Section 2.3.1 Housing, paragraph three, last sentence, page 31 be amended, by deleting the word “can” following the words “variety of housing choices” and by substituting the word “may”.

11. In the MDP, Section 5.2.7 Public accountability, page 109, Policies, letter a, be amended by deleting roman numerals ” i.-viiii.” in their entirety and by substituting with the following:

“i. Planned land supply

ii. Efficient utility servicing

iii. Suitable transportation capacity

iv. Strategic planning objectives

v. Financial impact of infrastructure and operating costs to the city

vi. Landowner interest”

13. In the MDP, Section 5.2.7 Public accountability, page 109, Policies be amended by deleting letter b in its entirety and by substituting with the following:

“b. Upon adoption of a new Local Area Plan, all relevant maps in both the MDP and CTP must be updated.”.

14. That the proposed MDP and CTP be referred back to the Administration to make these plans more consistent with the land use and transportation plans recently adopted as part of the East Regional Context Study.

15. Direct Administration to delete the reference made on Map 2 of the MDP which would seem to require an unnecessary amendment to the Municipal Development Plan, just to start an Area Structure Plan for the 17th Avenue SE corridor and Area Structure Plan, for which Council established a commencement date after there is a new financing arrangement between the City and the land development industry.

16. In the MDP, Section 3.4 Corridors, Land Use Policies, Pages 79-83 be amended to create opportunities for large format retail which would include parking requirements necessary for these larger format retail stores.

17. Direct Administration to differentiate between what should be included in the Bylaw and what should form part of the policy document, example targets in policy.

18. Direct administration to work with the land development industry to ensure proposed targets and thresholds will be interpreted in such a way as to enable the Belvedere landowners to create a smart-growth, sustainable, transit-oriented, complete community, as envisioned by the Belvedere landowners within the 17th avenue corridor, which can be implemented and successfully marketed to Calgarians over the next 5 – 10 years.

Alderman Colley-Urquhart

1. That Policy 3.3.2 Major Activity Centres, 3.3.3 Community Activity Centres, and 3.4.2 Urban Corridors be referred back to Administration for further consultation with the Development Industry.

2. Direct Administration, in consultation with the building and development industry, to report back to Council on what the minimum thresholds and requirements for all activity centres (Major, Community and Neighbourhood) and Corridors (Urban and Neighbourhood) will be. The report should include but not be limited to making recommendations on appropriate ranges, and identifying mechanisms to allow for the intensification of these areas.

3. Direct Administration to report back to Council on what amendments would be required to the Land Use Bylaw and what the implications of these amendments would be.

4. Direct Administration to report back to Council on what changes would need to be made to Development Appeal Board to accommodate Plan It and Land Use Bylaw amendments.

Alderman Connelly

1. WHEREAS the City needs to be efficient in managing its costs in relation to operating and maintenance costs; and

WHEREAS a review of current City standards and specifications for infrastructure to find cost savings where possible would benefit the parties involved in the provision and maintenance of servicing and road infrastructure;

THEREFORE it is moved that the City will conduct a detailed review of City standards with the development industry to reduce specifications where possible, reducing the use of resources towards capital replacement and future maintenance.

2. WHEREAS the policies identified under section 2.6.4 Ecological Networking may be counterproductive toward achieving the objectives of compact design as contemplated by the Municipal Development Plan; and

WHEREAS no cost analysis has been performed with regard to the policies of section 2.6.4 to determine the cost impact of the maintenance of the infrastructure required to support the policies of section 2.6.4; and

WHEREAS the Policies of 2.6.4 have not been reviewed with the Development Industry;

THEREFORE it is moved that Policy 2.6.4. be referred back to the Administration for further consultation with the Industry to review and address these concerns.

3. WHEREAS Policy 2.6.4 Ecological networks, Policies, Ecological protection a, be read in conjunction with policy 2.3.5 Municipal, school and environmental reserves, Policies, Municipal and school reserves c., which, may result in challenges in the provision of park space in communities;

THEREFORE it is moved that Policy 2.6.4 Watershed Management be deleted from the Municipal Development Plan.

4. WHEREAS Policy 2.6.4 Watershed Management z represents an intrusion of the public sector on private homeowners;

THEREFORE it is moved that Policy 2.6.4 z be deleted from the Municipal Development Plan.

Alderman Fox-Mellway

1. Direct Administration to review the Plan-It document and implement a small joint working group composed of City representatives and representatives from the Building and Development Industry should be struck to find appropriate targets and flexible thresholds to better respond to the desires of both current and future Calgarians. This group should also determine if any proposed directions are in conflict with existing City policy and address interpretation and implementation issues. This group will participate in a joint review of each of the objectives and policies of the MDP and CTP with the goal of reaching consensus, at which point administration will bring the Plans forward to Council, including an implementation strategy, prior to adoption of these Plans.

2. Direct Administration to provide a report to Council detailing the financial implications, capital and operating, of the MDP and CTP based on a sound understanding of how these documents will be interpreted and implemented. This report should include, but not be limited to, providing the required capital and operating costs for the City for each of the 10 year horizons to match the objectives, goals, targets, thresholds and policies of the documents.

Alderman Hodges

Direct Administration to amend the MDP, Section 2.3.4 Parks, Open Spaces and Outdoor Recreation, Policies, letter p, page 39 with respect to ensuring “public access is maintained or improved to major water bodies, where appropriate, including the Bow and Elbow Rivers and Nose Creek”, as well as Map 1 of appendix F of the CTP, entitled Primary Cycling Network, wherein line #3 identifies regional multi-use pathway route (both sides of river).

The intent of the amendments would be to recognize that private property exists in some sections of the proposed pathway adjacent to the Bow River in the Community of Bowness, and would affect a number of residential properties in the Community of Montgomery, as well and, as such, alternative pathway alignments should be prepared for inclusion in both the MDP and the CTP which would not require the use or acquisition of private properties.

Alderman Jones

1. In the MDP, Section 2.3.7 Foster community dialogue and participation in community planning, Policies, Community Participation, page 40 be amended by adding a new letter “d.” as follows:

“d. Local planning studies will include the necessary resources and timeframes to undertake community planning projects in a manner that is responsible, thorough, transparent and includes participatory community planning and consultation.”.

2. In the MDP, Section 2.3.2. Respecting and enhancing neighbourhood character, Policies, page 33 letter d be amended by adding the words “early in the decision making process” following the words “Local Area Plans”.

3. Direct Administration to involve community association representatives in discussions of MDP sustainment and implementation, and in the leading sustainment group (e.g. steering committee or similar body), once constituted, along with other stakeholders.

Alderman Lowe

1. In the MDP, Section 2.5.1 Transportation Choice, Objective, page 47, be amended by deleting the objective in its entirety and by substituting with the following:

“Facilitate the movement of goods and services, the effective movement of emergency and urgent services throughout the City while encouraging sustainable modes of transportation (i.e. walking, cycling and transit).”.

2. In the MDP, Section 2.6.5 Energy, page 67, Policies, Energy and Buildings, letter c, be amended by deleting the words “such as LEED or Built Green, Go Green (or an equivalent rating system)” following the words “and management systems”.

3. In the MDP, Section 3.3.1 General Activity Centre Policies, page 74, Mobility policies, be amended by moving policies n and k to be added before policies I and j and re-letter the policies accordingly.

4. In the MDP , Section 3.3.4 Neighbourhood Activity Centres, page 78, Land Use policies, be amended by policy letter e in its entirety and re-letter the sections accordingly.

5. In the MDP, Section 5.2.7 Public Accountability, page 109, Policies, letter a, ii, be amended by deleting the words “infrastructure and fiscal” following the words “An assessment of The City’s” and by substituting the word “financial”.

6. In the MDP, Section 5.2.7 Public Accountability, page 109, Policies, letter a, be amended by adding a new roman numeral “iii” as follows and re-letter the sections accordingly.

“iii. An assessment of the City’s infrastructure”.

7. In the CTP Section 1.5 Transportation Goals, page 05, Transportation Goal #4, be amended by deleting the words “To reduce automobile dependency,” following the words “Make public transit, walking and cycling the preferred mobility choices for more people.”.

8. In the CTP Section 1.5 Transportation Goals, page 05, be amended by moving Transportation Goal #5 to be Transportation Goal #1 and renumber the sections accordingly.

9. In the CTP Section 1.5 Transportation Goals, page 05, Transportation Goal #4, be amended by deleting the words “To reduce automobile dependency, “following the words “Make public transit, walking and cycling the preferred mobility choices for more people.”.

10. In the CTP Section 3.1 Transportation Choice, Objective, page 9, be amended by deleting the objective it in its entirety and substituting with the following:

“Objective Maintain automobile, commercial goods and emergency vehicle mobility in Calgary while placing increased on sustainable modes of transportation (walking, cycling and transit).”.

11. In the CTP Section 3.3 Transit, page 21, New river crossings, be amended by deleting the second sentence “These connections would be for exclusive use by transit, pedestrians, cyclists and emergency services.” and by deleting word “dedicated” following the word “These”.

12. In the CTP, Section 3.4 Goods Movement, page 27, Truck, Policies, letter e, be amended by adding the word “existing” following the words “and expansion of” and by deleting the word “should” following the words “within city limits” and by substituting the word “must”.

13. In the CTP, Section 3.6 Quality of Service, page 35, Policies, letter d, be amended by deleting the word “should” following the words “transportation system” and by substituting the word “must”.

14. In the CTP, Section 3.7 Complete Streets, page 43, Policies, Planning, design and maintenance of Complete Streets, letter b, be amended by deleting the word “and” following the words “pedestrians, cyclists” and by adding the words “and the movement of goods and services” following the word “transit”.

15. In the CTP, Section 3.10 Transportation Safety, page 51, Policies, letter b, be amended by deleting the word “should” following the words “transportation system” and by substituting the word “must”.

16. In the CTP, Appendix B Principles and Design Considerations for River Crossings, page 65, paragraph six, be amended by deleting the word “may” following the words “transit and pathway systems” and by substituting the word “will”.

17. In the CTP, Appendix D Connectivity Handbook, page 94, Access to regional street system, letter g, be amended by adding the following “All temporary and permanent access points should also be designed to serve as emergency evacuation routes.” following the words “two full access points are not practical.”.

Alderman Mar

1. Direct Administration to amend the MDP and the CTP to explicitly address the fundamental differences between urbanism and sub urbanism in order to permit successful development, redevelopment and management of both of these development patterns within the City of Calgary throughout the life of the Plan It Calgary Plan.

2. Direct Administration to create an Implementation Team consisting of City Staff and the Development industry to address specific threshold implementation and interpretation concerns as identified by the development industry.

3. Direct Administration to refer the population targets and density thresholds to Administration for further consultation with the development industry, including but not limited to Urban Development Institute and the Canadian Home Builders Association with the intent that the targets and thresholds reflect the projected “Maintenance Rate Scenario” as per the geo-demographic predictions of the Baxter Study.

4. Direct Administration to prepare, as part of the Plan It Calgary implementation plan, detailed maps that reflect areas of intensification that would affect developed communities, with particular attention, but not limited to, area surrounding Transit Orientated Development sites and Traffic Corridors.

Alderman McIver

1. In the MTP, Section 1.5 Review of the MDP, page 9, first paragraph, be amended by adding the words “are long term and” following the words “Core Indicators of the MDP (Part 5)” and by adding a new sentence “Meeting these goals is intended to be done on a city-wide basis and will not be completely burdened onto each individual ASP, ARP, RCS or Land Use application as it comes forward.” following the words “Calgarians and Council on three-year cycle.”.

2. In the MTP, Section 1.7 Interpreting the MDP, page 10, third paragraph, be amended by adding the word “reasonable” following the words “be interpreted to mean that every” and by deleting the words “unless it can be demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Approving Authority, that the policy could be achieved in another manner.” following the words “effort is to be taken to enact the policy”.

3. In the MDP, Section 1.7 Interpreting the MDP, page 10, be amended by adding a new paragraph four as follows:

“In other cases, the policy is meant to be a guideline which will require judgment to be exercised. In these cases, the words should, may or might are used.”.

4. In the MDP Section 2.1.2 Creating a city attractive to business, page 15, Policies, Supporting manufacturing and industrial businesses, letter n, be amended by deleting the word “industrial” following the words “and developable land for” and by substituting with the word “residential”.

5. In the MDP, Section 2.1.2 Creating a city attractive to business, page 15, Policies, Supporting business and investment, be amended by deleting letter c in its entirety and by re-lettering the sections on page 15 accordingly.

6. In the Municipal Development Plan, under Section 2.1.1 Creating a city attractive to people page 14, Policies, be amended by adding a new letter g as follows:

g. Ensure the availability of competitively priced, easily serviceable and developable land for residential purposes; including providing opportunities for brownfield redevelopment.

7. In the MDP, Section 2.1.4 Ensuring sustainable municipal finances page 17, Policies, letter c, be amended by adding the words “market conditions” following the words “infrastructure requirements”.

8. In the MDP, Section 2.5.3 Complete streets, page 51, Policy, letter a, be amended by adding the words “-as amended from time to time.” following the words “contained in Part 3 of the CTP”.

9. In the MDP, Section 2.5.4 Local transportation connectivity, page 51, Policy, letter a, be amended by deleting the words “must be assessed according to the connectivity policies contained in the CTP” following the words “Unplanned Greenfield developments” and substituting with the words “should aspire to the highest connectivity reasonable.”.

10. In the MDP, Section 2.6.2, Land, page 55, Objective, be amended by deleting the Objective in its entirety and substituting with the following “Strongly encourage that any land taken from undeveloped areas and placed in permanent use for any purpose is done in a way that is contiguous to existing development and is an improvement on the value of the undeveloped land as an asset to the environment, the economy or the quality of life of Calgarians”.

11. In the MDP, Section 2.6.2 Land, Policies page 55, letter b, be amended by deleting the words “seek to retain greater amounts of” following the words “Designs for new communities should” and substituting with the word “evaluate” and by deleting the words “in order to create more compact communities, increase” following the words “undisturbed land” and substitute with the words “to keep those areas undisturbed that have the highest value in regard to increased” and by adding the words “and opportunities to create more compact communities.” following the words “improve water quality”.

12. In the MDP, Section 3.2 Centre City, page 71, Land use policies letter a subsection I, be amended by deleting letter “i” in its entirety and by substituting with the following “Encourage all districts for business and employment while maintaining the Downtown as the largest.”.

13. In the MDP, Section 3.3 Activity Centres, page 73, be amended in Table 3.3 with an over riding statement: “Intensity required of activity centres must be set location by location in consideration of the actual opportunities available for development.

14. In the MDP, Section 3.3.1 General Activity Centre Policies, page 74, Mobility policies, letter n, be amended by deleting the words “locally-destined” following the words “loading and unloading of”.

15. In the MDP, Section 3.3.2 Major Activity Centres, page 75, letter b, be amended by deleting letter b it in its entirety and by substituting with the following:

“MAC’s should aspire to an intensity target of 200 jobs and population per gross developable acre to be met over time as opportunities permit and market conditions allow.”.

16. In the MDP, Section 3.4 Corridors, page 79, be amended in Table 3.4 with an over riding statement: “Intensity required of corridors must be set location by location in consideration of the actual opportunities available for development.”.

17. In the MDP, Section 3.4.1 General Corridors, Land Use Policies, page 80 letter e, be amended by deleting all size limits referenced this paragraph.

18. In the MDP, Section 3.4.1 General Corridor Policies, page 80, Mobility Policies, be amended by deleting letter m in its entirety and substitute with the following “Alternatives to parking in front of stores should be considered.”.

19. In the MDP, Section 3.4.1 General Corridor Policies, page 81, Public realm polices, letter r, be amended by adding the words “Where practical” following the words “onto public sidewalks on the north side of the street.”.

20. In the MDP, Section 3.6.2 Unplanned Greenfield Area, page 89, Land use polices letter c, be amended by deleting the words “70 people per gross developable hectare” following the words “should achieve a minimum intensity of” and substitute with the words “net developable acre”.

21. In the MDP, Section 3.6.2 Unplanned Greenfield Area, Land use polices, page 89, letter e, be amended by deleting “1.5 km” following the words “located a minimum” and substitute with “500 m”.

22. In the MDP, Section 3.7.2 Industrial-Employee Intensive, page 92, Land use polices, letter a, be amended by deleting the word “minimum” following the words “should achieve a” and substitute with the word “target”.

23. In the MDP, Section 3.7.3 Greenfield Industrial Area, page 94, Mobility polices, letter k, be amended by deleting the word “shall” following the word “Sidewalks” and substitute with the word “should”.

24. In the MDP, Section 5.2 A Strategic Framework for Growth and Change, page 105, paragraph two, be amended by adding the words “In consultation with stakeholders from the public, industry partners and available experts” following the words “and Directors Sub-Committee” and by adding the words “A terms of reference and membership list for GMSGC will be presented to City Council for approval within 3 months of the approval of the new MDP and CTP.” following the words “Regional Context Studies and information on the City’s infrastructure and fiscal capacity for growth.”.

25. In the MDP, Section 5.2.2 Strategic decisions, page 105, end of second paragraph, be amended by adding the words, “The goals in Figure 5.2 are city wide and are considered aspirational and an example of what may be achieved over a medium or long period of time as area mature. These goals should not be applied to a specific RCS, ASP, ARP or Land Use but should be considered in the city wide context.” following the words “orders of government, the public and stakeholders.”.

26. In the MDP, Section 5.2.2 Strategic decisions, page 106, Policies, letter b, be amended by adding the word “across all sectors” following the words “supply”.

27. In the MDP, Section 5.2.2 Strategic decisions, Policies, page 106, letter e, be amended by deleting the word “must” following the words “and investment decisions” and substitute with the word “should”.

28. In the MDP, Section 5.2.3 Planned land supply, page 106, Policies, letter a, be amended by deleting the words “Endeavour to” at the beginning of the sentence.

29. In the MDP, under Section 5. 3 Monitoring and reporting, page 110, Policy, by adding a new letter b as follows:

“b. The goals in Figure 5.2 are city wide and are considered aspirational and an example of what may be achieved over a medium or long period of time as the MDP changes mature. These goals should not be applied to a single RCS, ASP, ARP or Land Use but should be considered in the city wide context.”.

30. In the MDP, Section 5.3 Monitoring and Reporting, Page 111 Figure 5.2, be amended by adding an over riding statement as follows, “The goals in Figure 5.2 are city wide and are considered aspirational and an example of what may be achieved over a medium or long period of time as the areas mature. These goals should not be applied to development applications, RCS, ASP, ARP or Land Use but should be considered in the city wide context.”.

31. In the MDP, under Part 6 – Glossary, page 116, be amended following the paragraph low impact development (LID) by adding a new definition of “market conditions”.

32. Direct Administration to review the setbacks to the Sheppard Landfill on the map(s) in Plan It Calgary to ensure no unnecessary encroachment on surrounding property.

33. In the MDP, Section 4.1.1 Retail Structure, Pages 95 and 96, be referred to the Administration to make them less prescriptive in consultation with industry stakeholders.

34. In the MDP, Section 4.1.2 Retail Categories, Pages 97 and 98, be referred to the Administration to make them less prescriptive in consultation with industry stakeholders.

35. In the MDP, Section 2.6.3 Water on page 58, a to f, be referred to the Administration to return to council with an evaluation with how each of these policies can be achieved in co-operation with the development industry.

36. WHEREAS Appendix D is far too detailed to be included as an appendix to the City of Calgary Transportation Plan; and

WHEREAS the Connectivity Handbook will result in a “Plan by Numbers” approach to City Planning; and

WHEREAS the Connectivity Handbook will result in a form of development which is more costly to implement, increases impermeable surface, dedicates more land to roadways, increases maintenance costs and may reduce future opportunities for intensification;

THEREFORE it is moved that Appendix D be removed from the Calgary Transportation Plan, and all policies referring to this appendix be amended accordingly.

That the policy documents be amended to acknowledge that increased connectivity is important in all communities and initiatives should be developed in collaboration with the development industry to promote better connectivity throughout new and redeveloping communities.

37. WHEREAS Appendix C is far too detailed to be appropriate for inclusion as an appendix to the Calgary Transportation plan; and

WHEREAS standards in the Interim Complete Street Guidelines have not been constructed previously in the City of Calgary; and

WHEREAS these standards have not been field-tested nor reviewed with the Development Industry; and

WHEREAS these guidelines are more appropriate at a technical rather than policy level that allows for greater flexibility and adaptability to changing conditions;

Therefore it is moved that Appendix C be removed from the Calgary Transportation Plan, and all policies referring to this appendix be amended accordingly.

That a road and street palette be compiled as a set of guidelines in collaboration with the development industry and the public that provides a range of road and street types that can accommodate all forms of mobility:
walking, cycling, transit, and private vehicle use, goods and services movement and EMS, while supporting adjacent land uses.

Alderman Pincott

1. Direct Administration to amend the CTP to remove specific references to a 50th Ave Elbow River crossing and an Edworthy/Shaganappi Bow River crossing. Textual amendments are to be made in section 3.3 (Transit) New River Crossings, as well as Appendix B of the Calgary

Transportation Plan. The Primary Transit Network and the Primary Cycling Network maps should also be amended to reflect this change.

2. Direct Administration to amend Bylaw 40M2009 to reflect the above changes and remove the two river crossings from Appendix “A” of The City of Calgary Transportation System Map.

3. In the CTP, Section 3.11 Transit Accessibility, page 52, Policies, by adding a new policy c as follows:

“c.The Primary Transit Network, including all vehicles and supporting infrastructure (such as sidewalks and buildings), should be designed and built to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities.”

4. Direct Administration to establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism that will include updates to Council on progress toward the targets identified in the Core Indicators for Land Use and Mobility. A multi-stakeholder panel should be convened to review the performance information and provide recommendations to Council on the implications for budget discussions. The reports must be delivered in advance of The City’s business planning and budget cycle in order to inform those deliberations. A major review of all targets should occur on a ten year basis as part of the regular policy review.

Alderman Stevenson

Direct Administration to amend the relevant maps and text contained in the proposed Calgary Transportation Plan and Municipal Development Plan (M2009-012) to reflect the appropriate limits and classification of Airport Trail and 96 Avenue N.E.

Proposed Amendments to the Calgary Transportation Plan

1. In the CTP Section 3.1 Transportation Choice, Page 9, be amended by deleting the Objective in its entirety and by substituting with the words “Maintain automobile, commercial goods and emergency vehicle mobility in Calgary while placing increasing emphasis on more sustainable modes of transportation (walking, cycling and transit).”.

2. In the CTP, Section 3.4 Goods movement, page 26, paragraph four, be amended by adding the words “Impacts on adjacent municipalities should also be considered.” following the words, “The City must balance the need of goods and services movement with the needs of residential communities impacted by truck routes.”.

3. In the CTP, Section 3.4 Goods movement, page 27, Policies, be amended by adding a new letter f as follows:

“f. The City should consider the impact of goods movement routes on roadways in adjacent municipalities.”.

4. In the CTP under section 3.7, page 43, Policies, be amended by adding a new policy g. as follows and by re-lettering the sections accordingly:

“g. Appropriate transitions for road and street cross-sections should be developed where City infrastructure connects to infrastructure in surrounding municipalities.” Also amend all subsequent policy lettering in Section 3.7 as necessary to accommodate insertion of this new policy.”.

5. Amend the CTP under Appendix D, page 94, letter g, be amended by adding the words, “All temporary and permanent access points should also be designed to serve as emergency evacuation routes.” following the words “two full access points are not practical.”.

6. That Council direct Administration to work with industry and all other stakeholders to formulate a strategy to foster a clear understanding of the plan and its policies, as well as the implementation and interpretation of these policies.

Confused yet? I imagine those that are against Plan It are hoping you are. I know I am.

  • Bob McInnis

    DJ,For the most part, the amendments are nonsense but it seems all the aldermen got into the act and protected their agendas.With this much deferral and referral, and renogotiation with developers, I can't imagine PlanIt will be anything other than a memory after October 2010.

  • Bob McInnis

    DJ,
    For the most part, the amendments are nonsense but it seems all the aldermen got into the act and protected their agendas.

    With this much deferral and referral, and renogotiation with developers, I can't imagine PlanIt will be anything other than a memory after October 2010.