PDA

View Full Version : Alberta gets almost $1B to build



DebraW
19-12-2008, 04:34 PM
Alberta gets almost $1B to build
--$798 million comes from federal gas tax fund and will go to province's municipalities

By Trish Audette, Edmonton Journal
December 19, 2008 4:19 PM

An agreement signed Friday afternoon between the provincial and federal governments extends Alberta's take of the federal gas tax fund through 2014, making for nearly $800 million of funding for infrastructure over a four-year period.

The existing agreement ends in the 2009-10 fiscal year. The money will funnel into municipal projects.

"It's about stability and permanency," federal Labour Minister Rona Ambrose said. "Municipalities can then plan until (2014)."

In a joint federal-provincial announcement Friday afternoon, Ambrose and Minister of State Rob Merrifield also pledged $176-million in infrastructure funding for small communities with less than 100,000 people.

Small municipalities can start applying for this money aimed at projects that "contribute to a growing economy, a cleaner environment, and stronger communities" as early as Jan. 5.

Link:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Business/Alberta+gets+almost+build/1096419/story.html

richardW
19-12-2008, 05:03 PM
nice :)

Edmonton PRT
19-12-2008, 05:26 PM
Yeah, nice to get back at least part of the money taken from our wallets...:p

Doug
19-12-2008, 06:54 PM
Great news. Keep the infrastructure projects going. We will see a big improvement in this city within the next 5 years.

Sonic Death Monkey
19-12-2008, 07:59 PM
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Alberta/2008/12/19/7806676.html



Coun. Ben Henderson met news of the announcement with a bit of skepticism, saying that while money from the Gas Tax fund will be useful, the city is still waiting on federal money promised last year.
“I’m really concerned that we’ve yet to see the Building Canada fund,” he said. “I hope (the Gas Tax Fund) isn’t replacing that money because that would not move us forward.”

The Building Canada plan announced by the Tories in 2007 promised $33 billion by 2014 for infrastructure.

Asked about the plan Friday, Merrifield would only say that the federal and provincial governments are close to making an announcement about it.
Henderson said that after several years of trying to fill the gaps in the city’s infrastructure, this is the time to invest. “We may have a window now where we can do it a lot more cheaply,” he said.So we're expecting even more infrastructure coin from the feds. Kewl.



Coun. Kim Krushell said she’d like to see the money go toward the north leg of the LRT and neighbourhood renewal. “Both of those two items help stimulate your economy because you’re talking about hiring lots of engineers and contractors,” she said.
Agreed, but:
1) How about LRT to the west-end and Millwoods too?
2) I'd also like to see it applied to road improvements - overpasses on the Yellowhead and AHD, new bridge from Gateway Blvd to downtown and yes, filling the blessed potholes.

Solaris
19-12-2008, 09:27 PM
LRT LRT LRT now lets all say it together ..... LOL :smt059:smt051:smt069:smt064:smt064:smt064:smt064: smt041:smt067

highlander
19-12-2008, 09:42 PM
Nah.

Streetcars.

RTA
19-12-2008, 10:13 PM
^ Rail transit in general, then?

highlander
19-12-2008, 10:22 PM
Sure.

Can I drive?

The_Cat
19-12-2008, 10:37 PM
Agreed, but:
1) How about LRT to the west-end and Millwoods too?
2) I'd also like to see it applied to road improvements - overpasses on the Yellowhead and AHD, new bridge from Gateway Blvd to downtown and yes, filling the blessed potholes.

These sound like great projects. I think the only question left is assigning priorities to them.

I think the infrastructure funding has to be more than make-work projects. They have to facilitate commuters, or the flow of goods and services. Sonic Death Monkey, I think that the LRT is the highest priority, followed by the Gateway bridge to downtown.

Solaris
20-12-2008, 11:02 AM
Nah.

Streetcars.


i like it.....i always had this idea there should be a street car covering these areas whyte ave in the south, west mount in the west, 107th ave area in the north and 82nd street in the east. Dove tail it with good pedestrian oriented mixed development (stores ground level, condos, townhouses, apartments).

Solaris
20-12-2008, 11:05 AM
Sure.

Can I drive?


i think LRT park and ride should be restricted to periferal stations (clarview, Rutherford, Lewis Estates, etc.... I think inner city stations should focus on Transit center and pedestrian approaches

24karat
20-12-2008, 12:38 PM
What do you think? Edmonton's share would be about $200 million?

etownboarder
20-12-2008, 01:11 PM
Sure.

Can I drive?


i think LRT park and ride should be restricted to periferal stations (clarview, Rutherford, Lewis Estates, etc.... I think inner city stations should focus on Transit center and pedestrian approaches

agreed

Solaris
20-12-2008, 02:06 PM
What do you think? Edmonton's share would be about $200 million?


i think about 1/2. This is for big cities and mass transit. There was another grant yesterday for municipalities under 100,000. Oh this is 1/2 on a regional basis, so it would be for the captial region. So lets hope that new regional planning board is actually going to work for us.

moahunter
20-12-2008, 10:21 PM
i think LRT park and ride should be restricted to periferal stations (clarview, Rutherford, Lewis Estates, etc.... I think inner city stations should focus on Transit center and pedestrian approaches
I disagree - I think LRT should collect cars along the entire route, so that traffic is not forced to drive out to the edges. LRT will be more economic if it collects both cars and buses, becasue the reality is people will drive to LRT, but drivers won't bus to LRT. However, I do think ParkNrides should start charging, to recoup some of the costs of building some quality and attractive parkades at the stops.

richardW
21-12-2008, 01:41 AM
^ i agree that it would not not bee too unreasonable to charge a small fee for the park and ride stalls, the centrally located ones anyway. Like for the CP station, it could have a multi level parkade that has a small fee.

Ken Chapman
21-12-2008, 12:11 PM
With the ecnomic downturn and Billions of public dollars going into things and stuff one of the areas where we can get big time leveraged ROI is on literacy. 42% of Albertans are still learning to read rather than reading to learn. They are the folks first in line to face layoffs. Lets put some effort into a province wide literacy effort...not a stigma based brashness but a more inclusive approach. There is numeracy (I can use some help there), cultural and technological literacy too.

richardW
21-12-2008, 03:01 PM
With the ecnomic downturn and Billions of public dollars going into things and stuff one of the areas where we can get big time leveraged ROI is on literacy. 42% of Albertans are still learning to read rather than reading to learn. They are the folks first in line to face layoffs. Lets put some effort into a province wide literacy effort...not a stigma based brashness but a more inclusive approach. There is numeracy (I can use some help there), cultural and technological literacy too.

not to be a jerk but can i get a link to that statistic, cause 42% sounds a bit fishy

etownboarder
21-12-2008, 03:12 PM
Sounds like total BS to me...

The_Cat
21-12-2008, 04:34 PM
Sorry Ken, this money is earmarked for infrastructure, not literacy programs. That can be administered under another program (e.g., education or employment).

grish
21-12-2008, 04:51 PM
Sorry Ken, this money is earmarked for infrastructure, not literacy programs. That can be administered under another program (e.g., education or employment).
I appreciate the thought to work towards improving literacy. Some of the federal financial assistance and injection of funds that is being talked about and potentially leading to $20 to $30 billion debt is training funds for workers loosing jobs in fields that are not going to be viable long-term employments.

I think that this specific thread has to do with infrastructure spending funding announcement. It is true that governments should also spend money on education, health, and environmental protection amongst others. One could take a position that this billion dollars is better spent on education than infrastructure, for example. I do not share that position, but it could be appropriate within this thread.

If, however, people wish to debate and propose similar or greater funding in education (such as what happened in several European countries--free education including free higher education leading to economic Renaissance) in addition to infrastructure spending, those arguments should probably occupy their own thread.

Ken Chapman
21-12-2008, 08:11 PM
Infrastructure is not just bricks and mortar. There are many kinds of infrastructure. Social, human and connectivity are just some of them.

Without the skills needed for the 21st century reality spenidng borrowed money on buildings, roads and bridges will only be a burden on future generations. We need to ensure we have the skills needed now and next to be effective in a post-industrial economy.

This is the time for all of us to press for literacy training concurrent with traditional infrastructure spending.

Ken Chapman
21-12-2008, 08:13 PM
I will check the references in the morning with Literacy Alberta and get then for you

moahunter
21-12-2008, 09:14 PM
Unless someone can show some evidence that adult literacy programs result in higher growth or similar, I have severe doubts about this. I mean, do adults who are not highly literate even want to be? If they do, and consider it a priority, I'm sure they'll seek it out.

Sometimes I think there is an elitism at work in these programs - there are a number of trades were practical knowledge, experience and skills are more important that the length of words one uses. Maybe instead of literacy improvement, we would be just as well off putting in place better apprenticeship programs and similar training, for people (and especially kids) who don't quite fit the academic mold rather than trying to push everybody into it?

Sonic Death Monkey
21-12-2008, 09:30 PM
Holy thread diversion!
This is the wrong forum for the literacy thing, so why can't you people talk about it here:
http://www.connect2edmonton.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=10160

Ken Chapman
21-12-2008, 11:42 PM
Infrastructure needs skilled workers who have uptodate skills. Not being able to read or write effectively means these building projects cost more and are dangerous places to work too. If people can't read the operating instructions on new equipment or the safety rules about the job site then this is the perfect place to start this discussion. It should be funded outside the capital projects but what a great opportunity to fix this social infractructure deficit.

The private sector does not see it as their job. Besides they were so busy recently and short staffed so they could not respond - even if they wanted to. With public infrastructure projects being the order of the day to keep people working, why not buff up their skills at the same time? It will pay off dividends to workers long after that road is built.