Calgary fire chief retiring with warning about city’s growth

[speedog]

Calgary fire chief retiring with warning about city’s growth

Far-flung suburbs increasingly tax resources

BY JASON MARKUSOFF, CALGARY HERALD JULY 8, 2014

To retiring fire chief Bruce Burrell’s thinking, city planners may have more effect on Calgary’s firefighting future than city budget-makers.

Burrell, 55, explained publicly Tuesday his surprise decision to retire at this week’s end — family issues in Nova Scotia — but also warned council that the ever-expanding suburbs will continue to strain the fire department’s ability to do its job.

Throughout the chief’s nine years in Calgary, the city has always been racing to build enough new fire halls to serve new fringe communities — and grow its budget rapidly to fully staff those new facilities.

According to a long-standing Calgary Fire benchmark, the first engine should arrive to an emergency call within seven minutes. Last year, that only happened 66 per cent of the time.

The farther communities are from a fire hall, the longer it takes to reach those homes. And as the city must build more far-flung stations for several small, fledgling populations, costs keep rising — more than $230 million for Calgary Fire last year and rising rapidly.

“Growth, and especially non-contiguous growth — growth that doesn’t touch up against existing services — is very expensive to provide services to,” Burrell told reporters at Calgary Fire headquarters.

The chief praised the city’s growth management strategy, the controversial plan that urges the city to limit development of new suburbs rather than the traditional pattern of new communities sprouting up on almost every undeveloped edge of Calgary. Developers have warned those controls are too limiting, but are also looking for ways to shoulder the city’s startup costs for growth so that city tax pressures and debt ceilings aren’t impediments.

While that industry is taking more responsibility for the costs of new fire halls and other infrastructure, the cost of staffing those new fire halls isn’t covered by enough new property taxpayers in those developing areas, Coun. Druh Farrell said.

She recalled a chart Burrell showed them, that fire calls can cost taxpayers $400 in some areas, but ran $6,000 each in Valley Ridge on the city’s far west end.

“That’s the killer,” she said. “It’s those areas that don’t have the density and don’t have the tax base.”

Coun. Shane Keating, who represents the suburban southeast, said the city’s response time targets may not make as much sense as they used to, given that the driving time within that target is only 4½ minutes. He said building code regulators should revisit the idea of mandatory sprinklers in new homes, which would shift costs of fire protection to home buyers instead of taxpayers.

Burrell was full of praise for city council Tuesday, noting they face budget pressures to keep tax increases low but also meet public service demands. In recent years, under Mayor Naheed Nenshi, Burrell has warned often that budget reductions designed to make his department leaner will translate into front-line service cuts that make it difficult to handle growth.

“Not saying somebody can’t find more efficiency. I’ll leave that up to the people behind me,” he said, referring to the deputy chiefs gathered around him at the news conference.

His departure comes a week after a Conference Board of Canada report gave a glowing review of his performance in another role: as emergency management director during the 2013 flood.

“I guess it’s nice to leave on a high note but I just want to go on the record: I did not have anything to do with the flooding occurring,” he said, to laughter from assembled media and the deputy chiefs who flanked him at the lectern.

“I would have been just as pleased not to deal with the floods.”

Burrell said he and his wife recently chose to speed up their timeline after initially planning to retire in October 2015.

“It’s important for us to return home to Nova Scotia to support family,” he said. “We have some family issues I won’t get into. But it is time for us to go home and lend a hand.”

Before coming to lead Calgary’s fire department in 2005, Burrell was deputy fire chief in Halifax, responsible for emergency management during the devastation of hurricane Juan in 2003.

The city manager will choose an interim chief this week, Burrell said.

So how far is it from 1: a fire station and 2: an EMS station to your home? Do you even know where the closest stations are to your home?

For myself, I've got an EMS station (#5) 8 city blocks away (800 meters or so), one fire station (#7) is 18 blocks away and another fire/EMS station (#18) is 31 blocks away - they're all quite close so response times will usually be very short

This link (http://www.calgary.ca/_layouts/cocis/calgarymap/calgarymap.aspx?lon=-7950.62530539372&lat=5662924.479928392&zoom=3&sideBar=1&layers=%5B%7B%22name%22%3A%22EMS%2520Station%22%2C%22active%22%3Atrue%7D%2C%7B%22name%22%3A%22Fire%2520Station%22%2C%22active%22%3Atrue%7D%5D) (CoC web site) will provide locations of all EMS and Fire stations.

Link (http://www.calgaryherald.com/Calgary+fire+chief+retiring+with+warning+about+city+growth/10011497/story.html) to Calgary Herald story.

[A790]

Originally posted by speedog


So how far is it from 1: a fire station and 2: an EMS station to your home? Do you even know where the closest stations are to your home?

For myself, I've got an EMS station (#5) 8 city blocks away (800 meters or so), one fire station (#7) is 18 blocks away and another fire/EMS station (#18) is 31 blocks away - they're all quite close so response times will usually be very short

This link (http://www.calgary.ca/_layouts/cocis/calgarymap/calgarymap.aspx?lon=-7950.62530539372&lat=5662924.479928392&zoom=3&sideBar=1&layers=%5B%7B%22name%22%3A%22EMS%2520Station%22%2C%22active%22%3Atrue%7D%2C%7B%22name%22%3A%22Fire%2520Station%22%2C%22active%22%3Atrue%7D%5D) (CoC web site) will provide locations of all EMS and Fire stations.

Link (http://www.calgaryherald.com/Calgary+fire+chief+retiring+with+warning+about+city+growth/10011497/story.html) to Calgary Herald story.
2 km away in McKenzie Towne, though it'll take them at least 7 minutes to get out of the traffic circle :bigpimp:

[roopi]

4.3kms to a hospital, and 4.5kms to a Fire Station

[schocker]

Fire station with ems, 1.6 km, 17.4 km to Foothills hospital

[88CRX]

Just what this city needs.... another person complaining about suburban development.

:banghead:

[speedog]

Originally posted by roopi
4.3kms to a hospital, and 4.5kms to a Fire Station
So the news article speaks to Fire stations and I added in EMS stations because they're a similar first responding type of unit and you add in a hospital location? The intent here is response times and that is generally from a station where these services home bases are. Having a hospital across the street is no good if someone is in your home having a heart attack and you need fire/EMS there.

Also, a regular block in the city equates to 0.1km - the Calgary Fire benchmark is 7 minutes which would equate to 5.6km at 50kph if no obstacles are encountered. But if one factors in traffic, clearing intersections and the increased speeds at which fire/EMS might be able to travel at, I would imagine that that 5.6km distance could be reduced or stretched out.

[speedog]

Originally posted by 88CRX
Just what this city needs.... another person complaining about suburban development.
Why is it a problem for someone to express their concerns about the CoC's ability to provide emergency services in a timely manner to every resident?

Or is this just something that people in the burbs should suck up and accept?

[roopi]

Originally posted by speedog

So the news article speaks to Fire stations and I added in EMS stations because they're a similar first responding type of unit and you add in a hospital location? The intent here is response times and that is generally from a station where these services home bases are. Having a hospital across the street is no good if someone is in your home having a heart attack and you need fire/EMS there.

Sorry chief. Another Fire Station/EMS station is located 4.4 kms away and is estimated at 7 minutes without traffic by Google.

I'm centrally located between 2 fire stations a EMS station and a hospital. Suburbia is working out well. :D

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by 88CRX
Just what this city needs.... another person complaining about suburban development.

:banghead:

Yeah, can't these people just shut up so we can get back to complaining how property taxes are rising and service is declining and ignore the core problem behind them?

I mean, what could the mayor, city planners, experts in urban planning and the fire chief possibly know about the effect of sprawl on services and support infrastructure and their costs?

[88CRX]

Originally posted by speedog

Why is it a problem for someone to express their concerns about the CoC's ability to provide emergency services in a timely manner to every resident?

Or is this just something that people in the burbs should suck up and accept?

I wouldn't disagree that it's a real issue and problem.... but I can already picture Nenshi using this as an argument as he continues down the road of limiting suburban development.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by kertejud2


Yeah, can't these people just shut up so we can get back to complaining how property taxes are rising and service is declining and ignore the core problem behind them?

I mean, what could the mayor, city planners, experts in urban planning and the fire chief possibly know about the effect of sprawl on services and support infrastructure and their costs?

I'm not against raising taxes for added services but I can understand why people in general are not supportive of simply giving the City more of their hard earned money when all we'll get out of it is more bike lanes and blue public art rings :dunno:

[quick_scar]

Im 3.6km from an ems/fire hall and 2.9 from just a fire hall. 13km to Rockyview once they have me in the ambluance.

[speedog]

Originally posted by roopi
Sorry chief. Another Fire Station/EMS station is located 4.4 kms away and is estimated at 7 minutes without traffic by Google.

I'm centrally located between 2 fire stations a EMS station and a hospital. Suburbia is working out well. :D
But not all of suburbia is that lucky - SW Tuscany to fire/EMS station 34 is about 8.4km or 11 minutes per Google and I doubt that any responder from that station would be there in under 7 minutes. Now parts of Tuscany have been existence for 18 or more years and their emergency response times still suck and probably won't get any better any time soon - response times from station 35 in Valley Ridge might be a minute quicker but even that's not that significant of an improvement.

[speedog]

Originally posted by 88CRX
I wouldn't disagree that it's a real issue and problem.... but I can already picture Nenshi using this as an argument as he continues down the road of limiting suburban development.

Aaah, now the real story comes out - it's all about Nenshi and his plan.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by speedog


Aaah, now the real story comes out - it's all about Nenshi and his plan.

I don't think you read my post.

[ExtraSlow]

The fire department does a lot of planning for new developments. The issue is that some developments were built without consulting the fire department, and those are the ones that have the worst response times. The ideal time to plan for location and staffing of a fire station is a couple years before they break ground.

[01RedDX]

.

[b_t]

Originally posted by 88CRX


I wouldn't disagree that it's a real issue and problem.... but I can already picture Nenshi using this as an argument as he continues down the road of limiting suburban development.

So you have an issue with a politician using a very valid and reasonable argument as support for his changes?

This city is insanely big and needs to stop growing, Nenshi is on the right track, and I certainly do hope he cites the former chief to garner more support for his densification plans.

[DeleriousZ]

4.6km from a fire station, 8.2km from a real hospital.

One thing I always have to question is why does it take something like retirement for these guys to come out with statements like this? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to have them saying important things while they're still more likely to be able to do something about it? Reminds me of Eisenhower's farewell address...

[speedog]

Originally posted by 88CRX
I don't think you read my post.
Oh I did.

Never the less, as response times appear to be a concern, then why the hate-on for someone who publicly expresses those concerns? I'd rather see it be out in the open resulting in it possibly being discussed at community meetings and such, instead of not being talked about because you know the next time a number of houses burn down in some community and someone points a finger at response times as being part of the problem, then another bandwagon/witch-burning hunt will begin. Better to have an issue out in the open than being swept away under some rug.

[heavyfuel]

Maybe loosen up the hiring practices a bit and get a volunteer system in place like smaller hamlets?

I'm sure that in some parts of the world firefighting equipment that is less than new yet in good repair does the job just fine as well.

Oh, right this is Calgary. So all I need to care about is that I live less than 2 minutes from a fire hall.

[speedog]

Originally posted by DeleriousZ
4.6km from a fire station, 8.2km from a real hospital.

One thing I always have to question is why does it take something like retirement for these guys to come out with statements like this? Wouldn't it be more beneficial to have them saying important things while they're still more likely to be able to do something about it? Reminds me of Eisenhower's farewell address...
My suspicion is these guys are making statements like this a lot of the time (whether it be internally or in a public forum) but it only becomes news worthy when the news media deems it so.

Case in point - we all knew this second runway was coming for many years at the airport and yet now we have people complaining about the increased noise above their communities as result. Why is this news worthy now but it wasn't many years ago when everything was in the proposal/planning stages? (Shit, I'm gonna derail my own thread)

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by 88CRX


I wouldn't disagree that it's a real issue and problem.... but I can already picture Nenshi using this as an argument as he continues down the road of limiting suburban development.

It is what it is.

[civic_stylez]

We are pretty fortunate in Auburn Bay, new fire hall less than 1km away. New hospital 2 minute walk and a fire hall in Mackenzie Towne. If something happened at my house it would be way faster just to drive over from my house which is great because im cheap and wont have to pay for an Ambulance ride.

[suntan]

Originally posted by b_t


So you have an issue with a politician using a very valid and reasonable argument as support for his changes?

This city is insanely big and needs to stop growing, Nenshi is on the right track, and I certainly do hope he cites the former chief to garner more support for his densification plans. Calgary is insanely big? Go to California sometime. Oakland-SF-SJ. Now that's fucking big.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by b_t


So you have an issue with a politician using a very valid and reasonable argument as support for his changes?

This city is insanely big and needs to stop growing, Nenshi is on the right track, and I certainly do hope he cites the former chief to garner more support for his densification plans.

The solution to fire fighting response times to new communities is not to stop development, even though that's the solution they're giving.

It's to build more fire halls in new communities. :dunno:

[b_t]

Originally posted by 88CRX


The solution to fire fighting response times to new communities is not to stop development, even though that's the solution they're giving.

It's to build more fire halls in new communities. :dunno:

oh, it is that easy? You just gotta build a new hall, buy new trucks, find new firefighters, train them, shuffle around your veterans and disrupt every other fire hall so you have senior guys on hand to mentor the newbies, then you gotta raise taxes to pay for it all and god forbid you do that.

[01RedDX]

.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by 88CRX


The solution to fire fighting response times to new communities is not to stop development, even though that's the solution they're giving.

It's to build more fire halls in new communities. :dunno:

It's not because you have to staff them. Out of the 3 services, I believe fire is most dangerous but least call upon.

More dense = more efficient use of resources.

[speedog]

Originally posted by 88CRX
The solution to fire fighting response times to new communities is not to stop development, even though that's the solution they're giving.

It's to build more fire halls in new communities. :dunno:
So how is it that a community on the outskirts of Calgary like Tuscany (most definitely suburbia) of which parts of it have homes that are 20 years or older and is one of Calgary's largest communities in terms of size and population never managed to have either an EMS or fire station located within it's boundaries?

This is also not a Nenshi issue because 20 years ago, he was still a young lad going to school at Harvard. I don't think this is any mayor's fault but somehow a community like this has been lacking in public facilities. Hell, they didn't get a K-4 CBE school until 8 years ago, a 4-9 CBE middle school in the last 2 years or so and a Catholic K-9 in 2007. So how is it that people can be okay living in a suburban community like this for 12 years with no schools or longer with what many people would view as inadequate emergency services? How does this come to be from city hall? By the way, I can say 20 years because that's how long my sister-in-laws family has lived in their home in Tuscany an dyes, Tuscany is on the very outskirts of Calgary.

[rage2]

Originally posted by suntan
Calgary is insanely big? Go to California sometime. Oakland-SF-SJ. Now that's fucking big.
haha no kidding. We just think we're huge because it takes forever to go one suburb to another with no freeways. You can drive an hour at 120km/h in LA to go from one suburb to another. If we had a freeway system like Cali, it would take me 15 mins to go from one corner of the city to the other.

[01RedDX]

.

[suntan]

Originally posted by 01RedDX


Nice freeway system, horrible congestion. Also, those are 3 separate municipalities in one urban agglomeration.
Calgary as a single city/municipality is absolutely huge. I think a great idea is to separate Calgary into different municipalities. "Inner City" gets to keep all 15K City employees.

[benyl]

Originally posted by rage2

haha no kidding. We just think we're huge because it takes forever to go one suburb to another with no freeways. You can drive an hour at 120km/h in LA to go from one suburb to another. If we had a freeway system like Cali, it would take me 15 mins to go from one corner of the city to the other.

It's pretty big. 825 square km.

LA is 1200 km2
SF is 600km2
SJ is 466km2
Oakland is 200km2

Sure, if you put SF, SJ and OK together, you get a bigger area, but they all have separate police, fire, ems and mayors.

[01RedDX]

.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by b_t


oh, it is that easy? You just gotta build a new hall, buy new trucks, find new firefighters, train them, shuffle around your veterans and disrupt every other fire hall so you have senior guys on hand to mentor the newbies, then you gotta raise taxes to pay for it all and god forbid you do that.

I don't think anyone said it's easy but to think cutting off new development is the solution is taking the easy way out. If people thought housing prices were stupid now just wait until the supply runs out because guess what... it is rapidly running out.

The city has a very fine line to walk. If supply runs low and prices continue to rise people will look elsewhere (Airdrie, Chestermere, etc) which is even worse. They live out of the City, don't pay property taxes yet use our services.


Originally posted by speedog

So how is it that a community on the outskirts of Calgary like Tuscany (most definitely suburbia) of which parts of it have homes that are 20 years or older and is one of Calgary's largest communities in terms of size and population never managed to have either an EMS or fire station located within it's boundaries?

This is also not a Nenshi issue because 20 years ago, he was still a young lad going to school at Harvard. I don't think this is any mayor's fault but somehow a community like this has been lacking in public facilities. Hell, they didn't get a K-4 CBE school until 8 years ago, a 4-9 CBE middle school in the last 2 years or so and a Catholic K-9 in 2007. So how is it that people can be okay living in a suburban community like this for 12 years with no schools or longer with what many people would view as inadequate emergency services? How does this come to be from city hall? By the way, I can say 20 years because that's how long my sister-in-laws family has lived in their home in Tuscany an dyes, Tuscany is on the very outskirts of Calgary.

That is just a poorly planned community then, I have no idea who developed it or who approved it at the city but that's not the issue being discussed. The issue is NEW and FUTURE community development.

[rage2]

Originally posted by benyl
It's pretty big. 825 square km.

LA is 1200 km2
SF is 600km2
SJ is 466km2
Oakland is 200km2

Sure, if you put SF, SJ and OK together, you get a bigger area, but they all have separate police, fire, ems and mayors.
Yea, just logical separation. I'm comparing Calgary Metropolitan Area vs. Greater Los Angeles Area.

[speedog]

Originally posted by 88CRX
That is just a poorly planned community then, I have no idea who developed it or who approved it at the city but that's not the issue being discussed. The issue is NEW and FUTURE community development.
Some of parts of Tuscany are very new.

[suntan]

Originally posted by benyl


It's pretty big. 825 square km.

LA is 1200 km2
SF is 600km2
SJ is 466km2
Oakland is 200km2

Sure, if you put SF, SJ and OK together, you get a bigger area, but they all have separate police, fire, ems and mayors. So what you're saying is that those cities are even more inefficient than the sleepy heads in Calgary's city hall, seeing as how administrative functions would be duplicated three times?

Also, your analysis on footage is wrong. The entire 101 highway from SF to SJ is populated, so there's a bunch of cities you're missing (ahem, Sunnyvale). You should also use the Metro areas, not the city (I'm not even sure how Wikipedia gets that 600km2 for SF. SF "proper" is only 121 km2, which they're very proud of mentioning whenever I'm down there.)

So if you use metro, SF is a ball busting 12000 km2, SJ is a portly 22000 km2... etc...

A nice way to understand how small Calgary is and how mega large some other cities are is to open two Google Maps windows and scale them side by side. Then Calgary looks absolutely puny compared to the LA tri-country area. Or hell, even fucking NY and its five Burroughs, and the mega sprawl all around it.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by speedog

Some of parts of Tuscany are very new.

Yes, but the whole community and land use is already done, approved and set in stone. All the communities that are already under construction are done deals and the developers just roll through them now.

[speedog]

Originally posted by 88CRX
Yes, but the whole community and land use is already done, approved and set in stone. All the communities that are already under construction are done deals and the developers just roll through them now.
K, good point.

So are these new communities going to see reduced response times in the 7 minutes or less range?

[suntan]

Tuscany was one of the communities created when Calgary's growth sucked. So yeah, it started early, but I'd say 80% of the community didn't actually appear until after 2005.

Fuck I used to deliver pizza up there back in 96. There were around two roads. Same with Citadel.

[88CRX]

The funny thing is the newer communities like Mackenzie Town and Auburn bay are fairly dense. They have lots of single family homes (on smaller lots) but they also have tons of townhomes and apartment buildings. I don't feel that communities like these contribute to "uncontrolled sprawl".

The problem communities that really screwed the city over are the communities built in the 60's, 70's and 80'. Tiny little 1200ft2 homes on 120' lots in Acadia, Willow Park and Lake Bonivista contributed the crazy sprawl of this city.

Also how many people on here bitch about the tiny lots and lack of street parking because of said small lots. So do you want density or do you want 100' of street parking in front of your house? You can't have both.

[suntan]

Exactly. Look at Edgemont. There is not a single home there that doesn't back onto a green space (!).

Also those communities were zoned 100% R-1, so there's no businesses in those communities to raise the amount of property tax.

[flipstah]

<1km for EMS
2km for Fire

:thumbsup: :bigpimp:

[roopi]

Originally posted by 01RedDX


No kidding, infrastructure as an afterthought is one of the biggest issues this city has. We are nearly the size of New York with 1/10th of the population. Kudos to the chief, but this is just one of the problems with Calgary's huge, unchecked sprawl.

So NYC has over 200 fire stations and Calgary has about 40. If Calgary's population would grow to New Yorks but stay the same in size would we need an additional 160 or so stations? :dunno:

[01RedDX]

.

[roopi]

So either way if the city becomes more dense or we sprawl we require more stations.

[suntan]

Yeah and NYC is hella expensive to live in.

It's also mega congested. They've spent billions on subway station renovations to ease 45 minute long lineups.

[nickyh]

The closest Fire/EMS from me is 5.1km or 8min 34 sec, so we are well above the 7second mark quoted in the article.

Another EMS only is 5.7km (8m51sec) and Fire only is 5.9km (8m56sec).
Closest hospital is 12.1km or 18min, and the second closest is 14.8km or 20min away.

[speedog]

Originally posted by suntan
Exactly. Look at Edgemont. There is not a single home there that doesn't back onto a green space (!).

Also those communities were zoned 100% R-1, so there's no businesses in those communities to raise the amount of property tax.

Ummm, you should take another look using Google maps in the satellite view, lots of homes there not backing out onto green spaces. Probably more not backing onto to green space then do.

[nzwasp]

I am in Montreaux, 3k from a firestation however the only time I called 911 they sent two ambulances from Cochrane. Who then didn't know where the hospital in Calgary was.

[suntan]

Originally posted by speedog


Ummm, you should take another look using Google maps in the satellite view, lots of homes there not backing out onto green spaces. Probably more not backing onto to green space then do. Okay, almost all. Look carefully - there's usually a pathway between the backyards.

[speedog]

Originally posted by suntan
Okay, almost all. Look carefully - there's usually a pathway between the backyards.
Yupp, did and I see so many where the back yards butt up against each other or there's an alley. Personally, a skinny ass bike path between homes isn't much of a green space - not compared to an actually park or natural area.

[suntan]

Yeah, but it contributes to the low density that urban twits whine about.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by 88CRX
The funny thing is the newer communities like Mackenzie Town and Auburn bay are fairly dense. They have lots of single family homes (on smaller lots) but they also have tons of townhomes and apartment buildings. I don't feel that communities like these contribute to &quot;uncontrolled sprawl&quot;.

The problem communities that really screwed the city over are the communities built in the 60's, 70's and 80'. Tiny little 1200ft2 homes on 120' lots in Acadia, Willow Park and Lake Bonivista contributed the crazy sprawl of this city.

Also how many people on here bitch about the tiny lots and lack of street parking because of said small lots. So do you want density or do you want 100' of street parking in front of your house? You can't have both.

I can't repeat what rage2 has said before.

THE SUBURBS DO NOT COST CALGARY ADDITIONAL MONEY.

The density is either there, or it isn't. ALBERTA laws require certain population densities in new developments, new neighbourhoods are way denser than old ones. The suburbs are NOT costing additional money.

It's such bass-ackwards god damn terrible logic where people go "dur, the city is getting bigger, so its more expensive". Why? Why is that a thing? Density is all that matters. If area A is as dense as area B, the costs are the same. End of fucking discussion :banghead: That's why this fire chief is a god damn moron.

[suntan]

The problem is that city costs are going up more than revenue they are receiving. Of course most of that is simply labour cost but people like Nenshi and Farrell will never admit to that.

What they would like is a total freeze on greenfield development, because they mistakenly believe that that is the main contributor to rising city costs.

Of course, if that were to happen, costs would still rise. Then they'd have no one but themselves to blame. Which probably wouldn't be a bad thing.

[b_t]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1
That's why this fire chief is a god damn moron.

So you know better than the guy who got to see the books, spent his whole career dealing with stuff like this, sat in countless meetings about the departmental budget, and had an inside line to City Hall? :rofl:

[icky2unk]

Originally posted by b_t


So you know better than the guy who got to see the books, spent his whole career dealing with stuff like this, sat in countless meetings about the departmental budget, and had an inside line to City Hall? :rofl:

Just because someone has access to all the information doesn't mean they are reading it correctly.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by b_t


So you know better than the guy who got to see the books, spent his whole career dealing with stuff like this, sat in countless meetings about the departmental budget, and had an inside line to City Hall? :rofl:

I'm not saying that the OVERALL cost isn't going up. Of course it is, more people/developments to protect, higher costs.

What I am arguing is that costs are going up exponentially. Which is what people make it sound like. The costs to fight fires on a population density basis should be linear. Elementary school kids know that.

So, if the city is reducing the amount of money for a given density, well of course they need more money. But it has ZERO to do with growth, and everything to do with how the city budgets.

Of course, the funding will always be a couple years behind due to the services needing to be in place before the developments are finished, but that has always been the cost of running a growing city. Its not magically getting more expensive all of a sudden (except for labour of course).

Edit-
TL;DR
There is a fixed price per density unit for providing services in any city. There is underfunded, funded exactly as needed, and overfunded. The % of the overall city budget that goes towards the Fire Department should not change, but OBVIOUSLY, the total $ should go up every year.

[b_t]

If you are saying elementary kids know this, that is because you are so massively oversimplifying the issue you cannot possibly make any valid points. There could be economies of scale, geographical distribution affects the cost of emergency services highly, the metric used to determine adequate performance will affect the cost, the job market will affect it, technological changes will affect it, political differences between aldermen and their corresponding ridings will affect it, and so on


Originally posted by icky2unk


Just because someone has access to all the information doesn't mean they are reading it correctly.

So the guys with access to none of the information at all will reach better conclusions? Got ya.

[BlackArcher101]

Wonder how much effect the bad roads during winter have on the 66 percent number.

[msommers]

Maybe I missed it but what is the required density of a community/area before another fire station is required?

What if we're never close to the actual density cap of each fire station? Is expanding still a good idea?

Folks always want to compare us to New York but I don't know why, the dynamics aren't even close. So how about this. What long-term established city has low-density high land coverage? How are they doing? Is there a comparable city so we're comparing apples to apples? Or is there not another city like ours because it's not a good long-term plan?

I'm not pretending like I know the answers, just seem like reasonable questions.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1




I can't repeat what rage2 has said before.

THE SUBURBS DO NOT COST CALGARY ADDITIONAL MONEY.

Does this refer to the taking residential dwellings and multiplying it by median assessed value stat and thinking it includes all property tax argument?




Edit-
TL;DR
There is a fixed price per density unit for providing services in any city. There is underfunded, funded exactly as needed, and overfunded. The % of the overall city budget that goes towards the Fire Department should not change, but OBVIOUSLY, the total $ should go up every year.

Well if you were to take the population of the Inner City from say, the Olympics in 1988 and today and see how many fire stations needed to be built since and compare it to outward growth and how many fire stations needed to be built, you'd find that since 1988, two have been opened in the Inner City (Eau Claire and Vista Heights, the latter's old station switching to EMS).

Number of dwellings increasing, number of people increasing, yet the number of new fire stations needing to be built stays surprisingly small, because it turns out a 10-20 storey condo/apartment building has a much more favorable density unit (whatever the hell that means) when it comes to services.

While the operation cost of the fire department should stay at a similar percentage, sprawl means that the capital costs shoot up and the neighborhoods they serve can't fully support all the costs of added infrastructure (be it schools, roads, fire departments etc.) on their own.

This is why it costs more to build out, especially at the rate Calgary has.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by msommers
Maybe I missed it but what is the required density of a community/area before another fire station is required?

What if we're never close to the actual density cap of each fire station? Is expanding still a good idea?

Folks always want to compare us to New York but I don't know why, the dynamics aren't even close. So how about this. What long-term established city has low-density high land coverage? How are they doing? Is there a comparable city so we're comparing apples to apples? Or is there not another city like ours because it's not a good long-term plan?

I'm not pretending like I know the answers, just seem like reasonable questions.

It is very hard to find comparables because the age of Calgary and the age it hit its big 'growth spurts' at limit the scope to North America (I mean, Dublin is kind of close, but hardly a similar city in any other way). But American metro areas are just so messed up both with population but also the dynamics of all civic services in some of these regions that can have hundreds of individual municipalities making up the region .

In terms of strict city size, Calgary would fit in between Dallas and San Jose in the States slotting in at #10, well above the likes of Boston, Denver and Salt Lake City. But once you include metros, Calgary drops to 46th behind the likes of Richmond, VA, Oklahoma City and Louisville.

But when you factor in the money that is in this city as well as the attitude of the people as well as the city's place in Canada, AND the amount of growth, there just isn't any place like it right now. Edmonton is probably the closest comparable we have sadly but they are growing with a much different mindset in part because the money they have is a different kind of money (the whole 'blue collar vs. white collar' stuff).

Phoenix used to be the good American example but their economy is shit now and the region is overrun with satellite communities doing a bunch of dumb things (i.e. Glendale spending hundreds of millions on an arena and football stadium when they're the size of Saskatoon).



So in short, just hop on for the ride, nobody really knows what's going on, where we're going or whether or not we can get there.

[kenny]

Originally posted by speedog
So how is it that a community on the outskirts of Calgary like Tuscany (most definitely suburbia) of which parts of it have homes that are 20 years or older and is one of Calgary's largest communities in terms of size and population never managed to have either an EMS or fire station located within it's boundaries?

Because Tuscany is a completely fucked up community built with the absolute worst plans. Crappy road network, terrible NIMBY anti-shortcut entrance road that had to be corrected to be realigned properly with Scenic Acres, and lack of adjacent development. Hopefully nothing like that will ever get approved again.

[TurboMedic]

Originally posted by speedog

So how is it that a community on the outskirts of Calgary like Tuscany (most definitely suburbia) of which parts of it have homes that are 20 years or older and is one of Calgary's largest communities in terms of size and population never managed to have either an EMS or fire station located within it's boundaries?

This is also not a Nenshi issue because 20 years ago, he was still a young lad going to school at Harvard. I don't think this is any mayor's fault but somehow a community like this has been lacking in public facilities. Hell, they didn't get a K-4 CBE school until 8 years ago, a 4-9 CBE middle school in the last 2 years or so and a Catholic K-9 in 2007. So how is it that people can be okay living in a suburban community like this for 12 years with no schools or longer with what many people would view as inadequate emergency services? How does this come to be from city hall? By the way, I can say 20 years because that's how long my sister-in-laws family has lived in their home in Tuscany an dyes, Tuscany is on the very outskirts of Calgary.

Tuscany also has access to 21 station, which I think may be close physically than 34, but more importantly have better access, especially since the stoney tr underpass. I've done plenty of calls in tuscany

[TurboMedic]

FWIW, remember most of you are calculating your "time" based on standard speeds. I can assure you it takes much less than posted to make those times.

I also want to add, its fine and dandy to include EMS in this (thanks speedog), but unlike Fire we are quite unlikely to be in the stations. We typically will have only 10-20 ambulances available to respond anywhere in the city (out of 47 I think it is now on the road at any given time), and multiple times a day dip below 3-5 available for periods of time. Fire doesn't have that volume, nor do they really exercise flexible deployment the way we do, so 9 times out of 10, the station near you will have a fully staffed truck or 3 in it.

My question is, and this isn't being mean, but why do people still put more value in property and belongings than life? Why am I driving from mid downtown to past heritage on a medical call because there just aren't enough ambulances? Yet we ask for more fire stations?? Shouldn't we be adding more ambulances? We do 3x the call volume with a fraction the resources and manpower..................... :nut:


To answer the initial question, 29 station at coach hill is 2.2km from my house, staffing fire/ems

[Go4Long]

rather than looking at land area (which is all well and good), why don't we look at the number of fire assets per population of some of the larger cities that people are talking about.

Los Angeles Fire Department for example has 106 stations, 132 engines (seems odd), and 6 helicopters, with 3'586 uniformed members for a population of 3.9 million.

It really seems like Calgary needs a fire helicopter...or actually almost 2.

[120Comm]

Originally posted by TurboMedic
unlike Fire we are quite unlikely to be in the stations.

But .. but.. Southgate is a station!! :D Just one huge station not necessarily in the middle of the area that all the ambulances formerly at stations migrated to...

[Skidro]

I have a fire station within jogging distance (69th street) and im sure there a few others in the area which could respond in under 7 minutes if necessary.