Note that of the 399  interviews and forms collected from members of the public across Calgary, the West Campus does not emerge as the #1 preference in any of the samples presented.  For parents and patients,
the #1 choice is Lincoln Park (28%); also the top choice of healthcare workers (42%). For the public at large, the first choice is Century Park (30%, 32% or 36%, depending on which compilation is used). 

1997
“You, the community, wanted ALL the property deeded to the University of Calgary. Murray Smith agreed with these concerns and took them to government caucus and cabinet. Shortly thereafter, the government announced that the entire 184 acres of land would be transferred to the University of Calgary. NOTHING can be done to the property without full community consultation.”
Murray Smith’s campaign literature during the 1997 election.

“I don’t consider the issue closed. On May 19, I met with representatives of the community and the
University. At that meeting we jointly committed to involving the community in a meaningful way in any
decisions that might be made about the land. I am more than willing to facilitate and assist in that process.”
More from Murray Smith’s 1997 campaign literature

2001
“Smith sees his duty clearly when it comes to construction of the new children’s hospital on the
site, and the ensuing traffic and other challenges. ‘I work for the community. Not the university or the
hospital,’ he said...’The community wants consultation with the CRHA and the university and I mean meaningful consultation – not just town halls or open houses,’ said Smith. ‘People are concerned they won’t have an influence in traffic patterns, architectural designs, those sorts of things.’”
Calgary Herald article, March 5, 2001

March 16, 2001
“...on February 5, 2001, members of the University Heights community met with MLA Murray Smith, CRHA Board Chairman Jim Dinning and Chief Executive Officer Jack Davis, where a number of priorities were agreed upon, including the need for a frank, collaborative approach
to problem solving.”
correspondence from Gary Mar, Minister of Health and Wellness

UHCA welcomes this commitment.  For months, UHCA and surrounding communities have been saying we want a true interactive consultative process. UHCA takes the position that, so far, U of C and the CRHA have engaged in a Notification Process, not a dialogue. The U of C’s new West Campus: Development and Land Use Concept Briefing Package, for instance, does not even mention any community input to date, even though the Advisory Committee has been meeting for at least a year. 

Part of the City process is to make information available for public discussion. U of C plans to host Open Houses in six neighbouring communities, staring with University Heights on April 9 from 7-9 pm, at University Elementary School. UHCA URGES UH RESIDENTS TO ATTEND. For other times and dates, please see the U of C website Open House page. 

UPDATE ON TIMING:
Although U of C  emphasizes that plans are still in a very early stage, the West Campus Development Land Use Concept Briefing Package that U of C submitted to the City for preliminary approval, contains a timeline that shows grading the Reserve Lands could begin as soon as May or June of this year.

The U of C has invited a limited number of representatives from surrounding communities to take part in a day-long workshop (April 7) on options for building massing and exterior finishes, circulation and site location for the Children’s Hospital.

From that workshop, U of C intends to take plans and drawings to display at the upcoming Open Houses. The U of C team expects to collect comments from the public, which would feed into revised plans and drawings for another set of Open Houses, more comments, and possible more revisions. Following this schedule, U of C might arrive at a final plan by June of this year.

THE PROPOSED 16TH AVENUE INTERCHANGE WOULD BE DEALT WITH SEPARATELY.  The City of Calgary has a separate public process for changing road systems, which definitely involves public hearings. The 16th Avenue interchange could be before the City Transportation Committee in June as well. Other aspects of the U of C’s Transportation Plan are also available online.

AT THE CITY LEVEL:
From the CRHA:   “The U of C, and the CRHA as the first project on the West Campus, have agreed to work with Alderman Dale Hodges and the City to work toward an agreement on a list of generic land uses to which the University will restrict its use on the West Campus. The final agreement will include specific excluded uses, and establish a maximum density for development, based on utility and road capacity.”

AT THE OPEN HOUSES:
U of C and CRHA invite public comments on much less substantive issues. They propose that subjects for discussion at the Open Houses would include:
• public open space, parks, and "urban amenities" (such as a berry patch);
• access to regional and local pathways;
• traffic patterns, including cut-through traffic and bicycle-friendly streets;
• wildlife;
• biophysical analysis;
• grades;
• noise attenuation (eg, sound barrier walls).

Note that the U of C remains steadfast in its determination to include a “conference facility” on the site, which apparently involves 184 short-stay rooms.

UHCA CONCERNS:
As part of the South Shaganappi Area Development Council, UHCA still seeks to put the proposed West Campus development into the larger context of all the developments planned for the NW region (eg, Foothills Hospital expansion; main campus expansion; new Sportsplex with 6 covered soccer fields; new Colonel Belcher Hospital and seniors' residence; Market Mall expansion).  SSADC has asked the Hon Murray Smith to arrange Alberta Infrastructure funding for an independent consultant to assemble an overall Area Redevelopment Plan. Mr Smith did promise to do so, at the Varsity Hall all-candidates’ meeting -- but at this writing, the new Minister of Energy has yet to follow up. 

UHCA has said repeatedly that our residents want the Education Reserve Lands used only for bona fide academic purposes. UH residents are already bothered by noise from the heating plant and concerned about emissions from the U of C and Foothills, much less a third power plant. To most UH residents, “Environmental Impact” has to do with noise levels and air quality, as well as protecting established flora and fauna.  Finally, UHCA maintains that local citizens must have access to an independent third-party dispute-resolution mechanism for  individuals who can demonstrate that the development diminishes their enjoyment of their homes.

"No," says ACH Project Manager Art Froese.
"Ninety percent of the information you want will be in two studies," says Roman Cooney.
Those two studies would be: the traffic-noise study, which will provide information about noise levels along 16th Avenue now, and project traffic noise levels if the interchange is built.  The STARS/EMS study will provide information about helicopter landings. 

Questions about the new hospital's power plant noise and emissions remain unaddressed. The question of  the new West Campus power plant and possible electrical generation facilities is in very preliminary stages, and entirely in the University's hands. Apparently the U of C wants a 100-MW co-generation facility to provide both heat and electricity for all three sites: main campus, West campus and South campus (Foothills Hospital complex).

CRHA clarifies its construction intentions, asks for  peaceful discussions with UHCA over
developing hospital design. 

On February 5, the Hon Murray Smith arranged a lunch meeting for two UHCA representatives with himself and two of the top people at CRHA: Chairman Jim Dinning, and CEO Jack Davis.

The purpose of the lunch was to establish better communications and clear up some
misunderstandings. Generally speaking, CRHA wanted to know how they could get their
information to UH residents, and UHCA wanted to know how we could get residents' concerns
to CRHA, and how those concerns would be addressed. The meeting was cordial and much
information was exchanged.

UHCA relayed some of the concerns that residents have expressed to us, in conversation, by
email, and by phone. We feel squeezed by institutions, threatened by the proposed interchange,
concerned about noise and  emissions. UH residents are wary that if agreement is reached on one
facility, more announcements may  be in the wings. We also emphasized that residents currently
are opposed to the facility being located on the West Campus.

CRHA responded that the proposed Children's Hospital would be low-rise and child-friendly.
The plan is to rebuild Foothills Hospital, concentrating on treating cancer, cardiovascular, and
bone-and-joint treatment and research "Care Centres" -- and not just expand indefinitely. 

(The new Foothills Master Plan will be delayed a bit, in order to integrate the bone-and-joint
facility announced last week. Look for the Master Plan in April or May, not March as previously
announced.) 

CRHA suggested that the proposed 16th Avenue  interchange can be reconfigured. CRHA also
suggested that both Foothills and U of C power plants could be replaced with a plant that is 
more friendly both environmentally and to residents. 

The new hospital would route ambulances along 16th Ave, to minimize noise, and perhaps put the
heli-pad on the roof rather than at ground level. As well, they suggested, new diagnostic-and-
treatment facilities in the South and North of the city would relieve some of the load now placed
on the ACH  Emergency Room. 

CRHA also suggested that UHCA might be interested in an arrangement whereby the community
could use some portion of the hospital building, such as the gymnasium.

CRHA was surprised to hear that STARS helicopters have been flying over our community, and
promised to contact STARS that very day to discuss flight paths. 

UHCA indicated that residents are currently unconvinced that the grasslands are the best site for
the new ACH, and that perhaps CRHA could provide some clearer explanations for the
recommendation. CRHA replied that they had some work to do to further explain their
committee's recommendation to our community and to the public.

Most children's hospitals now are teaching hospitals, CRHA said. "Primarily" teaching hospitals,
was the phrase. Yet on questioning, CRHA agreed that ACH is practically the only hospital in
Calgary with pediatric beds. There are some pediatric beds at Foothills and some at Peter
Lougheed, but those are mostly adolescent mental health beds. 

UHCA again asked for a dispute-resolution mechanism, so that individual residents can bring
their concerns to CRHA and have some kind of hearing. CRHA suggested that informal meetings
of key people might be the best solution. UHCA did not agree, preferring a third-party or
structured  mechanism.

CRHA said that they do listen to the residents, especially with Murray Smith looking over their
shoulder. They pointed to the CLS central lab as an example, saying that UHCA and Murray
Smith persuaded them to change their plans, and that the new location is probably better than the
grasslands location would have been. UHCA said we agreed that the new location is better and
that our members think we can help CRHA come up with a better plan for ACH too. 

An early step in opening up two-way communication will be an Open House at University
Elementary School, at a date yet to be determined. UHCA suggested that CRHA provide people
with some information on paper, to take home and read. 

As for future expansion of the new hospital after initial construction, CRHA suggested setting up
a process of  consultation so that UHCA residents would not be caught off-guard again, as has
happened so often during this past  year.

The meeting indicated that CHRA and the U of C are prepared to make significant changes in the PROCESS for determining what will be built on the grasslands. New INFORMATION is becoming available, starting with several reports to be released next week. The TIMELINE for proceeding is becoming clearer. Notwithstanding, there are still some areas where UHCA residents have substantial CONCERNS.
PROGRESS ON THE PLANNING PROCESS:
CRHA has been talking with Calgary City Hall about the customary planning process for involving local communities in proposals to develop large parcels of undeveloped land, such as the former General Hospital site and the empty Canadian Forces Base. The CRHA is moving to adopt this process, as it applies to a provincially regulated facility. This would involve extensive study and consultation with neighbouring communities. The City process also involves several levels of review by City Council and planning department, which would NOT automatically be built in to the new hospital process.

Craig McDougall, who has been UHCA’s representative on the regional Advisory Committee for many long months, said, “This meeting represents real movement and I’m pleased to see it.”

Background: while CRHA deserves credit for adopting recognized planning processes, several UHCA residents have already pointed out that some portion of the proposed interchange would be built on City land, and therefore City approval and co-operation are essential to the plan.

The Hon Murray Smith, MLA for Calgary Varsity,  suggested a new working committee, with one UHCA representative meeting regularly with CRHA and U of C staff, as well as Mr Smith and Alderman Dale Hodges. Ald Hodges has agreed.  The Northwest Advisory Committee, made up of other representatives from NW communities, would be invited to select a representative to attend these meetings as well. Mr Smith strongly supported UHCA’s call for a dispute-reconciliation mechanism to be established in advance.

Comment: The NW Advisory Committee decided against this plan.

The City of Calgary is in the process of commissioning a traffic study for all of NW Calgary, looking at the cumulative impact of traffic from the shopping centres (Market Mall, Northlands, etc) as well as from Foothills Hospital, the U of C, and the new Colonel Belcher Hospital.

UHCA residents urgently want a full and comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment; ACH Project Manager Art Froese and the U of C are not convinced that they need to do more than the basic City requirements.

The University is exploring options for generating its own electricity, probably a 50 MW co-generation facility using excess heat from its heating plant. UHCA wants to be kept fully informed from the very earliest stages of any such project, and to have some authority in deciding what kind of  project is appropriate for that site, if any.

UHCA wants to ensure that no part of the grasslands, whether university or hospital, will be used for what would be considered industrial purposes if the land were subject to the City zoning processes.

It is not clear whether the proposed hospital would include facilities for private, for-profit, healthcare providers.  No such services are in place at the present ACH. The Programs committee report will recommend some services for the near future, but the CRHA stated that programs change to meet evolving needs.

Back to top of page

Residents asked how many ACH inpatients actually travel to Foothills or the Cancer Centre for treatment. CRHA estimates there about 782 pediatric visits a year to the Tom Baker Cancer Centre for radiotherapy. These visits involve about 46 patients making multiple visits (between 7 and 35 visits per patient). Children who stabilize under treatment may receive radiotherapy as outpatients and therefore would not be inpatients requiring transportation from ACH, but would travel from their own homes. There are also some 245 pediatric cancer patient visits for MRIs, but again these are not necessarily inpatients.

Doctor travel between ACH and the Foothills Health Sciences Centre varies from daily (for about 17 faculty); to 3 to 5 times a week (for 8 individuals involved with research); to weekly for Head Administrators. In addition, CRHA notes, all the clinical facutly use the medical library at the Health Sciences Centre.

Fortunately, most (although not all ) medical journals are now available online, 24/7, through Medline at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/databases/freemedl.html    That should save some travel time.

Back to top of page

The Dec 13 Open House spontaneously turned into a Town Hall meeting. Residents arrived early (6:45, for a 7 pm opening), looked at the displays, and started setting up folding chairs in rows the length of the UES gymnasium.

At 7:15, UHCA Development Officer Craig McDougall  opened the meeting with a short update and a reminder that the purpose of the Open House was to collect written comments. But people wanted to speak. On either side of Craig MacDougall were Ward 1 Alderman Dale Hodges, who had insisted that UHCA hold the Open House, and  Calgary-Varsity MLA Murray Smith, who heard about the Open House and attended on his own initiative. Both these elected officials responded to questions and comments, and both have pledged to take UHCA concerns back to their respective colleagues.

UHCA resident unable to attend the meeting? We still want your comments. Please click though to the
Community Input Form

By 8:30, this observer counted 150 people in chairs, and more along the side.  Also present were the news media: A Channel, CFCN and Global TV, CBC Radio One and QR77, and (apparently -- no one signed the Media list) the Calgary Herald. 

UHCA  residents expressed a variety of viewpoints, but most were opposed to the proposed hospital site. The impromptu panelists answered questions as best they could -- Alderman Hodges talked about process and Mr Smith said he had not been consulted by the Site Selection Committee or even invited to their announcement -- but since the event was originally designed as an Open House, no representatives from the University or CRHA were present to answer question.

Later, a UHCA resident who is also on the Board at the university, said that the U of C was unfairly criticized for its absence. The UHCA Board is seeking ways to make sure the U of C and the CRHA have opportunities to respond to UHCA residents' concerns. Among those concerns:

the current Alberta Children's Hospital has a heli-pad and many UH residents wonder if that heli-pad would move with the hospital. UH residents have already expressed exasperation with the Foothills Medical Centre helicopter flight path over our homes.

UH sits between two large and ever-expanding institutions: Foothills Hospital to the south, and the University  to the north, which both create traffic pressure and isolate our community from the rest of the city already;

Both those institutions have their own power plants and presumably the new hospital would too. Do we really want our children breathing emissions from three major power plants nearby?

the proposed overpass across 16th Avenue is problematic at best -- nobody wants to pay for it, much less for turning 16th Avenue into a divided highway at that point;

the on- and off-ramps come very close to some backyards, and the overpass itself would probably loom over people's homes no matter how much landscaping is provided;

"We want an environmental impact study," as Linda Hulak said, to cheers from the audience;

We also a completed traffic study. Preliminary results show that more than 1300 cars a day use Ulrich Road; that's 135 cars an hour;

Retired doctors made the point that medical resources should be spread out around the city, and that doctors-in-training need to work in a variety of different settings and hospitals in order to be well-rounded;

Original plans for West Campus included a 30,000 sq m. conference hotel facility -- which seems redundant to UH residents who know that Motel Village is just the other side of Crowchild Trail.

Ironically, the land's status as university property, exempts it from city regulation, and thus opens it for uses that would require extensive community consultation anywhere else in Calgary. As a result, the communities around the grasslands have had to respond to other proposals -- later deemed to be inappropriate -- to build on the land.

The most recent skirmish started in April 2000, when the university and CRHA decided to build the central diagnostics lab for Calgary Laboratory Services, somewhere on the property. UHCA and surrounding communities insisted that putting CLS on the grasslands would be inappropriate use of the land and inappropriate placement of what is essentially an industrial facility.

A timeline constructed to keep track of the twists and turns of that set of negotiations still offers some valuable background information and context for this round of discussions.

Back to top of page