Everyone's talking about separated bike lanes, and what they have in mind is separated bike lanes on roads, and usually in the downtown.  Separated bike lanes along the avenues in the downtown (and along other major roads) would of course be a Very God Thing.  But you should keep a few things in mind.

1. We have loads of separated bike paths in Calgary already!  Every time the city (Parks Department) paints a yellow line down a sidewalk or pathway parallel to a road, that's in effect a separated bike lane. Think pathway along Memorial, along 29 St NW, along John Laurie, 24 Ave NW south of the UofC, 26 St SE, 14 St along Earl Grey golf course. Sure, it's usually shared with pedestrians, although where it's twinned its a proper bike-only sidepath. And there is the pesky 20 kmh speed restriction. But still. In most places (ie, oher than along the rivers), because of the low pedestrian volume, those paths are in effect  off-street cycle track like the ones people want.
2. What the City hasn't done (anywhere, as far as I know), is add proper intersection treatments. When a pathway intersects and crosses a road, that's where the hazard is. And in many areas it's a very real (as in, deadly) hazard. The cyclist who was killed a month ago was travelling along a sidepath (along 52 St SE when he was crossing 61 Ave SE).  People think that you have to dismount in the crosswalks, but that's not true. There's no law against riding through a crosswalk.  But thre are no warning signs that a road is crossing a pathway, no special road markings, no separate signals for bicycles triggered by approaching bicycles, nothing. A big problem is that cars are allowed to turn on red in Calgary (not allowed in Europe!).  They wait at the red light, look left for cross traffic, and go when they think the coast is clear. In the meantime, a pedestrian or cyclist might very well have (often legally, and in the case of pedestrians, with the right of way!) have entered the intersection and be in front of them.  By the time the driver realizes this, they've hit the pedestrian or cyclist. Happened to me, happened to the cyclist who was killed on 52 St SE, almost happened to me again when I was walking along 52 St just the other week.
3. For these reasons (cross traffic), and when there's parking next to the sidepath, it's not always advisable to install separated bike lanes. They work best when you have long stretches without driveways or crossings. They make the most sense when the road they're next to has heavy, high-speed traffic, or when the speed differential is large (eg, on an uphill even when cars go at normal speed).  When speed is low (on the streets -- not avenues -- downtown where everyone has to stop at every block), when the sidepath is or would be obscured by parked cars, and when blocks are short or have lots of driveways/alleys, they don't make as much sense and are really hard to design properly.
4. Although in many places a sidepath on the "sidewalk" is perfectly serviceable, because of the problems at intersections and the conflicts wherever there are more than a few pedestrians, it's usually better to install them on the street.  But that requires widening the street (expensive) or taking out parking or a driving lane.  (On the other hand, separate signals for bikes and bke detectors to trigger them are also expensive). In many places, that would be the proper, safe, but not very popular way to go.  We're facing an uphill battle there.