Search results

It's hilarious how Admin refuses to rank future Green Line stages, something Council first asked for Q1 2018 and has been deferred 6 or 7 times now, each time with Admin promising "soon". At some point, Council needs to start firing people

There was a report from the Green Line Technical and Risk Committee early in the year (Green Line committee meeting from February 21) that highlighted a number of similar issues, that are pretty troubling given that the project had been underway for 5+ years and construction was supposed to...

The Red and Blue lines were built cheaply, the City in the past proudly pointed out how economical they were. And they were successful from the start because they ran through existing transit corridors of good ridership. And even then there was significant pauses in the expansion of the Red Line...

I've seen it used as a reason for why the costs increased so much, but I don't think it holds up when looking at the earlier documents. From the beginning, a long tunnel from north of 16th Ave through the core was always in consideration. The long tunnel option was overwhelmingly recommended...

Almost all of the blame can be placed on the City badly underestimating how expensive the Green Line was going to be, leading to major revisions in 2017 and earlier this year. Back in late 2015, they were predicting construction would have started in 2018 and be done in 2024, for the entire 40...

That does seem to be the only way for the current section north of the river to even remotely work: I'd assume that if the NC line ever gets far north, that local traffic only rule will go up to 40th Avenue. But it's hilarious in a perverse way that despite claiming improved transportation...

I would consider these changes not a change in scope so much as the consequences of the failure of the planners to accurately estimate costs.

I think the scope was clear, replace the overcrowded buses of the NC with cheaper operating trains and expand transit service into the deep SE. The problem was that the councilors got giddy when they thought it would only cost $4.5-$5B and forgot to keep tabs on the Green Line as it rapidly...

Versus the NE line being stuck Marlborough for 20 years? Without limitless resources these are the tough choices. The previous LRT lines have been compromised in order to increase their reach but ended up being among the most successful light rail lines in North America. It's ~$5B for Stage 1...

During the peak AM rush, there's no change in the Eastern direction, you'll still have the same number of trains coming in as we do now. The difference will be that you'll also have ~22 full trains coming from the Western direction, maximizing the passenger capacity of 7th Ave from both...

It's full in the East direction with the very high ridership South and high ridership NE. But from the other direction, you just have the high ridership NW and medium ridership West. With careful scheduling of the trains, there should be enough capacity for one more high ridership line (NC)...

I wouldn't necessarily expect the Green Line to replace that many car trips; their estimate is about the equivalent of 6000 cars. And is that more important than resolving the overcrowded buses of the Centre Street N corrdor? Greg Morrow suggested splitting the lines: Another option is...

And common consequences of these projects going over-budget has been cutting back on the usefulness of route, and/or the reduction of other transit services to pay for them. You can see that in the numerous projects in the US where LRT is built but overall ridership declines (as bus service is...

If the Green Line does get delayed, or stopped, it won't be because of people like Jim Gray or the UCP Government, it'll be because of the continuing terrible management of the Green Line project. The Green Line Technical and Risk Committee just reported the following: The Green Line is only...

Back in 2016 when Council was first deciding on how to get into downtown, the options and costs were presented. Using the Centre Street Bridge (Option A) wasn't much cheaper than using a new bridge (Option E) and that option even included an underground station at 16th Avenue. A high-level...

The Province's funding changes may be the straw that's currently breaking the Green Line's back but all of its trouble really stem from it going more than $3B over budget for the full-line. Since the decision to use Shepard for the yard appears to be unassailable, then any cost savings have to...

That was the idea of Option E back when they were deciding on how to get into Downtown. But if you go to https://engage.calgary.ca/greenline, it states for Centre Street N: "The key change for Centre Street N include a surface alignment up the middle of Centre Street with a surface station...

I've read that 16th Ave is expected to have 11K riders/day which is a pretty substantial portion considering the whole of Phase 1 is only expecting 65K/day at most. And why is the NC LRT a struggle; it has by far the highest bus ridership corridor left in the City, has the most...

Not if you want a massive political fight. Stopping there all but guarantees that any future money will go to the SE (and other lines) and NC LRT will never be built.

The problem is that it's not a bit more money, and where previous choices made to build the Green Line "properly" has already increase its construction costs to upwards of $9 billion. The City can no longer afford to build the Green Line properly, it probably can't even afford to build it...