Search results

It may be ugly, but it still scored higher than the current option of the new bridge. Centre Street got two checks for Fiscal Capacity and Sustainable Development, while the new bridge (plus running at grade south of 16th Ave) option only got one for Fiscal Capacity. Both got strikes for...

Using the Centre Street bridge was one of the options looked at in the past, but in 2016 when money was no concern, they went with the deep tunnel. In 2019 when it became impossible to even reach Shepard with $5B, they had to resort to the second worst option (only ahead of elevated through...

Eyeballing the elevations and distances from plans presented in the 2015 "North Central LRT Corridor Study", may be 3.5%-4% depending on how long the bridge is.

IMO, I think they are getting these optimistic numbers because they need it to be that high in order to help justify the Green Line in general. Even with 11K at 16th, projected ridership is already pretty mediocre (55-65K/day) given the $5B capital and >$40M operating costs.

Do you have an example of what they could do. All I can think is that they create express route for the north of Beddington Trail communities that directly go to downtown using Deerfoot to bypass Centre Street altogether. Otherwise, the pitch for the Green Line as a LRT seems to indicate that...

But you can't blame Alberta solely for this, the City made its own independent decision to pick the SE in 2017 while ignoring all of the same reasons you listed. And given how little work has been done in the NC (no preliminary plan that was promised for 2019, few if any land acquisitions) I...

I think pessimism is warranted since the last last time there was good news for the Green Line was when it was originally approved in 2015 as a <$5B for a very useful 40 km to be finished by 2024. It's been downhill since then as the line exploded in costs, forcing the cut to a much less useful...

Yeah, I suspect that the Max improvements to the 301 is all that the NC can hope to expect for the next 25-30 years, even though the supposed capacity limitations of BRT for Centre Street N was a big reason why the Green Line needed to skip directly to LRT.

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...