O-tac
Active Member
I must really trigger you since you’ve only posted less than 100 times, with a sizeable number of those posts directed at me every time I say something disparaging about the UCP.
Green Line LRT | ?m | ?s | Calgary Transit
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
I must really trigger you since you’ve only posted less than 100 times, with a sizeable number of those posts directed at me every time I say something disparaging about the UCP.
SlippinJimmy
New Member
Pot calling the kettle at best, at most as ideological as your statement; if they really wanted it dead they would've killed it sooner. Maybe the cost projections should have been done more responsibly and if (no pun intended) the costs have ballooned because of unforeseen circumstances maybe better risk management should've been done.
Says who? Can't and didn't the federal government do what they want with their money anyway? While the legislation (if actually as described) would not have been in any way beneficial to any ordinary person in this province and would have been par for the course for the pathetic Kenney government, this sounds like something an opinionated journalist would write. There have been so many other issues with this project aside from this and suggesting the provincial government can play monkey in the middle and block the fed's money just sounds like a lazy ideologically charged argument.
Honestly if the tunnel gets shortened any further I'd almost change teams and be for cancelling the whole thing. If we want to secure Calgary as a car dominant city then you spend (less) billions on, as I like to say, a really long slow electric bus on rails with 10-15 minute frequency. It won't get anyone around particularly fast, it will have to wait at traffic lights, will get into traffic accidents, and will force people outside more to wait at even more glorified bus stops. By the time this thing is build this city will be closer to 2 million population, we deserve big boy infrastructure, not something that again goes 40km/h on a street. I will definitely be driving if that's the case. It will also be very bad for any businesses on those streets where it would be street level.
This is a more reasonable take. A political issue for me like this is a tough one as I have maybe said before. I respect the provincial government in so far as they don't want a part in massive cost overruns BUT I am very frustrated that seemingly everywhere else in Canada with a large population other than Edmonton gets better transit infrastructure than we do and they are ensuring this remains the case. I can see the case that tax payers outside of Calgary don't want any more of their taxes going to this project that only really serves us Calgarians, but at the same time, Calgary is where the money is.
The federal government is just a bunch of ideologues that only care about spending money in places they think they can get support and love to punish places that don't support them basically holding Canadians ransom by saying "if you want something, then be on your best behaviour and vote for us, otherwise you don't exist". It's really an abusive relationship with people that seem to care very little about the well being of the country they are supposed to serve.
As for the city level, maybe, just maybe, we don't need electric firetrucks that bad. Or maybe we didn't need to rename Fort Calgary that bad. How is anyone supposed to take their pleas to higher levels of government seriously when they piss their money away on window dressing pet projects like this. We have water mains and the likes falling apart and they punish us for their incompetence and yet still celebrate a battery firetruck. The whole council needs to rethink their career paths, as does the unelected bureaucracy.
This ideological fingerpointing and conspiracy theories about this that or the other are why projects like this either fail or get dumbed down to a shadow of what they once were, and guess what, no one is happy in the end.
Shaganappian
New Member
The math on this new terminus is awful. Ogden, Inglewood and Ramsey have a combined population around 15k and limited TOD potential. Industrial lands will drive negligible ridership. Worse, Lynnwood is not a viable park and ride location. If this gets built as proposed the operating losses will be a major strain on an already stressed Calgary Transit. At this point it would be more viable to construct the ROW as a BRT corridor to a more logical terminus (McKenzie Towne?) and add the downtown tunnel and tracks in the future (like Ottawa but better executed).
Or since everyone hates buses for some reason, maybe scrap the project and build over 25k units of affordable housing.
Or since everyone hates buses for some reason, maybe scrap the project and build over 25k units of affordable housing.
lemongrab
Active Member
I know the money fairy is getting ready to take flight, but is there not a risk that the money will be reluctant to flow for such an underwhelming project? Particularly if Millhouse is calling the shots?
And as a taxpayer at all three levels, I just don't find the argument to spend $5B on a bad project because we can spend a bunch more money soon to make it less bad...very compelling.
And one more big question...this is at least the 3rd significant scope reduction...so far. Why do we think it will be the last? At this point in the game it sure feels like it should be - and frankly it's hard to imagine spending more for any less - but it's not hard for me to imagine cost overruns and paying more for what amounts to like...1/6th of the original announcement?
I'd like to trust that there are 6 hours of closed-door reasons why this is the least bad of the bad options. But I don't. That has been the same argument with each previous butchering of the scope, and each time it has gotten worse. Fool me three times...
And as a taxpayer at all three levels, I just don't find the argument to spend $5B on a bad project because we can spend a bunch more money soon to make it less bad...very compelling.
And one more big question...this is at least the 3rd significant scope reduction...so far. Why do we think it will be the last? At this point in the game it sure feels like it should be - and frankly it's hard to imagine spending more for any less - but it's not hard for me to imagine cost overruns and paying more for what amounts to like...1/6th of the original announcement?
I'd like to trust that there are 6 hours of closed-door reasons why this is the least bad of the bad options. But I don't. That has been the same argument with each previous butchering of the scope, and each time it has gotten worse. Fool me three times...
JoeUrban
Active Member
Does anyone have the old map that had the LRT going up the nose creek valley before jogging back west?
I'm starting to warm up to that original idea and just have the BRT on Centre.
Edit: found it
I'm starting to warm up to that original idea and just have the BRT on Centre.
Edit: found it
O-tac
Active Member
I honestly think council should have bit the bullet on the cost overrun and at least built it to QP or Shepard. It’s going to be over budget no matter what. The Rick Bells and Jim Grays are salivating on the sidelines waiting to write their diatribes with silly names for councillors. So if that’s inevitable why piss off the people who have supported this project up until now? This is the absolute worst version that will anger everyone. Sure it needs to get built. But the math on a line terminating in freaking Ogden is terrible. As was mentioned there’s not even Park & Ride potential. The Glenmore Inn and adjacent strip mall parking lot is gonna finally be utilized to its’ max potential I guess.
Nawads
Active Member
I've been a big Green Line supporter. But this seems a bit insane. How did we get cut down to 7 stations for 6.2 billion? That's not far off 1 billion per station. (They also cut centre street out). Especially since a large portion of the line they've cut is on a train right of way to start with, you would have thought it wouldn't have been that much more to build at least a couple more stations.
outoftheice
Active Member
Millican station was one of the few stations that has been planned for Park N Ride since day 1 of Green Line so it's not really fair to say it has no Park N Ride potential. Now how many people outside the community of Lynnwood/Ogden will actually be willing to take the time to drive there and use it is another question.
I think the thing to remember is that opening day of Green Line won't be until late 2031 at the earliest and the downtown tunneling will take significantly longer to build than any surface running track in south east Calgary. If more funding is dedicated to this project between now and 2027, it is quite conceivable that a phase 2 from Millican to Douglas Glen or Shepard could open on the same day as the current phase 1 plan and I think that's what Council is banking on. It's not that onerous a cost if the Feds come to the table with a chunk of their new permanent transit fund....
I think the thing to remember is that opening day of Green Line won't be until late 2031 at the earliest and the downtown tunneling will take significantly longer to build than any surface running track in south east Calgary. If more funding is dedicated to this project between now and 2027, it is quite conceivable that a phase 2 from Millican to Douglas Glen or Shepard could open on the same day as the current phase 1 plan and I think that's what Council is banking on. It's not that onerous a cost if the Feds come to the table with a chunk of their new permanent transit fund....
ahuch
Active Member
Its fairly limited in terms of number of stalls, that's all. The plans do show a park and ride there.
kempes_78
New Member
This happens when amateurs run megaprojects. Many fingers in the pie yet no understanding of how to manage it. 2 contracts to design and build the line? $ in for the consultants and $ out for the poor tax payers. The design stages fooled everyone and nobody blinked. Poor cost, design and construction consulting.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
A couple issues here, obviously.
First, project inflation in North America needs to be solved. At current rates of escalation, this is the last LRT line to ever be built. Looking at other cities, it’s hardly the greenline it’s everything else too - costs are escalating so far beyond other inflation measures.
15 years ago, $2-2.5B bought the 19km, 15 station fully automated, fully grade separated Canada Line. Green line is 1/3 the stations, 1/2 the length, 3x the cost, 0x the automation, and I can only assume substantially easier building conditions for the majority of the route. This cost/value degradation is unsustainable.
Secondly, the reference to some sort of “grand central” station is neat but totally ridiculously. The Provincial rail plan is so far a cocktail napkin sketch. I get the benefits of positioning the spin to soften the blow, but let’s get real - alignment is to an imaginary product.
Lastly, I’d be curious in the more technical qualities of the rump. If $6B is what it take to build a great future-proofed north-south tunnel in the core with capacity and quality to forever expand service - perhaps an expensive, but worthwhile pursuit.
But spending all this money - for slow, non-automated trains, in a tunnel that doesn’t connect - Not sure here- if the costs are so ridiculous, might as well buy a light metro than an LRT.
First, project inflation in North America needs to be solved. At current rates of escalation, this is the last LRT line to ever be built. Looking at other cities, it’s hardly the greenline it’s everything else too - costs are escalating so far beyond other inflation measures.
15 years ago, $2-2.5B bought the 19km, 15 station fully automated, fully grade separated Canada Line. Green line is 1/3 the stations, 1/2 the length, 3x the cost, 0x the automation, and I can only assume substantially easier building conditions for the majority of the route. This cost/value degradation is unsustainable.
Secondly, the reference to some sort of “grand central” station is neat but totally ridiculously. The Provincial rail plan is so far a cocktail napkin sketch. I get the benefits of positioning the spin to soften the blow, but let’s get real - alignment is to an imaginary product.
Lastly, I’d be curious in the more technical qualities of the rump. If $6B is what it take to build a great future-proofed north-south tunnel in the core with capacity and quality to forever expand service - perhaps an expensive, but worthwhile pursuit.
But spending all this money - for slow, non-automated trains, in a tunnel that doesn’t connect - Not sure here- if the costs are so ridiculous, might as well buy a light metro than an LRT.
FCC1982
Active Member
So paying more to get much less. At least the downtown tunnel remains mostly in tact. But man this seems outrageously expensive for the significantly shorter length. Are there any comparable projects we can use to determine cost per km ?
I now worry the City won’t have money for any other infrastructure projects for over a decade.
I now worry the City won’t have money for any other infrastructure projects for over a decade.
FCC1982
Active Member
Good point - I agree that is what the City is counting on.
accord1999
Active Member
The closest North American project in terms of cost and cost increases I can think of is Honolulu's Skyline which also started at around $4B and continually escalated to around $12B for the full 20-mile elevated line (and is not fully funded). But at least Honolulu can claim being isolated and lacking in any experience with rail transit.
Skyline (Honolulu) - Wikipedia
jhappy77
Active Member
1. I've heard the 4 St SE station is now at surface level. Anyone know where the tunnel will begin, then?
2. Is there literally any chance that the scope could be changed further? Because the price-tag for so little actual line is eye-watering. We should be reducing the tunnel length to skip only the busiest roads (everywhere between Macleod to 4th Ave) and be using the Centre St bridge to cross the Bow. (so, probably tunnel under 1st St SW or Centre St).
2. Is there literally any chance that the scope could be changed further? Because the price-tag for so little actual line is eye-watering. We should be reducing the tunnel length to skip only the busiest roads (everywhere between Macleod to 4th Ave) and be using the Centre St bridge to cross the Bow. (so, probably tunnel under 1st St SW or Centre St).