CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Can you elaborate? Truly curious as an outsider.
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
CBBarnett
Senior Member
I do wonder what a private sector major bus garage would cost, if there is such a comparable thing that would have a similar scale, fleet size and operational requirements.
Now I am all interested in this niche world of bus garage costs and design, here's another massively expensive one in Vancouver for 300 busses in a multi-storey garage configuration. No cheap land in Vancouver, plus got slammed with inflation and new seismic code requirements. $848M!
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-marpole-transit-centre-bus-depot-vancouver-cost
DiscoStu
Active Member
I've tried to submit a couple of proposals for government contracts before, and just the process of submission alone made my brain hurt. It was needlessly byzantine, and this was for a relatively simple graphic design project... I can't even imagine what it's like for something like a building.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
What we're realizing is buckle up for whatever comes after the Vic park bus barns. How expensive is the green line train storage in Shepard?
DiscoStu
Active Member
I don't know about you guys, but I'm starting to think the Vic park barns are just fine.
Last edited:
FCC1982
Active Member
A new bus barns is not something I want to spend close to $1B on but I would like to free-up the site of the current one.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
For bus infrastructure you should be able to get three levels of government paying for it. That should help. I was thinking if a couple of the suburban bus barns are built in the right place you could include storage/maintenance for the airport and regional railcars too. So maybe you can get the province to support more than 33.3% of the project?
darwink
Senior Member
Their labour costs are much lower since they're poorer .
darwink
Senior Member
Would we rather use our '3 levels' application on 1 super nice thing, , or 1 meh thing and a second thing that costs as much as the meh thing. Matching funds are not unlimited.
1875
Senior Member
nice infrastructure for a have not province
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Ideally you'd have one in the north and one in the south. Both are the exact same design so you're not having to duplicate the design work, only the construction, which should improve efficiency. I'm single-handedly solving our nation's productivity issue.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
I just want transit to decide what's best for them. Stay or move - but give them the funding and decision that what maximizes their service efficiency and operations potential so we can get quality, high frequent service easier.
What I am skeptical is "transit" projects that aren't really for transit - they are driven by vague increase "development potential" arguments. These always sound great, but if there's no concrete plan for immediate development they really aren't anything, often they are just vapour-ware nonsense in practice - but with a very real and immediate impact to transit service.
We have seas of development opportunities, many of which never happened. The sentence always goes: " ____ is such a great location with great development potential if only we ______."
Try out the sentence for Victoria Park:
"Victoria Park is such a great location with great development potential if only we build a new arena, build a new convention centre, expand stampede park, tear down an existing neighbourhood, build a new underpass, expand the convention centre, build another new arena, extend 17th Avenue and add an at-grade LRT crossing, plan to build another underpass, and finally move a bus garage."
I am not saying that it won't happen or there isn't benefit - I am just saying transit should make the call that's best for them. The track record of boosters relying on development potential arguments is very poor in the immediate area so shouldn't be the leading reason.
lemongrab
Active Member
And even after all that it's still right beside freight tracks and in a flood plain!
outoftheice
Active Member
Will be curious to see if there is a list of projects that accompany this plan. Spending up to $250 million a year on rec facilities for the next 25 years seems like it would build a crap ton of new things. How much was the Y in Seton?
calgaryherald.com
What is GamePLAN? Council to consider 25-year spending plan to fund rec facilities
When it comes to recreational facilities, should the City of Calgary be making waves, going under, or staying afloat?
calgaryherald.com
IceCreamMan
Active Member
100%. I'll add to this; I have submitted on many government contracts, and a large chunk of them are pervasively set up in a way that in order to win them, you need the experience; but in order to get that experience, you need to win them. This creates a limited ecosystem where only few firms that have that experience are able to actually win them. A good example of this is with fire stations in Calgary; only a few designers have the resume for them, and therefore those studios win all that specific work. I can tell you straight up that if given the chance, other firms and startups can competitively design these if given the chance, and they try - but they usually never make it deep into the bidding process. Governments have backed themselves into a corner with this type of bidding structure, and it limits competition. I will say there are cases that do buck that trend, but they are very rare and few/far between.