[Oddball]

I agree about a mix, but seeing as how the west side of town just got a C-Train line, maybe it's time to give the roads a bit of an upgrade too. I don't think this is going to create any snarl. The snarl already exists.

 

[Surrealplaces]

We are supposed to hear about the provincial budget today. I wonder where the Green Line funding will fall?

 

[Oddball]

It's an interesting question. $10.4B is the provincial deficit estimate I've heard. That's pretty eye watering even at the federal level. I'm also under the impression that this is an operational rather than capital deficit. So if we really are borrowing just to keep the lights on, I think in my heart of hearts I want them to say no for now. I'd rather see the fiscal house set in order before any grand spending commitments are made to brand new projects like the Green Line. There are a few things like the SW ring road with its time pressure and highway 63 with its toll in lives that should probably go forward regardless though. I think Calgarians, by in large, respect the idea that we need more fiscal responsibility in this province and would be prepared to wait for provincial funding so long as they have the impression that they can count on it being forethcoming later when times are a bit better. That said, if the budget contains a pile of goodies for other reagions, but particularly for Edmonton and not for Calgary, there will be plenty of grumbling.

The other thing that I think has to be kept in mind is what price assumptions are being made for oil and gas prices in this budget. Is this going to be a situation like the federal budget where the Liberals have set themselves up for an easy win later by claming the budget deficit will be $30B but assume a very conservative price estimate for oil of $25 per barrel. How reliable is this $10.4B figure really? I guess we'll wait and see.

 

[Oddball]

What's in the 2016 Budget for Calgary

"Green Line

The government has allocated no new money for the Green Line LRT in Calgary and has “no timeline” for project support. While new LRT funding is not included in the budget, the province says it is in talks with the cities and is committed to supporting public transit."

Nada, kinda as expected.

 

[Surrealplaces]

I was wondering if that was going to happen. I think we will see it start at least at the south-east end. A carbon tax might also fund the north end.

 

[Surrealplaces]

speaking of the north end, it looks like the tunnel under the Bow River is the preferred option

http://engage.calgary.ca/application/files/1414/6060/9906/CC_-_Option_D.pdf

 

[Oddball]

If the feds are willing to firm up that $1.5B commitment, say into the form of a large novelty check, fire up the tunnel boring machine and hop to it. Then start pushing outward from there.

...The other thing that I think has to be kept in mind is what price assumptions are being made for oil and gas prices in this budget. Is this going to be a situation like the federal budget where the Liberals have set themselves up for an easy win later by claming the budget deficit will be $30B but assume a very conservative price estimate for oil of $25 per barrel. How reliable is this $10.4B figure really? I guess we'll wait and see.

As an aisde related to an early conversation in this thread. The PBO says the government's estimates of the federal deficit are probably overstated by about $10B.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Funding in these times will be the big issue for sure. Sounds like the federal deficit will be much bigger than expected, and of course that's only the estimates. I suspect it will be even higher than they are predicting, once all is said and done.

 

[Oddball]

If the city really intends to push forward with the tunnel, which I hope they do, I wonder if we're going to hear revived talk of the 8th Avenue Subway as well. If they're still serious about it, allowances will have to be made in the Green Line tunnel's deisgn.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Here are a few renderings showing what the stations could look like with various options.

 

[Oddball]

All these single lanes of traffic nausiate me. It terrifies me that most of the renders they've released are mostly for options I bitterly oppose. Especially the Center and 9th surface renders. I'm a proponent of Plan D myself and the only acceptable alternatives are B & C anyway so that station shouldn't exist as a surface station in any reality worth living in. The more of it that ends up underground the better. I was heavily in favour of the Beltline station being put at 10th, but now that I see the alignments for 11th or 12th call for that section to also be tunnelled, I've switched my stance. My preference is now for 11th, it has the tunnel under MacLeod while being closer to the East Village than 12th.

That said, I'm ok with the plans that they have for single lanes of traffic on Centre Street north of 16th.

I get that 2nd isn't the most widely used road in the city and that reducing it to a single lane of traffic probably wouldn't be too detrimental to getting around downtown. What strikes me as odd though, is that I thought that the point of elevating the Green Line through downtown was to make it less obtrusive, not more so.

I've always disliked the options that involve bridging over Prince's Island. The render does open up the possibility of an appealing bridge design, but now notice that it also obscures the view of the Centre Street bridge. It would have to be quite the vision to make that worth while. The one in the render definitely wouldn't be worth it.

Finally, I kinda like the large elevated platforms used on the Red and Blue lines. The Green Line ones look like bus stops to me, but you can't argue with their cost effectiveness. They just won't look very special.

 

[Oddball]

http://globalnews.ca/news/2651630/investigative-drilling-in-calgarys-bow-river-begins-ahead-of-proposed-green-line-tunnel/

I'm sorry I missed this. It must have been quite the site to see. It's nice to seem them doing some actual physical work on the project. It might be the last thing we get on the Green Line for a bit.

 

[Cowtown]

All these single lanes of traffic nausiate me. It terrifies me that most of the renders they've released are mostly for options I bitterly oppose. Especially the Center and 9th surface renders. I'm a proponent of Plan D myself and the only acceptable alternatives are B & C anyway so that station shouldn't exist as a surface station in any reality worth living in. The more of it that ends up underground the better. I was heavily in favour of the Beltline station being put at 10th, but now that I see the alignments for 11th or 12th call for that section to also be tunnelled, I've switched my stance. My preference is now for 11th, it has the tunnel under MacLeod while being closer to the East Village than 12th.

Aren't they planning on going with the underground station for 9th ave and Centre? I could be wrong, but I thought that's the option they are leaning towards. Which is also the one I like too. The surface station at 9th would mean a surface route over centre street bridge.

 

[Oddball]

I believe you are correct, so hopefully the point is moot. Seeing the renders of the surface station did make me feel a little like my avatar though.

As far as I know, the final decision on the alignment hasn't been made but that Option D, a tunnel all the way through downtown, is the preferred choice. Both plans A and E could potentially involve a surface station on Centre & 9th N. A puts the train on the Centre Street Bridge and E would have the train on a bridge over Prince's Island. I really don't like either of those plans.

 

[Zoom]

The ring road has been in the works since the 1960s because it's a very 1960s way of planning a city. As I said, it's been shown time and time again in cities all over the world that building more highways just shuffles around and increases gridlock rather than getting rid of it. Traditional transportation planning resembles a whack-a-mole game where the construction/upgrade of one highway just leads to the need to construct/upgrade another, all the while pulling public resources away from other priorities and encouraging development on the fringes of the city rather than in the centre.

The solution is increased density in the existing city and offering as many transportation options as possible rather than just focusing on the car. I'd be quite happy seeing the land transfer agreement lapse. The history of defeated highway projects have tended to produce much better results than the history of completed highways.

For the record, I moved here from Toronto which has its own horror stories of trying to build highways around the outskirts of the city. They've never worked. Though Toronto's rapid transit system is a few decades older, it also essentially abandoned transit expansion in the 1990s (only one new station was built then as well) - despite the fact that the city was growing at an incredible rate. Both Toronto and Calgary have been relatively active in expanding their networks since the early 2000s, but they're really just playing catch up
.

Nicely put

I believe you are correct, so hopefully the point is moot. Seeing the renders of the surface station did make me feel a little like my avatar though.

As far as I know, the final decision on the alignment hasn't been made but that Option D, a tunnel all the way through downtown, is the preferred choice. Both plans A and E could potentially involve a surface station on Centre & 9th N. A puts the train on the Centre Street Bridge and E would have the train on a bridge over Prince's Island. I really don't like either of those plans.

I'm with you. Option D all the way!