[Social Justice]

Yes, I think based on the arguments for presented for doing the Green Line that it makes more sense and follows the previous successful LRT practices to go North first. The SE IMO is also easier to build out in smaller extensions (if you don't need to reach the Shepard for the maintenance facility right away); while to reach a useful initial terminus point in the NC (like Beddington) still requires a "mega-project:"

I think it all depends on what the city wants to achieve.

NC LRT: More expensive and achieve higher LRT ridership on opening day.

SE LRT: Cheaper and attract more first time transit users and thus increase the percent of people taking transit.

 

[darwink]

Plus the SE, at the eventual end, is an anchor, the south health campus. The NC, there is no anchor - potential for the future for the airport, but that is distant.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

Plus the SE, at the eventual end, is an anchor, the south health campus. The NC, there is no anchor - potential for the future for the airport, but that is distant.

There is land set aside somewhere in the north for a future North Health Campus, adjacent to the Green Line ROW.

 

[Cowtown]

My choice would be NC first, but I guess with maintenance sheds needed at the SE end, the SE end was always going to come first.

Yes, I think based on the arguments for presented for doing the Green Line that it makes more sense and follows the previous successful LRT practices to go North first. The SE IMO is also easier to build out in smaller extensions (if you don't need to reach the Shepard for the maintenance facility right away); while to reach a useful initial terminus point in the NC (like Beddington) still requires a "mega-project:"

Yes, I think based on the arguments for presented for doing the Green Line that it makes more sense and follows the previous successful LRT practices to go North first. The SE IMO is also easier to build out in smaller extensions (if you don't need to reach the Shepard for the maintenance facility right away); while to reach a useful initial terminus point in the NC (like Beddington) still requires a "mega-project:"

 

[accord1999]

I think it all depends on what the city wants to achieve.

NC LRT: More expensive and achieve higher LRT ridership on opening day.

SE LRT: Cheaper and attract more first time transit users and thus increase the percent of people taking transit.

I think this is the big problem, where the City previously never truly decided about which was more important (though Route Ahead had the NC LRT slightly ahead), and which they were able to avoid by thinking the Green Line could be built all at once. But in 2017, when it became apparent that $4.6B could only build most of only one line, the City Admin chose the SE without any public engagement, debate or full accounting of how they scored it. Some anger was held in check at that time based on the hope that cost savings could be found in Stage 1 to expand construction, but now that the DT is in trouble, it's obvious to many NC politicians that LRT service in the NC, especially north of Beddington Trail, will be delayed indefinitely. Unless they can force a re-examination of the entire project now.

And with the news that Calgary Transit's operating budget will be reduced by $7M (requiring 80,000 hours of service cuts), higher ridership and reduced operating costs should be an increasingly important factor. With all the efforts the City is going through to find $60M in operating budget cuts from all departments, how's it going to pay for the $40M/year Stage 1 operating costs (net of new revenue and operational savings)?

To run the mammoth project, administration calculated it would take about $40 million in annual funding, which in the current budget would make up 15 per cent of Calgary Transit's operational costs.

Nenshi said the city's investing in transit service to places in Calgary that don't currently have good service, or they have no service at all, which means the city will have to come up with new cash to pad the line – especially in the southeast.

"When we built the West LRT, it actually had very little impact on our operating budget because we replaced buses that were more expensive on a per-rider basis," said Nenshi. "The BRTs, we'll be able to absorb, it's not a problem ... council is going to have to find significant money between now and 2026 to operate the Green Line."

Green Line operational costs will take 'significant' cash: Nenshi | Metro Calgary

Although fully funded, the Green Line will take millions to operate annually

web.archive.org

 

[darwink]

There is land set aside somewhere in the north for a future North Health Campus, adjacent to the Green Line ROW.

Yeah. In 30, 40 years there will be an anchor there.

 

[accord1999]

My choice would be NC first, but I guess with maintenance sheds needed at the SE end, the SE end was always going to come first.

At the May 2017 meeting, Mayor Nenshi asks Fabiola MacIntyre, at 8:46:22 of the video, about sites in the North and she confirms that it could fit at Aurora Business Park (by 96th Ave).

Strategic Meeting of Council - May 15, 2017

pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com

So while Shepard is a better site for maintenance yard, and likely the best site for a $4.6-$5B project that stretched from North Pointe-Seton (or at least Beddington-Shepard, which was supposed to be the core of the Green Line), I think the location should be re-examined now that we know we can only build most of the SE or most of the NC given the funding that is available.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

I still find it completely f*cking bonkers that these discussions are only happening now... long after approval and funding secured. Christ almighty.

 

[Social Justice]

I still find it completely f*cking bonkers that these discussions are only happening now... long after approval and funding secured. Christ almighty.

Right!? This feels like Groundhogs day with Bill Murray. I remember having these debates/discussions 5 years ago with Suburbia on SSP.

 

[Social Justice]

I think this is the big problem, where the City previously never truly decided about which was more important (though Route Ahead had the NC LRT slightly ahead), and which they were able to avoid by thinking the Green Line could be built all at once. But in 2017, when it became apparent that $4.6B could only build most of only one line, the City Admin chose the SE without any public engagement, debate or full accounting of how they scored it. Some anger was held in check at that time based on the hope that cost savings could be found in Stage 1 to expand construction, but now that the DT is in trouble, it's obvious to many NC politicians that LRT service in the NC, especially north of Beddington Trail, will be delayed indefinitely. Unless they can force a re-examination of the entire project now.

And with the news that Calgary Transit's operating budget will be reduced by $7M (requiring 80,000 hours of service cuts), higher ridership and reduced operating costs should be an increasingly important factor. With all the efforts the City is going through to find $60M in operating budget cuts from all departments, how's it going to pay for the $40M/year Stage 1 operating costs (net of new revenue and operational savings)?

Green Line operational costs will take 'significant' cash: Nenshi | Metro Calgary

Although fully funded, the Green Line will take millions to operate annually

web.archive.org

Keep in mind Sean Chu didn't really push hard for the NC LRT to go through his ward. Whereas, Shane Keating gave the SE LRT line his full support and fought hard for it.

 

[Social Justice]

So while Shepard is a better site for maintenance yard, and likely the best site for a $4.6-$5B project that stretched from North Pointe-Seton (or at least Beddington-Shepard, which was supposed to be the core of the Green Line), I think the location should be re-examined now that we know we can only build most of the SE or most of the NC given the funding that is available.

But it won't be re-examined. If anything, only the section from 16th Ave to downtown will be re-examined.

 

[accord1999]

Keep in mind Sean Chu didn't really push hard for the NC LRT to go through his ward. Whereas, Shane Keating gave the SE LRT line his full support and fought hard for it.

Sure, but Chu shouldn't be the only one blamed. He didn't push hard for it, but the Green Line was sold as a project where substantial portions of both the NC and SE were going to be built (and where in earlier posts, I showed the City used reasons from the NC as reasons to build the Green Line). The City messaging up to May 2017 was that the core Green Line would be Beddington to Shepard:

An internal city report, obtained by Postmedia through the Freedom of Information Act, suggests the mega-project would be built over three stages. The first phase, or “core section,” would stretch 26.5 kilometres from Beddington in the north, through the downtown core and end at the planned Shepard station and maintenance facility in the south.

And that the City was still under-estimating the costs of the line (it's more like $8+ billion now from North Pointe-Seton):

Last fall, Logan told councillors construction of the entire line could cost $5.8 billion to $6.7 billion. He now says the price range will be lower but declined to offer an updated estimate until administration delivers its report in June.

Green Line LRT to be phased in, won't reach transit-starved communities for years

It’ll cost billions of dollars, include an ambitious tunnel or two, radically impact dozens of communities and — eventually — ease commutes for thousands of transi…

calgaryherald.com

But it won't be re-examined. If anything, only the section from 16th Ave to downtown will be re-examined.

There's already been calls from the Beltline Neighborhood Association, Gondek and Rempel about re-examination of the whole line; I guess we'll know how strong it is on the 29th during the meeting.

 

[O-tac]

Keep in mind Sean Chu didn't really push hard for the NC LRT to go through his ward. Whereas, Shane Keating gave the SE LRT line his full support and fought hard for it.

Shane Keating has been a fantastic ambassador for the Greenline and the driving force it seems on council. Sean Chu probably opposed it because he's Sean Chu.

 

[O-tac]

There's already been calls from the Beltline Neighborhood Association, Gondek and Rempel about re-examination of the whole line; I guess we'll know how strong it is on the 29th during the meeting.

That's precisely the problem. All these nay sayer armchair quarterbacks chiming in at the eleventh hour with completely opposite ideas from one another. Rempel wants a nose creek alignment and Woolley wants nothing less than a full fledged subway and Jim Gray wants an elevated track which Woolley vehemently opposes. We're left with a bunch of eleventh hour assholes who are tearing apart a project that had full funding from 3 levels of government that took nearly a decade to reach an agreement on. Do you see where this is going?

 

[accord1999]

That's precisely the problem.

Those are not the problem, they are symptoms (or reactions) to the real problem, which is the continuing increase in the cost of the Green Line. This was the Green Line (late 2015) that was sold to politicians and the public:

It was great; if the City could just find that money, it could eliminate overcrowded buses in the NC, improve transit service to the deep SE and for $5B, it wouldn't even greatly affect downtown thanks to a substantial tunnel from north of 16th Ave N to 10 Ave SW. And the politicians did find the money, but then the Green Line exploded in costs. If the City could have stay close to budget, or at least able to build Beddington-Shepard with the tunnel for $5B, there would be far fewer calls for rethinks and pauses.

We're left with a bunch of eleventh hour assholes who are tearing apart a project that had full funding from 3 levels of government that took nearly a decade to reach an agreement on. Do you see where this is going?

But that's the thing, it's no longer fully funded. So that's why you have these varied people having raising issues, because these compromises now being forced by the increased costs of the Green Line were never discussed in the past.