UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Yes the recommendation but not the final decision.
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
Oddball
Senior Member
Hey UW, did you ever hear if the recommendation went out? I tried the City's Greenline website today, but found it more inscrutable than usual. I didn't find anything in Google News searches either.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
They won't be making the final decision on the recommendation until the spring. The full green line alignment recommendation then gets submitted in June.
Oddball
Senior Member
Bummer. I'll have to get back to praying that they've recommended the tunnel option. Thanks.
Always_Biking
Senior Member
Waiting til June it is.
Oddball
Senior Member
There was a pretty major Herald article this morning. It sounds as though the city is moving towards building the Green line in phases rather than as a one shot. The first and most major phase would run the stretch from Beddington to Shepard Road. Here's a map:
The big losers appear to be the people in the South East. Most of the stations to be built later are in their neck of the woods.
The main driver for this is funding. The province has still only committed a small amount of the requested $1.5B. And the cost estimates for the line as a whole are probably above the $4.5B according to the article. The new estimate is $5.8B to $6.7B.
Additionally and of grater concern, the potential for higher cost could mean less stations through the central portion of the line. Eau Claire and Centre Street (in he beltline) could be delayed and 9th ave and 16th ave North of the river could be merged into a single station.
The article is also pushing ahead the start date to mid-2019. I believe Fall 2018 was put forward sometime last year.
In all it's disappointing, but not surprising. The west leg of the Blue Line came it at nearly $2B for a little over 8km of track. I know that involved a large elevated portion and a good deal of tunneling, but nowhere near as much as the Green Line calls for, and then add in the fact that the Green line is 5 to 6 times as long, there's no way they were going to keep it at two and a half times the cost. I'm happy with the decision to phase the construction, becuase that means getting more sooner, but I really hope they don't leave too much of the downtown portion unbuilt. Skipping the lone Beltine station in the first phase seems like an utterly bizarre decision to me.
The big losers appear to be the people in the South East. Most of the stations to be built later are in their neck of the woods.
The main driver for this is funding. The province has still only committed a small amount of the requested $1.5B. And the cost estimates for the line as a whole are probably above the $4.5B according to the article. The new estimate is $5.8B to $6.7B.
Additionally and of grater concern, the potential for higher cost could mean less stations through the central portion of the line. Eau Claire and Centre Street (in he beltline) could be delayed and 9th ave and 16th ave North of the river could be merged into a single station.
The article is also pushing ahead the start date to mid-2019. I believe Fall 2018 was put forward sometime last year.
In all it's disappointing, but not surprising. The west leg of the Blue Line came it at nearly $2B for a little over 8km of track. I know that involved a large elevated portion and a good deal of tunneling, but nowhere near as much as the Green Line calls for, and then add in the fact that the Green line is 5 to 6 times as long, there's no way they were going to keep it at two and a half times the cost. I'm happy with the decision to phase the construction, becuase that means getting more sooner, but I really hope they don't leave too much of the downtown portion unbuilt. Skipping the lone Beltine station in the first phase seems like an utterly bizarre decision to me.
Attachments
MichaelS
Senior Member
I wonder how much debate there will be over the phasing locations (what is in the first phase, and what is in following phases). I understand that the Shepard station is pretty much set, as that is where the car's maintenance facility is planned. While it may seem bizarre to skip a Beltline station in this first phase, I bet there will be huge howls from SE residents who say it is bizarre to leave the McKenzie Town station out of the first phase.
Oddball
Senior Member
If I lived in the South East I'd be livid at the announcement. But of course, as some one who communtes downtown, I'd never live in the South East to begin with. Cheaper housing costs isn't enough to lure me into that sub-urban hell hole.
I read the part about the maintenance facility being in Shepard, so that makes sense. I think I'd rather see the city push out and finish one end (99% chance of that being the North) rather than do bit by bit in one direction. It'll piss of the people in the south, but they should probably look at moving to Panorama then anyway.
I read the part about the maintenance facility being in Shepard, so that makes sense. I think I'd rather see the city push out and finish one end (99% chance of that being the North) rather than do bit by bit in one direction. It'll piss of the people in the south, but they should probably look at moving to Panorama then anyway.
googspecial
Active Member
I believe they are saying to Shepard Station - not Shepard Road - which would add 3 more stations to the South end of your phase map. This station is immediately north of the 130 AVE Box Mall, where they will be building the maintenance centre and a park & ride.
If they are to ax the Eau Claire & Centre ST stations - that would not only leave only 1 station Downtown, but also in the employment catchment of the line as there are also offices south of the tracks that would benefit from a Centre ST station. Notwithstanding the many people who live adjacent to those 2 stations.... I almost refuse to believe that they will do that...
That being said - I do think that phasing the project is the best way forward, and I also somewhat expected this to be the case, with almost the exact same scope. The only difference I would make would be to add even 1 more station South to MacKenzie Towne to service that area. The Prestwick station could be a potential add-in for future phases.
Oddball
Senior Member
Ah yeah good call. I misunderstood what they meant by Shepard.
Yeah, that seemed like a bonkers idea to me too. I think it's just an idea that's been presented to council and it's probably "a la carte" if they decide to do something like that. So they could say postpone just one of the the proposed stations if they saw fit.
Given how I made a mistake, I've had to reformulate my opinion. I agree that going as far as MacKenzie town makes sense.
Yeah, that seemed like a bonkers idea to me too. I think it's just an idea that's been presented to council and it's probably "a la carte" if they decide to do something like that. So they could say postpone just one of the the proposed stations if they saw fit.
Given how I made a mistake, I've had to reformulate my opinion. I agree that going as far as MacKenzie town makes sense.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Skipping Eau Claire & Beltline stations would make very little sense, if ridership and providing access is a goal. Eau Claire is a major destination in it's own right; not just the mall, but the hotels nearby, condos, major events in the plaza & Prince's Island Park, Chinatown etc. If the goal is to provide transit to places people go/live/work, that would be a weird one to skip. Beltline is similar. Obviously the highest density area of the city for population, but also a huge number of offices and destinations: nearly all of Calgary's nightlife, Stampede Park, etc.
A big problem with both the N & SE sections of this project is the lack of any real concentration of employment / destinations / population which is what makes transit effective. Inglewood is a great destination, but small in the grand scheme of things and limited in the ability to redevelop to high density. Quarry Park is developing into a node (but with limited transit appeal thanks to huge surface parking lots and lack of pedestrian-focused design) as well as Seton / South Hospital (unfortunately built as far on the edge as possible). The new neighbourhoods south of 22x are decently dense and transit supportive, however like the hospital, are very far away. Apart from Inglewood, there are no concentrations that would be services in the SE for the first proposed phase.
The Centre Street corridor does quite a bit better in current density & ability to redevelop, but again lacks any real large destinations along the route. The "town square" cluster in Panorama Hills could be considered one, however it is unfortunately completely car-oriented, limited transit appeal. At least it acts as a land bank for redevelopment. Again, the first phase doesn't get here either.
So, it sounds like the Greenline is stuck in a hard place: It needs to provide access to destinations of concentration, but those are clustered in the core and are the most expensive to service. The SE line seems to have a pretty weak ridership potential unless it is anchored by the South Hospital, which is won't be in the first phase as proposed. The Centre Street line is better for current density and redevelopment, but lacks any real large destinations of concentration. Meanwhile, the cycle of car-dependence marches forward, with new interchanges, car-oriented neighbourhoods and trip patterns being further developed and entrenched while the Greenline builds out over 25 years.
This seems like a case of funding priorities (i.e. a complete paradigm shift to never spend money on interchanges for 25 years so all road capital can go to the LRT) or accessing additional revenue sources. The SE line just doesn't seem to work without full build out.
A big problem with both the N & SE sections of this project is the lack of any real concentration of employment / destinations / population which is what makes transit effective. Inglewood is a great destination, but small in the grand scheme of things and limited in the ability to redevelop to high density. Quarry Park is developing into a node (but with limited transit appeal thanks to huge surface parking lots and lack of pedestrian-focused design) as well as Seton / South Hospital (unfortunately built as far on the edge as possible). The new neighbourhoods south of 22x are decently dense and transit supportive, however like the hospital, are very far away. Apart from Inglewood, there are no concentrations that would be services in the SE for the first proposed phase.
The Centre Street corridor does quite a bit better in current density & ability to redevelop, but again lacks any real large destinations along the route. The "town square" cluster in Panorama Hills could be considered one, however it is unfortunately completely car-oriented, limited transit appeal. At least it acts as a land bank for redevelopment. Again, the first phase doesn't get here either.
So, it sounds like the Greenline is stuck in a hard place: It needs to provide access to destinations of concentration, but those are clustered in the core and are the most expensive to service. The SE line seems to have a pretty weak ridership potential unless it is anchored by the South Hospital, which is won't be in the first phase as proposed. The Centre Street line is better for current density and redevelopment, but lacks any real large destinations of concentration. Meanwhile, the cycle of car-dependence marches forward, with new interchanges, car-oriented neighbourhoods and trip patterns being further developed and entrenched while the Greenline builds out over 25 years.
This seems like a case of funding priorities (i.e. a complete paradigm shift to never spend money on interchanges for 25 years so all road capital can go to the LRT) or accessing additional revenue sources. The SE line just doesn't seem to work without full build out.
I'm not too surprised they are phasing it in. Residents won't happy, but like Shane Keating said in the article, other lines have been phased in. It's nothing new. I just hope they don't skip the Beltline and Eau Claire station, it's one thing not to extend it, but another to skip areas in the middle of the line.
I'm with you guys on Mckenzie Towne. It's not that much further south and catches a lot of population. I would think getting past the ring road would add significant cost.
I'm with you guys on Mckenzie Towne. It's not that much further south and catches a lot of population. I would think getting past the ring road would add significant cost.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
I don't mind them phasing it. The homer in me is a little sad that we won't be the first city in the country with a rapid transit network over 100 km long for a little longer, but whatever 
Well written blog article on the Green Line.
http://www.spuryyc.org/the-green-line-through-the-lens-of-density/
http://www.spuryyc.org/the-green-line-through-the-lens-of-density/
