darwink
Senior Member
Would it be a lot of work for bureaucrats? Yes. Would it cause a lot of political controversy? Yes. Would it be easy for politicians to order it be done? Also yes.
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
I could be wrong but I assume some kind of contract has been signed with the LRV maker and the other involved. Its typically not nothing to get out of contracts. But maybe there's a built-in out.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Agreed - should have said the perception of being "undersized". It's an incredibly effective transit line.
I am actually surprised more North American cities haven't tried to copy the Canada Line - even just at a superficial level. Every major transit project is imagined as such a one-off from others, and there seems to be a preference in early design to look at comparable cities for implementation ideas (even if they have shit transit) rather than look at the good implementation ideas themselves.
Toronto and Montreal are building new turn-key lines with small, automated trains and smaller stations that will save costs over their conventional subway networks. That's not the whole story with the Canada Line, but I read that it inspired those projects: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/montreal-skytrain-train-reseau-electrique-metropolitain
Montreal seems to be hitting the mark with the REM, but Toronto's Ontario Line looks like it will still be super expensive.
Montreal seems to be hitting the mark with the REM, but Toronto's Ontario Line looks like it will still be super expensive.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
Almost like there should be some national or at least provincial standard that's replicable across the board. Cities and provinces might be too proud to give up any authority on their projects. Green line is too far gone to do something like this so we're likely too far gone.
DougB
Active Member
Where is that tunnel? I know of the tunnel for the bike bath
MichaelS
Senior Member
I imagine what is more likely to happen if she was opposed to this project is just make it clear there will be no additional funding from the Province. Then, if/when it comes in over budget, it will be up to the Feds to cover the difference, or the City to somehow do so.
YYCguy
Active Member
If she was opposed to it, why would she designate Ric McIvor as Green Line liaison and if she was opposed to it, wouldn’t she have indicated so already? Why wait till the election to drop that bombshell? No, I think it’s still a go, but as for north and south extensions, I’m not sure when or if they will happen under her watch.
O-tac
Active Member
Because the UCP is slimy and Smith has mused about funding lrt to the airport while questioning the route chosen for the Greenline. Also her rich donors recently posted an op-ed demanding the greenline be shelved.
whatchyyc
Active Member
accord1999
Active Member
I don't think that's fair to Gray or Mckendrick. They oppose what Stage 1 of the Green Line has become and are offering their own ideas. As they say, success has many fathers, failure is an orphan but also with many people saying that they can do better.
IMO basically it boils down to how fast Calgary can get another $2+B for the Green Line. If that money is available prior to the end of Stage 1 construction than building out Stage 1 as is (but with a better river crossing option) is the best option. But if that money won't be available for decades, than it will be a financially draining white elephant and it would be better to prioritize opening-day ridership by going further SE at the expense of the river crossing and other cost cutting in the core.
O-tac
Active Member
It's been over a decade of armchair quarterbacks questioning basic things that were covered in multiple studies. The UCP has played endless games with funding and time wasting exercises. The time has come to shit or get off the pot. There are 2 TOD's (QP and Seton) almost fully built out with no lrt.
DougB
Active Member
$4K, the donation cap, does not buy much influence
DougB
Active Member
The studies have proven unable to accurately model costs, so they haven't been all that useful. The "armchair quarterbacks" have actual experience in delivering large projects, unlike the all of the transit advocates.
If this turns into a boondoogle, Calgary taxpayers will be crippled for decades, along the line of what happened in Montreal with the Big Owe.
I thought the city already had the money set aside - $52 million/year provincial health refund, or whatever it was. And then the feds matched it, and the province was going to use the carbon tax to pay for it in the NDP days, but now I guess it's coming from an oil royalties windfall.