[O-tac]

I suspect the BS isn’t finished yet. I got this flyer in the mail that is clearly political advertising with no disclosure of who is funding it. Jim Gray again? Another group of ‘concerned citizens’ fighting the Greenline (along with attacking every non conservative councillor). I submitted a complaint to Elections Alberta.

 

[O-tac]

Province recommits funding to Calgary's Green Line LRT project

"Productive discussions" between the city and province over the past few weeks have led to the decision to resume Green Line Construction.

calgary.citynews.ca

I logged in to share the same article lol! This is probably the best outcome atm. Let the next competent government not run by Danielle Smith finish the connection through DT.

 

[trtcttc]

That's the part I don't get - why did the Province commit to the on the July revised scope of Downtown to Millican?

If they weren't happy about it to the point of pulling funding, they should have been working behind closed doors at that point so the actual announcement was a revised scope being "4th to Shepard and we will revisit downtown through a rescoping exercise led by the Province".

Why was any of this drama public and all the contractual damage and risk increased? All this could have just been sorted in July without any of us knowing.

That would require competent ministers that know how to negotiate in private and recognize how detrimental increased risk would bring to a project. Unfortunately, it's clear we don't have that on this file.

 

[lemongrab]

can someone confirm if the line gonna run to shepherd and not millican? which was earlier got shortened from eau claire to millican. I think its win win, as the line will go to all the way SE from arena. While construction will continue they can figure out the north alignment too with potential of airport line!

If I've learned one thing from this saga, it's how we (royal we) come to accept unpopular compromises as acceptable outcomes fairly quickly. Running at grade on Centre St is one example, Shephard being regarded as good penetration to the SE is another (its still ~6km shy of the first good 360 degree catchment area). It is what it is, now but it wasn't an unreasonable complaint to call the original 16th-Shephard a train from nowhere to nowhere (nowhere to somewhere to nowhere perhaps is more fair)

one thing i am worry is the EAU CLAIR area, what they gonna do for that area. such a nice location , if we just left those empty condo and market there for 5-10 years?

I'd argue that over-valuing/emphasizing redevelopment of EC was probably a major contributor to the tunnel vision here. I'll never understand how knocking those condos down didn't give anyone more pause in the midst of a housing crisis. Sure, it's only 36 units, but it's contrary to the whole city-building notion of the green line. It would be one thing if this alignment was the overwhelmingly best option over all others, but this has clearly proven out to be false.

 

[Gazyyc]

How has the tunnel alignment being the best option proven to be false? I'm honestly curious here. For a project that is meant to keep the city moving for 50-100 years, how has it been shown to be the worst option?
This keeps getting thrown around but I've not seen any actual evidence showing it to be case.
Does it cost an arm and a leg, yeah it damn well does to do something right the first and only time and to not spend the next 40 years (more like 90 before it even gets a shovel in the ground red line tunnel) wishing it was done right from the get go.

The costs are offset by the long term viability of the line and usefulness of it as the city continues to grow towards 2 million.
A stub to 4th or a transfer station at city hall is a worse option by a country mile.

And a 36 unit condo, yeah it's a shame but why should it give pause? If the lines built , the housing potential along the route are enormous, especially the NC corridor.
And if this is a huge concern, the Prov could of stepped in at any point and went...excuse us but.....
They didn't, so they obviously saw the benefit of the route.

 

[Gazyyc]

And Shepard being the farthest penetration point south. The structured,staged approach for the extremities of the current legs is why we have lines that reach out as they do.
If when the red line was built, they looked and went, well it doesn't go to crowfoot/Dalhousie (whatever the furthest built up area was at the time) guess we should bin the whole thing and not bother, we wouldn't be were we are today.

You build what you can now and then plan to basically build continuously as funding is available.
And Shepard is a major area, such as Crowfoot is a natural collection point for the NW bus routes so is Shepard. The industrial areas that currently bus to Chinook, all the communities south that go to Somerset, Anderson. Shepard is a perfect spot for an interim end of the line. It's not no-where.

 

[accord1999]

How has the tunnel alignment being the best option proven to be false? I'm honestly curious here. For a project that is meant to keep the city moving for 50-100 years, how has it been shown to be the worst option?

You can't just look always at the long-term, you also have to consider the short-term and medium-term ROI. You're spending more than a generation worth of transit capital funding for a cut-down segment that doesn't fulfill any of the Green Line business case priorities (replaced overloaded buses in the north, reach deep SE communities). Imagine if the Green Line in 2015 presented a line that only went from Eau Claire to Lynnwood for even $4.5B, it would have been laughed out of the building.

And don't forget, the northern part of the tunnel was already cut (and reducing its total length by 40%) in 2020 to save money.

 

[Gazyyc]

And sometimes you do need to look long term and weigh if the long term benefits outweigh the short/medium otherwise you end up backed into a corner with no way out.
I know short term, how's it impact me now, is the way things are done here but this was a chance to actually future proof something.


A rail line, be it LRT, Metro or Heavy rail, I would argue is by definition, a long term investment. Your not building rail to get you through the next 5-10 years.

 

[HudsonA08]

I do believe an elevated option will be the path forward. And honestly I don’t think they cause the issues everyone wants to make out. Get some more great public art on it. Tie it into the +15 and do not run it just to city hall (I agree that would be a poor decision for the future).

But I also don’t agree it needs to access 17th. I worked near 17th and it is an easy walk, or even quicker bus ride to the existing lrt. I do not think they need more service when the north central has nothing and the traffic into downtown on central is insane.

Also I don’t think the beltline needs the green line to increase development. It’s doing ok.

Do we have an idea where they can make the turn into downtown though. 2nd? That is an issue with elevated. You can’t turn that thing on a dime between 2 towers.

 

[Sambo]

I logged in to share the same article lol! This is probably the best outcome atm. Let the next competent government not run by Danielle Smith finish the connection through DT.

Conservative province dude. Live with it.

 

[O-tac]

You’re such a weirdo. Do my posts trigger you? Gotta assert that narrative that we’re a solid blue province or else your foundation begins to crack? No, we aren’t a monolithic conservative province. We have elected MLA’s and MP’s and many municipal councillors who aren’t UCP or CPC politicians. Brace yourself, Nenshi might be Premier some day…

 

[O-tac]

And Shepard being the farthest penetration point south. The structured,staged approach for the extremities of the current legs is why we have lines that reach out as they do.
If when the red line was built, they looked and went, well it doesn't go to crowfoot/Dalhousie (whatever the furthest built up area was at the time) guess we should bin the whole thing and not bother, we wouldn't be were we are today.

You build what you can now and then plan to basically build continuously as funding is available.
And Shepard is a major area, such as Crowfoot is a natural collection point for the NW bus routes so is Shepard. The industrial areas that currently bus to Chinook, all the communities south that go to Somerset, Anderson. Shepard is a perfect spot for an interim end of the line. It's not no-where.

Yeah, Shepard is absolutely not the middle of nowhere. It’s the largest shopping node of the SE and the entrance to 3 or 4 communities. Not to mention the high volume of riders there will be at Ogden, Quarry Park and Douglasglen before that. Even the highfield station might surprise with workers nearby plus Riverbend and the trailerpark.

 

[lemongrab]

How has the tunnel alignment being the best option proven to be false? I'm honestly curious here. For a project that is meant to keep the city moving for 50-100 years, how has it been shown to be the worst option?
This keeps getting thrown around but I've not seen any actual evidence showing it to be case.

The tunnel couldn't get to the start line in 9 years. I didn't say it's the worst option, but it is not clearly the best. It's fair to argue that you still think it's the best, but I would hope by this point everyone can agree it is not overwhelmingly the best. IF it could be built at a reasonable cost, then maybe the pros outweigh the cons, but even then I'm not convinced it's overwhelming. From a user experience standpoint, arriving multiple levels below grade is not necessarily awesome. What are the OPEX and tradeoffs of maintaining a deep station in perpetuity? You'll probably tell me that's how big city's do it. Which is cool, but how many of those city's have ~7.5 blocks worth of surface parking lots within 500 meters of their most central station?

Does it cost an arm and a leg, yeah it damn well does to do something right the first and only time and to not spend the next 40 years (more like 90 before it even gets a shovel in the ground red line tunnel) wishing it was done right from the get go.

I don't rue 7th Ave at-grade at all. We see the alternative up in Stinkville. We've achieved 2.5x the ridership by building length instead of 'doing it right the first time'. If red line at grade is so bad, then maybe it would have been better to prioritize that tunnel? It's still not impossible. Or should the lowest ridership line with the lowest projected through-riders be the one to have the most capacity for frequency and quickest travel speed through the core?

The costs are offset by the long term viability of the line and usefulness of it as the city continues to grow towards 2 million.
A stub to 4th or a transfer station at city hall is a worse option by a country mile.

I just want the best overall system. That doesn't necessarily mean building the next project to the absolute highest standards at the expense of other priorities.

And a 36 unit condo, yeah it's a shame but why should it give pause? If the lines built , the housing potential along the route are enormous, especially the NC corridor.
And if this is a huge concern, the Prov could of stepped in at any point and went...excuse us but.....
They didn't, so they obviously saw the benefit of the route.

So we trade a small bird in the hand for some magic beans. Are we anywhere close to exhausting our existing TOD options? EC area was revitalizing just fine with or without the green line.

 

[Joborule]

I do believe an elevated option will be the path forward. And honestly I don’t think they cause the issues everyone wants to make out. Get some more great public art on it. Tie it into the +15 and do not run it just to city hall (I agree that would be a poor decision for the future).

But I also don’t agree it needs to access 17th. I worked near 17th and it is an easy walk, or even quicker bus ride to the existing lrt. I do not think they need more service when the north central has nothing and the traffic into downtown on central is insane.

Also I don’t think the beltline needs the green line to increase development. It’s doing ok.

Do we have an idea where they can make the turn into downtown though. 2nd? That is an issue with elevated. You can’t turn that thing on a dime between 2 towers.

If they want to be conscious with an appropriate NCLRT connection, and not overload City Hall as a transfer point - forcing a tunnel to be built which they are trying to avoid for the medium term - then 2 ST SW is the natural alignment for elevated. With the lay of the land currently, there should be a sufficient radius to make the turn from 10 Av to 2 St.

 

[Gazyyc]

The tunnel couldn't get to the start line in 9 years. I didn't say it's the worst option, but it is not clearly the best. It's fair to argue that you still think it's the best, but I would hope by this point everyone can agree it is not overwhelmingly the best. IF it could be built at a reasonable cost, then maybe the pros outweigh the cons, but even then I'm not convinced it's overwhelming. From a user experience standpoint, arriving multiple levels below grade is not necessarily awesome. What are the OPEX and tradeoffs of maintaining a deep station in perpetuity? You'll probably tell me that's how big city's do it. Which is cool, but how many of those city's have ~7.5 blocks worth of surface parking lots within 500 meters of their most central station?

Firstly, I wouldnt presume to tell you anything. You stated that the current alignement had proven to be false. Proven implies that there is factual evidence available to demonstrate such. I simply asked what was available, showing this. I would argue the Province pulling their funding, wasnt a demonstration of this, as they had reviewed the project multiple times, including this latest amendedment and determined if was acceptable, until they woke up one morning and decided it wasnt. If the Province releases documentation or communications with the City, showing they were questioning the reduction/tunnel section prior to the Minister pulling funding (after saying it could be taken to the bank ) I will gladly alter my viewpoint.

The arguement for OPEX and user experience arriving underground, can be applied directly to an elevated option also.
I frankly dont care how other cities do things. I live in and my concerns are with Calgary and again, I wouldnt presume to tell you anything.
Im unsure as to your point about the surface lots. Which central station are you referring to?

I don't rue 7th Ave at-grade at all. We see the alternative up in Stinkville. We've achieved 2.5x the ridership by building length instead of 'doing it right the first time'. If red line at grade is so bad, then maybe it would have been better to prioritize that tunnel? It's still not impossible. Or should the lowest ridership line with the lowest projected through-riders be the one to have the most capacity for frequency and quickest travel speed through the core?

I don't rue 7th Ave either, it as you have stated, allowed Calgary to be one of if not the example of how to build LRT to maximize ridership and coverage. My point was that even with the successes we have seen, the ultimate build out is for a tunnel for the Red Line but that wont likely be completed in anyones lifetime here. We had the chance to do it right at the onset with the Green Line, instead of having to come back in x years and try again. Be it tunnel or elevated, my concern is running the line without impacting the Red and Blue operations ( Id hate to see 3 lines shut down becuase there was an incident where the lines cross ). The fact that the review is still looking at an 'At Grade' option for the CBD is personally concerning.

I just want the best overall system. That doesn't necessarily mean building the next project to the absolute highest standards at the expense of other priorities.

Same here. I dont want something that in 10-20 years we are going to be looking at it, wondering how to fix it. It doesnt have to be the highest standards but it also cant be sub-standard. If an elevated line that addresses the concerns of the DT Business associations and doesnt just skirt the outer edges of DT, then lets go for it but I personally think its a 2nd choice design, behind a tunnel.

So we trade a small bird in the hand for some magic beans. Are we anywhere close to exhausting our existing TOD options? EC area was revitalizing just fine with or without the green line.

Your right, there are plently of TOD options still existing ( Looking at you Westbrook.....) and its a shame that these individuals are losing their homes but there was a review and developement process that came up with the alignment. I think this one we will just agree to disagree on.

End of the day, this just needs to get built and politicians just need to stop pissing in each others cornflakes trying to score points. Their elected to serve and represent their constituents and should be able to act like adults and discuss issues in private instead of the media circus the Green Line has become.

And just think, we have all this to look forward to again with the Northern line in whatever shape it eventually takes lol