Quote:
Originally Posted by temple5
I always preferred the option of the Ctrain coming out of the side of the hill and going on a bridge over the river and then tunneling through downtown, but thats just me, I get it, for some reason the city doesnt want to build another bridge over the Bow river (unless of course its a pedestrian only bridge).
I love the, whats another $400m argument - reminds me of my friends arguments, debt is free - who cares about debit. Other than spending other peoples money, does anyone say that in real life on a regular basis with anything that costs over $1000? Who buys anything for 25% more for functionality. People will normally pay more for it simply because of asthetics, marketing, brand name, status symbol etc. I just hope that Ccc didnt approve this option because the city has a serious NYC envy problem in Calgary.
Its to bad we dont have any good councilors on the right side of the spectrum in Calgary to provide at least a resemblance of opposition or reasonable alternative. Anyone who claims to be seem to be in the developers pocket or they are to involved with other special interest groups.
Instead of the "its only 400m more" argument. Why isnt the argument - what could we do for CT with the 400M if we didnt spend it here. How much would tunneling the red line under downtown be, could this cover half that cost?. What about re-designing some stations in the NE or Chinook to limit traffic interactions and improve system reliability. Or how about fast tracking an express bus line down 17th Ave SE to downtown (where the green line should be going instead of to the SE where it will be a boat anchor on system costs for decades to come before any meaningful redevelopment occurs).
|
It's not it's only 400 million more. The city over 30 years will have 630 million increase in property taxes as a result of this choice. This 400 million is being spent so that you don't recreate the problem that was the NE line.
If you are spending 4.5 billion on a project and for 10% more you get significantly more functionality it is the right decision. And the cost to do it later when it becomes necessary is likely aournd the 2 billion dollar cost of the tunnel now. So you can save 400 million now and have a 2 billion liability in the future or you can spend the 400 million now.
I'd agree that adding a 17th Ave BRT makes a lot of sense. Burying the 7th Ave line while improving the experience is quite an expensive option in terms of $ per additional capacity.