[accord1999]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I feel like I could rant forever here...what am I missing? This seems like such an obvious boondoggle at this point. Please convince me I'm wrong.

I don't think you're wrong at all (but I've felt this way ever since they decided to go SE instead of N when they realized they didn't have enough money to do both) but I think at this point the City having spent so much time and effort is "pot-committed" to building LRT even if financially it no longer makes much sense. I'd expect that in 3-4 years time, when the budget further increases and they'll still continue building it even if the Bow River crossing is canceled.

It seems to be a thing with rail and cities, just look at Honolulu. Their new rail line has gone from <$5B to >$12B but they're still plugging along even though they still need to find at least $3B to reach the downtown.

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

what I can't understand is why every single other thing has been on the table to get cut/reconsidered except for the actual mode of travel (ie. train vs. bus)???

Originally Posted by GGG

Having ridden the bus ways with dedicated row they are awesome. I don’t understand the Opex vs Capex decision around bus vs train and how it makes sense over the long term. Build a bus way, the whole way, go North first as you don’t need the service depot to be attached to the line.

Back in 2020 when the changes to the core were finalized, they did a release a report looking at "alternatives" including BRT only. But it really was half-hearted at best and (IMO) wasn't a bonafide attempt to see if there were better options. Instead it was where they started with the new alignment as the best option and worked their way backwards to justify it.





https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....umentId=131775

And the primary criticisms about the BRT option, how it would not be able to meet demand in the longer term and require so many buses are an even bigger issue for the current Stage 1 since it has no short-term, middle-term or long-term solution to Centre Street N since it has spent so much money going through downtown and going in the wrong direction to Shepard. The writer of the report doesn't appear to realize just how little North the Green Line goes and how expensive it is to go further.

I think they also cheat on the operating costs; they include the passenger trips from buses going on the Centre Street N corridor and the 302 into the ridership of Stage 1 but don't include their operating costs. The BRT option looks like it gets charged with every bus that runs on Centre Street N and massively expanded bus service in the SE

Option B1 is the most affordable option and would have the longest length, but compared to Option A2, it is not forecast to meet the projected demand beyond the medium-term time horizon. Upgrading Option B1 to LRT in the future to resolve this demand issue is also challenging and costly and does not provide the best value.

While from an environmental perspective, B1 performs better, there is significant risk that due to the number of buses required to meet the required demand, it would present significant operational challenges and risk compared to Option A2.

Given the very frequent BRT headways that would be required to meet the forecast demand, this would have significant and potentially unresolvable operational challenges. These challenges would include significant
pressure on road space downtown, potentially to the detriment of private vehicle movements as well as the ability to maintain transit vehicle spacing, headways and reliability.