Calgary Public Transit - Discussion

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Joborule

The AECOM report for those interested. Features renders of the explored alignments (all elevated), as well a conceptual Grand Central Station.

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/1c6c...2024-12-18.pdf

Interesting when you get to the "indirect risks" section. "REDACTED".

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I thought the report was labeled confidential by the provincial government to avoid "influencing construction costs"?

It was, but everyone called them on their BS for that. There are multiple pages that are redacted. Presumably, that was the problem info.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

So CBC is reporting tonight that the province says that the city is still responsible for all cost overruns and legal risk. I think that’s it then - I can’t see the city proceeding.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...-cgy-1.7414335

This failure falls squarely at the feet on Sean Chu. Had this been originally conceived as North Central line, the value to neighbourhoods and riders would have been immediately recognized and I think proceeded with a bit more expediency.

[Looch City]

They probably redacted the page that had "and therefore we recommend the tunnel" in big bold letters.

[topfiverecords]

What is this a LRT document for ants? Anyone else's locked on 5% zoom rate?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

What is this a LRT document for ants? Anyone else's locked on 5% zoom rate?

Nope,mine is fine. Gonna blame this on user error.

[getbak]

It opens at 5% for me, but I can zoom it in to 100% fine.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Wormius

This failure falls squarely at the feet on Sean Chu. Had this been originally conceived as North Central line, the value to neighbourhoods and riders would have been immediately recognized and I think proceeded with a bit more expediency.

The need for LRT for NC Calgary has been known and enumerated for decades.But the planners have continued to ignore it except to use NC ridership to advocate for skipping BRT for the SE.



if you swapped Keating for Chu the results would have been the same because the GL would have still have picked Shepard for the maintenance yard by 2015.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

I thought the report was labeled confidential by the provincial government to avoid "influencing construction costs"?

The construction cost info is redacted.

So to answer the question of how did the UCP get the alignment it wanted it appears they just didn’t include a comparison to the below ground option wasn’t in the scope of this document as the old proposal does not seem to be mentioned anywhere.

[curves2000]

Build the line the proper way with the tunnel but trim down on some of the more cost heavy parts of the stations and simplify. Design them for reduced operating expenses going forward and keep them simple. You can always upgrade if need be but your not going to be building more tunnels in 20 years most likely.

The City and the Province need to both stop playing games and get on with this nonsense but in the meantime the need for this project does not stop. Build what is the best option and then hammer the feds and the province for more money all the time. We will have a new Conservative government in power in Ottawa most likely soon and they should be friendly to Calgary. The province can't continue to ignore the needs of the largest city for transportation forever. Do it right and be pragmatic about it.

[Locke]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ices-1.7412807

Oh man, the residents who lost their homes are distinctly unhappy. The Eau Claire residents for one, but right across from my office there used to be 3 duplexes that were leveled...now seemingly for nothing.

'Boondoggle' doesn't seem like a strong enough term.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Build the line the proper way with the tunnel but trim down on some of the more cost heavy parts of the stations and simplify. Design them for reduced operating expenses going forward and keep them simple. You can always upgrade if need be but your not going to be building more tunnels in 20 years most likely.

The City and the Province need to both stop playing games and get on with this nonsense but in the meantime the need for this project does not stop. Build what is the best option and then hammer the feds and the province for more money all the time. We will have a new Conservative government in power in Ottawa most likely soon and they should be friendly to Calgary. The province can't continue to ignore the needs of the largest city for transportation forever. Do it right and be pragmatic about it.

I have my doubts public transit will be a priority for a federal Conservative gov't.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by D as in David

I have my doubts public transit will be a priority for a federal Conservative gov't.

Me too. Which is why I don't think it's a good idea to build a project that is so dependent on future extensions to actually be useful (which is true of both the city and prov proposals)

[PepsiFree]

This is probably dumb but I don’t entirely understand why they don’t just reveal their grand master plan for the train lines and then just chip away at it station by station starting from downtown outwards. Even if they’re only completely 1-2 stations every 1-2 years, wouldn’t that be easier?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Me too. Which is why I don't think it's a good idea to build a project that is so dependent on future extensions to actually be useful (which is true of both the city and prov proposals)

It's too bad there isn't a public transit project they could build that didn't require a tunnel and where even the first stations went through a densely populated corridor that already has high transit use. Because that would be perfect.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This is probably dumb but I don’t entirely understand why they don’t just reveal their grand master plan for the train lines and then just chip away at it station by station starting from downtown outwards. Even if they’re only completely 1-2 stations every 1-2 years, wouldn’t that be easier?

Isn’t a turn-around (or whatever the term is) needed at the end of each line? I think the cost of building them, tearing them down again, rebuilding, would be costly. Not to mention, perpetual construction along Centre St., and you know how drivers get when construction slows down their commutes.

I have to give some kudos to places where when they want a new train line to be built, they just say “f it” to everybody and build it and not worry about infinite consultations with everyone and the squirrels.

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by D as in David

I have my doubts public transit will be a priority for a federal Conservative gov't.

Outside of some major infrastructure projects, Alberta conservative governments have never been very supportive of transit.

For example, Alberta Transportation no longer has anyone on staff with transit expertise. Transit is not an Alberta priority

[puffnstuff]

The City having to deal with ucp on basically anything is what I imagine its like having to deal with trump on anything. No expertise, just going on whims, flawed ideology and a desire to reward their donors.

[jwslam]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This is probably dumb but I don’t entirely understand why they don’t just reveal their grand master plan for the train lines and then just chip away at it station by station starting from downtown outwards. Even if they’re only completely 1-2 stations every 1-2 years, wouldn’t that be easier?

Well first you have to start with where to store / manage the trains... so the first station would not / cannot be downtown.

Having a train that connects only Sheppard to Quarry Park might benefit... 1000 people? of which only 10 percent would use it?

Then you have to factor in that when you don't have plans solidified, as we have seen, any new person getting involved changes things dramatically. You have someone new come in, spend time and wages learning your design, deciding they don't agree and spend more time and wages re-designing. Then you also, as you've seen, forego all the lessons learned to make new mistakes that were already previously avoided.

Further to that, trying to build in stages puts you at the threat of supply issues and other interfacing issues. For example, a manufacturer no longer makes the type of track you want in mass quantities, so you're forced to pay custom order fees.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by jwslam

Further to that, trying to build in stages puts you at the threat of supply issues and other interfacing issues. For example, a manufacturer no longer makes the type of track you want in mass quantities, so you're forced to pay custom order fees.

Is this a real issue, or a hypothetical one? I would've assumed train track is pretty standardized.