Airport Tunnel Rejected Again? **UPDATE** It's built!

[mykalberta]

Also the tunnel as is allows the possibility of a NE spur line to the airport. The undertaking if even possible would be at least 5X.

The tunnel wouldnt simply need to be the length of the new runway, but would also need to be likely 20%+ longer in case of planes skidding off the runway.

[Art Vandelay]

I wish they had built a N-S tunnel. My commute to/from Airdrie has gone from 5 minutes to 10* since they closed Barlow.




*its more like 25 (in Calgary minutes). I'd easily save 5 mins if Barlow was still open though. I hate McKnight to Northbound Deerfoot.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Also the tunnel as is allows the possibility of a NE spur line to the airport. The undertaking if even possible would be at least 5X.

The tunnel wouldnt simply need to be the length of the new runway, but would also need to be likely 20%+ longer in case of planes skidding off the runway.

If a hypothetical N/S tunnel was built, it wouldn't be built under the runway. It would have to be built under the apron, taxiways and possibly the terminal expansion. It would definitely have to go under the Airport's long long term expansion plans. To avoid going under the terminal in those long term plans, a tunnel would probably have to be 2.5 - 3 times as long as the current E/W tunnel. In the under-construction terminal/apron plan, this tunnel would have to be at minimum 33% longer than the E/W tunnel being built, but likely around 50%. Plus, I really doubt the Airport Authority would allow a public tunnel in such a location. In addition, the current 2 lane tunnel being built under the new taxiway F would have to be 6 lanes wide.

Such a tunnel would not provide the road capacity required for the developing NE area inside the ring road, and roads like CHB would have to be upgraded. The city's reports have shown that these upgrades would cost significantly more than the E/W tunnel's cost. Essentially, the E/W tunnel would have been required even if a more expensive and complicated N/S tunnel would have been built.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay

I wish they had built a N-S tunnel. My commute to/from Airdrie has gone from 5 minutes to 10* since they closed Barlow.




*its more like 25 (in Calgary minutes). I'd easily save 5 mins if Barlow was still open though. I hate McKnight to Northbound Deerfoot.

Why not use Metis Trail?

[Art Vandelay]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Why not use Metis Trail?

I take 36th st occasionally. It's pretty much the same time as Deerfoot. A bit less frustrating (not having to merge onto Deerfoot). I work on Aerial way so it's a long way around either way.

[You Need a Thneed]

Airport Terminal Master plan (from the City of Calgary Metis Trail/Airport Trail reclassification report to council today):




I think that shows pretty well why a N/S tunnel would have to be much longer than the one they are building.

[Rathji]

Honestly, I cannot figure out what anything is on that map, or where it is in relation to anything else. The only thing it tells me is that the airport will look something like Jean Chretien with his face painted like the Joker.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Honestly, I cannot figure out what anything is on that map, or where it is in relation to anything else. The only thing it tells me is that the airport will look something like Jean Chretien with his face painted like the Joker.

I'm so glad that someone else said it....I didn't want to seem like the only one who had no clue what this was showing. All I can figure out is that, based on glancing at information now and again in the media, is that this is over budget. They have to upgrade a number of other streets and the airport authority pays something like 1/3 of the cost for this. The tunnel itself might stay in the budget, but when you add in these other things its what....$200M more? Thats pretty crazy if true.

I really don't know the ins and outs, so I'm sure that someone will probably jump all over me for saying that.

[Bigtime]

Excuse the gaudy MS Paint, here is the explanation for the plan:



Note that on the existing terminal the middle pier (B/C) does NOT have the hammerhead end. That may be a future expansion possibility.

[Tyler]

What are the giant circles at the top?

[Knut]

Nipples.

Airport needs nipples

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Tyler

What are the giant circles at the top?

I think they're the intersections of Airport Trail and 19th St and Airport Trail and Barlow Trail.

I assume they're big indistinct circles as the airport's way of saying "something will need to be done with these interchanges, but that's something for the city to worry about".

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Excuse the gaudy MS Paint, here is the explanation for the plan:



Note that on the existing terminal the middle pier (B/C) does NOT have the hammerhead end. That may be a future expansion possibility.

Also, the current IFP construction doesn't have the corner to the south at the east end. There's the expansion to the B/C pier, then the extension of the IFP currently being built (maybe a couple), and then what you've marked as future.

Originally Posted by Tyler

What are the giant circles at the top?

Road interchange locations.

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm so glad that someone else said it....I didn't want to seem like the only one who had no clue what this was showing. All I can figure out is that, based on glancing at information now and again in the media, is that this is over budget. They have to upgrade a number of other streets and the airport authority pays something like 1/3 of the cost for this. The tunnel itself might stay in the budget, but when you add in these other things its what....$200M more? Thats pretty crazy if true.

I really don't know the ins and outs, so I'm sure that someone will probably jump all over me for saying that.

The tunnel is on budget, all of the other road upgrades that you hear in the media are road upgrades that would be happening at some point in the future anyway. As an example, the construction of 96th Ave between 36th Street and 60th Street would be done in the near future tunnel or no tunnel. Interchanges would be needed in the future in the area whether the tunnel went in or not. For such things, saying that the cost of those interchanges should be included as part of the tunnel cost (as some media and some Aldermen - ahem Lowe - have done) doesn't make much sense.

The city gets $20 million (I think?) towards the first phase of interchanges on Airport Trail (I think these will go ahead as soon as the MSI program is extended due to growth in the NE area), and then 50% of the cost of the future flyovers that are decades away. Without an agreement, the city would have received ZERO help from the Airport Authority on these. It's true that the first phase of interchanges will go ahead sooner then they otherwise would have.

The reclassification of Metis Trail as a arterial road instead of a skeletal road (going through council today), which was made possible by the tunnel construction, will save the city roughly $200 million dollars itself.

The $294 million project budget for the tunnel includes:

Tunnel construction - including electrical and mechanical systems, etc
Roadway Construction through tunnel to 36th Street
Project financing
Concessions to Airport Authority
Contingency
Widening Airport Trail from Deerfoot to Barlow Trail to 6 lanes

You will note that what I've bolded really has nothing to do with the actual tunnel either, and would be something that would have been required either way.

The contingency for the project was a higher percentage than normal. We won't know until the project is complete how much was used, but there is potential for money left in the contingency, which could nearly cover the cost of the phase one interchanges (together with the Airport Authority's share).

[Slava]

Well the number that I though I heard was about 300M+, and the airport authority deal says they put in $112M or something like that. When you consider this it sounds more like Hawkesworth was right when he said $500M. I mean yes, the province/feds could put more in and reduce the city amount, but it sounds like it will be pretty close to that figure.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well the number that I though I heard was about 300M+, and the airport authority deal says they put in $112M or something like that. When you consider this it sounds more like Hawkesworth was right when he said $500M. I mean yes, the province/feds could put more in and reduce the city amount, but it sounds like it will be pretty close to that figure.

The Airport Authority's money that they are putting in (mostly in the future), is part of these interchanges that would eventually go in even if the tunnel was never built.

$294 million is the project budget, and like I said, even that includes work that would have eventually been done even if there was no tunnel (widening of Airport Trail between Deerfoot and Barlow).

The only way to make the accounting read anywhere near $500 million is to include the cost of interchanges that would have been required in the future anyway, and ignore savings incurred elsewhere, where other infrastructure won't have to be upgraded because the tunnel was built.

I've said it before, the net cost of the tunnel to the city is roughly zero, give or take $50 million at the most.

[You Need a Thneed]

And a couple of minutes ago, the downgrading of Metis was made official by council. This is a result of a report that council asked the city to make on the day council approved the tunnel in the first place.

[Art Vandelay]

So, is Metis Trail going to be just one lane in each direction in that one part (near 84th Ave) forever or are they going to widen/divide it?

Wasn't there some land owner that didn't want to give up their property?

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Art Vandelay

So, is Metis Trail going to be just one lane in each direction in that one part (near 84th Ave) forever or are they going to widen/divide it?

Wasn't there some land owner that didn't want to give up their property?

Herald Article from today.

That should make the city's negotiations for the required land much easier. I wonder if we might even see the road twinned next summer. That would be nice.

[mykalberta]

Interesting read about that guy. Anyone know more about him?

[You Need a Thneed]

dp. somehow when I edited a message, it created a new one.