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.
I guess I understand stuff like this, my thought is more… if we’d had started chipping away at this right when it was first announced years and years ago we’d be pretty far along already instead of however many dollars in with nothing to show.
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?
The UCP has yet to decide which benefactor they will reward with a multi-million dollar contract to write a conceptual report on it.
I guess I understand stuff like this, my thought is more… if we’d had started chipping away at this right when it was first announced years and years ago we’d be pretty far along already instead of however many dollars in with nothing to show.
They should have just committed to building Inglewood to the south and go full on construction years ago while they worked out how to do the downtown configuration. The savings they would have had from doing the SE 90% of the leg vs waiting till now would have alleviated some of the rise in costs of doing the downtown tunnel, and they'd be much closer to a full operation date. But...
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.
Yeah that's pretty much why emerging economies, or places like China and UAE, can get big projects done...somebody lays down the law, and things get bulldozed through regardless of consequence. It's not pretty, and often unjust to many, but it gets things done. Or you have countries like Japan, that get things built in a more efficient way, but that requires some serious cohesion and discipline.
Meanwhile we are stuck with paralysis by analysis... with endless consultations and studies, ballooning costs, and several rounds of political flip-flopping. Imagine trying to build the transcontinental railway in Canada today? I'm not even sure it would be possible. It's also why I'm skeptical of all the aggressive energy-transition talk...it takes 10-15 years to permit a new mine in this country, yet somehow we're all going to be living off of batteries soon? Good luck with that.
Obviously we need to maintain a certain set of standards and protocols, but there has to be some swing back the other way at some point, or we're just continue to be mired in this type of development purgatory.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
On a related note for public transit discussion, there's an RFP out right now for the Franklin Station Area Redevelopment, which will put in a new park 'n' ride lot, bus loop, and housing development parcel, and enhanced streetscape on the south side of Memorial Drive.
Has nothing to do with the Green Line, but hey, it's public transit related! Kewl kewl kewl
Yeah that's pretty much why emerging economies, or places like China and UAE, can get big projects done...somebody lays down the law, and things get bulldozed through regardless of consequence. It's not pretty, and often unjust to many, but it gets things done. Or you have countries like Japan, that get things built in a more efficient way, but that requires some serious cohesion and discipline.
Meanwhile we are stuck with paralysis by analysis... with endless consultations and studies, ballooning costs, and several rounds of political flip-flopping. Imagine trying to build the transcontinental railway in Canada today? I'm not even sure it would be possible. It's also why I'm skeptical of all the aggressive energy-transition talk...it takes 10-15 years to permit a new mine in this country, yet somehow we're all going to be living off of batteries soon? Good luck with that.
Obviously we need to maintain a certain set of standards and protocols, but there has to be some swing back the other way at some point, or we're just continue to be mired in this type of development purgatory.
It absolutely wouldn't be possible. There's no way. You'd never get the consultations done, and you definitely couldn't get permission to build through the mountains.
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.
The City was doing exactly what you suggest. The Province at the last minute said 'nope, no tunnels we're yanking the funding'. And without the Province at the table, the City cannot carry the financial burden independently.
The City can't do what you suggest when the Province isn't willing to partner in good faith.
Last edited by Torture; 12-19-2024 at 11:34 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Torture For This Useful Post:
Yeah that's pretty much why emerging economies, or places like China and UAE, can get big projects done...somebody lays down the law, and things get bulldozed through regardless of consequence. It's not pretty, and often unjust to many, but it gets things done. Or you have countries like Japan, that get things built in a more efficient way, but that requires some serious cohesion and discipline.
Meanwhile we are stuck with paralysis by analysis... with endless consultations and studies, ballooning costs, and several rounds of political flip-flopping. Imagine trying to build the transcontinental railway in Canada today? I'm not even sure it would be possible. It's also why I'm skeptical of all the aggressive energy-transition talk...it takes 10-15 years to permit a new mine in this country, yet somehow we're all going to be living off of batteries soon? Good luck with that.
What a lack of standards and protocols can get you:
Quote:
Many died from exhaustion, illness, or exposure, while others were killed in explosions or crushed when tunnels collapsed. Between 600-4,000 Chinese men died working on the Canadian Pacific Railway.
Obviously we need to maintain a certain set of standards and protocols, but there has to be some swing back the other way at some point, or we're just continue to be mired in this type of development purgatory.
How big of a swing is acceptable? To determine that properly, this would require analyzing each standard and protocol, no? Was there insufficient analysis in the setting of standards and protocols in the first place or are there valid reasons for the current ones?
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.
Ive said it before, Chu being anti this project - and specifically to his ward - and Keating being the main driving froce for this project is probably 90% of the reason this project was going SE first.
Remember that this was a SE BRT/tramway/something project before it even became the green line.
This is why having a not useless tit of a councilor is kind of important. It'd be fascinating to know the alternate universe version where we had a councilor pushing hard for the north waaaay back then. We probably would have at least had a north line to the core done by now.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
This is why having a not useless tit of a councilor is kind of important. It'd be fascinating to know the alternate universe version where we had a councilor pushing hard for the north waaaay back then. We probably would have at least had a north line to the core done by now.
And parts of the north still have a useless tit cause Terry Wong sure isn't pushing hard for any kind of solution for the centre street corridor. Unless it's Chinatown or his new masters in the Sonya Sharp and Dan McLean party he doesn't give a ####. Always pushing for "it needs more consultation with citizens" ex. rezoning - but on the new green line plan? Not a peep about this 'plan' needing consultation from Calgarians.
But hey, at least he's doing the right things at the right times for the right people and always doing right. Can't wait to vote against him.
Last edited by Torture; 12-19-2024 at 12:46 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Torture For This Useful Post:
This is why having a not useless tit of a councilor is kind of important. It'd be fascinating to know the alternate universe version where we had a councilor pushing hard for the north waaaay back then. We probably would have at least had a north line to the core done by now.
I doubt it; it's clear to me that the Green Line has been fixated on going to the SE from the start. That's why they only looked in the SE for the maintenance yard and picked the farthest spot. And despite 16th-64th Av being the obvious next extension, the Green Line refused to commit to it for Stage 2.
And also despite making promises about finishing the design for the NC LRT and acquiring land, none of that has ever happened. There was supposed to a preliminary design finished in 2017, then in 2019 and now they don't even bother to provide any updates. The NC LRT has been a few years away from being ready for construction since 2015.
Last edited by accord1999; 12-19-2024 at 01:28 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to accord1999 For This Useful Post:
Maybe Sean Chu needed it explained in terms that he can understand. You see, Mr. Chu, you're the choo choo train. Let's paint it navy blue with a red stripe and put your police badge on the front. And Centre Street is a 16 year old girl, "probably".
Yeah I went there. Not sorry. His admission is on-record. He's a scumbag.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Jimmy Stang For This Useful Post:
I guess I understand stuff like this, my thought is more… if we’d had started chipping away at this right when it was first announced years and years ago we’d be pretty far along already instead of however many dollars in with nothing to show.
One problem from the earliest days is that they almost thought they had too much money...at least in the sense that they wanted to keep everything within one single project umbrella to simplify dealings with the funding partners. So the most sensible approach of SE BRT immediately + NLRT ASAP was considered more complicated on the accounting side. The first project wouldn't use the whole budget, and they probably wouldn't get to the start line on the LRT part until some crazy date like 2023 or something.
Breaking down to smaller projects definitely would have been more deliverable. Another option if you really want to do trains for the SE for some reason (because ridership doesn't justify it for another 30 years maybe hopefully) would have been to stick with High Floor trains to the SE (as was the assumption until the late 2000s) and interline with the Red Line under the CPKC tracks (Option 7 in the AECOM report)...AND build the 8th Ave subway for the red line. That certainly could have been lumped into a single project, but it lacks the opportunity to make false promises for the north...
Also, the city wanted this to be a 'city building' project, not a transit project. That's how Eau Claire was chiseled in stone on the plan early on, no matter how bad the geology happens to be. Later on, the event centre has become another non-negotiable .
Locking in low-floor trains is another example - for the city building vibes. Except those benefits aren't really true when you build full grade separation (which you should if you're trying to make a good transit project because its better). But maybe someday we'll see 16th-64th built where the low floor train is actually necessary.
__________________
CP's 15th Most Annoying Poster! (who wasn't too cowardly to enter that super duper serious competition)
The Following User Says Thank You to powderjunkie For This Useful Post:
I doubt it; it's clear to me that the Green Line has been fixated on going to the SE from the start. That's why they only looked in the SE for the maintenance yard and picked the farthest spot. And despite 16th-64th Av being the obvious next extension, the Green Line refused to commit to it for Stage 2.
And also despite making promises about finishing the design for the NC LRT and acquiring land, none of that has ever happened. There was supposed to a preliminary design finished in 2017, then in 2019 and now they don't even bother to provide any updates. The NC LRT has been a few years away from being ready for construction since 2015.
I thought they had a NC plan at one point. The one that didn't have a station until 24th Ave NW and it was 8 stories under ground because they were tunneling under the Bow at that time.
Can't wait to vote against him.
