[Update: Approved] First Leg of the Green Line LRT

[InglewoodFan]

Looks like Davison has a bit of a selective memory when it comes to what he voted for or not.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1270409886422011904

Something/someone is behind the never ending can kicking on this file. There seems to be a lot going on behind the scenes and playbook is being followed. My pet theory is that Davison is angling for a run at the big chair and he is positioning himself as the "I didn't spend all the money" candidate. A less transparent Farkas if you will.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by InglewoodFan

Looks like Davison has a bit of a selective memory when it comes to what he voted for or not.

Something/someone is behind the never ending can kicking on this file. There seems to be a lot going on behind the scenes and playbook is being followed. My pet theory is that Davison is angling for a run at the big chair and he is positioning himself as the "I didn't spend all the money" candidate. A less transparent Farkas if you will.

My theory is developer money to build the train to Seton rather than North of the river.

[Torture]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1270429286453792769

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Torture

My theory is developer money to build the train to Seton rather than North of the river.

There's some irony in that those same developers are probably also building in the far north of Calgary and would benefit equally from a north extension. By killing a river crossing they are essentially writing off any chance of LRT ever reaching the northern communities in this lifetime.

[Jimmy Stang]

Sean Chu has tweeted that he’s voting yes on Monday. He’s been a bit useless as a councillor and his constituents don’t seem to mind, to say the least, but voting no would’ve been a massive screw job on his ward.

So... I agree with Sean Chu. Just this once.

[tvp2003]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Sean Chu has tweeted that he’s voting yes on Monday. He’s been a bit useless as a councillor and his constituents don’t seem to mind, to say the least, but voting no would’ve been a massive screw job on his ward.

So... I agree with Sean Chu. Just this once.

I'm not a big fan of Chu but to give him credit, he has a pretty extensive writeup on his website about his position on the Green Line. It was one of his main campaign promises, so it would be hard for him to go back on it now. That said, it was easy to be "pro-Green Line" when the original plan was unveiled. I'd like for him to have more of a critical view now that things have changed: https://seanchu.ca/green-line-where-i-stand/



Interestingly, I also recently received an email from Greg Miller (the guy who lost to Chu in the last election) -- I must have been on an old email list. He is also in favor of the Green Line as well.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Torture

My theory is developer money to build the train to Seton rather than North of the river.

My theory is that several councillors are heavily invested in this:
http://www.sheparddevelopment.com/

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

There's some irony in that those same developers are probably also building in the far north of Calgary and would benefit equally from a north extension. By killing a river crossing they are essentially writing off any chance of LRT ever reaching the northern communities in this lifetime.

But even with the river crossing, it's still a substantial cost to just reach Panorama Hills. Livingston/Carrington are too new to justify having rail service (it doesn't even have real bus service) and doesn't have the pull of a major hospital like Seton does. The developers have probably calculated that the only likely chance of the Green Line reaching new communities is through a prioritization of the SE.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Sean Chu has tweeted that he’s voting yes on Monday. He’s been a bit useless as a councillor and his constituents don’t seem to mind, to say the least, but voting no would’ve been a massive screw job on his ward.

So... I agree with Sean Chu. Just this once.

So weird. Is Chu saying that he always has been advocating for the Greenline? Well, at least good that he is supporting it now.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by accord1999

But even with the river crossing, it's still a substantial cost to just reach Panorama Hills. Livingston/Carrington are too new to justify having rail service (it doesn't even have real bus service) and doesn't have the pull of a major hospital like Seton does. The developers have probably calculated that the only likely chance of the Green Line reaching new communities is through a prioritization of the SE.

Greenfield developments are gonna take a very long time to get to with the current phasing of the greenline. Since it seems pretty clear from the language of councillors and the administration that phase 2 is going to be primarily focused on north extension. And there's a long distance to go until they get to an area that's greenfield development ready.

Even if funding for phase 2 came in on Monday, it'll probably be at best an extension to Beddington and McKenzie Towne. But the greenline has the advantage of being a TOD friendly line; especially along the northern leg. But it is costlier than undeveloped land - both in money and time. Calgary's development market isn't heavily influenced to focus on infill, and redevelopment projects still. But perhaps financial incentives can be put in place to make it more attractive.

[Torture]

Telephone poll conducted over the weekend.

• 67.8% of Calgarians support building the Green Line based on the estimate that the project will create 20,000 new jobs.
• 70.5% of Calgarians support building the Green Line while the project is supported by a $3 Billion dollar commitment from the Federal and Provincial governments.
• 63.5% of Calgarians support building the Green Line to North Central and Southeast communities, as planned by the City.

https://www.projectcalgary.org/poll_...rts_green_line

Council vote is tomorrow.

[Weitz]

20,000 new jobs?!?!?

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Weitz

20,000 new jobs?!?!?

Yep, they've been using that figure for awhile.

[Vedder]

At first glance that seems like a flawed poll due to the framing of the questions.

Would be interesting to see results if questions were asked based on cost risk, property tax increases, etc.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Torture

Yep, they've been using that figure for awhile.

Even though it can't possibly be true?

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Weitz

20,000 new jobs?!?!?

Yeah that sounds like a lot of BS to me. Maybe it will result 20000 new jobs along the green line but result in 20000 lost jobs elsewhere in the city.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Vedder

At first glance that seems like a flawed poll due to the framing of the questions.

Would be interesting to see results if questions were asked based on cost risk, property tax increases, etc.

Because if you frame it about cost, risk, and property tax increases that wouldn't be a flawed poll due to the framing of the questions...

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Fire

Yeah that sounds like a lot of BS to me. Maybe it will result 20000 new jobs along the green line but result in 20000 lost jobs elsewhere in the city.

I think the idea is construction (ie. from 2021 - 2027). Not moving jobs around the city that would be lost elsewhere.

Edit:

[Fuzz]

Jeez, the pyramids were built with fewer people than that. Under 7000.


https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-histo...-great-pyramid

[Vedder]

Originally Posted by Torture

Because if you frame it about cost, risk, and property tax increases it wouldn't influence anybody...

Yes, that’s the point. People could be answering the original poll without appropriate context. Changing the framing changes the answer, and therefore these numbers aren’t that informative.