05-16-2017, 11:15 PM
|
#81
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
Good plan mostly. But every cm of new track should be elevated or underground IMO.
|
In some areas yes. For low-floor trains traveling next to industrial properties, landfills and over low-volume roads in deep SE Calgary? Totally unnecessary.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to frinkprof For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-16-2017, 11:19 PM
|
#82
|
Voted for Kodos
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof
In some areas yes. For low-floor trains traveling next to industrial properties, landfills and over low-volume roads in deep SE Calgary? Totally unnecessary.
|
This phase 1 portion doesn't have any level crossings with any major roads. The cost increase to eliminate the remains ones is totally unnecessary.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 06:20 AM
|
#83
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violator
If they build it when labour is cheap and multiple contracts can be given out over different portions then it's gonna be cheaper.
|
I hope that is the case. the fact that the shovels don't hit the ground until 2020 doesn't fill me with optimism on that front though. By that point I sure hope that the unemployment rate in the city has declined and we're on the road to recovery.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 07:36 AM
|
#84
|
Franchise Player
|
I want to go back in time and smack whoever allowed so many at-grade crossings with the West LRT. I know there was endless debate of alignment and costs of trenching, but 26th Street and along Shagaugusta should've been a no brainer to continue the trenching all the way from Westbrook.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 07:58 AM
|
#85
|
Franchise Player
|
lol at under budget - when was the last time a government project ever came in under budget.
they government would estimate $10 to get coffee and donuts for a staff meeting and the bill would likely be somewhere are $72.50 and they say say, opps, our budget was off and everyone would move on, no questions asked, no real explaination given.
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 08:21 AM
|
#86
|
Voted for Kodos
|
Most government projects have come in under budget.
West LRT came in over budget, yes, but what are other ones?
The West LRT, BTW, wasn't nearly as over budget as people think, the cost was misadvertised to many to start. The misadvertising caused Council to spend the contingency on the 45th Street grade separation, which it shouldn't have.
There was the construction contact cost, and there was the total project cost, which included the purchase of LRVs, land purchases, etc.
This number we are talking about for the Green Line includes all of those things.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 08:33 AM
|
#87
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof
In some areas yes. For low-floor trains traveling next to industrial properties, landfills and over low-volume roads in deep SE Calgary? Totally unnecessary.
|
I just don't think light rail should intersect ANY road. There is no reason Calgary shouldn't/couldn't have light rail like Vancouver where it's completely above ground outside of the core, and completely underground in the core.
Is it really inconceivable that Calgary reaches a population of 3 million?
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 10:01 AM
|
#88
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Somewhere down the crazy river.
|
I didn't see this, but what was the total cost of the line if it was going to be built in its entirety?
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 10:20 AM
|
#89
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Deep South
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
I just don't think light rail should intersect ANY road. There is no reason Calgary shouldn't/couldn't have light rail like Vancouver where it's completely above ground outside of the core, and completely underground in the core.
Is it really inconceivable that Calgary reaches a population of 3 million?
|
But there is a reason, and that reason is cost.
__________________
Much like a sports ticker, you may feel obligated to read this
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 10:28 AM
|
#90
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkajz44
But there is a reason, and that reason is cost.
|
May as well not build anything then right? Cost.
Every major city does elevated or below grade. Is Calgary one of the poorest cities in North America? That would be need to me.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-17-2017, 10:51 AM
|
#91
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northendzone
lol at under budget - when was the last time a government project ever came in under budget.
they government would estimate $10 to get coffee and donuts for a staff meeting and the bill would likely be somewhere are $72.50 and they say say, opps, our budget was off and everyone would move on, no questions asked, no real explaination given.
|
The downtown cycle track came in $1.65M (~23%) under budget.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...nent-1.3904361
Sent from my SM-G925W8 using Tapatalk
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-17-2017, 11:46 AM
|
#92
|
My face is a bum!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
May as well not build anything then right? Cost.
Every major city does elevated or below grade. Is Calgary one of the poorest cities in North America? That would be need to me.
|
Calgary has one of the most extensive and heavily used systems compared to its population.
This has largely been attributed to keeping an eye toward.... cost.
There are pros and cons, and I don't disagree that future proofing can sometimes be significantly cheaper than retrofitting, but keeping an eye to costs has advantages as well.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 12:10 PM
|
#93
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Deep South
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
May as well not build anything then right? Cost.
Every major city does elevated or below grade. Is Calgary one of the poorest cities in North America? That would be need to me.
|
I was curious about this, so I took a look online. Here is a listing of all the heavy rail/rapid transit systems in North America (rapid transit defined as transit with exclusive right-of-way and are grade separated):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_by_ridership
The one thing I notice about this list? All the cities are much more "major" than Calgary. We are talking about populations mostly between 3 and 10 million, as opposed to our 1.2 million here. We cannot compare systems that serve 3 to 10 times as many people as ours, most of which have been developing for decades longer than us.
__________________
Much like a sports ticker, you may feel obligated to read this
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 12:17 PM
|
#94
|
Voted for Kodos
|
The Phase 1 plan has level crossings at:
8th Street (maybe)
Milligan Road SE
Shepard Road SE (less traffic on it after new Glenmore Ogden interchange complete)
Driveway by Quarry Park Blvd
107th Ave SE
29th Street SE
None of those is going to cause any traffic issues now or at any point in the future.
Getting rid of those for hundreds of millions of dollars is certainly a waste of money.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 12:25 PM
|
#95
|
Voted for Kodos
|
The phase 1 plan is grade separated from:
Everything downtown
12th Street SE
11th Street SE
26th Ave SE
Blackfoot Trail
Highfield Blvd
46th Ave / 15th Street
Deerfoot Trail
Ogden Road
69th Ave SE
Glenmore Trail
114th Ave SE
Barlow Trail SE
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 12:29 PM
|
#96
|
Franchise Player
|
I'm sure people in Vancouver certainly consider the sky train a waste of money and wish they saved a few hundred million by having it at grade.
According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CTrain...APTA-Q1-2015-3 the daily ridership in Calgary is 330k daily passengers, whereas ridership in Vancouver is 390k daily. With a massive expansion upcoming, you could realistically expect Calgary's daily ridership to match or surpass Vancouver's.
Why sell Calgary short and build the expansion at grade? Didn't they learn their lesson from the disaster that is 36th street NE and Macleod trail in the south? Cars belong on the surface, light rail belongs below or above.
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 12:35 PM
|
#97
|
Voted for Kodos
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
I'm sure people in Vancouver certainly consider the sky train a waste of money and wish they saved a few hundred million by having it at grade.
According to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CTrain...APTA-Q1-2015-3 the daily ridership in Calgary is 330k daily passengers, whereas ridership in Vancouver is 390k daily. With a massive expansion upcoming, you could realistically expect Calgary's daily ridership to match or surpass Vancouver's.
Why sell Calgary short and build the expansion at grade? Didn't they learn their lesson from the disaster that is 36th street NE and Macleod trail in the south? Cars belong on the surface, light rail belongs below or above.
|
Look at my list of level crossings above - which of those intersections would you spend $50 million or more to have grade separated?
If you want to elevate or bury the whole thing, then double the price of the project.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to You Need a Thneed For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-17-2017, 12:56 PM
|
#98
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delgar
The West LRT expansion was hugely off budget. This one will be too. It doesn't matter what it "should" cost or how close the city "should" be as the project starts, the fact is, they're going to go way over budget. Anyone suggesting otherwise hasn't watched the history of public projects in Calgary.
Here's one article, about the West LRT.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...ning-to-others
EDIT: And GGG, "Plus/Minus 30%" or "10%"? That's ridiculous. There is no possible way they come under budget. Its always more.
|
I would disagree. If you fix scope early and kick the client off of the project day one and actually build it to specs as specified today you have an equally good chance of being below or over budget. The problem is everyone working on the project will slowly add things that they feel add value and slowly the costs go up.
This projects over runs will be on station design and increasing the underground scopes and traffic separation scopes. It's rare that these over runs aren't self inflicted.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-17-2017, 01:01 PM
|
#99
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
|
I did not know this, and I guess I stand corrected, although I feel that there are likely way more govermeent related projects that come in over budget than under budget, and in some ways this one has gotten off to a rocky start as we are being delivered much less than the original idea for the same price as the original idea.
as I recall (without looking it up) the south hospital was built for twice or more of the original estimate (although I will conceded that the construction happened during the boom times which likely had a massive effect on the final price)
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
|
|
|
05-17-2017, 01:21 PM
|
#100
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed
Look at my list of level crossings above - which of those intersections would you spend $50 million or more to have grade separated?
If you want to elevate or bury the whole thing, then double the price of the project.
|
All of them.
In Vancouver it's not even a discussion about which roads to intersect or not. It's all above grade, no question, and no one regrets spending the extra money to have it grade separated.
If this expansion is intended to increase ridership, then it makes sense to do it right the first time.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:05 AM.
|
|