Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 05-15-2017, 10:16 AM   #61
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearFart View Post
I heard a rumor that the province is unlikely to come through on the funding which could nix this whole thing - anyone else heard this?
They will come up with funding 6 months before the next election.
Fuzz is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Old 05-15-2017, 12:42 PM   #62
accord1999
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof View Post
I'm saying that it's a big win in the context of who is representing the North Central communities politically. Sean Chu actually said early on that the North Central leg wasn't needed right now. Yes, he advocated against infrastructure in his ward. That the north central is getting the bone it is, is a win in that context.
But it's also clear that over the years, interaction with his communities has completely changed his mind and the stub of 16th Avenue would be completely unacceptable, especially to his re-election chances.

Quote:
As for the "first things that gets canceled" bit, that won't be happening. If this is the phase 1 that gets approved, that's what's getting built. The whole first phase will be built concurrently and any cost overruns won't jeopardize either end because they will be mostly built by the time they would be realized. It's not like they will build the SE portion, see how it goes, then go ahead with the line to 16th Avenue.
We'll have to see how the actual sub-phases of construction are laid out. It might be that they build out from Shepard to downtown, saving the most expensive parts for last. I hope that they release the details of Phase 1.

Quote:
Actually, the LRT has been almost entirely built in two extended building booms. The first was from 1978-1990 (the three lines mentioned above, plus an extension to Brentwood), then there was a long period of inactivity in the 90s (extensions to Crowfoot in the NW, Somerset in the south and the West Line were all planned and could have been built then). The second big building boom for the LRT was from 1999-2014. This included extensions to Fish Creek-Lacombe in 2001, Dalhousie in 2003, Somerset in 2004, McKnight-Westwinds in 2007, Crowfoot in 2009, Saddletowne in 2012, Tuscany in 2014 and the whole West line in 2012.
Given the much larger scale of the SE LRT compared to any one of the original legs plus the challenge of the tunnel, I'm fully expecting that the SE LRT will consume all the resources of this boom. The NC LRT will have to wait for the next boom, decades later and where it will still have to compete with extensions to the existing lines. After all, the NC has been skipped over every other train building boom, why not the next several?

Quote:
You can't compare the American experience with building transit to the Canadian one. Full stop. Generally, in everywhere but New York City, the conversation in American cities is closer to "should we have transit?" In Canada it is "awesome, when do we get to build this thing?"

The appetite for transit projects in Canada's big cities is huge. The West LRT went over budget, but that's barely a blip on the political radar.
I see plenty of enthusiasm for light rail in the US, especially from the city level. It's only once projects get underway and the costs starting rising and promises are scaled back that the enthusiasm wanes. Honolulu was popular at $3 billion, but not so much when it's approaching $8 billion.

I also see no reason or evidence that Canadians or Calgarians are so much superior to Americans on project management and construction that Phase 1 will be built perfectly or that Calgarians will tolerate overruns or accept continual increases in taxes to pay for it. Even Vancouverites wouldn't accept a 0.5% sales tax increase to pay for mass transit.

Last edited by accord1999; 05-15-2017 at 12:59 PM.
accord1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2017, 05:27 PM   #63
frinkprof
First Line Centre
 
frinkprof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
But it's also clear that over the years, interaction with his communities has completely changed his mind and the stub of 16th Avenue would be completely unacceptable, especially to his re-election chances.

We'll have to see how the actual sub-phases of construction are laid out. It might be that they build out from Shepard to downtown, saving the most expensive parts for last. I hope that they release the details of Phase 1.

Given the much larger scale of the SE LRT compared to any one of the original legs plus the challenge of the tunnel, I'm fully expecting that the SE LRT will consume all the resources of this boom. The NC LRT will have to wait for the next boom, decades later and where it will still have to compete with extensions to the existing lines. After all, the NC has been skipped over every other train building boom, why not the next several?

I see plenty of enthusiasm for light rail in the US, especially from the city level. It's only once projects get underway and the costs starting rising and promises are scaled back that the enthusiasm wanes. Honolulu was popular at $3 billion, but not so much when it's approaching $8 billion.

I also see no reason or evidence that Canadians or Calgarians are so much superior to Americans on project management and construction that Phase 1 will be built perfectly or that Calgarians will tolerate overruns or accept continual increases in taxes to pay for it. Even Vancouverites wouldn't accept a 0.5% sales tax increase to pay for mass transit.
I think we're quibbling over a bunch of small, diverging topics, so I'll try to be concise and not multi-quote.

- Whether or not Sean Chu has changed his mind, it's too late. There wasn't a strong voice on the North Central LRT side early on, and even if he starts fighting now, Shane Keating has been a stronger advocate for SE LRT all along and will continue to be, and Chu isn't an effective councilor on pretty much any file. I think the only thing I can say for certain about Chu is that we don't know the depth of his ineptitude.

- There won't be subphases of what they build first (Phase 1), from a construction or project management perspective. Whatever the final approved Phase 1 is will be built on multiple fronts as one larger construction project. By the time any cost overruns become realized, the whole first phase will be under construction (or nearly completed) such that you can't cut it into "subphases."

- The NC LRT was "skipped over" every other time because the first three lines were built in the 80s and were higher value routes. When the West LRT was built, the North Central line was languishing in a sort of planning hell (official plan was Nose Creek valley). It is now planned and ready to be built. All this time, the North Central catchment area was very well served by buses because Centre Street worked so well for buses up until now where it is hit its capacity threshold.

- The transit tax plebiscite in Vancouver was a pretty bad political exercise. Right before the election the BC Liberals turned around and promised to fund the Surrey LRT and the Broadway Skytrain extension which would have effectively been what the Translink tax would have funded.

- There may be some want and political will in American cities for high capacity rapid transit projects, but it's a matter of scale in comparison to Canada. No metro area in the US of comparable population to Calgary has anything close to the network Calgary does, nor the clamor to expand it. Kitchener-Waterloo and Hamilton are in the stages of building LRT. No city in the US of comparable size even has that on their radar. In terms of transit ridership in North America, Calgary is fifth behind New York, Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.
frinkprof is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to frinkprof For This Useful Post:
Old 05-16-2017, 12:15 PM   #64
Ironhorse
Franchise Player
 
Ironhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

So council voted in favour last night. So this means the plan is set in stone, pending funding?
Ironhorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 12:33 PM   #65
frinkprof
First Line Centre
 
frinkprof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironhorse View Post
So council voted in favour last night. So this means the plan is set in stone, pending funding?
It was the Transportation and Transit Standing Policy Committee, still has to go to full Council. Usually approval at Committee means it will be approved at Council, sometimes with some amendments.

Last edited by frinkprof; 05-16-2017 at 12:39 PM.
frinkprof is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to frinkprof For This Useful Post:
Old 05-16-2017, 12:42 PM   #66
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof View Post
It was the Transportation and Transit Standing Policy Committee, still has to go to full Council. Usually approval at Committee means it will be approved at Council, sometimes with some amendments.
I thought council voted in favour 12-3?
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 12:45 PM   #67
MelBridgeman
Franchise Player
 
MelBridgeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Just look at the Ward map if you really need to know why this plan stops at 16 ave OR isn't built to the north first.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie Telford The chief of staff to the prime minister of Canada
“Line up all kinds of people to write op-eds.”
MelBridgeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 12:52 PM   #68
llwhiteoutll
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by accord1999 View Post
You could build it somewhere else, possibly at Aurora Business Park by 96th Ave or even farmland that's still closer to the Calgary downtown then Shepard since the scenario described in Bunk's post has the NC line being the priority.
So to follow up on this.

There will be a second maintenance facility in the Aurora business park when the north section is completed and split the load with Shepard. Until the north leg is completed, the Shepard facility will handle all trains for the Green Line.

The SE line was promised before the NC line, that's why the phasing was implemented this way.
llwhiteoutll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 01:07 PM   #69
You Need a Thneed
Voted for Kodos
 
You Need a Thneed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frinkprof View Post
It was the Transportation and Transit Standing Policy Committee, still has to go to full Council. Usually approval at Committee means it will be approved at Council, sometimes with some amendments.
This was a full council meeting. However the belt line to inglewood/ramsay alignment is not yet finalized. That will come in June.
__________________
My LinkedIn Profile.
You Need a Thneed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 01:09 PM   #70
You Need a Thneed
Voted for Kodos
 
You Need a Thneed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll View Post
So to follow up on this.

There will be a second maintenance facility in the Aurora business park when the north section is completed and split the load with Shepard. Until the north leg is completed, the Shepard facility will handle all trains for the Green Line.

The SE line was promised before the NC line, that's why the phasing was implemented this way.
The Aurora maintenance facility will be a secondary and smaller one. There isn't enough space in Aurora for the main facility.

That is a big reason why the SE will go first, there isn't a place to put the main maintenance and storage facility in the north.

The idea is do everything now that needs to be done so that the line can be extended in the future as smaller, more manageable chunks. ($300 million at a time or so).
__________________
My LinkedIn Profile.

Last edited by You Need a Thneed; 05-16-2017 at 01:12 PM.
You Need a Thneed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 01:10 PM   #71
Locke
Franchise Player
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4X4 View Post
Why take buses off the road when you could take cars off the road?
We really need a system of tubes like they have in Futurama.
__________________
The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!

This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.

If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Locke is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Old 05-16-2017, 01:12 PM   #72
frinkprof
First Line Centre
 
frinkprof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed View Post
This was a full council meeting. However the belt line to inglewood/ramsay alignment is not yet finalized. That will come in June.
Ah yeah you're right.
frinkprof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 01:25 PM   #73
accord1999
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed View Post
The Aurora maintenance facility will be a secondary and smaller one. There isn't enough space in Aurora for the main facility.

That is a big reason why the SE will go first, there isn't a place to put the main maintenance and storage facility in the north.
From the QA between the mayor and Administration regarding whether they ever looked at putting the facility in the north, the answer suggested to me that it would fit in Aurora. They needed 70 acres (which is quite a bit bigger than any of the existing facilities) and fits but they didn't like the loss of space from the TOD. Though with an uncertain date on when the LRT will reach 96th Ave, I question how much development they can expect at Aurora.
accord1999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 03:06 PM   #74
Bill Bumface
My face is a bum!
 
Bill Bumface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke View Post
We really need a system of tubes like they have in Futurama.

We do.

It's called the "Internet".

Duh.
Bill Bumface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 08:48 PM   #75
Northendzone
Franchise Player
 
Northendzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Exp:
Default

So the estimate is $5 billion, I assume the real price will be closer to $8 billion
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
Northendzone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 09:37 PM   #76
You Need a Thneed
Voted for Kodos
 
You Need a Thneed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northendzone View Post
So the estimate is $5 billion, I assume the real price will be closer to $8 billion
I believe the city estimated this to be about 80% likely of being under the "announced" amount. The number at this point would include a healthy contingency.
__________________
My LinkedIn Profile.
You Need a Thneed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 09:47 PM   #77
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

This should be a plus/minus 30% at this stage of the design. After a year or so of detail design you should be at plus/minus 10%
GGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 10:02 PM   #78
Kjesse
Retired
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Exp:
Default

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.

Last edited by Kjesse; 05-16-2017 at 10:09 PM.
Kjesse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 10:09 PM   #79
CroFlames
Franchise Player
 
CroFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Good plan mostly. But every cm of new track should be elevated or underground IMO.
CroFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2017, 10:22 PM   #80
Violator
On Hiatus
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Calgary Alberta Canada
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delgar View Post
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.
If they build it when labour is cheap and multiple contracts can be given out over different portions then it's gonna be cheaper.
Violator is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021