West LRT | 7 Stations | 8.0 KM | In Service

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I'm wondering why the North LRT line needs to be on (under) Centre St in the downtown core?

If the line was built under 4th St west, it still hits most of the CBD, plus Prince's Island, and can stay buried under the River, Sunnyside and Rosedale until it reaches 16th Ave.

I'm trying to understand what you mean here.

Fusili covered why to use Centre St north of the core, but you said *in* the downtown core. I don't understand how it is any different to tunnel under the hill 4 blocks west of Centre St, especially since that brings it under part of Sunnyside, and then curves it rather drastically under the middle of Prince's Island Park to meet the SE Line's Eau Claire station under 2nd St.

I realize this isn't the NCLRT thread, but I would rather talk about this until my initial reaction of "What?!" wears off at this 4 month delay.

[5seconds]

So the 'Big Unfunded' item was the public art component? Is that legally mandated, or can they choose not to do that with this project? While I generally like the art spending associated with this kind of project, the stations themselves are really nice, and I think I could live without more public art if it came to that.

Also, they are predicting a $35 million overspend. If the outstanding property compensation goes more in the City's favour, and if they can sell the Westbrook property they own for a decent amount, would this cover the overspend?

I agree with Mar, for a budget of $1b. this isn't a terrible result. Too bad about the delay in opening though. I still think trenching the line around 45th was the right thing to do.

[srperrycgy]

The demolition of the old Ernest Manning High has started. Sorry about the quality.


WLRT-11122011-1 by srp775, on Flickr


WLRT-11122011-2 by srp775, on Flickr

[Innersoul1]

The signage for the new Sarcee overpass is HORRIBLE. In all directions you are bound to go the wrong way unless you are familiar with the new traffic flow. I am shocked that they haven't done a better job with temporary signage.

[mersar]

Noticed yesterday that the signal trees are up on parts of the guideway. And there are caternary poles all the way to the west end of the guideway too.

[danofkent]

The level of transparancy within the WestLRT project has always been terrible, but I'm still astounded by the conflicting reports on costs and the reasons for over-runs. The media has identified several causes for the budget shortfall, but these all answer more questions than they answer.

1. Trenching the LRT at 45 St caused the shortfall by eating into the contingency fund. This is not what the city said at the time. Funds were available because the quotes came in below budget, with additional funds added to the project from a separate transport reserve fund. These costs were fully known about before a shovel hit the ground. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2009/10/05/calgary-west-lrt-trench-ctrain.html

2. Land purchase costs have pushed up the price tag. Yet further reading of reports shows that overspends in this area are not included in the $1.46bn price tag. These costs will not be settled until next year, at which point the project team may have to come back to the city for additional funding.

3. Public art was not included in the budget. Whatever you may think of public art, it boggles the mind that their budget simply ignored an element that the city requires in all projects. However, it's not clear to me that the current budget includes the 1% either, since there seems to be some discussion about whether to ignore the requirement.

4. The Sarcee trail interchange was unfunded. I've seen this reported in the Herald, but surely it can't be true. The new interchange was included in the project scope from the outset, and the LRT could not have crossed Sarcee without it unless they closed the 17 Av intersection.

5. The city reportedly gave a $5 million underspend on the 69 St parkade to the CBE for the additional wing on the school. This is a small part of the budget, but it seems that it was done without council approval and despite school building not being a city responsibility. How and why did this happen?!

6. Landscaping costs have also been mentioned. Surely these would have been included in the additional budget? From the outset, landscaping has been upheld as a form of visual screening and sound attenuation. What else were they planning to do with the land adjacent to the tracks?

Two additional items don't seem to have been mentioned, but are also pertinent to understanding what went wrong.

1. The change of route between 11 st and Westbrook Mall. Reports initially indicated that this had added $20 million to the estimated cost - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2008/05/14/cgy-lrt-expansion.html - although we have been told by our Alderman that when the quotes came in, the revised route actually reduced the cost. Either way, this is not news and should have been in the approved budget.

2. Sound attenuation. The project tried to cut costs by not providing sound walls, in stark contrast to the other end of the line which has 8-10' high sound walls protecting all residential areas. Along WestLRT, the only sound barriers proposed from the outset protect Shaganappi golf course and the area by the new school. That's despite this line being closer to houses than any other in the city. Subsequently, the city has relented and started construction of sound walls along Bow Trail by Sovereign Cr. There is a further meeting about another short length of proposed sound wall later this month. These were not in the budget, but clearly should have been. Are the costs included in the budgets now being reported in the media?

[MalcolmTucker]

The new interchange was included in the project scope from the outset, and the LRT could not have crossed Sarcee without it unless they closed the 17 Av intersection.

There was always a flyover for the LRT, but not funding for a traffic interchange.

[kw5150]

Well, looks like we have learned a few lessons, thanks for pointing it out.

[Innersoul1]

Originally Posted by danofkent

2. Sound attenuation. The project tried to cut costs by not providing sound walls, in stark contrast to the other end of the line which has 8-10' high sound walls protecting all residential areas. Along WestLRT, the only sound barriers proposed from the outset protect Shaganappi golf course and the area by the new school. That's despite this line being closer to houses than any other in the city. Subsequently, the city has relented and started construction of sound walls along Bow Trail by Sovereign Cr. There is a further meeting about another short length of proposed sound wall later this month. These were not in the budget, but clearly should have been. Are the costs included in the budgets now being reported in the media?

This end of the line really doesn't need sound attenuation. In the areas where it passes through residential areas it is trenched or existing sound walls are in place. There are sound walls being installed on Bow trail just west of Crowchild. That is actually the only area where it is needed.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

There was always a flyover for the LRT, but not funding for a traffic interchange.

The interchange should not have been included in the budget IMO.

[danofkent]

Originally Posted by Innersoul1

This end of the line really doesn't need sound attenuation. In the areas where it passes through residential areas it is trenched or existing sound walls are in place. There are sound walls being installed on Bow trail just west of Crowchild. That is actually the only area where it is needed.

Not true. There is a level crossing at 47 St and then the tracks run at grade before elevating to get over Sarcee. This is through a residential area, with houses backing directly onto the tracks. There is no existing sound wall and none is planned.

[danofkent]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

There was always a flyover for the LRT, but not funding for a traffic interchange.

I don't understand. The Sarcee Trail interchange was brought into the scope before the project was tendered, so how was it not included in the bid, which came in below budget?

October 6, 2008: City Council approves the Sarcee Trail/17th Ave. S.W. Interchange configuration. It is now included within the West LRT project scope and will be part of the Design-Build Request For Proposal.

November 3, 2008: West LRT Office issues the Design-Build Request for Qualifications to Industry.

October, 2009: West LRT Office awards the Design-Build contract to SNC Lavalin and its partners. The design-build team will begin preparing the construction sites and lay down areas over the next few months with construction beginning in early 2010.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by danofkent

I don't understand. The Sarcee Trail interchange was brought into the scope before the project was tendered, so how was it not included in the bid, which came in below budget?

October 6, 2008: City Council approves the Sarcee Trail/17th Ave. S.W. Interchange configuration. It is now included within the West LRT project scope and will be part of the Design-Build Request For Proposal.

November 3, 2008: West LRT Office issues the Design-Build Request for Qualifications to Industry.

October, 2009: West LRT Office awards the Design-Build contract to SNC Lavalin and its partners. The design-build team will begin preparing the construction sites and lay down areas over the next few months with construction beginning in early 2010.

It was included in the tender yes, but not in the project budget. So when people say the budget when from ~$750 million to ~$1400 million, it does not mean the ~$750 million project elements over spent to ~$1400 million. To fund the 17th/Sarcee interchange they swapped Bow and 17th on the TIP list (and the local Alderman at the time lobbied for the Bow interchange not to be built simultaneously due to traffic issues even though the city had proposed it at the time, while the Richmond Road interchange was uploaded to the province as part of the ring road. So money was reallocated from other interchange projects to the 17th interchange, and then the contract was rolled into the tender.

It doesn't really matter from anything but optics of the price the project was sold to the public at vs the price the project as a whole actually was. It was technically not scope creep.

[eggbert]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It was included in the tender yes, but not in the project budget. So when people say the budget when from ~$750 million to ~$1400 million, it does not mean the ~$750 million project elements over spent to ~$1400 million. To fund the 17th/Sarcee interchange they swapped Bow and 17th on the TIP list (and the local Alderman at the time lobbied for the Bow interchange not to be built simultaneously due to traffic issues even though the city had proposed it at the time, while the Richmond Road interchange was uploaded to the province as part of the ring road. So money was reallocated from other interchange projects to the 17th interchange, and then the contract was rolled into the tender.

It doesn't really matter from anything but optics of the price the project was sold to the public at vs the price the project as a whole actually was. It was technically not scope creep.

Are you talking Bow and Sarcee? If so, are there any plans for this coming sooner than later?

[MalcolmTucker]

Would have to look at its location on the TIPs list, and I have no idea where that is anymore.

[Innersoul1]

Originally Posted by danofkent

Not true. There is a level crossing at 47 St and then the tracks run at grade before elevating to get over Sarcee. This is through a residential area, with houses backing directly onto the tracks. There is no existing sound wall and none is planned.

I suppose that I forgot about that location.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It was included in the tender yes, but not in the project budget. So when people say the budget when from ~$750 million to ~$1400 million, it does not mean the ~$750 million project elements over spent to ~$1400 million. To fund the 17th/Sarcee interchange they swapped Bow and 17th on the TIP list (and the local Alderman at the time lobbied for the Bow interchange not to be built simultaneously due to traffic issues even though the city had proposed it at the time, while the Richmond Road interchange was uploaded to the province as part of the ring road. So money was reallocated from other interchange projects to the 17th interchange, and then the contract was rolled into the tender.

It doesn't really matter from anything but optics of the price the project was sold to the public at vs the price the project as a whole actually was. It was technically not scope creep.

The trenching/tunneling on 17th was scope creep and entirely unnecessary.

Is the new high school part of the $1.4B number?

It is the cost of land acquistion that blows my mind. Most of that alignment had been planned since the 70s and the City had been acquiring property for years (ex. the AMA building and cop shop on 17th were intentionally set back when they were built in the 80s with LRT in mind). Yes some of the land was acquired at the peak of the boom, but I still get a sense that the City did not bargain hard enough.

[kw5150]

This has to be one of the most exciting projects in Calgary in a long time.

[danofkent]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It was included in the tender yes, but not in the project budget. So when people say the budget when from ~$750 million to ~$1400 million, it does not mean the ~$750 million project elements over spent to ~$1400 million. To fund the 17th/Sarcee interchange they swapped Bow and 17th on the TIP list (and the local Alderman at the time lobbied for the Bow interchange not to be built simultaneously due to traffic issues even though the city had proposed it at the time, while the Richmond Road interchange was uploaded to the province as part of the ring road. So money was reallocated from other interchange projects to the 17th interchange, and then the contract was rolled into the tender.

It doesn't really matter from anything but optics of the price the project was sold to the public at vs the price the project as a whole actually was. It was technically not scope creep.

Thanks for clearing that up. I assumed that must be the case, as the numbers quoted in the media make no sense at all. It's ridiculous to call a project "over budget" when you are including elements which were budgeted separately.

I'm concerned to see costs like the Sarcee interchange lumped in with the WestLRT project. It makes it sound like a vast sum is being spent on transit, when a large portion of the costs are actually for road improvements.

[PPAR]

This project is a design-build contract, so if it costs more than expected to construct, that is SNC Lavalin's problem, not the Calgary taxpayer's.

The most valid point I see made above is that the city set the right of way for the WLRT way back in the 1980's and has been acquiring property when able since then. How they managed to end up being soaked on expropriations boggles the mind. I do remember a homeowner quoted in the paper about how they were shocked to have to move after 20 years...well guess what, they should have realized the LRT had been planned 10 years BEFORE they bought the house.

The media is really just being sensational.