Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by N McCity

The justification certainly becomes undeniable when that corridor becomes the primary transit access to the airport if it isn't already.

I agree though. Busses are far less risk until you can properly replace them rather replacing them with a half done job that is good enough for now but then cannot be replaced again later. Especially if a measly street car isn't any faster than a bus.

I like the project that the Canadian Infrastructure Bank is looking at far more than the crappy City airport transit project anyway. A direct heavy rail link from downtown to the airport (and Banff) is far better than a people mover then transfer to low grade LRT that the City envisions.

[N McCity]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Streetcar will probably be slower than a bus and a lot less flexible. If the goal is to destroy the businesses along that corridor along with the quality of life of the residents in the area then this might be a worthy investment.

At that rate may as well get someone to make some double articulated busses for that stretch. If service is gonna be about as bad as a large bus, then just make it a large bus

The failure of ability to properly think causes this gravitation towards street cars. People that are fans of Druh and Wooley and all those would probably say something along the lines of, "street cars are good because European cities use trams which is the same thing and it works well there". This would all be without realizing that where these systems are in place there they are a supplementary feeder to a proper mass/rapid transit and in a place where they are replacing busses but there won't ever be the case to build a new mass/rapid transit line. Here we are so stupid that we want to use it instead of a real train and it won't work.

[N McCity]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I like the project that the Canadian Infrastructure Bank is looking at far more than the crappy City airport transit project anyway. A direct heavy rail link from downtown to the airport (and Banff) is far better than a people mover then transfer to low grade LRT that the City envisions.

Oh hang on I knew about downtown to Banff but I didn't know it was thought to have access to the airport too!

Couple that with the highspeed rail project and... One can dream!

Having said that the people mover idea is still fine just for getting people out of the airport to places in the north side of the city.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by N McCity

Oh hang on I knew about downtown to Banff but I didn't know it was thought to have access to the airport too!

Couple that with the highspeed rail project and... One can dream!

Having said that the people mover idea is still fine just for getting people out of the airport to places in the north side of the city.

The CIB added the airport link to the study to help see if the link would help make the Calgary-Banff project more viable. The CIB process is a way different way to think about infrastructure projects since they don't lock in a scope to define the cost then work to contain that cost, they target subsidy minimization, which can mean vastly increasing scope if it ends up with a lower public cash contribution.


As for high speed rail, I hear a serious private consortium is cooking up a project. The hyperloop being kicked around has spurred some actors that were sitting around waiting for the government to make the first move, to instead start to work on it themselves much more seriously.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The CIB added the airport link to the study to help see if the link would help make the Calgary-Banff project more viable. The CIB process is a way different way to think about infrastructure projects since they don't lock in a scope to define the cost then work to contain that cost, they target subsidy minimization, which can mean vastly increasing scope if it ends up with a lower public cash contribution.


As for high speed rail, I hear a serious private consortium is cooking up a project. The hyperloop being kicked around has spurred some actors that were sitting around waiting for the government to make the first move, to instead start to work on it themselves much more seriously.

So you're saying the hyperloop project isn't a complete pipe dream? Interesting. I'd love to see this happen as long as it doesn't involve any tax dollars. I'm fine with the government granting a consortium land rights to build it on.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

So you're saying the hyperloop project isn't a complete pipe dream? Interesting. I'd love to see this happen as long as it doesn't involve any tax dollars. I'm fine with the government granting a consortium land rights to build it on.

It is that hyperloop talk has spurred the rail folks to believe a serious proposal would get a serious hearing from the province - including working on land commitments.


Any is a hard test to pass. Minimal is the right test.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by milomilo

To be honest I think we've all forgotten what the point of this LRT even is - at some point the goal of building the Green Line became the building of the Green Line.

Yeah, at this point the #1 reason to continue on this clearly unsatisfactory path is that we would lose the Federal and provincial money. But I'm not sure that is necessarily true that if the City asks for a deferral to review and create a more useful line for $5B that it would lose the money. Given the way the Federal Government is spending money these days, I doubt that it would really care if the Green Line funding is spent between 2021-2027 or 2024-2030, and certainly the Government of Alberta wouldn't mind a delay.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Yeah, at this point the #1 reason to continue on this clearly unsatisfactory path is that we would lose the Federal and provincial money. But I'm not sure that is necessarily true that if the City asks for a deferral to review and create a more useful line for $5B that it would lose the money. Given the way the Federal Government is spending money these days, I doubt that it would really care if the Green Line funding is spent between 2021-2027 or 2024-2030, and certainly the Government of Alberta wouldn't mind a delay.

The feds would probably be forgiving but I can just imagine the type of speech Kenney would relish giving while permanently withdrawing the provincial funds.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

So you're saying the hyperloop project isn't a complete pipe dream? Interesting. I'd love to see this happen as long as it doesn't involve any tax dollars. I'm fine with the government granting a consortium land rights to build it on.

A rail project would definitely require substantial government funding of some form, there is no way around that and if that is the bar we have then we will never have any passenger rail. But one must remember railways will have economic benefit and will result in fewer roads needing to be built.

[MalcolmTucker]

I still think you vastly underestimate how much money can be made from fares, or over estimate the capital cost for HSR. I know the proof is in the doing, but do try to keep an open mind about numbers, instead of being dismissive without evidence when studies show it is quite possible to thread this needle in Alberta.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

I still think you vastly underestimate how much money can be made from fares, or over estimate the capital cost for HSR. I know the proof is in the doing, but do try to keep an open mind about numbers, instead of being dismissive without evidence when studies show it is quite possible to thread this needle in Alberta.

Studies, from years ago. As you say, the proof is in the doing and we all know that rail projects always increase massively in price from the initial estimates and, with only one exception, are always major public sector projects led by the government. HSR (or any rail) is expensive wherever it is built, I cannot see why it would be different here.

I can only believe there really are private investors serious about investing in Alberta HSR when they put money on the table. The closest we have is the Waterous proposal that produced nothing, and the latest hyperloop nonsense.

[superelevation]

Originally Posted by N McCity

Well the commonality problem may become more apparent in the years to come if SNC no longer operates it.

And it has a major expansion problem in that they can't really expand its capacity without spending exorbitant amounts of money.

That's the case for common equipment; in the long run it's cheaper. That in mind, their difference there is still better IMO than opting for low floor, non grade separated.

Canada Line can be expnaded.

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

My understanding is that the Canada line was built to support an ultimate capacity of 16,000 ppdph or so. Currently it has capacity of around 7,000 ppdph.

Lots of expansion capacity left.

15k but yeah

Originally Posted by N McCity

Oh man I didn't even consider the impact to businesses the construction of the street car portion would have. That will be even more of a disaster than the finished product will be.

My qualm is that we all get fed this story that trams and street cars work elsewhere so they will work here too. The difference is they are supplementary to an actual rapid transit system, not in lieu of it.

This last sentence is a key point, at grade lines are kind of like very high quality buses (great for local service at high frequencies all day but not very fast).

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Streetcar will probably be slower than a bus and a lot less flexible. If the goal is to destroy the businesses along that corridor along with the quality of life of the residents in the area then this might be a worthy investment.

Well the better transit access won't hurt. Its not like Subway construction wouldn't also be very disruptive, especially if its cut and cover.

[N McCity]

Originally Posted by superelevation

This last sentence is a key point, at grade lines are kind of like very high quality buses (great for local service at high frequencies all day but not very fast).



Well the better transit access won't hurt. Its not like Subway construction wouldn't also be very disruptive, especially if its cut and cover.

Why make a high quality bus for billions of dollars? Who is going to say an they’ll stop driving and use that because it’s much faster and more efficient than the busses that were on the route before? The only gain would be capacity, that’s really it. It wouldn’t be effective at simply supplementing a rapid transit line over that distance because it’s long and I built on a corridor that seems to be more needing rapid transit on it. For what we need here, if you want a high quality bus, assume it is temporary and build it somewhat right but with a much lower risk design than this thing that will become obsolete AND unreplacable.

A street as narrow as centre street would not be able to support cut and cover as the while street width would have to be removed. Centre St is not Cambie St; Cambie’s cross section for the most part is wider than Macleod Tr and it is largely residential so it’s somewhere cut and cover may have worked, but they even admitted never again. They would have to bore the tunnels which would leave far less disruption than any option disruption. If they didn’t like that given it is Calgary and tunnels that long are evil here, elevate it. Anything that’s better than the current plan that’s worthy of billions of dollars in investment. But nah they’ll just take the option expensive enough to look like they’re doing a great forward thinking project but still as cheap as possible.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by superelevation

Well the better transit access won't hurt. Its not like Subway construction wouldn't also be very disruptive, especially if its cut and cover.

Yes, it will be disruptive regardless.

One could say that the disruption will be worth it, as afterwards we'll get a nice TOD corridor. That isn't credible to me though, as you just have to look at 16 Ave to see how rebuilding a road doesn't automatically encourage development - it's still a horrible wasteland a decade later. Same with our failure to encourage TOD around LRT stations.

[Pegasus]

Good to hear that the "city is exploring potential ways to navigate the future of transportation in Calgary based on the duration of, and fallout from, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic during economic uncertainty".

Scenarios include:

Scenario 1: Rapid Recovery
Scenario 2: Increased Crisis
Scenario 3: Transformational Change
High Downtown Vacancy Rates

"So as were taking a look at costly infrastructure, particularly things like the Green Line LRT Project, we need to make sure there's a good business case and a cost benefit to it, otherwise we're broke and we need to make sure every dollar we spend right now is well spent." - Ward 11 Councillor Jeromy Farkas

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/what-will-tra...y-explores-potential-scenarios-1.5154019

[N McCity]

Originally Posted by Pegasus

Good to hear that the "city is exploring potential ways to navigate the future of transportation in Calgary based on the duration of, and fallout from, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic during economic uncertainty".

Scenarios include:

Scenario 1: Rapid Recovery
Scenario 2: Increased Crisis
Scenario 3: Transformational Change
High Downtown Vacancy Rates

"So as were taking a look at costly infrastructure, particularly things like the Green Line LRT Project, we need to make sure there's a good business case and a cost benefit to it, otherwise we're broke and we need to make sure every dollar we spend right now is well spent." - Ward 11 Councillor Jeromy Farkas

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/what-will-tra...y-explores-potential-scenarios-1.5154019

He’s not wrong in that every dollar does need to count, but it’s not only the city’s money going into the thing unlike other projects where that is the case.

I agree that they need to consider whether the current design is worth the money. The problem is this is Calgary and that means you have to do it even cheaper rather than saying it needs to be done and needs to be done right for there to be a business case or attraction of a business case. Building infrastructure like this should attract dense development which could be influential in tax revenue.

As for the other stuff, I don’t think they should get all crazy with that assuming things will never be the same again. There is still a gravity cities have in general towards attracting people which is why the worldwide proportion of rural population is shrinking. Real estate will be cheap, anyone sick of rural areas or sick of crime and boredom in small Canadian towns way want to move in for a good deal.

[CalgaryTransit guy]

Originally Posted by milomilo

They assumed the line was going to be cheaper than it was, so set the budget before they knew what it would get them. And then even a line half the length of the original sales pitch was too expensive, so they had to downgrade it further. And because of that faulty assumption, they linked two lines together that in hindsight probably would have been better kept separate.

Many decisions that were made were incremental and not bad on their own merits, but the end result has been a project that looks much different to what was originally planned, and it is very questionable that it now fulfils any of the original goals adequately considering how expensive it is.

So City Council set the budget for the project...before they even knew the real cost of it?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CalgaryTransit guy

So City Council set the budget for the project...before they even knew the real cost of it?

Well yeah, that's how the project has gone from 40+km LRT, to 20km with a deep tunnel, to 20km with a shallow tunnel and crappy street running section to... whatever the next update tells us. All while the price remained the same (well, increased somewhat, but of course, we're told the price increase wasn't really an increase, that was always the cost).

The only thing that is guaranteed is that when the scope is reduced further, we'll still be told it is the most awesome project ever, exactly as amazing as it was before.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by CalgaryTransit guy

So City Council set the budget for the project...before they even knew the real cost of it?

It's worse than that. During the lead up to the 2015 federal election campaign a few big name Conservative MPs had a meeting with I believe three city councilors and asked them what it would cost to build an LRT line from the very north end of Calgary to the very south end. The councilors told them $4.5 billion and the feds said great, we're in for a third of the cost. City got all excited as the plan was to do BRT and they figured with the feds on board they could get the province to pony up $1.5 billion and they upgrade the system to LRT. Fast forward a few years and reality started to sink in when people realized there was no way you could build the line for $4.5 billion. That lead to major changes in the scope of the project and a lot of spinning on the City's part. Probably the biggest planning disaster in the city's history and we have no idea exactly what we'll be getting, when or how much this is all going to cost other than it's going to be a lot more than $4.5 billion. To do it right I'm sticking with $7.7 billion.

[Pegasus]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

It's worse than that. During the lead up to the 2015 federal election campaign a few big name Conservative MPs had a meeting with I believe three city councilors and asked them what it would cost to build an LRT line from the very north end of Calgary to the very south end. The councilors told them $4.5 billion and the feds said great, we're in for a third of the cost. City got all excited as the plan was to do BRT and they figured with the feds on board they could get the province to pony up $1.5 billion and they upgrade the system to LRT. Fast forward a few years and reality started to sink in when people realized there was no way you could build the line for $4.5 billion. That lead to major changes in the scope of the project and a lot of spinning on the City's part. Probably the biggest planning disaster in the city's history and we have no idea exactly what we'll be getting, when or how much this is all going to cost other than it's going to be a lot more than $4.5 billion. To do it right I'm sticking with $7.7 billion.

Looks to me like this new study I referred to above may give the City just the off-ramp they need (to save face) from this ill-conceived and poorly planned project!