Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[MalcolmTucker]

There are good old reports that detail how much money it would cost in track upgrades and such to get to 150 kph (95 miles per hour in the report) for Calgary-Edmonton. In 1975, they government predicted it would cost almost $450 million, only $50 million less than going to nearly 200 kph (120 mph). Today, using general inflation that is north of $2 billion - closer to $2.5.

And as we know, speed = ridership, unless we want to think the old 3 hour 50 minute service with less than 60,000 riders per year is a good example to follow.

Later reports show that going from 200 kph to 300 kph the additional capital cost is more than made up for in higher revenue due to higher ridership.

So if you are willing to spend enough to establish 150 kph service, may as well go whole hog and go for true high speed.

There is a reason it hasn't been done, and it is because whenever people with about a big cost like that, they think about spending like how a road works, without thinking about the revenue side and until you have private company win a charter to build it where the government's contribution is land and banning others from building a competing service for a number of years, with almost nothing from the government - no one will believe it.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

There is a reason it hasn't been done, and it is because whenever people with about a big cost like that, they think about spending like how a road works, without thinking about the revenue side and until you have private company win a charter to build it where the government's contribution is land and banning others from building a competing service for a number of years, with almost nothing from the government - no one will believe it.

You say that, but when was the last time a private company on this continent built a new passenger railway? Any time in the last hundred years? Passenger rail is not a money making scheme any more, they are not built for the profit of the owners, but as vital infrastructure for a country/province/cities.

France didn't build its TGVs because a plucky group of investors thought it would be a great way to make money by building a high speed railway. They built them because the government and rail operators figured it was the best way to move people around by rail, and then gradually built the best lines to achieve that.

[MalcolmTucker]

In an environment where the option is nothing, versus the possibility of something, I prefer to go with the something. There is potential for private industry to do this on their own, numerous groups have approached the government over the years, of course quietly, and versus trying to get a ring road type expense through, it is the more probable option, as the same reports that show you can build it with full cost recovery show that it doesn't materially effect traffic on highway 2. So you can't divert highway funds to it unless you are willing for Highway 2 to become continuously worse.

Private rail is no more a money making scheme than private water networks are, but Europe has many cities with privately operated for profit water systems (the Canadian Pension Plan owns London's water utility on your behalf). Set up the market, and watch it go.

You are the one that doesn't like it that Canada has private companies that own the current freight network, so I think that just maybe you aren't really open to the government not owning it even if it can be viable without the government owning it.

Anyways - very off topic for this thread. Not that SSP cares.

[White Pine]

Originally Posted by canucklehead2

Not decades. This group is talking about restoring service using DMU or EMU's at 160 km/h in the next few years. And an emergency funding request is being talked about at the upcoming NDP convention...

https://www.albertaregionalrail.com/

I always wondered why they didn't do this. Something like Via's HFR. If they can get their own track it would be better.

EDIT: I mean specifically the Calgary-Edmonton route. Although I think there are probably too many stops and YYC shouldn't need one if served by Ctrain or equivalent.

[MrBigStuff]

I have seen underground trains at more than one level at San Fransisco - the BART and the MUNI trains. The LRT builders might want to look at this to see if this would shed any light on multi level tunnels for trains. I couldn't tell you what it's like for underground geology - as to how Calgary would compare to the Bay area - which I would bet is quite different from each other.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by MrBigStuff

I have seen underground trains at more than one level at San Fransisco - the BART and the MUNI trains. The LRT builders might want to look at this to see if this would shed any light on multi level tunnels for trains. I couldn't tell you what it's like for underground geology - as to how Calgary would compare to the Bay area - which I would bet is quite different from each other.

Originally Posted by MrBigStuff

I have seen underground trains at more than one level at San Fransisco - the BART and the MUNI trains. The LRT builders might want to look at this to see if this would shed any light on multi level tunnels for trains. I couldn't tell you what it's like for underground geology - as to how Calgary would compare to the Bay area - which I would bet is quite different from each other.

the market street subway was built inthe 60's for BART and to move the muni cars off the street surface even though market st surface is still crowded with buses, rubber wheel trollies, and the tourist "F" rail trolly

in calgary, when the 7th ave ctrain tracks reach capacity, the 8th ave subway is planned for construction. stretching from city hall to 9st w, it will become the route for NW-S trains while 7tb ave will remain in use for NE-W trains. city hall was built with provision for a tunnel to the s line, and a city hall station for the line. you can also see the bricked-up portal for this city hall tunnel from S trains where the middle pillars are "missing" in the cpr duck-under. this was provison for a future flat junction so S trains can use the 8th ave tunnel or 7th ave surface tracks. similarly 9th st W @ 7th ave will have a new flat junction installed so nw trains can choose to run on 7th ave or under 8th ave as needed

the new green line will be underground too, but using 2nd st alignment, and shouldn't connect with 7/8 ave tracks because the trains are not compatible. so think of 2nd st @7th ave / 8th ave as a lazy "H" stations or lazy "U" stations that wrap around the core, where the 2nd st station is the connector between 7/8 ave stations. because 8th ave subway was already planned for decades ago, but with the green line subway and station built first it will have to be deeper to leave room for the future 8th ave subway

[ClaytonA]

Originally Posted by accord1999

I think, as I mentioned in an earlier post, it's just the City unable to do much while Admin is still figuring out what Phase 2 should be (and cost) and completing the planning for the NC section. Things it really should have finished much earlier.

LRTotG does not need to wait for the City to firm up Phase 2. Think strategically - target CA's/provincial ridings' MLA candidates/voters outside 16 Ave N-McKenzie Towne.

With the Fed's providing funding over the City's best case (fastest) timeline and if contractors' have bids with the room, the portion in play for Phase 1 is to McKenzie Towne. *** You know the other communities are Phase 2+.

You want money for a land acquisition fund and 60+% design, business case studies/MAE as a minimum so this is factually construction ready. Maybe utility re-locates too. The city is going into austerity mode with One Calgary except for the 2026 Olympics - i.e. there is money if you're squeaky enough. Not all money needs to come from the City for this, YEG got GreenTrip/PTIF money for some of this, YYC's gotten federal and provincial money for this in the past. Re-do the work for the first phase done 2012-2015. Now it's easier since there's more material publically available from the city. Coordinate with the councillors, especially Keating. Even if you don't get a SWRR leftover billion you'll have everything ready and primed for pre-elections 2022 and 2023.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

E.g. TT2014-0690 Cost Benefit Analysis Green Line Transitway Extensions Att1.pdf

E.g. with math from here; https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....ocumentId=9083

From the BRT transitway planning, previously posted here jobs/population station density, the capital cost-benefit to sell to the city during RFP, etc it all points to Phase 1 extending if anywhere to McKenzie Towne. Do a softer effort in Prestwick and McKenzie Towne/Lake (always step it up once the RFP becomes known) with hard efforts just outside the 16 Ave N-McKenzie Towne. i.e. target the CA's and MLA candidates in Calgary Klein, Calgary Beddington, Calgary N, Calgary NE and for SE target Calgary SE/Auburn/Mahogany with a softer effort in Calgary Hays and Calgary Peigan. Also target leaders and potential cabinet members. Federally for 2019 also Calgary Confederation, Calgary Nose Hill, Calgary-Skyview, and for SE Calgary-Shepard. Note the #'s difference N to S... Start building lists for facebook/email blasts/newsletters/events/etc, donations for expenses, putting together candidate info packages, coordinating with councillors for what they need for CUTA, FCM, future TOD planning. Everybody singing from the same hymm sheet. Easy citizen/voter mobilization.


***
[could also see 28 Ave N, but dream is waiting and get this extended underground with flat access directly to grade in Tuxedo Park per renderings with bonus much less land acquistion required and that portion of Centre St staying 4 lanes or 2 plus parking]

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

LRTotG does not need to wait for the City to firm up Phase 2. Think strategically - target CA's/provincial ridings' MLA candidates/voters outside 16 Ave N-McKenzie Towne.

LRTontheGreen yesterday complained that the upcoming transport committee meeting still won't get the second stage recommendations so they can't properly advocate for it.

https://twitter.com/LRTontheGreen/st...30121592201216

[milomilo]

Perhaps they've finally realized that surface running on Centre Street is unfeasible. Toronto's Streetcar on Queen's Quay is an identical configuration, but takes a minimum of a ~29m ROW, compared to the ~22m ROW on Centre St. Only Toronto is using basically bus shelters on one direction - add full size stations and turning lanes and there is no chance we can fit in the City's plan on Centre St without expropriating all of one side of the street.

[joe498]

Transit Committee meeting today, giving an update on the project:

[jawagord]

Gee, who could of guessed tunnelling through downtown Calgary would be expensive and risky?

Project manager Paul Giannelia told committee members Thursday that constructing the underground portions of the line will mean reckoning with Calgary’s “poor soil” and risks associated with the deep foundations required for stations.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...for-green-line

[milomilo]

You're saying that as if it is a criticism, and I'm not sure why? What exactly has been done to deceive you here?

[s211]

Originally Posted by jawagord

Gee, who could of guessed tunnelling through downtown Calgary would be expensive and risky?

Ah yes, memories of 9th Avenue sluffing into the Bankers Hall pit. Good times.

[MalcolmTucker]

Where does the tunnel start again? The entry and exit pits are going to be massive. Only marginally smaller than Seattle's, and with our bad soil, and their bad soil, I bet they will be similar, though ours will have to do a tighter turn, at least with the current design. But if it is deeper, the curve could be way less tight and go under more stuff. https://crosscut.com/2013/07/diggng-...atching-bertha

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Where does the tunnel start again? The entry and exit pits are going to be massive. Only marginally smaller than Seattle's, and with our bad soil, and their bad soil, I bet they will be similar, though ours will have to do a tighter turn, at least with the current design. But if it is deeper, the curve could be way less tight and go under more stuff. https://crosscut.com/2013/07/diggng-...atching-bertha

If it has a crazy tight turn like the NW line does by North Hill Mall they should rethink the entire project. Spending $4.5+ billion on a very subpar experience is beyond stupid. Is this one of the reasons why the people in charge of this project have gone silent?

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Where does the tunnel start again? The entry and exit pits are going to be massive. Only marginally smaller than Seattle's, and with our bad soil, and their bad soil, I bet they will be similar, though ours will have to do a tighter turn, at least with the current design. But if it is deeper, the curve could be way less tight and go under more stuff. https://crosscut.com/2013/07/diggng-...atching-bertha

In theory, the south portal is at about 10th Ave and 4th Street S.E. (Victoria Park). The only other train portal is at about 20th avenue North.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

If it has a crazy tight turn like the NW line does by North Hill Mall they should rethink the entire project. Spending $4.5+ billion on a very subpar experience is beyond stupid. Is this one of the reasons why the people in charge of this project have gone silent?

https://engage.calgary.ca/greenline1...e#lg=1&slide=0

It should be fine, that was only going to be an issue if they chose the surface option and would have ruined the line as you say.

While it costs more in the short term, I'm glad the city did not compromise the central section of the line. Putting in at grade crossings downtown would have permanently ruined the line.

[ClaytonA]

Big hole to dig up infront of businesses on Centre Street. Do businesses appreciate what's going to happen and for how long?

If they were going to 28 Ave N and the Tuxedo Park station it would be infront of mostly single family detached homes with alley access. They could probably even close the road entirely for years without complete traffic armageddon. They closed 37 St NW with houses just like that for a sewer project like 20 years ago for what seemed like 8/9 months.

Still think they could do cut and cover north from Tuxedo Park/28 Ave N to McKnight since it's all residential with alley access. They wouldn't even need to worry about compensating businesses or drama such as 17 Ave SW right now. Cut and cover can be done faster and more cheaply (just throw more iron at it) than TBM's too.

McKnight's where the right of way gets wide enough again not to have as many property impacts and Centre St can stay 4 lanes over its entire length.

Re the soil, 8th Avenue Place was a pretty big hole too.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

Still think they could do cut and cover north from Tuxedo Park/28 Ave N to McKnight since it's all residential with alley access. They wouldn't even need to worry about compensating businesses or drama such as 17 Ave SW right now. Cut and cover can be done faster and more cheaply (just throw more iron at it) than TBM's too.

Chahal asked about tunneling past 16th Avenue and Paul Giannelia suggests that it would actually be cheap to use the TBM to tunnel to McKnight ("lowest cost tunnel you'll ever buy") while also simplifying property acquistion; a win-win.


At 2:16:28 of the meeting video:

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....ang=English#22

[milomilo]

Interesting comment. And then if you're tunneling to McKnight, you might as well go to 64th, as that is as far as you have to go before it actually opens up enough. I expect this discussion to come up eventually.

But then, once this is all built, people will ask 'why am I riding a cramped streetcar in this subway tunnel?'.