The_Cat said:
View attachment 681372
Click to expand...
Let me remind everyone that the the City had the option to go underground at this intersection to minimize delays and the potential for accidents, but there was some transport planner at the city that basically told car drivers to go fcuk themselves, this is Transit town. Shades of that intersection at the south end of the university. A complete traffic mess.

Ideology triumphing once again over how the real world works. I've got to find that quote, it was quoted in the media during the planning press for that transit line.
 
Yeah I'm sure it had nothing to do with going underground costing like a billion more, jeopardizing the project completely as transit funding is not really prioritized at all. It was definitely just because a transit planner said "go fuck yourself" to car drivers.

That makes sense, and would definitely go over well in a city where almost 90% of people drive to work.
 
^^ A billion dollars? That is a lie and you know it. Don't put out statements like that, without proof. And why would it have to be underground. An elevated guideway would have worked well at 109/ 104th.

Yes, ideology did play out in the decision. And in the future, residents will ask why the council of the day didn't make the right decision a la University and 114th, 111th ave etc etc.
 
IMG_9563.jpeg
IMG_9562.jpeg
 
whattheheck said:
^^ A billion dollars? That is a lie and you know it. Don't put out statements like that, without proof. And why would it have to be underground. An elevated guideway would have worked well at 109/ 104th.

Yes, ideology did play out in the decision. And in the future, residents will ask why the council of the day didn't make the right decision a la University and 114th, 111th ave etc etc.
Click to expand...
With an underground station at one intersection alone costing an extra 300 million, I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that going underground at every intersection could easily surpass a billion
 
whattheheck said:
^^ A billion dollars? That is a lie and you know it. Don't put out statements like that, without proof. And why would it have to be underground. An elevated guideway would have worked well at 109/ 104th.

Yes, ideology did play out in the decision. And in the future, residents will ask why the council of the day didn't make the right decision a la University and 114th, 111th ave etc etc.
Click to expand...
So... as per the actual analysis, it would cost between $85M (lower end of the elevated guideway +- 30%) and $390M (upper end of the underground option). and that's for 104 Ave and 109 St alone. If we extrapolate that to the other 2 controversial crossings along 104 Ave/SPR alone (116 and 124 st), consider the fact that to do that, the cheapest way would be to have the whole section between 107 st and 125 st either elevated or underground, extrapolate the costs, on the lower end, we're talking about $425M to $715M for elevated and $1.15Bn to $1.95Bn for underground.

if we could find that kind of extra funding, I would much rather extend the LRT towards the airport, or up towards St Albert. Or any combination of expanded LRT service we can think of. Damn, for $2bn we could probably get whole spur line of the Valley Line to somewhere in the city that is not connected to the network.
 
IanO said:
YEG is still 15-20 out in reality, but NW to St.Albert is planned and could go to their doorstep with a major park and ride within the decade or less and really create a near city-wide system.
Click to expand...
Oh, I know and I agree, but the whole point was to illustrate how much it doesn't make sense to complain about grade separation on 104 ave.
 
EtoV said:
Yeah I'm sure it had nothing to do with going underground costing like a billion more, jeopardizing the project completely as transit funding is not really prioritized at all. It was definitely just because a transit planner said "go fuck yourself" to car drivers.

That makes sense, and would definitely go over well in a city where almost 90% of people drive to work.
Click to expand...
The transit planner was unambiguously contemptuous when interviewed. I've got to find the interview, as it was so proforma transit uber alles it should have come with an anthem.

And AGAIN, for the record I ride transit at least ten times as much as I drive. Sometimes my car doesn't move for a few weeks. I just detest transit ideologues, especially planners, that think they can win people over by belittling and demonizing anything that isn't transit-only.
 
Just curious - but it seems like nothing is done yet on the 102 ave portion downtown. Anyone know the reason? I know it's only a few blocks but it just seems odd given how far along everything else is.
 
christopherj said:
Just curious - but it seems like nothing is done yet on the 102 ave portion downtown. Anyone know the reason? I know it's only a few blocks but it just seems odd given how far along everything else is.
Click to expand...
14km, hard to work on all parts at once. Limited subcontractors, definitely stretched thin this year. Lots of utility / design work has been done just no duct bank etc work yet
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top