The Green Line has faced inflationary pressures, leading to council approving both an increased budget and a smaller scope to move forward with construction later this year
The first phase of the Green Line is now only going to stretch from Lynnwood/Millican to Eau Claire and will cost nearly $6.3 billion, city councillors confirmed Tuesday, following an hours-long confidential discussion and multiple votes on the multi-billion-dollar CTrain project’s future.
Though the project was approved in 2021 with a funding commitment of $5.5 billion from all three orders of government, the Green Line has faced inflationary pressures ever since, leading to months of speculation that it would require either an increased budget or a smaller scope to move forward with construction later this year.
Ultimately, council approved both.
The original vision was for the Green Line’s first phase to include 13 stations and 18 kilometres of track extending from Shepard Station at 130th Avenue S.E. to Eau Claire in the north end of downtown.
Late Tuesday afternoon, council voted 10-5 to proceed with a new alignment that would instead see the first phase of the train stretch from Eau Claire to Lynnwood/Millican, with a maintenance and storage station at Highfield.
The revised scope takes out the five southernmost stations, including Ogden, South Hill, Quarry Park, Douglas Glen and Shepard. The line’s extension to these stations would need to come after more funding is secured.
Councillors who voted against the revised alignment were Couns. Dan McLean, Jennifer Wyness, Sean Chu, Sonya Sharp and Andre Chabot.
“My main concern is the tunnelling downtown,” McLean said. “It’s an unknown and costs could escalate.”
‘We have to start somewhere’
Later in the evening, a presentation on the project’s financial risks from CFO Carla Male indicated the revised budget for the revised Green Line first phase has risen to $6.248 billion.
The $705-million shortfall would be addressed over a period of six years starting in 2025 according to Male, through a variety of reductions, efficiencies, revenues or other sources.
These would include incremental $8-million annual increases to the Green Line program, as well as a $208-million transfer from the city’s Reserve for Future Capital and $4 million-per-year transfer from 2024 to 2031 from the public transit operating budget to the Green Line fund.
During their public discussion, councillors said it’s disappointing to not be able to fully build out the first phase of the train as originally envisioned and at the previous price, but that “we need to start somewhere.”
“This is just a start,” said Ward 7 Coun. Terry Wong. “Working our way down (past) Millican is constrained only because of the fact of costs, of inflation.
“But we have to start somewhere.”
Adversely, Sharp said she worries Calgarians will feel “duped” by what council approved Tuesday, and warned the public will question the group’s handling of public funds.
“We are paying far more for far less, and we’re draining our savings and eliminating future savings,” she said.
“This project does put future projects at risk. You talk about libraries, fire stations. CFO Male said they’re going to look for efficiencies . . . what does that actually mean?”
Ministers’ letters to Gondek outline funding requirements
The changes council approved Tuesday could have had repercussions in terms of funding levels from the other orders of government.
Included in city council’s Tuesday meeting agenda package were letters from ministers of both the provincial and federal governments that were sent to Mayor Jyoti Gondek in the past week.
A July 29 letter to Gondek from provincial Transportation and Economic Corridors Minister Devin Dreeshen outlined that the province’s portion of Green Line funding — $1.53 billion — would not be reduced or prorated as long as Phase 1 of the project still connects to the existing Blue and Red lines, and integrates with the province’s own plans for a future regional rail network.
The provincial minister has previously said the province would not commit any further funding to the project.
A letter from federal Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Minister Sean Fraser, dated July 26, stated that a “de-scoping” of the Green Line would mean the city would need to submit its new business case to the federal government’s treasury board by Aug. 15.
Like the province, Ottawa previously chipped in $1.53 billion to help fund the project, with its portion coming from the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP).
“I am supportive of continuing to advance the Green Line as we understand its importance to Calgarians, and I am committed to doing so in collaboration with Green Line, the city and province,” Fraser wrote.
“From the federal government’s perspective, a scope change and recommittal of the full amount of funding to the project would require full details of the project so that we may ensure that the de-scoped project continues to meet the objectives of the ICIP.”
Advocacy groups speak out against, or for, the Green Line
Steve Allan, a member of that committee, told reporters that the advocacy group wants the provincial government to conduct an investigation into the project.
Rethink the Green Line has been vocal with predictions that the true cost of the project as previously envisioned would be closer to $8 billion.
“We’ve had contributions from the province and the feds of $3 billion, so all that additional money . . . is on the backs of Calgary taxpayers,” Allan said.
One of the main reasons the original Green Line requires such a substantially higher budget, according to Allan, is the city’s desire to bore an underground tunnel to build part of the line below downtown.
It’s a decision that presents many engineering difficulties and would drastically drive construction costs up, Allan argued, and would put the city’s “financial future at risk.”
Former Stantec Consulting chief operating officer Barry Lester, another member of the Rethink the Green Line group, agreed that tunnelling under the downtown is unfeasible, primarily due to the proximity of the Bow and Elbow rivers, meaning there is a substantial amount of water below the surface.
“There’s going to be a lot of extra costs,” he said.
“It’s very risky. Do you want to be the guy operating the tunnel-boring machine all through the construction process? I don’t think so. There will be so many extras that come in after they start digging the tunnel. Nobody has been down there. That tunnel is going through uncharted territory.”