Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[Fuzz]

Naw, when we are done with the TBM for the green line they should pop a tunnel from the Sunnyside triangle lot down to 8th ave. They could keep the existing line in service until the tunnel was done.

[You Need A Thneed]

You need a entrance and and exit point for a TBM, so if you start from sunnyside, you would have to continue all the way to Olympic Plaza, to connect with the existing tunnel.

Now you have spent an additional billion.

[Fuzz]

Ya, but then we have 2 complete tunnels!

What is the timeframe for the 8th ave subway? Honestly sometimes in this city we do things twice, or 3 or 4 times, costing way more. If there are cost savings to do this, and we move the schedule up by 5 years or something, it might make sense.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Oh, it is entirely possible to have no road crossings in downtown for the red line tunnel while using the existing bridge. You can easily have 80m from tunnel portal to bridge with only some minor road alignment changes, without even taking some Opera House? lands (which would be a natural staging pit).

Totally within the grade climbing capabilities of Calgary's LRVs.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

^ Oh, it is entirely possible to have no road crossings in downtown for the red line tunnel while using the existing bridge. You can easily have 80m from tunnel portal to bridge with only some minor road alignment changes, without even taking some Opera House? lands (which would be a natural staging pit).

Totally within the grade climbing capabilities of Calgary's LRVs.

No road crossings??? But... NW line just gets down to grade mere metres north of 4th Ave. I'm missing something...

[MalcolmTucker]

Not as close as you think:



The yellow line is 80 meters, and there is plenty of room to reconfigure the road more radically to get even more clearance, even without elevating as the original 80s plan contemplated.

More radical plan (still super easy):


If you need even more space:


You can make even larger curves for up to 130m from portal to bridge and still have room for 4 thru lanes. You do create a 'must clear intersection box' situation though.

[googspecial]

I like your thinking with the jughandle. ^^

However if land acquisition is an issue from that parking lot, and without the need longer for the surface tracks along 9 ST - could just revert the whole stretch of street to a 2-way from 9 AVE through to Kensington (or lane reversal). Then have only 2 (possibly 3?) lanes of 4 AVE continue on to Bow Trail without permitting any turns. Not ideal, but could be potentially cheaper as well, plus having more northbound access routes to the bridge.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ It is a public lot: https://www.calgaryparking.com/findp...ocations/lot58

[CalgaryAlex]

Damn, never thought about that. Good idea!

[mellbell416]

So what do you all think?? Will the provincial government come through with Green Line fund commitment before October? Sounds like the SE section would have to go ahead of the north section if they don't meet that deadline...😬

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...nding-deadline

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Not as close as you think:

I have another idea.

No need for the tunnel to go down 9th street. Why not re-align the south bridge landing to go diagonally across that parking lot. Then southwards underground down 8th street instead of 9th. This solution would also shorten the tunnel distance required.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by mellbell416

So what do you all think?? Will the provincial government come through with Green Line fund commitment before October? Sounds like the SE section would have to go ahead of the north section if they don't meet that deadline...😬

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...nding-deadline

Not sure if cabinet can set up the carbon tax capital flow program on its own, or whether it is preferable to establish it with legislation. I bet there will be enough assurance of funding that the city will move forward.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

Removing the Red Line from 7th Ave means we can achieve 90-120 second headways on the Blue Line (more than double current capacity) because (1) there are no RedLine LRT trains obviously, and (2) the Blue Line doesn't have the short-block signal conflicts at 4th/5th/6th Ave that the Red line does which significantly contribute to delays.



Why?

Even when Calgary has a population of 3 million, it will be unlikely that the 4-car Blue Line will be at capacity. Red and Green, however, will likely need 5 trains (perhaps continuous cars) eventually. This is too long to fit on a surface block. Of course, with north-south routes, even 3 cars is too long for a block, and E-W avenues are busier than N-S streets.



Truth. Also, thanks for the handy map you provided above.



I like your out-of-the-box idea, but I'm afraid it might amount to making pedestrians and cyclists pay for auto and train convenience. That said, some cities have put their roads and rails completely underground (i.e. Chicago), but unfortunately I don't expect we'll ever see the labour and market conditions to make that possible here. I'd be okay with all downtown being covered with a +15 outdoor walk space... (effectively moving roads underground) but I don't think that's what you're getting at.

I would hope that the city will develop plans to bury the Red Line under 7 Ave and plan infrastructure and utilities accordingly. Just to avoid screwing ourselves over. That said, I can't see it being required in the next 50 years, if ever. The 36 St NE section of the Red Line will fail long before the 7 Ave portion. I could see grade separation there being a necessity in the 25 to 50 year horizon.

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

I would hope that the city will develop plans to bury the Red Line under 7 Ave and plan infrastructure and utilities accordingly. Just to avoid screwing ourselves over. That said, I can't see it being required in the next 50 years, if ever. The 36 St NE section of the Red Line will fail long before the 7 Ave portion. I could see grade separation there being a necessity in the 25 to 50 year horizon.

I think you mean the Blue line?

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

I would hope that the city will develop plans to bury the Red Line under 7 Ave and plan infrastructure and utilities accordingly. Just to avoid screwing ourselves over. That said, I can't see it being required in the next 50 years, if ever. The 36 St NE section of the Red Line will fail long before the 7 Ave portion. I could see grade separation there being a necessity in the 25 to 50 year horizon.

I think you mean the Blue Line too, and let me explain why I think it will never be moved underground. There is almost no benefit to be gained. Until ridership demands it, any grade separation downtown would be solely to the benefit of the few cars that cross 7th Ave, which would presumably have to wait for signalized surface auto traffic anyway.

There are a lot of options for increasing capacity on the Blue Line before we have to dig:
-133% increase to capacity by adding 4th car on all trains (already happening)
-200-300% increase to capacity by removing the Red Line from 7th Ave
-125% increase from continuous cars
That compounds and totals to a possible increase in capacity of 663% before 4-car station lengths can't handle the loads. The employment and population growth in the NE and W would need to see dramatic changes to get anywhere close to generating that kind of ridership, even in 50 years.

For the price of burying the Blue Line, we could service an entire other part of the city, i.e. 17th Ave SE, YYC, or commuter rail. In fact, the only way the Blue Line could possibly grow its ridership by anywhere close to 7x of what it is now is with the help of a MRU/37th St SW spur, which again would probably take priority over 7th Ave and cost about the same.

Then consider the cost and feasibility of extending suburban Blue Line Stations to service 5-car trains. It may not even be possible at some stations like Westbrook.

I think most of the proponent of burying 7th Ave c-trains either (a) falsely believe it will somehow improve traffic congestion downtown or (b) do not fully grasp how much capacity can be added and congestion removed by burying the Red Line.

May as well get used to 7th Ave being at grade, because it likely won't change in our lifetimes. Anyway, I kind of like the accessibility and visibility.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by PPAR

I have another idea.

No need for the tunnel to go down 9th street. Why not re-align the south bridge landing to go diagonally across that parking lot. Then southwards underground down 8th street instead of 9th. This solution would also shorten the tunnel distance required.

This is an interesting idea, but I see some obvious consequences:
-the loss of taxable, developable, waterfront land (although there'd be enough left for a smaller development, and you'd gain excavatable land along the current 9th st route)
-the the west-most downtown Red Line station would have to be moved 0.5-1 block east, reducing access from the west end, although there could still be an 8th&8th station entrance servicing Beltline access
-the use of Century Gardens for excavating the turn

If we went with 8th St, I'd consider putting a station under 8th St between 4th and 8th Aves. I'd also consider moving the westbound Blue Line station b/w 6-7th Aves one block west b/w 7-8th Aves. And I'd improve Century Gardens and the 8th St corridor project at the same time.

As I flesh out your idea in my head, I think I like it more and more.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I think you mean the Blue Line too, and let me explain why I think it will never be moved underground. There is almost no benefit to be gained. Until ridership demands it, any grade separation downtown would be solely to the benefit of the few cars that cross 7th Ave, which would presumably have to wait for signalized surface auto traffic anyway.

There are a lot of options for increasing capacity on the Blue Line before we have to dig:
-133% increase to capacity by adding 4th car on all trains (already happening)
-200-300% increase to capacity by removing the Red Line from 7th Ave
-125% increase from continuous cars
That compounds and totals to a possible increase in capacity of 663% before 4-car station lengths can't handle the loads. The employment and population growth in the NE and W would need to see dramatic changes to get anywhere close to generating that kind of ridership, even in 50 years.

For the price of burying the Blue Line, we could service an entire other part of the city, i.e. 17th Ave SE, YYC, or commuter rail. In fact, the only way the Blue Line could possibly grow its ridership by anywhere close to 7x of what it is now is with the help of a MRU/37th St SW spur, which again would probably take priority over 7th Ave and cost about the same.

Then consider the cost and feasibility of extending suburban Blue Line Stations to service 5-car trains. It may not even be possible at some stations like Westbrook.

I think most of the proponent of burying 7th Ave c-trains either (a) falsely believe it will somehow improve traffic congestion downtown or (b) do not fully grasp how much capacity can be added and congestion removed by burying the Red Line.

May as well get used to 7th Ave being at grade, because it likely won't change in our lifetimes. Anyway, I kind of like the accessibility and visibility.

While I agree with what you have said - I think your math is wrong. You can't add the percentages like that, you should be multiplying. Using your values, 1.33 x 3 x 1.25 = 5.

I'd also think the city wouldn't return to the max frequency on 7th we see now - it's clearly too much for it to handle. So 2x frequency would be more likely. The increase to 4 car trains also apparently leads to a 25% increase in capacity in practise, as the frequency is reduced. Using those figures, a 313% increase in capacity is able to be achieved - still substantial but not 7x.

Sorry to nit-pick I just think it's important the right data is used, as I'm sure most do!

[You Need A Thneed]

^ your math isn't quite right, but the point is.

Edit: Beaten

[RyLucky]

Damn math! haha. Next time I'm going to use a calculator.

Anyway, we've got a lot of room to grow before we need to dig. I also forgot to mention driverless trains (+capacity, +frequency, although the technology is still improving).

[Myke]

Seems like 12th Ave Underground is an option again.

http://www.beltlineyyc.ca/12_avenue_underground_is_back