Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[Vin]

Originally Posted by DKaz

Edmonton is getting Hyundai-Rotem LRVs for phase 2 of the Valley Line. So two sets of rolling stock and the line isn't even open yet.

Same manufacturer as the rolling stocks of Vancouver-Richmond & airport's Canada Line then.

[DoubleK]

With the Premier's letter to the City of Calgary on wanting to talk about LRT to the airport, what do you think she's specifically talking about?

I'm kinda thinking it would be to go from Saddletowne to the airport vs building out the Green Line?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

With the Premier's letter to the City of Calgary on wanting to talk about LRT to the airport, what do you think she's specifically talking about?

I'm kinda thinking it would be to go from Saddletowne to the airport vs building out the Green Line?

Nothing in particular.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

CAF has been selected to provide the LRVs for Green Line. Opening day of Stage 1 will see 2 car trains with 8 minute headways during peak times.

https://www.calgary.ca/green-line/green-...ity-award-contract-for-lrv-supplier.html

That’s really putting the cart before the horse! A year later, and tracks still aren’t laid! And the article states that Stage 2 will proceed if cost escalations and risks don’t materialize during Stage 1. Well we all know that costs are almost guaranteed to escalate so I guess we will not see Stage 2 for a very long time! Unless Smith can put money where her mouth is!

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

I'm kinda thinking it would be to go from Saddletowne to the airport vs building out the Green Line?

If Smith's comments are actually more concrete than what MalcolmTucker expects it to be, it would certainly have to be from the eastern side of YYC. The Green Line isn't even expected to start real construction until early 2024, and even if everything goes perfectly including funding and planning of future extensions, I doubt it reaches 96th Avenue before the late 2030s. By comparison, the Blue Line just needs an small extension to 88th Ave combined with a people-mover to the terminal.

https://twitter.com/HomelessCalgary/status/1592644986591641600

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by accord1999

https://twitter.com/HomelessCalgary/status/1592644986591641600

Thanks for posting that, that's what I thought I heard (the $1.8B figure)

I googled and came across the Airport Trail Funcitonal Planning Study but didn't find the infographic linked in the twitter post.

Ps. That twitter account is ... something.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Thanks for posting that, that's what I thought I heard (the $1.8B figure)

I googled and came across the Airport Trail Funcitonal Planning Study but didn't find the infographic linked in the twitter post.

I think they used the infographics from the Route Ahead report from the end of 2020, Attachment 3. It's an informative document describing many of the transit projects under study by the City; though frustratingly it does not have anything on Green Line extensions. Hopefully the Route Ahead update for this year will finally have new data on them.

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/...nda&lang=English&Item=20&Tab=attachments

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by accord1999

If Smith's comments are actually more concrete than what MalcolmTucker expects it to be, it would certainly have to be from the eastern side of YYC. The Green Line isn't even expected to start real construction until early 2024, and even if everything goes perfectly including funding and planning of future extensions, I doubt it reaches 96th Avenue before the late 2030s. By comparison, the Blue Line just needs an small extension to 88th Ave combined with a people-mover to the terminal.

https://twitter.com/HomelessCalgary/status/1592644986591641600

A people mover from 88th to the Airport would be a long bumpy ride. The only airport people movers I’ve been on are at YYZ and LGW as a terminal to terminal people mover. Both of those rides lurch and bump along a guideway and therefore thankfully a short distance. Unless there’s better technology for the distance required between 88th and the Terminal, I would much prefer to see the current technology used for that spur line.

[msmariner]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

A people mover from 88th to the Airport would be a long bumpy ride. The only airport people movers I’ve been on are at YYZ and LGW as a terminal to terminal people mover. Both of those rides lurch and bump along a guideway and therefore thankfully a short distance. Unless there’s better technology for the distance required between 88th and the Terminal, I would much prefer to see the current technology used for that spur line.

Wouldn’t it be more practical to extend NE line north up 60th St to Airport Tr. Then through the tunnel to the airport??

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by msmariner

Wouldn’t it be more practical to extend NE line north up 60th St to Airport Tr. Then through the tunnel to the airport??

Well that’s what I was driving at (and I agree with you!), but the Twitter article that was included in the post by accord1999 stated that the intention for the connection from the Blue Line to the airport was to be via a people mover!

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

A people mover from 88th to the Airport would be a long bumpy ride. The only airport people movers I’ve been on are at YYZ and LGW as a terminal to terminal people mover. Both of those rides lurch and bump along a guideway and therefore thankfully a short distance. Unless there’s better technology for the distance required between 88th and the Terminal, I would much prefer to see the current technology used for that spur line.

DEN, SFO and LAS for me. At those airports, the people mover was used to move from terminal to terminal, terminal to rental car center or terminal to rapid transit; ie movements within the airport itself.

Looking forward to Route Ahead as suggested by accord1999, hopefully they have new/updated/better information when they release the update.

[MalcolmTucker]

Newark has a somewhat long people mover - 2 km from the closest terminal to rail transfer. JFK is 7.5 km to a major station, 5.3 km to a minor station (different spurs). Oakland is 5 km. Phoenix is 3 km.

One reason a higher speed, and very frequent, system is preferred is the distance. Hence automated light metro of some sort.

[Nick]

Was the tunnel even designed for a possible transit option. And with the two interchanges built on Airport Tr, is there enough space to have rail transition to run along Airport Tr?

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by Nick

Was the tunnel even designed for a possible transit option. And with the two interchanges built on Airport Tr, is there enough space to have rail transition to run along Airport Tr?

The tunnel and interchanges were designed with Transit in mind.

[craner]

^Of course we lose a traffic lane in each direction in the tunnel.

[countastic]

Latest proposed changes to the Green Line. Less stations, new transit depot location. Revised budget of 6.2 billion to move 32,000 riders per day. What a mess..

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/FileStream.ashx?DocumentId=299072

[Pegasus]

The line to nowhere . . . Instead of building vanity projects why don't the (useless) council and (even more useless) mayor fix or replace aging infrastructure - such as the crumbling water feeder main!!! (Are the four-car trains still trapped in the depot . . . just asking)?

Also, if a new LRT line is so essential I don't understand why the (existing) 7th Avenue track couldn't be used for the Green Line downtown section - surely the extra trains could be accommodated using advanced signalling. Many major cities around the world function quite well with above-ground trams and LRT.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by Pegasus

The line to nowhere . . . Also, if a new LRT line is so essential I don't understand why the (existing) 7th Avenue track couldn't be used for the Green Line downtown section - surely the extra trains could be accommodated using advanced signalling. Many major cities around the world function quite well with above-ground trams and LRT.

Yes it does appear to the line to nowhere at the moment.

Some reasons why the 7th Ave tracks are not ideal for this line include:

1. The selected route doesn’t even travel on 7th avenue.
2. The 7th ave corridor is already getting overcrowded with both the Red and Blue lines using it.

I’m sure there are more reasons, but those are the most obvious to me.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Pegasus

The line to nowhere . . . Instead of building vanity projects why don't the (useless) council and (even more useless) mayor fix or replace aging infrastructure - such as the crumbling water feeder main!!! (Are the four-car trains still trapped in the depot . . . just asking)?

Also, if a new LRT line is so essential I don't understand why the (existing) 7th Avenue track couldn't be used for the Green Line downtown section - surely the extra trains could be accommodated using advanced signalling. Many major cities around the world function quite well with above-ground trams and LRT.

Using the 7th Ave corridor was evaluated in the 2000s.

There is a maximum theoretical capacity of 36 3 car trains per hour entering from the east. The maximum practical capacity is somewhere between 26 trains per hour, and 36, but the number drops slightly as trains are lengthened. I don't think schedules have been able to achieve 30 trains consistently.

At 4 car trains, the combined demand of the North Central, SE, South, and NE lines is 41 trains per hour. SE, South, and NE, is 32 trains per hour.

Easy to see sharing 7th gets maxed out fast. Using 7th necessitates the 8th Ave tunnel earlier, which compared to a 'do nothing' scenario, looks much more expensive.

The evaluation reflects the 'original sin' of the green line. Options are evaluated piecemeal not as a whole, and so, we ended up in this path dependent situation where we are stuck with a project no one is proud of.

[Pegasus]

Sounds like it is time to completely re-evaluate this project, especially as both the Alberta and Federal governments have indicated that a significant scope change will result in a funding review.

"In a letter obtained by Global News, Minster Devin Dreeshen told Calgary’s mayor the province’s $1.53-billion share of the funding is contingent on the Green Line’s final design “fully integrating” with the province’s rail master plan, which is set to be released next year." [Global News May 10, 2024]

". . . federal Housing and Infrastructure minister Sean Fraser said the federal government would need a revised business case by Aug. 15 to confirm its funding for the line." [Global News July 31, 2024]

Also need to change the name of this thread ($4.6 Billion Project) . . .