Calgary Public Transit II

[polishavenger]

Originally Posted by mersar

Sounds like the T&T Committee has officially axed the Nose Creek and 4th Street alignments for the Green Line. Final decision on which of Centre Street or Edmonton Trail to go to council near end of the year.

Huge relief, good to see planners thinking about the big picture and the needs of all residents rather than just one part of the city. Going the cheaper route in this case would have ultimately cost much more when all externalities are factored in.

[*Stardust*]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgar...e+north+central+route/9609855/story.html

Just saw this article on Calgary Herald. I think underground would be better for sure. That comment by Druh is interesting though. The project being 2 or 3 decades off? Oh my goodness


"Some big questions linger for planners of a north-central LRT route — and one’s even larger than whether it runs along Edmonton Trail or Centre Street.

How to get across the Bow River? Council will likely decide by December whether to tunnel underground and re-emerge on the north side of the river, or put light rails along the Centre Street Bridge.

LRT route

Both options have their downsides, council’s transportation committee was told Wednesday. Charting across the 98-year-old bridge will take out two lanes of traffic on a heavily used crossing, and engineers aren’t certain yet whether the structure could handle trains.

Burrowing beneath the Bow River and then up the bluffs would cost several times more than an above-ground solution. Transit planners also say the train wouldn’t emerge at street level until north of 16th Avenue N., meaning it would be expensive to provide underground stations for residents in Crescent Heights.

“I don’t want this just to be a suburban system. It needs to provide value for all users,” said Coun. Druh Farrell, who represents that neighbourhood.

The project is likely two to three decades off as part of a $5-billion route between the north end and south hospital. But the city has been consulting residents in areas like Tuxedo and Huntington Hills for several years on this long-range decision council will make soon.

The LRT’s future route through downtown and to connect with the future southeast line is more determined — a tunnel downtown at 2nd Street S.W. that cuts across 10th Avenue S.E. North of Beddington Trail, there is land set aside for a train to roll down the centre of Harvest Hills Boulevard.

But in between the core and Nose Creek Valley, the city hasn’t yet decided whether to use Edmonton Trail or Centre Street. (The planners’ report discards two unlikely alignment options: Nose Creek valley and 4th Street S.W.) In either case, a train line would likely take out the two centre lanes of car traffic so the city minimizes its need to acquire more property, said senior transit planner Jonathan Lea.

Coun. Sean Chu, councillor said he somewhat prefers Edmonton Trail as a train route, but isn’t sure where it makes most sense to share the street.

Lea noted that Centre Street currently handles 30,000 daily bus passengers and fewer than 20,000 cars. Already, there are plans for a bus-only lane for the area before LRT, likely down Centre Street.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald"

[DizzyEdge]

Would LRT take two lanes if it was elevated?

This seems like less than 1 lane

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=vancouver...LdyVReFfDbnJOc4QN7xg&cbp=12,36.1,,0,7.69

[milomilo]

20-30 years? If that's the case these studies are a waste of time and money, anything could happen in that time.

[DizzyEdge]

[H.E.Pennypacker]

^ Ew... Bury that line please...

[Cage]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Would LRT take two lanes if it was elevated?

This seems like less than 1 lane

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=vancouver...LdyVReFfDbnJOc4QN7xg&cbp=12,36.1,,0,7.69

Your URL indicates Number 3 road in Richmond. Prior to RAV line buildout, 3 road was six lanes wide, post RAV line its four lanes wide, so this confirms that elevated guideway would takeup at least 2 lanes.

The big question is how could at grade only take up 2 lanes, even considering low floor LRT option?

[Fuzz]

This seams silly. Centre street bridge? In 30 years that's going to be the biggest regret ever. Whats wrong with coming above ground at first st SW, build a new bridge FFS and into the bluff, underground to 20th ave or so. And seriously Druh, people in Crescent Heights can walk to 16th ave. We don't need a station as soon as it exists downtown. The distance form Eau Claire to 16th ave is 1.6km, its not that far.

[O-tacular]

That 20-30 year timeline assumes there won't be additional funding I take it? Otherwise that is simply unacceptable. In 20 to 30 years the city will be unrecognizable and likely 25% larger with the SE quadrant being one of the largest growth areas. That is fucking insane.

[lineman]

Obviously, as a homeowner in Crescent Heights, I'd prefer the line buried and hope the Centre street bridge and approach is above the max allowable grade of 6% to end that ridiculous short-sighted idea of running it at grade up the bridge. Also, I don't see how this would to connect to the preferred 2nd St SW alignment.

The Edmonton Trail at grade option is even more ridiculous as the grade up that hill is even steeper. The only way to active this would be build an approach ramp.



As I think more about it, barring personal interests, have it underground it's a more logical choice.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

This seams silly. Centre street bridge? In 30 years that's going to be the biggest regret ever. Whats wrong with coming above ground at first st SW, build a new bridge FFS and into the bluff, underground to 20th ave or so. And seriously Druh, people in Crescent Heights can walk to 16th ave. We don't need a station as soon as it exists downtown. The distance form Eau Claire to 16th ave is 1.6km, its not that far.

Building a bridge and tunnelling through the bluffs is my preferred option - but then again I think rail infrastructure looks good - I'm not sure that the idea would be as popular with others. I do however think it's entirely reasonable to have a station between downtown and 16th. Sunnyside is similarly close to downtown and that's the best station on the whole network.

Did anybody have any thoughts on the low-floor decision? While I think low-floor is great for on-street transit, that doesn't seem to be the direction this line is going in, which is a high capacity limited stop service, negating the benefits of low floor trains.

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

That 20-30 year timeline assumes there won't be additional funding I take it? Otherwise that is simply unacceptable. In 20 to 30 years the city will be unrecognizable and likely 25% larger with the SE quadrant being one of the largest growth areas. That is fucking insane.

If we are talking 20 years to build out, tunnelling under the river and underground to 16th should be the choice. Calgary will be a fairly large city by then, and traffic issues around crescent heights will be considerable. By then Nobody will think the removal of traffic lanes for LRT would be a good idea.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Building a bridge and tunnelling through the bluffs is my preferred option - but then again I think rail infrastructure looks good - I'm not sure that the idea would be as popular with others. I do however think it's entirely reasonable to have a station between downtown and 16th. Sunnyside is similarly close to downtown and that's the best station on the whole network.

Did anybody have any thoughts on the low-floor decision? While I think low-floor is great for on-street transit, that doesn't seem to be the direction this line is going in, which is a high capacity limited stop service, negating the benefits of low floor trains.

Most of the line is on-street. Many of the low floor benefits like cheaper and less intrusive stations are still present. High floor trains have essentially no benefit.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Building a bridge and tunnelling through the bluffs is my preferred option - but then again I think rail infrastructure looks good - I'm not sure that the idea would be as popular with others. I do however think it's entirely reasonable to have a station between downtown and 16th. Sunnyside is similarly close to downtown and that's the best station on the whole network.

Did anybody have any thoughts on the low-floor decision? While I think low-floor is great for on-street transit, that doesn't seem to be the direction this line is going in, which is a high capacity limited stop service, negating the benefits of low floor trains.

Sunnyside is busier because it is a destination and there is SAIT, Northill and the University upstream. Crescent Heights has nothing compared to Sunnyside, and I don't see it building out like that. There are really no destinations north for Crescent Heights travellers to go, and southbound during rush hour? Good luck getting on. I don't think we should be building a milk run. Sunnyside is also farther than the larger east end of downtown. The reality of the North Central line is that it is going to be all about moving commuters, and not much more. 16th ave area is really the only area ripe to develop any sort of retail destination for a long long time into the future.

As for low floor, I was surprised to hear they had made up their minds. All the images of low floor trains look to have lower capacity. I'm not totally against low floor, but if it is the case, it seams they have also decided that making this whole thing street level is the way they are going to go, so we can probably forget about tunnels, elevated tracks and anything sensible. 50 years from now people are really going to wonder why we made such a mickey mouse decision.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

Most of the line is on-street. Many of the low floor benefits like cheaper and less intrusive stations are still present. High floor trains have essentially no benefit.

Almost none of the SE LRT, as planned, runs on street. The only portion of the NC LRT that has a set path is in the median of Harvest Hills Boulevard as opposed to in the curb lane where low platforms serve a purpose.

High floor trains have plenty of benefits. There are reasons why they are built and why all heavy rail systems use them.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

Most of the line is on-street. Many of the low floor benefits like cheaper and less intrusive stations are still present. High floor trains have essentially no benefit.

Higher capacity and fleet interchangeability are two benefits. Is there going to be any street running? I don't think there is any on the SE section where the route is fairly well developed, and I believe the north of Beddington Trail section has been given a right of way, leaving only the northern section of Centre Street undecided (assuming the underground option is taken) to potentially be running on-street. Even so, I wouldn't call that mostly.

Fuzz has pretty much lined out why I disagree with that particular decision. Additionally, whatever we build now will be permanent and with us for decades, potentially centuries. Let's get it right.

[mellbell416]

Since the timeline for the North LRT is getting stretched into the future, does that mean that the SE LRT will be built ahead Of the North LRT?

Waiting decades for North LRT doesn't even seem possible given the heavy bus traffic on Centre Street Bridge - I would think that it would hit a capacity limit during peak hours before then...

[VIce]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

That 20-30 year timeline assumes there won't be additional funding I take it? Otherwise that is simply unacceptable. In 20 to 30 years the city will be unrecognizable and likely 25% larger with the SE quadrant being one of the largest growth areas. That is fucking insane.

Being only 25% larger after 20 years is an annual growth of less one percent... even with a slowdown at 2-3% growth, you're looking at a doubling in that timeframe.

[J-D]

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgar...e+north+central+route/9609855/story.html

Just saw this article on Calgary Herald. I think underground would be better for sure. That comment by Druh is interesting though. The project being 2 or 3 decades off? Oh my goodness


"Some big questions linger for planners of a north-central LRT route — and one’s even larger than whether it runs along Edmonton Trail or Centre Street.

How to get across the Bow River? Council will likely decide by December whether to tunnel underground and re-emerge on the north side of the river, or put light rails along the Centre Street Bridge.

LRT route

Both options have their downsides, council’s transportation committee was told Wednesday. Charting across the 98-year-old bridge will take out two lanes of traffic on a heavily used crossing, and engineers aren’t certain yet whether the structure could handle trains.

Burrowing beneath the Bow River and then up the bluffs would cost several times more than an above-ground solution. Transit planners also say the train wouldn’t emerge at street level until north of 16th Avenue N., meaning it would be expensive to provide underground stations for residents in Crescent Heights.

“I don’t want this just to be a suburban system. It needs to provide value for all users,” said Coun. Druh Farrell, who represents that neighbourhood.

The project is likely two to three decades off as part of a $5-billion route between the north end and south hospital. But the city has been consulting residents in areas like Tuxedo and Huntington Hills for several years on this long-range decision council will make soon.

The LRT’s future route through downtown and to connect with the future southeast line is more determined — a tunnel downtown at 2nd Street S.W. that cuts across 10th Avenue S.E. North of Beddington Trail, there is land set aside for a train to roll down the centre of Harvest Hills Boulevard.

But in between the core and Nose Creek Valley, the city hasn’t yet decided whether to use Edmonton Trail or Centre Street. (The planners’ report discards two unlikely alignment options: Nose Creek valley and 4th Street S.W.) In either case, a train line would likely take out the two centre lanes of car traffic so the city minimizes its need to acquire more property, said senior transit planner Jonathan Lea.

Coun. Sean Chu, councillor said he somewhat prefers Edmonton Trail as a train route, but isn’t sure where it makes most sense to share the street.

Lea noted that Centre Street currently handles 30,000 daily bus passengers and fewer than 20,000 cars. Already, there are plans for a bus-only lane for the area before LRT, likely down Centre Street.

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald"

20-30 years seems absurdly far away. As for Druh's comment - history is great, but it shouldn't play a deciding role in major infrastructure projects.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by polishavenger

Huge relief, good to see planners thinking about the big picture and the needs of all residents rather than just one part of the city. Going the cheaper route in this case would have ultimately cost much more when all externalities are factored in.

That is easy to do when you have zero responsibility for producing anything other than a bound report for something everyone involved knows won't be built in any form for decades.