Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadillaccc
Could not agree more. By 2030, Metro Calgary is going to be over two million people, that is almost a certainty. At an average of 2.8% growth per year (less than our average over the past 13 years), we will be there by 2027. We need to stop thinking like a city of 500 000 and more like a city of 2 500 000, because that's where we'll be by the time this thing comes online. A subway down 16th from 24th, under the Bow, under 2nd Street, and under 12th and over the Elbow to Inglewood is pretty much the only sensible option for this city's future. If we're going to put it on the street, we may as well build a damn streetcar system instead. Stop calling it an LRT if it's not going to be one.
|
I think criticism of the on-street approach is over-blown. Not as effective as underground, but given that no one wants to suggest taxes need to be raised, a federal government that couldn't care less about the cities to fund them properly and the provincial government can't seem to figure out a reliable, substantive funding arrangement for a city larger than 100,000 people I can hardly blame Calgary Transit for recommending the view they took. They even say that underground is ideal, but can't afford it with the current arrangement.
With proper coordination and signal priority - as well as dedicated lanes with full priority over auto traffic - on street could be effective. At grade stations, with low-floors and minimal infrastructure can be quite quick. Modern low-floor lines have no requirement for being set in the rock-ballast, they can have paved surfaces to double as emergency lanes for first-responders. Key intersections can be tunneled like 16th Ave and McKnight.
An alternative: Why does this train have to go down 2nd Street at all? Why can't it drop underground between 3rd Ave and 4th Ave on Centre when it exits the bridge and continue deep enough that it goes under the CPR tracks at an angle on Centre to connect with the SELRT? Yes, you miss Eau Claire by a block but put the core transfer station at Centre - 7th Ave - 8th Ave by Telus Convention Centre, the Bow, Telus Sky, Petro-Canada and many other mega-buildings; hardly a poor compromise. Surely this cost would be similar than a weird turn onto 2nd Street before heading underground? But this removes the need to turn awkwardly off the bridge and keeps the speed higher.
Hell, it can re-enter a cut-and-cover tunnel immediately after the Bridge to the North too, essentially keep the entire subway plan, minus the expensive, challenging and awkward grade climb of both avoiding the Centre Street Bridge while being underground under the river.
Not sure if that makes sense, perhaps I need to provide a diagram. But that saves the cost of the deep-bore tunnel, maintains access in Crescent Heights and get's people the underground experience they want. Think of how the Bloor Street subway uses the Prince Edward Viaduct while entering and existing the tunnel just for the bridge structure over the Don Valley in Toronto.
It still requires two lanes of the bridge, but as of 2017 those will be taken away anyway with the BRT lanes. They are hardly needed anyway in a world with vastly improved capacity by adding a LRT like this.
I suppose tunneling under the Tower complex would pose a challenge, as would the interfaces between the tunnel portals (but hardly as difficult as the expensive full underground approach), but that is what the engineers are for. Surely they could figure out how to make that work.
Thoughts?
Prev
Linear Mode
