Calgary Public Transit II

[Ferreth]

I think the public debate around this will revolve around if spending $500 mil is worth avoiding a bridge crossing over the end of Prince's Island. $500 mil is most of what we need to bury the South/NW line in downtown - worth in in my books, but people are funny about bridge crossings in this city.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by fusili

The at grade option still has to bury under 16th avenue, so the difference is 810m for that option vs 1575m for the bridge option. The bridge involves about 100m more downtown tunneling as well. So you are looking at $100M for 865m of extra tunnel and a new bridge. Also, I believe there is some structural reinforcement needed on the centre street bridge for that option.

So the cost difference is about $130m per km? Would cost another $600m to tunnel all the way to 64th (perhaps less, if we are needing to tunnel under McKnight), where the alignment clears. That would be well worth it in my opinion - would allow much faster speeds (I'm guessing at least 80km/h compared to maybe 50km/h max at grade), no limits on station length or frequency and much less risk of collisions.

[Fuzz]

I'm surprised to see a lot of redevelopment taking place between around 30th and 40th ave. It used to be junker houses, a bunch are being torn down and new stuff being built. Why isn't the city holding off allowing this until they decide how much ROW they need? I'd think they should be buying up whatever they can given its going to be a a construction zone and the extra space would be handy for re-routing traffic.

[*Stardust*]

I still think we should go underground. Better to do it right the first time! I really want Calgary to eventually bury all the LRT lines downtown and have a subway, and maybe one day go through a Beltline.

When will this final decision be made?

[MalcolmTucker]

I don't think the city can freeze redevelopment as long as it is conforming to the existing zoning.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

I don't think the city can freeze redevelopment as long as it is conforming to the existing zoning.

It just seams odd they were left in such a sorry state for so long and are now being re-developed.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

I still think we should go underground. Better to do it right the first time! I really want Calgary to eventually bury all the LRT lines downtown and have a subway, and maybe one day go through a Beltline.

When will this final decision be made?

Agreed! The city should just bite the bullet and buy a TBM and go to town with it.

8thave Subway, Centre street south of 16thave, Stampede park.

[MalcolmTucker]

As we have seen from Toronto, the TBM isn't the critical path that is holding this up.

[*Stardust*]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

As we have seen from Toronto, the TBM isn't the critical path that is holding this up.

It would be easier to get people around to have a subway. Especially in Beltline. We are overdue in my opinion. What was the population of Toronto or Montreal when they built their subway?

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'm surprised to see a lot of redevelopment taking place between around 30th and 40th ave. It used to be junker houses, a bunch are being torn down and new stuff being built. Why isn't the city holding off allowing this until they decide how much ROW they need? I'd think they should be buying up whatever they can given its going to be a a construction zone and the extra space would be handy for re-routing traffic.

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

I don't think the city can freeze redevelopment as long as it is conforming to the existing zoning.

IIRC, the city has road widening setbacks on Centre Street for most of the length, so the redevelopment should conform to that. Basically there will be a Xm wide buffer along the front property post-redevelopment that the city can purchase at a later date. At least that is the idea.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

It would be easier to get people around to have a subway. Especially in Beltline. We are overdue in my opinion. What was the population of Toronto or Montreal when they built their subway?

For Toronto, using the present boundaries of Toronto the first subway was approved when the population was just over 1 million, and completed when the population was about 1.5 million.

[*Stardust*]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

For Toronto, using the present boundaries of Toronto the first subway was approved when the population was just over 1 million, and completed when the population was about 1.5 million.

So pretty much where we are now. The city needs to get on board (see what I did there?) with building a subway.

[DizzyEdge]

For montreal:

             Approved     Completed
City        1.2 mill        1.3 mill
Island     1.7 mill        1.9 mill
Metro      2.1 mill        2.6 mill

That said, it appears the situation was desperate by the time it was built, with proposals dating back to 1910

So yeah, really with the sorts of ridership, it should go underground or elevated between downtown and the newer communities where a ROW is in place.

[DizzyEdge]

What about something like this:

bridge over Bow
Underground until 40th Ave - 3.6km
elevated from 40th to 60th aves, skirting the edges of the various parks just to the East of Centre - 1.9km
underground from 60th to 64th - 500m
at grade from 64th to Beddington Blvd using the road ROW to the east of Centre - 1.8km
underground from Beddington Blvd to just past Beddington Trail - ~1km

[GreaterMontréal]

The Montréal Métro construction started in 1962.
city : 1,201,559

Green Line , 9 stations in 1966.
Orange Line, 15 stations in 1966
Yellow Line, 3 stations in 1967

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Originally Posted by fusili

1. New bridge over the river.
- Underground from 10th avenue to 3rd avenue. Bridge over the river to a tunnel portal in the bluff. Underground until 20th avenue
- 7th avenue station underground
- 2nd ave station (Eau Claire) at grade
- 9th avenue station underground, about 7m from surface.
- $770M capital cost

This option seems optimal to me - Burying the entire thing at $1.3 billion would be ideal (not to mention a 40m below grade station would add some interesting development options) but that ~550 million could be attributed towards the 8th Ave Subway

[simster3]

Originally Posted by fusili

Really interesting to consider the alignment options from downtown to 16th avenue north. One option shows the route tunneling from 10th avenue to accommodate the 7th avenue station, but then coming up to grade for the Eau Claire station, bridging the river and then going into another tunnel in the bluff until just north of 20th avenue. The advantage of this is that it keeps the tunnels pretty shallow (the 9th avenue N station is only 7m from grade to the top of the tunnel) and doesn't have huge impacts on any major roads. If I read it right, only 2nd avenue downtown will have to be closed at 2nd street. Not a huge loss.

This is how I envisioned it to be done. I hope they go this route.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

This option seems optimal to me - Burying the entire thing at $1.3 billion would be ideal (not to mention a 40m below grade station would add some interesting development options) but that ~550 million could be attributed towards the 8th Ave Subway

Originally Posted by simster3

This is how I envisioned it to be done. I hope they go this route.

I wonder how much influence I had on this alignment. When Stantec came and presented their initial alignments, it was either the centre street bridge, or a subway. I asked whether they had considered coming out of a portal at Eau Claire and straight into a bridge over the river. Maybe they took the comment to heart.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

What about something like this:

bridge over Bow
Underground until 40th Ave - 3.6km
elevated from 40th to 60th aves, skirting the edges of the various parks just to the East of Centre - 1.9km
underground from 60th to 64th - 500m
at grade from 64th to Beddington Blvd using the road ROW to the east of Centre - 1.8km
underground from Beddington Blvd to just past Beddington Trail - ~1km

Whatever is done, I really think it needs to be decently separated from pedestrians/the roads. This is going to be a similar distance from downtown as Crowfoot/Tuscany stations, and the NWLRT already takes a long time to get downtown even with the long 80km/h section down Crowchild. Any on-street section is going to be 50km/h max (probably less) with far more interruptions for signals etc, so getting downtown from the North is going to take an age.

We should be aiming for this line to be at least as good as the lines we already have, not worse by all the important metrics (speed, capacity, frequency).

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by fusili

I wonder how much influence I had on this alignment. When Stantec came and presented their initial alignments, it was either the centre street bridge, or a subway. I asked whether they had considered coming out of a portal at Eau Claire and straight into a bridge over the river. Maybe they took the comment to heart.

I too remember saying this a year ago .

Originally Posted by milomilo

Agree with this too. Centre street is a horrible road for traffic already, there's no way having an LRT on the surface would improve things for anyone, car traffic, buses and LRT would all be dog slow. Ideally have a bridge next to the road bridge and smash into the bluffs and carry on in bored tunnels, it would look awesome! Would be expensive though as it wouldn't be able to surface for a long way north and I don't think cut and cover would be feasible. Once this is done, I'd like to see improvements to Centre St to make it nice for pedestrians, it really isn't an enjoyable street for any road user currently.

And I still think it would look great.