Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Do they? The older churches, like on 4th st by 30th ave and up 4th st and Northmount don't seam to have those parking requirements. The result is cars all over the place in Sundays. I tried to go to the Shoppers Drug Mart, and their parking lot was full of church goers. Maybe churches should run a Sunday bus if they don't want to accommodate cars.

Originally Posted by fusili

Those older churches are grandfathered. Or, properly stated, they are legal non-conforming uses (they have a DP, or were built before we had a land use bylaw, or in a weird year, 1973 I think it was, when we didn't have a land use bylaw, but are now not in conformance with the bylaw as it stands today). Most inner city churches don't have much parking at all, which is why they are so valuable. It would be impossible to get a church like that approved today.

I live half a block from an older church that has minimal parking and expect for 3-4 hrs (2 on Saturdays & 2 on Sundays) a week I see little impact from a parking perspective. The bigger impact is that they use part of a city park for parking so it has ruined the area.

Originally Posted by VerticalCity

I know because I've attended their church for quite some time. The main mega-building is used primarily for their huge weekend services, and could possibly be re-purposed to have smaller gathering spaces/classrooms, but it would be costly. The building on Centre Street has many classroom spaces as well as a gym and hosts gatherings for youth/university students, ESL classes, recreational basketball etc.

They probably could and would continue the community involvement, but with less capacity to host the above type of activities. That being said, the building right on centre street does have too much parking, and the city probably could make an arrangement to turn some of that chronically empty lot into a smaller park-and-ride.

Centre Street church would probably be one of the main drivers for off-peak usage of a station at this location, especially on the weekend.

CT has a deal with the church south of Crowchild at Dalhousie station for park and ride, or at least they did in the past.

[Aegis]

My understanding is that the Green Line will use transit vehicles compatible with at-grade stations rather than the current setup on the Red and Blue lines.

Can we expect that these vehicles will travel at the same potential rate of speed as the existing rolling stock? Or would they be slower?

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Aegis

My understanding is that the Green Line will use transit vehicles compatible with at-grade stations rather than the current setup on the Red and Blue lines.

Can we expect that these vehicles will travel at the same potential rate of speed as the existing rolling stock? Or would they be slower?

You can expect the vehicles to have the same maximum speed, 80 km/h (see this Siemens S70 brochure, as one example of a low-floor train: http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility...ms-and-light-rail/brochure-avenio-en.pdf)

Notwithstanding any other factors, like curve radius, etc. I have no idea whether the S70 or other train allows a smaller radius or requires a larger radius for a given speed, compared to U2/SD160.

[Nudrock]

Looking at the front page of that brochure...if I were a C-Train driver, I would feel a lot safer driving an older trains than in one of these new low-flow trains when it comes to a front end collision at an at-grade crossing.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

You can expect the vehicles to have the same maximum speed, 80 km/h (see this Siemens S70 brochure, as one example of a low-floor train: http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility...ms-and-light-rail/brochure-avenio-en.pdf)

Notwithstanding any other factors, like curve radius, etc. I have no idea whether the S70 or other train allows a smaller radius or requires a larger radius for a given speed, compared to U2/SD160.

Yeah - decent max speed but we can expect them to crawl along Centre St at barely 50km/h if lucky and the corners downtown look pretty tight too.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Yeah - decent max speed but we can expect them to crawl along Centre St at barely 50km/h if lucky and the corners downtown look pretty tight too.

That may or may not be the case, but that has nothing to do with high vs. low floor, and everything to do with design of the various rights-of-way.

[sim]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Yeah - decent max speed but we can expect them to crawl along Centre St at barely 50km/h if lucky and the corners downtown look pretty tight too.

Tight corners are one aspect that will make a tram such as the Siemens 570 (posted) more favourable. These vehicles have bogies that have wheels that turn independently - there is no axle - thus, there is less friction in tighter turns and they can be made more quickly without as much stress on the wheels/bogie and the track.

That I know of, independent wheels are the reason that these true low-floor type of LRVs can exist - the floor does not have to raise over an axle.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

That may or may not be the case, but that has nothing to do with high vs. low floor, and everything to do with design of the various rights-of-way.

Yeah, sorry should have made it more clear. There are plenty of slow points on the current network too - I hope we can avoid these on the new line.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Aegis

My understanding is that the Green Line will use transit vehicles compatible with at-grade stations rather than the current setup on the Red and Blue lines.

Can we expect that these vehicles will travel at the same potential rate of speed as the existing rolling stock? Or would they be slower?

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

You can expect the vehicles to have the same maximum speed, 80 km/h (see this Siemens S70 brochure, as one example of a low-floor train: http://www.mobility.siemens.com/mobility...ms-and-light-rail/brochure-avenio-en.pdf)

Notwithstanding any other factors, like curve radius, etc. I have no idea whether the S70 or other train allows a smaller radius or requires a larger radius for a given speed, compared to U2/SD160.

The truth is that with stop spacing <1.6 km, the train will only reach max speed for a moment (if that) between most stops. Between 16th ave and inglewood, I don't think the train will go faster than 40km/hr.

Still, low floor trains can go just as fast as their predecessors, and it's a smart idea to design the system for speeds faster than it will ordinarily use.

[PPAR]

With so many fundamental aspects of this project yet to be determined, I don't see how anyone can dictate the equipment that will be used.

[milomilo]

It seems it was decided years ago when the SELRT was being developed to use low floor trains and I see no reason why they would change that now. I can't remember if there is an official comment on train length, but I seem to remember 5 cars, 150m max mentioned somewhere which would be reasonable and sensible.

[MalcolmTucker]

Will be interesting to see how much innovation the eventual RFQ then RFP allows for.

This project will require enough vehicles that it basically is an opportunity to develop an entirely new model, or use any model that already exists. A huge optimization problem. We can do wider trains for the first time, or longer individual vehicles. If we do wider trains, do the stations need to be as long? Is it easier to build a wider station or a longer station even if both have the same area?

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Will be interesting to see how much innovation the eventual RFQ then RFP allows for.

This project will require enough vehicles that it basically is an opportunity to develop an entirely new model, or use any model that already exists. A huge optimization problem. We can do wider trains for the first time, or longer individual vehicles. If we do wider trains, do the stations need to be as long? Is it easier to build a wider station or a longer station even if both have the same area?

LRT widths are pretty standard in North America; vehicles 2650 mm wide and 4 foot 8 1/2 inch track gauge, and that's true across manufacturers and cities. There is some room for innovation on length, particularly longer vehicles with open gangways. But the width is pretty well fixed; there's a huge market now at that width (especially at low floor height).

[milomilo]

I never thought the existing trains were very narrow anyway, are they?

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

The truth is that with stop spacing <1.6 km, the train will only reach max speed for a moment (if that) between most stops. Between 16th ave and inglewood, I don't think the train will go faster than 40km/hr.

Still, low floor trains can go just as fast as their predecessors, and it's a smart idea to design the system for speeds faster than it will ordinarily use.

I don't think it should stop at 9th ave north.

[holhm22]

Originally Posted by milomilo

I never thought the existing trains were very narrow anyway, are they?

I always thought that they were pretty narrow; maybe the seating arrangement affected my perception. But it is LRT, so of course it won't be particularly wide.

[ClaytonA]

First phase of rail (if it's phased) will be from at least 4th St SE to Sheppard Station;

LRTontheGreen
@LRTontheGreen

Info from Shepard Station open house: New LRV storage & maintenance facility will be co-located with station (similar to McKnight/Westwinds)

6:25 PM - 10 Sep 2015

https://mobile.twitter.com/LRTontheGreen/status/642146930978516992?p=v

[andasen]

Really great stuff came out of the Design Charrette for the South Hill Station Area from this last week.

Highlights
The design team has divided the walking area into 8 subdistricts that will each have its own mix of uses.

-South Hill Village: The area bounded by 24th Street, Glenmore, the Canal/Tracks, and 86th Ave. Six story high street with street retail and primarily residential above with options for office and hotel uses. Calgary Transit is currently looking at having 14 Bus routes run out of this station. An idea that came out of the Charette that the team really liked was developing a market space around the Cheese Factory.

West South Hill: Bounded by Glenmore, 24th and Riverbend. Transitional mixed use area stepping up the density moving from lower densities adjacent to Riverbend to higher adjacent to 24th.

Mobile Home Parks: These will be retained with the existing uses through the medium term. Options for gradual redevelopment of these sites possible into the long term. Primary focus for change will be the formalization of green spaces south of the mobile home parks and establishing a pathway connection linking the Natural Gas ROW along the Trailer Parks to the Station. Also new access for the South Hill Park via 90th Ave

North Glenmore: Commercial area North of Glenmore - looking to renew this area, potentially redeveloping it to be orientated towards Ogden Road. Focus on professional services and seniors amenities were a priority for the community.

South East Ogden: Residential area bounded by the old Legion site, a green space, Glenmore and Ogden Rd. Intensification of residential within a low rise profile. Possibility of community retail. Future of Legion was not considered as part of the Charrette process, nor was it brought up by the community members.

Foremost Lands: Area South of the Green Line Alignment around the Foremost Lands. No plans to touch the Foremost building proper but Park 'n' Ride facilities North of building up to the tracks.

East Employment: Area east of the Canal, South of Glenmore. Office intensive use along the lines of Quarry Park with new pedestrian connection across the tracks and canal. Idea of having this bridge structure tied into retail nodes at each end ala the plus 15 network was discussed extensively.

Northeast Quarter: North of Glenmore, East of Canal. City really wanted ideas on this site, community had no interest in discussing options for redevelopment. Only concern that came up was related to Truck access from EB Glenmore to 30th St.

IIRC the projections for the 30 year time horizon enable up to 7000 units of apartments/town houses and half a million square feet of office in the south hill area.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by andasen

Really great stuff came out of the Design Charrette for the South Hill Station Area from this last week.

<snip>

Northeast Quarter: North of Glenmore, East of Canal. City really wanted ideas on this site, community had no interest in discussing options for redevelopment. Only concern that came up was related to Truck access from EB Glenmore to 30th St.

I can kind of get that, coming up with ideas for a chunk of industrial that's part of a gigantic contiguous industrial park doesn't exactly stimulate the imagination. All of the other areas though are prime for improvements.

[UofC.engineer]

Report so be presented to city council:

http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sirepub/...gudwmgcgeswl/37312710132015090656477.PDF

Looks like the plan is to still build a BRT then go to LRT later. I thought with the additional funding LRT could be built right away.