Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[milomilo]

Had a look at the Paris example - it's more of a tram train hence the ability to use 25kV AC and if it's planned on street extensions take place then the trains dual-voltage system will be used at 750V DC in those areas.

It seems AC is used to take advantage of higher voltages, which would be unsafe in urban environments (I'm also no expert on electrical stuff), so it's really only used on mainlines.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Why is AC preferred for LRV applications? Large scale transmission is moving toward DC because of the efficiencies it provides. Have LRVs gone to induction motors?

Bolded section is categorically false. DC is only used for bulk point to point transfer over extremely large distances.

[lineman]

MalcolmTucker and DoubleK are both correct. Although HVDC also makes sense in long distance underground/underwater applications (less capacitance in the insulation than AC) and where an asynchronous connection would be beneficial like an intertie between AB and SK (the respective grids are off by a fraction of a hertz).

[Bcasey25raptor]

So I assume the federal, provincial, and municipal funding for this is assured. Knowing this, when do you think construction on this could begin at the earliest?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

So I assume the federal, provincial, and municipal funding for this is assured. Knowing this, when do you think construction on this could begin at the earliest?

The province hasn't 'signed on the dotted line' but in Alberta there is an odd tradition of not announcing things unless they are in the budget. The battle with the province is over what pot the money comes out of, as there are some pots where it is net new dollars (like the carbon take transit funding program that is let to be announced let alone designed), and others where it would be a carve out allocation from within an existing dedicated transfer that is expiring soon but no one expects to not be continued.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

So I assume the federal, provincial, and municipal funding for this is assured. Knowing this, when do you think construction on this could begin at the earliest?

The intended start date is still sometime in 2017 from what I know. They've already started geologic testing along the route for the subway, and the Southeastern half of the line is already mostly designed.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

The intended start date is still sometime in 2017 from what I know. They've already started geologic testing along the route for the subway, and the Southeastern half of the line is already mostly designed.

That's fantastic.

I'm really impressed with calgary as of late. You guys are doing a lot right at the moment and the proper federal and provincial government is just icing on the cake.

I hope to be out there this summer for a few weeks.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

The intended start date is still sometime in 2017 from what I know. They've already started geologic testing along the route for the subway, and the Southeastern half of the line is already mostly designed.

I am a little concerned that the downtown/inner city stretch will be botched, not just because of the hurry to get built, but because also because it may also follow the same pattern of previous designs to maximize overall length at the cost of functionality for some key areas, in this case Downtown and the Beltline. The Greenline can't be seen as simplistically as a transportation project, with only lip-service paid to the city-building qualities to it.

Biggest potential misplays that could be born out of the "maximize efficiency to the surburbs" ideology:

• Elevated structure through downtown: will kill any hope of street life and make transfers painful for anyone switching lines.
  
• Access to Beltline: I hope rumours are true to have the Greenline turn on 12th rather than 10th to make it much more functional to the fastest growing, most mixed use neighbourhood we have. Ignoring the development there (existing, current and proposed in the future) is a huge wasted opportunity to connect the 23,000 living there currently (and upwards of 40 - 50,000 nearing full build out), not to mention the city's second largest office concentration after the CBD and only neighbourhood attempting to become a 24-hour destination. All efforts to make the line accessible to the neighbourhood should be done. It has the highest trip-origin/destination potential of any stop on the Greenline outside the CBD proper.
  
• Poorly integrated transfer station on 2nd Street: 2nd street and 8th/7th Avenue will become the defacto heart of the transportation network. All efforts to design this properly should be take to maximize transfer efficiency. This would also be a no-brainer decision for a regional / intercity rail connection along 9th Avenue where the existing CPR station infrastructure is currently. Huge missed opportunity if it isn't built in a way to integrate nicely at this location

[lubicon]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

So I assume the federal, provincial, and municipal funding for this is assured. Knowing this, when do you think construction on this could begin at the earliest?

City - yes
Province - no
Federal - no. At least not formally although both the previous and current government have hinted that they will pony up their share.

[MalcolmTucker]

I think access to the Beltline could be easily put in the tender for a 'tell us the additional costs, and if you can stay within the approved envelope with it' with a rather pain-free motion at council. Then council later in camera can decide whether to raise the budget/direct savings to add it if needed.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by MasterG

[LIST][*]Access to Beltline: I hope rumours are true to have the Greenline turn on 12th rather than 10th to make it much more functional to the fastest growing, most mixed use neighbourhood we have. Ignoring the development there (existing, current and proposed in the future) is a huge wasted opportunity to connect the 23,000 living there currently (and upwards of 40 - 50,000 nearing full build out), not to mention the city's second largest office concentration after the CBD and only neighbourhood attempting to become a 24-hour destination. All efforts to make the line accessible to the neighbourhood should be done.

What would 12th rather than 10th do to the plan for up and coming Inglewood?

Plus, isn't the Beltline close enough to walk?

Oh, and you're already a 24 hour destination (a'la — kings).

Originally Posted by MasterG

It has the highest trip-origin/destination potential of any stop on the Greenline outside the CBD proper.

I don't believe that to be true. I highly suspect North Pointe would be right up there. It already has a catchment of 40-50,000 people right now, and as I'm sure you'd agree, none of those 40-50,000 have a reasonable option to just stroll a few blocks to the core (should that be where some of them work).

I say keep the Beltline a walkable vibrant area. You can be a case-study during 2017's Walk21

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I am a little concerned that the downtown/inner city stretch will be botched, not just because of the hurry to get built, but because also because it may also follow the same pattern of previous designs to maximize overall length at the cost of functionality for some key areas, in this case Downtown and the Beltline. The Greenline can't be seen as simplistically as a transportation project, with only lip-service paid to the city-building qualities to it.

Biggest potential misplays that could be born out of the "maximize efficiency to the surburbs" ideology:

• Elevated structure through downtown: will kill any hope of street life and make transfers painful for anyone switching lines.
  
• Access to Beltline: I hope rumours are true to have the Greenline turn on 12th rather than 10th to make it much more functional to the fastest growing, most mixed use neighbourhood we have. Ignoring the development there (existing, current and proposed in the future) is a huge wasted opportunity to connect the 23,000 living there currently (and upwards of 40 - 50,000 nearing full build out), not to mention the city's second largest office concentration after the CBD and only neighbourhood attempting to become a 24-hour destination. All efforts to make the line accessible to the neighbourhood should be done. It has the highest trip-origin/destination potential of any stop on the Greenline outside the CBD proper.
  
• Poorly integrated transfer station on 2nd Street: 2nd street and 8th/7th Avenue will become the defacto heart of the transportation network. All efforts to design this properly should be take to maximize transfer efficiency. This would also be a no-brainer decision for a regional / intercity rail connection along 9th Avenue where the existing CPR station infrastructure is currently. Huge missed opportunity if it isn't built in a way to integrate nicely at this location

I agree with your first and third points (poor interface with Downtown and/or other lines negate some of the reasons to invest in the green line in the first place), but the point about 12th ave vs 10th ave has been looked at and there are some sound reasons to stick with 10th Ave:

-There could still be a stop at 10th ave & 1st st SW and a stop at 10th Ave & 4th St SE. The 1st st stop is only a 5 minute walk to Memorial Park Library or a 9 minute walk from St Mary's Cathedral. The 4th st E stop has potential to serve the fastest-growing (and ultimately, probably what will be the highest populated in a couple decades) part of the Beltline, Victoria Park, and better serves the East Village than a 12 st station would.

-Farther west in the Beltline, it only takes 10 minutes to walk from 7th Ave to 14th Ave. Ergo, these people at best would only experience and incremental improvement to transit access.

-The residents of the Beltline are among the most likely to walk or bike to work and school

-10th Ave is a shorter route (faster travel, less expensive capital cost, more direct)

-However the track is built, it will inevitably be a barrier in the community and conflict with pedestrians, service vehicles, bicycles, and existing infrastructure to some degree. It makes more sense to lump it together with the CPR ROW whenever possible rather than creating an island that is difficult to access.

-The only logical entrance to Inglewood is along the CPR ROW without an expensive and disruptive dig under or through Ramsay


Unfortunately, I think rapid transit through the centre of the Beltline is not in the foreseeable future. Rapid transit in Calgary will remain predominantly a suburb-to-downtown (and a few other employment nodes) service. The result is positive to the Beltline though: better service in and out of Victoria Park, new (improved, if not optimal) transit routes from the Beltline (1st st & 10th Ave) to Inglewood, the SE, and the North. The Greenline will be the best choice for anyone in north-central Calgary destined for the Beltline, which will essentially upgrade the #3 bus.

[MalcolmTucker]

Yeah, moving the Beltline stop will require additional tunnel or elevated structure, including a station. To move it two blocks south would be north of $200 million, half for the station (if replacing an at grade station with a not at grade station which I am not sure is definite).

[ggopher]

Since the green line will be using low floor trains. The tracks will not present a barrier. Looking at Portland, the train integrates well into the existing streets.

10th Avenue does appear to be the easiest and most direct route. However, I think there is some issues with the underground utilities that may necessitate moving the train to 12th avenue.

12th Avenue would also provide better access to the Saddledome, which will most likely be the Flames home for the next 15 years.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I am a little concerned that the downtown/inner city stretch will be botched, not just because of the hurry to get built, but because also because it may also follow the same pattern of previous designs to maximize overall length at the cost of functionality for some key areas, in this case Downtown and the Beltline. The Greenline can't be seen as simplistically as a transportation project, with only lip-service paid to the city-building qualities to it.

Biggest potential misplays that could be born out of the "maximize efficiency to the surburbs" ideology:

• Elevated structure through downtown: will kill any hope of street life and make transfers painful for anyone switching lines.
  
• Access to Beltline: I hope rumours are true to have the Greenline turn on 12th rather than 10th to make it much more functional to the fastest growing, most mixed use neighbourhood we have. Ignoring the development there (existing, current and proposed in the future) is a huge wasted opportunity to connect the 23,000 living there currently (and upwards of 40 - 50,000 nearing full build out), not to mention the city's second largest office concentration after the CBD and only neighbourhood attempting to become a 24-hour destination. All efforts to make the line accessible to the neighbourhood should be done. It has the highest trip-origin/destination potential of any stop on the Greenline outside the CBD proper.
  
• Poorly integrated transfer station on 2nd Street: 2nd street and 8th/7th Avenue will become the defacto heart of the transportation network. All efforts to design this properly should be take to maximize transfer efficiency. This would also be a no-brainer decision for a regional / intercity rail connection along 9th Avenue where the existing CPR station infrastructure is currently. Huge missed opportunity if it isn't built in a way to integrate nicely at this location

I concur with RyLucky that you are right on 1 and 3, but placing too much emphasis on the benefits from moving a station in the 10th Ave / Centre St vicinity south to 12th. Moving the station location will have no effect for anyone living west of 4th or 5th St, which is most Beltline residents and most Beltline businesses, present or future. The bulk of the offices are on 11th ave and would be equally well served by 10th and 12th ave alignments. You talk about the Beltline being the second biggest office development and second best origin/destination cluster. There's a big step between the #1 downtown and the #2 beltline on these categories; it's not like being the second best Sedin brother at hockey, it's more like being the second best Gretzky brother.

Sure, marginal better service to the Beltline would be nice, but not for the hundreds of millions it would cost in reality.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by ggopher

Since the green line will be using low floor trains. The tracks will not present a barrier. Looking at Portland, the train integrates well into the existing streets.

10th Avenue does appear to be the easiest and most direct route. However, I think there is some issues with the underground utilities that may necessitate moving the train to 12th avenue.

12th Avenue would also provide better access to the Saddledome, which will most likely be the Flames home for the next 15 years.

Tracks are ALWAYS a barrier, just to differing degrees. Ask yourself, before and after tracks are installed, which is easier: crossing the street in a wheel chair? Entering the alley with a delivery truck? Biking in the direction of the tracks? Convincing your least street-wise friend to meet you for coffee along the ROW?

Of course, the tracks hopefully bring more access than they remove, but there is no rail ROW in the world that is barrier free. In my opinion, 10th ave beats 12th ave in terms of interruption to access.

Your point about the proximity to the Stampede is valid, we need to balance this with proximity to the East Village, NMC, Central Library, and (pipe-dream) HSR station. Also, it's not unforeseeable that one day we might spur the green line west, through the beltline, and eventually south on Crowchild to MRU. If that happens, 10th and 8th (future subway) are close enough for some kind of transfer, whereas 12th would be pushing it.

[CalgaryAlex]

Let's face it, unless the Green Line goes far out of its way, no station on that line will be remotely close to the heart of the Beltline. In fact, I'd argue that any discussion over how the Green Line could serve the Beltline is a waste of time. Personally, I would stop at saying that the Green Line just plain won't serve the Beltline, and start looking at other options for the area. I mean, is the 4th St station even going to be included in the free-fare zone when the current Victoria Park Station isn't? If not, count on Beltline peeps sticking to sidewalks and avoiding the train entirely.

Creating a couple loops (perhaps 8th St/17th Ave/4th St/3rd Ave and 17th Ave/12th St/12th Ave/Macleod Trail... whatever, you get the point ) with dedicated lanes, high frequency, proper "stations", 24hr service as well as preferential green lighting to move people either E-W or N-S would be one option. Most importantly, these two loops (or any other similar option) should be part of the "free fare zone". No one wants to pay $3.15 to go from 12th Ave to downtown.

Cleaning up the spaghetti-mess of bus routes would be a first step, but we all know Calgary Transit won't hit the reset button on that disaster any time soon.

[CorporateWhore]

It's a shame that neither the existing nor upcoming lines directly serve the most densely populated part of Calgary. The Beltline is the real heart of this city, and full of people who embrace the urban lifestyle...yet the suburban dweller in the corner of the city gets higher priority. Ideally the West line really should've gone down something like 10th or 12th (or even 17th) before heading north. I know it was cheaper to do it the way they did, but personally I find it pretty short-sighted to not connect our LRT to the most thriving part of town.

While I definitely support a more dedicated inner-city loop of some sort, I still really hope the Green line goes as far south as possible before heading east. Even if not fully serving the area, I think it would help to have something within reasonable walking distance for a lot of people.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CalgaryAlex

Let's face it, unless the Green Line goes far out of its way, no station on that line will be remotely close to the heart of the Beltline. In fact, I'd argue that any discussion over how the Green Line could serve the Beltline is a waste of time. Personally, I would stop at saying that the Green Line just plain won't serve the Beltline, and start looking at other options for the area. I mean, is the 4th St station even going to be included in the free-fare zone when the current Victoria Park Station isn't? If not, count on Beltline peeps sticking to sidewalks and avoiding the train entirely.

Creating a couple loops (perhaps 8th St/17th Ave/4th St/3rd Ave and 17th Ave/12th St/12th Ave/Macleod Trail... whatever, you get the point ) with dedicated lanes, high frequency, proper "stations", 24hr service as well as preferential green lighting to move people either E-W or N-S would be one option. Most importantly, these two loops (or any other similar option) should be part of the "free fare zone". No one wants to pay $3.15 to go from 12th Ave to downtown.

Cleaning up the spaghetti-mess of bus routes would be a first step, but we all know Calgary Transit won't hit the reset button on that disaster any time soon.

I agree, even moving the line to 12th it will still barely serve the Beltline while disrupting it's primary function - movement of commuters downtown.

Ideally we'd have some streetcar lines in the inner city, but their cost would probably never be justified for the benefits.

[McMurph]

While I understand in principle the desire to move the green to 12th, it's far from a make-or-break deal. I'm not exactly sure where the residents of the Beltline are supposed to be going. There are a few destinations (Uni, Sait, Chinook (maybe)) and could be a few more with TOD and external employment nodes (Quarry Park and the South Hospital esp). But the system really is set up like commuter rail, bringing people from suburban homes to downtown workplaces. The folks who live in the Beltline are probably there in part because they don't want to spend a lot of time on a train. Sure, things will change in another 50 years or so, but even then the walk from 12 to 10 is little more than 100m.