Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

With respect to the 17Ave SE money over Deerfoot, it's shortsighted to not put it into the Green Line and get a better chance of less phasing. Get it built right to the edge of the city quicker. Unless the City is trying to save money by not upgrading 16 Ave NE to Deerfoot or other routes from the east to downtown by shifting the interchange money to this BRT? My impression though is that's not happening.

I guess compromises need to be made. Just like with the Build Calgary stuff last winter taking out LRT from new greenfield development charges, so that transportation-wise only freeways are automatically funded.

$42 million doesn't even extend the green line even one single station.

You can't ignore other projects by putting all the eggs into one basket as well.

The overpass as planned is a very worthy project.

[MalcolmTucker]

The money recently announced is meant to be spent soon, for planning/engineering, and building various things. You'll notice a pattern across the country with lots of little projects being moved forward- including planning for larger projects- not grandiose announcements.

I don't get the general trepidation some have on here from some about whether this comes to fruition or not. Unless city council backs away due to some unforeseen event this project is happening.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

RyLucky: not sure why you say "we'd have to build $1 billion tunnel under Stephen Ave at the same time". Certainly it would be unwise to build 2nd Street tunnel without adequate provision for 8th Ave tunnel crossing over/under and a station box, but that hardly calls for committing to the entire length of the 8th Ave tunnel "at the same time".

I think you sensed my crankiness about the subject.

You're right, we don't necessarily need to build both at the same time. However, at 2nd st and 8th ave SW we will have to dig out a red station first in order to dig out a green station below it. There is also already a station dug out at 8th Ave and Olympic Plaza. There might be efficiencies and limits to street disruption to do it all at once, but we don't have to.

I think we probably should, and I think 8th Ave only needs 4 stations: Olympic Plaza, 2nd St SW, 5th St SW, and 8th St SW. There will be people who try to push for 5 stations, but there is no need with station exits in all directions.

[*Stardust*]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I think you sensed my crankiness about the subject.

You're right, we don't necessarily need to build both at the same time. However, at 2nd st and 8th ave SW we will have to dig out a red station first in order to dig out a green station below it. There is also already a station dug out at 8th Ave and Olympic Plaza. There might be efficiencies and limits to street disruption to do it all at once, but we don't have to.

I think we probably should, and I think 8th Ave only needs 4 stations: Olympic Plaza, 2nd St SW, 5th St SW, and 8th St SW. There will be people who try to push for 5 stations, but there is no need with station exits in all directions.

Is there a plan after that to bury the 7th Ave line underground after the 8th Ave one is done?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I think you sensed my crankiness about the subject.

You're right, we don't necessarily need to build both at the same time. However, at 2nd st and 8th ave SW we will have to dig out a red station first in order to dig out a green station below it. There is also already a station dug out at 8th Ave and Olympic Plaza. There might be efficiencies and limits to street disruption to do it all at once, but we don't have to.

I think we probably should, and I think 8th Ave only needs 4 stations: Olympic Plaza, 2nd St SW, 5th St SW, and 8th St SW. There will be people who try to push for 5 stations, but there is no need with station exits in all directions.

To my knowledge there isn't a station box - the large area seen in news video and by urban explorers is part of a huge 4 track crossover under city hall.

The below is from the 'City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan' from the 80s.

Originally Posted by 5seconds

I have this. I can't remember where I got it, or how accurate it is. I think only one of the tunnels was built, not the one going to 7th Ave, but I can't really say.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

To my knowledge there isn't a station box - the large area seen in news video and by urban explorers is part of a huge 4 track crossover under city hall.

The below is from the 'City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan' from the 80s.

How much of the tunnel was built? Is there a portion built on 8th ave by Olympic plaza?

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

Is there a plan after that to bury the 7th Ave line underground after the 8th Ave one is done?

No. It will likely always be on the surface with 4-car trains max.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

How much of the tunnel was built? Is there a portion built on 8th ave by Olympic plaza?

Pure speculation on my part, the blue bits:



It is possible the portion approaching Olympic Plaza is flat reinforced floors in the basement/parkade - I believe that parkade has a weird shape.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

No. It will likely always be on the surface with 4-car trains max.

Isn't something like 2/3 of the load on the Red line, so burying it and removing it from 7th would instantly triple the capacity of the Blue line?

[*Stardust*]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Isn't something like 2/3 of the load on the Red line, so burying it and removing it from 7th would instantly triple the capacity of the Blue line?

In my mind, I don't think it would make sense to have the green line underground, then have 8th Ave underground and keep the 7th Ave line at grade.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

In my mind, I don't think it would make sense to have the green line underground, then have 8th Ave underground and keep the 7th Ave line at grade.

It saves a billion Dollarydoos, and with way lower frequency on 7th, I imagine the end to end time will be less, especially since no switches will be needed either.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It saves a billion Dollarydoos, and with way lower frequency on 7th, I imagine the end to end time will be less, especially since no switches will be needed either.

I wonder what kind of a price tag would be associated with the train remaining at grade, but vehicle traffic going under the tracks at each conflict intersection? I would think sidewalks can remain at grade, with walk signals being activated whenever a train isn't near that intersection. This would allow near free-flow of trains (although not at higher travel speeds), with pedestrians crossing whenever it is safe to do so instead of on an established intersection schedule.

I count 17 intersections in the core in conflict with the Blue Line. The new 4 St underpass cost $42 million, right? But that was a lot more extensive than these need (or could) be. Could cut the cost from a billion to much less than a billion and establish a partially-grade-separated corridor along 7th.

Just a... rather odd idea I just had.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Isn't something like 2/3 of the load on the Red line, so burying it and removing it from 7th would instantly triple the capacity of the Blue line?

Removing the Red Line from 7th Ave means we can achieve 90-120 second headways on the Blue Line (more than double current capacity) because (1) there are no RedLine LRT trains obviously, and (2) the Blue Line doesn't have the short-block signal conflicts at 4th/5th/6th Ave that the Red line does which significantly contribute to delays.

Originally Posted by *Stardust*

In my mind, I don't think it would make sense to have the green line underground, then have 8th Ave underground and keep the 7th Ave line at grade.

Why?

Even when Calgary has a population of 3 million, it will be unlikely that the 4-car Blue Line will be at capacity. Red and Green, however, will likely need 5 trains (perhaps continuous cars) eventually. This is too long to fit on a surface block. Of course, with north-south routes, even 3 cars is too long for a block, and E-W avenues are busier than N-S streets.

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It saves a billion Dollarydoos, and with way lower frequency on 7th, I imagine the end to end time will be less, especially since no switches will be needed either.

Truth. Also, thanks for the handy map you provided above.

Originally Posted by CalgaryAlex

I wonder what kind of a price tag would be associated with the train remaining at grade, but vehicle traffic going under the tracks at each conflict intersection? I would think sidewalks can remain at grade, with walk signals being activated whenever a train isn't near that intersection. This would allow near free-flow of trains (although not at higher travel speeds), with pedestrians crossing whenever it is safe to do so instead of on an established intersection schedule.

I count 17 intersections in the core in conflict with the Blue Line. The new 4 St underpass cost $42 million, right? But that was a lot more extensive than these need (or could) be. Could cut the cost from a billion to much less than a billion and establish a partially-grade-separated corridor along 7th.

Just a... rather odd idea I just had.

I like your out-of-the-box idea, but I'm afraid it might amount to making pedestrians and cyclists pay for auto and train convenience. That said, some cities have put their roads and rails completely underground (i.e. Chicago), but unfortunately I don't expect we'll ever see the labour and market conditions to make that possible here. I'd be okay with all downtown being covered with a +15 outdoor walk space... (effectively moving roads underground) but I don't think that's what you're getting at.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by CalgaryAlex

I wonder what kind of a price tag would be associated with the train remaining at grade, but vehicle traffic going under the tracks at each conflict intersection? I would think sidewalks can remain at grade, with walk signals being activated whenever a train isn't near that intersection. This would allow near free-flow of trains (although not at higher travel speeds), with pedestrians crossing whenever it is safe to do so instead of on an established intersection schedule.

On a strictly geometric basis, I'm guessing this is tricky. Using Google Maps, I measure 10 Ave to 8 Ave (at 5th Street W) at 250 metres, but 8 Ave to 6 Ave is 208 metres. The block between 9th and 10th Ave is longer than normal North-South blocks, for whatever historical CPR reasons.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I like your out-of-the-box idea, but I'm afraid it might amount to making pedestrians and cyclists pay for auto and train convenience. That said, some cities have put their roads and rails completely underground (i.e. Chicago), but unfortunately I don't expect we'll ever see the labour and market conditions to make that possible here. I'd be okay with all downtown being covered with a +15 outdoor walk space... (effectively moving roads underground) but I don't think that's what you're getting at.

The balance between travel modes is tricky. And I haven't done any math here, but I would guess that with no Red Line trains on 7th Ave (so greater spacing between trains), and without traffic signal schedules, it is possible that pedestrians and cyclists would achieve higher net crossing times than they do now.

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

On a strictly geometric basis, I'm guessing this is tricky. Using Google Maps, I measure 10 Ave to 8 Ave (at 5th Street W) at 250 metres, but 8 Ave to 6 Ave is 208 metres. The block between 9th and 10th Ave is longer than normal North-South blocks, for whatever historical CPR reasons.

Most of the CPR underpasses need to factor in 4+ tracks, so between a 15m width at 8 St (although this underpass also goes under 9 Ave) and 45m width at 1 St SE. The C-Train only needs about 7-9m (the elevated West Line is 9m across, but the distance between station platforms is about 7m). This could reduce the distance required to go underneath the tracks.

The other thing to consider is that this would screw with a number of parkade entrances, alley entrances, etc.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

I like your out-of-the-box idea, but I'm afraid it might amount to making pedestrians and cyclists pay for auto and train convenience. That said, some cities have put their roads and rails completely underground (i.e. Chicago), but unfortunately I don't expect we'll ever see the labour and market conditions to make that possible here. I'd be okay with all downtown being covered with a +15 outdoor walk space... (effectively moving roads underground) but I don't think that's what you're getting at.

It is a worthy idea to investigate, actually. The trains are not going to be going through each and every intersection in the city - this would be a few only. Additionally, a lot of Calgary pedestrian traffic is in the +15 network anyway. With cyclists going up Edmonton trail all through winter, I don't think they'll bat an eye at this either.

[You Need A Thneed]

Putting roads under the tracks on 7th is never going to happen. The 4th St underpass stretches from 9th to 11th, not 10th. They also had the advantage of being able to detour the CPR tracks a little bit the south so that they could get them out of the way while they built the bridge, and after the bridge was done they could reroute the tracks back onto the new bridge. This isn't possible on 7th, so you would be dealing with extremely complicated (expensive) engineering, or a compelte shutdown of 7th Ave for several years (you can't do them all at once). It would be at least as expensive as simply tunnelling the LRT line.

[McMurph]

I've got no issues with one line staying on the surface on 7th. Private vehicle traffic downtown isn't going to increase much and the transit dedicated street works well, particularly after the massive redesign. It also keeps the downtown free-fare zone as an amenity. Surface works much better for a quick hop-on/hop-off shuttle across the core you can keep an eye over your shoulder for a train while walking to your destination.

The biggest (and perhaps only significant) conflict is where the NW line turns and crosses 4th and 6th. It'll be interesting to see how they address that in getting the train off of the Bow River bridge and underground into the 8th Ave tunnel.

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

You're right, we don't necessarily need to build both at the same time. However, at 2nd st and 8th ave SW we will have to dig out a red station first in order to dig out a green station below it.

The 2nd Street and 8th Ave SW interchange station between green and red lines will be the central hub of Calgary's transit system long into the future. The design of this station deserves some careful planning and architectural thought. It has the potential to become a central public place in the city if done right. I think it would be a major mistake to simply create a utilitarian right of way for the future red line tunnel here. Perhaps commercial interests could be engaged on this part of the project to provide some retail space and connections to the Core shopping centre.

[CalgaryAlex]

Originally Posted by McMurph

I've got no issues with one line staying on the surface on 7th. Private vehicle traffic downtown isn't going to increase much and the transit dedicated street works well, particularly after the massive redesign. It also keeps the downtown free-fare zone as an amenity. Surface works much better for a quick hop-on/hop-off shuttle across the core you can keep an eye over your shoulder for a train while walking to your destination.

The biggest (and perhaps only significant) conflict is where the NW line turns and crosses 4th and 6th. It'll be interesting to see how they address that in getting the train off of the Bow River bridge and underground into the 8th Ave tunnel.

Too bad it would be much more difficult (I'm thinking years of shuttles connecting Sunnyside with downtown) and expensive to have the tunnel portal in Sunnyside south of the existing station, with the tunnel going under the river and avoiding at-grade intersections downtown altogether. The end result would be much, much better. It would also match the quality standards currently being set by the Green Line tunnel recommendations. But I can't see too many people swallowing such an idea.