Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[DizzyEdge]

With all of these LRT stations skirting the edges of the Beltline wouldn't the easy solution be to just have a looping bus that runs the length of 17th ave but also hits the stampede station, the Kirby station, and zigzags across 7th ave a few times?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Fair enough. But we need to consider the benefits grade separation in a high density area. I'd like to see a high quality final product.

As the famous poster Chadillac used to say on the dreaded Canada forums "The Greenline will be completely grade separated from 24th ave N to Lynnwood station. About 13kms!"(Assuming the CPR goes through with their plan to close the 8th street crossing).

To me it's lunacy not to use the CPR right of way to 4th ave. After 4th ave they can start tunneling and go below the Red line.

We have about 275m to get below the Red line tunnel.

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0433308,-114.0562165,258m/data=!3m1!1e3

See bold part above--totally agree, especially with the amounts of money being discussed.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

With all of these LRT stations skirting the edges of the Beltline wouldn't the easy solution be to just have a looping bus that runs the length of 17th ave but also hits the stampede station, the Kirby station, and zigzags across 7th ave a few times?

Agreed. Along with bike lanes.

[WilcoRogers]

Originally Posted by Boris2k7

Willem put up a great blog post about the Green Line a couple days ago. Go check it out.

http://www.spuryyc.org/the-green-line-through-the-lens-of-density/

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for posting.

[craner]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

Don't forget that a lot of households have two people who are working in them so although one of the two may work downtown and can easily walk to work, there is a good chance that the other may work outside of the downtown core. The fact should not be lost that the Green Line will service Aurora Business Park, Quarry Park and Seton and all three are destined to become major employment hubs in their own right. This is in addition to the fact that the Green Line will offer a quick connect to the airport which is already a major employment hub. I wouldn't be surprised to see beltline residents traveling opposite the traditional rush hour commuter pattern when using the Green Line however accessibility to residents (by moving the line south to 12th Ave) will be a key component in whether or not this occurs.

It will ? With bus service from one of the stations ?

[sim]

Originally Posted by Boris2k7

But this is not the case east of Macleod Trail. There's only 10th, 11th, and 12th. 10th cuts off at 4th Street and 11th cuts off at 6th Street. All current and proposed residential development is between 11th and 12th.

So use 11 Ave, and the north south roads. Or since all those sites are basically nothing at the moment, look at more dedication for extra ROW for precious vehicles.

We are so fixated on believing that vehicle access needs to be ultra-convenient and from every direction, even given the fact that there would be an LRT right there.

It'll be a good day when people start having the same level of concern for other means of access. We'll finally have overcome a massive institutionalized bias in favour of vehicle access.

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by craner

It will ? With bus service from one of the stations ?

Yup. As far as I know the short term plan is for the 300 airport express route to terminate at the 96th Ave Green Line station instead of continuing on downtown as it does now. This would allow it to operate as a high frequency shuttle service between the airport and the Green Line. Long term the Route Ahead vision is for the 300 to be replaced by either a spur line or (more likely) some sort of automated people mover that one finds at places such as Gatwick Airport. In fact if you look at the latest official Green Line map produced by the City of Calgary (found on page 6 of this pdf http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/...y-public-meeting-presentation-slides.pdf ) you'll see the airport link is now included as part of the Green Line vision.

[Electrical Storm]

Originally Posted by WilcoRogers

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for posting.

Really great read! Thanks

[craner]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

Yup. As far as I know the short term plan is for the 300 airport express route to terminate at the 96th Ave Green Line station instead of continuing on downtown as it does now. This would allow it to operate as a high frequency shuttle service between the airport and the Green Line. Long term the Route Ahead vision is for the 300 to be replaced by either a spur line or (more likely) some sort of automated people mover that one finds at places such as Gatwick Airport. In fact if you look at the latest official Green Line map produced by the City of Calgary (found on page 6 of this pdf http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/...y-public-meeting-presentation-slides.pdf ) you'll see the airport link is now included as part of the Green Line vision.

Thanks for posting that - very interesting.

[Boris2k7]

Originally Posted by sim

So use 11 Ave, and the north south roads. Or since all those sites are basically nothing at the moment, look at more dedication for extra ROW for precious vehicles.

We are so fixated on believing that vehicle access needs to be ultra-convenient and from every direction, even given the fact that there would be an LRT right there.

It'll be a good day when people start having the same level of concern for other means of access. We'll finally have overcome a massive institutionalized bias in favour of vehicle access.

There are already two nearby LRT lines, an existing bike lane, and a proposed bike lane. A surface alignment on 12th would jeopardize at least one of those investments. Again, only a single road which connects all the way through this part of the community, and that's the one you want to compromise for a surface line?

[craner]

$480M surface vs $600M underground - no contest, put it underground.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by craner

$480M surface vs $600M underground - no contest, put it underground.

Totally agree. Having it underground allows for a lot more options for what you can do in the area.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by craner

$480M surface vs $600M underground - no contest, put it underground.

Okay - so the difference is basically the value of a 30 floors building in downtown ... to put one station underground.

[mytwocents]

Originally Posted by craner

$480M surface vs $600M underground - no contest, put it underground.

Class 5 estimate I think it said so still preliminary. Could be up to 1.2 billion.

[PPAR]

Originally Posted by mytwocents

Class 5 estimate I think it said so still preliminary. Could be up to 1.2 billion.

Only if the Province drags their feet so long that another oil boom comes around...

[WilcoRogers]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Okay - so the difference is basically the value of a 30 floors building in downtown ... to put one station underground.

Remember this is a train that may eventually carry 90,000+ people a day. While comparing it to "floors in a building" is kind of a non-starter, I don't think it's a bad investment.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by mytwocents

Class 5 estimate I think it said so still preliminary. Could be up to 1.2 billion.

Class 5 is not the same as preliminary.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by WilcoRogers

Remember this is a train that may eventually carry 90,000+ people a day. While comparing it to "floors in a building" is kind of a non-starter, I don't think it's a bad investment.

Suggesting that 90,000+ people a day all get some level of benefit from the extra minimum $120M to put one station underground in the Beltline is illogical and a disingenuous statement. I think people suggesting it is not much money is problematic, and placing the "added value" (which is debatable in the first place) against something more tangible was an attempt to get people back to reality. This is not money that comes out of the blue, rather, is from the public purse. It also isn't the difference between the train servicing the Beltline or not, but is just about surface or underground, with both servicing the area quite well IMHO. If here we were talking about $120M to the owners of the Flames for a stadium, people would be upset (including me). The added (non-value IMHO) of going underground doesn't add up to $120,000,000.00. I wouldn't want my tax dollars going to this material increase in cost for no added service and limited added value. That's a lot of money that we do not have.

[MalcolmTucker]

We spent the same amount a decade ago to put the Westbrook Station and line segment underground versus elevated.

Money well spent due to context for this section of the Greenline, especially to avoid cross Macloed and 1st St SE at grade, both 26,000 Vehicles/Day crossings, effectively one 52,000 Vehicles/Day road, which is the equivalent of the west line crossing Sarcee Trail at grade. Added benefits of urbanness and whatnot, and maintaining other cycling/road infrastructure.

[mytwocents]

l totally don't know how to delete this haha.