Green Line LRT | ?m | ?s | Calgary Transit

[trtcttc]

Can you expand on this? Do you mean that once the 60% design is complete, then we'll hear more about the Eau Claire -> 16 Ave section?

I think what they mean is that once the design of Sheppard to Eau Claire is 60% complete, they'll know how much they can build with the existing funding. The reality is with the major inflationary pressures of the last few years, the original funding probably won't be enough to reach 16th. Chances are they will need to go back to the government for more funding to fully build out what was originally planned.

 

[CT (Chinese_T)]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-eau-claire-expropriation-green-line-1.7099434

 

[accord1999]

We're currently working on the 60% design for mainline and MSF. The development phase ends at 60%, and the decision to build Eau Claire to 16 Ave is based on the 60% estimate/pricing.

Are you able to provide a time estimate of when the 60% design would be ready (without endangering your job)? Today's Green Line Board meeting indicated that the 30% design was only received in January, which seems disappointingly slow.

 

[whatchyyc]

Are you able to provide a time estimate of when the 60% design would be ready (without endangering your job)? Today's Green Line Board meeting indicated that the 30% design was only received in January, which seems disappointingly slow.

If 60% means they move into the implementation phase it was already bumped to 16 months when they signed the agreement in April, so around the end of Q3 this year.

 

[superelevation]

me excavated in the main cost driver - so I am assuming shallow stations, with

Length is not the only factor in capacity. The low floor LRVs have a lot less flexible interior layout as seen in Toronto, Kitchener, Edmonton etc. which slows down dwell times and leaves less room for standing. You need a longer low floor vehicle to match the capacity of a high floor vehicle.

Cool thanks. So a three car consist on the Green line will be much longer than a three or even four car consist of the current Red/Blue line LRV's.

I seem to remember the tunneled section downtown will be under 8th Ave? Or was that an old plan?

But, the line is as noted *not* being designed for three car sets. The downtown tunnel will make fixing this very hard long term.

 

[trtcttc]

Length is not the only factor in capacity. The low floor LRVs have a lot less flexible interior layout as seen in Toronto, Kitchener, Edmonton etc. which slows down dwell times and leaves less room for standing. You need a longer low floor vehicle to match the capacity of a high floor vehicle.

Low floor also have a very narrow walkway between the seats over the wheels. This causes people to stand near the doors, limiting capacity below the design capacity. In Toronto, you'll often see areas not by the doors be somewhat empty but the areas around the doors packed and no one can get on.

 

[whatchyyc]

At least our door sections have two double doors rather than one. Similar door density to the Alstom trains in Ottawa and TTC Line 6
In my experience people already crowd around the doors on the high floor trains anyways, I don't think it will be that bad at all compared to a 3 car ctrain

 

[darwink]

The downtown tunnel will make fixing this very hard long term.

It will be fine.

If it becomes a problem the City can commission bespoke sets to absolutely maximize capacity.

Now would I do it if starting from first principles? No.

 

[FCC1982]

So are the tunnelled stations only going to be long enough for 2-car trains ?

 

[accord1999]

With the City asking for $166M from Alberta for the NC BRT that is now supposedly costing $500M (roughly enough for Green Line to go from 16th to 40th Avenue) and the Blue Line/People Mover to YYC now rising to the top of budget wishlists (at around $850-900M), it seems to me that they won't be able to cross the Bow and Green Line North is dead for this generation of transit spending.

Airport train, and housing among Calgary’s funding requests for provincial budget - Calgary | Globalnews.ca

It's unclear how much of Calgary's budget wishlist will be fulfilled after Premier Danielle Smith signaled spending restraint in the upcoming provincial budget.

globalnews.ca

 

[CBBarnett]

With the City asking for $166M from Alberta for the NC BRT that is now supposedly costing $500M (roughly enough for Green Line to go from 16th to 40th Avenue) and the Blue Line/People Mover to YYC now rising to the top of budget wishlists (at around $850-900M), it seems to me that they won't be able to cross the Bow and Green Line North is dead for this generation of transit spending.

Airport train, and housing among Calgary’s funding requests for provincial budget - Calgary | Globalnews.ca

It's unclear how much of Calgary's budget wishlist will be fulfilled after Premier Danielle Smith signaled spending restraint in the upcoming provincial budget.

globalnews.ca

$500M for NC BRT seems high - transit cost disease strikes Calgary just like almost everywhere else in North America.

I would be curious how much of the price is actually just accommodating cars circulation while expanding bus capacity. I get why taking 2 lanes permanently for buses 24/7 on Centre Street would be politically expensive, but struggle why you'd need half of billion dollars in actual money beyond that. The road already exists and is already majority transit trips. Just take the lanes and don't repave or widen anything except in a few pinch points. A few new signals, a few new barriers, a few more polished stops - easy.

Here's what Translink would have done in Surrey, cost $33M and improved bus service by up to 20% in speed on a 12km corridor :
https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/bus-projects/r6-scott-road-rapidbus

How:

• Actual bus priority in street - either narrowing existing lanes to make room for a bus lane or physically taking a dedicated lane from vehicles. This was almost always done within the existing right-of-way.
• Stop spacing of 800m instead of every 200-300m
• All door boarding

For transit to ever be successful, it simply cannot afford to bloat it projects to undercut it's own competitiveness by maintaining substantial vehicle capacity on a corridor dominated by transit already.

 

[darwink]

for the NC BRT that is now supposedly costing $500M (roughly enough for Green Line to go from 16th to 40th Avenue)

$550 in 2017-9 ish numbers. $776 million + or - what, 50%?

Anyways, got to go up to 64th, for a cool inflated $1.2 billion + or -. Not counting the 16th Ave crossing/station rebuild

and Green Line North is dead for this generation of transit spending.

There is still plenty of money in the Banana stand to do south and north.

The feds if not in this budget, in the fall, will outline the next 10 year infrastructure funding envelope available 2028 onwards. Expect $210 billion over 10 years, with over $130 billion of that being for infrastructure transfers. 'Calgary''s share is around 5%, or $6.5 billion. Or around $20 billion of total project value. Some will be absorbed by Deerfoot, other interchanges, and some by the train to Banff/Airport. The rest is there to divide up.

 

[accord1999]

$500M for NC BRT seems high - transit cost disease strikes Calgary just like almost everywhere else in North America.

Here's what Translink would have done in Surrey, cost $33M and improved bus service by up to 20% in speed on a 12km corridor :

I recall that they were talking about ~$50M in improvements (similar to Translink) so the leap to $500M is quite a surprise for me. There was a study in 2021 (GC2021-0747) and all the possible improvements they looked at totaled only $120M so I'd really like to know where the extra $350+M would go to.

$550 in 2017-9 ish numbers. $776 million + or - what, 50%?

Anyways, got to go up to 64th, for a cool inflated $1.2 billion + or -. Not counting the 16th Ave crossing/station rebuild

My thinking is that $50M is a minor investment that can easily be discarded if funding for Green Line North extensions become available in the near future. But $500M is a pretty significant sum. If they're using it for BRT instead of saving it for GL Stage 2, then that strongly suggests that the BRT will be in place for 15-20 years at least to amortize it.

And the public documents for the Green Line Board meeting point to more bad news for the Bow crossing.

 

[Unknown User]

$550 in 2017-9 ish numbers. $776 million + or - what, 50%?

Anyways, got to go up to 64th, for a cool inflated $1.2 billion + or -. Not counting the 16th Ave crossing/station rebuild


There is still plenty of money in the Banana stand to do south and north.

The feds if not in this budget, in the fall, will outline the next 10 year infrastructure funding envelope available 2028 onwards. Expect $210 billion over 10 years, with over $130 billion of that being for infrastructure transfers. 'Calgary''s share is around 5%, or $6.5 billion. Or around $20 billion of total project value. Some will be absorbed by Deerfoot, other interchanges, and some by the train to Banff/Airport. The rest is there to divide up.

I was under the impression that there is always money in the banana stand.

 

[darwink]

But $500M is a pretty significant sum.

got to include utility work, intersection widening/rebuild) (which will be needed for Greenline).

then that strongly suggests that the BRT will be in place for 15-20 years at least to amortize it.

That isn't how the city works. The city was instructed to build a BRT by Council. It will do so whether it makes sense or not, at a scope that is gradually expanded due to random thoughts about LRT convertibility, and the preferences of Councillors, the Mayor, and local stakeholders all wanting their piece that is a little bit extra. The project team for the most part won't push back because all the pieces are logical and make the project better, and a bigger project means more prestige for future jobs, talking at conferences, etc.