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

Go Elevated or try for Underground?

  • Work with the province and go with the Elevated option

    Votes: 8 72.7%

  • Try another approach and go for Underground option

    Votes: 2 18.2%

  • Cancel it altogether

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Total voters
    11
CBBarnett said:
such as this one on West 10th in Vancouver towards UBC.
Click to expand...
So that intersection in Vancouver, the peak hour movement on 10th is 647 vehicles. It is not even a controlled intersection--the phase is only triggered by pedestrian and bike beg buttons. Cars only go across West 10th via a stop sign. West Tenth is also entirely within the 600 m walk shed from West 4th, and West 16th, both being firmly in the stroadish territory, with six lanes, with only two regularly used for traffic, effectively providing bus lay bys along their entire route. West tenth because they were paralyzed and couldn't take away any more road capacity, is getting a subways which is more expensive than the green line.

The Calgary intersection I choose for comparison was Centre and 32nd Ave, within the lower demand section. The Calgary number is higher at 884.
 
CBBarnett said:
Within reading the rest of the report for additional context, seems like a weird conclusion - I think I am missing the assumptions that were used here. The biggest part that's missing is what do they mean by "transitway"?

Two possible definitions:
  • If "transitway" means full dedicated lanes, while preserving all car capacity - yeah that's prohibitively disruptive, expensive and a terrible idea. Glad it was rejected
  • If "transitway" means reallocated existing road space to increase quality and capacity of transit service - that's affordable and won't disrupt the neighbourhood at all.
Click to expand...
Good question. I assume that it's something based on the RouteAhead plans from 2012 but unfortunately those documents no longer seem to be available online anymore. This page gives a brief summary of what their plans were and sounds like a re-allocation of roads (and some sidewalks) for BRT travel and boarding:

1710536123162.png
 
"The proposed improvements to the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system outline a strategic, phased approach to enhancing public transportation efficiency, reliability, safety, and passenger comfort across several key city corridors. The plan includes the introduction of transit-only lanes, upgrading stations to MAX standard, and establishing park and ride facilities. By aligning these improvements with the existing 301 BRT and future Green Line Light Rail Transit (LRT) stations, the proposal aims to ensure seamless integration within the city’s broader transit network. Short-term and long-term enhancements focus on improving downtown connectivity, streamlining Centre Street North services, and extending the BRT network to accommodate future growth. Emphasizing user experience, the plan prioritizes operational efficiency, accessibility, and the integration of multi-use pathways. This comprehensive approach seeks to attract more users to public transit, reduce car dependency, and promote sustainable urban mobility, preparing the groundwork for a unified, efficient, and user-friendly transit system."
1710538993733.png
1710539016759.png
 
I didn't realize this, but there is already north BRT construction work underway. Link to project page.

There are new stations being built at Country Hills Blvd, 96th Ave, Beddington mall area, 78th, 64th, 56th, 40th and 28th Aves. The only one with a pull-out layby is 78th, which is a timepoint.

Also, new paving being done at four places; at CHB, at 96th Ave, at Beddington Trail and at 40th Ave.

40th Ave is a pure car capacity increase project; it's adding a left-turn lane. Beddington Trail is basically building the same thing that already exists at the bus-only crossing, but bigger and with more (red) concrete. 96th Ave is a small car capacity increase, making the northbound left turn lane longer.

Here's the CHB improvements: the pink is red transit-only paving, the yellow is car paving, the light green boxes are the stations.
1710572131984.png

Basically, adding a transit-only lane queue jump past the intersection and maintaining car capacity. Two things caught my eye. One is that southbound buses stop after the intersection, so the queue jump gets them to the station faster but they have to hope the traffic goes by while passengers are boarding.

The second thing I noticed is the sidewalk across the median on the south side (right side of the figure). There's a cross-slope across the median, so I suspect a straight across sidewalk is too steep for wheelchairs. The existing solution clearly isn't working well for most users, given the obvious desire line:
1710572669407.png


So I guess what they figured is that this shows that people really like walking in angles, so the new solution is:
1710572732922.png

Now there's twice as many angles to walk down! Win!
 
Saw an online ad by the provincial government touting an lrt extension to the airport. I know that was Danielle Smith's priority pet project over the greenline. Is funding safe for the greenline or can it be taken away when the full scope of the project and its budget gets presented in June? I don't trust the UCP or Danielle Smith at all.
 
O-tac said:
Saw an online ad by the provincial government touting an lrt extension to the airport. I know that was Danielle Smith's priority pet project over the greenline. Is funding safe for the greenline or can it be taken away when the full scope of the project and its budget gets presented in June? I don't trust the UCP or Danielle Smith at all.
Click to expand...
The province can change its mind at anytime, about any grant, any program. The only penalty to them would be political.
 
I think the "LRT to the airport" project funding is just a blue line extension to 88th Ave/a future "airport connector", not all the way to the airport?

livewirecalgary.com

Blue Line extension could be on track for 2025 with federal funding

The City of Calgary could get shovels in the ground on a Blue Line extension as early as 2025, but it still needs funding from another order of government. It’s not the one you think, either. Last …
livewirecalgary.com livewirecalgary.com
 
Wow, I mean this seems like a lot of work for a tunnel for a private company and some pedestrians. The issue with this line is it has become like an Olympic games; it is a city redefining project that has eliminated old landfills, closed a chicken factory, and added tunnels. In saying that I actually don't think it is a bad thing but it definitely is not just a train to nowhere.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top