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

[CBBarnett]

The Canada Line in Vancouver suffers from this yet as well so many transit enthusiasts just revert back to talking points from 20 years ago and call it under built. Even with 80m platforms, it would suffer from minor crowding due to not enough rolling stock.

I am always surprised how the Canada Line never inspired more projects to copy it's value approach with respect to grade-separated, automated, but with tiny bare-bones stations, small trains and standardization of everything. It's competitively fast, efficient and functional.

The Canada Line's problems now (the trains are crowded because the line is too useful) hardly outweigh the alternative (it might not exist at all) had they gone full metro-sized development with the substantially greater costs, complexity and risks, even back then in cheaper times to build stuff. With today's much more drastic construction inflation environment you'd think everyone would be trying the same approach - create ultra lean, but travel time competitive transit.

Montreal's REM project is a more recent project to watch, at a greater scale, that seems to understand creating good value for investment. Compared to Canada Line, it has much more complexity and benefits from other investments that aren't "priced in" for it's cost (i.e. the Champlain Bridge was priced separately, the Mont Royal tunnel is 100 years old they could partially reuse etc.) but is essentially creating an entirely new automated, high-speed, grade-separate metro network (26 stations, 67 kilometres) for only $9 billion - notably up from ~$5B originally estimated.

 

[thecivilengineer]

They could have done downtown section underground or elevated back in 80's but they always tryin to save cost, even Edmonton has underground.

 

[FCC1982]

How much time is lost on 7th having the train at grade stopping at traffic lights? how many incidents are there with cars or people? How much more work do they have to do to those tracks compared to what would be required in a tunnel? The idea of running any of the green line at grade downtown is just bonkers to me.

Me too.

 

[accord1999]

How much time is lost on 7th having the train at grade stopping at traffic lights? how many incidents are there with cars or people? How much more work do they have to do to those tracks compared to what would be required in a tunnel?

But at lot of the slowness also comes from having many stations close together, requiring more stops and total dwell time and forcing the train to constantly accelerate and decelerate. Even with a tunnel, if it had to stop every 500 m a train wouldn't be all that fast.

The idea of running any of the green line at grade downtown is just bonkers to me.

The idea is only back because the tunnel is something like $1B/km now and a underground station fully built out will probably cost as much as the event centre and that even with 20+ years worth of transit capital funding, it can't provide any benefit to the North or the SE.

 

[Mountain Man]

But at lot of the slowness also comes from having many stations close together, requiring more stops and total dwell time and forcing the train to constantly accelerate and decelerate. Even with a tunnel, if it had to stop every 500 m a train wouldn't be all that fast.

Sure, but it's made 2x as bad by stopping at lights or waiting for the train in front to clear the red at the station. The whole point of mass transit is to avoid traffic delays.

The idea is only back because the tunnel is something like $1B/km now and a underground station fully built out will probably cost as much as the event centre and that even with 20+ years worth of transit capital funding, it can't provide any benefit to the North or the SE.

It's better to spend the money now and do it right, than to half ass it and have a harder problem to solve in the future. Downtown is too busy to have the trains at grade we have now, adding another line will make it a damn mess!

 

[MichaelS]

It's better to spend the money now and do it right, than to half ass it and have a harder problem to solve in the future. Downtown is too busy to have the trains at grade we have now, adding another line will make it a damn mess!

Prove it, with verifiable analysis and an accurate cost estimate, that shows this extra cost is actually worth it. Saying sweeping statements like "downtown is too busy we must tunnel!" Without sound analysis, or "the train must go up Centre Street because that is where the people are" is the type of high level decision making on this project that has lead to the mess we are in, a lost decade and $1 billion spent with literally nothing to show for it except reduced budget for the rest of the transit network, and thus worse overall service.

Not meaning to call you out personally but I am just so fed up with the lack of critical thought that has gone into what was supposed to be the biggest project in this city's history. Instead, we have had emotional high level rhetoric based on "trends", and whenever someone tries to raise concerns about this approach they are insulted and accused of being partisan hacks.

 

[badc0ffee]

They could have done downtown section underground or elevated back in 80's but they always tryin to save cost, even Edmonton has underground.

I think part of it was that downtown Edmonton has much better geology for tunneling. In Calgary, downtown is essentially at the bottom of a riverbed.

 

[darwink]

I think part of it was that downtown Edmonton has much better geology for tunneling. In Calgary, downtown is essentially at the bottom of a riverbed.

Edmonton is sand on top of a coal mine. Perhaps less water saturated. In any case, Edmonton threw money at the problem. It was a tradeoff.

 

[thecivilengineer]

in that case we could have done elevated, and on street level a streetcar would have been better option and the main road in downtown would have been useful for other traffic. its very bad that main means of transit have to stop at red lights at every intersections.

 

[darwink]

in that case we could have done elevated, and on street level a streetcar would have been better option and the main road in downtown would have been useful for other traffic. its very bad that main means of transit have to stop at red lights at every intersections.

We could have. 7th and 8th were set aside for downtown revitalization as transit and pedestrian respectively.

Saving money enabled far more LRT to be built.

I think it was an acceptable tradeoff for the time.

 

[lemongrab]

Maybe a dumb question, but should LRT really ever have to stop for more than a few seconds at any given light? Can signals not be better optimized? Why can't a certain proximity of train trigger 'don't walk' to flash for the necessary length of time so the light cycle can change the moment the train is ready to move? What am I missing here?

 

[thecivilengineer]

Maybe a dumb question, but should LRT really ever have to stop for more than a few seconds at any given light? Can signals not be better optimized? Why can't a certain proximity of train trigger 'don't walk' to flash for the necessary length of time so the light cycle can change the moment the train is ready to move? What am I missing here?

Also, i use the train daily in free zone, and i noticed most of the time there's technical problem along the downtown area which leads to delay for few more minutes.

 

[darwink]

Maybe a dumb question, but should LRT really ever have to stop for more than a few seconds at any given light? Can signals not be better optimized? Why can't a certain proximity of train trigger 'don't walk' to flash for the necessary length of time so the light cycle can change the moment the train is ready to move? What am I missing here?

The trains are too frequent, so it’s better to coordinate blocks together than inch from light to light.

 

[DougB]

I think part of it was that downtown Edmonton has much better geology for tunneling. In Calgary, downtown is essentially at the bottom of a riverbed.

I think Edmonton is worse. I watched the Government Center (then Grandin) to University segment as it was built. The section from Government Center to the north riverbank has flexible tunnel walls that allow some degree of movement due to the river bank being mostly sand. The section from the south riverbank to University required several dewatering wells that pumped non-stop for 4 years. That whole segment cost ~$146M, including 2 underground stations and a bridge across the wide N Sask valley. That was in 1992 dollars, but it demonstrates how construction costs have escalated far faster than inflation in general.

The History of the Funding of Edmonton's LRT: The 1990s

If Edmonton’s LRT is ever going to charge forward, it might be helpful to look back and see what has pushed it ahead in the past. Here’s the first in a series of po…

edmontonjournal.com

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

am always surprised how the Canada Line never inspired more projects to copy it's value approach with respect to grade-separated, automated, but with tiny bare-bones stations, small trains and standardization of everything. It's competitively fast, efficient and functional.

Ditto. Vancouver has made some excellent choices for their rapid transit network and I really thought Calgary would follow the Canada line model for Green line.

Decade late and 10 billion short now though...

If nothing else, figured Edmonton's decision to build a crosstown streetcar would have had Calgary going in the exact opposite direction!