InfrastructureEnthusiast
New Member
That's definitely an interesting caveat to the low floor trains. Was that disclosed in any of the reports to council, or is it something you discovered from your own research?
Green Line LRT | ?m | ?s | Calgary Transit
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
InfrastructureEnthusiast
New Member
I think that argument held true when the LRT was first built, but now that beltline is much more densely developed I think 8av has greater balance for the core, if not DT specifically.
Splitting hairs though, the extra block one way or another doesn't add much to the overall commute time.
badc0ffee
Active Member
They rebuilt 7 Ave (except Centre St, which is from 2000), eliminating stops, twinning one station* (City Hall), and integrating platforms into the sidewalk, only like 10-15 years ago. I can't imagine there would be any appetite to redo it again so soon.
*Well, two if you count removing 10 St SW and building Downtown West/Kirby, but that was part of the west line project.
I think what prevented them from twinning the other stations was operational concerns, but I don't remember the details.
InfrastructureEnthusiast
New Member
If they are taking about running green line elevated in beltline, maybe they meant intersecting with 7av and not running down it? In other words, eau clair would be out of scope for now.
badc0ffee
Active Member
In my opinion, yes, in the short/medium term, as long as we use 4-car trains, and have a credible plan to separate one or more lines onto 8 Ave in the long term.
There are light rail systems like Muni in San Francisco and MAX in Portland that run more than two lines on the same pair of tracks. It's not ideal, but I think it could be a decent compromise.
lemongrab
Active Member
Did the non-twinning facilitate running busses down 7th? When did they stop doing that?
Tothewest
Active Member
I dont know that it would involve redo-ing much, perhaps twinning one more station closer to the east end, and removing one stop from the red/blue lines, giving to the green. Keeping in mind, the green line will stretch no further west than 3rd st.
Q's...
1) Could the 7th transit corridor be extended a block east of city hall station for a green line EV stop?
2) Is tunneling with stations the issue, or would tunneling to get from EV to the event centre be do-able with no stations underground in between?
darwink
Senior Member
Yes.
Would it slow down the service? Also yes.
from:
Last edited:
Joborule
Active Member
I feel we're overthinking if we're trying to figure out how to integrate or reimagine 7 Ave Transit Mall with SE LRT; whereas a cost effective simple solution may simply be just going with the elevated option through the Beltline and downtown. The transit mall is already at capacity as it is, and has a major drawback of vehicle/pedestrian collisions causing disruptions to service. It's also common for trains to break down on the transit mall, which also causes delays to both lines. So adding a third line to the mix that not only reduces service for the other two lines, but now incidents that occur will effect three lines with lower frequency caps doesn't improve transit for Calgarians overall. Mulit-line service on 7 Ave needs to be subtracted, not added.
Sure, the idea to accelerate the 8 Ave Subway to reallocate the Red Line onto that, and either have the SE LRT us that as well, or replace the Red Line on 7 Ave so there's now two lines for the West LRT into downtown is an alternative. But you still have the drawbacks of multiple lines on the Transit Mall, and the big issue here is the costs of going underground. By my estimation, the July 2024 city proposed Green Line was going to be underground for roughly 2km. The 8 Ave Subway would be 2.5km. The Green Line would've had to be deeper at some point, but will 8 Ave really be that much cheaper, if at all? And even if this concept was to be done, you will have to figure out how the NC LRT gets integrated into all this, which honestly should've had the LRT yesterday.
There's a reason why after two decades of studying this, the preferred option was to have the Green Line function to serve both the NC and SE, and not share tracks with 7 Ave. Do the best option for the long term today. The problem that I will largely place blame on the city councils over the past terms was having tunnel vision for the subway option when the costs for that exploded. It may have made sense back in 2015, 2017, and even 2021. But if the same result, but elevated can allow with the current allocated money to have the LRT actually reach areas where people in the SE live (and shit, maybe even get across the Bow River for the first phase), then it seems like a no brainer to go with elevated. 2 ST SW corridor really won't have much of a detrimental effect from it. In fact, if designed right, it may help improve it, lol.
Sure, the idea to accelerate the 8 Ave Subway to reallocate the Red Line onto that, and either have the SE LRT us that as well, or replace the Red Line on 7 Ave so there's now two lines for the West LRT into downtown is an alternative. But you still have the drawbacks of multiple lines on the Transit Mall, and the big issue here is the costs of going underground. By my estimation, the July 2024 city proposed Green Line was going to be underground for roughly 2km. The 8 Ave Subway would be 2.5km. The Green Line would've had to be deeper at some point, but will 8 Ave really be that much cheaper, if at all? And even if this concept was to be done, you will have to figure out how the NC LRT gets integrated into all this, which honestly should've had the LRT yesterday.
There's a reason why after two decades of studying this, the preferred option was to have the Green Line function to serve both the NC and SE, and not share tracks with 7 Ave. Do the best option for the long term today. The problem that I will largely place blame on the city councils over the past terms was having tunnel vision for the subway option when the costs for that exploded. It may have made sense back in 2015, 2017, and even 2021. But if the same result, but elevated can allow with the current allocated money to have the LRT actually reach areas where people in the SE live (and shit, maybe even get across the Bow River for the first phase), then it seems like a no brainer to go with elevated. 2 ST SW corridor really won't have much of a detrimental effect from it. In fact, if designed right, it may help improve it, lol.
ahuch
Active Member
outoftheice
Active Member
This is what the Jim Gray group has been pitching and given that the premier and minister have been parroting the Jim Gray group's talking points almost verbatim, my guess is this is what the province is going to deliver.
It will be a South East LRT that dead-ends at an elevated station behind city hall, forcing the vast majority of the 600 or so people who can fit on a 2 car train to head down the escalators, walk over to the City Hall station and try to cram themselves on the Red/Blue line trains that are entering downtown already full to get themselves to where they actually want to go which is 4 St SW and 7th Ave according to the City of Calgary's early Green Line work that tried to pinpoint where the highest concentration of jobs were downtown.
In the afternoons, the reverse will be true as those 600 people ride the free fare zone to City Hall to catch their SE LRT train back to the 'burbs but of course those are now 600 spots not available on a red or blue line train to the people who actually want to ride those trains meaning those trains will be departing City Hall station fairly empty with tons of potential riders stranded at other downtown stations.
So ya, looks great as a quick and easy way to save money when sketched out on a map, but I think it will be an absolute disaster for transit operations. Plus, of course, it also kills the concept of a connected SE-NC LRT
InfrastructureEnthusiast
New Member
Wow, that's pretty bad.. much worse than I was expecting. Why even bother with a dead end line like that? Especially when the terminus is so far east...
Have they put a price tag on that proposal?
Assuming construction costs have doubled since the 2013 upgradable BRT plan, it would be roughly 3 billion to built that all the way to Seton.
If 10av was used as an interim in the core there could be select stops all the way to 14st, or even sunalta station, much better access for transit users!
It may not be properly 'downtown' but 3 blocks south seems minor if it can offer a full east/west spread.
Last edited:
accord1999
Active Member
For their plan, it can go further to enable a connection with the NCLRT. I think their plan is trying to minimize risk by minimizing the amount of new infrastructure and essentially staying out of the downtown core, and using all of that savings to maximize reach.
The plan was proposed in May 2021, when they estimated the deep tunnel would cost at least $2B while their limited elevated line would be $200M.
Gray & Lester: Propose New Green Line Alignment for Downtown Calgary — Every Day Tourist
Calgary professionals sent a letter to Calgary Mayor Nenshi asking Council to reconsider the proposed transit alignment of the Green Line that would save 1.8B.
everydaytourist.ca
Last edited:
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
That elevated third street station offers an interesting opportunity to put the green line over the river and up Edmonton Trail, possibly turning west on 16th and then onto centre north, thereby keeping it all one line. It may not be ideal but I think it’s a pretty solid option given the issues the project is facing.
Edit: oh haha looks like Accord beat me to it by 30 seconds
Edit: oh haha looks like Accord beat me to it by 30 seconds
Ramsayite
Active Member
Welp, cuts the beltline out of the line pretty much completely.
Designed by people imagining downtown from the 1990s with zero understanding that the beltline is more actively used today than the core is.
Designed by people imagining downtown from the 1990s with zero understanding that the beltline is more actively used today than the core is.