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

[lemongrab]

Using 7th or even 8th Ave subway seems impossible without converting to HF trains, right?

Crazy idea:

SE GL moves to 12 Ave, probably gotta be a shallow UG station at arena. Then it connects with the red line underpass and switches into the municipal building tunnel.

But then it forks again to run WNW diagonally across Olympic Plaza for a terminus, leaving the straight 8th Ave ROW for HF trains.

Now it's likely a forever terminus and North is a separate line, but it wouldn't be totally impossible to connect them by running a few blocks up 1st St SE (construction disruption would be unpopular) then turning west on 3 Ave.

With the small empty parcel north of the NE corner of TCC you would have about 250 meters from the Muni Building (maybe even more considering the front plaza/sidewalk in front of west entrance)

Of course you'd have to tear up Olympic Plaza and turn 12 Ave north of Stampede into a construction zone........

What am I missing here...this seems kinda brilliant?

 

[ahuch]

Using 7th or even 8th Ave subway seems impossible without converting to HF trains, right?

Crazy idea:

SE GL moves to 12 Ave, probably gotta be a shallow UG station at arena. Then it connects with the red line underpass and switches into the municipal building tunnel.

But then it forks again to run WNW diagonally across Olympic Plaza for a terminus, leaving the straight 8th Ave ROW for HF trains.


Now it's likely a forever terminus and North is a separate line, but it wouldn't be totally impossible to connect them by running a few blocks up 1st St SE (construction disruption would be unpopular) then turning west on 3 Ave.

With the small empty parcel north of the NE corner of TCC you would have about 250 meters from the Muni Building (maybe even more considering the front plaza/sidewalk in front of west entrance)

Of course you'd have to tear up Olympic Plaza and turn 12 Ave north of Stampede into a construction zone........

What am I missing here...this seems kinda brilliant?

Well I think one piece is that we just had utility companies spend about 2 full years moving utilities from 11 ave to 12 ave for the previous green line alignment. Lol.

 

[lemongrab]

Sunk cost fallacy. Move them back!

Or, this is probably a stretch, but it might not even be impossible to do it off 11th Ave

 

[lemongrab]

40m and 50m radius circles:

 

[kempes_78]

Using 7th or even 8th Ave subway seems impossible without converting to HF trains, right?

Crazy idea:

SE GL moves to 12 Ave, probably gotta be a shallow UG station at arena. Then it connects with the red line underpass and switches into the municipal building tunnel.

But then it forks again to run WNW diagonally across Olympic Plaza for a terminus, leaving the straight 8th Ave ROW for HF trains.

View attachment 598895

Now it's likely a forever terminus and North is a separate line, but it wouldn't be totally impossible to connect them by running a few blocks up 1st St SE (construction disruption would be unpopular) then turning west on 3 Ave.

With the small empty parcel north of the NE corner of TCC you would have about 250 meters from the Muni Building (maybe even more considering the front plaza/sidewalk in front of west entrance)

Of course you'd have to tear up Olympic Plaza and turn 12 Ave north of Stampede into a construction zone........

What am I missing here...this seems kinda brilliant?

Have you taken town planning considerations on boars, headways, ridership, design philosophy amd geotechnical on board, etc, hmmmm.

 

[lemongrab]

Have you taken town planning considerations on boars, headways, ridership, design philosophy amd geotechnical on board, etc, hmmmm.

No. I'm just an idiot on the internet.

 

[kempes_78]

No. I'm just an idiot on the internet.

Ooerr missus.

 

[darwink]

Using 7th or even 8th Ave subway seems impossible without converting to HF trains, right?

Crazy idea:

SE GL moves to 12 Ave, probably gotta be a shallow UG station at arena. Then it connects with the red line underpass and switches into the municipal building tunnel.

But then it forks again to run WNW diagonally across Olympic Plaza for a terminus, leaving the straight 8th Ave ROW for HF trains.

View attachment 598895

Now it's likely a forever terminus and North is a separate line, but it wouldn't be totally impossible to connect them by running a few blocks up 1st St SE (construction disruption would be unpopular) then turning west on 3 Ave.

With the small empty parcel north of the NE corner of TCC you would have about 250 meters from the Muni Building (maybe even more considering the front plaza/sidewalk in front of west entrance)

Of course you'd have to tear up Olympic Plaza and turn 12 Ave north of Stampede into a construction zone........

What am I missing here...this seems kinda brilliant?

The issue to investigate would be passenger transfer demand westbound since the terminus is likely too far east. Better than 3rd St SE of course. But would need a detailed analysis on how much better.

 

[lemongrab]

The issue to investigate would be passenger transfer demand westbound since the terminus is likely too far east. Better than 3rd St SE of course. But would need a detailed analysis on how much better.

Yup it's a bit of a drawback, but it's really the exact same distance (1 full block) to WB 1st St station, which is the same station you'd walk to from GL on 2nd St. In fact it would be even faster from a shallow Olympic Plaza station than a deep 2nd St.

EB puts your transfer the same distance but 1 station further east. But that also means a slightly faster overall travel time.

Of course once red line moves to 8th you are locked into that first/last DT station, but it would hopefully be easier to kill the problem with frequency (what a great problem to have!)

A big plus I see is that stations for all 3 lines would be within a ~100m radius with 0-1 levels of grade separation, vs. ~180m and 1-2 levels in both the near and long term. Does that constant mobility benefit outweigh the overload drawback at absolute peak times?

 

[darwink]

Does that constant mobility benefit outweigh the overload drawback at absolute peak times?

The green line exists as conceived (an independent access to the centre of the business district) because in the 90s the conclusion was no.

 

[kempes_78]

The issue to investigate would be passenger transfer demand westbound since the terminus is likely too far east. Better than 3rd St SE of course. But would need a detailed analysis on how much better.

I understand your comment and thought. Ridership demand is dependent upon: promising estimates; system requirements, operational characteristics; LRT rolling stock types and usage along the lines; construction planning phases; maintenance; and, operational considerations. Effectively this means a wholesale review of Blue, Red and Green as an isolated section, whilst helpful, must be measured against the whole system.

A month's studies would be needed for this.

 

[lemongrab]

The green line exists as conceived (an independent access to the centre of the business district) because in the 90s the conclusion was no.

Well at this point we certain to accept a number of compromises. I'd be interested in a CBA between ideally placed deep stations and these alternative scenarios - ie. how much track length does the reallocated CAPEX buy? How much frequency does reallocated OPEX buy (say the delta between maintaining a deep tunnel+station and a shallow one)?

On the transfer balance issue I have a few questions:
1. How much changing ridership patterns change things?
2. How much does the reverse flow offset things (red/blue riders going to green)?
3. Would personal behaviour decisions be enough to mitigate it? Similar to induced demand with roads...if you get burned twice by overloaded trains, most people would seek out some of the following:

a. leave earlier/later​

b. choose a different boarding point​

c. use transit less/stop being a transit customer* (a situation we know currently exists on Centre St - I'd venture we currently lose more prospective customers there than we could on this issue)​

You mention the 90s...was that from a broader LRT planning study? My sense from SE specific reports is that the DT alignment was never really prescribed, but the assumption was that it would probably enter 7th or 8th Ave from the east...until the 2004-6 reports where they realized that wasn't feasible if North via Nose Creek did the same thing (which would also present this same geometry challenge; I don't think they ever really mention the transfer issue as much as overall 7th ave capacity). I'm sure it's been considered a lot, but I'm skeptical that it's an overriding objective

 

[kempes_78]

Well at this point we certain to accept a number of compromises. I'd be interested in a CBA between ideally placed deep stations and these alternative scenarios - ie. how much track length does the reallocated CAPEX buy? How much frequency does reallocated OPEX buy (say the delta between maintaining a deep tunnel+station and a shallow one)?

On the transfer balance issue I have a few questions:
1. How much changing ridership patterns change things?
2. How much does the reverse flow offset things (red/blue riders going to green)?
3. Would personal behaviour decisions be enough to mitigate it? Similar to induced demand with roads...if you get burned twice by overloaded trains, most people would seek out some of the following:

a. leave earlier/later​

b. choose a different boarding point​

c. use transit less/stop being a transit customer* (a situation we know currently exists on Centre St - I'd venture we currently lose more prospective customers there than we could on this issue)​

You mention the 90s...was that from a broader LRT planning study? My sense from SE specific reports is that the DT alignment was never really prescribed, but the assumption was that it would probably enter 7th or 8th Ave from the east...until the 2004-6 reports where they realized that wasn't feasible if North via Nose Creek did the same thing (which would also present this same geometry challenge; I don't think they ever really mention the transfer issue as much as overall 7th ave capacity). I'm sure it's been considered a lot, but I'm skeptical that it's an overriding objective

To answer your questions:
1. its cost quantification is dependent upon several factors: excavation depth along with associated supports, utility relocations, ground water control and construction methodology not to mention innovation and lean construction etc.
2. an economical study (as mentioned in my earlier post today) about ridership - several factors to consider based upon reasonable assumptions and known facts.
I do not understand what you mean by 'personal behaviour decisions' - please claify.

 

[lemongrab]

I do not understand what you mean by 'personal behaviour decisions'

Of course not. You weren't programmed to understand.

 

[kempes_78]

Of course not. You weren't programmed to understand.

Especially gibberish.....