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

[darwink]

By this logic, could what's underground there, from 10th Ave to 3rd Ave, not be elevated? Someone needs to remind me why rail has to be so high over freight.

Cause rail freight can explode, so avoiding over pressure.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

Cause rail freight can explode, so avoiding over pressure.

Yet it is running through our downtown.

 

[kora]

You could run them much much faster with an 8 Ave subway. It would be shame to spend a few years tearing up Stephen Ave to do it though...(wait a minute - we're doing that anyway!)

That's for sure. I think there could be interim measures like closing Centre Street, 3 Street, 7 Street, 10 Street to traffic across 7 Avenue. Some of these downtown north-south routes don't need to serve vehicles because they are essentially local roads .... In the same way that the railroad tracks don't have all the streets running to the Beltline. Has an analysis like this been conducted?

 

[lemongrab]

By this logic, could what's underground there, from 10th Ave to 3rd Ave, not be elevated? Someone needs to remind me why rail has to be so high over freight.

I think the key thing is exactly where the ~13m clearance issue:

Underground: Have to be deep under for 8 ave, which means you're inherently under CPKC/9th and 7th-4th Aves anyways. Your 7 Ave station is quite deep, but the beltine and north DT stations could be at-grade if you want. (but there is another deep clearance issue if you want to use 10th or 11th you need to either be at-grade through Macleods Tr or go way under the red line tunnel there, too)

Elevated: Have to be way over CPKC tracks, and also the +30 between 7-8 Aves. Then the last +15 is between 2nd&3rd Aves, which is just a couple hundred meters from the Bow River so you just stay high across the river. The CPKC tracks mean you have to start elevating about 500m before (see blue line west), which puts you at 1st St SE. So of course you bump it another 300 meters to clear that and Macleod NB. But then you're just 1 block from the 4 Ave SE underpass that needs to be navigated since we're using 10th, so you bump it another 250 meters east. Which puts you at Grand Central Station, which the prelim design seemed to envision the GL already elevated...so bump the start of the ramp another few hundred meters east!

So there isn't much of an option to shorten the elevated section as there could be with underground. But that tight turn from 3rd onto Centre St likely presents a few challenges, too.

 

[darwink]

But that tight turn from 3rd onto Centre St likely presents a few challenges, too.

if you go slow enough the turn is fine.

But politically, through China town ... that was just a non starter. Council had already fought and lost for a bike lane on 3rd, and 1 or 2 redevelopment projects hat would have sailed through if outside the area.

 

[lemongrab]

if you go slow enough the turn is fine.

But politically, through China town ... that was just a non starter. Council had already fought and lost for a bike lane on 3rd, and 1 or 2 redevelopment projects hat would have sailed through if outside the area.

Yup; I kinda meant the challenge of doing those two blocks on 3rd Ave where you'd presumably have a station, too. It looks somewhat trivial compared to the streets around it, but of course they're still important DT blocks (despite the preponderance of surface parking).

I was also wondering if you'd want to run down the west side of Centre street (ie. current SB lanes) to minimize vehicle interactions until you go under 16th? Which makes the turn off 3rd especially tight. This probably messes too much with access to west Crescent Hts (though that's kind of the point) and limits opportunity for any kind of shared busway (not sure how well that would work in any configuration). It brings me back to the point that we're not really maximizing the opportunities that a low-floor tram presents...because it turns out it doesn't really make great transit? But it sure looks neat in Portland and Bilbao!