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

[googspecial]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1223314970630189056

Pretty neat lil history tidbit.

I honestly think I've come around to the idea to just use the Centre Street Bridge, if it's going to run surface on Centre ST South of 16 AVE. Save the new bridge $$$ and get the line going North to 96 AVE and get the airport bird stoned too. Bus would be fine. Maybe add a station or two in the South. North and South of Stoney communities will both have to wait for Phase 2.

From the North, pretty much as planned, with underpass at McKnight. I'd add 64 AVE too.
16 AVE Station - underground, probably North of 16 AVE, but with access from the South as well. having it underground here still will allow car movements 16 AVE to adjust better to the reduced lanes further North and South.
9 AVE Station - surface. Great asset for Crescent Heights beyond it's residences. Tigerstadt Block is busy every night of the week, as are many other locations nearby. Crescent Heights High School. There's Uptown Edmonton Trail a few blocks East, and Sunnyside ain't that bad of a jaunt.
Centre Street Bridge - 1 lane car traffic each direction, maybe a bike lane, and lrt in middle, or a side.
Chinatown Station - surface between 2 & 3 AVEs, or underground before 4 AVE with access from both sides, portal from 2 to 3 AVE. Sucks to be you Eau Claire.
Stephen Avenue Station - South of 8 AVE, entrances from Stephen Ave and right out front the Calgary Tower.
**Would also make Centre ST pedestrian only South of 6 AVE to the Tower to facilitate line transfers, especially with a buried Red Line. Also detours vehicle traffic that use 9 AVE to take Centre Street Bridge, onto new routes, as an aid to the reduced lanes on the bridge
Turn East on 11 AVE, and as per "new plan", the rest.

If they are going to use Centre ST surface to get North within budget now, they might as well truly transform Centre Street. If the arguments against that are to please car drivers and leave the bridge as-is, then they need to tunnel to 16 AVE and build the new bridge over the park as per the last plan.

 

[CBBarnett]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1223314970630189056

Pretty neat lil history tidbit.

I honestly think I've come around to the idea to just use the Centre Street Bridge. If it's going to run surface on Centre ST South of 16 AVE. Save the new bridge $$$ and get the line going North to 96 AVE and get the airport bird stoned too. Maybe add a station or two in the South. North and South of Stoney communities will both have to wait for Phase 2.

From the North, pretty much as planned, with underpass at McKnight. I'd add 64 AVE too.
16 AVE Station - underground, probably North of 16 AVE, but with access from the South as well. having it underground here still will allow car movements 16 AVE to adjust better to the reduced lanes further North and South.
9 AVE Station - surface. Great asset for Crescent Heights beyond it's residences. Tigerstadt Block is busy every night of the week, as are many other locations nearby. Crescent Heights High School. There's Uptown Edmonton Trail a few blocks East, and Sunnyside ain't that bad of a jaunt.
Centre Street Bridge - 1 lane car traffic each direction, maybe a bike lane, and lrt in middle, or a side.
Chinatown Station - surface between 2 & 3 AVEs, or underground beneath 4 AVE with access from both sides, portal from 2 to 3 AVE. Sucks to be you Eau Claire.
Stephen Avenue Station - South of 8 AVE, entrances from Stephen Ave and right out front the Calgary Tower.
**Would also make Centre ST pedestrian only South of 6 AVE to the Tower to facilitate line transfers, especially with a buried Red Line. Also detours vehicle traffic that use 9 AVE to take Centre Street Bridge, onto new routes, as an aid to the reduced lanes on the bridge
Turn East on 11 AVE, and as per "new plan", the rest.

If they are going to use Centre ST surface to get North within budget now, they might as well truly transform Centre Street. If the arguments against that are to please car drivers and leave the bridge as-is, then they need to tunnel to 16 AVE and build the new bridge over the park as per the last plan.

I recall they deemed the existing bridge not sound enough to hold a modern train's weight but don't recall any details behind that statement. Would retrofitting Centre St. for weight be much more expensive than a whole new crossing, expropriations?

 

[accord1999]

Are they going to expropriate the land? I really have to wonder about some of the decisions being made about the northern alignment. I guess this is what you get when the new provincial government reneges on promised funds and threatens to eliminate the project altogether.

The Province's funding changes may be the straw that's currently breaking the Green Line's back but all of its trouble really stem from it going more than $3B over budget for the full-line. Since the decision to use Shepard for the yard appears to be unassailable, then any cost savings have to come from the NC.

 

[googspecial]

I recall they deemed the existing bridge not sound enough to hold a modern train's weight but don't recall any details behind that statement. Would retrofitting Centre St. for weight be much more expensive than a whole new crossing, expropriations?

I don't know what those numbers look like, but other reductions in costs to consider as well. No readjusting the bluff side with either a portal or grading. Memorial and Bow River Pathways are left alone mostly (could improve the lower deck while they're at it). No re-landscaping Prince's Island Park. Overall reduction in track length, albeit small.

 

[accord1999]

Back in 2016 when Council was first deciding on how to get into downtown, the options and costs were presented. Using the Centre Street Bridge (Option A) wasn't much cheaper than using a new bridge (Option E) and that option even included an underground station at 16th Avenue.

A high-level graphical view of the various options can be seen here:

https://s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.com/hdp.ca.prod.app.cgy-engage.files/7414/7215/3342/CC-options-combined.pdf

 

[googspecial]

That assumes the line still goes West through Eau Claire, which I understand is likely nonnegotiable at this point in the project. Just an opportunity I saw with using the existing bridge, and possibly getting more of the line out of it. And if they'll be disrupting traffic patterns up top the hill, might as well continue that down the bridge.

 

[outoftheice]

Actually, looking at these images more closely, I think the alignment you are referring to is the original tunnel alignment. The new bridge alignment does seem to go further south on Centre and turn off around 2 Ave NE.

You are correct, the new bridge alignment is being planned so that the Green Line enters Centre St just north of the traffic lights at 2nd Ave NE. No homes along the bluff will be directly impacted or expropriated.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

This is being reported as the new proposed downtown alignment

View attachment 227950 View attachment 227948View attachment 227949

That is the stupidest alignment of any that have been presented ever since the NC and SE lines were put into one project. F*ck sakes.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

I used to live the Crescent Heights, and unfortunately, I think the alignment of Centre street will result in a big political battle. I'd be happy if Centre is transit-only south of 16th or auto access is restricted...the city could add a station at 9th ave. However, I think the local businesses along Centre and the roads department would go bananas over the proposal. Also, what would be done with the existing centre street bridge? 4 lanes are going to be severely under utilized.

One last thing...I think the 16th ave crossing needs to be grade separated.

I agree with this except that I still think that it needs to be UG all the way to 16. After seeing this botched abortion of a proposal, I don't mind the thought of a bridge punching into the bluffs or an at-grade station at Eau Claire. I feel like we are pulling an Edmonton, except worse. Both of our existing lines (which have existed for decades) that cross 16 Avenue have crossed under it since their inception. The idea that we will be building an at grade station at the TransCanada Highway in the 2020s makes me actually angry. What the hell is happening at the city right now? If it's money, then don't build the f*cking portion north of the river until you can do it right, don't devastate the accessibility of a significant part of the city for decades to come just to satisfy your vanity.

 

[Silence&Motion]

Both of our existing lines (which have existed for decades) that cross 16 Avenue have crossed under it since their inception. The idea that we will be building an at grade station at the TransCanada Highway in the 2020s makes me actually angry.

It doesn't look like the line will actually reach 16 AVE at this point. I assume they'd go under 16 "when" they eventually extend the line north. I'd actually prefer a surface-level LRT over nothing at all. There will be incredible political blow back at removing driving lanes, but if they can overcome that, I think the end product would be better for the neighbourhood. Drivers would find alternative ways of getting downtown and things would eventually stabilize. King Street in Waterloo is probably a good idea of what Centre Street North could look like.

 

[darwink]

Part of it is political too - make the cost of tunnelling visible and make clear the benefit of tunnelling up to 16th Ave is a roads benefit not a transit benefit.

 

[Social Justice]

Part of it is political too - make the cost of tunnelling visible and make clear the benefit of tunnelling up to 16th Ave is a roads benefit not a transit benefit.

That's a good point...it'll be a big political fight, but one that's worth having. I think with running the LRT on the surface you save a ton of money and get a station on 9th avenue. Some posters say that the 9th ave station only panders to the rich SFH's in Crescent Heights, but I disagree. Centre has potential to increase the number of mixed use developments already on the street. Plus, on the east side of Crescent Heights there are a number of condos which produces a significant medium population density. Also, I could see a lot of people using the 9th ave station that want to go to the commercial area on Edmonton Trail.

Chad's right though...the city should take their time and plan this out properly. Also, the 16th ave crossing must be grade separated. It'd be bonkers if it wasn't.

If it's money, then don't build the f*cking portion north of the river until you can do it right, don't devastate the accessibility of a significant part of the city for decades to come just to satisfy your vanity.

 

[Social Justice]

If the LRT were to run on street, I'd like to see the following crossings:

7th Ave: Pedestrian
8th Ave: Pedestrian/Cyling
9th Ave: Station with pedestrian and cycling
10th Ave: Auto/Pedestrian
12th Ave: Auto/Pedestrian/Cycling
14th Ave: Pedestrian
16th Ave: Grade Separated with station below. (Similar to 69th Street)

 

[Silence&Motion]

In a heroic act of procrastination, I decided to calculate the per capita number of rapid transit stations for every CMA in Canada that has a rapid transit system.

I thought Calgary might actually be first, but it turns out that Montreal has the most stations based on its population. This lead will increase once it completes the RER line that is currently under construction. However, if Calgary were to build the first phase of the Green Line, it would have the most stations per capita. This, of course, assumes that population differences don't radically change and that other cities don't also build more stations per capita in the time it takes us to build the Green Line. That may actually be a pretty good bet given how far behind Ottawa and Edmonton are, and that Toronto and Montreal would need to build many more stations to account for their much larger populations. Montreal, for example, would have to build an additional 25 stations beyond what is already under construction to get below 24,648 people per station. However, if K-W completes the second stage of their LRT line, they would have the most stations per capita, but I'm not sure if there is actually any funding for that line at this point.

Some notes:
- Only rail stations are included (no buses!)
- One-way stations only count for half (sorry Calgary and Kitchener)
- Planned stations are not included because it is hard to figure out how likely they are to be built.
- I tried to avoid double-counting stations that serve more than one line with some exceptions. E.g. I figured Union Station in Toronto should be considered to house one commuter rail station (that serves multiple lines) and one subway station (so it's counted twice).

 

[Silence&Motion]

Group that wants pause on Green Line hosted private event with top city officials

The level of corruption here is really quite staggering. A small group of Calgary's wealthiest men (who have probably never taken transit in their lives) get a private Greenline engagement session with top city staff, the mayor's office, and two sitting councillors.

I continue to believe that Jim Grey, Steve Allen, and their cronies are basically trying to kill the Greenline for the UCP so that the UCP doesn't look like it broke one of its promises. At this point, the amount of quid pro quos being trade back and forth between Steve Allen and Doug Schweitzer has been well documented.