CBBarnett
Senior Member
Skipping Eau Claire & Beltline stations would make very little sense, if ridership and providing access is a goal. Eau Claire is a major destination in it's own right; not just the mall, but the hotels nearby, condos, major events in the plaza & Prince's Island Park, Chinatown etc. If the goal is to provide transit to places people go/live/work, that would be a weird one to skip. Beltline is similar. Obviously the highest density area of the city for population, but also a huge number of offices and destinations: nearly all of Calgary's nightlife, Stampede Park, etc.
A big problem with both the N & SE sections of this project is the lack of any real concentration of employment / destinations / population which is what makes transit effective. Inglewood is a great destination, but small in the grand scheme of things and limited in the ability to redevelop to high density. Quarry Park is developing into a node (but with limited transit appeal thanks to huge surface parking lots and lack of pedestrian-focused design) as well as Seton / South Hospital (unfortunately built as far on the edge as possible). The new neighbourhoods south of 22x are decently dense and transit supportive, however like the hospital, are very far away. Apart from Inglewood, there are no concentrations that would be services in the SE for the first proposed phase.
The Centre Street corridor does quite a bit better in current density & ability to redevelop, but again lacks any real large destinations along the route. The "town square" cluster in Panorama Hills could be considered one, however it is unfortunately completely car-oriented, limited transit appeal. At least it acts as a land bank for redevelopment. Again, the first phase doesn't get here either.
So, it sounds like the Greenline is stuck in a hard place: It needs to provide access to destinations of concentration, but those are clustered in the core and are the most expensive to service. The SE line seems to have a pretty weak ridership potential unless it is anchored by the South Hospital, which is won't be in the first phase as proposed. The Centre Street line is better for current density and redevelopment, but lacks any real large destinations of concentration. Meanwhile, the cycle of car-dependence marches forward, with new interchanges, car-oriented neighbourhoods and trip patterns being further developed and entrenched while the Greenline builds out over 25 years.
This seems like a case of funding priorities (i.e. a complete paradigm shift to never spend money on interchanges for 25 years so all road capital can go to the LRT) or accessing additional revenue sources. The SE line just doesn't seem to work without full build out.
A big problem with both the N & SE sections of this project is the lack of any real concentration of employment / destinations / population which is what makes transit effective. Inglewood is a great destination, but small in the grand scheme of things and limited in the ability to redevelop to high density. Quarry Park is developing into a node (but with limited transit appeal thanks to huge surface parking lots and lack of pedestrian-focused design) as well as Seton / South Hospital (unfortunately built as far on the edge as possible). The new neighbourhoods south of 22x are decently dense and transit supportive, however like the hospital, are very far away. Apart from Inglewood, there are no concentrations that would be services in the SE for the first proposed phase.
The Centre Street corridor does quite a bit better in current density & ability to redevelop, but again lacks any real large destinations along the route. The "town square" cluster in Panorama Hills could be considered one, however it is unfortunately completely car-oriented, limited transit appeal. At least it acts as a land bank for redevelopment. Again, the first phase doesn't get here either.
So, it sounds like the Greenline is stuck in a hard place: It needs to provide access to destinations of concentration, but those are clustered in the core and are the most expensive to service. The SE line seems to have a pretty weak ridership potential unless it is anchored by the South Hospital, which is won't be in the first phase as proposed. The Centre Street line is better for current density and redevelopment, but lacks any real large destinations of concentration. Meanwhile, the cycle of car-dependence marches forward, with new interchanges, car-oriented neighbourhoods and trip patterns being further developed and entrenched while the Greenline builds out over 25 years.
This seems like a case of funding priorities (i.e. a complete paradigm shift to never spend money on interchanges for 25 years so all road capital can go to the LRT) or accessing additional revenue sources. The SE line just doesn't seem to work without full build out.