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

[darwink]

Fun portal work:

 

[gsunnyg]

Fun portal work:

K now I'm down for a bridge! This rendering really emphasizes how badly the Waterfront properties messed up by not adding retail to help activate the riverfront (now they're gonna unknowingly miss another opportunity of activating a park/plaza). Could have been a really well-integrated TOD. Let's see what the Eau Claire redevelopment does to bring some vibrancy.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

I love that idea. Make the best of a bad situation and completely activating the area around it. Very cool.

 

[ahuch]

Not shocking but I bet this has some ripple effects with the green line project delays..
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-nenshi-construction-projects-1.5989441

 

[Mountain Man]

These are far better than I expected! glad they are taking the opportunity to active the spaces around the bridge! Now can we just get this approved at all levels so we can start building?!?!

 

[darwink]

Now can we just get this approved at all levels so we can start building?

No, because there is still fundamental differences with how the city thinks contracting should go, and the province. And those differences as discussed here amount to a huge black hole cost wise.

 

[haltcatchfire]

That Eau Claire landing is a mess. Rarely will people ever go up those steps to a platform that doesn't have a purpose to justify the cost of all of that work. No pedestrians are going to go up steps just to get to the other side. They will go around. A wide and gradual sweeping arc to the south of both path & bike route up and over the line would be much better and simpler. Goal One here should be the simplest and most accessible pedestrian and cycling route east-west through the area.

The east-west pathway route creates major conflict with the entry doors to the station. Not to mention this design hasn't thought one iota about the other seasons, which is typical for this city.

 

[CBBarnett]

That Eau Claire landing is a mess. Rarely will people ever go up those steps to a platform that doesn't have a purpose to justify the cost of all of that work. No pedestrians are going to go up steps just to get to the other side. They will go around. A wide and gradual sweeping arc to the south of both path & bike route up and over the line would be much better and simpler. Goal One here should be the simplest and most accessible pedestrian and cycling route east-west through the area.

The east-west pathway route creates major conflict with the entry doors to the station. Not to mention this design hasn't thought one iota about the other seasons, which is typical for this city.

I agree. Pockets of landscaping and multiple overhanging stairs creates ice dripping/snow maintenance issues, random width of pathways intersecting at weird angles will create weird congestion and pinch points all over, despite a big increase in pedestrian area overall.

I would remove all the weird stairs, triple the width of the gradual sweeping arc pathway for both pedestrians and cyclists and the make the size of the mixing zone/station plaza as large as possible in front of the station. Remove as much pointless random grass bits as possible and allow wide sweeping arcs to give real capacity with very wide pathways. This is forever the heart of the pathway network and will always have extremely high traffic. Build it with less landscape architecture flourishes and more sheer capacity.

 

[artvandelay]

Fun portal work:

I'm not a fan of the way this cuts off the river walk. I understand the grade challenges but I think the path should be continuous under the bridge, even if the river channel has to be shifted slightly northwards. I believe that area is largely manmade anyway.

 

[DougB]

Thoughts on the portal:
1) Biggest fail is trying to turn the portal into a plaza
2) Why does the LRT bridge have not only another pedestrian crossing, but one on either side? Pedestrian crossings of the lagoon already exist to the immediate east and immediate west. Keeping the bridge narrower will lessen it visual impact. Creating a redududant north-south pedestrian flow only adds to congestion
3) How about a restaurant building above the portal? I would offer excellent views and be far more utilized than a dead end plaza
4) I'm torn about providing pedestrian passage under the bridge by the portal. It would be dark, prone to ice build up and yet another spot for undesirables to congregate
5) Perhaps a wide ramp in the location of the stairways could minimize the jog in the pathway. Closer to the station, where the ramp is located in the image, could be another restaurant
6) Could the portal and bridge approach be shifted westward so that the pathway wouldn't have to make as sharp of a jog next to the Waterfront. This would likely be cost prohibative but even a 15m shift would make a difference. Perhaps eliminating the pedestrian pathways on either side of the tracks will allow the bridge to shift westward within the footprint shown in the image
7) Maybe enclose the section of the bridge through the park with something like this

1)

 

[Urban Outdoorsman]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/green-line-calgary-tunnel-park-1.5992355

 

[Urban Outdoorsman]

Found a fun little Easter-egg in the portal renders

Can this please be a thing!

 

[Mountain Man]

No, because there is still fundamental differences with how the city thinks contracting should go, and the province. And those differences as discussed here amount to a huge black hole cost wise.

Fair enough, had to go back a bit to see the discussion you guys were having...

 

[Mountain Man]

I'm not a fan of the way this cuts off the river walk. I understand the grade challenges but I think the path should be continuous under the bridge, even if the river channel has to be shifted slightly northwards. I believe that area is largely manmade anyway.

Yeah that is definitely an oversight, I'm sure the pathway will be continuous the entire way.

 

[haltcatchfire]

Found a fun little Easter-egg in the portal renders

Can this please be a thing!

Is that Farkas?