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

Go Elevated or try for Underground?

  • Work with the province and go with the Elevated option

    Votes: 27 75.0%

  • Try another approach and go for Underground option

    Votes: 6 16.7%

  • Cancel it altogether

    Votes: 1 2.8%

  • Go with a BRT solution

    Votes: 2 5.6%
  • Total voters
    36
Surrealplaces said:
I'm guessing she got a bunch of advice from some of her own people after she made a point of saying her cabinet would be 'more rural and less Calgary', or she read some of the several articles in papers around the country, pointing out what a mistake that was. I realize her voting base is largely rural, but it's plainly obvious that she needs Calgary to win the election. Hopefully Calgarians see past the sudden change in tactics and see her for what she is.
Click to expand...
Hopefully Notley sees her tactics and raises her a fieldhouse and a green line extension to Seton.
 
zagox said:
First sign of credible political strategy that I’ve seen from Smith since she took office. Vote for me and Calgary will get an arena, airport LRT, and a train to Banff. All stuff that like and can imagine themselves using.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with everything you've said but its funny to think middle/ upper-income ex-PC voters would ever see themselves on a train.
 
Unknown User said:
Totally agree with everything you've said but its funny to think middle/ upper-income ex-PC voters would ever see themselves on a train.
Click to expand...

I don’t think those voters see themselves riding the green line to Ogden, but my understanding is that airport rail is conceptually very popular - more so than in practice. Airport rail is actually used mainly by airport workers and a small share of air passengers but it is the kind of thing that even non-transit riders “think a world class city should have”.
 
zagox said:
I don’t think those voters see themselves riding the green line to Ogden, but my understanding is that airport rail is conceptually very popular - more so than in practice. Airport rail is actually used mainly by airport workers and a small share of air passengers but it is the kind of thing that even non-transit riders “think a world class city should have”.
Click to expand...
I've ridden airport trains in Chicago and Atlanta, and vast majority of traffic seemed to be airport workers, with no passengers sporting luggage. Which makes sense give the size of those airports. I've used the Hong Kong airport train, and that one had a lot of travelers, but that's a different situation. Here in Calgary there is still a lot of parking for airport employees, and probably enough bus service to get employees there. I'd much rather see money go to the Green Line or to putting the Red Line underground downtown.
 
Surrealplaces said:
I've ridden airport trains in Chicago and Atlanta, and vast majority of traffic seemed to be airport workers, with no passengers sporting luggage. Which makes sense give the size of those airports. I've used the Hong Kong airport train, and that one had a lot of travelers, but that's a different situation. Here in Calgary there is still a lot of parking for airport employees, and probably enough bus service to get employees there. I'd much rather see money go to the Green Line or to putting the Red Line underground downtown.
Click to expand...

I don’t think airport rail should be a particularly high priority for Calgary but if it creates political will to extend the green line to 96 Ave, it’s great.
 
The people-mover part is the weak link in the existing plans - I'd rather see a Green Line spur at 96 Ave (or elsewhere) that connects Airport and Blue Line. Agreed that it doesn't have to be a priority, but should be on the list of obvious future transit connections. The Canada Line spur in Vancouver is pretty effective version of this.

The Airport-Downtown-Banff proposal sounds good in theory too. For the Airport to Downtown stretch, it seems like it'll be a bit like UP in Toronto, which is hardly a best-in-class airport transit service, but still is really effective and popular for what it is.

In our case though, I don't have confidence the boosters can pull it off to the level required to make it an effective transit option. The Airport authority and CP both seem indifferent to it and they whole project seems distracted with boosterism and shiny new tech (e.g. hydrogen trains), rather than boring but more important stuff like service levels and infrastructure.

Maybe the renewed provincial interest (and funding) would help, but seems pretty last-minute electioneering than a serious commitment to effective airport transit.
 
Mountain Man said:
Would a separate line that just runs between the green and blue lines with a stop at the airport work? That could be the beginning of an e-w north LRT in the distant future.
Click to expand...
that's the city's current plan
btw the "peoplemover" will likely be skytrain technology
 
Here is the approved plan for the Airport People Mover. It is expected to be built in phases with the eastern phase built first.

Eastern Phase:

Screenshot_20221116_123922_Adobe Acrobat.jpg


Western Phase:

Screenshot_20221115_150213_Adobe Acrobat.jpg
 
outoftheice said:
Here is the approved plan for the Airport People Mover. It is expected to be built in phases with the eastern phase built first.

Eastern Phase:

View attachment 439552

Western Phase:

View attachment 439553
Click to expand...
One of the rules for great airport transit is that transit thrives on the diversity of possible uses. I think it would be interesting to see this line extended both east and west, and have a greater focus on TOD.
West: Country Hills Golf Club redevelopment, Hidden Creek, Kincora, Sage Hill, 144 Ave
East: Saddlecrest/68th St, Omni
To make it extandable eastwards, you'd probably want to move the 88 Ave Blue Line interchange station further north (maybe in the style of a west-lrt embankment at Airport Trail). Of course, that would mess with the city's extremely intelligent plan to spam interchanges at just about every major intersection in the northeast.
 
calgaryherald.com

Green Line CEO says project has undergone intense due diligence

Darshpreet Bhatti said the Green Line has been scrutinized from top to bottom by internal and external auditors, and that work continues.
calgaryherald.com calgaryherald.com

I also heard on the radio yesterday that they have made a deal with Harvard Properties to put the Eau Claire station underground at the mall, which will mean demolition of the mall and integrated into the redevelopment. Can't find that bit of information in an online article though.
 
MichaelS said:
calgaryherald.com

Green Line CEO says project has undergone intense due diligence

Darshpreet Bhatti said the Green Line has been scrutinized from top to bottom by internal and external auditors, and that work continues.
calgaryherald.com calgaryherald.com

I also heard on the radio yesterday that they have made a deal with Harvard Properties to put the Eau Claire station underground at the mall, which will mean demolition of the mall and integrated into the redevelopment. Can't find that bit of information in an online article though.
Click to expand...
Wonder what the language in the deal with Harvard looks like, it guarantees mall demolition, but what does it mean for the development? Hopefully at least a street level/podium buildout in conjunction with the stop. It can't be a Westbrook 'integration'!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top