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

[Transit Apologist]

At this point, I would raise the budget and extend it to Seton. Make it a proper line that will actually serve a lot of people

Shepard is close enough that in the short-term most feeder buses south of 130th can be rerouted to serve it for a few years before the Seton extension is inevitably built. It'll still be a little bit faster than going to the Red Line (which is what most of them do right now). In my opinion it's no worse than the early 2000's when all feeders south of Fish Creek Park were routed to Fish Creek-Lacombe for 3-4 years before Somerset could be built.

Wow, so even with all the "savings", they're keeping the terminus at Shepard, and we lose Eau Claire Station...

It's savings compared to the city's most recent proposal before the provincial takeover, which was going to build only to Lynnwood for the exact same $6.2 billion price tag. Truth is, the politicking on the province's part is disgusting but this proposal they ended up with is a huge improvement. Ending at Lynnwood would've added nothing to the overall network and relegated the train to the lowest-ridership portions of its entire route, leaving SE riders with a much more expensive version of the same mediocre transit service they have already.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

The language out of council isn't making this alignment look like a slam dunk either. Granted they haven't seen the report but I'd say it is 75/25 whether they adopt this, might be the next council's football.

Also there has to be an RFQ and RFP for this section so even if it is adopted, we are years away from any construction thing on the downtown portion. Which I guess gives the Grand Central station time to become more than an idea.

If council doesn't adopt this, then we're back to a stop-work on the Green Line, not sure they have the stomach for that. Especially the councillors running for re-election.

 

[darwink]

Wow, so even with all the "savings", they're keeping the terminus at Shepard, and we lose Eau Claire Station...

The city can decide on how to extend to Eau Claire, the cost would be rather minimal. But it has major land-use implications, so not exactly the province's call in the same way as ending the tunnel fools errand.

 

[darwink]

The language out of council isn't making this alignment look like a slam dunk either. Granted they haven't seen the report but I'd say it is 75/25 whether they adopt this, might be the next council's football.

Also there has to be an RFQ and RFP for this section so even if it is adopted, we are years away from any construction thing on the downtown portion. Which I guess gives the Grand Central station time to become more than an idea.

If council doesn't adopt this, then we're back to a stop-work on the Green Line, not sure they have the stomach for that. Especially the councillors running for re-election.

If council thinks the tunnel is worth an extra billion dollars, let council find the extra billion dollars. They did for the arena, they can do so for this if they really think it is worth it. Versus building 3 giant suburban rec centres. I know which I would choose.

 

[Meikkhaell]

So it cost 2.5 million to decide on a route anyone with Google Maps could see was the easiest route to take??? It does make sense though and hits the provinces requirements.

i wouldn't be nearly as bothered at the $2.5M consultant fee as I would be with the fact they didn't go to AECOM in the first place. I work for a private consultant that does lots of work with the city, and I've seen firsthand how much of a mess they are. Billions and years wasted with city engineers overdesigning and overcomplicating an alignment, going around in circles about funding, all just to pass it off and immediately get the right solution back from someone else.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

since they've insisted on the N-S street with the most +15s

Damn is there ever a lot of +15s on second street! 6 between 9th and 2nd Aves. I'd like to see it go to ground and then up Centre but there is nowhere to turn east.

This AECOM report better outline the options they looked at because I don't see how 1st Street SW wasn't the better option? There's the same parking lot you're using to turn north on 2nd that you could use to turn north on 1st.

 

[Golfing guy]

At this point, I would raise the budget and extend it to Seton. Make it a proper line that will actually serve a lot of people

Really how much more to get to Seton? The right away is there (at least till Stoney Tr) and it’s quite a pretty simple build. Except for a bridge over Stoney, not much structure needs built?

 

[zzkwilliamcanada]

so what about Eau Claire area, the market has been empty, such a great location. those land just left as it is now?

 

[HudsonA08]

This may just tell the city how to get into downtown, I wonder if the city can ask the RFP to include the Eau Claire stop as well. I would also hope the city lets the province know that the province is responsible to design and build the grand central terminal and when it needs to be done by.

 

[CplKlinger]

not exactly the province's call in the same way as ending the tunnel fools errand.

Smith has stated that this was for financial reasons, not jurisdictional:

"Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said in a news conference Friday morning that extending the elevated LRT line by 640 metres to an Eau Claire station would cost an additional $400 million.

'The reason it's important to connect Seventh Avenue is that it allows for transfers to both the Red and Blue Line. Going on to Eau Claire would cost another $400 million. And so that means that if you do that, then you can't take the project all the way out to Shepard,' said Smith.

'So those are the trade-offs that have to be made.'"

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

At this point, I would raise the budget and extend it to Seton. Make it a proper line that will actually serve a lot of people

No need to raise the budget, just replace the trains with autonomous electric buses!
That should free up more than enough money for the Seton extension, and to fully grade separate the line.

Might even free up enough money to pay for a similar dedicated bus route in the north to bridge blue line to north pointe via yyc, and kickstart the commuter rail system...

When those articles were posted summing up the history of the green line fiasco, it wasn't clear to me when or why it was decided that the SE *needed* to be LRT instead of the bus based setway?

Was it someone's campaign promise? Or was it just a side effect of the project scope growing to include the NC leg?

 

[Red Star]

Supposedly the new alignment, Elevated above 10th ave from "Grand Central Station", ending at 7th ave SW.
https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/c...-line-plan-the-ball-is-in-city-councils-court
View attachment 619184

I'm pretty disappointed with the alignment AECOM brought forth.

These are my thoughts on the proposed alignment:

1. There are six +15s on 2nd street which need to be demolished/reworked.
2. The transfer at 7th ave isn't great as the nearest westbound station on 7th ave is two blocks away.
3. The new station at 10th Ave. is kind of useless and adds travel time
4. The tracks have to go above this monstrosity on 9th Ave. & 2nd:

I propose this instead:

1. Utilize the existing CPR ROW
2. Begin track elevation west of 4th street.
3. The demolition/reworking of only two +15s is required
4. The tight corner of 9th and Center street has space at the NE corner to accommodate the turn.
5. Instead of building a new costly bridge over the Bow River, the alignment can utilize Center Street bridge...since it is a low floor train after all.

The drawback of using Center Street is that is misses a lot of the CBD. This means a longer walk for commuters.

 

[kora]

'The reason it's important to connect Seventh Avenue is that it allows for transfers to both the Red and Blue Line. Going on to Eau Claire would cost another $400 million. And so that means that if you do that, then you can't take the project all the way out to Shepard,' said Smith.

'So those are the trade-offs that have to be made.'"

Wonder how much it would cost to build a pedestrian tunnel from the 7 Avenue Green Line station to exit somewhere around 4 Avenue, so that pedestrians can skip the busy and unpleasant 6th, 5th, and 4th Avenues.

But when I think about it, that work better with an underground 7 Avenue station.

Technically the Plus 15 system is supposed to serve that purpose, but it's circuitous (not direct) and not open at all times.

 

[lemongrab]

It can stay elevate the entire stretch. This entirely leaves options open. Even better, it might socialize the idea of elevated, meaning we get elevated until north of 16th Ave N, a superior outcome.

Great point. I haven't thought too much about north of the Bow - my bias is wanting to avoid unnecessary (and expensive) impacts through PIP/river, but just shooting through elevated the whole time would probably be the best way to mitigate it with this alignment.

Of course we'd also lose out on the miraculous benefits of LF trains where they magically make every street a pedestrian paradise...speaking of which it would be a bit funny if we end up with 0 meters of track where LF is actually necessary (though maybe it would still drop down between 20th-64th)

Damn is there ever a lot of +15s on second street! 6 between 9th and 2nd Aves. I'd like to see it go to ground and then up Centre but there is nowhere to turn east.

This AECOM report better outline the options they looked at because I don't see how 1st Street SW wasn't the better option? There's the same parking lot you're using to turn north on 2nd that you could use to turn north on 1st.

The whole point of LF was the ability to turn on a dime, so 3rd or 2nd Aves should have been feasible (3rd ave was originally an option in late 2015).

 

[darwink]

"Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said in a news conference Friday morning that extending the elevated LRT line by 640 metres to an Eau Claire station would cost an additional $400 million.

That probably includes the expropriation cost of removing development opportunity, which is way way less if you come to a mutual agreement that maximizes benefits to the developer. It's a weird thing where the government deciding to do something, costs way way more, than the government working to do the same thing.