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

Go Elevated or try for Underground?

  • Work with the province and go with the Elevated option

    Votes: 25 71.4%

  • Try another approach and go for Underground option

    Votes: 7 20.0%

  • Cancel it altogether

    Votes: 1 2.9%

  • Go with a BRT solution

    Votes: 2 5.7%
  • Total voters
    35
Golfing guy said:
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?
Click to expand...

Even in 2019, it was estimated at upwards of $1B.

1734119335970.png


InfrastructureEnthusiast said:
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?
Click to expand...
Basically the side effect of the joining the SE to the NC. Since the NC portion was supposed to need LRT soon as bus capacity would not be adequate for Centre Street N, the whole project skipped BRT. But then chose to prioritize the SE at every opportunity.

1734119783602.png
 
zzkwilliamcanada said:
so what about Eau Claire area, the market has been empty, such a great location. those land just left as it is now?
Click to expand...
For now. I think that's actually better in the short run with so much uncertainty around this project. Maybe it never gets to Eau Claire and something else comes of that land. Once this is built in... 10 years? a lot of things could change with the city.
 
Red Star said:
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:

View attachment 619252
Click to expand...
It'll be at +45 level, so above all of the walkways. But I hope it will drop to +30 level north of 9th ave so the station replaces the +30 between Core and Scotia Centre. Either way, I think that's the only walkway that should be significantly affected
 
lemongrab said:
It'll be at +45 level, so above all of the walkways. But I hope it will drop to +30 level north of 9th ave so the station replaces the +30 between Core and Scotia Centre. Either way, I think that's the only walkway that should be significantly affected
Click to expand...
45' above the ground!

What's the point of using a low-floor train? 🤣
 
Low floor does make for cheaper stations at non-elevated stops. Which is all the stops south of the stop near 26th Ave. And it also means it can turn tighter? Okay, I'm grasping at straws... They're already ordered, that's why they're low floor.
 
My assumption is that it will run on the northside of 10th. So affected buildings will be Palliser South and Mount Royal House (which has a 8-story parkade podium). Single lane, two-way traffic should still work. I'm hoping there's a greenway under the elevated line and not parallel parking but I'm ready to be disappointed.
 
CalgaryTiger said:
Low floor does make for cheaper stations at non-elevated stops. Which is all the stops south of the stop near 26th Ave. And it also means it can turn tighter? Okay, I'm grasping at straws... They're already ordered, that's why they're low floor.
Click to expand...
Yup, ultimately it's not that big of a deal, but it eliminated some creative options as these costs erupted. I wish they pivoted to doing the 8 Ave subway for red line, and ran the SE as HF trains down 7th (after interlining with red line under the CPKC tracks). Timing would have even lined up perfectly with tearing up Olympic Plaza!

It never made sense to me to spend so much to tunnel what will be the lowest or 2nd lowest ridership of the 6 legs.
 
If more engineering and other work had been done on the north central in the last few years and not the southeast, I assume they would be going north with a maintenance facility near nose creek. Instead a lot of work was done in the southeast so you can't completely go back to zero.
 
CalgaryTiger said:
If more engineering and other work had been done on the north central in the last few years and not the southeast, I assume they would be going north with a maintenance facility near nose creek. Instead a lot of work was done in the southeast so you can't completely go back to zero.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of choices still to be made in the North Central, and the decision making processes at the city incentivize high cost solutions over making any one group disappointed. Ultimately, running up a road ROW that wasn't set aside decades ago is a very costly enterprise in policy, design and construction. Can easily spend a billion bucks just moving utilities. Would likely be way cheaper just to buy a row of houses up the entire corridor than try to move all those pipes, but that would really piss a very small group of people off.
 
Red Star said:
The drawback of using Center Street is that is misses a lot of the CBD. This means a longer walk for commuters.
Click to expand...
and more transfers. Your alignment also precludes building a double deck station for CPR commuter/regional rail which has been alluded to.

Anyways. The number 2 reason to stick with 2nd, after ridership and system balance (which has been true for 20 years of studies now) is that the city has already done a lot of the hard work moving utilities already.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top