That might have helped some, but the Green Line had a lot of new challenging things for Calgary like the deep tunnel through DT and under the Bow River. I think it also didn't help that funding for the GL came by pretty easily, therefore the initial planning never really care about...

Good question. I assume that it's something based on the RouteAhead plans from 2012 but unfortunately those documents no longer seem to be available online anymore. This page gives a brief summary of what their plans were and sounds like a re-allocation of roads (and some sidewalks) for BRT...

Even more annoying for NC Calgary is that the SETWAY was skipped because they said BRT wasn't adequate for the Centre Street N corridor in the medium term. And now, it probably won't even have that in the long term. I suspect the $500M ask is a bone to throw to NC Calgary for when the Bow...

I recall that they were talking about ~$50M in improvements (similar to Translink) so the leap to $500M is quite a surprise for me. There was a study in 2021 (GC2021-0747) and all the possible improvements they looked at totaled only $120M so I'd really like to know where the extra $350+M would...

With the City asking for $166M from Alberta for the NC BRT that is now supposedly costing $500M (roughly enough for Green Line to go from 16th to 40th Avenue) and the Blue Line/People Mover to YYC now rising to the top of budget wishlists (at around $850-900M), it seems to me that they won't be...

The plan was supposedly very popular, with 90% support from the North Haven community in 2005. But the City isn't willing to fund it yet. https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/north-haven-residents-want-action-on-increasingly-dangerous-northwest-intersection

Are you able to provide a time estimate of when the 60% design would be ready (without endangering your job)? Today's Green Line Board meeting indicated that the 30% design was only received in January, which seems disappointingly slow.

For this debate, the question is if ETS had another $125-$150M/year in funding, would it be better to use it to make fares free or to improve transit service. Free fares seems to be mostly a thing for US transit systems that have low ridership and don't actually have much passenger revenue to...

Of course, a lot of that lifestyle requires significant privilege, like knowing that you'll work at the same office for the same employer (or yourself) and picking the days you want go in, and that can be near residential areas for most of your working life. But for most people, they can't be...

Places you visit on vacation aren't always the places you want to live and work and do all of your regular activities, especially if you can't afford to pay tourist rates 365 days of the year. The City of Paris is the most visited city in the world, but it's shrinking in population for 100...

Three-cars are probably a design remnant from when Green Line was supposed to be built out all at once and were needed for the predicted opening day ridership from the NC. Prior to the economic problems of the 2014 oil crash and COVID, NC bus capacity on the Centre Street corridor was already...

Will that mean the Green Line will be physically limited to two-car trains without a future rebuilding of some stations?

Yeah, it's a pretty cluttered and somewhat confusing way to display the projects and their costs. Unfortunately, despite the importance of the future extensions to the success of the Green Line, the amount of information released about them since 2017 has been limited and that's the only...

To refresh our memories about the costs and benefits of the future stages, the data from March 2019 can be viewed here: https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=022afe15-39e9-4697-bbdf-7dc67f01c2c9&Agenda=PostMinutes&lang=English&Item=20&Tab=attachments The RouteAhead update...

Even if traffic levels at the 16th Ave section is reduced when the full Green Line is complete, the at-grade stations IMO results in significant compromises in the desire to turn that section of Centre Street into a walkable, "cozy" main street versus stations that can handle high passenger...

I suspect capital cost was the overwhelming (perhaps only) factor in choosing the at-grade option (Option E). Given that building even that option is uncertain today, the shallow tunnel option was probably still too expensive and ruled out early on...

The first draft of the revised alignment after the 2019 issues wanted to place the station between 4th and 5th Street because of the reasons you noted. However, after the functional design phase they had to move it over for operational and cost reasons.

I look forward to next year when it becomes official and council and LRT On the Green gets mad about it for a few days and then a week later change their minds and say the new (new, new) Stage 1 is still a good start, builds the most important and hardest part of the line, none of the previous...

For Stage 1 and its limited ridership, it'll be two-cars trains. But even with 5 minute headways, that peak capacity isn't that high. That's barely enough for NC trips 15 years ago and well below the capacity needed for the predicted number of NC transit trips at 1.5 million population that...

I think the designed length of the Green Line trains is too long for that happen. Most of the European trams use rolling stock of 30-40m length in total, while the Portland LRT that councillors went to visit only uses two car-sets that don't exceed 61m in length (and its streetcar is only 20m...