Best direction for the Green line at this point?

  • Go ahead with the current option of Eau Claire to Lynbrook and phase in extensions.

    Votes: 42 60.0%

  • Re-design the whole system

    Votes: 22 31.4%

  • Cancel it altogether

    Votes: 6 8.6%
  • Total voters
    70
trtcttc said:
I hear this future proofing argument a lot and I think it partially comes from 7th ave not being tunneled. Edmonton chose to tunnel the central city portion, and sure they future proofed, but it cost them significant transit expansion and arguably the tunneling wasn't even necessary.

This is also a low floor LRT, and one of its core advantages is street level boarding that doesn't require significant station infrastructure, with the downside being lower passenger limits which in reality it does not come close to the capacity limits because people congregate by the doors since they don't want to be stuck in that narrow walkway between wheel wells. They just rebuilt Victoria Park station because they wanted the integrated street level experience instead of a disconnected station. Now, to save 2 lanes of traffic, we're building a disconnected underground station for the Green Line Stampede Park/Event Centre station and risking the entire viability of the project for these two lanes of roadway.
Click to expand...
Good points. I'm partially sold on the idea. However, I have a few questions to ask you regarding a surface run train through downtown:

1. How do you propose the Greenline crosses the CP tracks?
2. Do you think there would be excess congestion and increased travel times having three train lines intersect at 7th Ave and 2nd street?
3. N-S city blocks are shorter than E-W blocks. They are about 80m in length. Do you think this length limits the Greenline capacity?
4. Do you think the Greenline crossing all those intersections would increase travel time?
 
Elevated saves most of the money while not introducing new problems.

Anyways, we will see if there is even any need really soon!
 
Take it for what it is worth...:
calgaryherald.com

Nelson: Continuous chaos consumes city council

Little by little Calgary is being consumed by chaos. It was simply irritating at first but now it has become a threat to the city's future
calgaryherald.com calgaryherald.com

From the column:
The original plan for this transit line was to run it from the far north to the deep south — 44 kilometres of track with 24 stations for $4.6 billion, to be shared equally by three levels of government. That pipedream was kyboshed long ago. Subsequently, we were told to welcome a slimmed-down Phase 1, costing $5.5 billion and covering a 20-kilometre route from Eau Claire to Shepard with 13 stations.

But don’t get too excited at the prospect of jumping aboard one of those trains any time soon. Rumours are now flying that the line will be slimmed down yet again, running only from Eau Claire to Ogden at a head-shaking cost of $8 billion. We should find out within weeks.
.
 
We definitely need the line to be either buried or elevated downtown. The level of congestion with all 3 lines running along the surface through downtown would be untenable. As it is I wonder how long it will be before there's pressure to bury the red and green line ROW as well.
 
MichaelS said:
Take it for what it is worth...:
calgaryherald.com

Nelson: Continuous chaos consumes city council

Little by little Calgary is being consumed by chaos. It was simply irritating at first but now it has become a threat to the city's future
calgaryherald.com calgaryherald.com

From the column:
The original plan for this transit line was to run it from the far north to the deep south — 44 kilometres of track with 24 stations for $4.6 billion, to be shared equally by three levels of government. That pipedream was kyboshed long ago. Subsequently, we were told to welcome a slimmed-down Phase 1, costing $5.5 billion and covering a 20-kilometre route from Eau Claire to Shepard with 13 stations.

But don’t get too excited at the prospect of jumping aboard one of those trains any time soon. Rumours are now flying that the line will be slimmed down yet again, running only from Eau Claire to Ogden at a head-shaking cost of $8 billion. We should find out within weeks.
.
Click to expand...
Well, Nelson has been around for a long time and he has to have gotten the $8 billion figure from somewhere, I wonder if someone on Council leaked it to him? I must admit, if the above is true is it really worth $8 billion for a line that only goes to Ogden? That's a huge cost to only serve a few neighbourhoods. Wasn't the main point of Ph 1 to get people from the populous and growing SE suburbs to downtown quickly?

I'm very pro transit but at some point would abandoning this mess and refocusing on an airport rail link make more sense?
 
Albertasaurus said:
Well, Nelson has been around for a long time and he has to have gotten the $8 billion figure from somewhere, I wonder if someone on Council leaked it to him? I must admit, if the above is true is it really worth $8 billion for a line that only goes to Ogden? That's a huge cost to only serve a few neighbourhoods. Wasn't the main point of Ph 1 to get people from the populous and growing SE suburbs to downtown quickly?

I'm very pro transit but at some point would abandoning this mess and refocusing on an airport rail link make more sense?
Click to expand...
$8 billions for a 10km line??? $800milion per km? 🤨
 
Could they not commit to phase 1 to Ogden and have the next segment further south waiting and ready to be started by the time Phase 1 is complete? Also, I thought it had to be built to Shepard for the maintenance facility.
 
Albertasaurus said:
Well, Nelson has been around for a long time and he has to have gotten the $8 billion figure from somewhere, I wonder if someone on Council leaked it to him? I must admit, if the above is true is it really worth $8 billion for a line that only goes to Ogden? That's a huge cost to only serve a few neighbourhoods. Wasn't the main point of Ph 1 to get people from the populous and growing SE suburbs to downtown quickly?

I'm very pro transit but at some point would abandoning this mess and refocusing on an airport rail link make more sense?
Click to expand...

No matter what this link needs to be built. If you don’t bite the bullet now it will only cost more later. It’s like the tunnel to the airport that was widened to accommodate future lrt. It cost more to do that but it needed to be done for any future connection to work.
 
darwink said:
The citizen's committee group.
calgary.ctvnews.ca

Higher cost estimates could spur change for Calgary's Green Line LRT project

According to an update on Tuesday about Calgary's Green Line project, there are a number of design possibilities on the table because of higher costs faced by the monumental infrastructure project.
calgary.ctvnews.ca calgary.ctvnews.ca
Click to expand...
Another quote from the same Citizen's Committee Group "It makes no sense for it to be running from Shepard to Eau Claire and tunnelling under downtown Calgary, which is full of water"
 
Let’s not forget that Steve Allan was the Kenney crony who was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to find a non existent conspiracy against Alberta Energy and came back with zero evidence after multiple extensions.
 
Colinfill said:
Another quote from the same Citizen's Committee Group "It makes no sense for it to be running from Shepard to Eau Claire and tunnelling under downtown Calgary, which is full of water"
Click to expand...
They suggest elevated between city hall and the library, which has the transit geometry problem (overwhelms the free fare zone) but isn't the worst otherwise.

I'd counter that if elevated, may as well just go right to the centre of the city.
 
Something is missing here, with the claim of it only going to Ogden, you need the maintenance facility. If anything, they go to Shepard but cut the tunnel.
 
CalgaryTiger said:
Something is missing here, with the claim of it only going to Ogden, you need the maintenance facility. If anything, they go to Shepard but cut the tunnel.
Click to expand...
It's just wild speculation. The price is up, so what gets cut to stay within a certain budget. No imagination that one could do something differently instead, if that comes to pass.

I have a feeling whatever is done, whether a bit of cost overrun, or a bit of last minute changes in the Beltline, that the absolutely out of the park speculation will make the what does happen look very reasonable.
 
darwink said:
They suggest elevated between city hall and the library, which has the transit geometry problem (overwhelms the free fare zone) but isn't the worst otherwise.

I'd counter that if elevated, may as well just go right to the centre of the city.
Click to expand...
Can you explain this to me, "elevated between city hall and the library"?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top