[Joborule]

One other thing I didn't consider with the 16th Ave N crossing is the long term plans of the Purple Line, and it's proposed integration with the Green Line. I believe it's been acknowledged by planners that when they upgrade the MAX Purple to a LRT line, that they intend to integrate it with the Green Line in Ingelwood. With doing that, I believe they intend to have the line run from North Calgary/Airdrie to Chesteremere then.

If there's going to be two train lines using the same tracks going up Centre Street, then an at grade crossing may not be ideal there. It's risky to do it as it is with one line, but with two, the risk are increased for the line to be disrupted by a vehicle/pedestrian collision with how much traffic is there. It's a problem downtown as we already know.

 

[outoftheice]

The final recommendations for Green Line Stage 1 - Segment 2 are now online. Major highlights are the addition of a station at 9th Ave N, moving the 2nd St SW station underground and incorporating it into the future redevelopment of Eau Claire market and the addition of a new multi-use pathway on the bridge over the Bow River to create a pedestrian and cycling connection between Eau Claire and Crescent Heights, bus online lanes on the Centre St bridge and up to $100 million in BRT improvements north of 16th Ave to move the 301 service closer to a Max style service. All of the info can be found at https://engage.calgary.ca/greenline

 

[Surrealplaces]

2nd street station underground and the potential to be part of the redevelopment is nice. I've always hoped the 2nd street station would be tied to a redevelopment somehow.

 

[zagox]

2nd street station underground and the potential to be part of the redevelopment is nice. I've always hoped the 2nd street station would be tied to a redevelopment somehow.

Agree, but it is concerning that this recommendation doesn’t come with even an agreement-in-principle with Harvard Developments on their commitments and expectations. I worry that these station integrations, especially Eau Claire, are going to take a lot of time and effort for the city to actually finalize, and they seem to be pretty much at square 1. Hope I’m wrong and the situation behind the scenes is more advanced.

Also, looks like the condo to the north of Eau Claire is going to be razed? That would open up the Eau Claire Market site to the waterfront and could be really nice, but I expect we will hear some gripes from the residents of those buildings.

 

[CBBarnett]

I'm impressed. The critics of this project have had favourable media exposure, combined with continued delays and radio silence for a while from the City of this - which seeded lots of doubt. But the homework looks done and the addition of 9th Ave N Station is a bonus as well as the pathway and Eau Claire integration. I really like the potential of the Centre Street corridor as it's configured, potential reminds me of a European high street or -still cool, but less famously - St Clair Avenue in Toronto that combines low-floor platforms in the centre of a retail high street. Excited to hear the debate in the final stretch here.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

Just needed a fully cropped version of these...

 

[darwink]

2nd street station underground and the potential to be part of the redevelopment is nice. I've always hoped the 2nd street station would be tied to a redevelopment somehow.

I am surprised it is underground. Way more money, but I guess to make the geometry work it is needed.

 

[darwink]

Also, looks like the condo to the north of Eau Claire is going to be razed? That would open up the Eau Claire Market site to the waterfront and could be really nice, but I expect we will hear some gripes from the residents of those buildings.

Yeah. Unless it is a tunnel under the river it needs to go.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

Also, looks like the condo to the north of Eau Claire is going to be razed? That would open up the Eau Claire Market site to the waterfront and could be really nice, but I expect we will hear some gripes from the residents of those buildings.

Good riddance to bad rubbish!

 

[Surrealplaces]

Agree, but it is concerning that this recommendation doesn’t come with even an agreement-in-principle with Harvard Developments on their commitments and expectations. I worry that these station integrations, especially Eau Claire, are going to take a lot of time and effort for the city to actually finalize, and they seem to be pretty much at square 1. Hope I’m wrong and the situation behind the scenes is more advanced.

Also, looks like the condo to the north of Eau Claire is going to be razed? That would open up the Eau Claire Market site to the waterfront and could be really nice, but I expect we will hear some gripes from the residents of those buildings.

I wonder how much say Harvard has these days? I recall Harvard having a certain amount of time (10 years maybe?) to do the development, and if they didn't do it, the city could go a different direction.

 

[Surrealplaces]

I am surprised it is underground. Way more money, but I guess to make the geometry work it is needed.

Would have to be a lot more money for sure. That must have been the reason for doing it, so kind of a silver lining in the cloud that is extra cost.

 

[Disraeli]

I wonder how much say Harvard has these days? I recall Harvard having a certain amount of time (10 years maybe?) to do the development, and if they didn't do it, the city could go a different direction.

I'm pretty sure the city has some sort of buyback option on the purchase contract. But I remember reading somewhere that Harvard bought the 70 year leasehold interest on the land before the city sold them the land so I imagine there are some legal issues that need to be ironed out

 

[CBBarnett]

Would have to be a lot more money for sure. That must have been the reason for doing it, so kind of a silver lining in the cloud that is extra cost.

I think it might not actually be technically underground - it looks like Eau Claire might be closure on Day 1 to a trenched station a bit like 45 Street SW Station. I think the intention would be to cap it with development, which is why they bring up the library example in the documentation. I vaguely recall Vancouver having a station or two that was very similar on their original 1980s Expo line where it wasn't fully underground but designed to be capped over with redevelopment which occurred a decade or two later.

 

[outoftheice]

You are correct. City will build the trenched station, Harvard will cap it with their re-development which will give it the illusion of being completely underground and why that language is being used in the public presentations.

 

[darwink]

Ahh, that makes more sense. probably 1/5th to 1/10th the cost of 'underground'.