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
YYCguy said:
Yet, except for the small retail/office area immediately adjacent to 96 Ave, the rest of the land remains undeveloped with no imminent construction.
Click to expand...
I've noticed that too. I think that the delays to the Green Line has really affected its development, LRT was supposed to be an important part of it (even when it was coming from the Nose Creek direction) and now they have no idea what to do. They haven't even bothered to update the area structure plan from 2008.

In hindsight, it would probably beneficial to have used it for something now rather than wait another 20 years so they could build their idealized vision:

1684225603976.png
 
The Green Line and Aurora are unlikely to feed off one another. The chances of Aurora turning into a Quarry Park scale employment hub are slim to none. It will most likely be mostly warehouses - not conducive to transit.
 
I’m getting way off topic here. Could a moderator please move this to/create a more appropriate thread?

A hospital in Aurora might create an opportunity to enhance the local road network (connect Centre Street to Harvest Hills Blvd and build out an interchange there for example) and having an LRT station next to a hospital (and a high speed train station nearby) would definitely be a good idea. So I can see that being a better location for a hospital than the site in Livingston.
 
I always thought that Centre St was pretty deliberately not connected (except for buses) to Harvest Hills Blvd. Centre St goes across most of the north, and directly into downtown, but has some bottlenecks like 2-lane sections, and will have even more with the Green Line. So, planners have to be careful about how much traffic it collects.
 
Surrealplaces said:
$1billion is steep, but that’s the price of projects these days. In 15 years it’ll feel like a bargain.
Click to expand...
The research all suggests that "the price" is not fixed. Bad procurements practice, design etc. drives costs up but, it's not a given: https://transitcosts.com/

Tunnels and guideway are riskier, but at grade track on street need not be uber expensive.
ByeByeBaby said:
And this is beside the point; if it was free, it wouldn't be worth connecting the red and blue lines to the green.
Click to expand...
Alright, then no point in discussing because we don't agree on the fundamental premise.
 
superelevation said:
Alright, then no point in discussing because we don't agree on the fundamental premise.
Click to expand...
I don't think we definitely disagree; I just have no idea what your fundamental premise is. (Coming around once a month and then vanishing makes it hard to have a conversation; I'd welcome more 'discussing'.)

You're arguing, I think, that the green line could and should be cheaply connected to the red/blue lines. Please describe how, on a map; not with vague statements about cost control or handwaving just building a track up a street somewhere. These lines have specific physical locations that -- to the best of my knowledge -- make connecting them difficult. You keep strongly asserting it would be cheap and easy; I've been wrong before and I'd be fascinated to see a solution.

I infer that the reason you think that this is a worthwhile initiative has something to do with fleet maintenance? With building fewer garages? With starting the green line in the north? I don't think you've ever said in so many words.

Every project has costs and benefits that should be evaluated. At least one of us is mistaken about the costs, and I don't really understand what benefits you are arguing for.
 
newsroom.calgary.ca

Green Line selects Graham Construction to build 78th Avenue Project

Following evaluation of the Request For Proposal, the Green Line Board has selected Graham Infrastructure LP to construct the 78 Avenue S.E. Grade Separation and Ogden Pedestrian Tunnel Project (“78th Avenue Project”). Before building the Ogden LRT station and tracks, the 78th Avenue Project...
newsroom.calgary.ca newsroom.calgary.ca
 
I don't think I fully understand the 78 Ave tunnel project.

As a pedestrian connection from Ogden to the canal pathway, it's great.

But why is a vehicle tunnel needed? If the idea is to get trucks into the area bounded by the tracks and the canal, they can already do that via Barlow and 61st Ave. I suppose the tunnel would divert trucks currently cutting through the community along Ogden Road north of Glenmore, and using the existing 69th Ave crossing, but how many trucks are doing this? And would they not just switch to Barlow and 61st if 69th were closed?

The city's page says 78th will not be designated a truck route, further confusing me (unless they just mean west of Ogden Road?)

I also don't understand the bike/ped infrastructure north of 78th, or the 72nd Ave pedestrian tunnel. Who is walking into that area in great enough numbers? Is there a major employer?

If the area between the tracks and canal is slated for some major TOD, I can see the need for all of this. But much of that area looks like an active railway yard and intermodal distribution centre.
 
Last edited:
Pure speculation but I suspect that it may have something to do with the fact that with with the railyard bound by the canal and tracks there may be requirements for emergency services to have multiple access points. With the crossing at 69th closing if anything were to shut down the 61st bridge there would be no other route in.
 
badc0ffee said:
I don't think I fully understand the 78 Ave tunnel project.

As a pedestrian connection from Ogden to the canal pathway, it's great.

But why is a vehicle tunnel needed?
Click to expand...

It's a textbook example of surplus extraction. The basic act of building the green line will bring in enough benefits to the city that it could be built for twice the price and still provide a net benefit, so the various 'stakeholders' will put in asks and requirements and scope increases and so on until the price has doubled. It still technically provides a benefit, so it'll get built, the local stakeholders get their goodies and who cares that we could have built twice as much instead. See also the underground Beltline section, see also the trenched West LRT at 45th Ave, and so on. If we built the Green Line at the price that Ottawa built their Confederation line for (adjusting for inflation), we'd be able to build 30 km instead of 20, up to 96 Ave N. If we built it at Edmonton Valley Line prices (again inflation adjusted), we'd be building 40 km instead of 30 and could do the whole line in one shot.

There's absolutely no need for this tunnel; it crosses a rail line that has about one train per hour, and increases access to basically nothing. But CP doesn't want to have the same disruption to their staff that they are absolutely fine with dishing out to everyone else, and they have the right of way, so they put in a demand in the negotiation. And there's no real pushback; in this case the legal framework around railroads in Canada is a fairly unique problem and one that should have been sorted out a long time ago by the feds, but there's plenty of other situations where it's just caving in to expand the scope and cost because that's easier than making a few people mad.

This area (400m circle from pedestrian tunnel) does not need millions of dollars of enhanced access.
1686095144378.png
 
ByeByeBaby said:
It's a textbook example of surplus extraction. The basic act of building the green line will bring in enough benefits to the city that it could be built for twice the price and still provide a net benefit, so the various 'stakeholders' will put in asks and requirements and scope increases and so on until the price has doubled. It still technically provides a benefit, so it'll get built, the local stakeholders get their goodies and who cares that we could have built twice as much instead. See also the underground Beltline section, see also the trenched West LRT at 45th Ave, and so on. If we built the Green Line at the price that Ottawa built their Confederation line for (adjusting for inflation), we'd be able to build 30 km instead of 20, up to 96 Ave N. If we built it at Edmonton Valley Line prices (again inflation adjusted), we'd be building 40 km instead of 30 and could do the whole line in one shot.

There's absolutely no need for this tunnel; it crosses a rail line that has about one train per hour, and increases access to basically nothing. But CP doesn't want to have the same disruption to their staff that they are absolutely fine with dishing out to everyone else, and they have the right of way, so they put in a demand in the negotiation. And there's no real pushback; in this case the legal framework around railroads in Canada is a fairly unique problem and one that should have been sorted out a long time ago by the feds, but there's plenty of other situations where it's just caving in to expand the scope and cost because that's easier than making a few people mad.

This area (400m circle from pedestrian tunnel) does not need millions of dollars of enhanced access.
View attachment 483426
Click to expand...
To add for the reasoning for CPKC, the orientation of Ogden Road/69 Ave/Ogden Dale Rd means that typically 5-7 vehicles get through the light to make the left hand turn onto Ogden in the afternoon, creating large backups for employees leaving. When the Green Line goes in, there won't be room for vehicles to queue when waiting at 69 Ave. Large trucks going slow/stopping at the crossing would be a large risk as well.

The other impact for Ogden Road traffic comes when a train passes through during the morning commute. This creates large traffic backups as dozens of cars line up along Ogden Road waiting for the crossing to clear. The tunnel will help a lot in that regard.
 
Last edited:
CalgaryTraveller said:
To add for the reasoning for CPKC, the orientation of Ogden Road/69 Ave/Ogden Dale Rd means that typically 5-7 vehicles get through the light to make the left hand turn onto Ogden in the afternoon, creating large backups for employees leaving. When the Green Line goes in, there won't be room for vehicles to queue when waiting at 69 Ave. Large trucks going slow/stopping at the crossing would be a large risk as well.

The other impact for Ogden Road traffic comes when a train passes through during the morning commute. This creates large traffic backups as dozens of cars line up along Ogden Road waiting for the crossing to clear. The tunnel will help a lot in that regard.
Click to expand...
And people say the green line has no benefits. You're welcome CN employees.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top