[darwink]

Or grade separation?

Yes. Likely a new bridge over the Bow as well, perhaps with provisions for future expansion. The Inglewood curve ROW is wide enough for 4 tracks.

In Inglewood itself, I expect an elevated Greenline with two tracks and an elevated passenger flyover with 2 tracks. Between Inglewood and just west of the Elbow River, the track ends up on the south side of the CPR ROW.

Now, would it maybe be better capital cost wise to build a station on the north side of the tracks instead? Yes, if you were only ever going to service north-bound. But freight trains are heavy (building elevated freight would be more expensive and require a forever operating subsidy), and to keep CPR as a willing partner, while providing the frequency wanted for the airport, plus HSR, plus potential regional rail north, south and east—you can see why this quickly became a tough nut to crack.

 

[outoftheice]

Interesting read and relevant to the Green Line discussions we have been having on here.

Eric Lombardi: Canada can no longer afford to ignore its ‘soft corruption’ problem

thehub.ca

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

Interesting read and relevant to the Green Line discussions we have been having on here.

Eric Lombardi: Canada can no longer afford to ignore its ‘soft corruption’ problem

thehub.ca

Great reading, really puts a spotlight on the bureaucratic bloat that is burdening all of society, not just green line.

Certainly doesn't seem there's a simple way to simplify things though..

 

[CalgaryTiger]

Interesting read and relevant to the Green Line discussions we have been having on here.

Eric Lombardi: Canada can no longer afford to ignore its ‘soft corruption’ problem

thehub.ca

This is arguing for in-housing, which as someone who just went from being an out-sourced employee to an in-housed employee I can tell you should be more of the norm. Some things can still be out-sourced (a role that can be added quickly on a per project basis) but what should not be under estimated is the value of in-house expertise.

The provincial government doesn't want to lean more into actually taking over the green line and transit development but it is the most efficient thing to do. It is clear that there are decades of rail infrastructure development required, the most efficient way to build that infrastructure is not to endlessly repeat consultations (and whatever else) about the next steps. Upload the responsibility to yourself, take some accountability and reap the rewards. That's cutting red tape. It is clear who is responsible for what in this country, the different levels of government need to actually hold the line on who does what.

Edit: Meanwhile... The fed's rail crown corporation for the corridor in Ontario and Quebec might actually have some work to do in November.

Toronto to Montreal in 3 hours? Canada might be finally ready to build a high speed rail line — but how fast it will be remains an open question

In the coming weeks, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet is expected to choose which of three groups of private companies will get to help design and build a new passenger

www.thestar.com

"According to the government source, the proposals from the private groups are in the “final stages” of assessment by the public service, and cabinet could decide by November which one is going to take part in the project."

 

[darwink]

"According to the government source, the proposals from the private groups are in the “final stages” of assessment by the public service, and cabinet could decide by November which one is going to take part in the project."

According to a friend, packages were in in late July. They may have included incremental options for straightening corridors, identifying which should be concurrent with rebuild, and which can be done later without service being hurt during the upgrade.

 

[Calgcouver]

I still think connecting via the blue line is fine IMO. Going from the YVR to Waterfront is ~30min. Copenhagen airport is like ~17min with the new line, but used to be like 25-30min to Kongens Nytorv (what i'd consider central). If we could get blue line service from YYC to downtown inside of ~35min, i think that is a pretty reasonable proposition considering the distance travelled and keeping the costs low for the project.

I don't imagine we would have the kind of ridership to have a YYZ UP Express style service here. Also lots of the people that work at the airport live in the NE and it would be a useful commuter link for workers going to and from YYC, regularly.

However you're not wrong about the frequency constraints.

 

[darwink]

keeping the costs low for the project

I don't think it keeps the cost low either. It is still 6km of track (closing in on comparable to the entire west LRT), with two big flyovers, one maybe two elevated stations, a lot of grade separation (likely finishing the Airport trail interchanges). 6km also requires a good number of vehicles to service unless you introduce the complication of short-turning.

I get how it might feel more economical in the gut. It looks so close on a map!

 

[lemongrab]

Kinda crazy that it would actually be closer to connect to the Green Line at just over 5kms. Not necessarily easier or cheaper of course.

 

[Tothewest]

Id still prefer the valley route, instead of connecting to the blue, which as @darwink mentioned wont be much, if at all cheaper. Valley is a bit more "line ready", and you could add a beddington and mcknight stop along the way...NO this isn't a green line this or that discussion, but it does unlock more of the city from an LRT perspective than going under the runway. It really isn't that much diff than Heritage/Anderson/Southland, most of the riders would park/ride or bus there

 

[CalgaryTiger]

you could add a beddington and mcknight stop along the way

Maybe for a regional service but not the airport. IMO that needs to go right downtown or have one stop between the airport and downtown. If you can get downtown in 10-15 minutes that is honestly more convenient than a cab or organizing a ride. Plus I like the idea of a single seat to Banff.

 

[FCC1982]

Just connect the blue line to the airport via 60 St > Airport Trail > Barlow Trail. It doesn't have to be this hard.

This doesn’t seem like a good route for those traveling between the airport and downtown.

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

I still think connecting via the blue line is fine IMO. Going from the YVR to Waterfront is ~30min. Copenhagen airport is like ~17min with the new line, but used to be like 25-30min to Kongens Nytorv (what i'd consider central). If we could get blue line service from YYC to downtown inside of ~35min, i think that is a pretty reasonable proposition considering the distance travelled and keeping the costs low for the project.

I don't imagine we would have the kind of ridership to have a YYZ UP Express style service here. Also lots of the people that work at the airport live in the NE and it would be a useful commuter link for workers going to and from YYC, regularly.

However you're not wrong about the frequency constraints.

Spending a lot of money to provide service that's on par with an existing option isn't a great deal in my opinion.

I do get the argument about providing access for employees though, and that why ultimately I think it would be best to have both LRT and HSR access to YYC.

HSR to provide a frequent high speed nonstop link to DT, and LRT to provide access for workers and airport users in the north side. When it does come time for the second link, might as well use LRT to bridge from blue line all the way to green and really maximize the network effect.

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

Maybe for a regional service but not the airport. IMO that needs to go right downtown or have one stop between the airport and downtown. If you can get downtown in 10-15 minutes that is honestly more convenient than a cab or organizing a ride. Plus I like the idea of a single seat to Banff.

It might not be feasible with the initial Banff route, but ultimately with a HSR link it would be great to have a smaller DT/YYC train running every 15 minutes. That would really nail the cab coffin closed!

But for the initial proposal, agree that the single seat from YYC to Banff is huge, not just for tourist convenience, but for restarting rail culture locally.

I imagine there are many Albertans who have never been on a non-LRT train in their lives, so having the convenience factor maximized would go a long way to justifying the expense of the project in peoples minds, and help make them more supportive of future rail projects

 

[lemongrab]

This happened about 1100 meters by foot from the Millican station (750m as the crow flies):
https://calgary.citynews.ca/2024/10/05/calgary-police-woman-crossing-street-killed/

Tragic. It illustrates the chicken/egg problem with transit in these kind of areas. This intersection sucks. It's had an MUP since at least 2009, but never been linked with a painted crosswalk (and the next ~8 crosswalks along this MUP to the east are moderately-heavily faded). The N-S crosswalk to grass where I suspect this happened had paint that looked a little worn on the 2009 streetview (kinda surprised its visible at all today)

An abundance of these examples is inevitable in any scenario (LRT or BRT or no Green Line) and its going to take decades to make meaningful progress. Successful outcomes with new transit means dumping hundreds of additional active users into these situations (though I'm skeptical these challenges were sufficiently considered in ridership projections).

I'd suggest it's a strong argument in favour of mode progression, where all infrastructure would evolve naturally in relation to each other. Maybe an LRT would mean an unprecedented blitz to improve things within the catchment areas, but that comes with opportunity cost to mobility improvements in the rest of the city.

No easy answers here and I'm not sure if we have prioritization for mobility upgrades right or wrong, but there is a helluva lot needed

 

[Tothewest]

This happened about 1100 meters by foot from the Millican station (750m as the crow flies):
https://calgary.citynews.ca/2024/10/05/calgary-police-woman-crossing-street-killed/

Tragic. It illustrates the chicken/egg problem with transit in these kind of areas. This intersection sucks. It's had an MUP since at least 2009, but never been linked with a painted crosswalk (and the next ~8 crosswalks along this MUP to the east are moderately-heavily faded). The N-S crosswalk to grass where I suspect this happened had paint that looked a little worn on the 2009 streetview (kinda surprised its visible at all today)

View attachment 601842

An abundance of these examples is inevitable in any scenario (LRT or BRT or no Green Line) and its going to take decades to make meaningful progress. Successful outcomes with new transit means dumping hundreds of additional active users into these situations (though I'm skeptical these challenges were sufficiently considered in ridership projections).

I'd suggest it's a strong argument in favour of mode progression, where all infrastructure would evolve naturally in relation to each other. Maybe an LRT would mean an unprecedented blitz to improve things within the catchment areas, but that comes with opportunity cost to mobility improvements in the rest of the city.

No easy answers here and I'm not sure if we have prioritization for mobility upgrades right or wrong, but there is a helluva lot needed

I don't mean to sound insensitive, a tragedy for sure....but how does it have anything to do with transit? The person crossed an uncontrolled intersection in an industrial park, in the dark, where a controlled access exists 1 block to the east....