Quote:
Originally Posted by timun
Nor I.
First of all you're envisioning a much tighter turning radius than planned up 2nd St from 11th Ave. The tunnel won't go under the Lewis Lofts building. See https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3685
In reality putting it up 1st Street will be much more difficult, and it won't just go under the single-storey retail at the Circle K, but will go under the Mount Royal House apartments (where Bottlescrew Bill's is) and may clip the foundation of the Palliser Hotel.
You're otherwise arguing that you'd rather turn 1st St north of 4th Ave into a trench, blow away Sien Lok Park, build a tunnel portal halfway up Crescent Heights, delete the 9th Ave N station, and somehow this'll cost so much less money than the current plan that it'll pay for another 1.5 km of cut-and-cover tunnel up Centre Street...?
Sorry to burst your bubble but there isn't a chance in hell of that being less expensive, and the trade-off of trench and surface-level rail up 1st St is a far, far worse proposition. |
So you're going under 11th Ave Place...an 11 storey building with at least 2 (maybe 3?) levels of underground parking.
You could do a 100m radius turn onto 1st St and you're still just barely clipping the corner of Circle K...no reason it would be anywhere close to under Mt Royal House or the Palliser. For reference, red line has about a 60m radius at 9st/7Ave; and about 80m at 14 Ave/19 St.
As for the portal north of 4th, there is negligible difference in how that would play out on either 1st or 2nd. Yes, I'd rather rip a scar through Sien Lok park than rip a scar through the east half of PIP.
The rationale I didn't elaborate is how much 1st St SW would benefit from this. The core is sorely lacking a vibrant N-S corridor to link our many vibrant E-W streets (8th/11th/12th/17th). 1st already has the most momentum, but of course the CPR underpass sucks and there's not much going on north of 6th. People=vibrancy=people.
2nd St is actually not too bad aesthetically, but there is very little opportunity for street level activation (and it dead ends at 9th). 1st already has some decent retail, with more turnkey space available, and a few surface lots north of 4th that could use a catalyst. 1st St south of the tracks will benefit either way, but much more so if the underpass became nicer+car free, and this would be an effective road diet since 1st would terminate for vehicles at either 10th or 11th.
As for Centre St, I don't actually care too much if it's at grade or buried, but I think there are far greater risks with at-grade (as have been outlined in this thread):
- pushing more cars to 10th/E=NG trail
- it would probably preclude further improvements to the public realm due to simple space constraints
- general mobility issues (reduced crossings, more pinch points near stations, etc)
- train travel speed/delays
- it should really go under 16th Ave either way, effectively shortening the length of trenching required. But of course 16th is a whole other kettle of fish here
I'm all for a road diet on Centre St. But slapping bike-lanes or a streetcar down is not necessarily the most effective way to improve the public realm. They make places feel better because they reduce the speed/volume/proximity of cars, but we're still left with narrow+bumpy sidewalks filled with a potpourri of obstructions like sign poles and utility boxes.
So my reason to go below-grade is actually to achieve a better road diet with more effective public realm improvements. Hopelessly idealistic, I know.