[Update: Approved] First Leg of the Green Line LRT

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by getbak

After a lengthy public hearing and debate, the Green Line committee has voted to forward the recommendations for the revised Green Line alignment to Council for a vote on June 15.

Council will again debate the recommendations on June 15.

I wonder why my Councillor would say things like this before voting...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1267947213633867778

https://twitter.com/user/status/1267947746130083841

[TorqueDog]

The City will come to regret not doing the 2017 alignment.

Then again we'll probably all be dead by the time it is someone else's problem and gets fixed.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Does anyone know if an operating budget for the new Green Line has been posted anywhere online? I'm undecided on this and am curious to see what this many stations and new rolling stock do from an operating cost perspective to help me understand if we can afford this.

Note that this is different from the capital cost of construction which appears to be split between the 3 levels of government - that I get.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

Does anyone know if an operating budget for the new Green Line has been posted anywhere online? I'm undecided on this and am curious to see what this many stations and new rolling stock do from an operating cost perspective to help me understand if we can afford this.

Note that this is different from the capital cost of construction which appears to be split between the 3 levels of government - that I get.

They also project this configuration of the Green Line will have about 55,000 daily riders by 2028.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

^^This is great - thanks. Is this posted anywhere on the City's website with more supporting details? I'd like to see what some of the assumptions are.

And why has the City not posted this on the Green Line site?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by getbak

They also project this configuration of the Green Line will have about 55,000 daily riders by 2028.

My brain probably isn't quite firing on all cylinders, but I'm not sure I compute the bus trunk line savings AND additional rider revenue. Is the idea that there will be $7M of additional ridership above and beyond those bus lines to be replaced?

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

The City will come to regret not doing the 2017 alignment.

Then again we'll probably all be dead by the time it is someone else's problem and gets fixed.

Just because centre street will be at grade? Or for some other reason?

Considering that the only difference between that and this is that now Centre Street will have an additional 1km of at grade tracks than originally intended on that road doesn't feel that seem that much of a trade off. In fact with it, it actually includes an additional station for the Crescent Heights community as a result.

The only issue I have is with 16 Avenue. It's possible that the station built as proposed is a temporary station, and they will indeed go underneath 16th when they extend north; but it isn't a sure thing, and due to costs may prefer to cross at grade, which I don't think is a great idea, but isn't a dealbreaker.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

My brain probably isn't quite firing on all cylinders, but I'm not sure I compute the bus trunk line savings AND additional rider revenue. Is the idea that there will be $7M of additional ridership above and beyond those bus lines to be replaced?

The bus trunk savings comes from a calculations based on the need to increase transit service to bring up SE to match levels in other parts of Calgary. Without the Green Line they would need to add 200-230K hours of bus service with an operating cost up $26-$30 million. With the Green Line, they would need 40K hours less bus service, "saving" them $5.2M.

See page 115:

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....umentId=131776

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Just because centre street will be at grade? Or for some other reason?

Considering that the only difference between that and this is that now Centre Street will have an additional 1km of at grade tracks than originally intended on that road doesn't feel that seem that much of a trade off. In fact with it, it actually includes an additional station for the Crescent Heights community as a result.

The only issue I have is with 16 Avenue. It's possible that the station built as proposed is a temporary station, and they will indeed go underneath 16th when they extend north; but it isn't a sure thing, and due to costs may prefer to cross at grade, which I don't think is a great idea, but isn't a dealbreaker.

For the two things you mentioned.

First, running Centre Street at grade will be a clusterf—k and makes me glad I don’t live north of the river anymore. Secondly, I am not holding my breath that they tunnel under 16th in the future. Once they’re ready to go north of 16th, they’ll find some reason — probably cost since things aren’t getting any cheaper — to justify keeping that at grade too. Just like how they’ve found a justification to deviate from the original 2017 alignment.

When the LRT was first being built in advance of the Olympics, I could see the advantage of building more of it at grade. There’s a reason our LRT today is more built out in comparison to Edmonton; tunnels are expensive. But we already have a mature LRT system now. Going forward, if we are going to add to it, we should do it the right way the first time (and I say that as someone in favour of the Green Line). The system is a lot less reliable with at-grade crossings because you know some idiot is going to drive their car in front of the train. This already happens with the 7 Ave transit corridor, and the 25 Ave crossing sucks too. I know tunnelling will mean it gets built at a slower pace, but that’s a reasonable trade-off for making sure it is done correctly, IMHO.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

For the two things you mentioned.

First, running Centre Street at grade will be a clusterf—k and makes me glad I don’t live north of the river anymore. Secondly, I am not holding my breath that they tunnel under 16th in the future. Once they’re ready to go north of 16th, they’ll find some reason — probably cost since things aren’t getting any cheaper — to justify keeping that at grade too. Just like how they’ve found a justification to deviate from the original 2017 alignment.

When the LRT was first being built in advance of the Olympics, I could see the advantage of building more of it at grade. There’s a reason our LRT today is more built out in comparison to Edmonton; tunnels are expensive. But we already have a mature LRT system now. Going forward, if we are going to add to it, we should do it the right way the first time (and I say that as someone in favour of the Green Line). The system is a lot less reliable with at-grade crossings because you know some idiot is going to drive their car in front of the train. This already happens with the 7 Ave transit corridor, and the 25 Ave crossing sucks too. I know tunnelling will mean it gets built at a slower pace, but that’s a reasonable trade-off for making sure it is done correctly, IMHO.

I live near Centre street and I'm concerned but the city seems to be aware of the concern and trying to not mess it up. The low floor trains that they are using for the Green line can integrate with the street environment much better than the current train lines as they essentially run at the same level as the traffic. It won't be 36 St NE.
Also, the reason for the switch was because going under the river was going to add significant risk because of where the Bow River's water table is. We would be talking about MAJOR cost overruns if they stuck with the original alignment.

I think it's really got the potential to add some vibrancy to the area. Rather than a 4 lane quasi-highway into downtown we'll have opportunity for some more interesting developments. At the City Council meeting the other day they had a developer on there that had already purchased land on Centre/16th in anticipation of the Green Line. There is a lot of potential along the Centre Street/16th Ave NW corridor, it's prime for development.

Most of the debate and opposition is on whether we cross the river now, but the business case is extremely solid to do it now if you want to extend it to the north within our generation. Rather than future councils having to find billions of dollars in funding to cross the Bow they would just need enough to extend stations at a time.
16th Ave NW would be one of the busiest stations based on their projections so it's not like we're just building it north for no reason as well. Crossing the river and going to 16th Ave would add more ridership to this first phase of the Green Line than going all the way south to McKenzie Town!

[TorqueDog]

I definitely hope you're right and and the City is proceeding correctly. I want them to get this right and bring some much needed revitalization to Centre St.

Yeah, the first thing I think of is 7 Ave SW, but 36 St NE is definitely a worst case scenario that I don't see the City doing again.

[Wormius]

I am kind of surprised that an elevated track, eg) Vancouver, wouldn’t be less intrusive and cheaper than tearing up Centre St.

[Ducay]

Considering the abortion that is light timings at every intersection where there is a Ctrain (irregardless of which line), the at-grade Green line is a horrific idea. Sure it can be at street level, but this is going to be the biggest mistake in a long time

[81MC]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I definitely hope you're right and and the City is proceeding correctly. I want them to get this right and bring some much needed revitalization to Centre St.

Yeah, the first thing I think of is 7 Ave SW, but 36 St NE is definitely a worst case scenario that I don't see the City doing again.

I'm not so sure. 17th SE is almost exactly the same approach as 36st: All stops located between direction lanes, dedicated ROW down middle of roadway, priority transit signals. I keep beating this drum, but transit that interferes so much with other traffic is the worst of both worlds. And I hope 7th ave isn't an example, half the buildings on the west side, particularly those most suited to pedestrian traffic, are empty.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't have much hope for this development.

[Wormius]

Brett Wilson getting rightfully skewered on Twitter for his Greenline antics and race baiting the Mayor.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1268233025898164224

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Brett Wilson getting rightfully skewered on Twitter for his Greenline antics and race baiting the Mayor.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1268233025898164224

Is he actually well? Has he always been this stupid?

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by 81MC

I'm not so sure. 17th SE is almost exactly the same approach as 36st: All stops located between direction lanes, dedicated ROW down middle of roadway, priority transit signals. I keep beating this drum, but transit that interferes so much with other traffic is the worst of both worlds. And I hope 7th ave isn't an example, half the buildings on the west side, particularly those most suited to pedestrian traffic, are empty.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't have much hope for this development.

Yeah, I didn't mean to suggest I think 7 Avenue SW is a good example to follow, it sucks hard, but 36 Street NE is awful. Not thrilled that 17 Ave SE is going to be similar. Yecch.

[Ozy_Flame]

Nenshi's reponse Tweet was awesome to Wilson's.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Torture

I live near Centre street and I'm concerned but the city seems to be aware of the concern and trying to not mess it up. The low floor trains that they are using for the Green line can integrate with the street environment much better than the current train lines as they essentially run at the same level as the traffic. It won't be 36 St NE.

You're really talking at cross-purposes here. The "problem" that the low-floor train cars "address" is the construction of more imposing, grade-separated stations isn't required. The future Green Line stations will be much like the fancy schmancy bus stops built for the Max BRT lines. In this respect it means you won't have a multi-storey structure looming over houses in the father-flung neighbourhoods the line will eventually serve.

However, there's nothing about the low-floor trains that makes them any better or safer at interacting with pedestrian and vehicular traffic. They're still big rail vehicles that present a danger at every single at-grade crossing. 36 St NE sucks because the rail line itself presents a massive impediment to cars and pedestrians being able to cross from one side to the other. It cuts connectivity down drastically. That is what I envision when I see the revised Green Line routing. Not as much of an issue going up the hill from the Centre Street Bridge, but it will become a problem north of 7th Ave. That the "stations" at 9th Ave and 16th end up being more like glorified bus platforms is irrelevant.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I am kind of surprised that an elevated track, eg) Vancouver, wouldn’t be less intrusive and cheaper than tearing up Centre St.

Building an elevated track would still require tearing up Centre Street and losing a couple of lanes of traffic for the support pillars. Also, the pillars are so close together that you can't really use the space between them for anything meaningful.

At ground level, the support structures for the tracks are ugly and any efforts to make them less-ugly is costly and would just be adding lipstick to a pig. Everything also casts significant shadows.

Elevated stations would require elevators and maybe escalators to the platforms, which would need to be protected from the elements and are expensive to buy, install, and maintain. You also need safety measures to prevent people from falling or jumping off the platform. Ground level stations are basically a really big bus stop. With the low-floor trains, the platform isn't much higher than a sidewalk.