Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project
Hello everyone,
As has been suggested in the Southeast Transitway Thread, the latest federal funding announcement means that it is extremely likely the Green Line will proceed as LRT and not a transitway and will also be built in both north and south east regions of Calgary simultaneously. This thread has been created to discuss the project as it moves through the funding/planning and construction phases. With any luck we'll be using this thread to view opening day photos at some point in the early 2020s!! Project Summary: Green Line Map: http://www.lrtonthegreen.ca/wp-conte...tation-Map.png Green Line Flyover: Green Line Stats: - Will add 40 km of track to Calgary's existing 53 km LRT network - 27 proposed stations - 4 interchange stations with the proposed RouteAhead Rapid Transit Network (96th Ave N, 16th Ave N, 7th Ave S, Quarry Park) - Low floor LRVs have been proposed as the preferred technology - It is estimated almost 300,000k Calgarians live along the proposed route - The route will serve 8 major employment centres in the city. - Totally project cost estimated at $4.6 Billion - Depending on additional funding, construction may begin as early as summer 2017 Green Line Advocacy: Community advocacy has been a big factor in trying to secure funding for the Green Line. The LRT on the Green Foundation has played an instrumental role in this advocacy and is a good place to start for people who are interested in helping out to try and get this project built in its entirety. Their website can be found here: http://www.lrtonthegreen.ca Current Green Line Funding Status: (As of July 30, 2015) Municipal: $52 million x 10 years for a total of $520 million Provincial: None announced Federal: Up to $1.53 billion from the newly created Public Transit Fund Total Funding: $2.05 billion |
Thanks!
The mayor spoke of this likely starting to builde from the centre and working outwards. With that in mind, what would the first phase likely include, and when would that first phase open (with 2024 being the full green line completion)? |
So pumped about this project! Massive undertaking, huge benefit. :tup:
|
I'm glad that they are starting centre. I'm hoping for a station at Eau Claire, then head down to 7th avenue, where it will intersect with the current line underground, then go to 10th avenue and 1st street, perhaps at the parking lot west of bottle screw bills, then to Olympic way.
|
One of the most important pieces of the Green Line LRT has still yet to be determined.... the route and station locations for the line between 16th Ave N and 4th Street SE. There are 4 main options that are under consideration for this portion of the line. Calgary Transit will begin public consultations early this Fall to get feedback on the four options. The final selection of the preferred alignment will be made to Calgary City Council's Transit and Transportation Committee in December, 2015. There are pros and cons to each and every option... here are the ones under consideration:
Option A Cost of Centre City Segment: $600 million Cost of Green Line North Using this Option (10 Ave S to North Pointe): $1.1 Billion Travel Time Estimate (10 Ave S to North Pointe): 33-35 minutes Option B Cost of Centre City Segment: $800 million Cost of Green Line North Using this Option (10 Ave S to North Pointe): $1.3 Billion Travel Time Estimate (10 Ave S to North Pointe): 30-32 minutes Option C Cost of Centre City Segment: $800 million Cost of Green Line North Using this Option (10 Ave S to North Pointe): $1.3 Billion Travel Time Estimate (10 Ave S to North Pointe): 30-32 minutes Option D Cost of Centre City Segment: $1.3 Billion Cost of Green Line North Using this Option (10 Ave S to North Pointe): $1.8 Billion Travel Time Estimate (10 Ave S to North Pointe): 28-30 minutes All images sourced from: http://www.lrtonthegreen.ca/about-the-green-line/ |
My thoughts on those options:
1. Tunnel that shit. Do it right from the start...Option D, with a caveat. 2. There are not enough stations. Having only 1 station between Eau Claire and 16th is way too sparse. We are trying to create communities here that are easy to access…spreading them this far apart makes it seem like it being a “rocket to the suburbs” is still much of a prevailing thought amongst city planners. You're already buying the land and building the track...don't cheap out with stations (make them simpler if need be). I would also consider adding one more station downtown, probably somewhere around the corner of 10th and 2nd on these maps. There seems like quite a bit of walking distance from station to station here. I think its more important to give more people access, than it is to get out of the inner city 2 minutes earlier. |
option D all the way. If you're going to do, at least do it right the first time around. I'm actually dissappointed that the stations in Beltline will not be underground. It shou stay underground until after Stampede park going onto Ramsay and Inglewood.
|
Option D with a caveat: they shouldn't daylight the line until it is east of Macleod Trail. If they want it to run above ground after that, fine (I assume that one of the big complications is the underpass at 4th St SE).
|
Option B all the way. Not only is it cheaper than option D, the stations are much closer to grade. 50m deep? That is insane.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
If made to rank, I'd take C first, then B, and don't think A or D make the grade to even be ranked. Know that no matter how you cut it, there is still an opportunity cost with going for D. Either the full build-out doesn't happen as fast or something else the city needs to do doesn't happen. That's reality. |
I really don't like options A and C. Raised tracks downtown just seem awkward and claustrophobic to me. Personal opinion there.
I like option B most as long as the bridge isn't an abysmally ugly structure, and the integration with 2nd St in Eau Claire is well thought out. I like the idea of coming out of the bluff north of the river and getting a good view before going back underground. Obviously everyone is going to go apeshit over option D because :psycho: SUBWAY SUBWAY SUBWAY :psycho:... but really, doing option B with most of it underground but still saving $500 million is just as good, with the added bonus of a bit of sunlight. There might be a couple intersection changes when it comes into downtown but absolutely nothing major. In any case, I'm looking forward to the planning process and community outreach starting in earnest over the next year. |
Hm. Option D looks pretty crazy... those are some deep tunnels. I don't see it happening. Option A would just be another example of us cheaping out and not doing it right the first time. B and C seem like the most logical choices. My preference would be C, really just because I like elevated train lines :D. And that's your cue to tell me why I'm wrong.
|
I'd reconsider and choose option B if:
a) some real thought and design goes into the bridge, and it's not just a McBridge b) some of the freed-up money goes into improving the Beltline portion. Whether it's for a deep tunnel or an elevation section, I think full grade separation is worth paying for |
Quote:
b) Definitely. I am picturing at-grade crossings at both Macleod intersections on 10th Ave... the image in my head is one of utter failure. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I don't mind option B as long as they do a good job of the bridge and the interface of the tunnel in Eau Claire. It means that a station at Crescent Heights is likely as the tunnel depth won't be too bad (unlike the full tunnel option).
|
Even as a Sunnyside resident myself who isn't crazy about the idea of a new bridge over Prince's Island Park, Option B does really seem like the logical option given the other choices. They can expect a lot of opposition to it from locals if it's just a concrete bar, though. The bridge needs to look good. They can probably expect a lot of opposition even if it does...
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.