Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by milomilo

That's why most people agree option B is the best - cheaper and shallow underground stations.

No doubt - though there are still the holdouts who'd simply like to use more of the public coffer. My close one-two were Option C then Option B. Option D and A simply don't cut the grade.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by suburbia

That's a fair point and perhaps overtime a network that competed against the +15 network could be created below grade, but at the 9th avenue and centre street north station that is 13 floors below grade, what are you going to connect to? A massage parlour?

And what major retail is located here now? It's kind of hard to be disjointed when there's nothing to be disjointed with! You typically only find subterranean integration in the densest part of the network (i.e. downtown).

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by The Chemist

And what major retail is located here now? It's kind of hard to be disjointed when there's nothing to be disjointed with! You typically only find subterranean integration in the densest part of the network (i.e. downtown).

Begs the question as to why there is even a need for a station there, and why people would travel 164 feet underground to get on a train to get them down the hill to downtown (where everyone is headed).

[Chadillaccc]

I'm still a fan of option D, but I'd honestly say scrap the 9 Avenue station, and put the 16th Avenue Station under the intersection of 15 Avenue and Centre, with a station head on each side of the south side of 16 Avenue. That will make this station more accessible to people in crescent heights south of it, and it will eliminate the need for an extremely expensive and impractical station that frankly not many people will use. Could also do ped tunnels from the north side of 16th to connect to this, to eliminate the busy crossing at 16 Avenue as an issue from people walking from north.

Eliminating the 9 Avenue Station will have the added benefit of the train being able to continue at 4% grade straight from the river to 16 Ave, thereby likely lowering the depth of the station by (hopefully) a storey or two.

I really just hate the idea of a bridge over Prince's Island.



And as for Suburbia's constant incessant drivel, thank god for the ignore feature.

[nick.flood]

delete

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I'm still a fan of option D, but I'd honestly say scrap the 9 Avenue station, and put the 16th Avenue Station under the intersection of 15 Avenue and Centre, with a station head on each side of the south side of 16 Avenue. That will make this station more accessible to people in crescent heights south of it, and it will eliminate the need for an extremely expensive and impractical station that frankly not many people will use. Could also do ped tunnels from the north side of 16th to connect to this, to eliminate the busy crossing at 16 Avenue as an issue from people walking from north.

Eliminating the 9 Avenue Station will have the added benefit of the train being able to continue at 4% grade straight from the river to 16 Ave, thereby likely lowering the depth of the station by (hopefully) a storey or two.

I really just hate the idea of a bridge over Prince's Island.



And as for Suburbia's constant incessant drivel, thank god for the ignore feature.

This is definitely an option that should be explored. Let's call it 'Option E'.

It's worth noting that a 4-car station with one end at 16th Ave would have it's other end at 14th Ave. Add a 5th Car and a 30° Escalator at each end, and the south end of the station could essentially be at 13th Ave. From there it's only 400 m to 9th Ave anyway! An 800 m (10 min walk) bubble around a hypothetical station entrance at 13th Ave and Centre St catches all of Crescent Heights as far west as 5th St W, as far southeast as Edmonton Trail and 8th Ave NW (OEB Breakfast), and as far east as 5th St E.

Much cheaper than D and no super deep stations. Oh, and the entire North leg saves 2 minutes from their commute by removing a station.

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

Option E
Cost of Centre City Segment: $1.1 Billion
Cost of Green Line North Using this Option (10 Ave S to North Pointe): $1.6 Billion
Travel Time Estimate (10 Ave S to North Pointe): 26-28 minutes

It's a clear winner versus Option D. A is out. Comparing E to B or C, E is probably $300M more (if any of these estimates are realistic) but preserves Prince's Island and 2nd St, and E saves about 4 minutes from travel times.

[Fuzz]

Just curious why option D shows a maximum grade of 4% while the others can manage 6%. If it came up from the river at a steeper grade, couldn't they make the stations shallower? Or is there another reason?

[RicoLance21]

I think I'll prefer option C, only because the downtown stations are the closer to street level than those of any other options given. One thing I would wish for is to somehow cooperate with the Core. Replace the +30 level between TD Square and Scotia with a station that would straddle over the entire width of 2nd St. There would be 3rd level entrances to both adjoining buildings where the +30 walkway currently is. Also, there would be escalators from the +15 walkway to the station for easy transfer to the 2nd level. The +15 walkway would have to be widened slightly to accommodate a bit of a mezzanine for easy walk from northbound platform to southbound platform or vice versa. Also, there would be a series of escalators and two elevators at both the north end and the south end of the station. The ones at the south end of the station would also integrate with the underground station under Stephen Avenue. The length of the station itself would start from around Stephen Avenue all the way to around Intact Insurance building. The station can have access to the future Brookfield West tower and Intact Insurance building at +15 level. Voila, we have a grand station that sits at +30 level with excellent connections to all other lines. What do you think of this vision?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

This is definitely an option that should be explored. Let's call it 'Option E'.

It's worth noting that a 4-car station with one end at 16th Ave would have it's other end at 14th Ave. Add a 5th Car and a 30° Escalator at each end, and the south end of the station could essentially be at 13th Ave. From there it's only 400 m to 9th Ave anyway! An 800 m (10 min walk) bubble around a hypothetical station entrance at 13th Ave and Centre St catches all of Crescent Heights as far west as 5th St W, as far southeast as Edmonton Trail and 8th Ave NW (OEB Breakfast), and as far east as 5th St E.

Much cheaper than D and no super deep stations. Oh, and the entire North leg saves 2 minutes from their commute by removing a station.

Option E would probably close traffic lanes during construction, a valuable symbolically route into downtown, while north of 16th wouldn't. A deep 9th Station could probably be mined with station heads off the roadway.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Option E would probably close traffic lanes during construction, a valuable symbolically route into downtown, while north of 16th wouldn't. A deep 9th Station could probably be mined with station heads off the roadway.

Probably. But, no matter what I think centre street will have to be closed during construction somewhere. Maybe just 2 lanes? Maybe the city will buy a few lots and lay the foundations for supertall TOD's that will go on top of the station when they sell surface rights back.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

Probably. But, no matter what I think centre street will have to be closed during construction somewhere. Maybe just 2 lanes? Maybe the city will buy a few lots and lay the foundations for supertall TOD's that will go on top of the station when they sell surface rights back.

Just maybe, and maybe I'm a Chinese jet pilot.


(Anyone get the reference?)

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by nick.flood

Always thinking of the present.

I was just supporting Chadillac - he does have some good points.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I think I'll prefer option C, only because the downtown stations are the closer to street level than those of any other options given. One thing I would wish for is to somehow cooperate with the Core. Replace the +30 level between TD Square and Scotia with a station that would straddle over the entire width of 2nd St. There would be 3rd level entrances to both adjoining buildings where the +30 walkway currently is. Also, there would be escalators from the +15 walkway to the station for easy transfer to the 2nd level. The +15 walkway would have to be widened slightly to accommodate a bit of a mezzanine for easy walk from northbound platform to southbound platform or vice versa. Also, there would be a series of escalators and two elevators at both the north end and the south end of the station. The ones at the south end of the station would also integrate with the underground station under Stephen Avenue. The length of the station itself would start from around Stephen Avenue all the way to around Intact Insurance building. The station can have access to the future Brookfield West tower and Intact Insurance building at +15 level. Voila, we have a grand station that sits at +30 level with excellent connections to all other lines. What do you think of this vision?

Great comments. Like it.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I think I'll prefer option C, only because the downtown stations are the closer to street level than those of any other options given. One thing I would wish for is to somehow cooperate with the Core. Replace the +30 level between TD Square and Scotia with a station that would straddle over the entire width of 2nd St. There would be 3rd level entrances to both adjoining buildings where the +30 walkway currently is. Also, there would be escalators from the +15 walkway to the station for easy transfer to the 2nd level. The +15 walkway would have to be widened slightly to accommodate a bit of a mezzanine for easy walk from northbound platform to southbound platform or vice versa. Also, there would be a series of escalators and two elevators at both the north end and the south end of the station. The ones at the south end of the station would also integrate with the underground station under Stephen Avenue. The length of the station itself would start from around Stephen Avenue all the way to around Intact Insurance building. The station can have access to the future Brookfield West tower and Intact Insurance building at +15 level. Voila, we have a grand station that sits at +30 level with excellent connections to all other lines. What do you think of this vision?

I guess the only issue is it will also be a major transfer point, and it ends up a long ways down to the 8th ave subway. One of the reasons I like buried through downtown, its only 1 level to transfer.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I guess the only issue is it will also be a major transfer point, and it ends up a long ways down to the 8th ave subway. One of the reasons I like buried through downtown, its only 1 level to transfer.

Has there been a decision on the 8th avenue tunnel? I don't recall there having been one. I don't think it has happened and don't think it will. If it happens, will be at least 30 years into the future if ever, given the added capacity 4 car trains provide. As such, the major transfer will be between the green line and the two 7th avenue surface lines. Again, I don't think 8th avenue tunnel will ever happen.

And remember, people want that increased distance between the two existing surface lines and the green line, at a massive additional cost!

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Has there been a decision on the 8th avenue tunnel? I don't recall there having been one. I don't think it has happened and don't think it will. If it happens, will be at least 30 years into the future if ever, given the added capacity 4 car trains provide. As such, the major transfer will be between the green line and the two 7th avenue surface lines. Again, I don't think 8th avenue tunnel will ever happen.

And remember, people want that increased distance between the two existing surface lines and the green line, at a massive additional cost!

B and C are the same cost, so no massive additional cost at all for the tunnel + bridge option.

The 8th ave subway is definitely needed. Once 4 cars are in that is the limit for capacity without the tunnel, and 7th ave and the flat junctions either end is already embarrassingly crappy in it's current state. Really the subway should be much higher priority than the SE leg, but that's politics.

[shogged]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

And as for Suburbia's constant incessant drivel, thank god for the ignore feature.

Rich coming from you lol

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I think I'll prefer option C, only because the downtown stations are the closer to street level than those of any other options given. One thing I would wish for is to somehow cooperate with the Core. Replace the +30 level between TD Square and Scotia with a station that would straddle over the entire width of 2nd St. There would be 3rd level entrances to both adjoining buildings where the +30 walkway currently is. Also, there would be escalators from the +15 walkway to the station for easy transfer to the 2nd level. The +15 walkway would have to be widened slightly to accommodate a bit of a mezzanine for easy walk from northbound platform to southbound platform or vice versa. Also, there would be a series of escalators and two elevators at both the north end and the south end of the station. The ones at the south end of the station would also integrate with the underground station under Stephen Avenue. The length of the station itself would start from around Stephen Avenue all the way to around Intact Insurance building. The station can have access to the future Brookfield West tower and Intact Insurance building at +15 level. Voila, we have a grand station that sits at +30 level with excellent connections to all other lines. What do you think of this vision?

This is the best articulated defence of C so far. You vision sounds nice, but I have a few issues:

1) As already discussed, damning second street to eternal darkness is not my favourite. If C is truly the same cost a B (which casts no shadow until Prince's Island), then I expect C will be a tough sell.

2) When it comes to station areas, +15s, and privately-developed mall areas, who has legal proprietary rights? It may not seem like a big issue, but currently The Core is run exactly like a private retailer (not a public space), despite the huge public investments into the Devonian Gardens and bonus density awarded for including +15s, etc. For example, Ivanhoe Cambridge (sorry for picking on them when others do the same) deliberately runs the escalators in a way that forces people to spend more time walking past storefronts. If a station were to be connected to the +45 level, the city ought to have final say on all decisions that affect the movement of commuters, the hours in which they can pass through, and the acceptable behaviours. Transit probably ought to handle security in the corridors that connect stations. Concerns like this cannot be overlooked. Of course, Ivanhoe Cambridge and others stand to benefit a lot from this line. It is vital that there be the most direct connections possible between all stations, and remember the WB 7th ave station is on the other side of 1st st.

3) Which version (underground or +45) can get folks to their destination sooner? I imagine those who travel the +15s won't much mind either way, but it's a much longer transfer for those switching to the 8th ave subway.

4) Don't forget that C means that Eau Claire station will also be elevated. Picture Sunalta Station there... It's not necessarily that bad, but hardly as subtle and accessible as an at-grade station (as in B).

I hope I don't sound too oppositional. I haven't yet written off option C in my head, so I'm partly responding to help myself think things through. However, I'm skeptical that C can be executed well. B is a comparable price and avoids many of C's flaws. I'll keep waiting for a more detailed cost/benefit analysis (hopefully with options A2, B2-4, C2-4, and D2-6).

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Has there been a decision on the 8th avenue tunnel? I don't recall there having been one. I don't think it has happened and don't think it will. If it happens, will be at least 30 years into the future if ever, given the added capacity 4 car trains provide. As such, the major transfer will be between the green line and the two 7th avenue surface lines. Again, I don't think 8th avenue tunnel will ever happen.

And remember, people want that increased distance between the two existing surface lines and the green line, at a massive additional cost!

8th ave has always been part of the long term plan. You say 30 years, and just last year everyone was saying full LRT on the green line was decades away. One funding announcement and here we are. I think it is better to plan for an inconvenience for 10 years than dooming a future to a poorly thought out plan. Nor saying a +30 is poorly thought out, but lets not write off all the ideas just because short term it doesn't make 100% sense.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

3) Which version (underground or +45) can get folks to their destination sooner? I imagine those who travel the +15s won't much mind either way, but it's a much longer transfer for those switching to the 8th ave subway.

What 8th avenue subway? I didn't know there were trains running down there?

Never gonna happen either.