Future Canadian Transit Maps

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Boris2k7

The biggest reason to separate them would be to improve the headway between trains during peak rush hour. Another side reason would be that we just paid to make all these shiny new stations and it would be a shame not to get the maximum use out of them.



Well, the one we are specifically talking about for the purposes of this conversation (WRT the RouteAhead Plan) is the 2km stretch down 8th Ave for the existing line. The other one will have to go underneath the 8th Ave subway but will be a much shorter tunnel.

There's also the potential for the 2nd tunnel to be much longer, though not as likely as the shorter version. If the city decides to do the smart, forethinking option, the tunnel will go from Olympic Way in Victoria Park, under downtown, under the Bow River, and not come up until around 20 Avenue North. The total length would be between 5 and 6 kilometers.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

There's also the potential for the 2nd tunnel to be much longer, though not as likely as the shorter version. If the city decides to do the smart, forethinking option, the tunnel will go from Olympic Way in Victoria Park, under downtown, under the Bow River, and not come up until around 20 Avenue North. The total length would be between 5 and 6 kilometers.

Or alternatively (and my preference), come out of tunnel at Eau Claire, bridge the bow and re-enter on the bluffs on the other side of the river before emerging around 24th Ave.

[SOSS]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

There's also the potential for the 2nd tunnel to be much longer, though not as likely as the shorter version. If the city decides to do the smart, forethinking option, the tunnel will go from Olympic Way in Victoria Park, under downtown, under the Bow River, and not come up until around 20 Avenue North. The total length would be between 5 and 6 kilometers.

This would be mostly a cut and cover up centre, right? Have they settled on the north central alignment?

I think its funny how Surrey is thinking surface LRT will be the best thing for them since slice bread when Calgary (considered a great model) will be spending some serious money on creating grade-separation.

[Chadillaccc]

Yes it would be all cut and cover except the under-river portions and the portion that would be nearly 100 meters deep (under the bluffs just after the river), due to our geology. The North Central alignment has been selected as Centre Street. They announced it a couple months ago.


Centre Street given nod for Calgary’s north-central LRT, but tunnel question remains
Robson Fletcher | December 17, 2014

Calgary’s eventual north-central LRT line should run along Centre Street, most councillors on the city’s transportation committee agreed Thursday, but they put off a decision on whether trains should travel below the Bow River or over it.

Connecting the proposed line from north Calgary to downtown remains an open question, a logistical challenge, and a pricey undertaking, no matter how the city approaches the long-term project.

City staff estimate that tunnelling beneath the Bow River would cost roughly $1.8 billion and save between three and seven minutes in travel time from the north end of the line to downtown, compared to a $1.1-billion plan to have trains use the existing Centre Street bridge to cross the waterway.

Full story: http://metronews.ca/news/calgary/124...stion-remains/

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The new Route 6 and 101 uses the Hurdman transit bridge. That will soon be gone.

Good point, didn't think about that. I imagine they'll have to choose between truncating them at Lees or having them go to Hurdman via the 417. The latter is not as crazy as it sounds, because the Lees onramp to the 417 continues directly to the Riverside offramp (though they currently don't because of construction, they will again once its done) meaning a bus doing that route won't be killed by congestion in the through lanes. The 101 currently does the same thing already to get between Metcalfe St & Lees Av, it drives down the merge lane of the 417, and even at rush hour it's never too badly held up. I'd personally advocate for the 417 option for connectivity to the SE Transitway (which I imagine you'd agree with me on--yay we've found common ground for once ), but I suspect the city will be silly and go with the truncate-at-Lees option.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Anyways, we will wait for some concrete proposals.

We shall. Can't be too long coming, we're only 3 years away.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Have they actually started an Environmental assessment for the Baseline BRT? The Baseline route will involve a major rebuild of Baseline Road.

Yep, there's been stuff about it in the Ottawa section.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by SOSS

This would be mostly a cut and cover up centre, right? Have they settled on the north central alignment?

I think its funny how Surrey is thinking surface LRT will be the best thing for them since slice bread when Calgary (considered a great model) will be spending some serious money on creating grade-separation.

Calgary is planning to separate its red and blue lines not because of congestion with vehicles, but because of congestion with each other. Trains currently run at the manufacturer-specified minimum headway in the downtown section, so they cannot improve frequency until the two lines are separated. With respect to surface LRT, the 201 line in Calgary (its most heavily used) has a huge degree of grade seperation with a number of buried sections. Grade intersections typically are only for the most minor of roadway, and (with the exception of Heritage Drive, which is on the books for future grade separation) never seem to cross a major road.

Calgary invested a lot in grade separation right from the start; the question is really just when you reach diminishing returns on your investment.