Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[nick.flood]

delete

[nick.flood]

delete

[McMurph]

B with a beautiful bridge. But the bar for a new crossing, particularly in that spot, has to be set really high. Ditto the interface with the bluff.

[Joborule]

I'm all in for option B. The difference between tunneling below the river and building a bridge over it is much more for little gain. The bridge shouldn't effect the park that much. Save the costs where it's affordable.

[*Stardust*]

Either way, this station will help the Eau Claire developments for sure

[holhm22]

I like option D, other cities have done fine with stations that deep; but option B is a really good option if the bridge has a good design unlike the wreck that the Red Line's bridge is.

[PPAR]

Great new thread! Clearly the topic du jour in Calgary.

I agree a modded option B is best. The thing I don't understand is the need to go east on tenth ave. Why not take the line south as far as 12th. This would separate the line better from the 7th ave corridor downtown, and improve access to the Sheldon Chumir Centre, students at St. Mary's and Western, and the stampede grounds. There would also be some utilization by people in the Central Memorial Park area to get downtown and on to Red and Green line destinations. Looking at the map, going down 12th ave does not seem to overly interfere with the chosen route from the elbow river crossing on.

[Spring2008]

^Option B. I hope some of this is elevated. Potentially some great views of the mountains.

I believe the city is expanding the $52M property tax allocation over 30 yrs now to account for their full $1.5B portion share. The NDP needs to step up. Would be nice to get some of that annual net transfer loss of $4B provincially and $10B federally we give out every year (see Nenshi's twitter account) . Imagine getting our money back for just a few yrs. we'd have the Ferrari of everything in the infrastructure world. No lie.

Originally Posted by outoftheice

Hello everyone,
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

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

I believe the city is expanding the $52M property tax allocation over 30 yrs now to account for their full $1.5B portion share.

This is the solution to funding the City's share of the project that that LRT on the Green Foundation has been advocating for however it has yet to be voted on by City Council. Given the recent Federal funding announcement I think most City Councillors are now receptive to the idea and I wouldn't be surprised if we see a vote on the issue in September or October of this year.

[Spring2008]

^oh I see. Btw the Feds have announced they're contributing $600M to the sw ring road today, money savings that the NDP can reallocate to this project as this was initially budgeted as all provincial funding project.

http://www.660news.com/2015/07/30/fe...ary-ring-road/

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by rkarsk

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...

This will be the biggest challenge. The inner-city has an oversupply of NIMBY morons.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by CalgaryAlex

I really don't like options A and C. Raised tracks downtown just seem awkward and claustrophobic to me. Personal opinion there.

Wow that's a$$ backwards. Usually people would feel claustrophobic if they were put in a hole 13 floors into the ground.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Wow that's a$$ backwards.

You're aware that you don't have to censor the word "ass" on this site, right? It's not even a fucking curse word.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Wooster

This will be the case. We caught this oversight at the time it was presented at Council. It was actually just a function of a fuzzy line between where the scope of work of the NCLRT functional plan started an the SELRT functional plan ended. Of course, we know now it will be one project. It will daylight east of Macleod.

Good. Well, that ends my concerns about this project's big impacts. Any but A.

[logan5]

This line has more of a Metro characteristic with an underground along Centre St., as opposed to the other lines that feel more commuter like (as far as I can tell). Centre St should really start to intensify from here on out with the prospect of being a few short minutes by train to the dt core.

Most of the surrounding area is single detached homes. There should be dramatic change in the coming decades I would hope.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

You're aware that you don't have to censor the word "ass" on this site, right? It's not even a fucking curse word.

It was a double play on the fact that the claustrophobic option the claustrophobe was preferring, also was the most expensive. Complicated for an American - I get it. Love your Trump though.

[DavidKuitunen]

• Video Link

[RyLucky]

I was all for Option D until I saw how deep those stations will be. Here are a few questions I have:

-Why must the tunnel under the Bow be so deep? Is there no safe technology to build a waterproof tunnel closer to the surface?
-How deep is 20/27/50/35 m? I assume that is the floor of the tunnel? Does anyone know the relative depths of metro stations in other cities? Many cities have 2 (or more) layers of subways, each requiring multiple "stories" of clearance.
-I am surprised that Options B and C have the same price, because typically tunnelling is far more expensive than elevation. Reason?
-wrt coming to grade on 10th, what is the plan at the 4th St SE crossing?
-If we proceed with any option except C, it seems logical to excavate (at least part) of the 8th St subway at the same time. Is this considered in estimates?

Thanks

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Wooster

This will be the case. We caught this oversight at the time it was presented at Council. It was actually just a function of a fuzzy line between where the scope of work of the NCLRT functional plan started an the SELRT functional plan ended. Of course, we know now it will be one project. It will daylight east of Macleod.

They going under the Red line tunnel? I am glad, but just making sure this is the plan.

[DizzyEdge]

When considering the options, consider which one will be best after 75 years of 'north hill' redevelopment.