Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

outoftheice · #1 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 6:37 PM**

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:

Green Line Flyover:

• Video Link

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

suburbia · #2 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 7:08 PM**

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)?

Luk_o · #3 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 7:13 PM**

So pumped about this project! Massive undertaking, huge benefit.

*Stardust* · #4 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 7:37 PM**

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.

outoftheice · #5 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 8:46 PM**

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/

*Stardust* · #6 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 9:24 PM**

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.

Big Sky · #7 Posted **Aug 10, 2015, 8:42 PM**

I'm for option B or D. I'm leaning toward 'B'. D would be my first choice except that the 9th ave and 16th ave stations are really too far down IMO. On option B I think the line needs to stay underground further east.

We need an option E

option B but with the line coming up above ground somewhere around Vic Park

Quote:

Originally Posted by outoftheice

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/

Chadillaccc · #8 Posted **Apr 24, 2016, 9:23 PM**

On the first page of this thread, the north portal for option D was at 24 Avenue....

Quote:

Originally Posted by outoftheice

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

Plan View:

Profile View:

All images sourced from: http://www.lrtonthegreen.ca/about-the-green-line/

kw5150 · #9 Posted **Apr 26, 2016, 4:03 PM**

I prefer Option B and C.

I do trust that our experts are making the correct choice......but when i see a tunnel THAT DEEP and a line that does not capitalize on the BEST VIEW EVER, I start to wonder. It really seems like we are forcing a subway just because we want one.

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

nick.flood · #10 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 10:31 PM**

delete

nick.flood · #11 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 10:42 PM**

delete

CorporateWhore · #12 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 9:22 PM**

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.

Wooster · #13 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 10:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorporateWhore

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.

I imagine there will be two Downtown stations (Eau Claire and 7th Avenue) and two Beltline stations (10th Ave near 1st street SW and in Railtown near 4th Street SE).

Wooster · #14 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 10:18 PM**

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).

rkarsk · #15 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 10:31 PM**

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...

Joborule · #16 Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 12:05 AM**

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* · #17 Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 12:09 AM**

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

suburbia · #18 Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 1:40 AM**

Quote:

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.

floobie · #19 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 9:47 PM**

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

. And that's your cue to tell me why I'm wrong.

Boris2k7 · #20 Posted **Jul 30, 2015, 9:52 PM**

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