Green Line LRT - $4.6 Billion Project

[accord1999]

Lots of reading materiel for the upcoming important Green Line meeting, from the updated alignment, NC BRT study and the capital/financing/spending breakdowns for the construction period.

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....nglish&Item=18

[jawagord]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Lots of reading materiel for the upcoming important Green Line meeting, from the updated alignment, NC BRT study and the capital/financing/spending breakdowns for the construction period.

https://pub-calgary.escribemeetings....nglish&Item=18

Was scanning the attachments and letter 38 (7.1.1 Attachment 13) from Neil McKendrik (former manager of transit planning, Calgary Transit) is a terrific summary of what is wrong with the green line plan. The folly of building 2 short lines instead of one complete line is fully explained. The green line is a bad political compromise pushed forward by this council, it’s not something competent transit designers would propose in absence of their political bosses instructing them to do it.

Unfortunately so many of the public submittals are the same: fanboy/girl build it now types that support anything, the don’t build it types that are fearful of building in an uncertain economy and the preserve Prince’s Island types; that it all becomes noise which drowns out the few really thoughtful critiques. I can see opposition to the PI bridge might sway some of city council but I think the committee will continue doing what they want.

[milomilo]

Yeah I think sadly the argument that has the most teeth is the argument that is least rational and most wrong - the protection of PI park. However, if it ends with the north section being cut, the end justifies the means I guess. There's no chance it's going underground there now.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by jawagord

Was scanning the attachments and letter 38 (7.1.1 Attachment 13) from Neil McKendrik (former manager of transit planning, Calgary Transit) is a terrific summary of what is wrong with the green line plan. The folly of building 2 short lines instead of one complete line is fully explained. The green line is a bad political compromise pushed forward by this council, it’s not something competent transit designers would propose in absence of their political bosses instructing them to do it.

That's an excellent letter; he was also interviewed in a CBC article last year with two other transit planners who also agreed with him on the poor bang for the buck aspect of the line:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...gers-1.5247339

But despite these criticisms by respected transit individuals, most of the Green Line supporters still treat any opposition as purely an attack on all transit and aren't willing to listen.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by jawagord

Was scanning the attachments and letter 38 (7.1.1 Attachment 13) from Neil McKendrik (former manager of transit planning, Calgary Transit) is a terrific summary of what is wrong with the green line plan. The folly of building 2 short lines instead of one complete line is fully explained. The green line is a bad political compromise pushed forward by this council, it’s not something competent transit designers would propose in absence of their political bosses instructing them to do it.

This part of his letter referencing the N.W. leg is very concerning.

The University Station did not sufficiently reduce travel time nor did it provide a suitable transfer station for the large number of bus routes and high passenger volumes coming from NW communities. The reaction from NW transit riders and residents was extremely negative. As a result there were significant protests, an internal investigation by an independent auditor, and considerable loss of confidence on the part of Calgarians. As a result, the downtown oriented NW bus services were retained and ran parallel to NW LRT, at considerable extra cost for the next 16 years until the NW line was extended to Dalhousie.

If we end up doing the same thing for the Green Line what are the true operating costs going to end up being? To me his suggestions are common sense. Build to Seton first and then worry about the NC leg.

[accord1999]

That's always been the plan even with the previous tunneled alignment on Centre Street N; they would keep the existing bus routes and frequency as they didn't expect anybody from the North to transfer to a train so close to DT. But I guess it doesn't matter as the operating costs belong to Bus operations, rather than Green Line.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by accord1999

That's always been the plan even with the previous tunneled alignment on Centre Street N; they would keep the existing bus routes and frequency as they didn't expect anybody from the North to transfer to a train so close to DT. But I guess it doesn't matter as the operating costs belong to Bus operations, rather than Green Line.

It's all transit to most people and there is just one taxpayer. If they go ahead with their current plan I can see service in the north getting worse not better.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

It's all transit to most people and there is just one taxpayer. If they go ahead with their current plan I can see service in the north getting worse not better.

Why is that?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Why is that?

Trains will mess with the operation of buses just as much as they will with cars. The 16th Ave area will be a gong show. Why do you think it won't be worse?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Trains will mess with the operation of buses just as much as they will with cars. The 16th Ave area will be a gong show. Why do you think it won't be worse?

The buses from 16th ave onwards can share the LRT ROW and stations.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The buses from 16th ave onwards can share the LRT ROW and stations.

That's the theory, the question is how resilient it will be in non-ideal weather conditions.

[lucx]

Originally Posted by accord1999

That's the theory, the question is how resilient it will be in non-ideal weather conditions.

Buses ran decently on 7 Ave for decades. It wasn't ideal, but Centre St probably won't have the train volume as 7 Ave.

[Rollerstud98]

Originally Posted by lucx

Buses ran decently on 7 Ave for decades. It wasn't ideal, but Centre St probably won't have the train volume as 7 Ave.

Are you calling for all non transit traffic to be removed from centre street?

[lucx]

Originally Posted by Rollerstud98

Are you calling for all non transit traffic to be removed from centre street?

Where did you infer that? Buses used to run on 7 Ave so there's lots of experience with winter conditions. Buses were removed from 7 Ave because they interfere with 4-car trains. Centre street probably won't have the same volume of LRT traffic as 7 Ave when it opens so there's less train-bus conflicts.

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

This part of his letter referencing the N.W. leg is very concerning.

The University Station did not sufficiently reduce travel time nor did it provide a suitable transfer station for the large number of bus routes and high passenger volumes coming from NW communities. The reaction from NW transit riders and residents was extremely negative. As a result there were significant protests, an internal investigation by an independent auditor, and considerable loss of confidence on the part of Calgarians. As a result, the downtown oriented NW bus services were retained and ran parallel to NW LRT, at considerable extra cost for the next 16 years until the NW line was extended to Dalhousie.

If we end up doing the same thing for the Green Line what are the true operating costs going to end up being? To me his suggestions are common sense. Build to Seton first and then worry about the NC leg.

The thing is the University Station and Shepard Station aren't the same thing at all. University Station has no park and ride and is located in the middle of an expressway that provides quick access to downtown. If the busses already had to go on Crowchild Trail to feed into the University Station it did make more sense for them to just continue downtown as the travel times would have been similar.

A much better comparison to Shepard Station would be Anderson Station as both have a large park and ride component, are located close, but not in, large residential neighbourhoods and neither are geographically positioned for speedy express bus service to downtown so connecting to the LRT is decidedly quicker. McKendrick conveniently ignores the fact that Anderson Station successfully served as the terminus for the Red Line for years and helped make the southern leg of the Red Line the busiest part of our LRT network. I think concerns about Shepard Station not being used by Calgarians are way overblown.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

The thing is the University Station and Shepard Station aren't the same thing at all. University Station has no park and ride and is located in the middle of an expressway that provides quick access to downtown. If the busses already had to go on Crowchild Trail to feed into the University Station it did make more sense for them to just continue downtown as the travel times would have been similar.

A much better comparison to Shepard Station would be Anderson Station as both have a large park and ride component, are located close, but not in, large residential neighbourhoods and neither are geographically positioned for speedy express bus service to downtown so connecting to the LRT is decidedly quicker. McKendrick conveniently ignores the fact that Anderson Station successfully served as the terminus for the Red Line for years and helped make the southern leg of the Red Line the busiest part of our LRT network. I think concerns about Shepard Station not being used by Calgarians are way overblown.

Wasn't he talking about the station at 16 Ave and the buses on Center Street? I'm pretty sure his comments on this matter have nothing to do with Shepard Station other than the S.E. line needs to go to Seton to be useful.

[jawagord]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

The thing is the University Station and Shepard Station aren't the same thing at all. University Station has no park and ride and is located in the middle of an expressway that provides quick access to downtown. If the busses already had to go on Crowchild Trail to feed into the University Station it did make more sense for them to just continue downtown as the travel times would have been similar.

A much better comparison to Shepard Station would be Anderson Station as both have a large park and ride component, are located close, but not in, large residential neighbourhoods and neither are geographically positioned for speedy express bus service to downtown so connecting to the LRT is decidedly quicker. McKendrick conveniently ignores the fact that Anderson Station successfully served as the terminus for the Red Line for years and helped make the southern leg of the Red Line the busiest part of our LRT network. I think concerns about Shepard Station not being used by Calgarians are way overblown.

There’s almost zero people living within 10 minute walking distance of Shepard station with only McKenzie town to the south and Douglasdale to the west but cutoff by Deerfoot Trail. Anderson has communities to the West, North and South and then communities to the east of Macleod. It’s wishful thinking to imagine Shepard Station is going to attract large ridership when people are already in the cars on Deerfoot or on a bus. Instead of building north to 16 ave (0.8km of the most expensive and useless track) building out to the south hospital makes a far better termination of phase 1, then there are 3 south stations that people can access the train from as well as the hospital campus being a major south destination for 2 way traffic.

https://www.calgary.ca/Transportatio...al-Station.pdf


https://www.calgary.ca/Transportatio...rd-Station.pdf

[MalcolmTucker]

The key is that from Shepard, the lrt trip time will be much much faster due to all of the grade separation north of there that bumped the price tag up. So much so that the transfer penalty is non existent. It will be like Anderson and Brentwood were before further extensions: a massive transfer station serving all neighbourhoods further out.

[jawagord]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The key is that from Shepard, the lrt trip time will be much much faster due to all of the grade separation north of there that bumped the price tag up. So much so that the transfer penalty is non existent. It will be like Anderson and Brentwood were before further extensions: a massive transfer station serving all neighbourhoods further out.

Neil M was on the Danielle Smith show a couple weeks back (preamble starts at minute 21 most of the interesting comments are from minute 27 on), if you don't want to listen to the discussion my take-aways from Neil's comments are:

- Shepard Station was never planned as a bus terminal connector. It's tucked behind the Canadian Tire and difficult to get to (in my experience anyone who has taken the 130 overpass or 52nd street knows what a clusterf*ck of traffic lights and turn signals 130 ave is). It's highly questionable that riders will take long bus ride to Shepard or navigate their way to a parking lot to take the LRT.
- 16ave North station is close to useless, will have low ridership as the line is too short to encourage people to get off bus or car. Which means extra operating costs to run both LRT and buses on center street.
- North Center bus system is highly successful and can be improved to increase ridership at much lower cost than LRT. Don't build LRT to the North at this time.
-No rational from ridership basis to connect North and South portions of green line, connection idea is political and highly costly.
-build south line to Seton, Shepard to Seton is the least costly section of LRT to build.
-no risk to government funding if only South line is built and bus service to North is expanded.


https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Po...icId=144250155

Sensible Alternative website LRT map:

https://greenlineinfo.ca/assets/uplo...ve_May2020.pdf

[milomilo]

It makes some sense to transfer at Shepard. What doesn't make sense is to transfer at 16 Ave.

The vision for Centre St is gross. It's confirmed that the city wants to run both buses and trains on the LRT tracks, thus even further negating any advantage a train has. It's essentially going to be kilometre after kilometre of 7 Ave.