Bike sure, cars, sure. Somehow I doubt a 1916 bridge can handle 8+ loaded c-trains on the bridge along with cars/trucks/pedestrians.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Bike sure, cars, sure. Somehow I doubt a 1916 bridge can handle 8+ loaded c-trains on the bridge along with cars/trucks/pedestrians.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Alright then, put the green station at the south end of the bridge, and the new Purple Line station at the north end. People can walk accross to transfer lines. It'll still be a shorter walk than some of those Vancouver ones. We'll also save a ton of money on upkeep of the bridge if it doesn't have to hold the weight of vehicles anymore.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
The new Purple Line can run hard, straight and fast up the entire length of Center Street North.
Last edited by Tik-Tok; 06-18-2020 at 09:35 AM.
It should be able to I'd assume. If there's a traffic jam in downtown then the whole bridge might be packed full of cars. Engineers would have had to design around that possibility for sure. So what weighs more, two lanes packed full of vehicles or tracks + two trains (one each direction) on the bridge? Trains might be more weight in a smaller area but less weight overall ... Idk how tracks work but I'd assume they distribute the weight as well over a larger footprint.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
That that bridge is 4 lanes standstill full of cars and trucks every day.
Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
Originally posted by Toma
fact.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Siemens S200 is 40k kg for each car and I would assume carry roughly the same passengers as a bendy bus. Would a Bendy bus weight that much?
So simple calculation is each S200 = 20 passenger cars. 4 of them would be 80 cars. both ways would be 160 cars. Can we even fit 160 cars on the bridge?
The other is grade but given S200 and do 10 degree, that's probably not an issue.
Last edited by Xtrema; 06-18-2020 at 09:57 AM.
So my idea will save dozens of CO2!This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Such CO2This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
Originally posted by Toma
fact.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Center Street matters and what they are doing is horrible.
I am user #49Originally posted by rage2
Shit, there's only 49 users here, I doubt we'll even break 100
So, I've lurked in this thread a while and all I can see is a lot of NIMBYISM and people who like to appear to beyond as fiscal conservatives, but on the other hand would probably fully support a new arena...
I was really excited for the green line when it was initially laid out. I agree with Speedog that it should have been underground till at least 64 Ave in the north, but all in all the original design had merit. Unfortunately due to our provincial government and our current economic situation, changes were made. The changes to make the north section at grade are really dumb. And not having train access to the airport continues to baffle me. I mean, I might be a teacher now, but my first degree was in city planning, and the city regularly makes short sites decisions which they eventually need to rectify in the future, costing more money in the long run. Just do it right the first time.
As for the cost. I see it as nessecary. This project creates thousands of jobs, jobs which allow people to spend money on our local shops and restaurants. And as for the taxes which would inevitably increase; I am okay with it, cause I hate having to beg for a ride to the airport instead of a 30 to 40 dollar cab...
Originally posted by speedog
So more beyond armchair activism at work again?
wait, how does this help you get to the airport?
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
You take a bus from 16th ave of course!This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name
Soooooo, the same way you get to the airport now?This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
How progressive!
Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
Originally posted by Toma
fact.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
The 300 bus is pretty good. I have used it.
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
No, I am saying that either the green line should have had an airport extension, or fully extend the NE line to the Airport. Either way the city dropped the ball on getting people to the airport.
Originally posted by speedog
So more beyond armchair activism at work again?
Cherry on top is that green line uses a train that’s incompatible with the rest of the network, so we couldn’t even one day and another 100 billion dollars later green line and NE connect at the airport. Ever.
Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
Originally posted by Toma
fact.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Curiously, there aren't many Canadian cities that have train to airport access. Vancouver and Toronto are the only ones that come to mind, likely because they have the population density to make economic sense of it. Most of our major cities have a dedicated rapid-travel bus service instead.
City design, particularly travel fareways whether it be bus, car or train have always come across as an after-thought. Take for example the very recent Flanders Ave traffic circle clusterfuck. The traffic circle is the simplest design there is and yet they managed to fuck it up royally. True it is a feat, just not a positve one. Honourable Mention for a recent design clusterfuck goes out to Sarcee Tr and 16th Ave.
Last edited by msommers; 06-20-2020 at 01:50 PM.
Ultracrepidarian
How many of those cities haveThis quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
A) airports within city limits
B) an LRT system
C) existing track within a km of the the airport lol
Not much about Calgary’s LRT system isn’t a joke
Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
Originally posted by Toma
fact.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
And Vancouver only has it because of the 2010 Olympics. It's also seen both sides of complaints:This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
First it was that people were inflating ridership projections to ram the project through. Then people quickly realized that they significantly under-predicted ridership projections (in part because growth wasn't planned along the line until after it was built). The most vocal of the early opposition was just mayors of other cities not wanting to see all the eggs put into one basket because it would limit the transit money they'd get (Burnaby was most vocal in the opposition).
But the line shows the perils of underbuilding to save on cost (and in their case, time as well) in the same of making things more politically palatable.
- Building some platforms at 40m (rest of the network is 50m) limits the system to two-car trains. So they have to expand them.
- Single-tracking the terminus stations significantly reduced capacity (they need to double them).
- Turning space doesn't allow for the necessary banking at high speeds, so more braking is needed, reducing average speed and increasing headways (this can't be fixed). Saved on land acquisition and construction timing.
All of the choices become harder and more expensive now because they can't afford major service disruptions. The City of Calgary is following the same script, as many cities do: cut costs early, pay more later. See: 7th Ave.
100% me and Idk wtf I am talking about other than I don't like it. I need a cause to be angry about and a train cutting through the park is it for me but I'm also too passive to do anything other than bitch on Beyond lolThis quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I am user #49Originally posted by rage2
Shit, there's only 49 users here, I doubt we'll even break 100
Well for A, YVR is in Richmond, YUL is in Dorval, YYZ is in Mississauga, YEG is in the county of Leduc. YOW is actually in Ottawa but the actual area that the city of Ottawa administers encompasses is more than triple the area that the city of Calgary administers and that's for a city that is considerably smaller population wise than Calgary.This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote