Calgary Public Transit II

[5seconds]

Some creative accounting looks to kick start funding for the SE LRT earlier than expected:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Fund+s...heast+Calgary+transit/5704999/story.html

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Some creative accounting looks to kick start funding for the SE LRT earlier than expected:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Fund+s...heast+Calgary+transit/5704999/story.html

Smart. Now hopefully the province allows this - Edmonton did a similar thing for the NAIT LRT line. Helps reduce financing costs too, since MSI has been continuously 'reprofiled' to deliver more of its funding in the later years of the agreement to reduce the provincial deficit in more 'creative' accounting.

That being said, this doesn't free up nearly enough money to do anything for the SE LRT other than what was already planned with the Green Trip money. Planning, setting aside money for property acquisition (likely by optioning land, some acquisition if people want to sell today), and maybe building some of the 'SETWAY' (at least McKenzie through Douglasdale, at most up to Glenmore).

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Smart. Now hopefully the province allows this - Edmonton did a similar thing for the NAIT LRT line. Helps reduce financing costs too, since MSI has been continuously 'reprofiled' to deliver more of its funding in the later years of the agreement to reduce the provincial deficit in more 'creative' accounting.

That being said, this doesn't free up nearly enough money to do anything for the SE LRT other than what was already planned with the Green Trip money. Planning, setting aside money for property acquisition (likely by optioning land, some acquisition if people want to sell today), and maybe building some of the 'SETWAY' (at least McKenzie through Douglasdale, at most up to Glenmore).

Whatever it is, it better be mostly property acquisition. Any spending on a Busway, unless easily (and cheaply), upgraded to rail is a waste of money in the long term.

[fusili]

I forgot to post this earlier, but here is the latest installment of the CivicCamp blog series on long range transit planning. This one is on the North Crosstown route (16th avenue north):

http://www.civiccamp.org/2011/11/the-calgary-transitcamp-vision-the-north-crosstown-route/

[You Need A Thneed]

It should be mentioned that this funding will also move up the 17th Ave SE corridor funding as well. That will be a big bonus for the BRT in that area.

For SELRT, I agree with fusilli here. Don't waste money on infrastructure that will have to be torn out when full funding comes.

Build for rail, then think of ways to use it for busses in the interim. Don't build bus specific facilities now.

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

It should be mentioned that this funding will also move up the 17th Ave SE corridor funding as well. That will be a big bonus for the BRT in that area.

What is the long-term plan for 17th? Is it just BRTs on dedicated busways? I thought I heard something about a tram at one time, was that ever a serious proposal?

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

What is the long-term plan for 17th? Is it just BRTs on dedicated busways? I thought I heard something about a tram at one time, was that ever a serious proposal?

Dedicated bus lanes (centre busway), with the possibility of changing to a streetcar.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Dedicated bus lanes (centre busway), with the possibility of changing to a streetcar.

The biggest part of the expense is the over Deerfoot portion - I have to wonder whether that part is really worth it, vs. doing nothing west of 17th Ave SE proper, or connecting to Barlow Station instead.

From way back in the thread, unfortunately the map no longer is served.

Plan includes:
17th Avenue transit lanes - $94 million
Busway to connect 17th Ave SE with SE LRT in Inglewood - $153 million, plus land purchases

I was wondering - why go to the SE LRT? Why not up to Barlow/Maxbell? The route is shorter, doesn't need the SE LRT (which might not get all the way downtown in the first phase), and likely much cheaper to shore up a hill side that to buld bridges over a rail yard, freeway, canal and river.

Orange = SE LRT
Red = NE LRT
Yellow = Barlow Maxbell 17th BRT connector
Blue = 17th BRT and Inglewood Transitway

[5seconds]

Interesting, thank you both. I found the article, but not the map:

http://www.globaltvbc.com/city+studying+bus-only+lane+on+international+avenue/79835/story.html

I don't see how they plan on getting a busway from the Blackfoot Truckstop to the Inglewood LRT station, but the 17th ave portion sounds promising.

[You Need A Thneed]

SE 17th Ave Corridor Plan

Open House Info Panels

Inglewood Routings from Inglewood Open Houses.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

I don't see how they plan on getting a busway from the Blackfoot Truckstop to the Inglewood LRT station, but the 17th ave portion sounds promising.

You can do a lot with $153 million big ones. Whether it should be done is another matter. The connection is only really useful if the SE LRT first phase includes the downtown tunnel, which is a long way off.

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

SE 17th Ave Corridor Plan

Open House Info Panels

Inglewood Routings from Inglewood Open Houses.

Thank you for those. Really exciting plans they have for the area.

I was going to comment that the proposed busway through Inglewood does not serve the Inglewood very well directly, but I guess it would already be served well by the LRT and existing bus services. The busway would be more of a way to get through the area quickly so that it can better serve the 17th ave corridor.

That's a lot of infrastructure, but in light of the new 4th street underpass' $70m. price tag, would the $153m. go as far as they need it to? (I realise that much of that went to CPR, but do they think they can get the bridges/tunnels built for that much?)

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Some creative accounting looks to kick start funding for the SE LRT earlier than expected:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Fund+s...heast+Calgary+transit/5704999/story.html

Sadly I think this will just serve to delay the SE LRT to the point where we may never see it. The current council seems to be on-board with using the funds to build a dedicated bus-way in the South East. The South East LRT will be a very expensive project and I'm concerned that after dumping so much money into a dedicated bus-way, future councils will take the approach that small investments into further improving the bus-way will be a much better use of funds than tearing up all the infrastructure that's already there and spending billions on the LRT. If people living in the deep South East realized that a vote for dedicated BRT is a vote against the LRT I think you would see support for the BRT dry up overnight.... Unfortunately I think that PR battle has already been lost....

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

Sadly I think this will just serve to delay the SE LRT to the point where we may never see it. The current council seems to be on-board with using the funds to build a dedicated bus-way in the South East. The South East LRT will be a very expensive project and I'm concerned that after dumping so much money into a dedicated bus-way, future councils will take the approach that small investments into further improving the bus-way will be a much better use of funds than tearing up all the infrastructure that's already there and spending billions on the LRT. If people living in the deep South East realized that a vote for dedicated BRT is a vote against the LRT I think you would see support for the BRT dry up overnight.... Unfortunately I think that PR battle has already been lost....

That depends on how it is built. If what they build needs to be ripped up to build the LRT, then you are right. That's not the intention of this though.. The intention is to build something that can easily be converted into LRT later. That's why the suggestion that this money gets used for property acquisition.

[MalcolmTucker]

The intention is to build something that can easily be converted into LRT later.

The rub is the definition of easily - does that mean 2 year shutdown or 6 months...

[fusili]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

SE 17th Ave Corridor Plan

Open House Info Panels

Inglewood Routings from Inglewood Open Houses.

In my opinion the only routing through Inglewood that makes sense is the first option presented on the open house panels. This obviously infers an LRT, as it interlines with the SE LRT. So I could see it making sense to build the busway on 17th avenue up until just before Deerfoot, and then using one of the other alignments (not actual construction of lanes, but using lane reversals or peak-period transit only lanes) in the mean time. But in terms of phasing, I think the SE LRT should come even before the SE 17 Bus Lanes.

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by fusili

In my opinion the only routing through Inglewood that makes sense is the first option presented on the open house panels. This obviously infers an LRT, as it interlines with the SE LRT. So I could see it making sense to build the busway on 17th avenue up until just before Deerfoot, and then using one of the other alignments (not actual construction of lanes, but using lane reversals or peak-period transit only lanes) in the mean time. But in terms of phasing, I think the SE LRT should come even before the SE 17 Bus Lanes.

Agreed. I also agree that while the 17th Ave bus lanes are worthwhile, building anything west of Deerfoot should wait until SELRT is at least under construction.

I am very against any sort of temporary transitway that could be converted to SELRT. I really don't think we should spend any money when the LRT could begin construction within 5 years, especially if that money could be used to make sure that construction can begin within 5 years. As well, because of the sheer length of the route, and the need to adjust buses in the SE to feed into the LRT anyways, a transitway does not actually provide any benefit on that route.

If we are going to spend money on that corridor before being able to construct the LRT, why not spend it on things that will have to be done to construct the LRT anyways? Such as, but not limited to, property acquisition, grading/route preparation, building interchanges and other road improvements that the LRT will require (off the top of my head, these road improvements include 8 St SE and 9 Av SE, 11 St SE at the at-grade rail crossing at Portland St, Glenmore Trail/Ogden Rd/Shepard Rd), and also TOD planning and planning for Eau Claire station to ensure it could have a NCLRT extend north from it.

Anything to make the final price tag affordable.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by DarkKeyo

Agreed. I also agree that while the 17th Ave bus lanes are worthwhile, building anything west of Deerfoot should wait until SELRT is at least under construction.

I am very against any sort of temporary transitway that could be converted to SELRT. I really don't think we should spend any money when the LRT could begin construction within 5 years, especially if that money could be used to make sure that construction can begin within 5 years. As well, because of the sheer length of the route, and the need to adjust buses in the SE to feed into the LRT anyways, a transitway does not actually provide any benefit on that route.

If we are going to spend money on that corridor before being able to construct the LRT, why not spend it on things that will have to be done to construct the LRT anyways? Such as, but not limited to, property acquisition, grading/route preparation, building interchanges and other road improvements that the LRT will require (off the top of my head, these road improvements include 8 St SE and 9 Av SE, 11 St SE at the at-grade rail crossing at Portland St, Glenmore Trail/Ogden Rd/Shepard Rd), and also TOD planning and planning for Eau Claire station to ensure it could have a NCLRT extend north from it.

Anything to make the final price tag affordable.

Fully agreed. Property acquisition and constructing any road upgrades that will happen anyway will not only take those costs off the ultimate price tag, they will speed up construction once the money is in place.

The two things I think we must absolutely do (as you alluded to above) is design Eau Claire for a possible extenstion (as you mentioned), but also to plan a spur just south of Inglewood station, for any eventual spur line to 17th Avenue SE. What does a sput cost really? If we never even use it, the cost of the short spur is so minimal, but if we do use it, the cost savings and reduction of construction interruption on the future SE LRT would be astronomical.

[MalcolmTucker]

I would go further than you against SELRT spending - we should not spend any money that creates path dependency, or creates useless sunk cost infrastructure should the technology choice that is cheapest for the project turns out not to be what the current conception of the project is. With underground stations, extensive grade seperations, and probable expansion with similar qualities, I doubt low floor LRT is the most cost effective option in the long term. Whether that doubt turns out to be true or not remains to be seen, but we should not make decisions that cloud future decisions with todays preferences.

[polishavenger]

Originally Posted by fusili

The two things I think we must absolutely do (as you alluded to above) is design Eau Claire for a possible extenstion (as you mentioned), but also to plan a spur just south of Inglewood station, for any eventual spur line to 17th Avenue SE. What does a sput cost really? If we never even use it, the cost of the short spur is so minimal, but if we do use it, the cost savings and reduction of construction interruption on the future SE LRT would be astronomical.

I only agree with this if youu envision inglewood as the terminus point of a 17th ave line that just feeds into the SE line, but does not interline with it.