Calgary Public Transit II

[speedog]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Since they're back to the drawing board on the Crowchild corridor, something I think they should consider is the possibility of the LRT along the route between University Drive and Bow Trail.

Reason being that if the crosstown Bowness/COP-17th SE route ever evolves into become an LRT, it may not be a bad idea having the LRT ride along 16th ave from Montgomery to the Foothills Hopsital, where it'll then dip south on University Drive to Crowchild Trail, and then connect with the WLRT line before Sunalta station.

We'll all be pushing up daisies before anything like this will ever come to pass.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

This is the site for the new bus storage/maintenance/refuelling facility.

And future LRT storage?

[frinkprof]

^No.

There will be another LRV storage facility in the vicinity of 212th Avenue SW when the south line gets extended and also one along the SE line.

[Spring2008]

Late night trains?

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Late+night+trains+pondered+transit+numbers+grow/9428081/story.html

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Is enhanced transit to the airport really a priority? I find the 300 works well, and all BRTs and LRTs hit downtown where it originates. Even Toronto is just working on getting something better than bus service and they're more than double our population.

It certainly isn't a priority for Calgary Transit or the Airport Authority but it is a popular priority, especially among low information voters. For a variety of reasons, none of which are particularly conducive to ridership or service provision but many of which are valid, airport links are highly valued by the population at large.

That tension between the two institutions and voters is something that I imagine will grow over time. I see that eventually leading to political pressure for enhanced transit to the airport.

[technomad]

So all the arguments against LRT to the airport, long travel time, complication for visitors, expense of the line, etc, are exactly the reasons why HSR is the better way to connect the airport to the transit network.

Nullify the expense part, intent is to build a suburban HSR station anyways, and at the terminal would only be a few km east of its current assumed location.

Travel time and confusion are nullified by the HSR route being direct to downtown. Fast and simple. If an elevated ROW were used for that portion, it would allow for automated skytrain type cars to be used, enabling trains every couple of minutes.

My base argument comes down to a similar one for the HSR project in the first place, taking flights from YYC-YEG off the runways. How many cabs run from the airport into downtown? And how many could be taken out of traffic if a fast convenient alternative was available?

If you can quickly walk from the terminal to a station, wait no more than 5 minutes to get on a train that takes you directly to a central transit station downtown, where you can access any number of hotel/business destinations
via +15, or quickly transfer to any LRT line, I'm betting it would get a decent amount of use.

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

+1 exactly my point.



+1. Plus if you're traveling for business I'm betting your time is worth something - my employer certainly wouldn't want me burning 30-60 mins extra on travel just to save 40 bucks. Heck I was in YXE for work yesterday and the cab from the airport is like $17 - I would never take transit even for leisure trips for those kinds of prices.



I'll take your word for it on the travel times (and I'll keep it in mind if work ever sends me out to YVR, I've wanted to try it out since it opened). However I doubt a YYC line would ever be as quick and direct. Plus I don't see the YYCAA opening its wallet anytime soon - hell they hardly support the existing transit service as it is.

[technomad]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

It certainly isn't a priority for Calgary Transit or the Airport Authority but it is a popular priority, especially among low information voters. For a variety of reasons, none of which are particularly conducive to ridership or service provision but many of which are valid, airport links are highly valued by the population at large.

That tension between the two institutions and voters is something that I imagine will grow over time. I see that eventually leading to political pressure for enhanced transit to the airport.

Also why I like a HSR station instead. It takes the priority pressure off of Calgary transit.

I would definitely prefer to see NC/SE LRT happen first, and even a western crescent line if it can piggyback onto a flood mitigation tunnel, but there's also no reason these couldn't happen in parallel with HSR development.

All these projects still largely come down to provincial funding. Hopefully once the ring roads are complete, some more cash can be focused on transit and rail projects.

[Fuzz]

Basically you are advocating a SEPARATE direct transit link between downtown and the Airport that just happens to be on the same track that connects to HSR, because given your suggested headways, there is no way those trains will run the full route to Edmonton. Maybe once every few ours one goes all the way through. So do you use the same type of train? Its obviously not going to reach high speeds on that short stretch. If you use the same train, that sounds expensive and wasteful. If you don't, then what is the point having it instead of LRT or perhaps something else?

I''m not saying its a bad idea to have a fast direct connection from the airport to downtown, just that making the airport with its crappy access, expensive parking etc some sort of transit hub doesn't sound all that optimal given that there will be very little overlap of airport passengers and rail passengers leaving or entering the city.

[frinkprof]

Late-night trains pondered as transit numbers grow


By Tamara Gignac, Calgary Herald January 24, 2014


Calgary Transit may run later into the night as ridership continues to soar.

More than 107 million customers crammed into buses and trains last year — a record for the city’s transportation network and an increase of five per cent over 2012.

Transit officials suggest a few reasons for the spike. Council bolstered service hours by 2.5 per cent in 2013, adding a new bus route in southeast Calgary and making changes to existing routes.

A growing number of jobs in the city also translated into additional passengers, as did an extension of the Blue Line to the city’s northeast.

And the city saw a healthy uptick in ridership — 11 per cent — from the $1.4 billion west LRT, which transports commuters from as far away as 69th St. SW.

[...]

Late-night transit service is being considered. “We’re going to do some studies to see what kind of market there is. Should ridership continue to increase, that provides us with funding to look at it on a priority basis,” Morgan said.

The issue is whether it’s the right place to spend money. “Are there other acute areas where we have overloads or ridership gains? We’ll look at all the options to see what the biggest bang is for our buck.”

[...]

Calgary Transit plans to hire additional peace officers to improve security and keep a better eye on drunk and rowdy passengers this year.

[...]

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Late+night+trains+pondered+transit+numbers+grow/9428081/story.html

[technomad]

It isn't necessarily about a huge demand of rail/air travelers so much as it is about making the transfer not only possible, but easy. Simplicity and speed are key to success.

If a suburban station is to be built, it still makes more sense to tie it into existing travel oriented infrastructure (airport trail linking deerfoot and stoney, nearby hotels, restaurants, parking, etc) than putting a station in nose creek where there is... well, a creek.

As for the connection itself, yes, 1 track for 2 train types between YYC and downtown on a dedicated ROW.

One shinkasen type train (up to 400m) that would make the complete trip to Edmonton once an hour, and another shorter train to just run from the airport to downtown and back, automated so it can be run as often as possible without increasing operational (aka driver) costs.

YYC terminal to downtown via airport trail and nose creek is about 18 km. An LRT type vehicle with top speed of 80 km/h could do that non-stop in about 15 mins.

A better vehicle, a sort of mini-shinkasen train capable of at least 200 km/h along a dedicated HSR ROW could do that in as little as 6 minutes given the same acceleration rates as the c-train.

6 minutes from downtown to the airport, even in rush hour....

If that isn't a compelling argument to link the systems, I don't know what is.

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Basically you are advocating a SEPARATE direct transit link between downtown and the Airport that just happens to be on the same track that connects to HSR, because given your suggested headways, there is no way those trains will run the full route to Edmonton. Maybe once every few ours one goes all the way through. So do you use the same type of train? Its obviously not going to reach high speeds on that short stretch. If you use the same train, that sounds expensive and wasteful. If you don't, then what is the point having it instead of LRT or perhaps something else?

I''m not saying its a bad idea to have a fast direct connection from the airport to downtown, just that making the airport with its crappy access, expensive parking etc some sort of transit hub doesn't sound all that optimal given that there will be very little overlap of airport passengers and rail passengers leaving or entering the city.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by technomad

It isn't necessarily about a huge demand of rail/air travelers so much as it is about making the transfer not only possible, but easy. Simplicity and speed are key to success.

If a suburban station is to be built, it still makes more sense to tie it into existing travel oriented infrastructure (airport trail linking deerfoot and stoney, nearby hotels, restaurants, parking, etc) than putting a station in nose creek where there is... well, a creek.

As for the connection itself, yes, 1 track for 2 train types between YYC and downtown on a dedicated ROW.

One shinkasen type train (up to 400m) that would make the complete trip to Edmonton once an hour, and another shorter train to just run from the airport to downtown and back, automated so it can be run as often as possible without increasing operational (aka driver) costs.

YYC terminal to downtown via airport trail and nose creek is about 18 km. An LRT type vehicle with top speed of 80 km/h could do that non-stop in about 15 mins.

A better vehicle, a sort of mini-shinkasen train capable of at least 200 km/h along a dedicated HSR ROW could do that in as little as 6 minutes given the same acceleration rates as the c-train.

6 minutes from downtown to the airport, even in rush hour....

If that isn't a compelling argument to link the systems, I don't know what is.

I want to address one issue with this, automated trains on a shared track with any level crossings (any alignment down nose creek will have at least one level ped crossing + other smaller vehicle crossings), induces too many variables to safety operate at 80km/h let alone 200km/h, the level of control is not there to allow it safely. Any automated solution either needs 100% isolation from other factors (typically human) or your safety systems become overbearing reducing much of the advantage of automation (i.e. upfront capital outweighs the operational cost reductions).

Not to mention the liability on a non-dedicated/uncontrolled ROW for an automated train traveling at 200km/h would be astronomical.

Option 1 - All trains on the ROW are automated, including the HSR. This means that there cannot be any level crossings anywhere along the line (Calgary to Edmonton), causing this option to be cost prohibitive.

Option 2 - Automated trains/uncontrolled/partially uncontrolled ROW - Trains are limited to a speed at which injury is non-fatal (20-30 km/h), causing this option to remove the utility of any train

Option 3 - Manual HSR trains/automated Airport shuttle trains - require dedicated ROW, no level crossings from Airport to DT. All trains within this section must be under automated central control HSR included. Again cost for this dedicated ROW through some of the densest parts of Calgary is going to cost prohibitive.

Keep in mind the current plan for HSR uses the existing rail ROW & track through the Nose Creek corridor and into DT adding an automated train to that would require the move to a dedicated track (both capacity & safety), including a new bridge over the Bow River (keep in mind new bridges must be clear span due to environmental regulations).

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Keep in mind the current plan for HSR uses the existing rail ROW & track through the Nose Creek corridor and into DT adding an automated train to that would require the move to a dedicated track (both capacity & safety), including a new bridge over the Bow River (keep in mind new bridges must be clear span due to environmental regulations).

Current plans for downtown access would likely change considerably with negotiation from CP, since I don't really think HSR is compatible with mainline freight rail, even with updated FRA standards and corridor expansion. Access into downtown Calgary will likely be one of the most expensive parts of the system.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Current plans for downtown access would likely change considerably with negotiation from CP, since I don't really think HSR is compatible with mainline freight rail, even with updated FRA standards and corridor expansion. Access into downtown Calgary will likely be one of the most expensive parts of the system.

I've always wondered if that was actually going to happen, could push the HSR project from expensive but viable (albeit only for government), to expensive and nonviable (even for government).

And the Sun had a field day on a $25M ped bridge....wonder what they'll have to say about a HSR project with a bridge an order of magnitude more difficult to engineer.

[Chadillaccc]

Suffice to say, I am excited for these beasts to begin arriving in 18 months! (new render)



http://www.canadianmetalworking.com/dail...-calgary-with-60-lrt-vehicles-99452.html

[technomad]

Option 1.

For HSR to be truly viable IMO, it has to be able to do DT-DT in 1 hour or less.

That means a shinkansen type system, or maglev, both of which require completely grade separated ROW.

So yes, this would definitely need a fully grade separated, dedicated ROW within the city, terminating at a larger sunalta type elevated station behind Calgary tower.

An elevated track along nose creek into downtown would be the simplest way to go, but running it at grade between deerfoot like lrt on crowchild could provide a bonus pretext for fixing up some of those interchanges...

Not sure why extending the spec of no level crossings has to be cost prohibitive for the whole run, it's not like an overpass for every country road is required.

This is also why I like taking the HSR line east on Airport trail and north from there, makes it easier to run a greenfield route that easily bypasses the malzak/airdrie cluster.

I really do think we're closer to seeing a contiguous developed north right up to airdrie than we think, but similar grow wouldn't be expected east of the city.

This could even be designed into the eventual extension of stoney east to north of airdire.

If complete grade separation is required for a truly high speed line, it seems like the ROWs should harmonize well with freeway spec highways.

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

Option 1 - All trains on the ROW are automated, including the HSR. This means that there cannot be any level crossings anywhere along the line (Calgary to Edmonton), causing this option to be cost prohibitive.

Keep in mind the current plan for HSR uses the existing rail ROW & track through the Nose Creek corridor and into DT adding an automated train to that would require the move to a dedicated track (both capacity & safety), including a new bridge over the Bow River (keep in mind new bridges must be clear span due to environmental regulations).

Agreed, better to leave the existing/expanded rail lines to freight and commuter service up to malzac and airdrie, and let HSR run at speed unimpeded.

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Current plans for downtown access would likely change considerably with negotiation from CP, since I don't really think HSR is compatible with mainline freight rail, even with updated FRA standards and corridor expansion. Access into downtown Calgary will likely be one of the most expensive parts of the system.

[Boris2k7]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Suffice to say, I am excited for these beasts to begin arriving in 18 months! (new render)


<snip>

Damn, son!

[DizzyEdge]

Re: Airport transit, pic I snapped last night:

[DizzyEdge]

Has anyone at CT considered (or is it even possible) to run trains from one station to multiple destinations? I was just in denver and there you can pretty much do the equivalent of if there as an A Train from 69th street to Westwinds, a B train to Crowfoot, a C train to whatever the south line terminus is, etc. Now the impression I get is in other cities there are more destinations people are heading to other than just going to and from downtown, so that might be why there's no option like that here. But the discussion about one of the con's of a West Village stadium park being that you only have access to one line made me wonder if on game day you could have a train from Sunalta to Crowfoot, or Sunalta to the end of the south line.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Has anyone at CT considered (or is it even possible) to run trains from one station to multiple destinations? I was just in denver and there you can pretty much do the equivalent of if there as an A Train from 69th street to Westwinds, a B train to Crowfoot, a C train to whatever the south line terminus is, etc. Now the impression I get is in other cities there are more destinations people are heading to other than just going to and from downtown, so that might be why there's no option like that here. But the discussion about one of the con's of a West Village stadium park being that you only have access to one line made me wonder if on game day you could have a train from Sunalta to Crowfoot, or Sunalta to the end of the south line.

Without the driver getting out and reversing the train and all the hassle that this entails (i.e. radically reducing capacity on 7th Ave as a train sits there), trains can enter the downtown from the NE or SC and can exit to the W or NW (and vice-versa, of course). So in addition to the current NE-W and S-NW routings, it is possible to do NE-NW and S-W. (In fact, I know that there has historically been an occasional NE-NW train; not sure if they still exist).

There is a tradeoff with this; to start with, everything you gain in serving multiple corridors you must give up in frequency. The choice is either to have a SC-NW train running every 10 minutes, or a SC-NW train every 20 minutes and a SC-W train every 20 minutes; this doesn't really help anybody all that much - either you view it as having much worse service, or you view it as having a 50% chance of transferring rather than either always or never transferring. The benefit is particularly small in our current system, where transfers are relatively painless especially during the peaks - you just stand there a couple of minutes until the other train comes.

There are other costs; to start with, there's the complexity issue, both from a customer understanding point of view as well as an operations point of view. There's also a balancing aspect -- the SC is busier than the NE, and the NW is busier than the W, so pairing them this way best matches the demand. There is also the potential for crosstown trips -- I used to take the Circle Route from my ancestral home in the NE to the University, which was faster and easier than transferring downtown between trains. So it makes sense to provide the direct service to the U of C from the south, where there is no direct alternative.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ With only one transfer point, the logical runs you would add wouldn't speed up anyone's trip. They would only add confusion. Waiting at the start of your trip versus waiting in the middle is a mugs game.