Calgary Public Transit II

[MalcolmTucker]

I could see a Nose Creek option coming in on the CPR ROW, just not joining the NELRT. Eventually there will be a need for way more service up Symons Valley, so the two can coexist. I don't think it is an either or. Intercepting all bus passengers north of beddington buys centre st a few more years of capacity.

It is workable, and as an alternative for if the boom in oil sands revenue ends could be viable. Otherwise there will be more than enough money, as long as we don't expect construction to start in the next 5 years.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Parking rates are only one part of the equation... the role of attracting talent, working with other companies and so much infrastructure already existing in downtown's real estate and transportation sectors are all major competitive advantages over suburban sites and are likely going to be increasingly so for the forseeable future.

It is more complicated than that and depends on the nature of a business.

The larger a company the greater the proportion of it's interactions that are inherently internal or non-local and the parts of the company that have the greatest external interactions tend to be discrete business units (i.e. sales) that may not need to be onsite with the internal facing parts of the company.

It is likely therefore that larger companies are more inclined to make the move than smaller ones.

The company I work for now is leaving the core almost immediately. There are plastic tubs stacked about fifty high. If you ask us where most of our interactions are the answers would be Edmonton and random locations in Southern Alberta. My former employer on the other hand most of our interactions were within several blocks downtown, at one point we had a madcap scheme to all move into EAP together.

[Halofire]

Despite my disagreement with putting the CTrain at grade on centre street, I think Nose Creek is worse.

My main gripe is really around bottlenecking centre street bridge and up to 16th ave. the right-of-way isn't wide enough to handle all of the needs on its own. Surfacing north of 20th, not a big issue.

He's an option that was never presented, and maybe they're a reason for that, but if tunnelling is unreasonable, and bridging over Prince's Island is sacrilegious... would it work?


The choice between 3rd or 4th st SW and 3rd ave(at-grade) or 4th ave(underground) downtown is a debate for later.

[Fuzz]

PW, if you had told me 15 years ago we would build the west LRT with a large elevated segment, elevated station, and an underground station, I wouldn't have believed it either. What we are looking at for Centre street isn't all that different and will serve many more people.

You asked what the difference was between this plan and all the past ones, and why they are bothering... The past plans were very rough ideas. It seams in order to apply for any federal funding they need more than that(unless we are Toronto...) so that is what they are doing.

[J-D]

Originally Posted by Halofire

Despite my disagreement with putting the CTrain at grade on centre street, I think Nose Creek is worse.

My main gripe is really around bottlenecking centre street bridge and up to 16th ave. the right-of-way isn't wide enough to handle all of the needs on its own. Surfacing north of 20th, not a big issue.

He's an option that was never presented, and maybe they're a reason for that, but if tunnelling is unreasonable, and bridging over Prince's Island is sacrilegious... would it work?


The choice between 3rd or 4th st SW and 3rd ave(at-grade) or 4th ave(underground) downtown is a debate for later.

At grade downtown and underground later?

I think elevated is more likely.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

PW, if you had told me 15 years ago we would build the west LRT with a large elevated segment, elevated station, and an underground station, I wouldn't have believed it either. What we are looking at for Centre street isn't all that different and will serve many more people.

You asked what the difference was between this plan and all the past ones, and why they are bothering... The past plans were very rough ideas. It seams in order to apply for any federal funding they need more than that(unless we are Toronto...) so that is what they are doing.

That little bit of difference you perceive accounts for billions of dollars.

But that isn't actually what I asked, I asked why are the plans of this mayor and council different from those who came before and those still to come.

If the previous corridor alignment could be discarded in it's entirety because it pleased the mayor and council, what is to stop a future mayor and council for doing the same and what therefore makes these plans any more concrete when nobody is suggesting any of this is actionable in the foreseeable future.

You guys act as thought the pet projects of the current mayor and council are the ten commandments.

[Fuzz]

Your right, they should just do their jobs and stop planning for the future and attempting to improve anything. It will all work out if no one attempts anything

[Policy Wonk]

By all means plan for the future, just plan for the real future. The west is headed into an era of severe austerity. Alberta is headed for a majority government of right-wing extremists and the whole world is in a commodities bubble that includes oil and gas.

Alternatively, campaign for US Statehood. I'm not being sarcastic.

This is not new thinking, my parents bought a house in the 70's based on assurances that the Centre Street LRT was imminent. I think someone here posted a map depicting a Centre Street alignment even older than that.

[lineman]

Originally Posted by Halofire

Despite my disagreement with putting the CTrain at grade on centre street, I think Nose Creek is worse.

My main gripe is really around bottlenecking centre street bridge and up to 16th ave. the right-of-way isn't wide enough to handle all of the needs on its own. Surfacing north of 20th, not a big issue.

He's an option that was never presented, and maybe they're a reason for that, but if tunnelling is unreasonable, and bridging over Prince's Island is sacrilegious... would it work?


The choice between 3rd or 4th st SW and 3rd ave(at-grade) or 4th ave(underground) downtown is a debate for later.

The turning radii involved would mean tearing down the Shell building and that mall in Chinatown. Speaking of Chinatown, remember that stink raised over a bike lane? Imagine how they'd feel about an LRT line.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

By all means plan for the future, just plan for the real future. The west is headed into an era of severe austerity. Alberta is headed for a majority government of right-wing extremists and the whole world is in a commodities bubble that includes oil and gas.

Alternatively, campaign for US Statehood. I'm not being sarcastic.

This is not new thinking, my parents bought a house in the 70's based on assurances that the Centre Street LRT was imminent. I think someone here posted a map depicting a Centre Street alignment even older than that.

And the ring road was promised for over 50 years, its well under way. Is this all that much different?

US statehood? I haven't heard that one in years...

[Policy Wonk]

The only thing those have in common is provincial money.

Until such time as "Blatchford" ascends to it's rightful place as the most thoroughly discredited development proposal in Alberta that title will rightfully belong to the Centre Street Subway. There is no new ground to be broken on this issue, the horse is bonemeal. Nothing has been said in the last four years that wasn't said in the previous forty.

We can't get the 8th Ave Subway built, which I have never heard a soul argue wasn't 100% essential fifteen years ago. And yet this is to be considered a serious proposal?

And yes, US Statehood.

Look at the federal dollars that pour into all sorts of transit projects in the US, if Calgary wants a $13 billion dollar Big Dig, that is probably the only way.

[fusili]

I am still confused at why we are discussing a false dichotomy of a centre street subway vs nose creek and why we think at-grade operation is completely infeasible. We are talking about a road that carries 25K vehicles a day (south of 16th). Taking two lanes of this for an LRT that can carry that amount of passengers in a single hour isn't that ridiculous.

[Chadillaccc]

That seems like an extremely short-sighted view...

[lineman]

I'm sure a good chunk of that 25k is during the morning and afternoon rush. During to afternoon rush, traffic is backed up at 16th, then quickly thins out north of that. Taking out two lanes effectively takes out 2/3 lanes during reversal times. Prioritizing an at grade system prevents turn movements (where a good chunk happen on 12th and 16th) causing more back ups. Sorry, but you have to look beyond just a simple traffic count.

I don't have data on this. This is from personal experience and living in the area.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by lineman

I'm sure a good chunk of that 25k is during the morning and afternoon rush. During to afternoon rush, traffic is backed up at 16th, then quickly thins out north of that. Taking out two lanes effectively takes out 2/3 lanes during reversal times. Prioritizing an at grade system prevents turn movements (where a good chunk happen on 12th and 16th) causing more back ups. Sorry, but you have to look beyond just a simple traffic count.

I don't have data on this. This is from personal experience and living in the area.

I agree. I have no idea how going from 3 lanes to 1 in rush hour isn't going to cause massive issues for straight through traffic, let alone left turns.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

What? Are we actually talking about LRT on the street up Centre, as if it is a good thing? Having it above ground would be a disastrous mistake for the future of this city, unless it was completely elevated of course.

IMO at grade would be better than elevated. That said >50% of the capacity of Centre St is currently used by buses, why is it so horrible or unfeasible to have at grade LRT utilize 50% of the ROW? We're not talking turning Centre into 36th St this will be an in-street implementation not the gravel ROW as is in place on 36th.

Originally Posted by fusili

I am still confused at why we are discussing a false dichotomy of a centre street subway vs nose creek and why we think at-grade operation is completely infeasible. We are talking about a road that carries 25K vehicles a day (south of 16th). Taking two lanes of this for an LRT that can carry that amount of passengers in a single hour isn't that ridiculous.

Agreed, it carries 25k vehicles and >30k transit users. Why are we not prioritizing the greater user base again?

Originally Posted by lineman

I'm sure a good chunk of that 25k is during the morning and afternoon rush. During to afternoon rush, traffic is backed up at 16th, then quickly thins out north of that. Taking out two lanes effectively takes out 2/3 lanes during reversal times. Prioritizing an at grade system prevents turn movements (where a good chunk happen on 12th and 16th) causing more back ups. Sorry, but you have to look beyond just a simple traffic count.

I don't have data on this. This is from personal experience and living in the area.

I've driven that stretch a few times in the last while (during rush hour, and also live in the area) and only once or twice was I stuck behind a car turning, and normally I've made those turns without much issue at all.

Are the people turning at 16th the people that live in the area? Are they the people that are stopping and spending their money in that area? Are they the residents of the area? I would bet that 95+% of the people making that turn continue past at very minimum Crowchild if not further. IMO those are not the people that we need to build for, we should be building for the people that live and spend their time in that area.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Halofire

Absolutely it could be built and operationally cost effective, but from a capital expense how many years would it take to recover the costs to convert? Will it serve the communities it goes through equally, or will it benefit those north of Beddington trail at the expense of those south of it. Essentially, the burden of implementation is on those to the south of it, while the benefit is primarily for those to the north.

Another possibility is to divert BRT traffic serving north of beddington trail to edmonton trail, and have 2 transit right of ways. I just feel there are so many more options & possibilities with buses and the agility to adjust to demand by area than an at-grade LRT that is so... permanent and inflexible.

True, it may be required to provide an alternate ROW for the north of Beddington user base than for those south of it, and they may be different technologies at certain points too.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Halofire

Despite my disagreement with putting the CTrain at grade on centre street, I think Nose Creek is worse.

My main gripe is really around bottlenecking centre street bridge and up to 16th ave. the right-of-way isn't wide enough to handle all of the needs on its own. Surfacing north of 20th, not a big issue.

He's an option that was never presented, and maybe they're a reason for that, but if tunnelling is unreasonable, and bridging over Prince's Island is sacrilegious... would it work?


The choice between 3rd or 4th st SW and 3rd ave(at-grade) or 4th ave(underground) downtown is a debate for later.

Not too bad, might have to work on avoiding the emergency ops center in rotary park though.....

That said, I'm not sure the bottle-neck would be any worse than it is now, 70+% of the southbound rush hour traffic exits onto 3rd or 4th Aves south of that it's primarily buses turning on 6th. Is converting 2 lanes to transit (bus or rail) really going to make traffic that much worse? IMO removing transit from general traffic will result in reduced congestion for everyone, vehicles and transit.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

[Rant] You guys continue to put this theory forward that the decisions of this mayor and council are sacrosanct and will be binding on Calgary for all times.

By no means am I saying that.

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

And the Nose Creek LRT isn't some crazy idea, it was the standing policy while there are few projects that have been more decisively discredited than the Centre Street subway. This is fundamentally about the difference between reality and fantasy. A Nose Creek or at grade Centre Street LRT are actually doable. While this SELRT/NCLRT married by a giant tunnel is laughable. Look at the things we can't get done in this city and tell me with a straight face that this is actually plausible in any of our lifetimes. My disagreement with a Centre Street subway is that even if it were possible, the corridor would never intensify enough to have justified the investment. While the continued growth of the suburbs north of Beddington Trail that the NCLRT was intended to serve really isn't in doubt.

The Nose Creek alignment as been just as decisively discredited, by this government and the studies they've commissioned. That said the subway up Centre is not likely to happen either from a purely monetary perspective. Centre st needs dramatic improvement to it's transit capacity immediately and the areas north of Beddington will continue to need improved service going forward is one rail line the be all and end of of solutions, I doubt that, but it provides the best benefit for myself (yes it's a slightly selfish fight) and is what the current government is focused on. When someone provides a better solutions (Dedicated ROW BRT down nose creek for the commuters and Dedicated ROW BRT south of Beddignton on Centre for the rest of us maybe?) I'm interested in hear them.

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

Mayor and council can plan whatever they like, yet they are blissfully free of responsibility when they themselves acknowledge nothing is going to be built for decades. But political pet projects being what they are, with a changing of the guard comes overflowing recycling bins.

Absolutely they can just like every other government can with any of the other hair brained schemes they seem to come up with.

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

The LRT is a commuter rail system, that is why it is successful. You can build on this success or stare longingly at pictures of street cars.

Just because it's been that way doesn't mean it has to continue to be that way, if we want to continue our urban transformation we need to start focusing on serving the people that use the system in the greatest percentage and focus in the positive changes that an urban transit system can have outside of removing cars from a road that is continually expanding.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

That seems like an extremely short-sighted view...

Because we need to run a subway every time we encounter a road? 2nd Avenue in New York needs a subway. Geary Boulevard in San Francisco needs a subway. Centre Street in Calgary? Not so much.

Originally Posted by lineman

I'm sure a good chunk of that 25k is during the morning and afternoon rush. During to afternoon rush, traffic is backed up at 16th, then quickly thins out north of that. Taking out two lanes effectively takes out 2/3 lanes during reversal times. Prioritizing an at grade system prevents turn movements (where a good chunk happen on 12th and 16th) causing more back ups. Sorry, but you have to look beyond just a simple traffic count.

I don't have data on this. This is from personal experience and living in the area.

I imagine so too. Building a right-of-way that can handle 25K passengers per hour would really help with that, wouldn't you think?
Agreed about turn movements at 16th, so why don't we build a short underpass under 16th (like how the NW LRT does at 16th avenue between Lion's Park and Banff Trail), and perhaps put a station there? That would maintain turn movement capacity, while reducing the amount of underground operations.

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I agree. I have no idea how going from 3 lanes to 1 in rush hour isn't going to cause massive issues for straight through traffic, let alone left turns.

Like above, most left turns are at 16th avenue. That can be managed with an underground (or elevated) portion for that one intersection. The good thing with Centre street is that it has two parallel routes that can take on extra capacity within a few blocks (4th and Edmonton Trail).