Calgary Public Transit II

[frinkprof]

Yeah the circle LRT line idea that gets trotted out a lot here is probably a case of transit fantasies getting a little too far detached from reality. Not exactly a bad thing, until it comes to actually making it happen.

Ridership aside, the monetary and political costs of buying up the hundreds, if not thousands, of properties needed to do it would be prohibitive by itself. It would have to cut through vast swaths of established communities and commercial areas. The alternative would be to bury or elevate it, which would be expensive as well.

We probably won't see a full circle LRT that follows anything close to the size of the 72/73 route. What we may see is a few spurs off the radial lines to serve some of the established major activity centers not currently served by LRT. MRU from the west and/or south line, airport from northeast and/or north central line, future/current deep south communities from south line (Providence, Bridlewood, etc.) and maybe West Campus/Foothills from northwest line.

A circle BRT is much more realistic and easily (read: much more cheaply) scalable than LRT. Also would have capacity that matches the ridership potential more closely.

As sim notes above, a high-capacity circle route is usually used to service a city's established central urban areas. For Calgary, this basically means the Centre City, or simply Beltline and the CBD. Not Westbrook, not Chinook, not Sunridge, etc. (i.e. current 72/73 route). This can be done with a loop streetcar route or two.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

It isn't that a circle route wouldn't be useful, or wouldn't be technically feasible. It is that the threshold for ridership to make LRT worthwhile is quite high and a cross town would have a hard time sustaining a ridership higher than any of the planned radial lines.

That speed is also a function of headway - the loop headway has to be really low to be useful as well.

Originally Posted by Riise

Another good point and something I have wrangled with when thinking about where a circle LRT line should go. If we go further out and place it in the ring road corridor we can achieve higher speeds but that would also increase the distance that needs to be traversed.

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Ridership aside, the monetary and political costs of buying up the hundreds, if not thousands, of properties needed to do it would be prohibitive by itself.A circle BRT is much more realistic and easily (read: much more cheaply) scalable than LRT. Also would have capacity that matches the ridership potential more closely.

A BRT is much preferable to LRT for a loop for many of the reasons above. Basically, any loop will have to be a BRT and not LRT, with some key areas that have dedicated rights of way, and the rest can just use queue jumps and the like to achieve the desired result. I would imagine that in several cases, such as 16th avenue north and maybe 52nd street east, the capital costs would consist of some paint and putting in roll curbs and not much else. Yeah you reduce a lane, but if you plan stops correctly and make transfers seemless, the loss of automobile capacity can be made up with the increased use of transit.

In terms of trip generators that aren't currently served by transit, you are looking primarily at Foothills Hospital, MRU, Rockyview and some of the SE (Foothills) industrial area, and not much else (airport maybe, but you really only need 15 minute service there- it needs to be reliable, but not necessarily frequent). If you can serve these locations, as well as use other BRTs to make easier transfers (such as from the South Line to the SE line to connect to the South Hospital, or from the NC line to the NW line to connect to the UofC and SAIT), you can have a pretty efficient system.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by Sir.Humphrey.Appleby

It isn't that a circle route wouldn't be useful, or wouldn't be technically feasible. It is that the threshold for ridership to make LRT worthwhile is quite high and a cross town would have a hard time sustaining a ridership higher than any of the planned radial lines. Even with aggressive investment in the system as a whole a cross town line ends up in the later half of the century - not something that is even worth worrying about.

That we would even think of replacing a bus that only runs 17 times during the wide peak (6 am - 9 am) before reverting back to half hour headways is a function of 'it looks good on a map, it is logical, so therefore it is worthwhile'. Well, if there was demand the bus would run a heck of a lot more times than 17 times during a wide rush hour. Works out to 1 3 car c-train an hour!

I like this quote from the blog 'Human Transit' that I think applies here, at least a little bit:


Now I know the route is circuitous and slow right now, and ridership would likely improve with a more limited stop service that doesn't meander too much, but at this point a BRT circle route is quite a leap of faith to use service hours for considering that as you make the route faster you start eliminating trip generators along its length. It would be a useful experiment to try of course, but I doubt the experiment would yield ridership to make the experiment permanent along the entire route except as a political vanity project.

For radial line to radial line commuters, the transfer to the circle route and back to the radial line while it creates a bit more capacity in the inner city, the loop line has to be really fast to be faster than going through downtown and transferring, especially on the time frame we are talking about which is when at least two subways will be done (maybe more subject to the study that is ongoing). That speed is also a function of headway - the loop headway has to be really low to be useful as well.

I could see portions of a circle LRT route being viable as the next major project after the six radial lines are completed and the NW-S is buried under 8th Ave. So some point around 2030. Connecting Chinook, Westbrook, and University stations on the South, West, and North West lines might be able to generate enough traffic, between the major destinations along the way and serving as a downtown bypass, to justify its existence. Studies would have to be worked on but what else are we going to work on after the currently planned routes are complete?

The route would go something like this:

Chinook Station on the South Line
Elbow Station @ Elbow and Glenmore
Rockview Hospital Station
Lakeview Station @ Crowchild and Glenmore
Mount Royal University Station

Then a choice between A or B routing

A
Richmond Road Station @ Richmond and 37th Street
Westbrook Station on the West Line
Spruce Cliff Station @ Spruce Drive and 37th Street
Foothills Hospital Station @ West Campus Boulevard and 16th Ave

B
Richmond Road Station @ Richmond and 29th Street
26th Street Station on the West Line
Foothills Hospital Station @ 29th Street

Then both would hit
McMahon Stadium Station @ west side of stadium
University Station on the NW Line

There are some other lines that might, depending on how studies play, be a higher priority but I hope we do not abandon rail construction as soon as we finish the six radial lines. If we move entirely to BRTs we might have a very hard time moving back or servicing redevelopment within the city's current built environment.

[sim]

Honest to god, a circle route (LRT) should just plain and simply leave everyone's mind right now. I'm going to use stronger language here and simply state that it has absolutely zero chance of working in Calgary- not now, and not in 20 years. As Sir Humphrey said, it may, just may, be something to look at in the latter part of this century, but it is completely irrelevant now.

I'm saying this as a person that subjectively would love to see a circle route get built. I love trains and mass transit. Heck, spend the 4 - 5 billion dollars this might cost. Would be cool... until looked at objectively.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by sim

Honest to god, a circle route (LRT) should just plain and simply leave everyone's mind right now. I'm going to use stronger language here and simply state that it has absolutely zero chance of working in Calgary- not now, and not in 20 years. As Sir Humphrey said, it may, just may, be something to look at in the latter part of this century, but it is completely irrelevant now.

I'm saying this as a person that subjectively would love to see a circle route get built. I love trains and mass transit. Heck, spend the 4 - 5 billion dollars this might cost. Would be cool... until looked at objectively.

Okay so post 2030, or how ever long it takes to complete the primary network, what do we do? We have the following system:

NW-S Line, with 8th Avenue Subway and five car stations.
W-NE Line, with four car stations.
N-SE Line, with Centre Street Subway and five car stations.

Do we then simply abandon rail construction? Sure we can cheap out and start building tons of BRT lines while letting the province use capital funds to develop an expensive Commuter Rail system that serves almost no one but is that the best we can do? I would much rather that the city continues to lobby for infrastructure funds than let bedroom towns take it all.

Are there really no LRT lines, other than the planned six radials, that would make sense in the next fifty years? Are you so sure that there no reason to even consider ideas or study some of them?

Personally I would like to see a study, it can even wait until the entire primary network is complete, that tells us what kind of ridership the 20 currently generates, what kind of growth could be expected if it were replaced by a direct limited stop service (like the one I outlined in the previous post), and what kind of growth could be expected do to expansion of the universities and hospitals and the development of TODs at Chinook and Westbrook. If the study says that buses will continue to be the most effective and useful way of servicing these major employment centres then buses are the way to go. Until then I have no problem with people brainstorming some ideas for the direction that Calgary Transit takes after the current plans have been realized.

[mersar]

Post the 6 radial legs (which I suspect will be later then 2030) theres always going to be minor extensions off at least some of the lines, but aside from that the next I'd expect to see if the only other LRT line thats ever been formally mentioned in a city report that isn't a radial line: the 162nd avenue line. Granted its incarnation thats been proposed is pretty much useless, extend it east and make it a spur off the SELRT and it would do well to connect the far SW and far SE together.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by mersar

Post the 6 radial legs (which I suspect will be later then 2030) theres always going to be minor extensions off at least some of the lines, but aside from that the next I'd expect to see if the only other LRT line thats ever been formally mentioned in a city report that isn't a radial line: the 162nd avenue line. Granted its incarnation thats been proposed is pretty much useless, extend it east and make it a spur off the SELRT and it would do well to connect the far SW and far SE together.

I really hope it is complete by 2030 and there is no reason it cannot be but yeah, the city might abandon expansion plans for another twenty years so who knows. We really should aim to have the SE LRT and 8th Ave Subway under construction by the end of the decade. If we can handle that much then we will not be falling too far behind.

[polishavenger]

I dont think anyone is arguing that the circle line is feasible now, or in twenty years. The point is that the city should start very long range planning so that development proceeds in a patter that will complement a circle route that would link all the radial arms in the very long term. Unless you start protecting ROW's now, it will become a very expensive exercise 50 years from now to start the process then. If in the future the development patterns change, or a fundamental technological change renders LRT obsolete, or the city stagnates, then the ROW's can be sold back, converted to parks, or any number of other things.

[suburb]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

The route would go something like this:

Chinook Station on the South Line
Elbow Station @ Elbow and Glenmore
Rockview Hospital Station
Lakeview Station @ Crowchild and Glenmore
Mount Royal University Station

Then a choice between A or B routing

A
Richmond Road Station @ Richmond and 37th Street
Westbrook Station on the West Line
Spruce Cliff Station @ Spruce Drive and 37th Street
Foothills Hospital Station @ West Campus Boulevard and 16th Ave

B
Richmond Road Station @ Richmond and 29th Street
26th Street Station on the West Line
Foothills Hospital Station @ 29th Street

Then both would hit
McMahon Stadium Station @ west side of stadium
University Station on the NW Line

I would not go to McMahon / University station for a couple reasons:
1. Over the next few years, the front of Foothills hospital will be on the West side. The new McCaig Tower already has some floors open, and when planning for future we have to look at plans for future campuses also. Also note that the two new Faculty of Medicine buildings are on the West side of the Foothills campus (HRIC and TRW buildings).
2. The Alberta Children's Hospital and West Campus in general is not serviced very well at all. The ACH is also a university hospital so there is a lot of education happening there also. MRU, FMC and ACH need to be connected.
3. University station is not set for redevelopment and there isn't really a proper loop there for connections (a somewhat minor point, but still valid).

SO - I would instead take it from the Foothills Hospital Campus, across the new bridge connecting it to West Campus (West Campus Blvd), Children's Hospital and then up to the new Brentwood TOD (perhaps via 37th) that will have increased density.

[suburb]

Originally Posted by fusili

In terms of trip generators that aren't currently served by transit, you are looking primarily at Foothills Hospital, MRU, Rockyview and some of the SE (Foothills) industrial area, and not much else (airport maybe, but you really only need 15 minute service there- it needs to be reliable, but not necessarily frequent).

I think we shouldn't just be looking at the nodes that are trip generators but where the people that generate those trips come from. For foothills industrial, it may be somewhat serviced but not well enough. The BRT line that is really required there is from the NE straight down. Ever try 52nd or getting out to Deerfoot North from there in rush hour?

A major problem with the NE LRT alignment is that it is too far West of a vast majority of where the people actually live. Only in the recent extensions has it jogged over. The NW leg is much better in this respect. It also has to do with how the quadrants were designed though - the commercial stuff in the NE being lined on the West side, whereas in the NW Crowfoot and the like are along the central spine. Think of the population within a 2km radius of Sunridge Mall relative to a similar radius had it been located, lets say where the coop is by the leisure centre. There is some density around the mall currently, but that would have at least been paralleled at the alternate - and there would have been residential 360 degrees while also working off the library, leisure centre, etc. Anyway, can't do it now, so back to the BRT topic ...

Where I'm going with this is that while first inkling would have a BRT from Marlborough going down to Foothills Industrial, I think it actually makes better sense for that BRT to run from Westwinds (or even the next stop further north when it is done) down the 52nd street spine where the people live, down to Foothills industrial. We can't change completely the NE design, but we can at least help deal with the current issues by planning better transit there.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by polishavenger

The point is that the city should start very long range planning so that development proceeds in a patter that will complement a circle route that would link all the radial arms in the very long term. Unless you start protecting ROW's now, it will become a very expensive exercise 50 years from now to start the process then. If in the future the development patterns change, or a fundamental technological change renders LRT obsolete, or the city stagnates, then the ROW's can be sold back, converted to parks, or any number of other things.

Excellent points. I would also add that is not just ROWs that need to be protected, but also transfer stations that need to be planned. We should have a rough idea where the ROWs will go, but a very clear idea of where the transfer stations will be. Even a 200m distance between stations will kill any potential for transfers.

Originally Posted by suburb

I think we shouldn't just be looking at the nodes that are trip generators but where the people that generate those trips come from. For foothills industrial, it may be somewhat serviced but not well enough. The BRT line that is really required there is from the NE straight down. Ever try 52nd or getting out to Deerfoot North from there in rush hour?

Where I'm going with this is that while first inkling would have a BRT from Marlborough going down to Foothills Industrial, I think it actually makes better sense for that BRT to run from Westwinds (or even the next stop further north when it is done) down the 52nd street spine where the people live, down to Foothills industrial.

Totally agreed. Just a note about your first point- due to the low-density nature of Calgary's residential development, and the nature of how transit trips are made- the density of the destination is much more important than the density of the origin (i.e. you can drive to the park-n-ride, but you can't drive from your destination station). So transit routes don't necessarily have to go to everyone's door (which I think is the problem with CT right now), but they should be well serviced by feeder routes, and most importantly, connect to each other. For instance, a BRT/Tram/Whathaveyou running down 16th to the Foothills hospital doesn't necessarily have to have a large residential catchment area around it's stations, but it does have to connect to lines that do (NCLRT, NWLRT and even the NELRT). That way the ridership will mostly come from the LRTs, which would be substantial. Same goes for a Westbrook-MRU-Rockyview-Heritage line- it won't really pick up that much in residential catchment areas, but it will draw anyone from the West or South lines who need to access MRU and Rockyview. And that is nothing to sneeze at.

About your 2nd point. I think a BRT on 52nd Street running from Saddleridge (which I think is better, because it is on 52nd essentially) all the way down to Glenmore and then to Shepared Road station on the SELRT line is a must. The good thing about using 52nd street, is that all the feeder buses for the NE line can simply be re-jigged to feed the 52nd street BRT stations as well as the NELRT with almost no loss of time or route changes.

[suburb]

Originally Posted by fusili

About your 2nd point. I think a BRT on 52nd Street running from Saddleridge (which I think is better, because it is on 52nd essentially) all the way down to Glenmore and then to Shepared Road station on the SELRT line is a must. The good thing about using 52nd street, is that all the feeder buses for the NE line can simply be re-jigged to feed the 52nd street BRT stations as well as the NELRT with almost no loss of time or route changes.

There ya' go - now we're talkin'.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by suburb

There ya' go - now we're talkin'.

Another good thing about a 52nd street BRT- there is enough ROW (right-of-way, sorry for the technical term) space along almost the whole corridor to be able to implement dedicated bus lanes without any property acquisition at all. The only area without much room is between 8th avenue and 17th avenue, which may require some property acquisition. Overpasses over 16th avenue and maybe McKngiht could be difficult and may warrant a new bridges. But other than that, it could be done very cost-effectively.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by fusili

Another good thing about a 52nd street BRT- there is enough ROW (right-of-way, sorry for the technical term) space along almost the whole corridor to be able to implement dedicated bus lanes without any property acquisition at all. The only area without much room is between 8th avenue and 17th avenue, which may require some property acquisition. Overpasses over 16th avenue and maybe McKngiht could be difficult and may warrant a new bridges. But other than that, it could be done very cost-effectively.

You would have to expropriate 10 or so houses between 16th and McKnight, mostly where cross streets intersect with 52nd.

I've long thought that 52nd would be a great corridor for a BRT. You could have one line from Saddletowne station all the way down to Mckenzie Towne, and one line that would use most of the same route, but would cut over at glenmore to the SE LRT line, and at 32nd ave to connect up to Whitehorn Station. I would consider extending the line west to harvest hills blvd, via the airport, through the airport trail tunnel of course.

[RicoLance21]

Just saw Global news tonight, and heard these transit improvements:

Express bus from McKnight/Westwinds to YYC
More cross-town travels
New routes in new neighbourhoods
Major increases in non-peak hour service
Route 3 to become a 24/7 service

[frinkprof]

^Are these approved, or just on the table and/or ideas at this stage?

[RicoLance21]

I'd say these are on the table. Likelihood to approve is comfortably high, IMO. The big highlight for me is Route 3, the lifeblood of my daily commute. I hope the frequency of Route 3 goes down to 3 or 4 minutes from the current 5 minutes in the peak afternoon hour, because they are absolutely packed. I am sure 1ajs will love the injection too.

Here's a link:
http://www.globaltoronto.com/City+Transp...e+from+Park+Ride+lots/3925864/story.html

[eggbert]

Airport bus requires road construction
Last Updated: Friday, December 3, 2010 | 6:28 PM MT
CBC News
An express bus line between Calgary International Airport and downtown Calgary will soon be in service after an infusion of cash from the city.An express bus line between Calgary International Airport and downtown Calgary will soon be in service after an infusion of cash from the city. (CBC)

A $2-million boost to Calgary Transit voted on by Calgary city council earlier this week will include an express bus line between downtown and the airport.

Travellers and airport workers without their own vehicles have to take $15 shuttle rides, expensive taxis or several connecting bus and LRT routes to access the airport.

Some airline employees are happy to hear they will no longer have to scrounge for rides out to the northeast reaches of the city.

"There's just not a very convenient way to get to and from [the airport], I find. It can be very frustrating, trying to find somebody to co-ordinate a pick-up and drop-off," said WestJet employee Amanda Gullage, who lives in Sunalta and has a friend drive her to and from work five days a week.

"I'd love to see [the bus route] happen.… I'd use it. Lots of people would."


Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2...route-transit.html?ref=rss#ixzz177Mn7SE3

[MalcolmTucker]

Is there still going to be a route 57 type that goes up the back roads to actually get to the WestJet hangars? If not the crew bus which if I am not mistaken will have a through route at all times is going to be even busier.

[frinkprof]

^Just went over that proposed Airport service pdf, and yes the route 57 will continue up the re-aligned McCall Way and still go to the airport services area (Westjet, et al.), but not to the terminal.