Calgary Public Transit II

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by monocle

Nice to see Calgary ranking highly. How does this make sense?



-76.8% drive to work... 1,071,515 * 76.8% = 822 924 people
-270 000 commuters on the C-Train... 270 000 + 822 924 = 1 092 924 ???

Obviously, not every human being in town works, so the numbers are skewed, but surely, some of those driving to work also use Transit.

And, is the C-Train "at it's limit"? I thought adding 4 cars increases capacity? The way it's stated in the article, it sounds like the C-Train is on it's last legs.

There is 270,000 passengers on the C-Train. But it's likely that each commuter is counted twice each day so realistically the number is closer to 135,000.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

I think the lost potential capacity for the NE line issue is more than enough reason in and of itself to throw out the Nose Creek route right now.

Interline, and the NE line will require an expensive upgrade in the future. Don't interline, and there's likely no need to ever upgrade.

Personally, I like the idea of a P3, where the contractor can design the whole thing, including pick the technology. The contractor would then operate the lint for 30 years. We just give some parameters, such as some general station locations. Do it for the whole line from MacKenzie Towne/South Hospital to Northpointe.

For a total new build a design build operate maintain and possibly finance is the way to go most definitely. To say whether P3 finance or traditional finance would be cheaper is impossible without a crystal ball but P3 for the rest of project delivery is much better in my view even without finance.

To all those against P3s, you might not know it but the WestLRT is a design build finance but with what would normally be long term payments covered by a big downpayment and the transfer of lots of developable land. If done traditionally the city would have needed all money up front and would have taken the risk on not making much back by selling land to developers. The city externalized that risk and gained cost certainty.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

For a total new build a design build operate maintain and possibly finance is the way to go most definitely. To say whether P3 finance or traditional finance would be cheaper is impossible without a crystal ball but P3 for the rest of project delivery is much better in my view even without finance.

To all those against P3s, you might not know it but the WestLRT is a design build finance but with what would normally be long term payments covered by a big downpayment and the transfer of lots of developable land. If done traditionally the city would have needed all money up front and would have taken the risk on not making much back by selling land to developers. The city externalized that risk and gained cost certainty.

Well as one of the resident P3 skeptics, that characterization is a little flawed. The design aspect of the West LRT was, beyond some engineering, essentially a public endeavour. The technology, the route, the station locations, and where and how it will be grade separated was all determined by the city. I think public control over those aspects is very important; costs may be inflated but it ensures that citizens get the infrastructure they want. An in kind payment of land instead of cash is also somewhat different from a real P3 financing arrangement. That said, I am still wary of the practice. Not necessarily in the case of the West LRT, where it may work out fine, but in general there is a lot of room in P3s for corruption. The way they are structured it is far too easy for them to allow public wealth to be transferred to private institutions.

I tend to think the general idea behind P3s is pretty cyclical. It is nothing new, similar arrangements built transportation systems a century ago. There was a reason we moved away from it, namely scandals and poor service. We might have managed to forget it for a while but we will have to see how long that lasts.

[fusili]

Ok, here is a quick idea to bounce off everyone here. The city of Calgary seems to think it costs tens of millions of dollars to build bus only lanes, and a comparable amount for separated bike lanes. But why can't we just put in heavy duty plastic jersey barriers, paint some markings and call it a day? They are cheap, easy to replace and probably don't damage vehicles much when they are hit. Check the streetview image below for how they do it in Madrid. I don't see why we can't implement an entire network of Bus-only lanes in Calgary for pennies to the dollar for what Calgary transit thinks we need.

Thoughts

Bus lanes in Madrid

[monocle]

Originally Posted by fusili

Thoughts

Bus lanes in Madrid

What would Road Maintenance be like in the winters? I like the idea, just wondering if this is similar to the reason I heard that we don't have raised Highway Lane Markers. i.e. Graters peel them off.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by monocle

What would Road Maintenance be like in the winters? I like the idea, just wondering if this is similar to the reason I heard that we don't have raised Highway Lane Markers. i.e. Graters peel them off.

Grater:


Grader:


While you might be able to get them of with a grater, you are probably thinking grader.

[monocle]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Grater:


Grader:

[fusili]

Originally Posted by monocle

What would Road Maintenance be like in the winters? I like the idea, just wondering if this is similar to the reason I heard that we don't have raised Highway Lane Markers. i.e. Graters peel them off.

Well, don't plow into the barrier. That seems simple to me.

[Radley77]

I've been keeping track of the bike lane (with concrete barriers and width is maybe 1.8ish metres) along Riverfront Avenue for winter clearing and they have done an adequate job of clearing snow out of the bike lane. It also appears that they have a bike lane street sweeper as well. I haven't seen it in operation, but the city has figured out a way to get rid of the gravel that had accumulated during the winter.

I don't think it would be an issue to have a separate bus lane with respect to snow removal or maintenance.

I would love to hear what kind of equipment was used to clean the cycling lanes from snow in the winter and gravel in the spring.

[tmjr]

Originally Posted by fusili

Ok, here is a quick idea to bounce off everyone here. The city of Calgary seems to think it costs tens of millions of dollars to build bus only lanes, and a comparable amount for separated bike lanes. But why can't we just put in heavy duty plastic jersey barriers, paint some markings and call it a day?

Do the bus-only lanes need to be physically separated from automobile traffic? Wouldn't it be enough to designate and sign the lanes as HOV with the police ticketing anyone violating the rules? Is that just naive or am I missing something else here?

[Radley77]

I was thinking the other day that both 4th and 5th Avenue downtown really could use a HOV or carpool lane (especially during rush hour). Too much congestion and single occupant vehichles. People that are car pooling should have priority over vehichles with only one occupant.

[Radley77]

I had read this report regarding traffic signal prioritization. In this case, the payout time I had calculated was only 4 months.

http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/TSP_AVTS_Summary_Report.pdf


weekday passengers 21,000
weekend passenger estimate 7,000
total weekly passenger 119,000
weeks in a year 52.2
total passengers per year 6,209,117
before signal delay round trip (seconds) 742
after signal delay round trip (seconds) 621
difference round trip (seconds) 121
trip savings (assume 25% of round trip in seconds) 30.3
time savings annually (seconds) 187,825,801
time savings annually (hours) 52,174
actual costs $420,696
average hourly rate $25.65
annual savings $1,338,258.83
monthly savings $111,521.57
payout time (months) 3.77

It'd be interesting to know which transit routes have been traffic prioritized at this point and which are planned for the future. If citizens are looking for compelling reasons to use transit, this would be a nice feature to be aware of.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by tmjr

Do the bus-only lanes need to be physically separated from automobile traffic? Wouldn't it be enough to designate and sign the lanes as HOV with the police ticketing anyone violating the rules? Is that just naive or am I missing something else here?

Without physical separation, you get people cheating all the time and using the lane, either consciously or by accident. A physical barrier makes it very obvious and is more or less self enforcing. The whole point is to make the buses faster by removing traffic from the lane. Without the barrier, the exercise seems rather pointless, as traffic will impede the buses anyway. As well, the cost of enforcing the rules and using police time to do so is probably more expensive in the long run then using the barriers (if done inexpensively).

A good example is the 10th avenue bicycle lane. Not a single driver knows it is there, and absolutely no one respects the lane. Without the physical barrier, people completely ignore the rules.

[GTING]

Originally Posted by Radley77

...I would love to hear what kind of equipment was used to clean the cycling lanes from snow in the winter and gravel in the spring.

I have seen them on the north side of the Bow, plowing with old green Jeep CJ5's (or CJ3?). Those Jeeps are so narrow they would plow the bike path perfectly.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by GTING

I have seen them on the north side of the Bow, plowing with old green Jeep CJ5's (or CJ3?). Those Jeeps are so narrow they would plow the bike path perfectly.

No way! The Willy is such a versatile vehichle. I have used it from everything for hauling around slough pumps to climbing steep coulee hills and picking rocks. My dad said he has seen the City of Calgary's CJ's roaming around and I had been looking out for them. They really would be perfect for clearing a bike or bus lane.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by fusili

Without physical separation, you get people cheating all the time and using the lane, either consciously or by accident. A physical barrier makes it very obvious and is more or less self enforcing. The whole point is to make the buses faster by removing traffic from the lane. Without the barrier, the exercise seems rather pointless, as traffic will impede the buses anyway. As well, the cost of enforcing the rules and using police time to do so is probably more expensive in the long run then using the barriers (if done inexpensively).

However with physical separation, all your bus traffic must be express in order for the system (HOV lane) to work properly.

Example is 109 Street in Edmonton, get about 15 buses in a conga line and the first one is local with the rest as express. With a physical barriers, the Express busses are realy express as they must stop everytime local bus stops. Without a physical barrier the express busses can go around the local bus, at least in theory. In actual practice, sometimes the traffic actively refuses to let buss traffic into the middle lane.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Cage

However with physical separation, all your bus traffic must be express in order for the system (HOV lane) to work properly.

Example is 109 Street in Edmonton, get about 15 buses in a conga line and the first one is local with the rest as express. With a physical barriers, the Express busses are realy express as they must stop everytime local bus stops. Without a physical barrier the express busses can go around the local bus, at least in theory. In actual practice, sometimes the traffic actively refuses to let buss traffic into the middle lane.

You are exactly right. All the traffic on the ROW would be express (I would even go so far as to say that sharing a lane with HOV vehicles is ridiculous). The only other way to do it would be to have lay-bys for any non-express stops, thus moving the stopped buses out of the ROW.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by fusili

You are exactly right. All the traffic on the ROW would be express (I would even go so far as to say that sharing a lane with HOV vehicles is ridiculous). The only other way to do it would be to have lay-bys for any non-express stops, thus moving the stopped buses out of the ROW.

If the only vehichles in the ROW are express buses then perhaps one alternative could be implementing a HOV ticketing and traffice enforcement camera system instead of physical barriers. It'd probably collect enough fines to pay off the system installation and still achieve the desired outcome.

[bigcanuck]

Originally Posted by Radley77

I was thinking the other day that both 4th and 5th Avenue downtown really could use a HOV or carpool lane (especially during rush hour). Too much congestion and single occupant vehichles. People that are car pooling should have priority over vehichles with only one occupant.

The right lane is for buses & people turning right. The left lane(s) are for people turning left. That only leaves the 2 middle lanes. And how can you enforce people cutting through the middle lanes to make it to either the right or left lanes.

I don't think HOV is really possible on a downtown street.

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by bigcanuck

The right lane is for buses & people turning right. The left lane(s) are for people turning left. That only leaves the 2 middle lanes. And how can you enforce people cutting through the middle lanes to make it to either the right or left lanes.

I don't think HOV is really possible on a downtown street.

I'm not aware of the techology yet, but I wouldn't be suprised if within the next decade someone comes up with a HOV camera traffic enforcement device. I had friends building robots in university with video cameras that tracked objects based on shape and colour. When coupled with an infrared sensor, one could use a video camera to determine if there is multiple occupants in a vehichle and whether that vehichle has travelled for more than one consecutive block in the HOV lane. 'Hits' could be verified by a human and a ticket issued.

I'd be curious how effective the honour system is as a pilot project. In the winter the commute in and out of downtown can be particularly brutal. It'd be nice to have an incentive to optimize that, especially during peak traffic periods.