Calgary Public Transit II

[Wooster]

^ Supposedly by stampede, but there may be additional work to do on it following stampede.

[frinkprof]

^They'll be hard-pressed to open either side by Stampede.

[Bender77]

Noticed yesterday that the new signs on the 3rd st. platform were lit up. They just had the time flashing and that the real time tracking was coming. Sorry never got a chance to snap a pic.

[Ramsayfarian]

Just found this on Twitter.
• Video Link

[UofC.engineer]

I rode my bike to the NE yesterday and stopped to see the construction on the LRT line. At Martindale the station looks completely finished and there was a lot of workers laying rail. I talked to a construction worker and she said the city is planning for the station to be open by fall and not in 2012. Sorry folks, I didn't have my camera on me

[fusili]

Just a thought. What do people think of the idea to run a tunnel down 2nd street for the SE/NC line, and just eliminate the 8th Avenue subway?

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by fusili

Just a thought. What do people think of the idea to run a tunnel down 2nd street for the SE/NC line, and just eliminate the 8th Avenue subway?

I thought the very long term plan was to have both tunnelled? Grade separating the SE/NC line will not relieve the congestion on 7th Ave between the NW/S and NE/W line.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by fusili

Just a thought. What do people think of the idea to run a tunnel down 2nd street for the SE/NC line, and just eliminate the 8th Avenue subway?

Not much. You're going to have to separate the 201 from the 202 to increase headways and thus capacity.

As more T.O.D's spring up along the 201 line in both the south and North-West area of town there is going to be a higher demand for capacity.
As Cochrane and Okotoks continue to grow at a rate of 3 per year there is going to be a higher demand for capacity.
As the Regional Transit commission roll out more commuter buses over the next ten years that drop people off at the terminus there is going to be a higher demand for capacity.

Plus, seeing 5 car C-trains would be pretty ballin'. It would make me feel like I live in a big city.

[Dr.Zoidburg]

Originally Posted by jeffwhit

I think it has to be the Ring-a-Ding-Dong-Dandy card.

In that case how about the Malfunction at the Junction card?

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by fusili

Just a thought. What do people think of the idea to run a tunnel down 2nd street for the SE/NC line, and just eliminate the 8th Avenue subway?

As other posters have stated, interlined operations along 7 Ave do not provide enough capacity for any reasonable growth of the existing lines. The existing ridership is near the limit for three cars and the one third boost from four cars could be eaten up relatively quickly.

That said, I could see the need to split the NW-S and W-NE lines delayed. It might even be possible to put it off indefinitely, but it would require entirely new rapid transit lines to be built to relieve the congestion. I think a 14 St W and 16 Ave N line could do it. They could be in the form of BRT, LRT, or something else but they would need to be relatively rapid and high capacity. The SE LRT combined with the southern section of the 14 St W line would hopefully drain enough riders from the S LRT to allow it to handle growth. Likewise, the western section of the 16 Ave N line and the northern section of the 14 St W line would hopefully do the same for the NW LRT.

Even then there could still be significant capacity issues going into the core at transfer stations. The 14 St line could cause issues for the W LRT at Sunalta Station and the NW LRT at SAIT (though it would be difficult to turn either into proper transfer stations, both would theoretically be within a short <5 minute walk from 14 St line stations). The 16 Ave N line could cause issues for the NW LRT at SAIT and the N LRT at Centre/16 Ave. Hopefully the lines would allow a number of riders to bypass downtown completely (residents of the NE using the NE LRT, the 16 Ave line, then the NW LRT to get to the University and the like). Still, the six radial lines might require three independent, grade separated, ROWs through downtown just to allow future ridership growth irrespective of any other lines.

I would personally support the immediate implementation of "BRT" lines, akin to our current express bus "BRT" lines, on 14 St and 16 Ave to see what kind of effect they have. That said, I think the 8 Ave subway should be built before any really expensive infrastructure is built for either line. So I would delay the planned grade separated busway on the west side of 14 St S, with its expensive bridges for roads like 90 Ave, until the NW-S line has some real capacity to handle growth. It should be pretty affordable to just run busses from Country Hills Boulevard down 14 St-38 Ave-16 St-Glenmore Bridge Rd (over the damn)-14 St to Anderson Road, keep stops to between half a mile and mile apart, and see how well it does. Making various sections grade separated could really make it expensive.

[fusili]

I see the issue like this:

- We can build the Stephan Avenue Subway and increase headways on the NW/S and NE/W lines
or
- We can build the 2nd Street Subway and get two entirely new lines, plus increase out coverage of the downtown area, specifically the north end of downtown. Building the 8th avenue subway actually moves transit away from the job concentration in the downtown (which I believe is moving north due to projects such as centennial and jameson etc).

I really, really question the decision to build the 2nd Street Subway but only use it for the SELRT (assuming the NC LRT goes up Nose Creek). That is a very expensive piece of infrastructure that is not being optimally used.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by fusili

I see the issue like this:

- We can build the Stephan Avenue Subway and increase headways on the NW/S and NE/W lines
or
- We can build the 2nd Street Subway and get two entirely new lines, plus increase out coverage of the downtown area, specifically the north end of downtown. Building the 8th avenue subway actually moves transit away from the job concentration in the downtown (which I believe is moving north due to projects such as centennial and jameson etc).

I really, really question the decision to build the 2nd Street Subway but only use it for the SELRT (assuming the NC LRT goes up Nose Creek). That is a very expensive piece of infrastructure that is not being optimally used.

I really can't see the issue as an either/or proposition. I agree that it doesn't make sense to dead end a subway through downtown but the costs of the 8 Ave subway just aren't comparable to the costs of a combined SE LRT, N LRT, and 2 St subway. Delaying the 8 Ave subway, which ought to cost somewhere in the neighbourhood of 250 to 400 million, won't give us the N-SE LRT with Centre Street subway, which ought to cost more like 4 billion.

I don't have a particular preference for which comes first. If we could get the SE LRT under construction by 2020, then it might make sense since 7 Ave with four car trains could still suffice for a time. Much later than that and we might desperately need the additional capacity on the existing lines. For less than a billion dollars we could build the 8 Ave subway and double the size of our LRV fleet. That might give us the SE LRT from downtown to Ogden, if we are lucky, and I doubt we would need to double the LRV fleet. No matter which is built first, the 8 Ave subway or the 2 St subway, it will have to take the other into account. Indeed, the 2 St subway might need to take an eventual 7 Ave subway (for the W-NE line) into account as well.

[freeweed]

I'm with fusili on one front - I've been wondering lately why a 6th Ave subway isn't at least being considered. Employment is moving steadily north as more and more projects are built and surface lots are removed.

There are probably a billion reasons why not, but it's at least something I hope is on the table. A couple of 25 year old half-completed stations isn't enough rationale in my books.

[Wooster]

I've always wondered if the 100 year old foundations of buildings on Stephen Avenue could handle such disruption underneath them during construction of a subway.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by freeweed

I'm with fusili on one front - I've been wondering lately why a 6th Ave subway isn't at least being considered. Employment is moving steadily north as more and more projects are built and surface lots are removed.

There are probably a billion reasons why not, but it's at least something I hope is on the table. A couple of 25 year old half-completed stations isn't enough rationale in my books.

My thoughts exactly. Why put Stephan avenue under construction for 3 years, when we can do it to 6th avenue? There is a lot of business that would hurt on Stephan from construciton, but on 6th? Not as much. 4th should be able to handle some additional traffic, and if need be, we could make some temporary lane changes in the downtown to make up for the construction on 6th avenue. West LRT would also be complete, so could help a lot of traffic get off of 6th anyways.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by freeweed

I'm with fusili on one front - I've been wondering lately why a 6th Ave subway isn't at least being considered. Employment is moving steadily north as more and more projects are built and surface lots are removed.

There are probably a billion reasons why not, but it's at least something I hope is on the table. A couple of 25 year old half-completed stations isn't enough rationale in my books.

I would imagine that employment will continue to move north for a little while but then it will reverse and go south. There isn't that much space left in Eau Claire and a lot of it will likely end up a residential. There is a lot of space between 9 Ave and 12 Ave that could start looking pretty attractive.

[fusili]

Another idea I had would be to utilize the 2nd street subway for a future International Avenue LRT (low floor of course) and perhaps another spur line to the west. That way we fully utilize the tunnel through the downtown. The grade separation of the 2nd street tunnel should be able to handle headways of 2 minutes or so, which I believe could service the SE, NC, International Avenue and a future west spur (perhaps splitting off the line at 16th avenue and Centre Street). Just throwing ideas out there. Thoughts?

[MalcolmTucker]

Shall see what the tunnel study says, but a 6th Ave tunnel would be even more expensive because it would have to be lower than the Bow's parkade, and would require a new access tunnel from the east and west with new land, whereas the 8th ave requires no extra land, and has been clearly of utilities over the years. Stations are a huge cost, and making them deeper will just increase costs and keep everything closed for longer.

6th might have the trunk water and sewer mains for downtown under it since no transit is designated for it, and it wasn't part of the planned east, west cuplet for the Bow Trail Connector/4th&5th Avenue flyovers, for all we know.

As for shutting down 8th, it will be hell for rental businesses for sure. But Granville in Vancouver recovered pretty fast, I don't see any reason to believe even 2 years of pits would have a net negative effect 5 years later.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by fusili

Another idea I had would be to utilize the 2nd street subway for a future International Avenue LRT (low floor of course) and perhaps another spur line to the west. That way we fully utilize the tunnel through the downtown. The grade separation of the 2nd street tunnel should be able to handle headways of 2 minutes or so, which I believe could service the SE, NC, International Avenue and a future west spur (perhaps splitting off the line at 16th avenue and Centre Street). Just throwing ideas out there. Thoughts?

Until we have a model that shows what peak hour demand would be, I wouldn't want to constrain the 2nd St subway line. Also, I would be concerned about running full length LRT trains up and down 17th Ave SE, I doubt ridership would be high enough to justify big trains, whether the scale would be appropriate to the urban design, and running 2 car trains to keep frequency acceptable while SE riders cram onto trains wouldn't be tenable.

I would be perfectly ok with a forced transfer onto a smaller scale system somewhere in Inglewood for 17th Ave SE service, not everything needs to be one size fits all.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

I would imagine that employment will continue to move north for a little while but then it will reverse and go south. There isn't that much space left in Eau Claire and a lot of it will likely end up a residential. There is a lot of space between 9 Ave and 12 Ave that could start looking pretty attractive.

True - the Beltline part of the equation throws things for a loop. Of course, if we're talking about this kind of density on a (roughly) 10 block N-S distance... we damn well better have LRT lines that run N-S by then.