Calgary Public Transit II

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

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.

Good point. I agree about running full length LRTS up 17th Avenue, but we could do something similar to the MUNI/BART in San Francisco and run 5 car trains for the SE/NC LRT along with 2 car 17th Ave/West (whatever that would be) trains on the same ROW (or 3 cars vs 1 car depending on the design and capacity of the train technology). The SE/NC trains would be more frequent and longer, while the 17th/West trains would be less frequent and shorter.

Of course we would have to have a study done to determine peak headway demand before we start overloading the 2nd street subway, but due to the lower ridership that the 17th/west trains would require the impact on the SE/NC headways would be minimal in my estimation. It also allows for a street running, better integrated 17th Avenue ROW, which would be cheaper, without having to pay for a separte ROW through the downtown. The headways on 17th avenue would be already constrained (as it would be street running) so I don't see much of an impact on the SE line.

My rough calculation (which is probably grossly over-simplified) is that with 3 car trains (based on the Dublin Alstom Citadis, which would be ~120m long), you would have a crush load of about 300 per car- or 900 per train (300 or 600 per train for the 1- or 2-car consists for 17th avenue SE). With headways of 2 minutes (roughly what you get on 7th avenue, and that is running on street- I think between the NE and S we have 35 cars per hour) that is a rough peak passenger per direction per hour of 27K with just the SE. If you ran let's say 25 trains for the SE, and 10 trains (2 car consists) for 17th that would be 22.5K for the SE and 6K for 17th avenue. You could increase this to four car trains for the SE (160m long, 1200 person capacity) which would bring the person/direction/hour to 30K. That seems pretty reasonable to me. I don't know though. Thoughts?

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by 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.

I could see a 17 Ave SE line requiring full size trains. Chestermere is the one suburb that I could see justifying LRT. It is closer to downtown than Somerset-Bridlewood and, since all of the land in between has been annexed by either Calgary or it, is likely to be developed to be contiguous to the city. I would also assume, for a variety of reasons, that it would be easier to upzone Forest Lawn than just about anywhere else in the city.

Still, I too would prefer a distinct line as opposed to a spur that enters downtown. It could easily connect to Crossroads Station on the SE LRT and Erlton Station on the S LRT. A single transfer really isn't a big deal so long as headways are short enough. It would require adequate capacity on the six radial lines to take all downtown bound travellers who want to transfer over but that should be doable if there are three distinct routes through the core. The benefit of such a line, along with other BRT/LRT/etcetera lines of the kind on 16 Ave/14 St/and so on, would be a move towards more of a grid system for mass transit. They would still allow easy access to downtown with a transfer to a radial line but they would also facilitate better transportation to places outside of the core by enabling fewer transfers that don't involve the congested downtown stops.

[fusili]

All this discussion reminds me of the unique situation Calgary is in for a City of 1 million people. We are discussing capacity constraints on ROWs, while most cities our size fight just to get ridership high enough to justify lines. More and more, this city will become defined by our transit system. I like this.

[5seconds]

I went to the Calgary Transit open house yesterday for the bus route changes. I have to say, they were very approachable and very willing to listen.

The biggest opposition came from the discontinuance of the number 18 to downtown, but one of the options they mentioned is that there had already been work on maintaining that route downtown, but including the Currie Barracks and Marda Loop. It would add more time than most commuters would like, but I like that they are thinking and the routes, so far at least, are fluid enough to make sure the issues can be addressed.

I didn't agree with all the changes, but you can't make everyone happy. If they can add a slightly later express bus to Lakeview and maintain the 18 (even if altered), overall the plan looks like a good thing.

[freeweed]

Found out something a bit bizarre (in my opinion) today... when retailers return unsold transit passes to CT, there's a $10 re-stocking type fee that they have to eat. Seems a bit unfair.

Would the new electronic cards remove the requirement for retailers at all?

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Found out something a bit bizarre (in my opinion) today... when retailers return unsold transit passes to CT, there's a $10 re-stocking type fee that they have to eat. Seems a bit unfair.

Would the new electronic cards remove the requirement for retailers at all?

It makes you wonder why they even bother to stock them at all.

Was that price per pass? Or per transaction (like if the store had to return 20 passes, they would pay a total of $10 for that one grouped transaction)?

I always wondered about how much a retailer gets for a pass or a book of tickets. Sometimes I buy a book of tickets on my debit card, so if the retailer eats that debit transaction fee, then that kind of — for them.

[You Need A Thneed]

Whitehorn Station ramp:

[Ferreth]

Originally Posted by 5seconds

It makes you wonder why they even bother to stock them at all.

Was that price per pass? Or per transaction (like if the store had to return 20 passes, they would pay a total of $10 for that one grouped transaction)?

I always wondered about how much a retailer gets for a pass or a book of tickets. Sometimes I buy a book of tickets on my debit card, so if the retailer eats that debit transaction fee, then that kind of — for them.

A retailer told me they get nothing for selling tickets. The motivation is that they'll get a profit from the other things you'll buy while getting your tickets or pass. The $10 restock explains why places run out of passes so fast - they want to be sure they don't have any leftover!

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by Ferreth

A retailer told me they get nothing for selling tickets.

Does that mean that they actually lose money when I use my debit card and don't buy anything else? I'll have to stop doing that.

[MalcolmTucker]

Well, debit cards are ok, they pay little for that. But if you ever use your credit card for that, make sure to buy a jug of milk or cigarettes (if you smoke).

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Well, debit cards are ok, they pay little for that. But if you ever use your credit card for that, make sure to buy a jug of milk or cigarettes (if you smoke).

Place I go to will not accept credit cards for transit passes and tickets. It's technically against their merchant agreements with Visa and Mastercard, but I certainly don't blame them.

The more I learn about CT's arrangement with merchants, the more it pisses me off. It's great customer service to have stuff sold city-wide (and at any hour), merchants should make at least a coupla bucks on these things. At the very least, it shouldn't — COST them. As someone mentioned, no wonder so many sell out so quick - I've been caught with this in the past and it really pissed me off. It's just a freaking piece of cardboard, why not print extras and just destroy the remaining stock?

[MalcolmTucker]

why not print extras and just destroy the remaining stock?

In other cities, pass renting has been a problem, where someone will rent a pass from a store then the store will return the pass as unsold stock on the last possible day. So getting pretty close to actual demand is rather important until we have RFID chips in each.

[frinkprof]

From CPTDB:

Both sides of City Hall Station will open July 6th, Olympic Plaza Station will close that same day. The south side of City Hall Station will then re-close on July 16th to complete work needed to re-open later.

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

Still, I too would prefer a distinct line as opposed to a spur that enters downtown. It could easily connect to Crossroads Station on the SE LRT and Erlton Station on the S LRT. A single transfer really isn't a big deal so long as headways are short enough. It would require adequate capacity on the six radial lines to take all downtown bound travellers who want to transfer over but that should be doable if there are three distinct routes through the core. The benefit of such a line, along with other BRT/LRT/etcetera lines of the kind on 16 Ave/14 St/and so on, would be a move towards more of a grid system for mass transit. They would still allow easy access to downtown with a transfer to a radial line but they would also facilitate better transportation to places outside of the core by enabling fewer transfers that don't involve the congested downtown stops.

I think there maybe a large benefit if we did interline SE and S at Erlton initially. In the short term service would improvement on South as it will be 5 cars vs 4 and with lower headway. (Assuming SE needs to go ahead before or at the same time as the 8ave subway)

Then I wouldn't mind seeing a redo in the alignments when it's time for International Ave LRT. Why not have the 2nd st subway extend all the way down to 25th and then cut across to Crossroad station. The International LRT take can then take over the part the ROW that SE would have in Inglewood. Possibly later continue on and head some how to MRU. And it could be a LRT completely done on the surface if we use a lane from 11th and 12th instead of using 10th.

This way Calgary gets a solid N-S route through the center of downtown and beltline. Granted this routing would be on the 40+ year timeline. And the NC line time would likely be effected by this.

Or when they split it out we could move the South line from 8th Ave subway to 2nd street and leave southeast connected with NW. Another possibility.

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

From CPTDB:

Both sides of City Hall Station will open July 6th, Olympic Plaza Station will close that same day. The south side of City Hall Station will then re-close on July 16th to complete work needed to re-open later.

Signs are up at Olympic Plaza saying this, now. The ramps and platform beside the buildings aren't finished, but the platform on the train sides are.

And then the last original 1981 downtown station will be relegated to history.

[DizzyEdge]

If anyone gets a chance to use the new airport BRT, let me know about your experience. I'm planning on taking it to and from the airport next week.

[Wooster]

Here's a good video report from the Herald on this route. Glad to see this up and running. Transit did an amazing job planning and putting together this route very, very quickly after the Mayor got it approved through Innovation Funding.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Airport/5014258/story.html

[Radley77]

Originally Posted by Wooster

Here's a good video report from the Herald on this route. Glad to see this up and running. Transit did an amazing job planning and putting together this route very, very quickly after the Mayor got it approved through Innovation Funding.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/Airport/5014258/story.html

I like the fare differentiation aspect. I am looking forward to using this route!

[DizzyEdge]

^^ I love the morons in the herald comments on the story yesterday
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/en...ween+downtown+airport/5009061/story.html

[DizzyEdge]

also, enjoy:

Kevin Libin: The high cost of Calgary’s low-cost transit

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011...-high-cost-of-calgarys-low-cost-transit/