Calgary Public Transit II

[lrt's friend]

And buses, even on a dedicated transitway, travel a lot slower than LRT

As an Ottawa resident, I can tell you that this is not true. Just this past Monday, I used the bus on the Transitway that runs immediately parallel to the O-Train. Both depart from the same station. Eventhough the O-Train departed first, and the bus had to stop at an intermediate station, both arrived at the cross-over point at the same time. I made this observation before where a bus and train were running parallel to each other, that the train, at best was operating at the same speed. So, it is possible that buses running on a dedicated Transitway to perform just as well as LRT, if speed is the main consideration. Where speed becomes an issue, is when the quality of the right of way is not the same ie. buses having to stop at signalled intersections whereas a train does not.

[MalcolmTucker]

Well, how fast does the O-Train travel between stations? Are the tracks speed limited at all?

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

As an Ottawa resident, I can tell you that this is not true. Just this past Monday, I used the bus on the Transitway that runs immediately parallel to the O-Train. Both depart from the same station. Eventhough the O-Train departed first, and the bus had to stop at an intermediate station, both arrived at the cross-over point at the same time. I made this observation before where a bus and train were running parallel to each other, that the train, at best was operating at the same speed. So, it is possible that buses running on a dedicated Transitway to perform just as well as LRT, if speed is the main consideration. Where speed becomes an issue, is when the quality of the right of way is not the same ie. buses having to stop at signalled intersections whereas a train does not.

It is possible, in some circumstances. Rarely along an entire route, and usually with the sort of design that is not the "temporary measures" that ius SETWAY. The point I was making was that what is envisioned for the SELRT corridor, which is "temporary transitways" and ultimately, within 20 years almost certainly, an LRT, is only going to function better when the LRT is put in. Not with SETWAY. Not unless the SETWAY was constructed in an identical way to the Ottawa Transitway, in which case it would run into two identical problems: that downtown, not in it's own ROW, would be congested, and that conversion to LRT would be as expensive by then as building LRT is now.

I can phrase my viewpoint effectively here, where we bounce ideas off each other, but I'm having trouble phrasing a letter to the city that basically says "Don't waste money on SETWAY!"

[MalcolmTucker]

Instead of being against the SETWAY, I would instead be super pro, to make sure it is designed so that LRT conversion doesn''t take 2 or 3 years. It needs to be graded and curved properly, with utilities moved or reinforced, with caternary piles installed in the initial build.

My guess is this project will be executed so slowly that hopefully all the extra demands and costs up front, of not wanting to have things built twice, and new financing sources will mean that we will just end up building LRT in the first place.

[You Need A Thneed]

Better to do a shorter stretch of the SE Transitway right, than to do a half-assed longer stretch.

If it gets built, design it so that the conversion to rail is as easy as removing the roadway surface, simply attaching the rail, and installing catenary poles and wires.

Install the bases for the poles from the outset, as well as the plinths for the tracks.

Design it for the tracks, then figure out how you can run buses on it in the meantime.

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Instead of being against the SETWAY, I would instead be super pro, to make sure it is designed so that LRT conversion doesn''t take 2 or 3 years. It needs to be graded and curved properly, with utilities moved or reinforced, with caternary piles installed in the initial build.

My guess is this project will be executed so slowly that hopefully all the extra demands and costs up front, of not wanting to have things built twice, and new financing sources will mean that we will just end up building LRT in the first place.

I agree completely with that last paragraph. If they're going to grade, curve, move utilities, and put in caternary poles, why try and figure out the complex task of putting something that buses can drive on on top of all that? I'm pretty sure discussions here said that it isn't as easy as pouring a layer of asphalt over all that.

I would only agree to that if 1. They did design it for very easy conversion, 2. There is a way to run buses on that, and 3. If it only covers a limited portion of the line. East Village to Ogden, maybe.

[Koolfire]

Originally Posted by DarkKeyo

I agree completely with that last paragraph. If they're going to grade, curve, move utilities, and put in caternary poles, why try and figure out the complex task of putting something that buses can drive on on top of all that? I'm pretty sure discussions here said that it isn't as easy as pouring a layer of asphalt over all that.

What about using railway ties and steel grating (Like on bridges)? When it's time to change out they can rip off the grating and put rails down. Use curbs give the grating support on the sides.

[lrt's friend]

Not unless the SETWAY was constructed in an identical way to the Ottawa Transitway, in which case it would run into two identical problems: that downtown, not in it's own ROW, would be congested,

Is the C-Train not also facing congestion issues downtown as well? It may not appear as bumper to bumper traffic, but it is still congestion if you cannot schedule more trains. Really, what Ottawa is facing with BRT is not so much different than Calgary is facing with LRT. The difficult question of moving more passengers to and from downtown. Both systems have similar capacities and both have similar right of ways downtown. What I guess I am saying is that there are some fallacies assumed when comparing BRT with LRT. Usually those fallacies arise when comparing a superior implementation of LRT with an inferior implementation of BRT. I am not suggesting that Ottawa is doing anything better. Hardly. I am very critical of what is going on here. Hopefully Ottawa will finally move forward with LRT after its 2006 false-start, which I am still angry about.

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Is the C-Train not also facing congestion issues downtown as well? It may not appear as bumper to bumper traffic, but it is still congestion if you cannot schedule more trains. Really, what Ottawa is facing with BRT is not so much different than Calgary is facing with LRT. The difficult question of moving more passengers to and from downtown. Both systems have similar capacities and both have similar right of ways downtown. What I guess I am saying is that there are some fallacies assumed when comparing BRT with LRT. Usually those fallacies arise when comparing a superior implementation of LRT with an inferior implementation of BRT. I am not suggesting that Ottawa is doing anything better. Hardly. I am very critical of what is going on here. Hopefully Ottawa will finally move forward with LRT after its 2006 false-start, which I am still angry about.

Yeah, Ottawa's had a rough time with LRT...

C-Train does have congestion problems downtown, and these are ultimately going to be solved with the same method as Ottawa is hoping to use: an LRT Subway. In Calgary, in fact, two, possibly three, subways. Of those, the first priority is the subway for the SELRT, which is the most expensive part of it, and therefore the part a SE Transitway wouldn't fix. A fully completed SELRT subway would delay the need for a subway on existing lines, or such is the apparent opinion of Calgary Transit. And if NCLRT was tied into it, then I could believe that.

And thus the specific needs of the SE corridor, and the NC corridor if they choose later this year to connect that to the SELRT Subway, require LRT and would have little use for BRT. I am trying not to use fallacies, but instead look at the specific needs of SELRT and how it fits into our network.

[CalgaryChipmunk]

So I just found out the other day that once the West LRT is ready, all the direct bus routes to downtown from the West will be cancelled and instead all buses will connect to the nearest LRT station. I take the 101 from Coach Hill. I don't want to have to be get on a bus to be taken further away from my destination and then have to wait for a transfer onto a Ctrain. And wont this just lead to the Ctrains being absolutely packed at rush hour, and people further down the line can't then get on the Ctrain? Plus removing the 101 will remove access down to Bow Trail between Sarcee and 37th Street. I'm really not convinced that this is a great idea. Surely they could keep smaller, less regular direct buses to downtown. If the City want to encourage more people to use public transport they need to provide choices, not a 'one size fits all'.

http://www.westlrt.ca/contentreports/calgarytransit.cfm

[armorand93]

Thats stupid. There should ALWAYS be a bus route to downtown from any part of the city. Hell, it might even solve some crowding issues on the NW line (Brentwood - Downtown, Lions Park - Downtown, Sunnyside - Downtown). I'm from Winnipeg, and I could stand a slightly longer bus ride

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by CalgaryChipmunk

So I just found out the other day that once the West LRT is ready, all the direct bus routes to downtown from the West will be cancelled and instead all buses will connect to the nearest LRT station. I take the 101 from Coach Hill. I don't want to have to be get on a bus to be taken further away from my destination and then have to wait for a transfer onto a Ctrain. And wont this just lead to the Ctrains being absolutely packed at rush hour, and people further down the line can't then get on the Ctrain? Plus removing the 101 will remove access down to Bow Trail between Sarcee and 37th Street. I'm really not convinced that this is a great idea. Surely they could keep smaller, less regular direct buses to downtown. If the City want to encourage more people to use public transport they need to provide choices, not a 'one size fits all'.

http://www.westlrt.ca/contentreports/calgarytransit.cfm

A point-form response might be the best way to address your post.

- This has been discussed a few times in the West LRT thread http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=168428&page=65

- The West LRT will be a low volume line compared to the existing three lines. Crowding should never be a problem - even with a full feeder bus scheme

- The advantage of taking the C-Train for part of the trip are increased reliability and speed that the exclusive right of way provides.

- I did actually share your sentiments about the lack of service on Bow Trail between Sarcee and 37th Streets, and have brought it up a couple of times at open houses. Still, the new route 6 covers for most of the gap. I've come around and I don't see it as the problem that I used to.

- I've heard the argument about the "being taken in the opposite direction of your destination to get to the station" before and I think there is something to it. I'm not sure if I can get a good idea of the effects of it until I actually see it in operation. The feeder bus model works in the deeper south, farther northwest and northeast communities because the doubling back done by the buses in those areas is much smaller in scale than the geographical distance to downtown, therefore the time spent getting to the station is more than made up by the travel time gains made by connecting to the train. The west side, being geographically closer to downtown might not see the same benefits from the feeder bus model.

Nevertheless, your travel times are projected to improve slightly after the West LRT opens and the feeder bus system is implemented:

http://www.westlrt.ca/files/West%20LRT%20proposed%20bus%20travel%20times.pdf

[MalcolmTucker]

Should remember also that frequency will over time increase greatly on the feeder routes as well, saving a lot more time for users and a lot of tax money (much cheaper to operate at high frequencies when you have a much shorter route). If you perfectly timed your routes to you never had to wait before and traveled largely outside of the peak peak, you won't save time.

Even with the transfer most users will save time under the new model due to decreased waiting times, and the LRT just operating faster and not ever having to deal with traffic.

[fusili]

Not every part of the city should have direct downtown bus service. That would be a fantastic way to have incredibly high operating costs and ensure a lot of buses are deadheading for a long period of time.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by CalgaryChipmunk

So I just found out the other day that once the West LRT is ready, all the direct bus routes to downtown from the West will be cancelled and instead all buses will connect to the nearest LRT station. I take the 101 from Coach Hill. I don't want to have to be get on a bus to be taken further away from my destination and then have to wait for a transfer onto a Ctrain. And wont this just lead to the Ctrains being absolutely packed at rush hour, and people further down the line can't then get on the Ctrain? Plus removing the 101 will remove access down to Bow Trail between Sarcee and 37th Street. I'm really not convinced that this is a great idea. Surely they could keep smaller, less regular direct buses to downtown. If the City want to encourage more people to use public transport they need to provide choices, not a 'one size fits all'.

http://www.westlrt.ca/contentreports/calgarytransit.cfm

All I can say is that as someone who's been through it more than once in this city - trust me, you'll learn to love the LRT pretty quick. It's light years beyond bus service in pretty much every aspect. Most of your concerns are things we all worried about, but are non-issues today.

[5seconds]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Even with the transfer most users will save time under the new model due to decreased waiting times, and the LRT just operating faster and not ever having to deal with traffic.

It's too bad that some communities that are being affected are not even being hooked up to the new LRT line.

In Lakeview the 18, which currently goes downtown, will only go to Chinook LRT, and the 47, which already goes to Chinook LRT, will also only go to Chinook LRT. They are both being hooked into the new BRT at Mount Royal University, but either way, it will almost certainly not help travel time, especially if the final destination is not downtown. (The 47 and 18 currently run about every 30 minutes, and I can't explain why, but I don't see them becoming more frequent.)

Talking to Calgary Transit, it seems as though they recognise that they will need to alter some of the proposed routes, as they admit that some of the new routes have their problems. There was talk about maintaining the 18 to downtown, but having it run through at least part of Marda Loop, which I thought was a great idea.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by freeweed

All I can say is that as someone who's been through it more than once in this city - trust me, you'll learn to love the LRT pretty quick. It's light years beyond bus service in pretty much every aspect. Most of your concerns are things we all worried about, but are non-issues today.

I agree with Freeweed. In fact, I am much an advocate for basically retrofitting our milk-run (frequent stops, non-dedicated lanes, meandering routes, low capacity etc etc) bus system with a series of high-speed, high frequency BRTs and LRTs, with regular buses serving only as a feeders. The dilution of routes and ridership by our current system only results in low frequency, low ridership, and low speed. What we need to do is concentrate ridership onto high-speed, high frequency routes and try to reduce operational burdens of the bus system.

[DarkKeyo]

Agreed that we don't need direct to downtown bus service in any part of the city, agreed that we need something like Fusili is describing, with a lot of high-frequency main routes, and agreed that people living in the West will benefit even if they have that extra transfer.

I would like to point out that *some* routes paralleling the train are necessary. The 10, for example. The 10, which parallels the South/NW line from Anderson to Dalhousie, is extremely useful when the train is delayed or crowded, and also serves as a feeder for areas between the stations. The 3 also parallels the South line and has very high ridership. The 2 should perform this function in the West when it opens. The NE doesn't have an equivalent of this, which makes any delay or overcrowding much worse for people I know who live there. All of these, of course, don't go to the far suburban stations such as Crowfoot, Somerset, or 69th St.

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by fusili

I agree with Freeweed. In fact, I am much an advocate for basically retrofitting our milk-run (frequent stops, non-dedicated lanes, meandering routes, low capacity etc etc) bus system with a series of high-speed, high frequency BRTs and LRTs, with regular buses serving only as a feeders. The dilution of routes and ridership by our current system only results in low frequency, low ridership, and low speed. What we need to do is concentrate ridership onto high-speed, high frequency routes and try to reduce operational burdens of the bus system.

Since you first told me about this idea, I've been interested to know where you would put your high-frequency BRT's and LRT's. I assume the 6 radial LRT and 3 radial BRT corridors, as well as crosstown routes?

[CalgaryChipmunk]

wow thanks for all the responses and feedback! I'll guess I'll just have to give it a try.