Calgary Public Transit II

[Aegis]

Originally Posted by freeweed

I'm still awaiting an announcement that the Tuscany extension is on permanent hold.

I can't tell from your post if you are or are not in favor of putting it on hold, but, if you are in favor of it, I disagree.

It would be smarter to build out the NW line essentially to completion and then shift priority to the newer lines, rather than leaving an unfinished line in the NW while we start/delay construction of the other lines.

There has already been a ton of growth West of Crowfoot, and the distance from Crowfoot station still requires a lot of people to drive to the station, which effectively nullifies any reduction in "carbon footprint" of the trip. As I've mentioned before, people will drive further to get a parking spot at another station when Crowfoot is full. It would be better to make it easier for people to get to the station by bus rather than make it inconvenient and force more cars back on the road. If we delayed it now, how long would it be until it's done? I don't want another Brentwood Station scenario.

[freeweed]

Aegis, I agree completely with you. I was being very dryly sarcastic with my post. With delay after delay after delay on this station, it kinda does feel like it's on permanent hold. Last I heard was 2014, which means we better see some serious construction this spring at the very latest - time will tell.

[Rusty van Reddick]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

In the picture it looks like the designers have taken a regular sidewalk and bolted fair payment machines to it with no regard for platform height.

I had to stare at this for several minutes trying to figure out what "unfair payment" would be.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by Rusty van Reddick

I had to stare at this for several minutes trying to figure out what "unfair payment" would be.

Lol. I wrote it for the grader good

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

This is a very good point. How many people actually expect highrise development along Centre Street, north of 20th ave? And even south of 20th, the highest buildings will be at the intersection with 16th Ave, which is happening again regardless of LRT. I do think we will see lots of increased density in the form of low to midrise developments, but this is already happening, without the City spending billions on putting an LRT up there. There are several DP's in for 3-4 storey office and residential projects along the corridor.

To me the biggest impediment to the Nose Creek alignment is the interlining with the NE-W route. This might be a big enough problem to justify the costs of putting it up Centre Street.

Highrise, perhaps not, but there are 10+ multi parcel lots between 16th ave and 40th ave, about half with signs advertising for development opportunity, so I certainly can see all of centre having "the Bridges" style development right up to McKnight, as well as similar development south of 24th between Centre and Edmonton Trail.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by sim

By what metric? Kim Jong Il was a successful leader.

The success of the C-Train has come out of the fact it is more or less a commuter rail operation with LRV's. The light-rail systems that are little more than punching bags for Libertard thinktanks are the ones that ape street cars. With that in mind and the fact the Nose Creek based NCLRT was intended to link the northern fringe suburbs to downtown it would have been immensely successful.

No, the word is public transit. As such a public good, and something that benefits society maximally when maximally accessible.

Great, so lets build it to serve an area that will undoubtedly see massive population growth. The new suburbs north of Beddington Trail. Also known as NOT Centre Street. The type of intensification that would be required to make a Centre Street LRT or Subway anything other than insanity would unleash a war that I don't think many people here can even comprehend. I'm thinking 1970's Boston freeway revolts.

[DizzyEdge]

It's often been said that 24hr C-train isn't feasible as that downtime between about 2am and 5am is needed for maintenance. But why aren't we running a 24 hr bus? I would assume with the new DUI rules and the taxi issue, that people would quickly fill these busses. Something along the lines of keeping the LRT and BRT routes going over the gap.

[DizzyEdge]

I'd love LRT or some sort of rail up Centre, but I have to agree with Policy Wonk that the ROI might not be there, until it's so busy that it's back to back busses, which if the original LRT was built might never happen since much of the bus traffic increase would be bringing people down Centre from the NLRT catchment area.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

I don't get how this is an argument against the Centre St alignment; from 96th and Harvest Hills to the middle of downtown is 15 km via Nose Creek and 11 km via Centre Street. The Nose Creek alignment would have 7 stations before entering the CBD; an example proposal for Centre Street is... 7 stations. So the "rapid link" you are arguing for is the one that goes 36% farther and stops as frequently.

The longer distance is offset by massively lower capital costs and the ability to operate at higher speed.

Although the Nose Creek line would provide double the service to the two least-used stations in the whole system, so there's that benefit. Too bad we'd wind up digging ourselves an 8th ave tunnel at significant expense to relieve the congestion due to interlining on 7th Ave, then undo that by reintroducing it.

Sigh... not this one again.

I realize this is heresy around here but:

1. There is nothing wrong with interlining.
2. The 202 will have to be buried years ahead of any North Central LRT being built.

The peak headways Calgary Transit has stated it is their intention to operate are higher than the combined 201 and 202 traffic on 7th today. Calgary Transit can't operate their present peak schedule, with or without interlining because of surface traffic. This will have to be addressed decades before a North Central LRT begins serious planning.

Well, capital cost, at least. Certainly the dozens of buses down Centre St. could be largely replaced by LRT, so the operating costs are way lower for a Centre St. LRT. And there's the added costs (to the City and other agencies) of further sprawl; these are harder to quantify, but to the degree a Centre St. LRT reduces the need for additional tri-services coverage, or new schools, etc., there is also the potential for cost savings. And if the value of property goes up 10-20% near LRT stations, the increase in the property tax base is radically higher for a Centre St. alignment.

This is the same nonsense advanced by the proponents of shutting down the Edmonton airport. Is somebody in the market for a typical suburban home in N.W. Calgary going to buy a infill condo on Centre Street just because they build one there instead? Probably not. Further the marginal costs associated with public services aren't really in the physical plant but in manpower, most of which is has to be allocated based on population rather than location.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Highrise, perhaps not, but there are 10+ multi parcel lots between 16th ave and 40th ave, about half with signs advertising for development opportunity, so I certainly can see all of centre having "the Bridges" style development right up to McKnight, as well as similar development south of 24th between Centre and Edmonton Trail.

Agreed, and this is something that is already happening, without an LRT line.
For instance:
Centre Street Place
http://www.opuscorp.ca/development/currentprojects/centrestreet.cfm

201 Tuxedo North:
http://www.201tuxedonorth.com/register.aspx

And according to "My Property" on the City's website, there is a DP in for these houses for a mixed use building (27 units, 5 retail bays) (DP2011-3910):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...KDVUnJMugecJcY8PtxaQ&cbp=12,54.45,,0,2.2

There is also a DP in for this gravel lot, for a mixed use grocery store, office, medical clinic, and retail building (DP2011-3015):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...PUfRmBTr8K-lZLaOSjdg&cbp=12,77.39,,0,3.8

And there is a DP for a special care facility on this lot (DP2011-1312):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...GdTzwqtsGt3lvWYR2w&cbp=12,112.55,,0,6.81

There is also a DP out for multi-residential here (DP2011-4655):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...OmaFl3rPxuXAOYTEJQw&cbp=12,81.63,,0,8.71

The point I am making is that the people who say we need to put the LRT up Centre Street to encourage density don't seem to realize that the density is happening already, without the need to invest billions of dollars of public money.

[DarkKeyo]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

Great, so lets build it to serve an area that will undoubtedly see massive population growth. The new suburbs north of Beddington Trail. Also known as NOT Centre Street. The type of intensification that would be required to make a Centre Street LRT or Subway anything other than insanity would unleash a war that I don't think many people here can even comprehend. I'm thinking 1970's Boston freeway revolts.

I'm going to make a guess that your main objection to Centre St NLRT is that everyone along Centre St will take it as an act of war. If so, then how do you explain the reaction of the community associations quoted in the article that started all this? This article:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=5542625&postcount=4339

And, how do you explain the public response at the open houses, the response that triggered the decision to dump the Nose Creek route? Open houses are where the people who start "1970 Boston freeway revolts" go to start 1970 Boston freeway revolts. In Calgary, open houses are magnets for complaints. I was at the Northern Hills open house for NCLRT, in Cardel Place, which was full of people who would benefit from the Nose Creek alignment, and even at the time I was there, more than half the people were busily making comments favoring Centre St or Edmonton Trail.

I am basing my guess on how many times you've implied that residents along Centre St will oppose any sort of density, or train construction.

[Policy Wonk]

I doubt there was much NIMBY opposition to Interstate 695 in the 1950's either, but when construction was looming in the 1970's all hell broke loose.

It isn't the C-Train that will trigger massive opposition, it is the massive intensification that will be required to make it worthwhile that will. Status quo and the C-Train running somewhere around 1st Street NE or as a subway probably wouldn't bother many people outside of the immediate area. Turning Centre Street into Yonge Street on the other hand will bring out every Grandpa Simpson and Maude Flanders analogue with a shot 🞵🞵🞵.

And if status quo density is an acceptable outcome, what was the point of the Centre Street LRT again?

[DizzyEdge]

I think when it comes to LRT and centre street
- Residents in the immediate area will be supportive, as much of what is on centre is businesses, or rentals and anyone who needs to exit or enter the communities have many alternative routes with the grid pattern.
- change it to start messing up the blocks adjacent to centre, and that goodwill will evaporate quickly
- people outside of the immediate area who commute down centre will be pissed, but with 4th and Edm trail running parallel that shoudln't be too bad.

The question I have, and I'm not sure if it's been answered. Could elevated rail be done on Centre without closing all 4 lanes like cut and cover would?
Also, how would cut and cover work, in the sense of if you need to cut and cover say 40 blocks, could you always been working on say 2 blocks at a time, so that centre is more or less operating as normal other than a short 2 block detour that moves north or south as work progresses?

And lastly, what is the additional cost of routing it down centre, and how does that compare to the additional ridership?

One con to the centre street LRT plan is it's only a 30 min busride from Beddington Trail to downtown, meaning on average someone within that area would only be a 15 min busride from DT, or a northern LRT station. In that scenario they'd probably not really gain anything time-wise by having LRT closer unless they're taking a very short trip, in which case bus is likely good enough.

LRT up centre mostly adds a nicer transit experience, and and greater urban feel for the corridor, but I have a feeling that may be close to the extent. And I say that as someone who lives by the corridor and would love to have LRT.

[sim]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

The success of the C-Train has come out of the fact it is more or less a commuter rail operation with LRV's. The light-rail systems that are little more than punching bags for Libertard thinktanks are the ones that ape street cars. With that in mind and the fact the Nose Creek based NCLRT was intended to link the northern fringe suburbs to downtown it would have been immensely successful.

Yes, as a commuter service, a predifined measure of success. The intention is a poor one from the get go, because all it would serve to do is further encourage poor growth patterns. Libertard thinktanks...? Are you positing that trams/streetcars aren't successful?

Great, so lets build it to serve an area that will undoubtedly see massive population growth. The new suburbs north of Beddington Trail. Also known as NOT Centre Street. The type of intensification that would be required to make a Centre Street LRT or Subway anything other than insanity would unleash a war that I don't think many people here can even comprehend. I'm thinking 1970's Boston freeway revolts.

The type of settlement structure required to obtain any sort of feasible load factors during non-peak hours is exactly not this. But if this is what we want, so be it. Continue on this fatalist, short-term thinking, poor overall resource utilization route, literally and figuratively.

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I doubt there was much NIMBY opposition to Interstate 695 in the 1950's either, but when construction was looming in the 1970's all hell broke loose.

It isn't the C-Train that will trigger massive opposition, it is the massive intensification that will be required to make it worthwhile that will. Status quo and the C-Train running somewhere around 1st Street NE or as a subway probably wouldn't bother many people outside of the immediate area. Turning Centre Street into Yonge Street on the other hand will bring out every Grandpa Simpson and Maude Flanders analogue with a shot 🞵🞵🞵.

And if status quo density is an acceptable outcome, what was the point of the Centre Street LRT again?

I'm curious if you've reviewed the Calgary Municipal Development Plan? (Available here: http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/LUPP/Pages/Municipal-Development-Plan/Municipal-Development-Plan-MDP.aspx ) According to the Development Plan, Centre Street south of McKnight Blvd has been designated as an urban growth corridor. As a result, it is only a matter of time before the city creates an area redevelopment plan to guide the densification of the Centre Street corridor. I don't think anyone really believes that Centre Street will become Calgary's Yonge Street, but given the goals set out in the Calgary MDP, I think it's fair to say we will see the City push to have Centre Street develop into Calgary's Bloor Street W. (essentially an urban corridor made up of multi-story mixed use under approx 7 stories... which also just happens to have a subway line running parallel to it).

My point here is that no, status quo density is not acceptable and the City is well aware of this. According to current City policy and planning documents, the intensification of Centre Street is going to happen anyways. Therefore, this massive battle you seem to feel is going to greet any attempts to add density to Centre Street is also going to happen anyways. So to answer your question: The point of the Centre Street LRT is to give the City something positive to offer residents living along the Centre Street corridor when the time comes to create ARPs to increase the density as envisioned in the Calgary Municipal Development Plan. I completely agree that if you go to residents and say "We need to increase density in your neighbourhood... deal with it" you're going to be met with a lot of opposition. If you go to residents and say "We need to increase density in your neighbourhood and we're going to build an LRT with-in walking distance of your house to help take any of the additional strain off the existing infrastructure" I think you will see a lot of that opposition disappear. The way Calgary grows needs to change and needs to change soon. A Centre Street LRT is one way to convince residents to allow that to happen.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Agreed, and this is something that is already happening, without an LRT line.
For instance:
Centre Street Place
http://www.opuscorp.ca/development/currentprojects/centrestreet.cfm

201 Tuxedo North:
http://www.201tuxedonorth.com/register.aspx

And according to "My Property" on the City's website, there is a DP in for these houses for a mixed use building (27 units, 5 retail bays) (DP2011-3910):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...KDVUnJMugecJcY8PtxaQ&cbp=12,54.45,,0,2.2

There is also a DP in for this gravel lot, for a mixed use grocery store, office, medical clinic, and retail building (DP2011-3015):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...PUfRmBTr8K-lZLaOSjdg&cbp=12,77.39,,0,3.8

And there is a DP for a special care facility on this lot (DP2011-1312):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...GdTzwqtsGt3lvWYR2w&cbp=12,112.55,,0,6.81

There is also a DP out for multi-residential here (DP2011-4655):
http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2302+Centre...OmaFl3rPxuXAOYTEJQw&cbp=12,81.63,,0,8.71

The point I am making is that the people who say we need to put the LRT up Centre Street to encourage density don't seem to realize that the density is happening already, without the need to invest billions of dollars of public money.

Dang! If all this development were to materialize, Centre Street would be a great place for me to call home! And IF the LRT were to materialize it would just be icing on the cake! Good bye Airdrie!

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

I'm curious if you've reviewed the Calgary Municipal Development Plan? (Available here: http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/LUPP/Pages/Municipal-Development-Plan/Municipal-Development-Plan-MDP.aspx ) According to the Development Plan, Centre Street south of McKnight Blvd has been designated as an urban growth corridor. As a result, it is only a matter of time before the city creates an area redevelopment plan to guide the densification of the Centre Street corridor. I don't think anyone really believes that Centre Street will become Calgary's Yonge Street, but given the goals set out in the Calgary MDP, I think it's fair to say we will see the City push to have Centre Street develop into Calgary's Bloor Street W. (essentially an urban corridor made up of multi-story mixed use under approx 7 stories... which also just happens to have a subway line running parallel to it).

I know all about it, and it will die in the face of massive public opposition when any serious effort is made to implement it. Or worse yet elect a straight ticket of demagogues who promise to kill it.

I completely agree that if you go to residents and say "We need to increase density in your neighbourhood... deal with it" you're going to be met with a lot of opposition. If you go to residents and say "We need to increase density in your neighbourhood and we're going to build an LRT with-in walking distance of your house to help take any of the additional strain off the existing infrastructure" I think you will see a lot of that opposition disappear. The way Calgary grows needs to change and needs to change soon. A Centre Street LRT is one way to convince residents to allow that to happen.

Option two isn't going to be received a whole lot better, I have been the poor 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 who had to deliver that type of patronizing message to very angry people.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by sim

Yes, as a commuter service, a predifined measure of success. The intention is a poor one from the get go, because all it would serve to do is further encourage poor growth patterns. Libertard thinktanks...? Are you positing that trams/streetcars aren't successful?

What you call "poor growth patterns" is the way an extreme plurality of people choose to live. You're probably just going to have to deal with it and settle for maximizing their transit usage.

And compared to the ridership achieved by more suburban commuter oriented systems, I would not characterize many modern streetcar systems as successful. If success to you is people hoping on and off to get a coffee - well there you go.

The type of settlement structure required to obtain any sort of feasible load factors during non-peak hours is exactly not this. But if this is what we want, so be it. Continue on this fatalist, short-term thinking, poor overall resource utilization route, literally and figuratively.

There is no spatial structure that supports much ridership during non-peak hours, the world has been pretty set in the hours it keeps since the industrial revolution.

[outoftheice]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I know all about it, and it will die in the face of massive public opposition when any serious effort is made to implement it. Or worse yet elect a straight ticket of demagogues who promise to kill it.

Option two isn't going to be received a whole lot better, I have been the poor 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 who had to deliver that type of patronizing message to very angry people.

Well I have to say that I don't envy your position of having to deliver a message like that. However I find that with any large scale transportation project, there will always be a room full of angry people. Let's face it, people don't like change at all and there will always be people who go to the ends of the earth to resist it. The question is, how many of those people are there in relation to the total number of people the project will impact?? There was some well organized resistance to the West LRT by local community groups however at the end of the day, the majority of people recognized the benefits that the LRT could bring to the city and the project is currently well on its way to completion. The West LRT Westbrook ARP includes parts of 17th Ave SW and calls for mid-rise mixed use buildings along 17th Ave and increased density through in-fill projects in the surrounding communities... essentially an identical plan to what would be needed for Centre Street. So we have already seen proof in Calgary that this type of intensification in existing communities can be accepted by residents when it's linked to an LRT project. I'm curious as to why you think a Centre Street LRT and the intensification of the surrounding communities would be received so differently than the West LRT and the related ARPs were?

You have also made comments in the past about how people at Calgary Transit pretty much dismiss a Centre Street LRT outright and are just playing along for the sake of the politicians, and I will agree that there have been a few comments in the press by CT spokespeople that seem to jive with this theory. So my question to you (and them as well I guess) is why so negative about what can be done in this city?? Look at current and proposed transit projects for places like Vancouver and Toronto and you will find projects much larger and much more ambitious than a Centre Street subway. The Eglinton Crosstown LRT project in Toronto has a projected cost of over $8 BILLION.... more than the cost of building the SE LRT AND a Centre Street subway. The biggest difference between Calgary and those cities is that Toronto and Vancouver no longer have a choice but to deal with the mess that years of sprawl have brought them and we still have the luxury of time before our planning decisions start to catch up to us. Prioritizing projects like the SE LRT and a Centre Street Subway is a key way to help change the way the city is built (if I remember correctly there was $11 BILLION in savings Plan It: Calgary could potentially save the city if we are able to curb our sprawl) and avoid the traffic gridlock that is plaguing Vancouver and Toronto. Why do you seem to feel that this stuff is out of reach for a city that is in one of the wealthiest provinces in the country when it is currently being done in areas of the country that are strapped for cash even more than we are??

[Ridge]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Aegis, I agree completely with you. I was being very dryly sarcastic with my post. With delay after delay after delay on this station, it kinda does feel like it's on permanent hold. Last I heard was 2014, which means we better see some serious construction this spring at the very latest - time will tell.

The RFPQ for the NW LRT Extension to Rocky Ridge / Tuscany closes on January 26th. I expect we would see that followed by an RFP and a contract before spring, so serious construction in spring could well be in the works.