Calgary Public Transit II

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Those monolithic up-over-down-again station heads were really a poor idea, especially for the busier stations like Chinook and Anderson. It will be good to see this one go.

Interesting, I don't recall hearing about this change before. Certainly makes their timelines more feasible.

This may be a tad dark, but I wonder how many more pedestrian accidents we'll see in the future as we add more at-grade crossings.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Interesting, I don't recall hearing about this change before. Certainly makes their timelines more feasible.

This may be a tad dark, but I wonder how many more pedestrian accidents we'll see in the future as we add more at-grade crossings.

My feeling is we'll see less at Chinook then we've seen in the past, as this redesign gets rid of the blind spot that currently exists along 61st Ave as the trains head north, which is where a lot of the current incidents and near-misses happen there. As for other stations, its hard to say. I think it will probably be no worse than before and the seriousness of accidents could drop providing the crossings are done right (ie: you can only cross in front of the train as its leaving, rather then in front of it as it arrives)

[The Chemist]

Will that 'monolithic' station design also be gotten rid of at Heritage, Southland, and Anderson when they go for rebuild?

[frinkprof]

^Southland's already been extended, and I haven't heard anything for the other ones, although the Draft Anderson Station Area Plan has images that show a rebuilt station without the station structure.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Interesting, I don't recall hearing about this change before. Certainly makes their timelines more feasible.

This may be a tad dark, but I wonder how many more pedestrian accidents we'll see in the future as we add more at-grade crossings.

I was thinking the same thing. I'd like to see some more intelligent gates at the crossings to help prevent that.

[elconsulto]

As of yesterday there is a LED sign on the EEEL building at UofC that displays a bus schedule much like how the signs at C-trains work. A hint of more to come? Potential GPS implementation?

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by elconsulto

As of yesterday there is a LED sign on the EEEL building at UofC that displays a bus schedule much like how the signs at C-trains work. A hint of more to come? Potential GPS implementation?

Read the past couple pages of the thread.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Mersar and I have had a peek at the design. It looks good. There will be a new bus shelter building separate from the station itself as YNAT mentions.

So if there are two at grade crossings is what type of weather shelter will there be for people waiting on the platform?

I personally like the up and over approach of the older stations because on a really cold day you can wait inside, and it is heated pretty decently.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

So if there are two at grade crossings is there any type of weather shelter for people waiting on the platform?

I personally like the up and over approach of the older stations because on a really cold day you can wait inside, and it is heated pretty decently.

Heated shelters on the platform as per YouNeedaThneed's last post.

[UofC.engineer]

I hope the platform shelters are not like the ones on Canyon Meadows or Fish Creek stations. There are no doors on the shelters and the inside is filthy and graffitied up.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

I hope the platform shelters are not like the ones on Canyon Meadows or Fish Creek stations. There are no doors on the shelters and the inside is filthy and graffitied up.

No, probably more like the ones at Somerset-Bridlewood and McKnight-Westwinds. Glass enclosure with closing door and heaters inside.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

I personally like the up and over approach of the older stations because on a really cold day you can wait inside, and it is heated pretty decently.

It is pretty hard to justify the expense of operating them when no services are provided. No concessions or public washrooms, just a useless shell of a building.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

It is pretty hard to justify the expense of operating them when no services are provided. No concessions or public washrooms, just a useless shell of a building.

True, true but grade separated crossings gives me the opportunity to run for the train when its pulling up to the station.

I personally liked the up and over designs, it gave the stations a 'metro' feel instead of LRT/streetcar feel like 39th ave or banff trail, but i guess for people with mobility issues two at grade crossings will probably be easier and more convenient.

At the end end of the day you're probably right policy wonk. The up and over approach was expensive for what it was; however I'd have to disagree with mersar(respectfully of course). I do believe collisions will increase at chinook with 2 at-grade crossings even with the blind corner removed and intelligent gates. There will always be that one person out of a million that is in a hurry and thinks he or she can run faster than the train.

Even though this is a bad example the guy in this video gets smoked by a train at banff trail.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Transi...in/5826506/story.html?cid=megadrop_story

I say bad example because he isn't paying attention and the station doesn't have crossing arms.

[UofC.engineer]

I'd like to know the pedestrian traffic flows for the stations: Anderson, Southland, Heritage and Chinook. How many people use the building? and how many people use the crossing? coming both on and off to the platforms.

[Policy Wonk]

My personal preference, even thought it is doesn't really jive with the way things get done would be to build some fairly large stations with an indoor retail concourse and public amenities and turn entire stations over to private operators who could sublease the retail space. This would provide for a permanently manned station, better security and the ability for the private operator to deal with vagrants the same way they are treated when they wander into Holt Refrew... very quickly.

This is being experimented with in Sydney Australia where the airport CityRail station is privately operated under a 35 year lease.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

True, true but grade separated crossings gives me the opportunity to run for the train when its pulling up to the station.

Nothing is/was ever more frustrating than seeing a train coming in, from a fair distance I might add, and then having to proceed to use the ridiculous and overbuilt [climb up the huge set of stairs/escalator=>long corridor/empty space past the ticket machines=>descend another huge set of stairs] route only to miss by a mile the train that would have been a piece of cake to catch in any other circumstance.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

My personal preference, even thought it is doesn't really jive with the way things get done would be to build some fairly large stations with an indoor retail concourse and public amenities and turn entire stations over to private operators who could sublease the retail space. This would provide for a permanently manned station, better security and the ability for the private operator to deal with vagrants the same way they are treated when they wander into Holt Refrew... very quickly.

This is being experimented with in Sydney Australia where the airport CityRail station is privately operated under a 35 year lease.

Would it not have to be a sweetheart and/or publicly subsidized leasing scheme though? The retail components of the old south and NE line stations shut down years ago because the operators couldn't make a go of it and there's been very little interest in the venture since.

[mwalker_mw]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Would it not have to be a sweetheart and/or publicly subsidized leasing scheme though? The retail components of the old south and NE line stations shut down years ago because the operators couldn't make a go of it and there's been very little interest in the venture since.

Something tells me that a Starbucks or Tim Hortons right beside a captive gaggle of office drones first thing in the morning might be able to make a profit. IIRC the last attempts at stores in the stations was long before it became fashionable to drop several dollars daily on brown liquid. They could limit their open hours to peak times but the lease could require them to provide security/washrooms/whatever all day.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Would it not have to be a sweetheart and/or publicly subsidized leasing scheme though? The retail components of the old south and NE line stations shut down years ago because the operators couldn't make a go of it and there's been very little interest in the venture since.

Calgary Transit put them out of business by way of ridiculous rents, so relative to past terms I suppose it would be a sweetheart deal.

The issue was last revisited as part of the security review and was supposed to result in a one year pilot project. But I don't believe anything ever came of that.

[srperrycgy]

Quite frankly, the pedestrians at Chinook are idiots. I've witnessed a lot of jaywalking across 61st Ave and some of these folks use the rail crossing as a crosswalk too. Removing the "blind spot" from the NB CTrain crossing is a good idea.