Calgary Public Transit II - Page 245

frinkprof · #**4881** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 3:00 PM**

^I really don't like how the airport LRT connection is being used as an election promise in the absence of any other reason (like, I don't know, catchment/ridership per km or $ spent figures) than simply because it sounds pleasing to people's ears.

This really highlights the need for the "A Route Ahead" long-term transit plan to be completed and highlight some priorities for projects like this so that people, especially people like Galpin and Craig Burrows (who last threw out the airport LRT promise in the last municipal election), can understand that the SE, North Central and probably a few other projects should have higher priority than the airport LRT when building the system.

YYCguys · #**4882** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 5:08 PM**

^^^I wish there was a like button on here. Good point frinkprof.^^^

fusili · #**4883** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 5:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by frinkprof

^I really don't like how the airport LRT connection is being used as an election promise in the absence of any other reason (like, I don't know, catchment/ridership per km or $ spent figures) than simply because it sounds pleasing to people's ears.

This really highlights the need for the "A Route Ahead" long-term transit plan to be completed and highlight some priorities for projects like this so that people, especially people like Galpin and Craig Burrows (who last threw out the airport LRT promise in the last municipal election), can understand that the SE, North Central and probably a few other projects should have higher priority than the airport LRT when building the system.

Exactly. Route Ahead is a absolutely necessary initiative. Planning a network one piece at a time does not work. We

Like Jarrett Walker said at the Better Transit YYC event: every 10 years or so, cities have to take a step back and look at the overall system and how it works. Then they need to "prune" the system- reducing ineffective routes and strengthening important ones.

5seconds · #**4884** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 5:14 PM**

Would a NE-LRT Airport connection represent an alternate end-of-line station?

Is there anyway it could stop at the airport as a stop along the way, or would it have to terminate there?

suburbia · #**4885** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 5:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Would a NE-LRT Airport connection represent an alternate end-of-line station?

Is there anyway it could stop at the airport as a stop along the way, or would it have to terminate there?

It could be a spur such that different cars have different terminations. In downtown you could catch a train heading to the NE that says either Airport or Skyview. That would mean the airport would never have trains every five minutes, and nor would Skyview, but these extremities would be sufficiently serviced for their populations.

The concept of the airport being a stop along the way north doesn't make sense as it is too far west relative to skyview, etc. You could take it all the way to the NC line I suppose, so those trains would go, as an example, starting on the west line, all the way up the NE, splinter to the airport, join the NC line, and end in the SE line. Would make for some funky scheduling work, but would be possible. The benefit to this plan would be, that from the airport, not only could you access the NE, downtown and West directly, but also all the way down the north central spine, and the SE - all without transferring trains. If someone is coming in to visit a patient at the South hospital or is headed to a big event at the Stampede or Eau Claire, they hop on the westbound train from the airport. If someone is coming to visit family that lives in signal hill or the westbrook TOD, or UCalgary DT Campus, they hop on the eastbound train from the airport. The airport and areas around it would be 'almost' as well connected as downtown. Once the airport tunnel and the 96th avenue connection are both in place, the additional cost of connecting all the may is marginal relative to the potential value. It also is 'properly' integrating one of the most important airports in our country and a huge asset of this city.

Drawing, sad as it may be, is mine:

Hmmm ... I like this plan. Can I get some royalties?

You Need A Thneed · #**4886** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 5:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Would a NE-LRT Airport connection represent an alternate end-of-line station?

Is there anyway it could stop at the airport as a stop along the way, or would it have to terminate there?

There no way to have an airport terminal stop along the current plan, and still reach the already determined future station locations. Skyview Ranch is well under construction - oriented towards the future LRT Station.

Having a spur would be an option, but my guess as to what gets built in the future will be a separate line connecting the NE line, Airport Terminal, Future High Speed Rail line, and the NC line, and perhaps extending further than that eventually.

Full Mountain · #**4887** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 7:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

There no way to have an airport terminal stop along the current plan, and still reach the already determined future station locations. Skyview Ranch is well under construction - oriented towards the future LRT Station.

Having a spur would be an option, but my guess as to what gets built in the future will be a separate line connecting the NE line, Airport Terminal, Future High Speed Rail line, and the NC line, and perhaps extending further than that eventually.

I would suspect that the only way that a airport line will be built will be part of a major north cross town route (ie from ring road to ring road sort of thing)

frinkprof · #**4888** Posted **Apr 19, 2012, 8:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

I would suspect that the only way that a airport line will be built will be part of a major north cross town route (ie from ring road to ring road sort of thing)

Really? I think the case is there for an airport spur from either the NE or north central line (looking more and more like the NE line). That could be the first phase in such a crosstown route (probably going as far as a north central line connection as a second phase), but the airport is a big enough destination/trip generator on its own (of course, to reiterate, not as big as SE, North Central, etc.) to not have to be just a stop along a crosstown route. It would probably get built at some time whether or not the rest of a crosstown route was in the offing.

Koolfire · #**4889** Posted **Apr 20, 2012, 4:41 AM**

I'm thinking if they spur to the airport why stop there. They could continue on to the North Central artery north of Beddington Trail. The only problem I see is that it would be about same travel time as using the current 301.

I would spur off McKnight station and run along Metis Trail to 96th and then head west as it would be 13km vs 15 km to North Pointe but building it along Metis would require an additional km worth of track to be built. 2.6 KM from McKnight station to Metis/96th vs 1.6 KM from 60th/96th to Metis/96th.

Currently Cityhall to McKnight is 12KM covered in about 20 minutes with 7 stops. This extension would be 13KM but only 3 stop (Harvest,Airport,McKnight) so about 15 minutes. Total 35 minutes. 301 currently (at least according to timing points which I think is wrong for rush hour) takes 35 minutes from North Pointe to Downtown. So the question is: Is it worth it?

Bassic Lab · #**4890** Posted **Apr 21, 2012, 1:23 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolfire

I'm thinking if they spur to the airport why stop there. They could continue on to the North Central artery north of Beddington Trail. The only problem I see is that it would be about same travel time as using the current 301.

I would spur off McKnight station and run along Metis Trail to 96th and then head west as it would be 13km vs 15 km to North Pointe but building it along Metis would require an additional km worth of track to be built. 2.6 KM from McKnight station to Metis/96th vs 1.6 KM from 60th/96th to Metis/96th.

Currently Cityhall to McKnight is 12KM covered in about 20 minutes with 7 stops. This extension would be 13KM but only 3 stop (Harvest,Airport,McKnight) so about 15 minutes. Total 35 minutes. 301 currently (at least according to timing points which I think is wrong for rush hour) takes 35 minutes from North Pointe to Downtown. So the question is: Is it worth it?

That is an interesting idea. It could serve to relieve pressure from the Centre Street busses (though it would save less from the 301 and more from the multitude of rush hour express busses that use the corridor during peak traffic time) if they become overburdened before a true NC LRT could be built for whatever reason. There would definitely need to be conditions though. At a bare minimum the 8 Ave Subway would need to be built first; there is no way that 7 Ave could handle existing train traffic and the traffic from the airport-norh central spur. It would need to be designed with the future in mind; the Harvest Hills Boulevard section would need to be built with a future connection to a true NC LRT in mind and the Airport section would need to be able to form its own independent line in the future. It would need to be considerably cheaper than the eventual true NC LRT; there is no point in making a half assed stop gap NC LRT just to serve the Airport if it costs anywhere near as much as the chosen NC LRT routing. Lastly, 36 St NE would need to be able to handle the additional traffic; I'm not sure how many more peak hour trains that section can handle before the level crossings seriously begin to impair the functionality of certain intersections (I've already mentioned my belief that the 36 St NE section may well need to be rebuilt as an elevated line to allow eventually desired headways on the NE LRT).

I still think it would be better to complete the six radial lines, the 8 Ave Subway, and maybe even a 17 Ave SE line before we worry about serving the Airport. That said, if it could be done for less than a billion, delay the need for a NC LRT from the 15-20 year horizon to 30+ to allow us to save for a Centre Street Subway, and give us an Airport connection sooner, then it might be a good idea.

Also I think it would be better for an Airport line, eventually meant to function as an independent connector between the NC LRT and the NE LRT with further extensions at some distant point in time, to continue along 96 Ave/Airport Trail to connect with the NE LRT in the vicinity of 96 Ave and 60 St. There would also need to be more than three stations along it and the Harvest Hills portion of the NC LRT. Initially we'd want the currently planned Coventry Station (at Harvest Hills @ roughly Country Village Road), Harvest Hills Station (at Harvest Hills @ 96 Ave), and Aurora Station (at 96 Ave @ roughly Aurora Park Link), along with the Airport Station and in the future we would want the planned 96 Ave Station (at the CP tracks for transfers to commuter/High Speed Rail), along with a station around 96 Ave @ Metis Trail. The future stations would depend on the build out of Commuter/HSR on the one hand and the build out of the industrial park on the other; they may even be called for at the time such a theoretical NC LRT/Airport Line stop gap would be built.

ByeByeBaby · #**4891** Posted **Apr 21, 2012, 4:15 AM**

I'm a huge believer in airport transit. However, recently, I've begun to think the only reason to run the C-Train to the airport is if there will be a market for east-west transit in the area independent of an airport connection. There's certainly a fair bit of growth projected in the north and northeast, so it's possible a market may emerge. There is also a notional transit alignment protected along Beddington Trail (passing through Hidden Valley) to Symons Valley. In theory, this is a spur from a north-central line, but it could also be an east-west line that connects to the NC line, then continues to the airport and on to 96th and 60th St to connect in some way with the NE LRT.

An alternate approach is an automated people mover that connects the airport to the nearest LRT station, probably on a NC line (no matter what corridor). For an example, the DFW Skylink runs at up to 60 km/h. Because APM vehicles are lighter than LRT, the infrastructure is cheaper - the DFW system is 8 km long and was built in 2005 for $225M. The West LRT is the same length, but something like four times that cost, and it isn't 100% grade separated. The downside to APM systems is limited capacity; the system at DFW has about 2000 people/hour capacity, while the LRT will have ten times that capacity at four cars. And, as a bonus, an APM would permit multiple stations in the airport; say one at terminal A, one between B/C and D, and one in the new international terminal, with potential for future terminals and an offsite rental car facility at 96th.

mersar · #**4892** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 2:51 PM**

Lots of details for CONNECT are now on the CT web site at http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/connect.html

Highlights:

Two types of cards (reloadable and disposable)
- reloadable are available in card or key fob format ($2 and $5 to purchase one time cost)
Purchase online, including with auto-reload
Monthly pass users don't need to swipe their card at LRT stations
90 minute transfers will work automatically
Current paper based single tickets and books of 10 tickets will remain
Monthly passes will be electronic (disposable card with month printed on it) as well as airport passes
Can load monthly pass, 10 tickets or a cash amount to reloadable cards (but they mention in future possibility of yearly and weekly passes too)
There will be a 'lost card protection' service on reloadable cards only

No update on when it launches, aside from this summer. But the example images they show of the disposable cards are for June 2012 so lets hope. Most TVM's and quite a few of the bus readers are appearing to be ready to go (showing a white light with a message to swipe your card) and I believe the plan had been to use the Spring and Summer students at UofC and MRU as the test group for the new system (Spring semester starts on May 9 at UofC so I may take a peak at the Ticket Office and see what they are handing out for UPass)

You Need A Thneed · #**4893** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 3:07 PM**

Some Details about the sunnyside station renovation.

5seconds · #**4894** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 4:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mersar

Lots of details for CONNECT are now on the CT web site at http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/connect.html

Highlights:

Two types of cards (reloadable and disposable)
- reloadable are available in card or key fob format ($2 and $5 to purchase one time cost)
Purchase online, including with auto-reload
Monthly pass users don't need to swipe their card at LRT stations
90 minute transfers will work automatically
Current paper based single tickets and books of 10 tickets will remain
Monthly passes will be electronic (disposable card with month printed on it) as well as airport passes
Can load monthly pass, 10 tickets or a cash amount to reloadable cards (but they mention in future possibility of yearly and weekly passes too)
There will be a 'lost card protection' service on reloadable cards only

No update on when it launches, aside from this summer. But the example images they show of the disposable cards are for June 2012 so lets hope. Most TVM's and quite a few of the bus readers are appearing to be ready to go (showing a white light with a message to swipe your card) and I believe the plan had been to use the Spring and Summer students at UofC and MRU as the test group for the new system (Spring semester starts on May 9 at UofC so I may take a peak at the Ticket Office and see what they are handing out for UPass)

Sounds good. I wonder what the range of the card will be (like if I keep the card in my wallet, can I just swipe my wallet without taking the card out?).

I also wonder if there is any flexibility in the transfers. I know that when snow is bad, and buses are really delayed, drivers will give out new transfers to people when they get off so that they have a valid transfer for the next leg of their journey (I have had a few 90 minute journeys).

I notice that under future uses they have 'Weekly and Yearly' passes. I wonder if they have started to look at that yet.

Full Mountain · #**4895** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 4:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5seconds

Sounds good. I wonder what the range of the card will be (like if I keep the card in my wallet, can I just swipe my wallet without taking the card out?).

I also wonder if there is any flexibility in the transfers. I know that when snow is bad, and buses are really delayed, drivers will give out new transfers to people when they get off so that they have a valid transfer for the next leg of their journey (I have had a few 90 minute journeys).

I notice that under future uses they have 'Weekly and Yearly' passes. I wonder if they have started to look at that yet.

I would imagine that they will work from inside your wallet, I suspect they will be similar to the building access cards.

MasterG · #**4896** Posted **Apr 27, 2012, 6:41 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

Some Details about the sunnyside station renovation.

I like it, it looks very well done, seems to integrate well with the area. The hippies and drum circles of Sunnyside will have a new home with that stage

You Need A Thneed · #**4897** Posted **Apr 29, 2012, 8:15 PM**

NE LRT extention is supposed to open up on August 27th.

mersar · #**4898** Posted **May 2, 2012, 8:34 PM**

According to an article in the Herald the CONNECT system is up and running for its pilot phase as of this week with 400 UofC students and 100 City staff. No word on full launch yet.

DizzyEdge · #**4899** Posted **May 4, 2012, 7:52 PM**

There's a bunch of Jane's Walks this weekend
http://janeswalk.net/cities/landing/category/calgary/

And I see one is NCLRT related:

Sat May 05 16:00 North Central LRT - Transforming Community Julia Frohlich, Community Member, & Jen Malzer, Senior Transit Planner at City of Calgary - Buchanan School, 3717 Centre Street North

DizzyEdge · #**4900** Posted **May 8, 2012, 8:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

There's a bunch of Jane's Walks this weekend
http://janeswalk.net/cities/landing/category/calgary/

And I see one is NCLRT related:

Sat May 05 16:00 North Central LRT - Transforming Community Julia Frohlich, Community Member, & Jen Malzer, Senior Transit Planner at City of Calgary - Buchanan School, 3717 Centre Street North

A couple of things:

I went on the NCLRT walk, and we all had some good discussions. Some things which were mentioned, which are still up in the air of course so don't take this as anything concrete:

- since the Nose Creek route is 25% longer than straight up Centre, some time tests going up Centre (in a car) were similar to the estimated Nose Creek route
- Got a very good look at the grade going down into the Nose Creek area, and why CT might be concerned about busses in the winter.
- There was apparently some talk of the new Science Centre perhaps having access to a NCLRT station, but the Science Centre is now looking at projects at the creek itself, so aren't necessarily interested any more
- There is no appetite for a solution which requires lots of expropriation
- Although nothing has been nailed down, there has been some thoughts about a low floor LRT which possibly shares Centre or the Centre ROW anyway
- Preference is to not cul-de-sac tens of east-west aves
- No appetite for 36th st style mess

I can't really elaborate on any of those since they were all just brief comments, and I may have misunderstood any one of them.

Also somewhat related (as there had been some talk on here about possible station site) , I see this piece of city property is for sale:

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=calgary&hl...JOs9Gt0aSAVaf_D2RA&cbp=12,123.36,,0,2.65