Calgary Public Transit II

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

There was enough after paying for LRT fleet renewal, or has that been pushed off?

I think there was about $200M for fleet renewal (we should be hearing about that soon, I think), about $300M for the SETWAY, and a little bit for 17th Ave SE.

[Northski]

The city has about 500 million in reserves it can use for SETWAY. However usually it likes to have a significant amount of unspent money in reserves so that when there are federal and provincial funding programs it has the money for matching grants. The 500 million is after the current green trip and msi funding re-allocations/allocations.

http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sirepub/view.aspx?cabinet=published_meetings&fileid=146231

[frinkprof]

Northeast LRT Station Refurbishment/Platform Extensions

The six remaining northeast line stations will be refurbished in 2013 and 2014, and have their platforms replaced and extended.

Rundle, Marlborough and Franklin stations will be done in 2013 with Barlow/Max Bell, Zoo and Bridgeland stations being done in 2014.

The platforms will be completely replaced in all cases and furnishings, shelters, etc. will be upgraded. In some cases, the pedestrian overpass accesses to these stations will be replaced as well.

The first station scheduled for refurbishment is Rundle Station. Construction starts late this month. The station will be able to remain open most of the time, save for the platform replacement, which will take place over a long weekend (not sure which one yet - but my guess is Family Day long weekend or Good Friday long weekend) when the station will be closed. Marlborough Station construction starts in March.

Here's a before/after rendering (not that great a rendering, but you get the idea):

More information: http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Transit-projects/NE-LRT-platform-extensions.aspx

------------------------------

With this news, the completion of the 4-car capacity upgrades becomes more clear, but the following stations are still up in the air.

University - Only a 4 month window to work with due to the school year.

SAIT - See University. Also has an enclosure on either end - one or both of which will have to be completely or partially torn down.

Victoria Park/Stampede - Timing is difficult for this one due to Stampede, hockey season and other events that make this a critical station for much of the year.

Banff Trail - Should be done during the football offseason. Not as difficult as Victoria Park/Stampede, but not without constraint.

Anderson - No temporal or site constraints other than it is a busy transfer station.

Lion's Park - Should be the easiest of the remaining stations. The schedule for this one is known. Starts Spring 2013 and lasts 6 months. Will be open for much of that time.

39th Avenue - Somewhat difficult due to site conditions. Might need a road closure of 39th Avenue.

[andasen]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Northeast LRT Station Refurbishment/Platform Extensions

[snip]

39th Avenue - Somewhat difficult due to site conditions. Might need a road closure of 39th Avenue.

Thanks forthe info!

With 39th in particular wasn't there also the option of outright moving it which came up in the mission road project? They still musing on which way they're going to go on this one?

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

Northeast LRT Station Refurbishment/Platform Extensions

The six remaining northeast line stations will be refurbished in 2013 and 2014, and have their platforms replaced and extended.

Rundle, Marlborough and Franklin stations will be done in 2013 with Barlow/Max Bell, Zoo and Bridgeland stations being done in 2014.

The platforms will be completely replaced in all cases and furnishings, shelters, etc. will be upgraded. In some cases, the pedestrian overpass accesses to these stations will be replaced as well.

The first station scheduled for refurbishment is Rundle Station. Construction starts late this month. The station will be able to remain open most of the time, save for the platform replacement, which will take place over a long weekend (not sure which one yet - but my guess is Family Day long weekend or Good Friday long weekend) when the station will be closed. Marlborough Station construction starts in March.

Here's a before/after rendering (not that great a rendering, but you get the idea):

More information: http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/Pages/Transit-projects/NE-LRT-platform-extensions.aspx

------------------------------

With this news, the completion of the 4-car capacity upgrades becomes more clear, but the following stations are still up in the air.

University - Only a 4 month window to work with due to the school year.

SAIT - See University. Also has an enclosure on either end - one or both of which will have to be completely or partially torn down.

Victoria Park/Stampede - Timing is difficult for this one due to Stampede, hockey season and other events that make this a critical station for much of the year.

Banff Trail - Should be done during the football offseason. Not as difficult as Victoria Park/Stampede, but not without constraint.

Anderson - No temporal or site constraints other than it is a busy transfer station.

Lion's Park - Should be the easiest of the remaining stations. The schedule for this one is known. Starts Spring 2013 and lasts 6 months. Will be open for much of that time.

39th Avenue - Somewhat difficult due to site conditions. Might need a road closure of 39th Avenue.

Thanks for the info! It seems as though the NE/WLRT will be ready for 4 car trains before the NW/SLRT? I assume the latter is the more crowded of the 2 lines, but I haven't seen numbers since the new line opened. I expect CT is anxiously awaiting January's ridership figures.

It seems to me that taking the Ctrain will be an entirely new experience in a few years. Some of the stations you mentioned may present opportunities for total redesign, and there are only a few chance times remaining before the new trains arrive. There was talk about the stampede redeveloping their entrance to allow direct entry from 17th ave into the park. I have no idea how they intend to do this, but they'll definitely need to collaborate with CT, and maybe a redesigned Victoria park station could fit into this. University and SAITACADJubilee may also lend themselves to creative solutions. Interesting to hear that 39 may move completely! -an underutilized site with a lot of potential. I wish IOL had moved there! I think improved pedestrian environment could do wonders for the station area.

Are they really going to paint the ped overpass at Rundle red? I've always thought Rundle ought to be one of the flagship stations on the line seeing as how there are so many jobs and residents in the area, and that 32nd ave is one of the most economically-diverse roads in Calgary, but it is hindered by circuitous obstacle-laden pedestrian routes and unattractive parking. I hope that in my lifetime I see Rundle transform into a true TOD. King Rylucky would impose the following actions/policies:
1) created a second pedestrian overpass at the north end of Rundle Station creating a straight path to the PLC.
2) parcel off the parking lots to the east and north of Sunridge mall to sell. Build a park with real grass and trees and a plaza near the station. Think Westbrook ARP.
3) systematically go through all of NE Calgary's industrial areas and ensure that there are sidewalks or AT LEAST safe pedestrian routes through parking lots. Revisit policies on building setbacks, and consider a type of bonusing system for developers that improve the pedestrian environments. Build a green corridor thats threads through the parking lots in the area connecting Rundle to Nose Creek via vista heights. The aim of these initiatives with regards to Rundle Station is to encourage more transit culture in the area.

[RyLucky]

^^^
4) build a crosstown BRT routes on 16th ave N and 52nd St E that converge at Rundle station. H

[fusili]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

. King Rylucky would impose the following actions/policies:
1) created a second pedestrian overpass at the north end of Rundle Station creating a straight path to the PLC.

A thousand times yes!

[fusili]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

^^^
4) build a crosstown BRT routes on 16th ave N and 52nd St E that converge at Rundle station. H

And again, a thousand times yes. Having a transfer station/hub at Rundle/PLC would be a great idea. There is a case to be made to run the 52nd Street BRT over to Rundle/PLC via 32nd ave just to make that a better transfer. You could also run the 16th avenue N BRT on 32nd ave east of Deerfoot, which seems to have more employment on it. That way the NE LRT, the 52nd Street BRT and the 16th Ave BRT would all converge at PLC/Rundle. It would make it a great NE transit hub much akin to Westbrook or Heritage in other quadrants of the city.

I forgot who, but someone posted a fantasy transit map that had something like this.

[Cage]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

With this news, the completion of the 4-car capacity upgrades becomes more clear, but the following stations are still up in the air.

University - Only a 4 month window to work with due to the school year.

SAIT - See University. Also has an enclosure on either end - one or both of which will have to be completely or partially torn down.

Victoria Park/Stampede - Timing is difficult for this one due to Stampede, hockey season and other events that make this a critical station for much of the year.

Banff Trail - Should be done during the football offseason. Not as difficult as Victoria Park/Stampede, but not without constraint.

Anderson - No temporal or site constraints other than it is a busy transfer station.

Lion's Park - Should be the easiest of the remaining stations. The schedule for this one is known. Starts Spring 2013 and lasts 6 months. Will be open for much of that time.

39th Avenue - Somewhat difficult due to site conditions. Might need a road closure of 39th Avenue.

University: I believe there is enough room to expand the platfrom to four cars at the NW end. If not (because of the power station at this end) then a little movement to the SE side could accomplish the task. This could be completed with minimal disruption to the station if (and this is a big IF) CT is will to just do the basics of an extension and not look at whole station redesign/refurbsihment.

SAIT: Blow out the enclosure on the NW end and there would be enough room for platform extension. Could still keep the very end of the extension if CT wanted, but based on the Chinook designs, could easily look at open air section for the NW.

Victoria Park: Use the third platfrom while the station undergoes extension. Again keep things to minimum and only focus on the train extension to the north.

Banff Trail: Easily done by extending the platfrom to the SE.

Lions Park: Pull the station tpo the East, however could blow out the bus bays.

39th Avenue: Close the road and extend the station to the North. Once you overcome the political hurdle of closing the road, should the lights at MacLeod also be removed?

My problem with the four car stations project, and its something that could become a major customer relations issue for CT, is the lack of reasoning/transparency at completing whole station refurbishments vs just the bear minimums to get to four car capability.
1) What is the reason for tearing out Chinook Station vs just the minimum extension to the south?
2) Why not just do the bear minimum for extensions?
3) How does the station refurb impact the average user once completed. For example, the Chinook Station will save station users about 20 seconds versus the current up and over. A prettier station does nothing for its capabilities or customer service enhancements. How does a prettier station improve the experience vs faster timeline to four car capability.
4) If they are taking the opportunity to refurb the stations. why paint all the activities as REQUIRED for the four car capability?

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

Thanks for the info! It seems as though the NE/WLRT will be ready for 4 car trains before the NW/SLRT? I assume the latter is the more crowded of the 2 lines, but I haven't seen numbers since the new line opened. I expect CT is anxiously awaiting January's ridership figures.

It seems to me that taking the Ctrain will be an entirely new experience in a few years. Some of the stations you mentioned may present opportunities for total redesign, and there are only a few chance times remaining before the new trains arrive. There was talk about the stampede redeveloping their entrance to allow direct entry from 17th ave into the park. I have no idea how they intend to do this, but they'll definitely need to collaborate with CT, and maybe a redesigned Victoria park station could fit into this. University and SAITACADJubilee may also lend themselves to creative solutions. Interesting to hear that 39 may move completely! -an underutilized site with a lot of potential. I wish IOL had moved there! I think improved pedestrian environment could do wonders for the station area.

Are they really going to paint the ped overpass at Rundle red? I've always thought Rundle ought to be one of the flagship stations on the line seeing as how there are so many jobs and residents in the area, and that 32nd ave is one of the most economically-diverse roads in Calgary, but it is hindered by circuitous obstacle-laden pedestrian routes and unattractive parking. I hope that in my lifetime I see Rundle transform into a true TOD. King Rylucky would impose the following actions/policies:
1) created a second pedestrian overpass at the north end of Rundle Station creating a straight path to the PLC.
2) parcel off the parking lots to the east and north of Sunridge mall to sell. Build a park with real grass and trees and a plaza near the station. Think Westbrook ARP.
3) systematically go through all of NE Calgary's industrial areas and ensure that there are sidewalks or AT LEAST safe pedestrian routes through parking lots. Revisit policies on building setbacks, and consider a type of bonusing system for developers that improve the pedestrian environments. Build a green corridor thats threads through the parking lots in the area connecting Rundle to Nose Creek via vista heights. The aim of these initiatives with regards to Rundle Station is to encourage more transit culture in the area.

I am surprised that no direct connect exists to PLC, I mean even when they built the train in the 80s they must have known about trip-generation locations. that has to be one of the biggest destinations in the NE.

[Riise]

Originally Posted by fusili

And again, a thousand times yes. Having a transfer station/hub at Rundle/PLC would be a great idea. There is a case to be made to run the 52nd Street BRT over to Rundle/PLC via 32nd ave just to make that a better transfer. You could also run the 16th avenue N BRT on 32nd ave east of Deerfoot, which seems to have more employment on it. That way the NE LRT, the 52nd Street BRT and the 16th Ave BRT would all converge at PLC/Rundle. It would make it a great NE transit hub much akin to Westbrook or Heritage in other quadrants of the city.

I forgot who, but someone posted a fantasy transit map that had something like this.

I've always automatically thought of having a 16th Avenue BRT interchange at Marlborough but Rundle, which is my home statation, does make a lot of sense. I also believe that Rundle Station and 32nd Avenue NE do have a lot of redevelopment potential. They really are prime areas for transformations from barren auto-centric areas to people-oriented 'places'.

[Riise]

Although I am against the privatization of railways, does the fleet renewal project present us with a chance to utilize private finance? Would it make financial sense, or provide us with a reasonable advantage, if a bank or investment fund were to buy new LRVs that the City would then lease from them?

During a funding crunch like the one we are currently facing, it might be nice to free up funds earmarked for fleet renewal so they can be pumped into larger projects.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by fusili

I forgot who, but someone posted a fantasy transit map that had something like this.

This one?


Regarding the possible 39th ave closure, I just wanted to say I'm in favour of keeping the lights at Macleod for pedestrians heading to the station. Perhaps an on-demand xwalk?

Regarding Cage's 4 questions - good questions haha. While I'm in favour of total station refurbishment, you are right: it seems like simple extensions could be done without station closure (ie close one end at a time while work is ongoing - like sunnyside). However, A more attractive station definitely improves customer perception of their CT experience. Take the west LRT for example, superb quality that the rest of the city deserves too.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

This one?

That's the one.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

Regarding the possible 39th ave closure, I just wanted to say I'm in favour of keeping the lights at Macleod for pedestrians heading to the station. Perhaps an on-demand xwalk?

Regarding Cage's 4 questions - good questions haha. While I'm in favour of total station refurbishment, you are right: it seems like simple extensions could be done without station closure (ie close one end at a time while work is ongoing - like sunnyside). However, A more attractive station definitely improves customer perception of their CT experience. Take the west LRT for example, superb quality that the rest of the city deserves too.

I am surprised that there isn't a larger redevelopment push in this grubby industrial area around 39th. I would assume it is becoming less attractive to many industries due to increasing congestion, and more attractive to others requiring proximity to downtown, central city etc.

My guess is that once the beltline is built out more fully in 20 years, condo/office redevelopement might look to this area. the proximity and availability of large tracks of land primed for redevelopment in this area is probably the greatest potential after the current inner city communities redevelopment becomes more challenging as they are filled.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I am surprised that there isn't a larger redevelopment push in this grubby industrial area around 39th. I would assume it is becoming less attractive to many industries due to increasing congestion, and more attractive to others requiring proximity to downtown, central city etc.

My guess is that once the beltline is built out more fully in 20 years, condo/office redevelopement might look to this area. the proximity and availability of large tracks of land primed for redevelopment in this area is probably the greatest potential after the current inner city communities redevelopment becomes more challenging as they are filled.

I believe the inner city industrial, such as Manchester, actually has higher prices per area than other industrial areas. I remember a report stating something to that effect.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Riise

Although I am against the privatization of railways, does the fleet renewal project present us with a chance to utilize private finance? Would it make financial sense, or provide us with a reasonable advantage, if a bank or investment fund were to buy new LRVs that the City would then lease from them?

During a funding crunch like the one we are currently facing, it might be nice to free up funds earmarked for fleet renewal so they can be pumped into larger projects.

Easier to finance through other means. (the city borrows at provincial interest rates) Now, if we were going to issue a contract for all fleet maintenance and car provision based on a fee per service hour basis it might make sense - but only if you believe there are inefficiencies under the current system. Being able to see the true cost not the marginal cost of additional service might create service issues that may not be optimal (shorter service hours replaced by buses).

The land development around Westbrook will be interesting - I hope the city can recover a good portion of its costs.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by fusili

I believe the inner city industrial, such as Manchester, actually has higher prices per area than other industrial areas. I remember a report stating something to that effect.

That trend would be indicative of leading to redevelopment in the long run, wouldn't it? (among other factors)

If land becomes more and more valuable, uses like office and residential offer better returns on land than low-density industrial. I think we already have seen that, most larger , space-intensive industries have moved out, smaller sized ones are the norm. these will be gradually replaced with more and more efficient uses of land, as land prices increase.

By how much they would need to increase to encourage office and residential development is another question entirely..

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MasterG

That trend would be indicative of leading to redevelopment in the long run, wouldn't it? (among other factors)

If land becomes more and more valuable, uses like office and residential offer better returns on land than low-density industrial. I think we already have seen that, most larger , space-intensive industries have moved out, smaller sized ones are the norm. these will be gradually replaced with more and more efficient uses of land, as land prices increase.

By how much they would need to increase to encourage office and residential development is another question entirely..

Perhaps the real estate industry is thinking that, but from what I can tell, these areas are going to be light industrial for a long time. Because of the constraints on serviced industrial land in Calgary, the city is very hesitant to rezone light industrial for office or other uses. Perhaps as more industrial land in places like the SE, NE and NW becomes available, we may see some of this land convert to office, but until then, I think the prices are due more to industrial demand that potential redevelopment.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I am surprised that there isn't a larger redevelopment push in this grubby industrial area around 39th. I would assume it is becoming less attractive to many industries due to increasing congestion, and more attractive to others requiring proximity to downtown, central city etc.

My guess is that once the beltline is built out more fully in 20 years, condo/office redevelopement might look to this area. the proximity and availability of large tracks of land primed for redevelopment in this area is probably the greatest potential after the current inner city communities redevelopment becomes more challenging as they are filled.

I think you are right that eventually this area will be a great spot, but right now there are a few problems, some of which have easy solutions:
1) the impound lot is taking up a ton of land and is turbo-ugly. Move it.
2) Macleod is one of the most turbo-ugly roads in the city. Spruce it up with trees, slow traffic, encourage a better street environment, and allow more cross traffic. As is, it is a giant pain for a pedestrian to cross.

There was talk last year, i think, of a mission road ARP. It was defeated and dismissed as impractical and naive to the market. (Maybe someone else on here knows the details better). Now, there is new life for development on Mission road again, but we'll see.