Calgary Public Transit II

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

But this is what is funny to me... it is somehow unthinkable that future Calgary will find the resources to build a 7th Ave Subway in the name of increasing capacity and restoring surface traffic, but it is just a given that an "administration not yet born" will pull out all the stops to build an impossibly expensive Centre Street LRT alignment instead of Nose Creek. All for the opportunity to fight the residents of established communities block by block over TOD and intensification instead of shooting a damn near straight line to ridership rich Northern suburbs.

That groupthink strikes again; I remember someone on here pretty recently strenuously protesting the perception a Centre Street LRT is the urban alternative and the Nose Creek LRT is the suburban one.

I would still honestly appreciate a number or relative capacity that you think would be the maximum appropriate for 7th Ave (if you want a horizon, March 18, 2076 -- although seems to me that the maximum train capacity is relatively horizon independent). If we're having a discussion about whether there would be sufficient capacity for the demand, we need to actually talk about what we think the capacity and demand might be, not baldly state "never enough capacity". But maybe you don't want a discussion.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by ken0042

What are the chances that CPR would ever want to give up/sell the land they have between 9th and 10 ave? That would make for a nice LRT ROW, complete with bridges already built.

I'm just thinking that if a 7th ave subway is in the 30-50 year plan, anything could be possible.

As long as rail transportation is used, CP won't give up that land.

[RicoLance21]

Originally Posted by ken0042

What are the chances that CPR would ever want to give up/sell the land they have between 9th and 10 ave? That would make for a nice LRT ROW, complete with bridges already built.

I'm just thinking that if a 7th ave subway is in the 30-50 year plan, anything could be possible.

I think the chances that CPR would ever want to give up its downtown land is equivalent to the chances that the upper Mount Royal neighbourhood would ever accept multi-family housing.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I think the chances that CPR would ever want to give up its downtown land is equivalent to the chances that the upper Mount Royal neighbourhood would ever accept multi-family housing.

Do nanny suites count?

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

That groupthink strikes again; I remember someone on here pretty recently strenuously protesting the perception a Centre Street LRT is the urban alternative and the Nose Creek LRT is the suburban one.

I would still honestly appreciate a number or relative capacity that you think would be the maximum appropriate for 7th Ave (if you want a horizon, March 18, 2076 -- although seems to me that the maximum train capacity is relatively horizon independent). If we're having a discussion about whether there would be sufficient capacity for the demand, we need to actually talk about what we think the capacity and demand might be, not baldly state "never enough capacity". But maybe you don't want a discussion.

When I refer to a date, I am referring to projects. These projects, particularly a Centre Street LRT seems to be spoken of in a nearly present tense and that decisions being made in City Hall today are binding and to be executed on. Fusili draws on a study that refers to a population that is probably no more than a decade away in dismissing the need for something that wouldn't even conceivably be built for another 30 or 40 years.

The argument that I can't follow is that merely allocating all the "capacity" operated today to a single line and then standing before gawd and with absolute confidence claiming that it permanently invalidates the need for a 7th Ave subway, which coincidently enough is perceived to be in direct support of a proposed North Central LRT alignment you really, really don't seem to like.

As for headways, my comfort zone would be in the 3:00 to 3:30 range. Would that be sufficient with four car consists in 2050? Well, I wouldn't make that bet.

But naturally, come that time and with the benefit of history and experience with the new fangled 8th Ave LRT the very possibility of doing the same with 7th Ave will be 100% off the table. A great consensus will be reached to restore the mess on 7th Ave they had just fixed a decade or two earlier.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I suspect once the four car trains are ready to go Calgary Transit will experiment extensively with trying balance capacity with increased headways.

But this is what is funny to me... it is somehow unthinkable that future Calgary will find the resources to build a 7th Ave Subway in the name of increasing capacity and restoring surface traffic, but it is just a given that an "administration not yet born" will pull out all the stops to build an impossibly expensive Centre Street LRT alignment instead of Nose Creek. All for the opportunity to fight the residents of established communities block by block over TOD and intensification instead of shooting a damn near straight line to ridership rich Northern suburbs.

If I had some sense of the time frame you guys were working with, I just might agree with you to that point. But the sweeping claims of long-term adequacy are baffling to me.

"Calgary" is projected to double in size over the next forty years and i'm at least assuming that you guys wish to see transit's modal share grow in that time. Yet in 2013 you're all-in on declaring 7th ave as a surface ROW forever adequate.

I still don't believe for a second that in the absence of the unending debate over Centre Street vs. Nose Creek anyone would seriously be arguing this.

Same time next year boys...

The Centre Street versus Nose Creek debate clearly plays into it but I really can't understand the definitive language people are using here. The idea that 7 Ave will never need to be buried is simply bizarre. Yes, the current set up will suffice, so long as the 8 Ave subway is built, for a very long time but it will eventually hit a limit. In my opinion 36 St will actually hit the limit before 7 Ave and require its own grade separation but both will eventually happen.

Simply put, the 8 Ave subway was needed five years ago. There is a reason that, despite a growing population, we have seen LRT ridership stagnant. There has not been any spare capacity during that period. Four car consists are a stop gap that will not increase capacity by a third. In a grade separated system it would but level crossings require more time for longer trains. We will not be able to push as many four car trains through 7 Ave as we do today even if we decide to keep the current level of congestion.

There is a reason why cities a century ago began replacing at grade systems with elevated and buried ones. It only took 25 years for 7 Ave to fail to meet the needs of the NW-S and NE lines. I think that it is crazy to think that it's impossible for it to fail to meet the needs of the W-NE line in another 25, let alone 50 or 100.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

I think the chances that CPR would ever want to give up its downtown land is equivalent to the chances that the upper Mount Royal neighbourhood would ever accept multi-family housing.

Other cities have had the main lines moved out of their city-centres and re-routed around the outskirts though, haven't they? Why couldn't we?

[MalcolmTucker]

Our surrounding hills make it harder. For public transit utilization, CPR has said they'd be open to triple tracking the mainline to allow for significant use. Once the Cochrane feeder bus is at 4000 pax a day I could see a serious look see at doing that.

[RicoLance21]

Edmonton, for example, got its downtown tracks removed because there is already a cross-town set of tracks located conveniently along the Yellowhead. That gave CNR a no-brainer relocation of its tracks and rail yard out of downtown.

[Allan83]

I’m I missing something? Isn’t the SETWAY supposed to be the intermediate step before the SELRT?

The SETWAY:
-doesn’t need the downtown tunnel because the busses can get off it and use the regular city streets
-doesn’t need an extension past QP, or perhaps even Lynnwood, for the same reason
-provides more flexibility as many different bus routes and emergency vehicles can use it

On how to pay for it, the recent public consultation on how the $52 million should be spent didn’t favour spending it on big projects such as this, but perhaps between the developers and future tax revenue from developments along the line a good chunk of the money could be found. The downtown to QP SETWAY would be about $600 million, iirc, so we’d need to find about $30 million per year if I’ve done my math right.

[MalcolmTucker]

Developments don't generate incremental tax revenue in Alberta, unless a policy decision has been made to cause it to happen.

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Developments don't generate incremental tax revenue in Alberta, unless a policy decision has been made to cause it to happen.

I’m forgetting the name of the program right now but I’m referring to the one that was used to fund the improvements in East Village, using to a significant extent future tax dollars from The Bow.

[MalcolmTucker]

Yeah, without major changes I doubt the appetite to ring fence an entire section of the city out of city and education taxes would exist at either the provincial and municipal levels. If the area gets too big, and the city is willing to tax finance it (which is all TIFs are), just raise city taxes to pay for it. It has the same net effect in the end. Otherwise you run into fiscal capacity and transparency issues like Chicago.

[MalcolmTucker]

Also, population projections for 2041 came out today, with Calgary at 2,347,246 in the medium growth scenario with the province just a hair over 6 million. http://ow.ly/21oyVQ

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

Simply put, the 8 Ave subway was needed five years ago. There is a reason that, despite a growing population, we have seen LRT ridership stagnant. There has not been any spare capacity during that period. Four car consists are a stop gap that will not increase capacity by a third. In a grade separated system it would but level crossings require more time for longer trains. We will not be able to push as many four car trains through 7 Ave as we do today even if we decide to keep the current level of congestion

The practical problem is political, the only think the general public understands is adding kilometres of track and serving new communities, preferably theirs. Had the 8th Ave subway come before the West LRT idiots who read the Sun would have been raging about a wasteful "Cadillac Project" being put before adding service and probably that 7th Ave would not then be re-opened to traffic. I suspect the same dynamic will see the SE LRT come before the 8th Ave subway too.

One of my friends works with a US transit system, the agency has been trying to secure funds for a trivial project that would address some unique characteristics and improve peak service on a particular line that has extreme peaks and nothing but homeless people the rest of the time. This project has gone unfunded. Meanwhile there is Local, State and Federal money on the table for a new extension to a hospital, stadium and campus complex that is itself unfunded and may never be built. On the other hand there is always ample money for plastering agency owned buildings with solar panels and buying hybrid company cars.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I suspect the same dynamic will see the SE LRT come before the 8th Ave subway too.

This presents an interesting scenario because the 2nd st tunnel will be two levels down in order to accommodate the 8th ave tunnel. The last plans I saw had no interaction between tunnels (for a transfer you'd have to come outside and go to another entrance for the other line), which strikes me as really stupid. Of course, it was only a preliminary plan.

If we had 8B$ to spend, it seems practical to build e SELRT, NCLRT, and Eight Ave Subway all at once. All three would be well used from the start. In fact, we could use all these projects (and others) in 2013.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by RicoLance21

Edmonton, for example, got its downtown tracks removed because there is already a cross-town set of tracks located conveniently along the Yellowhead. That gave CNR a no-brainer relocation of its tracks and rail yard out of downtown.

It was a no-brainer because other than offices they had already left. The track through downtown Edmonton were really only there for the purposes of passenger rail. The yard in downtown Edmonton was more or less abandoned come the intermodal era.

Come the 90's VIA Rail in Edmonton had dwindled to just three runs of the Super Continental in each direction per week and that just couldn't justify the continued operation of the station in the Edmonton CN Tower or maintaining the ROW. Once they relocated to the Edmonton Amshack the track was removed.

[Policy Wonk]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

This presents an interesting scenario because the 2nd st tunnel will be two levels down in order to accommodate the 8th ave tunnel. The last plans I saw had no interaction between tunnels (for a transfer you'd have to come outside and go to another entrance for the other line), which strikes me as really stupid. Of course, it was only a preliminary plan.

I suspect when everything is said and done the S.E. LRT will start at grade somewhere along the CPR ROW east of 11th Street where the CPR goes from two to four tracks that used to be used for Palliser Station. Maybe even Palliser Station itself.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

I suspect when everything is said and done the S.E. LRT will start at grade somewhere along the CPR ROW east of 11th Street where the CPR goes from two to four tracks that used to be used for Palliser Station. Maybe even Palliser Station itself.

It seems not worth doing unless it at least connects to the existing lines, no?

[srperrycgy]

From the Calgary Herald's Twitter account tonight:

@calgarytransit has announced Chinook Station will reopen Sept. 2 at noon after months of upgrading.