Calgary Public Transit II

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

Good point .. However is there a better direct route from one of the NE LRT stations to the airport than what would be from the 96th Ave route taken from a NCLRT shuttle?

When the 88th Ave station is built, and Airport Trail goes through to 60th St (or whatever it gets renamed to), a shuttle would be every bit as direct as a shuttle from the NC line could be.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

When the 88th Ave station is built, and Airport Trail goes through to 60th St (or whatever it gets renamed to), a shuttle would be every bit as direct as a shuttle from the NC line could be.

True! I misread the long term plan of the Airport business park

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Cage

You are approaching this from the mindset of a public transit person and not an airport operator. This is where most of the issues have their root cause.

1. Airport expects Ctransit to lease a ticket wicket/booth like Red Arrow and the other shuttle companies. Ctransit does not see the need and does not pay for the expense, instead they get an agreement with Couche Tarde/Macs to use existing facilities free of charge.

2. Benches are provided around the arrival area for customers. The airport bus area was not designed for outdoor benches. If Ctransit wants an outdoor bench area, they can pay for the modifications an mnove their operations to International terminal.

3. All electronic kiosks are property of the airport authority and must operate to IATA CUSS (common use self service) standards. Electronid kiosks can be owned by the operator. This is to prevent each operator (read airline) from having their own proprietary kiosks. Requirements for common use equipment result in substantial savings to the airport as airlines cannot put proprietary computer equipment at the checkin counters and gates, proprietary equipment has been used to justify gate and desk hoarding by the airlines (look at LAX as an example, only Tom Bradley terminal is Common Use, all other terminals are airline specific). Hoarding the gates blocks out the smaller players or leads to expensive over expansion of the facilities. Further if one lessee gets special exception, all other airport lessees get the same treatment. To get an electronic kiosk would require Ctransit to bring it up to CUSS and CUTE standards.

4. Airport gets a lot more money from cab departure than it gets from city buss departure. Again the city approaches things from the naivity that the airport should provide services and space for free. Ctransit gets shocked when they find out the airport wants $$$ per pax boarded.

Were I the City, I would gladly pay the airport's fees, from the new toolbooths on 96th Ave.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

Were I the City, I would gladly pay the airport's fees, from the new toolbooths on 96th Ave.

I was going to go there, but didn't. Airport wants to play hardball, fine. Toll booths just outside the airport, from which Calgary Transit is exempt, would work just fine. How about a $10 airport toll? If YYC wants to be jerks about it, we can be jerks too.

[RyLucky]

No need for anyone to be jerks. It's in everyone's interest to cooperate. Does the airport have authority to ban public transit? Not legitimately. If they are worried about losing parking or taxi revenue, that's just too bad. Their role is that of an airport, not a parking authority.

[andasen]

Originally Posted by fusili

I was going to go there, but didn't. Airport wants to play hardball, fine. Toll booths just outside the airport, from which Calgary Transit is exempt, would work just fine. How about a $10 airport toll? If YYC wants to be jerks about it, we can be jerks too.

Well that's a few steps short of nuclear chicken. There has to be better way of starting the conversation than threatening M.A.D.

I suggest that it might be wiser to call in favours from Ottawa first.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by andasen

Well that's a few steps short of nuclear chicken. There has to be better way of starting the conversation than threatening M.A.D.

I suggest that it might be wiser to call in favours from Ottawa first.

Agreed. I think this can and should be solved much easier. City pays for better signs and the electronic kiosk. Airport agrees to have a non-airline have their own electronic kiosk. End of disagreement.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by fusili

Agreed. I think this can and should be solved much easier. City pays for better signs and the electronic kiosk. Airport agrees to have a non-airline have their own electronic kiosk. End of disagreement.

I agree that a mutually beneficial solution can be reached, with both parties benefitting. But if the airport were to put up ridiculous phony blocks like requiring IATA standard electronic kiosks which transit operators at YVR, SFO, SEA etc don't need (hint: the terminal here is already filled with noncompliant kiosks - I got a hundred bucks out of the noncompliant Bank of Montreal electronic kiosk last time I was there), then I would feel free to remind the airport that they are surrounded by a city, not the other way around.

[sitchensis]

Some points from what I have heard from people in the City:

1. There are ticket machines being installed at the airport.
2. There may be a space in the airport dedicated to a CT kiosk.
3. Marketing is a big component of the Route 300. Same with way-finding. The challenge is implementation, collaboration, and consistent branding.
4. There is room in the new airport tunnel for LRT -- but only single track.
5. CT is actively monitoring ridership and customer satisfaction on the Route 300. These things have to happen in increments and there must be a business case for investment instead of a "Wouldn't it be nice" sentiment.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by sitchensis

Some points from what I have heard from people in the City:

1. There are ticket machines being installed at the airport.
2. There may be a space in the airport dedicated to a CT kiosk.
3. Marketing is a big component of the Route 300. Same with way-finding. The challenge is implementation, collaboration, and consistent branding.
4. There is room in the new airport tunnel for LRT -- but only single track.
5. CT is actively monitoring ridership and customer satisfaction on the Route 300. These things have to happen in increments and there must be a business case for investment instead of a "Wouldn't it be nice" sentiment.

I agree with these steps. I don't agree that adding a sign to let you know where the bus is should ever be an incremental improvement for Phase 2 of the project. Even a temporary one until branding is sorted out would have sufficed.

I know they will get there eventually with improvements, I am just surprised it started with such obvious short-comings. I am sure in time it will smooth out. The actual route and ride is quite quick and direct, as well as the mapping around what stop to get off of if you are in a particular hotel. good things will come to those who wait I suppose, for the rest of the improvements.

[freeweed]

While I personally think that an LRT line to the airport is one of the silliest transit ideas being floated around lately (for many reasons, but they've already been well-articulated by others) - I do agree with one thing:

YYC is bizarrely the only airport of any size that I can think of, where it's not obvious how to get on public transit. As a Calgarian, I figured it out years ago, but as a visitor? Good luck. And even at that, we don't exactly have many bus lines there - is it just the one still? I'm remembering the old days when it was only the 57 taking you to Whitehorn.

Our spoke-and-hub transit model fails miserably when it comes to things like this.

[MMMBeer]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I agree with these steps. I don't agree that adding a sign to let you know where the bus is should ever be an incremental improvement for Phase 2 of the project. Even a temporary one until branding is sorted out would have sufficed.

I know they will get there eventually with improvements, I am just surprised it started with such obvious short-comings. I am sure in time it will smooth out. The actual route and ride is quite quick and direct, as well as the mapping around what stop to get off of if you are in a particular hotel. good things will come to those who wait I suppose, for the rest of the improvements.

Depends on your definition of "quick" and "direct".

I have taken the 300 a couple of times from downtown to YYC, once mid-morning and once just after lunch. Both times were before the new route via the new 96 Ave bridge - but both trips were 40-45 mins, from getting on the bus to getting out at YYC.

The route has stops on on Centre, but what this really ends up doing is picking people up in Chinatown that otherwise would have gotten on a 3 and giving them an alternative on their trip up Centre. If you really wanted to be "quick" and "direct" should just eliminate all the stops on Centre outside of DT. Maybe even cut down on the number of stops DT too.

Just my observation. I took this only for fun as a transit geek (although I really was catching a plane both times) - if I was in a hurry and/or could expense the ride for work, I would be taking a cab or driving my own car and parking.

[freeweed]

Wait what?

Any conceivable "LRT-equivalent" route would leave YYC, head straight down Deerfoot, and its very first stop would be close to if not right on 7th Ave. No wonder people think an LRT line is the only solution, if this is how poorly implemented our bus service is.

$8.50 for a 45 minute trip, or $25 for a 15 minute cab ride? I can't imagine many business types choosing the former. And as a tourist, I sure as shit wouldn't lug my bags onto a city bus if this was the kind of service received.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

Depends on your definition of "quick" and "direct".

I have taken the 300 a couple of times from downtown to YYC, once mid-morning and once just after lunch. Both times were before the new route via the new 96 Ave bridge - but both trips were 40-45 mins, from getting on the bus to getting out at YYC.

The route has stops on on Centre, but what this really ends up doing is picking people up in Chinatown that otherwise would have gotten on a 3 and giving them an alternative on their trip up Centre. If you really wanted to be "quick" and "direct" should just eliminate all the stops on Centre outside of DT. Maybe even cut down on the number of stops DT too.

Just my observation. I took this only for fun as a transit geek (although I really was catching a plane both times) - if I was in a hurry and/or could expense the ride for work, I would be taking a cab or driving my own car and parking.

ah good comments, perhaps the times that I took was luckily fast, (about 30 minutes both times). I would support a full deerfoot to Memorial express bus, no stops. Perhaps with a provision to stop on 16th ave if the Crosstown BRT is built. And the eventual goal to switch-over to a NCLRT route at airport trail and centre st if that is finished.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

Depends on your definition of "quick" and "direct".

I have taken the 300 a couple of times from downtown to YYC, once mid-morning and once just after lunch. Both times were before the new route via the new 96 Ave bridge - but both trips were 40-45 mins, from getting on the bus to getting out at YYC.

The route has stops on on Centre, but what this really ends up doing is picking people up in Chinatown that otherwise would have gotten on a 3 and giving them an alternative on their trip up Centre. If you really wanted to be "quick" and "direct" should just eliminate all the stops on Centre outside of DT. Maybe even cut down on the number of stops DT too.

Just my observation. I took this only for fun as a transit geek (although I really was catching a plane both times) - if I was in a hurry and/or could expense the ride for work, I would be taking a cab or driving my own car and parking.

Agree totally that the route has too many stops. Everything in north central Calgary runs through the 78th Ave terminal; I would have a stop there maybe, but otherwise, the only stops should be in the downtown. (And there is no need for a stop at the Harry Hays building and then a second one two blocks away in Chinatown.) If you get rid of the stops, you should be able to get down to a 35 minute or so trip, which is reasonably competitive, especially with bus lane improvements on Centre St permitting more reliability than Deerfoot. I suspect that the extra stops are there to provide additional ridership to try and justify the bus.

PS to freeweed: 15 minute cab ride? Are you going to the Deerfoot/Memorial interchange? Actual downtown destinations are closer to a 25 minute cab ride, 30+ mins during rush hour.

How much is the ticket for driving in the transit only lane? (NB Centre St before McKnight)

CPS nailed somebody there today and it was awesome.

[TallisRH]

Whole bunch of construction pics:
4-car platform extensions

Big update - click each photo for a larger version.

Rundle Station
Nearly done here, though most of the communications equipment on the platform still needs to be installed. Still waiting for lighting to be installed as well.




Marlborough Station
Similar to Rundle, most of the major platform work is finished. Extra wide emergency exit ramp at the south end is coming along too.




Franklin Station
Waiting for platform signage along with lighting and communications equipment to be installed.


Victoria Park


Lions Park
Both inbound and outbound platforms are installed now. Work continues on the new ramps.


Anderson Station

Tuscany Station progress

Catenary poles looked to be up nearly all the way from Crowfoot to Tuscany.

Heritage Station pedestrian bridge

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by TallisRH

Nice photos! This one really emphasizes the high density around Tuscany.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

PS to freeweed: 15 minute cab ride? Are you going to the Deerfoot/Memorial interchange? Actual downtown destinations are closer to a 25 minute cab ride, 30+ mins during rush hour.

Even Google claims that outside of rush hour, it's exactly 20 minutes to the heart of downtown (measured by a random point almost dead centre). And Google assumes you drive a bit slower than the speed limit, which is hilarious on Deerfoot.

Although good point. Cab rides probably add a few minutes beyond what I take.

Loving the station @ Tuscany. Anyone know if they expect delays due to the flood work this summer?

[Wigs]

just a thought:
it's too bad Calgary couldn't implement a short term sales tax (0.25%) like SLC to get going ASAP on both the NC and SE LRT projects.

http://m.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2...npopular-public-transit-system-hit/7298/

It wasn't always the case that Utah was in a hurry to build public transit. In 1992, voters rejected a tax measure that would have funded a light rail line in Salt Lake Valley. In 1997, at the groundbreaking for what would become the successful TRAX system, protestors held up signs that read: "Light Rail Kills Children." Not exactly a warm welcome.

Today, however, TRAX and transit are such integral parts of the Salt Lake metro that it's hard to imagine life without them. In 2006, voters easily approved a quarter-cent sales tax hike (64-36) so that the expansion (dubbed FrontLines 2015) could finish up by 2015 instead of 2030. And that $2.5 billion, five track project was completed this August — a full two years early.

"We have a backbone that serves a majority of the state's population."

That's 70 miles in 7 years, more than doubling the length of the Utah Transit Authority system, at $340 million under budget. How does a region once opposed to light rail perform a feat that would be impressive any day, but especially in times of transit cutbacks? The key, says Steve Meyer, chief capital development officer of UTA, is gathering broad support among stakeholders.

Calgarians love to shop and have high disposable incomes. We could get both lines done by 2020. one can dream, right