Calgary's $8 BILLION Transit Plan - The RouteAhead

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by VIce

I've often thought about this. Why can't a Flames/Stamps/concert ticket stub be considered a valid transit pass immediately before and after event time? Or plane tickets for the Route 300 and 100 buses?

Great idea.

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

The Bank of Canada doesn't make $1000 notes anymore, in part due to counterfeiting concerns; I can understand why Calgary Transit would not be interested in getting into the business of making a piece of paper worth $1152.

What they should be doing is a subscription basis where you are mailed a monthly pass at the end of each month for a year, like the TTC does. This could be a big help in particular to the low income pass purchasers, who have to go in person each month to one of six locations that are mostly open banker's hours -- including three within a block of each other downtown, one in an industrial park ill-served by transit, and one in Palliser, one of the wealthier communities in the city.

I'd also like to see more work (okay, any work) with employers for bulk purchases of transit passes. Tri-Met in Portland has a very interesting program, as an example.

Good idea. Also, I think annual passes could work - same value as some gym memberships.

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Denver has a ton of special fares, including a bunch for sports:

http://www.rtd-denver.com/Fares.shtml

Originally Posted by Tropics

Mandatory purchase of CT passes for all city and CT workers.

Interesting idea. I suppose it could come out of our paychecks, at a discount of course. There are a lot of city employees who travel to and from work before transit is operating. Were I in negotiation with unions, maybe I'd throw in free transit on a year when I new we couldn't afford to give city employees a raise. Then just keep the program going.

Originally Posted by Tropics

University students have no choice. They are not all "fine with it". I had many a discussion with many university students when I was there that were not happy with being forced to buy transit passes. For many of them it is a waste of their money and simply more student loans they will have to pay off after graduation.

Whether you agree they should be forced to buy them or not that is the reality.

I prefer to keep UPass mandatory. Big discount. It's cheaper than driving & parking, and the students with the most need aren't driving. If I had it my way, it would just be free (ie. the entire city is forced to buy passes via taxes, possibly with exemptions).

Interestingly, I met with Paul Hinman (WRP MLA) a few years back (this was he was one of only 2 elected people in the party and they were still formalizing their platform), and he floated the idea past me that he thought transit should be free for everyone. I don't think his party feels that way anymore.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by Tropics

University students have no choice. They are not all "fine with it". I had many a discussion with many university students when I was there that were not happy with being forced to buy transit passes. For many of them it is a waste of their money and simply more student loans they will have to pay off after graduation.

Whether you agree they should be forced to buy them or not that is the reality.

The UPass was never forced onto students. It was students who lobbied for the creation of the program, after post secondary passes were eliminated by CT. Students (both those represented by the SU and the GSA) demanded the UPass in referendums in 2001, and again in 2004 at the U of C. At MRU, the referendums occurred in 2005, 2006, and 2007; SAIT in 2001; ACAD in 2005. All referendums passed with large majorities.

As someone who has been at this university too long for his own good, I've never met anyone who opposed the UPass.

[artvandelay]

Originally Posted by Tropics

University students have no choice. They are not all "fine with it". I had many a discussion with many university students when I was there that were not happy with being forced to buy transit passes. For many of them it is a waste of their money and simply more student loans they will have to pay off after graduation.

Whether you agree they should be forced to buy them or not that is the reality.

The majority of students when I went to U of C were either indifferent or in favour of the U Pass when I went there. I actually can't recall anyone complaining about it as it was only $95 or so per semester - not much in the context of tuition fees and books.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Tropics

University students have no choice. They are not all "fine with it". I had many a discussion with many university students when I was there that were not happy with being forced to buy transit passes. For many of them it is a waste of their money and simply more student loans they will have to pay off after graduation.

Whether you agree they should be forced to buy them or not that is the reality.

It's either the UPass or a more expensive tuition bump to build parking structures. The "forced to buy" rhetoric is tiresome in all cases.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

It's either the UPass or a more expensive tuition bump to build parking structures. The "forced to buy" rhetoric is tiresome in all cases.

Parking structures bring in revenue (unless they started giving out free parking on the University).

[VIce]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

Parking structures bring in revenue (unless they started giving out free parking on the University).

They also take up some of the most valuable real-estate, though. The new grad residence is under construction on portions of Lots 11 and 12. Current engineering complex expansion includes what was Lot 14. My office is currently located in what was, when I first enrolled here, lot 20.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

The "forced to buy" rhetoric is tiresome in all cases.

Semantics are the only thing that make that different then "mandatory for all students".

It is what it is.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by VIce

They also take up some of the most valuable real-estate, though. The new grad residence is under construction on portions of Lots 11 and 12. Current engineering complex expansion includes what was Lot 14. My office is currently located in what was, when I first enrolled here, lot 20.

The UofC has far too many huge surface parking lots. They need more lots like the multi-story art parkade and less of the huge surface lots such as the ones west of the engineering building. The construction costs would be recouped by the parking fees.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Tropics

The UofC has far too many huge surface parking lots. They need more lots like the multi-story art parkade and less of the huge surface lots such as the ones west of the engineering building. The construction costs would be recouped by the parking fees.

So we can charge students high parking fees instead?

The transit pass is an absolute winner for the UofC. Imagine what lot 10 would look like if students didn't get a UPass. Or what Varsity, University Heights or Banff trail would look like for parking (they are already pretty bad). UofC is a commuting campus, and the $6.00 per day for lot 10 is pretty good compared to taking the train everyday and buying a $100 monthly pass. When the cost of transit effectively drops to zero, that calculation changes completely.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Tropics

The UofC has far too many huge surface parking lots. They need more lots like the multi-story art parkade and less of the huge surface lots such as the ones west of the engineering building. The construction costs would be recouped by the parking fees.

The campus plan eventually replaces all lost parking with structured parking from the 2010 base case.

The perception I had during my undergrad: the UPass stopped the creeping up of parking fees for a few years.

[Tropics]

Originally Posted by fusili

So we can charge students high parking fees instead?

Multistory parkades that can fit many times more cars on the same section of land then a surface parking lot can be cost effective without increasing parking rates.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Tropics

Multistory parkades that can fit many times more cars on the same section of land then a surface parking lot can be cost effective without increasing parking rates.

Not when at minimum you're talking $25,000 per space in structured parking.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Tropics

Multistory parkades that can fit many times more cars on the same section of land then a surface parking lot can be cost effective without increasing parking rates.

Yeah, what crazy planet are you from? Downtown Tokyo or New York parking structures are more cost effective. University of Calgary, not so much.

Cost per square foot for structured parking in Calgary (above ground 2012 average construction costs) was 60-80 a square foot. That is 15K a spot minimum. That does't include ramps.

[RyLucky]

The University also has the problem of only being busy 8 months/year. Those lots are pretty useless in summer and after hours.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

The University also has the problem of only being busy 8 months/year. Those lots are pretty useless in summer and after hours.

Yep. Not sure how bad lots 10 & 11 are these days, but there is usually only about an hour a day that you have to wait in line to get into lot 32 usually (between 11:30 and 12:30), and even then its only a few minute wait until someone leaves. And that's only during Fall/Winter semesters, the rest of the year the lots are half empty in the middle of the day.

[DizzyEdge]

Is the land set aside for a future HSR station the block on the West or the East side of 4th St SE?

[Spring2008]

Sounds like we'll find out about federal funding on our new BRT network and Green Line LRT this afternoon:

http://globalnews.ca/news/1142376/federal-budget-what-tops-calgarys-wish-list/

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

Sounds like we'll find out about federal funding on our new BRT network and Green Line LRT this afternoon:

http://globalnews.ca/news/1142376/federal-budget-what-tops-calgarys-wish-list/

There was nothing new for cities. The program criteria for the Building Canada Fund will be rolled out by the end of March. $330 million over ten years would be my estimate for the city from the BCF. $662 million from the gas tax fund. $170 million from other programs.

And remember, this is all the funding. For everything. And it isn't enough for a 1/3rd share on the Green Line.

Disappointed? Yes. Surprised? No.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

There was nothing new for cities. The program criteria for the Building Canada Fund will be rolled out by the end of March. $330 million over ten years would be my estimate for the city from the BCF. $662 million from the gas tax fund. $170 million from other programs.

And remember, this is all the funding. For everything. And it isn't enough for a 1/3rd share on the Green Line.

Disappointed? Yes. Surprised? No.

Man I could use some sweet swing / opposition riding infrastructure funds right now. How you doing Scarborough Subway, Evergreen Line and Montreal bridges?

[The Chemist]

People get the governments they deserve, so if Calgarians want to continue blindly electing Conservatives regardless of their ability (the city has re-elected that moron Rob Anders for at least 4 straight terms, for crying out loud! ) they can't really complain about getting passed over for juicy handouts.

Start electing people other than Conservatives every election and things might start to change in a hurry.