Calgary Public Transit II

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Not to doubt you, I just don't understand the numbers. Lane widths are about 3m(Centre street bridge is 12.6m, so this makes sense). I'm not sure how this comes to 22.8m? Unless you count sidewalk width, but its still a big stretch to 30m.

I was using the current ROW, not the ROW with the road widenings applied.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Not to doubt you, I just don't understand the numbers. Lane widths are about 3m(Centre street bridge is 12.6m, so this makes sense). I'm not sure how this comes to 22.8m? Unless you count sidewalk width, but its still a big stretch to 30m.

There is a council mandated bylaw setback for this portion of Centre Street. Properties on both sides of the street are to protect/provide an additional 3.810 meters, to create an ultimate right-of-way of 30.480 meters.

See pages 113/114 of the land use bylaw:
http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/DBA/Documents/Calgary-Land-Use-bylaw-1P2007/bylaw_1p2007.pdf

[fusili]

Just a FYI for the conversation. Toronto's new Flexity Freedom vehicles (made by Bombardier) for the Eglington Crosstown can carry 251 passengers per train (ours current carry 225 IIRC). With a four-car consist, that is 1000 passengers per train, or ~30K per hour. They are 100% low floor and require a 25m turning radius. They are 2.65m wide and go max 80km/hr.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I've been to Amsterdam as well, and that is not a low floor LRT.

What would you consider these?


Credit: Fun Guide Through Amsterdam

Originally Posted by fusili

Are you talking about the trams, or the Metro?

I was referring to the trains that operate in street in the centraal district, not sure what Fuzz was referring to though

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

What would you consider these?


Credit: Fun Guide Through Amsterdam



I was referring to the trains that operate in street in the centraal district, not sure what Fuzz was referring to though

Those are the trams, which is what I was referring to.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by fusili

Just a FYI for the conversation. Toronto's new Flexity Freedom vehicles (made by Bombardier) for the Eglington Crosstown can carry 251 passengers per train (ours current carry 225 IIRC). With a four-car consist, that is 1000 passengers per train, or ~30K per hour. They are 100% low floor and require a 25m turning radius. They are 2.65m wide and go max 80km/hr.

The Metrolinx Flexity's for the crosstown are 28-29 m long.

source: http://www.bombardier.com/en/media-centr...nth=all&f-type=pr&show-by-page=50&page=1

They will operate in pairs first, and I believe the line is designed to support 3 car trains eventually.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The Metrolinx Flexity's for the crosstown are 28-29 m long.

source: http://www.bombardier.com/en/media-centr...nth=all&f-type=pr&show-by-page=50&page=1

They will operate in pairs first, and I believe the line is designed to support 3 car trains eventually.

The Flexity can operate as 4 car trains. The picture is the 5 module consist, which is the one that carries 251 passengers per vehicle.

EDIT- This is also the 4-door version. There is a 6 door version as well.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

What would you consider these?


I was referring to the trains that operate in street in the centraal district, not sure what Fuzz was referring to though

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Those are the trams, which is what I was referring to.

Those are definitely high-floor. What is that 4"?? Crazy, how could anyone think those are low-floor??? [sarcasm]

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Those are the trams, which is what I was referring to.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between this and low floor lrt, care to enlighten me? I know that some of the Amsterdam system runs in mixed traffic at times, are there differences with the vehicles themselves?

[MalcolmTucker]

Usually capable of tighter turns, in some places will only have doors on one side instead of both, and sometimes capable of higher grades. In Toronto their streetcars also are spec'd to allow one streetcar to push or pull another in case of mechanical failure, including up the maximum grade. Toronto's street cars can also use simpler single point switches, instead of more modern switches and can use trolley poles instead of pantographs which require heavier wire and supports.

Likely would have been cheaper for them to buy conventional lrt and replace the incompatible infrastructure, I believe a Toronto ombudsmen or auditor concluded as much.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by Policy Wonk

An elevated ROW casting a shadow on people's front yards will be a very tough sell.

True, but I would only expect elevated until maybe McKnight, much of which from 16th ave north is retail or rental/future redevelopment sites.

[Chadillaccc]

So is there actually any proposal to bury the LRT under the stampede grounds? I think it would be a great idea for them. Would offer a significant amount of room for expansion, plus bring the hypothetical station closer to the Saddledome and Stampede events.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Usually capable of tighter turns, in some places will only have doors on one side instead of both, and sometimes capable of higher grades. In Toronto their streetcars also are spec'd to allow one streetcar to push or pull another in case of mechanical failure, including up the maximum grade. Toronto's street cars can also use simpler single point switches, instead of more modern switches and can use trolley poles instead of pantographs which require heavier wire and supports.

Likely would have been cheaper for them to buy conventional lrt and replace the incompatible infrastructure, I believe a Toronto ombudsmen or auditor concluded as much.

So are the terms tram and street car interchangeable?

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

I'm not sure I understand the difference between this and low floor lrt, care to enlighten me? I know that some of the Amsterdam system runs in mixed traffic at times, are there differences with the vehicles themselves?

This is more of an example of what Calgary would be looking for in terms of a low-floor LRV. Siemens S70, approximate 221 passengers per car using San Diego's specs:

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

This is more of an example of what Calgary would be looking for in terms of a low-floor LRV. Siemens S70, approximate 221 passengers per car using San Diego's specs:

So ultimately very similar in style then.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

So are the terms tram and street car interchangeable?

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

This is more of an example of what Calgary would be looking for in terms of a low-floor LRV. Siemens S70, approximate 221 passengers per car using San Diego's specs:

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

So ultimately very similar in style then.

Yes, trams are what Europeans typically call them, Streetcars are what North Americans call them. Basically the same thing.

The Siemens S70 is slightly wider than the Bombardiers Flexitys IIRC, but I wouldn't be surprised if Calgary went with Siemens again for this system.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by fusili

Just a FYI for the conversation. Toronto's new Flexity Freedom vehicles (made by Bombardier) for the Eglington Crosstown can carry 251 passengers per train (ours current carry 225 IIRC). With a four-car consist, that is 1000 passengers per train, or ~30K per hour. They are 100% low floor and require a 25m turning radius. They are 2.65m wide and go max 80km/hr.

They're also 30.8 meters long. A four car consist of Flexity Freedom's is equivalent to a five car consist of SD-160s. Five SD-160s fit 1125 passengers compared to 1004 in the Flexity Freedoms.

Again, low floor vehicles have been found to have 15% higher maintenance costs and raise infrastructure maintenance by 20%. They also cost more to produce. There are clear benefits to a unified fleet in procurement and fleet management. Why on Earth would we want to go low floor?

[MalcolmTucker]

If the cost is that much higher, we can just ask for both low and high floor options in the p3 tender. Then will see the full life cycle cost. Simple solution.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

They're also 30.8 meters long. A four car consist of Flexity Freedom's is equivalent to a five car consist of SD-160s. Five SD-160s fit 1125 passengers compared to 1004 in the Flexity Freedoms.

Again, low floor vehicles have been found to have 15% higher maintenance costs and raise infrastructure maintenance by 20%. They also cost more to produce. There are clear benefits to a unified fleet in procurement and fleet management. Why on Earth would we want to go low floor?

It really is a nonsensical decision. I haven't seen any 'official' confirmation though, and if the line really is so far away hopefully things will change.

Are we expecting this to be built with provision for 5-car consists? ISTR it would be. I can't imagine the stations being any shorter than 4-cars given that is what is in use on the existing system.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

They're also 30.8 meters long. A four car consist of Flexity Freedom's is equivalent to a five car consist of SD-160s. Five SD-160s fit 1125 passengers compared to 1004 in the Flexity Freedoms.

Again, low floor vehicles have been found to have 15% higher maintenance costs and raise infrastructure maintenance by 20%. They also cost more to produce. There are clear benefits to a unified fleet in procurement and fleet management. Why on Earth would we want to go low floor?

Because station costs are lower, and pedestrian access is easier. High floor trains along Centre street would be difficult to build accessible stations with.