Calgary Public Transit II

[Allan83]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I just absolutely can not believe the city isn't planning to have the 8th Ave Subway until the 2040s. What a complete fucking joke. We should have it now, we'll need it in five years, and it will be imperative in ten years. Just insane.

I suspect it’ll get moved up. There’s always a certain amount of politics in these things, showing need and lobbying the upper levels of government for more money and what not. This would be a nice, sexy, high profile, downtown project for them to put their names on. They could be heroes and come to the rescue by offering money for this project.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Imagine getting this kind of data. CT should do a better job documenting and releasing their ridership numbers. I assume they at least have a guess on how many people board routes, but I doubt in this kind of detail:

From an optimization audit of Translink in Vancouver a few years ago:

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/Document...Bus%20System%20Performance%20Review.ashx

I bet they do have that kind of detail, it's just not released to the public.

[Fuzz]

Interesting they have Airport Rail before Centre St LRT.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Any hope remaining for a West Campus gondola in advance of whatever they envision for the long-term? There was a one year report commissions like two years ago. What happened?

It is in process. Outside groups besides the community associations with AHS and the University of Calgary working on it, so it might be taking a bit more time than originally thought. Not sure whatever happened to the first phase funding, at one point the sub-committee removed it from the ten year horizon. It may go back on the table in the fall. Hard to plan without the follow on to MSI being in place, but expecting that before the spring is an extreme long shot. Since the money is post 2017 anyways there is little rush.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I bet they do have that kind of detail, it's just not released to the public.

That's too bad they aren't sharing it easily. Is this something they would give up by request? I could see a ton of valuable applications to the public knowing the capacity and usage of some of the main-line routes.

And it would temporarily satiate my un-quenchable thirst of transit data

[Aegis]

The more I've researched airport rail in other North American cities, the more I think that an automated people-mover concept would work a lot better for Calgary than a direct LRT connection to the airport. It seems like this would be cheaper and easier to implement too. Can anyone offer their analysis of this idea?

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

I really liked the comment by Fusili (I'm paraphrashing here) about a standard increase of service. Ie, shuttle bus->normal bus->10 min service->articulated buses->BRT 'lite' ->BRT w/Transitway -> LRT

Would there be any point in inserting streetcars in there when you could just use single-car LRT which is then easily expandible? I'm assuming single car LRT wouldn't be useful in mixed traffic as I'd think that a streetcar would be more designed for constant start and stop movement than an LRT car, and using the order above you'd already be at the stage of dedicated lanes.

Any transit in mixed traffic transit is equivalent (bus vs train), the mode progression has more to do with level of dedicated infrastructure, only the last step (Transitway->LRT) is a capacity increase, all others are primarily reliability upgrades as a result of new infrastructure.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by Aegis

The more I've researched airport rail in other North American cities, the more I think that an automated people-mover concept would work a lot better for Calgary than a direct LRT connection to the airport. It seems like this would be cheaper and easier to implement too. Can anyone offer their analysis of this idea?

If the Airport Authority ponies up for the cost absolutely, if it's the cities cost, put a specially painted set of buses with signal priority at key locations.

As I mentioned in my post in reply to DizzyEdge, if you have a high level of dedicated infrastructure in place the building of a rail based people mover/LRT only provides capacity, the demand for that capacity isn't likely to exist to/from the airport for the foreseeable future.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by Aegis

The more I've researched airport rail in other North American cities, the more I think that an automated people-mover concept would work a lot better for Calgary than a direct LRT connection to the airport. It seems like this would be cheaper and easier to implement too. Can anyone offer their analysis of this idea?

There has been some discussion about just that on this forum (maybe this thread?). Essentially the issue is that if you put a spur on the NE line, the residential users north of the spur would likely out-number the airport users. Running every 2nd or 3rd train to the airport would give 20-30 minute service for most of the day. Aside from the perception that rail is just 'nicer' than a bus, that would be a huge investment in infrastructure for a marginal improvement over the Route 300 level of service. A people-mover to a future 96th Ave station would get to piggy-back off of the 5/10 minute service on the NE line.

The Route 300 is actually a very effective and appropriate route for Calgary. Its hard to think of an economically sensible way to beat it with rail transport (in the future, it will probably be centre street congestion).

[VIce]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

If the Airport Authority ponies up for the cost absolutely, if it's the cities cost, put a specially painted set of buses with signal priority at key locations.

As I mentioned in my post in reply to DizzyEdge, if you have a high level of dedicated infrastructure in place the building of a rail based people mover/LRT only provides capacity, the demand for that capacity isn't likely to exist to/from the airport for the foreseeable future.

Thats something I hadn't considered. If Route 300, in the future, makes use of the north-central transitway that will be an exceptional level of service.

[Full Mountain]

Originally Posted by VIce

Thats something I hadn't considered. If Route 300, in the future, makes use of the north-central transitway that will be an exceptional level of service.

I struggle with the 300 going all the way downtown if a frequent service is available closer to the airport.

Alternatively significantly reducing the stops outside of downtown on the 300 would help too, i.e. there shouldn't be more than a couple stops between DT and 96th.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by VIce

Thats something I hadn't considered. If Route 300, in the future, makes use of the north-central transitway that will be an exceptional level of service.

I have used Route 300 several times and actually am quite impressed. They have addressed some significant criticisms I had when first opened - no benches, no signs or directions from the terminal, no ticket machines, no kiosk for non-locals. These have been addressed by now I think and the ride is actually quite good and quick to Downtown with only a few stops before the city centre.

A few improvements from the airport authority's on better signage and promotion would go a long way. There is little indication that public transportation exists when walking through the terminal, it is lumped under ground transportation and is not very clear where you should go. The CT area is still shoved off to the side of the entire facility, in a way that suggests they don't believe it to be a real service that needs any level of priority.

I wonder if there is any plans to amend this once the IFP opens and pulls some of the airport activity even farther away?

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by Full Mountain

I struggle with the 300 going all the way downtown if a frequent service is available closer to the airport.

Alternatively significantly reducing the stops outside of downtown on the 300 would help too, i.e. there shouldn't be more than a couple stops between DT and 96th.

I believe they have 4 - 5 stops. I would rather see the NC Transitway / LRT setup being utilized where all that Route 300 does is go back and forth between the terminal and a station at 96th Ave. Less wait times and more reliable for everyone.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I have used Route 300 several times and actually am quite impressed. They have addressed some significant criticisms I had when first opened - no benches, no signs or directions from the terminal, no ticket machines, no kiosk for non-locals. These have been addressed by now I think and the ride is actually quite good and quick to Downtown with only a few stops before the city centre.

A few improvements from the airport authority's on better signage and promotion would go a long way. There is little indication that public transportation exists when walking through the terminal, it is lumped under ground transportation and is not very clear where you should go. The CT area is still shoved off to the side of the entire facility, in a way that suggests they don't believe it to be a real service that needs any level of priority.

I wonder if there is any plans to amend this once the IFP opens and pulls some of the airport activity even farther away?

Should the city spend more for better placement? There is only so much that can be done. With the International terminal, anyone know whether they will put in a second stop or will they force everyone to schlep?

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Should the city spend more for better placement? There is only so much that can be done. With the International terminal, anyone know whether they will put in a second stop or will they force everyone to schlep?

I would be okay with improved route-finding inside the building and some consistent and repeated signage once they settle on the location of the stop, assuming they do intend to make changes.

And they should spend more if that is what is required to make it as attractive as it can be. Better lighting, better shelters, heaters in the winters if necessary etc. This is the first time many people will be using Calgary Transit, it should be one of our nicest routes, even if it never becomes economic to build a fancy-pants Canada Line. Some small aesthetic improvements and a more obvious bus-bay wouldn't cost enough to make it too expensive to do. The image is worth it.

Or as you suggested, having a second one on the other end of the terminal as part of the new International Terminal would work just fine, one on each end. They must be 500 metres apart by the time all is said and done.

[MalcolmTucker]

For the record, I think we will end up with a Union Pearson Express type train for business and tourists in addition to a people mover connecting the airport to both the Centre LRT and NE LRT (unless the Centre LRT route is so fast as to prevent the need for an express train). Can likely do an UPX type train for the same cost as a LRT spur, and have a reasonable chance of making some of the capital back.

[YYCguys]

The UPX is rumoured to be charging $20-$30 for a fare! I hope if a similar type of system is implemented in Calgary, that they don't go crazy with the fares like that. A more reasonable fare would be like what's charged from YVR on the Canada Line (fare plus $5).

[93JC]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

For the record, I think we will end up with a Union Pearson Express type train for business and tourists in addition to a people mover connecting the airport to both the Centre LRT and NE LRT (unless the Centre LRT route is so fast as to prevent the need for an express train). Can likely do an UPX type train for the same cost as a LRT spur, and have a reasonable chance of making some of the capital back.

Express train from the airport to... ??

[Trans Canada]

LRT to the airport is like HSR. To put it simply, a) it isn't needed now or in the foreseeable future, and b) it will be expensive. There are far better uses of transit dollars, and I think Route Ahead gets it right by prioritizing bus transitways (my only concern, like others here, might be 8th avenue subway).

The only way Calgary will get LRT to the airport is if the Olympics come to town.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Should the city spend more for better placement? There is only so much that can be done. With the International terminal, anyone know whether they will put in a second stop or will they force everyone to schlep?

Only so much, but right now (or at least when I used it last), the pre-boarding experience is atrocious - it really creates a bad impression. No signage, having to drag your suitcase to the wrong side of a dark roadway only to find you have to buy your ticket at Mac's (I was really blindsided by that one - WTF?).

That could be many people's first experience of Calgary Transit, and I expect after that many won't bother with buses in the future.