Calgary Public Transit II

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

I get the impression that the author is exaggerating the problem with the Metro line. Can anyone on this forum attest to the problems?

I rode the Metro Line when I was in Edmonton 2 months ago and it was indeed extremely slow. I actually thought "what is the point?".. the trains weren't even running at 40 kph I'd guess, and the wait at McEwan station was like 10 minutes.

[sportsdude]

I know Edmontonians primarily use the Connect2Edmonton message boards instead of SSP.

Just reading some of the posts the waits are between 6-15 minutes for some of these lights for both pedestrians and drivers.

They also said the signalling system installed is not still 100% despite the massive delays which causes the line to move extremely slow.

So slow that people can get off at Kingsway Station (2nd last station) and walk to NAIT station faster than the LRT. (850m)

[UofC.engineer]

Ok, the criticisms are valid then.

This sounds like a ridiculous question, but at what point is grade separation on a cross road required on an LRT system? Obviously there is different types of LRT technologies and different types of roadways. But is there a 'magic' number that planners use? (30,000+ vehicles a day)


I think Heritage Drive and 162 ave should have grade separation on the south line.

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Ok, the criticisms are valid then.

This sounds like a ridiculous question, but at what point is grade separation on a cross road required on an LRT system? Obviously there is different types of LRT technologies and different types of roadways. But is there a 'magic' number that planners use? (30,000+ vehicles a day)


I think Heritage Drive and 162 ave should have grade separation on the south line.

east bound 25th avenue SW also has big hold-ups due to the LRT and traffic light synchronization

[youngregina]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

east bound 25th avenue SW also has big hold-ups due to the LRT and traffic light synchronization

At least this section is synchronized properly. Some could argue that the east-west movement gets far too backed up, however, compared to how many people take the train and use Macleod during rush hours, I'd say the north-south movement takes at least 80% priority.

From the times I've been stuck travelling across the intersection (mostly east-west), I've been dumbfounded by how people are so inept at using the proper lanes and utilizing the intersection to its fullest potential. I'd say that uneducated drivers are partly to blame for how few cars actually get through.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Ok, the criticisms are valid then.

This sounds like a ridiculous question, but at what point is grade separation on a cross road required on an LRT system? Obviously there is different types of LRT technologies and different types of roadways. But is there a 'magic' number that planners use? (30,000+ vehicles a day)


I think Heritage Drive and 162 ave should have grade separation on the south line.

Heritage is pretty close to the required level.


http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/...e-Drive---Macleod-Trail-Interchange.aspx

[UofC.engineer]

Checker Cabs absolutely not behind group opposing southwest Calgary BRT

http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/201...nd-group-opposing-sw-brt-says-owner.html

“We are affected land owners that want a say in this is development. We want a say because our children play in those yards.”

WHERE WILL THE CHILDREN PLAY

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Checker Cabs absolutely not behind group opposing southwest Calgary BRT

http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/201...nd-group-opposing-sw-brt-says-owner.html

So Checker Cabs as an incorporated entity is not behind the group opposing it, but the owner of Checker Cabs is not only a member of the group against this transportation improvement project, but is a central leader of the lobby. Little bit of COI beyond "where will the children play".

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Ok, the criticisms are valid then.

This sounds like a ridiculous question, but at what point is grade separation on a cross road required on an LRT system? Obviously there is different types of LRT technologies and different types of roadways. But is there a 'magic' number that planners use? (30,000+ vehicles a day)

I think Heritage Drive and 162 ave should have grade separation on the south line.

Calgary's highest daily traffic volumes with at-grade crossings outside of the downtown are:
162nd Ave S - 25000
32nd Ave NE - 21000
Heritage Dr - 20000
58 Ave S - 18000
Saddletowne Circle NE - 16000
25th Ave S - 11000
(Macleod / 1st St E are 32000 / 28000 across 7th Ave, and are 25000/26000 at 10th Ave if the Green Line crosses them at grade there)

In Edmonton, the highest volumes with at-grade crossing not on the Metro line is at University Drive / 82nd Ave - 21000 which I understand is already a bit of a cluster due to the high volumes on the other side of the intersection and the turning movements. The other high volume crossings are 82nd st and 112 Ave by Commonwealth (18500 each).

But the Metro line north of downtown is ridiculous - it first crosses 107 Ave (18800 vehicles), then crosses Kingsway (16300 vehicles), then immediately crosses 111 Ave (23900 vehicles). Then, one stop later, it crosses both 106 St (4000) and Princess Elizabeth Ave (30000 vehicles). This is the really brutal decision. Here's a link; look at it with your own eyes. In Calgary, the high volume roads crossed by the LRT have two things in common; first, they are nowhere near each other, so any delay is localized. The four main roads crossed by the Metro line are all within 2km of each other, and together they comprise the only four major east-west roads between 104th (the middle of downtown) and the Yellowhead, 4 km to the north (because of the airport lands).

Secondly, in Calgary the high volume road crossings are all (162nd aside) the minor road at/near their intersections, so the LRT can cross the road while a road parallel to the LRT has green time that it would have anyway. Sure, 25th Ave (for example) is stopped when the LRT is there, but it will always have a lot of red light time because Macleod is so much busier. At 106/Princess Elizabeth, the LRT crosses both streets so that the entire intersection is effectively shut down for the LRT. Not only that, but the LRT is negotiating a fairly tight (100m radius) curve and going immediately into a station, so the train will take a long time because of low speeds - in Calgary, the higher volume grade crossings (20K+) involve trains travelling straight track away from stations; even Heritage is actually 200m from the platform itself. The Kingsway crossing is in the middle of a block, so it adds a signal where there was none before.

The sad thing is, the Metro line came in under budget, by roughly enough to trench both the Kingsway and 106/Princess Elizabeth crossings. And all this, of course, leaves aside the signal debacle which is straight up incompetence as far as I can tell.

If the LRT is crossing a high volume road (and particularly a high volume road that isn't going to be grade separated in the future), the best practice is to do a traffic microsimulation to see what the effects are. I suspect that crossing multiple major roads in the same area produces more congestion than any single road crossing would.

[Socguy]

^ I lived in Edmonton when they were building the south extension of the LRT. The University/82nd ave crossing was originally planned to be grade separated however, during the public consultations the public was all up in arms about spending extra money to put the line under the road so the city acquiesced and ran it across the surface. The crossing light fiasco with the Peace Bridge reminded me a lot the LRT situation actually.

Just goes to show, that if you're going to build something, just spend the money to build it right.

[MMMBeer]

Originally Posted by Socguy

^ I lived in Edmonton when they were building the south extension of the LRT. The University/82nd ave crossing was originally planned to be grade separated however, during the public consultations the public was all up in arms about spending extra money to put the line under the road so the city acquiesced and ran it across the surface. The crossing light fiasco with the Peace Bridge reminded me a lot the LRT situation actually.

Just goes to show, that if you're going to build something, just spend the money to build it right.

LOL when the West LRT was being built, there was a vocal lobby to get the line trenched beneath 45 St SW, hang the cost.

With the ambulance station being right there I kinda agree with the eventual decision to do that rather than have a crossing. Cost was what, 80m or so IIRC?

Although they neglected to put a left turn lane for EB 17 Ave turning to 45 NB, which can be annoying in the mornings for such a busy route. But I digress...

[MalcolmTucker]

^ 80 m with the Scarboro changes iirc, so about half that.

The problems with Edmonton's system, beyond the temporary signal issues, would be comparable to if the West LRT was at grade through Westbrook and crossed half of Bow, 33rd and 37th.

[Fuzz]

It doesn't help that they don't appear to have any roads at right angles to each other. Who layed out that road system, anyway?

[sim]

Originally Posted by UofC.engineer

Ok, the criticisms are valid then.

This sounds like a ridiculous question, but at what point is grade separation on a cross road required on an LRT system? Obviously there is different types of LRT technologies and different types of roadways. But is there a 'magic' number that planners use? (30,000+ vehicles a day)


I think Heritage Drive and 162 ave should have grade separation on the south line.

I think it's a good question. I also think that there is no real answer. Is an average travel time savings per vehicle of 10 seconds worth the cost? Do we care that grade separation basically always imposes additional barriers to active transportation modes? Or that what is shown in the above image actually imposes additional travel time for a number of the bus routes that currently use the loop?

In a perfect world, we might actually care about all these issues, do a real benefit - cost (place it in the context of historical development and further entrenchment of a pretty inefficient and unhealthy transportation system) and probably find it's not worth it (and would never be in an urban area). Unfortunately, in our "real" world, the default is "traffic flow good" and we are on an illusory and unfounded battle to achieve this.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by MMMBeer

LOL when the West LRT was being built, there was a vocal lobby to get the line trenched beneath 45 St SW, hang the cost.

With the ambulance station being right there I kinda agree with the eventual decision to do that rather than have a crossing. Cost was what, 80m or so IIRC?

Although they neglected to put a left turn lane for EB 17 Ave turning to 45 NB, which can be annoying in the mornings for such a busy route. But I digress...

The emergency services station there was the biggest red herring in the world, but what great cover for NIMBYs. I don't think even the fire department - the most speed-at-all-costs, the community be damned group out there - was opposed to an at-grade crossing, behind closed doors. For maybe a few hundred thousand dollars I'm guessing a signal preempt could be created where trains were held at the station if EMS or Fire were rolling out on an emergency call in the same way that regular traffic lights near fire stations are held. For one quarter the cost of the trench, a second redundant emergency station could have been built on the other side of the tracks from the existing one. (Or if emergency response time was actually a community concern, an additional station somewhere else in west Calgary - say around Richmond and 37th - would produce much more broadly reduced response times.) For no money at all, C-train drivers could watch to see if an ambulance was approaching the intersection before proceeding.

There's a great German proverb about this: Organisation vor Elektronik vor Beton (Organization before electronics before concrete).

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by sim

I think it's a good question. I also think that there is no real answer. Is an average travel time savings per vehicle of 10 seconds worth the cost? Do we care that grade separation basically always imposes additional barriers to active transportation modes? Or that what is shown in the above image actually imposes additional travel time for a number of the bus routes that currently use the loop?

In a perfect world, we might actually care about all these issues, do a real benefit - cost (place it in the context of historical development and further entrenchment of a pretty inefficient and unhealthy transportation system) and probably find it's not worth it (and would never be in an urban area). Unfortunately, in our "real" world, the default is "traffic flow good" and we are on an illusory and unfounded battle to achieve this.

Could you please explain this? How does the grade separation of pedestrian/cycle ways proposed impose additional barriers? The plan in the link has paths and overpasses everywhere, and for once they mostly don't involve pointless switchbacks like normal from the city.

Heritage Drive/Macleod Trail recommended plan with pedestrian links

I don't know about you, but I would far rather traverse the area on foot by direct overpasses as in that plan than what is there currently - a four way signaled intersection with narrow sidewalks, regardless of whether the cars are congested or moving.

Streetview

[Riise]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Could you please explain this? How does the grade separation of pedestrian/cycle ways proposed impose additional barriers?

When ROWs are grade-separated, they are usually made to be free-flowing and in order to be free-flowing they cannot be impeded by other modes (i.e. active transportation). As active modes of transportation cannot intersect grade-separated ROWs without the provision of an overpass/underpass, the ROW is essentially a barrier to natural movement of active modes.

[Socguy]

CBC ran an interview today with Mac Logan regarding the opposition to the SW BRT. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/mac-logan-sw-brt-ready-to-engage-response-1.3395439

He didn't come right out and say it, but sounds like he's a little exasperated with the bunk spewing from this camp.

[UofC.engineer]

Originally Posted by Socguy

CBC ran an interview today with Mac Logan regarding the opposition to the SW BRT. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/mac-logan-sw-brt-ready-to-engage-response-1.3395439

He didn't come right out and say it, but sounds like he's a little exasperated with the bunk spewing from this camp.

"We are just simply, totally being kept out of the loop and that's what we're very concerned about,"

Really??? Having an open house on the SW BRT just a couple months ago is being kept out of the loop?


Check out the 'Ready to Engage' website! It's gold!

http://www.readytoengage.ca/index.php/issues-3/

"Health, Safety & Environmental Concerns

-Increased light and noise pollution.
-Poor air quality resulting from increased bus and vehicle emissions.
-LRT-style bus platforms replacing our green spaces that will attract the same illicit activities that frequently occur in our city’s LRT stations."

[CalgaryLankan]

Found these photos of new S200 c-train cars being built in Sacramento, CA. Sorry if it was posted earlier.

http://carsandtrains.com/calgary9/