Calgary Public Transit II

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Before West LRT was opened, 301 was a continous route of what-would-become-west-LRT to Centre St North.

So... why wasn't 301 and 302 combined when West LRT opened? I don't know. I've heard on this forum that supply would badly imbalanced between the two portions.

Which of course is interesting since the train would in theory have the same problem.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by DizzyEdge

Which of course is interesting since the train would in theory have the same problem.

Yeah, that's certainly possible. If I put on my rose-coloured glasses, perhaps this will be less severe with trains than with buses, because LRT will have a bigger positive impact on travel times for the SE than the N, relative to existing BRT service. i.e., it'll become a more attractive service.

Also (still with rose-coloured glasses firmly in place), LRT has lower operating costs per passenger than buses, so the impact of providing "too much" service on one leg is more tolerable in terms of wasted costs.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Yeah, that's certainly possible. If I put on my rose-coloured glasses, perhaps this will be less severe with trains than with buses, because LRT will have a bigger positive impact on travel times for the SE than the N, relative to existing BRT service. i.e., it'll become a more attractive service.

Also (still with rose-coloured glasses firmly in place), LRT has lower operating costs per passenger than buses, so the impact of providing "too much" service on one leg is more tolerable in terms of wasted costs.

It would also be more logistically difficult (needs a third platform, adds potential to screw up) and overtly annoying to have trains turning back downtown.

[accord1999]

I suspect the reason why Route 3 got split applies to the 301/302 as well:

Why is the route being split?

Splitting the route allows us to use buses more efficiently and better target the needs of customers in different sections of the city. For example, the north part of Route 3 requires large articulated buses (60 ft.), while the south portion does not. By splitting the route we can dedicate more articulated buses to Route 3, and use standard size and shuttle buses on Route 37.

Additionally, splitting Route 3 allows bus schedules to be more consistent and reliable. If there’s traffic congestion downtown or delays in the north, it won’t impact Route 37.

http://www.calgarytransit.com/news/introducing-route-37-route-3-has-split-two

[Corndogger]

City seeks bids to supply 40 natural gas-fueled transit buses

Calgary Transit’s shift away from a mostly diesel bus fleet will begin early next year with the arrival of 40 new natural gas-fueled buses as the city seeks cheaper and more environmentally friendly fuel sources to power transit.

The city is seeking an initial order of 30 to 40 compressed natural gas (CNG) buses worth around $24 million — with the first eight to be delivered by the end of this year — according to municipal bid documents. Another 70 to 80 CNG buses could be added each year for the next five years, for a total of about 450 buses over the life of the contract.

The city also hopes to have an agreement in place by next January to secure a source of renewable natural gas, so that the new CNG fleet will be powered by renewables from day one of operations.

...

The city expects to save around $5 million a year with renewable natural gas compared to diesel once the entire 450-bus fleet is in operation.

A huge bus barn and maintenance facility currently under construction in the Stoney Industrial Area on 15th Street N.E. will house the CNG buses when it opens in early 2019. The new facility will also be able to support the city’s existing diesel fleet.

...

Coun. Shane Keating, chair of the city’s transportation and transit committee, said he’s in favor of a mix of fuel sources powering transit, including electricity, so long as it’s accomplishing the goal of reducing costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

“It may not be (to) our advantage to go 100 percent to either fuel source, depending on the need,” Keating said.

Source: http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news...&utm_source=Twitter#link_time=1517801555

[suburbia]

Can't remember if this was already shared. Girders going up over Deerfoot for the International Avenue BRT. They'll need to shut down different pieces of Deerfoot on three different occasions in the coming weeks.

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/...se-brt-phase-2-28-st-se-to-9-ave-se.aspx

Project Update – February 2018

This month residents and businesses will start to see the BRT bridges really start to take shape. Crews will be putting the girders in place for the bridge over Deerfoot Trail. To make sure this work can be done safely, there will be three road closures this month:

• February 13-15, 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.: Deerfoot Trail will be closed for north and southbound traffic. Southbound traffic will be detoured onto Blackfoot Trail, and northbound traffic will be detoured onto Peigan Trail.
• February 20-22, 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.: 17 Avenue SE southbound on ramp to Deerfoot Trail will be closed. Traffic will be detoured to Memorial Drive or Blackfoot Trail.
• February 26-28, 9 p.m. to 5 a.m.: Northbound traffic off ramp from Deerfoot Trail to 17 Avenue SE will be closed. Traffic will be detoured onto Memorial Drive.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[ClaytonA]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Pardon my ignorance but how much of the BRT's gets dedicated ROW?

17 Ave SE project and a couple km's of the SW BRT by the Rocky View Hospital on 14 St SW. The rest is more accurately called express buses (limited stops, better bus shelters, a few queue jumps, traffic signal extensions).

[CrossedTheTracks]

CT will be changing bus routes around the new BRT routes.

The City of Calgary is building new and improved Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) routes that will shape the way the broader transit network operates. As part of this project, Calgary Transit is reviewing dozens of existing bus routes to develop a more effective and efficient bus network in Calgary.

...

We will be collecting stakeholder and citizen feedback online and at open houses throughout the city. We will report back in the early summer 2018.

Details and opportunity to provide feedback at https://engage.calgary.ca/busreview.

[milomilo]

They recently put up a couple of the bus shelters for the North Crosstown 'BRT', next to SAIT. It's a pretty pathetic excuse for a BRT, but at least 16th gets a proper through route.

[joe498]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

CT will be changing bus routes around the new BRT routes.



Details and opportunity to provide feedback at https://engage.calgary.ca/busreview.

This is actually a massive shakeup. Went to an open house today and was shocked by how much is being changed. Going to be really interesting to see the differences this fall.

[YYCguys]

With the latest pedestrian fatality this morning near the Whitehorn station, what changes do you folks think would help alleviate pedestrian/train interactions on that line? I know this idea is drastic, but what about raising or burying that line? Between vehicles/trains/pedestrians it’s just on a poor alignment at the moment.

[MalcolmTucker]

An arm across the crosswalk seems to be needed there. I believe the west line has this a few places. Somewhat expensive but after 2 deaths, obvious a change is needed.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

With the latest pedestrian fatality this morning near the Whitehorn station, what changes do you folks think would help alleviate pedestrian/train interactions on that line? I know this idea is drastic, but what about raising or burying that line? Between vehicles/trains/pedestrians it’s just on a poor alignment at the moment.

That section of the blue line is spectacularly awful in every way, but it's a lost cause now, we can only learn for the future. Yet more evidence (not that anyone should need it) that rapid transit and pedestrians don't mix - we should have learnt this lesson and not built the Green Line with grade crossings, improved safety and eliminated the drivers. But low quality LRT is embedded in council and Calgary Transit's attitude, even after the Green Line plan morphed from an entirely street level LRT to a substantially underground (almost) metro.

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

An arm across the crosswalk seems to be needed there. I believe the west line has this a few places. Somewhat expensive but after 2 deaths, obvious a change is needed.

There's no room for gate arms the way the intersection is designed now - there's barely any space for pedestrian refuge before the tracks - really 36th Street needs to be narrowed by a lane in each direction to create more pedestrian waiting/refuge space at each level crossing. I'm not naive enough to think this is even a remote possibility though.

[Socguy]

Originally Posted by milomilo

That section of the blue line is spectacularly awful in every way, but it's a lost cause now, we can only learn for the future. Yet more evidence (not that anyone should need it) that rapid transit and pedestrians don't mix - we should have learnt this lesson and not built the Green Line with grade crossings, improved safety and eliminated the drivers. But low quality LRT is embedded in council and Calgary Transit's attitude, even after the Green Line plan morphed from an entirely street level LRT to a substantially underground (almost) metro.

Yes. This.

North American cities have been built around the car and it limits what can be done with transit now. Destinations that most people need to use transit for are far away which means that transit needs to be fast in order to be useful for riders. Problem is that speed kills so, generally speaking, transit must be kept as isolated as possible from collision points between cars, cyclists and pedestrians. Sadly this impacts the grand vision to have a system that's somehow doubles as a community oriented streetcar and a commuter train.

[YYCguys]

Councillor George Chahal urging Council to move ahead with a more substantial transit link to YYC, either off of the Blue Line or Green Line. I think they should have the link travel BETWEEN the Blue Line AND the Green Line via YYC. Open house today ends in 1/2 hour but can fill out short basic survey, link below:

http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TI/...s/Green-Line-to-Blue-Line-Connector.aspx

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

I think they should have the link travel BETWEEN the Blue Line AND the Green Line via YYC.

Green Line North has to exist first.

Chahal is smart to support it, an airport connector in a near to mid-term time frame would have to come from the NE, meaning expansion of the NE line and improved service to his Ward. Just like it will be wise for Chu and Gyondek to defer the airport connector to the far future (if not kill it outright), since any dollar spent there will be a dollar not spent in the NC line.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Green Line North has to exist first.

Duh! We all know that! But at least the planning can begin!

[milomilo]

Should be interesting what technology choice they use. They could use high floor LRT, as they will then be able to link it to the Blue line to transfer trains for maintenance (even if it is operationally a spur). If they use low floor, which would be what I imagine the city would want to use going forward, they would have to have the line isolated for decades while the Green line is built out to the north. Perhaps they could have a small maintenance depot on the line, and do larger maintenance by taking the trains elsewhere by truck?

My best guess is they use BRT that could be upgraded to low floor LRT.