Calgary Public Transit II

[ClaytonA]

As devil's advocate, as I think Calgary Transit has great planning and operations staff. Councils in the recent past have tended to meddle and make transportation political. Staff does a great job. Calgary and Calgary's staff are not Wellington New Zealand.

I saw this quite a while a ago and thought of Calgary Transit's Zero-Based Reviews, service reallocations, and service optimizations, as well as the current 4-year budget proposal One Calgary highlighting that continued austerity may force prolonging retirement of U2s and a reduction back to 3 car LRT trains.

Please, please ignore the article and blog post itself. Link added purely for background. Please focus on this from the comments;

... 1) It seems you do not take into account local politics. ... Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) which is responsible for PT in the region and has a majority of suburban councilors outside the city. The suburbs are not interested in PT in the city ... except that it should be cheap (in fact, the suburbs want a four-lane highway through the city center to the airport ...

the GWRC manipulated a spine study which came to the conclusion that Light Rail makes no economic sense and BRT should be chosen. For a while the network change was being labelled as BRT but of course exactly zero requirements for a BRT network have been implemented so they dropped that label. A bus has no chance to stick to any schedule in Wellington (unless you pad the schedule with a lot of buffer which would make them painfully slow). ...

https://humantransit.org/2018/10/wellington-notes-on-an-nz-newsroom-article.html

There are some parallels with YYC.

• Council dominated by suburban councillors
• Council focused more on reducing costs versus 2010-2018 growth
• Highway expansion (SWRR, Crowchild Tr, MacLeod Tr, Sarcee Tr, upcoming Airport Tr, upcoming 16 Ave NE)
• Service changes (cuts?) since 2013
• Express Buses and BRT funded from service changes, not new funding
• The spine network dynamic used for service changes
• Busy spine lines and cut backs on alternatives (possibility of more to come, 4 -> 3)
• Unfunded $40 million annual Green Line service budget ask being used to hammer current budget requests (self flagellation by Calgary Transpo)
• No discussion of subsituting capital investments to reduce transit operating costs (eg more dedicated lanes [downtown, two-way 4 St SW, etc], even more transit signal priority, etc.)

It's interesting (Councillor Keating's been good, shows understanding) how all councillors and the mayor are marketing the BRT network. Is a capital investment without the corresponding operating/service investment really a service expansion? Debatable. Probably at the margin.

https://www.shanekeating.ca/2018/07/24/max/

... Over the next year we will see one of the largest expansions in transit service in our history. The new service, called MAX, will change the way Calgarians move around our city. ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calgary transit muddles through - ridership is creeping up again, funding won't be as tight. Per capita funding has been decreasing, but it should be able to stay out of a defund-discredit spiral or falling-ridership-leads-to-further-service-cuts spiral. YEG and YOW will measurably jump ahead of YYC in transit ridership by 2026 as transit becomes a more attractive mode there and Calgary's underfunding of buses becomes more apparent.

Oh course the other dynamic is Balzac is getting some big developments just outside the City boundary because they have (long term probably temporarily) lower property taxes. Same for residential development around Calgary.

Contact your councillors regarding the 4-year budget's allocation of their property taxes at inflation plus population growth. Trial balloons are being floated. 3 car LRT. Mainstreets scaled back. Tax increases for 14 new edge communities. Some city parts operate in a lean, toned, scrappy unfunded paradigm (not claiming this is specifically transit) and has to be carefully innovative, but there still is money for perceived priorities. What departments' budget didn't get cut in the downturn? What is the relative efficiency of investment in roads versus transit (econ, enviro, social)? Squeaky wheel.

[ClaytonA]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Great find! Another example of how stupid the planning was initially starts around the 5 minute mark. To me it sounds like within two days they pulled a cost number out of their butts to get the feds to finance 1/3. If the feds were the ones that came to them why would they ask for the cheapest solution? And like you said, why would they think a surface route would be okay? Do these guys actually use the system? Doesn't look like it.

"Hey I've got a few billion I need to shovel out before the upcoming federal election. What projects do you guys have I can have a press conference for? I need something big, transformative, city-wide, and popular."

"Well we could fund a waste water treatment plant at Bonnybrook"

"What, I don't give a $hit about pumping $hit. Won't get me elected."

"Ahhh, what about a new LRT line from Northpointe to Seton?"

"Awesome. How much?"

"Ahh the preliminary conceptual number we have is $4.5 billion, but we haven't really even started looking into this yet. Give us some time."

"No time. This needs to be announced before the election is called."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you would have said no to $1.5 billion suddenly appearing?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

So you would have said no to $1.5 billion suddenly appearing?

If spending that money financially cripples our transit system (hypothetically, I don't know if it will), then maybe we would have been better off not taking it.

[ClaytonA]

Definitely think we could have run a abreviated 3 month study to improve the cost estimate from Class 5, $ per km variety.

Looking at the first page in the RouteAhead thread at what was supposed to be accomplished in the short term (i.e. first 10 years by 2023) we're roughly 5 out of 7.
That title of the image though...

Everything really depends on whether transit ridership increases and if those increases pay for more service expansion in addition to inflation/O&M/etc. I'm not sure the new express buses and BRT is enough.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

If spending that money financially cripples our transit system (hypothetically, I don't know if it will), then maybe we would have been better off not taking it.

I agree.

In the video Carra doesn't say that the feds came to them with $1.5 billion. Remple and Kenney came asking what they could do to help ensure the entire corridor got LRT service. The city should have asked to get the best like other cities do and not settle for an urban design disaster. Given that the feds didn't seem to hesitate committing $1.5 billion I have a feeling they city could have gotten a lot more. They should have realized without the need for further study that the entire downtown section and a lot of the north line would have to be underground to function properly and provide the most benefit. They should have said the line would cost ~$7.8 billion and asked the feds to cover $3 billion. The feds might have said you're asking for too much but they wouldn't have walked away. Horrible negotiating on the city's part as far as I'm concerned.

[Doug]

Unless dt employment rebounds, Calgary Transit will struggle to justify significant investment. Calgary is a cold, low density city with high private vehicle ownership. The only reason it has sustained the existing light rail network has been highly centralized employment.

[holhm22]

Originally Posted by Jaspertf

...A lot of the U2s are reaching the end of their operable life, the U2s in Calgary could even now be the oldest rolling stock in active commuter service in the developed world, 27 of the U2s are 37 years old!...

Lot of great points here, although I do want to point out that Hong Kong's MTR still runs most of their M-Stock trains older than the U2s, and rather well and efficiently too. To be fair though, they did undergo refurbishment in the late 90s.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Doug

Unless dt employment rebounds, Calgary Transit will struggle to justify significant investment. Calgary is a cold, low density city with high private vehicle ownership.

Doug - do you have data / references for that? It may well be true, but I'm curious how it compares to like-sized cities w.r.t. vehicle ownership and some of your other metrics with like-sized cities like Buffalo, Edmonton or even Portland.

[ImmortalHawk]

Originally Posted by holhm22

Lot of great points here, although I do want to point out that Hong Kong's MTR still runs most of their M-Stock trains older than the U2s, and rather well and efficiently too. To be fair though, they did undergo refurbishment in the late 90s.

I would beg to differ about the efficiently part. I have family in Hong Kong, and from what I've heard, it's not too good. A while ago, the MTR system crashed when 4 of their lines got completely shut down. That caused a lot of chaos and even panic, as people line up to get to work, only to find that they will have to be redirected to a shuttle bus. The company stated that it was some electrical problems and technical issues that caused it, but passengers have been complaining for the past 10 years about how much money is spent on high-profile businessmen and how expensive the fares were, but not service quality and actually wanting passengers to travel safe. They ignore the essence of comfortable and easy travelling.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

They should have said the line would cost ~$7.8 billion and asked the feds to cover $3 billion. The feds might have said you're asking for too much but they wouldn't have walked away. Horrible negotiating on the city's part as far as I'm concerned.

And even if they sincerely believed in 2015 that North Pointe-Seton, even with the downtown tunnel option, would cost $4.5-$5B, at some point between then and May 2017 the City should have realized that it was going way overbudget and started asking for more money. If not the full amount then at least enough to reach Beddington in the North.

Instead May 2017 rolls around and it seems like everybody outside of the Administration gets completely surprised by how small the line is. And despite that, and much to the consternation of ClaytonA, there doesn't seem to be an effort by the City to get more funding.

[holhm22]

Originally Posted by ImmortalHawk

I would beg to differ about the efficiently part. I have family in Hong Kong, and from what I've heard, it's not too good. A while ago, the MTR system crashed when 4 of their lines got completely shut down. That caused a lot of chaos and even panic, as people line up to get to work, only to find that they will have to be redirected to a shuttle bus. The company stated that it was some electrical problems and technical issues that caused it, but passengers have been complaining for the past 10 years about how much money is spent on high-profile businessmen and how expensive the fares were, but not service quality and actually wanting passengers to travel safe. They ignore the essence of comfortable and easy travelling.

I do understand how your family is complaining about the situation of the MTR, especially with that recent big failure of 4 essential city lines you mentioned, but from my personal experience of visiting many times, the MTR operates much much better than the LRT here. I feel like a lot of people in HK like to complain about the MTR and other public transport, when it's really many times better than in North America, and due to the quality of public transport being so much higher, everyone has much higher expectations.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by ImmortalHawk

I would beg to differ about the efficiently part. I have family in Hong Kong, and from what I've heard, it's not too good. A while ago, the MTR system crashed when 4 of their lines got completely shut down. That caused a lot of chaos and even panic, as people line up to get to work, only to find that they will have to be redirected to a shuttle bus. The company stated that it was some electrical problems and technical issues that caused it, but passengers have been complaining for the past 10 years about how much money is spent on high-profile businessmen and how expensive the fares were, but not service quality and actually wanting passengers to travel safe. They ignore the essence of comfortable and easy travelling.

Hong Kong's system is definitely considerably more expensive than any other metro in Greater China (i.e. including Taiwan) -HK$12 for a 15 minute journey? That's like 3 times the price of the Shanghai Metro. Personally I think the Taipei Metro is the best system in Greater China - it's not much more expensive than mainland Metros, but it has longer service hours and it's considerably more orderly than mainland metros are.

[Music Lover]

Sign this petition!!!
Let's make this happen!

https://www.change.org/p/music-lovers-music-on-the-bus-in-calgary-and-edmonton-transit-service

[milomilo]

No thanks.

[suburbia]

Thought this was interesting from Vancouver, among the urban planning thought and implementation leaders:

https://twitter.com/UBC/status/1057396121314779138

Why are there no bike lanes on Main Mall or University Boulevard? Because the centre of campus is a Pedestrian Priority Zone, where safety and sharing the space trump speedy travel.

https://planning.ubc.ca/vancouver/news-events/newsletter/2018-10-29/where-are-bike-lanes

With the start of every school year, Campus + Community Planning receives requests for bike lanes on UBC’s main arteries. But installing them would put pedestrians at a greater risk of injury, says Krista Falkner, the department’s Transportation Engineer. Instead, cyclists are encouraged to slow down and yield to pedestrians in these spaces — and head for an alternate route like East or West Mall if they want to go faster.

[suburbia]

MAX launch November 17th
http://www.calgarytransit.com/max

[suburbia]

MAX routes - images from City of Calgary

Purple


Teal


Orange

[lubicon]

Cross posting in the roads section since this involves both transit and roads.
Over the weekend I had a chance to drive 17 Ave SE where the new MAX BRT line will be opening next week. The setup looks really nice, stations are clean and well lit and construction looks pretty close to being done, maybe just some final landscaping to do in the spring.

There are a couple of significant items of interest, at least to me on this particular line. Due to it running down the middle of 17 Avenue there are a few changes to traffic slow compared to before. First thing to watch is that since the stations seem to be at the end of the block it is slightly confusing for left turning traffic as the left turn lanes appears not to be on the far left anymore. In fact it is still the left most traffic lane but there are now two lanes of transit inside of that and I can see drivers inadvertently cutting into the transit lanes when turning into the left turn bay. They are separated by a slight bump but not a full curb by what I see. Interesting to see how this works out.

To go along with the centre lanes for transit, obviously there is no more access to the opposite side of the road except at intersections – you can no longer turn left off 17th to access a business on the opposite side, or exit out of a business and cross over 17th to travel the opposite direction except at intersections. To help with this the City has put in (to my knowledge) the only dedicated U Turn signal I have ever seen. They run concurrent with the dedicated left turn arrows at an intersection and clearly indicates a U Turn is also permitted. To go with this signal, all other cross traffic movements are prohibited from the side streets entering 17th. There are also lighted signs to indicate no right hand turn on red onto 17th is allowed while the U Turn signal is active. Once that cycle ends and the light turns green for 17 Ave regular movement the sign turns off and right hand turns onto 17th are permitted again.
I have not seen signals like this anywhere else in Calgary so this is certainly new and is going to take some time for drivers to adjust to.

[suburbia]

The concept of centre lane BRT is not unique, and is actually quite similar to the reasons even at-grade LRT run the same way generally speaking.

Originally Posted by lubicon

To go along with the centre lanes for transit, obviously there is no more access to the opposite side of the road except at intersections – you can no longer turn left off 17th to access a business on the opposite side, or exit out of a business and cross over 17th to travel the opposite direction except at intersections. To help with this the City has put in (to my knowledge) the only dedicated U Turn signal I have ever seen. They run concurrent with the dedicated left turn arrows at an intersection and clearly indicates a U Turn is also permitted.
<>
I have not seen signals like this anywhere else in Calgary so this is certainly new and is going to take some time for drivers to adjust to.

That's really interesting. I think that should enable more efficiency overall. I've never seen this elsewhere either, but can imagine it will be very successful.

Very much looking forward to the evolution(s) happening along this high potential stretch.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]