HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2015, 10:55 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by simster3 View Post
Its a relatively small street for something like that. Also the sound. I would be happy if they took out a lane of parking and put in a separted bike lane to connect 26th Ave bike lanes to Westbrook and the river network though.

A street car would be a better fit on a road like 37th St, it is wider and the homes there are already used to higher traffic volumes.
Pedestrianise east of 22nd to 14th then and divert the traffic to 32nd and 34th, access is still available by the alleys. Then no noise from cars, just quiet electric trains.

I know, pedestrianised streets are forbidden in Calgary, but this is the fantasy thread! How much nicer would something like this be?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2015, 11:11 PM
RyLucky's Avatar
RyLucky RyLucky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
How come? I'd love one.

That's a cool map, I like the idea of a network of streetcar lines a lot (although not actually in mixed traffic), but I fear there would be no business case for them as you'd need a pretty dense network of them over a largish densely populated area to get the most benefit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simster3 View Post
Its a relatively small street for something like that. Also the sound. I would be happy if they took out a lane of parking and put in a separted bike lane to connect 26th Ave bike lanes to Westbrook and the river network though.

A street car would be a better fit on a road like 37th St, it is wider and the homes there are already used to higher traffic volumes.
I kind of like the idea of Streetcars for short distances on slow-moving (<30km/h) urban retail roads, especially when rapid transit isn't (and never will be) an option for the direction of travel. For example:

-Eau Claire-->Mission-->Erlton-->Ramsay-->Inglewood-->zoo-->1st ave (Bridgeland)--> Edmonton Tr-->16th ave/ctr st NCLRT station

Nobody would ever be expected to ride the whole thing, but maybe it would build character in those nearly-connected neighbourhoods like Spiller Rd, 4th St S, and Edmonton Trail. Busses are better for journeys more than about 2 km.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Aug 5, 2015, 11:25 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyLucky View Post
I kind of like the idea of Streetcars for short distances on slow-moving (<30km/h) urban retail roads, especially when rapid transit isn't (and never will be) an option for the direction of travel. For example:

-Eau Claire-->Mission-->Erlton-->Ramsay-->Inglewood-->zoo-->1st ave (Bridgeland)--> Edmonton Tr-->16th ave/ctr st NCLRT station

Nobody would ever be expected to ride the whole thing, but maybe it would build character in those nearly-connected neighbourhoods like Spiller Rd, 4th St S, and Edmonton Trail. Busses are better for journeys more than about 2 km.
I wonder how those streetcars in Portland are doing? They definitely are only good for short distances and more for mobility than commuting. That's why I'm against the NCLRT being too streetcar like - it has far too far to travel to waste time on Centre Street.

I personally would gladly hop on a streetcar to go short distances(especially if there is a smartcard system), because unlike buses it's obvious where they are going. I would never do the same with a bus though, and I bet I'm not the only one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 6:42 AM
MasterG's Avatar
MasterG MasterG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
I wonder how those streetcars in Portland are doing? They definitely are only good for short distances and more for mobility than commuting. That's why I'm against the NCLRT being too streetcar like - it has far too far to travel to waste time on Centre Street.

I personally would gladly hop on a streetcar to go short distances(especially if there is a smartcard system), because unlike buses it's obvious where they are going. I would never do the same with a bus though, and I bet I'm not the only one.
The continuum of surface-level transit changes rapidly as soon as you give "street-cars" their own right-of-way and signal priority, even if it is on ground-level with minimum fencing and separation structures (walls, highway barriers etc.) from the surrounding area.

It will be interesting once designs are discussed. Modern LRTs can maintain high average speed, grade-level operations, and minimal barriers to cross traffic and pedestrians if implemented properly. Is Calgary capable of handling such a system? Much like Toronto (subways, subways, subways), the politicians, Calgary transit and the general public seems to exhibit Ctrain bias, as in the only way they can imagine a Ctrain line is the way we have currently built them, rather than what other cities are doing that could work better for city-building and transportation needs alike.

I would be very surprised if whatever the design team comes up with looks anything like the Portland Streetcar (or any streetcar system for that matter).
__________________
From the right side of the wrong side of the tracks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 1:04 PM
googspecial googspecial is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: YYC
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by simster3 View Post
A street car would be a better fit on a road like 37th St, it is wider and the homes there are already used to higher traffic volumes.
I had originally drawn it down 37 ST, but wanted to connect Currie Barracks better, and 33 ST just made more sense to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 1:50 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterG View Post
I would be very surprised if whatever the design team comes up with looks anything like the Portland Streetcar (or any streetcar system for that matter).
Sorry if the Portland comment sounded as more of a poke at streetcars - I honestly am interested if they are successful in Portland. It's hard to filter articles.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 2:31 PM
CrossedTheTracks CrossedTheTracks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyLucky View Post
I kind of like the idea of Streetcars for short distances on slow-moving (<30km/h) urban retail roads, especially when rapid transit isn't (and never will be) an option for the direction of travel. For example:

[snip]

Busses are better for journeys more than about 2 km.
That's a curious way of thinking about streetcars (not that you're alone...).

My frame of reference on streetcars is this: when I (briefly) lived in Toronto, I had the choice of either subway+subway to work, or a single streetcar (501). They took roughly the same amount of time, 25 minutes. I flipped back and forth depending on my mood!

There's no reason to think of streetcars as being for slow traffic, even when operating in mixed lanes. Certainly no reason to think of them as being slower than buses. There's only one thing that streetcars are really bad at: getting around obstacles on the track.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 5:25 PM
ByeByeBaby's Avatar
ByeByeBaby ByeByeBaby is offline
Crunchin' the numbers.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: T2R, YYC, 403, CA-AB.
Posts: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks View Post
That's a curious way of thinking about streetcars (not that you're alone...).

My frame of reference on streetcars is this: when I (briefly) lived in Toronto, I had the choice of either subway+subway to work, or a single streetcar (501). They took roughly the same amount of time, 25 minutes. I flipped back and forth depending on my mood!

There's no reason to think of streetcars as being for slow traffic, even when operating in mixed lanes. Certainly no reason to think of them as being slower than buses. There's only one thing that streetcars are really bad at: getting around obstacles on the track.
As you yourself say; in mixed traffic with the same stop spacing, they are no faster than buses, and the second there is an obstacle on the track then the streetcar is slower than the bus. And obstacles on the track aren't uncommon in an urban environment - ask me about the 5 minutes I spent on the streetcar in Portland behind a double-parked UPS truck.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 5:55 PM
UofC.engineer's Avatar
UofC.engineer UofC.engineer is offline
Laura Palmer
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Twin Peaks, Calgary, AB
Posts: 1,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby View Post
As you yourself say; in mixed traffic with the same stop spacing, they are no faster than buses, and the second there is an obstacle on the track then the streetcar is slower than the bus. And obstacles on the track aren't uncommon in an urban environment - ask me about the 5 minutes I spent on the streetcar in Portland behind a double-parked UPS truck.
Yeah, sounds like a pain in the ass. I think the portland streetcars have very long headways too. About 15min in peak time IIRC. Why did portland reintroduce streetcars in 2001? Was it simply to encourage developer investment. Could Calgary do the same on streets that need an extra push? Is it even worth it? What are the benefits of a streetcar vs. a bus? To me streetcars have a cool factor associated with them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 6:22 PM
CrossedTheTracks CrossedTheTracks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby View Post
As you yourself say; in mixed traffic with the same stop spacing, they are no faster than buses, and the second there is an obstacle on the track then the streetcar is slower than the bus. And obstacles on the track aren't uncommon in an urban environment - ask me about the 5 minutes I spent on the streetcar in Portland behind a double-parked UPS truck.
Yeah, to clarify, I'm not claiming that streetcars are better than buses, but there's no good reason to pigeon-hole streetcars as "good for slow streets".

The one way that streetcars can be faster than bus is by avoiding the wait to pull back into traffic from a bus bay, since streetcars inherently don't do that. Of course, there's another solution to that: don't have pull-out bays for bus stops.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 7:39 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
Sorry if the Portland comment sounded as more of a poke at streetcars - I honestly am interested if they are successful in Portland. It's hard to filter articles.
If you want to rapidly gentrify an area a huge infrastructure investment helps. Hard to delineate between the effect of a street car, and the accompanying streetscape improvements though (opinion generally informed by literature I don't care to spend time looking up right now!). In the USA these go together as you need the streetcar to get federal funds for the entire project, and congress put funds earmarked specifically for Streetcars, so if you weren't attempting to build one you were potentially leaving money on the table.

We basically did this without a streetcar in the East Village and Bridgeland.

I could see the case to do this kind of infrastructure on the Bowness-Forestlawn BRT route as it would likely have a huge impact on redevelopment for the entire corridor. Would be expensive though for little travel time gain over buses with similar programming.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 9:26 PM
RyLucky's Avatar
RyLucky RyLucky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks View Post
That's a curious way of thinking about streetcars (not that you're alone...).

My frame of reference on streetcars is this: when I (briefly) lived in Toronto, I had the choice of either subway+subway to work, or a single streetcar (501). They took roughly the same amount of time, 25 minutes. I flipped back and forth depending on my mood!

There's no reason to think of streetcars as being for slow traffic, even when operating in mixed lanes. Certainly no reason to think of them as being slower than buses. There's only one thing that streetcars are really bad at: getting around obstacles on the track.
Relative to a bus, Toronto street cars are bad at lots of things (avoiding obstacles and other broken streetcars, getting passengers hit by cars due to centre loading, wheelchair access, noise, leaving the roadway free of obstacles that pose risks to cyclists/wheelchairs/pedestrians, allowing cars to safely pass), but the newer technology can solve a lot of those issues. What streetcars ARE good at is ensuring a smooth-ish ride, acting as living heritage, making a sense of place, and psychologically comforting commuters that they are in the right spot.

I would argue that a huge proportion of the perception is just branding. People associate streetcar tracks with trendy neighbourhoods, reliable schedules, and a certain "upscale" or metropolitan form of transit. People associate busses with waiting in the cold, being in scary industrial parks late at night, etc. A related phenomenon occurred when CT incidentally changed deckles on busses at the same time as introducing express 101/104 and other routes before the WLRT. People began to associate the red busses with faster, more reliable service, even though only a few routes had any changes.

The limiting factor in terms of efficiency is Right of Way. Whether bus, BRT, LRT, Streetcar - it doesn't matter. Any of these forms can achieve the about same metrics for stops 800 m apart. Bus is by far the most versatile and inexpensive of these models until we are talking about a >50:1 passenger to driver ratio in all directions, at which point it is cheaper to operate LRT or streetcar (though typically LRT's are longer).

BUT... it's not that simple because people aren't that simple. If everyone perceives streetcars as safer, more comfortable, more reliable, etc, more people will ride them. The problem is that you never know how people might feel in the future, and I'm not sure it's responsible to offer the more expensive and less versatile option at the expense of existing services. If we wanted, we could start building schools out of sandstone again, but then again ATCO trailer portables have their advantages too, especially when we can build them for a fraction of the price.

If ever we were contemplating installing a streetcar, I'd ask:
1) Why not a bus?
2) Why not a natural gas powered bus?
3) Why not a bus with overhead power supply?

If someone can answer those three questions without bringing in psychology, kudos.

Otherwise, I think we need to revisit what we are trying to achieve with said streetcar. If the goal is generating sense of place/community/mobility for those who would not have boarded a bus for whatever reason, let's explore all the ways we might achieve those goals, and if streetcar is still the best bang for its buck (against things like improvements to sidewalks, bike lanes, new parks, etc), then so be it. I'm skeptical of mixed-traffic streetcars being the best fit for any street except those that connect disconnected, slow-moving retail streets to just-beyond-walking-distance transit hubs, for commuters travelling 1-3 km. Any less and you might as well walk; any more and the high speed you'd need to compete with a bus degrades the retail/street environment that the streetcar was intended to nurture in the first place, especially when there are already bus systems that extend all the way to the suburbs travelling in the same direction. That's why a Streetcar works well for a Neighbourhood like W Queen W (Toronto): it turns a 30 minute walk to the subway into a 17 minute streetcar ride, retail on Queen gets the benefit of being "in the loop" and a more metropolitan/urban, it honour's Toronto's pre-automobile history, and if you don't want to walk you can have shelter from rainy Ontario skies.

That said, modern low-floor streetcars with ROW are essentially LRTs. When I think STREETcar, I think of short vehicles that share ROW with vehicle traffic. Maybe the term is as obsolete as the old technology. Really all that matters is the degree of ROW.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 10:05 PM
ByeByeBaby's Avatar
ByeByeBaby ByeByeBaby is offline
Crunchin' the numbers.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: T2R, YYC, 403, CA-AB.
Posts: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
Sorry if the Portland comment sounded as more of a poke at streetcars - I honestly am interested if they are successful in Portland. It's hard to filter articles.
Modestly so; it performs well in terms of ridership relative to the other comparable US short-line central streetcars (Seattle, Tacoma, Salt Lake, Tucson) as well as all the heritage street cars (Tampa, Kenosha, Memphis etc.). But it has much lower ridership relative to most contemporary true (dedicated ROW) LRT systems.

I put together a bit of a comparison with three other downtown transit alternatives; in Calgary, the free fare zone, in Vancouver, two regular bus routes that circle the downtown and West End, and in DC the three lines of the Circulator bus system, a dedicated special frequent service low-cost bus. (The DC Circulator operates three other lines; one is new so there is no ridership info and the other two don't really go downtown at all and are unsurprisingly much less efficient.)



It seems clear that an attractive service can gather riders regardless of the vehicle type, and that Portland spent $250 million on capital where the other agencies just dedicated a handful of buses. Anything Portland gets a sheen of urbanism, but it's not that great from a transit perspective, particularly when compared to Calgary.

Streetcar boosters also point to the redevelopment potential, but as MalcolmTucker pointed out, we just did the same thing in the East Village with nicer sidewalks.

Mostly though, I'm just glad that the streetcar discussion is in the transit fantasy thread, where it belongs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 10:19 PM
MalcolmTucker MalcolmTucker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,429
In Portland it is important to point out two things: 1, since the service is so slow (6.5 mph), and so infrequent it is faster to walk for trips for trips under a mile according to Human Transit. Also, unless the service is perfectly timed for transfers between the lines (it is probably perfectly offset), switching between the lines makes the system even slower, for an average 15 minute wait for a two line trip.

From a social policy perspective on streetcars, is it better to spread out gentrification so more people can afford to live in a high status neighbourhoods?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 10:34 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker View Post
In Portland it is important to point out two things: 1, since the service is so slow (6.5 mph), and so infrequent it is faster to walk for trips for trips under a mile according to Human Transit. Also, unless the service is perfectly timed for transfers between the lines (it is probably perfectly offset), switching between the lines makes the system even slower, for an average 15 minute wait for a two line trip.

From a social policy perspective on streetcars, is it better to spread out gentrification so more people can afford to live in a high status neighbourhoods?
Seems to be that if building streetcars were free/money were no object, they would be great. But in a world of limited funds, they will almost always lose to other options.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 10:40 PM
CalgaryAlex's Avatar
CalgaryAlex CalgaryAlex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 617
The poor design of stops in this city plays a large role in the negative perception of buses (and people yearning for streetcars as if they are magic). If the stop looks ghetto, your impression is already poor before you even step onto the vehicle.
  • If bus stops had better lighting, landscaping, shelter and furniture, potential passengers will feel more comfortable
  • Each stop should include an informative and clear map of the routes available at the stop. If you're walking along the street and notice a bus stop, what if you could take it and save 10 minutes walking to your destination? How the hell would you know without going online? This information needs to be evident and communicated properly
  • Unique (large) signage, symbols and lighting should attract potential users from blocks away. A simple aluminum post with a tiny blue and white sign is not enough. They need to "pop" out at you, not blend in with the sky and parking signage
  • Add digital boards with GPS-enabled "next bus" time tracking. If these boards are too much trouble, at least have some sort of indication that a bus will actually arrive at the stop if you wait long enough. I once waited for nearly an hour at an industrial park stop waiting for a bus before realizing that it was a seasonal stop with no service at the time. A simple LED with a "yes" or "no" will be enough for most people, allowing them to make a decision between waiting or finding another method of arriving at their destination

Make a few simple changes to the worst part of taking the bus (waiting at a stop) and the gap in attractiveness between bus and streetcar will narrow significantly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 11:17 PM
holhm22 holhm22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 315
For bus stop info, HK is a good example.
They have all the route stops listed on the board. The board itself is 3 sided and can show info for 3 routes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Aug 6, 2015, 11:44 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by holhm22 View Post
For bus stop info, HK is a good example.
They have all the route stops listed on the board. The board itself is 3 sided and can show info for 3 routes.
[IMG]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...s_Stop_01a.jpg[IMG]
I actually think that shows perfectly why buses suck - there's seemingly dozens of routes there from three different operators, presumably with lots of overlap and weird scheduling. It looks very confusing. With a rail based system, because the infrastructure is expensive and fixed, you have far fewer routes and it is much simpler to know where and when it goes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2015, 12:33 AM
RyLucky's Avatar
RyLucky RyLucky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalgaryAlex View Post
The poor design of stops in this city plays a large role in the negative perception of buses (and people yearning for streetcars as if they are magic). If the stop looks ghetto, your impression is already poor before you even step onto the vehicle.
  • If bus stops had better lighting, landscaping, shelter and furniture, potential passengers will feel more comfortable
  • Each stop should include an informative and clear map of the routes available at the stop. If you're walking along the street and notice a bus stop, what if you could take it and save 10 minutes walking to your destination? How the hell would you know without going online? This information needs to be evident and communicated properly
  • Unique (large) signage, symbols and lighting should attract potential users from blocks away. A simple aluminum post with a tiny blue and white sign is not enough. They need to "pop" out at you, not blend in with the sky and parking signage
  • Add digital boards with GPS-enabled "next bus" time tracking. If these boards are too much trouble, at least have some sort of indication that a bus will actually arrive at the stop if you wait long enough. I once waited for nearly an hour at an industrial park stop waiting for a bus before realizing that it was a seasonal stop with no service at the time. A simple LED with a "yes" or "no" will be enough for most people, allowing them to make a decision between waiting or finding another method of arriving at their destination

Make a few simple changes to the worst part of taking the bus (waiting at a stop) and the gap in attractiveness between bus and streetcar will narrow significantly.
Well said and good points. When are fare cards, GPS displays, and rear door loading coming again?

As for HK, Toronto has the same thing. Also, Milo makes a good point about how confusing it can be with so many routes, but that's a hard one to get around in a city like Calgary where buses from Downtown could lead anywhere in our low-density suburbs. For me, Google has been a real gamechanger when it comes to planning my route. I'm curious how new technology will better communicate this information in a few years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2015, 4:13 AM
holhm22 holhm22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
I actually think that shows perfectly why buses suck - there's seemingly dozens of routes there from three different operators, presumably with lots of overlap and weird scheduling. It looks very confusing. With a rail based system, because the infrastructure is expensive and fixed, you have far fewer routes and it is much simpler to know where and when it goes.
Oh wow really? In HK, no one actually looks at the scheduling really as buses come very often. If you experience it yourself, it's not as bad as it looks, trust me. But the 3 operator part is really a pain, since they do use the same route #s in different areas for the different operators. Then again, it's Hong Kong, so the whole city is pretty confusing

At least those info boards, even if confusing, is better than nothing at all!
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:20 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.