[Jack Doe]

I would have to agree with the triple face palm.

A little info about the Frontier Centre which Steve Lafleur represents:

"A conservative/libertarian, non-profit think tank founded to undertake research and education in support of economic growth and social outcomes..." [Google Search Result]

It doesn't surprise me that they would be against a publicly-funded mass transit system. They are generally a pro-roads, pro-sprawl organization. If the LRT supports sprawl, I would think they would be in favour of it. Recently one of their contributors advocated building a road north of Churchill MB to Baffin Island on towards Iqaluit. It gives you some idea of where their thinking is at.

Being in agreement with Naomi Lakritz does make me question whether I'm on the right side of this argument. Next thing you know, cats and dogs will start cohabiting...

[Cage]

Submitted without comment.

Naomi Lakritz article from Herald
http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/columnists/story.html?id=ce3b5f60-2b77-4b9f-9c36-96595dad16f2

[fusili]

Submitted without comment.

Naomi Lakritz article from Herald
http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/columnists/story.html?id=ce3b5f60-2b77-4b9f-9c36-96595dad16f2

Wow. While I agree with her, she argues so badly it hurts.

[freeweed]

Recently one of their contributors advocated building a road north of Churchill MB to Baffin Island on towards Iqaluit. It gives you some idea of where their thinking is at.

To be fair, I'm pretty sure an LRT line would be equally infeasible. :P

Being in agreement with Naomi Lakritz does make me question whether I'm on the right side of this argument. Next thing you know, cats and dogs will start cohabiting...

I feel the same way, although we should all take a moment to reflect: we should always strive to judge an argument on its own merit, not based on who is saying it.

Her point about -30 is well made - no matter how many times I'll complain about delayed trains, the fact is they're 100 times more reliable than the bus. Ice/snow on the roads almost never delay a train. It's usually drunken morons jumping in front of them. And that delays road traffic too.

However, I repeat: it made me feel a bit dirty to find myself nodding to something she wrote. This is unquestionably the first time in memory (and she's followed me around the country so I've had decades of exposure) and quite possibly the first time I haven't sat at a monitor/newspaper screaming "you stupid bitch, you couldn't be more wrong!!!!".

[Jack Doe]

To be fair, I'm pretty sure an LRT line would be equally infeasible. :P

I would ride an LRT from Churchill to Iqaluit. At least both ways. Seems like a desolate place to get stuck in.

I feel the same way, although we should all take a moment to reflect: we should always strive to judge an argument on its own merit, not based on who is saying it.

Her point about -30 is well made - no matter how many times I'll complain about delayed trains, the fact is they're 100 times more reliable than the bus. Ice/snow on the roads almost never delay a train. It's usually drunken morons jumping in front of them. And that delays road traffic too.

However, I repeat: it made me feel a bit dirty to find myself nodding to something she wrote. This is unquestionably the first time in memory (and she's followed me around the country so I've had decades of exposure) and quite possibly the first time I haven't sat at a monitor/newspaper screaming "you stupid bitch, you couldn't be more wrong!!!!".

Naomi Latritz reminds me of a broken watch. Right at least twice a day.

[frinkprof]

Add me to the list that thinks the Lafleur article is a big pile of fail, and although it has a couple shortcomings, the Lakritz article is pretty spot-on. I could go into more detail by systematically responding to each of Lafleur's points but the major stuff has been covered in posts above.

I liked this bit from the Lakritz article so much that it bears repeating.

A great city should offer a variety of public transit options, each one complementing -not replacing -the other.

[frinkprof]

One thing though, Lafleur approaches something of a good argument when he notes the diminishing returns (in terms of ridership gains) of expansions done since 1990. This is because all extensions done since 1990 haven't seen gains in capacity or gone to serve previously unserved corridors. They have been service expansions on existing lines rather than capacity expansions.

The current expansions of the West LRT and the 4-car extensions change that, and the future projects of the SE line and 8th Avenue subway will as well.

[Bassic Lab]

One thing though, Lafleur approaches something of a good argument when he notes the diminishing returns (in terms of ridership gains) of expansions done since 1990. This is because all extensions done since 1990 haven't seen gains in capacity or gone to serve previously unserved corridors. They have been service expansions on existing lines rather than capacity expansions.

The current expansions of the West LRT and the 4-car extensions change that, and the future projects of the SE line and 8th Avenue subway will as well.

That was the only part of Lafleur's editorial that remotely touched on local conditions. Beyond it, my impression was that it was essentially a boilerplate anti-LRT polemic. It was about as applicable to Phoenix as it was to here. Such a Mad libs style attack on LRT, just fill the the blanks with the city's name and maybe a few select local figures, just is not applicable to Calgary. Rail based transportation can in no way be defined as a vanity project here; it is an integral aspect of the city's transportation network. If anything our system is more likely to bump up against the upper capacity limits of LRT. Arguing that it could be replaced by a lower capacity bus system is near delusional.

The comparison of capital expenses of an LRT route to busses is really the fatal flaw. Even ignoring the massive operational expenses of such a plan, we could not have simply thrown hundreds of busses on Macleod, Crowchild, and 36 St NE and then called it a day. We would have needed to create busways along the routes to achieve anything remotely approaching existing capacity, drastically inflating the capital costs of a BRT system. Labour costs, just for drivers let alone mechanics, would then be at least six times higher. The simple fact is that in Calgary the LRT has been so successful that busses could not handle the load.

The argument, by both Lafleur and Lakritz, over the effect on property values is also more theoretical than Calgary specific. Neither makes an effort to actually look at the city and see if affordable communities exist in proximity to LRT lines. Lakritz's response that many residents fear a drop in property values is rather beside the point. Lafleur is correct that generally property values should climb, not because there is a fancy yuppie train nearby but instead because transportation in the area is simply superior. That does not mean that Marlborough, Rundle, and Whitehorn have suddenly become priced beyond the means of lower income Calgarians. Furthermore, by the time the six primary lines are complete, let alone some other theoretical routes like 17 Ave SE, coverage ought to be sufficient to ensure that there are no areas that can be ghettoized by poor transportation links or gentrified too severely by excellent transportation links.

[Radley77]

The full study is below:

A Critical Analysis of Calgary's Light Rail Transit System (http://www.fcpp.org/files/1/PS104_30CTrain_MR10_F1.pdf) - Steve Lafleur, Frontier Centre for Public Policy

I entirely agree that the biggest reason I didn't agree with the report was that there was a poor argument to say BRT is better than LRT without consideration of the capital cost for the right of way.

I also think right of way is one of the biggest reasons for the light rail's high ridership. It wouldn't be safe to have a subsurface BRT for the southeast line inthe downtown for right of way because of CO.

The one thing I read that I agreed with him on is about the Park'n'Ride. There is an opportunity cost with that, though prob not near as high as the estimate mentioned. I also somewhat agreed that Calgary Transit (Ctrain) has been doing a good job for creative class types that work downtown in the CBD, but has been missing out building good transit connections with some other activity nodes in the city.

[MalcolmTucker]

Yeah well, outside of serving the Universities, and what is along the LRT system, our bus system is constrained greatly by the subsidy level. That being said, the level of service needed to convert choice riders from cars to buses for work trips to industrial parks for example is just unsustainable.

Trying to get choice riders onto two transfer trips is really hard - trips that start or end at nodes the system is already reasonably good at. The funny thing is many similar ideological conservatives oppose initiatives to build new nodes.

[Bassic Lab]

The full study is below:

A Critical Analysis of Calgary's Light Rail Transit System (http://www.fcpp.org/files/1/PS104_30CTrain_MR10_F1.pdf) - Steve Lafleur, Frontier Centre for Public Policy

I entirely agree that the biggest reason I didn't agree with the report was that there was a poor argument to say BRT is better than LRT without consideration of the capital cost for the right of way.

I also think right of way is one of the biggest reasons for the light rail's high ridership. It wouldn't be safe to have a subsurface BRT for the southeast line inthe downtown for right of way because of CO.

The one thing I read that I agreed with him on is about the Park'n'Ride. There is an opportunity cost with that, though prob not near as high as the estimate mentioned. I also somewhat agreed that Calgary Transit (Ctrain) has been doing a good job for creative class types that work downtown in the CBD, but has been missing out building good transit connections with some other activity nodes in the city.

I'm now partway through the report. In Lafleur's defence, it is better researched than the impression I got just from the editorial. That doesn't mean that the stats aren't cherry picked and it still reads like something written by someone who doesn't understand the city but he did at least look into the matter. There are some pretty egregious uses of statistics. Calling the C-Train a failure because a bigger proportion of the metro's population drives into the downtown than other cities is bending the truth to suit his will. It is simply a function of having a bigger proportion of people heading downtown in general.

The issue with per capita spending on roads and transit is another example. I am always shocked whenever people complain about the level of spending being higher in Alberta, especially Calgary, than elsewhere in the country on anything. Like the combination of the highest labour costs with the fastest growth rate would allow for anything else. If we cut our transportation spending to the national per capita average we would be seriously underfunding the system. We need more expansion to keep up with the population and we need to pay more to get it down; that is simply the reality of this province.

I do have a major issue with a false dichotomy that he sets up. I would agree that the LRT does facilitate living in the burbs and working downtown. That does not mean that Calgary without the C-Train would sprawl any less. I am nearly positive that it would actually mean a Calgary where employment sprawl followed residential sprawl, just like most North American cities. The fact that we, almost uniquely, avoided that fate is something remarkable. It has also created a condition where inner city living is sought after, hence the high prices for housing anywhere remotely close to the core. This bodes well for future intensification in the inner city. If our white collar jobs were spread out in office parks all over the city then our prospects for a more sustainable built form in the future would disappear. We have something to build on as opposed to most cities which are basically grasping at straws.

Okay, I've now finished reading the report and wow. There is no way that the value of a suburban park and ride stall should be valued at the same rate ($22.00 dollars a day) as downtown parking. The report is either outdated or simply false on the matter of free parking being a subsidy because of the reserved parking fee being put in place. I think that replacing the $3.00 charge with the convoluted reserve system is problematic but it does mean we are not entirely subsidizing parking. Furthermore, there is no way that suburban parking is worth the price of downtown parking. To really find the value of park and ride spots we would need to come up with some kind of variable pricing scheme to try to attain the maximum possible amount of revenue. My gut, not the most scientific method but it beats simply substituting downtown parking rates, tells me that something like the $3.00 dollar fee was about right. The removal of Lafleur's seriously inflated subsidy numbers, to be replaced by something based on a realistic price for suburban parking with the reserved spaces fee figured in, should seriously reduce the per rider costs he came up with.

Literally 23% of the per rider cost of $2.73 that he came up with, including capital costs, is based on his inflated park and ride subsidy number. Then there is the inflation from his guesses on the subsidy level of U-passes, police protection, and Harper's transit tax rebate. That is an insanely iffy, and likely hugely inflated, cost per rider. Even with that, and his general guesstimate on the number of paying versus non paying riders, he ends up with a total of $3.00 dollars for every paying rider. Lafleur's own numbers show that the cost per paying rider is equal to the revenue generated. There is no way that a serious, let alone equally inflated, exploration of per rider costs for a BRT system would show a lack of subsidy.

Then there is the comparison of BRT speed to LRT speed. His chart chooses not to include a BRT column for Calgary. This is in spite of lauding the cost effectiveness of our endeavours towards BRT. The reason is obvious, our low cost BRTs, using existing road ROWs, are significantly slower than our LRTs. A BRT route that would exceed the average speed of our LRT would at a minimum require its own ROW, a significant cost, and probably fewer stops as well. I am particularly shocked at Dallas's BRT average speed of 56 MPH. That is more than 90 km/h. Is it a non-stop express?

The report is definitely an ideologically driven hit piece, likely targeted at the American market. The message is clear, no longer is the message "don't build an LRT system, Calgary is an outlier you can't hope to match." Now they can say, "even Calgary shouldn't have built an LRT system, and if they should have stuck with the Blue Arrow then you definitely should." The lack of any understanding of Calgary's context is really evident with the call for more BRT routes to service dense employment nodes. The closest things to dense employment nodes not presently serviced by the LRT (ie excluding downtwon, the UofC, SAIT, etcetera) are Mount Royal University, Foothills Hospital, and Rockyview Hospital. All of which are planned to have BRT connections. After that we hit a few malls. There simply aren't dense employment nodes in the city that need a multitude of rapid transit routes. Most BRTs that we would implement (like 14 St SW, 16 Ave N, Heritage-MRU-Westbrook, and 17 Ave SE) are meant to aid the LRT by providing connections between lines or removing riders from currently congested trains.

[reflexzero]

...Plus. we'd have one ugly, undesirable downtown.

Ummmm... it's still rather ugly. Needs a good cleaning. Walked in from Birdgeland this morning after our C-Train operator let us know at the end of the line that there were problems downtown, and it's pretty gross.

[MalcolmTucker]

I find it funny the report by a free market think tank valued parking spots above what the market can bare. As we saw, no park and ride lots were full (or only a few were) under the $3 a day regime.

He makes the mistake of equating value with consumer surplus. Since P&R extracts other costs from riders (fares, communal travel, slower travel time for many when you include wait times) the amount of consumer surplus left to capture is much lower than it is for parking downtown. One of the reason people choose to P&R vs. full length drive is because they get to keep more surplus!

[freeweed]

So um, wtf?? We once again stop all rapid transit service in this city because once again some drunk fell on the tracks in the middle of the night?

I guess I should stem my anger, I'm hearing phrases like "severed legs" being thrown around. But still.. what chaos into downtown this morning. If this is truly the first completely innocent/not stupid bystander to be hurt by the C-Train, I apologize profusely.

Edit: Hmm, sounds bizarre. Cops discovered a body on the tracks at 3:40 am. Isn't that well after the trains stop running?

[DarkKeyo]

I realised while passing by on the #100 that Martindale station is visible from Metis Trail, and looks to be pretty much complete, structurally. If I weren't on a bus I'd have pics, there haven't been many in this thread recently.

And the worst part about the mess this morning was not being able to hear the announcement explaining it, at Dalhousue, at 10 am long after whatever happened happened.

[CTrainDude]

I realised while passing by on the #100 that Martindale station is visible from Metis Trail, and looks to be pretty much complete, structurally. If I weren't on a bus I'd have pics, there haven't been many in this thread recently.

And the worst part about the mess this morning was not being able to hear the announcement explaining it, at Dalhousue, at 10 am long after whatever happened happened.

I think there was another incident this morning after the guy with the severed leg last night. That may have been the announcement you heard.

[freeweed]

Decided to try the Park n Ride at Crowfoot this morning for fun. The pay terminals are covered up but otherwise there's zero indication of the change. No signs, nothing. All existing signage is in place and not even a hint about where the reserved parking will be - it'll be a lot of work over the weekend I suspect.

It was fairly quiet (Friday, spring break week) but the funniest part was the 4 hour spaces - they were 3/4 empty. Everyone continued to park rather far away, while leaving the very best spots alone.

I realize this is only a one day thing (reserved areas take that all over on Monday), but it was funny nonetheless.

[mersar]

Brentwood was much the same. No signage anywhere to indicate anything had changed, though there were a couple CT crews parked there and some sign posts had pylons sitting on top of them for some reason. Lot was probably 70% full I'd guess at 9am.

MacMahon was noticibly less busy though, but considering the University decided to keep the $3 fee in place there it isn't too surprising and I'd expect it to be pretty empty unless the rest of the NW lots fill to capacity on a daily basis.

[reflexzero]

Yep, in typical fashion everything is a great mystery inasmuch as it ensures more people will get ticketed on Monday.

[Ferreth]

I took the bus today and while I was waiting at Barlow Max Bell Station, I noticed the "reserved" signs for the set of stalls inside the bus loop. (It's a very small P n' R) Never have I seen a crappier bunch of muddy stalls being "reserved parking" before now.

[mersar]

The signs they put up over the weekend were tiny little signs that look the same as the 'bait car' signs (black on yellow) that are up in the lots. According to tweets on twitter though more visible signage will be in place tomorrow, and they will start enforcing the reserved areas tomorrow as well.

[reflexzero]

I saw the reserved parking map on the CT site for Barlow, and that is laughable. $70.00 to reserve a tiny mud puddle.

Speaking of Barlow Max Bell (OT I know) is the cladding on the arena leftover from some other project? I think of ketchup and mustard when I ride by.

[freeweed]

So, after Monday's gong show, I just had to try the PnR lot today. At 7:05am, Crowfoot was just filling in the last few unreserved spots. So there's a baseline. I'd guess Dalhousie fills within 15-30 mins from that, and Brentwood not too long after. Certainly by 8 I can't see any spots being available anywhere. Except the reserved spaces of course - once again they were half empty today. The way I see it, if you can't make it before 8, you might as well not bother trying until after 10. So much for morning dentist etc appointments :(

The "duh, we didn't realize tiny signs that look identical to bait car warning signs might not be read" solution is hysterical - they had actual people directing traffic. Absolutely no other signage I could see. This does not strike me as a sustainable option.

[suburb]

Certainly by 8 I can't see any spots being available anywhere. Except the reserved spaces of course - once again they were half empty today. The way I see it, if you can't make it before 8, you might as well not bother trying until after 10.

If you don't need to park at a PnR by 8am to get to work on time, you're getting it too easy at work and should be taxed extra. Lots filling up by 8am are just where they need to be. Filling up by 7am is too early.

Personally, I very much like this hybrid solution with reserved and free spots. They can re-balance on a lot by lot basis as time passes.

[frinkprof]

This does not strike me as a sustainable option.What does then?

[mersar]

Except the reserved spaces of course - once again they were half empty today.

Thats mostly as they didn't sell all the reserved permits for this month before they stopped sales from what I heard (and I think someone else mentioned it on here as well)

[freeweed]

What does then?

Anything other than a fulltime parking attendant?

[frinkprof]

Anything other than a fulltime parking attendant?Sorry, I thought you were referring to the reservation system in general, not the suggestion in your last paragraph.

[freeweed]

If you don't need to park at a PnR by 8am to get to work on time, you're getting it too easy at work and should be taxed extra.

That assumes every single person on transit works before 9, and does the usual M-F rush hour commute (and does this every single day).

What about people who only occasionally use it, due to other morning appointments etc? Feeder bus service outside of the rush is highly degraded (think 30 mins or more between buses). Part of the problem with the reserved system is you're basically giving the finger to those people in favour of Cochranites and people who *could* take a 10 minute feeder bus but choose not to.

Not that there's a solution that would make everyone perfectly happy. However, the biggest complaint before any PnR fee was "the lots fill up too fast and I can't get a spot". Well, we're exactly back to that situation - except half the lots are making the city money. It's now worse on both fronts (the money grab, and the poor spot availability).

I think the signage fiasco is proof positive that this, like every other decision in recent memory regarding these lots, was poorly thought out and obviously not by anyone who actually USES the system.

[freeweed]

Sorry, I thought you were referring to the reservation system in general, not the suggestion in your last paragraph.

Well, the more I look at it I think the reservation system is stupid as well, but that's a different rant. At least that still helps pad the city coffers. They certainly aren't spending the money on lot upgrades like they claimed it was for in the first place (easy to tell that this money disappears into general revenue, because proper signage would have been a drop in the bucket compared to the millions these lots bring in).

[suburb]

That assumes every single person on transit works before 9, and does the usual M-F rush hour commute (and does this every single day).

What about people who only occasionally use it, due to other morning appointments etc? Feeder bus service outside of the rush is highly degraded (think 30 mins or more between buses).

No solution is perfect. The best solution is reasonable for the largest number of people while also being fiscally responsible. I would love a direct LRT from my house to my work with no stops with a schedule that is triggered by my coffee maker. But it might be expensive for the city and may just cost more than the West and SE LRT lines combined.

BTW - starting work before nine does not correlate to "the usual M-F rush hour commute". You have the option of starting work earlier.

Aside - Was "M-F rush hour" meant to be a pun. LOL!

... the biggest complaint before any PnR fee was "the lots fill up too fast and I can't get a spot". Well, we're exactly back to that situation - except half the lots are making the city money. It's now worse on both fronts (the money grab, and the poor spot availability).

That is just ridiculous. Obviously the pay spots are the ones still available - and the excess free up at 10am anyway. It is not a money grab as the revenue is peanuts compared to the costs associated with public transit. We can't be a welfare state for everyone and their dog. What would your solution be for free spots available all day long? Tripling the size of the lots by buying out houses? There is only so much land for free parking!

[Mazrim]

Wanna know why the signage sucked for the reserved spots? There's no standard for LRT lots at all. We're just fortunate they keep saying "look at the old stations" when they build new stations and design the signage. Regulatory signage and Calgary Transit signage are handled separately in parking lots, which is stupid. There's very little communication between the two groups (it amounts to going out in the field and asking if they can mount their no parking sign onto the directional signage). Because of this, some person gets randomly assigned to manufacture new signs when new initiatives and has nothing to really follow (like the fiasco with the signage saying you had to face out so they could scan your license plate). Then managers probably ask them to shrink stuff to save money.

They got it wrong before, they got it wrong this time, and they probably will again.

Thankfully, West LRT should be done by one group, so there will be consistency, even if it's not correct.

[Cage]

I too parked at Crowfoot and I have paid for a reserved spot.

This worked really well today after yesterday's M-F screw up.

Got to Corwfoot by 7:45am with less than 20% of the reserved lots available. Easily parked and short walk to train.

There were 3 C-Transit Peace Officers at each of the two entrances. No additional signage at crowfoot, but with the peace officers there was no need for additional signage. I suspect that larger reserved lot location got peace officers while smaller locations got improved signage. In the comming days or next week I anticipate the peace officer requirements to dissapate in favour of improved signage at all locations.

Couple of things not well advertised.

The current image for reserved parking at crowfoot looks like this:
http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/reserved_parking_crowfoot_station_20110330.pdf

See link if the image don't work: http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/reserved_parking_crowfoot_station_20110330.pdf

The original image was the same as above except that all three boxes were designated for reserved parking.

Screw up number one by C-Transit was not advising the reserved parkers the reserved lot sizes had shrunk. The revision was made and publiched on March 30th, so C transit had lots of time to inform the reserved parkers and through the online sign up email addresses were obtained from each parker.

In a post a few pages back now, I pontificated that reserved parking would be 100% taken up for April. Clearly wrong on this account as actual events have shown. However I still believe that reserved parking will eventually be 100% taken up although it may take 1-2 additional months to get there.

For the next three weeks there will be numerous early parkers who are now forced to park in the back lots because reserved lots are located in prime locations. These parkers are arriving in the 7am to 7:30am time frame with those closer to 7:30 unable to find a spot. Some of these parkers will take up the reserved stall for May 1 and in turn expand the reserved lot size to include a larger area.

By May 1 parkers in the 6:30-7am arrival time will find that prime locations have further shrunk and they have to either arrive earlier, walk farther, or find another form of transportation. Some of these customers will obtain a reserved stall and further push reserved parking to its ultimate build out.

The build out of crowfoot reserved parking will put pressure on Dalhousie lot (both reserved and free). In turn Dalhousie and Crowfoot build out will put pressure on Brentwood.

New bold prediction: Crowfoot reserved parking will be at full capacity by September 1, Dalhousie will be at full capacity by October 1. Brentwood will likely never be at full reserved spot capacity, but will likely remain at 80-90% reserved lot capacity.

[bookermorgan]

Should CT have build more stations with parkades? As ugly as they are ;)

[SmokWawelski]

I don't know about you guys, but I think that the lots fill up with lots of out of towners. For Crowfoot, Cochrane, for the NE line Airdrie and for the South line, Okotoks and High River. These people do not pay into the city, yet use the Calgary public transportation system extensively Monday to Friday. Why can we not use those fancy camera cars that the city uses to issue tickets in downtown core, to scan all of the parked cars by 9am at the parknride lots and issue some sort of a fee to those out of towners to compensate the city. Or offer them a reserved spot which costs more then what it would cost a Calgarian.

[Cage]

I suspect that Crowfoot is probably 25-33% out of towners (Cochranites).

NE line woud be too far out of the way for Airdrie folk to catch the train.

Southline should have good representation fro High River and Okatoks at both Somerset and Fish Creek stations, never been to these stations to comment on the percentage.

The one thing that surprises me is the number of Crowfoot commuters who have a destination beyond downtown. I see this happen all the time when I get on at 1st Street get the last seat and 1/2 the sitting crew stay with me until Crowfoot. Only other explanation is a lot of people get on at Olympic Plaza.

[MalcolmTucker]

I don't know about you guys, but I think that the lots fill up with lots of out of towners. For Crowfoot, Cochrane, for the NE line Airdrie and for the South line, Okotoks and High River. These people do not pay into the city, yet use the Calgary public transportation system extensively Monday to Friday. Why can we not use those fancy camera cars that the city uses to issue tickets in downtown core, to scan all of the parked cars by 9am at the parknride lots and issue some sort of a fee to those out of towners to compensate the city. Or offer them a reserved spot which costs more then what it would cost a Calgarian.

It isn't free to query the registry database. Just be thankful we aren't in a situation with contiguous suburbs, and that almost all out of towners only take LRT. The marginal cost of a P&R user to the system is much lower than a bus delivered customer (depending on how much it cost to build the parking space and all but still).

Anything gained would be less than any resources devoted to stop it.

[frinkprof]

Wanna know why the signage sucked for the reserved spots? There's no standard for LRT lots at all. We're just fortunate they keep saying "look at the old stations" when they build new stations and design the signage. Regulatory signage and Calgary Transit signage are handled separately in parking lots, which is stupid. There's very little communication between the two groups (it amounts to going out in the field and asking if they can mount their no parking sign onto the directional signage). Because of this, some person gets randomly assigned to manufacture new signs when new initiatives and has nothing to really follow (like the fiasco with the signage saying you had to face out so they could scan your license plate). Then managers probably ask them to shrink stuff to save money.I'm trying to make sense of this. Can you clarify or re-word? I'm not sure I get what the issue is exactly.

[frinkprof]

North Central LRT Open Houses upcoming in late May:

Wednesday May 25, 2011(4pm – 8pm)
Location: Cardel Place
11950 Country Village Link NE (lobby area)

Thursday May 26, 2011 (4pm – 8pm)
Location: Winston Heights Community Association
520-27 Ave NE (main hall)

Saturday May 28, 2011 (9:30am – 2:30pm)
Location: Huntington Hills Community Association
520-78 Ave NW (main hall)

[You Need A Thneed]

Frink, I was just thinking of posting the same thing!

[frinkprof]

Meant to post the link as well.

http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/north_central_lrt_oh_2011.html

[fusili]

Meant to post the link as well.

http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/north_central_lrt_oh_2011.html

Sweet. I think this is very preliminary, but it is important to start the discussion. :)

[frinkprof]

There's some open houses ongoing this week for the 7th Avenue Refurbishment project.7 Avenue LRT Refurbishment Project Information Session, Phase Four


Join us for an inforamtion session on Phase 4 of the 7 Avenue LRT Refubishment Project:
Time: Information boards will be on display from April 11 – 15, with the opportunity to ask questions from 11 a.m. – 2 p.m. on Tuesday, April 12 and Thursday, April 14.
Location: Municipal Building Atrium
The 7 Avenue LRT Refurbishment Project aims to revitalize an inner city corridor by upgrading the downtown CTrain platforms to accommodate four car CTrains, and creating a pedestrian friendly environment with wider sidewalks, improved lighting and enhanced streetscapes. Phase four covers the blocks from Centre Street to 4 Street SE, and will be under construction throughout this year. This information session will give people the opportunity to see the plans for work on these blocks and ask questions.

Website: www.calgary.ca/ti http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/7_Ave_Phase_4.html

Seems a little late to be having open houses for this, but this does seem to indicate that Centre Street Station will be extended sometime this year. Centre Street Station will be the last one needing to be extended, and it shouldn't take very long at all.

City Hall Station (both sides) will be open in June.

[Jack Doe]

Thanks for the update Frink. I will definitely be going to one of the open houses to pimp for the Centre St Subway.

I thought the Centre St station was already 4-car capable. Apparently I'm wrong. Good to see it's getting done. Bring on 4-car LRT!

Still no word on the Stephen Av Subway? I thought the planning study was supposed to start this year. Anybody have any info?

[magnetite]

Hey guys, I have a question about the four car extensions. Will every station be closed for 7 weeks or so like Southland is when they extend the platforms to four cars?

[mersar]

Hey guys, I have a question about the four car extensions. Will every station be closed for 7 weeks or so like Southland is when they extend the platforms to four cars?

No. Some will, mainly the south stations from the original leg. The NE stations shouldn't need any prolonged closures (couple days for white horn was all it took), but well have to see as many of the stations are unique in design.

[You Need A Thneed]

Yeah, all of the NE stations will likely only be a series of weekend closures, just as Whitehorn has been.

Southland's closure is longer because of the construction of the platform itslef, and the style of the building around it.

[DarkKeyo]

I visited the open house this afternoon. I didn't have time to get into any discussions about NCLRT or 8 th av subway, but I saw the renderings and asked a few questions. 

The twinned City Hall station will be open in time for stampede, but the tie-ins between the platform and adjacent buildings/sidewalks, particularly on the south platform, will be worked on the rest of the year. The streetscape improvements for all blocks between 3rd st sw and 4 st se will be done this winter, and the rest west of 8th st by when the WLRT opens. 

The plus 15 over City Hall station will be redone, with a new entrance to the Citu Hall building. When I asked about redoing a platform/+15 in front of a potential Central Library site, the representative told me that that part of the platform is being designed with reconstruction in mind. All the new downtown stations have been. 

Except Centre St. Despite it looking like it could be extended with a bit of concrete, the west side of the platform will have to be demolished and rebuilt. Without closing the station. Since I exit the west end of that station to get to work, I'll have a good view of this. 

On the displays, 11th st station is referred to as 'Downtown West - Kerby'. Apparently the name is still 'under discussion', even though we've heard Kerby Centre is moving. I like Downtown West, I find the numbered  stations boring. 

The list of stations on the 201 to be extended this year; the representative has heard that all the 202 stations will be extended by the opening of WLRT. 

I'd love to have a good, non-time-constrained discussion with CT representatives and fellow forum members, about all this... Maybe at the NCLRT open houses?

[frinkprof]

I'd love to have a good, non-time-constrained discussion with CT representatives and fellow forum members, about all this... Maybe at the NCLRT open houses?We really should get more SSPers, including you DarkKeyo, involved with Transit Camp. It's an arm of Civic Camp. We're having a meeting tonight. Our first one where Calgary Transit officials will be attending.

Here's the agenda:

http://www.civiccamp.org/2011/04/transitcamp-april-12-meeting-agenda/

It's at Sunalta Community Hall, 1627 10 Avenue SW at 7 PM this evening. Everyone is welcome if you can make it, even if you'll be late.

SSPers involved so far are myself, fusili, srperrycgy and the (dormant, as far as SSP goes) Beltliner. Some people from the Civic Camp side of things are involved, and some others.

[McPaul]

Ooh!

That looks like a great idea...

Too bad it will be over by the time I could get down there.

Next time.

[Arch26]

On the displays, 11th st station is referred to as 'Downtown West - Kerby'. Apparently the name is still 'under discussion', even though we've heard Kerby Centre is moving. I like Downtown West, I find the numbered  stations boring. 

That is the station's official name. The reference to Kerby has nothing to do with the Kerby Centre per se. It is actually a historical reference to Rev. George Kerby who founded Mount Royal College and Central United Church. The site of the station is actually the original site of the school (the main building sat across the street from the Kerby Centre--now a parking lot). The Kerby Memorial Building (the Kerby Centre) was also originally part of MRC. George Kerby's house was also located on the site.

[Stang]

That is the station's official name. The reference to Kerby has nothing to do with the Kerby Centre per se. It is actually a historical reference to Rev. George Kerby who founded Mount Royal College and Central United Church. The site of the station is actually the original site of the school (the main building sat across the street from the Kerby Centre--now a parking lot). The Kerby Memorial Building (the Kerby Centre) was also originally part of MRC. George Kerby's house was also located on the site.

Thanks for the clarification. Now if they could just get rid of the hyphenation. What's wrong with "Kerby Station"? You'll either know where it is and that it is in the west part of downtown, or you'll be looking at a map. The redundancy is a bit silly.

I would still prefer that they name it after a landmark that actually exists, however, and something like Mewata Station would still have historical significance, people would know that it is near... well... Mewata Armouries. I'm sure that the city would still botch that by calling it "Kerby - Mewata - Downtown West - Old Planetarium" station.

[DizzyEdge]

Thanks for the clarification. Now if they could just get rid of the hyphenation. What's wrong with "Kerby Station"? You'll either know where it is and that it is in the west part of downtown, or you'll be looking at a map. The redundancy is a bit silly.

I would still prefer that they name it after a landmark that actually exists, however, and something like Mewata Station would still have historical significance, people would know that it is near... well... Mewata Armouries. I'm sure that the city would still botch that by calling it "Kerby - Mewata - Downtown West - Old Planetarium" station.

Write in vote for Mewata?

[DarkKeyo]

That is the station's official name. The reference to Kerby has nothing to do with the Kerby Centre per se. It is actually a historical reference to Rev. George Kerby who founded Mount Royal College and Central United Church. The site of the station is actually the original site of the school (the main building sat across the street from the Kerby Centre--now a parking lot). The Kerby Memorial Building (the Kerby Centre) was also originally part of MRC. George Kerby's house was also located on the site.

Interesting bit of history.... A bit they should put a sign up at that station about. I'd take "Kerby Station", in that case, or "Mewata Station". Since this is the first official document (or display in this case) I've seen that doesn't give the name as 11 St, I can believe the comment that it's "under discussion".

Slightly off topic... Why would they ever get rid of the original MRC building? They knocked down so much else in the downtown core to make parking lots and ultimately buildings, and they saved other heritage buildings. Having such a heritage building right beside the station platform would have been quite interesting. It would certainly help reduce the general sense of repetition that the all-identical downtown platforms have.

[frinkprof]

I've covered some of this information already, but this post has been written to be copied and pasted to other message boards so it may seem a bit repetitive here on SSP.


So there's been a couple things recently that have given me quite a bit of information, which I'll share below.

First off, I and a few other people have founded a group called "Transit Camp" that aims to be a citizen's group that will advocate for better transit in Calgary, speak to ongoing issues, and tackle new ones that develop from the standpoint of the riders and other interested public parties. The name comes from being an aligned with and an arm of Calgary Civic Camp (http://www.civiccamp.org/). We've been meeting for about 4 months now.

At our last meeting, we were able to meet with some representatives from Calgary Transit. It was mostly to present our purpose and goals thus far and to establish a relationship and dialog with CT. We were able to present some ideas and issues and get some feedback, as well as to get some rudimentary information about some hot topics that are current and upcoming with CT.

The other thing was that I stopped by the 7th Avenue Refurbishment open house setup at City Hall today.

I've tried to break all the information up by topic, which I'll share below.


7th Ave. Refurbishment

Both sides of City Hall Station will be open for Stampede 2011. Opening should be late June. The south side may have to close again after Stampede for a short time to finish up some work. There will be a new +15 connecting the two sides of the station (and City Hall building) that will be built just to the west of the station platforms. Removal of Olympic Plaza Station will follow City Hall opening.

Centre Street Station extension starts construction Spring 2011, ends Fall 2011. No closure needed (save for maybe a weekend closure or two).

11th Street Station will be open by Fall 2012.



Realtime Arrival Information (aka "GPS" implementation, but not really that simple)

Still on track for 2012 completion and rollout

Equipment has been on portion of the bus fleet for some time now, and information has been used internally by CT. With full implementation, goal is to analyze routes for pinch points and then help with decisions regarding scheduling, route planning and infrastructure improvements.

System elements will eventually be integrated with "Opticom" signal control system. This system has been in place since start of route 301 in 2003, allows buses on certain routes to allow for longer green lights or shorter red lights. Realtime information will help optimize system, which includes 160+ intersections.

Realtime data from GPS/RFID systems will be available to third-party developers for use in web/smartphone applications, research, etc.


Fare Payment Systems (aka smartcard implementation)

On track for 2012 rollout


Public Engagment

Calgary Transit putting much more focus on engaging public, especially through web and social media

Website will receive overhaul soon

Policy, procedure, planning, etc. information will be made more available to public. For example, documents detailing how and why routes, schedules, stop locations, etc. are planned and implemented will be made available on website soon

Public Engagement process for future NE LRT extensions (past Saddletown on toward Country Hills, Skyview, Stoney Trail and beyond) will be upcoming soon. Focus will be on areas around future stations, design themes, access, providing information, etc.

Open houses for North Central LRT upcoming, detailed more below


Bikes on Transit

One of the people at the meeting was from BikeCalgary, and made a presentation for a proposal for bike racks on buses serving route 3, BRT routes, and route 72/73, based off research from Vancouver and Victoria among other cities

Various attempts at implementing bike racks on certain routes have been tried over last 10 years with very little success

Problems with putting bike racks on are chiefly nuances with assigning buses to routes on a day-to-day basis, an ever-changing bus fleet, and the biggest being a huge storage space crunch at garages.


North Central LRT

Open houses upcoming. This was prompted by what was seen as a need to take a step back regarding the philosophy of the route selection. So, focus of these open houses will mostly be on route, primarily between downtown and Beddington Trail, and presentation of various trade-offs between routes.

3 corridors will be presented - Centre Street, Edmonton Trail and Nose Creek. Attendees are encouraged to provide thoughts on their preferred routes. E-mails and phone call responses also encouraged if unable to attend.

Ideally, this will help narrow down to 2 routes.

CT representatives strongly hinted that they hope to see people show preference for more central routing (Centre, Edmonton Trail) rather than Nose Creek

Original selection of Nose Creek alignment in 2006 report was influenced by need to put something on paper and other pressures. Route has since been further complicated by CP Rail corridor becoming unavailable in favour of future High Speed Rail route.


Fleet and Fleet Management

As noted above, there's huge space crunch for growing fleet. New garages needed and expansions to existing garages.

Spring Gardens facility (32nd Ave. North connector) will be expanded, timeline undetermined.

Several new garage locations (both bus and LRV) in various stages of development. 30 acre parcel on 194th Ave. south purchased several years ago, but waiting for site to be serviced by City.

Congestion and operational constraints for LRVs at Anderson garage is growing issue. LRVs may be moved out of Anderson altogether to new facility near 212th Ave. south. Need to wait until LRT line is extended there. If that happens, Anderson would convert fully to bus storage.

This didn't come up at the meeting, but the Oliver Bowen Maintenance Facility (SW of McKnight-Westwinds Station) will need to be expanded (as per plans) to accommodate next order of LRVs, and new LRV storage/maintenance facilities will be part of new SE and North Central lines.

U2 LRV refurbishment (old LRT cars) was proposed by Bombardier and is currently working its way through City Hall for potential approval. New numbers show possible $2.2M cost per car, to achieve maximum 40-50% increase on lifespan of vehicle. Seeing as how average cost of new cars is $3.6M per, this is unlikely to happen, and new cars will be purchased sooner than later to replace U2s. Report with new numbers will be online Friday afternoon.

GM New Look buses (c. 1977-1982, aka "fishbowl" buses) should all be retired by next year.

Calgary Transit has ~$310M total annual operating cost, this is before revenues (primarily fares) are subtracted to get the net. Unfortunately I didn't write down the net figure, but I think it's on the order of $160M.


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

I think that's everything. If anyone has any questions I'll try and answer them based on what I have learned or ask them at my next opportunity to speak with someone at CT.

Also, if you're interested in being involved in Transit Camp, PM me. Involvement can range from just being on the mailing list or contacting one of us with questions, or attending our (so far) rather informal meetings and working on developing responses to various issues that arise.

[srperrycgy]

:previous:
Thanks for posting this, frinkprof. Working afternoon/evenings now prevents me from attending the meetings.

IMHO, the increased use of Twitter by CT has worked well. It's amazing to get a response from CT from just an off-hand tweet and not a complaint. Especially with the crappy weather today, they were keeping up with all the detours and delays. :tup:

[Cage]

For the past couple of weeks I have noticed there are a few SD160 Ctrain cars that appear to have their windows recently replaced. The windows are double paned from top to bottom with no opening at the top of the window for ventilation.

I understand that as part of the air conditioning refurbishment the windows were permanently locked and that all new SD160s would not have windows. However I was not aware that Windows would be replaced.

Another alternative, are there some of the brand new SD160s being delivered without old seat plan (seats face forward or backward)?

[frinkprof]

Another alternative, are there some of the brand new SD160s being delivered without old seat plan (seats face forward or backward)?Not exactly sure what you're asking here, but all the newest Series 8 SD160s are being delivered with perimeter seating, where all seats are facing toward the inside of the train.

[DarkKeyo]

The westbound new City Hall platform has it's LED's lit up tonight.

[mersar]

For the past couple of weeks I have noticed there are a few SD160 Ctrain cars that appear to have their windows recently replaced. The windows are double paned from top to bottom with no opening at the top of the window for ventilation.

I understand that as part of the air conditioning refurbishment the windows were permanently locked and that all new SD160s would not have windows. However I was not aware that Windows would be replaced

CT recently tendered for the replacement of all the windows on both the older sd160s as well as the u2s. Essentially stronger, more vandalism resistant and better insulated glass. They started with doing this on sone of the older sd160s when they did the roofline refurb and there's about a half dozen of those done now I believe now.

[frinkprof]

I found this on CT's website. It shows the tentative schedule for 4 car train extensions. I presume it will be updated sometime later this year to show a more firm date on the ones listed as "2012 or 2013." Also note the ones which need to be closed. If no more are added, I must say I'm surprised that it is only 3 total including Southland. The Chinook closure will be a bitch to deal with since a lot of bus routes (especially crosstown routes like 72/73 and 23) connect through that station.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y54/frinkprof/4carschedule.jpg

This is in addition to the following assumptions:

- Victoria Park/Stampede will be extended during the hockey offseason, and not during Stampede
- SAIT and University will be extended during the months of May-August
- Banff Trail will be extended during the months of December-May

[lubicon]

The Chinook closure will be a real bitch personally. The timing of it will coincide nicely with the moving of our company offices from DT to the industrial park just east of Chinook station. A large chunk of our workforce takes transit and we'll no sooner get settled in to our new digs and then everyone's commuting schedule will be completely messed up by this closure.

[MichaelS]

Do we know how long the closure will be? Will it be 6 weeks like Southland, or just a weekend like Whitehorn?

[frinkprof]

Do we know how long the closure will be? Will it be 6 weeks like Southland, or just a weekend like Whitehorn?For Chinook and 39th Avenue, probably something on the order of 6 weeks like Southland. One or more weekend closures will likely be needed for most other stations.

[Cage]

CT recently tendered for the replacement of all the windows on both the older sd160s as well as the u2s. Essentially stronger, more vandalism resistant and better insulated glass. They started with doing this on sone of the older sd160s when they did the roofline refurb and there's about a half dozen of those done now I believe now.

Thanks Mersar for the information. This answers my questions (the original question was poorly worded, apologies to the SSP community about that).

Replacement of windows on the older SD160s is great idea. No longer a need for the windows to open at the top as the cabin is climate controlled for both heat and a/c.

Changing the windows on the U2's does pose a problem, IMHO. They don't have A/C and the cabin can get quite hot when the train travels downhill and the driver rides the brakes. Openning and closing the windows is the only way to regulate cabin temp.

[mersar]

Thanks Mersar for the information. This answers my questions (the original question was poorly worded, apologies to the SSP community about that).

Replacement of windows on the older SD160s is great idea. No longer a need for the windows to open at the top as the cabin is climate controlled for both heat and a/c.

Changing the windows on the U2's does pose a problem, IMHO. They don't have A/C and the cabin can get quite hot when the train travels downhill and the driver rides the brakes. Openning and closing the windows is the only way to regulate cabin temp.

I believe the new windows on the u2s are still openable.

[mersar]

Just looking through council agendas, and noticed that the LPT committee is going to be presented with a recomendation from Administration tomorrow to move ahead with buying new LRV's versus refurbisment.

Also a lot of details in the report outlining the rationale, including anticipated fleet sizes, cost per unit depending on going with Siemens or someone else, minimum order sizes, retirement plans (8 or 9 LRV's a year after 2012). And also the expected 'midlife' refurb for the older SD160's that will start in about 5 years, which will include updates to make them compatible with the Series 8 SD160's we're now receiving including new couplers, cameras, etc.

[MalcolmTucker]

When is the LPT meeting?

[CTrainDude]

When is the LPT meeting?
Tomorrow....

[MichaelS]

Starts at 9:30 in the morning.

[CTrainDude]

For Chinook and 39th Avenue, probably something on the order of 6 weeks like Southland. One or more weekend closures will likely be needed for most other stations.
I would guess that Chinook will be longer.

[McPaul]

I've determined that people in this city have NO comprehension of the term "personal space"

I got on the 302 at A Channel. Sat at the far back right, up against the window.

The 302 is a long ride, right?

Well, just two stops later, some guy gets on the bus, which is nearly empty, I think there was one person at the front and one in the middle.. This guy sits down at the back center seat Just one seat away from me.

Wtf? I wanted to turn to the guy and say "you have GOT to be kidding!!!?" but didn't. The bus was empty!!!

I could understand him sitting at the left window... Even that I wouldn't mind, but one seat between our cheeks? No way.

I know I should have moved or said something, but didn't. I just stared at him in disbelief.

And he rode it all the way down, too. I got off at 130 ave, he got off huts before the deer foot inn.


UGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

[frinkprof]

There is a significant committee going on today at City Hall. The Land Use Planning and Transportation (LPT) committee meets and will be presented with a series of reports that Calgary Transit was directed to prepare, largely dealing with the LRV fleet. The reports include:

- LRV fleet plan
- Whether to refurbish the old U2 trains, or to replace them with new ones
- Delivering 4 car CTrain service
- LRV storage and maintenance facilities.

I'll provide a brief summary. Lots more information, graphs, cool pictures of various LRV parts, etc. in the actual reports. I was going to pull some graphs and pictures, but I might save that for another time.

LRV Fleet Plan

Current fleet is 154 units, projected 2030 fleet is 233 units

Left out of assumptions are the possibility of SE and North Central lines, although it does assume extensions to Silverado and 212th Avenue in the south by 2021, and Stoney Trail in the NE by 2019, with the obvious extra LRVs needed to serve those extensions

Current U2s are to be progressively retired from 2013 until 2022 (based on replacing them rather than refurbishing them, see below)

Oldest SD160 units (32 of them, c. 2001) will undergo a mid-life refurbishment between 2015-2020 that will basically give them all the specifications of the new cars (interior cameras, side-mounted displays, new couplers to enable running them together), although not necessarily seating arrangement

Fleet total includes provision for extra cars needed for 4-car operation (see below)

U2 Refurbishment

Cost/benefit overrules refurbishment of U2s given the estimated $2.2M cost/unit versus $3.6M for a new car, and the marginal lifespan and reliability gains that the refurbishment would give

Delivering 4 car CTrain service

System will be 4-car capable by 2014.

2010 ridership numbers show that during certain segments of the peak morning and evening rushes on the various lines, 4 car service could be used now. More needed given 2020 ridership forecasts

When 2014 comes along, strategy will be to add 4 car trains to the schedule during these trouble spots

South Line during morning rush is busiest, with NE and NW lines being less, but roughly equal in terms of ridership

By end of 2014, a projection of 8 additional LRVs would be needed to be assigned to the 201 South-NW line, and 4 to the 202 NE line

More would be needed to accommodate future ridership over time for a total of 19 additional LRVs assigned to the 201, and 8 to the 202 line by 2020.

This amounts to what will be a incomplete peak system coverage by 4 car trains (meaning some trains at peak will be 3 car, some will be 4), so that leaves room for future growth

LRV Storage and Maintenance Facilities

This report was brief as apparently there is already a study regarding bus and LRV maintenance facilities being conducted by Calgary Transit and Transportation Infrastructure

Nature of operations, particularly at Anderson and Haysboro facilities will make 4-car train operation problematic for those facilities to cope

Currently, expansion is taking place at the Oliver Bowen Maintenance Facility (OBMF) in the NE, which should accommodate the current order of LRVs, and almost all of the projected 233 needed by 2030, but any more than that and capacity is constrained

Basically, new facility is needed to store LRVs in long term, and perhaps medium term to cope with 4 car operation.

Results

It is recommended that 50 more LRVs be ordered immediately for 2013-2015 arrival and commission.

20 are to replace least reliable U2s in current fleet, and 30 would be for growth (4 car trains)

Provincial GreenTRIP funding is recommend to cover the procurement costs

As many as 76 units are projected to be procured by 2017 to accommodate further U2 replacement, expansion of 4 car service, and future extensions to Stoney Trail and 212th Avenue.

Here's the link to the LPT agenda, if you click the last item listed (LPT2011-044), the report PDFs will pop up on the right hand side. The summary above is from these reports.

http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=160&doctype=AGENDA

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

SE Transitway is also on the LPT agenda today, but I haven't gone over that yet. I may get to that later.

[Rusty van Reddick]

McPaul-

The back car of a subway is allegedly (I have never actually seen this in 29 years as an out gay man, so this might be an urban legend) the "cruising car." Looks like this guy decided to make that true of the backs of buses too.

You missed out on some lovin'. At the Deerfoot Inn.

[McPaul]

I was hoping and praying he wasn't getting off at 130 Ave either and had visions of this guy following me everywhere I went that day!!

apparently these fears were for good reason!

is this sort of like the Safeway on 8th is known in some circles as the "Singles Safeway" even though I've never seen anyone pick up anyone there? it's a half block from Xenex, so I am there several times a week. Never seen anything like that. Maybe I should start something...

[kw5150]

I've determined that people in this city have NO comprehension of the term "personal space"

I got on the 302 at A Channel. Sat at the far back right, up against the window.

The 302 is a long ride, right?

Well, just two stops later, some guy gets on the bus, which is nearly empty, I think there was one person at the front and one in the middle.. This guy sits down at the back center seat Just one seat away from me.

Wtf? I wanted to turn to the guy and say "you have GOT to be kidding!!!?" but didn't. The bus was empty!!!

I could understand him sitting at the left window... Even that I wouldn't mind, but one seat between our cheeks? No way.

I know I should have moved or said something, but didn't. I just stared at him in disbelief.

And he rode it all the way down, too. I got off at 130 ave, he got off huts before the deer foot inn.


UGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

Maybe it was "just for laughs" playing a gag on you.

[freeweed]

McPaul-

The back car of a subway is allegedly (I have never actually seen this in 29 years as an out gay man, so this might be an urban legend) the "cruising car." Looks like this guy decided to make that true of the backs of buses too.

You missed out on some lovin'. At the Deerfoot Inn.

This is entirely OT, but as a naive person I've often wondered about the dozens of urban legends surrounding how gay men hook up. "Be in this stall at 5pm on Friday" messages have always amused me because I've always assumed they're a joke, but a very small part of me thinks - what if it's for real? And what if right now it's 5pm on a Friday and I just need to pee? What am I getting myself into? :haha:

We should start a "gay man hookup urban legend" thread.

[frinkprof]

This is entirely OT, but as a naive person I've often wondered about the dozens of urban legends surrounding how gay men hook up. "Be in this stall at 5pm on Friday" messages have always amused me because I've always assumed they're a joke, but a very small part of me thinks - what if it's for real? And what if right now it's 5pm on a Friday and I just need to pee? What am I getting myself into? :haha:

We should start a "gay man hookup urban legend" thread.http://www.nhlsnipers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/dumb-dumber-unrated-edition-20060119033605174-000.jpg

[floobie]

Hm. I take the train about twice a week from Dalhousie station, and do park there. I've usually been able to get a spot before about 9:30am. But after that, I'm screwed and have to drive to the university and pay more to park there... and usually have to walk way further to get where I'm going than I would if I were walking from the University station.

I have no opinion about the reservations so far. I'm not buying one for twice a week. But, I certainly don't mind not having to pay for parking. So, my satisfaction with this decision will be entirely dependent on how likely I am to get a spot at my usual time when this all goes into effect.

Time to update my opinion. Not a fan of the reservations at all. I've tried to get a spot at Dalhousie station a few times now, each time progressively earlier. I've yet to be able to get a spot. So, basically unless I can get to the lot before 7:30 or so (I'm assuming, having never actually succeeded yet), I'm out of luck... meanwhile the vast majority of the reserved spots are empty, at that point. I'd honestly rather just pay the three bucks. Sure, I could triple my commute time and take a bus to the station... or I could just hop in my car and get to the university way faster. The situation is still salvageable, though, I think. I'm hoping they'll make running adjustments to the size of the reserved sections in these lots.

Fortunately, once I find a job downtown and move into a nearby condo, this will all be moot. (Anyone looking for a new graduate geologist, by the way? ;))

[Ramsayfarian]

This is entirely OT, but as a naive person I've often wondered about the dozens of urban legends surrounding how gay men hook up. "Be in this stall at 5pm on Friday" messages have always amused me because I've always assumed they're a joke, but a very small part of me thinks - what if it's for real? And what if right now it's 5pm on a Friday and I just need to pee? What am I getting myself into? :haha:

We should start a "gay man hookup urban legend" thread.

I thought it was common knowledge that it happenes at Leaf's games.

LNAXQ0fi8MM

[Cage]

Time to update my opinion. Not a fan of the reservations at all. I've tried to get a spot at Dalhousie station a few times now, each time progressively earlier. I've yet to be able to get a spot. So, basically unless I can get to the lot before 7:30 or so (I'm assuming, having never actually succeeded yet), I'm out of luck... meanwhile the vast majority of the reserved spots are empty, at that point. I'd honestly rather just pay the three bucks. Sure, I could triple my commute time and take a bus to the station... or I could just hop in my car and get to the university way faster. The situation is still salvageable, though, I think. I'm hoping they'll make running adjustments to the size of the reserved sections in these lots.

Calgary Transit will be making adjustments to the size of Reserved parking area, however not ti your liking.

For May 2011:
- Crowfoot reserved parking has over 130 additional parkers signed up. They will likely be openning up another parking lot to reserved parking for May 1.
- Dalhousie parking has increased by over 40 spots. Look for another row of parking to go into reserved parking status.
- I have no information on the other PnR lots.

PnR is not really designed for the occaisional transit user such as yourself. It is really intended for the 4-5 days per week parker that also has a Monthly transit pass. In order to be able to provide PnR to the occaisional user, it would require significant under utilized parking space. Lots would be required to excced the demand of the regular PnR users by about 120% to 150% to handle the additional traffic from occaisional use.

Additionally, the itinerant parker should pay a hefty premium to cover the over build-out of the PnR lots. This methodology is most apparent in the airfare pricing models used by major airlines. If you are a frequent user, there is a ticket pack available. Infrequent, last minute flyers pay a signficant premium to have the service on demand.

[Koolfire]

Left out of assumptions are the possibility of SE and North Central lines, although it does assume extensions to Silverado and 212th Avenue in the south by 2021, and Stoney Trail in the NE by 2019, with the obvious extra LRVs needed to serve those extensions


This seems a little ambitious projection. It's possible that the entire area (NE) fills up in the next 8 years but it's large area. 2025 seems more realistic.

[freeweed]

Calgary Transit will be making adjustments to the size of Reserved parking area, however not ti your liking.

For May 2011:
- Crowfoot reserved parking has over 130 additional parkers signed up. They will likely be openning up another parking lot to reserved parking for May 1.
- Dalhousie parking has increased by over 40 spots. Look for another row of parking to go into reserved parking status.
- I have no information on the other PnR lots.

PnR is not really designed for the occaisional transit user such as yourself. It is really intended for the 4-5 days per week parker that also has a Monthly transit pass. In order to be able to provide PnR to the occaisional user, it would require significant under utilized parking space. Lots would be required to excced the demand of the regular PnR users by about 120% to 150% to handle the additional traffic from occaisional use.

Wow, I'm a bit shocked. I continue to drive to the PnR lot mostly out of morbid curiosity and I've noticed a few things:

1. There are still spots at Crowfoot in the "free" areas shortly after 7. It gets pretty much full by 7:30 though. On days like Thursday (before a long weekend) it has plenty of spots well after 7:30.

2. The reserved area has never ever come even remotely close to full. When I go home at the end of the day it's always a quarter empty if not half. The fact that it's free after 10am seems to matter very little, because who the hell even uses these spots that late (I personally have, but it's a very small number of people).

3. The reserved parking system, while great for the bottom line, is leading to a massive under-utilization of parking at Crowfoot.

4. Based on actual usage, and my desire to full utilize all of this empty asphalt, they should take a serious look at making the reserved area "free" after 9am. I'd even go so far as to say 8am on a lot of days. By and large anyone who is regularly commuting (and hence, reserving a spot) is almost certainly parking before then. Not a lot of downtown workers can come to work after 9.

I dunno, overall things are better now but the entire system still screams "cash grab" to me. A LOT of people must be paying for reserved spots that they're using very infrequently. In a city with generous vacation packages and flex time, there aren't many downtown commuters who work 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year. So inevitably we'll end up with a lot of unused space each and every single day. Add in the long weekends, spring breaks, summer days off, etc and I have a hard time imagining any day where the reserved areas fill up. Unfortunately, CT has to guarantee as many spots as people pay for, so we'll ALWAYS have this waste of space.

There's some irony in your mention of lots needing to be 120-150% bigger to deal with occasional use. Because that's exactly what's happening with the supposed regular use in the reserved spots. Just seems so pointless to build all this surface lot area and not have it used. But hey, it helps fill the treasury and that's what matters, right?

(OT: I JUST noticed that you can resize the SSP comment input box. Shows how much attention I pay here)

[floobie]

Wow, I'm a bit shocked. I continue to drive to the PnR lot mostly out of morbid curiosity and I've noticed a few things:

1. There are still spots at Crowfoot in the "free" areas shortly after 7. It gets pretty much full by 7:30 though. On days like Thursday (before a long weekend) it has plenty of spots well after 7:30.

2. The reserved area has never ever come even remotely close to full. When I go home at the end of the day it's always a quarter empty if not half. The fact that it's free after 10am seems to matter very little, because who the hell even uses these spots that late (I personally have, but it's a very small number of people).

3. The reserved parking system, while great for the bottom line, is leading to a massive under-utilization of parking at Crowfoot.

4. Based on actual usage, and my desire to full utilize all of this empty asphalt, they should take a serious look at making the reserved area "free" after 9am. I'd even go so far as to say 8am on a lot of days. By and large anyone who is regularly commuting (and hence, reserving a spot) is almost certainly parking before then. Not a lot of downtown workers can come to work after 9.

I dunno, overall things are better now but the entire system still screams "cash grab" to me. A LOT of people must be paying for reserved spots that they're using very infrequently. In a city with generous vacation packages and flex time, there aren't many downtown commuters who work 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year. So inevitably we'll end up with a lot of unused space each and every single day. Add in the long weekends, spring breaks, summer days off, etc and I have a hard time imagining any day where the reserved areas fill up. Unfortunately, CT has to guarantee as many spots as people pay for, so we'll ALWAYS have this waste of space.

There's some irony in your mention of lots needing to be 120-150% bigger to deal with occasional use. Because that's exactly what's happening with the supposed regular use in the reserved spots. Just seems so pointless to build all this surface lot area and not have it used. But hey, it helps fill the treasury and that's what matters, right?

(OT: I JUST noticed that you can resize the SSP comment input box. Shows how much attention I pay here)

I'm not sure what the best solution is here... before the reserved spots, with the 3 dollar fee across the board, the lot was definitely better utilized. The lot at Dalhousie station would always fill up to capacity within the morning. Now that never happens, because so many of the reserved spots go unused. It would be nice if the reserved spots became "up for grabs" after a given time in the morning... though they'd have to significantly cut the price of those spots for people to go along with it.

As Cage said, though, it really depends on who is being targeted. For the daily downtown commuter, this system is definitely better, I think. It will encourage transit usage, because being able to reserve a spot completely removes any uncertainty from one's daily commute. Knowing your car will have a spot makes commuting by transit a lot more reliable. For people like me, though, it really does suck. So, I guess it comes down to which group contributes more to overall transit utilization (which is probably quite separate from parking utilization). It is probably the daily commute crowd... which is unfortunate for me.

[freeweed]

It would be nice if the reserved spots became "up for grabs" after a given time in the morning...

They already do, at 10am. Which is far too late to serve much purpose, based on usage that I've seen so far.

[Ferreth]

They already do, at 10am. Which is far too late to serve much purpose, based on usage that I've seen so far.

So why are the spots being unused? People catching the bus perhaps?

[MalcolmTucker]

So why are the spots being unused? People catching the bus perhaps?

Usually in reserved lots with unreserved spots after figuring out the utilization rate in the first year or so you start selling more spots than you have bring the utilization rate up while still almost guaranteeing pay parkers a spot.

Just by nature a certain percentage of people will be sick, on business trips, on vacation, going to an offsite meeting. I am sure some people that bought the reserved spot were tire kickers who might realize they don't need it after a couple of months.

[freeweed]

So why are the spots being unused? People catching the bus perhaps?

Already covered that in my rant above:

In a city with generous vacation packages and flex time, there aren't many downtown commuters who work 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year. So inevitably we'll end up with a lot of unused space each and every single day. Add in the long weekends, spring breaks, summer days off, etc

Honestly, even if people only got 3 weeks off on average (which is pretty damned scanty for downtown office workers), that's a 6% vacancy rate in the PnR lot just from that alone. With flex time still fairly common it's closer to double that. Add in sick days and all the other reasons people don't go to work every day and I wouldn't be surprised if the average worker in downtown Calgary misses 15-20% of the so-called "work week". Which translates into massive vacancy at the PnR lots.

Here's hoping CT does this smart, and reserves spots based on actual usage, not just how many people paid. Leave a small buffer, sure - but nothing like what I've been seeing. It's just a waste of space (and for surface parking, that's saying something).

[TransitSupporter]

I have a bit of a rant about the HOV lane on Centre St. In particular I notice it in the evening rush hour, and it pisses me off how many single occupant vehicles are just zipping happily and blissfully along the HOV lane past their SOV colleages who are in the proper lanes next to them. Admittedly I don't think the abusers are doing it necessarily intentionally, but the signage kinda sucks and I've never seen anyone policing it. I tried calling 311 (pathetic response) and I wrote to Druh Farrell (never got a response).

Anyone have any other suggestions who could help get these SOVs out of the HOV lane so that CT can get through as intended? It gets especially annoying at 16th Ave, where SOVs sit behind the bus stopped there and actually prevent another bus from coming through the intersection. GRRRRR!

[freeweed]

Anyone have any other suggestions who could help get these SOVs out of the HOV lane so that CT can get through as intended?

A $500 fine would be a good start. But CPS is too busy radaring our freeways and making sure you don't drive 35 km/h through a playground zone that no kids are in.

[J-D]

A $500 fine would be a good start. But CPS is too busy radaring our freeways and making sure you don't drive 35 km/h through a playground zone that no kids are in.

I honestly don't understand why there are so many playground/school zones in the city and how long they are... Most of them have 4-6 foot fences anyways! I pay far more attention to my speedometer as opposed to scanning the environment. :shrug:

[lubicon]

Question about the reserved spots at the Park and Ride lots. When you sign up, do you get a specific spot or just a spot in the reserved lot?

Freeweed got me thinking about all the unused spots that have been paid for but are not necessarily used on any given day. Maybe the City could overbook, much like airlines do, knowing that a certain percentage of users will likely not use their spot on any given day. Oversell by say 5% (eg sell 105 reserved spots for every 100 actual spots). They would just need to figure out how to handle things on the occasional day that everyone who paid actually shows up looking for parking.

[lubicon]

A $500 fine would be a good start. But CPS is too busy radaring our freeways and making sure you don't drive 35 km/h through a playground zone that no kids are in.

Or nailing people for speeding in the lst 50 feet of a 2km long construction zone, or nailing people driving 60 in a 50 zone on a four lane divided road, downhill, where there are no pedestrians or housing units anywhere close. Both of which they were doing this weekend.

[fusili]

I have a bit of a rant about the HOV lane on Centre St. In particular I notice it in the evening rush hour, and it pisses me off how many single occupant vehicles are just zipping happily and blissfully along the HOV lane past their SOV colleages who are in the proper lanes next to them. Admittedly I don't think the abusers are doing it necessarily intentionally, but the signage kinda sucks and I've never seen anyone policing it. I tried calling 311 (pathetic response) and I wrote to Druh Farrell (never got a response).

Anyone have any other suggestions who could help get these SOVs out of the HOV lane so that CT can get through as intended? It gets especially annoying at 16th Ave, where SOVs sit behind the bus stopped there and actually prevent another bus from coming through the intersection. GRRRRR!

Easy solution- make it a transit only lane. Calgary Transit wants this and Roads knows the HOV lane doesn't work properly. Put a camera up and ticket every single vehicle using the lane. Easy.

[UofC.engineer]

Easy solution- make it a transit only lane. Calgary Transit wants this and Roads knows the HOV lane doesn't work properly. Put a camera up and ticket every single vehicle using the lane. Easy.

In California people put dummies in the passenger seats and drive in the HOV lanes. When the camera snaps a photo it looks like two people...people and be very crafty when it comes to dodging the law.

[artvandelay]

I have a bit of a rant about the HOV lane on centre street.

There's an HOV lane on centre? I had no idea and I just drove it the other day. Where/which direction is it?

[freeweed]

Question about the reserved spots at the Park and Ride lots. When you sign up, do you get a specific spot or just a spot in the reserved lot?

Pretty sure (although not 100% positive) that it's a generic spot in the reserved area.

[fusili]

In California people put dummies in the passenger seats and drive in the HOV lanes. When the camera snaps a photo it looks like two people...people and be very crafty when it comes to dodging the law.

You can't dodge this one. If your car is in the lane, you get a fine. It wouldn't be a HOV, it would be a transit only lane (plus emergency vehicles).

[Koolfire]

Easy solution- make it a transit only lane. Calgary Transit wants this and Roads knows the HOV lane doesn't work properly. Put a camera up and ticket every single vehicle using the lane. Easy.

I'm not 100% certain if the turning rules change with Transit only lanes. HOV lanes a SOV may enter the HOV to make an immediate turn or turn into the HOV lane and a first safe opportunity get over to a SOV lane.

Something tells me that it would be quite dangerous to try and turn from the second lane into a side street with bus actively traveling in the first lane. So I'm not quite sure.

Now a series of cameras where a person that gets picked up 3 times on different blocks that may work. But a single picture not sure if that would hold up.

[Koolfire]

There's an HOV lane on centre? I had no idea and I just drove it the other day. Where/which direction is it?

It's only active during rushhour with lane reversal. Between 20th ave and 6th ave(? not sure were it ends downtown)