[Rathji]

As far as the RouteAhead, I really find it is hard to grasp what I could possibly suggest for a 30 year plan that would be meaningful. The scope is really too large for me to make a meaningful comment. Ask me about 5-10 years from now, and I can give some input but anything more than that and I am at a loss.

Short term, I think the SE LRT should be a priority but in the meantime the BRT should be maximized to it's full potential. This stuff could easily apply to other areas but I am most familiar with the 302, so I will use it as an example.

It shouldn't take longer to take the BRT into downtown than it does to drive to Anderson and hop on a train. I realize this will mean cutting out more stops and possibly diverting the route and utilizing more community shuttles - for example routing the 302 up 24th ST rather than Quarry Park and then having a shuttle that handles the rest. With a route that small, it should't take more than a bus or two to maintain a 5-10 min wait/travel time. The same could be done at the deep SE end, cutting out multiple stops and adding a dedicated shuttle to the park and ride.

I do realize that just doing that would be more expensive, since you have more buses and drivers in play, so it's not that simple. If you make the BRT routes more efficient, then you can alter existing routes that feed the LRT line or go directly downtown like community express shuttles and instead focus on the BRT and increase the routes that feed it.

Also related to BRT routes is the fact that there are not many options to travel from deep in a quadrant to deep in another quadrant that does not directly route through downtown. The 72/73 kind of serves this purpose, but the city has long since outgrown it. Perhaps an "Outer Circle route" or a box of BRT's that go from deep SE->SW->NW->NE-> SE, and maybe utilizing the ring road. I know I have seen long term plans (don't know if they are official or not) that involve a couple concentric rings of LRT routes, so kind of something that might mirror that setup.

On more of a financing and long term thing, I think there should be involvement from feeder communities. It might make financial sense for places like Airdrie and Okotoks to be involved in our transit future. Many 'leeches', as some people on this board already point out with much disgust, use our transit every day but don't contribute in taxes. If we had a rail solution from these places, then it would encourage growth of those cities and help reduce the spawl problem within Calgary, so even if we took a bit of a hit on the long term deal, it might make more financial sense to do that rather than losing money on every house that is built by financing transportation and utility services to these communities.

I guess now that I think of it, some of these ideas might fall into the 10-30 year range.