Calgary Public Transit - Discussion

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Would the West - NE line have access to the Tunnel at all?

In case of having to shut down 7th ave or even some thing as simple as getting the trains to the ne yard.?

They could easily maintain the interlocking into 7th Ave, and put a switch at the junction to City Hall, for equipment moves.

Edit: Beaten.

[mykalberta]

For the SE line, has there been any thought given to making the SE a spur line on Anderson going E? I would reduce the cost and serve the majority of the people you need at a much lower cost.

I still think the Subway should be cost priority 1 for CTransit (although not overly popular).

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

For the SE line, has there been any thought given to making the SE a spur line on Anderson going E? I would reduce the cost and serve the majority of the people you need at a much lower cost.

I still think the Subway should be cost priority 1 for CTransit (although not overly popular).

That doesn't help get people downtown. The S train between Anderson and downtown are already full. What is needed is more capacity into downtown.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

That doesn't help get people downtown. The S train between Anderson and downtown are already full. What is needed is more capacity into downtown.

Correct but if you build a subway downtown then that removes the 7th ave bottleneck and you could double the number of trains running on that line. And other than the residents in the deep south the rest of the line really wouldnt be used that much IMO. It would be a pickup and deliver with a bunch of stations in the middle.

At 3B I dont see that line getting built anytime soon if at all and a spur line satisfies the majority of the need and also almost doubles the capacity for every station North of Macleod.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

The SELRT versus NCLRT debate will be very interesting to watch play out. The Herald article is pretty good, however a friend of mine on facebook brought an interesting view to the thought that since more people in the NC area already use transit it should get the go-ahead:

If the SELRT does go ahead first, the City absolutely must leverage the line. In order to get the line the areas being serviced should have to accept changes that would make the areas much friendlier and supportive to transit.

[Barnes]

I would love to see an area plan around Ogden in conjunction with developing the selrt. There definitly would be a tremendous gap between douglasdale and ramsey but there is potential. It could be a cool area with good connectivity. The legion was recently vacated and I'm not sure there is much demand for a bar/curling rink for anyone else to lease.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Correct but if you build a subway downtown then that removes the 7th ave bottleneck and you could double the number of trains running on that line. And other than the residents in the deep south the rest of the line really wouldnt be used that much IMO. It would be a pickup and deliver with a bunch of stations in the middle.

At 3B I dont see that line getting built anytime soon if at all and a spur line satisfies the majority of the need and also almost doubles the capacity for every station North of Macleod.

It removes redevelopment potential from Ogden, inglewood etc.
it unneccessarily increases the operating cost for the train, because you would be running many more trains than required on the NW line.
It limits the future growth potential of both the SE and S lines.
It adds to the travel time from the SE, which will already be high.
It would require buying up a ROW from douglasdale to Macleod
It requires the 8th Ave subway to be completed first.
It wouldn't serve Quarry Park.

It may save a little bit of money, but I don't know if it gets the line built any sooner.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by SebC

I've often wondered if we could have two-level cars that would still fit through the tunnels. Shrink the height of the electronic contacts, and have the bottom level floor be below the platform height. Would this work? Would the space used for stairs defeat the purpose?

Self-quoting in case frinkprof missed it the first time.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by SebC

Self-quoting in case frinkprof missed it the first time.

They wouldn't make it under +15's

[SebC]

Originally Posted by nik-

They wouldn't make it under +15's

If it was a substantial enough capacity increase, I would think raising the +15s would be worth it. If you had to increase clearance in the tunnels though it would likely be a nightmare.

[Rathji]

Redesigning +15s to include a raised section in the center to accommodate higher trains would probably be the most trivial part of the process.

[nik-]

You'd also have to take into account things like increased stop time at each station to ensure the people on the upper deck had time to get off.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by nik-

You'd also have to take into account things like increased stop time at each station to ensure the people on the upper deck had time to get off.

I don't know about that. Increasing car capacity could lead to shorter stop times (doors able to close, more space to move around).

[You Need a Thneed]

Double deck might be possible, however, one level would have be be as low to the ground as possible, and each level would have to be only about 6 feet floor to ceiling. It would be impossible to any kind of room for strollers and wheelchairs. Also, it still might not work through some of the tunnels.

Probably not a good idea.

Here's the inside of a Metra Train in Chicago that is double deck:

Link

[Nufy]

Originally Posted by shermanator

I'm late to the party, but I really don't think that places like "Shawnessy Towne Centre" and "Dalhousie Shopping Centre" are attractions. What's there, a freaking Safeway. WOW LET'S CHECK IT OUT!

Is there a stop so people can check out "The Bridge"...

[frinkprof]

Took some photos of the work at Chinook Station. The photos didn't really come out well, but you get the idea.

Pile layout for the bus shelter. These will be drilled on Monday. Not long after, you will see the beginnings of the new building going up.




Stripping the area where the new utility building will go. This will house some upgraded communications equipment among other things. The existing substation building will remain.

[Table 5]

Are there any renderings of how this will look when finished?

[frinkprof]

^Yes.

EDIT: After thinking about it, figured the tone would be lost over the internet.

None that can be shared.

The station itself will be demolished, with the canopy structure remaining. The canopy will be reclad. The canopy recladding and the bus shelter will look similar. The comparable that comes to mind is the Shaganappi Point station, in form if not materials. The platform will of course be extended and there will be walk-on access only with heated shelters on the platform.

[You Need a Thneed]

Yes, in form, it will be like McKnight Westwinds, Or Saddletowne. Shaganappi Point is side loading, so not quite as close in form. Essentially, a platform with small heated shelters on it, and no other buildings.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Yes, in form, it will be like McKnight Westwinds, Or Saddletowne. Shaganappi Point is side loading, so not quite as close in form. Essentially, a platform with small heated shelters on it, and no other buildings.

Yeah I was talking more about the canopy and the bus shelter roof.