WestLRT Construction Transgression thread

[red sky]

I think fotze was a fellow 108er but probably was hooking up with the 112 when it came by.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by fotze

But you don't design the system for every little person's situation, is annoying that the people closer to the core are now inconvenienced for those further away, but majority rules though.

That's kind of always been the problem with this network, you're always best off when you live at the end of the C-Train line.

[Rathji]

So, the west LRT leg is almost done and the people who are using it are bitching about it already?

Those of us who take transit from the SE feel a great deal of sympathy for you.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Rathji

So, the west LRT leg is almost done and the people who are using it are bitching about it already?

Those of us who take transit from the SE feel a great deal of sympathy for you.

But we will have to transfer once! Doesn't anyone think of the children?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Rathji

So, the west LRT leg is almost done and the people who are using it are bitching about it already?

Those of us who take transit from the SE feel a great deal of sympathy for you.

No one's bitching about it; far from it actually.

People are bitching about the elimination of the 101, 104 and 301... routes that have become highly efficient as is. It's not preferred that all three of those are cancelled - which is what is happening.

[Rathji]

Well financially, you can't have both.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Well financially, you can't have both.

Meh, bet we can.

My idea is the pay-per-distance zoning system. Costs are instantly covered.

[Rathji]

Ok, so lets play this game.

If you change the fare payment as you are suggesting, and assuming there are zero costs to implement such a system, why would you assume it would bring in more money?

People closer to their destinations would pay less, and people far away would pay more. Logically, people somewhere in the middle would pay the same amount. If CT wanted to raise fares across the board to pay for this service, they could just do that, without hiding that fare increase in a complicated zoning system.

The reason they don't do it is because it is a waste of money to have so many routes duplicating service, especially when the LRT part of the route will be the lowest use part of the entire transit system.

edit: Let me clarify, I am not saying that the current service proposals are going to be the most ideal, and that some changes might need to be made, but complaining that essentially boils down to "I don't want to transfer from a bus to a train" really doesn't make sense to me.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Ok, so lets play this game.

If you change the fare payment as you are suggesting, and assuming there are zero costs to implement such a system, why would you assume it would bring in more money?

People closer to their destinations would pay less, and people far away would pay more. Logically, people somewhere in the middle would pay the same amount. If CT wanted to raise fares across the board to pay for this service, they could just do that, without hiding that fare increase in a complicated zoning system.

Don't lower the rate. You only have to increase it. The first concentric zone originating from the centre of the city pays the current rate. The next concentric zone a higher rate, and so forth.

Increased revenue will pay for far-reaching bus and LRT systems. The further out you live, the more you pay to ride transit, given you use the service more - the way that is should be.

Ridership might go proportionally down from residents living further away (but I doubt as much as some might think). Really, there is no benefit for the city to have suburban citizens paying the same cost as an inner-city citizen. They pay the same and use more resources to commute.

This is happening in other cities around the world; this is not a new and fresh idea. Not sure why Calgary can't adopt it too. It's a great source of revenue for the city to pay for services, especially in a sprawling city such as ours.

[Rathji]

Ignoring the fact that if CT wanted to (or could even, given their mandate) drastically raise fares to fund expansion, they would just do it, I think this is an interesting idea to consider, but I have some questions.

So if I live right beside Anderson station and I am taking transit downtown I pay, say $5 is the fare that they have decided upon.

What if I get on the #10 bus at SouthCenter, it also goes downtown. How much do I pay? $5 again I assume? But what if I am only taking the #10 to Heritage drive, I assume that trip would be less, since I am clearly using less resources, right?

How do you structure your payment system to account for that? Just kick everyone off the bus every few stops and make them pay for the next part of their trip?

[GirlySports]

That would be like in DC. You have to pay for every station you go. All the prices are listed on the board, depending on what station you are standing in and where you are going. At your destination if you are short, you cannot leave the station.

You would get a lot of confused people.

[Muta]

GirlySports: or, it would just be based on zones, where Calgary would have three or four of them. Every zone you cross, you pay more. Not confusing in the slightest; Vancouver does this.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Muta

GirlySports: or, it would just be based on zones, where Calgary would have three or four of them. Every zone you cross, you pay more. Not confusing in the slightest; Vancouver does this.

Are monthly bus passes till the same price for everyone? Then it's still an advantage to live far.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Are monthly bus passes till the same price for everyone? Then it's still an advantage to live far.

Yeah, not sure about that. Good question. I'm assuming that type of issue is dealt with in other cities.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Muta

GirlySports: or, it would just be based on zones, where Calgary would have three or four of them. Every zone you cross, you pay more. Not confusing in the slightest; Vancouver does this.

So you make them pay more if they are still on the bus when they cross a zone? How would that work?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Ignoring the fact that if CT wanted to (or could even, given their mandate) drastically raise fares to fund expansion, they would just do it, I think this is an interesting idea to consider, but I have some questions.

So if I live right beside Anderson station and I am taking transit downtown I pay, say $5 is the fare that they have decided upon.

What if I get on the #10 bus at SouthCenter, it also goes downtown. How much do I pay? $5 again I assume? But what if I am only taking the #10 to Heritage drive, I assume that trip would be less, since I am clearly using less resources, right?

Absolutely. The shorter the distance, the less you pay.

Originally Posted by Rathji

How do you structure your payment system to account for that? Just kick everyone off the bus every few stops and make them pay for the next part of their trip?

If the two stations are in the same zone, you'd pay the minimal fare. If they're spanning two zones, then you need to pay the increased rate.

I agree it wouldn't be perfect, but the general idea is there. I've taken the Canada Line in Vancouver many times, and I've never had a problem with their fee structure / zoning system. Works pretty well.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Rathji

So you make them pay more if they are still on the bus when they cross a zone? How would that work?

You would pay a higher rate when you get on. That, or, from what I remember being in Auckland, you pay when you leave the bus. They had a tracking system that managed that sort of thing. Again, it wasn't perfect and I don't remember the details, but I didn't have any problems with it. Again, I'm not a transit planner but I do know these types of systems exist. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than me can comment on this.

[Cscutch]

WOW, people are complaining about losing the 101,104,301 routes. The train is going to be way quicker, especially on the way home.

I work at the east end of DT and it was about 15min quicker for me to walk to the train, take it to 4th and then walk over to catch the bus at the west end of 6th ave and catch it from there. And still many of the days we got caught up in the traffic trying to get off bow trail onto crowchild.

I am waiting for the day I will be in the train watching all people stuck in traffic as we go flying by.

Chris

[The Goon]

As someone who lives pretty much on top of the line, I'm looking forward to getting on the train when it opens. It's been 2.5 years of construction noise so I'm more excited about it being done. Plus it'll blow my two-year-old's mind.

[RW99]

Originally Posted by Cscutch

WOW, people are complaining about losing the 101,104,301 routes. The train is going to be way quicker, especially on the way home.

I work at the east end of DT and it was about 15min quicker for me to walk to the train, take it to 4th and then walk over to catch the bus at the west end of 6th ave and catch it from there. And still many of the days we got caught up in the traffic trying to get off bow trail onto crowchild.

I am waiting for the day I will be in the train watching all people stuck in traffic as we go flying by.

Chris

I'm quite happy being on a direct to DT bus route. People who take the train seem to be late to work a lot more often.