Flames to announce plans to announce arena plans in the... future...

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Doesn't the train commute like 200,000+ people a day? Not bad for a system that doesn't cover large swaths of the city.

When I stand on the platform or get on the train, particularly during rush hour which is what you're talking about, the thing is quite full a lot of the time.

I think people use the train. Quite a lot of people.

I actually have no idea to be honest, other than the constant complaints we here from our mayors over the years that Calgarian's don't give up our cars for our daily commute, which is the reason DT parking in this city is the 2nd most expensive in NA to New York. Supply and Demand due to the volume of vehicles allows parking to be so expensive, because we use it so much.

But I really have no true idea how well it's used and what the numbers are, or if they are good for a city of this size.

I would suggest however, that using how packed the train is in the morning would not be a good indicator of usage. Transit will obviously only schedule enough trains to move the masses they have, it's only good business sense to ensure the trains are "packed" as you put it, costs them much less than running say two trains at around the same time at half capacity. But that's the true test, how many trains should a city of this size have running during rush our versus what we have if transit is being embraced? I don't know.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

As much as I would personally like the train to go to the airport, Calgarians as a whole struggle to embrace using the LRT to get them to work in the mornings, I doubt many would be jazzed about using it to get them to the airport for vacations.

Kind of odd to suggest that Calgarians struggle to embrace using LRT when it has one of the highest rates of ridership, per capita, in North America. I would suggest that if you think people have failed to embrace it to commute to work that you've never tried to ride the train during rush hour.

That being said, the SE leg is needed long before an airport extension is.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

Calgary Transit ridership outpacing city’s growth

About 107.5 million customers punched a ticket in the past 12 months, a 5.5 per cent year-over-year jump. In the bigger picture, transit ridership has doubled the rate of Calgary’s growth over the past three years.

Transit boss Doug Morgan attributed much of the growth to a rise in non-work-based trips, opening the west LRT line and adding service in far-flung suburbs.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I actually have no idea to be honest, other than the constant complaints we here from our mayors over the years that Calgarian's don't give up our cars for our daily commute, which is the reason DT parking in this city is the 2nd most expensive in NA to New York. Supply and Demand due to the volume of vehicles allows parking to be so expensive, because we use it so much.

By that logic, New Yorkers struggle even more with embracing transit.

Also, as you have identified, high prices are the result of two factors: supply and demand. In Calgary's case, I would argue that the most significant factor in high parking prices downtown are the restrictions the city has placed on parking supply.

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

But I really have no true idea how well it's used and what the numbers are, or if they are good for a city of this size.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...s_by_ridership

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-Train:

Daily ridership 290,000[3]

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I actually have no idea to be honest, other than the constant complaints we here from our mayors over the years that Calgarian's don't give up our cars for our daily commute, which is the reason DT parking in this city is the 2nd most expensive in NA to New York.

I used to think that too, until I was in NYC and realized you could park downtown close to the financial district for about $20 a day - unlike here, where $20 gets you three hours.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Makarov

By that logic, New Yorkers struggle even more with embracing transit.

Also, as you have identified, high prices are the result of two factors: supply and demand. In Calgary's case, I would argue that the most significant factor in high parking prices downtown are the restrictions the city has placed on parking supply.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...s_by_ridership

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-Train:

Here is where things get uncomfortable for Calgarians, politically.

Ridership is outpacing growth, but train infrastructure is not outpacing ridership.

I think you can pretty easily bet where the demographics for that ridership are coming from, and it's not, in say (delicately), the CaptainCrunch or Cheese demographics.

One thing I think is pretty safe as a statement is that in terms of mass transit, if you build it, they will come. I can't think of a properly run mass transit system in the world with declining ridership numbers. I know in the case of Vancouver, the Canada line (downtown to Richmond/YVR) has already vastly surpassed ridership expectations in only it's third year in service. The system as a whole is still bursting at the seams, even during non-peak hours.

According to Makarov's article, ridership increase is largely attributed to servicing otherwise unserviced suburbs.

Before they think of opening a station at the airport and running a line out there, maybe the rationale above should be examined. Build lines to all of Calgary's communities and then organize a hub to the airport.

[burn_this_city]

I'd feel like a jackass riding the train with a huge suitcase.

[strombad]

Personally, I'd love to see an airport route added before a SE route, just so I can sit back and soak in the high levels of butthurt from all of the SE that occurs every time something that isn't an SE line is introduced.

So much butthurt.

[Tyler]

So back to the new arena..

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Tyler

So back to the new arena..

I totally forgot I was in the new arena thread.

I saw the Saddledome, I'd love to go back. That said if love to see a new arena as well.

As a fan across the country the facility doesn't make much of a difference to me. I love the moving ceiling idea though.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I actually have no idea to be honest, other than the constant complaints we here from our mayors over the years that Calgarian's don't give up our cars for our daily commute, .

You have the cause and effect backwards. Parking here is expensive because the city restricts its supply to force people to use transit.

Also, our transit is ridiculously good for a city of our size. I posted the following in the "Give back our $52 million" thread to a similar comment.

Calgary metro has a population of 1.278 million people. The US metros closest to us in population are Memphis, Oklahoma City, Louisville KY, and Richmond VA.

In 2011, Calgary Transit had 96.2 million passengers. (1)
In 2011 Memphis Transit Authority had just over 10 million passengers (2)
In 2011 Metro Transit (Oklahoma City) carried ~3 million passengers (3)
Transit Authority of River City (Louisville) carries ~15 million passengers (4)
Greater Richmond Transit serves "more than 10 million passengers" (5)

So compared to the closest in size N. American metro areas to Calgary, our transit is used ~10x more often. Maybe you have another way of determining that our transit is in fact appalingly bad for a city of our size?

1 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/a...ridership.html
2 page 7 of annual report http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/a...ridership.html
3 http://www.gometro.org/about-us
4 http://www.ridetarc.org/about/mission/
5 http://www.ridegrtc.com/images/RFP%20116-13-09.pdf

Edited to add: Louiseville has only busses, Memphis has a small trolley system (partly for tourism), OKC has only buses and Richmond has only buses. We have a modern (and groundbreaking when originally built) light rail transit system. Our transit is light years ahead of similar sized North American cities.
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...1&postcount=48

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Makarov

By that logic, New Yorkers struggle even more with embracing transit.

Also, as you have identified, high prices are the result of two factors: supply and demand. In Calgary's case, I would argue that the most significant factor in high parking prices downtown are the restrictions the city has placed on parking supply.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...s_by_ridership

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-Train:

Not by that logic, because New York clearly has a shortage (for good reason) of available parking, Calgary IMO does not.

I appreciate the Wikki links, but with no base line, what does they mean. I still have no idea what % or our working population is opting to take our transit every day rather than there cars, and if that's good. All the compariables on that list are also only other Light Rail, which isn't really the proper comparitor. For example, the Toronto example on that list only includes their over ground rail cars, but does not include their underground Metro systme or even the go trains - which are a far more compariable use case IMO to Calgary's LRT system.

[karl262]

So we are all in agreement, and this thread has now reached its conclusion:

There should be LRT to the airport eventually, but higher priority routes have to be addressed first.


Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Kind of odd to suggest that Calgarians struggle to embrace using LRT when it has one of the highest rates of ridership, per capita, in North America. I would suggest that if you think people have failed to embrace it to commute to work that you've never tried to ride the train during rush hour.

I see that a lot from people who complain about the C-Train.

"Nobody wants to take it, it sucks."
"Why does it suck"
"It's always packed"

[Envitro]

Can we get back on topic and stop talking LRT please?

Every time there is a post here I think that there is news related to the new arena. Then disappointment ensues...

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Can we get back on topic and stop talking LRT please?

Every time there is a post here I think that there is news related to the new arena. Then disappointment ensues...

If there was actual news, there would either be a new thread about it or an update to the title.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

You have the cause and effect backwards. Parking here is expensive because the city restricts its supply to force people to use transit.

Also, our transit is ridiculously good for a city of our size. I posted the following in the "Give back our $52 million" thread to a similar comment.

I think we are looking at this the wrong way (I have no issues with our transit system). But comparing cities of similar size and transit usage means nothing if the scope of those transit or LRT systems are not as robust as ours, because as you point out the usage will be impacted by this.

If just looking at the problem at hand, should the LRT be expanded to the Airport, we only need to understand a few things:

- What percentage of our population uses LRT as their prefered transportation for traveling to work and evennings out etc...
- How does that compare to other cities that have managed to get good use out of their airport train system?

I don't know the answers, but I'm guessing we have a lot less of our population using LRT for these things then many of the cities quoted as getting good use from an airport line. Doesn't really matter what the reason why is (we love cars, LRT isn't convenient enough yet, something else), that's what would speak to the viability of expanding the train to the airport.

[Hockeyguy15]

So it's settled then.

The new rink will be made up of C-Train cars and will move along the track during the game.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by cleveland steam whistle

i think we are looking at this the wrong way (i have no issues with our transit system). But comparing cities of similar size and transit usage means nothing if the scope of those transit or lrt systems are not as robust as ours, because as you point out the usage will be impacted by this.

If just looking at the problem at hand, should the lrt be expanded to the airport, we only need to understand a few things:

- what percentage of our population uses lrt as their prefered transportation for traveling to work and evennings out etc...
- how does that compare to other cities that have managed to get good use out of their airport train system?

I don't know the answers, but i'm guessing we have a lot less of our population using lrt for these things then many of the cities quoted as getting good use from an airport line. Doesn't really matter what the reason why is (we love cars, lrt isn't convenient enough yet, something else), that's what would speak to the viability of expanding the train to the airport.

stop

[strombad]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

stop

Interesting point of view!