Calgary Public Transit - Discussion

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

Then the notice comes out that the entire station is being temporarily closed for the upgrade, for a minimum of 6 weeks, starting on the 19th. The notice was given on the 13th, I believe.

I know I had seen the notice about it closing months ago; including in this thread. I don't think the exact dates were not known; but I know mid-March had been discussed.

Still sucks- I know. But it has to be done.

[frinkprof]

^No. There was notice of the closing of the at-grade access at the south end of the platform (which includes the handicap access) a few months ago. However, the notice for the closure of the whole station wasn't until about a week prior to when it closed. HeartzofFire is right on that one.

It's unfortunate for people like him but due to the layout of the station, the construction methods on the original platform, and the nature of the work needed to be done, the station had to be closed. Expect similar for the rest of the south line stations save for Canyon Meadows, Fish Creek-Lacombe and of course Somerset-Bridlewood and Shawnessy which don't need to be extended.

[jammies]

They should definitely rethink their entire upgrade plans to make sure you are catered to.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by jammies

They should definitely rethink their entire upgrade plans to make sure you are catered to.

He is complaining about the fact that very little notice was given, and that the replacement shuttle isn't up to par and is inconvenient, which he is right to do.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Ducay

He is complaining about the fact that very little notice was given, and that the replacement shuttle isn't up to par and is inconvenient, which he is right to do.

I can't say for certain he is wrong about the notice, but his complaints about the shuttle seem to be way off base.

[frinkprof]

A C-Train operator that posts on another forum just gave this short-term schedule for 4 car extensions:

Canyon Meadows to start in April and finish before Stampede
Brentwood to start in April and finish before Stampede

Erlton to start after Stampede

Likely no closures of the scale needed at Southland for Canyon Meadows and Brentwood. Should be quick add-ons as the existing platforms don't need to be replaced.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Ducay

He is complaining about the fact that very little notice was given, and that the replacement shuttle isn't up to par and is inconvenient, which he is right to do.

But there was notice given, and there are alternative ways to get to work other than walking an hour to the C-train station even discounting the fact that the shuttle comes earlier than he "researched".

I was pretty choked when they closed down 14th Street by my place for a couple weeks last month. I didn't expect the city to hold my hand and make it all better for me, though, I spent some of my own time figuring out the best ways around the problem rather than just complaining.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

A C-Train operator that posts on another forum just gave this short-term schedule for 4 car extensions:

Canyon Meadows to start in April and finish before Stampede
Brentwood to start in April and finish before Stampede

Erlton to start after Stampede

Likely no closures of the scale needed at Southland for Canyon Meadows and Brentwood. Should be quick add-ons as the existing platforms don't need to be replaced.

Apparently Sunnyside, Chinook and Anderson to follow with completion in late 2011, early 2012. City Hall will also open in June 2011 and the new 11th Street Station will open in time for West LRT in 2012.

That leaves all of 2013 and most of 2012 to do:

University
Banff Trail
Lion's Park
SAIT

Victoria Park/Stampede
39th Avenue
Heritage
Fish Creek-Lacombe

Victoria Park/Stampede will probably be done after Stampede and before hockey season to not interfere with the traffic from those events. University and SAIT will probably be done between the months of May and August so as to not interfere with the regular post-secondary school year.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by jammies

But there was notice given, and there are alternative ways to get to work other than walking an hour to the C-train station even discounting the fact that the shuttle comes earlier than he "researched".

The notice given was insufficient.

The frequency of the bus and the hours of operation changed shortly before the station closed.

I can't prove it now because I don't have any evidence to back it up, but between the time of notice for full station closure and actual closure, the posted schedule for the shuttle service was every 30 minutes, starting at 6:07. I am 100% confident of this. Also, the shuttle service originally was supposed to go between Anderson/Southland/Heritage. Now apparently it only goes between Southland/Heritage.

The fact that it now starts at 3:40 am and runs every 15 minutes tells me that I wasn't the only one that said 'Not good enough.'

And as for rethinking their upgrade plan to cater to my personal needs, grow up. If Southland needed to be extended, they should've done so before they put up that pedestrian bridge over the tracks leading into the Telvent parking lot. One less obstacle to work around.

The whole thing is just one big catastrophic blunder. I hope for the sake of other riders no one gets inconvenienced as much as those out of Southland have been.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

The notice given was insufficient.

The frequency of the bus and the hours of operation changed shortly before the station closed.

I can't prove it now because I don't have any evidence to back it up, but between the time of notice for full station closure and actual closure, the posted schedule for the shuttle service was every 30 minutes, starting at 6:07. I am 100% confident of this. Also, the shuttle service originally was supposed to go between Anderson/Southland/Heritage. Now apparently it only goes between Southland/Heritage.

The fact that it now starts at 3:40 am and runs every 15 minutes tells me that I wasn't the only one that said 'Not good enough.'

And as for rethinking their upgrade plan to cater to my personal needs, grow up. If Southland needed to be extended, they should've done so before they put up that pedestrian bridge over the tracks leading into the Telvent parking lot. One less obstacle to work around.

The whole thing is just one big catastrophic blunder. I hope for the sake of other riders no one gets inconvenienced as much as those out of Southland have been.

I understand the dissatisfaction with the notice given and the level of alternative service (shuttle) as originally proposed. Could you confirm one way or the other the following though?

Are you of the opinion that the extension project and its benefits to capacity and service for either yourself or transit riders as group do not outweigh the inconveniences you and others have to endure over the next six weeks?

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

I understand the dissatisfaction with the notice given and the level of alternative service (shuttle) as originally proposed. Could you confirm one way or the other the following though?

Are you of the opinion that the extension project and its benefits to capacity and service for either yourself or transit riders as group do not outweigh the inconveniences you and others have to endure over the next six weeks?

For the general public: C-train's 4 cars long is needed in Calgary, yes. The benefits to capacity and services are substantial. It's unfortunate that Southland station is so ill-equipped to remain open while the upgrade is taking place. For example stations in the Northeast all have their handicap access inside the station, so when it comes time to upgrade each of them, their customers won't be inconvenienced like those out of Southland have been.

For my individual self: I don't give a flying fata what the excuse is, completely closing down Southland Station to upgrade it to a 4 car station -- while apparently necessary -- is a total catastrophe. I'm not sure when the station itself was built, but clearly it was built during a time when handicap access was not at a priority in building construction and more like an afterthought. The closing of the at-grade section of the station was an unfortunate necessity for the upgrade as a whole. But that's where the line should have been drawn. This upgrade should have been done in such a way that the station would not need to be closed. Because of the seeming inability to do so, the upgrade is a blunder and the engineers behind it ought to learn well from its mistakes, because I am certain that there are some stations that will not tolerate full closures. SAIT/ACAD/Jubilee, University, and Chinook just off the top of my head. The former two will likely not need to be fully closed, but Chinook just might.

For my own personal needs, the station does not need an upgrade. I board the C-Train at Southland well before or after rush hour commences/concludes no matter what shift I'm working. This gives me a somewhat jaded perspective of things, I admit. I've had to take the C-train during rush hour in the past. I know it's nothing pleasant. The 4 car stations will improve rush hour congestion, but will do nothing to affect my individual commute.

[4X4]

Dude. It's a 10 minute walk to Anderson from Southland. Wake up 10 minutes earlier. At least, that's what they tell me when I bitch about road inconveniences.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Dude. It's a 10 minute walk to Anderson from Southland. Wake up 10 minutes earlier. At least, that's what they tell me when I bitch about road inconveniences.

Okay there, Sonic The Hedgehog.

I don't know how freakishly gargantuan your legs are, but it is certainly NOT a ten minute walk from Southland to Anderson.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

Okay there, Sonic The Hedgehog.

I don't know how freakishly gargantuan your legs are, but it is certainly NOT a ten minute walk from Southland to Anderson.

lol.

No, that seriously made me laugh out loud.

Maybe my perception of time was distorted by the fact taht when I used to live down there, my only purpose for walking that route was to walk my dog. It really only seemed like ten minutes. 12 maybe? It's certainly nothing like 20 or 30. FTR, I'm talking about walking on the sacramento dr. side, and sticking to the grass behind the soccer field and the baseball diamond.

[Barnes]

It's like 15 mins or so. Under 2 kms.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Yeah, either way, it's 5 minutes via the busses that are running every 15 minutes.

[frinkprof]

Not to say you don't have grounds for some complaint HeartzofFire, as I would never argue against an increase to the level of service in the short, medium or long term. I must take issue with your wording though. Honestly, it's pretty ridiculous.

The earthquake and tsunamis in Japan are a total catastrophe.

Being relegated to a 5 minute bus ride at a frequency of 15 minutes in the place of LRT service for 6 weeks is a temporary inconvenience.

EDIT: Again I realize that your primary argument is with the notice given and the original outlay of the alternate bus service. I also realize that you prefaced your above statements as speaking for yourself. However, forgetting about Japan and other people, even on the scale of your own life, there has to be some hardship more deserving of the words "total catastrophe" than your transit experience as foreseeable for the next 6 weeks.

[CrusaderPi]

Originally Posted by Barnes

It's like 15 mins or so. Under 2 kms.

Walking two kilometers? What the crap is this? The bloody stone age? Walk two kms. I outta walk you.

Prediction time! The C-Train op that got canned for crosswording on the job gets his job back with back pay in two months or so. No way the union doesn't grieve that.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

And as for rethinking their upgrade plan to cater to my personal needs, grow up.

Oh, you were suggesting something else? My mistake, I mustn't have realized that there were hordes of people that usually walked to that station before 6 AM who also fit all of the following criteria: can't operate a bicycle; don't own a car; couldn't reschedule their work hours for a short period of time; are unable to find someone to carpool with.

[frinkprof]

A couple of Herald editorials. A point-counterpoint sort of tandem regarding the C-Train LRT system.

The first is written by Steve Lafleur from the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a right-wing think tank, and author of a book looking back (critically) on the C-Train's first 30 years.

C-Train system is costly and inefficient




By Steve Lafleur, Calgary Herald March 30, 2011

Calgary's C-Train is turning 30 this May. While this anniversary will no doubt be met with fanfare, it is also an opportunity to examine the performance of the system.


Has the C-Train delivered value for money? More importantly, does expanding the C-Train make sense for the city? Sadly, the answer to both questions is no.


Light-rail transit has become a fad among urban planners in mid-sized North American cities. They argue that LRT is a happy medium between buses and subways. In reality, LRT combines the disadvantages of both. LRT is slow, inflexible and expensive. Moreover, the C-Train has exacerbated the very problem it is meant to fix: rampant urban sprawl.


Let us look at costs. The C-Train has been called the most efficient LRT system in North America. Indeed, as of 2000, it was the least subsidized North American LRT system by a substantial margin. The capital cost per rider of other LRT systems ranged from $8,900 in Edmonton to an astonishing $44,300 in New Jersey. The $2,400 capital cost per weekday rider in Calgary looked good in comparison.

[...]

Link to the rest of the article

And a rebuttal from Herald staff writer Naomi Lakritz.

When it comes to efficiency, nothing beats the train


Naomi Lakritz, Calgary Herald

Published: Wednesday, March 30, 2011


Should other people take the bus?


Steve Lafleur of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy thinks so. He's the author of the column on the opposite page that examines the C-Train's operation with the standard right-wing approach -a cost-benefit analysis guaranteed to resonate with other right wingers who share the mantra of lower taxes above all else, including over the reality of everyday experience.


Lafleur's take on the C-Train -he prefers buses, although he doesn't say if he actually rides them -will come as a surprise to those who are regular riders of the train.


For example, Lafleur blames the C-Train for accelerating urban sprawl. That is just patently untrue. First comes the sprawl, and then if the population in new areas reaches a certain density to warrant it, the C-Train expands to meet the need.

Tracks are not extended out to bald prairie first, in the hopes that developers might follow with new subdivisions. The reason the northwest extension was built from Brentwood to Dalhousie and then to Crowfoot, with plans to go on to Rocky Ridge, is that population in those areas grew large enough to assure that ridership would be at a high enough volume.


Lafleur's arguments that the poor are benefited much more by buses than by the C-Train really strike me as odd.


He says that unlike the wealthy, who can drive to park-and-ride lots, "it's not easy for the city's poorest to get to LRT stations in the first place." Actually, it is as easy for them as it is for anyone. They just have to get on a bus. Calgary Transit has 965 buses travelling on 160 routes. The majority of those are feeder routes that go to LRT stations, some of them to more than one station, such as the No. 20, Heritage/Northmount, which stops at Brentwood and Heritage stations.


[...]

Link to the rest of the article


Discuss.