Calgary Public Transit - Discussion

[GirlySports]

I'm still waiting for the bullet train to Edmonton.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by BrolyTheUnholy

I wish they'd left the seats. The trains often got so packed, crowded, and hot that more often than not I'd start feeling a little woozy during the trip home. A seat definitely helped. This city always boggles the mind with its transit decisions. This question is probably answered in one of the 178 or so pages on here, but does anyone know why they abandoned the underground train tunnel through downtown so long ago? Flooding risks from the river? Budget?

It was a budget thing. The original plan for the subway was abandoned during the oil crash in the 80's, and the decision to run it at surface was made so they had money to get it to McMahon. It's still in their long range plan, so it's not impossible. Just expensive.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I think they might enjoy more business if there was easy access from the train and less parking hassle. There’s like how many parking spots along the street anyway? You end up having to park on a side street anyway.

It would be a great tradeoff, if the train were likely to have many riders.

Train or no train, some (lots) of people are still going to drive, and end up parking wherever they can. I'm totally fine with axing parking though...not sure narrowing sidewalks is the right idea though.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I'm totally fine with axing parking though...not sure narrowing sidewalks is the right idea though.

Removing parking really kills people's desire to walk/spend time somewhere, because now they are in close proximity to moving vehicles.

Think of going for a walk down Macleod or 16th Avenue vs. the current incarnation of Centre Street. While Centre Street isn't exactly a pedestrian Mecca, it is a lot more appealing to spend time on.

Narrow sidewalks would make the problem even worse.

I really like how they've allowed evening/weekend street parking on Edmonton Trail as it has made walking on that street quite a bit better than it was.

[Joborule]

If two lanes is maintained, then parking on Centre should still be allowed outside of rush hour.

[BrolyTheUnholy]

This might sound like a dunce comment, but why the need for parking of you're taking transit? Most people don't seem to like to take transit from start to finish, just the CTrain (as long as their point of origin has access to transit). The street I live on gets ridiculously, and I mean ridiculously, overfilled with people parking to take the train, to the point that the street is a hazard to drive on. People's car noses are sticking out in the street because they're trying to squeeze into a spot on the side of the road that's too small, people are darting in and out from between cars to cross the road, they're parked so close to side streets that you can't see if anyone's coming and have to quite literally pull out into the road and just hope no one's coming. This probably belongs in the gear grinder because man does it chap my ass.

[Jimmy Stang]

^ Parking to take the train is probably due to inadequate transit options upstream of the train, plus a little bit of "rail bias" as well. That doesn't excuse illegal and stupid parking though. I'd be temped to call the parking authority if people are parked illegally and dangerously.

My sister-in-law drives from the far North to Huntington, where she parks residentally. Then she hops on the 301 or whatever it is and heads downtown. Obviously the place where she chose to live is problematic for transit, and it would probably take much longer to take transit the whole way. That's not how I'd like to commute, but a lot of Calgarians do it.

I live within walking distance (over 1 kilometre though, but I like walking) of the Tuscany station, and prior to it opening, residents were given the option to implement parking restrictions on their streets. We had the option, despite being way further than necessary, but our street didn't put in a request. Other streets did and got 2 hour zones, except by residential permit. That might be an option to explore as well if it is becoming a problem.

[toonmaster]

You need 80% sign on of owners to implement parking restrictions on a street in an existing neighbourhood.

[CliffFletcher]

Walking to a bus stop, waiting for a bus, and taking a bus to a station (which could take twice as long as driving), is way more time and hassle than driving to a station.

Factor in not being able to drop a kid off to school on the way to work, and the return trip, where you have to wait at the station for a bus again, and you can't run any errands on your way home, and is it any surprise nobody wants to take a bus+train if they can help it?

[Jimmy Stang]

Has there been any word on when electronic fare payment (via the app) will be rolled out? Other than the latest from November when it was announced that it would be "sometime in 2020".

It would also seem like a great time to finally try some "peak-load pricing". Keep the regular fare at $3.50, but allow some discounted fares for non-commuting hours like evenings and weekends, or even mid-day on a weekday, when trains and buses are operating at well below capacity. It could be done as an app-only option to keep things easier for everyone.

I would also love to see some sort of consideration for very short trips. A five-minute, one-stop trip is much different than a 30 minute, multi-stop commute.

One argument is that there will be less revenue coming in from the same number of trips. But I would argue that there are a lot of trips that aren't taken at all because it isn't worth $7 return to do an errand or activity that's one or two stops away.

[BrolyTheUnholy]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

I would also love to see some sort of consideration for very short trips. A five-minute, one-stop trip is much different than a 30 minute, multi-stop commute.

One argument is that there will be less revenue coming in from the same number of trips. But I would argue that there are a lot of trips that aren't taken at all because it isn't worth $7 return to do an errand or activity that's one or two stops away.

I absolutely, absolutely agree with this. Think of people with mobility issues who maybe don't qualify for subsidized passes, and end up having to pay $3.50 just to go 4 blocks. Meanwhile someone going from say Legacy to Dalhousie pays the same. That's pretty wrong IMO. I think it's Vancouver (and I could be wrong, but it's ringing a bell) that charges based on distance traveled, which I think is brilliant. Think of the folks from Airdrie and Okotoks who don't pay taxes for CT but end up paying the same as someone who does and who travels 1/8th the distance the out of towners do daily.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by BrolyTheUnholy

I absolutely, absolutely agree with this. Think of people with mobility issues who maybe don't qualify for subsidized passes, and end up having to pay $3.50 just to go 4 blocks. Meanwhile someone going from say Legacy to Dalhousie pays the same. That's pretty wrong IMO. I think it's Vancouver (and I could be wrong, but it's ringing a bell) that charges based on distance traveled, which I think is brilliant. Think of the folks from Airdrie and Okotoks who don't pay taxes for CT but end up paying the same as someone who does and who travels 1/8th the distance the out of towners do daily.

I don't necessarily agree with the "Okotokians don't pay their share" because they still pay a user fee, plus the province and feds have invested a fair chunk into Calgary Transit. Sure, they don't pay City of Calgary taxes, but most of that goes to the province anyway and they trickle some back to the city.

But we're definitely beating the same drum re: distance, zones, etc.

I wouldn't necessarily want to see the base fare increased, but rather some consideration for shorter and/or off-peak trips. I think it would bring in more money, more riders, and use up some unused capacity.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by BrolyTheUnholy

I think it's Vancouver (and I could be wrong, but it's ringing a bell) that charges based on distance traveled, which I think is brilliant.

Vancouver has three zones, and you pay for each zone you cross. Evenings and weekends are 1 zone payment only, regardless of where you go.

When I was in Japan, I found out you only paid for station to station distance. That's with smart cards and gates at every station of course, but it was nice paying very little for a short hop. I think the highest was about $10 from Haneda Airport to central Tokyo.

[Bill Bumface]

I live one stop out of downtown and never use the train as $7 for a stop or two just doesn't seem right, may as well walk, bike, use an e-scooter etc.

[GirlySports]

Thought this article was interesting.


Why New York City Stopped Building Subways

Nearly 80 years ago, a construction standstill derailed the subway’s progress, leading to its present crisis. This is the story, decade by decade.

[GirlySports]

The new trains suck when packed. Nothing to hold onto.
Esp if you are short like me.

[InglewoodFan]

This is ... odd. Who are these guys and why do they hold so much sway?

Group that wants pause on Green Line hosted private event with top city officials

If these guys are stakeholders, what stake do they hold? Just seems like an odd collection of characters to oppose a transit project, not really the transit riding types and they have never disclosed that they are property owners along the line or anything. They just keep playing this "concerned citizens" card and the city seems to be rolling over backwards for them. If we got a half dozen CPers together, do you think we could get city manager et al to meet with us?

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by InglewoodFan

This is ... odd. Who are these guys and why do they hold so much sway?

They just keep playing this "concerned citizens" card and the city seems to be rolling over backwards for them. If we got a half dozen CPers together, do you think we could get city manager et al to meet with us?

I think they're just some of the leading citizens of the City whose stake is seeing the City do well. The Green Line is by far the most expensive project ever undertaken by the City and has been pretty much a disaster so far. They were correct in calling out the issues with the Downtown alignment last summer which the City has admitted by moving away from the full tunnel.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by accord1999

I think they're just some of the leading citizens of the City whose stake is seeing the City do well. The Green Line is by far the most expensive project ever undertaken by the City and has been pretty much a disaster so far. They were correct in calling out the issues with the Downtown alignment last summer which the City has admitted by moving away from the full tunnel.

Leading citizens closely aligned with the UCP and fundraising to oppose this expenditure.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by InglewoodFan

This is ... odd. Who are these guys and why do they hold so much sway?

Group that wants pause on Green Line hosted private event with top city officials

If these guys are stakeholders, what stake do they hold? Just seems like an odd collection of characters to oppose a transit project, not really the transit riding types and they have never disclosed that they are property owners along the line or anything. They just keep playing this "concerned citizens" card and the city seems to be rolling over backwards for them. If we got a half dozen CPers together, do you think we could get city manager et al to meet with us?

Most CPers are 1%ers so probably.

In this case concerned citizens is business interest wolf in sheep's clothing.