[Surrealplaces]

Would certainly be good to develop more to use counter peak capacity

I think that's the main way to do it. Part of it is a culture thing. Whenever I've been on a train during off peak hours the demographics are notably different. By far, the ratio of young people to older middle aged people is much higher at off peak times. Also the percentage of immigrants is much higher during off peak than peak. The LRt is already pulling in young people, the city just needs to keep building around the stations so that those young people keep using it.

 

[Reecemartin]

Generally having housing and high density development around stations is a nice way to create momentum that doesn't eb and flow so much when the economy isn't doing as well which would be of great value particularly in Calgary

 

[Always_Biking]

That idea had been picking up over the last 10 years or so. If you look at the number of developments are going in and around the LRT stations, that’s exactly what is happening.

It took the city a while to catch on to the idea of Increasing density around the stations, but it’s now got some good momentum.

Would certainly be good to develop more to use counter peak capacity

 

[Cowtown]

Hopefully I don't seem to blunt here,but what do you mean by 'in many ways'? What are the many ways? They both carry morning commuters? All rail transit systems, carry morning commuters from an endpoint into a core area. The two systems have almost nothing in common.

The Go train runs every half hour...The Ctrain during off peak hours runs every 8 to 12 minutes. The C-train is a $3.00 fare typical, of a city transit system, while the go train 15 or 20 bucks....typical of a commuter rail system. The GoTrains terminate at a central spot and and don't continue onward from that spot...the very definition of a commuter train, whereas the Ctrain cuts through the city's central area and continues on in another direction, which is very typical of a city transit system. The entire system of the Ctrain is within the city limits.

Gonna cross post this on a few forums, some comments on a Toronto area forum compared the C-Train to GO transit in many ways and it does seem to be a somewhat apt comparison:

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...cluding-extensions.4952/page-826#post-1361622

How do people think we can improve the number of people using the C-Train outside of commuting? TOD, off-peak discount etc?

 

[Reecemartin]

Hopefully I don't seem to blunt here,but what do you mean by 'in many ways'? What are the many ways? They both carry morning commuters? All rail transit systems, carry morning commuters from an endpoint into a core area. The two systems have almost nothing in common.

The Go train runs every half hour...The Ctrain during off peak hours runs every 8 to 12 minutes. The C-train is a $3.00 fare typical, of a city transit system, while the go train 15 or 20 bucks....typical of a commuter rail system. The GoTrains terminate at a central spot and and don't continue onward from that spot...the very definition of a commuter train, whereas the Ctrain cuts through the city's central area and continues on in another direction, which is very typical of a city transit system. The entire system of the Ctrain is within the city limits.

If you look at the frequencies yes those are obviously quite different however the actual capacities are very similar (800 person C-Train every 10 minutes versus a few thousand on a GO Train every half hour - though it's more like every 15 in the peak on several lines). It's also worth noting that the GO trains also run through the city center and then continue in particular on the Lakeshore Line (which has the highest service density). I was also referring to land uses around stations which is pretty similar for both GO and the C-Train with a mix of land use but in both cases not enough density near a lot of the stations, this is changing in both cases but the size of the parking lots at most outer C-Train stations is more akin to GO than a lot of urban systems. I'd also point out that in both systems I think a lot of additional grade separations and station improvements are in order.

Note: I fully recognize that numerous sections of the C-Train (West Line Springs to mind) are more TOD oriented and that there are also significant well integrated urban sections and have lots of grade separation. What I'd love to is a bigger push to see less parking lots and more GO Style parkades at a lot of the outer stations (could be funded by selling the land to developers?) as well as more grade separations (South Line comes to mind) and especially more stations where people don't cross the tracks to enter.

TLDR: I don't intend to say the C-Train is the same style of system as GO (in fact its an interesting blend of urban and commuter railway that I'd argue kills two birds with one stone), however I'd like to see a stronger push to remove grade crossings and improve stations with additional canopies and amenities similar to GO which faces many similar challenges to the C-Trains outer stations.

 

[darwink]

Structured parking is expensive - you need really expensive land to fund $40,000 per spot parkades without additional subsidy.

 

[Reecemartin]

Structured parking is expensive - you need really expensive land to fund $40,000 per spot parkades without additional subsidy.

I'd imagine the land near most LRT stations is quite valuable though? Why not sell the land and maybe air rights over the corridor in exchange for parking expansion.

Another idea I'd pull from GO is expanding reserved parking. At GO lots if someone requests a reserved space they will simply add one until a parking lot eventually becomes all reserved. A similar system could turn all of the C-Trains parking in to paid space and could encourage people to consider other options for getting to the station.

 

[Silence&Motion]

Reecemartin, don't mind the knee-jerk reactions against your comparison. Plenty of Calgarians bristle at any mention of Toronto.

There are useful comparisons AND contrasts to be made between the C-Train and GO Trains, especially as GO upgrades to a "Regional Express Rail" (RER) system. The C-Train is most GO-like in the south, where it runs along an existing rail corridor that weaves through industrial areas and suburban subdivisions. Those corridors pose similar problems and opportunities for TOD for both the C-Train and the GO-Train. Both systems also face infrastructure limits on their frequency that includes congestion within the city centre (at Union Station, for the GO Train, and along 7th Ave for the C-Train), and at-grade road crossings.

As Social Justice mentioned, the C-Train is a bit better connected to major nodes and amenities outside the core (universities, malls, the stadium, etc.), which gives it more potential to become more of a metro than a commuter service. However, the decision to run the C-Train down the centre of the Crowchild in the NW and along 17th Ave in the SW has got to be one of the stupidest decisions made in the history of the system. In this sense, it's a little more like the Spadina-University subway line running down the middle of the Allen Expressway.

 

[Surrealplaces]

TLDR: I don't intend to say the C-Train is the same style of system as GO (in fact its an interesting blend of urban and commuter railway that I'd argue kills two birds with one stone), however I'd like to see a stronger push to remove grade crossings and improve stations with additional canopies and amenities similar to GO which faces many similar challenges to the C-Trains outer stations.

The CTrain definitely has traits of a bit metro and a bit Go train. During the day or after hours, it's more of a metro, and at peak hours a commuter service. When I've used it during the day I've seen lots of people getting off at inner city stations and the post secondary institutions mentioned by Social Justice. Once you get past Brentwood station the train becomes quiet, but at peak times not near as menu people getting on/off at inner stations.... it's full right to the end.

Personally I think of it as more of a metro because of my own uses of it which tend to be short improvisational runs and often only a couple of stops. There have been times when I've headed out from my downtown office and took it over to Sunnyside just to hit the grocery store to get a few things, and then headed back to the office. I've taken it a few times from 6th street station over to city hall, only for the purpose of taking a walk around East Village or taken it over to Sunnyside just to go for a walk around Kensington.

 

[Reecemartin]

The CTrain definitely has traits of a bit metro and a bit Go train. During the day or after hours, it's more of a metro, and at peak hours a commuter service. When I've used it during the day I've seen lots of people getting off at inner city stations and the post secondary institutions mentioned by Social Justice. Once you get past Brentwood station the train becomes quiet, but at peak times not near as menu people getting on/off at inner stations.... it's full right to the end.

Personally I think of it as more of a metro because of my own uses of it which tend to be short improvisational runs and often only a couple of stops. There have been times when I've headed out from my downtown office and took it over to Sunnyside just to hit the grocery store to get a few things, and then headed back to the office. I've taken it a few times from 6th street station over to city hall, only for the purpose of taking a walk around East Village or taken it over to Sunnyside just to go for a walk around Kensington.

I think encouraging those short type of trips is another good idea because as you said it means people could use it for lots of little errands etc.

 

[Surrealplaces]

BRT construction

Full sized image
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kevincappis/28952146557/sizes/o/

 

[GoVertical]

Work progressing on the Southeast BRT:

 

[Cowtown]

Fair enough, I was speaking more to the frequencies and the distance between stops. Surrealplaces summed up my thoughts with his post about using the C-Train for short, quick trips. I will agree that there are aspects of the Ctrain that are similar to a commuter system.
I find the Ctrain is like a metro system for the inner city stops out as far as Brentwood, Franklin, or Chinook, and more of a commuter system after those stops.

If you look at the frequencies yes those are obviously quite different however the actual capacities are very similar (800 person C-Train every 10 minutes versus a few thousand on a GO Train every half hour - though it's more like every 15 in the peak on several lines). It's also worth noting that the GO trains also run through the city center and then continue in particular on the Lakeshore Line (which has the highest service density). I was also referring to land uses around stations which is pretty similar for both GO and the C-Train with a mix of land use but in both cases not enough density near a lot of the stations, this is changing in both cases but the size of the parking lots at most outer C-Train stations is more akin to GO than a lot of urban systems. I'd also point out that in both systems I think a lot of additional grade separations and station improvements are in order.

 

[darwink]

Reecemartin, don't mind the knee-jerk reactions against your comparison. Plenty of Calgarians bristle at any mention of Toronto.

There are useful comparisons AND contrasts to be made between the C-Train and GO Trains, especially as GO upgrades to a "Regional Express Rail" (RER) system. The C-Train is most GO-like in the south, where it runs along an existing rail corridor that weaves through industrial areas and suburban subdivisions. Those corridors pose similar problems and opportunities for TOD for both the C-Train and the GO-Train. Both systems also face infrastructure limits on their frequency that includes congestion within the city centre (at Union Station, for the GO Train, and along 7th Ave for the C-Train), and at-grade road crossings.

As Social Justice mentioned, the C-Train is a bit better connected to major nodes and amenities outside the core (universities, malls, the stadium, etc.), which gives it more potential to become more of a metro than a commuter service. However, the decision to run the C-Train down the centre of the Crowchild in the NW and along 17th Ave in the SW has got to be one of the stupidest decisions made in the history of the system. In this sense, it's a little more like the Spadina-University subway line running down the middle of the Allen Expressway.

Crowchild is fair, but why the hate on 17th Ave?

I'd imagine the land near most LRT stations is quite valuable though? Why not sell the land and maybe air rights over the corridor in exchange for parking expansion.

Another idea I'd pull from GO is expanding reserved parking. At GO lots if someone requests a reserved space they will simply add one until a parking lot eventually becomes all reserved. A similar system could turn all of the C-Trains parking in to paid space and could encourage people to consider other options for getting to the station.

The city sold land at Westbrook and it is sitting idle. You'd have to compete with buying and bulldozing pad retail. Construction costs a lot, the existing lots don't even cover their operating expenses. The city hasn't even been able to sell the Anderson lots which never fill up anymore.

All C-Train parking should be paid, and none should be reserved — all C-Train lots should be priced so that they get to 95% full. If you go full reserved, you actually under-utilize the lots since there are very few days where everyone drives, and if you over sell, which you should, without a buffer margin people will be up in arms ("If I pay for a spot, I should have a spot rabble rabble").

Dynamic per lot pricing, at some stations, that price might be $1, at others it would be $5. Right now you have massive waiting lists at some stations for a reserved spot, along with free parking for everyone that needs to be at work really early. In the summer you could advertise specials to drive utilization and introduce non-riders to transit.

 

[Silence&Motion]

Crowchild is fair, but why the hate on 17th Ave?

Because west of 37th street, 17th ave is basically an expressway. There is virtually no possibility of functional TOD around 45 St, Sirocco, or 69 St stations.