darwink
Senior Member
I think spot measurements for the stations? I think a sample of buses have automated counters as well.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Always_Biking
- Start date
CBBarnett
Senior Member
One of the best easy/cheap things Calgary Transit could do to improve itself would be open their dataset the way that Translink in Vancouver does. Link here to their awesome data pages.
Translink publishes average ridership on each route (bus, train, ferry, regional rail) and service cost per rider. They even break down reliability, utilization, time of boardings, capacities and a number of other measures. I've never seen such good data publicly available by a transit agency. Dashboards and consumable formats are easy to use on all levels of detail. Check their dashboard here.
Publicly available data allows the public/politicians to advocate and audit the transit service and give visibility into mostly black-box decisions that are made around route choices, frequencies and costs. Perhaps more cynically, if CT was forced to open their data sets and it turns out they won't/ aren't capable of tracking at the right level of granularity such as the route level, time of day etc. - that will light some political fires to get better data quality pretty quick. Ultimately, data visibility improvements will lead to better transit services in this city.
Reecemartin
Active Member
Remember Ottawas system isn't just appearing, its replacing probably the most used section of transitway in Canada or the US, I have heard numerous reports that on opening it will be the busiest . . . "Nearly five years in the making, it will be the busiest LRT line in North America on its first day of service," (https://ottawacitizen.com/news/loca...ractor-to-turn-over-2-1b-lrt-line-in-one-year)
I also think its important to be clear that grade separation is actually a pretty important thing, not only does it mean you don't have cars hitting trains (which happens frequently enough it goes without saying - disrupting service) but, it also means that you can implement automatic signalling and push service to the maximum frequency.
Reecemartin
Active Member
I'd imagine having a smart card makes this really easy to do, another big benefit.
It probably will be the busiest LRT line, (and I'm not 100% convinced, but it wouldn't surprise me) but not the busiest LRT system. Either way, Ottawa's system will be a good one, and replacing the transitway will give it instant ridership.
I think the grade separation is a minor advantage, can be overrated in many cases, and in Calgary's case not worth the money, but I think it works in Ottawa's case given the geographical layout. Ottawa's high density areas that the system is hitting are closer together than Calgary's, also the bulk of Ottawa's system, the confederation line is a straight line on flat ground, and only on the Ontario side (where all the population and growth is), they don't have to branch out in 6 directions to cover the city. I myself, would go with grade separation in Ottawa's case but not in Calgary's case.
I know many people, especially transit aficionados look at the Calgary / Ottawa systems as a competition of some sort, but they really aren't. I think both are (and will be) successful examples in their individual situations.
Last edited:
Reecemartin
Active Member
I think the West LRT is an example of an ideal amount of Grade Separation tbh . . .
What I really appreciate in Ottawas system is that they seem to have designed some really excellent stations and they have also made the whole system quite future proof.
What I really appreciate in Ottawas system is that they seem to have designed some really excellent stations and they have also made the whole system quite future proof.
darwink
Senior Member
Will be interesting when Ottawa's system starts spurring in future phases, and how it will handle transfer traffic at Bayview. Passing through the current transfer hub for many routes, Hurdman, last winter during morning rush was an experience!
Map here: https://www.stage2lrt.ca/
Map here: https://www.stage2lrt.ca/
Looking forward to checking out Ottawa's system one day. Definitely a well designed system, and the stations look great.
Reecemartin
Active Member
I think whats refreshing to see is fewer plans and studies and more action, especially coming from Vancouver.
In particular, I really appreciate how far stations have come since the days of the Original Edmonton LRT and the Skytrain, across the country I think the bar for stations is a lot higher (same could be said for rolling stock), I also think the new transit we are building is also more likely to be successful given our improved land use policy etc.
In particular, I really appreciate how far stations have come since the days of the Original Edmonton LRT and the Skytrain, across the country I think the bar for stations is a lot higher (same could be said for rolling stock), I also think the new transit we are building is also more likely to be successful given our improved land use policy etc.
Reecemartin
Active Member
On the point of Downtown Tunnel or Airport connection, honestly why not both? The downtown tunnel I have seen estimated costing 800 million? Surely then combined with even an expensive LRT extension a combined project would probably not be close to the scale of the Green Line.
And I don't think the airport connector necessarily has to be an LRT extension a decent automated people mover with reasonable capacity could be super well integrated into a new mobility hub station (think stacked platforms with C-Train on the lower level) and would probably be fairly cheap, plus something akin to Vancouver could be done where people travelling from downtown to the airport would pay a small extra fair to cover a portion of the costs.
And I don't think the airport connector necessarily has to be an LRT extension a decent automated people mover with reasonable capacity could be super well integrated into a new mobility hub station (think stacked platforms with C-Train on the lower level) and would probably be fairly cheap, plus something akin to Vancouver could be done where people travelling from downtown to the airport would pay a small extra fair to cover a portion of the costs.
darwink
Senior Member
In an ideal world, sure both. In a not so ideal world, the funding agreements for the current green line is already absorbing 20 years of funding from other levels, and 30 years from the City. Cupboards are going to be pretty bare for awhile.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Agreed. Ottawa has well integrated land-use and transit into their plans. This is backbone infrastructure and looks really well thought out to succeed both on day 1 and well into the future. They have also done a far better job than Calgary on linking institutions to transit as anchors (universities, colleges, malls etc.)
The amount of near-success in linking institutions to transit in Calgary drives me nuts:
- PLC/Sunridge Mall near Whitehorn but awkwardly and frustratingly non-pedestrian friendly to get to
- Chinook Centre being just awkwardly too far way from LRT (with notable improvements due to the bridge)
- U of C sprawling away from the LRT instead of towards it
- MRU, Foothills, Rockyview, Childrens Hospital and South Health Campus all without good quality transit despite many decades of planning where transit could either have been developed to reach them, or the facility could have been placed next to existing transit
Reecemartin
Active Member
Do you think Edmonton has done better in this regard with their recent expansions?
CBBarnett
Senior Member
I would think so on that short Metro line extension, but haven't seen in person so just speculating. 3 stations with a major mall, college, hospital and arena all connected closely (plus that old airport land for future, higher density development where transit is planned for from the start). I am sure there is plenty of tweaks that could be made to make it more tightly integrated (better crosswalks, removal of random fences etc.) and their ongoing signalling/speed issues might be the biggest issues for the line, but the location/route and stations appear to be all good choices IMO.
That has been a problem. When the system was first designed it was designed more as a commuter system to keep commuter traffic going downtown off the roads. The NW section is great at Sunnyide/SAIT/Lions Park, but really should have come over to Foothills Medical complex and McMahon, then straight through the middle of the university and then out onto Crowchild around the Brentwood mall area. It probably would have cost a bundle and maybe wasn't easy to do, but it would have hit the high density areas better.