It is possible to infer from documents such as the City of Calgary’s “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan” that the long-range objective for C-Train service through the city centre will involve separate, dedicated metro lines for any light rail line serving the downtown core, to the point of designing the City Hall metro station from a standing start as an interchange between Line 201 and Line 202 (City of Calgary, 1982:30). The vision for this system, as matters stood in 1982, was for Line 201 and Line 202 to meet at City Hall, with Line 201 following the Stephen Avenue Metro described elsewhere in this document, and with Line 202 continuing in a separate metro constructed underneath Seventh Avenue South. Such a line would doubtlessly be technically feasible, accounting for the necessity of interchanging between stations along Line 201 and 202 through the downtown core, and such a line would have the added benefit of paving over the gap between Calgary’s East Village district and its downtown core by bringing a substantial portion of Line 202’s approach to City Hall below the surface. At the same time, it is worth investigating both the option to construct the envisaged Seventh Avenue Metro and the option to multiply one’s force by stacking both metros one atop the other underneath Stephen Avenue, if only to explore possible efficiencies in interchanging and system-wide connectivity.
In the interest of facilitating passenger transfers to the greatest possible extent between Line 201 in the Stephen Avenue Metro and Line 202 in the Seventh Avenue Metro, the latter underground service would operate in parallel with its Stephen Avenue counterpart. Using the roughed-in City Hall Station as a starting point (City of Calgary, 1982:28-30), and bearing in mind the investigation already under way by the city, the Seventh Avenue Metro would continue west for approximately 200 metres to Museum Station, east of Centre Street, to serve the Glenbow Museum and adjacent hotels. From that point, the Seventh Avenue Metro would arrive after a distance of approximately 400 metres at Bankers’ Hall Station, serving adjacent retail and commercial developments and acting as the downtown core’s primary interchange station. At a distance of approximately 300 metres due west would be Fifth Street Station, also serving a number of adjacent retail and commercial developments. The final station on the Seventh Avenue Metro would be approximately 500 metres west at Century Garden Station, serving retail, commercial, and recreational uses between Seventh and Eighth Streets SW. Line 202 trains would then surface at a portal in the vicinity of Tenth Street SW to connect with the Eleventh Street Station already planned for revenue service on the route, and continue westward from that point. While Bankers’ Hall Station would, as noted, serve as the primary interchange station in the downtown core, all of the stations on the Seventh Avenue Metro would, as noted, maintain connections to Line 201 stations on the Stephen Avenue Metro.
The total capital investment required for the Seventh Avenue Metro comes to $757-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $38-million from 2025 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2021 to 2024 in four instalments of $189-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
Seventh Avenue Metro:
$233-million
plus five metro stations (City Hall, Museum, Bankers’ Hall, Fifth Street, Century Garden)
@ $92-million each: $460-million
Rolling Stock of 16 LRVs (SD-160)
@ $4-million each: $ 64-million
The overall benefit to completing the Seventh Avenue Metro would approximate the scale of completing the Stephen Avenue Metro, so that Line 202 could also increase peak-hour passenger throughput from its current level of 7,255 passengers per hour per direction on three-car trains running at five-minute headways to an absolute maximum of 36,000 passengers per hour per direction on five-car trains running at two-minute headways (Calgary Transit, 2008c; Siemens Transportation Systems, 2005:1). These enhancements to the effectiveness of the C-Train system as a network would also afford opportunities for more reliable system-wide connectivity and enhanced passenger satisfaction with the service. Only one critical question remains, that question being whether it is technically and fiscally feasible to construct a “stacked” metro in which Line 202 runs underneath Line 201 beneath Stephen Avenue; the benefit of being able to transfer between levels from Line 201 to Line 202 and vice-versa along the same corridor needs to be weighed against the structural and geophysical risks of building metro systems to 25-metre depths through downtown Calgary.
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
City of Calgary (1982). “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/planning/pdf/city_hall_arp.pdf
Siemens Transportation Systems (2005). “SD160 Light Rail Vehicle, Calgary, Canada: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.sts.siemens.com/DS/SD160%20Calgary%20DS.pdf
23 April 2008
Building on What Can Work: Line 203 Phase I — 2017
Two light rail extension options have already been identified in this document, and although both extensions are technically and financially feasible and are functional and useful to Calgary’s C-Train passengers on the whole, they amount to the proverbial low-hanging fruit, being relatively simple and inexpensive additions to the C-Train network as it presently exists. There are two other light rail development projects that will need to be completed by 2017, two years prior to the commencement of revenue service on a built-out Line 201 and three years before revenue service on a built-out Line 202 begins, if the C-Train system is to accommodate the gains in system ridership arising both from the line extensions and from anticipated population growth. To relieve overloaded passenger traffic and tight C-Train headways on the Seventh Avenue Transit Corridor, it will become vital to the success of Calgary’s light rail system to divert Line 201 to the Stephen Avenue Metro, an underground connector built underneath Eighth Avenue. The other critical project will be the commissioning of the Eau Claire Metro, an underground connector built underneath Second Street SW and Tenth Avenue SW, as part of the activation of C-Train Line 203, travelling generally to the southeast from Calgary’s downtown core to residential and commercial areas east of Deerfoot Trail and south of 17 Avenue SE. This phase of C-Train system construction represents a substantial capital investment and involves technical issues peculiar to Calgary’s terrain, but the strategic benefits of this construction outweigh the risks to such an extent that the city is justified in completing this phase with all possible speed.
The concept of metro service through downtown Calgary dates back to 1967’s Calgary Transportation Study (City of Calgary, 1967:27), with service beneath Eighth Avenue SW being identified as a priority as early as 1970 (Simpson and Curtin et alia, 1970:4). Using the roughed-in City Hall Station as a starting point (City of Calgary, 1982:28-30), and bearing in mind the investigation already under way by the city, the Stephen Avenue Metro would continue west for approximately 200 metres to Museum Station, east of Centre Street, to serve the Glenbow Museum and adjacent hotels. From that point, the Stephen Avenue Metro would arrive after a distance of approximately 400 metres at Bankers’ Hall Station, serving adjacent retail and commercial developments and acting as the downtown core’s primary interchange station. At a distance of approximately 300 metres due west would be Fifth Street Station, also serving a number of adjacent retail and commercial developments. The final station on the Stephen Avenue Metro would be approximately 500 metres west at Century Garden Station, serving retail, commercial, and recreational uses between Seventh and Eighth Streets SW. After turning northward to parallel Ninth Street SW, the Stephen Avenue Metro would rejoin the existing surface light rail line at a portal near Sixth Avenue SW, travelling roughly 400 metres in the process (City of Calgary, 2007a:95). While Bankers’ Hall Station would, as noted, serve as the primary interchange station in the downtown core, all of the stations on the Stephen Avenue Metro would maintain connections to Line 202 platforms along the Seventh Avenue Transit Corridor.
The Eau Claire Metro was identified as a necessary condition for the completion of Line 203 of the C-Train, which in turn was defined in 1987 as vital to any concerted effort to offer mass transit to residents in southeast Calgary (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2006:6). Starting from Eau Claire Station, beneath the intersection of Second Street and Riverfront Avenue SW, the Eau Claire Metro would continue for approximately 500 metres under Second Street SW to arrive at Central Station, between Sixth and Seventh Avenues SW and interchanging both with Bankers’ Hall Station on Line 201 and with Line 202 platforms along the Seventh Avenue Transit Corridor, before turning under the Canadian Pacific Railway to run below Tenth Avenue SW for a total of roughly 700 metres to arrive at Volunteer Way Station at the intersection with Centre Street, and then surfacing at First Street SE to travel for a total of approximately 700 metres to the at-grade Olympic Way Station, where Tenth Avenue intersects with Fourth Street SE (City of Calgary, 2007a:95). Line 203 would then cross the Elbow River and follow the CPR right of way for roughly 1,600 metres to Inglewood/Ramsay Station, at the intersection of 11 Avenue and 11 Street SE (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2006:59), before continuing 1,200 metres to Crossroads Station, where 11 Avenue and 26 Street SE meet (2006:61), and another 1,200 metres thence to Highfield Station, at the intersection of Ogden Road and Highfield Boulevard SE (2006:63). This line would continue to run parallel to the CPR for an additional 2,200 metres to Lynnwood Station, at the intersection of Ogden Road and Millican Road SE (2006:65), and for a further 1,400 metres to Ogden Station, where Ogden Road meets 69 Avenue SE (2006:67), before crossing Glenmore Trail SE and continuing a further 1,800 metres to South Hill Station, at the intersection of Shepard Road and 85 Avenue SE (2006:69). At this point, Line 203 would diverge from the CPR right of way, continuing south parallel to 24 Street SE for approximately 1,700 metres to Quarry Park Station, as proposed by the developers of the Quarry Park commercial and residential subdivision (Remington Development Corporation, 2008), and from there roughly another 1,500 metres to Douglasdale Station, at the intersection of 29 Avenue and 114 Street SE. The list of destinations along this preliminary stretch of the Eau Claire Metro and Line 203 incorporates an eclectic mix of commercial, residential, and industrial properties.
The total capital investment required for the Stephen Avenue Metro, the Eau Claire Metro, and the first stage of Line 203 to Douglasdale comes to $1,964-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $98-million from 2018 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2012 to 2017 in six instalments of $328-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
Stephen Avenue Metro: $233-million
plus five metro stations (City Hall, Museum, Bankers’ Hall, Fifth Street, Century Garden)
@ $92-million each: $460-million
Eau Claire Metro: $233-million
plus three metro stations (Eau Claire, Central, Volunteer Way)
@ $92-million each: $276-million
Southeast Surface Track and Way of 13.00 km
@ $25-million per km: $325-million
plus nine surface stations (Olympic Way, Inglewood/Ramsay, Crossroads, Highfield, Lynnwood, Ogden, South Hill, Quarry Park, Douglasdale)
@ $10-million each: $ 90-million
Ogden Yard: $200-million
Rolling Stock of 37 LRVs (Avanto)
@ $4-million each: $148-million
A number of operational benefits would come into play for the C-Train system on the successful completion of this construction phase. Line 203 alone would bring 55,000 daily revenue passengers to and from the Eau Claire Metro and the city centre in 2017, based on previous analyses of population growth and residency patterns in southeast Calgary (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2006:56), and furthermore would provide a viable alternative to automobile travel for riders from elsewhere in the city with travel demand to commercial and industrial areas along the line. Even more importantly, perhaps, the availability of the Stephen Avenue Metro to Line 201 would allow both for a reduction in headway times both for Line 201 and 202 through the downtown core, and for an increase in the overall capacity of C-Trains using both lines, so that Line 201 could increase peak-hour passenger throughput from its current level of 7,255 passengers per hour per direction on three-car trains running at five-minute headways to an absolute maximum of 36,000 passengers per hour per direction on five-car trains running at two-minute headways (Calgary Transit, 2008c; Siemens Transportation Systems, 2005:1). These enhancements to the effectiveness of the C-Train system as a network would also afford opportunities for more reliable system-wide connectivity and enhanced passenger satisfaction with the service.
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
City of Calgary (1967). Calgary Transportation Study, Volume 2. From City of Calgary Archives.
City of Calgary (1982). “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/planning/pdf/city_hall_arp.pdf
City of Calgary (2007a). “Centre City Plan”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/centre_city/centre_city_plan_one.pdf
Clifton ND Lea et alia (2006). “Southeast LRT Functional Planning Study, Phase III: Glenmore Trail to Elbow River”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/SE_LRT_Final_Report.pdf
Remington Development Corporation (2008). “Quarry Park: Site Access”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.quarrypark.ca/site.html
Siemens Transportation Systems (2005). “SD160 Light Rail Vehicle, Calgary, Canada: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.sts.siemens.com/DS/SD160%20Calgary%20DS.pdf
Simpson and Curtin et alia (1970). “Transit for Calgary’s Future: Engineering Analysis for 1978 Rapid Transit System”. From City of Calgary Archives.
The concept of metro service through downtown Calgary dates back to 1967’s Calgary Transportation Study (City of Calgary, 1967:27), with service beneath Eighth Avenue SW being identified as a priority as early as 1970 (Simpson and Curtin et alia, 1970:4). Using the roughed-in City Hall Station as a starting point (City of Calgary, 1982:28-30), and bearing in mind the investigation already under way by the city, the Stephen Avenue Metro would continue west for approximately 200 metres to Museum Station, east of Centre Street, to serve the Glenbow Museum and adjacent hotels. From that point, the Stephen Avenue Metro would arrive after a distance of approximately 400 metres at Bankers’ Hall Station, serving adjacent retail and commercial developments and acting as the downtown core’s primary interchange station. At a distance of approximately 300 metres due west would be Fifth Street Station, also serving a number of adjacent retail and commercial developments. The final station on the Stephen Avenue Metro would be approximately 500 metres west at Century Garden Station, serving retail, commercial, and recreational uses between Seventh and Eighth Streets SW. After turning northward to parallel Ninth Street SW, the Stephen Avenue Metro would rejoin the existing surface light rail line at a portal near Sixth Avenue SW, travelling roughly 400 metres in the process (City of Calgary, 2007a:95). While Bankers’ Hall Station would, as noted, serve as the primary interchange station in the downtown core, all of the stations on the Stephen Avenue Metro would maintain connections to Line 202 platforms along the Seventh Avenue Transit Corridor.
The Eau Claire Metro was identified as a necessary condition for the completion of Line 203 of the C-Train, which in turn was defined in 1987 as vital to any concerted effort to offer mass transit to residents in southeast Calgary (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2006:6). Starting from Eau Claire Station, beneath the intersection of Second Street and Riverfront Avenue SW, the Eau Claire Metro would continue for approximately 500 metres under Second Street SW to arrive at Central Station, between Sixth and Seventh Avenues SW and interchanging both with Bankers’ Hall Station on Line 201 and with Line 202 platforms along the Seventh Avenue Transit Corridor, before turning under the Canadian Pacific Railway to run below Tenth Avenue SW for a total of roughly 700 metres to arrive at Volunteer Way Station at the intersection with Centre Street, and then surfacing at First Street SE to travel for a total of approximately 700 metres to the at-grade Olympic Way Station, where Tenth Avenue intersects with Fourth Street SE (City of Calgary, 2007a:95). Line 203 would then cross the Elbow River and follow the CPR right of way for roughly 1,600 metres to Inglewood/Ramsay Station, at the intersection of 11 Avenue and 11 Street SE (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2006:59), before continuing 1,200 metres to Crossroads Station, where 11 Avenue and 26 Street SE meet (2006:61), and another 1,200 metres thence to Highfield Station, at the intersection of Ogden Road and Highfield Boulevard SE (2006:63). This line would continue to run parallel to the CPR for an additional 2,200 metres to Lynnwood Station, at the intersection of Ogden Road and Millican Road SE (2006:65), and for a further 1,400 metres to Ogden Station, where Ogden Road meets 69 Avenue SE (2006:67), before crossing Glenmore Trail SE and continuing a further 1,800 metres to South Hill Station, at the intersection of Shepard Road and 85 Avenue SE (2006:69). At this point, Line 203 would diverge from the CPR right of way, continuing south parallel to 24 Street SE for approximately 1,700 metres to Quarry Park Station, as proposed by the developers of the Quarry Park commercial and residential subdivision (Remington Development Corporation, 2008), and from there roughly another 1,500 metres to Douglasdale Station, at the intersection of 29 Avenue and 114 Street SE. The list of destinations along this preliminary stretch of the Eau Claire Metro and Line 203 incorporates an eclectic mix of commercial, residential, and industrial properties.
The total capital investment required for the Stephen Avenue Metro, the Eau Claire Metro, and the first stage of Line 203 to Douglasdale comes to $1,964-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $98-million from 2018 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2012 to 2017 in six instalments of $328-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
Stephen Avenue Metro: $233-million
plus five metro stations (City Hall, Museum, Bankers’ Hall, Fifth Street, Century Garden)
@ $92-million each: $460-million
Eau Claire Metro: $233-million
plus three metro stations (Eau Claire, Central, Volunteer Way)
@ $92-million each: $276-million
Southeast Surface Track and Way of 13.00 km
@ $25-million per km: $325-million
plus nine surface stations (Olympic Way, Inglewood/Ramsay, Crossroads, Highfield, Lynnwood, Ogden, South Hill, Quarry Park, Douglasdale)
@ $10-million each: $ 90-million
Ogden Yard: $200-million
Rolling Stock of 37 LRVs (Avanto)
@ $4-million each: $148-million
A number of operational benefits would come into play for the C-Train system on the successful completion of this construction phase. Line 203 alone would bring 55,000 daily revenue passengers to and from the Eau Claire Metro and the city centre in 2017, based on previous analyses of population growth and residency patterns in southeast Calgary (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2006:56), and furthermore would provide a viable alternative to automobile travel for riders from elsewhere in the city with travel demand to commercial and industrial areas along the line. Even more importantly, perhaps, the availability of the Stephen Avenue Metro to Line 201 would allow both for a reduction in headway times both for Line 201 and 202 through the downtown core, and for an increase in the overall capacity of C-Trains using both lines, so that Line 201 could increase peak-hour passenger throughput from its current level of 7,255 passengers per hour per direction on three-car trains running at five-minute headways to an absolute maximum of 36,000 passengers per hour per direction on five-car trains running at two-minute headways (Calgary Transit, 2008c; Siemens Transportation Systems, 2005:1). These enhancements to the effectiveness of the C-Train system as a network would also afford opportunities for more reliable system-wide connectivity and enhanced passenger satisfaction with the service.
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
City of Calgary (1967). Calgary Transportation Study, Volume 2. From City of Calgary Archives.
City of Calgary (1982). “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/planning/pdf/city_hall_arp.pdf
City of Calgary (2007a). “Centre City Plan”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/centre_city/centre_city_plan_one.pdf
Clifton ND Lea et alia (2006). “Southeast LRT Functional Planning Study, Phase III: Glenmore Trail to Elbow River”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/SE_LRT_Final_Report.pdf
Remington Development Corporation (2008). “Quarry Park: Site Access”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.quarrypark.ca/site.html
Siemens Transportation Systems (2005). “SD160 Light Rail Vehicle, Calgary, Canada: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.sts.siemens.com/DS/SD160%20Calgary%20DS.pdf
Simpson and Curtin et alia (1970). “Transit for Calgary’s Future: Engineering Analysis for 1978 Rapid Transit System”. From City of Calgary Archives.
Building on What Can Work: Line 202 Buildout — 2020
The announcement today that StoneGate Landing would commence construction in northeast Calgary, east of Deerfoot Trail and north of Calgary International Airport, in 2009 for completion by 2016 speaks to the importance of effective mass transit to the northeast sector of the city. The Calgary Herald’s Mario Toneguzzi reported that the 455-hectare site would be built out over the course of the next eight years to encompass roughly one million square metres of light industrial development, a 200,000-square-metre midrise office campus, and 150,000 square metres of retail and entertainment services incorporating some pedestrian amenities (Toneguzzi, 2008). Moreover, Toneguzzi’s report (2008) referred to StoneGate Landing’s proximity to lands that would accommodate 60,000 residents. Based on these development indicators alone, a horizon is now in sight for the development and completion of C-Train Line 202, primarily from its projected northeast terminus at Saddletowne Station but additionally from its projected western terminus at 69 Street Station, by 2020 — a mere four years after StoneGate Landing and its adjacent residential lands achieve full occupancy.
Light rail extensions of Line 202 to the northeast and to the west have been anticipated in several statutory planning documents. The western extension of the line from 69 Street Station would be relatively short, consisting of 1.60 kilometres of electrified double track at grade paralleling 17 Avenue SW and curving northwest past the intersection of 85 Street SW to a terminal facility at Aspen Woods Station to serve the East Springbank neighbourhood of the same name (City of Calgary, 2005f:I.3). The longer Line 202 extension would be to the northeast, following the 60 Street right of way from Saddletowne Station at grade for roughly 800 metres to 88 Avenue Station (City of Calgary, 1984:19) and a further 2,400 metres to arrive at Country Hills East Station at the junction of 60 Street and Country Hills Boulevard NE (City of Calgary, 2007d:21). This route would continue toward a westward turn at 128 Avenue NE and arrive after a net distance of 2,400 metres at Northpointe Station (2007d:21), where 128 Avenue intersects with 52 Street NE. From this location, Line 202 would continue west along 128 Avenue NE and then turn north to its terminus at Stonegate Station, a transit-orientated retail and commercial development node at the approximate intersection of a reconfigured Barlow Boulevard and the decommissioned 36 Street NE right of way (City of Calgary, 2007e:13).
The total capital investment required for both extensions of Line 202 comes to $364-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $18-million from 2021 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2018 to 2020 in three instalments of $121-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
Northeast Surface Track and Way of 8.40 km @ $25-mil per km: $210-mil
plus four surface stations (88 Avenue, Country Hills East, Northpointe, Stonegate) @ $10-mil each: $40-mil
West Surface Track and Way of 1.60 km @ $25-mil per km: $40-mil
plus one surface station (Aspen Woods) @ $10-mil each: $10-mil
Rolling Stock of 8 LRVs (SD-160) @ $4-mil each: $32-mil
The northeast extension of Line 202 would be particularly valuable to residential passengers in that area of the city travelling to destinations on the C-Train system, and indeed, this function would be the almost exclusive benefit of the western extension of the line. At the same time, the transit-orientated retail and commercial development node at Stonegate Station, and to an appreciably lesser extent the adjacent commercial and light industrial uses envisioned for the remaining portions of StoneGate Landing, afford opportunities for passengers from other precincts of the city to travel northeast along Line 202 counter to predominant traffic flows to downtown Calgary, and thus allow for the possibility of maximising overall use of this capital transportation investment.
Works Cited
City of Calgary (1984). “Saddle Ridge Area Structure Plan”. URL as of 24 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/saddle_ridge_asp/saddle_ridge_asp_one.pdf
City of Calgary (2005f). “Report to Council from Calgary Planning Commission: East Springbank Area Structure Plan (Aspen Woods).” URL as of 23 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/BU/planning/pdf/cpc_agendas/2005_may_05/m2005_015.pdf
City of Calgary (2007d). “Northeast Community A Area Structure Plan”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/northeast_community_a_asp.pdf
City of Calgary (2007e). “Northeast Industrial Area Structure Plan”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/northeast_industrial_asp.pdf
Toneguzzi, Mario (2008). “$3B project city’s biggest ever: Development planned for northeast”. The Calgary Herald, 23 Apr 2008, p. D1. URL as of 23 Apr 2008 http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/story.html?id=95e8a25d-c28f-471a-b857-1689c638f4df&k=62155
Light rail extensions of Line 202 to the northeast and to the west have been anticipated in several statutory planning documents. The western extension of the line from 69 Street Station would be relatively short, consisting of 1.60 kilometres of electrified double track at grade paralleling 17 Avenue SW and curving northwest past the intersection of 85 Street SW to a terminal facility at Aspen Woods Station to serve the East Springbank neighbourhood of the same name (City of Calgary, 2005f:I.3). The longer Line 202 extension would be to the northeast, following the 60 Street right of way from Saddletowne Station at grade for roughly 800 metres to 88 Avenue Station (City of Calgary, 1984:19) and a further 2,400 metres to arrive at Country Hills East Station at the junction of 60 Street and Country Hills Boulevard NE (City of Calgary, 2007d:21). This route would continue toward a westward turn at 128 Avenue NE and arrive after a net distance of 2,400 metres at Northpointe Station (2007d:21), where 128 Avenue intersects with 52 Street NE. From this location, Line 202 would continue west along 128 Avenue NE and then turn north to its terminus at Stonegate Station, a transit-orientated retail and commercial development node at the approximate intersection of a reconfigured Barlow Boulevard and the decommissioned 36 Street NE right of way (City of Calgary, 2007e:13).
The total capital investment required for both extensions of Line 202 comes to $364-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $18-million from 2021 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2018 to 2020 in three instalments of $121-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
Northeast Surface Track and Way of 8.40 km @ $25-mil per km: $210-mil
plus four surface stations (88 Avenue, Country Hills East, Northpointe, Stonegate) @ $10-mil each: $40-mil
West Surface Track and Way of 1.60 km @ $25-mil per km: $40-mil
plus one surface station (Aspen Woods) @ $10-mil each: $10-mil
Rolling Stock of 8 LRVs (SD-160) @ $4-mil each: $32-mil
The northeast extension of Line 202 would be particularly valuable to residential passengers in that area of the city travelling to destinations on the C-Train system, and indeed, this function would be the almost exclusive benefit of the western extension of the line. At the same time, the transit-orientated retail and commercial development node at Stonegate Station, and to an appreciably lesser extent the adjacent commercial and light industrial uses envisioned for the remaining portions of StoneGate Landing, afford opportunities for passengers from other precincts of the city to travel northeast along Line 202 counter to predominant traffic flows to downtown Calgary, and thus allow for the possibility of maximising overall use of this capital transportation investment.
Works Cited
City of Calgary (1984). “Saddle Ridge Area Structure Plan”. URL as of 24 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/saddle_ridge_asp/saddle_ridge_asp_one.pdf
City of Calgary (2005f). “Report to Council from Calgary Planning Commission: East Springbank Area Structure Plan (Aspen Woods).” URL as of 23 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/BU/planning/pdf/cpc_agendas/2005_may_05/m2005_015.pdf
City of Calgary (2007d). “Northeast Community A Area Structure Plan”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/northeast_community_a_asp.pdf
City of Calgary (2007e). “Northeast Industrial Area Structure Plan”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/northeast_industrial_asp.pdf
Toneguzzi, Mario (2008). “$3B project city’s biggest ever: Development planned for northeast”. The Calgary Herald, 23 Apr 2008, p. D1. URL as of 23 Apr 2008 http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/story.html?id=95e8a25d-c28f-471a-b857-1689c638f4df&k=62155
22 April 2008
Building on What Can Work: Line 201 Buildout — 2019
With the completion of the northwest leg of the C-Train’s Line 201 to Tuscany and Rocky Ridge expected by the end of 2011, only one stage would remain for Line 201 to operate at its full length. This 5.5-kilometre, three-station extension of Line 201 would continue along existing rights of way in parallel to the Canadian Pacific Railway, and would satisfy revenue passenger service for emerging and planned residential communities south of Alberta Highway 22X, which exists both as a vital east-west motorway artery across the southern flank of the city and as a critical barrier to north-south passenger travel. As a highly economical and thoroughly sustainable means of offering rapid transit to a sector of the city slated for a long-term residential population of 70,000 (City of Calgary, 2007l:10), the buildout of Line 201 represents a quick win for the City of Calgary, and a strategic transportation objective that would easily be met by the year 2019.
The extension of Line 201, as already anticipated in The City of Calgary’s 2007 “South Macleod Regional Policy Plan”, would consist of 5.5 kilometres of electrified double track paralleling the CPR, passing underneath existing bridging along Alberta Highway 22X to serve three light rail stations. Silverado Station would be a surface-level station located about one kilometre due south of Alberta Highway 22X, serving passengers in the new Silverado subdivision. The line would continue from that point to Dawes Road Station, approximately 300 metres south of 194 Avenue SW, which would serve as the epicentre of transit-orientated residential, commercial, and recreational developments in the area (City of Calgary, 2007l:19). Roughly 300 metres north of the current southern city limit, and at the heart of a transit-orientated development supporting a commercial centre (2007l:19), the Line 201 extension would come to its ultimate end at 240 Avenue Station.
The total capital investment required for the extension of Line 201 comes to $200-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $10-million from 2020 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2017 to 2019 in three instalments of $67-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
* South Surface Track and Way of 5.50 km @ $25-million per km: $138-million
* plus three surface stations (Silverado, Dawes Road, 240 Avenue) @ $10-million each: $30-million
* Rolling Stock of 8 LRVs (SD-160) @ $4-million each: $32-million
The primary opportunity deriving from the southward extension of Line 201 is that of serving residential passengers travelling within the city to destinations on the C-Train system. With intensified residential, commercial, and recreational development in the vicinity of Dawes Road Station, non-residential traffic along this extension remains an outside possibility.
Works Cited
City of Calgary (2007l). “South Macleod Trail Regional Policy Plan”. URL as of 22 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/south_macleod_trail_rpp/south_macleod_trail_rpp_one.pdf
The extension of Line 201, as already anticipated in The City of Calgary’s 2007 “South Macleod Regional Policy Plan”, would consist of 5.5 kilometres of electrified double track paralleling the CPR, passing underneath existing bridging along Alberta Highway 22X to serve three light rail stations. Silverado Station would be a surface-level station located about one kilometre due south of Alberta Highway 22X, serving passengers in the new Silverado subdivision. The line would continue from that point to Dawes Road Station, approximately 300 metres south of 194 Avenue SW, which would serve as the epicentre of transit-orientated residential, commercial, and recreational developments in the area (City of Calgary, 2007l:19). Roughly 300 metres north of the current southern city limit, and at the heart of a transit-orientated development supporting a commercial centre (2007l:19), the Line 201 extension would come to its ultimate end at 240 Avenue Station.
The total capital investment required for the extension of Line 201 comes to $200-million, a figure that could be carried over thirty years in instalments of $10-million from 2020 onward, or financed through an MSI-equivalent funding mechanism from 2017 to 2019 in three instalments of $67-million. The details of the necessary capital investment are identified as follows:
* South Surface Track and Way of 5.50 km @ $25-million per km: $138-million
* plus three surface stations (Silverado, Dawes Road, 240 Avenue) @ $10-million each: $30-million
* Rolling Stock of 8 LRVs (SD-160) @ $4-million each: $32-million
The primary opportunity deriving from the southward extension of Line 201 is that of serving residential passengers travelling within the city to destinations on the C-Train system. With intensified residential, commercial, and recreational development in the vicinity of Dawes Road Station, non-residential traffic along this extension remains an outside possibility.
Works Cited
City of Calgary (2007l). “South Macleod Trail Regional Policy Plan”. URL as of 22 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/south_macleod_trail_rpp/south_macleod_trail_rpp_one.pdf
11 April 2008
Operating Assumptions
Any capital plan for C-Train system expansion in Calgary must account for a number of expenses and complicating factors.
At its simplest level, light rail service of any description requires light rail vehicles, and for operating purposes system costs will be based on a cost per light rail vehicle of four million dollars (City of Calgary, 2007j:13). The Siemens Transportation Systems SD160 is a high-floor light rail vehicle already in multiple-unit service in Calgary, and while C-Train passengers and operators alike are familiar with this vehicle as a result, it does offer some planning constraints in that its single articulation compromises its turning radius, and in that in the Calgary context it would be restricted exclusively to multiple-unit light rail operation; each SD160 vehicle accommodates 64 seated passengers, with a maximum passenger load of 240, and is 2.65 metres wide, 3.84 high, and 24.82 metres long, thus offering a five-car train length of 124.10 metres (Siemens Transportation Systems, 2005:1). Alternatively, the Siemens Transportation Systems S70 Avanto is a 70-percent low-floor light rail vehicle in multiple-unit service in Charlotte, North Carolina, and in San Diego, California, and while this vehicle would be relatively novel in C-Train operation, it does offer some planning advantages in that its double articulation shortens its turning radius, and in that single-unit or double-unit configurations could operate in street-level tram configurations; each Avanto vehicle accommodates 68 seated passengers, with a maximum passenger load of 236, and is 2.65 metres wide, 3.68 high, and 28.53 metres long, thus offering a five-car train length of 142.65 metres (Siemens Transportation Systems, 2006:3-4)
Track, station, and facility capital construction costs are heavily dependent on the extent to which grade separation is employed. Based on current available data from the City of Calgary, surface-level track and way construction is feasible at $25-million per kilometre, with surface-level stations costing $10-million each (City of Calgary, 2007j:12-13). The calculations for metro construction are complex at the best of times, but using cost estimates for Toronto’s metro extension from Downsview Station to the Vaughan Corporate Centre as a reasonable model (Toronto Transit Commission, 2008:22), metro construction is feasible at $155-million per kilometre, with underground stations costing $92-million each. The latter figure is predicated on a rough approximation of Toronto metro station topography, stemming in turn from 1970-era plans for Calgary metro stations (Simpson and Curtin et alia, 1970:8; Figure 4), whereby a mezzanine four metres below the surface would provide access to metro station platforms ten metres below the surface; tunnels and platforms at a second underground level would be feasible at 16 metres below grade, and were a third underground level to be required — for example, three levels of metro construction at Second Street and Stephen Avenue SW, or at a metro portal on the north bank of the Bow River — such construction could conceivably be accommodated at a level of 25 metres below grade. Whereas the Oliver Bowen Maintenance Facility was budget in 2005 to serve 65 light rail vehicles at a total capital cost of $116.4-million dollars (City of Calgary, 2006a:50), a combination of construction inflation, rising land prices, and a change of scope for future yards to accommodate 80 light rail vehicles leaves the capital cost estimate for future light rail vehicle yards at $200-million each for the purposes of this analysis.
All future lines in this analysis are posited for construction at a rate of five kilometres per annum. Project financing is to be costed at constant 2008 Canadian dollars throughout this document, and will reference total project capital costs, thirty-year annualised instalment breakdowns, and best fit annual charges under the Province of Alberta’s Municipal Sustainability Initiative (Queen’s Printer of Alberta, 2007) or conceivable successor funding models.
Works Cited
City of Calgary (2006a). “2006 to 2008 Budget: Transportation Budget Details”. URL as of 11 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/finance/budget/2006_2008/proposed/transportation_budget_details.pdf
City of Calgary (2007j). “Urgent Multi-Year Infrastructure Investments”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/mayor/lrt_rec_presentation.pdf
Queen’s Printer of Alberta (2007). “Municipal Sustainability Initiative”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.municipalaffairs.gov.ab.ca/mc_municipal_sustainability_initiative.cfm
Siemens Transportation Systems (2005). “SD160 Light Rail Vehicle, Calgary, Canada: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.sts.siemens.com/DS/SD160%20Calgary%20DS.pdf
Siemens Transportation Systems (2006). “S70 Light Rail Vehicle: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.siemens.pl/upload/images/TS-Avanto%20S70_usa.pdf
Simpson and Curtin et alia (1970). “Transit for Calgary’s Future: Engineering Analysis for 1978 Rapid Transit System”. From City of Calgary Archives.
At its simplest level, light rail service of any description requires light rail vehicles, and for operating purposes system costs will be based on a cost per light rail vehicle of four million dollars (City of Calgary, 2007j:13). The Siemens Transportation Systems SD160 is a high-floor light rail vehicle already in multiple-unit service in Calgary, and while C-Train passengers and operators alike are familiar with this vehicle as a result, it does offer some planning constraints in that its single articulation compromises its turning radius, and in that in the Calgary context it would be restricted exclusively to multiple-unit light rail operation; each SD160 vehicle accommodates 64 seated passengers, with a maximum passenger load of 240, and is 2.65 metres wide, 3.84 high, and 24.82 metres long, thus offering a five-car train length of 124.10 metres (Siemens Transportation Systems, 2005:1). Alternatively, the Siemens Transportation Systems S70 Avanto is a 70-percent low-floor light rail vehicle in multiple-unit service in Charlotte, North Carolina, and in San Diego, California, and while this vehicle would be relatively novel in C-Train operation, it does offer some planning advantages in that its double articulation shortens its turning radius, and in that single-unit or double-unit configurations could operate in street-level tram configurations; each Avanto vehicle accommodates 68 seated passengers, with a maximum passenger load of 236, and is 2.65 metres wide, 3.68 high, and 28.53 metres long, thus offering a five-car train length of 142.65 metres (Siemens Transportation Systems, 2006:3-4)
Track, station, and facility capital construction costs are heavily dependent on the extent to which grade separation is employed. Based on current available data from the City of Calgary, surface-level track and way construction is feasible at $25-million per kilometre, with surface-level stations costing $10-million each (City of Calgary, 2007j:12-13). The calculations for metro construction are complex at the best of times, but using cost estimates for Toronto’s metro extension from Downsview Station to the Vaughan Corporate Centre as a reasonable model (Toronto Transit Commission, 2008:22), metro construction is feasible at $155-million per kilometre, with underground stations costing $92-million each. The latter figure is predicated on a rough approximation of Toronto metro station topography, stemming in turn from 1970-era plans for Calgary metro stations (Simpson and Curtin et alia, 1970:8; Figure 4), whereby a mezzanine four metres below the surface would provide access to metro station platforms ten metres below the surface; tunnels and platforms at a second underground level would be feasible at 16 metres below grade, and were a third underground level to be required — for example, three levels of metro construction at Second Street and Stephen Avenue SW, or at a metro portal on the north bank of the Bow River — such construction could conceivably be accommodated at a level of 25 metres below grade. Whereas the Oliver Bowen Maintenance Facility was budget in 2005 to serve 65 light rail vehicles at a total capital cost of $116.4-million dollars (City of Calgary, 2006a:50), a combination of construction inflation, rising land prices, and a change of scope for future yards to accommodate 80 light rail vehicles leaves the capital cost estimate for future light rail vehicle yards at $200-million each for the purposes of this analysis.
All future lines in this analysis are posited for construction at a rate of five kilometres per annum. Project financing is to be costed at constant 2008 Canadian dollars throughout this document, and will reference total project capital costs, thirty-year annualised instalment breakdowns, and best fit annual charges under the Province of Alberta’s Municipal Sustainability Initiative (Queen’s Printer of Alberta, 2007) or conceivable successor funding models.
Works Cited
City of Calgary (2006a). “2006 to 2008 Budget: Transportation Budget Details”. URL as of 11 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/finance/budget/2006_2008/proposed/transportation_budget_details.pdf
City of Calgary (2007j). “Urgent Multi-Year Infrastructure Investments”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/mayor/lrt_rec_presentation.pdf
Queen’s Printer of Alberta (2007). “Municipal Sustainability Initiative”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.municipalaffairs.gov.ab.ca/mc_municipal_sustainability_initiative.cfm
Siemens Transportation Systems (2005). “SD160 Light Rail Vehicle, Calgary, Canada: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.sts.siemens.com/DS/SD160%20Calgary%20DS.pdf
Siemens Transportation Systems (2006). “S70 Light Rail Vehicle: Technical Information”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.siemens.pl/upload/images/TS-Avanto%20S70_usa.pdf
Simpson and Curtin et alia (1970). “Transit for Calgary’s Future: Engineering Analysis for 1978 Rapid Transit System”. From City of Calgary Archives.
Reasons to Abandon Prior Tunnel Vision
While the C-Train is at present the most successful implementation of light rail transit service in North America, its future effectiveness is at risk. The issue is not one of too few riders, as subsequent analysis will show; nor is it one of too many riders, as prior investigation of Calgary Transit’s light rail expansion strategy made plain. What will bring light rail in Calgary to a screeching halt — if the citizens of our city allow it — will be the deadly combination of inertia and tunnel vision. The managers to whom the people of this city have entrusted the future of the C-Train system are mired in the plans, policies, and political environment of the past, which makes it essential to document the changes in fact that will be needed to precipitate the necessary changes in thought to fortify and expand the C-Train system in new and more effective ways.
Perhaps the most self-evident reason to reconsider the extent and the scale of civic investment in the C-Train system is the sustained and significant rise in light rail ridership in Calgary since 1996, over and above already impressive gains in city population and in system length from that time. From 1996 to 2007, the population of Calgary increased from 768,082 to 1,019,942 inhabitants (Queen’s Printer of Canada, 2007; Queen’s Printer of Canada, 2008; City of Calgary, 2007b), representing a gain of approximately 33 percent, and the overall length of the C-Train system increased from 20.3 miles to 27.9 miles (Calgary Transit, 2008c), representing an approximately 37 percent increase that would be reasonably comparable to the growth in population. As a compilation of American Public Transport Association daily ridership reports since 1996 will demonstrate, however, C-Train ridership has risen from 133,700 riders per day in 1996 (APTA, 1997) to 271,100 riders per day in 2007 (APTA, 2008a) — which means that overall ridership has more than doubled from 1996 levels, representing a 103 percent gain. A relatively simple calculation further demonstrates that on a standard APTA benchmark, daily passengers per mile, the C-Train has grown 48 percent from 6586 to 9719 passengers per mile between 1996 and 2007, in the process both strongly outperforming other North American light rail systems (APTA, 2008c; Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon, 2008; San Diego Metropolitan Transit System, 2007; Regional Transportation District of Denver, 2008) and offering service levels comparable on daily ridership and passenger-per-mile metrics to heavy rail metro systems in major metropolitan regions such as Atlanta and the San Francisco Bay Area (APTA, 2008b; Metropolitan Atlanta Regional Transportation Authority, 2004; San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, 2008). In a North American context, although it will be some point well into the future before Calgary’s passenger-per-mile figures approach those of New York (APTA, 2008b; New York State Office of the State Comptroller, 1999) or Toronto (APTA, 2008a; Toronto Transit Commission, 2007), Calgary operates what is by any reasonable and statistically valid measure a strong and successful light rail transit system, and has earned its residents’ trust in a stronger, more successful one yet.
A robust light rail transit system will also benefit Calgarians through the strategic escalation of transit-orientated development adjacent to C-Train passenger stations. This concept has been axiomatic to city planning in Calgary since at least 2005 in terms of “[creating] a higher density, walkable, mixed-use environment within station areas in order to optimize use of existing transit infrastructure, create mobility options for Calgarians, and benefit local communities and city-wide transit riders alike” (City of Calgary, 2005e:v). Indeed, the Transportation Research Board identified transit-orientated development in 2007 as a critical step towards building passenger traffic on mass transit systems across North America, noting the additional benefit (2007:91) of “their potential to generate transit trips during off-peak periods (i.e., for restaurants, stores, and entertainment attractions), as well as during the peak commute periods”. In its 2005 ranking of 66 current and proposed C-Train stations by transit-orientated development priority and viability (City of Calgary, 2005c), Calgary Transit was able to hint at Heritage Station’s importance in microcosm to municipal and private-sector site intensification near light rail stations as a whole (2005c:2), and its predictions have borne fruit by way of a station plan envisioning a new and improved Calgary Transit operations and control centre (Calgary Transit, 2007:44), and more tangibly by way of a four-tower, 1200-unit condominium complex advertising its proximity and ready access to Heritage Station as an essential feature (Westcorp Properties Inc., 2008). Although the stated long-range goal of transit-orientated development is to maximise land use and density near mass transit stations, this goal derives fundamentally in Calgary from the existing success of the C-Train system in attracting revenue passengers in the first instance.
In his 2004 re-evaluation of the triple bottom line concept, “Enter the Triple Bottom Line”, business analyst John Elkington identified seven key drivers, or “revolutions” (2004:3-7), that are as applicable to examining the future direction of Calgary’s C-Train system as to responding at the corporate level to “[an] agenda [that] focuses corporations not just on the economic value that they add, but also on the environmental and social value that they add — or destroy” (2004:3). Figures cited above from the American Public Transport Association and from civic censuses clearly articulate the premise that the market for C-Train service in Calgary, the first key driver, is larger and growing more quickly than previously anticipated. What follows from this point is the degree to which Calgarians have taken to using the C-Train system since 1996 as a transportation tool, relative to Calgary’s growth in population — suggesting a fundamental and growing shift in civic values, the second key driver. This document is a direct response to the Plan It Calgary Initiative, which itself is a response to the third key driver of transparency, whereby citizens oblige themselves to offer input and to expect throughput in key municipal decisions. The fourth key driver, life-cycle technology, demands the abandonment of quick fixes in favour of a more strategic and systematic view of overall performance, which in the context of C-Train system planning involves examining ways to take maximum advantage of light rail’s scalability as Calgary’s light rail system matures and expands. Such an exercise demands a level of partnership, the fifth key driver, between passengers and transit managers that integrates trust and responsiveness from both sides into sustained system performance and enhancement. From this point, the sixth key driver — time — becomes important, both as a measure of how quickly service expansions and enhancements can be phased into the C-Train system and as an indicator of how long the system as a whole will be efficient and effective. All of these issues ultimately answer to the seventh and final key driver of corporate governance, and the central issue deriving from this key driver is the extent to which transit directors will be expected — and more crucially, permitted — to direct Calgary’s light rail system by its paying passengers.
For all of these reasons, the growth in Calgary’s population and the dividends being paid to its citizens by the rising success of the C-Train system since 1996 dictate a change in focus for the strategic direction of light rail development in this city. Least-cost routing, whereby the financial efficiency of the system has been paramount in route development, made initial C-Train services feasible and created the early conditions for passenger demand and system effectiveness. The time has come, however, for route development and the expansion strategy of Calgary’s light rail transit service, to follow from greatest-benefit routing, wherein financial considerations — while still necessary and important — are secondary to the ultimate goal of providing the most C-Train service to as many Calgarians as possible. If the Plan It Calgary initiative is to respond to Calgarians’ hopes and aspirations for our city, and therefore if the city is to grow and prosper in a changing world, the C-Train system must become this city’s spine, providing a robust and responsive structure on which Calgarians can built and connect with each other.
Works Cited
American Public Transport Association (1997). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 1996”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/96q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2002). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 2001”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/01q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2007). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 2006”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/06q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2008a). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 2007”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2008b). “Heavy Rail Public Transportation Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter, 2007”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q4hr.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2008c). “Light Rail Public Transportation Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter, 2007”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q4lr.pdf
Calgary Transit (2007). “Heritage Station Transit Oriented Development: Station Area Master Plan”. URL as of 11 Apr 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/heritage_station_transit_oriented_development_080225.pdf
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
City of Calgary (2005c). “Priority Stations Report, 2005 March”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://publicaccess.calgary.ca/lldm01/livelink.exe?func=ccpa.general&msgID=KTAcryyscY&msgAction=download&vernum=1
City of Calgary (2005e). “Transit Oriented Development Policy Guidelines”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/3405_tod_policy_guidelines.pdf
City of Calgary (2007b). “Civic Census”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_0_104_0_0_35/http%3B/content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Municipal+Government/Civic+Census/Civic+Census.htm
Elkington, John (2004). “Enter the Triple Bottom Line”. In Enriques, Adrian, and Richardson, Julie, editors (2004). The Triple Bottom Line, Does It All Add Up?: Assessing the Sustainability of Business and CSR. London: Earthscan. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.johnelkington.com/TBL-elkington-chapter.pdf
Metropolitan Atlanta Regional Transportation Authority (2004). “Media Kit”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.itsmarta.com/newsroom/martafacts.htm
New York State Office of the State Comptroller (1999). “A Guide for Evaluating the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Proposed Capital Program for 2000 Through 2004”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt700/rpt700.htm
Queen’s Printer of Canada (2007). “2001 Community Profiles: Calgary: All Data”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/profil01/CP01/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=4806016&Geo2=PR&Code2=48&Data=Count&SearchText=calgary&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&Custom=
Queen’s Printer of Canada (2008). “2006 Community Profiles: Census Subdivision: Calgary: Population”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/profiles/community/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=4806016&Geo2=PR&Code2=48&Data=Count&SearchText=calgary&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=Population&Custom=
Regional Transportation District of Denver (2008). “RTD Facts”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.rtd-denver.com/Projects/Fact_Sheets/RTD_Facts.pdf
San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (2007). “General Information”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.sdmts.com/MTS/About_MTS.asp
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (2008). “BART System Facts”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.bart.gov/about/history/systemfacts.asp
Toronto Transit Commission (2007). “2006 Operating Statistics”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/operatingstatistics2006.pdf
Transportation Research Board (2007). TCRP Report 111: Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_111.pdf
Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (2008). “MAX Light Rail Project History”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://trimet.org/about/history/maxoverview.htm
Westcorp Properties Inc. (2008). “New Calgary Condos — London at Heritage Station: Building Features: C-Train at Your Doorstep”. URL as of 11 Apr 2008 http://www.ilikelondon.com/flash/index.html
Perhaps the most self-evident reason to reconsider the extent and the scale of civic investment in the C-Train system is the sustained and significant rise in light rail ridership in Calgary since 1996, over and above already impressive gains in city population and in system length from that time. From 1996 to 2007, the population of Calgary increased from 768,082 to 1,019,942 inhabitants (Queen’s Printer of Canada, 2007; Queen’s Printer of Canada, 2008; City of Calgary, 2007b), representing a gain of approximately 33 percent, and the overall length of the C-Train system increased from 20.3 miles to 27.9 miles (Calgary Transit, 2008c), representing an approximately 37 percent increase that would be reasonably comparable to the growth in population. As a compilation of American Public Transport Association daily ridership reports since 1996 will demonstrate, however, C-Train ridership has risen from 133,700 riders per day in 1996 (APTA, 1997) to 271,100 riders per day in 2007 (APTA, 2008a) — which means that overall ridership has more than doubled from 1996 levels, representing a 103 percent gain. A relatively simple calculation further demonstrates that on a standard APTA benchmark, daily passengers per mile, the C-Train has grown 48 percent from 6586 to 9719 passengers per mile between 1996 and 2007, in the process both strongly outperforming other North American light rail systems (APTA, 2008c; Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon, 2008; San Diego Metropolitan Transit System, 2007; Regional Transportation District of Denver, 2008) and offering service levels comparable on daily ridership and passenger-per-mile metrics to heavy rail metro systems in major metropolitan regions such as Atlanta and the San Francisco Bay Area (APTA, 2008b; Metropolitan Atlanta Regional Transportation Authority, 2004; San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, 2008). In a North American context, although it will be some point well into the future before Calgary’s passenger-per-mile figures approach those of New York (APTA, 2008b; New York State Office of the State Comptroller, 1999) or Toronto (APTA, 2008a; Toronto Transit Commission, 2007), Calgary operates what is by any reasonable and statistically valid measure a strong and successful light rail transit system, and has earned its residents’ trust in a stronger, more successful one yet.
A robust light rail transit system will also benefit Calgarians through the strategic escalation of transit-orientated development adjacent to C-Train passenger stations. This concept has been axiomatic to city planning in Calgary since at least 2005 in terms of “[creating] a higher density, walkable, mixed-use environment within station areas in order to optimize use of existing transit infrastructure, create mobility options for Calgarians, and benefit local communities and city-wide transit riders alike” (City of Calgary, 2005e:v). Indeed, the Transportation Research Board identified transit-orientated development in 2007 as a critical step towards building passenger traffic on mass transit systems across North America, noting the additional benefit (2007:91) of “their potential to generate transit trips during off-peak periods (i.e., for restaurants, stores, and entertainment attractions), as well as during the peak commute periods”. In its 2005 ranking of 66 current and proposed C-Train stations by transit-orientated development priority and viability (City of Calgary, 2005c), Calgary Transit was able to hint at Heritage Station’s importance in microcosm to municipal and private-sector site intensification near light rail stations as a whole (2005c:2), and its predictions have borne fruit by way of a station plan envisioning a new and improved Calgary Transit operations and control centre (Calgary Transit, 2007:44), and more tangibly by way of a four-tower, 1200-unit condominium complex advertising its proximity and ready access to Heritage Station as an essential feature (Westcorp Properties Inc., 2008). Although the stated long-range goal of transit-orientated development is to maximise land use and density near mass transit stations, this goal derives fundamentally in Calgary from the existing success of the C-Train system in attracting revenue passengers in the first instance.
In his 2004 re-evaluation of the triple bottom line concept, “Enter the Triple Bottom Line”, business analyst John Elkington identified seven key drivers, or “revolutions” (2004:3-7), that are as applicable to examining the future direction of Calgary’s C-Train system as to responding at the corporate level to “[an] agenda [that] focuses corporations not just on the economic value that they add, but also on the environmental and social value that they add — or destroy” (2004:3). Figures cited above from the American Public Transport Association and from civic censuses clearly articulate the premise that the market for C-Train service in Calgary, the first key driver, is larger and growing more quickly than previously anticipated. What follows from this point is the degree to which Calgarians have taken to using the C-Train system since 1996 as a transportation tool, relative to Calgary’s growth in population — suggesting a fundamental and growing shift in civic values, the second key driver. This document is a direct response to the Plan It Calgary Initiative, which itself is a response to the third key driver of transparency, whereby citizens oblige themselves to offer input and to expect throughput in key municipal decisions. The fourth key driver, life-cycle technology, demands the abandonment of quick fixes in favour of a more strategic and systematic view of overall performance, which in the context of C-Train system planning involves examining ways to take maximum advantage of light rail’s scalability as Calgary’s light rail system matures and expands. Such an exercise demands a level of partnership, the fifth key driver, between passengers and transit managers that integrates trust and responsiveness from both sides into sustained system performance and enhancement. From this point, the sixth key driver — time — becomes important, both as a measure of how quickly service expansions and enhancements can be phased into the C-Train system and as an indicator of how long the system as a whole will be efficient and effective. All of these issues ultimately answer to the seventh and final key driver of corporate governance, and the central issue deriving from this key driver is the extent to which transit directors will be expected — and more crucially, permitted — to direct Calgary’s light rail system by its paying passengers.
For all of these reasons, the growth in Calgary’s population and the dividends being paid to its citizens by the rising success of the C-Train system since 1996 dictate a change in focus for the strategic direction of light rail development in this city. Least-cost routing, whereby the financial efficiency of the system has been paramount in route development, made initial C-Train services feasible and created the early conditions for passenger demand and system effectiveness. The time has come, however, for route development and the expansion strategy of Calgary’s light rail transit service, to follow from greatest-benefit routing, wherein financial considerations — while still necessary and important — are secondary to the ultimate goal of providing the most C-Train service to as many Calgarians as possible. If the Plan It Calgary initiative is to respond to Calgarians’ hopes and aspirations for our city, and therefore if the city is to grow and prosper in a changing world, the C-Train system must become this city’s spine, providing a robust and responsive structure on which Calgarians can built and connect with each other.
Works Cited
American Public Transport Association (1997). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 1996”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/96q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2002). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 2001”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/01q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2007). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 2006”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/06q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2008a). “APTA Public Transportation Ridership Report: Canada, Fourth Quarter, 2007”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q4can.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2008b). “Heavy Rail Public Transportation Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter, 2007”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q4hr.pdf
American Public Transport Association (2008c). “Light Rail Public Transportation Ridership Report: Fourth Quarter, 2007”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership/riderep/documents/07q4lr.pdf
Calgary Transit (2007). “Heritage Station Transit Oriented Development: Station Area Master Plan”. URL as of 11 Apr 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/heritage_station_transit_oriented_development_080225.pdf
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
City of Calgary (2005c). “Priority Stations Report, 2005 March”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://publicaccess.calgary.ca/lldm01/livelink.exe?func=ccpa.general&msgID=KTAcryyscY&msgAction=download&vernum=1
City of Calgary (2005e). “Transit Oriented Development Policy Guidelines”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/3405_tod_policy_guidelines.pdf
City of Calgary (2007b). “Civic Census”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_0_104_0_0_35/http%3B/content.calgary.ca/CCA/City+Hall/Municipal+Government/Civic+Census/Civic+Census.htm
Elkington, John (2004). “Enter the Triple Bottom Line”. In Enriques, Adrian, and Richardson, Julie, editors (2004). The Triple Bottom Line, Does It All Add Up?: Assessing the Sustainability of Business and CSR. London: Earthscan. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.johnelkington.com/TBL-elkington-chapter.pdf
Metropolitan Atlanta Regional Transportation Authority (2004). “Media Kit”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.itsmarta.com/newsroom/martafacts.htm
New York State Office of the State Comptroller (1999). “A Guide for Evaluating the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Proposed Capital Program for 2000 Through 2004”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt700/rpt700.htm
Queen’s Printer of Canada (2007). “2001 Community Profiles: Calgary: All Data”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/profil01/CP01/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=4806016&Geo2=PR&Code2=48&Data=Count&SearchText=calgary&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&Custom=
Queen’s Printer of Canada (2008). “2006 Community Profiles: Census Subdivision: Calgary: Population”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www12.statcan.ca/english/census06/data/profiles/community/Details/Page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=4806016&Geo2=PR&Code2=48&Data=Count&SearchText=calgary&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=Population&Custom=
Regional Transportation District of Denver (2008). “RTD Facts”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.rtd-denver.com/Projects/Fact_Sheets/RTD_Facts.pdf
San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (2007). “General Information”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.sdmts.com/MTS/About_MTS.asp
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (2008). “BART System Facts”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.bart.gov/about/history/systemfacts.asp
Toronto Transit Commission (2007). “2006 Operating Statistics”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/operatingstatistics2006.pdf
Transportation Research Board (2007). TCRP Report 111: Elements Needed to Create High Ridership Transit Systems. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_111.pdf
Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (2008). “MAX Light Rail Project History”. URL as of 21 Mar 2008 http://trimet.org/about/history/maxoverview.htm
Westcorp Properties Inc. (2008). “New Calgary Condos — London at Heritage Station: Building Features: C-Train at Your Doorstep”. URL as of 11 Apr 2008 http://www.ilikelondon.com/flash/index.html
10 April 2008
On the Drawing Board
Calgary’s C-Train system has been in a state of continuous capital planning for extensions since its inception. Most of Calgary Transit’s short- to medium-range capital planning schema derives from its 2006 document “Strategic Development of Calgary’s C-Train System”, a document that tries to anticipate C-Train system needs in Calgary over a 15-year interval. Although Calgary Transit and the City make efforts to project a longer view of their light rail planning strategy, such attempts are frequently overtaken by current events and by the unexpectedly rapid growth in Calgary’s population. Consequently, some of the plans listed below would by definition be more feasible under reasonable technical and budget expectations than others.
The current capital plans for Line 201 would see it built out and expanded to its penultimate form by 2018 (Calgary Transit, 2006d:4), with the possibility of a southward two-station extension beyond 2026 (2008d:4). Line 201’s northwest leg would be completed in 2011 with a 2.2-kilometre single-station extension from Crowfoot Station in the median of Crowchild Trail to Tuscany/Rocky Ridge Station, adjacent to the Rocky Ridge Road right of way (City of Calgary, 2007j:12). The southern leg would see the lengthening of its C-Train platforms from Victoria Park/Stampede to Fish Creek/Lacombe to accommodate four-car trains by 2015, with similar improvements to stations on the northwest leg being completed by 2018 (2006d:9). Two further stops on the south leg of Line 201 have been proposed for Silverado Station, near a new subdivision at 194 Avenue SW, and for 212 Avenue Station, but the opening of these stations before 2026 is not at present being contemplated (2008d:4).
Early gains in the length of the northeast leg of Line 202 will be tempered by relatively slow growth in ensuing years. Two stations extending northeast from McKnight/Westwinds — Martindale Station, a set of platforms running through a dedicated parkway within the northern portion of the Martindale subdivision, and Saddletowne Station, on the northwest arc of Saddletowne Circle NE between 60 Street and 80 Avenue NE — have been approved for construction and for commencement of revenue service in 2011 (City of Calgary, 2007j:12). Service for four-car C-Trains would be instituted for the whole of Line 202 upon the extension of C-Train platforms from Bridgeland/Memorial to Whitehorn by 2021 (Calgary Transit, 2006d:9). A long-range forecast for residential development further northeast in Calgary makes provisions (City of Calgary, 2006b:19) for three additional C-Train stations in the median of 60 Street NE near Airport Trail, Country Hills Boulevard, and 128 Avenue NE, and for a fourth near Barlow Trail and 128 Avenue NE, but none of these stations are expected to be in service prior to 2026 (Calgary Transit, 2008d:4).
Conversely, the six-station, 7.7-kilometre west leg of Line 202 (City of Calgary, 2008c) is expected to be substantially complete by 2012 (City of Calgary, 2007j:12), with only one station being mulled for long-range expansion. The extension would leave the downtown core along Seventh Avenue SW, crossing 11 Street SW and traversing the northern boundary of Shaw Millennium Park toward an elevate guideway stopping at Sunalta Station, near the intersection of 10 Avenue and 16 Street SW. The guide would continue west parallel to the Canadian Pacific Railway and skirt the interchange of Crowchild Trail and Bow Trail SW before settling into its own surface right of way on the north flank of Bow Trail and shopping at Shaganappi Station, adjacent to 26 Street SW. At 33 Street SW, Line 202 would enter and underground portal and turn underneath the current Ernest Manning High School site to arrive at the C-Train’s first metro station, Westbrook Station. After a turn underneath 17 Avenue SW, the line would surface at 41 Street SW onto a dedicated surface right of way on the north flank of 17 Avenue to stop at 45 Street Station. Line 202 would continue west onto a dedicated bridge across Sarcee Trail SW and onto a right of way with a stop at Signal Hill Station, adjacent to Costello Boulevard and Sirocco Drive SW. From there, the line would enter an underground portal at Simcoe Boulevard SW and come to a stop underneath 17 Avenue SW at 69 Street Station for its 2012 debut. A 1.7-kilometre extension across 85 Street SW to a potential Aspen Woods Station is not expected to open prior to 2026 (Calgary Transit, 2008d:4).
Even though a functional study has been commissioned by the City of Calgary to investigate and to document by the end of 2008 the technical and financial implications of constructing a metro to accommodate necessary long-range improvements to C-Train service through the centre of Calgary (City of Calgary, 2007j:13), the only current project for upgrading downtown light rail transportation is the series of platform renovations and pedestrian realm enhancements for the current Seventh Avenue transit corridor derived from plans presented to the city by Graham Edmunds Carter and Sturgess Architecture in 2004. Through a combination of renovations in place and of platform relocations, the Seventh Avenue platforms are to be lengthened to serve four-car C-Trains, integrated more closely with existing and future commercial developments along Seventh Avenue, and enhanced with public art, landscaping, and passenger amenities over several phases by 2012 (2004:29-33). Both the Stephen Avenue Metro, meant to accommodate Line 201 downtown, and a long-range Seventh Avenue Metro, where downtown service for Line 202 would ultimately be relocated, are referenced in passing as part of 1982’s “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”, in which a proposed Central Station serving both lines would concentrate passenger debarkation, transfer, and amenity spaces in the vicinity of the Calgary Municipal Building (City of Calgary, 1982:28-30). By the same token, an Eau Claire Metro running under Second Street SW from Second Avenue to Tenth Avenue SW, designed for future southeast light rail service, was identified as the more viable option in that line’s engineering study (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2004:36-37). In all available research documentation, however, the only downtown C-Train system improvement on offer under a specific and current timeline is indeed the Seventh Avenue corridor renovation.
Light rail service to the southeast area of the city is one of two longer-range C-Train system extensions under active consideration between 2021 and 2026 (Calgary Transit, 2006d:4). The southeast leg, provisionally identifiable as Line 203, is planned to start from the downtown core at an underground Eau Claire Station, where Second Street and Second Avenue SW intersect. The Eau Claire Metro described above would continue beneath Second Street SW to an interchange stop, Central Station, at Sixth Avenue with connections to Lines 201 and 202. From there, the line would turn underground to follow Tenth Avenue SW to Volunteer Way Station, at the Centre Street intersection. Line 203 would surface east of Macleod Trail SE and continue to Olympic Way Station, adjacent to Fourth Street SE, and cross the Elbow River, paralleling the Canadian Pacific right of way from that point (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2004:35), to Inglewood/Ramsay Station, at the intersection of 11 Avenue and 11 Street SE; to Crossroads Station, near the intersection of 11 Street and 26 Avenue SE; to Highfield Station, near the intersection of Highfield Boulevard and Ogden Road SE; to Lynnwood Station, where Ogden Road meets Millican Road SE; to Ogden Station, near the intersection of 69 Avenue and 69 Avenue SE; and thence to South Hill Station, at a realigned 85 Avenue and Shepard Road SE. The line would then run parallel to 24 Street SE, where a private developer (Remington Development Corporation, 2008) has proposed a Quarry Park Station at 100 Avenue SE, before ending its initial stage in 2021 at Douglasdale Station, at the intersection of 114 Avenue and 29 Street SE. Further stations would be built in 2026 or later (Calgary Transit, 2008d:4) to serve Shepard, Prestwick, McKenzie Towne, Auburn Bay, the Southeastern Health Campus, and Seton.
The final C-Train line being investigated for construction in the 2026 timeframe would be the north-central leg, which as a conceived spur of Line 202 (Calgary Transit, 2006c:27) could reasonably be identified as Line 202X. This leg would be constructed in close proximity to the Nose Creek Valley, with stops at Eighth Avenue NE, 32 Avenue NE, 64 Avenue NE, and Airport Trail NE. Line 202X would then closely follow Airport Trail NE for two stops before entering the median of Harvest Hills Boulevard N to serve stations near Harvest Oak Gate, Country Hills Boulevard, Panamount Boulevard, Symons Valley Parkway, Highway 566, and Range Road 272. Very little investigation of this right of way has thus far been completed, although functional studies from 2007 are presently under way (Calgary Transit, 2008d:5-6).
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2006c). North Central Calgary Transit Corridor Review”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/north_central_calgary_transit_corridor_review.pdf
Calgary Transit (2006d). “Strategic Development of Calgary’s C-Train System”. URL as of 24 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/LRT_STRATEGIC_DEVELOPMENT_update.pdf
Calgary Transit (2008d). “South Nose Creek Planning Area: North Central LRT Alignment Options”. URL as of 24 Mar 2008 http://publicaccess.calgary.ca/lldm01/livelink.exe?func=ccpa.general&msgID=WKcssssAcO&msgAction=Download
City of Calgary (1982). “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/planning/pdf/city_hall_arp.pdf
City of Calgary (2006b). “Northeast Regional Policy Plan”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/northeast_regional_policy_plan/northeast_regional_policy_plan_one.pdf
City of Calgary (2007j). “Urgent Multi-Year Infrastructure Investments”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/mayor/lrt_rec_presentation.pdf
City of Calgary (2008c). “Council Approved West LRT Alignment”. URL as of 10 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/transportation_infrastructure/West_LRT/Council_Approved_West_LRT_Alignment.pdf
Clifton ND Lea et alia (2004). “Southeast LRT Functional Planning Study, Phase III: Glenmore Trail to Elbow River”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/SE_LRT_Final_Report.pdf
Graham Edmunds Carter and Sturgess Architecture (2004). “Seventh Avenue LRT Station Reconstruction and Pedestrian Environment Upgrades”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/7Avenue_LRT_Station_Reconstruction.pdf
Remington Development Corporation (2008). “Quarry Park: Site Access”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.quarrypark.ca/site.html
The current capital plans for Line 201 would see it built out and expanded to its penultimate form by 2018 (Calgary Transit, 2006d:4), with the possibility of a southward two-station extension beyond 2026 (2008d:4). Line 201’s northwest leg would be completed in 2011 with a 2.2-kilometre single-station extension from Crowfoot Station in the median of Crowchild Trail to Tuscany/Rocky Ridge Station, adjacent to the Rocky Ridge Road right of way (City of Calgary, 2007j:12). The southern leg would see the lengthening of its C-Train platforms from Victoria Park/Stampede to Fish Creek/Lacombe to accommodate four-car trains by 2015, with similar improvements to stations on the northwest leg being completed by 2018 (2006d:9). Two further stops on the south leg of Line 201 have been proposed for Silverado Station, near a new subdivision at 194 Avenue SW, and for 212 Avenue Station, but the opening of these stations before 2026 is not at present being contemplated (2008d:4).
Early gains in the length of the northeast leg of Line 202 will be tempered by relatively slow growth in ensuing years. Two stations extending northeast from McKnight/Westwinds — Martindale Station, a set of platforms running through a dedicated parkway within the northern portion of the Martindale subdivision, and Saddletowne Station, on the northwest arc of Saddletowne Circle NE between 60 Street and 80 Avenue NE — have been approved for construction and for commencement of revenue service in 2011 (City of Calgary, 2007j:12). Service for four-car C-Trains would be instituted for the whole of Line 202 upon the extension of C-Train platforms from Bridgeland/Memorial to Whitehorn by 2021 (Calgary Transit, 2006d:9). A long-range forecast for residential development further northeast in Calgary makes provisions (City of Calgary, 2006b:19) for three additional C-Train stations in the median of 60 Street NE near Airport Trail, Country Hills Boulevard, and 128 Avenue NE, and for a fourth near Barlow Trail and 128 Avenue NE, but none of these stations are expected to be in service prior to 2026 (Calgary Transit, 2008d:4).
Conversely, the six-station, 7.7-kilometre west leg of Line 202 (City of Calgary, 2008c) is expected to be substantially complete by 2012 (City of Calgary, 2007j:12), with only one station being mulled for long-range expansion. The extension would leave the downtown core along Seventh Avenue SW, crossing 11 Street SW and traversing the northern boundary of Shaw Millennium Park toward an elevate guideway stopping at Sunalta Station, near the intersection of 10 Avenue and 16 Street SW. The guide would continue west parallel to the Canadian Pacific Railway and skirt the interchange of Crowchild Trail and Bow Trail SW before settling into its own surface right of way on the north flank of Bow Trail and shopping at Shaganappi Station, adjacent to 26 Street SW. At 33 Street SW, Line 202 would enter and underground portal and turn underneath the current Ernest Manning High School site to arrive at the C-Train’s first metro station, Westbrook Station. After a turn underneath 17 Avenue SW, the line would surface at 41 Street SW onto a dedicated surface right of way on the north flank of 17 Avenue to stop at 45 Street Station. Line 202 would continue west onto a dedicated bridge across Sarcee Trail SW and onto a right of way with a stop at Signal Hill Station, adjacent to Costello Boulevard and Sirocco Drive SW. From there, the line would enter an underground portal at Simcoe Boulevard SW and come to a stop underneath 17 Avenue SW at 69 Street Station for its 2012 debut. A 1.7-kilometre extension across 85 Street SW to a potential Aspen Woods Station is not expected to open prior to 2026 (Calgary Transit, 2008d:4).
Even though a functional study has been commissioned by the City of Calgary to investigate and to document by the end of 2008 the technical and financial implications of constructing a metro to accommodate necessary long-range improvements to C-Train service through the centre of Calgary (City of Calgary, 2007j:13), the only current project for upgrading downtown light rail transportation is the series of platform renovations and pedestrian realm enhancements for the current Seventh Avenue transit corridor derived from plans presented to the city by Graham Edmunds Carter and Sturgess Architecture in 2004. Through a combination of renovations in place and of platform relocations, the Seventh Avenue platforms are to be lengthened to serve four-car C-Trains, integrated more closely with existing and future commercial developments along Seventh Avenue, and enhanced with public art, landscaping, and passenger amenities over several phases by 2012 (2004:29-33). Both the Stephen Avenue Metro, meant to accommodate Line 201 downtown, and a long-range Seventh Avenue Metro, where downtown service for Line 202 would ultimately be relocated, are referenced in passing as part of 1982’s “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”, in which a proposed Central Station serving both lines would concentrate passenger debarkation, transfer, and amenity spaces in the vicinity of the Calgary Municipal Building (City of Calgary, 1982:28-30). By the same token, an Eau Claire Metro running under Second Street SW from Second Avenue to Tenth Avenue SW, designed for future southeast light rail service, was identified as the more viable option in that line’s engineering study (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2004:36-37). In all available research documentation, however, the only downtown C-Train system improvement on offer under a specific and current timeline is indeed the Seventh Avenue corridor renovation.
Light rail service to the southeast area of the city is one of two longer-range C-Train system extensions under active consideration between 2021 and 2026 (Calgary Transit, 2006d:4). The southeast leg, provisionally identifiable as Line 203, is planned to start from the downtown core at an underground Eau Claire Station, where Second Street and Second Avenue SW intersect. The Eau Claire Metro described above would continue beneath Second Street SW to an interchange stop, Central Station, at Sixth Avenue with connections to Lines 201 and 202. From there, the line would turn underground to follow Tenth Avenue SW to Volunteer Way Station, at the Centre Street intersection. Line 203 would surface east of Macleod Trail SE and continue to Olympic Way Station, adjacent to Fourth Street SE, and cross the Elbow River, paralleling the Canadian Pacific right of way from that point (Clifton ND Lea et alia, 2004:35), to Inglewood/Ramsay Station, at the intersection of 11 Avenue and 11 Street SE; to Crossroads Station, near the intersection of 11 Street and 26 Avenue SE; to Highfield Station, near the intersection of Highfield Boulevard and Ogden Road SE; to Lynnwood Station, where Ogden Road meets Millican Road SE; to Ogden Station, near the intersection of 69 Avenue and 69 Avenue SE; and thence to South Hill Station, at a realigned 85 Avenue and Shepard Road SE. The line would then run parallel to 24 Street SE, where a private developer (Remington Development Corporation, 2008) has proposed a Quarry Park Station at 100 Avenue SE, before ending its initial stage in 2021 at Douglasdale Station, at the intersection of 114 Avenue and 29 Street SE. Further stations would be built in 2026 or later (Calgary Transit, 2008d:4) to serve Shepard, Prestwick, McKenzie Towne, Auburn Bay, the Southeastern Health Campus, and Seton.
The final C-Train line being investigated for construction in the 2026 timeframe would be the north-central leg, which as a conceived spur of Line 202 (Calgary Transit, 2006c:27) could reasonably be identified as Line 202X. This leg would be constructed in close proximity to the Nose Creek Valley, with stops at Eighth Avenue NE, 32 Avenue NE, 64 Avenue NE, and Airport Trail NE. Line 202X would then closely follow Airport Trail NE for two stops before entering the median of Harvest Hills Boulevard N to serve stations near Harvest Oak Gate, Country Hills Boulevard, Panamount Boulevard, Symons Valley Parkway, Highway 566, and Range Road 272. Very little investigation of this right of way has thus far been completed, although functional studies from 2007 are presently under way (Calgary Transit, 2008d:5-6).
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2006c). North Central Calgary Transit Corridor Review”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/north_central_calgary_transit_corridor_review.pdf
Calgary Transit (2006d). “Strategic Development of Calgary’s C-Train System”. URL as of 24 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/LRT_STRATEGIC_DEVELOPMENT_update.pdf
Calgary Transit (2008d). “South Nose Creek Planning Area: North Central LRT Alignment Options”. URL as of 24 Mar 2008 http://publicaccess.calgary.ca/lldm01/livelink.exe?func=ccpa.general&msgID=WKcssssAcO&msgAction=Download
City of Calgary (1982). “City Hall Area Redevelopment Plan”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/planning/pdf/city_hall_arp.pdf
City of Calgary (2006b). “Northeast Regional Policy Plan”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/DocGallery/BU/planning/pdf/northeast_regional_policy_plan/northeast_regional_policy_plan_one.pdf
City of Calgary (2007j). “Urgent Multi-Year Infrastructure Investments”. URL as of 20 Mar 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/mayor/lrt_rec_presentation.pdf
City of Calgary (2008c). “Council Approved West LRT Alignment”. URL as of 10 Apr 2008 http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/bu/transportation_infrastructure/West_LRT/Council_Approved_West_LRT_Alignment.pdf
Clifton ND Lea et alia (2004). “Southeast LRT Functional Planning Study, Phase III: Glenmore Trail to Elbow River”. URL as of 26 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/SE_LRT_Final_Report.pdf
Graham Edmunds Carter and Sturgess Architecture (2004). “Seventh Avenue LRT Station Reconstruction and Pedestrian Environment Upgrades”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/pdf/7Avenue_LRT_Station_Reconstruction.pdf
Remington Development Corporation (2008). “Quarry Park: Site Access”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.quarrypark.ca/site.html
The Existing C-Train System
As of 2008, the C-Train system consists of 37 stations offering passenger service along 44.9 kilometres of electrified double track between central Calgary and the city’s northeast, northwest, and south environs. Although the core of the system dates to three primary phases of construction between 1978 and 1987, a short system extension in 1990 and effectively uninterrupted construction through this century’s first decade have combined to increase both the reach and the passenger use of the C-Train in Calgary. Continuous increases in the number of active light rail vehicles have dictated a corresponding rise in investments to light rail vehicle storage and maintenance facilities to ensure a reasonable state of operational capability and good repair for the C-Train’s vehicle fleet.
Light rail transit service in Calgary was inaugurated on 25 May 1981 after three years of construction with the opening of Line 201 from Anderson Road to the city centre along Seventh Avenue SW. The southern terminus of the C-Train line was set at Anderson Station, north of Anderson Road and parallel to the Canadian Pacific Railway, with a substantial allocation of space for connecting Calgary Transit buses and for Park and Ride commuter automobile parking. Proceeding northward, the line follows the CPR right of way over roughly five kilometres to three virtually identical stations in architectural form and operational function — Southland Station, Heritage Station, and Chinook Station — with more modest yet still significant Park and Ride and bus transfer facilities for a base of primarily residential commuters. The line then continues for about two kilometres to an underpass at 42 Avenue SE, from which it diverges from the CPR corridor and surfaces at what is now 39 Avenue Station, consisting of two side platforms and offering passenger connections to Macleod Trail and to industrial-area buses. From there, the line parallels Burnsland Road SE before entering a 700-metre tunnel beneath Cemetery Hill and surfacing to a level crossing of 25 Avenue SE to enter what is currently Erlton/Stampede Station, separated from the southern entrance to Stampede Park by the banks of the Elbow River. An 800-metre right of way between Macleod Trail and the western boundary of Stampede Park leads to what is now Victoria Park/Stampede Station, with direct pedestrian connections to the Stampede Park grounds and facilities and to 17 Avenue. The line enters a tunnelled portal at 12 Avenue SE and surfaces at the intersection of Seventh Avenue and Third Street SE, from which Line 201 of the C-Train finished its run downtown, serving westbound platforms at Olympic Plaza, First Street SW, Fourth Street SW, and Seventh Street SW, and serving eastbound platforms at City Hall, Centre Street, Third Street SW, Sixth Street SW, and Eighth Street SW. This initial stage of Line 201 of the C-Train system consisted of an overall length of 12.9 kilometres over seven southbound stations and nine downtown platforms, and at present serves a daily ridership of 86,100 passengers (Calgary Transit, 2008c).
Although it was Calgary Transit’s original stated intention to extend Line 201 to the city’s northwest, planning difficulties and political discontent led to the creation of Line 202 to the northeast, with revenue service commencing on 29 April 1985. Whitehorn Station, the original terminus of the line, was constructed in the median of 36 Street NE at the intersection of 39 Avenue NE. Two southward stations were also completed in the 36 Street NE median — Rundle Station, at the intersection of 25 Avenue NE, and Marlborough Station, at the intersection of 8 Avenue NE. The line then entered an underground portal to turn underneath the intersection of 36 Street and Memorial Drive NE before surfacing in the median of Memorial Drive to reach Franklin Station at the intersection of 27 Street SE. The two subsequent inbound Line 202 stations in the Memorial Drive median — Barlow/Max Bell Station, between Barlow Trail and 19 Street NE, and Zoo Station, at the northeast entrance to the Calgary Zoo — differed from their counterparts in that passengers debarked from the C-Train platforms through underground vestibules with tunnels beneath Memorial Drive to their transfer and pedestrian destinations, rather than to the elevated mezzanines and pedestrian bridges over roadways that are common to the other five original stations. Bridgeland/Memorial Station, in the Memorial Drive median adjacent to 9 Street NE, affords pedestrian connections to the Bow River Pathway System and to The Bridges, a transit-orientated development project on the former site of the Calgary General Hospital, and a flyover bridge across the Bow River connects Line 202 by way of Sixth Street SE to the Seventh Avenue transit corridor, with a new intermediate platform at Third Street SE and a new terminal platform at Tenth Street SW. This initial stage of Line 202 consisted of an overall length of 9.8 kilometres over seven northeast-bound stations and two additional downtown platforms, and at present serves a daily ridership of 58,900 passengers (Calgary Transit, 2008c).
Line 201 was eventually successfully extended to five stations in northwest Calgary in time for use during the XV Olympic Winter Games, with revenue service commencing on 7 September 1987. University Station, the original terminus of the northwest extension, is situated in the median of Crowchild Trail NW, between 24 Avenue and 32 Avenue NW. The line crossed through an underground portal at the intersection of Crowchild Trail and 24 Avenue NW to surface at Banff Trail Station, at the intersection of Banff Trail and 23 Avenue NW. Passing through a second underground portal underneath 16 Avenue NW, the line surfaced again at the intersection of 14 Avenue and 19 Street NW to meet Lions Park Station. From that point, the line followed 14 Avenue across 14 Street NW to arrive immediately adjacent to the Southern Alberta Jubilee Auditorium at the “Southern Alberta Institute of Technology/Alberta College of Art and Design/Jubilee Station”, which for obvious reasons of brevity will be identified henceforth as Jubilee Station. The line crossed 10 Street NW on a flyover bridge and descended to surface level along 9A Street NW, where at Third Avenue NW it would stop at Sunnyside Station before rising on a bridge to cross Memorial Drive and the Bow River to a right of way paralleling Ninth Street SW that connected to the Seventh Avenue transit corridor. This extension of Line 201 consisted of an overall length of 5.6 kilometres over five northwest-bound stations and two additional downtown platforms, and at present serves a daily ridership of 80,400 passengers (Calgary Transit, 2008c).
The C-Train system was further expanded through a series of incremental extensions, the vast majority of which were to Line 201, and almost all of which came into revenue service after the year 2000 (Calgary Transit, 2008c). The first incremental extension to the system occurred on 31 August 1990, with a 1.0-kilometre line from University Station in the median of Crowchild Trail NW to Brentwood Station, between 32 Avenue and Brisebois Drive NW. Two further stations were added to the southern leg of Line 201 on 26 October 2001, when the line was extended by 3.4 kilometres through Fish Creek Provincial Park to serve Canyon Meadows Station, at the foot of 130 Avenue SW, and Fish Creek/Lacombe Station, adjacent to Shawnee Gate SW and Bannister Road SE. Line 201 would be extended once more to the northwest on 15 December 2003, with a 3.0-kilometre continuation in the median of Crowchild Trail NW to Dalhousie Station, just southeast of the intersection of 53 Street NW. On 28 June 2004, Line 201 would add two further southbound stations along a 3.0-kilometre extension to Shawnessy Station, at the foot of Shawmeadows Gate SW, and to Somerset/Bridlewood Station, located just north of Shawville Gate SW. Line 202 would see its first extension on 17 December 2007 with the completion of a 2.8-kilometre traverse of McKnight Boulevard NE to McKnight/Westwinds Station, sandwiched between Metis Trail and Westwinds Drive NE south of 64 Avenue NE. A further northwest extension of Line 201, consisting of 4.0 kilometres of track in the median of Crowchild Trail NW to Crowfoot Station, northwest of the Nose Hill Drive NW interchange, is presently under construction with revenue service expected to commence by the end of 2008.
The C-Train system operates a total of 152 light rail vehicles, storing and maintaining them at three yard facilities in various locations throughout Calgary (Calgary Transit, 2008c). The Siemens-Duewag U2, of which Calgary Transit currently keeps 80 in active service, was first employed in the C-Train system on its inauguration in 1981, while its operational successor, the Siemens Transportation Systems SD160, first came into service in Calgary in 2000, and presently contributes 72 vehicles to the overall C-Train fleet. The city’s light rail vehicles have been maintained, cleaned, and overhauled from the time of the C-Train system’s inception at Anderson Yard, a 19,000-square-metre facility accommodating 55 light rail vehicles. The Haysboro Storage Facility, opened in 1985, is a 3,500-square-metre carhouse that is used to store 60 light rail vehicles and perform basic light maintenance duties. Scheduled for completion by the end of 2009 is the Oliver Bowen Maintenance Facility, a 20,449-square-metre location allowing for the storage, heavy maintenance, and cleaning of 65 light rail vehicles, with a provision for further expansion to accommodate 108 vehicles in total (EllisDon Corporation, 2008).
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
EllisDon Corporation (2008). “Oliver Bowen LRT Maintenance Facility: EllisDon Project Profile”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.ellisdon.com/ed/projects/view/?id=3088688
Light rail transit service in Calgary was inaugurated on 25 May 1981 after three years of construction with the opening of Line 201 from Anderson Road to the city centre along Seventh Avenue SW. The southern terminus of the C-Train line was set at Anderson Station, north of Anderson Road and parallel to the Canadian Pacific Railway, with a substantial allocation of space for connecting Calgary Transit buses and for Park and Ride commuter automobile parking. Proceeding northward, the line follows the CPR right of way over roughly five kilometres to three virtually identical stations in architectural form and operational function — Southland Station, Heritage Station, and Chinook Station — with more modest yet still significant Park and Ride and bus transfer facilities for a base of primarily residential commuters. The line then continues for about two kilometres to an underpass at 42 Avenue SE, from which it diverges from the CPR corridor and surfaces at what is now 39 Avenue Station, consisting of two side platforms and offering passenger connections to Macleod Trail and to industrial-area buses. From there, the line parallels Burnsland Road SE before entering a 700-metre tunnel beneath Cemetery Hill and surfacing to a level crossing of 25 Avenue SE to enter what is currently Erlton/Stampede Station, separated from the southern entrance to Stampede Park by the banks of the Elbow River. An 800-metre right of way between Macleod Trail and the western boundary of Stampede Park leads to what is now Victoria Park/Stampede Station, with direct pedestrian connections to the Stampede Park grounds and facilities and to 17 Avenue. The line enters a tunnelled portal at 12 Avenue SE and surfaces at the intersection of Seventh Avenue and Third Street SE, from which Line 201 of the C-Train finished its run downtown, serving westbound platforms at Olympic Plaza, First Street SW, Fourth Street SW, and Seventh Street SW, and serving eastbound platforms at City Hall, Centre Street, Third Street SW, Sixth Street SW, and Eighth Street SW. This initial stage of Line 201 of the C-Train system consisted of an overall length of 12.9 kilometres over seven southbound stations and nine downtown platforms, and at present serves a daily ridership of 86,100 passengers (Calgary Transit, 2008c).
Although it was Calgary Transit’s original stated intention to extend Line 201 to the city’s northwest, planning difficulties and political discontent led to the creation of Line 202 to the northeast, with revenue service commencing on 29 April 1985. Whitehorn Station, the original terminus of the line, was constructed in the median of 36 Street NE at the intersection of 39 Avenue NE. Two southward stations were also completed in the 36 Street NE median — Rundle Station, at the intersection of 25 Avenue NE, and Marlborough Station, at the intersection of 8 Avenue NE. The line then entered an underground portal to turn underneath the intersection of 36 Street and Memorial Drive NE before surfacing in the median of Memorial Drive to reach Franklin Station at the intersection of 27 Street SE. The two subsequent inbound Line 202 stations in the Memorial Drive median — Barlow/Max Bell Station, between Barlow Trail and 19 Street NE, and Zoo Station, at the northeast entrance to the Calgary Zoo — differed from their counterparts in that passengers debarked from the C-Train platforms through underground vestibules with tunnels beneath Memorial Drive to their transfer and pedestrian destinations, rather than to the elevated mezzanines and pedestrian bridges over roadways that are common to the other five original stations. Bridgeland/Memorial Station, in the Memorial Drive median adjacent to 9 Street NE, affords pedestrian connections to the Bow River Pathway System and to The Bridges, a transit-orientated development project on the former site of the Calgary General Hospital, and a flyover bridge across the Bow River connects Line 202 by way of Sixth Street SE to the Seventh Avenue transit corridor, with a new intermediate platform at Third Street SE and a new terminal platform at Tenth Street SW. This initial stage of Line 202 consisted of an overall length of 9.8 kilometres over seven northeast-bound stations and two additional downtown platforms, and at present serves a daily ridership of 58,900 passengers (Calgary Transit, 2008c).
Line 201 was eventually successfully extended to five stations in northwest Calgary in time for use during the XV Olympic Winter Games, with revenue service commencing on 7 September 1987. University Station, the original terminus of the northwest extension, is situated in the median of Crowchild Trail NW, between 24 Avenue and 32 Avenue NW. The line crossed through an underground portal at the intersection of Crowchild Trail and 24 Avenue NW to surface at Banff Trail Station, at the intersection of Banff Trail and 23 Avenue NW. Passing through a second underground portal underneath 16 Avenue NW, the line surfaced again at the intersection of 14 Avenue and 19 Street NW to meet Lions Park Station. From that point, the line followed 14 Avenue across 14 Street NW to arrive immediately adjacent to the Southern Alberta Jubilee Auditorium at the “Southern Alberta Institute of Technology/Alberta College of Art and Design/Jubilee Station”, which for obvious reasons of brevity will be identified henceforth as Jubilee Station. The line crossed 10 Street NW on a flyover bridge and descended to surface level along 9A Street NW, where at Third Avenue NW it would stop at Sunnyside Station before rising on a bridge to cross Memorial Drive and the Bow River to a right of way paralleling Ninth Street SW that connected to the Seventh Avenue transit corridor. This extension of Line 201 consisted of an overall length of 5.6 kilometres over five northwest-bound stations and two additional downtown platforms, and at present serves a daily ridership of 80,400 passengers (Calgary Transit, 2008c).
The C-Train system was further expanded through a series of incremental extensions, the vast majority of which were to Line 201, and almost all of which came into revenue service after the year 2000 (Calgary Transit, 2008c). The first incremental extension to the system occurred on 31 August 1990, with a 1.0-kilometre line from University Station in the median of Crowchild Trail NW to Brentwood Station, between 32 Avenue and Brisebois Drive NW. Two further stations were added to the southern leg of Line 201 on 26 October 2001, when the line was extended by 3.4 kilometres through Fish Creek Provincial Park to serve Canyon Meadows Station, at the foot of 130 Avenue SW, and Fish Creek/Lacombe Station, adjacent to Shawnee Gate SW and Bannister Road SE. Line 201 would be extended once more to the northwest on 15 December 2003, with a 3.0-kilometre continuation in the median of Crowchild Trail NW to Dalhousie Station, just southeast of the intersection of 53 Street NW. On 28 June 2004, Line 201 would add two further southbound stations along a 3.0-kilometre extension to Shawnessy Station, at the foot of Shawmeadows Gate SW, and to Somerset/Bridlewood Station, located just north of Shawville Gate SW. Line 202 would see its first extension on 17 December 2007 with the completion of a 2.8-kilometre traverse of McKnight Boulevard NE to McKnight/Westwinds Station, sandwiched between Metis Trail and Westwinds Drive NE south of 64 Avenue NE. A further northwest extension of Line 201, consisting of 4.0 kilometres of track in the median of Crowchild Trail NW to Crowfoot Station, northwest of the Nose Hill Drive NW interchange, is presently under construction with revenue service expected to commence by the end of 2008.
The C-Train system operates a total of 152 light rail vehicles, storing and maintaining them at three yard facilities in various locations throughout Calgary (Calgary Transit, 2008c). The Siemens-Duewag U2, of which Calgary Transit currently keeps 80 in active service, was first employed in the C-Train system on its inauguration in 1981, while its operational successor, the Siemens Transportation Systems SD160, first came into service in Calgary in 2000, and presently contributes 72 vehicles to the overall C-Train fleet. The city’s light rail vehicles have been maintained, cleaned, and overhauled from the time of the C-Train system’s inception at Anderson Yard, a 19,000-square-metre facility accommodating 55 light rail vehicles. The Haysboro Storage Facility, opened in 1985, is a 3,500-square-metre carhouse that is used to store 60 light rail vehicles and perform basic light maintenance duties. Scheduled for completion by the end of 2009 is the Oliver Bowen Maintenance Facility, a 20,449-square-metre location allowing for the storage, heavy maintenance, and cleaning of 65 light rail vehicles, with a provision for further expansion to accommodate 108 vehicles in total (EllisDon Corporation, 2008).
Works Cited
Calgary Transit (2008c). “LRT Technical Data”. URL as of 25 Mar 2008 http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
EllisDon Corporation (2008). “Oliver Bowen LRT Maintenance Facility: EllisDon Project Profile”. URL as of 02 Apr 2008 http://www.ellisdon.com/ed/projects/view/?id=3088688
08 April 2008
02 April 2008
I Think I'm Getting Better....
As even a cursory glance at the datelines on this blog would tell you, it has indeed been a while since I last posted here. Deal with it. ;)
In any case, I'm working on a report on long-range light rail transit development that I intend to present to Plan It Calgary, a great blooming city-wide confabulation of people who are more or less expecting to be ignored by the city's Land Use Planning and Policy department as they revisit the civic land use and transportation plan. Here, for your edification and amusement, is the first completed section of my contribution to the city's exercise in tilting at windmills, in which I discuss in brief some of the history behind Calgary's decision to build an LRT. Enjoy — and flame merrily away.
History of Light Rail Planning in Calgary
Rail-based mass transit service for Calgarians has been a part of the city’s public transportation planning process for over forty years. The first indication of Calgary’s commitment to mass transit by rail would appear in 1967’s Calgary Transportation Study, a twenty-year plan devoted mostly to roadway expansion that would nonetheless incorporate a two-line passenger metro system sharing tracks in the downtown core whose initial revenue service would occur in 1978. In subsequent years, a number of factors would contribute to a change in the plan’s focus that would see Calgary commit to light rail transit service in shared rights of way, but by 1977 the momentum was solidly in favour of light rail transit as an option for downtown commuting. What follows is a necessarily brief history of how mass transit by rail evolved and then manifested itself in Calgary.
The Calgary Transportation Study of 1967
The history of light rail transit in Calgary officially began with the publication of the Calgary Transportation Study in December of 1967. Although mass transit was a secondary component of this long-range transportation plan, the Calgary Transportation Study envisioned two metro lines — one with southern and north-western legs, the other with western and northern legs — sharing a common downtown metro with five stations along Seventh Avenue between City Hall and 11 Street SW. In essence, this proposed 38-station metro system was expected to accommodate peak commuter volumes of 10,000 passengers per hour per direction (City of Calgary, 1967:18) along a total system length of 19.61 miles, or 31.55 kilometres, to be constructed in several stages with a system completion date well beyond the twenty-year planning horizon established in the Calgary Transportation Study. The total projected capital investment of $115-million (1967:21) seems almost quaint in light of the construction costs that would be incurred in the development of Calgary’s present light rail transit system.
A total of five metro stations would have been brought into service underneath a 1.33-mile (2.14 kilometres) stretch of Seventh Avenue by 1978 (City of Calgary, 1967:27) to act as the spine of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro system. The westernmost station downtown would have been built at the intersection of Seventh Avenue and 11 Street SW. From there, the line would have continued eastbound to the intersection of Seventh Avenue and Seventh Street SW, and thence to the intersection of Seventh Avenue and Fourth Street SW. One could argue in hindsight that the two busiest stations in the proposed metro system would have extended eastward along Seventh Avenue to intersections at First Street SW, interchanging with the Hudson’s Bay Company Building, and at Second Street SW, interchanging with City Hall (City of Calgary, 1967:19; Figure A:23).
The nine-station, 4.51-mile (7.26 kilometres) northwest leg of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro system proposal (City of Calgary, 1967:19-20; Figure A:19) bears obvious similarities, and the occasional striking contrast, to the light rail line that would eventually reach the northwest precincts of the city. The first station outside of the downtown core would have been Hillhurst Station, constructed underneath the intersection of 11A Street and Gladstone Road NW. From there, the line would have passed underneath Riley Park to an Auditorium Station, immediately adjacent of course to the Southern Alberta Jubilee Auditorium. Two additional stations would have been built at North Hill, at 16 Avenue between 16 and 17 Streets NW to serve the North Hill Shopping Centre, and at Capitol Hill, approximately at the intersection of Capitol Hill Crescent and Tye Street NW. Traffic to McMahon Stadium would have been accommodated at Stadium Station, underneath the northeast corner of the present McMahon Stadium parking lot adjacent to the intersection of Crowchild Trail and 23 Avenue NW. Metro service to the University of Calgary would have been served at University Station, roughly underneath the present site of the university’s Biological Sciences Building. The two northwest-most metro stations to be completed by 1978 would have been constructed underneath Crowchild Trail — Brentwood Station, at the intersection with Charleswood Drive NW, and Brisebois Station, at the intersection with Brisebois Drive NW. A single-station extension of the northwest leg to Banff Trail Station, at the intersection of Crowchild Trail and Northland Drive NW, was expected to be brought into revenue service by 1986 (1967:27).
The third component of the Calgary Transportation Study’s 1978-vintage metro system would have consisted of a ten-station, 5.90-mile (9.49-kilometres) south leg (City of Calgary, 1967:19; Figure A:20) that bore but a slight resemblance to the first iteration of light rail service in Calgary. Stampede Park would have been served by Exhibition Grounds Station, underneath the intersection of the 17 Avenue and Third Street SE rights of way. The line would thence have continued to Mission Station, at the junction of 25 Avenue SW with the west bank of the Elbow River, and to Parkhill Station, at the intersection of Mission Road and First Street SW. Two subsequent stations would have then been built at Stanley Park, where 42 Avenue and Stanley Drive SW meet, and at Windsor Park, at the intersection of 50 Avenue and Fourth Street SW. The current site of Chinook Centre would have earned two metro stations on this proposed line — Southridge Station, at 58 Avenue and Fifth Street SW, and Chinook Station, at Glenmore Trail and Fifth Street SW. By 1978, the southern leg of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro system would have seen the commissioning of two further stations — Kingsland Station, at the junction of 75 Avenue and 4A Street SW, and Haysboro Station, which would effectively have been directly beneath the present Heritage LRT station at Heritage Drive SW and the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks. By 1986, the southern leg of the metro system would have been extended to Southwood Station, due north of the present Southland LRT station at the intersection of Southland Drive and the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks (1967:27).
At the same time as the south-to-northwest metro line was completed, the Calgary Transportation Study also foresaw the opening of a third seven-station, 3.26-mile (5.25 kilometres) metro leg from the downtown core to the inner-southwest neighbourhoods of the city (City of Calgary, 1967:20; Figure A:22). The first station of this southwest leg outside of the downtown core would have been built under 14 Street SW, between 10 Avenue and 11 Avenue SW, and commissioned as Sunalta Station. The southwest leg would then have been extended beneath 14 Street SW to the aptly-named 17 Avenue Station, at the junction of 14 Street and 17 Avenue SW, and to Bankview Station, where 14 Street and 25 Avenue intersect. From there, the southwest metro leg would have turned beneath 26 Avenue SW to South Calgary Station, at its intersection with 20 Street SW, and to Knob Hill Station, at its junction with Crowchild Trail SW. At that point, the southwest metro leg would have continued to Killarney Station, where 26 Avenue and 29 Street SW intersect, and thence to its terminus at Glendale Station, at the junction of 26 Avenue and 37 Street SW (1967:28).
Even though the Calgary Transportation Study did make a point of mapping a fourth metro leg to serve the northern environs of the city (City of Calgary, 1967:20; Figure A:21), no date for implementing the seven-station, 4.61-mile (7.42 kilometres) extension was defined in the document, indicating that northward metro construction would have occurred well beyond the twenty-year horizon by which the study was constrained (1967:28). Initially, the north leg would have curved out of the downtown core to stop at Renfrew Station, at the intersection of Eighth Avenue and Edmonton Trail NE. The metro would then have eased itself to an alignment under Centre Street North, with stops at Crescent Heights Station, at the junction with 16 Avenue North, and at Tuxedo Station, at the junction with 24 Avenue North. Further stops were set for construction along Centre Street at Northminster Station, where Centre Street meets 32 Avenue North, and at Highland Park Station, at Centre Street’s intersection with 40 Avenue North. After a slight deviation to meet 48 Avenue Station, at the intersection of Centre Street and Laycock Drive North, the north leg of the metro would ease itself under Fourth Street NW to its terminus at Thorncliffe Station, at its junction with Northmount Drive NW.
The Calgary Transportation Study was predicated on the construction of metro service being divided into several stages. The first stage would have seen construction of a continuous metro line from Brisebois Station in the northwest through the downtown core to a southern terminus at Haysboro Station by 1978 (City of Calgary, 1967:27). In its second stage, the Calgary Transportation Study metro system would have been built to the southwest from the city centre to Glendale Station by 1986 (1967:28). Concurrently, by 1986 the original metro line would have been extended to the northwest from Brisebois to Banff Trail Station, and to the south from Haysboro to Southwood Station (1967:28). The fourth and final stage of metro construction in Calgary would then have involved the commissioning of the northeast leg from downtown to Thorncliffe at an indeterminate point in the future (1967:28).
The Decision for Light Rail
By 1970, the planning and design process for passenger metro service in Calgary had progressed to the point where functional engineering studies had generated cost estimates for a re-aligned downtown service underneath Stephen Avenue ranging from $26.5-million to $35.8-million, depending on whether the four proposed downtown metro stations were to be constructed with central platforms or side platforms (Simpson and Curtin et alia, 1970:8). At the same time, 1970 would witness the start of a building boom, and subsequently of construction inflation, in Calgary, thus rendering moot most of the capital cost calculations that the Calgary Transportation Study had estimated three years before. The city’s transportation planners were therefore left to find alternatives to metro construction that required lesser degrees of capital investment while offering most of the operational advantages of metro service. It was over the course of this investigation that the city would seize upon light rail transit as its preferred construction alternative.
In “Selection of LRT for Calgary’s South Corridor”, their 1978 report to the American Public Transport Association, City of Calgary transportation experts W.C. Kuyt and J.D. Hemstock described the incremental improvements and strategic system planning (1978:3-4) that had been implemented between the demise of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro plan and the commissioning of light rail transit service for the city. The establishment of Blue Arrow express bus services to Calgary’s outlying regions and a series of ancillary road upgrades dated back to 1973. In 1975, it was officially proposed that a light rail transit service be constructed from the downtown core to Anderson Road, using a combination of transit-only surface service along Seventh Avenue and a shared right of way with the Canadian Pacific Railway. Calgary’s City Council approved the construction of this light rail service in May of 1977, and the first stages of light rail implementation in Calgary officially commenced on 25 July 1977. In their analysis and preparations for light rail construction, Kuyt and Hemstock succeeded in their argument for building light rail prior to further roadway upgrades, noting that “potential savings, both financial and environmental, are achievable therefore only if transit precedes road construction” (1978:7).
Kuyt and Hemstock compared light rail’s capital and operational capabilities both to expanded Blue Arrow express bus services and to dedicated busways (1978:13-15), and found both of these alternatives inferior to that of light rail in Calgary. Despite a relative premium over both busways and express bus lanes in required capital funding, Kuyt and Hemstock concluded that light rail service trumped both modes of enhanced bus service by ameliorating roadway traffic congestion and by minimising annual operating costs (1978:13-15). “Most importantly, however,” Kuyt and Hemstock noted, “it was felt that the level of service and capacity which could be offered would be essential in achieving long term transit objectives” (1978:15). In the ultimate analysis that Kuyt and Hemstock offered, “by providing a high level of service at reasonable cost and substantial flexibility for improvement and expansion, LRT is most suitable to meet the City’s objectives” (1978:28).
Works Cited
City of Calgary (1967). Calgary Transportation Study, Volume 2. From City of Calgary Archives.
Kuyt, W.C., and Hemstock, J.D. (1978). “Selection of LRT for Calgary’s South Corridor”. From proceedings of American Public Transport Association Western Conference, 15-19 Apr 1978. From City of Calgary Archives.
In any case, I'm working on a report on long-range light rail transit development that I intend to present to Plan It Calgary, a great blooming city-wide confabulation of people who are more or less expecting to be ignored by the city's Land Use Planning and Policy department as they revisit the civic land use and transportation plan. Here, for your edification and amusement, is the first completed section of my contribution to the city's exercise in tilting at windmills, in which I discuss in brief some of the history behind Calgary's decision to build an LRT. Enjoy — and flame merrily away.
History of Light Rail Planning in Calgary
Rail-based mass transit service for Calgarians has been a part of the city’s public transportation planning process for over forty years. The first indication of Calgary’s commitment to mass transit by rail would appear in 1967’s Calgary Transportation Study, a twenty-year plan devoted mostly to roadway expansion that would nonetheless incorporate a two-line passenger metro system sharing tracks in the downtown core whose initial revenue service would occur in 1978. In subsequent years, a number of factors would contribute to a change in the plan’s focus that would see Calgary commit to light rail transit service in shared rights of way, but by 1977 the momentum was solidly in favour of light rail transit as an option for downtown commuting. What follows is a necessarily brief history of how mass transit by rail evolved and then manifested itself in Calgary.
The Calgary Transportation Study of 1967
The history of light rail transit in Calgary officially began with the publication of the Calgary Transportation Study in December of 1967. Although mass transit was a secondary component of this long-range transportation plan, the Calgary Transportation Study envisioned two metro lines — one with southern and north-western legs, the other with western and northern legs — sharing a common downtown metro with five stations along Seventh Avenue between City Hall and 11 Street SW. In essence, this proposed 38-station metro system was expected to accommodate peak commuter volumes of 10,000 passengers per hour per direction (City of Calgary, 1967:18) along a total system length of 19.61 miles, or 31.55 kilometres, to be constructed in several stages with a system completion date well beyond the twenty-year planning horizon established in the Calgary Transportation Study. The total projected capital investment of $115-million (1967:21) seems almost quaint in light of the construction costs that would be incurred in the development of Calgary’s present light rail transit system.
A total of five metro stations would have been brought into service underneath a 1.33-mile (2.14 kilometres) stretch of Seventh Avenue by 1978 (City of Calgary, 1967:27) to act as the spine of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro system. The westernmost station downtown would have been built at the intersection of Seventh Avenue and 11 Street SW. From there, the line would have continued eastbound to the intersection of Seventh Avenue and Seventh Street SW, and thence to the intersection of Seventh Avenue and Fourth Street SW. One could argue in hindsight that the two busiest stations in the proposed metro system would have extended eastward along Seventh Avenue to intersections at First Street SW, interchanging with the Hudson’s Bay Company Building, and at Second Street SW, interchanging with City Hall (City of Calgary, 1967:19; Figure A:23).
The nine-station, 4.51-mile (7.26 kilometres) northwest leg of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro system proposal (City of Calgary, 1967:19-20; Figure A:19) bears obvious similarities, and the occasional striking contrast, to the light rail line that would eventually reach the northwest precincts of the city. The first station outside of the downtown core would have been Hillhurst Station, constructed underneath the intersection of 11A Street and Gladstone Road NW. From there, the line would have passed underneath Riley Park to an Auditorium Station, immediately adjacent of course to the Southern Alberta Jubilee Auditorium. Two additional stations would have been built at North Hill, at 16 Avenue between 16 and 17 Streets NW to serve the North Hill Shopping Centre, and at Capitol Hill, approximately at the intersection of Capitol Hill Crescent and Tye Street NW. Traffic to McMahon Stadium would have been accommodated at Stadium Station, underneath the northeast corner of the present McMahon Stadium parking lot adjacent to the intersection of Crowchild Trail and 23 Avenue NW. Metro service to the University of Calgary would have been served at University Station, roughly underneath the present site of the university’s Biological Sciences Building. The two northwest-most metro stations to be completed by 1978 would have been constructed underneath Crowchild Trail — Brentwood Station, at the intersection with Charleswood Drive NW, and Brisebois Station, at the intersection with Brisebois Drive NW. A single-station extension of the northwest leg to Banff Trail Station, at the intersection of Crowchild Trail and Northland Drive NW, was expected to be brought into revenue service by 1986 (1967:27).
The third component of the Calgary Transportation Study’s 1978-vintage metro system would have consisted of a ten-station, 5.90-mile (9.49-kilometres) south leg (City of Calgary, 1967:19; Figure A:20) that bore but a slight resemblance to the first iteration of light rail service in Calgary. Stampede Park would have been served by Exhibition Grounds Station, underneath the intersection of the 17 Avenue and Third Street SE rights of way. The line would thence have continued to Mission Station, at the junction of 25 Avenue SW with the west bank of the Elbow River, and to Parkhill Station, at the intersection of Mission Road and First Street SW. Two subsequent stations would have then been built at Stanley Park, where 42 Avenue and Stanley Drive SW meet, and at Windsor Park, at the intersection of 50 Avenue and Fourth Street SW. The current site of Chinook Centre would have earned two metro stations on this proposed line — Southridge Station, at 58 Avenue and Fifth Street SW, and Chinook Station, at Glenmore Trail and Fifth Street SW. By 1978, the southern leg of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro system would have seen the commissioning of two further stations — Kingsland Station, at the junction of 75 Avenue and 4A Street SW, and Haysboro Station, which would effectively have been directly beneath the present Heritage LRT station at Heritage Drive SW and the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks. By 1986, the southern leg of the metro system would have been extended to Southwood Station, due north of the present Southland LRT station at the intersection of Southland Drive and the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks (1967:27).
At the same time as the south-to-northwest metro line was completed, the Calgary Transportation Study also foresaw the opening of a third seven-station, 3.26-mile (5.25 kilometres) metro leg from the downtown core to the inner-southwest neighbourhoods of the city (City of Calgary, 1967:20; Figure A:22). The first station of this southwest leg outside of the downtown core would have been built under 14 Street SW, between 10 Avenue and 11 Avenue SW, and commissioned as Sunalta Station. The southwest leg would then have been extended beneath 14 Street SW to the aptly-named 17 Avenue Station, at the junction of 14 Street and 17 Avenue SW, and to Bankview Station, where 14 Street and 25 Avenue intersect. From there, the southwest metro leg would have turned beneath 26 Avenue SW to South Calgary Station, at its intersection with 20 Street SW, and to Knob Hill Station, at its junction with Crowchild Trail SW. At that point, the southwest metro leg would have continued to Killarney Station, where 26 Avenue and 29 Street SW intersect, and thence to its terminus at Glendale Station, at the junction of 26 Avenue and 37 Street SW (1967:28).
Even though the Calgary Transportation Study did make a point of mapping a fourth metro leg to serve the northern environs of the city (City of Calgary, 1967:20; Figure A:21), no date for implementing the seven-station, 4.61-mile (7.42 kilometres) extension was defined in the document, indicating that northward metro construction would have occurred well beyond the twenty-year horizon by which the study was constrained (1967:28). Initially, the north leg would have curved out of the downtown core to stop at Renfrew Station, at the intersection of Eighth Avenue and Edmonton Trail NE. The metro would then have eased itself to an alignment under Centre Street North, with stops at Crescent Heights Station, at the junction with 16 Avenue North, and at Tuxedo Station, at the junction with 24 Avenue North. Further stops were set for construction along Centre Street at Northminster Station, where Centre Street meets 32 Avenue North, and at Highland Park Station, at Centre Street’s intersection with 40 Avenue North. After a slight deviation to meet 48 Avenue Station, at the intersection of Centre Street and Laycock Drive North, the north leg of the metro would ease itself under Fourth Street NW to its terminus at Thorncliffe Station, at its junction with Northmount Drive NW.
The Calgary Transportation Study was predicated on the construction of metro service being divided into several stages. The first stage would have seen construction of a continuous metro line from Brisebois Station in the northwest through the downtown core to a southern terminus at Haysboro Station by 1978 (City of Calgary, 1967:27). In its second stage, the Calgary Transportation Study metro system would have been built to the southwest from the city centre to Glendale Station by 1986 (1967:28). Concurrently, by 1986 the original metro line would have been extended to the northwest from Brisebois to Banff Trail Station, and to the south from Haysboro to Southwood Station (1967:28). The fourth and final stage of metro construction in Calgary would then have involved the commissioning of the northeast leg from downtown to Thorncliffe at an indeterminate point in the future (1967:28).
The Decision for Light Rail
By 1970, the planning and design process for passenger metro service in Calgary had progressed to the point where functional engineering studies had generated cost estimates for a re-aligned downtown service underneath Stephen Avenue ranging from $26.5-million to $35.8-million, depending on whether the four proposed downtown metro stations were to be constructed with central platforms or side platforms (Simpson and Curtin et alia, 1970:8). At the same time, 1970 would witness the start of a building boom, and subsequently of construction inflation, in Calgary, thus rendering moot most of the capital cost calculations that the Calgary Transportation Study had estimated three years before. The city’s transportation planners were therefore left to find alternatives to metro construction that required lesser degrees of capital investment while offering most of the operational advantages of metro service. It was over the course of this investigation that the city would seize upon light rail transit as its preferred construction alternative.
In “Selection of LRT for Calgary’s South Corridor”, their 1978 report to the American Public Transport Association, City of Calgary transportation experts W.C. Kuyt and J.D. Hemstock described the incremental improvements and strategic system planning (1978:3-4) that had been implemented between the demise of the Calgary Transportation Study’s metro plan and the commissioning of light rail transit service for the city. The establishment of Blue Arrow express bus services to Calgary’s outlying regions and a series of ancillary road upgrades dated back to 1973. In 1975, it was officially proposed that a light rail transit service be constructed from the downtown core to Anderson Road, using a combination of transit-only surface service along Seventh Avenue and a shared right of way with the Canadian Pacific Railway. Calgary’s City Council approved the construction of this light rail service in May of 1977, and the first stages of light rail implementation in Calgary officially commenced on 25 July 1977. In their analysis and preparations for light rail construction, Kuyt and Hemstock succeeded in their argument for building light rail prior to further roadway upgrades, noting that “potential savings, both financial and environmental, are achievable therefore only if transit precedes road construction” (1978:7).
Kuyt and Hemstock compared light rail’s capital and operational capabilities both to expanded Blue Arrow express bus services and to dedicated busways (1978:13-15), and found both of these alternatives inferior to that of light rail in Calgary. Despite a relative premium over both busways and express bus lanes in required capital funding, Kuyt and Hemstock concluded that light rail service trumped both modes of enhanced bus service by ameliorating roadway traffic congestion and by minimising annual operating costs (1978:13-15). “Most importantly, however,” Kuyt and Hemstock noted, “it was felt that the level of service and capacity which could be offered would be essential in achieving long term transit objectives” (1978:15). In the ultimate analysis that Kuyt and Hemstock offered, “by providing a high level of service at reasonable cost and substantial flexibility for improvement and expansion, LRT is most suitable to meet the City’s objectives” (1978:28).
Works Cited
City of Calgary (1967). Calgary Transportation Study, Volume 2. From City of Calgary Archives.
Kuyt, W.C., and Hemstock, J.D. (1978). “Selection of LRT for Calgary’s South Corridor”. From proceedings of American Public Transport Association Western Conference, 15-19 Apr 1978. From City of Calgary Archives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)