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.