Spring2008
Active Member
This would be great for tourism and olympics. I'd prob leave the car at home and take the train from time to time just for the experience.
|
|
|
Calgary Regional Rail Transit
- Thread starter Oddball
- Start date
JasperTF
New Member
Do we want to spend $17 billion creating 8 lanes on Highways 1 & 2 between Airdrie, Okotoks, Calgary and Banff, or $3 billion on enhancements to the existing railroads in order to enable an efficient and environmentally friendly passenger rail network? Studies show that rail service attracts more riders than bus services.
One of the principle responsibilities of Government is Transportation Infrastructure that enables the free movement of goods and people, congested infrastructure networks inhibit economic growth. Bus services are an efficient and economical short term solution, the road network is already in place and the buses are relatively inexpensive, however they are not a long term solution.
Amalgamation of On-It, Roam and Airdrie Transit under a single entity controlled by a Calgary Regional Partnership Transportation Group would be an initial step, the Airdrie Transit buses on routes 901 and 902 could be used for an enhanced connection between Canmore and Banff, and to an intercept lot at Fenlands and another at junction 89 on Highway 1. GO Transit's Regional Express Rail program will not become operational until 2022, at which point rolling stock will become available to use for commuter rail services Airdrie-Calgary and Okotoks-Calgary, and weekend/holiday train service Calgary-Banff. For the longer term, establishing an intercept lot at Fenlands would lead to an aerial gondola to Norquay, eliminating the hill climb and allowing development of the parking lot, and another aerial gondola to the Cave and Basin and on to Banff Upper Hot Springs/Sulphur Mountain, creating a transportation hub at the Banff railway station, with access to the bus station for scenic tours and easy walking distance to Banff Avenue.
From the Calgary Regional Transit Plan 2009, the medium-long term (2020 and later) calls for the development and implementation of commuter rail linkages from downtown Calgary to Cochrane, Okotoks and Airdrie. "Commuter rail is an essential component of the overall Calgary Regional Partnership Transit Plan". Commuter rail should become a reality in the Calgary Region when the following conditions are present:-
- When population and employment levels have significantly increased.
- There are firm and significant Federal and Provincial commitments for the capital costs.
+ GO Transit was started in 1967 with the Lakeshore East and Lakeshore West lines, in 1974 the Georgetown line was established through Brampton. In 1971 the population of Brampton was 41,211, by 1981 the population had exploded to 149,030. The current population of Airdrie is 61,581 (2016). From the Airdrie Transit Master Plan, according to the 2015 Municipal Census, 45.2% of workers commute to Calgary daily, residents commuting to Calgary represent a significant portion of Airdrie Transit's market. The primary destination in Calgary for commuters is the downtown core. The Intercity Express bus service already has a high level of ridership and expanding this market means putting faster, more convenient and more frequent service to places residents want to go. In the short term this can be achieved by additional busses, for the long term the best way to achieve this is by a commuter rail service.
+ Alberta Transportation recognizes the importance of having an integrated transportation system with seamless connections between all modes and will work closely with Municipalities and other partners in implementing the Provincial Transit Strategy. Although the vast majority of public infrastructure in Canada falls under Provincial, Territorial or Municipal jurisdiction, the Government of Canada has a long history of making strategic investments in a wide range of infrastructure categories. The Government of Canada has announced a historic plan to invest more than $180 billion in infrastructure over 12 years. The priority is to promote infrastructure that will contribute to long term economic growth, build inclusive communities, and support a low carbon, green economy.
The Banff Long Term Transportation Study shows that 93% of Banff's annual 3.8 million visitors arrive in a personal vehicle, traffic congestion is an issue with approximately 1,000 parking stalls required in the short term. Banff has a reputation for being one of Canada's national treasures, options that are up for consideration to improve visitor experiences include park-and-ride lots, new roadway links, transit enhancements and aerial transit (gondolas). On average 23,751 vehicles per day enter Banff town-site. Intercept parking is commonly used where space is not readily available at the destination area, or where the presence of vehicles would undermine the visitor experience. By providing a safe and inviting place for visitors to park their vehicles outside the destination, the character of the destination can be retained and the visitor experience can be enhanced with the removal of congestion and a convenient and environmentally friendly transit system. A trail of the intercept lot concept is possible using existing stalls in the Fenlands lot, if successful it would be easy to expand the lot size. Expanding road capacity will not substantially reduce vehicle wait times and would simply shift the problem elsewhere in the road network that has not been expanded. In order to resolve congestion, around 7,400 vehicles per day would need to be removed from the road system, in the short term park-and-ride schemes will be effective, for the long term and efficient, frequent and fast rail service will meet those needs.
For movement of people around Banff, aerial transit would be a convenient long term solution, being grade separated they are not subject to congestion that occurs with at-grade solutions, aerial transit is also a visitor experience in itself. The best alignment for an aerial transit system would be one that does not travel over private property, has minimal visual impact from residences and principle viewpoints, and connects the principle visitor destinations. By establishing the intercept lot at Fenlands, it would make a convenient point as a start of aerial transit, one gondola up to Norquay, and another to the Cave and Basin and on to Banff Upper Hot Springs/Sulphur Mountain. Neither of these routes cross private property, and nor do they cross Banff town-site or Banff Avenue. For the destinations, aerial transit could lead to the closure of various parking lots that could instead be used as locations for additional facilities that could enhance the visitor experience.
If commuter/regional rail is not built, the alternative is to build additional road capacity, a highway costs $8.25 million per lane-kilometer. Per lane capacity of a highway can be estimated at 1,700 passenger cars per hour, a Bi-level coach can carry up to 360 passengers, GO Transit operates 10 coach trains moving 3,600 passengers per train, therefore 1 GO Transit type train per hour has a greater capacity than a 2 lane highway. Using the Airdrie-Calgary corridor as an example, the existing rail infrastructure would support an early GO Transit or West Coast Express style commuter service, Calgary direction trains for the morning rush hour and Airdrie direction trains for the afternoon rush hour. With an approx. travel time of 25 mins between Airdrie and downtown Calgary, an initial service enhancement would be a station with passing tracks south of Country Hills Boulevard, allowing a back and forth service with a frequency of a train every half an hour. Further service enhancements would be to twin the entire line enabling an improved frequency of trains to every 15 or 10 minutes, and extending the service to Olds, or Red Deer, or even on to Edmonton.
GO Transit is currently engaged in an enhancement to their services to improve frequency and extend service to all day on most lines, and to using electric trains to improve efficiency and the environment, called Regional Express Rail. With GO Transit switching to electric train-sets, their existing diesel locomotives and passenger rolling stock will become available for use. At the end of March 2017, GO Transit received $8.5 billion to start construction, meaning rolling stock would become available around 2022, giving 5 years to study and evaluate, plan, design, construct, and implement commuter rail services into Calgary. Once basic commuter rail services are established, enhancements can be made where necessary.
Do we want to spend $17 billion creating 8 lanes on Highways 1 & 2 between Airdrie, Okotoks, Calgary and Banff, or $3 billion on enhancements to the existing railroads in order to enable an efficient and environmentally friendly passenger rail network?
Source material:
Calgary Regional Transit Plan 2009
GO RER Initial Business Case Summary 2015
Bow Valley Passenger Rail Presentation
Banff Long Term Transportation Study 2016
City of Airdrie Transit Master Plan 2016
https://www.albertaregionalrail.com/
One of the principle responsibilities of Government is Transportation Infrastructure that enables the free movement of goods and people, congested infrastructure networks inhibit economic growth. Bus services are an efficient and economical short term solution, the road network is already in place and the buses are relatively inexpensive, however they are not a long term solution.
Amalgamation of On-It, Roam and Airdrie Transit under a single entity controlled by a Calgary Regional Partnership Transportation Group would be an initial step, the Airdrie Transit buses on routes 901 and 902 could be used for an enhanced connection between Canmore and Banff, and to an intercept lot at Fenlands and another at junction 89 on Highway 1. GO Transit's Regional Express Rail program will not become operational until 2022, at which point rolling stock will become available to use for commuter rail services Airdrie-Calgary and Okotoks-Calgary, and weekend/holiday train service Calgary-Banff. For the longer term, establishing an intercept lot at Fenlands would lead to an aerial gondola to Norquay, eliminating the hill climb and allowing development of the parking lot, and another aerial gondola to the Cave and Basin and on to Banff Upper Hot Springs/Sulphur Mountain, creating a transportation hub at the Banff railway station, with access to the bus station for scenic tours and easy walking distance to Banff Avenue.
From the Calgary Regional Transit Plan 2009, the medium-long term (2020 and later) calls for the development and implementation of commuter rail linkages from downtown Calgary to Cochrane, Okotoks and Airdrie. "Commuter rail is an essential component of the overall Calgary Regional Partnership Transit Plan". Commuter rail should become a reality in the Calgary Region when the following conditions are present:-
- When population and employment levels have significantly increased.
- There are firm and significant Federal and Provincial commitments for the capital costs.
+ GO Transit was started in 1967 with the Lakeshore East and Lakeshore West lines, in 1974 the Georgetown line was established through Brampton. In 1971 the population of Brampton was 41,211, by 1981 the population had exploded to 149,030. The current population of Airdrie is 61,581 (2016). From the Airdrie Transit Master Plan, according to the 2015 Municipal Census, 45.2% of workers commute to Calgary daily, residents commuting to Calgary represent a significant portion of Airdrie Transit's market. The primary destination in Calgary for commuters is the downtown core. The Intercity Express bus service already has a high level of ridership and expanding this market means putting faster, more convenient and more frequent service to places residents want to go. In the short term this can be achieved by additional busses, for the long term the best way to achieve this is by a commuter rail service.
+ Alberta Transportation recognizes the importance of having an integrated transportation system with seamless connections between all modes and will work closely with Municipalities and other partners in implementing the Provincial Transit Strategy. Although the vast majority of public infrastructure in Canada falls under Provincial, Territorial or Municipal jurisdiction, the Government of Canada has a long history of making strategic investments in a wide range of infrastructure categories. The Government of Canada has announced a historic plan to invest more than $180 billion in infrastructure over 12 years. The priority is to promote infrastructure that will contribute to long term economic growth, build inclusive communities, and support a low carbon, green economy.
The Banff Long Term Transportation Study shows that 93% of Banff's annual 3.8 million visitors arrive in a personal vehicle, traffic congestion is an issue with approximately 1,000 parking stalls required in the short term. Banff has a reputation for being one of Canada's national treasures, options that are up for consideration to improve visitor experiences include park-and-ride lots, new roadway links, transit enhancements and aerial transit (gondolas). On average 23,751 vehicles per day enter Banff town-site. Intercept parking is commonly used where space is not readily available at the destination area, or where the presence of vehicles would undermine the visitor experience. By providing a safe and inviting place for visitors to park their vehicles outside the destination, the character of the destination can be retained and the visitor experience can be enhanced with the removal of congestion and a convenient and environmentally friendly transit system. A trail of the intercept lot concept is possible using existing stalls in the Fenlands lot, if successful it would be easy to expand the lot size. Expanding road capacity will not substantially reduce vehicle wait times and would simply shift the problem elsewhere in the road network that has not been expanded. In order to resolve congestion, around 7,400 vehicles per day would need to be removed from the road system, in the short term park-and-ride schemes will be effective, for the long term and efficient, frequent and fast rail service will meet those needs.
For movement of people around Banff, aerial transit would be a convenient long term solution, being grade separated they are not subject to congestion that occurs with at-grade solutions, aerial transit is also a visitor experience in itself. The best alignment for an aerial transit system would be one that does not travel over private property, has minimal visual impact from residences and principle viewpoints, and connects the principle visitor destinations. By establishing the intercept lot at Fenlands, it would make a convenient point as a start of aerial transit, one gondola up to Norquay, and another to the Cave and Basin and on to Banff Upper Hot Springs/Sulphur Mountain. Neither of these routes cross private property, and nor do they cross Banff town-site or Banff Avenue. For the destinations, aerial transit could lead to the closure of various parking lots that could instead be used as locations for additional facilities that could enhance the visitor experience.
If commuter/regional rail is not built, the alternative is to build additional road capacity, a highway costs $8.25 million per lane-kilometer. Per lane capacity of a highway can be estimated at 1,700 passenger cars per hour, a Bi-level coach can carry up to 360 passengers, GO Transit operates 10 coach trains moving 3,600 passengers per train, therefore 1 GO Transit type train per hour has a greater capacity than a 2 lane highway. Using the Airdrie-Calgary corridor as an example, the existing rail infrastructure would support an early GO Transit or West Coast Express style commuter service, Calgary direction trains for the morning rush hour and Airdrie direction trains for the afternoon rush hour. With an approx. travel time of 25 mins between Airdrie and downtown Calgary, an initial service enhancement would be a station with passing tracks south of Country Hills Boulevard, allowing a back and forth service with a frequency of a train every half an hour. Further service enhancements would be to twin the entire line enabling an improved frequency of trains to every 15 or 10 minutes, and extending the service to Olds, or Red Deer, or even on to Edmonton.
GO Transit is currently engaged in an enhancement to their services to improve frequency and extend service to all day on most lines, and to using electric trains to improve efficiency and the environment, called Regional Express Rail. With GO Transit switching to electric train-sets, their existing diesel locomotives and passenger rolling stock will become available for use. At the end of March 2017, GO Transit received $8.5 billion to start construction, meaning rolling stock would become available around 2022, giving 5 years to study and evaluate, plan, design, construct, and implement commuter rail services into Calgary. Once basic commuter rail services are established, enhancements can be made where necessary.
Do we want to spend $17 billion creating 8 lanes on Highways 1 & 2 between Airdrie, Okotoks, Calgary and Banff, or $3 billion on enhancements to the existing railroads in order to enable an efficient and environmentally friendly passenger rail network?
Source material:
Calgary Regional Transit Plan 2009
GO RER Initial Business Case Summary 2015
Bow Valley Passenger Rail Presentation
Banff Long Term Transportation Study 2016
City of Airdrie Transit Master Plan 2016
https://www.albertaregionalrail.com/
Attachments
Cowtown
Senior Member
Operater
Active Member
Hi,
Sorry But this is NOT the Year to B Going to Banff! WHY? Those "B.C. Wild Fires" are Making It Rough to See Anything and That Smoke/Haze
are Nothing to Laugh At, Pretty Bad. I was on the "On IT Bus" on Saturday - Aug 11th and the Haze was Very Bad. Didn't See a Hell of a Lot Either.
Bamff? Nice to Visit etc, but NOT When B.C. is Burning Down.
Tnx,
Operater.
Sorry But this is NOT the Year to B Going to Banff! WHY? Those "B.C. Wild Fires" are Making It Rough to See Anything and That Smoke/Haze
are Nothing to Laugh At, Pretty Bad. I was on the "On IT Bus" on Saturday - Aug 11th and the Haze was Very Bad. Didn't See a Hell of a Lot Either.
Bamff? Nice to Visit etc, but NOT When B.C. is Burning Down.
Tnx,
Operater.
JasperTF
New Member
http://www.calgary.ca/Transportatio...ate/Transit-Assumptions/PnR-capacity-2076.pdf
Commuter rail is in the City of Calgary plan, just not until 2076.
Commuter rail is in the City of Calgary plan, just not until 2076.
darwink
Senior Member
Funny how they had modeled the 8th Ave LRT tunnel for 2039, and pushed the Greenline beyond. I guess that is what happens when you model based on a hard expenditure cap of $4 billion a decade.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
There's a big transit success story forming in Canmore, Banff and the Park. Roam Transit's frequency boost on their routes has led to huge growth numbers in ridership Check page 14 onward- particularly page 17 - for ridership stats up to August 2018: http://roamtransit.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/September-2018-BVRTSC-Agenda-Package.pdf
A few highlights:
The math makes lots of sense and Roam Transit seems to get that: maxed out traffic network that won't expand as it is antithetical to the whole national park thing, high level of transit acceptance from tourists, highly congested and concentrated destinations (Banff, Lake Louise, Johnson Canyon etc.)
A few highlights:
- Canmore - Banff Regional route up 22%, seeing multiple consecutive years of 20% + growth, up to 15K trips in August
- 147k trips (4,770 / day) in Banff alone in July 2018, up 51% from July 2017
- Banff local routes up 36% ridership since August 2017, some routes seeing 50 - 100+% ridership
- Expansion plans include 4 new buses dedicated to run between Banff and Lake Louise, with future stops anticipated at Sunshine and Johnson's Canyon
The math makes lots of sense and Roam Transit seems to get that: maxed out traffic network that won't expand as it is antithetical to the whole national park thing, high level of transit acceptance from tourists, highly congested and concentrated destinations (Banff, Lake Louise, Johnson Canyon etc.)
hollahollaholla
New Member
I'm all in for creating viable passenger rail for Alberta. With the help of JasperTF using the Alberta Regional Rail plan we're focussing on advocacy for rail passenger rail development im the province.
www.railalberta.com
We're only in our infancy and are trying to provide information and answers for the time being, but I think an important first step is letting people know that there is a growing demand for this service.
www.railalberta.com
We're only in our infancy and are trying to provide information and answers for the time being, but I think an important first step is letting people know that there is a growing demand for this service.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Another update on the Banff-Calgary transit planning. The long-discussed feasibility study conducted by Calgary, Banff, Canmore and Cochrane should be out this month. From the article: "The feasibility study looks at a rail corridor option and a coach bus option, along with the potential for adding stops in Cochrane and Canmore."
https://www.thestar.com/calgary/201...it-options-for-calgary-to-banff-corridor.html
I bet anyone coming back from Banff yesterday and stuck near Canmore for 10 hours as a result of a single point of failure, highway dependent development corridor would support rail investment. Rail doesn't solve all our congestion issues to the mountains, but certainly would be a huge step in making the whole corridor's transportation system more sustainable, more resilient and more accessible.
https://www.thestar.com/calgary/201...it-options-for-calgary-to-banff-corridor.html
I bet anyone coming back from Banff yesterday and stuck near Canmore for 10 hours as a result of a single point of failure, highway dependent development corridor would support rail investment. Rail doesn't solve all our congestion issues to the mountains, but certainly would be a huge step in making the whole corridor's transportation system more sustainable, more resilient and more accessible.
A CBC article discussing the transit increases that CBBarnett had mentioned earlier.
Banff sees drop in traffic as transit ridership increases
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/banff-traffic-transit-1.4865717
Banff sees drop in traffic as transit ridership increases
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/banff-traffic-transit-1.4865717
Social Justice
Active Member
It could also be that 2017 was a busy year due to free Park entry.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
That's the thing in the article, vehicles entering Banff dropped by 2.5% while Transit ridership is up over 50%. I think the evidence is pointing to the transit frequency boost being the major driver in ridership growth; probably a combination of mode switching (drivers, private bus passengers switched to public buses) and trip generation (I now do a trip I wasn't going to because the bus is actually convenient).
All in all a good news story and good evidence that transit frequency and convenience is the key to ridership.
JasperTF
New Member
The FRA has finally updated 49 CFR parts 229, 231, 236, and 238. Effectively they have created a new Tier 3 for high speed trains, also they have finally acknowledged that Crash Energy Management and Crash Prevention Measures are better than building high-velocity bank vaults. Under the new rules, old, heavy trains can now be replaced with lighter, sleeker, more-modern models. European and Asian trains are designed to absorb impacts and avoid collisions in the first place, and they have better safety records. The trains will now be more energy efficient and cheaper thanks to the changes, and they will also be more likely to have features that prevent overcrowding, like open gangways.
As Canada follows the FRA regulations, the development of rail will now be cheaper and more viable.
As Canada follows the FRA regulations, the development of rail will now be cheaper and more viable.
RyLucky
Active Member
Adding on to what @JasperTF said, I think rail transit to the parks could have some important environmental and economic impacts beyond the obvious (insert typical transit vs cars stats on hydrocarbon combustion).
1) Visitors would arriving by train would be more densely concentrated around station areas. This may reduce impact to the broader park and allow for development near the station that would otherwise be impossible.
2) Hwy 1 is way to variable when it comes to weather, accidents, and delays. As the only way through the pass, who knows how many countless hours of human life have been wasted to delays.
3) International tourists do not want to drive here if they can avoid it. Also, they are coming from places like Europe, Japan, and China where they are already very comfortable travelling by rail.
4) If there is a stomach for higher density development in Canmore or Banff, we are going to have to dissuade extensive vehicle use in these high density developments. If you could stack 700 people (probably hotel guests) into an acre in Banff, you are looking at creating ~$100M in property appreciation for that acre, and possibly grossing $60k per room annually. That's a hypothetical $42M gross annual revenue (excluding externalities) for the cost of 1 acre.
1) Visitors would arriving by train would be more densely concentrated around station areas. This may reduce impact to the broader park and allow for development near the station that would otherwise be impossible.
2) Hwy 1 is way to variable when it comes to weather, accidents, and delays. As the only way through the pass, who knows how many countless hours of human life have been wasted to delays.
3) International tourists do not want to drive here if they can avoid it. Also, they are coming from places like Europe, Japan, and China where they are already very comfortable travelling by rail.
4) If there is a stomach for higher density development in Canmore or Banff, we are going to have to dissuade extensive vehicle use in these high density developments. If you could stack 700 people (probably hotel guests) into an acre in Banff, you are looking at creating ~$100M in property appreciation for that acre, and possibly grossing $60k per room annually. That's a hypothetical $42M gross annual revenue (excluding externalities) for the cost of 1 acre.