Editor’s Note: Here is the latest posting from Calgary TransitCamp contributor Peter Schryvers on the Calgary TransitCamp vision for better public transportation in Calgary. Your comments are welcome!
This week, Kim Jones, a fellow member of Calgary TransitCamp who works in the central business district, explained to me that for her morning commute she boards the LRT at Shawnessy station (on the South Line), and heads south. Of course, Kim isn’t actually headed south, as her ultimate destination is in the opposite direction; she is actually taking the train to the end of the line simply so she can get a seat. What makes this behavior even more exceptional is that Shawnessy station is only the second stop on the line.
For those who do not regularly take the LRT in Calgary, this may seem strange, but to those of us who do, it is not an uncommon sight. Some riders will take a train heading west through the downtown, only to get off at the last downtown station, and cross the street so they can get a seat on the trains heading east. Others do the opposite, riding the train to City Hall station and changing trains.
Calgary suffers from a transit problem that many cities (outside of much larger and denser cities) simply do not have: the train is full. At stations just outside the downtown, such as Sunnyside, Bridgeland, and Erlton, getting on the train during rush hour is virtually impossible. The same is true for stations even further out. And the south line is arguably the worst. In short, the LRT is a victim of its own success.
To understand why this is, and to shed some light on the issue, we have done a little number crunching and work with maps. Below is a map showing the different catchments (the term transit planners use to describe an area that is served by a transit line) of the different LRT lines in Calgary (existing, under construction and proposed). We have taken these areas and calculated what the population is of each, based on the most recent civic census (which gives population breakdowns by community). Some of the numbers and areas on the map will be rough, as it isn’t always clear cut which communities are served by which lines, but the general picture is illustrative. We have also added numbers showing future growth in each catchment- which are based on long-term growth plans for the city (namely the West Regional Context Study, the SW Regional Policy Plan, the South Macleod Trail Regional Policy Plan, the NE Regional Policy Plan, the SE Regional Policy Plan, the East Regional Context Study, and the North Regional Context Study, all of which can be found in PDF format here).
The above map shows us a lot. First, it gives us a good idea of the relative populations served by each existing line. The 219,000 people served by the south line (compared to 172,000 for the northwest line and 148,000 for the northeast line) is a good indication that it will be the busiest of all the lines, which is why it is so full so quickly.
Second, it shows us what the populations are of future lines, both those planned, and under construction. I, for one, was surprised that the West LRT in fact had a larger catchment than the future Southeast LRT, an interesting fact considering the debates occurring prior to the construction of the West LRT; of course, raw residential population isn’t and shouldn’t be the only factor when planning transit lines, but it is interesting nonetheless. Also interesting to note is how large the north central catchment area really is. After the South and Northwest lines, the North Central line, if it were built today, would serve the third-largest population of any line.
Third, the map shows some areas that are not served either by current LRT lines, or by lines planned in the future. These are areas where the distance to the nearest LRT station, by bus or by walking, is almost comparable to the distance to the downtown: what we call Bowness, Greater Forest Lawn and South Calgary. These areas are the subject of a future blog, but we want you to keep them in mind.
But the map above doesn’t just tell us about the current state of our city and transit system; it gives us some insights into the future. Growth plans and documents show that the future (mostly suburban) planned growth of the city is concentrated in the north-central, south and southeast regions of our city. There is some growth in the northeast and east parts of the city, and admittedly there will be growth in the west as well, but there is no regional plan outlining future growth in this area, at least not that we could find. The bulk of the growth, though, is in these three areas. This leads to a lot of questions.
First, if the south line is currently at capacity, and is almost full by the second station and serves almost 50,000 more residents than any other line, is this the best place to plan for an additional 151,000 people? And should we be planning for all of them at the end of the line? If it is hard to get on the train now further down the line, it will be nearly impossible with this additional growth.
Second, are the growth plans for the southeast and north-central areas similarly troublesome? The southeast region of the city is arguably the farthest from the downtown and suffers from considerable traffic problems already, with the locations where Deerfoot crosses the Bow River at the Ivor Strong and Calf Robe Bridges being perhaps the two biggest headaches. Is this a good place to plan for an additional 189,000 people? The same question can be asked of the north central region’s plans for growth.
Finally, when we add up these suburban growth projections, it comes to a whopping 650,000 more people. Is this level of outward suburban growth even desirable? Or should we be making more effort to focus growth within the current boundaries of our city, and especially close to existing transit lines? This is of course part of a much larger discussion our city is having, but from a transit perspective, it is quite interesting.
The good news is that plans are not destiny. Just because these population growth estimates are in our plans, it does not mean that they will come to be. And perhaps now is a good time to pause and think about not just the future growth of our city, but also the role that transit plays in this growth. Before we end this blog post, we want all of you to consider the following:
Should we base our plans for growth on transit capacity? That is to say, should our approval of development in the city be based on our ability to serve that growth with transit? These are big issues for our city to consider, but we should never shy away from complex problems arising from growth. Planning around transit capacity may be one step we can take to ensure a more sustainable city in the future.
{ 0 comments }
