Archive for January, 2009

Langley, Surrey mayors push for light rail funding

January 31, 2009

Thanks to the South Fraser Blog for pointing out this article in the Langley Advance about the federal budget:

Langley Township Mayor Rick Green said he is not sure that all the money will go to “shovel ready” projects. Some of the projects may be a couple years away from starting construction, Green said. Green said he hopes that Surrey Mayor Diane Watts has brought regional issues to the forefront. She has been lobbying for money for projects that would affect much of the south Fraser area.

“We’re talking light rail,” Green said.

I’m very glad to see municipalities working together on this, and that it’s now a top priority at the local level. Now, I wonder when our provincial politicos will wake up to the new reality in the Fraser Valley…..

Rail for the Valley “the single most popular idea”

January 27, 2009

UPDATE: More coverage, see this editorial in the Surrey Leader: Keep the momentum

An article by Jeff Nagel, appearing in Black Press newspapers throughout the Valley

The Lower Mainland needs new rail transit lines and amenities ranging from better bike routes to theatres and teen centres.

And don’t forget about housing.

Those are among the suggestions Black Press readers have advanced as part of the newspaper group’s The Path Ahead project.

Launched earlier this month, the initiative aimed to bring local citizens together online to suggest ways to improve the economy and local communities – specifically through government-funded infrastructure projects – during the current downturn.

Dozens of responses have been posted on Black Press newspaper websites in advance of this week’s federal budget, which is expected to unleash billions of dollars in deficit spending to stimulate the economy.

The single most popular idea: establishment of a passenger light rail line to the Fraser Valley. Many readers argued it could be done efficiently and inexpensively using existing rail lines…. (click here for the rest of the article)

It seems the public continues to be way ahead of politicians on this. With $4 billion of federal infrastructure money being available for projects that are “shovel ready,” upgrading the Interurban track in the Fraser Valley for high-speed light rail is an absolute no-brainer that is not only a shovel-ready but a shovel-worthy project – in fact the most popular idea in the Fraser Valley.

We will see very soon if our municipal, and especially provincial politicians are listening, or if they have in fact completely forgotten about the public that they have been elected to serve.

Tram-Train trials in Sheffied UK, should our politicians have a look?

January 27, 2009

Tram-train, where light rail vehicles can operate on tram (streetcar) or regular railway tracks, is getting a lot of interest around the world. The reason? It’s cheap to install and operate.

Our politicians and transit bureaucrats should investigate tram-train operation, especially for the interurban before squandering billions of dollars on politically prestigious transit projects like the Evergreen line and SkyTrain extensions to UBC and Surrey. For the cost of 10 KM. of SkyTrain in Surrey we can build a deluxe Vancouver to Chilliwack tram-train service; the sad thing is, is anyone listening?

An innovative form of public transport called a ‘tram-train’ is to be trialled for the first time in the UK on a the ever-growing 37 mile stretch of the Penistone Line between Huddersfield-Barnsley-Sheffield.

Five new tram-trains, which can run on both railway tracks and tram lines, will replace conventional trains currently used on the Penistone Line; tram-trains are lighter and greener than conventional trains; they use less fuel and weigh less, which reduces wear and tear on tracks therefore decreasing the need for disruptive maintenance works. Tram-trains have faster acceleration and deceleration rates so they can also offer passengers better journey times.

The trial will commence in 2010 and will last for two years. It will look at the operating costs, environmental benefits and technical suitability of the tram-trains as well as gauging how popular the vehicles are with passengers on the route. A second phase could also be possible, which would test the vehicles on the Sheffield Supertram system to see what additional benefits the vehicles can deliver when extended onto city centre tram lines.

The manufacturer of the five new tram-trains has yet to be decided, with Northern Rail (owned by Serco-Ned Railways) planning to run a competition to decided which manufacturer to use. All five vehicles will be leased. Network Rail have signalled that they will spend around £15k in track improvements and alteration to stations in readiness for the trial.

Transport Secretary, Ruth Kelly, is quoted as saying: “Tram-trains will bring quicker journeys and offer a greener travel option for passengers in Yorkshire. This trial, the first in Britain, could herald the start of a new era in public transport. Passenger feedback is a vital ingredient in determining the success of the trial and I look forward to hearing what the people of Yorkshire think about the comfort and reliability of tram-trains.”

The Penistone Line, one of the most successful Community Rail Partnerships, has been chosen for the trial because it offers the chance to test the tram-trains on a route that in part is for passenger trains only and in part for passenger and freight trains.

The project is a partnership between the DfT, Northern Rail and Network Rail and seeks to establish whether tram-trains similar to those operating successfully in Europe are suitable for Britain’s railway network.

The Charleroi Pre-metro, the metro that was built and they didn’t come! A short history on failed transit planning.

January 26, 2009

One ‘metro‘ system that every proponent of the SkyTrain light-metro ignores is the Charleroi pre-metro. In Belgium traditional LRT is known as ‘trams‘, LRT built as a light-metro is known as pre metro. Pre metro has much in common with SkyTrain, including segregated rights-of-ways and large stations with escalators, etc. The Charleroi Métro is famous for the parts of it which were never built, partially built, or fully completed but not opened. There are many important lessons to be learned, yet one is afraid that the ‘powers that be’ are blind, deaf and dumb, with continued SkyTrain and/or light-metro construction in the Metro Vancouver region. One wonders, with such low ridership numbers, that the Evergreen Line will be Vancouver’s version with the Charleroi.

The Charleroi was planned in the 1960s as a 48-km network, using heavy rail metro trains, consisting of eight branch lines radiating from a central loop downtown. If completed as planned, this would have been the largest metro system in the Benelux region. Funds ran out during construction, however, and only one complete line (to Monument), part of another line (as far as Gilly), and three-quarters of the loop were actually built and opened to traffic, all between 1976 and 1996.

Another branch line towards the suburb of Châtelet (Châtelineau) was almost finished, to the extent of installing track, power cables, escalators and still-working electric signals to the first three stations, but never opened as the expected passenger numbers were too low to pay for the extra staff and rolling stock.

A fourth branch towards Gosselies, on the street following a former Vicinal tram route, is in use as far as the Jumet tram depot but does not carry passengers.

The high costs of construction, together with a decline in Charleroi’s traditional “smokestack” industries, and questioning of the scope of the whole project in proportion to the actual demand for it, are all cited as reasons for the original plan going unfulfilled.

Click onto the following sites to see what a never used or abandoned metro looks like in a few years.

http://diggelfjoer.swalker.nl/index.php?main=aband&sub=abandcharl

http://diggelfjoer.swalker.nl/index.php?main=aband&sub=abandcharl&page=abandcharl2

Getting Value for Money – Diesel Light Rail Transit and LRT in Ottawa

January 25, 2009

An interesting comment about the successful Diesel LRT operation in Ottawa. ‘Rail for The Valley’ must support Diesel LRT to start passenger service in the Fraser Valley as it negates the need for expensive electrical overhead or catenary. Certainly if ‘demand’ increases to the point of 15 minute or 10 minute operation, then electric LRT can be considered for some or all of the route. I think a 90 minute service to start is an achievable goal and is the kind of schedules what many European light railways operate on similar type lines.

In October 2001, Ottawa started service on its Light Rail Pilot Project named the O-Train. This project uses modern diesel light rail equipment on an existing north-south freight rail line on the west side of downtown Ottawa. This five-station route connects to Ottawa’s existing east-west bus Transitway system with simple stations at its north and south ends. Because it uses an existing rail line, it cost only about $4 million per kilometer to set up this 8km line, including the cost of track upgrades, signaling, simple stations, and three Bombardier Talent diesel light rail vehicles.

The north end station, Bayview, is at the west end of Lebreton Flats, a large brownfields area that had sat fallow for 40 years, though now being redeveloped. The Canadian War Museum is situated there. The south end station, Greenboro, is at the South Keys Shopping Centre, a huge big-box mall, surrounded on its east and south sides by multi-unit residential areas. Greenboro is the terminus for many south-end bus routes, and has a 620 space Park & Ride lot for the bus Transitway, which was only half utilized when the O-Train was being planned. By the time the O-Train started running, Park & Ride bus patrons filled the lot. The O-Train is in the unique situation of effectively having no park and ride capacity for its users, yet the O-Train has exceeded its original projected ridership by a wide margin.

The three other stations are at Carling Avenue, Carleton University, and Confederation Heights. Carling is one block from the Italian restaurant district on Preston Street, and two blocks from Dow’s Lake (Winterlude, Tulip Festival), and major government and private sector office buildings, and has four bus routes nearby. Carleton University station is the major attraction on the line, and sees all-day ridership with peaks in the morning, mid-morning, afternoon, and evening. Confederation Heights station has 8,000 office workers, mostly government with some private sector, has Brookfield High school nearby, and is served by six bus routes.

When the line opened, a huge influx of students started shopping at South Keys, because Carleton U is isolated on a peninsula between the Rideau River and Canal, was hard to access by bus or on foot, and had no stores nearby.

When the line opened, Mayor Bob Chiarelli announced that we would quickly expand Diesel Light Rail Transit on existing under-utilized rail lines that cross Ottawa east and west. He marvelled at the low cost of DLRT on existing rail lines, compared to the cost for bus Transitways which average $15 million/km.

Then, something happened. Mayor Chiarelli allowed planning for east-west rail to get bogged down in Environmental Assessment studies where City Staff tried to avoid re-use of existing rail corridors, and instead aimed for what would essentially be electrified LRT that becomes a circuitous slow streetcar line on busy streets in far-flung suburban areas rather than rapid transit.

The mayor announced that a $600 million project, using one-third funding from the federal and provincial governments each, and would replace the wildly successful O-Train (now carrying double its projected ridership of 5,000 – 6,000 per day). The proposed LRT would extend deep to the south beyond the Ottawa airport, and then abruptly turn west into a yet mostly unbuilt dormitory community of Riverside South, then across a new Strandherd Bridge over the Rideau River into the southeast corner of Barrhaven, another example of suburban sprawl.

In May of 2004, the City sent the O-Train out to VIA’s Fallowfield Station for the big funding announcement. I was sent as T2000’s representative. While standing on the platform beside the O-Train, I kept asking myself, “Why doesn’t one of these reporters ask me the question, ‘If the O-Train can get to Barrhaven now, on existing VIA track, why do we need to build a $600 million line into Barrhaven through Riverside South?’ ” No one asked. Except, when I was at Central Station in Montreal ten months later, a VIA executive, without any prodding by me, said, “You know Tim, when you had your O-Train out at our Fallowfield Station last year, why didn’t someone ask the question, …?”

The City’s plan would be a fully double-tracked electric light rail line which would extend east from the Bayview station into downtown Ottawa, but would end awkwardly in the middle of the Mackenzie King Bridge at the Rideau Centre downtown shopping complex. The proposed end-point was then moved a little further east to end, still awkwardly, at the northern tip of Ottawa University, with no proper provision for transfers to buses.

The rock cut that the O-Train uses south of Bayview to the Dow’s Lake tunnel would be widened slightly, and a second tunnel built beside the original. Rather than build a second span beside the existing one, the single-track bridge at Carleton U over the Rideau River would be completely replaced with a double-track bridge. City staff had the consultants design the reconstruction in such a way that the line would have to be shut down for three years, rather than the three or four month summer shutdowns that council had mandated.

City staff wanted to alter the existing tunnel at Dow’s Lake to permanently prevent the passage of freight trains from Walkley yard to Gatineau over the Prince of Wales bridge. The O-Train line allowed for freight movement after O-Train operations shut down for the night. With world oil supplies about to peak, it seems to be a foolish thing to lose the last remaining link between the freight rail lines in Ontario and Quebec west of Montreal in the Ottawa Valley.

In order to fit the LRT onto Albert and Slater Streets downtown, 12% of Slater Street, and 29% of Albert Street buses would have to be removed. The way they were going to do this would be sure to depress bus ridership by at least as much as any gain in ridership on the LRT. When the LRT future ridership study was finally revealed reluctantly by City staff, it showed that only a little over 400 people per peak hour would ride from all three Barrhaven stations combined. The circuitous route that the train would take through Riverside South to get to Barrhaven ensured that the existing express buses from Barrhaven to downtown would be 10 to 15 minutes faster than the train. Thus, there would be no one riding the train, and no justification for reducing and redeploying, those buses. LRT would be very ineffi- cient and expensive compared to buses.

Total ridership projected for the LRT was a just over 40,000 per day, most of that coming from the section of the line that was already served by the existing O-Train, with ridership over 10,000 per day, and climbing at about 15% per year. In addition, City staff had decided that rather than re-use the existing DLRT vehicles on other rail lines around Ottawa, they were to be sold off, losing about $10 million in equity that the City had in them.

The cost of the mega-project was now approaching $1 billion, or 30 times what the original O-Train had cost, for only about four times the ridership. Plus, it did nothing for east-west transportation where there was real demand and serious road congestion.

As an important aside, it needs to be said that, when the bus Transitway was built, the promise was made to convert it to LRT when there was sufficient ridership. That point has long passed. Even with the Transitway, Ottawa continued to run express and local buses that duplicated each other’s routes and bring huge volumes of buses on Albert and Slater streets during rush hours. Ottawa transit officials have claimed that it would lose riders if people had to transfer, in spite of the fact that transit agencies everywhere structure themselves in terms of feeder and trunk routes and seem not to lose ridership by doing this. (Almost three-quarters of the O-Train users transfer from buses.)

Seeing that the LRT expansion was “going off the tracks” by becoming a hugely costly mega-project that missed the real transit needs of the city, a group of residents formed “Friends of the O-Train” in June of 2006, and presented a more practical plan for LRT expansion on Oct 30, 2006, just before the City election. Among its recommendations was keeping DLRT as part of Ottawa’s transit mix, with expansions on several existing but underutilized rail lines, and putting electrified LRT where it was really desperately needed on the downtown east-west Transitway corridor. This proposal caused quite a stir, and galvanized opposition among voters against the City’s flawed LRT plan.

A fair interpretation of Ottawa’s election result is that the public had major doubts about the mega-project LRT. Enough people saw fit to vote in a new Mayor, Larry O’Brien, who promised, and has set up, a Task Force to re-evaluate how transportation should evolve in Ottawa. A close council vote in December, 2006 defeated the proposed LRT expansion project, and we now await the outcome of the Task Force, due to report in June. Meanwhile, some city councillors are trying to get more busways started, spend money on double-decker buses, and a new garage to house them, in an attempt to show that they are not going to let the Mayor’s Task Force decide how transit should evolve in Ottawa.

By Tim Lane
7 February 2007

[From Transport 2000 Ontario Report, January/February 2007]

Abbotsford wants light rail

January 24, 2009

The Abbotsford public wants light rail! (didn’t we already know this?)

And according to newspaper feedback, clearly there is a clamouring for the return of the interurban – AND WHY NOT – we could have an initial regular service, inexpensively, within 2 years.

I think the public understands that the Interurban track is not “the perfect alignment,” but better to get started NOW on the track to sustainability, than to wait another 20 years!

Article from the Abbotsford News:

Å desire for improved light rail in the Fraser Valley has so far dominated the responses made by the public to the Abbotsford News, as part of our Path Ahead campaign.

With B.C. and the nation facing turbulent economic times in 2009, newspapers throughout the Black Press chain are asking the public what they believe will be the best ways to jump-start the economy.

With key industries experiencing financial challenges, fewer job opportunities and residents curtailing their spending, the question is timely.

Judging by the responses to date, available at http://www.abbynews.com, an improved light rail system is almost the unanimous choice of local residents.

“With rising oil prices, a transitioning economy, growing population and increasing environmental concerns, light rail transit is a must have for the southern Fraser Valley,” username “live2ride” writes, describing the project as a “no-brainer.”

“I really believe that one of the best investments the federal government can make is to accelerate the restoration of the Interurban,” continues “caseysman.” “A modern passenger rail system will help get people into Vancouver during the Olympics, and facilitate sustainable development in the Fraser Valley for decades to come.”

According to “tugboat,” a rail system would “bring the entire valley together.”

“OldAbbyDave,” meanwhile, supports the construction of a new light rail train station in downtown Abbotsford.

“Kodii” says Abbotsford may have to be content with improvements to the McCallum and Clearbrook Interchanges, and an extension to the airport runway, as “those are going to bring jobs now.”

Kodii agrees, however, that the number one priority should be a project to connect Abbotsford to Vancouver, preferably a light rail system.

Public comments for the Path Ahead initiative are still being welcomed at http://www.abbynews.com.

One note regarding the comment by Kodii: initial upgrading of the Interurban track, including track surfacing, replacement ties, ballast upgrade, rail replacement, and the installation of crossings, is necessary for regular high-speed light rail service, and can be done immediately, creating many local jobs. A shovel-ready, shovel-worthy project.

Catenary-Free LRT!

January 24, 2009

The following item was sent to the Light Rail Committee and maybe of interest to those promoting modern LRT for the ‘Valley’. One of the main complaints against light-rail is that it collects electricity from an overhead wire using span wires connected to lamp posts (Vancouver’s trolleybuses) or from a Catenary. The most common method is by an overhead span or Catenary, which some people deem unsightly. Other methods used by trams are using a ‘third rail’ as used by SkyTrain and light-rail vehicles in tunnels or the plough, where electrical contact is made using a ‘plough’ that runs in a slot along the road, with the electrical wire or pick-up being underground.

The third rail can only be used on segregated sections of rights-of-ways and the plough, because of its expense, only in sensitive areas in city centres.

Bombardier is now marketing a safe third rail system for light-rail/tram systems that can be used in complete safety on nonsegregated rights-of-ways, including city streets.

Bombardier Presents First Catenary-Free and Contactless Operating Tram

BERLIN, GERMANY – Bombardier Transportation today introduced the first completely contactless and catenary-free operating tram. The BOMBARDIER PRIMOVE catenary-free operation was presented to journalists on the test track at Bombardier’s Bautzen site in Germany.

“The PRIMOVE technology is a unique system that provides complete catenary-free operation of trams over distances of varying lengths and in all surroundings,” said Dr Carsten Struve, Director Advanced Technology Development Bombardier Transportation at the system’s presentation. “The catenary-free operation offers an entirely new prospect, particularly for trams operating in historic city centres where impressive cityscapes can now exist unencumbered by visual pollution from overhead lines. Combined with the new BOMBARDIER MITRAC Energy Saver technology, the PRIMOVE system can also save additional energy.”

For rail operators, the PRIMOVE system offers significant advantages. Among these are the completely invisible power supply, the easy installation and the complete irrelevance of weather conditions. In addition, the contactless and very safe energy transfer system reduces wear on parts, limiting equipment lifecycle costs. Thanks to the PRIMOVE system, infrastructure costs related to tunnel sections can also be reduced significantly. The system does not need ‘third rail’ or high roof systems, resulting in smaller tunnel profiles. The system’s electrical drive operates with lower noise levels and eliminates emissions. The integrated MITRAC Energy Saver results in significant operating cost reductions by recharging energy.

PRIMOVE technology is one of the highlights of the innovative BOMBARDIER ECO4 portfolio of technologies launched by the global rail leader last year. The new portfolio offers energy and cost-efficient solutions for total train performance through ten ready-to-use ECO4 products that are based on the four principles of energy, efficiency, economy and ecology.

The innovative principle of the PRIMOVE system is rooted in the principle of inductive power transfer, a technology used in cleanrooms in the computer chip and automotive industries. With Bombardier’s introduction of PRIMOVE, inductive power transfer comes to rail vehicles for the first time.

How the PRIMOVE technology works

The electric power components of the PRIMOVE technology are hidden under the vehicle and beneath the tracks. The electrical primary and secondary circuits are separated from each other, a principle also used in transformers. Creating a magnet field, the primary circuit is built into the infrastructure. The secondary circuit in the vehicle transforms this energy field into electricity for the tram’s operation. The cable of the primary circuit can be easily integrated in-between the tracks. The vehicle is equipped with pick-up coils underneath the vehicle, which are connected to the tram’s traction system through a cable. In addition, connected segments in the ground ensure a safe operation as they are only fully energised when completely covered by the vehicle. Therefore, the system can also be integrated in pedestrian zones, for example.

Efficiency with MITRAC Energy Saver

An additional benefit of the system is the integration of the MITRAC Energy Saver, which is mounted on the roof of a light rail vehicle: The innovative capacitors of the system store the energy released each time a vehicle brakes and re-use it during acceleration or operation. Applied to light rail vehicles, the system has (during testing in Mannheim since 2003) been proven to save up to 30 per cent of energy, thus reducing emissions as well as costs. The technology can also be used as a performance booster by adding extra power to the vehicle during acceleration. Behind the system is a double layer capacitor technology (also known as “ultracapacitors”), a smartly designed storage device charged with the eletrical energy set free when the brakes are used. The capacitors’ storage cells are charged with energy which is transformed during the breaking process.

Friends of Rail for the Valley meeting in Chilliwack last night

January 23, 2009

Last night was great.

There were about 20 of us, which could have made it a bit unwieldy and more difficult to get things done, but everyone was on the same page, people were focused and determined, and it was a great meeting. Most people who came were from Chilliwack, as well as a few from Abbotsford.

We completed the required paperwork to form a society – Friends Of Rail For The Valley – so hopefully that will be going through shortly.

Here’s an article about it in today’s Chilliwack Times.

Nothing fundamental changes with the Rail for the Valley campaign. There is simply now a new way for people to get involved and support this cause.

The purpose of the society: To advocate for the creation of a comprehensive passenger rail and transit network for the entire Fraser Valley, from Vancouver to Hope.

I think it’s a worthy goal.

TramTrains for Bristol – A News Release From the LRTA

January 23, 2009

I include this news release from the LRTA because of the similarities with Rail For The Valley’s campaign to reinstate the Vancouver to Chilliwack interurban service. Diesel light-rail is of course, a tramtrain!

PRESS RELEASE FROM

TramForward

21 January 2009

TramForward

suggests TramTrain for Bristol Metro

Light rail campaign

TramForward has welcomed support for the idea of a Bristol Metro as asignificant step in the right direction but considers that it can only meet its full potential with a rail link into the centre of Bristol.

TramForward believes that rather than wasting resources on the bus link to Ashton Vale, which could be better served by connection to the Metro, efforts should be concentrated on providing a tramway to link the Metro into the central area to permit the operation of tram trains.

While the proposed half hourly service is a good start, to be really successful some of the routes would need a higher frequency service. This combined with direct access to the central area would make a significant improvement to Bristol’s traffic.

It is welcome that the West of England Partnership and the four local Authorities are beginning to get the message but they need to be far more ambitious to if they are to create a real Metro for the Region.

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1.

TramForward is the campaigning arm of the Light Rail Transit Association.

2. The Light Rail Transit Association is the world’s leading organisation campaigning for better public transport through light rail, tramway and metro systems in our towns and cities for 70 years. It also supports the revitalisation of suburban and rural transport through the application of light rail.

3. The LRTA acts through its network of local branches, which campaign for better transport in their localities.

4. Membership of the LRTA costs under 12p a day. To join, visit http://www.lrta.org or write to the Membership Secretary, LRTA, 38 Wolseley Road, Sale, Greater Manchester, M33 7AU. Members of the LRTA receive the monthly magazine Tramways & Urban Transit – written and read by experts in the field – and gain other benefits including discounts on videos and books, tours of transport systems and cut-price admission to selected transport sites.

5. Press enquiries – please contact:

Geoff Lusher, Deputy Chairman, Light Rail Transit Association

86 Heritage Court, Warstone Lane, Birmingham, B18 6HU

Telephone 07768 457911

E-mail glusher@lrta.org

Calgary’s C-Train is carrying over 250,000 passengers a day!

January 22, 2009

The following should give some food for thought. “In the past 25 years, The City of Calgary has invested approximately $1 billion (Canadian dollars) in developing a three leg, radial LRT system that is closely integrated with an extensive bus network.” While in Vancouver over $6 billion ($8.5 billion if RAV/Canada Line is included) has been invested in a two line SkyTrain light-metro system that carries a bit less weekday ridership. The Vancouver Metro area has spent six to eight and half times more on light-metro, to carry fewer customers and if LRT had been built as originally planned, we could have had at least six times more LRT routes! More LRT, going more places would certainly have been the formula to attract the motorist from the car. Not so with SkyTrain, where 80% of riders first take a bus and are forced to transfer to light-metro.

If LRT had been built in the region, there would be no debate for the reinstatement of the valley interurban – it would be in operation now!

From the Calgary Economic Development:

Calgary Transit operates one of the most successful transit systems in North America. Transit ridership continues to flourish. Ridership on the C-Train system (Light Rail Transit system) is over 250,000 every weekday – the highest of any LRT system on the continent.

The Calgary Transit fleet is made up of regular buses, low floor buses, community shuttle buses, and light rail vehicles.

Bus service consists of a network of radial routes serving the downtown, feeder routes and cross-town bus routes. The bus system encompasses 150 routes covering more than 4,500 route km. The bus fleet is comprised of 798 buses, which includes 300 high floor buses, 404 accessible low-floor buses and 94 community shuttle vehicles.

In the past 25 years, The City of Calgary has invested approximately $1 billion (Canadian dollars) in developing a three leg, radial LRT system that is closely integrated with an extensive bus network.

As a result of Calgary’s population and subsequent ridership increase, existing LRT and bus services are operating near capacity during peak travel periods and The City of Calgary is embarking on a ten year, $1 billion dollar capital investment program to extend existing LRT lines and expand its LRT and bus fleet