It seems as if every time an extension to the Calgary light rail transit system is proposed, there is either some money-related outrage, or community protest. Truth be told, light rail transit is an expensive endeavor in any city, and Calgary’s (and Alberta’s) fiscal hawkishness is a real obstacle to any meaningful progress in making this a more accessible and sustainable city. However, there could be a less expensive solution to Calgary’s transit woes that is directly from its past.
There is little doubt that Vancouver’s transit system blows Calgary’s out of the water. Vancouver is usually declared Canada’s “most livable” city for good reason. It’s warm, green, culturally diverse and well planned. Much of the city’s liveability could easily be attributed to its well-oiled transit system. But the future of Vancouver’s transit system might not be in high tech trains–it might be in old-timey 19th century-style trolley car lines.
In the near future, the Vancouver SkyTrain is scheduled for a 2.8 billion dollar extension of its’ Millennium line to the University of British Columbia. However, Dave Beers of the Tyee reports that the money could be much more cost effective elsewhere:
The planned SkyTrain subway spur along Broadway and out to the University of British Columbia campus will cost taxpayers 15 times what it would take to build a tram line along the same route.
In fact, for the $2.8 billion cost of the single 12 kilometre SkyTrain tube from Commercial Drive to UBC, Vancouver could build 175 km of tram lines crisscrossing the city and beyond.
That is the finding of a study led by Prof. Patrick Condon of the UBC Design Centre for Sustainability. His team based their calculations on the recent experiences of Portland, Oregon, and various European cities with light rail transit.
“This study demonstrates that the money needed for one 12 km subway line would be more than enough to rebuild and substantially expand the region’s entire historic streetcar system,” state the authors, noting that Vancouver and surrounding communities were built along trolley lines dating back to 1890.
Vancouver could build an extensive system of streetcar lines for the same price of the Skytrain extension. According to the same article, a similar transit plan in Portland not only brought efficient public transit, it also caused a real estate boom in communities adjacent to the trolley line thanks to simple desirability.
While electric tram travel is much more time intensive, Beers argues, its cost effectiveness could be well worth it. While it may not have the speed of light rail, a streetcar system could work much better to serve communities that couldn’t be served effectively by a rail line.
The City of Calgary retired its tram line in 1975. Maybe 1975 wasn’t so crazy, after all. Streetcars could work well with Calgary’s road-dominated urban sprawl–especially the semi-enclosed and shut off suburbs with little room for rapid-rail development.
Photo of the Heritage Park streetcar courtesy “Pikelet68″ with a CC license.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Ah, the need for speed.
The destruction of trolley cars for medium speed transit had a lot to do with the powers of Big Auto at the time. Even in Calgary, the biggest outrage around transit lately seems to be the newly added expense of driving to the higher-speed LRT — now that they’ve rightly chosen to partially-price on-site parking. I’m absolutely flabbergasted by this conversation.
Bus-riding is anathema: “take the car to the train!” Perhaps the trolley will continue to be seen in the same light as bus service in Calgary. By many in this city, public transit isn’t seen as a public transportation service, rather as a private means to offset downtown parking costs and capacity constraints.
Strangely, the new adult buss passes (now $83/month) are fronted by pictures of Calgary’s old streetcar system. The caption reads “1909 – City officials on board the first street car.”
A renewed street car system would be a far better way to celebrate the centenary than a picture on a bus pass.
The fact that the street car is the image on the bus pass is served to signal that the old alternatives (which worked quite well) are quaint at best. Newer is always better, I suppose. Progress and all that stuff.
Later in the article Beers talks about the “need for speed”, and how trolley cars could be very effective if coordinated with traffic light timing. I also like the idea of, on double-lane streets of having one lane as an alternating “tram only” access during rush hour to ensure that trams are as fast as possible (probably beating all but the most careless drivers to their destinations).
One of the big problems with the trolley car system is the need for the driver to stop, get out, and use a pole to hook the car back up to the cables at least once during a trip through downtown Calgary. Ask someone’s parents about this. With downtown traffic the way it is, this would slow things down a fair bit for both transit riders and drivers, as well as increasing animosity towards the transit system. I assume that this problem has since been engineered out, but the stories about the inconvenience sound like they may not be worth the savings.
Actually, the occasional need to rehook not an issue for trolley cars (Trams) any more. Modern trams are very efficient and in addition to the many existing systems, there are numerous projects planned around the world right now.
Inconvenience, too, is all a matter of perspective. Although resetting the connecting hook would have been an inconvenience suburban sprawl, childhood and adult-onset asthma and the rising per capita cost of private transportation are all inconveniences, too. Tough decisions always need to be made — I think our city, at the very least, made very poor ones in regards to our mid-20th century transportation systems.