A Tale of Two Cities: Light Rail Transit in Canada
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 111, Issue 6
Abstract
Toronto and Montreal are often cited for having effectively tied together rail transit and land‐use planning. This paper probes whether two other Canadian cities, Calgary and Edmonton, have been equally successful with their recent light rail transit systems. Both Calgary and Edmonton have pioneered the development of the modern‐day version of turn‐of‐the‐century streetcar technology. Moreover, both have pursued creative approaches to zoning, joint development, cost sharing, and parking policies. An examination of before and after data, however, suggests that LRT's impacts on densities, residential construction, and mixed‐use development have been quite modest in both places. Moreover, costs per passenger have risen steadily during the post‐LRT period in both places, while total transit patronage levels have stabilized. It is apparent that the recent downturn in both Calgary's and Edmonton's petroleum‐sensitive economies have overshadowed any effects of LRT on urban form or travel behavior. Some local observers, however, remain optimistic that the longer term consequences of LRT in both communities will be substantial.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Bakker, J. J., “Edmonton's Light Rail Transit from Concept to Operations,” Transportation Research Record, Vol. 817, 1982, pp. 7–15.
2.
Bolger, D., and Morrall, J., “Development of Integrated Downtown Transportation Policies: The Calgary Experience,” Transportation Research Record, 1983.
3.
Bolger, D., Kushner, M., Brown, M., and Hubbell, J., “The Initial Impacts of Light Rail Transit on Travel in Calgary,” presented at the Institute of Transportation Engineers 53rd Annual Meeting, London, England, Aug., 1983.
4.
Brown, M., Morrall, J., and Wong, A., “The Impacts of Transit on Suburban Office Travel Characteristics,” presented at the 54th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, San Francisco, Calif., Sept., 1984.
5.
Cervero, R., “Monitoring Financial and Operating Trends Among U.S. Transit Properties,” Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Mass., U.S. Department of Transportation, 1984.
6.
Donnelly, P., “Rail Transit Impact Studies: Atlanta, Washington, San Diego,” Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, D.C., 1982.
7.
Feaver, D. B., “Railway Transit Booming,” The Washington Post, Washington, D.C., Apr. 17, 1984.
8.
Jones, D. W., Jr., Urban Transit Policy: An Economic and Political History, Prentice‐Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1985, pp. 135–141.
9.
O'Brien, W. B., and Tofflemire, J. D., “Planning for LRT in Edmonton,” RTAC Forum, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1981, pp. 39–44.
10.
Pickrell, D., The Causes of Rising Operating Deficits, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1983.
11.
Pushkarev, B., and Zupan, J., Public Transportation and Land Use Policy, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Ind., 1977.
12.
Pushkarev, B., and Zupan, J., Urban Rail in America: An Exploration of Criteria for Fixed‐Guideway Transit, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Ind., 1980.
13.
Soberman, R., “Comparative Review of Transportation Planning in Canada and the United States,” Transport Logistics and Review, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1983, pp. 99–109.
14.
Transit Fact Book, American Public Transit Association, 1984.
15.
Transit Fact Book, Canadian Urban Transit Association, Toronto, Canada, 1982.
16.
Webber, M., “The BART Experience—What Have We Learned?” Public Interest, Fall, 1976, pp. 79–108.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 ASCE.
History
Published online: Nov 1, 1985
Published in print: Nov 1985
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.