Calgary Public Transit II

[Elbownian]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Not too mention the daily issue of every single stop in mission being skipped by buses everyday because its full to the brim. You think that buses every 3 to 5 mins would have a space or two. Express bus or a mission short turn route is more than overdue.

I used to have the same problem trying to board the 3 at 56th Ave. In poor weather, it wasn't abnormal to have to wait upwards of half an hour for a bus to actually stop. It seems there are enormous number of passengers boarding south of Glenmore Trail. Mission at least has the benefit of both the 17 and 419 for those trying to get downtown (though a surprising number of people here seem to be unaware they can use these routes), but those along Elbow Drive between 4th St and Heritage Drive have no such alternatives.

Another problem Route 3 seems to regularly face is "bus-bunching" (I'm sure there's a technical term someone can provide for this): despite the 5-minute headway, you regularly find yourself waiting ten minutes, at which point three buses arrive almost simultaneously. One of these buses is frequently almost empty, but that's often not the one that actually stops for you. I've even seen this happen (well, the bunching, not so much the passenger congestion) on weekends at 10-minute headways. Obviously buses are going to face variable obstacles in terms of lights, time at each stop, and whatnot, but I have to think there's a better way to coordinate spacing.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by MasterG

Not too mention the daily issue of every single stop in mission being skipped by buses everyday because its full to the brim. You think that buses every 3 to 5 mins would have a space or two. Express bus or a mission short turn route is more than overdue.

This makes me laugh because I remember the same problem existed back when I was in high school at WCHS a long (but not THAT long) time ago! I'm not sure much has changed except that the population along the route has increased and a higher proportion take transit compared to before. #3 is kind of a roughy one to solve, but a few improvements such as advanced green for busses and more busses (if possible) may help.

Personally, I'd be in favour of putting a carpool lane through the entirety of its route (where 4-lane), as well as along every road in Calgary with similar problems (16th ave n, 32nd ave ne, Macleod, 52nd st e, DEERFOOT, etc.). Come to think of it, why the hell aren't there more carpool lanes, ESPECIALLY ON DEERFOOT? My recent road trip from vancouver to Seattle to Portland has reminded me of the value of carpool lanes. There are huge signs above the highway that indicate how long it takes to travel to upcoming exits, and the estimate for the carpool lane is often 20-40% faster. It's astonishing how many people prefer (ok, maybe it's not always a choice) to idle alone in their cars than carpool.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

This makes me laugh because I remember the same problem existed back when I was in high school at WCHS a long (but not THAT long) time ago! I'm not sure much has changed except that the population along the route has increased and a higher proportion take transit compared to before. #3 is kind of a roughy one to solve, but a few improvements such as advanced green for busses and more busses (if possible) may help.

Personally, I'd be in favour of putting a carpool lane through the entirety of its route (where 4-lane), as well as along every road in Calgary with similar problems (16th ave n, 32nd ave ne, Macleod, 52nd st e, DEERFOOT, etc.). Come to think of it, why the hell aren't there more carpool lanes, ESPECIALLY ON DEERFOOT? My recent road trip from vancouver to Seattle to Portland has reminded me of the value of carpool lanes. There are huge signs above the highway that indicate how long it takes to travel to upcoming exits, and the estimate for the carpool lane is often 20-40% faster. It's astonishing how many people prefer (ok, maybe it's not always a choice) to idle alone in their cars than carpool.

Carpooling is a pretty good idea, but the uptake isn't that great. Carpooling is much more about how your workplace functions than providing lanes. For it to really work requires support from your workplace. Guaranteed rides home (work pays for taxis in the cases of emergencies or working late), guarantees about when meetings can take place etc are all very necessary for carpooling to work. Here is a list of things that can throw carpooling off completely:

- Sick kid at school and you didn't drive today, so you can't go pick them up.
- Late meeting and you drove (or didn't drive) today. Everyone else in the carpool has no ride home.
- Change of work location for any of the drivers.
- Change of house location for any drivers.
- Need to drive to go to kids sports games right after work.

Carpooling is a good idea, but it is a lot harder than most people think. The biggest issue is that you now have other people dependent on you. If you take transit and any of the above changes, you just adjust accordingly, without any impacts on anyone else. If you were the carpool driver and you have a family emergency, you leave 3 people stranded at work.

I would rather have transit-only lanes.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by Elbownian

Another problem Route 3 seems to regularly face is "bus-bunching" (I'm sure there's a technical term someone can provide for this): despite the 5-minute headway, you regularly find yourself waiting ten minutes, at which point three buses arrive almost simultaneously. One of these buses is frequently almost empty, but that's often not the one that actually stops for you. I've even seen this happen (well, the bunching, not so much the passenger congestion) on weekends at 10-minute headways. Obviously buses are going to face variable obstacles in terms of lights, time at each stop, and whatnot, but I have to think there's a better way to coordinate spacing.

Bunching is something of a self-organizing phenomenon. If you have a full bus and an empty bus 10 minutes apart, the full bus has to stop more frequently and longer to drop people off. While that is happening, the empty bus behind it closes the distance, so there's only 9 minutes gap. Now, when the full bus passes a stop, there has been 10 minutes for people to show up, while the empty bus has only had 9 minutes, so there are fewer and shorter stops to board passengers, and the distance closes again, and so on until the empty bus is right behind the full one. It's a positive feedback system, and is hard to break out of without detailed control.

In addition to coordinating spacing, this is also helped by moving to things like a limited-stop service (which reduces the disparity in how often the full and the trailing empty bus stop). Going to all-door boarding (which decreases the dwell times, and reduces the disparity again) also helps.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

This makes me laugh because I remember the same problem existed back when I was in high school at WCHS a long (but not THAT long) time ago! I'm not sure much has changed except that the population along the route has increased and a higher proportion take transit compared to before. #3 is kind of a roughy one to solve, but a few improvements such as advanced green for busses and more busses (if possible) may help.

Personally, I'd be in favour of putting a carpool lane through the entirety of its route (where 4-lane), as well as along every road in Calgary with similar problems (16th ave n, 32nd ave ne, Macleod, 52nd st e, DEERFOOT, etc.). Come to think of it, why the hell aren't there more carpool lanes, ESPECIALLY ON DEERFOOT? My recent road trip from vancouver to Seattle to Portland has reminded me of the value of carpool lanes. There are huge signs above the highway that indicate how long it takes to travel to upcoming exits, and the estimate for the carpool lane is often 20-40% faster. It's astonishing how many people prefer (ok, maybe it's not always a choice) to idle alone in their cars than carpool.

IIRC, route 3 has had Opticom advanced green systems in place for over a decade already. And it's down to what, 3 minute peak headways? When I last checked (just before West LRT opened), route 3 had the most buses in operation during the AM peak; the 201 LRT had 33 trains, the 202 had 22 and the #3 had 20 buses in operation. After that was the 301 and 101, both around 10 buses, then the 305, 2, 104 and 14(!) around 9 buses. For comparison, the circle routes had around 6 each, and the typical neighbourhood routes had 2-5 buses.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

IIRC, route 3 has had Opticom advanced green systems in place for over a decade already. And it's down to what, 3 minute peak headways? When I last checked (just before West LRT opened), route 3 had the most buses in operation during the AM peak; the 201 LRT had 33 trains, the 202 had 22 and the #3 had 20 buses in operation. After that was the 301 and 101, both around 10 buses, then the 305, 2, 104 and 14(!) around 9 buses. For comparison, the circle routes had around 6 each, and the typical neighbourhood routes had 2-5 buses.

The 3, apart from the 301, is the most profitable bus route in the City I believe. I think it has something like 80% fare recovery.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by fusili

Carpooling is a pretty good idea, but the uptake isn't that great. Carpooling is much more about how your workplace functions than providing lanes. For it to really work requires support from your workplace. Guaranteed rides home (work pays for taxis in the cases of emergencies or working late), guarantees about when meetings can take place etc are all very necessary for carpooling to work. Here is a list of things that can throw carpooling off completely:

- Sick kid at school and you didn't drive today, so you can't go pick them up.
- Late meeting and you drove (or didn't drive) today. Everyone else in the carpool has no ride home.
- Change of work location for any of the drivers.
- Change of house location for any drivers.
- Need to drive to go to kids sports games right after work.

Carpooling is a good idea, but it is a lot harder than most people think. The biggest issue is that you now have other people dependent on you. If you take transit and any of the above changes, you just adjust accordingly, without any impacts on anyone else. If you were the carpool driver and you have a family emergency, you leave 3 people stranded at work.

I would rather have transit-only lanes.

Not everyone can carpool, but I guess really what I'd like to see in more areas are bus lanes where other vehicles are welcome if they carry more people. Roads should move the most people, not the most vehicles.

Edit: a full bus (or train for that matter) ought to always have priority over everything except another full bus or an emergency vehicle.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

IIRC, route 3 has had Opticom advanced green systems in place for over a decade already. And it's down to what, 3 minute peak headways? When I last checked (just before West LRT opened), route 3 had the most buses in operation during the AM peak; the 201 LRT had 33 trains, the 202 had 22 and the #3 had 20 buses in operation. After that was the 301 and 101, both around 10 buses, then the 305, 2, 104 and 14(!) around 9 buses. For comparison, the circle routes had around 6 each, and the typical neighbourhood routes had 2-5 buses.

Crazy, eh! What can be done to improve #3?

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by fusili

The 3, apart from the 301, is the most profitable bus route in the City I believe. I think it has something like 80% fare recovery.

So when you say profitable, you really mean just loses the least amount of money, right. Remind me not to take any stock tips from you.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

So when you say profitable, you really mean just loses the least amount of money, right. Remind me not to take any stock tips from you.

LOL. Good point. Perhaps, least subsidized would be a better term.

I take my stock tips from my girlfriend who works at a really good investment management company. She is good at picking stocks. I am good at being frugal (ahem, cheap, ahem).

[simster3]

What kind of impact would closing off some of the north/south streets during rush hour at 8th ave and 6th ave have for both the CTrain, busses and drivers? Has this ever been studied?

The streets I would suggest be closed would be the ones that don't cross into the beltline, or are good connection to across the river.

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by MichaelS

So when you say profitable, you really mean just loses the least amount of money, right. Remind me not to take any stock tips from you.

The actual revenue is hard to measure, but I would bet that a totally full bus pays for itself (for that one route, at that one time of day, in one direction, not including capital, not including social benefits or value added to service area, not including cost savings to other transportation infrastructure like roads) and helps the bottom line. If we could fill buses in both directions, we'd for sure be in the black

Originally Posted by simster3

What kind of impact would closing off some of the north/south streets during rush hour at 8th ave and 6th ave have for both the CTrain, busses and drivers? Has this ever been studied?

The streets I would suggest be closed would be the ones that don't cross into the beltline, or are good connection to across the river.

It's a good idea, but I think problem is not as much waiting for car traffic as waiting for other trains to get out of the way. However, having the NWLRT cross 4/5/6th ave, it slows the entire line down. There is little that can be done except build the NW/SLRT under these roads and separate entirely from the NE/WLRT line, at which point track capacity will more than double.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

Crazy, eh! What can be done to improve #3?

I think the proposal for a limited stop (I prefer "select stop") service from TransitCamp and recently put forward by CT is the best bet; instead of 50 stops south of downtown, have 15-20 and put the bulk of the service on that route -- it would have fewer problems from delays as people get on and off. That's the main quick-and-easy solution. It would get most people on this faster route better suited to the long haul.

Here is what a select service might look like, with the 15 core stops in blue and teal for the few possible additional stops. Green is the proposed SW BRT and red is the LRT.

A slightly longer-range solution is to have all-door boarding, which would either be once the smart card system is up and running, or through adding ticket machines at the select stop route stops -- my guess is roughly $100-250K for the south route 3, the same for the north 301. The articulated buses have 3 doors, but only one is in use as people get on in rush hour. This would be honour system like the LRT. (In reality, you only need all-door en route to the CBD, so you only need ticket machines on NB stops, but that would be waaay too complicated.)

Another longer range possibility is to have a select-express service, where buses do the select run from Canyon Meadows to Southland or Heritage, then cut over to 14th and take the SWBRT route directly to downtown. This assumes the SWBRT, of course, and also needs the buses to be basically full by Heritage.

Originally Posted by simster3

What kind of impact would closing off some of the north/south streets during rush hour at 8th ave and 6th ave have for both the CTrain, busses and drivers? Has this ever been studied?

The streets I would suggest be closed would be the ones that don't cross into the beltline, or are good connection to across the river.

RyLucky is right; I want to add that the last I heard, one major bottleneck was actually the 5th/6th ave crossing of the NW tracks, and closing N/S streets won't do anything for it. It's basically a signal timing problem, but the system is coordinated so the only way to improve things would be to reduce the signal timings on the busy roads, not the empty ones -- since the longest signal cycles will be where there is the most demand for the road. Which is unfortunate, but there we are.

[Offside_Ref]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

I want to add that the last I heard, one major bottleneck was actually the 5th/6th ave crossing of the NW tracks, and closing N/S streets won't do anything for it. It's basically a signal timing problem, but the system is coordinated so the only way to improve things would be to reduce the signal timings on the busy roads, not the empty ones -- since the longest signal cycles will be where there is the most demand for the road. Which is unfortunate, but there we are.

I want to know what they're going to do for 4 car operation on that stretch (I've probably mentioned it before). A three car train probably only has 10 feet of spare room between those blocks. They'll have to re-time all of downtown (Beltline included, it's all on the same plan, all 90 second cycles) to get the trains through. Means a whole lot of waiting for traffic on 4th, 5th, and 6th aves. That might also back up 69th St (am I supposed to say Blue line westbound now?) trains if a Crowfoot train has to stop between 9th and 8th streets because it just missed it's opening. Oh the chaos one person could cause by holding the door open for a couple seconds.

[suburbia]

Where are we with the gondola? We need it yesterday!

With redevelopment being looked at for the stadium shopping centre, this is an opportune time to visit the idea.

[MichaelS]

Originally Posted by suburbia

Where are we with the gondola? We need it yesterday!

With redevelopment being looked at for the stadium shopping centre, this is an opportune time to visit the idea.

I believe an RFP has gone out to look at transit between Westbrook and the University (or roughly thereabouts). Not sure the status of it.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by ByeByeBaby

I think the proposal for a limited stop (I prefer "select stop") service from TransitCamp and recently put forward by CT is the best bet; instead of 50 stops south of downtown, have 15-20 and put the bulk of the service on that route -- it would have fewer problems from delays as people get on and off. That's the main quick-and-easy solution. It would get most people on this faster route better suited to the long haul.

Here is what a select service might look like, with the 15 core stops in blue and teal for the few possible additional stops. Green is the proposed SW BRT and red is the LRT.

A slightly longer-range solution is to have all-door boarding, which would either be once the smart card system is up and running, or through adding ticket machines at the select stop route stops -- my guess is roughly $100-250K for the south route 3, the same for the north 301. The articulated buses have 3 doors, but only one is in use as people get on in rush hour. This would be honour system like the LRT. (In reality, you only need all-door en route to the CBD, so you only need ticket machines on NB stops, but that would be waaay too complicated.)

Another longer range possibility is to have a select-express service, where buses do the select run from Canyon Meadows to Southland or Heritage, then cut over to 14th and take the SWBRT route directly to downtown. This assumes the SWBRT, of course, and also needs the buses to be basically full by Heritage.



RyLucky is right; I want to add that the last I heard, one major bottleneck was actually the 5th/6th ave crossing of the NW tracks, and closing N/S streets won't do anything for it. It's basically a signal timing problem, but the system is coordinated so the only way to improve things would be to reduce the signal timings on the busy roads, not the empty ones -- since the longest signal cycles will be where there is the most demand for the road. Which is unfortunate, but there we are.

The biggest problem with the #3 is capacity. Putting articulated buses on the route during rush hour should solve the issue for the short to medium term. Long term, the problem might be entirely solved by building the 8 Ave Subway. I think it is an open question at this point as to what extent overcrowding on the #3 is related to overcrowding on the S LRT. Elbow Drive might not be able to support both local and express service at the point when there is a BRT on 14 St and the S LRT is not capacity constrained.

There does seem to have been a noticeable increase in ridership on the #3 in the south since the closure of Chinook Station. That does suggest a significant overlap between the riders of the #3 and the S LRT.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

The biggest problem with the #3 is capacity. Putting articulated buses on the route during rush hour should solve the issue for the short to medium term. Long term, the problem might be entirely solved by building the 8 Ave Subway. I think it is an open question at this point as to what extent overcrowding on the #3 is related to overcrowding on the S LRT. Elbow Drive might not be able to support both local and express service at the point when there is a BRT on 14 St and the S LRT is not capacity constrained.

There does seem to have been a noticeable increase in ridership on the #3 in the south since the closure of Chinook Station. That does suggest a significant overlap between the riders of the #3 and the S LRT.

They definitely do have ridership overlap. With the south being the largest transit market, it makes sense to have more than just the LRT provide a higher level of service. While a limited stop service does relieve pressure on the over capacity LRT, it will still be useful after the subway is built, as it serves areas not covered by the LRT, such as Britannia and Mission. Plus it is a straight north/south route and so fits nicely into a high frequency grid of transit routes.

[MasterG]

Originally Posted by fusili

They definitely do have ridership overlap. With the south being the largest transit market, it makes sense to have more than just the LRT provide a higher level of service. While a limited stop service does relieve pressure on the over capacity LRT, it will still be useful after the subway is built, as it serves areas not covered by the LRT, such as Britannia and Mission. Plus it is a straight north/south route and so fits nicely into a high frequency grid of transit routes.

I live in mission around 22nd ave. I try to take the 3 every day this week, and this was a typical week ( i.e. no heavy snows, accidents etc.) I leave sometime between 7 and 830, not consistently at any specific time really. If its full I start walking and look back when I get to the next stop

This week I successfully took it 3 times: every day I got passed by at least 1 full bus, 2 times I got passed by 2 full buses, and I got passed by 3 full ones the other 2 days. I successfully walked 2 of the 5 days to downtown, waiting at every stop along 4th street if a bus was approaching, but made it to downtown (~20mins) before any ones with room showed up. I never once got on the stop I first planned to, always at least 1 stop up. When I did manage to get on, never made it farther back on the bus that the front door which barely closed on me.

Frequency is great, but only if you can get on.

Thats why something needs to be done, I am sure people farther out down Elbow have the same problem in certain spots too.

[TransitSupporter]

Originally Posted by MasterG

I live in mission around 22nd ave. I try to take the 3 every day this week, and this was a typical week ( i.e. no heavy snows, accidents etc.) I leave sometime between 7 and 830, not consistently at any specific time really. If its full I start walking and look back when I get to the next stop

This week I successfully took it 3 times: every day I got passed by at least 1 full bus, 2 times I got passed by 2 full buses, and I got passed by 3 full ones the other 2 days. I successfully walked 2 of the 5 days to downtown, waiting at every stop along 4th street if a bus was approaching, but made it to downtown (~20mins) before any ones with room showed up. I never once got on the stop I first planned to, always at least 1 stop up. When I did manage to get on, never made it farther back on the bus that the front door which barely closed on me.

Frequency is great, but only if you can get on.

Thats why something needs to be done, I am sure people farther out down Elbow have the same problem in certain spots too.

I live in the NW and take the 3 SB from 32 Ave. We used to have a major problem like this (i.e. buses repeatedly full) but for the past several years CT has had some buses start their SB journey @ McKnight - it seems to help a lot. I don't know why they couldn't do something similar in the SW, starting some trips say, at 50th Ave or something.