Calgary Public Transit II

[MalcolmTucker]

And it is more than a month away. Half the changes may not be loaded into the planner yet.

[joe498]

Originally Posted by mellbell416

Thanks for that tip - a bus driver alerted me that the 302 bus route was changing in November. The 302 no longer would route down 18th St. SE, which means that it adds 10 minutes to my commute time Apparently the routes will be publicized this week for review...

Am I wrong in that it looks like the 136 route is disappearing (Bus to SE from Chinook Station)??

The 136 and 302 buses are critical to travel to Quarry Park - what a complete mess...

The 136 will no longer run after the changes take effect but they have rerouted route 24 which will now go up 18th street to downtown and also connects with 302 if someone wishes to transfer (but I think 24 goes all the way too). It may actually even be faster than your current commute.

[Rollerstud98]

Transit pretty fucked this morning. Made my drive more difficult lol. 5th street between 6 and 7th ave blocked and then all but 1 lane on 6th blocked directly west of that. Pretty funny.

[joe498]

Originally Posted by Rollerstud98

Transit pretty fucked this morning. Made my drive more difficult lol. 5th street between 6 and 7th ave blocked and then all but 1 lane on 6th blocked directly west of that. Pretty funny.

When the roads are bad more people try and take the train too.

[outoftheice]

I was taking a look at the Calgary Transit page that talks about the upcoming network changes and was honestly shocked at how poor the frequencies are for the new MAX service. How can Calgary Transit keep a straight face and justify spending hundreds of millions of dollars on infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising for BRT if the service is going to run less frequently than some of the regular bus routes?

MAX Orange (Saddletowne - Brentwood): Service Level: 16 min peak, 26-30 min off-peak

MAX Teal (Westbrook - Douglasglen): Service Level: 18 min peak, 20-25 min off-peak

MAX Purple (East Hills - City Centre): Service Level: 12 min peak, 22-30 min off-peak

http://www.calgarytransit.com/news/2018-transit-network

[milomilo]

Poor indeed. If those frequencies are all that's needed, then fine, I guess. Just don't market it as some game changing new BRT system when it clearly isn't. They at least could have reserved the MAX designation for the two routes that actually had major infrastructure built and not the two which only had some slightly nicer bus shelters put in.

[MalcolmTucker]

The initial operating schedule had to be within the existing service envelope iirc. I expect a funding package + SWBRT funding to up frequencies in the fall budget cycle.

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The initial operating schedule had to be within the existing service envelope iirc. I expect a funding package + SWBRT funding to up frequencies in the fall budget cycle.

This really sums it all up. It's fine to say that hundreds of millions were spent on infrastructure, but none of that capital money goes towards running the buses or paying the operators. If people want higher frequency, that will either be at the cost of service somewhere else on the system, or City Council will have to approve budget for more service hours.

That's going to be a big concern for Green Line as well - $4.53 billion only builds a train, but won't do anything to actually run and support service.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

The initial operating schedule had to be within the existing service envelope iirc. I expect a funding package + SWBRT funding to up frequencies in the fall budget cycle.

Fair enough.

To give the city credit, they are at least exactly following the plans they made, which is encouraging to me. In their plans, they distinguish 'Transitway', built on the SW and on 17th, from 'BRT' on the other routes.



The biggest unknown on the map is what they mean by 'rapid transit', as any conventional definition of that is quite different to 'HOV or other'.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

This really sums it all up. It's fine to say that hundreds of millions were spent on infrastructure, but none of that capital money goes towards running the buses or paying the operators. If people want higher frequency, that will either be at the cost of service somewhere else on the system, or City Council will have to approve budget for more service hours.

That's going to be a big concern for Green Line as well - $4.53 billion only builds a train, but won't do anything to actually run and support service.

Well, 'in theory', will building this new infrastructure not make running buses more efficient, pushing down the cost per trip, requiring fewer drivers and buses for the same frequency etc? And one green line train should be able to do the job of many buses.

And, on a larger scale, isn't the whole point of public transit that it is more cost effective than building new roads? If it actually costs us money to provide more service, then why do we bother with transit? (Not saying this to argue, but to discuss, BTW).

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Well, 'in theory', will building this new infrastructure not make running buses more efficient, pushing down the cost per trip, requiring fewer drivers and buses for the same frequency etc? And one green line train should be able to do the job of many buses.

And, on a larger scale, isn't the whole point of public transit that it is more cost effective than building new roads? If it actually costs us money to provide more service, then why do we bother with transit? (Not saying this to argue, but to discuss, BTW).

Yeah, more efficient. But in the end if we still want the feeder routes, or our neighbourhood design makes only running 'good' routes (has destinations along it, goes in a mostly straight line) not feasible while still providing coverage, it will cost more.



Hopefully by the end of the next decade we can scale up automated services to reduce the cost of coverage, and speed up services like access.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by milomilo

It has been suggested that a potential Airport LRT spur could be off of the Blue Line. What would potential travel times be from downtown to airport via Blue vs Green Lines, and which would more direct (it seems to me that the Blue Line is more circuitous and has more stops along the way)?

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

It has been suggested that a potential Airport LRT spur could be off of the Blue Line. What would potential travel times be from downtown to airport via Blue vs Green Lines, and which would more direct (it seems to me that the Blue Line is more circuitous and has more stops along the way)?

Calgary Transit has done all it can for the airport link to not be a spur, which is a good decision. Probably frequency of the lines will be the name of the game for trip times downtown. I think at least in the near term, the Green Line will have higher frequencies, where the Blue line is constrained until the Red Line gets its tunnel.

[joe498]

Originally Posted by outoftheice

I was taking a look at the Calgary Transit page that talks about the upcoming network changes and was honestly shocked at how poor the frequencies are for the new MAX service. How can Calgary Transit keep a straight face and justify spending hundreds of millions of dollars on infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising for BRT if the service is going to run less frequently than some of the regular bus routes?

MAX Orange (Saddletowne - Brentwood): Service Level: 16 min peak, 26-30 min off-peak

MAX Teal (Westbrook - Douglasglen): Service Level: 18 min peak, 20-25 min off-peak

MAX Purple (East Hills - City Centre): Service Level: 12 min peak, 22-30 min off-peak

http://www.calgarytransit.com/news/2018-transit-network

That is still a huge improvement over what they originally proposed. The MAX Teal was originally going to be 25 minutes peak frequency. Consultation from residents forced them improve it.

[accord1999]

I'd imagine that the significant decline in overall bus ridership (and revenue) over the last few years has forced Calgary Transit to reduce service levels to what they can afford and what the current ridership will be as compared to what they envisioned when they first started the BRT projects.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Well, 'in theory', will building this new infrastructure not make running buses more efficient, pushing down the cost per trip, requiring fewer drivers and buses for the same frequency etc? And one green line train should be able to do the job of many buses.

But for most of the Phase 1 line, the Green Line is adding service far beyond what exists today, which is why it's estimated to have $40M/year in net operating costs.

Nenshi talked about his concerns over it:

https://web.archive.org/web/201803131207...s-will-take-significant-cash-nenshi.html

[CTrainDude]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Calgary Transit has done all it can for the airport link to not be a spur, which is a good decision. Probably frequency of the lines will be the name of the game for trip times downtown. I think at least in the near term, the Green Line will have higher frequencies, where the Blue line is constrained until the Red Line gets its tunnel.

If airport LRT is built (which I believe is a big waste of money for the ridership return), I think best case scenario is some sort of automated people mover with transfer stations on both the Green and Blue lines - people may not want to transfer, but at least you can run very tight headways with the APM, so people won’t be waiting around long; you could even incorporate checkin kiosks at the Transfer station so you can use that time to checkin as well. If it’s a spur line, you’re unfairly compromising capacity north of the spur where the people actually live (whichever line you choose).

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by accord1999

But for most of the Phase 1 line, the Green Line is adding service far beyond what exists today, which is why it's estimated to have $40M/year in net operating costs.

Nenshi talked about his concerns over it:

https://web.archive.org/web/201803131207...s-will-take-significant-cash-nenshi.html

But that does beg the question, what is the point then? Playing devil's advocate here, because I support transit investment, but if building more public transit makes the system less cost efficient, then it can't be a very good project?

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Calgary Transit has done all it can for the airport link to not be a spur, which is a good decision. Probably frequency of the lines will be the name of the game for trip times downtown. I think at least in the near term, the Green Line will have higher frequencies, where the Blue line is constrained until the Red Line gets its tunnel.

But the Green Line won't extend that far north for... basically ever as far as I can see, as it's going to be too expensive to tunnel all the way north and there is not the room to run on surface. So Blue line it is.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by CTrainDude

If airport LRT is built (which I believe is a big waste of money for the ridership return), I think best case scenario is some sort of automated people mover with transfer stations on both the Green and Blue lines - people may not want to transfer, but at least you can run very tight headways with the APM, so people won’t be waiting around long; you could even incorporate checkin kiosks at the Transfer station so you can use that time to checkin as well. If it’s a spur line, you’re unfairly compromising capacity north of the spur where the people actually live (whichever line you choose).

If it’s anything like the people mover at YYZ, then forget it! That thing lurches and stops quick and it’s not a comfortable ride at all. The people mover at LGW (London Gatwick) is a much smoother ride. But those are very short distances in both cases. I am not sure what a long distance people mover (eg: ABC on the Green Line to airport to XYZ on the Blue Line) would feel like.