Jump to content
kevlo86

Calgary Transit

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, R. Meu said:

So it seems the temporarily suspended routes starting May 25 are: 27, 62, 64, 69, 70, 89, 95, 102, 103, 109, 110, 116, 117, 125, 133, 134, 142, 146, 151, 164, 174, 178, 305, 430, and to make it a total of 25 routes the 526 is probably the other route being suspended. (I spent some time on the app checking all the schedules along with a few other members on this board.)

Well at least this time, the feeders aren't taking a beating. Sucks for anyone using express buses to get to Downtown, though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, armorand said:

Sucks for anyone using express buses to get to Downtown, though...

Who is using those right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nick B said:

Who is using those right now?

Next to no one don't worry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blake M said:

Next to no one don't worry

Yeah, I'd say that on most of those buses, the driver probably represents 50% of the passenger load.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Blake M said:

Next to no one don't worry

The SE ones I've been able to observe, I'm lucky to count even a single passenger onboard lol. Just saying for travel times via CT, along with rush hour connectivity through the SE (who still happens to be employed, or needing to go somewhere) - it does suck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, armorand said:

Just saying for travel times via CT, along with rush hour connectivity through the SE (who still happens to be employed, or needing to go somewhere) - it does suck. 

Transit is probably very interested to hear from people who are still using the system — and especially to hear where people are going for work and other things. They were recently doing a survey on their website just for that reason. If you missed out on that opportunity, I'd suggest giving them a call or sending an email so that you can help them further refine the system to meet current transportation needs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, armorand said:

Just saying for travel times via CT, along with rush hour connectivity through the SE (who still happens to be employed, or needing to go somewhere) - it does suck. 

What would suck even more is sacrificing a perfectly good service hour that could easily move 10-15 essential commuters elsewhere in the city who have no alternate transit options, in favor of running an express route to move a whole 0-1 people in the SE who just so happen to need to go to downtown at 6 in the morning and can't possibly bear the thought of taking their local feeder bus to catch the LRT or 302 instead. Wouldn't seem like the best possible use of resources during these times, wouldn't you say?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Nick B said:

What would suck even more is sacrificing a perfectly good service hour that could easily move 10-15 essential commuters elsewhere in the city who have no alternate transit options, in favor of running an express route to move a whole 0-1 people in the SE who just so happen to need to go to downtown at 6 in the morning and can't possibly bear the thought of taking their local feeder bus to catch the LRT or 302 instead. Wouldn't seem like the best possible use of resources during these times, wouldn't you say?

I never said anything about keeping the express services at all - trust me, growing up in Winnipeg, i know this extremely well. The benefits of having a bus on a route that handles actual ridership and passenger counts, versus the one-off express, is definitely going to be greater value and money spent. For example, throwing a bus on the 11 Portage, versus using it on Park & Ride expresses to nowhere... 

I'm just saying - if someone were to take the 92 or 96 to Anderson (from far flung route sections around McKenzie) and then have to take the train to Downtown instead of a one-seat trip on the rush hour expresses - some commuters may take issue with that. 

I'm not defending empty expresses lol - but if services are going to get slashed even further, it just needs to be kept in mind, that transit needs to try and keep the "essential" services to keep things somewhat timely. Or at the very least, get some of the drivers to stick to schedule adherence, so transfers aren't going to be 30 minute waits, or having buses on/off time by nearly 10-15 minutes, in some cases. Of course maybe, don't run buses every 5 minutes if riderships down 80%... but keep the routes that do remain: on time, with transfers, schedule adherence, and direct routing (if possible) intact, to try and minimize the affects on the rest that do regularly and seriously required to use transit, to get to work, shop, etc etc. 

8 hours ago, downbeat said:

Transit is probably very interested to hear from people who are still using the system — and especially to hear where people are going for work and other things. They were recently doing a survey on their website just for that reason. If you missed out on that opportunity, I'd suggest giving them a call or sending an email so that you can help them further refine the system to meet current transportation needs.

There was a virus survey? Or did you mean the open houses & plans, for system-wide redesigns as has been, for the past couple of years? I've definitely partaked in the last few for the redesign of CT routing (I may or may not have been the one to convince CT of routing the 81 through Kingsland past what was my old apartment, with my comments), but anything virus, I wasn't aware of until now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, armorand said:

There was a virus survey? 

Yes — it was specifically related to COVID-19. The link popped up every time you visited the website. They were also promoting it on social media. It hasn't come up recently …

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, armorand said:

I've definitely partaked in the last few for the redesign of CT routing (I may or may not have been the one to convince CT of routing the 81 through Kingsland past what was my old apartment, with my comments)

Trust me, it takes a lot more than one person to convince transit of route changes. In speaking to the planning department at past engagement events, they do a thorough "investigation" to see what would be the costs/benefits of doing route changes such as the ones done with the 81. There's a lot of people behind those decisions, planners, schedulers, and, of course, passengers. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Blake M said:

Trust me, it takes a lot more than one person to convince transit of route changes. In speaking to the planning department at past engagement events, they do a thorough "investigation" to see what would be the costs/benefits of doing route changes such as the ones done with the 81. There's a lot of people behind those decisions, planners, schedulers, and, of course, passengers. 

That quote (of mine) was a joke. But honestly, having the 81 go through Kingsland does a service for the apartment community in the area. So glad it's there now - even if I don't live in the area anymore, alot of the seniors and disabled now have actual service going almost right to their doors, which helps things out alot. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, green_line_26 said:

 

Untitled.png

First time I've ever heard of the "162 Ave rapid transit" project. I'm curious though... why not extend it into Sundance, or dare extend it out to Seton? The 14 and 406 could be replaced on 22x with the BRT service, shaving off up to 30% of some of the route times, and keeping the 14/406 in the neighborhoods as feeders, while filling the BRT buses and guaranteeing ridership. Just seems weird not to fully extend it into a proper full BRT service, between Somerset and Seton/Auburn Bay.

Other than that? I'm impressed! Would like to see this supposed Shaganappi BRT route though go to Westbrook as a terminus, rather than being an MO extension. That way, pressure can be taken off the trains, and pressure off MO as well - since a seperate Shaganappi/Westbrook BRT "connector" could handle U of C, while if both can be routed through Foothills - could also spare CT tens of millions on gondolas or whatever was proposed, to connect the hosptial around the transit system. It would allow alot of capacity to be utilized for students, hospital workers and even just crosstown journeys. Would be worth looking into? I know the 20 already exists to fill that role... but a BRT version of the 20 would be sufficient motivation to skip the car/cabs/Uber and take transit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, armorand said:

why not extend it into Sundance, or dare extend it out to Seton? The 14 and 406 could be replaced on 22x with the BRT service, shaving off up to 30% of some of the route times, and keeping the 14/406 in the neighborhoods as feeders, while filling the BRT buses and guaranteeing ridership. Just seems weird not to fully extend it into a proper full BRT service, between Somerset and Seton/Auburn Bay.

No point in doing that. The Cranston/Auburn Bay services will more than likely be localized to the Green Line anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nick B said:

No point in doing that. The Cranston/Auburn Bay services will more than likely be localized to the Green Line anyway.

The thing is though - if that happens, what sort of service would exist in between Somerset & Seton, if all routes are localized in the future only? People would be forced to go up to Douglasdale/McKenzie, then transfer to Anderson/Heritage, just to get to Somerset and the deep SW of the city. That or fork out $30 for cabs every single trip. Is it wise to remove all connections between the hospital area (arguably one of the areas only real employment centers) and Somerset, once the LRT is fully built out and all feeders are completely localized, much like the 468?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, armorand said:

The thing is though - if that happens, what sort of service would exist in between Somerset & Seton, if all routes are localized in the future only? People would be forced to go up to Douglasdale/McKenzie, then transfer to Anderson/Heritage, just to get to Somerset and the deep SW of the city. That or fork out $30 for cabs every single trip. Is it wise to remove all connections between the hospital area (arguably one of the areas only real employment centers) and Somerset, once the LRT is fully built out and all feeders are completely localized, much like the 468?

I'm sure there will still be a bus connection to the hospital from Somerset. Though until they do the route review down here there's not much basis to speculate on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, armorand said:

The thing is though - if that happens, what sort of service would exist in between Somerset & Seton, if all routes are localized in the future only? People would be forced to go up to Douglasdale/McKenzie, then transfer to Anderson/Heritage, just to get to Somerset and the deep SW of the city. That or fork out $30 for cabs every single trip. Is it wise to remove all connections between the hospital area (arguably one of the areas only real employment centers) and Somerset, once the LRT is fully built out and all feeders are completely localized, much like the 468?

My assumption is that there will be sort of a single bus route from Somerset to the Hospital, another from Somerset to McKenzie Towne, a third from Anderson to Douglas Glen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just trying to solve an argument... Do any of the buses have automatic destination signs? 

My friend is convinced they are automatic but I have never seen or heard of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, nsCEO said:

Just trying to solve an argument... Do any of the buses have automatic destination signs? 

My friend is convinced they are automatic but I have never seen or heard of it

When functioning properly, the CAD system automatically sets the signs based on the buses’ schedule.  When there’s issues with CAD, operators can manually set signs. 

 So I guess the answer is usually supposed to be yes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.calgarytransit.com/news/our-covid-19-response has some interesting new information about shields on buses:

Quote

Shield installation on shuttles is already well underway and we’re completing about 12 vehicles a day. We expect to finish all shuttle shield installations by the end of May. We’re awaiting a big bus shield prototype and expect it to be available by June 1. Once it arrives, we’ll get feedback on it from ATU Local 583 and our employees. We’ll then install a shield on a big bus and send it out on the road for testing. If all goes well, we’re targeting to complete all big bus shield installations by July 1. After shields are in place, we will review our rear-door boarding policy.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, 1604 said:

http://www.calgarytransit.com/news/our-covid-19-response has some interesting new information about shields on buses:

No fares & fare enforcement until July? Nenshi's definitely not going to be a happy camper... especially with the longer wait times to reopen businesses thanks to Kenney, he may just take it out on city services and service hours for CT, in desperation to cut costs. I'm really hoping Nenshi doesn't take any more of the financial woes out on Calgary Transit... otherwise, the system and fleet may start looking like Winnipeg's, with small spare ratios, repair backlogs, service cuts, expansion halts and drops in ridership to match... 

As for the shields... just curious, wouldn't it be better for ATU and driver safety (not just health wise, but security as well), to install full security shields instead, versus just a bunch of duct-taped plexiglass and plastic tarps? Just seems like something a bit more beneficial long-term, for drivers. Its like using a paper towel to do the same job as a cloth towel that can be used over and over again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, armorand said:

No fares & fare enforcement until July?

For operators, sure (aren't operators discouraged from enforcing fare payment in regular times anyway?), but clearly customers are still expected to pay their fares and they're even ramping up enforcement (by the Peace Officers, I assume):

 image.thumb.png.92e2a76d1fecce28e1ab45d1ff4c4e97.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed a few artics out today on the Red Line shuttle. Of note, 6004 appears to have lost its livery, on the bottom forward driver’s side. It’s a sparkling clean white at the moment! 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, armorand said:

No fares & fare enforcement until July? Nenshi's definitely not going to be a happy camper... especially with the longer wait times to reopen businesses thanks to Kenney, he may just take it out on city services and service hours for CT, in desperation to cut costs. I'm really hoping Nenshi doesn't take any more of the financial woes out on Calgary Transit... otherwise, the system and fleet may start looking like Winnipeg's, with small spare ratios, repair backlogs, service cuts, expansion halts and drops in ridership to match... 

I disagree with the idea that the mayor and the city are “taking it out” on transit.

Let’s face it: there are fewer people needing to commute for any reason at the moment, so it is completely normal to scale back transit to match. I’m not sure you’d find any transit experts who think it’s a good idea to run empty buses and trains on a consistent basis. Service reductions are very disappointing to the transit fan/advocate in me but the rest of me completely understands and is sympathetic to the terrible fiscal situation in which the city (and all Canadian cities, really) currently finds itself. 

Notice where they *didn’t* cut service this time around: LRT, most MAX routes, #1, #3/301, #23, the buses following the old Circle Route, most routes passing near hospitals and most industrial routes. Probably an indication of where they think ridership growth will be in the short term, once the economy slowly gears up — i.e. everything except the downtown office setting.

Just the other day, the universities said their fall semester would be a mix of in person and remote learning, so that will have an impact on medium-term transit ridership as well.

And honestly, even if ridership were to suddenly double, there’s still room left on buses and trains to accommodate most of the time, from what I’ve been able to see.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...