Oh interesting. I didn't know there was a stop planned at the "Airport" (96th). Is there a thread about this?
|
|
|
- Thread starter Always_Biking
- Start date
darwink
Senior Member
Calgary Regional Rail Transit
When I was younger, the city of Calgary felt like an island of development unto itself. It didn't really have a metropolitan region like most major cities. There are now hundreds of thousands of people who live in Calgary's satellites. Airdrie, the largest of them has nearly sextupled in size...
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
The stop at 96th will connect to what will likely be an airport people-mover line similar to others around the world. 96 Avenue Station will in no way be considered the airport station.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
And for clarity, the Banff rail line station will be at YYC. The aforementioned 96 Avenue Station is on the Ctrain.
The mountain rail will be YYC -> Downtown -> Kieth -> Cochrane -> Stoney Nakoda (Seebe or Morley) -> Canmore -> Banff
I wish I could find out more about this. All I can find are speculative maps that show the "airport" station being on a peoplemover, or some future branch of the C-train, not the actual train from Banff (or downtown) rolling in to a station at the airport.
It doesn't seem like it would be reasonable (or possible) to have more than 1 rail use (C-train, peoplemover or regional passenger train) in the Airport Trail corridor.
I guess it would be possible to have regional rail coming in to the airport from the west, and C-train or a peoplemover from the east. Maybe I just need to work my way back through this thread, and the regional rail one.
whatchyyc
Active Member
Friends of Calgary Airport to Banff Rail Fact Sheet
Banff Rail Calgary Airport Terminal
Airport Transit Line Route Selection & Technology Study
Airport Transit Line - Plans and Profiles
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Ahead of any regional rail, people mover type system, I would like the Route 300 to be an actual express bus to downtown.
Currently the 300 acts as another layer of "express" service on Centre Street along with the Route 3 and Route 301. I am sure that picks up a few riders, but only opportunistic ones - if the far more frequent Route 3 and 301 happens to not be there when the 300 pulls in, might as well take it as it goes to the same place. There's likely no riders generated by the 300's route down Centre Street at all.
Let's compare to Canada's largest city with only bus airport transit (for now) - Montreal.
Montreal has long relied on the 747 Express Bus to connect downtown Montreal and the airport. They are currently building an automated light-metro (REM) to connect the airport and other places. In the future, 20 minute service is guaranteed by the REM with a completely grade-separated and automated metro system from the Airport to Downtown Montreal.
For comparison of Calgary and Montreal with today's bus-based service, all numbers and distances are approximate and mid-day traffic. Both Calgary and Montreal busses would be subject to congestion in rush-hours. Consider the travel times as the best case scenario as it changes by the hour.
A side note on the qualitative comparison. Here's what happens when you google "Calgary Airport Bus" v. "Montreal Airport Bus".
Montreal - the STM (Montreal's transit agency) is the first search result with key info in immediately available. Next is the map.
Calgary - Calgary Transit's page doesn't appear on first page of google result, nor does the map. The Airport's link provides limited information and eventually directs you to Calgary Transit's trip planner page, not a airport-specific landing page. I actually don't know if Calgary Transit even has an airport route page as I couldn't find one:
My conclusion & recommendations we could implement immediately (relative to any train or people mover construction):
Currently the 300 acts as another layer of "express" service on Centre Street along with the Route 3 and Route 301. I am sure that picks up a few riders, but only opportunistic ones - if the far more frequent Route 3 and 301 happens to not be there when the 300 pulls in, might as well take it as it goes to the same place. There's likely no riders generated by the 300's route down Centre Street at all.
Let's compare to Canada's largest city with only bus airport transit (for now) - Montreal.
Montreal has long relied on the 747 Express Bus to connect downtown Montreal and the airport. They are currently building an automated light-metro (REM) to connect the airport and other places. In the future, 20 minute service is guaranteed by the REM with a completely grade-separated and automated metro system from the Airport to Downtown Montreal.
For comparison of Calgary and Montreal with today's bus-based service, all numbers and distances are approximate and mid-day traffic. Both Calgary and Montreal busses would be subject to congestion in rush-hours. Consider the travel times as the best case scenario as it changes by the hour.
Montreal - LG | Montreal - Berri/UQAM | Calgary - 7 Ave SW | |
| Description | Airport to city centre west, Lionel-Groulx Stn. (Orange/Green Metro transfer) | Airport to city centre east, Berri-UQAM Stn. (Orange/Green/Yellow Metro transfer | Airport to City Centre, 7th Ave @ 5 Street SW (Blue/Red Transfer) |
| Travel Distance | ~16.5 km, both car and bus | ~ 21km, both car and bus/bus-metro | ~20km car and bus |
| Transit travel time | 19 min | 33 min | 40 min |
| Car travel time | 19 min | 24 min | 23 min |
| Bus v. Car travel time | same | Bus takes 9 minutes longer | Bus takes 17 minutes longer |
| Stops | 0 | 11 (all downtown) | 15 stops, 3 downtown |
| Service Period | 24/7 | 24/7 | 19 hours weekdays, 18 hours weekends, 4:30am - 11:30pm |
| Peak Frequency | every 8 minutes (15 minutes or better 10 hours/day) | every 6 minutes (15 mins or better for 12 hours/day) | every 30 minutes |
| Cost | $11 (includes transfers) | $11 (includes transfers) | $3.40 to airport, $11.25 return (day pass) |
A side note on the qualitative comparison. Here's what happens when you google "Calgary Airport Bus" v. "Montreal Airport Bus".
Montreal - the STM (Montreal's transit agency) is the first search result with key info in immediately available. Next is the map.
Calgary - Calgary Transit's page doesn't appear on first page of google result, nor does the map. The Airport's link provides limited information and eventually directs you to Calgary Transit's trip planner page, not a airport-specific landing page. I actually don't know if Calgary Transit even has an airport route page as I couldn't find one:
My conclusion & recommendations we could implement immediately (relative to any train or people mover construction):
- Make the 300 an actual express bus by directing it down Deerfoot and reducing the number of stops from ~15 to 2.
- Only stop should be at Airport & 7th Avenue, ideally at City Hall Station for both transfers so the bus doesn't have to cross downtown traffic.
- That change alone could save 10+ minutes per trip and make the service competitive with driving on time
- There can only be positive ridership change from this move - Centre Street is layered with far better services than the 300 so doesn't need a redundant airport route
- With a far faster trip time, add another bus. Get the peak service to 20 minutes or better all day. Extend hours if possible.
- For the love of god - and this is absolutely as important as the frequency/service stuff - please someone figure out websites and communications for Calgary Transit.
- Don't cede control of your service's offering to the airport to describe the airport public transit service what it is and how it works. They have no understanding or interest in it.
- Be emphatically pro-transit and win the communications side of things - compete!
whatchyyc
Active Member
In my own experience only maybe two or three people (including me) make the trip to the airport, the bus is almost always standing room only but everyone is off by the time we turn onto 96 Ave. It's literally just an extra 301 trip and makes getting to our relatively close airport super slow for no good reason
The website/comms thing is infuriating. I've seen systems serving just a few hundred thousand a year with better, cleaner websites and socials than CT.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
I get that logic and why Transit will see a marginal operational efficiency for interlining the 3 / 300/ 301. Anecdotally, I have taken the 300 outside of rush-hour and it's often quite full downtown, with only a handful of people getting off on the Centre Street section. Particularly true in the summer tourist season.
But it's part of the overall problem - the airport bus will always be a marginal service if you treat it as a marginal service. If operationally the goal is eke out a bit more utilization for a trip or two on Centre during rush-hours perhaps we shouldn't call it the Airport bus. If it's not a distinct service rename the route (e.g. 301A - North Point, 301B - Airport etc.)
- If we want good transit on Centre Street add more busses to Route 3 and 301 from the existing 8 - 20 / hour that already occur in each direction.
- If we want good transit to the airport, put Route 300 onto Deerfoot and make it far more obvious how to use it.
It's strange when a city and province are all intrigued and debating about spending billions on cool shiny trains... but we also can't find the momentum to adjust the existing transit to run a direct downtown to city centre bus every 20 minutes
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
Fancy transit to the airport is one of those things that is popular, but not all that useful. Everybody thinks it's a good idea, but the actual market when push comes to shove is small:
On the Montreal case, there are a few things I agree with, but the service to Lionel-Groulx is not downtown service in any meaningful sense; it's a kilometre and a half from Concordia, which is about as far west as you could consider downtown (and Montreal's downtown is a long east-west one; the middle of downtown is at least two kilometres from Lionel-Groulx). The way the roads go, Lionel-Groulx is roughly as close a station to the airport as any other It could be compared to Calgary's 100, which goes to McKnight Westwinds in 22 minutes (only 4 minutes more than by car) and which in theory has like 6 or 7 stops but I'd be shocked if it actually stopped more than twice on any given trip. But the 100's headway also sucks, every 30 minutes.
I also disagree with the implicit suggestion that people want to get to an arbitrary point downtown, and that's it. Especially the City Hall LRT station, which is not the most salubrious area, and more importantly, isn't near any hotels. Who wants to drag their bag several blocks in the winter to get to their hotel? Here's the downtown hotels (cyan) and 300 stops (magenta). The City Hall stop is noticable because it's the one that's the furthest from any hotels.
The 300 has problems -- both the unacceptable headways and the lack of good information -- but stopping a few times downtown so it's near the hotels is not one of the problems IMO.
As a side note, here's two current transit maps; which one was made by a city that invests in and wants you to take transit? Which one would entice you as a visitor? Which city employs a professional graphic designer?
I suspect the point of the 300 is to provide better transit service on a corridor that actually uses it, while saying we provide transit to the airport because people don't actually take transit to the airport, and so they don't know or care if it's good, as long as it's been advertised. In a way, it's genius -- it provides service that gets real ridership without actually costing the money for near-empty buses to speed down the Deerfoot. I'm not sure that taking service off of our best corridor to serve a market that isn't likely to take transit is actually a good deal.
But if we were to go with the cover story that the point of the 300 is airport service, then a direct route does make more sense. Right now, the 300 is scheduled for 90 minute round trips, with 38 or so round trips a day. That's 57 service hours of transit. If the route went on Deerfoot (it could bypass traffic on the shoulder in the peaks), it could be scheduled as a 60 minute trip; roughly 17-18 minutes each way to and from the airport, 18 minutes or so for the downtown loop, and 5-8 minutes of break time at the airport. That reschedule would permit 20 minute headways from 5 AM to midnight (instead of the current 30 minutes) for the same cost, which is in the order of magnitude of $3M per year. For about 10% more, that could add hourly overnight service. For 20% more, half hourly overnight. For 50% more, 15 minute headways all day and 30 minutes overnight. Sure, that's an extra $1.5 million dollars a year, which is only, what, 1000 years or so, give or take a few centuries of improved service for the cost of an airport train.
For our city at this time, what we need is the basics executed well. Remove the hassle as much as possible, through clear wayfinding and good promotional materials. This is on both ends - there should be a visible, high quality shelter at the downtown locations with a countdown timer and ticket machine in it.
- Travelling here for business? Your time is too valuable to figure out niche transit services, just spend the company's money on a taxi or Uber.
- Travelling here to meet family or friends? They probably don't live downtown, so you'd have to connect to another random transit service, plus they likely have a car and are picking you up.
- Travelling here in a group? That $11 fare adds up quickly; pretty soon it's comparable to taking a taxi, but with more hassle. If you have kids, you definitely want to have them in a cab rather than trying to keep them calm on a bus (and paying more than taxi for your trip).
- Travelling alone, on a holiday? You just spent four hours and hundreds of bucks cooped up in a plane; what's another 20 or 30 to save the hassle and just get to your hotel?
- Living here and travelling from the north suburbs? Why would you go out of your way south all the way to downtown to catch transit back past your house to the airport?
- Living here and travelling from the south suburbs? It's a 20-30 minute drive directly to the airport. By the time you shlep downtown to catch the bus, it's not really worth it.
- Living here and travelling from work downtown? You're a business traveller, just take a cab and expense it.
On the Montreal case, there are a few things I agree with, but the service to Lionel-Groulx is not downtown service in any meaningful sense; it's a kilometre and a half from Concordia, which is about as far west as you could consider downtown (and Montreal's downtown is a long east-west one; the middle of downtown is at least two kilometres from Lionel-Groulx). The way the roads go, Lionel-Groulx is roughly as close a station to the airport as any other It could be compared to Calgary's 100, which goes to McKnight Westwinds in 22 minutes (only 4 minutes more than by car) and which in theory has like 6 or 7 stops but I'd be shocked if it actually stopped more than twice on any given trip. But the 100's headway also sucks, every 30 minutes.
I also disagree with the implicit suggestion that people want to get to an arbitrary point downtown, and that's it. Especially the City Hall LRT station, which is not the most salubrious area, and more importantly, isn't near any hotels. Who wants to drag their bag several blocks in the winter to get to their hotel? Here's the downtown hotels (cyan) and 300 stops (magenta). The City Hall stop is noticable because it's the one that's the furthest from any hotels.
The 300 has problems -- both the unacceptable headways and the lack of good information -- but stopping a few times downtown so it's near the hotels is not one of the problems IMO.
As a side note, here's two current transit maps; which one was made by a city that invests in and wants you to take transit? Which one would entice you as a visitor? Which city employs a professional graphic designer?
I suspect the point of the 300 is to provide better transit service on a corridor that actually uses it, while saying we provide transit to the airport because people don't actually take transit to the airport, and so they don't know or care if it's good, as long as it's been advertised. In a way, it's genius -- it provides service that gets real ridership without actually costing the money for near-empty buses to speed down the Deerfoot. I'm not sure that taking service off of our best corridor to serve a market that isn't likely to take transit is actually a good deal.
But if we were to go with the cover story that the point of the 300 is airport service, then a direct route does make more sense. Right now, the 300 is scheduled for 90 minute round trips, with 38 or so round trips a day. That's 57 service hours of transit. If the route went on Deerfoot (it could bypass traffic on the shoulder in the peaks), it could be scheduled as a 60 minute trip; roughly 17-18 minutes each way to and from the airport, 18 minutes or so for the downtown loop, and 5-8 minutes of break time at the airport. That reschedule would permit 20 minute headways from 5 AM to midnight (instead of the current 30 minutes) for the same cost, which is in the order of magnitude of $3M per year. For about 10% more, that could add hourly overnight service. For 20% more, half hourly overnight. For 50% more, 15 minute headways all day and 30 minutes overnight. Sure, that's an extra $1.5 million dollars a year, which is only, what, 1000 years or so, give or take a few centuries of improved service for the cost of an airport train.
For our city at this time, what we need is the basics executed well. Remove the hassle as much as possible, through clear wayfinding and good promotional materials. This is on both ends - there should be a visible, high quality shelter at the downtown locations with a countdown timer and ticket machine in it.
CalgaryTiger
Senior Member
C-Train Ridership has recovered to January 2019 levels. Buses on the other hand... I take the 7 and the 6.
The 6 is packed by the time I get on at 17th Ave and 14 St. They need to crank up the frequency on the 6 during the morning and afternoon, while the 7 has suffered from the route change off 1st St downtown.
The 7 gets caught in traffic on 5th Ave and Macleod that has, numerous times, ended up with two buses running into each other where the first bus is packed with people because its forced to stop at every stop and the second bus is dead but can't pass the other one.
Either increase the frequency with Route Ahead or remove some stops.
livewirecalgary.com
The 6 is packed by the time I get on at 17th Ave and 14 St. They need to crank up the frequency on the 6 during the morning and afternoon, while the 7 has suffered from the route change off 1st St downtown.
The 7 gets caught in traffic on 5th Ave and Macleod that has, numerous times, ended up with two buses running into each other where the first bus is packed with people because its forced to stop at every stop and the second bus is dead but can't pass the other one.
Either increase the frequency with Route Ahead or remove some stops.
Calgary's January CTrain ridership surpasses pre-pandemic levels - LiveWire Calgary
The latest data on passengers boarding buses and trains in Calgary shows continued positive improvement in the number of passengers using Calgary Transit. Data released on March 8 outlined the growth of passenger numbers on the city’s LRT lines and highlighted the work still to be done to get...
livewirecalgary.com
Is that because homeless people are now factoring into the LRT counts. J/K
Nice to see such a big bounce back. One thing interesting, is every year there's a huge discrepancy between July and August (example shown in red box). Most years the difference is around 1M people. I'm assuming it's because the Stampede does big numbers in July?
Nice to see such a big bounce back. One thing interesting, is every year there's a huge discrepancy between July and August (example shown in red box). Most years the difference is around 1M people. I'm assuming it's because the Stampede does big numbers in July?
DougB
Active Member
Also lots of vacations in August
ByeByeBaby
Active Member
Stampede proper attendance is over a million, (plus six figures for the parade, and lots of people for other events) and someone who takes the train to the grounds is counted twice; once on the way there and once on the way home. In a way, I'm surprised the Stampede bump is only a million. I wouldn't be surprised if counting techniques are less accurate with the crush crowds at Stampede time and there's a bit of an undercount.