YYCguy
Active Member
I don’t travel along that route very often, but there doesn’t seem to be enough room to create transit only lanes from downtown to McKnight.
|
|
|
Calgary Transit
- Thread starter Always_Biking
- Start date
trtcttc
Senior Member
I passed by a few of the upgraded MAX stops, now they'll have to go in and replace all the signage that said "301 BRT". It's not just the post, the horizontal signs say the stop then in small letters at the bottom says "301 BRT". This kind of waste drives me crazy. It's just so simple to have named it before they upgraded the stations, especially when they ended up choosing green. Isn't the city still in a climate emergency? Maybe try some waste reduction.
Route 301 bus gets new name: Max Green - LiveWire Calgary
Calgary Transit is changing the name of the 301 bus, but it comes with no service alterations to the route itself. Starting Sept. 1, the Route 301 bus will officially become part of Calgary Transit’s Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network with a renaming to Max Green. This goes along with the Max...livewirecalgary.com
Lol North-Central Calgary, you might not get your Green Line but how about a MAX Green?
CBBarnett
Senior Member
If we are really talking about waste, the biggest issue remains the wasted hours of busses stuck downtown circulating on the avenues.
These upgrades don’t help with that but are otherwise a nice upgrade in both formalizing the stops and vastly improving the pedestrian and transit user experience waiting to board, on an otherwise fairly bleak corridor with sloppy sidewalk.
Calgary Transit (and Calgary in general) seems to default to the capital spending approach to make improvements. These are good but when it relates to the bus system I’m increasing convinced a comparatively cheap circulation plan is what is actually needed to make more substantial gains in effectiveness of the system.
Ultimately the thing that a circulation plan should reveal is the cheapest solution to improve transit quality, speed and reliability - just prioritize transit over cars at-grade, particularly on key corridors and in downtown/major destinations.
whatchyyc
Active Member
The signage is just a printed decal anyways, "301 BRT" already replaced "Max TBD" that was there before. Also, Green was a last minute political move when CT had a different color lined up
accord1999
Active Member
The NC BRT study noted the problems with the DT as well, and has some details about possible DT improvements including a bus only lane and change in routing to improve it.
However one thing that I don't see discussed is that even if CT gets bus only lanes and divert significant car travelers onto buses, is there enough bus capacity? Before the 2014 oil crash, the Centre Street bus routes had the most overloads in the system. It does CT no good if all these former car drivers can't even get on a bus during rush hour.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
i do wonderful how many more busses you can “create” during rush hour simply but reducing congestion for them downtown. Countless routes are subject to all sorts of bus bunching and delays downtown as a result of lack of priority. In the current state transit needs more busses to do less, as they must account for the time lost trying to grind through downtown at rush periods.
Again, it’s why a circulation plan has some of the best value of what they can do. Costs relatively nothing compared to major infrastructure , and you get a bunch of your busses back rather than have them wait in traffic downtown as they have for the past 50 years. It doesn’t solve everything of course, just a cheap way to make the existing fleet and service stretch much farther.