Buses are faster, more flexible, and can move more people per hour to more destinations at a lower cost than any rail system
Calgary Transit is mired in the past, building an obsolete transit system designed for an archaic view of a city. Before the pandemic, transit carried 45 percent of downtown Calgary employees to work, but less than 10 percent of workers in the rest of the Calgary urban area, showing that Calgary Transit doesn’t really serve all of Calgary; it mainly serves downtown.
That would have worked in 1909, when Calgary’s first electric streetcars began operating and most jobs were downtown. By 2016, less than 15 percent of Calgary jobs were downtown, and the pandemic has reduced that number further.
Rather than design a transit system that serves the entire urban area, Calgary Transit light-rail system reinforced its downtown focus. Transit ridership has grown since the city’s first light rail line opened in 1981, but it was growing faster before the light rail began operating than it has since then. Now Calgary Transit is planning even more downtown-oriented light-rail lines.
| Related Stories |
| Reinventing transit for the 21st century
|
| Want a job? Buy a car
|
| A better way to fund transit expansion
|
Light rail is an expensive form of low-capacity transit. The word “light” in light rail refers not to weight but to capacity: the American Public Transportation Association’s transit glossary defines light rail as “an electric railway with a ‘light volume’ traffic capacity.” While a light-rail train can hold a lot of people, for safety reasons a single light-rail line can move no more than about 20 trains per hour in each direction.
By comparison, Portland, Oregon, runs 160 buses per hour down certain city streets. An Istanbul busway moves more than 250 buses per hour. Bogota Columbia busways move 350 buses per hour. All these transitways cost far less per mile than light rail yet can move more people per hour.
Once they leave a busway, buses can go on any city street, reaching far more destinations than rail. If a bus breaks down or a street is closed for some reason, other buses can find detours, while a single light-rail breakdown can jam up an entire rail line. If transportation patterns change because of a pandemic, the opening of a new economic centre, or the decline of an existing centre, bus routes can change overnight while rail routes take years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars to change.
To truly serve the entire region, Calgary Transit must recognize that buses are faster, more flexible, and can move more people per hour to more destinations at a lower cost than any rail system. It should also recognize that modern urban areas have many economic centres and use buses to serve all those centres.
Besides downtown, Calgary’s major economic centres – the airport, the University of Calgary, Chinook Centre, the Seton Health Centre, and others – are mostly located near freeway on- and off-ramps. Calgary Transit should identify 10 or so such centres geographically distributed around the region. It should locate transit centres – which need be no more than curbside parking reserved for buses with some modest bus shelters – near the freeway exchanges closest to each centre.
It should then operate frequent (up to five times per hour) non-stop buses from every centre to every other centre. A few secondary transit centres might operate non-stop buses to just two or three other centres. Local bus routes should radiate away from each centre to serve every neighbourhood of the Calgary urban area.
Since non-stop buses will operate at freeway speeds, the average speed of this bus system will be more than double the average speed of Calgary’s current bus-and-rail system. Transit riders will be able to get from any corner of the urban area to any other part of the urban area at speeds that are competitive with driving.
Such a polycentric system will serve a much higher percentage of the region’s workers and other travelers than the current monocentric system yet cost no more to operate. It will cost far less to build than a single rail line since most of the necessary infrastructure already exists. While some may worry that buses will get caught in congestion, the solution is to fix congestion for everyone, not spend billions on a slow rail system that only serves a few people in the region.
It is time for Calgary Transit to enter the 21st century. A polycentric bus system may be the best way to do it.
Randal O’Toole is a transportation policy analyst and author of Building 21st Century Transit Systems for Canadian Cities, a recent report published by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
For interview requests, click here.
The opinions expressed by our columnists and contributors are theirs alone and do not inherently or expressly reflect the views of our publication.
© Troy Media
Troy Media is an editorial content provider to media outlets and its own hosted community news outlets across Canada.
