InfiNorth

Seems like a big environmental step back for BC Transit, especially since their current "environmental" campaign is using CNG (just another fossil fuel).

Regarding RapidBus, I'm surprised we aren't seeing any infrastructure installation yet - departure boards, better shelters (both proposed in the plan but I'm not holding my breath), better bus priority space... As for Umo, are there any buses that have equipment onboard already for testing?

I disagree wholeheartedly about the 11. I personally would like to see it rerouted via Cadboro Bay Road (past the Uplands Golf Club) in a bid to improve its speed as winding through the narrow, crowded, parking-infested mess that is Uplands is a massive waste of time. Either that, or same-road running (the split run is stupid and clearly just caters to reduce noise on rich peoples' streets) via Nottingham, Weald, and Upper Terrace. At some point, I would argue that we also need a beach drive service, at least in the summer. Fairfield, Beach Drive, Cadboro Bay Road, Arbutus, Finnerty, UVIC Exchange. Provide service that both serves some underserved areas, bolsters other services, and provides a recreational benefit like the bus that now finally goes to Thetis on every run.

Speaking of which... what happened to that mystical contactless cashless payment system we were supposed to get in 2022...? I take it that it's "delayed," just like the Victoria RapidBus that there is literally zero development on that was supposed to start operations a month ago.

Crazy... I'll miss their comfy seats but not their noise.

The Mount Newton X Road "Queue Jump" and station is almost done, looking forward to seeing it in action... however, I am extremely (to put it mildly) disappointed by the design. First of all, the queue jump lanes are way too short to have any benefit to buses - I am willing to bet that this queue jump ends up being about as useful as the afterthought queue (getting tired of typing that word) at Sayward. The issue is that even once the bus gets into the lane (far tooclose to the intersection), there are three issues with the lane design: The lanes are too short. Buses will have to wait until they are already within "one-light-cycle light range" of the intersection to be able to access this "queue jump." Northbound, the lane extends only ~220m, while Southbound it is ~270m, both of which are well within the "one-light-cycle range" of traffic at any time. Unfortunately, this demonstrates that as usual, transit money has been used as an excuse to build more infrastructure for private vehicles - we now have a slightly longer right turn lane. The stops have bus bulbs instead of in-line platforms. This means that not only will the buses be moving no faster than traffic itself, but they have to wait to merge back into traffic in a "bus lane" that is really just a right-turn lane that was funded with transit money. There is no transit priority signaling. This is the biggest issue - this project will offer absolutely zero improvement to transit journey time (I am genuinely willing to put money on that) because the bus waits with everyone else, and then has to merge into traffic on the other side of the light. Frankly, I'm pretty disgusted by how this has turned out. The big win here is that the Tsawout Nation and the surrounding burgeoning developments have far better transit connectivity, especially into Downtown. However, this project does more to get buses out of traffic and let cars slip by while the bus waits at the platform rather than improving the flow of bus traffic. Once the new stop is open, I'll be spending a day up on the overpass watching the behaviour of traffic and gauging how wrong or right I am about my assessment. I've noticed that bus drivers virtually never use the Sayward "queue jump" unless they are forced to by a passenger, as it (a) forces them to merge back in, which in a double-decker bus can't be all that fun, and (b) does nothing but offer another passing opportunity for cars. Not to mention that you have the dangerous merge conflict on the other side of the intersection where as usual, private car is king and the only protection from a T-Bone collision with some idiot who didn't notice the bus is a set of flashing ambers instead of an actual controlled light. I'll report back with findings (and data to support them) once the Mt. Newton lane opens for usage, and will gladly admit defeat if I am wrong because if I'm wrong, it means we have better transit. But I can't find a single reason that I would be wrong.

Where was the old layover for timing along the Thrift loop route?

I am looking at a map and I cannot for the world of me find this fabled Alexander (road? ave? st? way? blvd? runway? train tracks?)

I've done park maintenance for private operators in about a half-dozen provincial parks. Wished I'd be employed directly instead of through the province instead.

Any ideas why? The 350 will still route via Thrift, so I'm confused why the 351 won't.

It has long bothered me that virtually all of BC Transit's services in BC are contracted out. Eliminate the middle man. BC Transit has shown pretty clearly that they have the capacity to run the systems themselves based on Victoria, I see zero benefit in handing a chunk of change over a contractor to profit off a public service. Really don't understand the logic behind it.

If you don't mind me asking, you sure do travel and get transit information a lot - are you associated professionally with transport services or is it genuinely that heavy of a hobby? Mad respect for the info you manage to share either way.

Boom. They changed the headline almost immediately after I sent a complaint in.

The fact that they call it a "tour bus" kind of grinds my gears.

Then how do I delete it?