Victoria Regional Transit System

[InfiNorth]

Up in the newly expanding subdivisions in Sooke (near Sunriver Estates), I've noticed that the 64 does some weird side-trips into this area... though most of them head for Sooke instead of the East Sooke direction, which while logical on first glance provides a curious issue for travelers: How do you get home after getting into Sooke for shopping/school/work? That being said, service up there is so infrequent at this point that it barely matters as I can't imagine that those stops are used very much at all. The 64 East Sooke bothers me regardless for many, many reasons, but I thought I'd give a small suggestion for the Sunriver area. As it is purely a residential area, a one-way loop service would be most logical on Sunriver Way instead of bidirectional service with a turnaround at the other end. Here is what I mean in pictorial form. Yes, I know I'm supposed to be a mapmaker but I couldn't be bothered to try hard tonight. Paint will have to do.

[SomeIslandKid]

1 hour ago, InfiNorth said:

Up in the newly expanding subdivisions in Sooke (near Sunriver Estates), I've noticed that the 64 does some weird side-trips into this area... though most of them head for Sooke instead of the East Sooke direction, which while logical on first glance provides a curious issue for travelers: How do you get home after getting into Sooke for shopping/school/work? That being said, service up there is so infrequent at this point that it barely matters as I can't imagine that those stops are used very much at all. The 64 East Sooke bothers me regardless for many, many reasons, but I thought I'd give a small suggestion for the Sunriver area. As it is purely a residential area, a one-way loop service would be most logical on Sunriver Way instead of bidirectional service with a turnaround at the other end. Here is what I mean in pictorial form. Yes, I know I'm supposed to be a mapmaker but I couldn't be bothered to try hard tonight. Paint will have to do.

You should be happy with the plans in the Sooke Local Area Plan. It proposes cutting out Sunriver from the 64 and making it into one of 3 Sooke local routes. The 64 can then better service East Sooke with an additional connection to the Langford exchange via Metchosin, providing service to Beecher Bay. The 63 would also get a redo, cutting Whiffen Spit, while the 61/65/possible new variant would get a frequency boost. Lol if they add a new version and it ends up as the old 61x routing down Veterans.

Here's a badly snipped screenshot of the planned local routes, check the real PDF for actually quality and individual route diagrams haha. The local routes would get hourly service 6 days a week, bi-hourly Sunday, 30 min weekday peak, while the rural 63/64 would double from 4 trips a day to 8 or 9 with added Saturday service. Here's hoping they happen since they'd be a great improvement for Sooke.

[Matt Dunlop]

Honestly, the local service in Sooke is a joke. The 61 is the real money-maker (if you want to call it that!) and it runs basically every hour, except during peak times. The 63 only runs twice in the day, twice in the afternoon, that's it, and Mon-Fri at that. When they had the Future Bus in Sooke a couple years back, I did put in a suggestion to have the local service increased - and have it run daily including the weekends. How do you expect people to take transit when the service is a joke? Granted, at least they are using larger buses now which seat 24 people instead of 20 and load wheelchairs easier (Vicinity Natural Gas). BEFORE Covid-19 happened, there has been the odd occurence where people have been passed up due to the Arboc having limited capacity. 

This is a new topic - hopefully it turns into a new post! 

I put in a suggestion to BC Transit - and they forwarded it to scheduling/planning.

Right now, they are doing major construction on Millstream Rd/McCallum Dr. On a good day - it can take the bus an extra 5-10 minutes just to go half a KM, if that. 2 days ago - Friday - there was so much traffic, I got off the 57 on Treanor, walked, and still made it further than the bus. That was including waiting for traffic lights, etc. 

Anyways, I suggested that they have the 56 leaving the Langford Exchange drive down McCallum from Leigh Road - that way people at the exchange get a direct trip to Costco - no detouring through Thetis Heights/Millstream like they have to do now. The Florence Lake side could get service as it comes back from Thetis Heights after it does a 57, that way they aren't on the bus as long - they shouldn't have to wait for the bus to do a full loop around Thetis Heights just to get to the exchange. 

Also suggested that the service be increased to 40 minutes - I heard that the 52 will be changed in January and travelling down the back side of Bear Mountain to Leigh Road. I can only imagine the 52 would travel down Millstream towards Bear Mountain, then head back to the exchange along Leigh Road (towards Colwood). We'll see what happens in January. 

[InfiNorth]

11 hours ago, Matt Dunlop said:

The 63

Sooke is, in many respects, still considered a rural area and the 61 is a pretty special bus to have exist. That being said, even Youbou has better service than what they have on Otter Point Road.

[Matt Dunlop]

29 minutes ago, InfiNorth said:

Sooke is, in many respects, still considered a rural area and the 61 is a pretty special bus to have exist. That being said, even Youbou has better service than what they have on Otter Point Road.

And that's probably just an Arboc. Honestly, I think the local Sooke service should be split between two buses - one doing the 63's, one doing the 64's, morning and afternoon seperately... that way, if there's a breakdown, all service isn't lost. 

[InfiNorth]

https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/man-arrested-after-attack-on-bc-transit-driver-in-saanich-1.5191367

Can people please stop being idiots? Please? Also, this further reinforces my confusion about the driver door design that was chosen by BC Transit. It provides very little protection as an assailant can easily reach around the plexiglass. What were the reasons for not selecting a more protective enclosure?

[Dane]

8 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

I'm just quoting you to get your attention

In the Via thread you talked about the 12 year old Nova lifespan versus the longer lifespan of some D40LF's. I didn't want to derail that discussion that seems back on track (train talk) - but wanted to add some insight to the perception of bus lifespan. The New Flyer fleet received rebuilds at some point. A decision was made before Nova was selected for what became the 9300-series buses that no more rebuilds would occur midlife, and vehicles would retire around 12 years. The idea was / is that the cost was essentially the same taking into account ongoing maintenance and future technology savings in fuel etc etc. So, the Nova lifespan is indicative of a policy change rather than substantive quality change. This policy is probably influenced by the US where there's some sort of funding I don't totally understand that makes 12 years a pretty standard transit bus lifespan. 

[Matt Dunlop]

14 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/man-arrested-after-attack-on-bc-transit-driver-in-saanich-1.5191367

Can people please stop being idiots? Please? Also, this further reinforces my confusion about the driver door design that was chosen by BC Transit. It provides very little protection as an assailant can easily reach around the plexiglass. What were the reasons for not selecting a more protective enclosure?

And they say the nutcases only come out at night 
Sadly, assaults can happen for any reason, at any time of the day, on any route. 

Kudos to the bus driver for putting the passenger in his place, and luckily it was a bus with a shield and camera. The vinyl shower curtain doesn't provide any protection for the driver. 

[Matt Dunlop]

BC Transit is pleased to be proceeding with the release of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for our first 10 battery electric heavy-duty buses. 

https://www.bctransit.com/victoria/news?nid=1529710904788

[InfiNorth]

https://www.saanichnews.com/news/bc-transit-launches-investigation-after-passenger-fall-from-upper-deck/

I'm sorry but what exactly is BC Transit supposed to do to avoid this other than the already-present signs begging passengers to stay out of the stairway while underway? For the driver to get out of their seat and check the staircase every stop?

For the love of god please don't add another pre-recorded robo-voice announcement. Our buses barely ever even make it through the mask announcement, and with that it's already an endless barrage of noise that you just have to tune out.

[Matt Dunlop]

17 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

https://www.saanichnews.com/news/bc-transit-launches-investigation-after-passenger-fall-from-upper-deck/

I'm sorry but what exactly is BC Transit supposed to do to avoid this other than the already-present signs begging passengers to stay out of the stairway while underway? For the driver to get out of their seat and check the staircase every stop?

For the love of god please don't add another pre-recorded robo-voice announcement. Our buses barely ever even make it through the mask announcement, and with that it's already an endless barrage of noise that you just have to tune out.

How about "We accept no liablility when using the stairwells!" 

[Orion6784]

18 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

https://www.saanichnews.com/news/bc-transit-launches-investigation-after-passenger-fall-from-upper-deck/

I'm sorry but what exactly is BC Transit supposed to do to avoid this other than the already-present signs begging passengers to stay out of the stairway while underway? For the driver to get out of their seat and check the staircase every stop?

For the love of god please don't add another pre-recorded robo-voice announcement. Our buses barely ever even make it through the mask announcement, and with that it's already an endless barrage of noise that you just have to tune out.

They've had double deckers for how many years now?!?!?!? 20?!?!?!?!? It should be common knowledge that you watch your step going up and down the stairwell. Pay attention people!

[InfiNorth]

19 minutes ago, Orion6784 said:

They've had double deckers for how many years now?!?!?!? 20?!?!?!?!? It should be common knowledge that you watch your step going up and down the stairwell. Pay attention people!

My question is what are they even investigating? What is there to launch an investigation into? Someone fell down the staircase that they were using on a moving vehicle. 

[SomeIslandKid]

Eh there's a lot that a driver could've done to contribute to it. Possible safety measures that could be added. The results could be a big ole meh, but maybe there's a couple small ways to improve the railings, add some padding, or something. Alternatively, maybe the driver hit the gas way too hard, or had to slam on the breaks to avoid hitting something or someone, and it can shine a light on better tactics/the need for better road designs. Or maybe someone threw themselves down the stairs to see what'd happen. Never hurts to investigate and figure out what went wrong, and what reasonable steps to prevent it can be taken in the future.

[Matt Dunlop]

2 hours ago, SomeIslandKid said:

Eh there's a lot that a driver could've done to contribute to it. Possible safety measures that could be added. The results could be a big ole meh, but maybe there's a couple small ways to improve the railings, add some padding, or something. Alternatively, maybe the driver hit the gas way too hard, or had to slam on the breaks to avoid hitting something or someone, and it can shine a light on better tactics/the need for better road designs. Or maybe someone threw themselves down the stairs to see what'd happen. Never hurts to investigate and figure out what went wrong, and what reasonable steps to prevent it can be taken in the future.

The report said the bus was stopped, the lady got up to move downstairs, and then the driver stepped on the gas. The deckers aren't exactly McLaren's... they take a while to get up to speed. I am guessing the momentum of the bus going backwards made her lose balance and well... you know the rest. 

[SomeIslandKid]

1 hour ago, Matt Dunlop said:

The report said the bus was stopped, the lady got up to move downstairs, and then the driver stepped on the gas. The deckers aren't exactly McLaren's... they take a while to get up to speed. I am guessing the momentum of the bus going backwards made her lose balance and well... you know the rest. 

Where did you find that report? The only information given in the only linked article was that it was a 50. Nothing about the speed of the bus.

[Matt Dunlop]

7 hours ago, SomeIslandKid said:

Where did you find that report? The only information given in the only linked article was that it was a 50. Nothing about the speed of the bus.

https://www.iheartradio.ca/cfax-1070/news/langford-woman-injured-in-fall-on-bus-calls-on-bc-transit-to-improve-safety-1.13982527?fbclid=IwAR0wMRK3_ZmE_eXnRvTcTRROBQLKG4rH3aGcEnW5M4XUL5Ez_0b78E5WTc8

[CV92]

With the impending arrival of new double deckers coinciding with the 20-year anniversary of deckers in Victoria, and the retirement of the original 10,  Transit has launched a page on their website commemorating the occasion. Of note, the highest mileage of the original 10 is 9004, with 1,232,704km (and counting!). Bus 9001 will also be transferred back to Alexander-Dennis upon retirement and will be preserved in a museum. 

https://www.bctransit.com/doubledecker20

https://www.bctransit.com/documents/1529710964594

[InfiNorth]

16 hours ago, CV92 said:

With the impending arrival of new double deckers coinciding with the 20-year anniversary of deckers in Victoria, and the retirement of the original 10,  Transit has launched a page on their website commemorating the occasion. Of note, the highest mileage of the original 10 is 9004, with 1,232,704km (and counting!). Bus 9001 will also be transferred back to Alexander-Dennis upon retirement and will be preserved in a museum. 

https://www.bctransit.com/doubledecker20

https://www.bctransit.com/documents/1529710964594

It's too bad we don't have an active transit museum (other than a museum society) to preserve one of the originals here in BC. 

[InfiNorth]

I'm going to page @Articulated, @Matt Dunlop, @Dane, @CV92, @SomeIslandKid to try to answer this one... I was previously under the impression that BC Transit in the Victoria Regional Transit Service was the first system in North America to integrate double-decker buses into regular service. I didn't come up with this myself - it's stated on multiple websites and in several books. However, someone on Reddit has pointed out (accurately) that Brampton 8500 was in public service eleven years earlier after being used at 86 and in Victoria as a tour bus. The Wiki page says that it mostly operated for special events and not in regular service, but it also suggest that it saw regular service as well... so what's the consensus here? Is Victoria truly the first in North America to operate deckers in regular service or is that hogwash?

[CV92]

3 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

I'm going to page @Articulated, @Matt Dunlop, @Dane, @CV92, @SomeIslandKid to try to answer this one... I was previously under the impression that BC Transit in the Victoria Regional Transit Service was the first system in North America to integrate double-decker buses into regular service. I didn't come up with this myself - it's stated on multiple websites and in several books. However, someone on Reddit has pointed out (accurately) that Brampton 8500 was in public service eleven years earlier after being used at 86 and in Victoria as a tour bus. The Wiki page says that it mostly operated for special events and not in regular service, but it also suggest that it saw regular service as well... so what's the consensus here? Is Victoria truly the first in North America to operate deckers in regular service or is that hogwash?

Paging @Les Broughton and @BCT-3122-D800-10240!

[Articulated]

3 hours ago, InfiNorth said:

I'm going to page @Articulated, @Matt Dunlop, @Dane, @CV92, @SomeIslandKid to try to answer this one... I was previously under the impression that BC Transit in the Victoria Regional Transit Service was the first system in North America to integrate double-decker buses into regular service. I didn't come up with this myself - it's stated on multiple websites and in several books. However, someone on Reddit has pointed out (accurately) that Brampton 8500 was in public service eleven years earlier after being used at 86 and in Victoria as a tour bus. The Wiki page says that it mostly operated for special events and not in regular service, but it also suggest that it saw regular service as well... so what's the consensus here? Is Victoria truly the first in North America to operate deckers in regular service or is that hogwash?

Brampton Transit 8500 definitely did see revenue service during its time in Brampton, and it did have a farebox for those occasions, although any service it did see was rather limited. Most of the time it only operated on a short-turn on route 1 Queen, predominately during rush hours. Most drivers were unfamiliar with it, to the degree that it got smacked into the (regular-height) garage on more than one occasion.

So I guess you could say that Brampton Transit was the first to operate a double deck bus in revenue service, but it was certainly not to the level or extent of Victoria, with a sizeable fleet and regularly scheduled operation.

[InfiNorth]

I have now learned the New York City used double-decker buses long ago, and that LA used Neoplan N 122/3 buses (no idea if I'm typing that out correctly), meaning that no, Victoria was definitely not the first transit system in North America to use double decker buses by any measure whatsoever. Yes, they were the first in Canada on a technicality (bus vs. buses), but at least two transit systems in the USA operated double deckers long, long before Victoria.

[Articulated]

18 minutes ago, InfiNorth said:

I have now learned the New York City used double-decker buses long ago, and that LA used Neoplan N 122/3 buses (no idea if I'm typing that out correctly), meaning that no, Victoria was definitely not the first transit system in North America to use double decker buses by any measure whatsoever. Yes, they were the first in Canada on a technicality (bus vs. buses), but at least two transit systems in the USA operated double deckers long, long before Victoria.

Not to continue to drag this off-topic, but technically the TTC (Toronto Transportation Commission) operated double deck buses as some of their first buses:

Although they are certainly would not be considered anything close to a "modern" double decker.

[CV92]

1 hour ago, InfiNorth said:

I have now learned the New York City used double-decker buses long ago, and that LA used Neoplan N 122/3 buses (no idea if I'm typing that out correctly), meaning that no, Victoria was definitely not the first transit system in North America to use double decker buses by any measure whatsoever. Yes, they were the first in Canada on a technicality (bus vs. buses), but at least two transit systems in the USA operated double deckers long, long before Victoria.

This is an interesting topic that I never gave much thought before! Based on about 20 minutes worth of poking around the internet, I came up with a few possibilities for the discrepancies...

Full disclaimer, I'm no expert on this matter and as I noted above I formulated all of this with about 20 minutes worth of research and thought, so don't shoot me if I get something wrong  

The most obvious reason I can think is that it's a simple mistake that got lost in translation through years of journalists and bloggers omitting a key part of the statistic that is still referenced presently on BC Transit's website: that the Tridents are the first "low-floor, double deck buses in North America (Victoria)"  That's an important distinction to make, but it is an easy fact to gloss over if someone isn't familiar with the industry - this detail may have gotten buried over time due to this reason - even the person who wrote the 20th anniversary FAQ missed that! 

 

I honestly think the above is the real reason, but there could be a few other technicalities to get away on - and I'm not saying I necessarily agree with any of these, just to note that I don't think it's implausible that someone could draw these following conclusions:

I don't believe any public agency operated double decker buses in the year 2000 specifically, so I suppose they're a "first" just like the 2013 XN40s were BC Transit's "first" CNG powered buses, although I notice that Transit no longer makes this claim on their website.

Brampton: Based on was posted above about Brampton's use of their decker, due to it's limited scope of use it may not have been recognized as a full-time revenue vehicle, which could remove it from contention for people eager to claim a "crown" as their own.

NYC: Last time deckers operated for the purposes of transit, it was run by the Fifth Avenue Coach Company, which was a private company - historically common but not these days. If one were to limit the definition of "public" transit to those agencies that had direct government involvement, one could rule these ones out.

LA: This particular Neoplan vehicle seems to be defined as a "double deck coach" whereas the Dennis Trident is a "double deck transit bus." So again, if one were to grasp at straws, LA may have instead operated an "intercity double deck coach" service as opposed to double decker transit service. 

Toronto: During the time period when Toronto ran deckers, they were already public if I understand correctly - so this circles me back to my original point, that I think what has happened here is the detail of them being the first modern low floor double deck buses has been lost in the woodwork. 

I like to overthink things.