Transit Service Discussion (Articulated/Conventional/Shuttle/Skytrain/Seabus)

[Express691]

1 minute ago, nname said:

Take 430 and then transfer to the 49

Or if going east, take 407/430 and then take the 100

[nname]

33 minutes ago, Express691 said:

Id get really pissed if the 410 Steveston portion doesnt get renumbered back to 406 like it should be.

Based on the past few sheets... that aren't happening.

When 340 got chopped into 3 pieces, none of them takes the original route number of 336, 338, 343, 344.. the other two pieces become 341, 342 instead

511 should be a better match than 503

170 was supposed to be 161 (and reusing 170, although that was discontinued quite some time ago)

184 is quite similar to 162

189 is should be 165 (and they even re-use a recently discontinued 189 number for this)

either 180 or 181 or 182 could've become 148

360 could've been 353

361 could've been 355

363 could've been 356

....

And now it feel like 364 is a community route somewhere in White Rock... So if White Rock is going to add a new route, 365 is the number...?

 

Still wait to see what they're going to use for Maple Ridge if they're going to re-number... I don't think we'll see the 721 and 722 again...

Or the 169 re-route.. that's probably going to stay as 169 rather than becoming 177 even though the routing is exactly the same as 177...

[owo transit fan]

I don't know if this has been mentioned but, there is now a Capstan Way Station on the maps. When will translink build the new station?

[neopasturquoise]

They seem to re-number the routes based on either 1) the destination (e.g. the 733 goes along 133rd. Ave. and the 741 goes along 141st. Ave.) or 2) the previous route numbers of the community shuttles in sequence (e.g. C50, C51 and C52 etc. will become the 360, 361 and 362 etc.).

I assume they will re-number the shuttle routes in Maple Ridge as:

C41 becomes 722 (122nd. Ave.)

C43 becomes 723 (123rd. Ave.)

C44 becomes 724 (124th. Ave.)

C45 becomes 725 (in sequence)

C46 becomes 726 (in sequence)

C48 becomes 727 (in sequence)

C49 becomes 728 (128th. Ave.)

[nname]

C41 is likely to split into two routes though... I'm thinking it might be split at Bonson South so there won't be 4 different services running on the same road sharing the same number. Just look at that routing information for C41... Can it be any more confusing?

Quote

From Maple Meadows Station or Meadowtown Centre to Pitt Meadows Centre. Two directional service. Clockwise trips from Maple Meadows Station via access road, Dunn, Maple Meadows Way; or from Meadowtown Centre via access road, Maple Meadows Way; then all trips via Hammond, Wildwood Cres, Bonson, Fraser Way to Barnston View roundabout, Fraser Way, Bonson, 116B Ave, Blakely, Hammond, Harris, 119A Ave, 190A St, Ford, 189A St, 122 Ave to 191B St; continues clockwise; see route description from Pitt Meadows Centre on right. Counterclockwise trips from Maple Meadows Station via access road, Dunn, Meadowtown Centre; then all trips from Meadowtown Centre via Lougheed, Park Rd, 192A St, Davison, Harris, 122 Ave to 191B St; continues counterclockwise; see route description from Pitt Meadows Centre on right.

From Pitt Meadows Centre (122 Ave at 191B St) to Meadowtown Centre and/or Maple Meadows Station. Two-directional service. Clockwise trips via 122 Ave, 122A Ave, 192B St, Pitt Meadows Station roadway, Harris, Davison, 192A St, Park Rd, Lougheed, access road to Meadowtown Centre, with some trips continuing to Maple Meadows Station via access road, Dunn, to Maple Meadows Station. Counterclockwise trips via 122 Ave, 189A St, Ford, 190A St, 119 Ave, Harris, Hammond, Blakely, 116B Ave, Bonson, Fraser Way to Barnston View Roundabout, Fraser Way, Bonson, Wildwood Cres, Hammond, Maple Meadows Way, Dunn, Maple Meadows Station, with most trips continuing via Dunn, access road to Meadowtown Centre.

Similar arrangement was recently made for 171/172, 173/174, 184/185, and from the consultation, 404/405

With big increase in service expected for C45, C46, I expect both routes will get a clean-up to get rid of all those different kinds of routings. It would probably switch from a "two-way loop" into two "two-way service" with a split somewhere around Jackson Road...

Just a wishful thinking:

C41 -> 711, 712

C43 -> 713

C44 -> 714

C45/C46 -> 731, 732

C48 -> 722

C49 -> 721

On top of that, the 701 to Mission could re-number to either 702 or 751...

[neopasturquoise]

1 hour ago, owo transit fan said:

I don't know if this has been mentioned but, there is now a Capstan Way Station on the maps. When will translink build the new station?

From Richmond News (http://www.richmond-news.com/news/weekly-feature/city-centre-surges-on-development-tidal-wave-1.9800571):

"CAPSTAN WAY STATION AT CAPSTAN VILLAGE: Plans for the new Capstan Way station are said to be ahead of schedule, according to city spokesperson Ted Townsend. The city needs $25 million from development charges for the station, and has $14.5 million in the bank. Another $17 million is committed thanks in large part to the 1,150-unit Concord Gardens. However, Yuanheng Holdings Ltd., developer of the 850-unit, under-construction complex dubbed Vista Star, has told the city it is interested in loaning some money to the city to speed up the process. Townsend said it is too early to speculate on a start date, but 2027 was seen as an old estimate. The station may not slow down the commute time on the Canada Line as trains are expected to move faster than they presently do."

[Express691]

Finally found out about the C77 Nname was talking about - It was a proposed service to Sunshine Hills struck down by NIMBYs

[nname]

1 hour ago, Express691 said:

Finally found out about the C77 Nname was talking about - It was a proposed service to Sunshine Hills struck down by NIMBYs

I was trying to find info about it but can't seems to find them anymore... I only remember it was supposed to start in September 2005 along with C75 and C76, but was heavily opposed by residents in the area... It went as far as having route number assigned...

[jmward]

Are there any dates available as to when these southwest area changes are to be implemented? A timeline seems conspicuously missing from the translink site. I'd conjecture that we start seeing some of these changes implemented as early as december, but I don't know what the funding situation is like for this expansion. 

The 602 is my most used route, so I hope that the 603 and 604 changes extend 603 and 604 service to run at the hours the 602 currently does, and to replace the lost express trips (602 ends later in the morning and starts earlier in the evening than the 603 and 604, with many more trips). 

The 20-minute-ish time savings plus greatly increased reliability of the highway routing makes the commute a lot more appealing to tsawwassen riders, especially with all the new 601 routings and recent construction.

[8800GTX]

6 hours ago, jmward said:

Are there any dates available as to when these southwest area changes are to be implemented? A timeline seems conspicuously missing from the translink site. I'd conjecture that we start seeing some of these changes implemented as early as december, but I don't know what the funding situation is like for this expansion. 

The 602 is my most used route, so I hope that the 603 and 604 changes extend 603 and 604 service to run at the hours the 602 currently does, and to replace the lost express trips (602 ends later in the morning and starts earlier in the evening than the 603 and 604, with many more trips). 

The 20-minute-ish time savings plus greatly increased reliability of the highway routing makes the commute a lot more appealing to tsawwassen riders, especially with all the new 601 routings and recent construction.

Nothing is set in stone - and you can tell that the plan is looking a little more long-term (think SoFATP)than short-term what with the presence of a Capstan Way station. Currently the plan is under consultation and there's a survey on the website - they're asking for feedback on each and every route. So if you don't like any of the proposed changes, go have your say, now. I will be submitting my thoughts (same as the ones I posted here) shortly.

[ThatBusGuy]

3 hours ago, 8800GTX said:

Nothing is set in stone - and you can tell that the plan is looking a little more long-term (think SoFATP)than short-term what with the presence of a Capstan Way station. Currently the plan is under consultation and there's a survey on the website - they're asking for feedback on each and every route. So if you don't like any of the proposed changes, go have your say, now. I will be submitting my thoughts (same as the ones I posted here) shortly.

There's also the open houses between May 28th and June 11th - I plan on going to one or two to learn a bit more about it and give my own feedback beyond the survey. Maybe I'll even run into some forum folks...

[Millennium2002]

I'm not done with this yet... this is only a tentative overhaul of their concept for the Richmond area only:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sudK4_DMjHzejY7EWbi9DTURV1o&usp=sharing

It's not really easy to explain unfortunately... There are various things I'm trying to address:

• Lack of connectivity from SE Vancouver to NE Richmond. There is the talk of turning the 430 into a B-Line but as a resident on that route I think that is overly excessive. We already have FTN routes on both sides of the river; the main problem is the lack of a proper interchange between the two. One way I've tried to address this before was to put an exchange on the north side near Victoria and Marine... but one could also place it in Richmond near the IKEA
  • If we are to do this, then the 22 has to cross the bridge. This would be a logical continuation of the existing route south, but poses some reliability issues with traffic congestion. Could be a half/half FTN split with the 407 with the rest terminating under the bridge as currently.
  • 407 terminates at Jacombs, but could be extended north towards Marine Drive in a form of blended FTN service with the 22
  • The resources of the C96 are pushed north to serve the new residential developments along the north arm of the Fraser River. Goes between Bridgeport and Jacombs.
  • Blundell route extended to Jacombs via Westminster and No 6 Road. This improves transit connections to the auto mall and adjacent business park.
  • 410 FTN makes a stop at Jacombs. Also explore demand for B-Line service along this corridor.
  • New shuttle between Jacombs and 22nd Street Stn that uses Westminster Road in between. This is so commuters to and from Richmond are not unnecessarily slowed down by a ton. If 410 FTN promoted to B-Line, route can be extended along Cambie to provide local service.
• I'm not sure why TransLink wants to keep the C94 in light of the 402 FTN service to Richmond Olympic Oval... I have deleted it in my version.
• 401 FTN service extended north to Bridgeport via Garden City. No one online was pleased about the loss of service to that area...
• 404 service diverted to stop at Steveston and No 5 Road for better connectivity with the other routes (403, 405, Steveston Exchange, etc).
• Russ Baker Way bus service is currently its own route, but could be interlined with another route from Brighouse Stn.
• Deleted "403 west" in favour of expanded service along Williams

[8800GTX]

10 hours ago, Millennium2002 said:

I'm not done with this yet... this is only a tentative overhaul of their concept for the Richmond area only:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sudK4_DMjHzejY7EWbi9DTURV1o&usp=sharing

It's not really easy to explain unfortunately... There are various things I'm trying to address:

• Lack of connectivity from SE Vancouver to NE Richmond. There is the talk of turning the 430 into a B-Line but as a resident on that route I think that is overly excessive. We already have FTN routes on both sides of the river; the main problem is the lack of a proper interchange between the two. One way I've tried to address this before was to put an exchange on the north side near Victoria and Marine... but one could also place it in Richmond near the IKEA
  • If we are to do this, then the 22 has to cross the bridge. This would be a logical continuation of the existing route south, but poses some reliability issues with traffic congestion. Could be a half/half FTN split with the 407 with the rest terminating under the bridge as currently.
  • 407 terminates at Jacombs, but could be extended north towards Marine Drive in a form of blended FTN service with the 22
  • The resources of the C96 are pushed north to serve the new residential developments along the north arm of the Fraser River. Goes between Bridgeport and Jacombs.
  • Blundell route extended to Jacombs via Westminster and No 6 Road. This improves transit connections to the auto mall and adjacent business park.
  • 410 FTN makes a stop at Jacombs. Also explore demand for B-Line service along this corridor.
  • New shuttle between Jacombs and 22nd Street Stn that uses Westminster Road in between. This is so commuters to and from Richmond are not unnecessarily slowed down by a ton. If 410 FTN promoted to B-Line, route can be extended along Cambie to provide local service.
• I'm not sure why TransLink wants to keep the C94 in light of the 402 FTN service to Richmond Olympic Oval... I have deleted it in my version.
• 401 FTN service extended north to Bridgeport via Garden City. No one online was pleased about the loss of service to that area...
• 404 service diverted to stop at Steveston and No 5 Road for better connectivity with the other routes (403, 405, Steveston Exchange, etc).
• Russ Baker Way bus service is currently its own route, but could be interlined with another route from Brighouse Stn.
• Deleted "403 west" in favour of expanded service along Williams

I definitely see the merits of something like a Jacombs Exchange in particular with creating a terminus for your new shuttle routes, but at the same time I don't see a need for yet another terminus and particularly over there. It creates a diversion for 410 riders, and if the 430 does somehow turn into a B-Line that complicates its introduction. You may as well just route the 22 so its riders can connect to Cambie (maybe a bigger loop), and through-run the revised C96 and new shuttle service, positioning it as a local-access alternative to the 410.

[Stormscape]

Why not just make Knight via Industrial an all day routing instead of 4 runs per day? It's a little known extension, but the 22 runs to the IKEA on Sweden Way. Change to text view to see run details. No need to change routing, just move the terminus from Jacombs Road to Sweden Way at Bridgeport. Boom, transfer point added.

[Blue Bus Fan]

1 minute ago, Stormscape said:

Why not just make Knight via Industrial an all day routing instead of 4 runs per day? It's a little known extension, but the 22 runs to the IKEA on Sweden Way. Change to text view to see run details. No need to change routing, just move the terminus from Jacombs Road to Sweden Way at Bridgeport. Boom, transfer point added.

Why not instead extend the 22 to Bridgeport Station all day and delete the 407 portion between Marine Drive and Knight St to Bridgeport Station.

[Millennium2002]

3 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

Why not instead extend the 22 to Bridgeport Station all day and delete the 407 portion between Marine Drive and Knight St to Bridgeport Station.

Actually, I've decided to replace the cross-bridge route with something else. The main issue being that Knight Street Bridge suffers from traffic congestion. It appears that TransLink's solution thus far is to put non-FTN services on the bridge to limit the impact that this may have on customers in other parts of the line, and I think I'll just stick with that for now.

[Millennium2002]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sudK4_DMjHzejY7EWbi9DTURV1o&usp=sharing

I think I'll be submitting this as part of my feedback...

Again it looks very similar to TransLink's concept, but with some changes:

• Garden City corridor will get FTN service through the 401
• New highway express bus between Richmond and 22nd Street Station to appease commuters mad about being sidelined with the move of regular FTN service to the slower Westminster Hwy. I don't think this bus should be FTN, but that requires more analysis.
• Seafair terminus for Blundell route moved south towards an existing turnaround at the western dyke on Francis.
• New route takes the place of crossing Knight Street bridge. At this point, I didn't want to drag down the reliability of the 22 for the sake of the cross-bridge connection. If the bridge has its capacity upgraded in the future, then it may be worth looking at.
• 407 is no longer the route serving Russ Baker Way... instead the "408" on Garden City south will do that. This means the 407 and "408" will stop at Brighouse Stn.
• Removed "403 West"... I feel they should bump up service on the C93 instead.
• Removed C94 again for duplicating FTN services towards Richmond Olympic Oval.
• 404 and 405 truncated and both sent to Brighouse Station as before: 407 and remnants of C96 will instead provide north Richmond services to River Road and the like.
• I can't decide where the terminus of the 410 should be... so I've just kept it where it is now. In a way I guess that helps with implicitly forcing TransLink not to interline it with another route given all the reliability issues that people have been having with it.

Thoughts? I don't think I'll be able to satisfy everyone, but that's as good as I can probably make it.

[buizelbus]

8 minutes ago, Millennium2002 said:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sudK4_DMjHzejY7EWbi9DTURV1o&usp=sharing

 

I think I'll be submitting this as part of my feedback...

 

Again it looks very similar to TransLink's concept, but with some changes:

• Garden City corridor will get FTN service through the 401
• New highway express bus between Richmond and 22nd Street Station to appease commuters mad about being sidelined with the move of regular FTN service to the slower Westminster Hwy. I don't think this bus should be FTN, but that requires more analysis.
• Seafair terminus for Blundell route moved south towards an existing turnaround at the western dyke on Francis.
• New route takes the place of crossing Knight Street bridge. At this point, I didn't want to drag down the reliability of the 22 for the sake of the cross-bridge connection. If the bridge has its capacity upgraded in the future, then it may be worth looking at.
• 407 is no longer the route serving Russ Baker Way... instead the "408" on Garden City south will do that. This means the 407 and "408" will stop at Brighouse Stn.
• Removed "403 West"... I feel they should bump up service on the C93 instead.
• Removed C94 again for duplicating FTN services towards Richmond Olympic Oval.
• 404 and 405 truncated and both sent to Brighouse Station as before: 407 and remnants of C96 will instead provide north Richmond services to River Road and the like.
• I can't decide where the terminus of the 410 should be... so I've just kept it where it is now.

Thoughts? I don't think I'll be able to satisfy everyone, but that's as good as I can probably make it.

Use the new 408 to have service down Bridgeport and up the bridge

[Millennium2002]

1 minute ago, buizel10 said:

Use the new 408 to have service down Bridgeport and up the bridge

I won't suggest that because the route will be too long and we'll end up with "problems with the 410, part 2". Also, it'll be way too indirect of a route between the two termini. Interlining might be possible, though... but that's about it.

[buizelbus]

Just now, Millennium2002 said:

I won't suggest that because the route will be too long and we'll end up with "problems with the 410, part 2".

I shall "make a edit" part 1

[Express691]

Starting to build concern at 22nd street station: If TransLink is gonna continue to stuff 22nd Street Station with buses then the loop will be needing a redesign within the next 20 years. In fact some of our responses to the changes may be different if artics (or even express fleet) are brought into the game. Some of these ideas were brought up in the dreams and aspirations thread, but the main idea was to ban artics from heading down into the loop and layover area. Their layover is in orange, the others drop off in the red zone.

 

 

Heck, buses used to come in through 7th avenue Westbound as referenced in this youtube clip
 

 

[Stormscape]

looking at Google Maps, that is quite the maneuver the drivers had to pull off, as they had to essentially drive up this bike path for about 100 feet then make a sharp left, because the bus in the clip is coming down through where the taxi stand at 22nd Street is today.

[ThatBusGuy]

Coming in a bit late with my thoughts on the service changes for South Delta (I have thoughts for Richmond too, but since I don't know the area/demand as well I won't get into it). Here's the changes I've come up with to counter some of the proposals made so far:

C86: Cancelled

609 - South Delta Exchange/Ladner Exchange Via Tsawwassen First Nation: Extended along 41b St, River Road W, and replaces the southern portion of the C86 to Ladner Exchange. Increased service to every 30 minutes. (Note, likely not exactly the same routing through TFN as on the attached map, as the roads to be used aren't made yet)

New Route - Bridgeport Station/South Delta Exchange Via Tsawwassen Mills: Yes, I know the benefits and drawbacks of a route to the mall have been debated before. Stick with me. Southbound trips via Hwy 99, Hwy 17/17a as far as Salish Sea Dr, then north to Canoe Pass Way, and south via 52nd St following the 609 routing to SD Exchange. Northbound trips do the same in reverse. Service would probably be once an hour, possibly with half-hour service on weekends and peak hours if ridership seems high enough.

So, what's the point of all that? Tsawwassen residents get an all-day express to/from Bridgeport, but it's infrequent and only covers a small part of the town itself. Well...

601 - Bridgeport Station/South Delta: With all the new and improved service to the mall and Tsawwassen First Nation by the other routes, the FTN 601 returns to its old routing along 56th St and 28th Ave and does NOT go past the mall. Without having to go far out of its way, as has been proposed, this will make trips faster and less of a pain. Even residents who don't directly benefit from the express route can still get a shorter journey without having to transfer.

Now, clearly I'm not a professional route planner, so I'd be happy to get feedback about what could be improved here. Just thought I'd share these ideas.

[Dr. BusFreak]

48 minutes ago, ThatBusGuy said:

New Route - Bridgeport Station/South Delta Exchange Via Tsawwassen Mills: Yes, I know the benefits and drawbacks of a route to the mall have been debated before. Stick with me. Southbound trips via Hwy 99, Hwy 17/17a as far as Salish Sea Dr, then north to Canoe Pass Way, and south via 52nd St following the 609 routing to SD Exchange. Northbound trips do the same in reverse. Service would probably be once an hour, possibly with half-hour service on weekends and peak hours if ridership seems high enough.

So, what's the point of all that? Tsawwassen residents get an all-day express to/from Bridgeport, but it's infrequent and only covers a small part of the town itself. Well...

601 - Bridgeport Station/South Delta: With all the new and improved service to the mall and Tsawwassen First Nation by the other routes, the FTN 601 returns to its old routing along 56th St and 28th Ave and does NOT go past the mall. Without having to go far out of its way, as has been proposed, this will make trips faster and less of a pain. Even residents who don't directly benefit from the express route can still get a shorter journey without having to transfer.

In the past, I've supported the idea of an express bus between Bridgeport Station to South Delta Exchange to service the Tsawwassen Mills, but over time, I've realized that  the Tsawwassen Mills now has a free express coach service from Canada Place that stops by Bridgeport Station, and it would be more cost effective for TransLink to add the 601 onto the FTN, rather than having a dedicated express bus to service the Tsawwassen. With that said, if you re-route the 601 via 56th street instead of 52nd street, you essentially disconnect all reliable transit service to the Tsawwassen Mills. The only way people could get to the Tsawwassen Mills is via the hourly service of your proposed route to/from Bridgeport Station/South Delta Exchange via Tsawwassen Mills, or the 620, which is also an infrequent bus.

As for Richmond, I really don't relish the idea of the 401 and 405 being split into two routes and the 480 being discontinued. I do think that service will be needed on 6 Road in the future though. There is absolutely no transit service on 6 Road below Highway 91 currently. Routing would look something like this:  https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1MSTuQ7siuJzSin5Jdvwvpf3Hg7s&ll=49.18017621341151%2C-123.1180968572998&z=14. Service would be somewhere between an hour during weekends and off peak weekdays, and 30 minute frequencies during peak times. I know it's mostly farms along 6 Road, but Richmond is ever-expanding, so there could be some use of a 6 Road bus in the future. Comments?

[Express691]

That express coach you mentioned only runs twice on saturday, and on sunday. 2:30 and 5:30. (In the summer they plan to run it 7 days a week though. This is info from the last time I checked.)

Also, I dont expect route numbers 406, 408, 411, 409, and 413 to be used in the future. All of those existed before the 98 B-line came into existence.

-406 was basically the southern end of the 410. 

-408 was the eastern half of the 401

-411 was the 491 (one road, Westminster, 3 road north to Airport Station and Vancouver)

-409 to my memory was a shoppers shuttle.

5 road isnt even that busy in the off-peak. What I see it as is a faster version of the 401, which connects Richmond Centre to the Horseshoe Way industrial areas. You have to go south of Kingsbridge drive to find residential areas (most of that is single detatched housing and on one side of 5 road). Thus I dont think we don't need a 6 road route anytime soon.

One question though: Do you think a route going to Fraserwood and Kingswood Industrial from the north (Knight Street) would be a better idea? Or albeit extending C98 north to Knight Street via 8 Road, westminster, and  That way it runs peak hour only and saves time for regional connections.

I also want us to reflect on this statement that came up in a conversation with a former board member:

"I think in general for the Richmond Centre area, they want to spread everything out. Brighouse station is a 'madhouse' during rush hour."

I mean, most transfers at Brighouse are from train to bus, dont you think? By looking at what they want to do, it reminds me of that old busway that went down number 3 road. They can (probably) get away without building that brand new bus loop (which I heard was supposed to be completed a short time after opening)

I will close out by saying that the road infrastructure on Richmond's side of the Fraser River is kinda wonky. You have this big gap between Steveston Hwy/6 Road and Blundell road @ Kingswood that its impossible to even create a Richmond version of the 640 that touches all the industrial areas along the river (at least along the south arm).