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

[maege]

8 hours ago, 8800GTX said:

Rather than making the 430 itself into B-Line (as proposed in the Mayors' 10-year vision) I have proposed the following B-Line bus services:

• 49-B: 49th Avenue B-Line service

  B-Line service connects 49th Avenue from Metrotown Station to Langara-49th Station, connecting Langara College. Metrotown portion is interlined with proposed B-Line on Willingdon Ave.

• 420-B: Victoria Dr and Bridgeport Rd B-Line service

  B-Line service connects Bridgeport Rd with the Victoria Drive corridor, from Bridgeport Station to Commercial-Broadway. The 420 roughly achieves two B-Line objectives in the current Mayors' 10-year transit plan.

Would there still be the 43 B-line along 41st Ave? 

Also, for the 422/423 loop, I would have it run between Lansdowne and Bridgeport or Cambie Rd as it duplicates other buses virtually the whole way. Cutting the route shorter may not give it enough ridership, though, so I would probably be inclined to go with the 407w as Translink proposed, and figure out another service for the No 4 Rd and River Rd area.

Edit: Overall, there seems to be a decent amount of unnecessary duplication of routes and services, which usually leads to higher operating costs and lower frequency on a number of routes. I'll see if I can use your map and strip out the most of the duplication, then post it here for thoughts.

[8800GTX]

9 hours ago, Millennium2002 said:

I must say that I quite like the B-Line proposal... The others I'm on the fence about, as I'm not a frequent transit user to/from Richmond.

• I can't agree with Steveston having two separate termini depending on which way the route approaches Chatham. That would be confusing to novice users or tourists.
• Minor note, but the 422 loop probably won't exist in the form that you supplied if it were to become a reality... It'll most likely be an interlined combination of two routes, much like how some routes operate in the Tri-Cities. The termini for this pairing will probably be Bridgeport Station and Lansdowne Station.
• 410, 411, and 417 all running between East and West Richmond... man that's a lot of options. Maybe even too much, frankly. I doubt the existing demand would sustain that many buses...

The second termini in Steveston was kind of more conceptual than final, I just thought it would make sense to improve connections out to Garry Point Park.

On the creation of the 410/411/417: The 411 idea I am using was first discussed extensively on Voony's blog, and I think has been long necessary, I think a sizable segment of 410 ridership is regional ridership, going almost from end-to-end. I've routed it to Bridgeport Station to provide the best commute opportunities to YVR-Airport, in addition to the rest of Richmond.

As discussed by Voony, 410 runs are actually not cost-efficient for facilitating a regional connection. A 411 run, taking the highways and facilitated by new Hwy 91 shoulder lanes, could take as little as half the time a 410E requires from end-to-end - so essentially, the same cost to do a 410E run would do two 411 runs. The 410 has something like 10 or 11 runs per hour going westbound in the peak hours today; if you were to take two of those runs back (still leaving 8 runs/hour or 7.5 min freq on the 410), you could have a 15 minute service on 411 without increasing costs, and the end result is an increase in carrying capacity when you factor both the 410 and the 411 together.

The 417 helps retains connections to Westminster and the Fraserwood area from Richmond, but it also facilitates links to the Bridgeport/NE industrial area that are removed due to the proposed changes to the 405/407. The setup in my map would require few extra service hours. My 417 is supposed to run every half hour. So on Bridgeport, combined half-hour service with the 415 (peak-only) facilitates the proposed 15-min peak 407E service that was in SWATP. Same could happen in Queensborough, with 417/414 facilitating combined 15-min service (if 417 remains on Westminster, at least; I ended up choosing the Dyke Rd routing to have 417 expand coverage).

7 hours ago, Large Cat said:

Then in the River District, the 100 could be rerouted along Kent (although this would require 1 intersection to be changed slightly), so that seniors and others living there can still get somewhere without walking uphill. That, along with a planning process for rethinking all the SE Vancouver / South Burnaby bus routes.

I feel like the ridership along these two corridors is much more overloaded right now than the 430/130 ridership...but correct me if I'm wrong.

100 is not too bad. What it really needs is additional runs between Marine Stn and Knight St. That's where it's getting really busy, particularly in the evenings coming out of Marine Station with the new Marine Gateway complex, but I don't think there needs to be a change in service design if the goal is to better facilitate ridership. You could do that effectively by extending the 8. (I ride it every day at various times of day, I'd know).

River District would probably be served best by routes connecting north-south to link with Metrotown, Joyce and other stations, which would give opportunities to connect with 100 and other east-west routes (including 49, 49-B, 43-.

1 hour ago, maege said:

Would there still be the 43 B-line along 41st Ave? 

Also, for the 422/423 loop, I would have it run between Lansdowne and Bridgeport or Cambie Rd as it duplicates other buses virtually the whole way. Cutting the route shorter may not give it enough ridership, though, so I would probably be inclined to go with the 407w as Translink proposed, and figure out another service for the No 4 Rd and River Rd area.

While not shown, there would be no change to the 43-B plan and it would go ahead.

I'm not following on the 422/423 service duplication you're talking about, the only corridor on which it creates duplication is on Lansdowne (the brief duplication on Cambie is because there's no other way across the Highway; and Alderbridge does not count as 301 is not making local stops there). A routing on Alderbridge would miss Lansdowne Station, while truncating it would really hurt connections and service productivity. It's not really a long segment, though I would say bound to become a busy one with higher-density redevelopment of Lansdowne Mall.

One of the reasons I'm keeping 407 on Lulu Island is that I think that the benefits of bringing it up to Russ Baker would not outweigh the loss of connections to eastern bus routes and central Richmond. SWATP requires you to transfer twice if you just want to connect between 407W and 410E. Already, I'm noticing a loss in my map, as the 407W becomes the only Lulu Island route/corridor without any direct connection to the 301 (as a SOF rider, I will feel that loss). My original rendition actually had the 407 duplicate 402 service on Lansdowne and Garden City, while a retained C94/409 extends up the River Rd extension. I initially felt that running 407/402 together would be a suitable replacement for B-Line service on Garden City, but I ended up choosing this setup to reduce the service duplication.

[maege]

Sorry for the giantly long post in advance.

3 minutes ago, 8800GTX said:

While not shown, there would be no change to the 43-B.

In that case, I would wait and see first what the 43 B-line does to 49 ridership before fully committing to a 49 B-line, since the 43 can be an easy alternate route and serve basically the same purpose. I do like your general idea for the 20 B-line continuing to Richmond, although I could see it potentially continuing on Argyle to Marine Dr, then onto Knight. Not a huge deal either way though. 

53 minutes ago, 8800GTX said:

I'm not following on the 422/423 service duplication you're talking about, the only corridor on which it creates duplication is on Lansdowne (and this is to facilitate the loop design of the route). I guess I could route it on Alderbridge, but then it would miss Lansdowne Station. Truncating the route just to avoid any sort of duplication with Lansdowne/402 would hurt service productivity.

For the 422/423 there would only be 4 stops  between Lansdowne station and Bridgeport Rd that aren't served either exactly by other routes, or very closely. Those would be Alderbridge around May Dr, No 4 Rd at Alderbridge, No 4 Rd around Odlin Rd, and one on St Edwards Dr between Bird Rd and the shopping complex/Sandman hotel. Everything else is essentially shared stops with other routes. 

Add a stop at No 4 Rd for the 301, and Alderbridge at May and No 4 Rd at Alderbridge are then unnecessary as both are the areas served are within ~500m or less of walking distance by a stop on a more frequent route than the 422/423. The areas that the other two stops serve are almost all within 500m of other current stops as well on the 410, 301 or 420. Note numbers are based on the current standard of bus stops being 300-600m apart, and service area being a ~500m walking radius.

Check out the revised C94 on my revised map, as I tried to make it a much more compact and direct route to Canada Line stations. 

As I was designing the C94 and other routes, I realized just how bad the choice to remove the Westminster Station during construction was, since they shifted the other stations to places that make it much more difficult for bus connections.

It seems to me that route wouldn't be terribly productive as currently designed due to the duplication with other routes and circuitous nature of the route. I agree truncating it wouldn't provide any improvement, as it wouldn't be terribly different from the current C92, hence why I wouldn't do that, and would instead scrap the route and have other routes take over the necessary portions. 

53 minutes ago, 8800GTX said:

One of the reasons I'm keeping 407 on Lulu Island is that I think that the benefits of bringing it up to Russ Baker would not outweigh the loss of connections to eastern bus routes and central Richmond. SWATP requires you to transfer twice if you just want to connect between 407W and 410E. Already, I'm noticing a loss in my map, as the 407W becomes the only Lulu Island route/corridor without any direct connection to the 301 (as a SOF rider, I will feel that loss). My original rendition actually had the 407 duplicate 402 service on Lansdowne and Garden City, while a retained C94/409 extends up the River Rd extension. I initially felt that running 407/402 together would be a suitable replacement for B-Line service on Garden City, but I ended up choosing this setup to reduce the service duplication.

That second connection would only be necessary though if you are going to somewhere on Cambie east of Shell Rd (everything else on Cambie would be within 500-600m or less of a stop after only one connection). If you are going to Hamilton/Queensborough/22nd, it would be faster to catch the 411 from Bridgeport and transfer to the 410 over there, if needed, than riding the 410 all the way. Additionally, from Gilbert to Bridgeport Stn, the route is usually doesn't have much for traffic delays and is fairly good speed and could easily rival the time it would take to get to Bridgeport (compared to your routing of the 407), especially since the wait times at Bridgeport are half of what they are at other Richmond stations. As for central Richmond, there would be multiple frequent transit routes that could easily be transferred to, depending exactly where in central Richmond the destination was. Also, check out my revision of your map as I have the 402 meeting the 410 at Aberdeen, and the the 402 could continue on as the 410 from Aberdeen, potentially eliminating the need for a second transfer.

That would be applicable for destinations on Gilbert between Blundell and Steveston Hwy as other routes (401,406,412) would have stops within walking distance (~500m or less) for everything north of Blundell. Everything is a give and take and for me it comes back to this:

Usually, the more direct and grid like a bus system can be, the more efficient and productive it is, often bringing higher ridership along with it. The geographic nature of Richmond makes this somewhat more difficult due its shape and being an island, but some of your routes, instead of moving towards a more direct routing, are becoming more circuitous in nature, and that often proves both more confusing and less efficient.

In any case, here is the revised map I created. Note that I only made changes to routes in Richmond and Queensborough, and also didn't change most of the descriptions for each line, so those may not match. Following is a list of alterations that I made (at least as much as I can remember):

• 401: FTN, terminated at Brighouse, routed to new Steveston Exchange
• 402: FTN, altered to follow River Rd to Aberdeen Stn. Could become the 410 from there. 
• 403: FTN, same routing.
• 404: stays on No 4 Rd to Westminster Hwy, providing for a slightly easier to quickly understand route with less turns.
• 405: same routing
• 406 (410W): FTN, same routing
• 407: altered to continue on Gilbert to Russ Baker Way and Bridgeport Stn, replacing current C92 and previously shown 422. 
• 410 (410E): FTN, terminate at Aberdeen Stn. Route via Westminster Hwy since 411 serving as express. Always maintain routing (no detours through industrial areas on certain trips)
• 411: kept essentially the same routing. All day service, 20-30 minutes at worst for frequency with peak still being 15min or better frequency, although I would likely see both the 411 and 410 being part of the FTN (a little less frequency on the 410 than currently, with the 411 kept at 15min frequency almost all day).
• 412: Slightly altered routing from Garden City Rd to St Albans/Cooney Rd to provide a slightly more direct route and serve the dense residential areas between No 3 Rd and Garden City Rd.
• 413 (C93): Stay on Moncton St to Third Ave, terminating at Steveston Exchange. 
• 413L: Likely extension or second leg of 413 from Steveston Exchange to London Landing and back.
• 414 (C98): Altered route via Boyd, Boundary, Dyke, Fraserwood. Westminster Hwy stop for other buses can be accessed via the pedestrian walkway between Fraserwood Way and Westminster Hwy crosswalk.
• 415 (407E): altered to run mainly on River Rd between No 5 Rd and Bridgeport Stn, serving currently un-served areas and new developments.
• 417: eliminated as it provides largely duplicate service
• 420: FTN (aka 20/Commercial B-line): largely the same, with one possible change of routing via Argyle to Marine, then via Knight. Provides FTN service levels.
• 422: eliminated with other routes taking over various portions of the routing as it was indirect and circuitous. 
• 430: left discontinued.
• C94: Vastly altered. Connects Richmond Olympic Oval with Capstan via Lansdowne and No 4 Rd. Could potentially terminate at Lansdowne Stn instead.
• 408: FTN NEW Addition: Bridgeport to Riverport via Garden City Rd. There's a couple different options for this route, namely stay on Garden City Rd and avoid Brighouse/Lansdowne, split into two routes (Bridgeport-Brighouse and Brighouse-Riverport), or keep relatively the same route as shown on the map. This would replace the 401e routing from Brighouse to Riverport. It could route via Granville and/or Lansdowne instead of Cook and Westminster Hwy. Likely FTN (mainly due to the northern portion), although it could run just below FTN levels (aka 20min off-peak).
• Steveston Exchange: I'm saying it will be around 3rd and Chatham, and all Steveston buses terminate there.
• 301: Added new stop at No 4 Rd

6 hours ago, 8800GTX said:

The 100 is not too bad. What it really needs is additional runs west of Knight St. It's been getting really busy, particularly in the evenings coming out of Marine Station with the new Marine Gateway complex, but I don't think there needs to be a change in service design if the goal is to better facilitate ridership. You could do that effectively by extending the 8. (I ride it every day at various times of day, I'd know).

River District would probably be served best by routes connecting north-south to link with Metrotown, Joyce and other stations

I agree, I think what you propose is probably the best way to go about it. 

Eventually I could see a rail system from 22nd to around Marpole Loop (where it would connect with a future Arbutus line) largely following the existing rail corridor until somewhere between Boundary and Knight, where it would shift to Marine Dr for the remainder to Marpole. For the near term though, the bus changes proposed would be the best idea instead of detouring the 100.

[Blue Bus Fan]

@maege, you need to make the map public.

[Express691]

On 11/06/2017 at 7:31 PM, Michael Marriott said:

I specifically asked if convential peak runs of the 214 would be coming to West Van as well and was told would be.  Granted, this information could wrong and/or change before September.

It HAS changed; the call has been reversed, 214 conventional work will still be with CMBC.

http://unifor111.ca/en/news-and-events/news/214-blueridgephibbs-exchangevancouver-conventional-service#.WUhjtnOp7qA

[maege]

18 minutes ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

@maege, you need to make the map public.

Sorry, fixed now. Here it is

[buizelbus]

1 minute ago, maege said:

Sorry, fixed now. Here it is

Just a question, how do you make these? When I do them it looks really ugly and I have to use the ugly line drawer which makes the routes look really bad.

[Millennium2002]

13 minutes ago, buizel10 said:

Just a question, how do you make these? When I do them it looks really ugly and I have to use the ugly line drawer which makes the routes look really bad.

A lot of patience and fiddling with nodes...

If you take your time and use copious amounts of points to approximate the bends and curves of the routes, the end result shouldn't look too bad.

 

[maege]

55 minutes ago, buizel10 said:

Just a question, how do you make these? When I do them it looks really ugly and I have to use the ugly line drawer which makes the routes look really bad.

I use satellite mode, so I can see exactly where the route I want is. That helps with following the route to be more accurate. As for curves, it's usually 3 points per curve, one at each end, and one in the middle, if you want soft/smooth curves. Otherwise straight lines that accurately follow the route you want with few points works well. Note they can be adjusted after the fact if it looks too rough. Making the line wider than default, but not too wide and having different colours that align with different meanings helps provide clarity and structure without becoming too much.  Lastly, avoid putting a bunch of lines right next to each other or on top of each other for long distances if you can help it. If they are going they same place, and it is a short distance, you can follow the points exactly as you did with the first line to reduce how cluttered it looks. 

If you want to post an example of one you've done, I can take a look at it and possible provide some more specific tips.

[buizelbus]

40 minutes ago, maege said:

I use satellite mode, so I can see exactly where the route I want is. That helps with following the route to be more accurate. As for curves, it's usually 3 points per curve, one at each end, and one in the middle, if you want soft/smooth curves. Otherwise straight lines that accurately follow the route you want with few points works well. Note they can be adjusted after the fact if it looks too rough. Making the line wider than default, but not too wide and having different colours that align with different meanings helps provide clarity and structure without becoming too much.  Lastly, avoid putting a bunch of lines right next to each other or on top of each other for long distances if you can help it. If they are going they same place, and it is a short distance, you can follow the points exactly as you did with the first line to reduce how cluttered it looks. 

If you want to post an example of one you've done, I can take a look at it and possible provide some more specific tips.

Nah, it looks WAY too ugly and unfinished. Plus there are many errors so I'm restarting. I think I have what - 100+ routes, many over 20-30km?

[Blue Bus Fan]

I kinda disagree with everyone about converting the 430 into a B-line because ridership justify higher frequency. I think the 430 should be improved before converting it into B-Line after the TransLink determines if justifiable B-Line. 

[Stormscape]

430 service should be looked at extending to Midnight/1am before they consider B-Line conversion.

[Blue Bus Fan]

6 minutes ago, Stormscape said:

430 service should be looked at extending to Midnight/1am before they consider B-Line conversion.

And actually making it an express in Richmond.

[buizelbus]

1 hour ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

I kinda disagree with everyone about converting the 430 into a B-line because ridership justify higher frequency. I think the 430 should be improved before converting it into B-Line after the TransLink determines if justifiable B-Line. 

I think making it part of the FTN should be enough for many years to come.

[ThatBusGuy]

I think this has come up before but I don't remember the answer now... How feasible is having artics on the 430? I can't think if anything that would prevent it

[Stormscape]

It'd be slow up the Knight Street Hill but that's about it.

[buizelbus]

25 minutes ago, ThatBusGuy said:

I think this has come up before but I don't remember the answer now... How feasible is having artics on the 430? I can't think if anything that would prevent it

Might be sliding off hills like they do with the 49 in winter.

[Mountie]

41 minutes ago, ThatBusGuy said:

I think this has come up before but I don't remember the answer now... How feasible is having artics on the 430? I can't think if anything that would prevent it

Currently, I would assume layover space and the bus bays at Metrotown affects the viability of having artics. But when the new on-street loop opens, we could see artics being used.

[Brando737]

2 hours ago, Mountie said:

Currently, I would assume layover space and the bus bays at Metrotown affects the viability of having artics. But when the new on-street loop opens, we could see artics being used.

The on street loop will be partially open for the September sheet, but I wouldn't expect any artic's on the 430s any time soon.  I think higher frequency would benefit the 430 over artics in my opinion.

[Ninja Bus Fan]

6 hours ago, Stormscape said:

It'd be slow up the Knight Street Hill but that's about it.

It didn't seem that bad when we were going up the Knight Street Hill, but then again the bus was fairly empty when we were going up it. If you'd like to see a video of an XDE60 going up the Knight Street hill, I'll gladly make another unlisted video and post it on here. 

 

[Marlow1331]

3 hours ago, Brando737 said:

.I think higher frequency would benefit the 430 over artics in my opinion.

I agree, I look at it like this, you throw artics on, and the frequency remains the same. You boost the frequency, now you have more trips with more seating amongst the runs, which also adds more space for wheelchairs, strollers, and last but not least, bikes. 

[Millennium2002]

2 hours ago, Ninja Bus Fan said:

It didn't seem that bad when we were going up the Knight Street Hill, but then again the bus was fairly empty when we were going up it. If you'd like to see a video of an XDE60 going up the Knight Street hill, I'll gladly make another unlisted video and post it on here. 

Funny you mention this...

A long long time ago (wow has it been 7 years already), 

Searching on YouTube... 

 doing the 430 eastbound, and 

 as well.

(Not my videos, credits remain with uploaders!)

PS: Finding that old video and hearing the sounds inside sent shivers down my spine...

[Express691]

S370 is doing the last of the 590

[8800GTX]

Just announced at TL board: Double decker bus trial WILL be used on 555

[GORDOOM]

59 minutes ago, 8800GTX said:

Just announced at TL board: Double decker bus trial WILL be used on 555

From the "CMBC is not full of total morons" dept. Apart from maybe the #620, it's probably the most natural fit for double-deckers of all the routes on the network, even more so than the other tunnel buses.

Who knows? Maybe the combination of more room for seated passengers and the attraction of double-deckers will help grow ridership?