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

[Express691]

301 new stops added at 122nd street in both directions, started yesterday the 28th.

Speaking of which, they seem to have added a Saturday Morning overload going into Richmond and departs Scottsdale. I only know of its existence thru someone on here who has taken it for the past 2 Saturdays. Untrackable on Tcomm.

[Express691]

Apologize for double post, I want this to be noted:

More random OL trips - this time it's 2 351s to White Rock Centre in the evening between 1755 and 1820. One of them is run 93/601. 

Not sure if it's a piece on the board like the strange Saturday 301 overload. 

Any additional info on any of these 301/351 overloads is greatly appreciated. Thanks

[R8015]

SB 351 OVERLOADS:

Lv Bridgeport: 1755 and 1820

Both overload trips terminate at WHITE ROCK CENTRE (single run from Bridgeport to White Rock Centre and NIS to the yard)

Run number wise, the 1755 trip is 92/601 and the 1820 trip is 93/601.

These trips were initiated  about 2 weeks ago to address complaints regarding pass ups between Bridgeport and SSPR. Also note that the overloads are NOT trackable and both runs are OT pieces, so if it's unsigned = no show

[ThatBusGuy]

51 minutes ago, R8015 said:

SB 351 OVERLOADS:

Lv Bridgeport: 1755 and 1820

Both overload trips terminate at WHITE ROCK CENTRE (single run from Bridgeport to White Rock Centre and NIS to the yard)

Run number wise, the 1755 trip is 92/601 and the 1820 trip is 93/601.

These trips were initiated  about 2 weeks ago to address complaints regarding pass ups between Bridgeport and SSPR. Also note that the overloads are NOT trackable and both runs are OT pieces, so if it's unsigned = no show

I wonder if trips like these will be properly added to the schedule with the next service changes, or if they will just keep them as "bonus" trips. I don't see why they wouldn't fully add them, but with the other mid-sheet changes recently (new 301 stops, discontinuing the 259, etc) it feels like they could have just done that from the start.

[Brando737]

10 hours ago, ThatBusGuy said:

I wonder if trips like these will be properly added to the schedule with the next service changes, or if they will just keep them as "bonus" trips. I don't see why they wouldn't fully add them, but with the other mid-sheet changes recently (new 301 stops, discontinuing the 259, etc) it feels like they could have just done that from the start.

They will usually update the online schedules to add these extra trips if they are to be permanent.  However the print schedules will not be updated.  If these extra trips are working well then they will most likely be built into indexes for the next sheet.

[Express691]

Just now, Brando737 said:

They will usually update the online schedules to add these extra trips if they are to be permanent.  However the print schedules will not be updated.  If these extra trips are working well then they will most likely be built into indexes for the next sheet.

They did update the 319 print schedule when they added the extra trips. But even then, that increase had an alert sent out for it.

[8010]

Any word on possible winter service changes? Aside from B-Line changes for September 2019 all of the Phase 1 bus improvements are done, and with the Novas about to enter service in the weeks to come I assume some service expansion is expected to happen.

[Express691]

Bay Re-assignments effective November 5th as per https://alerts.translink.ca/

White Rock Center:
Bay 5 - 375 (currently the 351 stop)
 

[Express691]

https://alerts.translink.ca/

 410 WB to Brighouse resumes regular route after almost 2 years of construction.

[Millennium2002]

On my phone right now. I recall there being a diagram somewhere of a Lion's Gate - Victoria B-Line concept that TransLink was actually considering. While I like the idea, part of me feels that the Hastings corridor is overdue for some sort of transit priority measures; the 95 often skips passengers and gets trapped during rush hours between Downtown and Kootenay Loop. Maybe it's time to explore rail transit down that way to relieve the congestion?

(If this is more appropriate for fantasy, let me know and I'll bump it over.)

[Pops1719]

54 minutes ago, Millennium2002 said:

On my phone right now. I recall there being a diagram somewhere of a Lion's Gate - Victoria B-Line concept that TransLink was actually considering. While I like the idea, part of me feels that the Hastings corridor is overdue for some sort of transit priority measures; the 95 often skips passengers and gets trapped during rush hours between Downtown and Kootenay Loop. Maybe it's time to explore rail transit down that way to relieve the congestion?

(If this is more appropriate for fantasy, let me know and I'll bump it over.)

Maybe add a new WCE stop @ McGill and Bridgeway

[TranslinkKid]

2 hours ago, popillil said:

Maybe add a new WCE stop @ McGill and Bridgeway

Who in the world would get off/on a train there?

[Pops1719]

1 hour ago, TranslinkKid said:

Who in the world would get off/on a train there?

Idk, just a thought, maybe add a bus loop there which the 160 has its terminus, or something.

[GORDOOM]

I don't think the West Coast Express will still be around in twenty years. I think CP is going to force the service off of its mainline to make room for more freight trains.

IMO we should be planning in the long term for a new SkyTrain line along Hastings between downtown Vancouver and Moody Centre. (An Expo Line extension might make the line too long and too unreliable, even as a fully automated and grade-separated service.)

[8010]

7 minutes ago, GORDOOM said:

I don't think the West Coast Express will still be around in twenty years. I think CP is going to force the service off of its mainline to make room for more freight trains.

IMO we should be planning in the long term for a new SkyTrain line along Hastings between downtown Vancouver and Moody Centre. (An Expo Line extension might make the line too long and too unreliable, even as a fully automated and grade-separated service.)

And all-day bus service from Haney to Mission

[Brando737]

I think LRT or BRT would be a good option for Hastings.  SkyTrain would be way to expensive for that distance and a waste of money with the current Millenium line being so close to that corridor.

[GORDOOM]

7 hours ago, Brando737 said:

I think LRT or BRT would be a good option for Hastings.  SkyTrain would be way to expensive for that distance and a waste of money with the current Millenium line being so close to that corridor.

First of all, if anything, the density along Hastings means that it's even more justified there than on Lougheed. Second, it's not just about local traffic on Hastings. As I said earlier, part of the reason I think this project needs to be a priority is because we need to have a plan for replacing the West Coast Express - if freight volumes continue to grow, CP won't have room for the WCE trains on their mainline west of PoCo much longer. A subway line underneath Hastings would kill both birds with a single stone.

[Millennium2002]

Having taken the 135 and 95 over the past several years, I've observed that there is insufficient room for additional buses along that corridor during weekday rush hours. On top of that, we have numerous bus routes overlapping with each other on their way downtown: 7, 14, 16, 20, 95, 210, 211. I think we can do better than send more buses through a snail's crawl of a corridor.

[Firebrand]

14 hours ago, Millennium2002 said:

Having taken the 135 and 95 over the past several years, I've observed that there is insufficient room for additional buses along that corridor during weekday rush hours. On top of that, we have numerous bus routes overlapping with each other on their way downtown: 7, 14, 16, 20, 95, 210, 211. I think we can do better than send more buses through a snail's glacier's  crawl of a corridor.

I see faster moving glaciers breaking off in the far north than all of these buses during rush hours, especially when you have all of the Hastings traffic entering/leaving the Second Narrows bridge. The bridge traffic is the bane of the 95's existence.

[Brando737]

2 hours ago, Firebrand said:

I see faster moving glaciers breaking off in the far north than all of these buses during rush hours, especially when you have all of the Hastings traffic entering/leaving the Second Narrows bridge. The bridge traffic is the bane of the 95's existence.

Couldn't agree more.  The traffic lights also don't help at all between Clarke and Renfrew outside of peak hours, traffic just crawls.  

[maege]

21 hours ago, GORDOOM said:

First of all, if anything, the density along Hastings means that it's even more justified there than on Lougheed. Second, it's not just about local traffic on Hastings. As I said earlier, part of the reason I think this project needs to be a priority is because we need to have a plan for replacing the West Coast Express - if freight volumes continue to grow, CP won't have room for the WCE trains on their mainline west of PoCo much longer. A subway line underneath Hastings would kill both birds with a single stone.

Solution:

Use the ROW from PoCo down to Braid, then through the Grandview Cut. We need more tracks there for express/regional service to Surrey/Langley, and the valley anyway (Expo line reliever), so why not make use of them for the current/expanded WCE as well?

Have high capacity LRT on Hastings from Tri-cities to downtown, and serve the regional purpose with a dedicated regional corridor serving both SoF and the Valley  along with the PoCo/Coquitlam and out to Mission.

[bob32189]

3 hours ago, maege said:

Solution:

Have high capacity LRT on Hastings from Tri-cities to downtown, and serve the regional purpose with a dedicated regional corridor serving both SoF and the Valley  along with the PoCo/Coquitlam and out to Mission.

I'm rather new to this forum (so pardon me if I'm repeating what others have said), but I don't really think a tram on Hastings would work, especially if it's going from tri-cities (and essentially replacing the 160 and parts of the 14). As stated earlier, a big problem on the 95 is traffic lights that are littered everywhere on Hastings. Even if it's fully grade-separated, a surface rail would probably still have to navigate through these traffic lights which means that travel would not be faster enough to justify the cost of building a tram system.

Either that or I just don't know how trams work.

A better solution would be to do as you say, which is expand the WCE (CP Rail allowing) or maybe extend the Millennium Line further east. For Hastings, a proper metro line would be the only practical solution in my opinion.

[Transit geek]

1 hour ago, bob32189 said:

For Hastings, a proper metro line would be the only practical solution in my opinion.

Not to mention how much the city would have to shelve out to make room along Hastings for an elevated guideway and/or a cut-and-cover tunnel for 15 km followed by a 5 km bored tunnel under Burnaby Mountain! Thankfully the city has a decade or two to get everything sorted out, by which time there could be either higher demand for such a service or none at all.

[ThatBusGuy]

Two words:
Hastings Gondola

[Express691]

Even with the slope of the skytrain line, there will need to be an indirect routing to get to the peak of the university, or involve an escalator longer than Granville station. 

Just extend the SFU gondola down Hastings street. Lol