Jump to content

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


cleowin
 Share

Recommended Posts

I agree; I'm actually quite surprised thirty minutes continues to be the status quo. Until twelve or thirteen years ago most North Vancouver routes ran on thirty minute headways so it made sense, but now the major routes are 15 minute headways on Sundays.

Hoping to see that change, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Should be around November 30. I assume they give 2 weeks notice.

Would there be a Dec change this year? Current system map is vaild till Jan 3rd.

Edit: Seems like it would be different this year as there will be sheet change for both Dec and Jan. Temporary holidays service reduction maybe?

Sign #107 ends Dec 20th

Sign #108 starts Dec 21st and ends Jan 3rd

Sign #110 starts Jan 4th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change is on January 4 this year. Probably because of the survey stuff they had to do. I will edit this post as I find the changes.

009 3:27 PM Peak trip to Main Street is cut
010 2 additional AM NB peak trips from Marpole loop at 0554 and 0609
019 additional EB trips from Kingsway at Joyce M-F
025 3 AM WB trips between King Edward @ Granville and Willingdon @ Canada Way are cancelled
027 has a trip leaving Joyce at 0615 but without any additional timestamps (Mistake perhaps?)
041 additional WB AM Peak trip leaving 0703 from Granville going to UBC. WB AM Peak trip at 0755 from Joyce is cancelled in return.
041 additional WB PM Peak trip leaving 0204 from Granville going to UBC.
044 additional EB PM Peak trip leaving 1712 from UBC.
084 AM WB trips at 0815 and 0828 are cut again
145 4 additional SB PM Peak trips
151 NB PM Peak trip 1519 (school) will not detour via Mariner.
247 to (Return to normal?) route from Montroyal Blvd straight onto Capilano Road
407 Last NB Weekday trip to leave at 10:46pm instead of 12:50 (2 trips cut)
403 NB trip from 2508 on Saturdays short turns at Steveston at 5 road
410 has 1 additional PM Peak SB trip
620 with its normal seasonal changes
A Few schedules have yet to be released such as the 027 Sunday and 144 NB weekend/Holiday service, 239 AM EB service, 246 NB Sunday Service,
Do buses on Pender Street to return to normal route along Pender between Seymour and Main? Vancouver schedules do not note the detour but the North Vancouver ones do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change is on January 4 this year. Probably because of the survey stuff they had to do. I will edit this post as I find the changes.

403 NB trip from 2508 on Saturdays short turns at Steveston at 5 road

410 has 1 additional PM Peak SB trip

555 2 additional PM Peak EB trips

Actually 555 doesn't change. The word "Continued" has been added and those 2 lines have bumped down the schedule two spots in the PM area :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually 555 doesn't change. The word "Continued" has been added and those 2 lines have bumped down the schedule two spots in the PM area :)

Wow, I must have misread that.

Anyways, from what Im looking at so far, there does not seem to be any big changes as far as the major routes are concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not yet anyway, given the lead time for service changes the January schedules would have been designed while consultation on the changes was occurring. As well, a lot of the changes are linked to the Evergreen Line opening, and some of the Vancouver changes require adjustments to the trolley wires.

Keep in mind the last time Translink did a region wide consultation on network changes in November 2012, it was September 2013 when the first changes from the proposal were implemented, and the last was implemented in June 2014. So, I would expect a similar time frame for any of the proposed changes in this round of consultation.

Yeah, status quo on almost everything.

Guessing none of their 85 proposals are moving forward at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holiday service changes have been released, with the usual Sunday service levels and Christmas Day reductions going below the Sunday schedule. The complete list can be found here: http://www.translink.ca/en/Schedules-and-Maps/Holiday-Service.aspx

The Seabus could get pretty busy on boxing day with only half hour service. I'd expect sailing waits throughout much of the day. And on Christmas day, it looks like there will be a huge gap for service going up Lonsdale - no bus to meet the Seabus leaving WF at :16. Essentially the 229 is every hour at :02 and the 230 every hour at :47.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I think this would be the best thread for this. I read an article in the Surrey news leader that LRT for Surrey is gaining momentum. It mentioned Linda Hepner is going strong with keeping the election promise for LRT and the fact that the federal Liberals have all but one seat in Surrey and are supporting the project. The article mentions that construction should be started by 2018 (happens to be election time) on the first phase which is what the 96 is currently. Another contributing factor, which I didn't notice in the article, is that Translink's new CEO had a part in bringing Seattle's LRT to life which could bring even more momentum to Surrey's LRT.

I think a better option would be BRT with dedicated bus lanes and signal priority throughout the entire route which would be even cheaper than LRT and the timing is the same as the 96. There is also a question as to who might operate the LRT. The work basically belongs to CMBC so it could be that CMBC may operate the line similar to Edmonton and Calgary operates. The operates work both buses and LRT. Other options are BCRTC or a third party which would be the worst option in my opinion.

Maybe time for this topic to have its own thread?

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forwarding my response to Brando from the other thread....

@Brando737 - That article was probably the column (opinion) piece by Frank Bucholtz, not an actual news piece. If anything I would say LRT is having horrible momentum - because both the pro-LRT organization (Light Rail Links) and the City of Surrey have been engaging in a huge LRT push over this past week (there've been several news releases, and a new video if you check Surrey's YouTube), none of which have actually been given much notice by media and the general public. The Mayor's breakfast thing Hepner did yesterday was supposed to be focused on LRT - but it was the gas tax announcement that stole all the attention, with the words "LRT" or "Light Rail" basically omitted from news headlines (included in the article, but not the main part of the piece).

There's been some momentum for Surrey's video on Facebook, but you can tell that's pretty much a result of ad money they're putting to get it on people's news feeds. By comparison I also started putting ad money into a video on my opposition campaign's FB page for the first time, and it's gotten twice as far with several times as many views, likes and shares - and that's with both paid and significant organic reach.

If the LRT system was supported so well by the federal Liberals, they would be practically fearless in talking about funding it and doing so at every opportunity. But Minister Sohi didn't make that commitment when he visited on Friday. I'm working on a response to Frank's column on my blog right now, which I'm hoping to submit as a response letter.

(I also responded in the other thread on Kevin Desmond promoting Seattle's LRT system; there is absolutely no chance this would result in (additional) momentum for Surrey's LRT, because the SkyTrain vs LRT debate doesn't even exist in Seattle. I can imagine him promoting rail transit in general, but an on-street LRT - given Seattle has actually been moving away from "on-street" like MLK Blvd in its future LRT extensions? I don't think so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this would be the best thread for this. I read an article in the Surrey news leader that LRT for Surrey is gaining momentum. It mentioned Linda Hepner is going strong with keeping the election promise for LRT and the fact that the federal Liberals have all but one seat in Surrey and are supporting the project. The article mentions that construction should be started by 2018 (happens to be election time) on the first phase which is what the 96 is currently. Another contributing factor, which I didn't notice in the article, is that Translink's new CEO had a part in bringing Seattle's LRT to life which could bring even more momentum to Surrey's LRT.

I think a better option would be BRT with dedicated bus lanes and signal priority throughout the entire route which would be even cheaper than LRT and the timing is the same as the 96. There is also a question as to who might operate the LRT. The work basically belongs to CMBC so it could be that CMBC may operate the line similar to Edmonton and Calgary operates. The operates work both buses and LRT. Other options are BCRTC or a third party which would be the worst option in my opinion.

Maybe time for this topic to have its own thread?

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

Maybe they should do the 96 B-Line conversion to LRT first, before touching Fraser Highway. Since it's likely more suitable (but even it really isn't). Then the public will see how much of a disaster it'll be and finally push for skytrain down Fraser Highway.

Forwarding my response to Brando from the other thread....

If the LRT system was supported so well by the federal Liberals, they would be practically fearless in talking about funding it and doing so at every opportunity. But Minister Sohi didn't make that commitment when he visited on Friday. I'm working on a response to Frank's column on my blog right now, which I'm hoping to submit as a response letter.

(I also responded in the other thread on Kevin Desmond promoting Seattle's LRT system; there is absolutely no chance this would result in (additional) momentum for Surrey's LRT, because the SkyTrain vs LRT debate doesn't even exist in Seattle. I can imagine him promoting rail transit in general, but an on-street LRT - given Seattle has actually been moving away from "on-street" like MLK Blvd in its future LRT extensions? I don't think so).

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. LRT is better than nothing at all, so the promotion of it was simply a promotion of better transit. I think he'll look at all the options, and choose what's right for Surrey, not what the mayor thinks is right. And the federal Liberals will fund whatever option is requested -- I don't think they'll hold back funding for a skytrain project compared to an LRT project...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Line 410 needs to see the addition of artics during the peak hours, line 403 needs to see the return of artics on weekends

The main reason they don't block Artics out on the 410 is because of the turn out of 22nd street loop which can bottom out the buses. Also they have 7-10 min service on 410 in peak hours they don't need aritcs it's a waste of resources. I rather see them on the 480,49,620 cause that's where there needed most. The 40fts get the job done just fine and usually there only a full seated loads with a few standees every trip out of 22nd Also too much interlining on 410 blocks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason they don't block Artics out on the 410 is because of the turn out of 22nd street loop which can bottom out the buses. Also they have 7-10 min service on 410 in peak hours they don't need aritcs it's a waste of resources. I rather see them on the 480,49,620 cause that's where there needed most. The 40fts get the job done just fine and usually there only a full seated loads with a few standees every trip out of 22nd Also too much interlining on 410 blocks.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've seen artics on the 410 before so they are not a problem at 22nd st. The 7-10 min frequency isn't frequent enough on that route during peak hours using 40fts. Having artics on the route during the peak hours can bring the frequency down to 10-15 mins without problems freeing up 40fts for over routes. As a frequent 410 passenger I've had up to 3 pass ups in a row on that route during both the morning and afternoon peak hours that has caused me to be late for work/appointments too many times. Also the interlining of the route isn't a problem with the artics as I'm sure the stops for the 401, 402, 407 which all interline with the 410 can accommodate artics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...