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

[buizelbus]

26 minutes ago, Brando737 said:

 

Yes I meant D60LFRs.

On another note, I did some Googling and found a document about the bus loop at Brighouse station.  It's going to be a bus mall with a cul-de-sac at the eastern end for the buses to turn around, but no access to/from buswell St.  There will be the ability to enter/exit from buswell, but only for emergency situations and not regular use.

Link: https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/No3Road_Application_DPP_12141131918.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwinhr--s4fVAhUMyWMKHQlZBw0QFghAMAQ&usg=AFQjCNH6zUVAhMUHNPtXgXA8q_3GHnBOCA

What about pedestrians? Can they exit from Buswell?

[GORDOOM]

Also, why the cul-de-sac? Why not allow buses to make an on-street loop via Buswell? Or are they going for a Marine Drive-style two-bay solution, except with through routes staying on No. 3 Rd.?

[maege]

30 minutes ago, buizel10 said:

What about pedestrians? Can they exit from Buswell?

It looks like they can from the image and it says there would be vehicle access to/from Buswell in "emergencies" so I'm sure pedestrians would be able to use it normally at all times. 

[Brando737]

1 hour ago, GORDOOM said:

Also, why the cul-de-sac? Why not allow buses to make an on-street loop via Buswell? Or are they going for a Marine Drive-style two-bay solution, except with through routes staying on No. 3 Rd.?

I believe the reason for this design is to avoid any added noise for residents on Buswell St and to maximize the space available.  In my opinion, this design gets the most out of the limited space available.  If it was just a one way loop, buses would enter off Buswell and probably drop off shortly after entering the loop which would create a longer distance for passengers to get to the Canada Line and other bus connections.  In this design, buses will enter the loop from No 3 Rd and drop off just as they enter the loop then layover or turn around to pick up and back onto No 3 Rd.

The document mentions this will add service to Saba St so that leads me to believe the EB 401 405 and 407 will have thier bays on Saba then right Cooney left Cook to current routes.  Although Richmond is going to have an overhaul of its bus routes and this loop is probably a key to the functionality of those plans.  The 410 split will probably be the first change to utilize this loop and with that most likely planned for January, that is when I see this loop being complete.  Not unreasonable to believe it will be done for September however just not active except for the 301 and 430.

[ThatBusGuy]

https://tcomm.bustrainferry.com/mobile/block/b_1617377

I noticed today that this block is being done by shuttles. Is that new with the recent service changes, or have I just been blind

[buizelbus]

On 7/13/2017 at 4:23 PM, Brando737 said:

 

Yes I meant D60LFRs.

On another note, I did some Googling and found a document about the bus loop at Brighouse station.  It's going to be a bus mall with a cul-de-sac at the eastern end for the buses to turn around, but no access to/from buswell St.  There will be the ability to enter/exit from buswell, but only for emergency situations and not regular use.

Link: https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/No3Road_Application_DPP_12141131918.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwinhr--s4fVAhUMyWMKHQlZBw0QFghAMAQ&usg=AFQjCNH6zUVAhMUHNPtXgXA8q_3GHnBOCA

How many bus bays do you think will be in the bus mall?

[Brando737]

12 hours ago, buizel10 said:

How many bus bays do you think will be in the bus mall?

The document states the plan is for 13 bays in total which will break down into 1 for Handy Dart, 4 active bays and 8 layover bays.  Chances are, 1 of those active bays will be the drop off bay with 3 for loading which seems reasonable in my opinion.  Not so sure about only 8 layover bays though.  Probably will be sufficient before the complete overhaul of routes in Richmond.  Only the 301 402 404 and 410E (January possibility) will be using it to start.

[maege]

14 minutes ago, Brando737 said:

The document states the plan is for 13 bays in total which will break down into 1 for Handy Dart, 4 active bays and 8 layover bays.  Chances are, 1 of those active bays will be the drop off bay with 3 for loading which seems reasonable in my opinion.  Not so sure about only 8 layover bays though.  Probably will be sufficient before the complete overhaul of routes in Richmond.  Only the 301 402 404 and 410E (January possibility) will be using it to start.

Just curious, why wouldn't 401, 430, C94 and C96 use it at the start too?

[Brando737]

20 minutes ago, maege said:

Just curious, why wouldn't 401, 430, C94 and C96 use it at the start too?

Right, forgot about those.  So to start the 301 402 404 410E 430 C94 C96.  The 401 probably wouldn't use it in its current routing as it would just be wasted time for it to go in and out of the loop even if they allowed Buswell to be used regularly, but even then, only the WB 401 would have the most benefit.  It mentions adding service to Saba Rd so I could see the 401 EB using Saba R Cooney L Cook regular route same with the 407.  Although the city could demand that the 401 uses the loop anyways to get it off No 3 Rd as it has a long unload/load time.

[Express691]

Analyzing the 159 change, assuming the Eastbound schedule for WCX does not change. * is the short turn trip going northbound, and all buses are listed from their termini (Braid for the morning, Coquitlam for the afternoon):

Before AM at PoCo Station:
0554* bus -> 0604 train W1, 7 minute wait
0558 bus -> 0634 train W2, 6 minute wait
0623 bus -> 0704 train W3, 5 minute wait
0653 bus -> 0734 train W4, 5 minute wait
0715 bus -> 0804 train W5, 9 minute wait

Before PM:
16:24 train E1 -> 16:26 bus, 2 minute transfer
16:54 train E2 -> 16:56 bus, 2 minute transfer
17:24 train E3 -> 17:27 bus, 3 minute transfer
18:04 train E4 -> 18:06 bus, 2 minute transfer
18:54 train E5 -> 18:54 bus, seconds to transfer

September AM at Coquitlam Station (Note walk to Mary Hill @ Wilson (MHWS) is almost 5 minutes at 300 meters):
0542* bus -> 0610 train W1, 6 minute wait. Walk from MHWS with 5 minute transfer.
0555 bus -> 0640 train W2, 4 minute wait. Walk from MHWS with 5 minute transfer.
0625 bus -> 0710 train W3, 1 minute wait. Walk from MHWS with 2 minute transfer.
0655 bus -> 0740 train W4, bus is scheduled to arrive at 0741. Walk from MHWS is 0 minute transfer.
0715 bus -> 0810 train W5, 7 minute wait. Walk from MHWS with 8 minute transfer.

September PM at Coquitlam Station (Note the 159 leaves from bay 7)
16:19 train E1 -> 16:20 bus, 1 minute transfer. Alternate walk is a 5 minute wait.
16:49 train E2 -> 17:00 bus, 9 minute transfer. Alternate walk is a 5 minute wait.
17:19 train E3 -> 17:30 bus, 10 minute transfer. Alternate walk is a 17 minute wait.
17:59 train E4 -> 18:15 bus, 16 minute transfer. Alternate walk is a 18 minute wait.
18:49 train E5 -> 19:30 bus, 41 minute transfer. The closest 159 leaves at 18:45. Alternatively, the 18:45 bus arrives at Mary Hill @ Wilson at 18:57 while the train arrives at PoCo Station at 18:54.
 
Overall, the 159 connections with the West Coast Express was NOT thought out properly, especially in the PM peak where people will either be rushing or waiting longer to get onto their 159s. Walking to Mary Hill at Wilson does almost nothing to wait times. I expect a mid-sheet change for the 18:45 bus to leave at like 18:55 instead. If not, they should send the WCX trips into PoCo Station.

Wont be surprised if the paddle for the 18:45 159 SB says "Wait for" or "Meet with" West Coast Express passengers.

Also updated my previous post

On 7/11/2017 at 3:30 AM, Express691 said:

It was like that in the January sheet (and has been for a long time.)

-------------

502 eb stop at 64th avenue doesnt seem to list any times (noting stop is being closed for construction or is being cancelled entirely)

-------------

Saw no changes for 002 026 027(?) 028 029 032 033 041 084 95B 96B 99B 100 101 104 106 110 112 116 123 125 128 134 136 143 144 151 152 153 155 156 157 160 169 180 183 188 191 209 210 211 212 228 229 230 232 236 239 241 246 247 301 311 312 314 316 319 320 321 323 324 325 326 329 335 337 340 341 342 345 352 354 364 375 388 391 393 394 395 401 402 403 404 405 407 410 501 502 509 531 555 595 601 602 603 604 606 608 620 640 701 791 on weekday
-------------
22 additional trips in the am peak, frequency between 7 and 8 is every 4-5 minutes up from 6-7
25 increase to 5-6 minutes am peak.
43 gets 15 minute service all day (as mentioned), first and last bus hasnt changed
49 goes to 5-6 minutes all day
130 goes to 6 minutes peak
145 is tricky. Cant tell between seasonal and permanent changes, but I do know that the last trip arrives at SFU at 25:08 (20 mins. Later than the last one comes now.)
159 goes to Coquitlam Station (as previously mentioned) and gets a PM peak increase from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes.
240 additional peak hour trips (1 more bus per hour)
351 PM peak frequency increases: additional bus per hour both directions between 3 and 6, southbound frequency now reaches 10 minutes.
430 goes to 20 all day with 15 minutes peak

[GORDOOM]

So when does all this get finalized and the sign-up sheets go up? (Also, this one's a consolidated sheet, right?)

Also, hurrah for the #43 getting midday service! And another hurrah for the #430 getting better than 30-minute service off-peak!

Now, when can we get the #33 better than 30-minute service evenings and weekends? Judging from the times I've used it on the weekends, you could probably justify it...

[Brando737]

12 minutes ago, GORDOOM said:

So when does all this get finalized and the sign-up sheets go up? (Also, this one's a consolidated sheet, right?)

Also, hurrah for the #43 getting midday service! And another hurrah for the #430 getting better than 30-minute service off-peak!

Now, when can we get the #33 better than 30-minute service evenings and weekends? Judging from the times I've used it on the weekends, you could probably justify it...

They were completed and accepted a while ago, usually final about a month before signup.  Probably in planning much sooner that that however.  

Yes, the September sheet is the consolidated.  Signup started Monday last week so we do this one much sooner than the others to allow for route training where needed for transfers.

January will see further changes and added service from what I've heard.  They are spanning the plan out over 2 years I believe so 2018 will be year two.  Correct me if I'm wrong on that timeline.

[owo transit fan]

On 2017-07-11 at 3:30 AM, Express691 said:

It was like that in the January sheet (and has been for a long time.)

-------------

502 eb stop at 64th avenue doesnt seem to list any times (noting stop is being closed for construction or is being cancelled entirely)

-------------

Saw no changes for 033 041 084 95B 96B 99B 100 106 112 116 123 125 143 144 151 152 153 155 156 157 160 169 180 183 188 191 210 211 212 228 229 230 232 239 241 246 247 301 312 319 320 321 323 324 325 354 388 394 395 401 402 403 404 405 407 410 502 509 555 601 603 604 606 608 640 701 on weekday

-------------

25 increase to 5-6 minutes am peak.

43 gets 15 minute service all day (as mentioned), first and last bus hasnt changed

49 goes to 5-6 minutes all day

130 goes to 6 minutes peak

145 is tricky. Cant tell between seasonal and permanent changes, but I do know that the last trip arrives at SFU at 25:08 and (presumably) turns into a WB N35.

159 goes to Coquitlam Station (as previously mentioned) and gets a PM peak increase from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes.

240 additional peak hour trips (1 more bus per hour)

351 PM peak frequency increases: additional bus per hour both directions between 3 and 6

430 goes to 20 all day with 15 minutes peak

Does that include weekends?

 

[Express691]

no. First for me is finding any weekday changes to see where additional buses are needed.

Whats kinda throwing me off (well as far as this is temporary) is how the 002 and 022 still identify as West/East when in reality for this temporary change they should really be identifying as North/South

[Michael Marriott]

3 hours ago, Express691 said:

Whats kinda throwing me off (well as far as this is temporary) is how the 002 and 022 still identify as West/East when in reality for this temporary change they should really be identifying as North/South

The 17's even worse, since the directions have never been updated since the UBC portion was split off and given to the 14.  A trip to Downtown is WB, while the Oak trip is EB, despite plenty of out of direction travel, and the two terminals are more or less in a straight line north and south.  It was even worse the year Marine Dr Stn was closed, and a "WB" 17 Downtown would pull out of Marpole Loop, go east on Marine Dr, north on Oak, east on Broadway, north across the Cambie Bridge, then finally do a couple blocks of WB travel in Downtown to get to the library, ending farther east than it started on a WB trip. There are a couple of other routes where the direction assigned to each trip doesn't really line up with the direction the bus actually travels (the 335 and 351 come to mind, due to the looping nature of the route, and the 8 is EB/WB as well).

[Large Cat]

49 goes to 5-6 minutes all day...do you know the times when this begins/ends? I'm assuming it won't be like that until midnight, but even midday hours that would be pretty phenomenal, basically doubling the frequency. Would really help post-pm peak as well, since service can still be really inconsistent up until 9 or 10pm. Also wondering if Richmond will be operating with 40 footers on the route as well given this increase.

[Dr. BusFreak]

1 hour ago, Large Cat said:

Also wondering if Richmond will be operating with 40 footers on the route as well given this increase.

Doubt it, for 2 reasons: 1. The 49 can be really crowded at times due to the density around the route, so I think having 60 footers as well as increasing service is justified. 2. Where are all the XDE60s are going to go? Keeping the XDE60s at VTC ''in case'' if VTC doesn't have enough 60 foot trolleys is just a waste of resources, and transferring the XDE60s to BTC is probably not going to happen because BTC is receiving minimal service increases with the routes served by 60 footers. 

[Large Cat]

7 hours ago, Dr. BusFreak said:

Doubt it, for 2 reasons: 1. The 49 can be really crowded at times due to the density around the route, so I think having 60 footers as well as increasing service is justified. 2. Where are all the XDE60s are going to go? Keeping the XDE60s at VTC ''in case'' if VTC doesn't have enough 60 foot trolleys is just a waste of resources, and transferring the XDE60s to BTC is probably not going to happen because BTC is receiving minimal service increases with the routes served by 60 footers. 

What I meant was, the 49 seems to be receiving a really big service increase. Given that Novas are already seen on the 49 out of VTC from time to time, even with 25 dedicated XDE60'S, will transferring all 25 to Richmond even be enough to cover all of the new service with artics as well? If not, where will the additional artics come from? If we can't answer these questions we might have to assume there will be 40 footers on the route.

[Brando737]

20 minutes ago, Large Cat said:

What I meant was, the 49 seems to be receiving a really big service increase. Given that Novas are already seen on the 49 out of VTC from time to time, even with 25 dedicated XDE60'S, will transferring all 25 to Richmond even be enough to cover all of the new service with artics as well? If not, where will the additional artics come from? If we can't answer these questions we might have to assume there will be 40 footers on the route.

There are a couple artic's in storage that could be put on the 49, but probably not enough to have it be 100% artic.  I could see some 40 footers on the 49, maybe placed strategically between artic runs so 60 40 60 40 or 60 60 40 60 60 40 and so on.  Until an expansion order for artic's arrive, it's inevitable to have 40 footers on the 49.  They could also have the 480 be completely 40 footers to free up those artic's for the 49.  It'll be there way of forcing those people to the Canada Line and use the East/West services in Vancouver. I was thinking with the 145 going to PTC interlining with the 143 might free up a few buses with that configuration, but those are probably going to be used on the 43 if there are any extras from that.

The XDE60s will not stay at VTC.  They will probably all go back to RTC.  I don't know this for sure, but there are no plans to introduce artic's to anything at VTC that I know of.  Also simply not enough equipment for that to happen.  

[Phillip]

46 minutes ago, Brando737 said:

There are a couple artic's in storage that could be put on the 49, but probably not enough to have it be 100% artic.  I could see some 40 footers on the 49, maybe placed strategically between artic runs so 60 40 60 40 or 60 60 40 60 60 40 and so on.  Until an expansion order for artic's arrive, it's inevitable to have 40 footers on the 49.  They could also have the 480 be completely 40 footers to free up those artic's for the 49.  It'll be there way of forcing those people to the Canada Line and use the East/West services in Vancouver. I was thinking with the 145 going to PTC interlining with the 143 might free up a few buses with that configuration, but those are probably going to be used on the 43 if there are any extras from that.

The XDE60s will not stay at VTC.  They will probably all go back to RTC.  I don't know this for sure, but there are no plans to introduce artic's to anything at VTC that I know of.  Also simply not enough equipment for that to happen.  

Yes the XDE60's are going back to RTC I confirmed it with my Operations supervisor the other day. I saw 12002 at RTC a few days ago. Probably repair/maintenance because it was a service man driving.   

[ThomasW97]

46 minutes ago, Brando737 said:

There are a couple artic's in storage that could be put on the 49, but probably not enough to have it be 100% artic.  I could see some 40 footers on the 49, maybe placed strategically between artic runs so 60 40 60 40 or 60 60 40 60 60 40 and so on.  Until an expansion order for artic's arrive, it's inevitable to have 40 footers on the 49.  They could also have the 480 be completely 40 footers to free up those artic's for the 49.  It'll be there way of forcing those people to the Canada Line and use the East/West services in Vancouver. I was thinking with the 145 going to PTC interlining with the 143 might free up a few buses with that configuration, but those are probably going to be used on the 43 if there are any extras from that.

The XDE60s will not stay at VTC.  They will probably all go back to RTC.  I don't know this for sure, but there are no plans to introduce artic's to anything at VTC that I know of.  Also simply not enough equipment for that to happen.  

It would be a different story if they end up cancelling the 480

[Express691]

52 minutes ago, ThomasW97 said:

It would be a different story if they end up cancelling the 480

of which, the SoFATP results are expected to be released in the fall. 

 

I expect that they will end up keeping the 480 unless they do a service increase on all Vancouver E-W routes. Everything's full when they reach Canada Line. It's really full going the peak direction, yet the off-peak direction sees no ridership.

 

I do foresee 480 mid-day service being slashed in favour of the introduction of all day service on the 043 (April 2018 sheet perhaps??).

[iliketrains]

would 15019-15021 also be transferred to RTC?

[Express691]

11 hours ago, Large Cat said:

49 goes to 5-6 minutes all day...do you know the times when this begins/ends? I'm assuming it won't be like that until midnight, but even midday hours that would be pretty phenomenal, basically doubling the frequency. Would really help post-pm peak as well, since service can still be really inconsistent up until 9 or 10pm. Also wondering if Richmond will be operating with 40 footers on the route as well given this increase.

Here's the link to the proposed schedule for the 049 according to the info form Nname:

http://tripplanning.translink.ca/hiwire?.a=iHeadwaySheet&LineDirId=318501&Date=09-01-2017

 

PDF schedule in comparison

http://infomaps.translink.ca/Public_Timetables/135/tt049.pdf

 

Here's a frequency analysis for WB trips:

0600-0700: 8.5min, up from 12min

0700-0800: 5.5min, up from 6.5min

0800-0900: 6.5min, same.

0900-1000: 6min, up from 8.5min

1000-1100: 6.5min, up from 10min

1100-1400: 8.5min, up from 10min

1400-1500: 6min, up from 10min

1500-1600: 5min, up from 10min (2x the frequency)

1600-1700: 5min, up from 6.5min

1700-1800: 5.5min, up from 7.5min

1800-1900: 8.5min, up from 10min

...and so forth.

 

Also do note that the 49 leaves from Metrotown Bay 11 and routes via Central, Imperial to 49th

[Cathay 888]

On ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 0:52 PM, Brando737 said:

The 134/136 are being considered for transfer to PTC, but not at this point.  Likely sometime next year.

.

This is more make sense for being transfer to PTC for 134/136, specially both conventional and community shuttle are operating at the same depot~~