TransLink Future - Dream's and Aspirations

[maege]

15 hours ago, Michael Marriott said:

The main idea behind extending the 9 is to provide a connection to a Skytrain from the east end of the route, as opposed to its current terminus underneath a highway at a McDonalds.  Brentwood is usually mentioned as it is a major bus exchange and an anchor in its own right with the mall and redevelopment.  Even just getting the 9 to Gilmore Station would be an improvement, allowing for easier access to the rest of the system for east Broadway riders. If there was a desire to run a bus parallel to the Millennium Line through Burnaby it would make more sense to have a dedicated shuttle as the 9 is already a very long route, and runs at much higher frequencies than such a service would warrant.  Other than the cluster of redevelopment between Gilmore and Holdom, there is very little along Lougheed Highway through Burnaby.  The highway is also very pedestrain unfriendly, with long stretches where there are no crossing lights; and most of the neighborhood housing is oriented away from the Highway.  

Makes sense. Just looking at it again, I would agree, just move the 9 to Brentwood. The other routes in North Burnaby need a good bit of work (especially the 134), and should run much more east-west or north-south than the random paths some of them have now. 

15 hours ago, Michael Marriott said:

For your Edmonds-Lougheed proposal, that is similar to how the 112 used to look.  When the M-Line first opened, it ran its current route from Edmonds to New West, then via Columbia St/North Rd to Lougheed.  Low ridership along Columbia St resulted in the route being split at New West, with the east half becoming the C9 which has seen frequency cuts since.

Interesting, thanks. I sketched a rough outline of what some alterations may look like in New West and North Burnaby and included a new Glenbrook Skytrain Station in New West. I've wanted the Glenbrook Station (originally listed as an option in plans) for some time, and that would help transit a lot in the area, especially with a bunch of new development and towers recently built and more coming.

15 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

Maybe re-routes for buses routes, such as 16 because the route could service as local stop version of the tram. A Community Shuttle route for Kitsilano and around other neighbours. Also bus route between Olympic Village to Brentwood Station via West 4th turning left turning onto Quebec St, then left onto Terminal Ave, East 1st Ave then right onto Gilmore Ave, then left Halifax St, then right onto Willingdon Ave then terminating at Brentwood Station, this could be conventional bus or community shuttle. Maybe a shuttle to and around Granville Island. The 23 could also extended to service Olympic Village Station. 

But once the Tram line opens I could see Olympic Village being a min hub for Vancouver. 

The only buses that could really be re-routed are ones that use Granville Bridge currently, and moving those wouldn't make much sense. The 84 already roughly serves the tram route and could easily be used as a local stop alternative, so there's not really any reason to re-route the 16 to Olympic Village. 

As for Kits.... What? It's already served by the 2, 4, 7 and 84 just fine. Another route would seem pointless, especially from Olympic Village as it would duplicate the 84.

The new route you propose would seem to make more sense to just terminate around Main St-Science World, as I would expect any future tram would already run Olympic Village to Science World. 

For a Granville Island shuttle, it will be unneeded in the case of a tram, or would serve only as a local circulator around Granville Island (either with or without a tram), not really leaving the island except to the tram station. 

I don't see what point the 23 would have in extending to Olympic Village. It goes by Yaletown-Roundhouse just prior, so it would be shorter for people to just the the bus there instead.

So yeah, I don't see why/how Olympic Village would ever be a bus hub. Maybe a transfer hub between Canada line and the tram, but that's about it.

[Blue Bus Fan]

I wish that TransLink would sticker that says "Air Condition bus (train) - Open windows for emergency ventilation' more noticeable to passenger so people can actually follow what it says. 

[GORDOOM]

4 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

I wish that TransLink would sticker that says "Air Condition bus (train) - Open windows for emergency ventilation' more noticeable to passenger so people can actually follow what it says. 

They've modified them a couple times (on the buses and on SkyTrain) and people still open windows. It's not about the signage, but rather about people who don't read and don't follow directions.

The TTC had such a big problem with this that they actually bolted all the tip-in windows closed on their A/C-equipped buses, even knowing that this would mean BO'ing any bus without AC in the summer.

[Blue Bus Fan]

16 minutes ago, GORDOOM said:

They've modified them a couple times (on the buses and on SkyTrain) and people still open windows. It's not about the signage, but rather about people who don't read and don't follow directions.

The TTC had such a big problem with this that they actually bolted all the tip-in windows closed on their A/C-equipped buses, even knowing that this would mean BO'ing any bus without AC in the summer.

TransLink should beef up signage to see if it does anything if doesn't lock all windows. 

[Marlow1331]

4 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

TransLink should beef up signage to see if it does anything if doesn't lock all windows. 

People cant even read the destination half the time. If they arent reading the stickers on the window, they wont read it regardless. 

[buizelbus]

Some future bus stop locations with the new bus loop at Brighouse?

https://drive.google.com/open?id=15npoUIwxROLmbDeraBLJTkUkOpA&usp=sharing\

 

Also, it shows what I think will happen with the farther away stops. This map also included some routes I would love to replace some lost services.

M1: No. 3 -> Blundell -> No. 6 -> Riverport

M2: No. 3 -> Granville -> No. 5 -> Steveston -> Riverport

[Orion 1200]

On 6/22/2017 at 11:47 PM, GORDOOM said:

The TTC had such a big problem with this that they actually bolted all the tip-in windows closed on their A/C-equipped buses, even knowing that this would mean BO'ing any bus without AC in the summer.

Sadly, the TTC has never done any such thing. Some buses did have their windows bolted for a brief time a few years ago, but it wasn't to stop people from opening them when the AC was running.

[Blue Bus Fan]

I wish that TransLink would have D60LFR a refurnishment and transfer 6 to RTC and rest to West Vancouver Blue Bus for use on 257 and 620 and both routes would get all door boarding.

[GORDOOM]

24 minutes ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

I wish that TransLink would have D60LFR a refurnishment and transfer 6 to RTC and rest to West Vancouver Blue Bus for use on 257 and 620 and both routes would get all door boarding.

I'd send any D60LFRs that West Van doesn't need to PoCo for use on the Burnaby Mtn. shuttles. There's nothing better for hillclimbing!

[Blue Bus Fan]

Just now, GORDOOM said:

I'd send any D60LFRs that West Van doesn't need to PoCo for use on the Burnaby Mtn. shuttles. There's nothing better for hillclimbing!

How about XD60 for PCTC and BTC that are limited to SFU routes, 701, or Lougheed Highway B-Line. 

[buizelbus]

4 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

How about XD60 for PCTC and BTC that are limited to SFU routes, 701, or Lougheed Highway B-Line. 

How about XD60 with X12 engines.

[Brando737]

5 minutes ago, buizel10 said:

How about XD60 with X12 engines.

The RFP requested for 1 unit to have this engine for them to test.  I assume it would come in the first batch and if they like it, hopefully the later batches will have that engine.  I hear is just like the ISL in the early 8000s.

[GORDOOM]

1 hour ago, Brando737 said:

The RFP requested for 1 unit to have [the X12] for them to test.  I assume it would come in the first batch and if they like it, hopefully the later batches will have that engine.  I hear is just like the ISL in the early 8000s.

The D60LFRs had ISM engines, not ISLs - and yes, that's why they climb hills so well. I'm sure CMBC was salivating at the chance to get another engine worthy of an artic hillclimber.

[Express691]

6 hours ago, Brando737 said:

The RFP requested for 1 unit to have this engine for them to test.  I assume it would come in the first batch and if they like it, hopefully the later batches will have that engine.  I hear is just like the ISL in the early 8000s.

Looking at things, this would be a first amongst NA artics, for an engine that powerful (as in Cummins ISX/Volvo D13/Cummins X12). Especially for what the SFU routes require, an engine that strong could be installed under the risk that insurance/warranty would not be provided.

[Millennium2002]

I'm pretty sure New Flyer can handle the task given its previous experience with building custom powered buses... NovaBus I'm not so sure about however...

[maege]

I was thinking about a Coquitlam-Surrey (Guildford) rapid transit connection since I've seen and heard it mentioned a few times recently. I think a gondola (likely either a 3S or funitel) may be the best solution. You can have a direct line from Coquitlam Central to Guildford and there are only 10-15 houses that it would pass over, minimizing the potential opposition from a privacy standpoint since the line would mainly run over Lougheed Hwy, open/park land, and 152nd St. The line would be ~9.3km long as it is the most direct route, and would take 15-21 minutes to cover the whole line, depending on the number of stops and exact technology. Frequency would likely be 45-120 seconds, allowing for very minimal wait times. As for cost, it would likely be in the $15-$40 million per km range, for a total of $140-$372 million. 

I considered possible alternatives, but rail will be magnitudes more expensive, especially since there would need to be a new rail bridge over the Fraser River. Additionally, since the route would mainly be along highways, BRT would likely be more practical due to similar speeds from due to the highways and much lower costs due to not needing a bridge. For BRT, the route would be ~12km and time would be similar to the gondola because of the higher line speed but longer route distance, but bus frequency would be much lower (4-8min vs 45s-120s). Costs per km are also similar, but total cost would be more from the longer route distance. Lastly lower operating costs for a gondola (no drivers, much less maintenance necessary) combined with not needing to burn fuel and being only electric seem to complete the choice for me. 

I have added the line to my map along with some modifications and rationalizations of the Coquitlam and PoCo lines. If the Surrey LRT is built as Translink proposes currently, I could see the gondola continuing south on 152nd to the Fraser Hwy as well.

Any thoughts/questions/comments for connecting Coquitlam and Surrey?

[buizelbus]

5 minutes ago, maege said:

I was thinking about a Coquitlam-Surrey (Guildford) rapid transit connection since I've seen and heard it mentioned a few times recently. I think a gondola (likely either a 3S or funitel) may be the best solution. You can have a direct line from Coquitlam Central to Guildford and there are only 10-15 houses that it would pass over, minimizing the potential opposition from a privacy standpoint since the line would mainly run over Lougheed Hwy, open/park land, and 152nd St. The line would be ~9.3km long as it is the most direct route, and would take 15-21 minutes to cover the whole line, depending on the number of stops and exact technology. Frequency would likely be 45-120 seconds, allowing for very minimal wait times. As for cost, it would likely be in the $15-$40 million per km range, for a total of $140-$372 million. 

 

I considered possible alternatives, but rail will be magnitudes more expensive, especially since there would need to be a new rail bridge over the Fraser River. Additionally, since the route would mainly be along highways, BRT would likely be more practical due to similar speeds from due to the highways and much lower costs due to not needing a bridge. For BRT, the route would be ~12km and time would be similar to the gondola because of the higher line speed but longer route distance, but bus frequency would be much lower (4-8min vs 45s-120s). Costs per km are also similar, but total cost would be more from the longer route distance. Lastly lower operating costs for a gondola (no drivers, much less maintenance necessary) combined with not needing to burn fuel and being only electric seem to complete the choice for me. 

I have added the line to my map along with some modifications and rationalizations of the Coquitlam and PoCo lines. If the Surrey LRT is built as Translink proposes currently, I could see the gondola continuing south on 152nd to the Fraser Hwy as well.

Any thoughts/questions/comments for connecting Coquitlam and Surrey?

Yes, but BRT usually can carry more passengers. I do agree on the electricity standpoint, but if they really wanted to, they could use trolleybuses or CNG nZ engines (Cummins ISL G nZ)

[maege]

4 hours ago, buizel10 said:

Yes, but BRT usually can carry more passengers. I do agree on the electricity standpoint, but if they really wanted to, they could use trolleybuses or CNG nZ engines (Cummins ISL G nZ)

First of all, I don't see a Guildford-Coquitlam route needing anywhere near 4000+ pphpd capacity anytime in the next few decades, and it is extremely far from it now (Translink hasn't seen a need to implement such a bus route, and they have the data from Compass, so I would imagine the peak number of people travelling between the two currently is less than 1000pphpd). 

Secondly regarding BRT capacity... Ehhh, not so much. The largest bi-articulated bus (carrying 300 passengers), with a 3 minute frequency would be able to carry a max of 6000pphpd. By comparison, a 3S gondola can carry about 35 passengers per carriage and can have the same 6000pphpd capacity at 20 second frequency, and is able to go down to about 12 second frequency, which would let it carry 10,000pphpd. For comparison, the highest frequency you could do with a bi-articulated bus is maybe 90 seconds, and that's stretching it. That would give it 12,000pphpd capacity, not all that much more than the 3S. And at 90s frequency for BRT, you really would need a grade-separated solution, as any slightly delayed intersection would cause issues. Also, working with regular articulated buses would bring the capacity below that of a 3S gondola.

They could use different buses to reduce pollution and negative environmental impacts, but then that would increase the BRT cost even more, so it would definitely be more expensive than a gondola. 

[Translink69]

9 to Gilmore. Boundary Loop is awful since there the 2 closest stations are at least a 5 minute walk

[cleowin]

5 minutes ago, Translink69 said:

9 to Gilmore. Boundary Loop is awful since there the 2 closest stations are at least a 5 minute walk

Id almost do 9 to Brentwood, to serve local stops, but no trolley expansion under the belt of Corrigan.

[GORDOOM]

4 minutes ago, cleowin said:

Id almost do 9 to Brentwood, to serve local stops, but no trolley expansion under the belt of Corrigan.

9 to Brentwood was planned long enough ago that there was actually a "Brentwood Exchange" exposure on the rollsigns of the E901s. But as you say, Burnaby refuses to allow trolleybus overhead, so...

[captaintrolley]

3 minutes ago, GORDOOM said:

9 to Brentwood was planned long enough ago that there was actually a "Brentwood Exchange" exposure on the rollsigns of the E901s. But as you say, Burnaby refuses to allow trolleybus overhead, so...

There is trolley overhead to Metrotown, that's in Burnaby..

[cleowin]

Just now, captaintrolley said:

There is trolley overhead to Metrotown, that's in Burnaby..

I think he meant no further expansion of Trolley overhead, which is what I'm saying lol

[captaintrolley]

Just now, cleowin said:

I think he meant no further expansion of Trolley overhead, which is what I'm saying lol

OK. Stupid Burnaby. They don't know what's good for them.. 

[cleowin]

If burnaby wasn't an object.. I'd make the 106 to Edmonds a Trolley route, with VTC serving the 106 portion to EDmonds. Then the split route portion from edmonds to New west would stay conventional diesel.

That's really the only route I'd make trolley in Burnaby.