cleowin

TransLink Future - Dream's and Aspirations

944 posts in this topic

Yeah. I lived at 1st Avenue and there literally isn't anything worth providing transit service to, that the north-south routes don't already service. It'd only make sense to be used by an express bus to somewhere in Burnaby, but no local stops.

I think "323 Surrey Central Stn" meant that there is no service there, not that there was nothing to provide service to/from. There is nothing much other than houses on 16th and 33rd either, but a service was needed because of the large gap in east-west service in that area. In fact, this would provide another connection between all three Skytrain lines and could help out Broadway. "Citaro" made the point that a number of people don't want buses running down their street -- as far as I know, people on 16th didn't want buses either but they got them anyway. And gee -- the service is fairly busy! I think a community shuttle route on 1st would do for now, but if it is linked to the Beach/Davie route then it could become a 40-footer sometime since the C21/C23 could also use big buses at least in the peak hours. The gap between Broadway and Hastings is 21 blocks -- the rest of the city has bus routes every 8-16 blocks east-west. If this occurred, you wouldn't need the 22s to run down Terminal on certain trips either.

12 UBC/ALMA/RENFREW STN:

This bus would be operated by BTC 40 Footers.

Sorry, but I think this would be a redundant service with Broadway being so close (only 3 blocks away).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I think this would be a redundant service with Broadway being so close (only 3 blocks away).

Its the only Major Corridor in Vancouver not using bus service. Thats why I suggested it. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I think this would be a redundant service with Broadway being so close (only 3 blocks away).

Its the only Major Corridor in Vancouver not using bus service. Thats why I suggested it. B)

first ave i can see that but not 12 ave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you where to extend trolley service into burnaby further, where would you put Trolley Overhead wires?

I'd personally put it on the 106 route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

farther along hastings would help as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised they never extended the 9 from Boundary Loop to Gimore Station or even Brentwood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were going to do that but thanks to NIMBYs and the Monopoly Man, the mayor of Burnaby, most trolleybus extension projects never occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were going to do that but thanks to NIMBYs and the Monopoly Man, the mayor of Burnaby, most trolleybus extension projects never occurred.

don't mind if extending the wires to BTC for 9, 10, 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought of another thing I wouldn't mind seeing. I think they should extend the 33 out from 29th Ave Stn to at least BCIT via 29th Avenue, Moscrop Street, and Willingdon Avenue. Maybe even to Brentwood, but that might be redundant since the 25 already goes there as does the 130. I think this could be a peak hours only extension to the route and would help the 25 in the AM from the Canada Line to BCIT. That way, the 25 doesn't have to be increased as much since there are parts of the eastbound route that don't need more service (i.e. UBC to about Granville or Cambie in the AM). I know the 33 doesn't need extra service that direction either, but they could use the 10-12 minute service already on the 33 and extend it to BCIT (right on Canada Way off Willingdon, and then left on some street that I can't think of the name of at the moment, but it is a crescent and loops back around to Canada Way). Service could be one direction only, if desired instead, then the buses would just have to go left on Canada Way back to 29th Ave Stn to make the westbound trip.

There are many options for service here -- this is another area in the street grid where there is a gap in east-west service, and I think 29th Avenue is commonly used for buses coming from BTC, so it won't be new for the residents to have buses down their street. Whether it be a peak only, peak direction only service, or a peak only both directions service, I think there will be a demand. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, it is likely better to travel both directions since many people on 29th Avenue may want to get to the Skytrain in the AM and from it in the PM.

I know this is not likely ever to happen, but that's why it's in the "Dreams and Aspirations" section!

They were going to do that but thanks to NIMBYs and the Monopoly Man, the mayor of Burnaby, most trolleybus extension projects never occurred.

What NIMBYS? There's nothing much there. If people are complaining about buses down a HIGHWAY (Lougheed), then they shouldn't have decided to live on a highway. Besides, most of the developments are high-rises anyway so many wouldn't even notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought of another thing I wouldn't mind seeing. I think they should extend the 33 out from 29th Ave Stn to at least BCIT via 29th Avenue, Moscrop Street, and Willingdon Avenue. Maybe even to Brentwood, but that might be redundant since the 25 already goes there as does the 130. I think this could be a peak hours only extension to the route and would help the 25 in the AM from the Canada Line to BCIT. That way, the 25 doesn't have to be increased as much since there are parts of the eastbound route that don't need more service (i.e. UBC to about Granville or Cambie in the AM). I know the 33 doesn't need extra service that direction either, but they could use the 10-12 minute service already on the 33 and extend it to BCIT (right on Canada Way off Willingdon, and then left on some street that I can't think of the name of at the moment, but it is a crescent and loops back around to Canada Way). Service could be one direction only, if desired instead, then the buses would just have to go left on Canada Way back to 29th Ave Stn to make the westbound trip.

There are many options for service here -- this is another area in the street grid where there is a gap in east-west service, and I think 29th Avenue is commonly used for buses coming from BTC, so it won't be new for the residents to have buses down their street. Whether it be a peak only, peak direction only service, or a peak only both directions service, I think there will be a demand. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, it is likely better to travel both directions since many people on 29th Avenue may want to get to the Skytrain in the AM and from it in the PM.

I know this is not likely ever to happen, but that's why it's in the "Dreams and Aspirations" section!

What about 33 UBC/29th Avenue STN/Patterson STN?

Bus goes along 29th Avenue to Boundary Road onto Canada Way, down to Willingdon Avenue past BCIT/Moscrop Secondary (Same route as 130) and when it hits Central Boulevard, follow a 125. It could be Peak Hour service only to Patterson and return from Patterson with off-peak going to 29th Avenue STN only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is an old topic, and since I have been back in Vancouver for a while I was reading old topics and couldn't help but add some more things.

The C92 is INSANE during peak hours to/from BCIT. I was on one the other day after I had a stroll along the banks of the south airport, and it had to leave people behind at BCIT. I felt bad because I wasn't really using it for a purpose other than leisure. This was a regular D40LF bus as well, not a shuttle (all trips in peak hours are big buses, but many are Orions). So what if we did this: Keep the C92 on Sea Island and run it to/from Templeton Station and keep the "free on Sea Island" fare structure. This trip would bypass BCIT and not stop anywhere close. Have some peak hour trips run to/from the UPS building as well -- this wouldn't require another vehicle if it is scheduled correctly, but would just take away from a driver's layover. Then run the 402 as follows: Alternating trips during peak hours only (so 20 minute service) on the current routing via Two Road, Blundell, and Three Road to Brighouse. The other trips go Two Road, Two Road Bridge (or Westminster Hwy to Gilbert and Dinsmore Bridge), Russ Baker Way, Cessna Drive, BCIT, Airport Stn loop, Sea Island Way, Great Can. Way to Bridgeport Stn. In the off-peak hours, all trips would run the second routing at the current 30 minute frequencies. This would leave Blundell without transit outside peak hours, but there has been talk of a Blundell shuttle for a while now like the one on Williams, so this could be brought in to fix that problem.

The 405 is not very busy, but the northern section is very redundant and could be better served in a different way. If the northern section is eliminated, the C96 could take over for it by following its current routing as far as Cambie and Viking (including the diversion to Jack Bell Dr and McNeely), then do the 405's current routing to Knight and Marine, and include the "via Vulcan" loop in the peak hours. I've never seen more than 20 people on this bus at any time, but if they feel it may need it, then make it 20 minutes in peak hours with the shuttles.

Another "dream" would be to see artics on the 25 during the peak hours, and the re-implementation of trippers from UBC to Nanaimo Stn in the PM peak hours. Then all the AM trippers that begin at Nanaimo Stn (or some of the ones at Cambie) and all the PM Nanaimo Stn trippers could run from BTC and use artics. Either this or a peak hours only express route along King Edward in the following manner: Local service to/from Brentwood to Nanaimo, limited stops to Dunbar and King Ed, then local service again to UBC. And with this, have all 25s during the peak hours short-turn on both ends -- Nanaimo and Crown. This way you could even out the service use a bit by demand, and provide a service to Crown on King Ed. The boulevard is huge, so plenty of room to turn around in and terminate in front of the park. Then in the off-peak hours, run the 25 as per normal and get many of the express buses to turn into 25s. If this is done, there would be no need for artics.

The day we wish we could see our dreams...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

237 Brentwood Station-Kootenay Loop-Horseshoe Bay (how long until a bus burns down going up the cut? :P)

237.jpg

Chris Cassidy

You know what's funny? The North Shore Transit Plan has a route like this.. LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know what's funny? The North Shore Transit Plan has a route like this.. LOL.

as i heard from a blue bus driver, they are not allowed run 257 horsebay special from PNE via hwy1, taylor way, PR due to the steepy section, thats why they take marine drive instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is an old topic, and since I have been back in Vancouver for a while I was reading old topics and couldn't help but add some more things.

The C92 is INSANE during peak hours to/from BCIT. .... this wouldn't require another vehicle if it is scheduled correctly, but would just take away from a driver's layover. ....

The day we wish we could see our dreams...

There is little enough time for personal needs on most of the work. Please don't be suggesting that there be less. We need more busses and more time.

RTC Operator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but a 45 minute layover at Bridgeport Station is quite enough every 30 minutes... Saw the shuttle there on a weekday doing that and he said that's normal -- twice. So if the route is shortened to Templeton Stn., it will need even less time. I know the big buses are tight on the schedule, but that's because they come off other routes. I know one round-trip on a shortened C92 would take less than 20 minutes leaving more than 10 minutes of layover every 30 minutes if there is 30 minute frequency.

There is little enough time for personal needs on most of the work. Please don't be suggesting that there be less. We need more busses and more time.

RTC Operator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared to Edmonton, you have lots of layover / recovery time here. ETS = Extremely Tight Schedules. " Turn and Burn" is part of the normal everyday operator vocabulary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but a 45 minute layover at Bridgeport Station is quite enough every 30 minutes... Saw the shuttle there on a weekday doing that and he said that's normal -- twice. So if the route is shortened to Templeton Stn., it will need even less time. I know the big buses are tight on the schedule, but that's because they come off other routes. I know one round-trip on a shortened C92 would take less than 20 minutes leaving more than 10 minutes of layover every 30 minutes if there is 30 minute frequency.

I drive a conventional bus on the 601/351 line and haven't seen more than 10 mins in 2 years other than at 0500 ( only due to scheduling on the particular early straight I work). When I spent several months recently working the spare board out of RTC, I seldom got work that had more than 20 - 30 minutes total *scheduled* recovery time in a full shift and often considerably less. As far as other areas/systems go, all I can say is, if an operator needs a break for safety reasons take a reasonable break and then get back in the saddle.

Take Care

Not Quite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drive a conventional bus on the 601/351 line and haven't seen more than 10 mins in 2 years other than at 0500 ( only due to scheduling on the particular early straight I work). When I spent several months recently working the spare board out of RTC, I seldom got work that had more than 20 - 30 minutes total *scheduled* recovery time in a full shift and often considerably less. As far as other areas/systems go, all I can say is, if an operator needs a break for safety reasons take a reasonable break and then get back in the saddle.

Take Care

Not Quite

"Reasonable" is the key word in your post. Not saying at all that you do this since I don't know who you are (bus have most likely ridden your bus at some point), but I have seen drivers arrive with plenty of time to spare (15 minutes) and leave late to have more break. If there hadn't been a break for a while, fine. But the 15/50 is one of the worst and there is 15-20 minutes at each end of this 45 minute route. Originally when I saw this one driver do this (on the 15/50), I thought he had a bus problem, but then he pulled into the bay 10 minutes after his leave time and I asked him if there was a problem with the bus, and he said no. So when I asked him why he was late, he said "I arrived quite late and needed a break." BS. He arrived exactly on schedule and wanted more break.

For the most part, CMBC drivers are great with leaving on time if they arrive on time. I did see a driver arrive late (but technically on-time for his leave time) at Brentwood once, ran to go to the can, and came back quickly and left only a couple minutes late, so kudos to him. Leaving late for that is fine. But when drivers take extra time on purpose that is unreasonable (10+ minutes when there is already 10+ minutes), that's where there is a problem. When I mentioned that removing layover on a shortened C92 would allow it to run trips of the C90 without another bus, one thing that could be done is have a shift-change in between the C90 trips.

I should also mention that Saskatoon Transit doesn't give ANY break time to their drivers (well, for MOST routes -- the odd one has a bit). They drive straight-through with maybe a couple minutes at the downtown terminal timing point (2-3 minutes max). When I suggested to a driver that they allow break time, he said absolutely not because then there'd be too many issues with NIMBYs not wanting buses sitting in front of their houses, and that they'd lose their long negotiated 10 hour shifts, 4 days a week. I also suggested that they could shorten every route at the downtown terminal so people don't expect them to leave immediately, but he said that's not going to happen either since it would be too confusing to the riders. He said the union fought long and hard to reduce break times in favour of 10 hour shifts and a Christmas bonus. They have a lot of straight 10s and split 10s for 4 days a week with a rotating day off so there is a 4-day weekend every 4 weeks. There are some drivers that do 8 hours for 5 days, but many do not from what I heard when I used to live there. I believe (not sure though) that they also have part-time drivers that do much of the weekend work and peak hour extras.

Compared to Edmonton, you have lots of layover / recovery time here. ETS = Extremely Tight Schedules. " Turn and Burn" is part of the normal everyday operator vocabulary.

See my above part about Saskatoon. In fact, many systems have very little break compared to here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is always best to have extra recovery/layover time at the end of a particular route. Don't blame it solely on the Operator. If the Operator was on time at Cambie and 49 Avenue, etc, then he is within the variance, and it means that the actual route schedule is the issue.

From experience, stopping a bus in the middle of a route for 10 min. is not an ideal thing to do from both the Passenger's perspective nor from a Bus Operator perspective. As a Bus Operator, I would sit at Marine Drive Station an extra 10 min. if I knew there was too much time on the run and I would have to sit NB Cambie Street FS Broadway St.

An efficient and productive public transit system is in everyone's best interests. Recovery at end terminals and minimal in between is ideal. An excerpt from the North Shore Transit Plan; "Using additional service hours for service reliability and scheduling issues is a very poor use of resources. It is much better to use additional service hours for additional service and increase frequency instead." It sounds like CMBC needs to fix the route 15/50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right about leaving late because there is too much time -- I never thought of that. I don't know how much the times of the 15 changed after the Canada Line opened, but during construction there were numerous times that the bus was waiting 10 minutes at Broadway. I think the link with the 50 is good (should be all one route number -- too confusing to people since there are still people that think the bus stops at Olympic Village and turns back), but maybe the times just need to be adjusted slightly.

It is always best to have extra recovery/layover time at the end of a particular route. Don't blame it solely on the Operator. If the Operator was on time at Cambie and 49 Avenue, etc, then he is within the variance, and it means that the actual route schedule is the issue.

From experience, stopping a bus in the middle of a route for 10 min. is not an ideal thing to do from both the Passenger's perspective nor from a Bus Operator perspective. As a Bus Operator, I would sit at Marine Drive Station an extra 10 min. if I knew there was too much time on the run and I would have to sit NB Cambie Street FS Broadway St.

An efficient and productive public transit system is in everyone's best interests. Recovery at end terminals and minimal in between is ideal. An excerpt from the North Shore Transit Plan; "Using additional service hours for service reliability and scheduling issues is a very poor use of resources. It is much better to use additional service hours for additional service and increase frequency instead." It sounds like CMBC needs to fix the route 15/50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is always best to have extra recovery/layover time at the end of a particular route. Don't blame it solely on the Operator. If the Operator was on time at Cambie and 49 Avenue, etc, then he is within the variance, and it means that the actual route schedule is the issue.

From experience, stopping a bus in the middle of a route for 10 min. is not an ideal thing to do from both the Passenger's perspective nor from a Bus Operator perspective. As a Bus Operator, I would sit at Marine Drive Station an extra 10 min. if I knew there was too much time on the run and I would have to sit NB Cambie Street FS Broadway St.

An efficient and productive public transit system is in everyone's best interests. Recovery at end terminals and minimal in between is ideal. An excerpt from the North Shore Transit Plan; "Using additional service hours for service reliability and scheduling issues is a very poor use of resources. It is much better to use additional service hours for additional service and increase frequency instead." It sounds like CMBC needs to fix the route 15/50.

I know for a fact that the inbound N19's used to leave about 10-15 minutes late every night. This meant they didn't need to sit at Scott Road, New West, or Metrotown timing points. It also timed out perfect with the first connection they had at Willingdon wiht the 19/41.

Chris Cassidy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe it or not, midday and evening (think after 7pm) 410s headed back to Richmond are always incredibly early. Just the other day I was on a 7:30pm-ish trip that arrived back something like a full 10 minutes early.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you where to extend trolley service into burnaby further, where would you put Trolley Overhead wires?

Not Burnaby, but if you'd want to reduce diesel pollution, hang trolley wires on SW Marine Drive to UBC and run the 41 as trolley (again). The current UBC loop mess could be used to let the 41 run on West Mall with one or two stops or so, with a terminus somewhere at or on University Boulevard. Call it "UBC West Side Access" if you need a fancy name :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea, but I think the problem with this is that Marine Drive west of Crown has a speed limit of 80 km/h which the trolleys cannot do. If the limit was reduced to 70, then I think the trolleys would be fine (max of 65-ish), but going 65 in an 80 zone would not only bog down one lane of traffic, but make the trip longer. It is also currently possible to turn right on Dunbar, right on 16th, left on Dunbar, continue on Alma, and left on 10th to get to UBC, but again, that would take forever and probably wouldn't be worth it. I think the only way that trolleys will return to 41st is if they run the 43 (or 91 B-Line, whatever they call it) all day everyday 5-6 minutes peak 8-10 off-peak (15 minutes Saturdays, 15-20 minutes Sundays) with all trips to UBC. This would allow all 41s to short-turn at Crown and reduce their service slightly.

If anyone knows of any plans that are different to the above, please post them here -- I love discussing possible changes and the truth (or not!) in them.

Not Burnaby, but if you'd want to reduce diesel pollution, hang trolley wires on SW Marine Drive to UBC and run the 41 as trolley (again). The current UBC loop mess could be used to let the 41 run on West Mall with one or two stops or so, with a terminus somewhere at or on University Boulevard. Call it "UBC West Side Access" if you need a fancy name :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Google Maps the stretch of Marine Drive from the intersection with 41th up to 16th is about 4.1 km.

If we assume the conventional buses do 80 km/h for the whole 4.1 km and the trolley buses only 65 km/h, the trolley buses take about 45 seconds longer than the normal buses. With the stop at Kullahun Drive included, the difference will basically be zero, zilch, nada, as a bus probably barely gets to the full 80 km/h before the next intersection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now