Custom Transit Routes

[SirAndrew710]

On 2/8/2020 at 5:12 PM, SirAndrew710 said:

Inspired by a discussion I had with @armorand a while back with regards to bring up Route 82 ridership, I decided to take a look at ways to change it. Seeing as Route 98’s ridership base seems to be the people who use it to get across the Moray Bridge, I decided to tack some of that route onto the 82. I would also have the 11/21/22’s St. Charles service absorbed by the 82 if WT goes ahead and reroutes those three routes to Westport and the Iceplex.

I would also reroute the 98 so that it travels eastbound along Portage from Moray to Polo Park, similar to a now-former branch of the 79. In addition to providing a link from South Charleswood to Polo, it would give the 21 some much-needed help along the section of the route. Due to capacity issues at Polo Park Terminal and because there’s been talk of a residential development going up on the former Target site, I would terminate this bus on the north side of the mall.

These changes would mean no more interlining and potentially no more 40-foot buses on the 82. That route really doesn’t need them.

I’ve come up with another idea to improve service to and from Charleswood, because the feeder service and one 66 approximately every ≈30-35 minutes is inadequate. This revision to the 18 would see it travel straight down Corydon, past where it becomes Roblin, and travel all the way to the Perimeter. At Dale, it would either branch off to either serve Westdale or stay on Roblin, cross the West Perimeter Bridge and terminate at Unicity. To make up for the extra service along Corydon, the Moray branch of the 67 and 79 would be reinstated. I’ll come up with an option to account for the extra service to Unicity later, but I’m leaning towards improvements to the 66 by means of a third branch to Ridgewood, similar what the 65 will provide starting in the spring, and increased frequency as a result (i.e. 10-minute headway, alternating Polo Park-Ridgewood-Polo Park-Unicity).

Edited February 22, 2020 by SirAndrew710
Because there should be a map attached to this.

[SirAndrew710]

Here are two more ideas for the southern part of the city. One is an extended 17, which would use westbound Academy and southbound Kenaston before branching off to either Lindenwoods or Whyte Ridge. Both branches would terminate at Scurfield and Kenaston before heading back through the other neighborhood, similar to what the current route does in the Maples.

The other is a route from Polo to KP, similar to the 77, except it runs through the southern part of the city and uses a slightly-less-convoluted routing to get there. Basically, it’s a combination of the 74 and 75, except it avoids the U of M and draws on elements of the 16 and 96 to provide service to St. Vital Terminal and fill in the service gap that is Royalwood. Not only would it provide a one-seat ride from Polo Park to St. Vital Centre, but it would also provide a one-seat ride from St. Vital to KP - something I’m surprised doesn’t exist already.

[ConnorsCompShow]

I'm more surprised that given its "Crosstown" name that the 75 doesn't at least bother to pull in to the St. Vital Centre loop much like the 77 does at Garden City, at least during non-rush/via Willowlake periods. Especially seeing as if you're not exiting at St. Mary's or Dakota to fetch a 14/16, then it'd be to go to the mall or the surrounding shops.

[SirAndrew710]

The thing is Garden City Terminal is right off Leila, so going in wouldn’t take the 77 too far out of its way. St. Vital Terminal is on the south side of the mall, so it would need to dogleg via SB St. Mary’s, EB Meadowood and NB Dakota, which would add more time to that route. Then again, how do they time those routes in the first place? Particularly high-speed, few-stop sections of routes such as the Bishop section of the 75 and the Perimeter Highway section of the 66. I was on a 75 a few weeks back and we got stopped by a train and were still ahead of schedule when we reached Southdale Centre, and the driver’s console can’t even keep up with the bus on the Perimeter.

[SirAndrew710]

I drew these first two up in response to the announcement of the removal of the Spirits. One’s an extension to the proposed 23 to make up for the loss of the connection between Broadway and the Forks, while the other’s a reroute of the 38 to make up for the loss of service to the Exchange. Both routes headed in both directions would follow routings currently used by the Spirits. The only issue I see is the former’s right turn from EB Broadway to SB Garry due to the separated bike lanes on Garry. A while back, I rode a 300-series XD40 on Route 2 () and I don’t know how that bus made that turn. Though considering ridership on the City Hall/Broadway branch of the 29 (less than I see on the 2), maybe D30LFs are all that route would need?

I will also use this opportunity to revisit one of the first routes I created. When I first drew up the 27, I imagined that it would run to the Forks on weekdays when the Spirits aren’t running and William Stephenson and Westbrook otherwise, even on Saturday mornings. However, I re-drew it to take a direct path to and from the Forks via Portage East in both directions. I also added another branch of the 14 to Polo Park, which I’d seen proposed by @armorand previously and is a smart idea, which would be worked by all service Monday-Saturday until 7 PM and let the 27 handle west-most Ellice, while buses would alternate between going to Polo and going to Ferry when the 27 is not running. I also drew up a DART for the St. James area, which would operate when the 27 is not running and include timed transfer connections with the 14 at Polo.

I will post two more DARTs to replace the 82, 83 and 98 tomorrow.

[armorand]

14 - my old idea was to route the 14 down Empress, St James is good, but Empress has no traffic to delay the 14 going up & down the street. Might not cover as much retail, but does cover Home Depot, Blue Cross, CanadInns & Polo Park via Eastway/Westway. Also connects with the feeders (26, 79) and others as well. The 14 would work on St James with less traffic, but with traffic nightmares on St James? A 14 branch running off Empress, would be best. 

27 - loop the 27 at Ellice/Roseberry. Same layover point as the 14. 24, 25 and others can handle St James haha. But 27? Loop at Roseberry, and concentrate express down Ellice, would do wonders (unless Route 14 actually starts getting artics?)

DART... the older parts of St. James have good transit ridership as is, but anything west of Grace Hospital could really use DART service, without the 82 or 83. 

[SirAndrew710]

12 hours ago, armorand said:

14 - my old idea was to route the 14 down Empress, St James is good, but Empress has no traffic to delay the 14 going up & down the street. Might not cover as much retail, but does cover Home Depot, Blue Cross, CanadInns & Polo Park via Eastway/Westway. Also connects with the feeders (26, 79) and others as well. The 14 would work on St James with less traffic, but with traffic nightmares on St James? A 14 branch running off Empress, would be best. 

And that’s part of the reason why I chose the routing I did. With the 77’s routing, it would cover Save-on-Foods, Old Navy and Best Buy as well as Home Depot, Chapters, Blue Cross and Polo. Plus, with a dedicated left-turn lane and a stop on the south side of the intersection, the Ellice-St. James intersection seems made for something like that.

12 hours ago, armorand said:

27 - loop the 27 at Ellice/Roseberry. Same layover point as the 14. 24, 25 and others can handle St James haha. But 27? Loop at Roseberry, and concentrate express down Ellice, would do wonders (unless Route 14 actually starts getting artics?)

Except they can’t. Every 21 leaving downtown after 12:00 is always packed. I imagined that the 27 would have a similar relationship to the 21 and 24 that the 68 has to the 18 and 20, though I ride the 20 quite a bit and it’s always near-empty regardless of day and time, I rode an 18 at around 4:00 the Friday before last and only three other people stayed on past Cambridge (in fact, the 88 that I was on immediately before boarding that 18 had more people on board) and when I rode the 68 shortly after 2:00 this past Wednesday, there were never more than four others on board at any point between U of W and Renfrew. Whereas with the ridership the 24 and especially the 21 get, and the Old St. James branch of the 27 likely to run only once every half-hour or so (the 27 as a whole would run on a similar headway to the 14, but the branching would mean only one to Old St. James every 30-40 minutes and one to Silver, Berry and Polo Park, signed “POLO PARK… VIA FERRY ROAD” to avoid confusion with the 14, every 30-40 minutes), it would serve its purpose. I would imagine that there would be a 27 stop right in front of that new residential development on Lodge, so there’s a source of ridership right there.

Anyways, here are the other two DARTs I teased yesterday. I had drawn up the 103 before Friday’s announcement, so I had imagined that it would run when the 82 was off the road and replace the short-turn 83s that run evenings and Sundays. However, the changes mean it could operate early on Saturday mornings as well, like the 101 and 102. The 108, on the other hand, was drawn up after the announcement, and so it would run at almost all times outside of rush-hour. It would serve as Ridgewood West’s connection to the rest of the city when the 65 isn’t running and south Charleswood’s connection to the rest of the city when the 98 isn’t running. It would only run to Unicity on Saturday evenings and Sundays, as otherwise the 66 or 98 would provide that link, and timed transfer connections with every other 11 would be provided at Unicity. Departures from the Grace could be synced with the 11 and 21 as well.

[armorand]

5 hours ago, SirAndrew710 said:

And that’s part of the reason why I chose the routing I did. With the 77’s routing, it would cover Save-on-Foods, Old Navy and Best Buy as well as Home Depot, Chapters, Blue Cross and Polo. Plus, with a dedicated left-turn lane and a stop on the south side of the intersection, the Ellice-St. James intersection seems made for something like that.

Except they can’t. Every 21 leaving downtown after 12:00 is always packed. I imagined that the 27 would have a similar relationship to the 21 and 24 that the 68 has to the 18 and 20, though I ride the 20 quite a bit and it’s always near-empty regardless of day and time, I rode an 18 at around 4:00 the Friday before last and only three other people stayed on past Cambridge (in fact, the 88 that I was on immediately before boarding that 18 had more people on board) and when I rode the 68 shortly after 2:00 this past Wednesday, there were never more than four others on board at any point between U of W and Renfrew. Whereas with the ridership the 24 and especially the 21 get, and the Old St. James branch of the 27 likely to run only once every half-hour or so (the 27 as a whole would run on a similar headway to the 14, but the branching would mean only one to Old St. James every 30-40 minutes and one to Silver, Berry and Polo Park, signed “POLO PARK… VIA FERRY ROAD” to avoid confusion with the 14, every 30-40 minutes), it would serve its purpose. I would imagine that there would be a 27 stop right in front of that new residential development on Lodge, so there’s a source of ridership right there.

Anyways, here are the other two DARTs I teased yesterday. I had drawn up the 103 before Friday’s announcement, so I had imagined that it would run when the 82 was off the road and replace the short-turn 83s that run evenings and Sundays. However, the changes mean it could operate early on Saturday mornings as well, like the 101 and 102. The 108, on the other hand, was drawn up after the announcement, and so it would run at almost all times outside of rush-hour. It would serve as Ridgewood West’s connection to the rest of the city when the 65 isn’t running and south Charleswood’s connection to the rest of the city when the 98 isn’t running. It would only run to Unicity on Saturday evenings and Sundays, as otherwise the 66 or 98 would provide that link, and timed transfer connections with every other 11 would be provided at Unicity. Departures from the Grace could be synced with the 11 and 21 as well.

I meant, St. James the street itself, Ellice improvements have helped, but the larger street as a whole could use added capacity, to give the 14 and 77 alot less idling time, waiting for traffic to move. In terms of more service, totally agree. But without added capacity on the street for vehicles as a whole, it may delay transit much as how the 77 has been delayed for years prior. Its why I always drew up added service going up & down Empress, mostly as a bypass until the City of Winnipeg actually learns to repair their roads... but added capacity, I do agree. Polo/St James retail could use it. 

Bruce & Lodge... can they handle buses? The streets are cramped and in bad shape. If its an Arboc or D30LF, I could see feeders in between Portage & Ness. But full sizes buses might ruin the roads further & antagonize the NIMBY's. They can handle the occasional large vehicle of course, but repeated D40LF abuse might aggrivate the road conditions and neighbors, due to noise. Also, the midpoint between Portage & Ness is very walkable, under 10 minutes if its east of Whytewold.  But feeder services right up Moray would be nice. 

DARTS - I do like, but every single stop on Ness & Portage seem excessive for the 1st one. It would require alot more vehicles, which WT is notoriously bad at providing. 

Second Charleswood one though? With no 79, no 98, and the 66 only going to Dieppe once an hour? Emphasis should definitely be on connections, but otherwise, the only concern I can see, is just WT's lack of commitments to its own DART services, and lack of willingness to provide alternatives after slashing services... if a DART moved in right after these cuts begin? GREAT!!! BUT - seeing how they handled Waverley West, Sage Creek, CentrePort, Assiniboia Downs, etc etc... their track record of implenting services, or replacing lost services, is virtually non-existent outside of their precious SWRTC. 

[SirAndrew710]

11 minutes ago, armorand said:

I meant, St. James the street itself, Ellice improvements have helped, but the larger street as a whole could use added capacity, to give the 14 and 77 alot less idling time, waiting for traffic to move. In terms of more service, totally agree. But without added capacity on the street for vehicles as a whole, it may delay transit much as how the 77 has been delayed for years prior. Its why I always drew up added service going up & down Empress, mostly as a bypass until the City of Winnipeg actually learns to repair their roads... but added capacity, I do agree. Polo/St James retail could use it. 

I’m not sure when you left Winnipeg, but in the last few years, that area has been changed significantly. St. James from Portage to Ellice was repaved and the section from Maroons to Ellice was also widened. The intent of that was to reduce congestion, though I’d have to ride the 77 at rush hour at some point to see what effect it actually had on transit in particular. I rode it at night (shortly before 9:00) last month and we had no issue getting through there, but rush hour’s always a different story.

[SirAndrew710]

1 hour ago, armorand said:

Bruce & Lodge... can they handle buses? The streets are cramped and in bad shape. If its an Arboc or D30LF, I could see feeders in between Portage & Ness. But full sizes buses might ruin the roads further & antagonize the NIMBY's. They can handle the occasional large vehicle of course, but repeated D40LF abuse might aggrivate the road conditions and neighbors, due to noise. Also, the midpoint between Portage & Ness is very walkable, under 10 minutes if its east of Whytewold.  But feeder services right up Moray would be nice. 

Lodge was fixed last year and (looking at Google Street View) Bruce doesn't look much worse than some of the residential streets in Wolseley used by the 10. Even with 40-footers, the service hours I suggested (one bus every half hour, no evenings, no Sundays) mean they shouldn’t impact the road too poorly. Especially if they time the route in such a way that buses would be guaranteed to pass each other on Mount Royal, so that there would only be one at a time on each of Lodge and Bruce, if any. With regards to the noise, seeing as the newer buses run quieter than the older ones, I wonder if there’s such a way for dispatch to guarantee that only 600- and 800-series LFRs and XD40s would appear on that route, or at the very least that branch, outside of rush hour.

1 hour ago, armorand said:

DARTS - I do like, but every single stop on Ness & Portage seem excessive for the 1st one. It would require alot more vehicles, which WT is notoriously bad at providing. 

Second Charleswood one though? With no 79, no 98, and the 66 only going to Dieppe once an hour? Emphasis should definitely be on connections, but otherwise, the only concern I can see, is just WT's lack of commitments to its own DART services, and lack of willingness to provide alternatives after slashing services... if a DART moved in right after these cuts begin? GREAT!!! BUT - seeing how they handled Waverley West, Sage Creek, CentrePort, Assiniboia Downs, etc etc... their track record of implenting services, or replacing lost services, is virtually non-existent outside of their precious SWRTC. 

The reason for every stop on Portage and Ness is for the sake of transfer connections. If you look at the map for the 110, every Route 10 and Route 19 stop is on there. People would not normally be able to use them anyway - the only stops on that map that people would be able to board at without having to phone in beforehand would be the Grace and the four 82 stops at Unicity. With regards to the Charleswood one, maybe something I should’ve considered was providing transfers between this DART and the 66 at Dieppe, with passengers boarding the DART there not needing to phone in. On that map, the only stops where one would be able to board without phoning in are the ones north of the river (both leaving Unicity and leaving the Grace), the ones along the parkway and (when the bus is traveling to or from Unicity) the two westernmost Roblin stops.

[MMP15]

Here is what a better 95 could look like, via Outlet Mall. Avoids the "gauntlet" of traffic lights on Sterling Lyon by the Outlet Mall, but there is the inevitability of delays crossing the railway tracks at Shaftesbury.

 

[SirAndrew710]

2 minutes ago, MMP15 said:

Here is what a better 95 could look like, via Outlet Mall. Avoids the "gauntlet" of traffic lights on Sterling Lyon by the Outlet Mall, but there is the inevitability of delays crossing the railway tracks at Shaftesbury.

 

Those train tracks are pretty active as well. How would it work? Just based on that map, I’d assume it would only do the Outlet Mall headed westbound and the Seasons headed eastbound?

[MMP15]

1 minute ago, SirAndrew710 said:

Those train tracks are pretty active as well. How would it work? Just based on that map, I’d assume it would only do the Outlet Mall headed westbound and the Seasons headed eastbound?

That's correct. This limits the left turns needed in the Outlet mall/Seasons area to just one - being EB Sterling to NB Kenaston, avoiding delays from the long lights on Sterling to the Outlet/IKEA access roads.

[armorand]

4 hours ago, MMP15 said:

That's correct. This limits the left turns needed in the Outlet mall/Seasons area to just one - being EB Sterling to NB Kenaston, avoiding delays from the long lights on Sterling to the Outlet/IKEA access roads.

I'm curious why they can't just throw in transit priority lights... would make things so much easier. 

But yeah, the rail crossing has always been a nuisance for transit - even years after the underpass. It might just be better to route the 95 directly into Seasons from a right turn off from Kenaston, then for it to go across to IKEA, and one final leftbound turn back onto Kenaston going north. Or better yet, having better 98 to 74 (nearly said 78) transfers? By the way, i left Winnipeg in late 2017.

[SirAndrew710]

6 hours ago, armorand said:

I'm curious why they can't just throw in transit priority lights... would make things so much easier. 

But yeah, the rail crossing has always been a nuisance for transit - even years after the underpass. It might just be better to route the 95 directly into Seasons from a right turn off from Kenaston, then for it to go across to IKEA, and one final leftbound turn back onto Kenaston going north. Or better yet, having better 98 to 74 (nearly said 78) transfers? By the way, i left Winnipeg in late 2017.

So how would that work? Would it make a trip to the Outlet Mall and the Seasons, return to Taylor, serve South Tuxedo and Shaftesbury Park, return to the Seasons, and then head back to Taylor and continue on to Riverview? Also, the 98 doesn’t connect with the 74. I’m guessing you mean the 95?

[armorand]

95*

My bad. But yeah, if there was better 74 connections and transfers, a 95 extension wouldn't be necessary. It also wouldn't need to cross the tracks either. 

Then again though, Tuxedo is a rich neighborhood, and DART service (if Winnipeg Transit *ever* decides to get serious about public transit outside of Pembina Hwy and "cash-cow" services) in the Tuxedo/Taylor area, might be a bit better of a fit for their public transit needs, while keeping the 95 east of Pan Am, and letting the 67/79 absorb all of the riders from the Edgeland section of the rush hour 95.

[SirAndrew710]

34 minutes ago, armorand said:

95*

My bad. But yeah, if there was better 74 connections and transfers, a 95 extension wouldn't be necessary. It also wouldn't need to cross the tracks either. 

Then again though, Tuxedo is a rich neighborhood, and DART service (if Winnipeg Transit *ever* decides to get serious about public transit outside of Pembina Hwy and "cash-cow" services) in the Tuxedo/Taylor area, might be a bit better of a fit for their public transit needs, while keeping the 95 east of Pan Am, and letting the 67/79 absorb all of the riders from the Edgeland section of the rush hour 95.

South Tuxedo, I could understand, seeing as it’s the same assortment of crescents and bays as the neighborhoods the current DART routes serve, but what about River Heights? The grid system is in use there and the stops on Tuxedo are greater than 400 meters from the stops on Grant. In fact, in some parts, the 10 is closer to the 11 than the 95 is to the 66.

[SirAndrew710]

On 3/8/2020 at 7:12 PM, armorand said:

I meant, St. James the street itself, Ellice improvements have helped, but the larger street as a whole could use added capacity, to give the 14 and 77 alot less idling time, waiting for traffic to move. In terms of more service, totally agree. But without added capacity on the street for vehicles as a whole, it may delay transit much as how the 77 has been delayed for years prior.

I rode the 77 from end to end yesterday afternoon, and while we had no issue getting through there, it was 5:30 by the time we hit St. James and almost quarter to six by the time we reached Ellice. So my guess is the “busy” part of rush hour had come and gone and if I was on there even half an hour earlier, it might have been a different story. Case in point: when we left KP (at 4:09) and when we were on Henderson (at around 4:30), there was quite a bit of traffic around, though Main and the Garden City area (at about quarter to five) weren’t too bad either.

Anyways, here’s my latest idea. The northwestern area of the city is growing, and while WT’s done a decent job of providing service to some areas (though Amber Trails got the 35 well before they got the 33, and the 17 well before they got that), developing areas in the far northwest are only skimmed by the 31 and 77 and don’t have anything else. With that, I drew this up. It would follow a similar route to the 31, though would run local the length of its route, as far as Keewatin and Manitoba. From there, it would run straight north along Keewatin before turning west onto Old Commonwealth and serving some of the newer areas. Its outbound terminal would be located at Coatstone and King Edward, terminating at the westbound stop before 3:30 PM and the eastbound stop afterwards. Because “Castlebury Meadows” is way too much info to squeeze onto particularly the rear sign, outbound buses would be signed “KING EDWARD.” Slightly unrelated, but that stop at Dr. Jose Rizal and Adsum (#30772) should really be moved onto Old Commonwealth. If the bus has to make that stop, it has to make a tighter lane change to reach the left-turn lane than what the 98 has to make after stopping at Moray and Portage before turning left.

Edited March 14, 2020 by SirAndrew710
Because the section of Keewatin where that stop is located hasn’t been named “Keewatin” for many years.

[SirAndrew710]

Here are my latest ideas for the southwestern part of the city.

61 Pembina/Transcona Super Express

I will say this one was a nightmare to draw because I had to convert the 161 map to black-and-white by hand before trying to combine it with the 46. Anyway, this route, a combination of the 46 and 161, would serve as an express version of the new 47. It would operate express from Plessis to City Hall, like the existing express routes along that corridor, before observing all stops through the downtown area. It would then enter the Transitway and serve all the Phase 1 stations before exiting the Transitway at Jubilee and running non-stop to the U of M, like the 161.

63 Charleswood Super Express

This faster version of the 67 would provide peak-direction service to and from the Charleswood area at rush hour. It would observe every stop but Langside between Pacific Terminal and Maryland before running non-stop from there to Polo Park. From there, it would operate as a regular express with stops at Tuxedo/Kenaston (66, 74, 78), Edgeland/Corydon (18), Roblin/William Clement (98), Roblin/Grant (65, 66) and Roblin/Harstone (Dieppe Loop), past which point it would run local to Westdale.

[tctf101]

Decided to make a route that would replace the 3 after downtown spirit routes are discontinued as well as the south Donald portion of route 99 

[SirAndrew710]

24 minutes ago, Thewinnipegtransitfanhuang said:

Decided to make a route that would replace the 3 after downtown spirit routes are discontinued as well as the south Donald portion of route 99 

If I were to replace the 3 with anything, I probably wouldn’t have it go too far past RRC, let alone to Higgins.

[Viafreak]

33 minutes ago, Thewinnipegtransitfanhuang said:

Decided to make a route that would replace the 3 after downtown spirit routes are discontinued as well as the south Donald portion of route 99 

Nice route concept. Save for the southern portion of the route, it looks like the current routing of the 66. Not sure when that changed.

[SirAndrew710]

So it’s official, the mid-day 98 will be cut. The 55-minute headways render that route nearly useless anyway (the two times I’ve used it to get somewhere, I’ve either taken the 66 to Unicity or walked all the way back home - it would’ve been a long wait otherwise), but losing it completely would be even worse. With that in mind, I designed this route, which would preserve the Charleswood-Grace Hospital connection but would actually terminate somewhere of note on both ends. I routed it the way I did to avoid that rail crossing on Shaftesbury, though a westbound Grant at Kenaston West stop might need to be added. I’m also surprised you can take an outbound 21 right up to the Grace, but not an inbound one, so I routed it into the Grace in both directions.

[armorand]

14 hours ago, SirAndrew710 said:

So it’s official, the mid-day 98 will be cut. The 55-minute headways render that route nearly useless anyway (the two times I’ve used it to get somewhere, I’ve either taken the 66 to Unicity or walked all the way back home - it would’ve been a long wait otherwise), but losing it completely would be even worse. With that in mind, I designed this route, which would preserve the Charleswood-Grace Hospital connection but would actually terminate somewhere of note on both ends. I routed it the way I did to avoid that rail crossing on Shaftesbury, though a westbound Grant at Kenaston West stop might need to be added. I’m also surprised you can take an outbound 21 right up to the Grace, but not an inbound one, so I routed it into the Grace in both directions.

You just gave me an idea, actually. 

You know the 11 Polo-Downtown short-turn, aka "shoppers shuttle" when it used to run between what was two Cadillac Fairview malls?

What if we extended it to Seasons, and past the upcoming urban reserve and commercial on Kenaston? The ridership potential would be enormous.

[SirAndrew710]

8 hours ago, armorand said:

You just gave me an idea, actually. 

You know the 11 Polo-Downtown short-turn, aka "shoppers shuttle" when it used to run between what was two Cadillac Fairview malls?

What if we extended it to Seasons, and past the upcoming urban reserve and commercial on Kenaston? The ridership potential would be enormous.

“Shoppers’ Specials,” as they’re still informally known today, but yes, I know exactly what you mean. I’ll draw that up and post it this afternoon.