[Canadian Mind]

Aldergrove is already part of Langley.........

Rodger, my mistake. Can cut it out of my sentence then.

[Whalleyboy]

for the longest line time to expand both ways all the way out to langley and all the way to white rock

[DKaz]

Huh?

[Canadian Mind]

I think he is reffering to Expo line expansion, well, rather a split and expansion, with one line to Langley, and one line to White Rock

[Pennywise604]

I think he is reffering to Expo line expansion, well, rather a split and expansion, with one line to Langley, and one line to White Rock

Where would that White Rock one run down probably, King George or 152nd? Until where, 32nd or 16th?

[Canadian Mind]

Totally not my call, though based on previous statements made by others I am under the impression that the best route to White Rock would be to have an arm run down King George. Where it stops I couldn't tell you. I haven't been to White Rock since I was a small child, and I still picture it as what I remember, a small town. So when thinking about transit in the Metro transit to White Rock is the last thing on my mind.

[WarrenC12]

Totally not my call, though based on previous statements made by others I am under the impression that the best route to White Rock would be to have an arm run down King George. Where it stops I couldn't tell you. I haven't been to White Rock since I was a small child, and I still picture it as what I remember, a small town. So when thinking about transit in the Metro transit to White Rock is the last thing on my mind.

White Rock is pretty small geographically as well, it's more about the built up areas of "South Surrey".

I think the Expo line is ok as-is, maybe the planned extension to Guilford is good. From there though, LRT lines should be built to fan out to Langley, and go South, down KG, 152nd, or both.

[Zassk]

There are several power line right-of-ways crossing Surrey. Would they be useful places to put rapid transit lines at a reduced cost of land acquisition? Perhaps someone more familiar with Surrey can comment on this.

Also, another question - is Cloverdale less populous than White Rock/South Surrey? I seldom hear Cloverdale mentioned as a community to be connected to LRT.

[SpongeG]

cloverdale is pretty sparse

[NetMapel]

Extending the Expo line to White Rock or Langley won't exactly help the travel time to get to downtown. (It'll help travel time to Surrey and Burnaby, which is cool too) The only way to reduce traveling time for these communities is to have their own West Coast Express-type service that has limited stops inbetween downtown and these suburban centre. By that, I mean literally one stop per municipality so there will really only be about 3 stops max.

Both Langley and South Surrey/White Rock/Crescent Beach communities are small in population but fairly dense in a small area, so I think a train service such as the one I suggested could be very beneficial.

[Zassk]

How many people from White Rock or Langley actually travel to the downtown peninsula? I would think that they have many destinations throughout Metro, and the priority should be to connect them directly to the rapid transit network, rather than express service to downtown.

[twoNeurons]

Yeah, no kidding.

As for Cloverdale, it's mentioned a lot because the ROW practically runs right through it. It also has a decently dense centre. It's a little like Port Moody that way, except that Port Moody probably has more density with Newport Village being there.

Cloverdale's left of that little triangle in the middle where the yellow rail lines junction.
http://www.sfot.info/images/interurban_corridor.png
source (http://www.sfot.info)

[Whalleyboy]

first i want to make it clear i was only joking about the both lines to go with the whole we wont have the longest automated transit

white rock has alot of older retired people who like to travel downtown and all around the metro actually
i cant really see skytrain down that way but i could one day see a lrt linking to the semiahmoo area basicly what the 399 b-line is gonna take

as for langley i can't see many people going out to Vancouver

and i've been having doubts about putting skytrain to guildford noit that it wouldnt be nice to have transit but i think this is wrong way to go with it

[NetMapel]

How many people from White Rock or Langley actually travel to the downtown peninsula? I would think that they have many destinations throughout Metro, and the priority should be to connect them directly to the rapid transit network, rather than express service to downtown.

I do agree with you that these cities need to either have a rapid transit network or be better connected to one. However, if there is one thing I hear the most from fellow SSPers here is that our downtown needs more people. Clearly, the best way to bring more people to downtown is to have more accessible public transit for these further-reaching but high-growth areas. If, let's say there is a WCE-type service for these cities, people from these cities will be more likely to go do something in downtown or even work in downtown. I know this is a chicken or the egg argument but, I think my suggestion will really help the whole region and downtown in the future. There are a good number of schools in South Surrey/White Rock and I know the kids will be more than happy to go hang out in downtown if going to downtown is more accessible.

[Zassk]

I do agree with you that these cities need to either have a rapid transit network or be better connected to one. However, if there is one thing I hear the most from fellow SSPers here is that our downtown needs more people.

Well, that's a fine notion for downtown businesses, but is really not Langley's or White Rock's problem, is it? Commuting in the Metro region goes between various town centers, and the rapid transit network is what connects them. A WCE style of shuttle to downtown would be great for the Fraser Valley Regional District, but it doesn't take the place of giving the outer regions of Metro Vancouver a fixed link to the SkyTrain network. IMO, Langley and White Rock need a link to SkyTrain first, and it is Abbotsford and beyond that need WCE first.

[metroXpress]

Seriously, if Surrey wants to create a second downtown core, it needs to build rails (light rail or skytrain) that are Surrey City Centre-oriented. It already has connections to Downtown Vancouver and now it needs more lines to connect with the neighbouring cities; town centres.

[Whalleyboy]

Seriously, if Surrey wants to create a second downtown core, it needs to build rails (light rail or skytrain) that are Surrey City Centre-oriented. It already has connections to Downtown Vancouver and now it needs more lines to connect with the neighbouring cities; town centres.

agreed
this is why i dont want to see skytrain actually expanded. We shouldnt allow people to just ride through the city centre

[BCPhil]

As someone in White Rock, the area around the 152nd corridor is extremely built up. Most people think of the beach when they think White Rock, but everywhere else outside the original cottage area is quite built up as of late.

Areas of South Surrey/White Rock (Semiahmoo and Grandview Corners) are built up with thousands of appartments/condos/townhouses like it is around Metrotown. A Skytrain Station at the Mall would easily fetch ridership similar to the stations in New Westminster. Yes, there are a lot of old people in South Surrey/White Rock, but is is also one of the fastest growing parts of Metro Vancouver (the population is almost doubling every 10 years), and is one of the hottest places for young families to move to. All my neighbors have young kids that sleigh down the steep roads when it snows.

Many people still drive because driving downtown vs transit is still 50% time saver. (The absolute fastest way to get downtown is to drive to the Park and Ride at Bridgeport and ride Canada line, best of both worlds).

A WCE service would be a good start, but the problem with the railway is that the tracks are FAR from the population centers. Commuters would have to travel in the wrong direction and a long way to get to a station, thus eating up any time savings the train could make.

Either LRT or Skytrain would fetch a lot of riders as the system could be placed close to the population centers at the mall and along 152nd street. If it was a short East/West bus ride to a rapid transit North/South Backbone, it would net a huge number of riders going into Surrey and points beyond.

South Surrey has a population of around 60,000 people, White Rock another 20,000, and within just a few years the area will house over 100,000 people. They built BC's (and one of Canada's) largest Walmarts out here for a reason.

[Vancouver_Highrise]

Yeah, no kidding.

As for Cloverdale, it's mentioned a lot because the ROW practically runs right through it. It also has a decently dense centre. It's a little like Port Moody that way, except that Port Moody probably has more density with Newport Village being there.

Cloverdale's left of that little triangle in the middle where the yellow rail lines junction.
http://www.sfot.info/images/interurban_corridor.png
source (http://www.sfot.info)

That diagram of population is way out proportion... There is a huge gap between Langley/Cloverdale population.

I grew up in Langley and overhearing many conversations over the years, I can tell you skytrain is something that is very much desired there. Personally I went downtown as did many other people atleast once a week and I know it is a pain to bus or drive all the way to Surrey Central/King George.

[nname]

Translink has released the GTFS data. The download is available here:
http://www.translink.ca/en/Schedules-and-Maps/Developer-Resources.aspx

[Pennywise604]

As someone in White Rock, the area around the 152nd corridor is extremely built up. Most people think of the beach when they think White Rock, but everywhere else outside the original cottage area is quite built up as of late.

Areas of South Surrey/White Rock (Semiahmoo and Grandview Corners) are built up with thousands of appartments/condos/townhouses like it is around Metrotown. A Skytrain Station at the Mall would easily fetch ridership similar to the stations in New Westminster. Yes, there are a lot of old people in South Surrey/White Rock, but is is also one of the fastest growing parts of Metro Vancouver (the population is almost doubling every 10 years), and is one of the hottest places for young families to move to. All my neighbors have young kids that sleigh down the steep roads when it snows.

Many people still drive because driving downtown vs transit is still 50% time saver. (The absolute fastest way to get downtown is to drive to the Park and Ride at Bridgeport and ride Canada line, best of both worlds).

A WCE service would be a good start, but the problem with the railway is that the tracks are FAR from the population centers. Commuters would have to travel in the wrong direction and a long way to get to a station, thus eating up any time savings the train could make.

Either LRT or Skytrain would fetch a lot of riders as the system could be placed close to the population centers at the mall and along 152nd street. If it was a short East/West bus ride to a rapid transit North/South Backbone, it would net a huge number of riders going into Surrey and points beyond.

South Surrey has a population of around 60,000 people, White Rock another 20,000, and within just a few years the area will house over 100,000 people. They built BC's (and one of Canada's) largest Walmarts out here for a reason.

24th Ave. between King George and 164th is unbelievable for just how fast it's growing. My friend lives very close to there, and a year and a half ago, it was a deserted 2 lane road with nothing on either side. Now it's absolutely mind boggling. There's stores and restaurants everywhere, with many, many condos being built in basically every part of 24th, and all the side streets surrounding it.

Is the SS P&R (King George @ Hwy 99) really efficient? Every bus out of White Rock passed by there with the exception of 345 or whatever.

[BCPhil]

24th Ave. between King George and 164th is unbelievable for just how fast it's growing. My friend lives very close to there, and a year and a half ago, it was a deserted 2 lane road with nothing on either side. Now it's absolutely mind boggling. There's stores and restaurants everywhere, with many, many condos being built in basically every part of 24th, and all the side streets surrounding it.

Is the SS P&R (King George @ Hwy 99) really efficient? Every bus out of White Rock passed by there with the exception of 345 or whatever.

Yeah, most people don't know that unless you visit here. I didn't know about it until I moved. To me White Rock was the pier and Charlie Don't Surf. But that's the 'quaint' part. The part along 24th is growing fast, and the economic meltdown hardly left a dent in the sales and construction of townhomes. I don't know if a single project (maybe except the McMansions) stalled in the area. And much of the area is slated for further densification.

[SpongeG]

news says the trolly busses had problems this morning - the wires were frozen and many busses couldn't run -2 and 85% humidty caused them to ice up

[nname]

I wonder if this would also be problematic for LRT or streetcar wire in Vancouver...

[Mac Write]

I wonder if this would also be problematic for LRT or streetcar wire in Vancouver...
Most likely.

[officedweller]

Portland sometimes has problems with ice build up on the LRT wires.

[DKaz]

Trolleys don't seem to be too much of a problem in Edmonton's -25C weather, is it because of the lower humidity?

[Canadian Mind]

Trolleys don't seem to be too much of a problem in Edmonton's -25C weather, is it because of the lower humidity?

Yes.

[metroXpress]

Perhaps we should run empty buses at night to avoid the ice from freezing on the wires :D

[Canadian Mind]

Why empty buses? Might as well run a 24/7 service if you are gonna do that.

[GeeCee]

Perhaps we should run empty buses at night to avoid the ice from freezing on the wires :D

They do that, actually. They also run trucks along the trolley routes to spray the lines with deicer. Last night there was a problem with one of the deicer trucks.

[zivan56]

They also borrow the "triesel" bus from TRAMS (a former trolley converted to a diesel with poles still attached) to clear the lines.
Btw, there was a 60ft trolley which kept stopping in the middle of the street beside bus stops (4 way flashers)...this is not a safe way to let people off or treat other road users since you have no idea what they are doing.

[Metro-One]

Most of Europe has such weather (and large parts of Asia) in the winter, often colder then -2 also with humidity, why does it seem to be such a big problem here?

[zivan56]

^^ The new design of trolley pole "shoes" no longer has an ice cutter. This was done to ensure less de-wiring IIRC.

[LeftCoaster]

Most of Europe has such weather (and large parts of Asia) in the winter, often colder then -2 also with humidity, why does it seem to be such a big problem here?

Who says it isnt a problem over there? Its not exactly like it is the kind of big international news that would make it all the way over here.

[SpongeG]

its icy out there tonight - my car had to get scraped after sitting outsite all afternoon - its chilly out there - they say it could snow on friday

[WarrenC12]

^^ The new design of trolley pole "shoes" no longer has an ice cutter. This was done to ensure less de-wiring IIRC.

Is this a part that can be added for the 3-4 winter months and removed for the rest of the time?

[BCPhil]

In Europe, most trams use Pantograph connections.

Here, the trolley buses use poles. The poles run along the wires, and if there are large chunks of ice on the wires they can be thrown off.

The Pantograph doesn't require a "guided" connection as the wire is always overtop of the tram, so if there is an ice chunk the Pantograph just bounces off and reconnects to the wire. It's much less mechanical and tolerable of incidents.

We have to use poles on our buses because the rubber tires don't allow the vehicles to ground on the road. A tram can use a Pantograph and single overhead wire because the metal wheels ground the train.

Streetcars in Vancouver, like LRT in Portland, won't have the same level of problems as the bus due to the use of Pantographs and single overhead wires.

If you want to see how tolerable Pantograph is to untypical situation, watch the video of the TGV breaking the speed record.

[zivan56]

^^ Trams and frost/ice cause lots of traction issues (lots of sanding required on hilly parts).

Is this a part that can be added for the 3-4 winter months and removed for the rest of the time?

Well the shoe itself can be replaced. However, another problem is the fact that the poles automatically retract once power loss it detected (it assumes dewiring has occured).

The old trolleys could bring down all the wires at an intersection and cause serious damage/injury if they didn't stop before they hooked any wires once they came off/pole flew up. This was supposed to solve this, but it ended up causing the issue we are seeing today.

So, to sum up:
new trolley shoes remove less ice -> contact frequently lost with wire -> new automatically retracting poles activates (due to percieving that dewiring occured) -> poles go down fully and no power going to the bus -> driver has to get out and put them back up -> start the cycle again.
If we had the old ones, it would just so slow/create tons of sparks unless we have an ice storm or something causing a huge amount of ice buildup.

[Zassk]

^ Hmm.. was this safety tradeoff worth the inevitable loss in service every time we hit sub-zero temperatures? How often did the old buses catastrophically "de-wire" intersections? I've never seen it happen myself.

[WarrenC12]

^ Hmm.. was this safety tradeoff worth the inevitable loss in service every time we hit sub-zero temperatures? How often did the old buses catastrophically "de-wire" intersections? I've never seen it happen myself.

It sounds like de-icing trucks were the "answer" to this problem, but one of them had a problem the other night and wasn't able to de-ice the lines completely.

What other solutions are out there? Can we send a little heat along the wires? :shrug:

[Spork]

^ Hmm.. was this safety tradeoff worth the inevitable loss in service every time we hit sub-zero temperatures? How often did the old buses catastrophically "de-wire" intersections? I've never seen it happen myself.

I was once driving through Granville @ Broadway heading southbound, and a LIVE trolley wire came down and put a massive dent in the side of my friend's car. If it was a foot higher, it would have gone through the window, and likely killed my friend.

[DKaz]

I think the older buses were better able to handle the cold, although I remember being on a 20 bus three years back on a trolley that kept losing power. I avoided the 20 and walked to catch the more reliable 26 diesel bus that winter.

[WarrenC12]

I think the older buses were better able to handle the cold, although I remember being on a 20 bus three years back on a trolley that kept losing power. I avoided the 20 and walked to catch the more reliable 26 diesel bus that winter.

Cold sure, but I certainly remember seeing many, many buses falling off the wires. It usually didn't seem like a big deal to fix, but it happened.

I can't remember ever seeing a new trolley off the wires. Could be my luck though. :D

[zivan56]

^ Hmm.. was this safety tradeoff worth the inevitable loss in service every time we hit sub-zero temperatures? How often did the old buses catastrophically "de-wire" intersections? I've never seen it happen myself.
Even though not very frequently, it could take days to repair or could kill someone.

Well the problem is this was never tested in practice. During the testing of the pilot trolley, the old buses were running and clearing the wires. So they just assumed the new ones would do the same. I don't understand why they didn't retrofit a kill switch into the auto pole pulldown feature.

[arashi_1987]

Bus Service Changes Effective December 14

99 B-Line UBC/Commercial-Broadway Station

New stops in both directions at Fraser Street and Arbutus Street will improve customer access.

Link (http://www.translink.ca/en/Schedules-and-Maps/Transit-Service-Improvements.aspx)

Now I wonder what kind of crowding we might expect...
Let's see if AM westbound will see lots of people board at Fraser to make getting on at Main Street even more chaotic. And having a stop at Arbutus might mean people who would have gotten off at Granville to reach Arbutus would stay on the bus longer... I guess we won't really know what it's gonna be like until then and when UBC goes back into session again...

According to the new timetable it seems the trip will be on average 1 minute longer than right now...fingers crossed. :)

[raggedy13]

Hmm... this will make things interesting. I may be eating all you can eat sushi at BC Sushi more often now.

[arashi_1987]

Wow exactly what I was thinking. :cool: though their quality has gone down the hill (off topic lol)

[deasine]

About time... I mean I sort of understood why Fraser didn't get a B-Line stop, but the lack of a bus stop at Arbutus never made any sense to me.
Random fact: I think TransLink has been slowly changing the Comm'l-Bway Stn destination signs to Commercial Stn instead... makes much more sense!

[arashi_1987]

About time... I mean I sort of understood why Fraser didn't get a B-Line stop, but the lack of a bus stop at Arbutus never made any sense to me.
Random fact: I think TransLink has been slowly changing the Comm'l-Bway Stn destination signs to Commercial Stn instead... makes much more sense!

Next they better change that woman's voice on the bus to NOT say "Cambie Street and Broadway Skytrain Station"...People will get so confused with the old Broadway station. Should just get rid of "Broadway" and say City Hall Skytrain!! There's only 1 vancouver city hall!!

[WarrenC12]

Next they better change that woman's voice on the bus to NOT say "Cambie Street and Broadway Skytrain Station"...People will get so confused with the old Broadway station. Should just get rid of "Broadway" and say City Hall Skytrain!! There's only 1 vancouver city hall!!

LOL yep. Just wait until the UBC extension, every stop will be "Broadway-xxx" :D

Any idea if they are adding more buses to the route? How many stops does the B-Line have now between Commercial and UBC?

[roleypolinde]

This was a much needed addition, the neighbourhood around Arbutus is a lot more built up than in the past. It was insane to be exactly 15 minutes walk between Macdonald and Granville stops and watch 3 99's go by while I wait for a trolley bus to take me up to Granville

Not to mention trying to catch the 99 from a 8 Fraser means running three blocks across busy intersections to catch it at Main, having it stop at Fraser directly is awesome, I am more than content to put up with a few more people on the route to have this service.

[mr.x]

I'm all for having stops at Arbutus and Fraser, despite making the trip longer, but this plan better include more buses for the 99. There's no doubt that quite a few will be making the switch from the trolleys to the express.

[WarrenC12]

Well trolleys can't be express buses. Do you mean ordering more diesels?

Speaking of trolleys, I saw 2 #20s in a row heading north on Victoria (around 37th) this morning, which is not unusual during the morning rush. However the first bus was empty, the 2nd one was full. How could this happen unless the first one somehow leapfrogged the other. Are there sections of wire set up to allow this during busy times?

[CLC]

Well trolleys can't be express buses. Do you mean ordering more diesels?

Speaking of trolleys, I saw 2 #20s in a row heading north on Victoria (around 37th) this morning, which is not unusual during the morning rush. However the first bus was empty, the 2nd one was full. How could this happen unless the first one somehow leapfrogged the other. Are there sections of wire set up to allow this during busy times?

I am sure I know the reason. The first #20 you saw (the empty one) has just made left turn coming from 41st avenue, and it probably skipped the stop immediately at the front of that bakery shop, and heads north, that's why you saw it still empty near 37th. The second #20 is the normal one came all the way from below 54th.

[CLC]

99 B-Line UBC/Commercial-Broadway Station

New stops in both directions at Fraser Street and Arbutus Street will improve customer access.
...
According to the new timetable it seems the trip will be on average 1 minute longer than right now...fingers crossed. :)

1 minute longer? I pretty sure it will be up to 5 minutes longer, particularly since the Arbutus stop may be used by some seniors and physically challenged.

[jsbertram]

Well trolleys can't be express buses. Do you mean ordering more diesels?

...

Hmmm...
It seemed to work well for the 34 Hastings Express trolley bus, which used the express wire along Hastings Street with no stops between Main St and Kootenay Loop.
The wires are still there (last time I looked) so they may still be used by trollies starting or ending their service each day.

[allan_kuan]

Bus traffic to be reduced on Saba Road - TransLink (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/December/Bus-traffic-to-be-reduced-on-Saba-Road.aspx)

I find this to be a little... unusual. Due to complaints from residents some of the buses are being shifted back to their original locations after the September move. O.O

[jsbertram]

While I'm thinking of bus stops on Broadway, why not move the #9 eastbound from the 'temporary' location at Yukon, back closer to the C-Line station entrance. How about right in front of the insurance office?

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=vancouver&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=27.919765,56.513672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Vancouver,+Greater+Vancouver+Regional+District,+British+Columbia,+Canada&layer=c&cbll=49.263193,-123.113947&panoid=rbkRFznb5L3zLjTa3trM5w&cbp=12,203.06,,0,8.38&ll=49.263541,-123.114325&spn=0,359.997253&z=19

It looks like there is plenty of room at this pole for the 9 Eastbound to slip in (ignoring the delivery truck), since the next pole west is the 99 BLine stop.

[whatnext]

Would it be possible for Translink to add an East/West route along 57th/59th? There's quite a gap between 49th and Marine.

[hollywoodnorth]

Bus service returns to Granville Mall

Bus service will begin a gradual return to Granville Mall next month. Beginning Monday, December 14, the #50 False Creek South, which had been routed away from Granville during construction of Granville Mall and the Canada Line, will resume service on Granville Street northbound as far as Robson Street and southbound beginning at Nelson.

The northbound bus will turn right on Robson and then left on Seymour; the southbound bus will come up Howe Street from Cordova to Nelson, then turn left to Granville.

The re-route will stay in place until February 1, when all traffic will come off Granville Street for the month to create a pedestrian mall during the Olympics: the #50 will go back to using Seymour northbound and Howe southbound and then return to the December routing in March.

Also in March, work will begin on installing trolley overhead wires along Granville Street, so that trolley buses, which had been removed from Granville in April 2006, may resume service by the fall of 2010.

http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/December/Bus-service-returns-to-Granville-Mall.aspx

[BCPhil]

Would it be possible for Translink to add an East/West route along 57th/59th? There's quite a gap between 49th and Marine.

I think the thinking with the gap is even though it's a long walk north or south to the closest east/west route, it's usually not a far walk east or west for the closest north/south route.

[whatnext]

I think the thinking with the gap is even though it's a long walk north or south to the closest east/west route, it's usually not a far walk east or west for the closest north/south route.

True, but it seems the existing East/West routes are maxing out at rush hour with the Canada Line now open. Even a community shuttle will help.

Maybe it will have to wait till whenever the George Pearson rehab centre is ever redeveloped. That land is way too valuable for such a sprawling 1 story facility.

[deasine]

If you look through this thread, you'll find a lot other members proposing a route along 54th Avenue & 57th Avenue right until at least Langara. But until we can a lot more funding, there won't be a new bus route.

[BCPhil]

Bus service returns to Granville Mall

Bus service will begin a gradual return to Granville Mall next month. Beginning Monday, December 14, the #50 False Creek South, which had been routed away from Granville during construction of Granville Mall and the Canada Line, will resume service on Granville Street northbound as far as Robson Street and southbound beginning at Nelson.

The northbound bus will turn right on Robson and then left on Seymour; the southbound bus will come up Howe Street from Cordova to Nelson, then turn left to Granville.

The re-route will stay in place until February 1, when all traffic will come off Granville Street for the month to create a pedestrian mall during the Olympics: the #50 will go back to using Seymour northbound and Howe southbound and then return to the December routing in March.

Also in March, work will begin on installing trolley overhead wires along Granville Street, so that trolley buses, which had been removed from Granville in April 2006, may resume service by the fall of 2010.

http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/December/Bus-service-returns-to-Granville-Mall.aspx

It will be so nice in March to be able to walk out a station and get on a bus right there on Granville instead of walking over to Howe.

So when the overhead wires go back up, will there be no more bus service on Howe or Seymour at all?

Before Canada Line construction Howe and Seymour were home to the 98 bline and suburban routes. Now that those no longer exist, will there be a need for the dedicated transit lanes? Maybe the city could return off peak parking onto those streets to generate some extra revenue.

[CLC]

Would it be possible for Translink to add an East/West route along 57th/59th? There's quite a gap between 49th and Marine.

No offense, but I think adding such route now is a waste of resource. Ridership of new bus route needs quite a long time to build up. For instance, #33 ridership is not even one-fifth of that of #49 in non-rush hours.

Simply add more buses for #49 will benefit hundreds of people delayed by pass-ups everyday.

[nname]

Simply add more buses for #49 will benefit hundreds of people delayed by pass-ups everyday.

The biggest service improvement in December is actually the #49.. but they didn't mention it :rolleyes:

[deasine]

The biggest service improvement in December is actually the #49.. but they didn't mention it :rolleyes:

What are the improvements?

[nname]

What are the improvements?

I think there are like 2 full-length trips and 8 or so short-turned trips (from Cambie to Metrotown) added.

[deasine]

I think there are like 2 full-length trips and 8 or so short-turned trips (from Cambie to Metrotown) added.

I just hope the Langara students do take it instead of taking the UBC bus behind it, which happens quite often.

[jsbertram]

It will be so nice in March to be able to walk out a station and get on a bus right there on Granville instead of walking over to Howe.
...

You're gonna have a long wait unless you want the 50.

"... in March, work will begin on installing trolley overhead wires along Granville Street, so that trolley buses ... may resume service by the fall of 2010."

[jsbertram]

I was once driving through Granville @ Broadway heading southbound, and a LIVE trolley wire came down and put a massive dent in the side of my friend's car. If it was a foot higher, it would have gone through the window, and likely killed my friend.

Just to be clear, the trolly wires are LIVE 24 hours a day / 7 days a week / 52 weeks a year. Unless they are specifically powered off for maintenance, or have been disconnected because they are not in regular use. Even when you see a Translink or Hydro crew working on a wire, it is still usually powered up, which is why one of their first steps is to cover the wires in their work area with insulation.

When dealing with electricity I expect that all wires are LIVE unless I know for sure otherwise.

If a trolly wire actually does fall & hits a car, not much will happen even if the car becomes electrically charged, because the rubber tires of the car are a good insulator preventing the power from passing through the car to the ground.

However, do not try to exit the car because as soon as your foot hits the ground YOU become the best way for 600 Volts to get from the wire, though the car to the ground. Stay in the car (the best Faraday cage you can have) until the Police Dept, the Fire Dept, the Ambulance crew, and Translink get the power turned off & you are escorted (one at a time) from the car.

You'll have a dent to fix & a story for the grandkids about the olde-tyme electric buses before the anti-gravity personal travel pods were developed.

[allan_kuan]

Is it also possible to get out by hopping out of your car with both feet simultaneously?

[Canadian Mind]

Is it also possible to get out by hopping out of your car with both feet simultaneously?

Yes, but only if you are in immediate danger... meaning the risk of you dying in the car is greater than the 9/10 risk of you dying while you try to successfully hop out. You can't be touching the car when you touch the ground, and you can't let your feet separate as you hop... And as you hop away from the car, if you fall, you die.

[jsbertram]

Is it also possible to get out by hopping out of your car with both feet simultaneously?

Possibly, but most people 'wobble' while hopping, so they will instinctively want to prop themselves up after the first hop - touching the car ---ZZZZZZAP---

I suspect that hopping on one foot is better, but you'd need better balance too.

Hasn't this been figured out already on Mythbusters?

[jlousa]

The hopping method does not work well because most people miss the most important step, the idea is keeping you feet together so there is no differential between you legs for power to run up one leg and down the other (same concept can sit on a live wire). You are only ever supposed to get out of the car if it's on fire or if in immediate danger. The problem stems from the first hop as you exit the car even if you keep your feet together you are in contact with the car which is a large enough mass to provide some ground and you will get zapped. Ideally you would find a way to hop out of the car so that when you touch the ground you are no longer in contact with the car, not the easiest thing to do in most cars, especially under stress.

Back on topic, Looks like the waterfront hub vision is on the back burner, Translink issued an rfp for engineering on the seabuses terminals for possible updates.

[CLC]

I think there are like 2 full-length trips and 8 or so short-turned trips (from Cambie to Metrotown) added.

more short-turned trips would help, but I wonder if it needs to be go all the way to Metrotown? I think a shorter trip from Champlain Mall to Cambie station would be more effective.

[deasine]

I came across a rather surprising info sheet from the Bus Riders Union...

WHAT ELSE CAN I DO TO STOP THESE UNJUST FINES?
The Bus Riders Union has a campaign Justice for Riders: We won’t ride with Fear! No guns, No racial profiling! We’re calling on TransLink to stop enforcing fares. We believe that everyone has a right to public transit, regardless of their ability to pay. TransLink is using $173 fines to privatize public transit – it will become a service for the privileged few, rather than a right for all. For bus riders, these fines are unaffordable, create big money problems and prevent some people from using public transit.
(Bus Riders Union, 2007)

More info here:
http://bru.vcn.bc.ca/uploads/images/61/Justice_Info_sheet.pdf

[WarrenC12]

^^^^^^

$173 fines to privatize public transit? I don't even know where to start with that one.

I'm calling on the police to stop enforcing speed limits, drug laws, and public drunkeness. So far it's not going so well... :shrug:

[Zassk]

^ If users don't pay, then who will pay the drivers' wages? Or is it also a right for them to be a bus driver, regardless of Translink's ability to pay them?

[twoNeurons]

Considering the fact that Translink doesn't get any of the revenue (it all goes to the province) it's a pretty weak argument that fines are helping to privatize transit. Not to mention the fact that Translink doesn't enforce fares, the province does, by not allowing you to renew provincial driver's licenses. Of course, since those that can't pay for transit likely can't afford a car either, linking unpaid fines to license renewal doesn't really do much, does it?

[LeftCoaster]

I came across a rather surprising info sheet from the Bus Riders Union...


(Bus Riders Union, 2007)

More info here:
http://bru.vcn.bc.ca/uploads/images/61/Justice_Info_sheet.pdf

If they cant afford the $173 fine maybe they could try paying the rather affordable fare then?

:koko:

[deasine]

If they cant afford the $173 fine maybe they could try paying the rather affordable fare then?

:koko:

I asked myself the exact same question. Besides, how can we afford 500 buses if they post this kind of rubbish online.

[mooks28]

Trying to argue with the Bus Riders' Union is like trying to argue with the Anti-Poverty Committee. It's just a bunch of juvenile, self-proclaimed "activists" lacking any grounding in reality.

[WarrenC12]

Trying to argue with the Bus Riders' Union is like trying to argue with the Anti-Poverty Committee. It's just a bunch of juvenile, self-proclaimed "activists" lacking any grounding in reality.

BRU, APC, LRT crackpots... they're all the same.

[DKaz]

I just though of this Because I Got High parody.

I was gonna go to school but then I got high.
Took a Skytrain down to Granville so I can get high
Didn't have a fare with me so I got fined
Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I was gonna go to work but then I got high
Boss was pissed I missed too much work then I got fired
Had no money so I hopped a Skytrain to get by
And then I was fined, because I got high, because I got high

I was gonna pay the fine but then I got high.
Collectors came and repossessed my stuff, and then I got high
Now I've joined the BRU to fight for my rights
Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high.

[SpongeG]

i saw guy who was actually half dressed as a women - he was in drag or something like it - he had full make up womens clothes but of the pant variety - anyway he was being ticketed inside the station at VCC - canada line - he only wanted to go one stop or something and didn't see the point of paying or something anyway it was quite the scene for a while as people were watching him/her being ticketed

[wrenegade]

Rethinking Green: Save the evironment: Don't take transit

When the Toronto Transit Commission announced in November it would hike fares a 25¢ in the new year -- a roughly 10% increase -- it blamed the usual suspects: rising costs of fuel and wages.

The system, said TTC chairman Adam Giambrone, faced a $100-million shortfall in next year's operating budget.

When the bad news broke, the Torontoist.com, compared the inflation of the TTC's 21 fare hikes in the past 30 years against the price of gasoline and against the inflation rate.

Consistently, the analysis found, TTC fares had risen faster than inflation, and far faster than the price of gas. Between 1980 and 2010, the cash fare, adjusted for inflation, soared more than 80% and token prices are up 50%. The price of a litre of unleaded gas? Up about 30%, without inflation. As for wage increases, Statistics Canada reported last year that the median full-time, full-year salary of average Canadians has hardly increased at all since 1980.

Although it is charging more than ever, getting heftier federal, provincial and municipal subsidies than at any time in its history, although fuelling a car is pricier; and though its customer base has never been larger or keener to reduce its carbon footprint, the TTC, the largest system in the country, is struggling as much as ever to stem its losses. If this is the future of public transit, it does not look bright.

As other major systems across the continent strain in similar circumstances, the strategy of public transit system boosters has been to promote the service as an environmental necessity. In the name of Mother Nature, North American transit systems have received billions in subsidies in recent years - even though they were never developed for environmental purposes in the first place.

If the goal is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, air pollution and gas consumption, and maximize the environmental impact of sustainability spending, we may be better off without publicly funding transit at all.

"Subsidized transit is not sustainable by definition," says Wendell Cox, a transport policy consultant in St. Louis, and former L.A. County Transportation commissioner. "The potential of public transit has been so overblown it's almost scandalous."

It's not that environmentally minded transit promoters are being dishonest when they argue that city buses are more efficient than private cars: It's that they're talking about a fictional world where far more people ride buses. Mass transit vehicles use up roughly the same energy whether they are full or empty, and for much of the time, they're more empty than full.

For the bulk of the day, and on quieter routes, the average city bus usually undoes whatever efficiencies are gained during the few hours a day, on the few routes, where transit is at its peak.

Last year, policy analyst Randal O'Toole ran the numbers for the CATO Institute, where he is a senior fellow, comparing mass transit vehicles to private vehicles, ranking each based on how much energy they consume and how much CO2 they emit. The average motorized city bus, he reports, burns 27% more energy per mile than a private car and emits 31% more pounds of CO2. The U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics confirms that the average city bus requires 20% more energy per passenger than the average car.

"Unfortunately, right now the state of the art is that you're generally better off with private automobiles when you're talking about energy utilization. About the only way that transit can be competitive for energy or for environmental quality is if the transit lines gets an incredible amount of use, far higher than is now normally the case," says Tom Rubin, a transit policy consultant in California, and former chief financial officer of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. But crowded systems are a turn-off for riders, he says, so more passengers means even more buses and rail cars. "It's almost impossible to make transit more attractive without spending a huge amount of money."

The bus may be the most inefficient part of any major city's transit network, but they're the most vital part. Wider use of subways and light rail relies utterly on a feeder system of buses, says Michael Roschlau, president of the Canadian Urban Transit Association. "You can't just run [Calgary's] C-Train by itself and expect everyone to drive to the stations," he says. "Same thing for the subway in Toronto or Skytrain in Vancouver."

Without buses to carry them from their neighbourhood to the train stations, even fewer citizens would ride the trains, making trains, in turn, less efficient per passenger. Already, when trains, subways and streetcars are combined, the average public transit system is still no more efficient that private cars, according to the CATO study. All transit together does emit less CO2 than passenger cars carrying the same number of people the same distance (about 13% less) but even that gap is disappearing -- fast.

The U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics data shows that while transit's energy efficiency has worsened in recent decades-transit buses today consume 4,235 per passenger mile, or about 50% more energy than in 1980 -- the trend in cars has been the opposite direction: Today's cars are already about 20% more efficient than they were 25 years ago, down from 4,348 BTUs per passenger mile in 1980 to 3,525 in 2006.

The environmental case for public transit is falling just as fast, now that hybrid cars are achieving mass market status, with 65 models set to hit North American roads next year, Chevrolet planning to launch its electric Volt by 2011 and manufacturers rolling out super-high efficiency vehicles. In the next few years especially, the average energy consumption of passenger vehicles, and their emission levels, will only improve, with projections by the International Council on Clean Transportation showing the average auto could beat all public transit modes for efficiency and CO2 within the next five years.

"At this point, a Toyota Prius is less greenhouse-intensive than New York City Transit," Mr. Cox says. "Whatever advantage that transit has at the moment is going away very quickly."

Once eco-conscious urbanites realize the bus is worse for the planet than cars, they'll have little reason to keep riding, making transit's comparative per-passenger environmental footprint look even worse. And while transit system operators talk of "greening" their fleet, the fact is they face substantial limits. Whatever green gains transit can make, automobiles can probably do better, Mr. Rubin says.

When the federal government, the B.C. government and BC Transit revealed plans to run 20 hydrogen-powered buses in Whistler, B.C., in February for the Olympics, even the hard-green David Suzuki Foundation balked at the preposterous $2-million-per-bus price tag -- four times the price of a standard diesel -- arguing that the money would have been better spent on traditional transit initiatives, which "are on life support as far as the financial needs go," Ian Bruce, the group's climate-change campaigner, said.

He's surely right about the pointlessness of what will amount to a four-year, $90-million showpiece of technology not even remotely realistic for actual, financially strapped public transit systems.

And more money for diesel-powered buses may be hardly more worthwhile: The fact is that despite best efforts of transit planners and funding governments, and surveys showing a public keen on environmentalism, most commuters simply will not, or cannot, ride.

Last year's census data confirmed that the vast majority of Canadians have little use for transit. Just 216,000 more people rode at least once than did in 2001, a half-a-percentage increase, but that's actually a decrease relative to the 5.4% population growth over the same period. At the same time, Statistics Canada shows that operating costs for Canadian transit system has ballooned, up 30% from $3.7-billion in 2003 to $4.8-billion in 2007. In the United States, public transit's market share for travel has fallen by a third since 1980, from 1.5% to 1% in 2005. If anything were to get people out of their cars to stand at a bus stop, it would be the severe pain of soaring gas prices. But even as fuel in the United States. approached the unseen price of $4 a gallon in 2008, public transit ridership rose a mere 3.3%.

Transit boosters insist that we must go further, and redesign our cities to support transit systems. "Our cities continue to approve the suburban sorts of development that are very difficult to serve using public transit," Stephen Hazell, executive director of the Sierra Club of Canada, told reporters upon release of last year's disappointing ridership data. But the thousands of delivery trucks, taxi drivers, emergency vehicles, service trucks, car-bound workers and buses mean even high-density cities will keep needing highways, ring roads, bridges and flyovers. Meanwhile the massive cost of overhauling cities is just more billions to address an automobile environmental problem that is already on the way to resolving itself -- money that might be better, and more effectively deployed toward other earth-friendly measures, such as reducing traffic congestion.

A congestion charge toll implemented in Stockholm in 2007, for instance, reduced CO2 emissions in that city by roughly 16% last year, cut traffic by 18%, and, because it exempts low-emissions vehicles, led to a tripling of purchases of so-called green cars. Best of all, it sustains itself.

More roads, and more efficient roads, still won't address public transit's original, non-environmental purpose: providing mobility for citizens who lack their own. But where public transit is absent, or impractical, solutions for the small minority totally lacking other means have readily sprung up. Ridesharing applications for smart phones -- users enter their location and desired destination and a cost-conscious carpooler responds -- are already in wide use, Mr. Rubin says. Self-sustaining, small-scale private jitney systems have successfully operated for years in Atlantic City and Puerto Rico (all North America's early public transit systems were privately operated until they were nationalized). And with billions freed up from public transit funds, it appears entirely feasible to simply offer subsidized Prius taxis, or even car subsidies, to the small portion of the public entirely reliant on public mobility. A study last year by HDR Decision Economics, commissioned by the Canadian Urban Transit Association, found that Canada's public systems will need $78-billion more in infrastructure spending and $3.6-billion in annual subsidies to reach optimum capacity. For that kind of money, Canadian governments could, if they wanted, hand out $16,000 car or taxi allowances to every single Canadian who rides transit even casually, and still have $50-billion left over at the end of the decade. That plan wouldn't please the public unions and other transit-reliant lobbies pressing for more green-related transit funding. But it would relieve Canadians from having to perpetually prop up a system that's increasingly unsustainable -- financially and environmentally.

National Post

klibin@nationalpost.com

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2314104



Interesting way to look at the benefits of public transit. It doesn't tell the entire story, but from a purely environmental point of view, it doesn't paint the best picture.

[NetMapel]

Interesting article but I hardly trust any comment on this matter from these "experts" from California, the suburban crawl capital.

[geoff's two cents]

Last year, policy analyst Randal O'Toole ran the numbers for the CATO Institute, where he is a senior fellow, comparing mass transit vehicles to private vehicles, ranking each based on how much energy they consume and how much CO2 they emit. The average motorized city bus, he reports, burns 27% more energy per mile than a private car and emits 31% more pounds of CO2. The U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics confirms that the average city bus requires 20% more energy per passenger than the average car.

"The Cato Institute is a pro-free market, libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C.

"The Cato Institute is non-partisan, and its scholars' views are not consistently aligned with either major political party. For example, Cato scholars were sharply critical of the second Bush administration (2001 - 2009) on a wide variety of issues, including the Iraq war, civil liberties, education, health care, agriculture, energy policy, and excessive government spending. However, on other issues, most notably Social Security, global warming, tax policy, and immigration, Cato scholars had praised Bush administration initiatives."

Source: Wikipedia

Thanks for posting, awvan.

I'm not responding this way in order to completely devalue every insight the article offers. For one thing, it's a reminder that buses and metros don't run on magic power alone, and I think there's a lot of useful data here that should be considered for public transit planning - ie. putting bus routes through areas with accompanying long-term strategies to increase living density and transit use/efficiency over time, rather than, say, spending millions having public transit in areas destined for perpetual low-density sprawl. (In Vancouver's case, however, lower-capacity, lower-emissions shuttle buses are a step in the right direction. Notably, the article doesn't mention this).

However, it's important to recognize when a study is agenda-driven to the point of absurdity. Absent from the piece, for instance, is any discussion of where the money to build roads comes from (magic?), and an equally unfortunate dearth of discussion concerning the wider environmental cost of SOVs beyond simple tailpipe emissions.

That plan wouldn't please the public unions and other transit-reliant lobbies pressing for more green-related transit funding

This is also unfair and a little sneaky - implicitly and subtly though, not explicitly. This polarizes people into either proto-communist or regular-freedom-loving-democratic-citizen categories. The reality is much murkier. I'm neither a union member, nor am I exclusively "transit-reliant." Also, while I choose not to own a car, I've rented one on two occasions, I completely understand that some occupations require one, and can accept the fact that many regular transit users own a car for the purpose of out-of-town business and pleasure excursions. What the CATO institute does not recognize is that there are a lot of people that are neither "greenwashing" hippies nor full-blooded market libertarians. I'd say most of us fall somewhere between those two categories.

I think we can all imagine at least some of the environmental and ecological impact entailed in putting every single bus and public transit passenger into an SOV or taxi (thankfully, the article itself, if I read correctly, stops somewhat short of such completely totalizing solutions, though it does lead in that direction), hybrid or no. These consequences are about as carefully thought through as, say, those of a "greenwasher" proposing that cars be instantaneously eliminated from the planet. Both start from purely ideological first principles, and both perspectives do more harm than good to an otherwise constructive, practically-minded debate over how best to plan our city's twenty-first century transportation infrastructure.

[GeeCee]

Subsidizing public transit is unsustainable?? What world is that guy living in?????

[twoNeurons]

A couple of pictures of Bus information systems in Southend-On-Sea in Southeast England:

Perhaps a model for our system downtown once they work the kinks out of the GPS System?

It would be really nice on Granville when the trolleys are back.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2491/4172628009_f0f5747089.jpghttp://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4173381888_060eae1f69.jpg

[Stingray2004]

TransLink Cuts 3rd Quarter Deficit Nearly 50 per cent

Cost containment and lower fuel prices have offset a drop in revenues to allow TransLink to cut its forecast third quarter deficit by nearly 50 per cent. That, combined with the October 23rd decision by the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation to approve a funding supplement that provides $130 million in additional revenue, signals current levels of service on Metro Vancouver’s road and transit network will remain financially sustainable.

TransLink’s 2009 budget had forecast a deficit of $74 million by the end of September as a result of higher operating costs, driven by service expansion over the last five years. However, CEO Ian Jarvis reports the actual deficit to the end of September was $34 million, putting TransLink on track to a much better year-end result.

TransLink’s original 2009 budget forecast a deficit of $103 million. By mid-year, it had been reduced to $97 million, but now it appears that the year-end deficit will be $78 million, which will be covered by reserves.

To the end of September, lower fuel costs and savings from corporate-wide hiring freeze on non-operational positions, project delays and cuts in discretionary spending have mitigated the impacts of reduced revenues. TransLink’s revenues have suffered as a result of the economic downturn, with fuel taxes $7 million under budget, transit fare revenue $10 million lower than expected and Golden Ears Bridge tolls off by close to $2 million.

Transit ridership fell short of expectations, again likely due to the economy and a probable shift of some trips to private vehicles as a result of lower fuel prices. Approximately 138 million transit trips were recorded to the end of September, about 1 per cent lower than expected while the number of passenger boardings, which include transfers, were 4 per cent lower than expectation at $227 million.

Most of TransLink’s financial and customer service indices were trending positively by the end of the third quarter. Transit operating costs per passenger and per service hour were lower than forecast and the overall service rating by customers was slightly higher, at 7.3 out of 10.

Jarvis called the Mayors’ Council approval of $130 million in additional revenues ‘an important step toward financial stability’ but said that the new revenue alone would not be enough to sustain all of the improvements TransLink had put in place for the region’s road and transit system. “It’s still our duty to drive every possible administrative and operational efficiency out of our system to provide Metro Vancouver’s transportation network with the stability it needs,” Jarvis said. ‘A culture of cost containment is now firmly entrenched organization-wide.”

“For the first time in five years, the organization is on a firm financial footing. Between the new revenue and all of the efficiency efforts, TransLink has eliminated the structural deficit that has received a lot of attention in recent weeks and, with it, the threat of massive transit cutbacks that would have caused immeasurable damage now and taken a very, very long time to reverse”.

“With a solid foundation for the transportation network now in place, everybody with a stake in its future…and that’s pretty much everybody…can turn their attention toward how we can return to the growth and expansion it clearly needs if Metro Vancouver is going to maintain its world-wide reputation for sustainability and livability.”

http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/December/TransLink-cuts-3rd-Quarter-deficit-nearly-50-per-cent.aspx

[quobobo]

A couple of pictures of Bus information systems in Southend-On-Sea in Southeast England:

Perhaps a model for our system downtown once they work the kinks out of the GPS System?

The system on Main is working pretty well, I imagine that will be expanded in time.

[nickinacan]

A couple of pictures of Bus information systems in Southend-On-Sea in Southeast England:

Perhaps a model for our system downtown once they work the kinks out of the GPS System?

It would be really nice on Granville when the trolleys are back.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2491/4172628009_f0f5747089.jpghttp://farm5.static.flickr.com/4048/4173381888_060eae1f69.jpg

They had a similar system installed everywhere in Malmo, Sweden when I was there this summer. Oddly enough they were talking about making transit free for everyone to see what it did for ridership.

I think the biggest things that deter people from taking transit is the fact that it doesn't really save the average person time. There are way too many transfer points that eat up time. In my case it doubles the amount of time it would take me to drive to work, so it becomes the age old debate of what my time is really worth. Do I sit in traffic for an hour... or do I sit on a bus/train for two hours? This is the question Translink needs to ask itself. Where are people going to, from where, and how can they make it faster.

[nname]

Approximately 138 million transit trips were recorded to the end of September, about 1 per cent lower than expected while the number of passenger boardings, which include transfers, were 4 per cent lower than expectation at $227 million.

... and... they didn't count the ridership for Canada Line :koko:

[officedweller]

For those interested - lots of bus pics here - incuding wraps from 2005 to present:

http://www.trans-continental.ca/vancouver/

[CLC]

... and... they didn't count the ridership for Canada Line :koko:

oh really...
Canada Line "steals" lots of unexpected ridership from various north-south bus routes, one of them come to my mind is #3.

is #49 December improvement already goes into effect? Today evening rush I rode #49 eastbound from Langara station, there were three #49 in virtually 1-minute span. It certainly looks like a bit of improvement, though I boarded on the third bus and it's still standing room only.

[deasine]

Quote pulled out of an article:

On average, 240,000 passengers travel SkyTrain’s Expo and Millennium Lines each weekday. Our on- time performance rating* so far in 2009 is 94.50%.
(*On-time performance rating is a calculation of how often scheduled service is delivered with delays of 2 minutes or less.)

Via TransLink (http://www.translink.ca/en/About-TransLink/Media/2009/December/SkyTrain-Service-Disruption-Caused-By-Rare-Component-Problem.aspx)

[BCPhil]

Hmmm, they are making less money than expected in all areas or revenue, yet not losing as much money over all as they expected.

Is someone there just really bad at maths? Or do they hemorrhage that much money from hiring non operational personal that curtailing that save that much money?

Or is it the idea that they have "discretionary spending". That's basically money they feel they have to spend, even if they don't have a reason, just because the money is in the budget. It's spending money to meet the budget. Great Job Translink, not spending money we don't have on things we didn't need.

They seem to do this every year. Strike fear into the hearts of men, then at the last minute save all this money. I'm sure in the 4th Quarter they will find even more ways to save (or realize Canada Line ridership) and end up losing very little considering we are in the worst global economic crisis of our lifetimes.