[eduardo88]

Babies' bedtimes are whenever and wherever they want to sleep. Which is pretty much all the time except when you're sleeping. :D

Ahhh don't remind me! Mine's due in February, which will definitely mean no more SSP time :(

[G-Slice]

would it make sense to have the extension to UBC start from the station at commercial & broadway? so there would be two spurs from there, one going to UBC & one going to VCC-Clark, like how the Canada line goes to YVR & Richmond-Brighouse. that would cover that chunk of broadway between mt pleasant & commercial

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/2014/2958720582.jpg (http://img218.imageshack.us/i/2958720582.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

I like it. Direct service to downtown for the Millenium Line would be a huge boost to ridership. I expect extending the M-Line from VCC-Clark to Denman, and Beach via Vancouver City Centre could be done for the same cost as the Expo Line upgrades (about $2.8 billion if I recall), and would probably move enough ridership from the Expo Line that it would render the upgrades unnecessary. It would also put a station right in the middle of Millennium Water and spur the redevelopment of that sad little area between 2nd. Ave and Broadway.

I guess the problem is that building the UBC line from Broadway Station as opposed to VCC would basically make VCC useless until the extension to downtown, since it is likely that only 1/3 of Millennium/Evergreen trains would serve it. That would mean service at less than 10 minute frequencies for most of the day - enough time to walk to Broadway.

[Zassk]

It's never going to happen. We just got a 2nd line built to downtown. A 3rd line, if it ever happens, is sure to be on Hastings.

And if that ever happens, then it is probably 25 years out, unless somehow Expo Line can be extended east alongside the port lands for cheap.

[invisibleairwaves]

And SoF will probably secede from Translink if another downtown line happens before an eastern Expo Line extension, and rightly so. Connecting Coal Harbour and the West End to the Skytrain isn't such a bad idea though.

At this point, going from VCC-Clark is the only logical route unless the province somehow gets a multi-billion-dollar windfall and gives it all to Translink. We can't afford the Evergreen Line, let alone the UBC line plus another tunnel to downtown.

[paradigm4]

Hey, there could finally be a subway connection to Robson Square ;)

Great fantasy. If we had a ton of money, it'd be a nice option, but there's more pressing priorities unfortunately.

[madmigs]

It's never going to happen. We just got a 2nd line built to downtown. A 3rd line, if it ever happens, is sure to be on Hastings.

And if that ever happens, then it is probably 25 years out, unless somehow Expo Line can be extended east alongside the port lands for cheap.

Extend the expo line from waterfront down hastings up to SFU!! I think we need a new thread! lol

[CLC]

^ There is already a Transit Fantasies thread.

A Hastings Line will draw M-Line ridership down. It is not a wise use of scarce money for at least next 20 years. If extra money for rapid transit is available for Vancouver Proper, build it along 41/49st corridor first, which guarantee higher ridership in the foreseeable future than a Hastings-SFU line.

[madmigs]

^ There is already a Transit Fantasies thread.

A Hastings Line will draw M-Line ridership down. It is not a wise use of scarce money for at least next 20 years. If extra money for rapid transit is available for Vancouver Proper, build it along 41/49st corridor first, which guarantee higher ridership in the foreseeable future than a Hastings-SFU line.

It twas a joke :)

[cabotp]

^ There is already a Transit Fantasies thread.

A Hastings Line will draw M-Line ridership down. It is not a wise use of scarce money for at least next 20 years. If extra money for rapid transit is available for Vancouver Proper, build it along 41/49st corridor first, which guarantee higher ridership in the foreseeable future than a Hastings-SFU line.

Besides the Evergreen Line, UBC Extension and skytrain extension in Surrey.

What I do see happening is a B-Line bus service along 41st, Hastings, East from the Coq centre from the Evergreen Line to Haney. And then depending on how the skytrain is extended in Surrey and station locations at least 1 or 2 B-Line routes most likely out to Langley and South Surrey/ White rock.

As for future skytrain or possibly lrt expansion in the future. I'd say it would depend on which B-Line routes have the highest ridership.

[Kodii]

An online/Facebook campaign by the AMS is exploding in response to the Regional Growth Strategy:

Check it out and support it!

http://ubclinenow.com/

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=160888543938964

http://www.facebook.com/ubclinenow

[CLC]

^ As of now on an average weekday Broadway corridor ridership is lower than C-Line. During weekends it is no match, C-Line win easily. Whoever post in this ubc facebook wall is giving misleading info. Don't use the same tactics as railofthevalley.

[Zassk]

If you add all university-bound traffic from 41, 49, 25, etc., I think the comparison to C-line probably comes out favourable for the UBC line.

[CLC]

If you add all university-bound traffic from 41, 49, 25, etc., I think the comparison to C-line probably comes out favourable for the UBC line.

The campaigner also says "every day", I am not convinced that you can get anywhere close to 100000 university-bound traffic on weekends:jester:

[geoff's two cents]

If you add all university-bound traffic from 41, 49, 25, etc., I think the comparison to C-line probably comes out favourable for the UBC line.

Don't forget the 4, 17 & 44. I've never seen the C-line as congested as the 99. The 99 is, bar none, the most consistently overcrowded and unpleasant transit experience I have had. Unlike the Expo line, which experiences similar levels of crowding at rush hour, over- (and often unsafe) congestion on the 99 is common throughout the day. Delays are also surprisingly common, due I'm sure to driver error or heavy traffic - which only augments the congestion issue when the long-awaited bus finally arrives.

[CLC]

^ People in Vancouver does have proven ability to pack a bus, during my almost daily ride of infrequent #25 for rush hour many years ago, it was not uncommon to pack 60+ people on a 40feet bus, to get off the bus even at major stop was a challenge. For skytrain, people seems willing to wait for the next one or even "ride backward" first to get a seat.

#99 may have the largest pass-ups (1000+ per weekday) by number, but my pick of most overcrowded/unpleasant ride are #25 or #49 (recent), the former #98-b might also be included.

[WarrenC12]

Is it possible to put more buses into service on the #99?

[allan_kuan]

It is possible although not very recommended either, as increasing the number of buses only makes the surface routes much more congested... and we're not talking about just the Broadway corridor being affected by east-west traffic; in fact, most of the routes that head to UBC suffer from generally extreme crowding. Also it's been mentioned that running more of these buses actually costs more per kilometre than using heavy rail rapid transit. Adding more buses may alleviate the short-term problem but won't solve the long-term one.

[AlexYVR]

It is possible although not very recommended either, as increasing the number of buses only makes the surface routes much more congested... and we're not talking about just the Broadway corridor being affected by east-west traffic; in fact, most of the routes that head to UBC suffer from generally extreme crowding. Also it's been mentioned that running more of these buses actually costs more per kilometre than using heavy rail rapid transit. Adding more buses may alleviate the short-term problem but won't solve the long-term one.

Translink has reached the tipping point where adding more buses to Broadway will actually slow traffic and impede progress rather than smooth it. Broadway doesn't have the capacity for more buses at this point.

[Gordon]

One thing that might help is having the B Line buses having the ability to control the traffic lights along the route. this route is full in the opposite direction of peak from Cambie to Arbutus in the afternoons.

[WarrenC12]

What about re-instituting the bus-only lanes like the Olympics? At least during peak times.

If the buses are in fact passing up 4000 people/day, that is not acceptable.

[twoNeurons]

:previous:

Agreed. Speed up the buses, making them more efficient. Signal priority is a good idea.

[aberdeen5698]

One thing that might help is having the B Line buses having the ability to control the traffic lights along the route. this route is full in the opposite direction of peak from Cambie to Arbutus in the afternoons.I'm not a traffic engineer, but I suspect the density of buses in the Broadway corridor is so high that such a strategy can't work effectively. It would hardly leave any time for north-south traffic to proceed through the intersections. There has to be a minimum time allowed for cross traffic to flow.

[squeezied]

That's why a surface LRT with long trains (for high capacity) and short headways wouldn't work on Broadway... though I should be telling that to Zwei, but what's the point?

[cornholio]

I'm not a traffic engineer, but I suspect the density of buses in the Broadway corridor is so high that such a strategy can't work effectively. It would hardly leave any time for north-south traffic to proceed through the intersections. There has to be a minimum time allowed for cross traffic to flow.

You dont have to have the buses control the intersections, you just have to have a control room somewhere control them. The buses are all GPS equipped and all the intersections can have video monitoring, and it would be fairly easy to set up a system to measure the traffic volume along Broadway and the important cross streets. Once this is all in place you just need a person to monitor it and help out by controlling the lights in the most optimum way. On top of this you can develop a algorithm with the data to help make the best decisions, this algorithm can always tweaked and improved as you move forward.

It would never be perfect with the bus and traffic volume but you dont need it to be, all you need is for it to be better. Even if all you take is intersection monitoring, the GPS information from the buses, put in to one room ith one person who has the ability to control lights and im sure that one person will make a very big difference in the efficiency of the buses as he will have a overview of the entire system unlike a driver who only has a view of his one bus.

[officedweller]

The other thing about buses on Broadway is that the 99 B-Line buses must pass the No. 9 buses - so just one lane isn't going to do it - it'll be clogged by No. 9 buses.

[aberdeen5698]

You dont have to have the buses control the intersections, you just have to have a control room somewhere control them.I strongly suspect that you could make it a little better, but I doubt you'd be able to reduce the overall stop time at lights all that much. I suspect that only way to make a significant improvement would be to group the buses into "convoys", but that's very difficult with different buses stopping at different stops and waiting various times to board and disembark differing numbers of passengers. It also becomes a big issue for the capacity of the bus stops themselves (i.e., how many buses can you fit into a bus stop).

[cornholio]

I strongly suspect that you could make it a little better, but I doubt you'd be able to reduce the overall stop time at lights all that much. I suspect that only way to make a significant improvement would be to group the buses into "convoys", but that's very difficult with different buses stopping at different stops and waiting various times to board and disembark differing numbers of passengers. It also becomes a big issue for the capacity of the bus stops themselves (i.e., how many buses can you fit into a bus stop).

But even improving the efficiency(as a result capacity) of the 99 by say 10% the difference and value of that 10% is huge. It might not be noticeable to the commuters, and it might sound like a insignificant improvement, but even 10% would equal to thousands of extra people per day, and millions saved every year in operational costs.

In the end there isnt much else they can do, well except get longer buses which I still dont understand why they didnt get double articulated buses on a route like Broadway. Another option is to tweak pedestrian crossing lights at cross intersections to better allow right turning vehicles to clear broadway, also dont understand why they haven't done that yet, and a few no right turn signs would also greatly improve the flow, capacity and efficiency of the 99 buses, and the 9 buses and the rest of the traffic along Broadway.

Not to mention that regrdles of the 99 the traffic could be improved, on a route like Broadway im sure it would be worth it, infact a city like Vancouver should start looking at important roads and start setting up a system to be able to control their flow and monitor them.

[twoNeurons]

You could equip the buses with the ability to hold the next light for a set period of time. Or... buses when in range of an intersection and travelling over a set speed ( in motion ) would automatically signal the next light to go into a hold pattern if green. This alone would allow the buses to stop at their stops and not worry about not hitting the lights.

If it's manual, the driver gets a Stop Light Override Button which holds the green for a max time period. They can label it... the S.L.O.B.

"Quick! Hit the SLOB!"

[jsbertram]

Is it possible to put more buses into service on the #99?

I was wondering if the 99 b-line should experiment with having two buses show up at Commercial to load up at the same time during rush hours. Since its hard to avoid the buses bunching up, why not just have a pair of buses starting each scheduled run 4 times per hour during the rush?

Whichever bus is full first will pull away to start the run, and the people who were missed will just shift over to the second bus thats already there. The second bus can start its run as soon as its full too.

The smart riders will simply jump on the second bus so they are more likely to get a seat.


Many times I've been at a B-Line stop when 2 or 3 B-Line buses show up. Everyone tries to cram on to the first bus - even though you can see the other buses pulling up behind, or just about to arrive when the lights change. More often than not, I'll take the 2nd or 3rd bus (which isn't so cram-packed full) and by the time everyone exits at Cambie for the C-Line I now have a seat. By the time we get to Commercial, the bus that I deliberately skipped is now several blocks behind me.

[aberdeen5698]

But even improving the efficiency(as a result capacity) of the 99 by say 10% the difference and value of that 10% is huge.Improvement by 10% of the stop time at traffic lights is a pretty small portion of the overall time.

[jsbertram]

What about re-instituting the bus-only lanes like the Olympics? At least during peak times.

If the buses are in fact passing up 4000 people/day, that is not acceptable.

Broadway already has 'Diamond Lanes' that are bus-exclusive during rush hour.

However, because Broadway has local buses (9 Broadway/Boundary, 17 UBC/Downtown) and the B-Line, the B-Line has to change lanes out of the Diamond Lanes (into regular traffic) to pass the local buses.

[deasine]

In the end there isnt much else they can do, well except get longer buses which I still dont understand why they didnt get double articulated buses on a route like Broadway. Another option is to tweak pedestrian crossing lights at cross intersections to better allow right turning vehicles to clear broadway, also dont understand why they haven't done that yet, and a few no right turn signs would also greatly improve the flow, capacity and efficiency of the 99 buses, and the 9 buses and the rest of the traffic along Broadway.

Double articulated buses aren't common and are very expensive and take up a lot of space on the roadway, which is already limited on a route like Broadway. Plus, a specific facility must be built at either the Vancouver or Burnaby Bus Operations Centre to handle these extra long buses. Plus, it isn't a long-term solution: Broadway needs segregated rapid transit.

[jsbertram]

Don't forget the 4, 17 & 44. I've never seen the C-line as congested as the 99. The 99 is, bar none, the most consistently overcrowded and unpleasant transit experience I have had. Unlike the Expo line, which experiences similar levels of crowding at rush hour, over- (and often unsafe) congestion on the 99 is common throughout the day. Delays are also surprisingly common, due I'm sure to driver error or heavy traffic - which only augments the congestion issue when the long-awaited bus finally arrives.

So I'll renew my idea for a new UBC Non-Stop bus. This would have only two stops: Commercial Station and UBC Loop. At the hour and half-hour this UBC Non-Stop bus would pull up at its own stop (in front of Uncle Fatihs Pizza?), load up and start its run to UBC via 12th Ave and 10th Ave.

By getting away from Broadway traffic and bus stops, you could cut as much as 10 minutes off the run, and by taking the UBC-only commuters off the B-Line and local buses, there is more room on those buses.

[allan_kuan]

they tried that before... then pulled the service for unknown reasons (at least for me)

Essentially anything that could be done on the surface of Broadway has been done, except for signal overrides (which would just create a big traffic mess on both Broadway and cross streets) and LRT (which would create an even bigger mess). Rapid Transit is the only way to go now.

[jsbertram]

Improvement by 10% of the stop time at traffic lights is a pretty small portion of the overall time.

I thought there was a system that would hold the light green for a B-Line that was within a block of the intersection so it could get through the light before it changed.

[cornholio]

Improvement by 10% of the stop time at traffic lights is a pretty small portion of the overall time.

I can tell you that 10% in the real world is no small portion. 10% is huge, and the more efficient and used the system will be the biger that 10% will be.

Obviously long term the only solution is rapid transit but thats not going to be built anytime soon and even if it is it will still take years. Until then you have to do what is necessary to get by and all these little bits add up to the route either functioning or not functioning. In this case I dont think the costs are too high for some pretty big benefits, the 99 looks to me to be run pretty poorly. Its when you make all these improvements and have the 99 runing at pretty much peak efficiency that it becomes unsustainable to increase the capacity. For now until rapid transit gets built they should get some competent people to get down and start making the 99 better, tackle the easy problems first and im sure they can make some big differences that not only will cost very little but might save money.

[cornholio]

they tried that before... then pulled the service for unknown reasons (at least for me)

Essentially anything that could be done on the surface of Broadway has been done, except for signal overrides (which would just create a big traffic mess on both Broadway and cross streets) and LRT (which would create an even bigger mess). Rapid Transit is the only way to go now.

I doubt anything much has been done. Most of the decisions i have seen implemented have been not very thought out and have been blanketed across the route. What they need to do is out their money where their mouth is and get down and look at each block one by one first, then start designing a real traffic plan for Broadway that takes everything in to account and then implement it. That means controled intersections, some no right turn signs, no right left signs, tweaked priority lights and turn lights and pedestrian lights, so on and so forth. When all these things are done properly and with the surrounding area and the biger picture in mind im sure they can make Broadway flow better overall for everyone(buses, cars, pedestrians).

[cornholio]

Double articulated buses aren't common and are very expensive and take up a lot of space on the roadway, which is already limited on a route like Broadway. Plus, a specific facility must be built at either the Vancouver or Burnaby Bus Operations Centre to handle these extra long buses. Plus, it isn't a long-term solution: Broadway needs segregated rapid transit.

They would fit on Broadway well, thats not the problem. Storage would be a small issue but you cant tell me that they cant figure out a bandaid solution for their yard to make it all work. Even if they dont they can lease some land in EFC and store them there, they would have enough of them to probably make that a viable solution.

Source WIKIPEDIA

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Gvu_916_tuinen.jpg/800px-Gvu_916_tuinen.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Doppelgelenkbus_02_KMJ.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/Gothenburg-bus-16-by-BIL.jpg/800px-Gothenburg-bus-16-by-BIL.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Doppelgelenkbus_01_KMJ.jpg

[allan_kuan]

Well, a band-aid solution is exactly that.... it's only a temporary fix that will only stall SkyTrain expansion which is needed anyway along the Broadway corridor. I say just build it now, rather than later.

We're not talking just about people on Broadway itself... there's lots of them already... but any system of transit must also consider knock-on effects if the route proves to be more popular and everyone else decides that it's the better alternative. This may seem like asking just for better bus frequencies along the east-west routes to UBC but really, most of the routes should be local and shouldn't be packed to the point that people that wants to travel a few stops to their homes can't get on.

Finally, any bi-articulated bus that gets purchased for use here will have to come directly from Europe (unless you want to wait for New Flyer to develop a design in three years, which is error-prone and still pricey), and they're not priced cheap... add to that customs and duties... and we might as well just extend Millennium Line to Cambie!

[twoNeurons]

What about branding the 84 from VCC as a B-Line. If we can speed up the trip to UBC from that station, would a lot of students going to UBC take that route? Get a high percentage of UBC students off the 99 and onto alternate routes.

That takes the load off the 99.

[deasine]

They would fit on Broadway well, thats not the problem. Storage would be a small issue but you cant tell me that they cant figure out a bandaid solution for their yard to make it all work. Even if they dont they can lease some land in EFC and store them there, they would have enough of them to probably make that a viable solution.

No one is saying they won't fit. With minor modifications to bus stops (including removing of parking spaces), they will fit no problem. But once you factor in traffic with Broadway, it will be a problem. It will only produce more congestion.

Bi-articulated buses are normally used with bus-only lanes.

Like I said, we need to plan for rapid transit on Broadway, but the earliest we can see that of course is 2021 now. So if we are going with interim solutions leading up to rapid transit on Broadway, there are plenty of others that are much cheaper. Moreover, you can then easily redistribute these resources to other areas of Metro Vancouver.


BestBus Alternative: Introduce more bus routes on other corridors. UBC students who generally have to use the 99 B-Line and 84 Bus Routes come from other areas of Vancouver. Introduce more (express?) bus routes to downtown, to Main Street Stn, to other SkyTrain stns, to offload these pasesngers.
More Express Only Peak Hour Bus Routes
UBC-SkyTrain Station Only Buses

What about branding the 84 from VCC as a B-Line. If we can speed up the trip to UBC from that station, would a lot of students going to UBC take that route? Get a high percentage of UBC students off the 99 and onto alternate routes.

That takes the load off the 99.

I was thinking of something similar. The 84 doesn't need the B-Line frequency at night, but I do think the 84 could be operated with articulated buses like the 41. 84s are packed leaving VCC-Clark, where many have to wait at least one bus to get on, and people can't get on at Main Street either.

[allan_kuan]

Is it just me or are a lot of people now just resigned to the fate of having BRT plow our busy streets for many more years to come? (sigh)

(optimism sputters to a stop)

[twoNeurons]

:previous:
Rapid transit doesn't get built overnight. I'm sure even China couldn't finish the Broadway line before 2013.

[deasine]

:previous:
Rapid transit doesn't get built overnight. I'm sure even China couldn't finish the Broadway line before 2013.

Oh you'll be surprised then.

[TransitFreak]

:previous:
Rapid transit doesn't get built overnight. I'm sure even China couldn't finish the Broadway line before 2013.

Construction wise, they could probably get it done in time to open up with the Evergreen line (M-Line to Broadway City Hall at a minimum). It's getting the political resolve and finances in line, and all the necessary red tape within the next year to get going, then max out construction man hours and use two boring machines to get it going. Will that happen? Most likely not, but one can dream though...

[aberdeen5698]

I can tell you that 10% in the real world is no small portion.10% improvement going through the traffic lights does not translate into 10% savings overall. The wait time at stop lights is only a small part of the overall transit time. In terms of the end-to-end time it would probably only translate to 1-2% savings at most, and those kind of savings would be lost in the variability of the travel times themselves due to all the various issues that affect the route.

I actually like the idea of a non-stop route giving 3 classes of service - local, limited stop, and express. The biggest concern that seems to have been raised by the previous attempt at a nonstop service is people getting on the express bus by mistake. That can be pretty much be solved by having a brand new, different stop for the express service so that the only people who would go to it are those who know that it's an express stop.

And without intermediate stops there's no reason why you couldn't run the service on an entirely different route such as 12th or 16th and potentially reap some pretty significant gains.

The disadvantage of a non-stop service is that it would be lower frequency than the existing B-line - that would encourage riders to switch to the regular B-line if it happened to come first, lowering express ridership and making it less viable. I think you can largely deal with that by having the stop well segregated from the regular B-line service, thus making such switches less practical. For example, UBC-bound express buses could perhaps board on 10th Avenue on the south side of the Broadway station. That might make a lot of sense if those buses were routed via 12th Ave.

[cornholio]

No one is saying they won't fit. With minor modifications to bus stops (including removing of parking spaces), they will fit no problem. But once you factor in traffic with Broadway, it will be a problem. It will only produce more congestion.

Bi-articulated buses are normally used with bus-only lanes.

Like I said, we need to plan for rapid transit on Broadway, but the earliest we can see that of course is 2021 now. So if we are going with interim solutions leading up to rapid transit on Broadway, there are plenty of others that are much cheaper. Moreover, you can then easily redistribute these resources to other areas of Metro Vancouver.


BestBus Alternative: Introduce more bus routes on other corridors. UBC students who generally have to use the 99 B-Line and 84 Bus Routes come from other areas of Vancouver. Introduce more (express?) bus routes to downtown, to Main Street Stn, to other SkyTrain stns, to offload these passengers.
More Express Only Peak Hour Bus Routes
UBC-SkyTrain Station Only Buses



I was thinking of something similar. The 84 doesn't need the B-Line frequency at night, but I do think the 84 could be operated with articulated buses like the 41. 84s are packed leaving VCC-Clark, where many have to wait at least one bus to get on, and people can't get on at Main Street either.

I agree with you that Broadway needs rapid transit, but even then it pretty much cant be finished before 2015 at this point and even 2015 is beyond optimistic given the fact that its isnt a political issue right now. So you have another 5 or more years of the B-Line and its likely more.

The bolded parts is completely wrong, I would imagine that very few bi-articulated buses are actually in bus only lanes, and WHY would they be in bus only lanes anyways? There is no issue with driving them in traffic, none, there is no difference between driving a bi-articulated bus and a normal bus or quad articulated bus if you want to go that far. The length of the vehicle has no impact on the ability of the driver to drive it, so long as he can see the rear out his mirror(you would need a bus that is 100`s of meters long to not see the rear and there are truck trains like that)

edit: another important option they should look at is making improvements along 41st street to speed the 43 up. If they can cut about 5-8min of that trip and increase the frequency slightly it will cannibalize even more riders of the 99. Same goes for the 84 which looks to be faster already.

They should also better advertise the other options and that could probably make a big difference and push more people to use the other bus options.

[cabotp]

I agree with you that Broadway needs rapid transit, but even then it pretty much cant be finished before 2015 at this point and even 2015 is beyond optimistic given the fact that its isnt a political issue right now. So you have another 5 or more years of the B-Line and its likely more.

The bolded parts is completely wrong, I would imagine that very few bi-articulated buses are actually in bus only lanes, and WHY would they be in bus only lanes anyways? There is no issue with driving them in traffic, none, there is no difference between driving a bi-articulated bus and a normal bus or quad articulated bus if you want to go that far. The length of the vehicle has no impact on the ability of the driver to drive it, so long as he can see the rear out his mirror(you would need a bus that is 100`s of meters long to not see the rear and there are truck trains like that)

edit: another important option they should look at is making improvements along 41st street to speed the 43 up. If they can cut about 5-8min of that trip and increase the frequency slightly it will cannibalize even more riders of the 99. Same goes for the 84 which looks to be faster already.

They should also better advertise the other options and that could probably make a big difference and push more people to use the other bus options.

The biggest problem I find with 41st is that the 41 comes more often than the 43. As well as the 43 only being run during peak time.

During peak I'd have the 43 come ever 4-5 minutes. With the 41 at peak every 7-10 minutes. During midday maybe have the 43 every 7-10 and late at night ever 15 or so minutes. With the 41 being run a bit slower than that. The only problem is east of Claredon the 43 doesn't stop till near Kingsway. They may want to put a stop at Rupert.

[deasine]

I agree with you that Broadway needs rapid transit, but even then it pretty much cant be finished before 2015 at this point and even 2015 is beyond optimistic given the fact that its isnt a political issue right now. So you have another 5 or more years of the B-Line and its likely more.

The bolded parts is completely wrong, I would imagine that very few bi-articulated buses are actually in bus only lanes, and WHY would they be in bus only lanes anyways? There is no issue with driving them in traffic, none, there is no difference between driving a bi-articulated bus and a normal bus or quad articulated bus if you want to go that far. The length of the vehicle has no impact on the ability of the driver to drive it, so long as he can see the rear out his mirror(you would need a bus that is 100`s of meters long to not see the rear and there are truck trains like that)

Curitiba's BRT "Express" system, which I think has the most bi-articulated buses in the world, has its own ROW. Similarly, Bogota's BRT system also uses bi-articulated buses with its own exclusive lanes. I believe Hamburg's Metrobus 5, which uses bi-articulated buses as well, also has some form of ROW for the busiest portions of the corridor.

No, you don't need to have bus-only lanes for bi-articulated buses, and that's not what I said; I said most bi-articulated bus routes have some sort of ROW. It's not that it's not physically impossible to put bi-articulated buses on Broadway, it's that Broadway doesn't have the room to place more buses and longer buses at this point. This was discussed above already:

Translink has reached the tipping point where adding more buses to Broadway will actually slow traffic and impede progress rather than smooth it. Broadway doesn't have the capacity for more buses at this point.

As you've mentioned, an interim solution is needed, but I don't think that should come in the form of investing into a new fleet of longer buses. You can get more buses for the same amount of cost, and put them on other routes or form new routes to alleviate the 99 B-Line.

East of Cambie, there is no other West-East bus route between Broadway and King Edward. Many coming from those areas connect from a North-South Bus Route onto a 99 B-Line to get to the Broadway Commercial District, West Broadway, and UBC. This, plus passengers connecting from SkyTrain coming from different areas going to the Broadway Commercial District, West Broadway, or UBC, are funneled into the 99 B-Line. So... why not introduce bus routes (local and limited stop) on 12th Avenue to alleviate the passengers on the 99 B-Line. For one, people who need to reach the Broadway Corridor are within two blocks away (even closer if you are reaching City Hall/City Square, VGH, etc.). West of MacDonald, 12th becomes 10th, and the bus route(s) can even operate straight to UBC because passengers can instead use the Broadway Corridor.

What about introducing another bus route from Main Street Stn to the Broadway Corridor (via Main then 12th or Broadway, though Broadway will be slow), then onward to UBC (via 12th/10th or even perhaps via 16th)? Currently, the 99 B-Line collects Expo Line, Millennium Line, and 20 Trolley passengers. If this route is introduced, passengers connecting from the Expo Line going to Broadway Corridor/UBC have another express route choice without more transfers.

What about adding more buses on the 44? It runs at a low 20 minute frequency right now: it can certainly use more buses. Also note, the 44 line up at UBC Loop is quite horrific.

Some other routes farther from Broadway: what about adding another limited stop peak hour bus on King Edward (29th Avenue Stn>29th>King Edward>Dunbar>16th>Wesbrook Mall>UBC Loop, reason why I say 29th instead of Nanaimo is because 29th has room for layover). Taking passengers again from the Expo Line. We could use more buses are the 43. Why not introduce more buses and make it a route that is available off peak-hour (i.e. 84). What about a 57 route (though that's really about alleviating passengers on the 49)?

There are so many possibilities!

[dubsH]

The bolded parts is completely wrong, I would imagine that very few bi-articulated buses are actually in bus only lanes, and WHY would they be in bus only lanes anyways? There is no issue with driving them in traffic, none, there is no difference between driving a bi-articulated bus and a normal bus or quad articulated bus if you want to go that far. The length of the vehicle has no impact on the ability of the driver to drive it, so long as he can see the rear out his mirror(you would need a bus that is 100`s of meters long to not see the rear and there are truck trains like that)

What deasine said makes far more sense with regards to how it will work on Broadway. The reason why it wouldn't work WELL on Broadway is because of its length. Increasing the length means taking up more space on the road, and also requiring longer "platforms"waiting area at each stop, which may not be available for stops that already share stops close together (ie. you would have to move #9/#17 bus stops to fit the new ones). Also, storage and maintenance is not as easy as just expanding the "storage area". If that was the case, adding c-cars on SkyTrain would be a no-brainer. There obviously are technical limitations that prevent just "using band-aid solutions".

The benefits simply do not outweigh the costs.

[cornholio]

Deasine, I can assure you that MOST bi articulated buses DONT run on bus dedicated routes. They are in use all over the world and very few of them are used in ROW BRT systems.

The longest ones are (182feet)25m compared to (60feet)18m and and bit for the 99 buses. 6.8 meters(22feet) along 26 stations over 26km of roadway will not make much of a difference as far as parking spaces go. The blocks are 150m in Vancouver so thats also a non issue, you can fit 6 of these one after another along a whole block(compared to 8 of the current ones).

The current B line buses have a capacity of 120 passengers, generally bi articulated buses have a capacity of 180-200(even more on some).

People who say there is no room for their storage are really grasping at straws and should really drop the argument.

So again if translink wanted they can purchase bi articulated buses and increase the capacity of the 99 by 50% overnight. Infact they can even get trolley ones if they really wanted.

If originally they used Skoda instead of New Flyer they even would have had a facility and company in the region capable of supplying them(and trams for Vancouver), not to mention better and cheaper buses in the first place(yay to likely corruption and no real oversight).

[deasine]

Deasine, I can assure you that MOST bi articulated buses DONT run on bus dedicated routes. They are in use all over the world and very few of them are used in ROW BRT systems.

There aren't many systems in the world with bi-articulated buses. By the way, dedicated ROW does not equate to BRT, it could be a local bus route. I've already listed a few cities already, but here they are again:

The cities with the largest fleet of bi-articulated buses is Curitiba, which has dedicated ROW.
Utrecht: Lines 11 and 12 uses bi-articulated buses, both of which has dedicated ROW in some portions of the route (busiest ones) and bus "queue jumpers"
Hamburg: Metrobus 5 has dedicated ROW in some portions (busy areas). Not sure about E86 route.
Bogota: TransMilenio BRT system. Dedicated ROW.
Aachen: Lines 5 and 45 have parts dedicated ROW (again busy portions)
I've already listed many of the bi-articulated bus networks (at least half?). I could go on.

[CLC]

^ Certainly not a lot of cities run them, particularly for mixed traffic.
For reason unknown to me, none of Chinese cities has permitted use of 25 meters bus for regular operation yet, even though Chinese bus manufacturers have been in the market of making bi-articulated buses for many years

[cornholio]

^ Certainly not a lot of cities run them, particularly for mixed traffic.
For reason unknown to me, none of Chinese cities has permitted use of 25 meters bus for regular operation yet, even though Chinese bus manufacturers have been in the market of making bi-articulated buses for many years

Like I said twice already most cities run them in mixed traffic. Geneva, Zurich, Utrecht, seen some in Prague, Hamburg most are in mixed traffic, same with Achen, Sao Paulo(they just ordered 100 more from Volvo), Mexico city, San Salvador, I beleive Lima has some in mixed traffic, ummm there some in turkey in both BRT and mixed traffic, Bordeaux France had some until recently, Gottenburg has some in mixed traffic some in in their own lanes, theres lots and lots more all over the place though generally in small numbers.

Anyways im done arguing the point.

And both Beijing and Shanghai should be running them now, and if their not then they will be shortly according to what I read, in their ow ROW.

[dleung]

Just an observation... some of the dedicated LRT right-of-ways in Rome are shared by taxi-cabs and buses, lol.

[jsbertram]

Construction wise, they could probably get it done in time to open up with the Evergreen line (M-Line to Broadway City Hall at a minimum). It's getting the political resolve and finances in line, and all the necessary red tape within the next year to get going, then max out construction man hours and use two boring machines to get it going. Will that happen? Most likely not, but one can dream though...

You could double the speed of tunnelling by starting at Arbutus and have two TBMs head east to VCC and two more head west to UBC. The Arbutus construction pit becomes the Arbutus Station when tunnelling is finished (just like how Olympic Station was built).

It still wouldn't be done in time to have Gordo cut the opening day ribbon before the next BC election though.

[racc]

The AMS has a site urging people to take action to support rapid transit to UBC. More at:
http://ubclinenow.com/site/?page_id=6

[Vonny]

Is it just me or are a lot of people now just resigned to the fate of having BRT plow our busy streets for many more years to come? (sigh)

(optimism sputters to a stop)

Not necessarily, but it is still difficult to envision a skytrain extension up to UBC, so even up to Arbutus, you will still have the capacity issue west of arbutus (and probably further exacerbated, by the fact that other currently competitive alternative from Expo line, like 43 will be not really anymore.

On the topic of bi-articulated bus, I have plan to write something on it for my blog,

but here some preliminary bits:

From number I have collected from the lacmta (http://www.metro.net/) which has a fleet including 40", 45", 60" and 65 foot buses, and other correlations, you can deduce that the bus capacity as function of its length is looking like it:

http://voony.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/bus_capacity_length1.png

I have purposely put an index capacity normalized at 1 for the staple 40 foot bus, rather an absolute pax capacity, since you can get great variance for it across agencies:
For example LACMTA estimates capacity of its 65 footer at 100 pax, the constructor, nabi, will come up with number at 71, while in Bratislava, similar bus length will be considered able to carry 200 pax, and bi-articulated bus are more often than not in area having generous standard for bus capacity closer to the one of Bratislava than the one of LA ;)

That said you could question, the form of the curve:
There is lot of "dead" space in a bus, bus driver space, wheel's room...which will impair its capacity as well as the configuration of all of it can make the circulation, hence optimal loading and dwelling time more or less efficient (usually a bus carries less pax per sq meter rear of its rear wheel, rather than front of it, mostly because door access become more complicate (on the topic see http://voony.wordpress.com/2010/02/04/hyvonis-or-the-hydrogen-bus/ )

the articulation area is kind of a dead space of its own too, and it is usually 5 feet long...

(I don't know how to make image same scale), but the pictures below illustrate enough why a 65 foot bus, though only 10% longer than a 60 foot, can carry 20% more passenger (lacmta number)

artic 60 foot
http://www.ltd.org/admin/dynpage/_i3/images/artic.gif?w=100
Nabi 65 foot bus in LA
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2499/4049333724_36c01bc71b_z.jpg
Citaro GL 65 foot bus
http://www.imhd.zoznam.sk/ba/vozidla/nakresy/mercedes_benz_o_530_capacity.png


the additional articulation and wheel room is why a 80 foot bi-articulated bus doesn't provide much more capacity than an 65 foot single articulation...and eventually it is on of the reason why 65 foot seems to become overly popular (i guess it involve lot less maintenance too)...

Another reason from a Vancouver viewpoint, to prefer the 65 foot is that basically the market for 80 foot is nonexistent in NA (so as previously mentioned could require a custom order, or import with all associated risk), what is less the case for 65 foot, which being more versatile could be also deployed on much more route, so a 65 foot procurement could nourish more interest from manufacturer (and from a manufacturer view point, the work is mostly body extension in the case of the Nabi, Citaro has been one step further, but in a more established market).

[cornholio]

^Good post and very informative.
So I guess the question still is WHY the hell has trans link ordered 60 foot Nova buses when they NEED and could use atleast 65 buses on the Broadway line. Or even in my opinion 80 buses, youy might be right that the highest gain in capacity is in the first five feet over 60' but Broadway is at capacity and the options are limited. The easiest way to increase capacity right away by significant amounts is to use larger buses whic hare available.

I just dont understand Translink sometimes, they knew the situation when they put the orders in.

[deasine]

Like I said twice already most cities run them in mixed traffic. Geneva, Zurich, Utrecht, seen some in Prague, Hamburg most are in mixed traffic, same with Achen, Sao Paulo(they just ordered 100 more from Volvo), Mexico city, San Salvador, I beleive Lima has some in mixed traffic, ummm there some in turkey in both BRT and mixed traffic, Bordeaux France had some until recently, Gottenburg has some in mixed traffic some in in their own lanes, theres lots and lots more all over the place though generally in small numbers.

I don't get it, I explicitly point out some of these cities in my post earlier. Yes, there are portions of the bus routes where it does run on mixed traffic, but notice the "busy" portions have dedicated ROW, or feature queue jumpers. Last I remember, the Broadway Corridor is busy from end to end.

Moreover, many of these cities have road systems that are quite different from what we have on Broadway. Many of their blocks are longer, and feature fewer cross streets. Like I've said before, I'm not saying it's not physically impossible to put bi-articulated buses on Broadway. I've been saying it's just not necessarily the best solution; because it's such a congested corridor, having longer buses is just going to take up more road space. There's a reason why some cities choose to purchase double decker buses: they take up less space and move quite a lot of people, even though it's generally "less accessible." Even London's fleet of articulated buses weren't liked by many because they took up too much road space, adding to the congestion of the city. Hong Kong only uses double deckers and regular single decked buses. I can't imagine the public anger would occur if bus companies decided to use articulated buses on streets. You would essentially create a bus parking lot on Hong Kong Island.

Which reminds me, TransLink's representative for the BestBus Alternative in the UBC Broadway Corridor study actually mentioned about using double decker buses for some of the express routes. Articulated buses are great for people travelling in shorter distances because there are more entry and exit points on the bus. Double Deckers are better for routes that cater to passengers travelling at longer distances. In fact, people usually sit at the top deck of a bus because they know they won't be getting off soon. This is why GO TRANSIT decided to invest in a fleet of double deckers for the GO BUS routes.

And when did TransLink buy 60' buses from Nova?

[allan_kuan]

Is he talking about the 60' buses from New Flyer? That's a different company than NovaBus.

As for double-deckers, they've been tried here without too many major issues... although TransLink will still probably have to evaluate the routes so that it doesn't end up in the wrong places.

[Gordon]

The double deckers could be an option but would there be n issue with trolley wire celarance?

[jlousa]

No issue at all, the doubledecker buses aren't really any higher then the standard semi and there is plenty of space under them, what there isn't is space for double decker electrics so they would have to be selfpowered. Besides we have tourist double deckers now driving around w/o issues.

[deasine]

Vancouver Sightline Tours actually operates double decker buses:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2573/3716337298_cb35329ff5.jpg
(DennisTsang (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dennistt/3716337298/) of Flickr, 2009)

[TransitJack]

I like the idea of 4 doors on that 65' bus. That might make getting off a BLINE a little bit easier.

The thing about double-decker buses is they have very narrow stairs going up to the top and might really slow down the loading/unloading process.

[aberdeen5698]

The thing about double-decker buses is they have very narrow stairs going up to the top and might really slow down the loading/unloading process.The other thing about them is that they probably exacerbate the "back of the bus" syndrome wherein you can't get people to move to the back of the bus in order to maximize capacity. A lot of people would avoid moving to the upper deck for fear they wouldn't be able to get off when their stop came. So percentage-wise, I'd imagine that a double-decker bus would never run as close to capacity as an articulated bus, particularly if you allow all-door boarding as on the Broadway B-Line. In fact it would be interesting to compare what typical maximum capacities are achieved with double-decker vs. articulated buses.

Too bad you couldn't make an articulated double-decker - or can you? I assume the relative movement between sections would be excessive on the upper deck when the bus bends in the pitch axis.

[Spork]

Ta da!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Cropped_jumbo.jpg

[aberdeen5698]

Ta da!Interesting - thanks! Looks like a helluva engine compartment on that thing...

[allan_kuan]

From what I've read on that bus, people are only allowed to move between sections through the top floor. =O Therefore it isn't the best solution that exists.

[Vonny]

The other thing about them is that they probably exacerbate the "back of the bus" syndrome wherein you can't get people to move to the back of the bus in order to maximize capacity. A lot of people would avoid moving to the upper deck for fear they wouldn't be able to get off when their stop came.

that is the reason why, if you consider a double decker, you would like consider the design as below

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg/220px-NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg/750px-NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg)

It is a 45 foot Double decker Man lion's city DD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_Lion%27s_City) , 2 staircases, 3 doors.

So percentage-wise, I'd imagine that a double-decker bus would never run as close to capacity as an articulated bus, particularly if you allow all-door boarding as on the Broadway B-Line. In fact it would be interesting to compare what typical maximum capacities are achieved with double-decker vs. articulated buses.

Yes: It is a "phenomenon" of compartmentalization between cabins making the "observed" capacity of the bus (or train) lower than the theoretical one...

That is the main argument why you would like as seamless as possible connection between train (or bus) elements.

[jsbertram]

I like the idea of 4 doors on that 65' bus. That might make getting off a BLINE a little bit easier.

The thing about double-decker buses is they have very narrow stairs going up to the top and might really slow down the loading/unloading process.

Perhaps it should be encouraged that the upper deck be used for people on 'the long haul'. ie: people boarding at Commercial & exiting at UBC.

Anyone boarding at Main to exit at Cambie would be foolish to waste their time going to the upper deck & back down again (and might even miss their stop).

[LeftCoaster]

Perhaps it should be encouraged that the upper deck be used for people on 'the long haul'. ie: people boarding at Commercial & exiting at UBC.

Anyone boarding at Main to exit at Cambie would be foolish to waste their time going to the upper deck & back down again (and might even miss their stop).

You generally dont have to encourage people to do that, they tend to do it naturally. There are plenty of DD busses here in Singapore, and its only natural to go up top only when you are going to be one the bus for a while, otherwise its a hassle. In addition the top is a nicer place for a long ride as there are usually more available seats up there and not as much on and off traffic breezing by you and bumping into you.

[SpikePhanta]

You generally dont have to encourage people to do that, they tend to do it naturally. There are plenty of DD busses here in Singapore, and its only natural to go up top only when you are going to be one the bus for a while, otherwise its a hassle. In addition the top is a nicer place for a long ride as there are usually more available seats up there and not as much on and off traffic breezing by you and bumping into you.

But you know how rare common sense is in Vancouver. Many people don't take their bags off their backs, and many people don't like moving all the way to the back.

[allan_kuan]

Well it takes getting used to... no one on transit has ever been pushed back just to make more space on transit... and even if they do a few people will probably bring up the liability/human rights issues. =O

[aberdeen5698]

"Excuse me" / take a step / "Excuse me" / take a step / "Excuse me" / take a step

...it's always worked for me.

[cabotp]

"Excuse me" / take a step / "Excuse me" / take a step / "Excuse me" / take a step

...it's always worked for me.


After a while excuse me turns into "coming through"

The worst ones are those who have their back towards the front standing with a backpack on. With their legs spread wide and with a set of head phones on. In otherwords they can't see nor hear the fact that I'm right behind them breathing down their neck. In that case I just push them a little to see if they will move. If they don't I then just push them a whole lot more so that they get the message. Basically I always make it through and nothing is going to stop me.

[eduardo88]

that is the reason why, if you consider a double decker, you would like consider the design as below

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg/220px-NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg/750px-NEOMAN_A39_2007-03-15.jpg)

It is a 45 foot Double decker Man lion's city DD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAN_Lion%27s_City) , 2 staircases, 3 doors.



Yes: It is a "phenomenon" of compartmentalization between cabins making the "observed" capacity of the bus (or train) lower than the theoretical one...

That is the main argument why you would like as seamless as possible connection between train (or bus) elements.

I really think those Berlin double deckers could work in vancouver. They have really wide back stairs, and a smaller staircase up front, lots of standing room downstairs and the top is just seating (because the roof is quite low and the aisle isn't wide enough) They're definitely my favorite doubledecker bus i've been on. Loading/offloading isn't really an issue, because people eventually learn to get downstairs BEFORE they're stop and you simply don't put many seats downstairs, forcing people to go upstairs if they want a seat.

[BCPhil]

Double Decker buses would be pretty cool on the proposed Rapid Bus routes from Langley to Lougheed Station. You could get a lot of capacity without going to a wobbly articulated (I've been son some freaky rides out to Horseshoe Bay and Tsawwassen on those things when they get up to speed). And you would get some pretty spectacular views when going over the new Port Mann. Double deckers would probably work well on the 257 and 620 too, then the existing articulated buses on those routes could be used on the Blines.

[Vancity]

^Good post and very informative.
So I guess the question still is WHY the hell has trans link ordered 60 foot Nova buses when they NEED and could use atleast 65 buses on the Broadway line. Or even in my opinion 80 buses, youy might be right that the highest gain in capacity is in the first five feet over 60' but Broadway is at capacity and the options are limited. The easiest way to increase capacity right away by significant amounts is to use larger buses whic hare available.

I just dont understand Translink sometimes, they knew the situation when they put the orders in.

Because the people running Translink are idiots. This city needs better visionary leadership, especially when it comes down to our transit system. The people running this city, is a joke. Nothing ever gets done around here. All talk - and well, unfortunately, that's all there is.

[mooks28]

BC is a place where process really matters. Think of all the major debates we've had locally here. HST is a prime example -- people are MORE angry about the way it was imposed more than the actual tax.

That giant tower in the West End on Bidwell? Not as much fury over them building a tower but about the way it was put through...

Seriously.. I know Peter Ladner would frequently ask in public meetings "if you could set aside the process, what would you want the result to be" and they would answer with things like "a result that reflected a process where everyone was consulted" or some crap. It's really unbelievable...

[nname]

^Good post and very informative.
So I guess the question still is WHY the hell has trans link ordered 60 foot Nova buses when they NEED and could use atleast 65 buses on the Broadway line. Or even in my opinion 80 buses, youy might be right that the highest gain in capacity is in the first five feet over 60' but Broadway is at capacity and the options are limited. The easiest way to increase capacity right away by significant amounts is to use larger buses whic hare available.

I just dont understand Translink sometimes, they knew the situation when they put the orders in.

No one in Canada is making 65 and 80 feet bus, where do they order from? Transit companies in Canada don't buy buses made from US, btw... so at the minimum, they have to be imported from Europe.

And also, the maintenance facilities and bus stops are probably need to be modified and rebuild to fit the extra 5~20 feet in...

[jsbertram]

No one in Canada is making 65 and 80 feet bus, where do they order from? Transit companies in Canada don't buy buses made from US, btw... so at the minimum, they have to be imported from Europe.

And also, the maintenance facilities and bus stops are probably need to be modified and rebuild to fit the extra 5~20 feet in...

However, if Broadway gets a BRT-type of system created as a stop-gap before the SkyTrain UBC line is operating, they could create new bus platforms &tc to accomodate new longer (perhaps double-deck and/or articulated?) buses specifically for this route.

Either Flyer would tool up for a new production run based on a stretch of their current models, or Euro builders would do the same if Translink can't source them from N.A. builders.

[jsbertram]

You generally dont have to encourage people to do that, they tend to do it naturally. There are plenty of DD busses here in Singapore, and its only natural to go up top only when you are going to be one the bus for a while, otherwise its a hassle. In addition the top is a nicer place for a long ride as there are usually more available seats up there and not as much on and off traffic breezing by you and bumping into you.

With the stairs to the upper deck at the back, that will only encourage people to move there (if only to pass through to get upstairs).

Perhaps another 'inducement' would be to make all the lower deck seats side-bench seating so there is more room for standees. Don't want to stand for 45 minutes? Head upstairs & wait for a seat to become available.

[SFUVancouver]

Here's something to consider about the 99 B-Line

It's about 13 or 14 years old. If the UBC Line were to start construction within a year of the completion of the Evergreen line (I know, a big 'if') and it finishes within four years we are looking at basically a 2020 inauguration of service. Realistically we are looking at another nine to ten years of 99 B-Line service before it is replaced, almost its entire life to date over again. Personally I consider the modern 99 B-Line as having started when the U-Pass was introduced.

I think the BRT option for the UBC Line will be built no matter what, just to keep the corridor functional while we build whatever will replace it.

[Metro-One]

Just a quick little video I found from the transit video section of SSP, it shows a rather nasty accident occurring on Phoenix's new LRT. This pretty much sums up one oft he major advantages of skytrain, none of this:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid30311461001?bctid=46364514001

Even a green light does not mean there will not be a lengthy delay... not to mention a very unpleasant transit experience... but at least the window shopping was good, hehe

[BCPhil]

Just a quick little video I found from the transit video section of SSP, it shows a rather nasty accident occurring on Phoenix's new LRT. This pretty much sums up one oft he major advantages of skytrain, none of this:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid30311461001?bctid=46364514001

Even a green light does not mean there will not be a lengthy delay... not to mention a very unpleasant transit experience... but at least the window shopping was good, hehe

That's a bit extreme. The guy did blow through a red light and almost hit a guy crossing the road too. While I don't see a lot of that particular case happening IF LRT were on Broadway, LRT would definitely feel the impacts of other accidents, not just on Broadway, but also on connecting arteries. I think we've all seen the idiots that stop in the intersections at Granville and Broadway on a daily basis.

[CLC]

Just a quick little video I found from the transit video section of SSP, it shows a rather nasty accident occurring on Phoenix's new LRT. This pretty much sums up one oft he major advantages of skytrain, none of this:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid30311461001?bctid=46364514001

Even a green light does not mean there will not be a lengthy delay... not to mention a very unpleasant transit experience... but at least the window shopping was good, hehe
What time/day did this video taken? The light rail seemed to be rather slow on such a light-traffic situation. Should have been faster and gave the stupid red vehicle driver a harder hit:jester:

[cabotp]

Just a quick little video I found from the transit video section of SSP, it shows a rather nasty accident occurring on Phoenix's new LRT. This pretty much sums up one oft he major advantages of skytrain, none of this:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid30311461001?bctid=46364514001

Even a green light does not mean there will not be a lengthy delay... not to mention a very unpleasant transit experience... but at least the window shopping was good, hehe

I'm starting to wonder if the person or people in the truck were trying to commit suicide. There is no indication of the truck even trying to slow down. It is simply drive as fast as they can into the train.

[aberdeen5698]

While I don't see a lot of that particular case happening IF LRT were on Broadway, LRT would definitely feel the impacts of other accidents, not just on Broadway, but also on connecting arteries. I think we've all seen the idiots that stop in the intersections at Granville and Broadway on a daily basis.The important point is that these kinds of accidents demonstrate why surface LRT on Broadway is never going to be allowed to travel at Skytrain speeds - which of course means that Zweisystem's speed claims are bogus.

[trofirhen]

Just a quick little video I found from the transit video section of SSP, it shows a rather nasty accident occurring on Phoenix's new LRT. This pretty much sums up one oft he major advantages of skytrain, none of this:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid30311461001?bctid=46364514001

Even a green light does not mean there will not be a lengthy delay... not to mention a very unpleasant transit experience... but at least the window shopping was good, hehe
:previous:
Aiaiaiaiai !! Stupido Rapido!! (hope nobody was seriously hurt)

[SpongeG]

Rapid transit for UBC has priority over Surrey’s, students and university say

By Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun October 24, 2010 10:04 PM Comments (7)

The push for rapid transit to the University of B.C. is heating up, with the Alma Mater Society urging Metro Vancouver to make the issue an “urgent priority.”

Society president Bijan Ahmadian has sent a letter to the regional district saying rapid transit to UBC should be considered as “equally urgent” as that for south of Fraser communities in Metro Vancouver’s draft regional growth strategy.

The move comes after Metro cited the Evergreen Line, a Surrey SkyTrain extension and the Broadway corridor as the top priorities in its draft plan, bumping the UBC rapid transit line to the bottom.

Metro chief administrative officer Johnny Carline has said Surrey will bear the brunt of the region’s growth in the next 30 years, and more transit is needed to help shape that city’s development.

Only after Surrey gets improved transit should TransLink consider extending rapid transit to UBC, the draft strategy says.

But UBC argues the demand is already there for more transit to and from the university. About 4,000 students are passed up by full 99 B-Line buses every day.

The Alma Mater Society last week launched a campaign to demonstrate support for rapid transit. It said transit use to UBC is expected to grow by 10 per cent each year.

“We are concerned that Metro Vancouver is playing politics on the issue, and that students will suffer as a consequence,” Ahmadian said in the letter. “This is not just a UBC issue. This is your issue too. UBC students, faculty and alumni live throughout Metro Vancouver.”

Nancy Knight, UBC’s associate vice-president, planning, at UBC, agreed the university is a significant employment centre not just for the region but for the province.

The university is proposing to build more affordable student and faculty housing on campus, in hopes of building a more sustainable community where people can live, work and study closer to home.

...

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Rapid+transit+priority+over+Surrey+students+university/3720075/story.html#ixzz13LlpqvFu

[aberdeen5698]

Rapid transit for UBC has priority over Surrey’s, students and university sayI guess there could be a debate about whether it needs to go all the way to UBC, but I certainly agree that the Broadway corridor needs to be the next in line. In fact I think there's a good argument to be made that it should take precedence over the Evergreen line, but I'm afraid that ship has sailed.

When some other region is passing up 4,000 people a day and there's no way to substantially increase the number of buses, then they can "get in line".

[Gordon]

On numbers alone the UBC Line should probably be the next line, but the Evergreen line has become a ploitical necessity for the government & Translink to build.

[usog]

Surrey is prioritized above Broadway because of funding/population growth, as well as the fact that you won't have people threatening to sue if they start building out Skytrain here in my opinon. Combination of logic/hassle I'd say. It's nice that we actually want Skytrain out here in Surrey, that and the utter neglect of attention from Translink for the south-of-fraser needs fixing. That said, I would get behind an expansion to Cambie at the very least to connect it to the Canada line which would help a *lot*. Still, if UBC wants skytrain I say they will have to foot the chunk of the costs for extending it all the way out there.

[Zassk]

Still, if UBC wants skytrain I say they will have to foot the chunk of the costs for extending it all the way out there.

That does seem reasonable, as UBC has a huge endowment to draw upon, which could be put toward paying a portion of the line.

However, it does get potentially risky if we just say that, whatever jurisdiction antes up money gets top priority for a SkyTrain expansion. Municipalities can sell off land and assets or development permits to conjure up cash for such things. If the North Shore districts together pledge $1 billion toward an integrated transit line, then are we obligated to begin the planning process for a line to the North Shore the next day?

At any rate, the current situation with Evergreen vs. Broadway vs. Surrey certainly shows evidence that the provincial government does not share the regional government's priorities. The province wanted Canada Line built, and appears to want Surrey and Central Broadway built next, and the province appears to see Evergreen as a distraction or annoyance to getting these goals met.

[twoNeurons]

Politically, if UBC were to "chip in" or if the gov't were to "chip in" (considering UBC is a provincial institution) it would be a whole lot easier for the region SoF to swallow.

Then again, there's no reason not to pursue both South of Fraser and an extension to UBC, given enough funding.

[TransitJack]

The issue I see is there is a need for a Broadway rapid transit TODAY (and for the last 15 years). I'm all up for planning for the future (cough Surrey), but Broadway meets all density requirements for Skytrain, where as Surrey has many years to go before it begins to come close.

A few months back I rode the line out to Surrey, the first time in many years. I astonished by the lack of density along the route. Sure, there are some high rise towers and Surrey Place Mall has a fancy SFU building, but on the whole the area looks just like every other part of Surrey, strip malls and massive parking lots). What's more surprising is that the existing line has been there since 1994!!

I'm all up for Skytrain to have some sort of rapid transit, but when funding priorities have to be juggled, it makes more sense to fund the area that has the existing density to support such investment versus an area that has essentially neglected density for 17+ years.

Maybe give Surrey there often promised rapid bus and build the demand from that, a la 99 B-line Style. The thought of a Skytrain line through a city peppered with cul-de-sacs and strip malls seems premature.

[golog]

Surrey today needs an upgrade in bus service

Broadway today needs the addition of a grade separated rail transit

Translink, and cities in general, do not have resources to saturate high return investment opportunities since they do not have a monopoly on the benefits. It's arguable they cannot even meet the immediate needs they are called upon for.

We may have the luxury today of overlooking the big present costs of new translink projects for transit, bridges, and highways thanks to obfuscation by PPPs, borrowing in general, and voluntary contributions by other levels of government while they happen to have cash to spare. No one is complaining about increases in property taxes when their gains in property tax outweigh it

It's all made more difficult by the varying political priorities and dealmaking

We need a system that gives priority to the projects that will pay for themselves in the shortest amount of time, and one that will allow local independence in choosing a project while rewarding smart zoning and inter-municipality cooperation. This is hard as many services are not farebox positive, there is not a stable source of funding in proportion to the demands, and it's in the context where the competing parties can dump costs on, while luring revenue sources from, another party.

As it is, everyone is trying to grab all they can because there is virtually no cost when everyone is afraid there will be no money when it is their turn or they actually need it. Hoarding of budgets because the efforts are not aligned with incentives.

Everyone should want a UBC - Broadway line built with top priority, because it would create the most value from which there would be more resources to have both built as fast as possible. It would also free up busses that could immediately transition into a Surrey bus expansion with higher frequency service.

The Translink report to prioritize a Surrey extension is just stupid because it carries the presumption that only one more line after Evergreen could be built by 2040. It's effectively saying they have no plan at all -- they'll just let bridges fall into the water and convert Highway 1 into gravel road. Either it's a way to beg for their budget to be increased, or they've just given up and plan to rollover and die.

We need some adult leadership to resolve the underlying problems, instead of inciting new ones just to make it through the week.

I'll hush up now

[racc]

Rapid transit for UBC has priority over Surrey’s, students and university say

By Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun October 24, 2010 10:04 PM Comments (7)

The push for rapid transit to the University of B.C. is heating up, with the Alma Mater Society urging Metro Vancouver to make the issue an “urgent priority.”

Society president Bijan Ahmadian has sent a letter to the regional district saying rapid transit to UBC should be considered as “equally urgent” as that for south of Fraser communities in Metro Vancouver’s draft regional growth strategy.

The move comes after Metro cited the Evergreen Line, a Surrey SkyTrain extension and the Broadway corridor as the top priorities in its draft plan, bumping the UBC rapid transit line to the bottom.

Metro chief administrative officer Johnny Carline has said Surrey will bear the brunt of the region’s growth in the next 30 years, and more transit is needed to help shape that city’s development.

Only after Surrey gets improved transit should TransLink consider extending rapid transit to UBC, the draft strategy says.

But UBC argues the demand is already there for more transit to and from the university. About 4,000 students are passed up by full 99 B-Line buses every day.

The Alma Mater Society last week launched a campaign to demonstrate support for rapid transit. It said transit use to UBC is expected to grow by 10 per cent each year.

“We are concerned that Metro Vancouver is playing politics on the issue, and that students will suffer as a consequence,” Ahmadian said in the letter. “This is not just a UBC issue. This is your issue too. UBC students, faculty and alumni live throughout Metro Vancouver.”

Nancy Knight, UBC’s associate vice-president, planning, at UBC, agreed the university is a significant employment centre not just for the region but for the province.

The university is proposing to build more affordable student and faculty housing on campus, in hopes of building a more sustainable community where people can live, work and study closer to home.

...

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Rapid+transit+priority+over+Surrey+students+university/3720075/story.html#ixzz13LlpqvFu

Talk about a misleading headline, the article actually states that that UBC and Surrey should be “equally urgent”.

[Whalleyboy]

Surrey today needs an upgrade in bus service

Broadway today needs the addition of a grade separated rail transit

Translink, and cities in general, do not have resources to saturate high return investment opportunities since they do not have a monopoly on the benefits. It's arguable they cannot even meet the immediate needs they are called upon for.

We may have the luxury today of overlooking the big present costs of new translink projects for transit, bridges, and highways thanks to obfuscation by PPPs, borrowing in general, and voluntary contributions by other levels of government while they happen to have cash to spare. No one is complaining about increases in property taxes when their gains in property tax outweigh it

It's all made more difficult by the varying political priorities and dealmaking

We need a system that gives priority to the projects that will pay for themselves in the shortest amount of time, and one that will allow local independence in choosing a project while rewarding smart zoning and inter-municipality cooperation. This is hard as many services are not farebox positive, there is not a stable source of funding in proportion to the demands, and it's in the context where the competing parties can dump costs on, while luring revenue sources from, another party.

As it is, everyone is trying to grab all they can because there is virtually no cost when everyone is afraid there will be no money when it is their turn or they actually need it. Hoarding of budgets because the efforts are not aligned with incentives.

Everyone should want a UBC - Broadway line built with top priority, because it would create the most value from which there would be more resources to have both built as fast as possible. It would also free up busses that could immediately transition into a Surrey bus expansion with higher frequency service.

The Translink report to prioritize a Surrey extension is just stupid because it carries the presumption that only one more line after Evergreen could be built by 2040. It's effectively saying they have no plan at all -- they'll just let bridges fall into the water and convert Highway 1 into gravel road. Either it's a way to beg for their budget to be increased, or they've just given up and plan to rollover and die.

We need some adult leadership to resolve the underlying problems, instead of inciting new ones just to make it through the week.

I'll hush up now

I would actually like to see what projected income of the tickets payed for ubc line vs surrey line. Surrey people who don't have a monthly pass pay about 5$ one way/10$ each way or 151$ for a monthly pass to go all the way out to Vancouver where as UBC students get there discounted pass and this line main income would be through students going to ubc. Not saying that many won't use it to go along the broadway corridor but it would most likely be locals for the most part who would only pay 2.50$ one way/5$ each way