Luxury bus service eyed to get commuters out of their cars - Page 3

Kwik-E-Mart · #41 Posted **Mar 27, 2008, 4:58 AM**

It's better to do it now than never, and I don't need to say all the positives by GO Transit here in Toronto to echo my point out.

This is needed especially since ValleyMAX is going to be integrated into TransLink in the near future.

worldwide · #42 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 7:49 AM**

any word on that... one of the planners at abbotsford told me they were trying to work with translink back in January but i havent heard anything since.

lightrail · #43 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 7:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nutterbug

Artics are more practical for stop-and-go on-and-off hustle-and-bustle traffic, no? I think DD's are better suited for longer runs with relatively few stops.

Doesn't even London have artics now?

One route I would like to see converted to DD is the 257 route in West Van. Some of the best scenery is found on the Upper Levels Highway heading down towards Horseshoe Bay.

The overpass on Marine Drive (the Lions Gate Bridge ramp goes over Marine drive) is too low for double-deckers - the road would need lowering. They had to do this with a railway bridge in Victoria to allow double-deckers to operate on the No. 14.

deasine · #44 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 7:36 PM**

I wished they have made a continuous passage to Highway 1 from Lions Gate Bridge.

ssiguy · #45 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 8:34 PM**

I talked to a really nice guy today at Translink planning and here are some of the things coming onboard.....
1}There will be increased service on the #351 starting either summer or more probably Sept. They recently got new highway buses so he said this is a definate go.
2}The Rapid Bus from WR/SS will be inplace by the time the RAV opens up. It will increase in significantly better service as even with the increased service this year all the buses will get off at Bridgeport and return. They will save the route down Granville but there will be no reduction in WR/SS #351. In otherwords. The trip will only take two thirs the time but will ahve even higher frequency. He said that regular service during the day will be about every 8-9 minutes as opposed to the every thirty minutes now. That does not include rush hour buses like the #352/#354
3}As far as the Rapid Bus, they will be putting in some form of bus-only lanes well before the Oak Street bridge so they can go by the carss and won't get caught in the backups leading to the bridge. He said that is definatly part of the Rapid Bus makeup.
4}Also said that the current express route from Newton Centre to Hwy 99 which takes the Alex Frazer to Granville COULD become a regular service to RAV with HOV lanes on each side of the bridge to avoid getting stuck on/on approach to the Alex Frazer.
5} Even though the stations are small, and he agreed they were way to small but he just said they had a certain amount of money to work with, all three stations downtown are 50 metres to begin with and ALL the stations can be converted to 50 metres. I said that still is not enough for another train but hesaid no. Right now they will be running the 2 car train but the 50metres can accomodate 3 car trains he said due to overhang at each station. I guess its gone from being a micro-micro subway to just a micro. It seemed odd to me and I asked if these would just be small connector cars but he said no. He said they can all accomodate 3 full Rodem cars.
6}He said that there can possibly be more cars arriving before 2020 so that trains could run every 2 minutes. He said that if the Richmond part is significantly busier than the airport section then then could increase frequency to every 2 minutes as I just mentioned but having 3 trains every 6 minutes may result in two heading to Richmond and the other going to YVR.
7} He said that they are expecting an announcement fairly soon from the province as to how exactly the Rapid Bus and new commuter buses would work and tie into the current exopansions for stations etc.

BTW, I am still the ssiguy which referred to SaltSpring Island guy and although I have lived down here for two years I am to damn lazy to change my name.
Another BTW........is there a way to transfer this message onto skyscrapercity with out having to write it all over again. Let me know or if you can do it please do.

ssiguy · #46 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 9:26 PM**

BTW...............The Translink guy also said that by Sept nearly all routes, especially the one's radiating from downtown or on major routes like King George, 99 & 98 BLines will DEFINATLY be running later than they are now. That includes SkyTrain and some bus routes that will run all night.

Am I a wealth of information or what?

Nutterbug · #47 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 10:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

BTW, I am still the ssiguy which referred to SaltSpring Island guy and although I have lived down here for two years I am to damn lazy to change my name.
Another BTW........is there a way to transfer this message onto skyscrapercity with out having to write it all over again. Let me know or if you can do it please do.

Cut-and-paste?

SFUVancouver · #48 Posted **Apr 1, 2008, 11:54 PM**

Thanks for the updates!

Three-car Rotem trains feel like an okay compromise but we shouldn't hold our breath for them to arrive any time soon. It is also gratifying that someone from Translink is candid about the short stations.

I'm happy to hear that the frequency for highway buses will be significantly improved. Translink has put up an update of their spring schedule. LINK

The_Henry_Man · #49 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 12:02 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

5} Even though the stations are small, and he agreed they were way to small but he just said they had a certain amount of money to work with, all three stations downtown are 50 metres to begin with and ALL the stations can be converted to 50 metres. I said that still is not enough for another train but hesaid no. Right now they will be running the 2 car train but the 50metres can accomodate 3 car trains he said due to overhang at each station. I guess its gone from being a micro-micro subway to just a micro. It seemed odd to me and I asked if these would just be small connector cars but he said no. He said they can all accomodate 3 full Rodem cars.

What does he mean "overhang at each station"?

SFUVancouver · #50 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 12:16 AM**

^ Let me try...

_________STATION_________|
[][doors][][][doors][][][doors][][])

Basically the last set of doors at each end of the train would open to the platform like normal but the physical end of the body of the train would be outside the train platform. This is fine because you can only board the train through the doors. So who cares, really, if the end of the train is outside the limits of the platform. Its like an elevator cabin being bigger than its doors.

(Just look at all the area between the doors and the physical front of the train)

LINK

mr.x · #51 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 1:02 AM**

lol, didn't I already tell you that the suburban routes, particular to White Rock, would improve drastically as a result of terminating at Bridgeport instead of downtown? On top of additional buses, the shorter trip to terminate at Bridgeport instead means buses can run at a higher frequency and would be much more reliable. The downtown section is a huge bottleneck for buses, and is often why routes like the 98 are never on schedule.

But noooo....you refused to hear any of it.:ohno:

Great news on the three-car trains and the future additional cars! But considering that platforms are 50-metres long and three-car trains are 61/62-metres long, wouldn't that mean some of the doors would be outside of the platform?

Also, good to hear about all three downtown stations being 50-metre platforms. Before, it was only City Centre and Waterfront. Do you know the length of Broadway-City Hall, Oakridge, and especially Bridgeport?

With regards to those short platforms, didn't I tell all of you it wouldn't be sufficient? I was basically the guy on the Titanic that was firing rockets into the air.

worldwide · #52 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 5:58 AM**

can you elaborate about the busses running later? this sounds great

ssiguy · #53 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 6:13 AM**

It does seem kind of odd to me. I mean the stations will only be 50 metres but three Rodems are 61 metres. Its going to have to one hell of a hangover.........5 metres on each end. I don't see how that is possible. There doesn't look like there is enough space between the doors and the fronto f the trains but I was pretty specific and he said they can definatly accomodate 3 Rodems so I will take him on his word.
He completly agreed the stations were to small but they were given just so much money and it had to be able to carry 15,000 passengers per hour per hour.
As far as the extended bus & SkyTrain hours he wasn't sure but he said that it is going to happen probably by Sept. He strongly said that that was a definate go.

As far as my long note....what the hell is cut and paste? Was that a joke or am I a even bigger computer moron than I thought.

mr.x · #54 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 6:23 AM**

^ i believe other forumers mentioned about a possible hangover, however, it would probably mean the last doors on each end of the train would be inaccessible. They do it in other metros as well, when desperate for capacity.

If there will be a future 3-car train, the third car should be entirely a side seating arrangement rather than a row seating arrangement. Afterall, we are desperate for capacity and more standing capacity means more overall capacity.

It all comes down to a provincial government being cheap. Historically, the province has completely funded the construction of transit lines until the Gordon Campbell Liberals came around. The $400-million provincial contribution is miniscule compared to past contributions, and the treasury was capable of dishing out a lot more for the line....but the Liberals had other priorities and different policies towards this.

They've been so caught up with keeping things under budget and with making it a P3 they forgot about the potential consequences.

btw, i copy & pasted your post to SSC.

And it's Rotem, not Rodem. The contract with SNC-Lavalin/InTransitBC was to build a line with a max. design capacity of 15,000 passengers per hour per direction.

jlousa · #55 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 4:26 PM**

The 3rd car would obviously will be a C-car as it'll need to be open on both sides, no reason that C car needs to be the same length as the a-b cars. The talk has been of a 10M car but I'm sure a 14M car could still work, looking at the A-B cars there is quite a bit of room for overhang. We can order the C cars to whatever length they want, so I figure a 14-16M car would work nicely.

deasine · #56 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 5:20 PM**

I will be strongly against having a full third car if it removes the first/last doors of the train. That's just stupid.

Changing seating configurations of the Canada Line, adding a maximum length C car that does not remove the first/last doors, and having a much higher frequency would be smarter.

Anyway, funny how Global's report said the trains cannot be longer in the future.

jlousa · #57 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 6:19 PM**

I've noticed a lot of problems with Global in the last few months, it's pretty sad. I've been a Global news watcher for a good 15-20yrs and I'm finding myself unable to watch it anymore. Think I'll have to give CTV a try.

eduardo88 · #58 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 6:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

As far as my long note....what the hell is cut and paste? Was that a joke or am I a even bigger computer moron than I thought.

uhhhhhhh....

deasine · #59 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 6:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlousa

I've noticed a lot of problems with Global in the last few months, it's pretty sad. I've been a Global news watcher for a good 15-20yrs and I'm finding myself unable to watch it anymore. Think I'll have to give CTV a try.

I know I'm starting to look at other news especially at 6 'oclock. Global will still be my number one "source for tv news" but I'm giving others a try too.
Morning: Global/Canada AM
Noon: Me don't watch but if I do, I can only watch Global
Night: Global/CBC/CTV
Late Night: Global

mr.x · #60 Posted **Apr 2, 2008, 10:38 PM**

I don't even watch the news anymore, both CTV and Global. Global is more and more sensationalist with all of its spin, and CTV [and even CBC] is starting to follow their lead. I mean, CTV's recent report of how the Canada Line fare gates will be "late" was just poor reporting.

The only watching I will be doing is through the internet, through selected clips I'm interested in watching.