Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Vonny]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

This, and this. Half the ridership, half the distance and (roughly) just as many buses means that crowding won't be a problem. The real problem is what happens when all those 99 buses reach Arbutus and have to turn back around; no through roads up ahead for them to loop around, nor any good spot for a bus loop near Arbutus that won't cause serious congestion problems.

The only solution I can think of is to NOT terminate at Arbutus - keep going down Broadway, turn left on Burrard, and continue to the 44 terminus downtown (the 44 can go to VCC-Clark instead).

yes, the future bus route integration could look like below
(44 rerouted via Broadway, giving also direct access from the west end/East-kits to the broadway subway, and 84 rerouted toward Main instead of VCC):



so all the people coming from the Expo, Canada lines will have a direct bus connection to UBC...The (99/44) will keep more attractive only for people already on the M line

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

Yew is also currently a right-in/right out; that would need to be changed. 1 side of parking would need to be made a NS Anytime, at the minimum. there is no left-turn-lane on Broadway and no way to put one in. that means traffic would be impacted a lot considering a bus would be turning every ~3mins; they would bunch up due to on coming traffic being busy. it would need to become fully actuated with a dedicated left-turn-signal that can detect a bus and not a car which is more complicated; there are only 2 true bus actuated lights in the CoV. 3, if you consider a standard signal in a bus-only area.

Plus both 8th and Yew are too narrow for artics without getting rid of the parking lanes.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Some of those conditions sound to present some fairly significant issues. I thought the school was between Broadway and W10th, not Broadway and W8th. I think the parking and NIMBY issues will be a problem wherever the loop gets created. I guess turning left on Arbutus and round via 8th and Maple is easier, although obviously the residents of Maple wouldn't be happy.

I can't see Translink seriously running buses all the way Downtown just because turning them inconveniences a block of residents, but I guess we'll see how it's dealt with. Obviously there's some sort of solution already designed, and the City's website refers to rapid bus from Arbutus to UBC, although obviously that might not be where the bus route ends (although that's how it reads).

Nope, because 8th & Maple's got a roundabout that artics are going to have a hard time negotiating. There's a certain dramatic irony to the City spending year after year trying to get vehicles to not cut through the neighbourhood and not detour off the artery, then finding out that they need a block that allows vehicles to detour off the artery and cut through the neighbourhood.

It's about providing bus service on Burrard too; right now, there's a bit of a gap between 4th and Broadway that could be closed.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vonny

yes, the future bus route integration could look like below
(44 rerouted via Broadway, giving also direct access from the west end/East-kits to the broadway subway, and 84 rerouted toward Main instead of VCC):

Agreed... but wouldn't they just cancel the 44 and reroute the 99? AFAIK, the routes are named after the streets; the 44 runs down West 4th, and the 99 runs down West 9th Broadway.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Colin4567

I remember TransLink talking of turning all B-Lines into BRT-style routes but I didn't know there was already a plan for this for the remainder of the 99.
Can you provide a link to the documents?
.

On the Translink website there's greater clarity. "B-Line bus service from Arbutus Street west to UBC"

So the same as today - except presumably running more frequently. There's no suggestion of making it BRT - unless they do that

[Changing City]

Here's the presentation summary from last year.

"Arbutus Station will be the terminus station for this phase of the Broadway Extension. Passengers at this station will transfer between the Millennium Line and the B-Line bus service operating between Arbutus and UBC. While we expect a similar number of 99 B-Line buses to serve the Arbutus area in the future compared to today (approximately 20 per hour), we anticipate shorter queues compared to Commercial–Broadway Station.

Detailed decisions about the design and construction of the Broadway Extension have not been made. However, construction impacts are anticipated to be greater at Arbutus than most stations. Special consideration must be given to the design of the bus exchange and integration with the Arbutus Greenway.

Design Considerations
• Bus storage and turnarounds are anticipated to be located on station property.
• The design will consider: How the bus exchange space could be used in the future when rapid transit to UBC is complete and the bus exchange is no longer needed."

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

my understanding was the TransLink owns/will own where the Rogers/Fido store is; the block from 8th-Broadway and Arbutus-Greenway. i would also make the Dulux Paint store the station house, which is just East of the Arbutus Greenway. i think it would work decently although it would require purchasing a large chunk of land, so probably wouldn't happen

if they do that, buses could turn left onto Arbutus and then there could be a large entrance to the bus station to allow buses to turn right into the property and you could build "lanes" with "platforms" allowing the buses to line up and having people board.

the 1 block of parking on Arbutus could be removed because it would have a very very minimal impact. the new signal on Broadway and the Greenway would be timed with the Arbutus signal and the bus signal so buses get a green to fill-in the space when Arbutus and the Greenway are red on Broadway. (the E/W directions could be timed differently so WB traffic clears the gap by turning red before Arbutus, and EB could turn red slightly after Arbutus does; but it would shorten the time the Greenway is green, so probably wouldn't happen).

then, once the bus station isn't needed anymore, the bus station could be turned into a park on Arbutus Greenway with one-day connecting to Delamont Park with the Montessori Day Care disappearing.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

It still amazes me that the Gondola to SFU hasn't been built already.

Everything seems so logical (cost, benefit, scale) for it to just move forward on a whim.

The gondola to SFU will not get built until Derek Corrigan is no longer mayor of Burnaby. That sole thing is the only realistic reason it hasn't been built.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

my understanding was the TransLink owns/will own where the Rogers/Fido store is; the block from 8th-Broadway and Arbutus-Greenway. i would also make the Dulux Paint store the station house, which is just East of the Arbutus Greenway. i think it would work decently although it would require purchasing a large chunk of land, so probably wouldn't happen

if they do that, buses could turn left onto Arbutus and then there could be a large entrance to the bus station to allow buses to turn right into the property and you could build "lanes" with "platforms" allowing the buses to line up and having people board.

the 1 block of parking on Arbutus could be removed because it would have a very very minimal impact. the new signal on Broadway and the Greenway would be timed with the Arbutus signal and the bus signal so buses get a green to fill-in the space when Arbutus and the Greenway are red on Broadway. (the E/W directions could be timed differently so WB traffic clears the gap by turning red before Arbutus, and EB could turn red slightly after Arbutus does; but it would shorten the time the Greenway is green, so probably wouldn't happen).

Sounds good. The eastbound side's going to need a really long left-turn lane, though.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Drivers can and do close doors on crowds all the time, but when people wanna hold the door they will even if theres another train. Small incidents like that can and will throw too tight of a headway out of wack.

When exactly that happens on the SkyTrain right now, the delay is less than five seconds; even with 75s headways, there's still at least 40 seconds until the next train.

And once again, many stations have attendants that manage on-off crowds. All they'll be doing is saying "this train's full, get the next one" every minute instead of every couple of minutes.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Drivers can and do close doors on crowds all the time, but when people wanna hold the door they will even if theres another train. Small incidents like that can and will throw too tight of a headway out of wack.

That's what ATC and ATO are for. Train speed is automatically adjusted on the fly to maintains trains within the tolerance of their timetable.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The gondola to SFU will not get built until Derek Corrigan is no longer mayor of Burnaby. That sole thing is the only realistic reason it hasn't been built.

Too bad the guy seems to be mayor for life.

I remember attending SFU with the hopes that I would be riding the gondola in my final year... I graduated 5 years ago this spring, haha!

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

That's what ATC and ATO are for. Train speed is automatically adjusted on the fly to maintains trains within the tolerance of their timetable.

That works fine until you get to the point where an unexpected delay at the platform impacts the arrival of the following train, because it can all too easily cascade into a domino effect that affects train after train. That's especially problematic in the areas where there isn't a lot of distance between stations.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

That works fine until you get to the point where an unexpected delay at the platform impacts the arrival of the following train, because it can all too easily cascade into a domino effect that affects train after train. That's especially problematic in the areas where there isn't a lot of distance between stations.

As in medical emergencies and track intrusions? Because in those cases, the line's probably going to shut down no matter what. People keeping the door open while they squeeze through (as in the OP) aren't going to be much of a problem for ATC/ATO.

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by dpogue

Skimming over the presentation from the Mayor's Council meeting, and it has some info about the number of trains being ordered:

• 56 Mark III cars ordered as part of Phase 1
• 108 Mark III cars to be ordered as part of Phase 2 (including Broadway extension)

It also has some rather dire warnings about the remaining 15% of the funding required for Phase 2.

Looking over the attachment to the Mark III SkyTrain Vehicles Fleet Factory Inspection RFP and there are some more detailed dates for the next batch of 28 cars (these were the ones ordered as the option on the Evergreen extension). 4 cars (1 train) arriving each month from January 2019 to July 2019.

Let's hope that the 3rd set of 28 cars will arrive shortly after, although it's technically a separate order, but they should be identical so it makes sense to build them all in the same factory batch. That would bring us to the 56 cars from the Phase I plan, plus the existing 28 cars from the Evergreen extension.

To recap:

• 2016: 28 cars (Evergreen extension)
• 2019: 28 cars (Phase I, Evergreen option)
• 2020? 28 cars (Phase I)
• 2021+ 44 cars (Phase II)
• 2021+ 64 cars (Phase II, Broadway extension?)

[WarrenC12]

Thanks, good info. Only the first 28 in 2019 have been actually purchased, correct?

Is the retirement schedule for the Mark Is still up in the air? Did they all get refurbished?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

As in medical emergencies and track intrusions? Because in those cases, the line's probably going to shut down no matter what. People keeping the door open while they squeeze through (as in the OP) aren't going to be much of a problem for ATC/ATO.

It doesn't have to be a substantial outage to affect closely running trains.

For example, if you increase frequencies down to the point where there's only a ten-second margin for the following train, then a 10 second delay (not all that uncommon with people preventing the doors from closing) will force that following train to unnecessarily slow down and perhaps stop. That puts it behind schedule, which means there's less of a margin for the next train behind it, increasing the probability that the problem will be repeated and amplified for all the subsequent trains.

People forget that trains on a 75-second schedule don't have a 75 second margin. Due to deceleration, dwell and acceleration times the margin between trains at 75 second intervals is probably only 15 or 20 seconds. An arriving train can't enter the station with its normal deceleration profile when the preceding train is acceleration from a stop out of the station.

It's essentially the same problem as high frequency buses bunching up.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]