Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[MIPS]

FOIA's exist for this reason.


So minor incidents can't be publically reported on and things we are aware of can be hidden under a veil of secrecy and absolute-minimum BS press releases.
Even in small town BC, getting information out of the RCMP detachment is an absolute pain. They don't like people asking questions.
I mean, I've heard that there are still ways to eavesdrop on the RCMP's network (see the tow truck crackdown in Toronto earlier this year) but they've made the whole ability extremely illegal.

Edited: I'm implying that screening, preparing and delivering press releases for everything is lame and they just don't want to deal with the crap, so hey, encryption! Not that transit police have anything malicious to hide.

[cganuelas1995]

So what's the deal with transit capacity at the moment?

[vitmark]

Why are so many buses going intentionally slow now? Even if they are late, some drivers intentionally roll to a green light hoping it turns yellow. Fuck this shit.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by vitmark

Why are so many buses going intentionally slow now? Even if they are late, some drivers intentionally roll to a green light hoping it turns yellow. Fuck this shit.

I'm not in a rush to have the transit drivers race into intersections given that there are so many unskilled or inattentive car drivers on the roads. I still recall being a passenger on a bus approaching the intersection at a normal speed. The instant the light changed to yellow, a Civic that was just at the line jammed on their brakes, oblivious to the bus behind them. Fortunately, the bus driver was both attentive and skilled, dropping speed rapidly, but we still struck the back of the Civic with a fair bit of force.

[Vantage]

Originally Posted by vitmark

Why are so many buses going intentionally slow now? Even if they are late, some drivers intentionally roll to a green light hoping it turns yellow. Fuck this shit.

Could be a trolley, they have to slow down to switch cables.

[mcminsen]

Originally Posted by vitmark

Why are so many buses going intentionally slow now? Even if they are late, some drivers intentionally roll to a green light hoping it turns yellow. Fuck this shit.

I've noticed that also, especially along Broadway. I would guess that they are trying to stay on schedule.

Before the pandemic most buses that were off schedule were probably behind because things were so busy. Now, they probably can get ahead too easily.

[fredinno]

Surprised no one has posted this yet.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-bus-priority-measures-bus-lanes?auto=true

Given the scenario presented, the Mayors’ Council unanimously approved the recommendation directing TransLink staff to quickly develop a report on bus corridors that can see the rapid implementation of bus-priority measures, such as low-cost bus-only lanes with new signage and paint.

Other measures could include turning restrictions so that buses are not held up at intersections, and the installation of bus bulges on the curbside parking lane so that buses can stay on the travel lane without having to pull in and out.

The public transit authority may also consider reducing the number of bus stops, specifically where stops are spaced too close together, which slows down a bus.

“The ideal is to find the right balance between not having buses too far apart but not close together either,” said Ross. “We have done an assessment and we do know that we have many corridors where bus stops are too close together. We have to consider the accessibility for bus stops for seniors and people with disabilities. We know in some cases we have bus stops on both sides of the intersection.”

However, none of this is new to the Mayors’ Council. In October 2019, TransLink staff presented a report to the Mayors’ Council that stated 80% of the region’s bus routes are experiencing greater delays due to a lack of bus-priority measures and increased traffic congestion. These buses are traveling slower, compared to five years prior.

The report highlighted 20 of the most problematic bus corridors for delays, although a number of these corridors have since been improved by the new bus-priority measures of the recently launched RapidBus services.

Last fall’s report found that slowing bus service has increased TransLink’s operating costs by $75 million annually — equivalent to about 700,000 annual bus service hours or 12% of the annual operating costs of the bus fleet.

Big positive news, and it's something I've advocated for.

Unfortunately, it seems a lot of the people in the comments are pissed since it may take up travel lanes.
I doubt that (in most cases), but we'd have to look at the specifics.

The other issue is that this would effectively add B-Line service to a lot of the higher-demand bus routes. The next step would clearly to make existing B-Lines into BRT where possible, though that would cost a lot more money.

Or maybe they just turn more routes to B-Lines. That seems less likely, though. :/

[kaitoe]

Not sure if this has been posted yet but trolley buses are finally being used for the 41 route — I had only seen them tested along 41st prior to this weekend.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Surprised no one has posted this yet.

Big positive news, and it's something I've advocated for.

Unfortunately, it seems a lot of the people in the comments are pissed since it may take up travel lanes.
I doubt that (in most cases), but we'd have to look at the specifics.

The other issue is that this would effectively add B-Line service to a lot of the higher-demand bus routes. The next step would clearly to make existing B-Lines into BRT where possible, though that would cost a lot more money.

Or maybe they just turn more routes to B-Lines. That seems less likely, though. :/

Ooh car drivers are angry some of their lanes will be taken away for other uses - I'm soo shocked!

There's nothing to say this will turn more local routes into B-Line / RapidBus routes. What will happen is buses won't need to keep driving into / out of the parking lane to access bus stops. I can remember when they made it law and started fining drivers for not letting the bus back out into traffic. Somehow that didn't lead to carmageddon and this won't either.

I find it sadly amusing that they're still talking about removing bus stops in areas where they're close together. I can't remember how many years it's been (other than a lot of them) and I'm not sure anything has been done about it.

[ilikeredheads]

Some of these corridors are not wide enough for a bus lane.

49th ave, main, hastings: you'd have to remove parking which the NIMBYs will oppose.
No3 road: you'd have to remove that bike lane (which shouldn't exist there in the first place). Another problem is that there are too many entrance/exits to local businesses, so a bus lane won't be effective.
104ave: again, not wide enough. Reducing to one lane each direction is not going to fly.

broadway: should've removed parking for bus lanes but they'll be pointless when skytrain opens.

I thought the reason why some bus stops are close together is because the city requested them. I mean, it makes zero sense why there's a bus stop on both sides of the intersection.

[logan5]

How about cut and cover bus tunnels? Battery powered buses won't require ventilation, so the tunnel would be fairly basic. You would have operational speeds on par with Skytrain, given equal station spacing. 41st would be the next logical step in the rapid transit ladder for Vancouver.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Because buses and trains are relatively cheap - it's the tunnels, simple or not, that climb into the multi-billions. So if we're going to dig a tunnel, we might as well get the SkyTrain to go with it.

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

I thought the reason why some bus stops are close together is because the city requested them. I mean, it makes zero sense why there's a bus stop on both sides of the intersection.

99.9% sure that many of those are people who complained to the City who complained to TransLink that they needed a stop right outside their homes/businesses.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Because buses and trains are relatively cheap - it's the tunnels, simple or not, that climb into the multi-billions. So if we're going to dig a tunnel, we might as well get the SkyTrain to go with it.

The bored section of the Canada Line with just the raw tunnel with liner and unfinished station boxes cost 55 million per km. When you added rails, electrical, and trainsets, the cost was more than double that.

If you use existing b line buses and do cut and cover to save even more money, there would be considerable savings over building rrt. Technology will allow brt to match train capacity as well, so really, rrt is not needed at this point, and is actually a big waste of money.

Also, when the buses are moving twice as fast in a dedicated busway, you need only half the amount of buses to achieve the same capacity.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by logan5

The bored section of the Canada Line with just the raw tunnel with liner and unfinished station boxes cost 55 million per km. When you added rails, electrical, and trainsets, the cost was more than double that.

If you use existing b line buses and do cut and cover to save even more money, there would be considerable savings over building rrt. Technology will allow brt to match train capacity as well, so really, rrt is not needed at this point, and is actually a big waste of money.

Seattle's bus tunnel plan cost $250 million/km. In the 80s. In USD. And more vehicles = more maintenance and breakdowns, which brings you back to square one.... especially because trains are already slightly cheaper than buses in long-term operations costs.

This is like the light rail argument: spin it whichever way one wants using this big shiny technology or that one, it's still a third-world knockoff of the real thing. There's a reason why every BRT eventually becomes an RRT.

Originally Posted by logan5

Also, when the buses are moving twice as fast in a dedicated busway, you need only half the amount of buses to achieve the same capacity.

Capacity is size x frequency, not speed.

[Tvisforme]

Could the tunnels be built to eventually form a SkyTrain line, but be used at first for BRT? I wonder if there could be some benefit to that, especially if the initial tunnels are just built in high-traffic areas where the bus fleet would most benefit from it? For example, a tunnel on 41st from Granville to Cambie.

[Migrant_Coconut]

We could, but like I said, the tunnel is the hard/expensive part, and the train and tracks are (usually) the cheap/easy part. It'd be like buying a Cessna engine and then using it as a leafblower.

In the case of the R4 on 41st, if the Granville-Cambie stretch (I'd add Arbutus and Main for good measure) ends up with slow-enough speeds or high-enough demand to warrant the cost of a tunnel, it probably also needs something heavier than a BRT. Semi-tunnelled tram, SkyTrain, we can wait for TransLink to do the study in 2050 and then fight over it there.

[s211]

I finally had the opportunity to ride one of the double-decker buses. Interesting soft suspension on those things. They practically porpoise down the highway, bouncing like a sine wave down the road. It was a very strange sensation.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

99.9% sure that many of those are people who complained to the City who complained to TransLink that they needed a stop right outside their homes/businesses.

TransLink doesn't have a mandate to appease local residents, it has a mandate to improve the transportation network. So why?

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

Some of these corridors are not wide enough for a bus lane.

49th ave, main, hastings: you'd have to remove parking which the NIMBYs will oppose.
No3 road: you'd have to remove that bike lane (which shouldn't exist there in the first place). Another problem is that there are too many entrance/exits to local businesses, so a bus lane won't be effective.
104ave: again, not wide enough. Reducing to one lane each direction is not going to fly.

broadway: should've removed parking for bus lanes but they'll be pointless when skytrain opens.

I thought the reason why some bus stops are close together is because the city requested them. I mean, it makes zero sense why there's a bus stop on both sides of the intersection.

Sure, all of those are viable (minus 104). There's NIMBY problems, but there's NIMBY problems for Skytrain too.

Originally Posted by Sheba

Ooh car drivers are angry some of their lanes will be taken away for other uses - I'm soo shocked!

There's nothing to say this will turn more local routes into B-Line / RapidBus routes. What will happen is buses won't need to keep driving into / out of the parking lane to access bus stops. I can remember when they made it law and started fining drivers for not letting the bus back out into traffic. Somehow that didn't lead to carmageddon and this won't either.

I find it sadly amusing that they're still talking about removing bus stops in areas where they're close together. I can't remember how many years it's been (other than a lot of them) and I'm not sure anything has been done about it.

Thing is that transit priority is B-Line. So if Local Buses get improvements to turn into effective B-Lines...

Given the scenario presented, the Mayors’ Council unanimously approved the recommendation directing TransLink staff to quickly develop a report on bus corridors that can see the rapid implementation of bus-priority measures, such as low-cost bus-only lanes with new signage and paint.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

TransLink doesn't have a mandate to appease local residents, it has a mandate to improve the transportation network. So why?

TransLink answers to city councils, and city councils answer to whoever shouts the loudest.

For example, why in the name of Cthulhu would the former 49 route have detoured to a strip mall on 49th and Kerr? I highly doubt it was their idea.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Without needing to do any extensive and heavy construction on the LGB, how could they improve congestion in said section?