Quote:
Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue
oh crap...
|
The residents around Richmond Brighouse are very NIMBY, the City of Richmond is happy to oblige and this has been a constant thorn in the side for TL/CMBC. Many of the bus bays at Brighouse were actually located at Saba when the Canada Line opened; their opposition in 2010 was the reason some of the buses were moved to far-away bus bays on No. 3 Road and Cook Road.
In 2018 they raised ire again when the 410 and 401 were split and the 406 and 408 directed to terminate/layover on Saba Road. The significant noise improvements of Richmond's bus fleet (with the majority of buses at the time being brand new New Flyer XD40s) did not sway residents, who complained and forced CMBC to move the termini/layover of those routes several blocks north to Ackroyd Road. (Though these routes have since been moved into the new bus loop).
(the above chronicled in the following Richmond Council document:
https://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/TransitCirculation_Brighouse_PWT_03201953094.pdf)
--------
The bus loop itself was historically planned and even termed as a "bus mall" due to the assumption that there would be an access point for buses on both sides. Sometime during the process, the City of Richmond decided to side with any number of concerned residents and mandated the loop design with no bus access from the east side (Buswell Street), presumably to prevent any likelihood of buses laying over on Buswell Street.
Although I am unfortunately unable to track down the specific minutes and documents, there are some references to the decisions in this report on development permits dated July 11, 2019:
https://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/DP_Chairs_Buswell_CNCL_07221954224.pdf
This document and the previous one also make it clear that the operation plan of the bus loop is to accommodate only the six routes that have been moved there now (402, 404, 406, 408, 414, N10). One of the factors to TransLink having not moved more routes into the loop is actually that idling in the bus loop is not allowed. This is a rule that was likely among the requirements imposed by Richmond City Council after resident complaints. Meaning only terminating routes in the loop, and no through routes (like 403, 407, etc).
But ultimately, the biggest limitation is the loop design and lack of east-side access from Buswell Street. The need to accommodate five bus layover bays (for five daytime bus routes and one Night Bus) within the loop means that the remaining space allows for only two bus loading bays and two bus unloading bays.
Quote:
At the Panel meeting held on June 26, 2019, Architects ... provided a brief presentation, noting that:- Access to the Bus Mall loop is provided from No. 3 Road.
- The Bus Mall includes two bus loading bays on the north side, two unloading bays on the south side, five bus layover bays, a Handy Dart bay and three parking stalls for temporary parking of maintenance vehicles.
- A secondary public pedestrian and emergency vehicle access route are provided from the eastern end of the Bus Mall to Buswell Street secured with a statutory Right-of-Way.
|
The City of Richmond also appears to be interested in approving one change that will prevent buses from ever having that east side access, because residents nearby are concerned about - you guessed it - the glare from bus headlights.
Quote:
- A 12 ft. high acoustic wall along the eastern end of the Bus Mall is proposed to mitigate noise and block headlight glare from the Bus Mall to the townhouses in the Emporio building to the north. There is a row of trees planted in front of the acoustic wall.
|
The fact that the 401, 410 and 416 are not moving in the loop tells me that the loop is definitely at capacity and cannot add further routes.
This also means that the future Richmond to Expo Line RapidBus route will be boarding on No. 3 Road instead of utilizing the new bus loop.
Prev
We have an anti-transit city council, and people are too accustomed to radial (as opposed to gridlike) service.
Good work!
Linear Mode
