The article is too long to be published anywhere else, so I decided to put it on my blog exclusively.
For a TL;DR version, see here.
On
May 23rd, TransLink releases Phase II of the Southwest Area Transit
Plan, which includes proposals and consultation of transit service changes in
Richmond and South Delta for the next decade and more. From the author’s
perspective, there are some very positive changes, such as increasing the
frequency on various bus routes, and introducing better transit options to
Tsawwassen and some newly developed areas. On the other hand, there are also
quite a few controversial proposals, one of which involves cancelling the #480
bus, which runs between Bridgeport Station at Richmond and UBC.
#480:
A Richmond Service that has most stops in Vancouver
The
author is certain that many UBC commuters knows #480 bus pretty well. Although being
recognized (and classified by TransLink) as a Richmond bus route, all but one
stops of the route are in Vancouver or the UEL. This has been the case since it
was truncated from Richmond Centre (Brighouse Station) to Bridgeport Station in
2011 due to “service duplication” with the Canada Line. From Bridgeport
Station, it first has to cross the Oak Street Bridge, maneuver around Marpole,
then head north on Granville Street until 41st Avenue, where it
continues west towards UBC, picking up and dropping off at major stops along
the way. While it may seem that the #480 is a straight and direct route, heavy
and unpredictable traffic in Marpole and Kerrisdale, and occasional incidents
on the Oak Street Bridge can easily make the #480 schedule a useless piece of
paper. In the Southwest Area Transit Plan, TransLink claims that they propose
to cancel the route because it “duplicates with other service, [has] declining
ridership, the lowest on-time performance in 2015, and [faster alternatives].”
Checking
the Claims
Is
TransLink correct in their claims? Yeah, their points are very valid. In fact,
it does not take the planners at TransLink to realize how deeply “ill” the #480
is. Besides the fact that the bus is slow and unreliable during peak hours,
service improvements on the #43 and the #49 make these Vancouver cross-town
routes more appealing to those who want a (seemingly) faster and more predictable
journey. (For a comparison of travel times between the #43, #49 and #480 during
peak hours, see the table below). It may be tempting to conclude, based on
these facts that, the #480 is futile in our bus system and should become part
of the Vancouver transit history.
Route
|
Frequency (min)
AM to UBC
(7 a.m. – 9 a.m.)
PM from UBC
(4 p.m. – 6 p.m.)
|
Canada Line Travel Times From / T0 Bridgeport Station
to Canada Line Stations
|
Schedule Bus Travel Times From Canada Line Stations to
UBC (Arrive before 9 a.m.)
|
Schedule Bus Travel Times From UBC to Canada Line Stations (Depart UBC around 3 – 4 p.m.)
|
43 (Joyce Stn / UBC) Peak-hour Express
|
5 - 8 (AM)
9 – 10 (PM)
|
9 mins
Oakridge Stn
|
32 – 33 mins
|
34 – 36 mins
|
49 (Metrotown Stn / UBC)
|
6 – 9 (AM)
5 – 10 (PM)
|
7 mins
Langara Stn
|
32 – 35 mins
|
33 – 36 mins
|
480 (Bridgeport Stn / UBC)
Weekday Express
|
7 – 10 (AM)
7 – 11 (PM)
|
0 min
Bridgeport Stn
|
40 – 46 mins
|
45 – 47 mins
|
Table 1: Comparing Frequency and
Trip Times of #43, #49 and #480
(Source: TransLink Bus Schedule,
2016 September 2017 January & 2017 April)
The
next table gives the ridership figure of the #41, #43, #49 and the #480. These
numbers will appear again later in this article, but don’t feel pressured to
memorize the table. Just keep in mind that the #43 is a peak-hour only route,
and the #480 only runs on weekdays from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.. Thus, they have fewer
trips over the week than the #41 and the #49. Specifically, both the #43 and
the #480 do not run at nights or over the weekends during which traffic is
typically less busy, which is why delay-prone peak hour trips could have more
impact on the on-time performance measure of the #43 and the #480 more than the
#41 and the #49. However, this doesn’t mean that a low on-time performance is
solely because of service span.
Route
|
Ridership 2012
|
Ridership 2013
|
Ridership 2014
|
Ridership 2015
|
On-time Performance 2015
|
41 (Joyce Stn / UBC)
|
8,590,000
|
8,543,000
|
8,447,000
|
8,803,000
|
55%
(177th out of 208 bus routes)
|
43 (Joyce Stn / UBC)
Peak hour Express
|
1,457,000
|
1,391,000
|
1,406,000
|
1,367,000
|
41%
(177th out of 208 bus routes)
|
49 (Metrotown Stn / UBC)
|
6,444,000
|
6,662,000
|
6,967,000
|
7,268,000
|
60%
(120th out of 208 bus routes)
|
480 (Bridgeport Stn / UBC)
Weekday Express
|
1,076,000
|
1,031,000
|
1,035,000
|
975,000
|
29%
(208th
out of 208 bus routes)
|
Table 2: Comparing Service Performance
of #41, #43, #49 and #480
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
Who’s
still Taking the 480?
But
still, there must be reasons why 975,000 people continue to stick to the #480
in 2015, despite all the negative things said previously about the route. Of
course, the first reason that comes into mind is how the Canada Line, #43 bus
and #49 bus are all overcrowded during peak hours. Also, many commuters simply value
a one-seat ride, on which they can relax without having to worry about
transferring again.
In
reality, there are indeed ways to increase the capacity of the Canada Line, the
#43 (which will become UBC’s second B-Line by 2019) and the #49, but with
continued ridership growth along each of these transit corridors, they will
also have to make room for new riders of their own. Then, removing the #480
only means that those commuting from Richmond and South Delta to UBC, whether they
are currently taking the #43, the #49, or the #480, will have an even more
challenging time getting onto a train or a bus. Also, the assumption that those who are taking
the #480 right now will for sure switch to the Canada Line is unrealistic. The
comfort, directness, and a lack of hassle caused by transferring
(bus-)Skytrain-bus offered by the 480 are the reasons why its loyal supporters
did not turn to the other cross-town buses. For many long-distance commuters,
the alternative to #480 is either an overcrowded train/bus ride with more
transfers, or a car drive/ride that may be faster and more comfortable.
The
Solution may not be that Simple
With
plenty of new condos or townhouses being built or completed in Richmond, South of
the Fraser, Marpole and along Marine Drive, there will certainly be UBC
students, faculties or staff commuting from these areas, with quite a few of
them not living close to the Canada Line. These existing or future commuters
may not find the 480 to be perfect, especially during peak hours, but other
alternatives also have problems on their own – overcrowding, pass-ups,
congestion through busy areas such as Kerrisdale, etc. The solution to these
people’s commute problem may not be as simple as replacing the #480 with
increased frequency on the #43 and the #49.
A
major issue with the discontinuation of the #480 while the aforementioned areas
undergo a development boom is that, this further worsens the transit network
gap between South Vancouver, North Richmond and UBC, where existing transit
services are less competitive comparing to driving or even cycling. There is no
east-west cross-town service between 49th Avenue and Marine Drive.
The #100 Marine Drive bus only runs as far west as Marpole Loop where one gets
to connect to the #480, whose issues have been discussed in length. Transferring
between South Vancouver bus routes and the #43 and the #49 can be just as a
hassle as taking the #480: SkyTrain connections in the Southeast, like the #26
and the #29, are infrequent and filled with SkyTrain commuters during peak
hours, Downtown trolleys, like the #20 and the #17, face occasional delays and
have an addiction to bus bunching (e.g. 3 buses arriving in 20 minutes), and depending
on where you are getting on, you may be passed up by a few #43 & #49 before
you can get on, for example, at Main or Fraser Streets (just prior to Canada
Line Stations, and Langara College on the #49).
On
top of that, the 480 connects to the Canada Line and a variety of Richmond, Delta
and South Surrey / White Rock bus routes at Bridgeport Station. Many of these
commuters already spend one hour or more travelling between where they live and
Bridgeport Station, with some even having to transfer before they can hop on a
Bridgeport bus. Neither having an unreliable connector like the #480, nor adding
an additional transfer to their commute make transit an attractive option. In
the 2015 Transit Service Performance Report (TSPR) released by TransLink in last
summer, it was estimated that the Canada
Line could still carry ~1000 people / hour during the morning peak of 2015.
However, this includes trains coming from YVR Airport and Richmond-Brighouse.
Trains coming from Brighouse are usually much more packed than those coming
from YVR (in fact, Waterfront-bound trains were close to or at capacity at
Aberdeen Station on the Brighouse branch in the morning peak in 2015, according
to the TSPR). Thus, in practice, many commuters at Bridgeport will be more
likely to get on a train coming from YVR, which means that their wait time is
twice the morning peak frequency. What makes matter worse is that, in the
Southwest Area Transit Plan, TransLink proposes to re-direct various Richmond
internal bus routes to Bridgeport Station. While this is good and effective for
alleviating pressure of the Brighouse branch of the Canada Line, and shortening
Canada Line wait times of people connecting these buses, this will just further
challenge the capacity of Bridgeport Station.
Figure 1: Capacity and Passenger
Volume of Waterfront-bound Canada Line Trains at Bridgeport Station, Mondays
-Fridays
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
Figure 2: Capacity and Passenger
Volume of Waterfront-bound Canada Line Trains at Aberdeen Station, Mondays
-Fridays
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
Speaking
of the TSPR 2015, there are two things that worth to take note of for the
purpose of this article. The first thing is that Waterfront-bound Canada Line
is at capacity at Oakridge-41st Station, and it exceeds capacity
between Oakridge-41st and Olympic Village, during morning peak hours.
Also, as mentioned before, the Brighouse branch is also close to reaching
capacity at Aberdeen during morning peak. TransLink promises to increase
capacity on the Canada Line in the 10-Year Mayor’s Vision, and has taken a
first step by deploying an additional (backup) train during peak hours. Nevertheless,
population and jobs continue to grow along the Canada Line and its feeder
buses.
Figure 3: Capacity and Passenger
Volume of Waterfront-bound Canada Line Trains at Oakridge Station, Mondays
-Fridays
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
For
the second thing that needs to be brought up in the TSRP 2015, let’s look at
the table 2 again, which shows the ridership and on-time performance of several
bus routes. For your convenience, the author has copied and pasted the table
below. But instead of focusing on the #480, let’s shift our attention to the
#43 instead.
Route
|
Ridership 2012
|
Ridership 2013
|
Ridership 2014
|
Ridership 2015
|
On-time Performance 2015
|
41 (Joyce Stn / UBC)
|
8,590,000
|
8,543,000
|
8,447,000
|
8,803,000
|
55%
(177th out of 208 bus routes)
|
43 (Joyce Stn / UBC)
Peak hour Express
|
1,457,000
|
1,391,000
|
1,406,000
|
1,367,000
|
41%
(177th out of 208 bus routes)
|
49 (Metrotown Stn / UBC)
|
6,444,000
|
6,662,000
|
6,967,000
|
7,268,000
|
60%
(120th out of 208 bus routes)
|
480 (Bridgeport Stn / UBC)
Weekday Express
|
1,076,000
|
1,031,000
|
1,035,000
|
975,000
|
29%
(208th
out of 208 bus routes)
|
Table 3: Identical to Table 2,
Comparing Service Performance of #41, #43, #49 and #480
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
Notice
how its ridership has also dropped between 2012 and 2015, as well as between
2014 and 2015? On top of that, it also has the second lowest on-time
performance out of all four routes in 2015. To be fair, we have mentioned
before that on-time performance of peak-hour or weekday service only routes may
be more skewed, because they have fewer trips throughout the week and many of
their trips are affected by peak-hour traffic. But there must be a reason why
ridership of the #43 is going down, while ridership of the #49 has skyrocketed
since 2012. We don’t really have data to explain this, but based on anecdotal evidence,
heavy congestions and unpredictable traffic on W 41st Avenue,
particularly between Dunbar Street and West Blvd, may be the reason to blame. That
section of 41st Avenue through Kerrisdale affects not only the #480,
but also the #43. Nevertheless, it would be absurd to call for cancelling the
#43, which is bound to become UBC’s second B-Line by 2019, even though it meets
all the “criteria” listed by TransLink: suffering from “service duplication”
(with the #41), “declining ridership” and congested traffic.
The
underlying problem is neither with the #43 nor with the #480. Unreliable
service does drive down transit ridership, and simply giving up the service
does not make the problem go away. Tackling speed and reliability issues that
affects the #43, #480, and many other bus routes is the only appropriate
solution for long-term transit improvements.
Aftermath
and Solutions: Looking at the Alternative Worlds
In
any case, whether TransLink ends up deciding to cancel the #480 or not, a lot
of issues remain to be addressed. Here, let’s look at two alternative scenarios,
in one of which TransLink discontinues the #480, and the other TransLink keeps
the route. The author would like to make a few recommendations, regardless the fate
of the #480.
Now,
for those who doesn’t want to dig into all the technical details or evidence,
here’s a TL;DR of the remaining of this article for you:
Alternative
World #1: 480 Saved (Summary)
A
lot of work needs to be and can be done in order transform the #480 into a more
productive bus route, in case that the bus is preserved.
1.
Eliminate the underused off-peak service on the #480, because the #49, future
41st B-Line and the Canada Line are frequent, fast, and sufficient to
accommodate those currently taking the #480 outside of peak hours.
2.
Transfer the route to Vancouver Transit Centre (near Marpole) and couple it
with other UBC bus routes (e.g.: 25, 33, 41, 49, 84) to improve efficiency and
reduce the amount of “dead-heading” (buses running “Not In Service” to/from
depot.)
3.
Change the #480 route to skip congestion points and traffic bottlenecks such as
Kerrisdale, Central Marpole and Oak Street Bridge. A route via 49th
Avenue and Arthur Liang Bridge (see map below) is about 6-8 minutes faster than
the existing route under normal conditions. This route is also more reliable
because trip times will fluctuate less thus becoming more predictable. Even accounting for a reduced frequency on
the #480, the new route is still on average 3-5 minutes faster than its
alternatives (which all require an additional transfer) under normal
conditions.
Figure 4: Suggested new
route for re-designing the #480
(Map Layer Source:
Google Maps)
4.
Keeping the #480 during peak hours will alleviate the over-crowding on the #43,
#49 and the Canada Line during peak hours. In addition to that, the #43 is
choked at Kerrisdale; the #49 is too long and has way too many stop, and thus
is vulnerable to delays; upgrading the Canada Line capacity will be a prolonged
and continuous process while population along the line continues to grow as
well.
Alternative
World #2: Farewell #480 (Summary)
In
the case that the #480 is cancelled as proposed, the author suggests that the
following items should be considered:
1.
Increase frequency on the #43, #49 and upgrade capacity on the Canada Line.
Yeah, of course.
2.
Improve transit efficiency through Kerrisdale. Right now, 41st
Avenue through Kerrisdale is a chokepoint for bus routes such as #22, #41, #43
and #480. If transit operations do not improve on this segment of 41st
Avenue, the effect of the new 41st B-Line will suffer and its
ridership will dampen. Both the #99 and the #49 could really use some relief
from an effective support buddy.
3.
Introduce a new peak-hour only express service parallel to #49. The #49 is very
long, very popular during peak hours and has way too many stops. Running it too
frequent will only induce more delays and bus bunching along the route. If we
can have the #84 and the #99 separating only 5 blocks apart, there shouldn’t be
anything reason why a 41st B-Line and a 49th peak-hour
express cannot co-exist. Also, the #43, #99 and #84 are great examples of how
people love express buses.
4.
Keep a transit connection between UBC and Marpole. The bus can run on a
modified route of the recommended #480, namely travelling on 49th
Avenue and Granville Street between UBC and Marine Drive Station. This way,
direct transit connections between UBC and Southwest Vancouver, and between UBC
and the #100 Marine Drive bus which connects Southeast Vancouver and Burnaby
South are maintained.
Now,
for those who are not convinced by these conclusions, or want to know the
reasoning or the technical details behind these recommendations, please read on
-
Alternative
World #1: 480 Saved (Details)
Let’s
say TransLink agrees to keep the #480. This doesn’t mean that any of the
aforementioned issues associated with the route are resolved. Without making
any changes to the route, it still faces the risk of being erased in future
transit plans.
In
an attempt to save the #480, the author would like to make a few suggestions:
1)
Eliminate Off-Peak Service on the #480
While
the #480 is relatively well used during peak hours (peak passenger load ranked
19 out of 215 routes in 2015), it is underused during off-peak hours. Referring
to the TSPR 2015 (see table 3 below), the #480 has the lowest passenger per
trip and average highest passenger load during off-peak hours (9:00 – 15:00)
among all UBC services south of 41st Avenue. In addition, TransLink
plans to gradually extend operational hours on the #43 starting September 2017,
and will eventually turn the route into UBC’s second B-Line by 2019. Off-peak
service on the #43 will make it unnecessary and redundant to run the #480 at
the same period. The #49, future 41st Ave B-Line and the Canada Line
are frequent, offer fast journeys during off-peak hours, and have enough room
to accommodate those that are currently taking the 480 during midday.
Route
|
Average Boardings per Hour 2015
|
Average Cost per Passenger 2015
|
Average Highest Passenger Load 2015: from UBC
|
Average Highest Passenger Load 2015: to UBC
|
|
Midday off-peak statistics (09:00 – 15:00)
|
41 (Joyce Stn / UBC)
|
100
|
$0.91
|
36
|
43
|
49 (Metrotown Stn / UBC)
|
112
|
$0.77
|
55
|
60
|
480 (Bridgeport Stn / UBC)
|
43
|
$2.25
|
21
|
33
|
Table 3: Comparing Off-Peak Service
Performance of the #41, #49 and #480
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
2)
Improve Efficiency by Cutting Operational Wastes
Due
to historical reasons, #480 runs out of the Richmond Transit Centre (RTC, near Ironwood),
while its Bridgeport terminus is really close to the Vancouver Transit Centre
(VTC, near Marpole). On top of that, the #480 is the only UBC bus that runs out
of the RTC. As a result, some buses may have to “deadhead” (those “Not in
Service” bus you see) from Bridgeport or even from UBC all the way to Ironwood,
and vice versa. In addition,buses on the #480 cannot turn into other UBC routes
when it arrives at UBC to increase scheduling efficiency. Transferring the
route to Vancouver Transit Centre will reduce the amount “deadheading” because
the distance to depot decreases, and buses on the #480 can also run as a #25,
#33, #41, #49 and #84.
One
inefficiency of the #480 is that its ridership is mostly one-directional. Most
of its riders are UBC commuters that head to UBC in the morning, and return
home in the afternoon, and the opposite directions carry very few passengers. The #480, again, has the lowest average peak
passenger loads in the “reverse-peak” direction, when comparing to routes #43
and #49.
Route
|
Average Highest Passenger Load 2015: from UBC
|
Average Highest Passenger Load 2015: to UBC
|
|
Morning Peak Statistics
(06:00 – 09:00)
|
Afternoon Peak Statistics
(15:00 – 18:00)
|
43 (Joyce Stn / UBC)
|
19
|
26
|
49 (Metrotown Stn / UBC)
|
32
|
47
|
480 (Bridgeport Stn / UBC)
|
10
|
11
|
Table 4: Comparing Peak-hour,
Reverse-peak Direction Service Performance
of the #43, #49 and #480
(Source: TransLink Transit Service Performance
Review [TSPR] 2015 )
Reducing
frequency in the less popular direction will help to lower the cost of the
route, and make the service more efficient. If buses can on the #480 can run on
a variety of other UBC routes, and vice versa, this can allow for more flexible
scheduling and fewer underused #480 trips. For example, buses that end their
trip at UBC in the afternoon can leave as a #480 to Bridgeport, then return to
the Vancouver Transit Centre.
3)
Revamp the Outdated Route
Last
but not least, the #480 will not be able to survive in the long term with its
existing route, since it suffers too much from congestions, speed and delay
issues.
The
current #480 routing was designed in the early 1990s. Back then, there wasn’t
the #43, the Canada Line, or the #98 B-Line (predecessor of the Canada Line).
Also, Richmond wasn’t as developed as it is today as well. Thus, planners at
that time decided to have the #480 run through Kerrisdale and Marpole, in order
to alleviate the #41, other Vancouver/Richmond services, and pick up more
people along the way. Almost 30 years later, a lot has changed along the #480,
especially with all the development ongoing and completed at Marine Gateway /
Marpole, Capstan Way, River Road (Richmond), along Marine Drive (e.g. Fraserlands),
etc. There is by no means that, these
communities together have sufficient demand to support a peak express service to UBC.
But
how to find a routing that is fast, predictable, and provide good connections
to these communities?
(Author’s
WARNING: the following section is going to be quite technical, just so that the
conclusion is justifiable. Skim to the very end of the section if you don’t
care about the details.)
To
find out, the author used Google Map’s Distance Matrix API to test peak hour
travel times on the current route, as well as various other possible new
routes. The author will not spend a great deal of time explaining how the API
works, just note that it is used to predict future travel time, just like how
you ask Google Maps to estimate trip times through its graphical user interface.
Each possible route is broken down into many segments to test for individual
traffic volatility. The author randomly selected a week from October 2017 (when
detours on SW Marine should have cleared), and “asked” Google to predict travel
times on these segments, in an interval of 15 minutes during peak hours and 30
minutes during rest of the day. The total route travel time is approximated by
summing sectional travel times.
Google’s
API returns three driving times for each segment and a specific departure date
and time: an optimistic time (best-case scenario with very few better cases), a
pessimistic time (worst-case scenario with very few worse cases), and a
best-guess time (normal conditions). Since a week of data were aggregated,
weekly minimum, average and maximum travel times under different scenarios can
also be determined. All route segments
that the author tested are drawn on the following map.
Figure 6: All Possible
Options Tested for a New #480 Route
(Map Layer
Source: Google Maps)
Before
the different options were explored, the current #480 route was reviewed. Table
5 shows driving and scheduled transit times along the #480 route between
Bridgeport Station and Dunbar Loop, under normal and worst-case conditions. Those
departure times are chosen around when most UBC traffic and congestions
typically occur. (The section from Dunbar Loop to UBC is ignored because, quite
frankly, it does not contribute much to #480’s problem and has no good
alternative.) Here are some insights from Google’s data, before any numbers and
graphs are presented.
1)
Travel
times along the route can fluctuate quite a bit, especially on 41st
Avenue during both the morning and afternoon peak, and Oak Street Bridge in the
morning. The peak hour worst-case DRIVING times are generally 10 minutes longer
than scheduled TRANSIT times, as well as driving times under normal conditions
or during off-peak hours. Those are times when traffic is unpredictably bad,
and you get stuck on a bus that seems to be not moving at all forever. These
long delays happen occasionally, and they contribute significantly to the
route’s reliability issue. It also pays to mention that TransLink’s scheduled
time for the #480 during afternoon and parts of the morning peak may be too
tight to begin with, since the scheduled transit time is close to the normal
conditions driving times.
2)
The
devils, as always, are in the details. A short segment of the routecan lead to lengthy
delays. The section of #480 Bridgeport Station maneuvering around Hudson Street
and Marpole Loop onto Oak Street Bridge is quite congested during afternoon
peak hours, with the travel time jumps from 1 minute (midday) to 5 minutes on
the car.
3)
To
make lives easier for later calculations, a factor converting driving to
transit times is taken as the ratio between scheduled transit times and the sum
of normal & worst-case times. Let’s just say that it’s 0.45 in the morning
and 0.42 in the afternoon.
Route
|
Mode
|
Depart at
|
Normal Conditions
|
Worst-Case Conditions
|
Weekly Average
|
Weekly Minimum
|
Weekly Maximum
|
Weekly Average
|
Weekly Minimum
|
Weekly Maximum
|
Westbound (Dunbar Loop to Bridgeport Station,
Estimated
Driving Times)
|
Driving
|
07:30 a.m.
|
21’ 25’’
|
20’ 48’’
|
21’ 55’’
|
30’ 20’’
|
29’ 7’’
|
31’ 29’’
|
Transit
|
07:21 a.m.
|
24’
|
Driving
|
08:00 a.m.
|
24’ 5’’
|
22’ 53’’
|
24’ 54’’
|
36’ 20’’
|
33’ 45’’
|
38’ 12’’
|
Transit
|
08:01 a.m.
|
28’
|
Driving
|
08:30 a.m.
|
24’ 51’’
|
23’ 38’’
|
25’ 58’’
|
38’49’’
|
35’41’’
|
42’3’’
|
Transit
|
08:21 a.m.
|
27’
|
Transit to Driving Times Factor Estimate = Transit
Times / (Normal Average Driving Times + Worst Case Average Driving Times)
|
0.450
|
Eastbound (Dunbar Loop to Bridgeport Station, Estimated
Driving Times)
|
Driving
|
3:30 p.m.
|
27’ 13’’
|
29’ 37’’
|
31’ 3’’
|
42’ 15’’
|
37’ 22’’
|
46’ 21’’
|
Transit
|
3:29 p.m.
|
28’
|
Driving
|
4:30 p.m.
|
28’ 29’’
|
26’ 44’’
|
29’59’’
|
40’ 16’’
|
36’ 21’’
|
43’ 19’’
|
Transit
|
4:28 p.m.
|
27’
|
Driving
|
5:30 p.m.
|
27’ 34’’
|
25’ 43’’
|
30’ 36’’
|
39’ 51’’
|
36’ 29’’
|
44’ 57’’
|
Transit
|
5:28 pm.
|
28’
|
Transit to Driving Times Factor Estimate = Transit
Times / (Normal Average Driving Times + Worst Case Average Driving Times)
|
0.415
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 5: Travel Times on the #480
Route between UBC and Dunbar Loop, including 1) Estimated Driving Times under
Normal and Worst-Case Conditions, Listed by Weekly Averages, Maximums and
Minimums (Source: Google Maps Distance Matrix API), and 2) TransLink’s
Scheduled Bus Times (Source: TransLink Bus Schedule, January & April 2017)
Figure
6.1 – 6.5: Google Predicted Driving Times Plot along Some of the Most Congested
and Unpredictable Roads on the #480: 1) 41st Avenue from Dunbar to
Granville; 2) 41st Avenue from Granville to Dunbar; 3) Oak Street
Bridge from Richmond to Vancouver; 4) Oak Street Bridge from Vancouver to
Richmond; and 5) Hudson Street through Marpole to Oak & 71st.Check out the Legend for
what the Lines Represent.
To
recommend a better route for the #480, the author considered multiple different
routes, which were already shown in a previous map (figure 6). The objective is
to have a route that is faster, more reliable for those heading to Bridgeport
Station, and yet provides good connections to people living in South Vancovuer
and Marpole. Instead of writing a detailed analysis of how the new route was
determined, which would probably be too time-consuming and tedious for most
readers to go through, a summary table is
presented below that has pairs of two options “competing against” one another,
based on travel times averages and deviations. The option that is bolded is the
better performance one in each row.
Start / End Points
|
Route Options
|
Estimated Driving Times
Morning to UBC
7 – 9 a.m.
|
Estimated Driving Times
Afternoon to Richmond
3 -6 p.m.
|
Reason for Preference
|
Format: Normal [Worst-Case]
|
Between 71st Ave (@ Oak or Granville) and
Bridgeport Station
|
Oak Street Bridge (B1)
|
6 – 9 mins
[7 – 14 mins]
|
8 - 10 mins
[10 – 12 mins]
|
- The
Arthur Laing Bridge + Granville Street option is generally faster than all
other options
- The option
also maintains coverage of commercial and residential areas on Granville and
connections to #100 Marine Drive Bus
- It
avoids the delays due to crossing Marpole between Granville and Oak, on 70th,
71st or Hudson.
|
Arthur Laing Bridge
(B2)
|
6
– 8 mins
[7
– 12 mins]
|
7
– 9 mins
[9
– 12 mins]
|
Between 49th Ave (@ Oak or Granville) and Marpole
|
Oak St. (A1)
|
6 - 7 mins
[7 - 11 mins]
|
5 – 9 mins
[8 – 15 mins]
|
Granville St. (A2)
|
5 - 6 mins
[6
– 10 mins]
|
5 - 7 mins
[8
– 12 mins]
|
Between SW Marine Dr. @ Dunbar St. and Granville St.
@ 70th Ave. (Marpole)
|
49th Ave. +
Granville St. (C1+A2)
|
11
– 15 mins
[12
– 20 mins]
|
13
– 16 mins
[16
– 24 mins]
|
- SW Marine
Drive is too congested during peak hours with one lane per direction
- 49th
Ave + Granville Street is a much faster and reliable option
|
SW Marine Dr. (D1)
|
17 – 24 mins
[19 – 33 mins]
|
20 – 27 mins
[24 – 34 mins]
|
Between SW Marine Dr. @ Dunbar St and Oak St. @ 57th Ave. (Marpole)
|
49th Ave. +
Oak St. (C1+A2)
|
8 – 12 mins
[9 – 17 mins]
|
7 – 13 mins
[7 – 18 mins]
|
- Taking
57th Ave between Marine Dr
and Oak / Granville has no significant improvements than taking 49th
Ave
- 49th
Ave + Granville Street option better helps alleviate busier routes: #49, #10
- Putting
transit on 57th Ave requires new bus stops and other
infrastructures, and a local bus will be more suitable for 57th
Ave.
|
SW Marine Dr.+ 57th Ave (C2)
|
8 – 13 mins
[9 – 17 mins]
|
8 – 13 mins
[9 – 15 mins]
|
Between SW Marine Dr. @ Dunbar St and Granville St.
@ 63re Ave. (Marpole)
|
49th Ave. +
Granville St. (C1+A2)
|
9 – 13 mins
[10 – 18 mins]
|
10 – 13 mins
[12 – 19 mins]
|
- 49th
Ave + Granville Street has similar travel times to an option via West Blvd
and Angus Drive
- 49th
Ave + Granville Street option better helps alleviate busier routes: #49, #10
|
49th Ave + West Blvd. / Angus Dr. + 64th/63rd
Ave. (C3)
|
11 – 13 mins
[11 – 17 mins]
|
12 – 13 mins
[12 – 17 mins]
|
Table 6:
Travel Times Comparisons of Alternative Route Segments between Dunbar Loop and
Bridgeport Station
(Source: Google Maps Distance Matrix
API)
So,
drumroll for the end result please –
Figure 7: Suggested new route
for re-designing the #480
(Map Layer
Source: Google Maps)
This
map depicts the more preferred route design for the #480, under current
conditions and based on the above comparisons. Also, a change to the route of
#100 Marine Drive bus is suggested, so that it will run as a two-way route
through Marpole (from Marine Drive Station, via Marine Drive – Marpole Loop -
Granville – 70th/71st – Hudson – Marpole Loop). This will
help make the bus more convenient than the current one-way loop, and improve
connections with the #480.
To
see how this recommended #480 performs relatively to the existing one, let’s
compare travel times again:
Route
|
Mode
|
|
Estimated Driving/Transit Times or
Scheduled Transit Time (for existing route only)
|
Normal Conditions
|
Worst-Case Conditions
|
Weekly Average
|
Weekly Minimum
|
Weekly Maximum
|
Weekly Average
|
Weekly Minimum
|
Weekly Maximum
|
Westbound (Dunbar Loop to Bridgeport Station)
|
Existing
Route
|
Driving
|
07:30 a.m.
|
21’ 25’’
|
20’ 48’’
|
21’ 55’’
|
30’ 20’’
|
29’ 7’’
|
31’ 29’’
|
Transit
|
07:21 a.m.
|
24’
|
Suggested Route
|
Driving
|
07:30 a.m.
|
17’ 36’’
|
18’ 11’’
|
18’ 49’’
|
22’ 2’’
|
23’ 24’’
|
24’ 44’’
|
Transit
|
07:30 a.m.
|
18’ 6’’
|
Existing
Route
|
Driving
|
08:00 a.m.
|
24’ 5’’
|
22’ 53’’
|
24’ 54’’
|
36’ 20’’
|
33’ 45’’
|
38’ 12’’
|
Transit
|
08:01 a.m.
|
28’
|
Suggested Route
|
Driving
|
08:00 a.m.
|
19’ 24’’
|
20’ 1’’
|
20’ 50’’
|
25’ 51’’
|
27’ 33’’
|
29’ 1’’
|
Transit
|
08:00 a.m.
|
20’ 39’’
|
Existing
Route
|
Driving
|
08:30 a.m.
|
24’ 51’’
|
23’ 38’’
|
25’ 58’’
|
38’49’’
|
35’41’’
|
42’3’’
|
Transit
|
08:21 a.m.
|
27’
|
Suggested Route
|
Driving
|
08:30 a.m.
|
19’ 45’’
|
20’ 28’’
|
21’ 15’’
|
27’ 44’’
|
29’ 12’’
|
30’ 54’’
|
Transit
|
08:30 a.m.
|
21’ 41’’
|
|
Transit to Driving Times Factor Estimate = Transit
Times / (Normal Average Driving Times + Worst Case Average Driving Times)
|
0.450
|
Eastbound (Dunbar Loop to Bridgeport Station)
|
Existing
Route
|
Driving
|
3:30 p.m.
|
27’ 13’’
|
29’ 37’’
|
31’ 3’’
|
42’ 15’’
|
37’ 22’’
|
46’ 21’’
|
Transit
|
3:29 p.m.
|
28’
|
Suggested Route
|
Driving
|
3:30 p.m.
|
19’ 38’’
|
20’ 34’’
|
21’ 27’’
|
27’ 4’’
|
28’ 44’’
|
30’ 44’’
|
Transit
|
3:29 p.m.
|
20’ 49’’
|
Existing
Route
|
Driving
|
4:28 p.m.
|
28’ 29’’
|
26’ 44’’
|
29’59’’
|
40’ 16’’
|
36’ 21’’
|
43’ 19’’
|
Transit
|
4:30 p.m.
|
27’
|
Suggested Route
|
Driving
|
4:30 p.m.
|
19’ 11’’
|
20’ 25’’
|
21’ 30’’
|
26’ 45’’
|
29’ 7’’
|
30’ 53’’
|
Transit
|
4:30 p.m.
|
21’
|
Existing
Route
|
Driving
|
5:30 p.m.
|
27’ 34’’
|
25’ 43’’
|
30’ 36’’
|
39’ 51’’
|
36’ 29’’
|
44’ 57’’
|
Transit
|
5:28 pm.
|
28’
|
Suggested Route
|
Driving
|
5:30 p.m.
|
19’ 3’’
|
20’ 48’’
|
23’ 31’’
|
26’ 49’’
|
29’ 52’’
|
34’ 6’'
|
Transit
|
5:30 pm.
|
22’ 9’’
|
|
Transit to Driving Times Factor Estimate = Transit
Times / (Normal Average Driving Times + Worst Case Average Driving Times)
|
0.415
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 7: Travel Times on the Existing
and Recommended #480 Route between UBC and Dunbar Loop, including 1) Estimated
Driving Times under Normal and Worst-Case Conditions, Listed by Weekly
Averages, Maximums and Minimums (Existing & Suggested Source: Google Maps
Distance Matrix API), and 2) TransLink’s Scheduled Bus Times for Existing
Route, or Estimated Bus Times for Suggested Route (Existing Source: TransLink
Bus Schedule, January & April 2017; Suggested Source: Estimated based on
Driving Times & Conversion Factor)
Based
on this table, scheduled transit time on the suggested #480 route will be about
6 – 8 minutes shorter than the existing #480 route. If you are not convinced
that this new route has significant improvements over the old route, check out
the “worst-case times” columns. Travel times during worst-case conditions will
shortened by 6 – 13 minutes, and the differences between normal conditions and
worse-case trip times have also dropped. This means that, even on days when
traffic is horrible, the new #480 will still be much faster than the existing
#480. Smaller deviations on trip times will help make the #480 more reliable
and predictable.
Adding
onto that table, the author would like to put in five points of why the #480
route should be modified this way instead of cancelled:
1. The proposed routing skips Kerrisdale by
rerouting onto 49th Avenue. Kerrisdale is very congested during peak
hours, and the future 41st B-Line will provide express service all-day
on 41st Avenue. On the other hand, re-routing the #480 onto 49th
Avenue helps relieve the #49 during peak hours.
2.
It stays on Granville Street between 49th Avenue and 71st
Avenue. This allows the #480 to continue covering residential and commercial
areas on Granville Street and Marpole and connecting to the #100 Marine Drive
bus, thus maintaining the bus connections between UBC and the growing South
Vancouver. The Oak Street + Oak Street Bridge option, despite having similar
travel times, does not have these two advantages.
3.
The Granville + Arthur Liang Bridge is faster and more reliable than the
existing route, which uses Granville + Oak Street Bridge. The proposed #480
will omit Central Marpole and Marpole Loop, since the roads connecting this
area to the Oak Street Bridge are quite jammed up during afternoon peak hours, which
unnecessarily lengthens travel times. Unpredictable traffic on Highway 99 may
also back up onto Oak Street Bridge, affecting the current #480 route. Traffic
on Highway 99 will not have as much impact on the Arthur Laing Bridge.
Figure
7.1-7.2: Google Predicted Driving Times Plot along the Arthur Laing Bridge (1 –
Richmond to Vancouver, 2 –Vancouver to Richmond). Note that even though traffic
here seem volatile during peak hours, the actual variation of travel times throughout the week is only 2-3
minutes, much better and predictable than that on the Oak Street Bridge (which
has peak-hour trip time deviations of 5-8 minutes between different weekdays).
4.The
suggested #480 route has the fastest trip time between UBC and Bridgeport
Station, where commuters can directly transfer onto buses heading to South
Delta, Surrey and Richmond or the Canada Line. (In fact, the Southwest Area
Transit Plan and the Mayor’s Council Vision proposes a total of 8 existing or
new bus routes and 1 B-line, connecting Bridgeport Station to almost every
corner of Richmond.) Bridgeport is becoming a major transit hub south of the
Fraser River, and should have at least a peak-hour service connecting to UBC due
to their geographical proximity.
5.
The Canada Line is welcoming more development and ridership, with constraints
in capacity and a long timeline of capacity upgrades; the #43 is choked at
Kerrisdale during peak hours; the #49 is filling up fast, and suffers from
delays due to its long route and myriads of stops. Running a peak-hour service
on the proposed #480 helps divert commuters from the these heavily used
services, reducing pass-ups of cross-town routes at Canada Line Stations and
west side of Vancouver. Providing reliefs for the Canada Line (through #480,
B-Line replacing #430, improved #301, etc.) will help postpone the need of
using more expensive and disruptive upgrade methods that are only required
during peak hours, to allow for more time to aggregate funds required for those
projects. A direct connection also offers those who value comfort in their
commute an attractive option.
Speaking
of those alternatives that are mentioned by TransLink, how does this proposed
#480 fare against these routes? Again, let’s compare them all in a table.
Route
|
Frequency (min)
AM to UBC
(7 a.m. – 9 a.m.)
PM from UBC
(4 p.m. – 6 p.m.)
|
Schedule Bus Travel Times From Bridgeport Station to
UBC in AM
|
Schedule Bus Travel Times From UBC to Bridgeport
Station in PM
|
43 (Joyce Stn / UBC) Peak-hour Express
|
5 - 8 (AM)
9 – 10 (PM)
|
Bus: 32 – 33 mins
SkyTrain: 9 mins
Wait & Transfer Times: 5 – 6.5 mins#
|
Bus: 34 – 36 mins
SkyTrain: 9 mins
Wait & Transfer Times: 6.5 -7 mins#
|
Total Travel Times
|
46 – 48.5 mins
|
49.5 – 52 mins
|
49 (Metrotown Stn / UBC)
|
6 – 9 (AM)
5 – 10 (PM)
|
Bus: 32 – 35 mins
SkyTrain: 7 mins
Wait & Transfer Times: 5 – 6.5 mins#
|
Bus: 33 – 36 mins
SkyTrain: 7 mins Wait & Transfer Times: 5 – 7.5
mins#
|
Total Travel Times
|
44 – 48.5 mins
|
45 – 50.5 mins
|
480 (Bridgeport Stn / UBC)
Peak-hour Express
*Proposed Routing*
|
Assumed Frequency
10 - 15 (AM)
10 - 15 (PM)
|
Bus: 34 - 37
mins*
Wait & Transfer Times: 5 – 7.5 mins#
|
36 - 38 mins*
Wait & Transfer Times: 5 – 7.5 mins#
|
Total Travel Times
|
39 – 42 mins
|
41 – 45.5 mins
|
Table 8: Estimated Transit Travel
Times on the #43, #49 and Recommended #480 between UBC and Bridgeport Station,
including Expected Wait and Transfer Times (Source: TransLink’s Bus Schedule,
Google Maps Distance Matrix API, and Personal Experience)
Remarks:
*
These trip times come from adding the scheduled transit time (16 minutes)
between Dunbar Loop and UBC onto the trip time of the new route tabulated
earlier.
#Assuming
that: Your wait time of each bus/SkyTrain is half of its frequency; it takes
you 30 seconds to walk between bus stops and Oakridge’s Richmond -bound or
Langara’s Waterfront-bound platforms; it takes you 60 seconds to walk between
the entrance and Oakridge’s Waterfront -bound or Langara’s Richmond-bound
platforms (you’ll get why if you’ve been to the actual stations.) It is also
assumed that you get on the first bus/SkyTrain that arrives (sure, we know that
from time to time this doesn’t hold.)
Okay,
so accounting for waiting and transferring times for buses and the Canada Line,
and assuming that TransLink will cut frequency on the #480 slightly, the recommended
#480 route still has a bit of time advantage over the #43 and the #49. Note
that these calculations do not account for being passed-up by buses or the
Canada Line. In any case, the proposed #480 should be faster and more reliable,
which will help to build its ridership. However, the lack of a significant
difference in travel times means the #480 can maintain the status as a helper
and relief route to the #43 and the #49, without drawing massive crowds from them,
causing inefficiencies on the cross-town buses. Those who enjoy one-seat rides
and fewer transfers can hop on the #480, while those who hate riding buses and
prefer the train, commute near a Canada Line Station, or just miss the #480 at
the bus loop bus exchange, can continue to take the #43 or the #49. For
those who are commuting between UBC and Marpole and South Vancouver, the time
saved by improving the #480 over transferring between cross-town buses and
north-south trolleys will be even greater.
Alternative
World #2: Farewell #480 (Details)
Let’s
say that nobody can convince TransLink to keep the #480 at the end. What should
happen in that case? Is simply running a few more #43s and #49s enough? The
author lists below four possible items that TransLink can and should consider,
if it insists to discontinue the #480.
1)
Increase Frequency on #43, #49; Upgrade Capacity on Canada Line
There’s
nothing much to say here. TransLink can and will crunch this number themselves
to determine how many extra buses and trains they need to put on these
services. Upgrading capacity of all these routes is already part of the Mayor’s
Council Ten Year Vision: The Canada Line has already received its first service
improvement earlier this year, and the #43 & #49 will get their first service
boost in September 2017.
2)
Improve Transit Efficiency through Dunbar and Kerrisdale
Whether
or not the #480 is cancelled, this is something that has to be looked into. The
author is certain that TransLink is well-aware of and searching for an appropriate
solution for this problem, as Kerrisdale was already listed as a “local
congestion point” in the Vancouver/UBC Area Transit Plan published in 2005. If
transit continues to suffer from speed and reliability issues through this
segment of 41st Avenue, it will dampen the impact of improving the
#43 into a B-Line. The new B-Line will
have trouble diverting commuters from the popular #49 and #99.
3)
Put a Peak-Hour Express on 49th
Albeit
this will be less necessary if the #43 can get through traffic at Kerrisdale
faster and more reliable, putting an express service on 49th Avenue
during peak hours is still worthwhile to be considered. In fact, the #43 itself
is a great illustration of how people like express buses, even if they only run
at peak hours. Looking at the service performance of the #41 (Table 9), it is
overcrowded (red, bolded numbers) in the evenings and on Saturdays, but never
during actual peak hours (6-9, 15-18 on weekdays).
Table 9: Service Performance of the # 41 by Time of Day, on
Mondays-Fridays and Saturdays (Red Numbers = Overcrowding)
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
In
the 2005 Vancouver/UBC Transit Plan, running a B-Line on 41st was
deemed superior than running it on 49th because “destinations are
fewer and travel time benefits [on 49th] are unclear. 41st has a
much stronger nodal pattern of development that is well suited to a B-Line and
currently handles twice the daily volume of transit passengers (24,500 vs. 12,700)[2005’s
figure]. Connections to SkyTrain from 49th are also less direct.” (2005
Vancovuer/UBC ATP) But running a peak-hour express on 49th should
not be mutually exclusive with having a B-Line on 41st. TransLink’s
plan is to run more buses and increase the frequency of the #49, which makes
ever bus stop along its way. Imagine if we never have the #99 B-Line ,and it’s
the #9 that is running with a headway of every minute, stopping at every 1-2
blocks along Broadway. Without the #99,
transit on Broadway will be much less successful and popular. The #49 as well
as the #25 can ideally be run as frequent as the #99 in the future. However,
they are long routes that have countless stops along its route and high demand
during peak hours - it will be very inefficient to have each bus stopping at
all stop. The delay and bus bunching issues on these routes will only get
worse, not better. Running peak-hour express services on King Edward and 49th
with existing and new resources should be a better solution.
If
the #84 and the #99 can co-exist while both being successful, why can’t a
B-Line on 41st live happily
ever after with a peak-hour express on 49th?
4)
Keep a Connection between UBC and Marpole
With
so much development around Marpole, Marine Gateway, Fraserlands and more in
South Vancouver, there should be a bus connecting UBC and Marpole and the #100
Marine Drive bus, as an alternative to over-crowded #43, #49, almost-always-bunching
north-south trolleys. This helps to cut one transfer for those taking the #100.
Extending the #100 to UBC will make it too long and delay- and bunching-prone
because of how congested streets in Vancouver west-side is during peak hours.
One
simple solution is to implement the recommended #480 route with modifications: instead
of crossing the Arthur Laing Bridge to Bridgeport Station, the Marpole
connector should continue on Marine Drive until it reaches Marine Drive
Station.
Next
on the List: #44?
TransLink
attempted (and failed) to cancel the #258. Now they are proposing to
discontinue the #480. In case they want more efficiency on UBC bus services in
the future, which route will they turn to next?
The
#44, which runs between Waterfront Station (Downtown) and UBC has suffered from
declining ridership and a decreasing on-time performance over the past few
years. This is mainly due to construction-related delays along Burrard Street,
which encourage people to take #84, the #99 and the Canada Line as faster and
more predictable alternatives.
Route
|
Ridership 2012
|
Ridership 2013
|
Ridership 2014
|
Ridership 2015
|
On-time Performance 2015
|
44 (Downtown / UBC)
|
1,599,000
|
1,488,000
|
1,441,000
|
1,377,000
|
40%
(181th out of 208 bus routes)
|
Table 10: Service Performance of the # 44
(Source: TransLink Transit Service
Performance Review [TSPR] 2015 )
Now,
there is absolutely no evidence or
information suggesting that TransLink is interested in cancelling the #44
anytime soon. Nevertheless, the #44 also suffers from the same issues of the
#480 encounters: “service duplication” (with the #84, #99, #4, #14), “declining
ridership” and congested traffic. That’s why even though the author’s
speculation is purely hypothetical, it’s not impossible.
Perhaps
one day in the future, we will no longer need the #44 and the proposed #480.
The Millennium Line will be extended all the way to UBC, with convenient
connections to an upgraded Canada Line. There will be some kind of rapid
transit (BRT or LRT) on or near 41st Avenue, that enjoys a priority
treatment and avoids getting stuck at traffic. Other cross-town buses will also
be improved to be faster, more frequent and more reliable.
Yes,
the author is, to a large extent, dreaming. The reality is, while our transit
system is great, it is still far from being ideal. Many of the suggested alternatives
of the #480 – the #43, the #49, the #99 and the Canada Line – have flaws of
their own that have not been well-addressed and will take a lot of time and
effort to improve. Cancelling the #480 right now is way too soon, too
premature, and giving up the opportunity to refine the #480 to play a better
role in our transit network.
Final
Words: Roads, Roads and Roads
There
is one common theme that is secretly hidden throughout this article, do you realize
what that is? From our discussions of the issues of the #480, recognizing that similar
problems also exist on the #43 and the #49, then creating alternatives to replace
the #480, road constraints and congestions have become the recurring devil that
kills speed and reliability of our bus systems. Although building more SkyTrain
lines can help avoid traffic jams, we will likely never be able to expand
SkyTrain to every corner of Metro Vancouver. Buses and other forms of surface
transportation are here to stay in the foreseeable future, offering an
extensive network and support key rapid transit lines.
For
Greater Vancouver to be more livable in the future and to support the growth of
our population, a successful and better bus network will be indispensable. This
cannot be achieved solely through network expansion and increased frequency.
There needs to be additional infrastructure that aids bus operations: HOV or
transit dedicated lanes, transit priority signals and bypasses, facilities to
speed up time spent at bus stops, etc. This will require efforts not only from
TransLink, but also municipal governments. Cities around Metro Vancouver have
been very bold and dedicated about new and improved cycling facilities. They
are welcomed as cycling is an environmentally-friendly and healthy travel mode
that should be promoted. However, our local governments should not overlook the
similar kind of things that they can be doing for the bus riders in this
region, by taking actions to improve transit efficiency and reliability.
Lastly,
to fellow drivers out there that may be unhappy about some of the points in
this article, or that you need to contribute for U-Pass as well as transit
improvements in the region - always keep in mind that transit takes people off the
roads. In many cases, transit relieves traffic jams better than new and wider
roads. Without the transit system we have today, that trip to school or work
could have only gotten worse, not better.
Reference:
Southwest
Area Transit Plan – Phase 2:
http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Area-Planning/Southwest-Area-Transport-Plan.aspx
Mayors’
Council Vision for Transportation:
Transit
Service Performance Review 2015:
http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Managing-the-Transit-Network/Transit-Service-Performance-Review.aspx
Vancouver
/ UBC Area Transit Plan 2005:
If
you also support the new routing and all the other suggestions proposed by the
author, pleased do not hesitate to submit a copy of the suggested route map or
a link of this article to TransLink’s survey, while also mentioning that you
want the #480 to be kept and modified, rather than cancelled.
