Bus-only lane ineffective
Today's Vancouver Sun reports that a $270,000 bus-only lane in Vancouver has done nothing to reduce transit travel time:On paper it seemed simple.
Spend $207,000 to create bus-only lanes during peak hours along Broadway so the 99 B-line express bus can whisk passengers quicker from the SkyTrain station at Commercial to the University of B .C. and back again.
That was the theory and the money was spent and special bus lanes were designated along one of the busiest traffic and transit corridors in the city.
But in practice passengers aren't getting there any quicker.
I suspect this item will be totally ignored by the anti-Gateway blogs just like the news that BC's greenhouse gas emissions are going down.
8 Comments:
Actually the there was a long discussion about 99 B-line capacity and travel time issues on the LRC email list back in December.
Unfortunately all the elements of a successful rapid bus line (all-door loading, signal control, ticketing platforms, etc) have not yet been implemented on the 99 B-Line. It would be interesting to see what would happen to travel times if all of these elements were added.
Also this transit corridor is the busiest in the region (busier than along the future Canada Line). Some feel that this is really better suited for rail transit.
And as for the emissions reduction – it seems to me that this supports the position of NOT expanding freeways. After all, the emissions declined during a period when we were NOT building freeways or new highways. Everyone agrees that the Gateway project will INCREASE greenhouse gas emissions (even the province's report - there is some debate about how much).
Under Premier Campbell's plan we have to reduce ghg emissions by 10 times the amount that we have seen so far. There is no way we can do this by spending billions of dollars on projects that will increase emissions. We need to redirect that money to projects that will actually reduce emissions.
Blah blah blah!
Here is a great video that talks about how to make bus rapid transit effective:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bus+rapid+transit
More interesting comments on this issue at:
http://stephenrees.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/bus-only-lane-ineffective-study-shows/
(and more evidence that the pro-livable region crowd did not ignore this item).
One of the problems with our transit is the rerouting of B-line buses to the end of the skytrain line to justify ridership. If buses were allowed to cross the PortMann Bridge the traffic congestion would immediately improve.
Some interesting comments from Eric Doherty on the 99-B line issues:
"These bus lanes were designed primarily to increase reliability. City and TransLink staff repeated this several times in explaining the project to the
Vancouver - UBC Area Transit Plan Public Advisory Committee. My observations suggest that the bus lane has been successful in improving the consistency of transit travel times. I ride the 99B-line to UBC frequently, and when regular traffic grinds to a stop the buses keep moving. They don't move quickly, but they move a lot quicker than the folks sitting in their SUVs watching the bus go by.
Discussions in the Committee revealed that staff were well aware that
transit lanes designed to increasing transit speeds for express buses
are normally located in the center lanes (the fast lane) rather than the
curb lane (the slow lane). This is not rocket science."
Hi Jordon,
I see you have a blog-troll on your site, one of those nasty creeps that hides under the bridge of the information superhighway, waiting to pounce on your every posting with senseless attacks and irrational rants.
I checked out Rob’s blog and from the comments, no one reads it. So, he comes over here to camp out on your posts with his views. Rob, just a suggestion; spend a little more time writing something worth reading on your blog, instead of camping out on the blogs you total disagree with.
You're either desperately in search of attention or you an overzealous employee of SPEC or some other leftwing think tank? Which is it?
Walter, Jordan clearly states that this is "A weblog dedicated to dialogue on transportation.."
I am simply participating in this dialogue. Isn't the point of "dialogue" to present various viewpoints?
I am neither in search of attention or an employee of any NGO (I am an owner of two businesses).
My family has lived in this province for generations and I care deeply about its future. I have also had the experience of living freeway-dependent cities. I don't want us to make the mistakes that other cities have made.
Jordon has welcomed my comments both here and when we have met in person. Perhaps you could do the same Walter. Let's meet for coffee sometime.
Post a Comment
<< Home