Frances Bula header image 2

TransLink starts consultations on service “optimization” as it becomes a service more concentrated on serving existing customers than shaping future demand

November 9th, 2012 · 284 Comments

Transportation experts talk about the two functions of transit. It can primarily serve, which means putting most of your transit where existing demand is. Or it can be used to shape — so transit lines are built or routed into areas where demand isn’t strong yet, but the hope is that if transit goes there, development, density and demand will follow.

As a result of all the pressure to be efficient, efficient, efficient, the system — which had been very focused on shaping (many suburban bus lines running every 15 minutes even though not necessarily full, the Millennium Line, the West Coast Express, etc etc ) —  is now shifting over more to the serving mode. As a result, this just-out announcement from TransLink consultations for “service optimiatization,” which to people in more suburban areas is likely to translate as service cuts.

Members of the public will have an opportunity to offer comments and suggestions on proposals to provide transit service around Metro Vancouver in more efficient and effective ways. Public consultation on a set of proposed bus service optimization changes will begin November 19. Draft plans for refining and redesigning certain services will be presented both online and at a series of local open houses across the region. Feedback received will be taken into consideration as the plans are finalized in the New Year.

Service optimization is a critical part of TransLink’s ongoing program of managing the transit network. Its goal is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the transit network by reallocating existing resources from areas of low-productivity to areas where demand is higher. Using technology such as automated passenger counters and GPS tracking, TransLink planners can see how each bus route in the system is being used and use this information to better match transit supply to demand.

“Demand for transit service is growing in the region,” says TransLink CEO Ian Jarvis. “Our goal is to match that demand with an efficient service. Last year, we added 14 million more rides at no extra cost. We’re building on that success, and have a robust process in place to ensure we’re thinking about our customers and taxpayers as we plan and deliver transit service. We’ve done an analysis and now we want to hear from the public.”

The guiding principles for Service Optimization were established through consultations in 2010. One of those principles is to maintain service, to the greatest degree possible for transit-dependent customers while being efficient. (The guiding principles for Service Optimization can be found online at www.translink.ca/serviceoptimization<http://www.translink.ca/serviceoptimization>)

The increased ridership in 2011 through the optimization initiative generated 5 per cent more transit revenue, simply by shifting resources to where they were needed most. This indicates that service optimization is not only addressing current demand, but also generating more ridership.

The online consultation and open houses will continue through 4pm, December 13, with feedback being used to help finalize service changes. Any service adjustments will take effect later in 2013 or after.

SERVICE OPTIMIZATION 2013 – CONSULTATION SCHEDULE

Online consultation begins Monday, November 19 at www.translink.ca/serviceoptimization<http://www.translink.ca/serviceoptimization>. Comments will be welcome until December 13 at 4pm.

VANCOUVER (routes 2, 22, C21, C23)
Tues., Nov. 20, 4-7:30pm, Roundhouse Centre (Room B) – 181 Roundhouse Mews (off Pacific Blvd. at Davie)
2, 22: Combine as 22 and extend some short-turns to Knight and Kingsway
C21, C23: Separate services, extend C21 to Stanley Park and C23 along Terminal Ave

COQUITLAM (routes 153, 159, 177, 179, 189, C24, C29, C30, C38)
Wed. Nov. 21, 4 – 7:30 pm Evergreen Cultural Centre – Studio Theatre – 1205 Pinetree Way
153: Reroute via Schoolhouse Street to expand network coverage and reduce duplication
159, 177: Combine routes and discontinue service on low-demand segments
179, 189: Discontinue existing service and replace with new 188 David Avenue / Coast Meridian
C24: Reroute via Robinson and Foster to improve coverage and reduce duplication
C29, C30, C38: Reroute services near Coquitlam Centre to improve legibility and reliability

NEW WESTMINSTER (routes 101, 154, C98, C99)
Thurs. Nov. 22, 4 – 7:30pm Royal City Centre – Community Room – 620 – 6th St.
101, 154: Realign services to simplify network and improve directness of routes
C98, C99: Discontinue C99 and reroute C98 to improve service to Queensborough Landing area

SURREY (routes 312, 314, 332, 335, 502)
Wed. Nov. 28, Surrey City Central Library – Meeting Room 120 – 10350 University Drive (next to Surrey Central Station
312: Remove Scottsdale Mall detour to improve travel times and simplify route
314: Remove River Road segment to reduce duplication and simplify route
332, 335: Combine services and reroute via 72nd Ave to Newton Exchange
502: Introduce new 503 express service to Langley / Aldergrove and truncate 502 at Langley Centre

NORTH VANCOUVER (routes 211, 229, N24)
Thurs., Nov. 29, 4 – 7:30pm – Mollie Nye House, 940 Lynn Valley Rd.
211: Remove low-ridership Fairway detour
229: Split service at Lynn Valley and convert lower-demand portion to 227 community shuttle
N24: Reroute northern end of service to connect to Lynn Valley Town Centre

ALDERGROVE/LANGLEY (route 502)
Tues. Dec. 4, 5 – 7:30pm – Aldergrove Community High School (Small gym), 26850 – 29th Ave.
502: Introduce new 503 express service to Langley / Aldergrove and end 502 at Langley Centre

PITT MEADOWS (route C41)
Wed. Dec. 5, 4 – 7:30pm – Pitt Meadows Family Rec Centre, 12027 Harris Road
C41: Convert to two-way service with reduced frequency and reroute via civic centre

MAPLE RIDGE (routes C48 & C49)
Thurs. Dec. 6, 4 – 7:30pm, ACT Arts Centre & Theatre, 11944 Haney Place
C48, C49: Discontinue service on lowest-demand segments and reroute C48 to connect with West Coast Express

WEST VANCOUVER (routes 251, 252)
Tues. Dec. 11, 4 – 7:30pm, West Vancouver Memorial Library (Welsh Hall), 1950 Marine Dr.
251, 252: Reroute and convert to two-way service with connections to higher-frequency 250

BURNABY (routes C1, C2)
Wed. Dec. 12, 5 – 7:30pm. Gilmore Community School (Gym), 50 South Gilmore Ave.
C1, C2: Combine routes and extend to Kensington Square

Categories: Uncategorized

  • gman

    CK,nice spin Chris but again you’ve got nothing so you revert to an attempt to attack my character.There is a reason I prefer to protect my identity Chris,its so zealots like you cant make my or my families life miserable interfering with my business or putting up fake facebook pages or anything else their twisted little minds come up with. And Chris if you now are saying it isn’t going to be catastrophic then what the hell are we talking about?

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    Nobody’s going to bother you, your business, or your family over a moronic Internet argument. Look at how many people do post with their real names here. How many have been harrassed? The only people who are threatening folks regarding their work life is your posse bro. Nice company you keep.

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    “And Chris if you now are saying it isn’t going to be catastrophic ”

    I have made no claims regarding the level of severity of climate change. I have said I trust the scientific community’s perspective, namely that steps should be taken to mitigate the impacts of climate change. This is what I’m talking about. You have put words in my mouth again and again, call me a zealot, suggest I will attempt to harm your well-being, and you do so behind a pseudonym. Your character doesn’t need to be attacked by me. You’re soiling your reputation just fine all by yourself.

  • http://voony.wordpress.com Voony

    A Dave@237

    My comment is not a defense, it is fact…I understand it is uncomfortable facts shaking your belief, but they are.
    (You have started to compare a fantasy LRT with Skytrain, and no in face of reality you say “stop” and don’t want face reality why?)

    As mentioned by Rico, cost/new rider is a nice metric to use, let’s see what happen with a relatively cheap LRT like the Sacramento one: it is here.

    To be sure, evaluating a transit system involve evaluating lot of parameters…

  • Bill

    @ Chris Keam #253

    “ I have said I trust the scientific community’s perspective”

    Just another reason what it is called the Green Religion. Unquestioning faith.

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    I question why you are anonymous Bill. I think you have a vested interest. But you would prefer I not question that and demand unquestioning faith that you aren’t paid for your commenting. Prove this is wrong. You may email me privately with your real world contact details if you prefer — so I can verify you are simply a concerned citizen. Until you can live by your own principles, there’s no point in taking you seriously.

  • boohoo

    Chris, you don’t get it.

    When you disagree with the likes of Bill, gman, higgins etc, you are a paid operative of vision or leftist/socialist/communist/marxist hack or an eco-fascist bent on returning the world to a 12th century state all in a giant global green conspiracy.

    But if you question the likes of Bill, gman, higgins etc on their interests or reasons, well they are just concerned citizens.

    Maybe we should start the same? Bill, higgins, gman–all part of a right wing conspiracy to pollute the planet and lower taxes so they can cut all social programs and eliminate bike lanes and…oh never mind, it’s too stupid to actually try.

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    @Gman:

    One of the five W’s is ‘who’. As noted, many people here post using their real names. Some do not, but they also don’t question other people’s integrity with quite the same enthusiasm as you and your pals. If it’s important to know where Al Gore gets his money, then the only real question is why you aren’t willing to submit yourself to the same scrutiny over the same issue. The bottom line is the longer you fail to apply the same standard to your own behaviour, the more suspect your motives appear. I’m trying to give you a chance to prove you can live by the same standard you would impose on others. You don’t want to take it and that raises lots of red flags for anyone who understands part of the due diligence in this regard is establishing who you are actually dealing with. That’s not crazy, that’s smart. Calling me unstable isn’t helping your cause at all. People can google me and see I’m actually pretty sane. But they can’t do that for you can they? So all you’re doing with these unwarranted attacks is ruining your own credibility.

  • gman

    Update,
    Subject appears to show signs of agitation and extreme paranoia believed to be caused by his inability to control conversation and set rules on commenting practices that he is unable to enforce. Subject also shows an inability to separate subject of post with commenters and thus obsesses over identities rather than subject matter.
    Recommendations,
    When approaching subject speak in soft low guttural tones and smile nodding head in agreement while slowly backing away.

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    It’s not going to work, so don’t bother. This is not about me.

    You’ve shown repeatedly on this blog that who is discussing the subject matter is important to you. Now you’re grasping at straws and it shows. You can’t live by your own rules, you’ve been exposed as such and you have to look in the mirror and confront your double standard. A little less time insulting me and a bit more spent on self-reflection regarding your position might benefit you in the long run, even though there’s some short term pain in admitting to the hypocrisy.

  • Bill

    @Chris Keam #256

    “I question why you are anonymous Bill. I think you have a vested interest.”

    Chris, every time you paint yourself into a corner you deflect attention by opening another line of attack. But I’ll play along and I’ll even overlook the “anonymous” issue since other than Roger for the skeptics and yourself for the Warmists, all the other comments on the climate issue have been anonymous so this is just another of your red herrings.

    Yes, I do have a vested interest but then again everyone has a vested interest in what happens with energy policy. My interest is not directly tied to any particular source of energy, I just want to see a healthy economy with the greatest opportunity for growth since that is the only way we will be able to meet the financial challenges we face. Large public debts and social entitlement programs can only mean a reduced standard of living unless we grow our economy.

    Oh, and I am not backed stopped by either an inheritance or trust fund – can you say the same thing?

  • MB

    @ Chris K, while I share your frustation with our little cadre of contrarians who misrepresent others statements, who are the first off the block to ridicule, name call and project false assumptions about what their opponents actually think, and who resort to these defence mechanisms when they either cannot produce adequate sources for their outrageous statements or produce laughably amateurish sources with exceedingly biased fusing and motives, I will defend their right to make fools of themselves anonymously.

    My reasons are similar to g man’s in that I don’twwant crank calls or additional junk mail from unwanted sources. I also risk offending my employer.

    However, if identification is important to you I will email you privately. The quality of your comments and your honesty persuade me that you are trustworthy.

  • Frank Ducote

    MB – please count me in on that disclosure as well. I am amazed at the flack you and CK are willing to endure from many on this blog. Congrats on your courage to do so.

  • MB

    Thank you Frank. I do have fun some of the time, otherwise I wouldnt bother.

    Need your contact info … I’m only using a smart phone today.

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    “Oh, and I am not backed stopped by either an inheritance or trust fund – can you say the same thing?”

    Bill:

    I’ve been a part of the working world since I was ten. I started contributing to the household expenses at age 16 IIRC. Suffice to say no trust fund or inheritance is in my past, present, or future. I hope that answers your question and you’ll accept it at face value. As for your own identity, I’m willing to believe you, but I encourage you to read my comment to MB below, as it explains why I think some people should be compelled to put up their identity or cease accusing others of ulterior motives.

    MB:

    You can do as choose, but I’d prefer not to be entrusted with your information, in case someone does decide to hack my email, or similar. And I absolutely believe in the value of anonymity when it’s used to protect those who disclose information that’s in the public interest, or allow someone to express their point-of-view. The point is NOT that everyone should use their real name, but rather that those who point to associations and allegiances of un-anonymous posters or public figures and imply self-interest, should be willing to undergo the same scrutiny. Knowing the identity of your accuser is a central tenet of our society.

    Thanks Frank – kind words and I appreciate them.

  • gman

    You guys love to play the victim and now you’re going to start your own posse…..awesome!!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Deas0yWz5JM

  • Bill

    @gman #266

    Not “victims” but “Martyrs for the Cause”. Just another reason why it’s called the Green Religion.

  • boohoo

    Yeah, seeing you two come back with that, it really is stupid.

  • MB

    @g man, ‘C3′ is not a legitimate science forum and thus Hansen lives on.

    It is, however a Republican party forum and a gathering place for the coal lobby

  • MB

    @ Chris K, fair enough.

  • Everyman

    To paraphrase Forrest Gump, this thread is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get. ; )

  • IanS

    This:

    “And I absolutely believe in the value of anonymity when it’s used to protect those who disclose information that’s in the public interest, or allow someone to express their point-of-view. The point is NOT that everyone should use their real name, but rather that those who point to associations and allegiances of un-anonymous posters or public figures and imply self-interest, should be willing to undergo the same scrutiny. Knowing the identity of your accuser is a central tenet of our society.”

    Chris and I disagree on plenty in this blog, but I’m with him 100% on this.

  • Bill

    @Ian S #272

    I think you are off base on this one IanS. An individual’s affiliation is a matter of fact and it does not matter if the affiliation is noted by an anonymous poster. Affiliation is a relevant fact if the individual is expressing an opinion as an expert or is referenced as an expert which would tend to give some weight to their opinion. Now if someone, anonymous or not, discounts this opinion only because of this affiliation, it is really just an argument ad hominem and does nothing to discredit the opinion. It goes without saying that an opinion expressed anonymously without facts or reasoning is worth little.

    You can be either for or against anonymous comments but I don’t think you can really start making exceptions to either position.

  • gman

    What a pathetic group you are to pretend you’re so hard done by is truly pathetic,CK really thinks someone would actually give a crap what he has in his email are you kidding me.You people need to get a grip on reality the hubris you puke out is unbelievable no one cares what you say anymore we’ve all moved on and want nothing more than you to get the hell out of the way so the grownups can straighten things out.What a bunch of sorry goofs you are.MB cant even read a simple chart,instead he does the usual ad hom attack and at the same time accuses people of picking on him,how sad and disgusting. And what hypocrites you are I’m sure every time I comment on this blog a twitter alert is sent out.You people have absolutely no grip on reality instead your scared to death by Al Gore and his BS. Maybe once in your life you might care about your children and your grand children and the sovereignty of your country. Everyone that spouted your rhetoric is backpedaling now and we all know its BS .

    PS,
    MB that is Hansons data,go to the nasa site and plot it yourself if you’re able.Also on an even more ridicules note you throw out the label conservative as though its a bad word…well MB I don’t know if you got the memo we have a conservative government in this country and we the majority are getting pretty sick of your propaganda.

  • gman

    MB
    Only an A-hole would post something like this,but you did “:@ Chris K, while I share your frustation with our little cadre of contrarians who misrepresent others statements, who are the first off the block to ridicule, name call and project false assumptions about what their opponents actually think, and who resort to these defence mechanisms when they either cannot produce adequate sources for their outrageous statements or produce laughably amateurish sources with exceedingly biased fusing and motives, I will defend their right to make fools of themselves anonymously.
    What drivel….

    Thank you for showing how full of yourself you are although your whole deal rests on scary headlines and someone told me so.You have no idea what science is or how it works so why not stop pretending you do. It almost looks like you’re trying to backpedal your selves.

  • boohoo

    You stay classy gman.

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    @Bill:

    When a person is accusing others (esp. politicians) of various things such as using public policy for private gain, it’s a fairly serious accusation. I don’t think it’s unrealistic for both the reader and the person being targeted for criticism to know who is behind the comments. Esp. when the critic isn’t bringing forward specifics to back the allegations. As I say, it’s a fairly basic right in a free society to know the identity of your accuser. Our society hasn’t kept pace with our technology in this regard, just as once upon a time we printing presses before we had the rules in place to prevent unauthorized reproductions. So, I suppose we should police ourselves until a better solution comes along. Which, for me, means taking ownership of your comments if they impugn someone else’s character or motives. I don’t think it’s unreasonable (although it gets hard when cherished ideals are challenged). They say that a measure of a (wo)man is how they act when no one’s watching. An online pseudonym is the cyber-equivalent. What one says when they are unaccountable says much more about a person than the behaviors they exhibit when social mores are acting as a regulator of their actions. Gman’s screed above is a perfect example. I don’t think he would say that to anyone’s face for fear of consequences, so why should he get a free pass online?

  • http://www.chriskeam.com Chris Keam

    we ‘had’ printing presses….

  • Bill

    @Chris Keam #277

    I know Progressives are expert at twisting logic into a pretzel to make a point but your argument here is so flawed it’s hard to know where to begin.

    • A person’s affiliation or financial interest in an issue is a question of fact and it doesn’t matter who calls attention to it. In #175 MB, your new BFF, says “and discover your source is covered in oily fingerprints and has thus no credibility”. This would seem to suggest that the referenced source is financially supported by the oil industry and cannot be trusted. Should MB be censured for anonymously making this claim? I don’t have any problem with it because it is relevant if the source is funded by the oil industry although I disagree that it alone would discredit the source.

    • You don’t believe the “right to know the identity of your accuser” is absolute because you give a pass to “those who disclose information that is in the public interest”. So it is ok to disclose information that may be private or even confidential if it is in the public interest and the accused has no moral right to know who accused them yet pointing out an affiliation or financial interest anonymously that is public knowledge is offside. This is reasonable?

    • Legal remedies are always available for any allegations of financial impropriety that are not true.

    Finally, you comment “So, I suppose we should police ourselves until a better solution comes along”. Are you suggesting that we need a “Progressive Police Force” to regulate discussion on the internet? We don’t need a better solution. Frances Bula determines how this site is governed and that is how it should be in a society that values free speech. If you don’t like the rules, you are free not to comment.

  • boohoo

    Why must you insist on childish labels and stereotypical nonsense? Are you really that simple that you must devolve everyone into little boxes?

  • Glissando Remmy

    Thought of The Day

    “After so many comments, the rhetorical question comes in easy… “Who’s on First?”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nti08LWtxJI&feature=related

    We live in Vancouver and this keeps us busy.

  • Bill Lee

    FRom the Globe and Mail’s twitter feed from its Toronto section
    “@marcusbgee Marcus Gee Great cities know that transit investment will yield a tenfold payback over time, says GO prez Gary McNeil. #unlockgridlock”

  • http://members.shaw.ca/theultimatescam/The%20Bank%20of%20Canada.htm Roger Kemble

    Wrong Marcus Gee whoever you are. really wrong!

    Great cities know that making things to pay for the shiny trinkets you like to play with will yield ten fold payback over much less time.

    As for gridlock? That’s a function of sprawl that has inflicted cities since speculators became the only game in town . . .

  • Bill Lee

    Marcus Gee is the Toronto columnist for the Globe and Mail, as we may read a British Columbia section, Toronto has their own section.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/
    The twitter profile
    https://twitter.com/marcusbgee

    Marcus Gee
    @marcusbgee
    Marcus Gee is Toronto columnist for the Globe and Mail, Canada’s national newspaper.
    Toronto · http://globeandmail.com

    “He was born in Toronto and graduated from the University of British Columbia in 1979 with a degree in modern European history. He has worked as a reporter for the Vancouver morning newspaper, The Province; as an editor, writer and correspondent for Asiaweek magazine; as a reporter for United Press International in Manila and Sydney; as a foreign affairs writer at Maclean’s and as senior editor at The Financial Times of Canada.”

    And he is an ardent cyclist.