Cancelling #480: Simplistic Solution for Underlying Problems

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 23^rd, 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 41^st 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 49^th 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-41^st Station, and it exceeds capacity between Oakridge-41^st 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 41^st Avenue, particularly between Dunbar Street and West Blvd, may be the reason to blame. That section of 41^st 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 41^st 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 49^th 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, 41^st 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 41^st Avenue, the effect of the new 41^st 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 41^st B-Line and a 49^th 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 49^th 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 41^st 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 41^st 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 41^st 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) 41^st Avenue from Dunbar to Granville; 2) 41^st 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 & 71^st.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 – 70^th/71^st – 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

Depart at

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 49^th Avenue. Kerrisdale is very congested during peak hours, and the future 41^st B-Line will provide express service all-day on 41^st Avenue. On the other hand, re-routing the #480 onto 49^th Avenue helps relieve the #49 during peak hours.

2. It stays on Granville Street between 49^th Avenue and 71^st 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).[KKW5] 

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 41^st 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 49^th

Albeit this will be less necessary if the #43 can get through traffic at Kerrisdale faster and more reliable, putting an express service on 49^th 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 41^st was deemed superior than running it on 49^th because “destinations are fewer and travel time benefits [on 49^th] 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 49^th should not be mutually exclusive with having a B-Line on 41^st. 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 49^th 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 41^st  live happily ever after with a peak-hour express on 49^th?

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 41^st 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:

http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/about_translink/governance_and_board/mayors_vision/mayors_council_vision_mar_2015.pdf

http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/about_translink/governance_and_board/mayors_vision/mayors_council_vision_appendices_june_2014.pdf

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:

http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Area-Planning/Vancouver-UBC-Area-Transit-Plan.aspx

Those who are interested in submitting your opinion can do it through an on-line survey until Jun 19^th (Monday) or physically attend one of TransLink’s open house. Details here: http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Area-Planning/Southwest-Area-Transport-Plan/Get-Involved.aspx

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.