Post navigation
Pie-IX busway: From hope to deception
Contact me
Categories
Tags
Published on
July 25, 2023
Edited.
Removed a doublet of paragraphs.
Added an addendum about the upcoming service changes for the STM 439 in January 2024.
Updated September 6th 2023.
The Pie-IX integrated bus rapid transit (BRT) project had been in the works for more than a decade. It had finally opened in 2022, but it's sole success is the speed, but the user experience not so much. This articles dives deep into the history of the project, it's ups and downs. It describes many issues (and fixes!) that should be considered on this transit corridor and many others in the planning phase.
Ever since I came to Montreal, I was excited seeing the work on Montreal’s first proper dedicated busway (Article coming soon). I was always excited to get on at the prototype Amos station, just to get a feel of the future. Once the city had announced the opening date, I was more excited than ever to finally ride the main portion of the route. However, once I rode it, I was quite deceived. But I still had some hope, I labeled the issues as teething issues, and I had decided to come back a few months after opening to see how the system was faring, and every single time I rode it, I notice more and more issues, whilst any silver lining is getting ever so harder to find.
Now, I may seem quite pessimistic about this seemingly faster than average bus in Montreal (Source), but I just care about future implementations, which do not have a good outlook for the future because of negative perception of this project. This is not what I want to convey, but instead I would like to point out minor issues that should be rectified for future similar busway-like projects. Future projects should not ignore many innovations that had been carried out on the Pie-IX project, but instead should build on these ideas to continually have better busways. It is truly sad to see that this is not the case, as the mayor already confirmed that the Henri-Bourassa “Metrobus” project, will have curb-side bus lanes, instead of the center running bus lanes (Source). I will write an article in the future discussing this project.
Related article
Understanding your local bus network should not be as hard.
What is the Pie-IX busway integrated project?
Map of the original Pie-IX busway route. (Source)
The Pie-IX integrated project is a 11 km dedicated busway project. The reason it is called an integrated project, is one of the project’s first major innovations. It counts on many different governmental and private agencies collaborating together, to provide the public with the best value possible. It is a common complaint among Montrealers that construction is not well planned nor executed in Montreal, and this project is a rare exception to that. Instead of pulling up the road to install a bus rapid transit (BRT), then a few years later pull up the road again to fix the utilities under the road, they had decided to collaborate together.
Diagram of the upgraded infrastructures along Pie-IX. (Source)
With the meager sum of 520 million dollars (Source), the road’s electrical lines, sewage, water mains, communications, etc. was all updated, in addition to the addition of a center-lane running busway. In addition, this was one of the most heavily-used non-rail corridors in Montreal, and it made sense to have this level of infrastructure on Pie-IX.
History behind the project.
In 1989, the then STCUM installed a bus lane with stations on Pie-IX (Source). The bus lane was located in the center of the boulevard; however, unlike today’s implementation, the bus was running contraflow to traffic, with no barrier. A Youtuber named “Trainluvr” posted a video of this unique bus service (Video).
Original contraflow Pie-IX reserved lane opening day in 1990. (Source)
Between 1998 & 2002, 4 pedestrians were fatally struck, due to this setup (Source). On June 12th 2002, the wife of a bus operator was fatally struck and resulted in the suspension of service in the middle of the road coupled with the launch of an investigation by the coroner (Source). The then named, 505 Pie-IX bus was relegated to curb running with reserved lanes operational in peak travel direction during rush hour (Source). The stations remained abandoned, with the hope to eventually reopen them once the corridor was made more safe. This never happened, and instead it gave birth to the implementation that is installed today on Pie-IX in the 2010s. Once the project was announced, the existing center bus shelters were dismantled (Source).
Diagram of the Pie-IX boulevard configuration with the original busway. (Source page 30)
10 years for a fancy bus.
Back and forth between two governmental agencies.
After the report of the coroner was published, two ideas emerged. The now dissolved AMT proposed simply upgrading the curb running bus lanes by adding enhanced stops, funded and operated by a private investor. However, the STM was not fond of this idea and proposed that the Pie-IX boulevard should have a center running busway to avoid conflicts with motorists (Source). This is a start of a theme for the project, and explains why the project took 10 years to open a simple road.
Too many “partners” at the table.
Not only the project had to get the green light from the AMT and the STM before it was sent to the government, but also had to content with the city of Laval, STL, and also the MRC (county) of Les Moulins which is located 10 km away from the nearest station on the project. It was involved simply because its bus service (now exo Terrebonne-Mascouche sector), used two stations along the BRT. Too many government agencies were around the table and every single one of these “partners” had veto power on any decision because projects have to be unanimous for every single party. Therefore many steps in the project’s planning led to delay after delay (Source).
The project was not continuously worked on.
This delay had led the AMT to pursue the project at different rates. At one point LaPresse reported that it was a priority that shifted to a project pushed with indisposition to finally being relegated on the back burner for an entire year (Source).
A proposal that is completely disconnected from the communities.
Despite the partners at the table, the first version of the project was simply not adequate for the environment, in which it was too large and many mature trees would have to be removed. Some parties even complained of not being consulted (Source).
The “North American transit project creep.”
The “North American transit project creep” means that small additions were continually made to the project which in culmination made the price tag of the project increase substantially. LaPresse reported that the project had grown from a simple street improvement to completely rethinking an intersection (50 million $), rebuilding an overpass, a bridge and an exit (140 million $) and a complete rebuild of the sewers (100 million $) (Source). A government official proposed later to put trolleybuses, which in hindsight would have been a good idea (Article coming soon). This proposition was later axed due to the lack of space for transformers which was in conflict with mature trees and the aforementioned rebuilt sewers. The visual impact of the poles and electrical lines was also cited as a reason against trolleybuses (Source).
Other agencies and governments wanted a piece of the action.
Finally, the then Laval mayor, Gilles Vaillancourt, was reportedly enraged at the project because the Laval section was at risk of being cut. He insisted that there has to be 3 stations in Laval over 4 km, with each one having a park and ride, and if not he would do anything to block the project. A lot of time was lost and the Laval portion of the route cost almost as much as the entire Montreal section which had 18 stations over 9 km. LaPresse had reported thereafter that the costs were “redistributed” (Source).
70,000 projected ridership?
Map of proposed routes and frequencies along the future Pie-IX BRT. (Source page 6)
Detailed map of proposed routes and frequencies along the future Pie-IX BRT. (Source page 10)
Bus Number | Operator | Buses per hour during peak | Frequency during peak |
|---|---|---|---|
507 | STM | 24 buses per hour | 2 minutes 30 seconds |
509 | STM | 24 buses per hour | 2 minutes 30 seconds |
539 | STM | 10 buses per hour | 6 minutes |
4653 | STL | 6 buses per hour | 10 minutes |
52/252 | STL | 6 buses per hour | 10 minutes |
25 | URBIS (now exo Terrebonne-Mascouche) | 3 buses per hour | 20 minutes |
Table of proposed routes with their associated frequencies. (Source page 10)
This was the original plan for the Pie-IX bus corridor. There was supposed to be up to 73 bus/h, which is a bus every 49.3 seconds (!). Due to this super high frequency, the expected ridership for the busway was 70,000 riders per day. However, a LaPresse article stated that 40 buses per hour should be the target, because then there would be bus bunching, which is probable (Source).
Later in the project, the southern 3 stations were cut (more about this later on), and the “Montée Saint-François” station was also cut.
Since the scope of the project was scaled back, the number of routes were also scaled back. Now in 2017 (seen below), we see a very similar arrangement to what we have now. Although there are some minor changes, such as the 510, 511 and 539 all being named the 439 but with different branches. The "511" runs all the way to Carrefour Henri-Bourassa / Pie-IX (just north of Amos station). The 139 runs all the way to Notre-Dame / Pie-IX (identified as Terminus N-D below), and the 510 terminates at Lacordaire, instead of continuing on and turning north onto Lacordaire then Maurice-Duplessis.
Diagram of STM proposed routes in 2017, note the downgrade in the number of routes. (Source page 8)
However, still in 2017, there was a new STL line planned and the URBIS/exo 25 and 25B routes were supposed to continue south to the new blue line extension.
But due to the blue line extension not yet being open, these plans are likely scrapped, but a new terminal is planned to be constructed at the corner of Jean-Talon and Pie-IX, likely for these suburban buses (Source).
Diagram of suburban proposed routes in 2017, note the downgrade in the number of routes. (Source page 9)
Stations we're also redesigned to match the new ARTM standardized signage (Read more about it). Probably when they redesigned it, they dropped many key aspects that make a high quality busway, such as pre-payment with the removal of fare machines.
The reality of the Pie-IX busway routes.
Map of all services that operate on the newly opened Pie-IX busway.
Prints use map data from Mapbox and OpenStreetMap and their data sources. To learn more, visit https://www.mapbox.com/about/maps/ and http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright.
Data mapped from the open data from the Government of Quebec, EXO, ARTM, STM, STL, RTL.
A fraction of the service that was promised.
Easily, the weakest point of the BRT are the routes and the frequency. Compared to the original plan, they do not run as frequently and do not serve as many destinations. There are also some portions of the busway that are quite frankly, poorly served. I do find it absurd that originally, they were planning for up to 73 buses per hour to run on the busway during peak times, but there is a middle ground between 73 and 15 buses per hour that could be achieved, especially during off-peak times.
Bus Number | Operator | Buses per hour during peak | Frequen-cy during peak | Buses per hour during off-peak | Frequen-cy during off-peak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
439 | STM | 15 buses per hour | 4 minutes | 2 to 6 buses per hour | 10 to 30 minutes |
52 | STL | 1 bus per hour | 1 hour | 1 bus per hour | 1 hour |
252 | STL | 2 buses per hour | 30 minutes | 1 bus per hour | 1 hour |
25 | exo Terrebonne-Mascouche | 2 buses per hour | 30 minutes | 1 bus per hour | 1 hour |
25B | exo Terrebonne-Mascouche | No service | 1 bus per hour (if 25 is not running) | 1 hour |
Table of operational routes with their associated frequencies. (Transit App)
However, the main STM route, the 439, operates at a fraction that was originally planned. A 12-14 bus/h frequency during peak hours, instead of the 48 bus/h. On top of that, the wait can be up to 15-20 minutes during evenings. At least, it is not as bad as some BRT systems, such as VIVA in York Region, which runs up to every 30 minutes mid-day. Perhaps you can set the blame on the pandemic. However, this is a key corridor, running through some of the poorest neighborhoods which depend heavily on transit, and it was marketed by the STM until the launch to have a “metro-like frequency.” It is especially problematic when the service after 9pm drops to 4 buses per hour, which is a bus every 15 mins. However, only one bus on two actually goes deeper in Montreal North and therefore if you miss one, you are out waiting 30 mins at best or at worst having to take the next bus that short turns and then take a connecting bus to where the 439 terminates usually.
Weekday timetable of the STM 439 route at Pie-IX/Jarry station. (Source)
Beware of getting stuck in Laval!
It gets worse, the 2 stations in Laval receive a paltry amount of service. There are literally 11 departures on weekdays for the 439. In the morning, as seen below, buses only run into Montreal (south). During the afternoon peak, the buses only run towards Laval, end their service in Laval and return along the same path back to Montreal, out of service. This means, there is no way to go to Saint-Martin outside of peak hours, or go in the afternoon and have a convenient way to return. It is not possible either to go shopping in one of the nearby shops or connect with the STL and return back to Montreal via the busway. This was a problem when the 24 Hours newspaper went out to Laval when the busway was opened, and drivers were promising that a bus will come shortly, despite none actually coming (Source). Therefore, if you miss your stop, or you do not know the schedule, then you will be stuck in Laval with a very difficult way back if you are not familiar with the STL.
Weekday timetable of the STM 439 southbound route at the Laval Saint-Martin station. (Source)
I would be quite pessimistic if I ignored the existence of the STL 52 & 252. However, despite it being a Laval bus service, they do not service any BRT stop in Laval. They also run very infrequently, the 52 is a bus every hour, the entire day and the 252 is 6 departures per weekday in peak direction.
Weekday schedules of the STL 52 & 252 (Transit App)
There is also one last service, the exo Terrebonne-Mascouche 25 & 25B. They serve the De La Concorde BRT station. However, if you want to go from Laval to Montreal, you are not allowed to board on this bus, because of a pre-ARTM rule. The good thing is that this will be soon changed in a few years due to a bus network redesign that is upcoming in that exo sector and it will allow passengers to board the bus outside of the destined region. But, the question of schedules still arises, as this bus is yet again quite infrequent, with every 30 minutes during peak periods and every hour outside of peak periods. This means again, if you miss your bus, you are out waiting an hour for the next bus.
Weekday schedule of the exo Terrebonne-Mascouche 25 (Transit App)
Poor weekend service.
Now for the worst part of the schedule. There is no service at all before 8am and after 6pm on weekends, aside from the 25B and the 52. This is a huge problem, since there are a lot of attractions on weekends which end quite late in the evening and Montreal is kinda known for its nightlife. This is why the metro is open one hour later on Saturdays. There is also no service by the 439 in Laval on weekends.
Weekend timetable of the STM 439 route at Pie-IX/Jarry station. (Source)
Now for the worst part of the schedule. There is no service at all before 8am and after 6pm on weekends, aside from the 25B and the 52. This is a huge problem, since there are a lot of attractions on weekends which end quite late in the evening and Montreal is kinda known for its nightlife. This is why the metro is open one hour later on Saturdays. There is also no service by the 439 in Laval on weekends.
Most trips from Montreal North need a transfer.
Highlighted area of the limited service in Montreal North.
Prints use map data from Mapbox and OpenStreetMap and their data sources. To learn more, visit https://www.mapbox.com/about/maps/ and http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright.
Data mapped from the open data from the Government of Quebec, EXO, ARTM, STM, STL, RTL.
You thought it could not get any worse? Think again, Montreal North is poorly served outside of the morning peak. The highlighted area, which goes around the Montreal North area that is also served by several frequent (albeit slow) STM bus routes, only operates during morning peak. There is no afternoon service nor weekend service on the highlighted portion. This means, during normal operation, most people taking the Pie-IX BRT, must change buses in Montreal North or walk to their destination. Therefore, this adds time to their commute. Time that could be easily saved if the bus served more of Montreal North.
Weekday timetable of the STM 439 route at Léger / Rolland. (Source)
Fixing the alignment and timetables of routes on the Pie-IX BRT.
A suggestion that the STM can do at no or near zero extra cost to dramatically improve service.
To start off with, all 439 buses are based out of the Legendre bus depot, which is located at the corner of Legendre Street and Saint-Laurent Boulevard. When the buses end their service at any of the northern terminuses, they head out of service (or En Transit) via Highway 40 to get there. Buses get to Highway 40, by you guessed it, Pie-IX boulevard! So they run in mixed traffic, out of service, while serving zero clients, bypassing many busway stops.
Therefore, I propose to add a terminal point at Jarry and Pie-IX. Buses that are ending service at any terminus, does a short turn 439 route until Jarry and Pie-IX. In fact, the bus could exit the busway just before reaching Jarry, turn left onto Jarry, terminate at the existing bus stop which is at Jarry and 22nd Avenue (stop #51524). From what I had observed, there are a significant number of people that want to get off at Jarry anyways, since it is a major intersection of several STM bus routes. This will also solve the one way peak service into Laval, as buses ending at Laval, change to the 439 South and terminate at Jarry and Pie-IX. For the morning peak, instead of the bus starting in Laval, they start the 439 North at the SRB Pie-IX / Jarry stop, and head into Laval and then change into the 439 South and do the full route. Again, this will cost near to nothing because the buses already run parallel to the added service, it’s just that the bus currently runs out of service.
Further improving the 439 Laval service.
To start off with, the Laval portion needs more service. At least service in both directions during peak periods. However, what would be ideal, is to have a service that extends beyond Saint-Martin which can serve the adjacent neighborhoods. This bus could have a 30 minutes out of peak frequency and would be useful to convince people to leave their cars at their house and just get on the bus and metro to go downtown in less than 45 minutes. It currently takes around 50 minutes in the best case scenario and up to an hour with the STL 48 bus, which runs every hour. It could also stop at the nearby Centre de la Nature and give Montreal residents easier access to that major Laval attraction. It would also be competitive with the car, which takes 35 to 40 minutes to go downtown.
Montreal North 439 service.
Addendum: STM is improving service on the 439.
In July 2023, the STM board approved changes to the route 439, that will come into effect during Winter 2024. These changes include 2 major improvements:
- Longer service hours on week-ends (from 7 am to 9 pm instead of the current 8 am to 6 pm)
- The branch towards Henri-Bourassa/Lacordaire will now be extended all the way to Cégep Marie-Victorin.
However, the STM will be cutting service on weekdays. Instead of service ending at midnight, it will also end at 9 pm.
The 439 currently terminates at Henri-Bourassa and Lacordaire in Montreal North. It is surrounded by many retail stores and is connected to the following ex-10 min max routes of the STM: 32, 33, 48, 49 and 69. All of these routes are still heavily used since they all serve primarily poorer neighborhoods. Therefore, the STM should increase service in this sector by running the 439 anti-clockwise loop through Montreal North at all times, instead of just weekday morning peak. The only reason why I see the STM settled for the current configuration is to have a timing point at the end of the route. Therefore to solve this issue, the STM could implement two termini in Montreal North. The current starting point at Albert-Hudon/Henri-Bourassa will be the starting point in the morning, so that the bus picks up everyone in Montreal North and heads South. In the afternoon, the starting point could be somewhere on Sainte-Colette, which is a 6-lane wide road and so it does not interfere with the existing bus lines that run on Lacordaire. This will allow people to take the bus from Pie-IX metro, and take it directly to where they need to go in Montreal North. For those who cannot have the one seat trip, they can simply ride the 439 to the last stop, and change to the 439 in front of it to resume their trip.
Frequency.
The most urgent frequency improvement needs to be all-day weekend service. A bus every 10 minutes at all times should be the bare minimum along the core of the 439 (from Henri-Bourassa to Pie-IX metro station). Additionally, the 439 should be dramatically increased to match the metro-level of service. This means a bus every 5 to 7 minutes out of peak during weekdays, and every 10 minutes after 10pm. On top of that, when frequency is low, all buses should traverse the whole route, and no bus should terminate at Pie-IX metro or Carrefour Pie-IX/Henri-Bourassa. Again, many people in Montreal North travel late at night, and it is not really a bus RAPID transit service when you have to wait upwards of 30 minutes just to get the next bus to the correct destination.
Leverage the busway to increase capacity of the Orange Line.
The Orange Line was at or near its capacity during rush hour pre-pandemic and it is currently near those pre-pandemic levels or ridership (Source). Therefore, it is important to find ways to free up capacity on the orange line, and I believe by better using the Pie-IX busway infrastructure, that could be achieved. For example, the exo Terrebonne-Mascouche 19 bus runs between Terminus Terrebonne (the same terminus as the 25 & 25B) and the orange line terminus, Montmorency. The 19 bus, at peak times, has a departure every 10 minutes.
Conservative amount of people per bus | 40 |
|---|---|
Number of departures during peak time (moment that the 19 is every 10 minutes)
(6:26 am - 8:26 am) | 13 |
Total amount of passengers | 520 |
Estimated amount of people who ride the 19 in the morning peak towards Montmorency Metro.
Conservative amount of people per bus | 40 |
|---|---|
Number of departures during peak time (moment that the 19 is every 10 minutes)
(4:07 pm - 6:07 pm) | 13 |
Total amount of passengers | 520 |
Estimated amount of people who ride the 19 in the evening peak away from Montmorency Metro.
Estimated amount of people travelling on the exo Terrebonne-Mascouche 19 to and from Montmorency Metro during peak hours.
These estimates are only for the period that the 19 operates frequently, however there are a handful of departures before and after these periods that operate at every 20 minutes. On top of that, the aforementioned exo 25 bus runs every 30 minutes to peak and brings passengers to Henri-Bourassa station, another metro station on the orange line. Therefore, a conservative estimate of people that come from these buses to the orange line is around 800 people per direction per peak direction. This does not even count the amount of passengers that are heading towards Terrebonne-Mascouche, although the trains are not packed in this direction and overcrowding is not as big of a concern.
The majority of people who take the 19, typically transfer at Montmorency to head on to the metro and mostly head downtown. Therefore, I propose to instead make an extended route 25 that uses the Pie-IX BRT in its entirety, and terminate at the Pie-IX metro station, on the green line. This new route that I propose, would be referred to as from here on now: exo 25 Extended. Now as mentioned previously, the exo 25 bus was supposed to terminate at the new blue line bus terminal located at Jean-Talon & Pie-IX. However, this solution does not help the orange line, as riders will just take the blue line to Jean-Talon and change to the orange line there, which does not solve the capacity issue of the orange line. The green line has quite a bit of residual capacity left, and therefore not only would it free up capacity on the orange line, but riders from Terrebonne-Mascouche would benefit from a more comfortable ride, and in addition, will increase service through the Pie-IX BRT. As mentioned previously, once the exo Terrebonne-Mascouche sector gets a bus network redesign, exo buses will allow both boarding and disembarking in STM, STL and RTL sectors.
Will boarding and disembarking outside of exo’s territory be permitted in the new bus network, particularly in the RTL’s territory?
The new exo 25 Extended route would run more frequently, similar to that of the 19, which is every 10 mins during peak hours in peak direction and 20 to 30 mins off-peak. The 19 will remain however, with a decreased frequency of all day 30 mins off peak, to give key connections to other regional services such as STL buses and exo services. During off-peak times, this means that at Terminus Terrebonne there will be a bus every 15 mins either going to Montmorency metro station or heading towards Montreal North and Pie-IX metro station, as both routes would be ideally optimally staggered.
~22 minutes
Transfer
~4 minutes
~22 minutes
Total
~48 minutes
Estimated time between Terminus Terrebonne to Berri-UQAM station, downtown Montreal, current situation.
~40 minutes
Transfer
~<3 minutes
~8 minutes
Total
~51 minutes
Estimated time between Terminus Terrebonne to Berri-UQAM station, downtown Montreal, current situation if the exo 25 travelled the entire busway to Pie-IX station.
~30 minutes
Transfer
~<3 minutes
~8 minutes
Total
~41 minutes
Estimated time between Terminus Terrebonne to Berri-UQAM station, downtown Montreal, without Pie-IX bridge and Jean-Talon station construction if the exo 25 travelled the entire busway to Pie-IX station.
Terminus Terrebonne
to
Berri-UQAM
Mid-day, 1pm, summer holidays, little traffic
~41 minutes
Estimated time between Terminus Terrebonne to Berri-UQAM station, downtown Montreal, by car in best case scenario. (Source)
Estimated time between exo 19, exo 25 Extended and personal vehicle options to get from Terminus Terrebonne to Berri-UQAM station
As you can see, the time of both options is similar, albeit my proposed replacement for the exo 19 will be slower. However, this is compounded by a near one seat ride. Instead of a commuter traveling long distance only having a seat for roughly 50% of their journey and then having to take a packed metro for another 20 minutes, they will benefit from obtaining a comfortable seat for 40 minutes, and maybe having to stand up for 8 minutes on the green line. On top of that, the green line, contrary to the orange line, is not at capacity and therefore that ride will be more comfortable too. For the cherry on top of the cake, the Pie-IX BRT riders would also benefit from the extra capacity and frequency.
But, there is an elephant in the room. The numbers I had calculated for the potential exo 25 extended route, is using data from the current exo 25 travel time between Terminus Terrebonne and SRB De La Concorde stop, and adding the current 439 travel time between SRB De La Concorde and Pie-IX station. This means that once the detour in the Jean-Talon area is removed and the Pie-IX bridge construction works are completed, the hypothetical exo 25 Extended route could potentially shave off at minimum 5 minutes further, or up to 10 minutes, depending on circumstances, which would make it a no-brainer choice.
The same treatment could be done for the STL 52 and 252 routes, which could be extended to Pie-IX metro, instead of funneling riders to Henri-Bourassa station.
A full BRT experience watered down to a slightly better bus shelter.
Original test shelter, Amos southbound station on the Pie-IX busway. It was dismantled just before the main portion of the busway opened. (Source)
Removing off-board fare payment.
When the Pie-IX BRT was finalized, a prototype shelter was installed at the corner of Henri-Bourassa and Amos (seen above). As shown above, the original shelter had a real-time departure board, an information sign, a fare machine, a fare validator, camera system, emergency call system and garbage bins. Now, in the finalized version of the shelter, all those amenities were removed except for the information sign, camera system, emergency call system and real-time departure board. This is important, because the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP) describes Off-board fare collection as “one the most important factors in reducing travel time and improving the customer experience” and classifies it under “BRT basics” (Source). Therefore, when the BRT fully opened, they had briefly closed the Amos station to “upgrade” it, by removing the fare machines.
Amos southbound station today, a bare looking busway shelter.
The major issue with removing the fare machines from the stops is that it can significantly delay buses on the corridor. For example, with the ever-increasing fares from 3.75$ and beyond, would increase the number of coins needed to pay for the bus, and will cause even more delays. This is especially prominent, because the bus runs through poorer areas where people cannot necessarily afford to purchase a monthly pass, and therefore tend to purchase more single tickets with coins. There are many shops to purchase tickets around the line, but these shops are usually corner stores or shops with limited opening hours and limited knowledge about their existence. Thus, these people tend to purchase these tickets on the bus, and sometimes getting out the necessary coins and inserting it inside the fare box could take upwards of a minute and cause a significant increase in dwell times at stations.
Real-time departure board inside Pie-IX / Jarry southbound station.
On top of that, the fare machines would not have even cost that much to install and operate, since all the stations already have electricity for the lighting and displays as well as an internet connection for the real-time displays at the stations. The only additional cost would be the occasional visit to repair machines and fill it up with paper tickets and smart cards. Besides, all train stations in the Greater Montreal area, which cater to much less people than these bus shelters, all have at least one validator and one fare vending machine.
Information board located inside the Pie-IX / Jarry southbound station.
Poorly placed stop vis-a-vis the intersection.
Current configuration of the near-side southbound Amos station.
Map data ©2023 Google, Image Landsat/Copernicus. Captured on Google Earth: (Source)
This issue is only apparent at the Amos station, because it is the only station that is placed on the near-side of the intersection, but I’ve seen this happen many times. The bus sees no one at the stop, and therefore does not stop at the station and stops at the white line to wait for its light to continue on, or to turn into the adjacent lane of traffic (the busway ends at this stop). A slightly late rider runs to the stop and begs the driver to open the doors, but the driver drives off because he is not allowed to board passengers when the bus is waiting at the light. The rider must now wait upwards of an hour until the next suburban bus comes. This is a frustrating experience for the rider, since the bus is right there, but the rider cannot get on because the bus is just slightly past the intersection. In fact, this happened to me, and the driver on the 439 was nice enough to open the rear doors, but unfortunately, the bus was past the station, and there was little space for me to get on. On top of that, the driver was not supposed to do that and was supposed to do that, and was supposed to continue on his route. Luckily for me though, the next bus was just a few minutes behind, so it was not a big deal.
Two buses waiting for their turn to cross the intersection, but cannot board any passengers.
Now you may think that this is in the event that two buses show up at the stop at the same time, and that the bus can advance and let the bus behind it load. But, there is not enough space to let that happen, and the bus behind must wait for the first bus to completely clear the station before stopping and letting people board the second bus.
Fortunately, the solution is easy. Simply move the stop line slightly backward so that the driver can keep the doors open while waiting for the light to change. For the safety of pedestrians, the bus could exit the station at a slow speed, and make sure the intersection is clear, and then fully accelerate the bus once the near-side crosswalk cleared.
Proposed configuration of the near-side southbound Amos station.
Map data ©2023 Google, Image Landsat/Copernicus. Captured on Google Earth: (Source)
The lack of accessibility.
People with mobility issues are common than most people believe.
Large step between the bus and the station.
Current configuration of the near-side southbound Amos station.
Map data ©2023 Google, Image Landsat/Copernicus. Captured on Google Earth: (Source)
Another major oversight in stations was level boarding with buses. Stations were built at standard curb height, and therefore the step to board a bus is around 15 to 20 centimeters high. This may seem easy for able-bodied persons, but persons with disability or persons who have mobility issues have significant trouble getting on the buses, despite being low floor articulated buses running on the busway. There are also significant issues for mothers with strollers, as I witnessed once a mother trying to take a stroller on to the bus at the front door. Despite the driver lowering the bus, the step was still large enough for her baby’s drink to fall out of the drink holder on the wheelchair and onto the ground, adding even more dwell time just to get the stroller onto the bus, let alone the difficulties for mothers traveling alone on the bus.
Proper level boarding, such as on the recently opened Houston METRO Silver Line (pictured below), solves all these issues. There is virtually no step to get on the bus, and the driver can release smaller, quicker to deploy ramps which facilitate boarding and debarking even more. For people who have mobility issues, there is no longer any struggle to get on and off the bus with a 20 centimeter step. For mothers with strollers, it is much easier for them to get on and off the bus, and also reduces dwell times at stops.
Near no-step boarding at a Silver Line station in Houston, Texas. (Source)
Transition point between the street and the sidewalk.
In addition to the large step to get on to the bus, the curb to get on to the center platform at some stations is not even level with the street. This means that wheelchair users have difficulties getting on to the middle platform to board the bus.
Transition point between center platform and paved road.
The curb height difference between the road and the center platform, in some cases, exceeds the height of my shoe, which is 30 mm thick. The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) states that: “Transition points between adjacent curb ramp surfaces should be flush. Even a 13 mm (0.5 in) change in level combined with a change in grade can complicate access for wheelchair users” (Source page 21). Some users in wheelchairs had been even claiming that the transition point gap can be even 40 mm, such as at the Pie-IX / Mont-Royal station or even 50 mm such as at the Pie-IX / Rosemont station (Source). In the article, it is noted that “the Amos station at the north end of the line was the first one to be built and it served for six years as a testing ground, notably for groups that represented people with mobility issues. Dion noted two sidewalk ramps at that station that didn’t meet the street, both of them between the northbound station and the sidewalk on the east side of the street” (Source). This is interesting because the northbound stop is not the aforementioned testing station, only the southbound stop was, and no deficiencies were noted in the article.
Damaged concrete at the transition point.
This is further compounded by the significant amounts of damage at the transition point. After a mere year, this damage (seen above) is from snow plows clearing the snow and chipping off portions of concrete from the center platform.
This issue could be solved by simply planning raised crosswalks, similar to those on Des Pins, and raising the busway, to a similar height of the bike lanes on Des Pins. This would omit much of the ramp, and would reduce the speed of motorists. This would also result in intersections being safer, and motorists placing greater attention to pedestrians crossing the road. Anyways, raised crosswalks should be a norm around transit stops, as everyone must cross the road to access the bus, and since this level of infrastructure is only built on heavily ridden corridors, those crosswalks serve a lot of people, probably more persons than cars. This just solidifies the reason why it is important to place raised crosswalks, even on busy arteries, as transit users are more vulnerable, and in greater numbers.
Where are the benches?
Ischiatic supports and the emergency phone system inside the Pie-IX / Jarry station.
There is not any station along the corridor that has seats inside the shelter. Instead, there are metal supports that people can lean on, while waiting for the bus. Although this is okay for able-bodied persons; other persons with disabilities or difficulties to stand for prolonged periods of time would have difficulty. This is especially prominent when the wait can sometimes exceed 30 minutes for the 439 bus and over an hour for a suburban bus. The probable reasons that they were omitted is likely due to space-constraints, but also due to concerns of the homeless population setting up shop and sleeping in the shelters during the evening. However, these could both be fixed, by adding benches, instead of seats, so that there is no need for the backrest, and handles in between the seats so that the elderly can get up from the seat and prevent a person from sleeping on top of them.
Ideas to improve accessibility.
Audiovisual support.
A blind rider presses a button to generate an audio message from a screen. (Source)
If a rider is blind, they cannot know when their bus is coming, nor they are able to know what direction or where the bus is going. This makes it extremely difficult to riders who have a limited vision to get around on buses. Therefore to improve the situation, buttons should be placed near screens that when pressed, will play an audio announcement of the next buses arriving, with number, direction, destination and minutes until arrival. On top of that, when the bus arrives and the doors open, the bus should announce the bus number, direction and destination of the bus.
Braille.
The recently opened REM has signage, a first in the Greater Montreal region, to have braille installed.
To improve the accessibility of stops, the entrance of stations should have braille signs with tactile letters that state the name, direction and bus routes that serve that stop. Emergency instructions should also be printed in braille, because sometimes an individual that is blind or partially sighted may be alone in the stop and may be in need of emergency services.
Translink is installing braille and tactile letters at every single bus stop in the Greater Vancouver area. (Source)
Buses that are not adapted for operating a BRT service.
A STM 439 southbound bus waiting at the traffic light before entering 56th Street station.
Outdated equipment.
Interior of an STM 439 southbound articulated bus.
The major route on the Pie-IX busway is the 439 operated by the STM. It commonly uses Nova Bus 60 foot Articulated buses ordered from 2009 to 2013 (Source). The major issue with these buses is that they are old and are prone to mechanical issues since they are at or near the end of their lifespan, which is typically 12 years for a heavy duty city bus. The issues are so prevalent that the STM has started removing articulated buses altogether on certain routes, such as the 45 Papineau, 193 Jarry and the 197 Rosemont buses. In addition to that, due to the budget shortfalls, the STM cannot supplement service on the aforementioned bus routes to have a similar capacity as they had previously on those routes. It has led to those routes being some of the most commonly crowded routes on the island and ridership spiraling downward even further. On top of that, it is common to see on the few remaining articulated routes, normal 40 foot buses doing some of the heavy lifting. Therefore, to no surprise to anyone, sometimes these 40 foot buses make it onto the 439 Pie-IX BRT route.
Non-standard equipment.
A suburban bus typically used on the exo 25 and 25B routes.
Most buses that operate on the Pie-IX busway are the 60 foot Nova Bus LFS articulated buses operated by the STM. However, the busway is also shared with STL and exo Terrebonne-Mascouche. All three operators operate different types of buses. STL operates the 40 foot Nova Bus LFS hybrid buses, which is not too bad, considering it is almost identical to their 60 foot counterparts just shorter. exo Terrebonne-Mascouche, on the other hand, operates a completely different model of buses (sometimes they do use 40 foot Nova Bus LFS buses too) which is the 40 foot New Flyer Xcelsior (pictured above). These buses look different, but they also have considerably thinner doors than the already thin rear doors of the LFS. This further increases alighting and boarding times, which tends to create bus platoons. However, currently these buses only travel a handful of stops on the busway, and only tend to drop off or pick up a few people. But, if the infrastructure is used more properly, and allowing the exo Terrebonne-Mascouche route 25 to do through-running all the way to Pie-IX, this should change.
Snow days.
A 439 northbound 40 foot bus followed by a 439 articulated bus at 56th Street station on a normal day.
On snow days, or days of bad weather, all articulated buses of the STM are not used. Instead, normal 40 foot standard buses are used. These buses do not have rear door validators, such as on the articulated buses of the STM and therefore, on top of reducing capacity greatly, they also slow down dramatically boarding and debarking. This would not have been as great of an issue if there was off-board fare payment at stops.
A new standard for equipment running on the busway.
Marco Chitti commented that one way to increase the speed of the buses is increasing the number of doors (Source). However, there is currently no manufacturer in North America that offers 3 doors for 40 foot buses and 4 doors for 60 foot buses, which is standard for most Europe-based manufacturers. But, the STM, STL and exo Terrebonne-Mascouche could all order buses with the wider rear doors, found commonly on systems such as the TTC in the Greater Toronto Area or the MTA in New York City. They could go even a step beyond and order a similar specification to the newer MTA buses which feature sliding rear doors (Source). The sliding doors further reduce dwell times at stops, and increases the capacity of the vehicle slightly as more passengers can fit near the rear doors. It also improves accessibility, as the handles to get on the vehicle are throughout the length of the bottom portion of the doors (Source).
Major source of bus bunching: Traffic lights.
Pedestrian crossing at the Pie-IX / 56th Street intersection.
Intersections that slow down buses and make them bunch.
Pie-IX / D'Amos intersection. Pie-IX BRT northbound buses merge into normal traffic at this intersection just before reaching Henri-Bourassa.
Many blame the issue of bus bunching (Understand more about bus bunching) on the detour in the Jean-Talon area, but I do not believe it is the case, since buses arrive bunched up before even reaching the detoured section. Aside from the long dwell times at stations caused by the lack of pre-payment and level boarding, the most significant issues with the corridor that slows down buses are the intersections. The traffic lights seem to not have Transit Signal Priority (TSP) enabled, and many times buses have to brake abruptly because the traffic light changes. Some drivers even blow pass their "red" signal (I've witnessed this twice out of the three times I've ridden on the STM 439), because the transit signal phase (or configuration terminology used in this article) for buses is frustratingly shorter than the normal traffic signals. The transit signal is already "red" while the signal right next to it (pictured above as an example) is just turning yellow.
A traffic light phase that only allows buses to cross the intersection 8.70% of the time.
Combination "A"
Combination "B"
Combination "C"
Three possible phases, or configurations for the Pie-IX / D'Amos intersection.
Map data ©2023 Google, Image Landsat/Copernicus. Captured on Google Earth: (Source)
Combination | Phase length |
|---|---|
A | 10 seconds |
B | 1 minute and 10 seconds |
C | 35 seconds |
Timed phase lengths for each configuration for the Pie-IX / D'Amos intersection when there is a bus present at the northbound station.
Combination | Phase length |
|---|---|
B | 1 minute and 28 seconds |
C | 35 seconds |
Timed phase lengths for each configuration for the Pie-IX / D'Amos intersection when there is no bus present at the northbound station.
Timed phase lengths for each configuration for the Pie-IX / D'Amos intersection depending on if a northbound bus is present or not.
The biggest problem is that the bus only has a 10 second window to cross the intersection and if it misses that window, it has to wait almost two minutes for the next chance to exit the busway (combination A). If some rough napkin math is done, this results in 8.70% of the time, a bus can cross the intersection. This issue of waiting a long time for a small window to cross the intersection is not unique to this intersection (but this intersection is the worst for this out of all of them!). This causes the issue of bus bunching, and causing unreliable, uneven service along the corridor.
A three bus platoon arriving at Pie-IX / D'Amos station at once. Notice the long line of cars waiting to the left of the photo.
It seems that TSP is not even enabled for any of the intersections. This is due to buses just about to cross the intersection and the light turns to "red" about 25 meters before the bus reaches the intersection. The phase could have easily been extended five seconds at most, and the bus would not have needed to wait at that intersection to get another green. Back to real life, the bus waits another minute to cross the intersection. Then it stops at the station to pick up passengers and the boarding takes longer than usual because someone is paying with cash and holds up the bus for another minute. The bus finally departs the station and just misses it's phase at the next intersection for which it gets held up for another minute. The bus is now three minutes late, and the bus arrives at the next stop for which more people are waiting than usual because the bus running late. Now the dwell time at the station is longer, and the bus behind it catches up because the frequency is every three minutes during rush hour. This illustrates why it is crucial to have "heavy" transit priority, especially on a corridor of this type. The lanes that the bus operates on is carrying about half the road users of the road, as Pie-IX corridor typically sees 56,000 vehicles traverse it (Source) and the Pie-IX BRT is projected to carry 42,500 people per day (Source). This justifies that the bus should have much higher priority than other road users to further increase this throughput and decrease the number of vehicles.
Badly designed intersections.
Two STM 439 articulated buses attempting to merge into traffic, but is blocked by cars blocking the intersection. A third bus is at the station and a fourth is approaching the station.
Two STM 439 articulated buses are seen a few moments later when traffic ahead finally moved and the intersection became unblocked so they could finally merge into normal traffic.
You may think the pictures above is due to a traffic accident or some sort of uncommon scenario. In fact, this is a daily occurrence, caused by the long timings of the traffic lights at the intersections of Pie-IX / D'Amos and Pie-IX / Henri-Bourassa. The traffic lights do not take into account the long waiting times and adjust the timings of the phases accordingly. This leads to huge backups, and motorists getting frustrated. When they get frustrated, one tends to inch into the intersection and once one person does it, many follow. This creates the intersection blocking seen below. This is why buses tend to collect at this station. In the case seen above, two buses are waiting to merge, one is at the station and a fourth is approaching the station. This is how the bus bunching forms on the Pie-IX BRT.
Despite the sign clearly indicating not to stop in the marked zone of the intersection, cars still encroach and stop in the intersection, blocking it.
The solution would be to simply better time the traffic lights at the minimum. Ideally, it would be the installation of sensors which detect when the lanes are filled up with cars and only has space for a bus to enter on each lane. It would change the cycle to configuration C (seen in the previous part), and would wait until a bus has crossed the previous intersection. This would change the light to configuration A until the bus has served the station and has now merged into the traffic lane. Now the traffic light goes back to configuration C. It will only change back to configuration B once both lanes completely empty and the Pie-IX / Henri-Bourassa intersection turns red so that the lanes fill up again.
Poor pedestrian accessibility.
A pedestrian weaving between the cars that are sitting on top of the pedestrian crossing despite having 18 seconds left on the pedestrian counter.
Another side effect of the issue mentioned in the previous part, is that cars also block the pedestrian intersection. This causes difficulty for people to cross the intersection and needing to weave in-between of cars. On top of that, if it was a wheelchair user or any kind of disabled user, it would be utterly impossible to cross this intersection.
This could have been easily fixed if the crosswalks were raised, so that motorists were discouraged to stop on top of the crosswalks. It would also slow motorists down when going over them, forcing them to pay more attention.
Intersection of Pie-IX / Jarry. Note that the crosswalk has only one pedestrian island so that pedestrians can wait safely if they cannot cross the entire road.
Many pedestrians cross dangerously Pie-IX, especially to catch a bus at the stations. This issue primarily exists because people do not want to wait the 6 minutes during rush hour, or up to 20 minutes out of peak for a bus that heads into Montreal North. This could easily be fixed if there were two islands, and each section had it's own pedestrian signal. If that section was clear and no cars were incoming, pedestrians can cross safely that section. It would only change once there is a build-up of cars on both lanes, and then it will tailor a phase timing until that line up of cars is gone. It would also change immediately if it detects any transit vehicle. This is important, because even if the signal does not allow pedestrians to cross, they will still do it, because they have places to go and they do not want to wait 20 minutes for another bus, while a motorist could afford to be delayed a minute instead.
Major source of bus bunching: Oversight and tools.
While I am on the topic of bus bunching, I will touch on the other cause of bus bunching. The uneven load of buses is also a major reason why buses do not run on equal intervals. As you can see, there is typically a filled bus being trailed by several near empty buses. The issue is that it is difficult to properly merge buses starting at Notre-Dame and the buses starting at Pie-IX metro station. On top of that, the crowds are dependent on when the metro arrives, as many people are transferring from the metro to the bus. Therefore, what happens is that once a bus is full, it tends to dwell more at subsequent stops. This means it is running behind and therefore creates a huge gap ahead of it and lets buses behind it catch up to it, as they do not need to dwell as much at the stops because there are less people getting off the bus. On top of that, many bus operators do not respect the schedule, and tend to leave bus stops a minute or two early, worsening even further the gaps between two buses.
All the pictures seen below are the 439 North, and you can see that buses are bunched up before entering the detour at Jean-Talon area.
Buses on the 439 northbound are already bunched up even before entering the detour in the Jean-Talon area. (Transit App)
Despite a supervisor being dispatched at Pie-IX Station, it seems that he can do little to nothing to properly regulate the service because he does not have the right tools at his fingertips. From what I had seen, he had taken a picture of his laptop in the car, and then walked to the stop and told drivers to wait a minute or two and then depart to do his best to even out the service based off the picture he had taken from his cell phone.
Giving better tools to operators and dispatchers.
The best solution is to change the classic operator’s creed from never ever pulling away from a stop early or trying not to be late towards a new focus on pacing. A great example of this is UVX.
Picture of the operator's dashboard while operating UVX. (Source)
Pacing means that buses run as quickly as they can on the corridor, and if there are any adjustments that need to be made, the computer will notify the driver to hold at the next stop to create the proper gaps. Therefore, it is a shift of mentality towards ensuring that the interval of buses is consistent. Utah Valley Transit mentions this on the UVX schedule:
Will operators wait at timepoints?
No. Operators will leave the first timepoint on time and then travel as quickly as possible to the end of the route. Operators stop to let customers on and off the bus, but the operator does not keep a set schedule. (Source)
The STM now has access to the real-time positioning of every single bus, and it could implement this, coupled with interval-based schedules which would be more adapted to this sort of service. All 439 busway stops have digital displays which display the next departures in real time, so passengers will be informed of the next departures.
MBTA Skate.
Picture of a MBTA-issued Android tablet running the Skate App. (Source)
The MBTA Skate app, is an in-house developed open-source bus management app built for the bus inspectors at the MBTA in 2019. It came about after the blatant need for better technology to better manage its bus fleet and manage disruptions across the MBTA bus network. It was developed by a team of five people which included a project manager, UX designer, user research designer and two software developers. (Source)
The simplification that the MBTA Skate app provides to bus inspectors and dispatchers allows them to see the state of the route and monitor gaps between buses more closely. The so-called "ladders" were inspired from the subway boards that signallers are used to seeing, and adapting it for buses.
STM central control center for the Métro. Notice the "ladder" type view in the background. (Source)
On the MBTA Skate app, each triangle on the map represents a bus, and the line connected from the bus is connected to the nearest stop of where the bus should be according to it's schedule. The triangles have the run number and block number associated on it and are colored depending if the bus is on-time, late or early. Only major stops are shown, with an abbreviated name.
The STM also has a similar app (seen below, left image), but it does not convey the information as clearly. Instead of the MBTA Skate app only providing the necessary information at a glance and an expanded pane to house the additional information about that trip and bus, it puts all the information in a hard to see diagram. On top of that, every single stop is shown on the diagram, with only the stop number, not it's name. Buses that are in green, but have a striped pattern are those that are on layover. Again, the MBTA Skate app is better, as it shows the layover buses as smaller triangles on the top and bottom of the diagram. For the STM, the diagram's colors are not consistent either, as they do not follow the typical convention that red (or "hot") is early and blue (or "cold") is late.
Current STM Dispatcher route diagram. Note that it is complicated and not as easy to view at a glance the state of the line.
MBTA Skate route diagram.
Easy to view at a glance for many routes. (Source)
The biggest advantage of the MBTA Skate app, is that it is specifically designed to run on tablets. It is perfect for those who are out on the field, and instead of just taking a picture of the diagram and running to the bus stop, the MBTA bus inspectors have up-to-date information at their fingertips.
MBTA Skate route diagram.
Easy to view at a glance for many routes. (Source)
With co-operation of the people on the field, it led to the creation of the new expanded properties window. It shows not just the information about the bus and it's current run, but also the future trips and when someone has to take over the bus, and the details of their shift. It helped the inspectors plan for the future work that was involved, and to mitigate any service disruptions.
Speaking of service disruptions, the Skate app also provided more information when a bus was missing, or had to be taken off due to the bus being needed for a subway shuttle, for example. The designers took design inspiration from the Pac-Man ghosts and implemented it inside the app.
Route "ladders" with many ghosts present. Ghosts represent a bus that should be running, but is not due to many reasons, such as a subway-replacement shuttle. (Source)
The BRT Standard Scorecard for the Pie-IX BRT.
The Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP) created the standard for busways and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) services (Read more about the standard here). To rate and class systems, they had devised a scorecard which gives individual systems a score out of a hundred, and then ranks them based on four levels of BRT "quality" ranking from lowest to highest: Basic, Bronze, Silver and Gold. They have rated many systems across the globe, including some in Canada. Systems such as the Ottawa Transitway and the VIVA Transitway both obtained 64 points and this gives them the "Bronze" title (Source). Those who are familiar with both of the abovementioned systems, knows that the Ottawa Transitway is a much better experience than the VIVA Transitway, simply due to much shorter headways, and this is where the criticism of this metric comes into question. However, it is still the standard metric and highlights important aspects to have a well rounded BRT system, such as pre-pay boarding on the VIVA Transitway which is notably missing from Ottawa's Transitway.
The BRT Basics
Minimum requirements to be considered a BRT
- At least 3 km of dedicated lanes
- Score four or more points in dedicated right-of-way element
- Score four or more points in busway alignment element
- Score 20 or more points across all five BRT basic elements
Some elements are noted as "BRT Basics," which means that they must exist in some form and in some cases obtain over four points in that element to be even considered a BRT.
BRT Basics
A score of four points or more is required.
The right-of-way is where the bus operates. Ensuring it is dedicated ensures that buses can move quickly. The best-case scenario is a completely separated right-of-way, like an overground train. The worst-case scenario is no dedicated lanes.
Type of dedicated right-of-way | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Color-differentiated, dedicated lanes with no physical separation | 6 | 8.62 km / 11.1 km 77.66% % of corridor with type of dedicated right-of-way |
BRT Basics
A score of four points or more is required.
The alignment of the busway must reduce conflicts with other types of traffic as much as possible. The best-case scenario is center-running busway. The worst-case scenario is a curb-running busway, where buses run on the outer sides of the road.
Corridor confirgurations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Two-way median-alignment busway in the central verge of a two-way road | 8 | 8.62 km / 11.1 km 77.66% % of corridor with type of dedicated right-of-way |
BRT Basics
Essential element to true BRT corridors.
Off-board fare collection is one of the ways to speed up the bus the most. The best-case scenario is a barrier-controlled system, such as common on rail systems. The worst-case scenario is no special treatments for fare collection.
Off-board fare collection | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Onboard fare validation - all doors | 4 | 1 route / 5 routes 20% % of routes using corridor bus infrastructure |
BRT Basics
Essential element to true BRT corridors.
Reducing travel times is key, and one important method is reducing the amount of conflicts with personal vehicles. The best-case scenario is a prohibiting turns across the right-of-way. The worst-case scenario is that traffic lights detect when a bus is coming.
Most left-hand turns, those who cross the busway are banned across the corridor, although there are a few sprinkled throughout (Source).
Intersection treatments | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Turns prohibited across the busway. | 7 | 35 turns / 46 turns 76.09% % of turns across busway prohibited |
BRT Basics
Essential element to true BRT corridors.
Reducing alighting and boarding times is key and one way this is achieved is by having virtually no vertical gap between the bus and the platform. This also helps accessibility greatly across the system. The best-case scenario is that buses are at platform level with 4 cm or less of vertical gap. The worst-case scenario is no measures that reduce the vertical gap.
Platform-level boarding | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No measures | 0 | |
Service Planning
Having multiple routes that operates on a single corridor reduces the amount of time to access the busway. The best-case scenario is many routes. The worst-case scenario is a single route.
Multiple routes | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Two or more routes exist on the corridor, servicing at least two stations. | 4 | 5 routes |
Operating different types of services reduced the travel times. The best-case scenario is the existence local and express services. The worst-case scenario is that all services on the busway stop at every station.
Service types | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No limited-stop or express services | 0 |
Control center allows finer tweaking and optimal bus spacing. The best-case scenario is that all bus routes have a central control center. The worst-case scenario is there is no control system or control center with limited functionality.
A full-service control center monitors the location of all buses with GPS or similar technology and can:
- Respond to incidents in real-time;
- Control spacing of buses;
- Determine and respond to the maintenance status of all buses in the fleet;
- Record passenger boardings and alightings for future service adjustments;
- Use Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD)/Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) for bus tracking and performance monitoring.
Control center | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Control center with limited functionality. | 0 |
The control center for the STM, cannot control the spacing of vehicles along the corridor, which leads to frequent bus bunching.
The corridor is located among the top ten corridors of bus ridership.
Corridor location | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Corridor is one of top ten demand corridors | 2 |
Dedicated and highest quality infrastructure is located in the portion where there is the most riders.
Demand profile | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 1 Trunk Corridor configuration. | 3 |
A good transit system is open for as many hours as possible. If it is closed during late-nights or weekends, people may search other modes of transportation.
Operating hours | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Both late-night and weekend service. | 2 |
A good BRT connects to other BRT corridors, and is not stand-alone.
Multi-corridor | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No connected BRT network planned or built | 0 |
The Henri-Bourassa Metrobus project, is not a BRT, because it's busway will be located on the curb-side of the road (Source).
Infrastructure
Passing lanes allow express services to skip stations.
Passing lanes | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No passing lanes | 0 |
Buses cause a significant amount of pollution in urban areas. Key efforts must be done to reduce these harmful effects.
Emissions standards | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Euro VI or US 2010 | 3 |
For stations located on the far-side of the intersection, which is the majority for the Pie-IX BRT, it is key that the stations are set back far enough so that if passengers take long to board, the next bus can still dock without blocking the intersection. Ideally this should be 40 meters, but it is passable if it is 26 meters. Unfortunately for all Pie-IX BRT stations, the set back is 10 meters.
Station locations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
<25% of stations on corridor are set back 26 meters from intersections | 0 |
Center stations are the best, as it is easy for passengers to make transfers and reduces construction costs and reduces the needed spaces.
Center stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
All stations are split stations | 0 |
Good quality pavement is necessary to keep operations running smoothly as possible for as long as possible while minimizing distruptions.
Pavement quality on Pie-IX BRT is unknown, therefore full points given automatically.
Pavement materials | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Pavement structure designed for thirty-year life over entire corridor | 2 |
Stations
Stations should be optimally spaced apart to optimize the walking vs. bus speed. The optimal spacing is advised to be 450 meters. Beyond this, more time is necessary to walk than the time saved by bus speed. Below this, bus speeds will be reduced more than the time to walk.
On the Pie-IX BRT, stations are located around 652 meters apart, on average.
Distance between stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Stations are spaced, on average, between 0.3 km and 0.8 km apart | 2 |
One of the key features of BRT is that they feature enhanced shelters.
Wide
Stations should wider than 3 meters, to prevent overcrowding.
Weather-protected
Stations are protected from wind, rain and snow.
Safe
Stations have cameras, well-lit and transparent.
Attractive
Station design is attractive and creates the image of BRT, with a sense of permanence.
Stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Stations have all four elements. | 3 | 17 stations / 17 stations 100% % of stations |
Speed of boarding and alighting is partly linear with the number of doors.
Buses | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Buses have at least three doors (articulated buses) or two wide doors (non-articulated buses) on the station side. System allows boarding at all doors. | 3 | 129 weekday departures / 180 weekday departures 71.67% % of buses using corridor infrastructure meeting criteria |
Multiple bays and substations increase station capacity and reducing wait times to enter the station
Docking bays and substops | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No docking bays or substops | 0 |
Sliding doors prevent injury and protects passengers from the weather
Sliding doors | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No sliding doors | 0 |
Communications
Branding is key to separate the BRT system from normal bus services.
The stations have distinct branding, but the route and the buses follow the typical branding without any special treatment.
Branding | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Some buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand, regardless of rest of system. | 1 |
Passengers having access to real time information is key to having a high customer satisfaction upon riding the BRT.
Real time information board upon entering the stop.
Passenger information (at stations and on vehicles) | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Functioning real-time and up-to-date static passenger information corridor-wide | 2 |
Access and integration
A BRT should be accessible to all special-needs customers, including those who have physical and audiovisual barriers.
Unfortunately, the Pie-IX BRT provides no audiovisual support, and limited physical accessibility.
Universal accessibility | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Physical accessibility provided | 2 |
A BRT should be well connected with the whole public transport system
Integration with other public transport | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Integration of both physical design and fare payment | 3 |
A BRT corridor must be easy to access safely by walking.
Unfortunately, the Pie-IX corridors has intersections with excessive pedestrian waiting times (> 45 seconds), speed limits are high (> 30 km/h), design that matches more a freeway rather than a complex environment, pedestrians in some cases must cross 3 lanes of traffic and 2 bus lanes before reaching a safe pedestrian refuge, ramps do not always meet the paved surface and vehicles stopping and blocking the pedestrian crosswalk.
Pedestrian access | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and modest improvements along corridor | 3 |
Multi-modal transport by using active transportation methods are always better and allows different types of commuters to feed into the BRT system.
There is no bicycle parking along the Pie-IX corridor, but there is ample car parking space in Laval!
Bicycle parking | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No bicycle parking. | 0 |
Bicycle lanes improve access to the corridor.
Bicycle lanes | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No bicycle infrastructure | 0 |
Last mile transit is the most expensive. Therefore having a bicycle-sharing service near stations is key.
Bike-sharing integration | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Bicycle-sharing at <50% of stations on corridor. | 0 |
Operations deductions
A BRT is designed to be fast, and if it is not, it reduces the appeal of transit.
The average corridor speed of the Pie-IX BRT is 17.1 km/h (Source).
Commercial speeds | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Minimum average commercial speed is 16 km/h to 19 km/h | -1 |
An average articulated bus carries 120 people, and there are 13 departures per hour in peak direction along the core of the corridor, which amounts to a capacity of 1,560 passengers per hour per direction.
Passengers per hour per direction (PPHPD) in peak hour | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
PPHPD above a thousand | 0 |
It is rare to see someone drive on the busway.
Lack of enforcement | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No encroachment on BRT right-of-way | 0 |
The Pie-IX BRT does not have platform-level boarding by design
Gap when docking | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No platform-level boarding by design | 0 |
Overcrowding tends to deter people to ride the bus.
Overcrowding | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
No overcrowding | 0 |
The system just opened, so no deficiencies should be detected.
56th Street southbound station has severe damage with a cracked window and bent railings.
Amos southbound station has it's displays non functioning and signage removed.
Maintenance of stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Structural damage at stations | -2 |
Maintenance of technology systems | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Technology systems are not functional | -2 |
STM buses run frequently; however, STL and EXO buses do not.
Maintenance of stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
<50% have at least 8 buses per hour | -3 |
STM buses run frequently; however, STL and EXO buses do not.
Maintenance of stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
<60% of all routes have at least 4 buses per hour | -2 |
Buses should be spaced apart evenly to provide the best service.
However, even before the detour on the STM 439 bus route, buses are already bunched up, due to the absence of any system that keeps service running evenly spaced apart.
This leads to almost every single bus during rush hour being bunched up and regularly many buses appear.
Maintenance of stations | Points | Weighted by |
|---|---|---|
Multiple instances of bus bunching are observed on corridor within an hour | -4 |
Final score
Final thoughts.
The Pie-IX bus rapid transit (BRT) is a fantastic boost in service for those who rely on it. It has the highest average speed for any frequent bus in Montreal. But, even better results could be achieved, if only a little more thought, work and investment went inside the project. Right now, it still takes 25 to 30 minutes to travel by the BRT on Pie-IX, versus 20 minutes by car. I believe by implementing many strategies proposed in this article, the travel times could be reduced to match those of the car and make the Pie-IX BRT a much more compelling option that can truly replace a car. These measures should also be applied for future BRT corridors, such as Henri-Bourassa, Du Parc and Côte-Des-Neiges.
These measures include:
- Simplified planning processes
- Center-aligned bus only lanes
- True Métro-like frequency
- Bus route alignments that do not focus as much on funneling people towards Métro stations
- Minimizing "dead running"
- Pre-payment and ticket machines available at all stations
- Better planned set backs from intersections
- True level boarding
- Ensuring that stations can be accessed by wheelchair users
- Benches for the elderly and persons with disabilities
- Better support systems for those who are disabled
- Planning for better equipment (ideally trolleybuses!)
- Robust transit signal priority
- Better tools for dispatchers and for those who are on the field
- Inspiring from best industry practices
The aforementioned measures will not only promote travel times, but also the ease of use of this new system. Increasingly today, transit authorities have to face competition from the brain-dead ease of use of just using ride hailing services, such as Uber, and ordering a car within minutes. Therefore, one of the biggest challenges is to make public transport systems as easy to use as possible, and when there are barriers such as not having ticket machines at stops, it can easily deter people from ever trying public transport. Sometimes, these issues could be as bad as having no service, or getting stuck in an area such as Laval, which makes it insanely difficult to return back to Montreal. Therefore, transit authorities should put as one of their biggest priorities to clearly deliver such information at the minimum, and at best provide the needed frequent and reliable services. We know as a society we need to get people out of their cars, but we can not do that without providing them with a realistic alternative of providing with fast, frequent and reliable transit service. This is done by creating more corridors such as Pie-IX, but also enhancing them with the measures that are aforementioned. However, it seems that the opposite is happening, only one project will have centered bus lanes, a huge reason why the Pie-IX BRT is so quick despite lacking many typical amenities of a BRT, and this project is the Notre-Dame BRT in Laval, which is currently being studied (Source). All other "BRT" projects of the STM, such as on Henri-Bourassa, are curb-side lanes, which the BRT standard, does not consider to be a BRT. This is a huge mistake, and should be looked at in the future. On top of that, many small measures could be considered, such as adjusting bus stop spacing (Source), bus bulbs (Source) and also creating more effective reserved bus lanes (Source).
Contact me
Related article
A new take on the frequent transit map.
Let's stay connected.
Get a notification in your inbox when I publish a new article. Unsubscribe when you want to.
This is a personal blog. I do not represent nor affiliated with the ARTM, STM, STL, RTL, EXO or any other entity.
All content is © Cole Dev unless noted.
Comments