Stephen Rees's blog

Thoughts about the relationships between transport and the urban area it serves

Bus window visibility

with 2 comments

photo of a Range Rover, originally uploaded by jmv.

Jason Vanderhill on Flickr makes my point about bus window visibility nicely – though the exterior seems to be clean in this case.

He titled this image “photo of a Range Rover” – and I am prepared to take his word for it. I defy anyone to identify where it was taken just from looking at it (no cheating by looking at the flickr map!)

Translink, to their credit, do not allow the advertising wraps to cover bus windows. The makers of wraps claim they are transparent but that may only apply where the sunshine is a lot stronger than here

Written by Stephen Rees

December 1, 2007 at 8:02 am

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Whole-heartedly agree about the advertising on the exterior of bus windows. I think Translink got rid of them a few years ago, but I remember back then riding on some busses with them on, and on the rainy days it was even more dreary than being inside the interior of an airplane. At least in the picture taker’s case above, you could just wipe the window and get OK visibility.


    December 1, 2007 at 9:40 am

  2. Hello Mr. Rees

    As a former Vancouverite and TransLink bureaucrat, I’ve been following your blog for the interesting ideas posted here.

    I’d thought you may be interested in a newly published report on a “scenario performance assessment” exercise that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission conducted as part of its long range planning process.

    We tested three infrastructure scenarios plus aggressive pricing (five-fold increase in auto operating costs) and an alternative ‘smart growth’ land use. We measured performance against a set of targets, including CO2 reduction. What we found was quite interesting (and not entirely surprising):

    * Infrastructure ‘alone’ does not move the needle a whole lot, except
    * Freeway operations improvements (e.g., ramp metering, HOV lanes)
    * A network of frequent and fast bus transit services performs at least as well or better than all new proposed rail extensions, including high-speed rail
    * When pricing is layered, we saw significant mode shifts and movement in the needle; however, even with pricing, we do not meet our targets simply because the network of freeways make driving always an attractive option. If Metro Vancouver tested a five-fold increase in AO costs, we would see bus and SkyTrain ridership bursting at the seams and probably at least a 20% mode share. As it is, the Bay Area only tops out at ~10% transit mode split with all the pricing/land use and new buses.

    The gory details are located here:



    December 2, 2007 at 2:45 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: