The Finished Product (A New Ben Franklin Transit)Posted: November 8, 2011
If you follow me on Twitter or read the posts here on the blog, you know how I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking away on what to do with BFT. More specifically, what to do to make BFT better.
Obviously, I’m not a “real” transit planner. However, anyone and everyone has ideas, and mine just happen to be about transit a lot of the time. As I talked about a few posts ago, rather than focusing on what I wish BFT could have, I’ve been focusing on what BFT can have within the limitations of the current financial resources. I’ve said many times that the Tri-Cities has been very lucky in avoiding the majority of the economic downturn, but its starting to look like that luck might be running out. It’s a wait-and-see game at this point, but if push comes to shove, things could get very ugly around here, and I’d hate to see what that could do to BFT.
A while back, I posted a finished version of the map for my then-proposal for BFT. Looking back on it, my freshman effort was not that great. If I had to critique myself, I would say that my two biggest flaws were the directional arrows on every route marker, and the “rainbow.” (I don’t think I have to explain what “rainbow” means.) There are some people who like the rainbow, but in my opinion, it can be a pain on the eyes. When you have multiple colors in such a close proximity to each other, they tend to “bleed” into each other and can be very hard to look at. Plus, when you have multiple colors in use, it can make for some pretty big space consumers. Example, an old copy of the Dayton Street Transfer Point inset. (Link is to view the document via the Wayback Machine.) Another thing that must get serious consideration is accommodating people who are color blind. CHK America did a great job in addressing this issue when they did a recent revamp of the Spokane Transit system map.
Slowly but surely, I dumped just about everything from my first map and drew a new map. Take a peek below. (Click here or on the picture to view larger copy)
If you looked at the Spokane Transit system map that I included a link to, you can probably see where I got the idea for my color scheme. In the Spokane Transit map, colors were used to indicated frequency/type of service. In my map, it’s mainly indicative of service type only. Keep in mind that this map is for a reallocation to better service within the current constraints of financial resources, so increasing frequency isn’t a high priority at this point in the game.
A little bit about the map itself… The thick red lines are the intercity bus routes, while the thinner blue lines are for local bus routes. Green is used in the Columbia Center area for the “CC Rider” shuttles. A large reason I went with a common color scheme is for the simplicity it gives to the map. While the “rainbow” surely makes it easier to track a route along its length, all it takes are simple lines and smart positioning of route markers to make it nice and easy to figure out which bus route is which. Where bus routes share a corridor is also simplified. If two local routes are covering the same street, only one line is needed, and once again route marker placement makes sure it’s still easy to track a route. Where intercity and local routes share a corridor, the emphasis is given to the intercity route, as this are the primary routes of the system and should be a higher focus. Local route lines then simply outline the outside of the intercity line, which from a distance makes it more catching to the eyes. While not intentional, I like the effect I got from doing this. The CC Rider routes (50 and 52), while still an important part of the system, are given more of an independent status in this map, and so the lines run on their own accord without any “blending” into shared corridors with the other routes. I also considered building a special inset of this area to show only the “CC Rider” routes without having them on the main map, but for this version, I decided against that. Where both routes provide service (the route traveled from Three Rivers TC to the Columbia Center Mall, and then the mall itself), a solid green line is used, but where only one of the routes provides service, a dotted line is used. Route 52 also gets a third line type, which is more of a striped line, for its less-frequent service to Tapteal Drive that it covers every other run. Another special line type is used to indicate the peak-only service to the North Richland Business District (PNNL and Battelle), which in this case is a red/white line. On the street grid itself, there are a few lines that I may have left out, but the main focus is to only show roads that are arterials or otherwise provide important connections in their respective areas. Lastly, you’ll notice a couple of spots in east Kennewick where there are black lines either alone or blending with a local route, but not indicated by any route marker. That’ll be explained further in the blurbs on Route 41 and Route 48.
In an effort to lengthen the hours of service, another issue I’ve addressed is peak versus off-peak. It’s a fact that peak hours will always see more demand for transit service than off-peak hours (hence the names). However, with the exception of Route 41, 47, 48, 66, and 67 (technically also Route 110, which runs at a 60-min headway all day), every route runs every 30 minutes all day. The question that has to be asked is… why? Wouldn’t it be better to move those service hours around so that we can get transit service for a longer length of the day, as well as putting them where the demand is higher? That’s why in my revamp, every local route will run at a 30-min headway during peak hours (6AM-9AM and 2PM-6PM) and at a 60-min headway during mid-day hours and 6PM-End of Service. Intercity routes, with the exception of Route 170, will be at a constant 30-min headway from 6AM to 8PM (tentative), with 60-min headways until End of Service.
To break down all of this info, I’m going to include a list of route by route summaries below.
Route 10 and Route 22 (NEW ROUTES): Once upon a time, Route 10 provided local service in West Richland. (If you click this link to the Wayback Machine, you can see just how many different ways it’s gone and come back again.) In its current iteration as Route 110, it provides “intercity” service between Three Rivers TC and West Richland TC. After passing the BFT base, boardings/alightings are pretty much non-existant. The ridership is pretty spread out over the course of its travel through West Richland, but certainly no where near what an intercity bus route should have. That’s why I propose that we bring back Route 10, even though technically it’ll still be an intercity route (as will its counterpart/interline “partner” Route 22; see below). Leaving Knight Street TC, it’ll travel down Wellsian Way, enter I-182 for a few minutes, exit at Queensgate Drive, travel up to Duportail Street, pass by the Queensgate Transfer Point (see Route 39), head over to Keene Road, turn off at Kennedy Road, and finally head straight north on Bombing Range Road up to West Richland TC. For Route 22, this is simply a shifting from intercity service, currently done by Route 120, to local service. The only change that would be made to this route is when running in the Jadwin/Goethals area, the inbound bus would turn left at Gilliespie St & Jadwin, then right at Goethals to finish the trip at Knight Street TC. (Currently, inbound 120’s to Knight Street TC head north on the Jadwin Arterial, turn left at Lee Blvd, right at Goethals Dr, then finish the trip.) Much like the current loop of Route 66/67, the buses will run on a 1-hour loop to and from Knight Street TC, with West Richland TC being the mid-point.
Route 23: Though I’ve never been a big fan of the route used during the inbound trip in the area north of McMurray St, I know that this is a productive route. Therefore, I have no changes (beyond the headways for peak/off-peak) for this route.
Route 24 (NEW ROUTE) and Route 25: Route 25, as I talked about in the “Subtle Changes” post, is a one-way only route. In my style of transit planning, I try to avoid having routes being unidirectional, so Route 25 in particular really irks me. To solve this, I have a few different ideas. The first is to institute Route 24, which would be Route 25 running in the opposite direction. During peak hours, departures at :15 would run as Route 24, while :45 departures would run as Route 25. On off-peak hours, the 24/25 would only be at a 60-min headway, so the routes (which would be using buses interlined with Route 23) would alternate so that odd-hour departures (9AM, 11AM, 1PM, etc.) would be Route 25, and even hour departures (10AM, 12PM, etc.) would be Route 24. The second idea I have is to have Route 25 be the route that exists all day, while Route 24 would only be run during peak hours. The routes would still alternate departures depending if it’s at :15/:45. The last idea is to just simply leave Route 25 as it is (but still institute headway adjustments for peak/off-peak) without throwing in Route 24, which does have a risk of confusing riders, but this would be the last, non-ideal, option.
Route 26 (DELETED): Route 26 would be removed, but in its place, intercity Route 120 would run. (No changes to the direction of the route.) Route 120 would be on a constant 30-min headway all day from 6AM-8PM, along with the peak-only service extension to the North Richland Business District (PNNL and Battelle), and then 60-min headway until End of Service. On Saturdays, this segment of Route 120 would be at a 60-min headway all day. (See more about Route 120 below.)
Route 39: In its current version(s), Route 39 runs between Knight Street TC and Three Rivers TC. With newly created Route 10 now serving the segment between Knight Street TC and the Queensgate area, Route 39 would have its western terminus moved to the newly designated Queensgate Transfer Point (which is currently the mid-route layover point between Wal-Mart and The Home Depot). As such, this move would make the route run on a 30-min segment end to end, further simplifying schedule options. Currently, it takes 3 buses, running on 45-min segments, to serve the route on the alternated 39H/39K at 60-min headways from 6AM to 6PM, Monday to Saturday. Instead, in the revised Route 39, it would use only 2 buses all day. (*It’s important to note that this route is an exception to the 60-min headway off-peak/30-min headway peak rule explained earlier.). The first bus would leave Three Rivers TC at :00 as Route 39K and then leave Queensgate TP as Route 39H at :30, while the second bus would leave Three Rivers TC at :30 as Route 39H and then leave Queensgate TP as Route 39K at :00. With these changes to the schedule and moving of the western terminus, there would also be a slight change to Route 39K. Currently, the westbound 39K travels Gage Blvd between Grandridge Blvd and Keene Rd, while the eastbound 39K turns off Keene Rd at Kapalua Ave, then heads east on Gage Blvd to Leslie Rd, going north to Canyon St, east to Bellerive Dr, and finally south to go back on Gage Blvd and onwards toward Grandridge Blvd. I don’t have plans to remove the eastbound-only deviation on Kapalua Ave, as it is a necessity due to the complexity/unsafe-for-transit nature that the intersection of Keene Rd and Gage Blvd would make for the eastbound 39K. However, I am changing it so that Canyon St will be served by both the eastbound and westbound 39K. Eastbound would run the same as it is currently, but the deviation on Canyon St would be extended over to Steptoe St instead of Bellerive Dr. Westbound would do the same, just in the opposite direction.
Route 40 (NEW ROUTE): A long time ago, there was a Route 40. However, this is nothing like that previous iteration. Rather, this new route will be used to replace intercity Route 120 as it currently runs within Kennewick, but with some changes to it. Eastbound from Three Rivers TC, the route uses the same path as the 120 currently does. At the corner of Klamath Ave and Yelm St is where the route changes. Rather than heading north to Canal Dr, the bus will head slightly south to Highway 395, which it will use to head eastbound and exit at Columbia Drive. From there, it will continue eastbound to Fruitland St, then head southbound to Canal Dr, east to Auburn St, south to 6th Ave, west to Dayton St, and finally ending the trip at Dayton Street TP. The westbound trip is mostly the same, heading north on Dayton St, west on Kennewick Ave, and then north on Fruitland to follow the same path as the eastbound 40 did, and finally following the same path as the current 120 from the corner of Klamath Ave and Yelm St westward. In the process of instituting this new route, the 2 unique route deviations that the current 120 serves (one eastbound and one westbound) would be removed, though the eastbound deviation removal would be mitigated by the re-introduction of bidirectional service on Columbia Drive/Fruitland St. When I built this route on my map, I didn’t realize it at first, but this is a near exact copy of a previous version of Route 46 from the early 00’s. It gave me a small chuckle.
Route 41: I’ve mentioned before how Route 41 is the result of a consolidation of 3 different routes that used to run in Kennewick. In this proposal, I can’t bring back all 3 routes. However, if done right, I can bring back 2 of them while still covering most of the area once served by the 3 routes. Route 41, as it currently exists, covers a large swath of area. While in it’s revised form it will still do so, it won’t be on such an expansive nature. Westbound from Dayton Street TP, the bus will use the same route as the current 41 over to Gum St. At the corner of Gum St and 6th Ave, the bus will head east all the way down to Oak St, which is where it will have an immediate connection to 10th Ave. From there, it will head west all the way over to Washington Street, then south to 19th. At the corner of 19th Ave and Olympia St, instead of heading south as it does in its current form, the bus will continue headed west on 19th over to Vancouver St, which it will travel on northward to 7th Ave. Finally, it’ll head west on 7th Ave to northbound Highway 395, then take a short hop west on Kennewick Ave to end the trip at Huntington TC. In the eastbound direction, the bus will use the same directions in the opposite way as the westbound route. At the corner of Washington St and 3rd Ave, it’ll use the current route, which is north to 2nd Ave, west to Auburn St, south to 6th Ave, west to Dayton St, and north to Dayton Street TP, where it will end the route. If you remember earlier when I was explaining the meanings of line types, there was a black line shown running through much of east Kennewick, but with no indication of what it was. If you look closely, you’ll notice that the line running between Dayton Street TP and Huntington TC is Route 41 as it currently exists. The reason for this is that I’m pondering instituting a evening-only route in east Kennewick. Mainly this stems from trying to find the right balance of an even spread of the existing/available service hours. (That was a mouthful…) If I were to have this route instituted, it would only run after 6PM on a 60-min headway until End of Service. Ideally though, I would like to not have to have special routes instituted, as I feel it would be best to keep the route structure as simple as it can be.
Route 42: Just like Route 23, Route 42 has proven it’s worth as a productive route, so there is no need to institute any changes on it with the exception of the headways for peak/off-peak.
Route 46 (NEW ROUTE): Just as I explained above in the blurb about Route 41, I can’t bring back all of the service that Kennewick once had, but I can try to bring most of it back. In this iteration of Route 46 (which is actually a near-exact copy of the route’s last iteration before the financial crisis cuts), the bus has a pretty simple route. Westbound from Dayton Street TP, the bus will head west on 1st Ave/Vineyard Dr/4th Ave (this is all the same road), south on Olympia St, west on 36th Ave, north on Ely St, west on 19th Ave, north on Highway 395, west on Kennewick Ave, and finally end the route at Huntington TC. Eastbound from Huntington TC would be in the opposite direction, except near the end of the route it would turn off Vineyard Dr at Garfield St and head south to 6th Ave, east to Dayton St, and then end the route at Dayton Street TP.
Route 47: This route might not necessarily prove itself in consistent ridership numbers, but it does have two very important destinations along its route (Kennewick Library and Wal-Mart), and largely because of this, Route 47 will see no changes with the exception of the headways for peak/off-peak.
Route 48: I propose a couple of changes to Route 48, one of which I am very happy to make. When BFT went through the round of cuts/cost-saving that changed a large part of the routes in Kennewick, one of the changes made (after a lot of public feedback) was to have Route 48 deviate all the way up to 19th Ave from its route on 10th Ave in order to serve the residents on 19th between Ely St and Highway 395. Ever since day one of its existence, I have despised this deviation. I also hate the effect it had on the OTP/OTR for Route 48. If you watch the buses at Three Rivers TC or Dayton Street TP, you’ll see just about every 48 run during peak hours come in barely before pull times, or even as much as 5 minutes late. So with that, I happily propose to remove this deviation. So that the residents of this area are not completely abandoned, newly-established Route 46 would take over the service on this part of 19th Ave. The other change I would make to Route 48 is to add a deviation on 8th Ave so that bus service can be much closer to Kennewick General Hospital. So I don’t keep echoing myself, I would highly recommend at this point that you read my thoughts on what to do with Route 48 on the “Subtle Changes” post. Now, even though I just got done saying I despise the current 48’s deviation onto 19th Ave, I admit I may have to keep it in a slightly reduced form. As I covered in the end of the Route 41 blurb, I may consider instituting a evening-only route in east Kennewick. If that were to be the case, Route 41 and Route 46 would not run after 6PM, so the 48 would have to serve the deviation to 19th Ave at that time of the day only. I would rather avoid doing that, but the reality is that all options have to be considered.
Route 50 and Route 52 (NEW ROUTE): The CC Rider. A bit of history explains the reason for the existence of the CC Rider. Before Three Rivers TC was built, the west Kennewick transfer point was located in the mall parking lot, near the southwest car entrance at Quinault Ave (where the Goodwill trailer is). While this was certainly good for easy access to the mall, it wasn’t necessarily a safe location for riders. The transfer point itself only had a passenger shelter and some benches. I don’t know how it worked in the early days, but I know by the time the “Columbia Center Transfer Point” was closed, BFT was on a month-to-month lease with the mall owner, and it could have been terminated at any time. That’s why the opening of Three Rivers TC was such a big deal. However, this also ended the direct transit connection to the mall. In order to replace this, BFT launched the CC Rider, which ran 2 different fare-free shuttle routes serving the mall and other shopping destinations in the area. (The CC Rider was later added into the regular fare structure with the rest of the BFT routes.) A few revisions and some cuts/cost saving measures later, we ended up with just Route 50. While it is a good route, I don’t feel the CC Rider is using all its potential. The other issue has to do with my newly-created Route 10. As it exists right now, Route 110 serves the Island View neighborhood of Richland. It is in this neighborhood where BFT has its operations base. Clearly, it wouldn’t be very wise to leave this area without transit. That’s why I propose the institution of a new Route 52, operating alongside current Route 50 (which will remain unchanged). Departures from Three Rivers TC at :00 will run as Route 50, while departures at :30 will run as Route 52. Route 52 will travel along the same path as Route 50 from Three Rivers TC to the first mall stop at the Sears entrance. From there, it will continue driving along the mall loop road and head straight to the second mall stop at the north edge of JC Penney. After that, the bus will go to the streetlight at the mall’s northeast car entrance and head north on Columbia Center Blvd all the way to Columbia Park Trail. On Columbia Park Trail, the route will head west all the way to the Steptoe/240 roundabout. It is at the roundabout where Route 52 is split. On trips occurring during an even hour, the bus will do a full loop around the roundabout and head east on Columbia Park Trail, and then south on Columbia Center Blvd. On trips occurring during an odd hour, the bus will do a 3/4 loop around the roundabout and head south on Steptoe St for a short distance, then head east on Tapteal Dr before finally heading south on Columbia Center Blvd. For both even and odd hour trips on Route 52, the bus will turn off Columbia Center Blvd at the corner of Canal Dr, turning into the mall parking lot via the east car entrance, then serving a newly-created third mall stop near the southeast Macy’s entrance (near the wall separating the lower-level Macy’s parking lot from the higher end of the parking lot; this would obviously require the permission of the mall owners and could possibly require a couple of parking spots to be closed for rider safety/amenities). Finally, the bus will leave the mall parking lot via the southeast car entrance, turning onto Columbia Center Blvd for a short distance before turning east onto Quinault Ave and finally ending the route at Three Rivers TC.
Route 60/64/65: As I’ve said before, trying to effectively plan transit in Pasco is a PITA. And no, I’m not talking about Mediterranean bread… At this stage, the only changes I propose to these Pasco local routes is the adjustments of headways for peak/off-peak.
Route 62: If you looked closely at the map, you’ll notice a lack of directional arrows for Route 62, which is relatively unchanged from its current form. That’s because I’m not sure what I want to do with this route. One thing I’m considering is instituting a new opposite-direction route (much like my idea for Route 24/25 above, but also much like the same problems). For now, I’m going to just leave it mostly alone. The one small change I did to Route 62 is move the turn off from 1st Ave at Margaret St 2 blocks south to Sylvester St, in an effort to bring better “front-door” service to Pasco Intermodal Station. Ideally, someday I would like to have a bus route actually travel right into Pasco Intermodal Station with a bus stop at the bus loading docks, but that’s not something I’ll be covering this time around.
Route 66/67: As part of the Fall Shakeup (September Service Change), Route 66 and Route 67 were merged to create one great big loop route. I applaud the BFT planners for doing this. It was a good decision. However, I think that there is one thing that could be done to make it just a little bit better, and hopefully help facilitate better transit transfers for west Pasco in the process. I introduce you to Broadmoor Transfer Point. If you refer to the picture to the left, you’ll see in the satellite photo that there is a gravel parking lot east of the access road for Broadmoor Park. That’s where I would like to see a (temporary) transit center for west Pasco. In the future, ideally there would be a permanent transit center constructed in this area. Most likely, it would end up being somewhere near the Road 68 corridor, and of course would require a shakeup of transit service in Pasco. But for now, this transfer point would be used by Routes 66, 67, and 225. For the Route 66/67 loop, this would serve as the midpoint for the loop, where the bus would switch between the routes. For Route 225, this would be a mid-route layover point. Service from 22nd Ave TC would run at a 30-min segment to/from Broadmoor Transfer Point, while service from Knight Street TC in Richland would run at a 15-min segement to/from Broadmoor Transfer Point. (This would maintain the current 45-min segment that Route 225 runs on for the full length of the route.) A key transit destination, Charter College, would also benefit tremendously from this as well. Though it’s more of a commuter-oriented campus (majority of students drive), this could be a big benefit for both CC and BFT. Ideally, this could also lead to Charter College joining the College Bus Pass program, which right now is only used at CBC and WSU-TC.
Route 120/140/160: The Super Route. In this plan, Routes 120, 140, and 160 would all run as one big long route, but would switch route numbers depending on which city the route is in. (If you’ve paid close attention, you’ll notice how the route numbers have been chosen.) The way I have it setup, this route would become the “backbone” of the BFT system. As such, this route would be running at a constant 30-min headway all day from 6AM to 8PM, and then 60-min headway until End of Service. For Saturday service, the portion of Route 120 north of Knight Street TC would be running at a 60-min headway all day, but the rest of Route 120/140/160 would still be running at a 30-min headway until 8PM and then a 60-min headway until End of Service. There’s also a possibility that this route could be tied into a possible introduction of brand new Sunday transit service, but that’s a long ways away at this point. Later on, I’ll discuss a possible solution to have transit service on Sundays, albeit on a smaller scale.
Route 150 (NEW ROUTE): With the removal of the current 120 in Kennewick (turned into local Route 40), Huntington TC would be left without any connection to the intercity routes. To solve this, I propose the new Route 150, running as intercity service between Kennewick and Pasco. The main feature of this route is the re-introduction of bus service to Tri-Cities Airport, as well as giving the 20th Ave corridor more service, at the benefit of students attending Columbia Basin College. North of 22nd Ave TC, the 150 would follow the same route as the 225, but instead of turning off 20th Ave at Argent Rd, it would continue north onto the airport loop road, with a bus stop near the main terminal entrance. After completely the loop, the bus would head west on Argent Rd for a short distance before turning onto Saraceno Way in order to serve the on-campus bus stop, which is a “turnout” on the south end of the Saraceno Way roundabout. After this, the bus would head back onto Argent Rd, heading east to 20th Ave, and once again follow the same path as the 225 back to 22nd Ave TC. South of 22nd Ave TC, the 150 would follow the same route that the current 120 uses between 22nd Ave TC and Huntington TC. Unlike the other intercity routes (excluding Route 170), the 150 will be classified as an intercity route, but service levels will be on the same level as a local route. Bus 1 (the bus that will be out for the length of the service day) will leave 22nd Ave TC at X:15, serve the airport and CBC, return to 22nd Ave TC, leave at X:45, serve Huntington TC (departing Huntington TC at 1X:00), return to 22nd Ave TC and leaving at 1X:15 to begin the next loop. Bus 2 (the bus that will run during peak hours only) will leave Huntington TC at X:30, head to 22nd Ave TC, then depart from 22nd Ave TC at X:45, serving the airport and CBC, return to 22nd Ave TC, leave at 1X:15 and return to Huntington TC to begin the next loop at 1X:30. The only thing left to decide for this route is where/how to interline it. My first choice is to have it interline with the 66/67 in Pasco (for bus 1 only, bus 2 would be strictly used for Route 150). In a follow-up post, I hope to say I have come to a decision on this.
Route 170: Route 170 is perhaps the ugly duck of BFT. It runs completely independent of the rest of the BFT system, and is the only route (outside of the school trippers) to use the MCI buses. As it currently exists, I think the 170 is an effective route and serves its purpose well. In my proposal, I would like to bring back the 7:15 departure from Knight Street TC, and even maybe a 9:15PM departure as well. I also want to bring back a mid-day trip at 1:15PM on Saturdays. In the distant future, I think the 170 should have it’s Tri-Cities terminus moved to Three Rivers TC, but that will be left alone for now.
Route 225: Route 225, more than anything, is a bypass route for those who don’t want to ride the 120/140/160 all the way between Richland and Pasco. For now, the route will only see a few small beneficial changes. As discussed earlier in the Route 66/67 blurb, Route 225 would be serving the newly-created Broadmoor Transfer Point. Also, this route would see longer service hours, with constant 30-min headways from 6AM to 8PM, and then 60-min headways until End of Service. For Saturdays, the current 225 runs on a 60-min headway all day, and that would be continued in the revised version, though the route would continue to run until End of Service.
With this plan, there’s also something else that I would like to be considered: Sunday Service. As it currently stands, Sunday Service was eliminated during one of those cuts/cost-saving rounds because it was costing too much. (To be fair, it’s cost per-rider was nearly exactly the same as the cost for Night Service.) However, with the buses running later into the night now, Night Service wouldn’t have to be running as long. Though I would much rather just make Night Service run later into the night, I have a better idea: Move those now unused hours and re-institute Sunday Service. Just like the current model that Night Service runs on, this Sunday Service would be a demand-response service, with riders required to call and schedule their ride, and a limited amount of rides would be available. Though it’s a tentative plan at this point, I’m most likely going to have “End of Service” for fixed-route service be at 10PM, so that would leave 3 hours of Night Service time freed up from each night (Monday to Saturday), in total leaving 18 hours free for the demand-response programs. Put it all together, and we could have Sunday Service run from 6AM to 8PM, while Night Service on Friday and Saturday nights would be extended from the current end time of 12:30AM to 2:30AM (an additional surcharge would be added to the extra Friday/Saturday service time for cash-fares only).
Before I end this post, let me just say that none of these ideas are set in stone. This whole plan is strictly tentative, and obviously it would require a lot of work to even institute some of these changes. However, as I said at the start of the post, I have my ideas for what could be done to make BFT better, and so I truly believe in this plan. That said, I fully encourage and hope for feedback, thoughts, and suggestions on this. Sometimes the eyes of one person are not enough. No matter what it is, even criticism, I welcome it all. I want to know what people think about this. Sometime in the future, I’ll be releasing a new post on this same subject, and we’ll see what comes of that when it arrives.