01/20/94 09:00 vod 264 5026 BCT PLANNING (quuds vue

MEETING SUMMARY

The meeting was attended by approximately 20 individuals, mostly from the Citadel Heights
area and from the Eastern Drive area. Of the comment sheets and letters received, 8 were
generally supportive of the change, while six were generally opposed to the cuange. There
was also a petition received containing 118 signatures requesting increased peak period
service and the introduction of evening and Sunday service on route #159 between Port
Coquitlam Centre and Nev Westminster Station. (Another petition was submitted at the
meeting and subsequently withdrawn as it contained inaccurate statements about the
proposed change). A detailed summary of all comments reccived at the mecting is listed
in the attached table.

During the meeting, most attendees were generally supportive of the change, although some
suggested that it would be preferable to operate direct service between New Westminster
and Port Coquitlam. The most significant opposition to the proposed change was from
residents of Eastern Drive between Mary Hill Road and Western Drive.

3.0 EVENING SERVICE ON ROUTE #159

A number of attendees suggested that the proposal was acceptable as an interim service, but
that it would be preferable to implement evening, Sunday and holiday service on route
#159. In this way, Citadel Heights could receive direct service to New Westminster Station
and to Port Coquitlam Centre during all time periods.

In support of this, a group submitted a petition containing 118 signatures, requesting
evening, Sunday and holiday service as well as increased service during peak periods.

Preliminary estimates suggest that expansion of route #159 to evening and Sunday ‘holiday
service would require one extra bus during all evenings and on Sundays/holidays. ‘This.
would require approximately 2,700 hours at a cost of $162,000 per year. Projected ridership
would be approximately 12 boardings per hour at a cost of approximately$6.70 per
passenger. It is also expected that there would be a slight decrease in ridership and
productivity on #161 during these time periods.

4.0 SERVICE VIA EASTERN DRIVE

A number of residents opposed the proposal to introduce transit service to Eastern Drive.
Most cited an objection to service as it is perceived as noisy, dirty or an invasion of privacy.
A aumber of the residents indicated that they do not object to transit service entirely but
that the use of large buses is not appropriate for this area. Among these individuals, service
might be acceptable only if provided with an “Airport style” van.

JAN-20-1994 99:59