[WarrenC12]

I heard $100m as the cost, done as a P3.

The city spends more on worse ideas. I'd be interested in how much more they think they can get in development revenue based on the existence of the streetcar. I live in yaletown, but it might be a fun scenic route to Granville Island, instead of the overpriced aquabus or long walk over the bridge. :cool:

[ckkelley]

The Downtown Streetcar is something that's been on the books at City Hall for almost 20 years. It's high time, I say.

[aberdeen5698]

"Loser cruisers" don't attract ridership, streetcars and trains do.You think we need to spend $100 million so people can feel better about themselves?

[twoNeurons]

You think we need to spend $100 million so people can feel better about themselves?

A fixed route is always better for both tourists and residents. It adds predictability. A bus COULDN'T do the same job as a streetcar for the simple reason that it can't run along the dedicated tracks west of the OV.

Granville Island is a popular destination. A ribbon of steel connecting it to the OV and CBD is a good idea and a decent investment.

The Aquabus and FCF, while nice, doesn't connect downtown to Granville Island or mass transit... it connects to the South side beaches.

[agrant]

The route works, only because it hits some of the touristy places. 100+ million does seem like a lot, but I think long term it will be worth having.

[CLC]

"Loser cruisers" don't attract ridership, streetcars and trains do.

This statement no longer applies to Vancouver proper (just see #20, #49 along with the Broadway corridor), though may still apply to Surrey or beyond.

[CLC]

Granville Island is a popular destination. On a rainy weekday in Fall or winter months, Granville Island is rather quiet.

Speaking of potential streetcars, I think local residents will make up mass majority of the ridership anyway.

[Waders]

Well. Transportation really is the responsibility of Translink.
Vancouver city staff derails NPA’s streetcar campaign promise (http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Vancouver+city+staff+derails+streetcar+campaign+promise/5444778/story.html#ixzz1YjnUljnh)

[whatnext]

Well. Transportation really is the responsibility of Translink.
Vancouver city staff derails NPA’s streetcar campaign promise (http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Vancouver+city+staff+derails+streetcar+campaign+promise/5444778/story.html#ixzz1YjnUljnh)

Oh please. Like Frau Ballem is an unbiased source. :rolleyes:
She knows her goose is cooked should the NPA secure enough seats to build the streetcar anyway. Poor Cadman, ditched by his own party and all he can do is reprise his losing act of being Vision's pet poodle.

Translink's "commandments' aren't written in stone. Witness how many votes it took to get the Canada Line going. If the city wants it to happen, and the province agrees, it will happen.

[SpongeG]

I heard on Peak fm this morning that if Susan Anton gets elected as mayor, she will have the streetcar built (for a cost of $220 million) from Granville Island to Chinatown. This is interesting, as Translink doesn't have any money...

its not a translink project - its a city of vancouver project with as far as I have heard nothing to do with translink, it will be funded and run by the city of vancouver

[jhausner]

Can the City of Vancouver actually afford it? I have my doubts. Even with a private partnership I have my doubts. I also am on the side that the Broadway corridor would be vastly more important to the city. I mean let's face it, it isn't that hard to get to Granville Island as a tourist. My friends who have come from out of time many times and even friends that live in town have no issues getting there or to any other place.

We have these things called feet and there are also these little things called water taxis which are cheap and drop you right on the front door of the market.

Not saying it is a horrible idea but as funny as it is, I'm actually on the side of Vancouver city staff that it really shouldn't be a priority even if she becomes mayor. Then again I'd argue chicken, wheat, and bike lanes probably shouldn't have been city priorities anyway.

If she wins as Mayor you'd better hope she has the majority of Council on her side because if Vision is still in charge it ain't going to get done.

[splashflash]

The streetcar would provide no more mobility than a bus. The track shouldn't have been upgraded by the Vision council, and Broadway is far more important. An extension of the Millennium Line Skytrain, even to the Olympic Station at Cambie, would be superior to this half-baked idea. The NPA didn't think this one through very well, or the suggestion that the Pride Parade should be covered by taxpayer funds.

[whatnext]

The streetcar would provide no more mobility than a bus. The track shouldn't have been upgraded by the Vision council, and Broadway is far more important. An extension of the Millennium Line Skytrain, even to the Olympic Station at Cambie, would be superior to this half-baked idea. The NPA didn't think this one through very well, or the suggestion that the Pride Parade should be covered by taxpayer funds.

The amount of money involved in the streetcar is a drop in the bucket compared to the othe transit projects you mention. The streetcar was first supported by council in 1999 and a study done in 2005.

Maybe Cadman could have donated some of the funds he spent jetting around the world on the taxpayers dime to a project that would actually improve transit like this. Now he's just a sad little lame duck trying to be a shit disturber.

[peterprinciple]

It's hard to stop a moving train. It's hard to get a train moving. A train has to stop at all intersections which means it isnt going to be a fast trip. Let's put an articulated electric trolley Bus on this route. All you need is pavement. It's not hard to stop a moving bus.

[WarrenC12]

I don't see a problem with the COV pursuing the streetcar on their own.

As far as Broadway, sure they need to make sure land use planning supports a potential Skytrain extension, including general station locations, but the plan and the financing are all up to Translink and the province. All they can do is make the request and put it at the top of their list.

[Jebby]

It's hard to stop a moving train. It's hard to get a train moving. A train has to stop at all intersections which means it isnt going to be a fast trip. Let's put an articulated electric trolley Bus on this route. All you need is pavement. It's not hard to stop a moving bus.

The entire route between Granville Island and Olympic Village Station is completely grade-separated. Then on 1st Ave it runs in the median, meaning you can block off streets, allowing intersections every 3-4 blocks. Up Quebec St it's also grade separated. Then through Chinatown you do the same as on 1st Ave.

Also, this line can be potentially extended down the existing CN corridor along 6th Ave and down Arbutus all the way to Marine Drive station.

[satishreddy]

Hello All:

I haven't read the documents, so the following questions may already be answered.

(1) My initial question about the street car is: what problem does it solve?

(a) What unmet need does it address in the transportation system?
(b) If one wants to go from downtown to/from Granville Island one can take any one of a number of buses that travel on Granville.
(c) Is there an unmet need of transporting people between Main Street/Science World and Granville Island?
(d) Is it going to be any faster than existing buses/skytrain?

If the answer is: let's build develop a street car system because it is "sexier" than the existing bus network, then I can't support this plan.

(2) If the City of Vancouver pursues this on their own, then how will transfers be handled.

In my opinion, I think it will be difficult to achieve the ridership projections without allowing for transfers with the existing bus and skytrain network.

[agrant]

What is the population of SEFC going to be? Something like 15 thousand when all built out?

[NucksFanInVan]

The entire route between Granville Island and Olympic Village Station is completely grade-separated.

Sadly no. The crossing at Moberly (near the 7-11) is a level crossing. Also, while the other intersections are grade-separated, much of the length is still single-tracked. So if the point is that grade separation minimizes stops and starts, this section isn't a great example.


Also, this line can be potentially extended down the existing CN corridor along 6th Ave and down Arbutus all the way to Marine Drive station.

Again - sadly, no. There's a Starbucks in the way between Granville Island and 1st Ave.

[SpongeG]

that starbucks was designed to come apart - its a "temporary" structure built with the idea that the tracks would be used again one day - or so i read somewhere on here...

a streetcar would be nice but i don't know how useful it would be for commuters - for tourists or people living along it, it would be great, but you can catch a bus on granville street and get to the island really easily and quickly rather than having to go via chinatown to get there

it would be cool to have though i love the idea

[NetMapel]

As much as I like a streetcar system running in Vancouver, I think we got some priorities before that...

- Evergreen line
- Broadway M-line extension
- my pipe dream of a WCE-like heavy railway going down southward connecting North/South Surrey, Langely and Abbotsford to downtown Vancouver.

All of these, I feel, will benefit the entire metro Vancouver region more than a streetcar system.

[jlousa]

Difference is those all potential translink projects, this would be a COV project and wouldn't affect Translinks budget at all. In fact it might even encourage other cities to push ahead with some projects on their own.

[Zassk]

Sadly no. The crossing at Moberly (near the 7-11) is a level crossing. Also, while the other intersections are grade-separated, much of the length is still single-tracked.

The right-of-way is wide enough for double track, and I gather it is a relatively simple process to move a track horizontally to make room. But I agree that this is not a high priority route, it just happens to be a convenient route.

I would rather see plans made now to use the Arbutus corridor to connect Kerrisdale and Marpole to the UBC Line. I say this because it seems unlikely that this streetcar will be built earlier than the UBC Line.

The same Flexity-like streetcar technology could be used on Arbutus, and that track is in a usable state (for the most part).

An Arbutus streetcar could be connected to the False Creek track eventually, but that should not be a high priority, given how SkyTrain will crisscross the area.

[s211]

In fact it might even encourage other cities to push ahead with some projects on their own.

Ugh. Worse case scenario, because who wants a bunch of ad hoc, disjointed projects fueled by local fiefdoms?

[LeftCoaster]

Well as long as they are all operated by Translink I see the upside far outweighing the downside.

That said I have to disagree with Jlousa on wanting CoV to fund the streetcar as I would rather see the city put that money towards Translink's budget for the M line extension.

Money spent is money spent regardless of where it came from.

[caltrane74]

Streetcars are fun!

Go for it!, if the money is there, it's worthwhile, I'd say.



:)

[Metro-One]

I sure with Meggs and Robertson focused all their viaduct energy and efforts on the streetcar program instead. sigh...

Sad that the streetcar initiative seems to have completely fallen off the radar.

I wish they would at least purchase 2 new trams and actually run the Olympic demo line as a permanent transit structure. It would be great for getting to Granville Island from Olympic skytrain station.

[dreambrother808]

I agree with Leftcoaster. Streetcars are wonderful but if the COV has money then it should go to the M-Line pile. Perhaps other municipalities could also pitch in more for their specific transit needs.

Commissioning a viaduct study versus somehow scratching up $200 million dollars and building a streetcar (when you would rather focus on a greater transit need) are two very different things.

[Metro-One]

:previous:Did i say scratching up 200 million? I just wish the publicity & effort was being driven towards the street car instead. And by doing so perhaps the 200 million would follow through with this increased awareness and public support.

And space under the viaducts could be used as an OMC btw as originally planned before Meggs went on his personal political vendetta.

[jlousa]

My proposal wouldn't have the city paying for the streetcar but instead future residents. Same process could be used to fund the M-Line extension.

Impose a 20yr area specific DCL (say 100m from either direction of the streetcar line) The transit DCL would be ~$4-5psf (would work out between 2-5K for most new units) and would generate millions annually to cover financing the line.

Same could be done with the M-Line but the area could be streched to 200M in either direction.

It would not cover the complete costs but would make a sizable dent in the costs and no reason that those that receive the greatest benefit shouldn't pay the greatest share. This works better for local lines then it does for regional significate lines.

[officedweller]

My preference would be for the City to proceed as a P3 - and if it doesn't make any money and the operator goes bankrupt, sieze or reclaim the assets and start from a clean balance sheet.
For what I gather, that's pretty much how private transit systems came into public hands during the 20th century (okay, maybe with some help from the automakers)...

[whatnext]

I agree with Leftcoaster. Streetcars are wonderful but if the COV has money then it should go to the M-Line pile. Perhaps other municipalities could also pitch in more for their specific transit needs.

Commissioning a viaduct study versus somehow scratching up $200 million dollars and building a streetcar (when you would rather focus on a greater transit need) are two very different things.

The cost quoted would be a drop in the bucket towards M-Line expansion, and Translink doesn't have the money for the rest. Furthermore, given that this would be a P3 without Translink, Tranlink could redeploy busses and funds towards improving south of the Fraser routes. It would also have the additional benefit of removing cars from Granville island which is sorely overburdened by them now.

[mezzanine]

I'm cool to the streetcar plan.

-SEFC is already relatively well-served by transit. OV residents can walk to main st station or take the #84. GI residents can hop on a #50.

-if we really wanted to make major impacts with small amounts of money, I would work at ongoing improvements to bike lane infrastructure, and work to get the bike share program running. The CoV can also deploy more self-cleaning washrooms if they wanted a small-scale way to improve the transit experience in their local area.

I'm not totally against the streetcar plan. i see it more as a very special neighbourhood improvement project, though, rather than as a transport project.

[trofirhen]

As much as I like a streetcar system running in Vancouver, I think we got some priorities before that...

- Evergreen line
- Broadway M-line extension
- my pipe dream of a WCE-like heavy railway going down southward connecting North/South Surrey, Langely and Abbotsford to downtown Vancouver.

All of these, I feel, will benefit the entire metro Vancouver region more than a streetcar system.
:previous::previous::previous:
:tup: Yes!! I could not agree more. The streetcar system idea is nice, but what you list above is far more important and regionally influential, as you say.

[dreambrother808]

Meggs went on his personal political vendetta.

Or rather just an idea with which you disagree. No need to paint these emotionally-charged, villainous caricatures.

[dreambrother808]

The cost quoted would be a drop in the bucket towards M-Line expansion, and Translink doesn't have the money for the rest.

And yet that would cover half of the funding shortfall for Evergreen. $200 million is not chump change and could mean the difference between go or no go for the future M-Line extension.

[jlousa]

The funding for the M-Line would not be displaced by a streetcar line, not sure why that is so hard to comprehend. It would be funded by alternative means and not from funds earmarked for Translink.

[whatnext]

Or rather just an idea with which you disagree. No need to paint these emotionally-charged, villainous caricatures.

Except in this case Metro-One is dead on. The squandering of resources on the viaduct study is purely a pet project of former Strathcona resident Meggs.

[jsbertram]

My preference would be for the City to proceed as a P3 - and if it doesn't make any money and the operator goes bankrupt, sieze or reclaim the assets and start from a clean balance sheet.
For what I gather, that's pretty much how private transit systems came into public hands during the 20th century (okay, maybe with some help from the automakers)...

However, a private company getting involved in this will have already built & operated similar transit projects around the world, so when using a P3 model to build transit infrastructure the private company involved has already sharpened their pencils to know what are the cheapest and quickest ways to build it, what the passenger loads have to be before the project starts turning a profit, and and how long that will take.

The P3 contract will be designed to ensure that during the unprofitable early years, the gov't or translink will have to compensate the private company for the losses because the the private company doesn't want to be out of the business before the profits start rolling in.

The gov't and translink are at somewhat of a disadvantage with using a P3 for transit improvements, because they may happen only once a decade or so. When will the next Canada Line-type of P3 be built in the Vancouver area - a completely new transit line that operates separate and independent from the existing transit lines?

The private company involved in the P3 has been building and operating these Canada Line-style projects for a decade or more in cities around the world, so they have a better understanding of what makes them profitable, and how long it takes for them to become profitable. This gives them the upper hand in P3 negotiations because if they perceive that the project can't ever be profitable for the company they can decide to not get involved in the project. On the other hand, once the Gov't or Translink has decided the transit project is needed, its much harder for them to simply cancel the project.

Its good that the Canada Line P3 is hitting some of its traffic targets ahead of schedule but so far the Canada Line P3 still isn't operating at a profit, so Translink has been paying the P3 private company an annual subsidy to cover these losses. Even with the apparent success of the Canada Line P3, the translink subsidy could last another 10 or 15 years until true consistent annual profitability is reached.

[Zassk]

Even with the apparent success of the Canada Line P3, the translink subsidy could last another 10 or 15 years until true consistent annual profitability is reached.

I don't really see the issue. If it wasn't a P3, it would be an even greater money sink during those years, wouldn't it? This seems like a point in favour of building the streetcar or any other line as a P3.

[dreambrother808]

The funding for the M-Line would not be displaced by a streetcar line, not sure why that is so hard to comprehend. It would be funded by alternative means and not from funds earmarked for Translink.

True. My point was rather that if the city is able to come up with alternate means then those funds should instead be earmarked for contributing to the M-line, if possible. If this funding, such as the P3 aspect most likely, is only applicable to the streetcar and the city can guarantee that the financial outcome will be positive for us, I would support the idea. In the meantime, something about the whole proposal feels too good to be true, a pie-in-the-sky campaign promise. However, I could be wrong.

[squeezied]

Jerry Dobrovolny, COV's transportation directior, was a guest lecturer in one of our courses at UBC. The topic of his presentation was regarding the viaducts but I asked him what's the status of the downtown streetcar system. His answer echos what many of you already know: M-Line extention is the first priority, downtown streetcars is secondary. In other words, you won't see a streetcar system until the M-Line is extended.

Also notice I used "M-Line" instead of "UBC Line". Upon being asked what technology would be used along Broadway, Jerry informed me that the system has to be underground/grade separate and that a surface system won't be practical. Although not set in stone, it's reassuring to know the COV is striving for the M-Line extention (with provisional space alotted for stations).

[Metro-One]

:previous:I have heard the same from city officials that the system will be grade separated along Broadway, these community consultations are a little bit of a dog and pony show to appease the masses.

If that is the case for the streetcar system, then, as i have said before, I really wish the city would simply buy 2 new modern trams and run the short section they re-built as a permanent demo line. Otherwise the money used to re-build the tracks and two stations seems wasted.

[aberdeen5698]

The P3 contract will be designed to ensure that during the unprofitable early years, the gov't or translink will have to compensate the private company for the losses because the the private company doesn't want to be out of the business before the profits start rolling in.The big thing to watch out for in this type of endeavour is the ridership projections. In these deals the taxpayers get stuck if the ridership isn't up to expectations. Since the P3 company isn't generally at risk for low ridership, and since its in their interests to get the project built one way or another, watch out for inflated expectations.

[SpongeG]

:previous:I have heard the same from city officials that the system will be grade separated along Broadway, these community consultations are a little bit of a dog and pony show to appease the masses.

If that is the case for the streetcar system, then, as i have said before, I really wish the city would simply buy 2 new modern trams and run the short section they re-built as a permanent demo line. Otherwise the money used to re-build the tracks and two stations seems wasted.

volunteers run streetcars on weekends and holidays - i used it once this summer it was fun - they don't have any advertising budget unfortunately so they rely on a sidewalk board outside the station

[whatnext]

Jerry Dobrovolny, COV's transportation directior, was a guest lecturer in one of our courses at UBC. The topic of his presentation was regarding the viaducts but I asked him what's the status of the downtown streetcar system. His answer echos what many of you already know: M-Line extention is the first priority, downtown streetcars is secondary. In other words, you won't see a streetcar system until the M-Line is extended.

Also notice I used "M-Line" instead of "UBC Line". Upon being asked what technology would be used along Broadway, Jerry informed me that the system has to be underground/grade separate and that a surface system won't be practical. Although not set in stone, it's reassuring to know the COV is striving for the M-Line extention (with provisional space alotted for stations).

Methinks Dobrovolny better be a little more careful in the event there is a regime change at city hall. Or faster than you can say Judy Rogers...

[aberdeen5698]

I really wish the city would simply buy 2 new modern trams and run the short section they re-built as a permanent demo line. Otherwise the money used to re-build the tracks and two stations seems wasted.The thing is that if that section of the line can't generate enough ridership to pay for the capital and operating costs then it would be a case of throwing good money after bad.

[BCPhil]

True. My point was rather that if the city is able to come up with alternate means then those funds should instead be earmarked for contributing to the M-line, if possible. If this funding, such as the P3 aspect most likely, is only applicable to the streetcar and the city can guarantee that the financial outcome will be positive for us, I would support the idea. In the meantime, something about the whole proposal feels too good to be true, a pie-in-the-sky campaign promise. However, I could be wrong.

But, even if miracles happen and all the ducks line up in a row and the M-line down Broadway is christened the next project for Translink, it could be YEARS before shovels hit the ground.

The downtown Streetcar is ready to be built. The city has already sunk money into most of the planning and design. Most of the ROW is already reserved and marked on city plans and in many sections, the ROW is actually prepped and ready for tracks (like on 1st ave). If the City says "lets do this" the shovels could be in the ground within a couple of months. All the planning that's really left to be done is choose the model of trains you want.

So, the city could put aside $100 million now for M-Line, which, in 5 years will be more like $80 million adjusted and collecting dust; or it could go towards building a streetcar immediately.

That is $100-200 million that can be invested in the community immediately. And if it is a P3, then that's $100 million coming in from an outside third party that will be spent in the community. And it's targeting areas that are next in line for development, like SEFC, NEFC, the flats, and Chinatown. The streetcar can help drive development and business growth in these areas (and probably help finish selling the OV).

Don't focus too much on Granville Island; that's not the only focus of this line. It passes through Gastown, Chinatown, and SEFC too, areas that aren't really currently connected by transit to each other.

Yes, travel from Waterfront station to Granville Island is pretty straight forward (but also a bit long), but what about if you are in Chinatown? The route of the 50 isn't very clear if you are over on the East Side, and if you do get on it, it takes you the long way, through traffic packed downtown. How do you get from Chinatown to the OV? Most trips between these major points in the downtown core take about 20 to 25 minutes on transit; it's faster to walk.

Someone brought up that Granville Island is pretty dead on a rainy fall day. But I can argue that's because it's hard to get there if you are a downtown resident who depends on transit. Perhaps a transit system that easily brings people from various points around downtown, as well as connecting to both Skytrain Lines could inject some more vibrancy into Granville Island on those days. The streetcar has done quite a bit in Portland to bring tourists and local shoppers (as well as encourage new development) to previously dead parts of their downtown.

[trofirhen]

Methinks Dobrovolny better be a little more careful in the event there is a regime change at city hall. Or faster than you can say Judy Rogers...
:previous:
Who is Judy Rogers, what does she represent, and what administrative powers does she have, please? (I live overseas, and out of touch with the inner workings of city hall) ;)

[whatnext]

:previous:
Who is Judy Rogers, what does she represent, and what administrative powers does she have, please? (I live overseas, and out of touch with the inner workings of city hall) ;)

From Wikipedia (sorry):
...In 2008, within one week of Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson taking office, Rogers was dismissed by Robertson to be replaced by Penny Ballem as head of Vancouver's civil administration,[6] to provide a "fresh start" for Robertson's agenda...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judy_Rogers

[twoNeurons]

Someone brought up that Granville Island is pretty dead on a rainy fall day. But I can argue that's because it's hard to get there if you are a downtown resident who depends on transit. Perhaps a transit system that easily brings people from various points around downtown, as well as connecting to both Skytrain Lines could inject some more vibrancy into Granville Island on those days. The streetcar has done quite a bit in Portland to bring tourists and local shoppers (as well as encourage new development) to previously dead parts of their downtown.

Yep. Tourists are here during the week as well as the weekend. A one-stop train route would certainly make it easier to get to the market, Chinatown and the OV from their CBD hotel on those wet mid-week autumn mornings.

[LeftCoaster]

My proposal wouldn't have the city paying for the streetcar but instead future residents. Same process could be used to fund the M-Line extension.

Impose a 20yr area specific DCL (say 100m from either direction of the streetcar line) The transit DCL would be ~$4-5psf (would work out between 2-5K for most new units) and would generate millions annually to cover financing the line.

Same could be done with the M-Line but the area could be streched to 200M in either direction.

It would not cover the complete costs but would make a sizable dent in the costs and no reason that those that receive the greatest benefit shouldn't pay the greatest share. This works better for local lines then it does for regional significate lines.

Interesting.

I hadn't thought of doing that, I was just picturing a capital expenditure.

It's somewhat risky if the development doesn't come the city is on the hook, but given the propensity of Vancouver to grow, especially the neighbourhood effected by the streetcar, I'd say the risk is limited.

There is still a finite amount of cash floating around the city, but this is a much better solution to raise revenue and allocate the costs to the most appropriate user base.

I'm assuming this type of financing has been used in the past, either here or elsewhere... any good examples?

[aberdeen5698]

Don't focus too much on Granville Island; that's not the only focus of this line. It passes through Gastown, Chinatown, and SEFC too, areas that aren't really currently connected by transit to each other.I would be a lot more amenable to this idea if we first started with a bus route to prove that there's actually some demand for a route like this. As it is, I'm highly skeptical that ordinary residents would be all that interested in it, and if that's true then I'm not particularly inclined to spend public money on what would basically amount to a tourist attraction.

[whatnext]

I would be a lot more amenable to this idea if we first started with a bus route to prove that there's actually some demand for a route like this. As it is, I'm highly skeptical that ordinary residents would be all that interested in it, and if that's true then I'm not particularly inclined to spend public money on what would basically amount to a tourist attraction.

Um, you did ride the streetcar during the Olympics didn't you? It wasn't chockful of tourists, mostly locals.

[WaxItYourself]

I would be a lot more amenable to this idea if we first started with a bus route to prove that there's actually some demand for a route like this. As it is, I'm highly skeptical that ordinary residents would be all that interested in it, and if that's true then I'm not particularly inclined to spend public money on what would basically amount to a tourist attraction.I think with the proximity to the beaches and the parks, the Planetarium and the Vancouver Museum as well as the Bard on the Beach and Granville Island on one end and Stanley Park, the Vancouver Aquarium and everything around that area on the other that this route would be very popular with the locals in the warmer months.

[aberdeen5698]

Um, you did ride the streetcar during the Olympics didn't you? It wasn't chockful of tourists, mostly locals.

I think with the proximity to the beaches and the parks, the Planetarium and the Vancouver Museum as well as the Bard on the Beach and Granville Island on one end and Stanley Park, the Vancouver Aquarium and everything around that area on the other that this route would be very popular with the locals in the warmer months.

Terrific. If it's really going to be that popular then doing a pilot using a bus on the proposed route should prove successful, right?

[whatnext]

Terrific. If it's really going to be that popular then doing a pilot using a bus on the proposed route should prove successful, right?

As someone alluded to earlier, a loser cruiser won't have the same appeal as the streetcar.

[aberdeen5698]

As someone alluded to earlier, a loser cruiser won't have the same appeal as the streetcar.And as I replied earlier, I don't want my tax dollars being spent just so that snobs can feel better about themselves.

[SpongeG]

then don't vote for anton

[whatnext]

And as I replied earlier, I don't want my tax dollars being spent just so that snobs can feel better about themselves.

:rolleyes: Do you feel the same way about all those who take the Canada Line, but would never have ridden the 98B?

Funny how some have no problem spending money on bike lanes, which have a far smaller appeal.

[jlousa]

They are already spending your tax dollars so snobs feel better about themselves...besides where did you read that they would be spending your tax dollars on the streetcar??
The funding mechanism hasn't been stated yet nor will we know what it will consist of until after a new report is commissioned. It's possible that none of your precious tax dollars will be required to get this rolling.

[Porfiry]

As someone alluded to earlier, a loser cruiser won't have the same appeal as the streetcar.

A few hundred thousand people use these "loser cruisers" to get around the metro every day. I don't know what makes this route so special that a bus would not work. Unless, that is, it's just a toy for tourists.

[jlousa]

Really surprised at the lack of misunderstanding about this project. Sure it hits the tourist attractions (which by the way are mostly visited by locals first and foremost). This line also connects some of the densest neighbourhoods in the city. It would not only feeds people into neighboring areas but also feeds them onto the Canada Line, Expo Line and vice-versa.

[dreambrother808]

Funny how some have no problem spending money on bike lanes, which have a far smaller appeal.

When the city spends $200 million on a bike lane, then maybe they'll be a point to your statement.

[mezzanine]

Really surprised at the lack of misunderstanding about this project. Sure it hits the tourist attractions (which by the way are mostly visited by locals first and foremost). This line also connects some of the densest neighbourhoods in the city. It would not only feeds people into neighboring areas but also feeds them onto the Canada Line, Expo Line and vice-versa.

But I would argue that locals will see little net benefit as major transit improvement. They will see benefits as a neighbourhood improvement project however, but they should not be mistaken that it will be a mobility improvement.

I can see lots of potential pitfalls if ppl aren't cognizant of this. let's say that the streetcar is set up, without any help from translink to boot. When translink runs a bus rationalization assessment showing some streetcar effect drawing away from the #50, will locals accept cuts to the #50?

[aberdeen5698]

:rolleyes: Do you feel the same way about all those who take the Canada Line, but would never have ridden the 98B? If I thought the downtown streetcar could get 100,000/day ridership then I'd be behind it 100% Sure, a bus might not get the same level of ridership that a streetcar would, but it will at least give us some idea of whether there's even a minimal level of demand that might translate into something worthwhile with a streetcar. Heck, we could even contract the tour companies to use their "trolley" buses for the pilot project if you think that would help.

Compared to the cost of actually purchasing the needed vehicles and installing the infrastructure to run them, a bus trial is practically free. There's nothing to loose by trying it. The only reason I can think of that streetcar advocates would be opposed to the idea is if they're worried that even a minimal ridership won't materialize.

[aberdeen5698]

Really surprised at the lack of misunderstanding about this project.I like to think that in fact I actually do "lack any misunderstanding" (in other words, yes, I DO understand!). But I'm very skeptical that the ridership would justify a streetcar. You pay extra for streetcars and the only reason to do that is if you need the higher capacity they're capable of. It's pretty hard for me to imagine so much demand on this route that it couldn't be served just as well with a bus or trolley.

We already have a good mix of bus, trolley and metro infrastructure, and I simply think we need clear justification for throwing another technology into the mix. "Streetcars" IS NOT the answer to a transit problem, selection of the appropriate capacities and frequencies are. If someone can demonstrate to me that a streetcar would provide the required capacity and frequency on this route better than the technologies we're invested in, then I'll be behind it.

[b5baxter]

Apparently there is a new proposal coming out for a streetcar from VCC/Clark station to the Arbutus corridor.

[CLC]

Apparently there is a new proposal coming out for a streetcar from VCC/Clark station to the Arbutus corridor.
did a quick search...
The proposal mentioned in the Vision webblog?

[whatnext]

How suprising, if an idea doesn't fall from Gregor's pearly GQ lips (although it must be awfully lonely germinating before it gets there), some folks here have an immediate hate-on for it. :rolleyes:

[quobobo]

How suprising, if an idea doesn't fall from Gregor's pearly GQ lips (although it must be awfully lonely germinating before it gets there), some folks here have an immediate hate-on for it. :rolleyes:

I would really love to go just one week without hearing anything about Gregor Robertson from you, and I didn't even vote for him.

[b5baxter]

did a quick search...
The proposal mentioned in the Vision webblog?

Yes. I assume it is based on this idea:
http://www.translink.ca/en/Be-Part-of-the-Plan/Studies/UBC-Line-Rapid-Transit-Study/Alternative-Designs.aspx
-> LRT option 2

It is an interesting idea in that it:
- would provide rapid transit for the GNW campus
- could be used a first step towards a UBC line and an Arbutus line without committing to the whole cost

Concerns:
- is it the best way to start the UBC line - would a Broadway corridor make more sense?

[BCPhil]

If I thought the downtown streetcar could get 100,000/day ridership then I'd be behind it 100% Sure, a bus might not get the same level of ridership that a streetcar would, but it will at least give us some idea of whether there's even a minimal level of demand that might translate into something worthwhile with a streetcar. Heck, we could even contract the tour companies to use their "trolley" buses for the pilot project if you think that would help.

Compared to the cost of actually purchasing the needed vehicles and installing the infrastructure to run them, a bus trial is practically free. There's nothing to loose by trying it. The only reason I can think of that streetcar advocates would be opposed to the idea is if they're worried that even a minimal ridership won't materialize.

I think that is a little disproportional. We spent over $2 billion on the Canada Line for 100,000 riders/day. By that logic, the Streetcar would be worth it with only 5,000 riders per day (assuming a public contribution of $100 million). And I think that would be a reasonable target for a line from Waterfront to GI.

Don't forget that along with tourist destinations, the proposed line would also serve the growing office district in Gastown and Chinatown. Most startups I know about are now located in Gastown (CBD and Yaletown are too expensive), and I know far more people who work in Gastown than the CBD and Yaletown combined. So I would say that Gastown is a popular working destination for young professionals; the kind of people who use transit. And as the Gastown office supply is depleted, startups will spring up in Chinatown and maybe SEFC as old warehouses are replaced with offices. The CBD and Yaletown are well served by Skytrain now, while our growing office districts are poorly served.

What the proposed streetcar could bring that a bus can't is a certain amount of dedicated ROW. Along False creek the tram would be segregated, allowing it move without interference from traffic (and faster than speedlimits would safely allow). Elsewhere the trains could have signal priority at intersections that a bus can't get, and in most locations still run in dedicated lanes, free from vehicle traffic. A streetcar is also incredibly visible, and its lines plainly obvious, encouraging people to ride it. I don't think a bus line would have any of the advantages that the streetcar would have downtown. This isn't really like seeing if there is demand by using an express bus in the suburbs where a bus can simulate the stations and stops of a rapid transit line. And we already have bus lines around downtown, and they are incredibly popular. There are plenty of people now who disembark Skytrain at Main to get on a bus that goes through the East Side.

Also, by having better transit serve Granville Island, the island could get by with far fewer parking spots. Many of the existing surface lots could be replaced with new businesses and offices, increasing the areas vibrancy. The biggest problem with Granville Island is that there is no room for growth; a streetcar could get more people onto the island and at the same time increase the space available to business.

And so what if it is also a tourist attraction? The city (and other levels of government) already heavily invest in tourism. Should we close the Art Gallery, Museum, Aquarium, Cruiseship terminal, Science World, and more, because they have all received public money/subsidies? It's a major sector of our economy. And if the city can spend $100 million to bring more tourists to the east side of downtown and help stabilize service businesses in Gastown, Chinatown, SEFC, and Granville Island, thus help grow the business tax and employee base in the city, is that not a good investment? (not to mention the boost in property values that we would experience in a dilapidated part of the city).

For example, maybe the Salt Building (and the rest of the OV) wouldn't be empty if there was a tram running in the street right in front of it. Perhaps if the city invested the money on the streetcar it wouldn't have to eat a greater amount in lost investment on the OV.

And most of all, this wouldn't be a closed, one off system like the Canada Line, but the start to a much larger one. From its humble beginnings it can be extended to Stanley park, Kits, Yaletown, the Flats, Arbutus Corridor, and maybe even down Granville and Main streets. After getting the system started, we can look at which of our trolley lines could use the boost in capacity that Streetcar could bring and expand it there.

Can you not see the potential ridership that a line between Vanier Park and Stanley Park could generate? If you could build that for $400 million (which I think is more than the proposed budget for the full buildout), to get a similar investment per rider as the Canada Line you would only need about 20,000 riders/day. Do you really think there already isn't that much demand for travel along that line?

[MalcolmTucker]

What the proposed streetcar could bring that a bus can't is a certain amount of dedicated ROW. Along False creek the tram would be segregated, allowing it move without interference from traffic (and faster than speedlimits would safely allow). Elsewhere the trains could have signal priority at intersections that a bus can't get, and in most locations still run in dedicated lanes, free from vehicle traffic.
You can always build a busway.
A streetcar is also incredibly visible, and its lines plainly obvious, encouraging people to ride it.
This is harder to do with a bus, but not impossible.
thus help grow the business tax and employee base in the city, is that not a good investment? (not to mention the boost in property values that we would experience in a dilapidated part of the city).
It is almost impossible to quantify this number vs. business as usual, since unless the investment was displaced from outside the city, it would have likely happened elsewhere just closer to existing infrastructure. If a project like these spreads out development that densities drop in the near term once there is full build out you could end up worse off on the property capital stock base.

To decide to go forward with this project you need to justify it with mobility, and explain why it would be much better than buses with similar facilities in place (true 'stations', ROW, signal priority). You have to have a lot incremental benefits to justify spending much more on vehicles and a new maintenance facility. On a project this small I doubt the labour savings would be enough to close the gap unless frequencies were so low as to make it largely useless.

If you could build that for $400 million (which I think is more than the proposed budget for the full buildout), to get a similar investment per rider as the Canada Line you would only need about 20,000 riders/day. Do you really think there already isn't that much demand for travel along that line? This is a very bad way to measure benefits. You have to measure travel time saved for those riders, including those the line would displace from the Canada Line, SkyTrain and buses. The incremental benefits would be much lower than just sheer ridership.

By your metric, replacing the SkyTrain system with a faster version that destroyed the value of the original system would be wholy justified, when I don't think many would agree it is worth replacing something just because the new one would also have ridership.

[BCPhil]

You can always build a busway.

Busways are much wider and require a lot of concrete/pavement. Trams can operate in a much narrower space and safely pass much closer than buses. So if you are going to spend money on a busway, why not spend it on a smaller, simpler, easier to maintain track? Cars and taxis also have a bad habit of using busways, interfering with the operation of buses. Its a bumpy ride for a taxi to use the existing track between OV station and Granville Island.


This is harder to do with a bus, but not impossible.

But still requires an investment of some kind buying stations, signage, and special, easily identifiable buses, and a much more intense marketing campaign. The only thing missing are the tracks, so why not save on the marketing and invest the extra on a system that brings with it additional advantages over a bus? The ROI will be higher.


It is almost impossible to quantify this number vs. business as usual, since unless the investment was displaced from outside the city, it would have likely happened elsewhere just closer to existing infrastructure. If a project like these spreads out development that densities drop in the near term once there is full build out you could end up worse off on the property capital stock base.

To decide to go forward with this project you need to justify it with mobility, and explain why it would be much better than buses with similar facilities in place (true 'stations', ROW, signal priority). You have to have a lot incremental benefits to justify spending much more on vehicles and a new maintenance facility. On a project this small I doubt the labour savings would be enough to close the gap unless frequencies were so low as to make it largely useless.

There is only a finite amount of business space close to existing rail transit within CoV. Without expanding that area in the downtown area, Vancouver will (and is) see business move to other communities where there is space around transit, or away from transit where the savings in rent is worth the opportunity cost loss in shitty transit service. And it is not about just a current business move from one area to another, but where does growth happen? A growing population and economy means more businesses, businesses and jobs that currently don't exist anywhere. Those businesses have to start somewhere, and if there is no space easily accessible to rapid transit downtown, then they will move the burbs, where employees can drive to them and find cheap parking.


This is a very bad way to measure benefits. You have to measure travel time saved for those riders, including those the line would displace from the Canada Line, SkyTrain and buses. The incremental benefits would be much lower than just sheer ridership.

By your metric, replacing the SkyTrain system with a faster version that destroyed the value of the original system would be wholy justified, when I don't think many would agree it is worth replacing something just because the new one would also have ridership.


I don't think the line would displace anyone from the Canada Line or Expo Line. Infact, it could only ENCOURAGE further growth of those systems and decrease short trips that are made on overcrowded buses like the 3 and 8 (which are supposed to be serving people living in East Vancouver not crowded with people making short trips around downtown). The only ridership it would steal are people that travel to Waterfront that would rather get off at OV or Main street. They would still be using the Skytrain for part or most of their commute, but use streetcar for the last leg. This also completes the transit network downtown, converting people who currently drive. They will look at the streetcar and go "now there is a transit solution for my trip" and take transit and leave their car at home. Before the Canada Line I drove to Yaletown many days. Even with the transfer from Expo line, Canada Line was better and made me take transit more often. Convenient, frequent transit served my destination, so I switch from primarily driving to transit. And after the Canada Line I stopped riding the 6 bus (to get to the far end of Yaletown), but I doubt the 6 is less busy (in fact it seems like it is more busy since). So expanding transit options usually increases overall ridership while making certain efficiencies in places.

Besides, we ARE getting to a situation like that now. We are building the Evergreen line, and 2 of the stations will be at West Coast Express stations. So, should we not build the Evergreen line because we already have WCE, or dismantle the WCE because now we have Evergreen? They can't both be part of the larger transit picture that together or on their own, encourage further transit ridership overall? Also, how do you reconcile having the 15 (competing with the Canada Line) on Cambie or the 9 on Broadway (competing with the 99B)?

[Hot Rod]

just do it, for Christ's sake.

Why do people have to put it against this or that, Vancouver needs the M-Line Extension AND the downtown Streetcar. BOTH projects are long overdue and should take priority over the rest of the metro area. SOF should get bus and commuter bus routes that establish ridership before there is ever serious talk of rail expansion. I do agree with commuter rail expansion to include a south route, however, but not a new METRO line just because SOF dont have one. ...

Again, they should get busses that would be freed up once Vancouver gets its long overdue and necessary metro line extension to UBC and downtown streetcar (which should actually be more comprehensive than the proposed routing imo - but it is a start, I guess.

Surrey and all of metro Vancouver needs to realize they wouldn't be ANYTHING without Vancouver - hence the 'name' of the region. With a prosperous Vancouver, then the wealth can be shared more easily (through natural redeployments) to ESTABLISH those new transit ridership/routes THEN turn them into LRT or metro expansion once there is critical mass.

Why can't Translink take leadership role with this SANE method of transit thinking??

Vancovuer needs both metro and streetcar to be fully viable. Outside of Vancouver needs to prove it first.

[aberdeen5698]

Do you really think there already isn't that much demand for travel along that line?No, I don't. If it was the only means of public transportation then yes, it would have a lot of ridership. But there's already a ton of transit downtown and in that area streetcars won't be any faster than buses. Therefore most of your potential ridership is going to catch whatever vehicle arrives first, since that's what will get them to their destination faster.

The transit situation on the south side of False Creek isn't as good right now, but I believe that a bus service which completes the grid by connecting to the north/south routes would could easily meet the ridership needs at a fraction of the cost of a streetcar.

[twoNeurons]

The transit situation on the south side of False Creek isn't as good right now, but I believe that a bus service which completes the grid by connecting to the north/south routes would could easily meet the ridership needs at a fraction of the cost of a streetcar.

It may "meet" ridership, but it sure as heck won't increase it much. Trains are just... well... sexier. I've never taken a bus to Granville Island. I've taken the Aquabus though, and I've taken that tourist tram. Why? I wouldn't even know where to get ON a bus that goes to Granville Island.

[aberdeen5698]

Trains are just... well... sexier.And this is the crux of the disagreement. Some people think it's worth spending hundreds of millions on "sexier" and I don't - not if "plain Jane" does the job just as well.

[mezzanine]

I agree with aberdeen. I like streetcars, and it may draw more ridership than the #50 bus, but this is not a mobility improvment, and I am surprised when people say that it is, or make analogies to upgrading the 99 b-line to the canada line. the #50 almost never sees congestion on lamey mill road, and ridership is not staggering to begin with.

IMO the streetcar is re-development tool/neighbourhood improvement plan, not a mobility improvement. again, no one has convinced me otherwise.

even at that, the area by the ROW is already intensely developed. SEFC seems like it is developing without a streetcar, although a ROW is already marked out. Gastown may get unique benefit, but there will be issues wrt gentrification.

......

FYI, to get to waterfront station, granville island to olympic village, one can take the already existing #50, which runs ~ every 15 min on weekdays, a similar frequency to the portland streeetcar.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/Route_Files/74/routemap/r050.ashx

[GeeCee]

Why do people have to put it against this or that, Vancouver needs the M-Line Extension AND the downtown Streetcar. BOTH projects are long overdue and should take priority over the rest of the metro area.

...

Vancovuer needs both metro and streetcar to be fully viable. Outside of Vancouver needs to prove it first.

Something that you fail to consider is the amount of traffic that will be served by adding RRT or other mass-transit solutions to connect the suburbs to the existing rail network. Furthermore, Vancouver JUST GOT the Canada Line. It's not plausible to dump all of our transit dollars into the City of Vancouver since the region, province, and country all chip in for these projects. There's not much point in a transit utopia for those rich enough to live on the downtown peninsula if nobody can get to it.

[usog]

just do it, for Christ's sake.
Vancouver needs the M-Line Extension AND the downtown Streetcar. BOTH projects are long overdue and should take priority over the rest of the metro area. SOF should get bus and commuter bus routes that establish ridership before there is ever serious talk of rail expansion. I do agree with commuter rail expansion to include a south route, however, but not a new METRO line just because SOF dont have one. ...

Vancovuer needs both metro and streetcar to be fully viable. Outside of Vancouver needs to prove it first.

Does the 84 have constant passups almost all times of the day due to full buses? Is the corridor saturated and there are no parallel routes to stuff more buses down? The answer for this is proooooooooobably no. I'm really not seeing this urgent need for a streetcar/LRT in that area aside from how cool it would be. There are many other routes that are nearing or already at saturation that need the attention over this project which would probably benefit tourists more than anything. Like you said, proven need.

[whatnext]

Something that you fail to consider is the amount of traffic that will be served by adding RRT or other mass-transit solutions to connect the suburbs to the existing rail network. Furthermore, Vancouver JUST GOT the Canada Line. It's not plausible to dump all of our transit dollars into the City of Vancouver since the region, province, and country all chip in for these projects. There's not much point in a transit utopia for those rich enough to live on the downtown peninsula if nobody can get to it.

Sigh.:doh: Where does the "all of our transit dollars" come from? If you read the proposal, its a CoV P3. Repeat: it will NOT affect Translink funding.

[GeeCee]

Sigh.:doh: Where does the "all of our transit dollars" come from? If you read the proposal, its a CoV P3. Repeat: it will NOT affect Translink funding.

I didn't mean Translink in particular. :P The money for it still going to end up coming from the same place in the end (our pockets) through one way or another. Also I imagine there may be federal funding available for the project at the end of the day rather than a pure CoV/P3.

I still think that this should be built ASAP but Vancouver shouldn't jump the queue for public funds as b5baxter proposed.

[MalcolmTucker]

Also I imagine there may be federal funding available for the project at the end of the day rather than a pure CoV/P3.

Federal funding will be more than absorbed by skytrain projects in the coming years. Once you max out your portion of the funding which is distributed on a per capita basis even the most worthy project ever gets nothing.

[jlousa]

Vancouver wouldn't be jumping the queue, they got into line for the streetcar in 1999 and are now thinking of leaving the line and doing it on their own. The other cities should be happy as whatever project they have that was behind this one will move up a spot.

[logan5]

A street car route that makes sense could run up main st (close to my place of course) and serve a pretty busy Mt Pleasant neighborhood, and also connect with Mt. Pleasant station. One problem is that the downtown core is already overcrowded with buses, causing the main bus and probably others to bunch up along the rest of their route. So I think we need to build bus tunnels before we add a rail vehicle to the streets of downtown vancouver.

[BCPhil]

I agree with aberdeen. I like streetcars, and it may draw more ridership than the #50 bus, but this is not a mobility improvment, and I am surprised when people say that it is, or make analogies to upgrading the 99 b-line to the canada line. the #50 almost never sees congestion on lamey mill road, and ridership is not staggering to begin with.

IMO the streetcar is re-development tool/neighbourhood improvement plan, not a mobility improvement. again, no one has convinced me otherwise.

even at that, the area by the ROW is already intensely developed. SEFC seems like it is developing without a streetcar, although a ROW is already marked out. Gastown may get unique benefit, but there will be issues wrt gentrification.

......

FYI, to get to waterfront station, granville island to olympic village, one can take the already existing #50, which runs ~ every 15 min on weekdays, a similar frequency to the portland streeetcar.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/Route_Files/74/routemap/r050.ashx

While Lamey road isn't congested, many other parts of its route are. Granville street isn't the fastest there is, but worse still are when it navigates around Fir and 3rd ave. It's also pretty slow at times through Cambine and around Abbot.

The 50 isn't that bad when going from Gastown to Granville Island, but the return trip is dodgy. Without looking at that map, I couldn't tell you offhand which streets the 50 travels down through the East side. If you are going to Water at Carrall from Granville island you need to ride the bus around the loop through the east side.

Last summer, at Canada Place someone asked me how to get to Granville Island. I said take the bus and they looked at me like I insulted their honor, and they said they thought there was a train. Now imagine trying to explain to someone how to get to Granville Island from downtown using the Canada Line.

Me: Go to Waterfront station and take the Canada Line, not the other train, and take it to the Olympic Village.
Them: How do I know which one is which?
Me: There will be signs. Now in front of the Olympic Village station take the number 50 bus that says "Waterfront Station" on it.
Them: Wait, you said Waterfront station twice! And I didn't want to take the bus.
Me: Its a shorter bus ride, and it says "Waterfront" but it takes you to Granville island.
Them: I think we'll just walk, which direction is it?

At least this year I was able to tell someone they could ride the historic tourist tram, and they were surprised we had one and very excited to go do it.

While I agree the "trains are sexier" argument, isn't THE reason we should put in the streetcar, it is a valid one that when put alongside all the arguments together builds a compelling case.

Vancouver IS a tourist city. Vancouver SHOULD foster and nurture the tourist industry. There are a lot of jobs and businesses at stake. People come here on vacation, and one of our tourist gems, historic Gastown, could use some help. Having a nice, humming streetcar ding ding its way down Water street, as opposed to the roar of the diesel bus now, would really lift up the image of Gastown. It would make it feel more European, more safe, more inviting, more fun. Its better than it was 10 years ago already, and the Streetcar would help seal the deal and stabilize business in the area, thus provide a more stable job environment and tax base. The Streetcar would help the tourist industry, while at the same time help locals get around downtown.

[mezzanine]

The 50 isn't that bad when going from Gastown to Granville Island, but the return trip is dodgy. Without looking at that map, I couldn't tell you offhand which streets the 50 travels down through the East side. If you are going to Water at Carrall from Granville island you need to ride the bus around the loop through the east side.

but it's not that hard to find out, especially nowadays with TL's triplanner or mobile site. and with vancouver's grid system and frequent buses, it's not onerous, IMO

I would know as a local to perhaps take the #50 to olympic village station and get the c-line to waterfront. or a # 84 to main then transfer to a #3



Last summer, at Canada Place someone asked me how to get to Granville Island. I said take the bus and they looked at me like I insulted their honor, and they said they thought there was a train. Now imagine trying to explain to someone how to get to Granville Island from downtown using the Canada Line.


tourists who don't want to take 'a bus' can also take a c-line to yaletown and walk to an aquabus for a 'tourist experience'.

those who are not open to public transit could also take a 'vancouver trolley company' bus also.

jarrett walker had a good post on the tourist experience on transit and how it differs from locals.

http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/the-disneyland-theory-of-transit.html

and you also have all sorts of other issues that you might miss - what will happen to the currently viable private companies that run the aquabus and tourist trolleys? is the tourist experience is not being met with these private companies? if looked at in the tourism light, what sort of return will vancouver get for spending millions that we currently aren't getting? is granville island more for locals or more for tourists?


Vancouver IS a tourist city. Vancouver SHOULD foster and nurture the tourist industry. There are a lot of jobs and businesses at stake. People come here on vacation, and one of our tourist gems, historic Gastown, could use some help. Having a nice, humming streetcar ding ding its way down Water street, as opposed to the roar of the diesel bus now, would really lift up the image of Gastown. It would make it feel more European, more safe, more inviting, more fun. Its better than it was 10 years ago already, and the Streetcar would help seal the deal and stabilize business in the area, thus provide a more stable job environment and tax base. The Streetcar would help the tourist industry, while at the same time help locals get around downtown.


but again, you are mixing the 'transit' argument with the 'neighbourhood amenity' arguement. a streetcar would be fun for locals and tourists, i definately agree, but i still do not see them as a mobility improvement.

helping the tourism industry would be nice, it would also suggest that they would need to ante up for any pontential construction. i would argue that supporting other industries to diversify the local economy would be more important.

gastown seems to be improving already without a streetcar or even a ROW in place.

FWIW, when i cycle, there is ++ congestion from monk mcqueens to GI by charleston park due to the combined cycle/ped path. I would say greater benefit for locals would be to expand that section of the seawall to have a wider path with a separated pedestiran/cycle path to be similar to other sections.

[racc]

The 50 isn't that bad when going from Gastown to Granville Island, but the return trip is dodgy. Without looking at that map, I couldn't tell you offhand which streets the 50 travels down through the East side. If you are going to Water at Carrall from Granville island you need to ride the bus around the loop through the east side.

Last summer, at Canada Place someone asked me how to get to Granville Island. I said take the bus and they looked at me like I insulted their honor, and they said they thought there was a train. Now imagine trying to explain to someone how to get to Granville Island from downtown using the Canada Line.

Another solution is to put elevators from Granville Island to the the deck of the bridge. Then with bus stops at the elevators, people could use all the buses that go over the bridge to get to Granville Island. If the streetcar is built, this would also allow people to easily transfer from the buses on the bridge to the streetcar. For tourists, simply say "take the trolley" from Waterfront to GI. It would at least sound better than taking the bus. I also suspect that the trolley buses maybe looked as being better than diesel buses by tourists. Regardless, it would be much faster than either the 50 or the streetcar as it is really direct.

The city actually did some planning work on this a few years ago but nothing has happened lately.

[racc]

b
FWIW, when i cycle, there is ++ congestion from monk mcqueens to GI by charleston park due to the combined cycle/ped path. I would say greater benefit for locals would be to expand that section of the seawall to have a wider path with a separated pedestiran/cycle path to be similar to other sections.
With a bike sharing system, this could also be attractive to tourists. Actually, even without one, it would be great for tourists. All the bike rental shops need to do is start encouraging people to cycle along the rest of the Seawall rather than having everyone just go around Stanley Park.

[Jebby]

Can't people just get off the bus at the foot of the Granville bridge and walk two blocks north to Granville Island?

[s211]

Can't people just get off the bus at the foot of the Granville bridge and walk two blocks north to Granville Island?

Stop making sense! :tup:

[jlousa]

Sure if the streetcar's purpose was to solely serve Granville Island.

[racc]

Can't people just get off the bus at the foot of the Granville bridge and walk two blocks north to Granville Island?
What a ridiculous comment. If we want to encourage people to walk and use transit, we must make it easy and convenient for them. Otherwise, they will continue to drive. There is also the traffic signal at 6th or whatever the road is there that takes a long time to change.

[DKaz]

A lot of people take the 50 though. I did when I worked there. Even when they ran the discontinued 51 into Granville Island, I still prefered to take the 50.

[officedweller]

What a ridiculous comment. If we want to encourage people to walk and use transit, we must make it easy and convenient for them. Otherwise, they will continue to drive. There is also the traffic signal at 6th or whatever the road is there that takes a long time to change.

In other words, people are used to (and demand of their transit systems) the point to point convenience offered by the automobile.

The concept of convenience and proximity causes people to:
- tolerate sitting on a bus that circles around or waits in traffic because it gets you "closer" when walking would have been faster; or
- waiting for a parking space "closer" to the mall entrance when parking on the periphery and walking in would have been faster.

[trofirhen]

Can't people just get off the bus at the foot of the Granville bridge and walk two blocks north to Granville Island?

Stop making sense! :tup:
:previous:

Making sense ?! ?! That's politically incorrect these days, it seems.

[s211]

:previous:

Making sense ?! ?! That's politically incorrect these days, it seems.

It's my job to bring the hammer down on evangelizing zealots, and bring reality back into a discussion. Call me un-PC, and I'll wear the badge proudly. :)

[whatnext]

Can't people just get off the bus at the foot of the Granville bridge and walk two blocks north to Granville Island?

Not so pleasant for locals on a rainy day who will be shopping and carrying bags, or seniors or families with small children.