[BCPhil]

Not recommended reading... Yet another Vancouver sun author wrote about transit , including this statement for Broadway corridor

http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/Vancouver+makes+timely+transit+pitch/2620821/story.html

I hate it when the whole argument boils down to simple total cost. No thoughts given to the impacts of going cheap.

I would bet it would be a heck of a lot cheaper to offer free state cremations for everyone single person who dies instead of offering public healthcare, but that would never be considered an option.


I'd love to see a cobblestone commercial street lined with aged Maple, Oak, and Arbutus trees, a streetcar running down the middle. Dunno if the Broadway corridor and parrellel streets are the appropriate location for this though. Thoughts?

Commercial or Main. Both are very high volume bus lines with frequency approaching the max, and are both fairly lively, but not major thoroughfares.

Of corse, nothing would be better than having a streetcar running through Gastown on the cobble stone Water Street.

[trofirhen]

Of corse, nothing would be better than having a streetcar running through Gastown on the cobble stone Water Street.

How about Comercial, Water and Powell Street as well?

[trofirhen]

I thought I was simply spitting out the no-brainer solution. Stick both Skytrain and Streetcar down the Broadway corridor over time.

Question is, where the hell you gonna fit the streetcar? Broadway is too narrow and it is surrounded by small residential streets... Unless one of them is gentrified and turned into a bike/walk/streetcar only lane... :shrug:

I'd love to see a cobblestone commercial street lined with aged Maple, Oak, and Arbutus trees, a streetcar running down the middle. Dunno if the Broadway corridor and parrellel streets are the appropriate location for this though. Thoughts?

I think West and East Boulevard might be a place. Also, as People say, Commercial, Main, and Powell Streets. Broadway is really too major and urban a thoroughfare for this concept, most of it. I think we could do it well in other streets.. We need to request participative input.

People might like to leave ideas in sort of an idea bank :)

[Alex Mackinnon]

You need to remember that Broadway still needs to be able to handle some truck traffic to keep all the businesses on the corridor going. Past Granville it also serves as the corridor for the Lougheed Hwy.

[CLC]

Zweievilsystem is having some fun at Jarret Walker's blog again:

http://www.humantransit.org/2010/02/vancouver-the-broadway-debate-and-the-dangers-of-interrupted-grids.html#comments

[DKaz]

My goodness talk about sounding like a broken record. People don't like speed, they like ambience, blah blah blah.


People value time, either from a monetary standpoint or for other things they value such as personal time, family time, etc. Not many people want to waste time commuting, it needs to be fast.
People value convenience, transit has to go from the user's origin to the user's destination in a reasonable amount of time with as few transfers as possible or painless transfers.
Transit has to be cheaper than gas and parking, I know you factor in car payments, insurance, maintenance, etc., transit is way cheaper than driving, but the bottom line is that if someone needs to spend $3.75 on a fare when they only need $2 in gas, they will drive. It's way too cheap to drive in North America.
Ease of use and ambience probably falls here.

[cabotp]

My goodness talk about sounding like a broken record. People don't like speed, they like ambience, blah blah blah.


People value time, either from a monetary standpoint or for other things they value such as personal time, family time, etc. Not many people want to waste time commuting, it needs to be fast.
People value convenience, transit has to go from the user's origin to the user's destination in a reasonable amount of time with as few transfers as possible or painless transfers.
Transit has to be cheaper than gas and parking, I know you factor in car payments, insurance, maintenance, etc., transit is way cheaper than driving, but the bottom line is that if someone needs to spend $3.75 on a fare when they only need $2 in gas, they will drive. It's way too cheap to drive in North America.
Ease of use and ambience probably falls here.


Thank you.

Anyone who owns a car knows it is cheaper to drive than take transit. So what is the point of taking transit. They need to make driving more expense. Whether that be through adding tolls or higher parking rates or higher fuel taxes. It doesn't matter it needs to be made more expensive

I think alot of people drive to work. Not because they want to. Because they own and need a car for other stuff besides going to work. Once you start paying insurance and maintenance. It means that it becomes cheaper to pay the gas than it is to take transit.

[WarrenC12]

I find it amusing how there is a totally reasonable discussion of the issue, then zweisystem comes out of left field with his wacky ideas and nobody agrees with him. :haha:

[WarrenC12]

Thank you.

I think alot of people drive to work. Not because they want to. Because they own and need a car for other stuff besides going to work. Once you start paying insurance and maintenance. It means that it becomes cheaper to pay the gas than it is to take transit.

Exactly. One of the main deterrents to driving is also parking, either availability, or cost.

Another factor that needs consideration but isn't so easy to quantify, is doing what my gf and I did, which is going down to one car. She takes transit, and I usually bike, but I do drive from time to time. Transit is almost out of the question due to the connections involved. So there is a certain fixed cost savings, as we'd need 2 cars if we both drove to work.

[Mininari]

Exactly. One of the main deterrents to driving is also parking, either availability, or cost.

Another factor that needs consideration but isn't so easy to quantify, is doing what my gf and I did, which is going down to one car. She takes transit, and I usually bike, but I do drive from time to time. Transit is almost out of the question due to the connections involved. So there is a certain fixed cost savings, as we'd need 2 cars if we both drove to work.

You are definitely right.
At least if you're a student the U-Pass is cheap and lets you use both options... but not if you're a regular joe.

[Spork]

My goodness talk about sounding like a broken record. People don't like speed, they like ambience, blah blah blah.


People value time, either from a monetary standpoint or for other things they value such as personal time, family time, etc. Not many people want to waste time commuting, it needs to be fast.


Perfect counterpoint to this: Trains vs. Airplanes. If you've been in some of the old passenger trains from the 1930's-1950's, they are exquisitely nice. However, they are slow. How do people travel now? Plane. Fast, uncomfortable, inconvenient, polluting, and about the same price.

[cabotp]

:previous: Although now in short hop corridors HSR has taken over for airplanes. Because now it becomes the quicker option.

[WarrenC12]

:previous: Although now in short hop corridors HSR has taken over for airplanes. Because now it becomes the quicker option.

Exactly. I like the idea of taking the train to Seattle, but at double the time currently, I'll drive every time.

[cabotp]

In simple terms

As the speed of one form of transportation becomes faster to another more people will chose that form of transportation.

But at the same time as the cost of using a form of transportation increases compared to another form less people will use and revert back to another form.

It all comes down time vs money. People will choose the fastest form of transportation that they can afford. When talking about normal commutes. Because there is the odd person that will do something different. Those people though are most likely tourists or some idea of that.

[racc]

Exactly. I like the idea of taking the train to Seattle, but at double the time currently, I'll drive every time.

Point taken but time driving is pure wasted time. Time on the train can be put to good use with a laptop, or a nap or a meal. Sure it takes longer but all the time can be productive time.

[BCPhil]

Point taken but time driving is pure wasted time. Time on the train can be put to good use with a laptop, or a nap or a meal. Sure it takes longer but all the time can be productive time.

That's only true if you have unlimited spare time. If you are going to Seattle or Portland for the weekend and leave Friday right after work, then spending 5 extra hours at your destination (and checking in before the next calendar day so you can get a good night sleep and full day the day after) is worth a lot more than a few hours doing work. Yes it can be "productive" but if it is your weekend, then it is worth more personally to have more free time than trapped time.

It's the same for transit. If Skytrain on Broadway were to save an extra half hour a day, then that half hour a day would be much more valuable as completely free time at home than time trapped on Transit reading or napping.

[DKaz]

My wife and I share one car... to her she mostly just sees the cost of gas going in unless I ask her to chip in for the cost of say tires or other maintenance items... for me I recorded $12,000 (between the two of us) in car payments, insurance, maintenance, gas, etc. on the car in 2009. Luckily thanks to transit, we don't need a second car. I could think of a lot of things I'd like to do with $12,000.

[CLC]

If anyone knows more example of Medium capacity (light metro) system. Please add them to the wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium-capacity_rail_transport_system

We need to show that it's popularity transportation option (contrary to whatever Zwei-like people says) for many advanced cities in the world.

[CLC]

Zwei (railforthevalley) 's tactics may have more effect than I previously thought...
Found a blog by a senior Hawaii journalist, who seems to be fooled by what Zwei wrote about the "skytrain myth"
http://ilind.net/

[Metro-One]

:previous: Be sure to contact that journalist and send him our infor and history with zwei then.

[WarrenC12]

And make sure I start getting checks from the Skytrain lobby like zwei says I do. :D

[deasine]

Zwei (railforthevalley) 's tactics may have more effect than I previously thought...
Found a blog by a senior Hawaii journalist, who seems to be fooled by what Zwei wrote about the "skytrain myth"
http://ilind.net/

Like he said before, if you tell a lie enough, it becomes an accepted truth.

[mr.x]

Like he said before, if you tell a lie enough, it becomes an accepted truth.

He knows exactly what he's doing.

[RosstheBoss]

Ya I am from Abbotsford and naturally due to my geographic location have been hoping for rail for the valley for a long time. When i first learned of the group Rail for the Valley I had high hopes that they were going to get something done and help push for a Rail line out to the valley. As a person who knows a decent bit about transportation infrastructure I am becoming increasingly dismayed by Rail for the Valley's tactics. I"m sorry but I find many of their views to both naive and unrealistic. They distort the truths and try to make everything sound like a conspiracy.


I believe that Vancouver does need grade separated LRT, systems like the skytrain are an efficient interurban transportation network. Corridors like the UBC line should be built using skytrain because its advantages in an urban environment are far superior to that of other transportation models. Transportation Systems such as trams do have their place in Metro Vancouver I believe, however this technology should not and cannot be relied upon to form the transportation backbone of a city such as Vancouver.


I believe the best system would be one as follows. For the busiest transportation corridors such as broadway and for high grow areas such as the Tri Cities, skytrain as the primary urban transportation system should be used as the mode of transport for fast the movement of people over medium distances with a medium number of stops in an urban setting. Buses and trams should be used to create dense multi stop routes over a short geographic area. These two systems working together will make up the regional transit of a city.


For region to region travel I believe that high speed heavy rail should be used. This system would connect region to region with very limited stops to improve efficiency. High speed rail south of the Fraser should connect Abbotsford, Langley and Surrey then cross over a new Patullo bridge and have a stop in Burnaby and Vancouver. There should only be one or maybe two stops in each city so that people can switch over to regional transit. The stops in Surrey, Burnaby, and Vancouver would give three points to transfer onto the skytrain for a slower higher stop oriented train. I believe that on the north side of the Fraser the WCE should have its service upgraded by providing it with its own designated high speed track and increased service times with more departures. With the Evergreen line being build the WCE will have a further Eastern terminal where passengers can transfer to the skytrain and regional transit.


Sound far fetched? I think not, I have been to many cities and towns around the world have been frequently impressed by how cities across the world blend different forms of transportation to provide excellent service to the city core and as well service out to the suburbs. One excellent example of this would be Melbourne Australia. Though Melbourne is a very large city it has many suburbs of the same size or smaller then that of Vancouver. By providing rail out to these suburbs, residents who drive everywhere in their local community tend to use transit to make it into downtown Melbourne.


With a system such as this in place, not only would there be a change in the transportation behaviors of the local population but there would be a cultural change as well. Cities such as Abbotsford can use this to become a sustainable suburb, people will be able to leave in a place like Abbotsford and still enjoy the destinations of Vancouver. This may surprise some but I have friends and know many people who only see Vancouver every couple of years, it can be such a hassle to get to Vancouver that many people from Abbotsford just stay away. With a proper transportation network in place, residents from all over the lower mainland will have new options to see the most beautiful city in the world.

[clooless]

Like he said before, if you tell a lie enough, it becomes an accepted truth.

Well, here's a great one from that blog:

When we mentioned to friends from Vancouver that Honolulu is modeling its system after the SkyTrain, they had a quick response:

It’s automated. So when it stops, it stops for a long time. And it stops for a long time quite often.

I mean, honestly. What a load of bollocks.

[cabotp]

Ya I am from Abbotsford and naturally due to my geographic location have been hoping for rail for the valley for a long time. When i first learned of the group Rail for the Valley I had high hopes that they were going to get something done and help push for a Rail line out to the valley. As a person who knows a decent bit about transportation infrastructure I am becoming increasingly dismayed by Rail for the Valley's tactics. I"m sorry but I find many of their views to both naive and unrealistic. They distort the truths and try to make everything sound like a conspiracy.


I believe that Vancouver does need grade separated LRT, systems like the skytrain are an efficient interurban transportation network. Corridors like the UBC line should be built using skytrain because its advantages in an urban environment are far superior to that of other transportation models. Transportation Systems such as trams do have their place in Metro Vancouver I believe, however this technology should not and cannot be relied upon to form the transportation backbone of a city such as Vancouver.


I believe the best system would be one as follows. For the busiest transportation corridors such as broadway and for high grow areas such as the Tri Cities, skytrain as the primary urban transportation system should be used as the mode of transport for fast the movement of people over medium distances with a medium number of stops in an urban setting. Buses and trams should be used to create dense multi stop routes over a short geographic area. These two systems working together will make up the regional transit of a city.


For region to region travel I believe that high speed heavy rail should be used. This system would connect region to region with very limited stops to improve efficiency. High speed rail south of the Fraser should connect Abbotsford, Langley and Surrey then cross over a new Patullo bridge and have a stop in Burnaby and Vancouver. There should only be one or maybe two stops in each city so that people can switch over to regional transit. The stops in Surrey, Burnaby, and Vancouver would give three points to transfer onto the skytrain for a slower higher stop oriented train. I believe that on the north side of the Fraser the WCE should have its service upgraded by providing it with its own designated high speed track and increased service times with more departures. With the Evergreen line being build the WCE will have a further Eastern terminal where passengers can transfer to the skytrain and regional transit.


Sound far fetched? I think not, I have been to many cities and towns around the world have been frequently impressed by how cities across the world blend different forms of transportation to provide excellent service to the city core and as well service out to the suburbs. One excellent example of this would be Melbourne Australia. Though Melbourne is a very large city it has many suburbs of the same size or smaller then that of Vancouver. By providing rail out to these suburbs, residents who drive everywhere in their local community tend to use transit to make it into downtown Melbourne.


With a system such as this in place, not only would there be a change in the transportation behaviors of the local population but there would be a cultural change as well. Cities such as Abbotsford can use this to become a sustainable suburb, people will be able to leave in a place like Abbotsford and still enjoy the destinations of Vancouver. This may surprise some but I have friends and know many people who only see Vancouver every couple of years, it can be such a hassle to get to Vancouver that many people from Abbotsford just stay away. With a proper transportation network in place, residents from all over the lower mainland will have new options to see the most beautiful city in the world.

Well thought out and pretty much what I feel needs to be done as well. Really it comes down to have multiple layers of transit.

Commuter rail for the long trips from places like Mission, Abby, and Chilliwack.
Sky train for the higher density urban areas.
LRT at-grade for the not so dense corridors that are getting busy but not busy enough warrant Sky Train
And of course buses and what not.

Really the only thing stopping all this is well money :haha:

I think a lot of people out in Mission and probably even Abbotsford were quite thrilled to be able to take the West Coast Express and come back later on at night.

[CLC]

One excellent example of this would be Melbourne Australia. Though Melbourne is a very large city it has many suburbs of the same size or smaller then that of Vancouver. By providing rail out to these suburbs, residents who drive everywhere in their local community tend to use transit to make it into downtown Melbourne.

Melbourne does have a large tram system, and extensive rail system to suburbs. But from what I heard it is far from being excellence, perhaps it is different if you view it as tourist point of view or being a local resident there. Melbourne transit system was described as "chaos" from someone lived there told me, and last year Connex Melbourne and former operator of Yarra Trams were dumped

[jsbertram]

He knows exactly what he's doing.

And now Zwei will start saying "as discussed by the respected blogger ...", giving unsuspecting readers (who are unwilling to do their own fact-checking) the impression they are authorities on why LRT & Streetcars are superior to ALRT "SkyTrain".

[RosstheBoss]

Melbourne does have a large tram system, and extensive rail system to suburbs. But from what I heard it is far from being excellence, perhaps it is different if you view it as tourist point of view or being a local resident there. Melbourne transit system was described as "chaos" from someone lived there told me, and last year Connex Melbourne and former operator of Yarra Trams were dumped

I guess its just point of view, I have been on many transit systems around the world and found Melbourne's to be one of the best. My family on my moms side is originally from there and I still have relatives there. Really when compared to many North American transit systems it is like a masterpiece. Melbourne is much larger than Vancouver, so naturally it will have some chaos to it, and probably does need improvements here and there but as a tourist and transit enthusiast i must say what a system.

[cabotp]

I guess its just point of view, I have been on many transit systems around the world and found Melbourne's to be one of the best. My family on my moms side is originally from there and I still have relatives there. Really when compared to many North American transit systems it is like a masterpiece. Melbourne is much larger than Vancouver, so naturally it will have some chaos to it, and probably does need improvements here and there but as a tourist and transit enthusiast i must say what a system.

A lot of what people think of transit in a city depends on where they lived in that city.

Example ask anyone who lives out in Surrey and they would probably say transit is not all that great. And so they would move away and chances are when someone asked what transit was like they would say it sucked.

Now someone who lives in Vancouver. Most likely would have a more favourable review.

So it really comes to where people lived in a city and where they had to commute.

[mr.x]

And now Zwei will start saying "as discussed by the respected blogger ...", giving unsuspecting readers (who are unwilling to do their own fact-checking) the impression they are authorities on why LRT & Streetcars are superior to ALRT "SkyTrain".

Personally, I'd love to go after him and respond to the lies in each of his posts...and I know many of you do and I really do thank you for that. But it's incredibly frustrating - the guy has no job - and he's like a virus on the internet and in the print media that simply can't be killed no matter what you do. Responding to his asinine posts is needed so that folks that come across his garbage are given a much more balanced, sane, factually and logically correct alternative viewpoint...but you read his posts and you'd wish you could reach over into your monitor screen and strangle him on the other side.

How could someone be so incredibly selfish and irresponsible?

[tybuilding]

I don't think an LRT system would physically fit on Broadway. Here are the numbers I measured from Calgary with Google Earth.

Two tracks together - Outside track to outside track - 5.9m
Right of way - 1 Track - 4.1m
Track and Station Platform - 8.3m
Track, Station and Sidewalk outside of station - 10.3m

Broadway at Alder:

Sidewalk 2.3m
Bus / Parking Land 4.6m
Centre Lane 3.2m
Middle Lane 3.0 m


So if you wanted a sidewalk, station platform and a designated rightaway you would have this configuration:

Sidewalk / Platform / Track / Single Eastbound Lane / Single Westbound Lane / Track / Platform / Sidewalk.

So where there are stations there could be single lanes in either direction
Where there are no stations you could have 2 lanes.

There would also never be any parking anymore!

[GeeCee]

I saw a crappy old hatchback with a Rail For The Valley bumper sticker on it today around BCIT and I got pretty angry for a few moments.. zwwwwweeeeeeeiiiiii :hell:

[mrjauk]

I wouldn't get too upset at ole zwei. He may be able to influence the uninitiated, but the people who are/will be responsible for making transit decisions in this region understand what a colossal waste of money a surface-LRT along Broadway would be.

[Canadian Mind]

Which is why we aren't going for it.

Though it's a shame that some life-less individual is influencing policy decisions in far off lands he has no right to have influence in.

[cabotp]

Which is why we aren't going for it.

Though it's a shame that some life-less individual is influencing policy decisions in far off lands he has no right to have influence in.

If they are stupid enough to listen to him without checking all the facts.

Well they deserve what they get.

[twoNeurons]

Well, here's a great one from that blog:



I mean, honestly. What a load of bollocks.

But it does stop. Between 2am and 5am. That's a long time, isn't it? ;) :haha:

[jsbertram]

I don't think an LRT system would physically fit on Broadway. Here are the numbers I measured from Calgary with Google Earth.

Two tracks together - Outside track to outside track - 5.9m
Right of way - 1 Track - 4.1m
Track and Station Platform - 8.3m
Track, Station and Sidewalk outside of station - 10.3m

Broadway at Alder:

Sidewalk 2.3m
Bus / Parking Land 4.6m
Centre Lane 3.2m
Middle Lane 3.0 m


So if you wanted a sidewalk, station platform and a designated rightaway you would have this configuration:

Sidewalk / Platform / Track / Single Eastbound Lane / Single Westbound Lane / Track / Platform / Sidewalk.

So where there are stations there could be single lanes in either direction
Where there are no stations you could have 2 lanes.

There would also never be any parking anymore!

And now you've figured out why Calgary converted 7th Ave downtown to a transit-only roadway when LRT was built. Only LRT drivers and transit bus drivers are allowed to be on 7th Ave between 10th St West and 4th St East. This doesn't stop the occasional confused out-of-towner, but there are no other vehicles allowed on 7th Ave.

There are no parking meters (obviously) on 7th Ave, so buses can run in the curb lane - except when they have to use the LRT lane to pass LRT station platforms. I haven't heard of a transit bus vs. LRT collision, but a collision of LRT vs. vehicles crossing the tracks against the traffic lights are almost a weekly occurrence - often enough that someone has to die before the papers report on an LRT collision.

The rest of the LRT tracks are generally isolated from nearby roads by having the LRT ROW beside a road, or within the median between traffic roadways of a freeway or highway.

[jsbertram]

I don't think an LRT system would physically fit on Broadway. Here are the numbers I measured from Calgary with Google Earth.

Two tracks together - Outside track to outside track - 5.9m
Right of way - 1 Track - 4.1m
Track and Station Platform - 8.3m
Track, Station and Sidewalk outside of station - 10.3m

Broadway at Alder:

Sidewalk 2.3m
Bus / Parking Land 4.6m
Centre Lane 3.2m
Middle Lane 3.0 m


So if you wanted a sidewalk, station platform and a designated rightaway you would have this configuration:

Sidewalk / Platform / Track / Single Eastbound Lane / Single Westbound Lane / Track / Platform / Sidewalk.

So where there are stations there could be single lanes in either direction
Where there are no stations you could have 2 lanes.

There would also never be any parking anymore!

A missing piece of the Streetcar /Tram /LRT on Broadway puzzle is that the minor cross-streets would have to be blocked from making left-turns to or from Broadway. Major cross streets would need left-turn bays with advance-turn signals for vehicles leaving Broadway to prevent left-turning traffic from getting smacked by the driving-straight-through Streetcar /Tram /LRT.

A simple example: left-turn bays at Broadway / Oak so Broadway traffic can turn East-to-North or West-to-South. These left-turn bays are already there, but will have to be relocated further away from the Broadway centre line because the rail tracks will be using the two inside lanes exclusively. You can't have a train being blocked by someone waiting to make a left turn.

Same left-turn bays at Broadway / Cambie and Broadway / Main for East-to-North or West-to-South left-turning traffic.

All of the minor streets that cross Broadway (Laurel, Willow, Heather, Ash, Alberta, Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario) will have to be made right-turn only intersections because you can't have traffic making uncontrolled left turns in front of the trains when entering or leaving Broadway.

Some minor streets may have to be cut off from Broadway by building a coul-de-sac.

Yukon and Quebec may allow left turns onto Broadway, but left turns leaving Broadway may be disallowed.

Now repeat this for every intersection all the way west to UBC and east to Glen Dr (VCC) - some streets get cut off from Broadway with cul-de-sacs, some get right turn only restrictions and some get left-turn bays with advance lights.

Oh yes -- how do you herd pedestrians safely across the tracks at popular intersections like Willow and Heather (Vancouver General Hospital & related medical buildings are nearby). Does a sweet elderly lady with a walker get to push the crosswalk button and block the Streetcar /Tram /LRT so she can make it to her doctor's appointment on time?

[CLC]

^ Great summary of inconvenience that LRT will bring to Broadway. Again, you get what you paid for. I always say LRT has three characteristics: slow, safety concerns, inconvenience. Casuing inconvenience to drivers (likely means extra time to drive to the destination) may be a good thing though, they may choose to take the tram next time :D

[lezard]

A missing piece of the Streetcar /Tram /LRT on Broadway puzzle is that the minor cross-streets would have to be blocked from making left-turns to or from Broadway. Major cross streets would need left-turn bays with advance-turn signals for vehicles leaving Broadway to prevent left-turning traffic from getting smacked by the driving-straight-through Streetcar /Tram /LRT.

A simple example: left-turn bays at Broadway / Oak so Broadway traffic can turn East-to-North or West-to-South. These left-turn bays are already there, but will have to be relocated further away from the Broadway centre line because the rail tracks will be using the two inside lanes exclusively. You can't have a train being blocked by someone waiting to make a left turn.

Same left-turn bays at Broadway / Cambie and Broadway / Main for East-to-North or West-to-South left-turning traffic.

All of the minor streets that cross Broadway (Laurel, Willow, Heather, Ash, Alberta, Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario) will have to be made right-turn only intersections because you can't have traffic making uncontrolled left turns in front of the trains when entering or leaving Broadway.

Some minor streets may have to be cut off from Broadway by building a coul-de-sac.

Yukon and Quebec may allow left turns onto Broadway, but left turns leaving Broadway may be disallowed.

Now repeat this for every intersection all the way west to UBC and east to Glen Dr (VCC) - some streets get cut off from Broadway with cul-de-sacs, some get right turn only restrictions and some get left-turn bays with advance lights.

Oh yes -- how do you herd pedestrians safely across the tracks at popular intersections like Willow and Heather (Vancouver General Hospital & related medical buildings are nearby). Does a sweet elderly lady with a walker get to push the crosswalk button and block the Streetcar /Tram /LRT so she can make it to her doctor's appointment on time?

Have you ever seen a functioning streetcar system? I have used two in the last few months, Geneva and Zurich. Both cities are famous for banning left turns as well as little old ladies and medical buildings.

Does the word "red-light" mean anything to you? Streetcars can be given priority over all other traffic, so the little old lady may have to wait till the streetcar passes the crosswalk she is waiting at; after that she can be given all the time in the world, or streetcar stops could be set just before the intersection, cross traffic is given the green light while the streetcar unloads, etc...

I apologise, I forgot whilst ranting , that Broadway is unique and no other street is like it. Genevans go to sleep dreaming of left turn traffic and the joy of having wide boulevards like Broadway.

Post scriptum. Before the flaming starts: I am certain streetcar will work on broadway but I don't think it will solve the east-west corridor rapid transit problem.

[Zassk]

It has always seemed to me that 4th Avenue is the logical place for an LRT or streetcar, while Broadway obviously needs to be connected to the regional system.

[lezard]

It has always seemed to me that 4th Avenue is the logical place for an LRT or streetcar, while Broadway obviously needs to be connected to the regional system.

The logical location for any transit investment should be where it is needed, where there is sufficient demand to justify the cost, not where it fits.

Someone here once suggested streetcar should run along the seawall rather than on Broadway because there it would fit and not interfere with left turns and what not.

How about somewhere between Saskatoon and Edmonton or Inuvik. Lots of room there. It boggles the mind.

The only reason grade separated LRT makes any sense on Broadway is because there is assuredly enough demand there.

[mezzanine]

How about somewhere between Saskatoon and Edmonton or Inuvik. Lots of room there. It boggles the mind.

Before the flaming starts: I am certain streetcar will work on broadway but I don't think it will solve the east-west corridor rapid transit problem.

You are going to be flamed and possibly banned not because you have different opinions, but because you are throwing insults left right and centre, and not adding to contructive discussion.

[lezard]

You are going to be flamed and possibly banned not because you have different opinions, but because you are throwing insults left right and centre, and not adding to contructive discussion.

I fail to see where I was throwing insults around, nevertheless, as you feel offended, please accept my apologies.

If you want to find fault streetcar, it should be based on real experience with that mode of transportation (not personal, like mine, for that is anecdotal), ord on actual studies made of existing systems.

The reason that some are getting so much traction for streetcar on Broadway rather than a more adequate solution is because of the very weak and faulty arguments used here (Edit: by some) against streetcar.

[deasine]

Before jumping to conclusions, no one here really is against streetcar, but against streetcar if SkyTrain wasn't to be built... which is really the issue of debate now. It's either one technology or another, not both, and there is no need for both anyway.

[lezard]

Before jumping to conclusions, no one here really is against streetcar, but against streetcar if SkyTrain wasn't to be built... which is really the issue of debate now. It's either one technology or another, not both, and there is no need for both anyway.

Not jumping to conclusions. I personally don't care whether you are for or against streetcars.

I understood the issue is not what get's built if Skytrain isn't chosen; but rather ensuring that some form of grade separated rapid transit is built.

I have to disagree with your statement that it is one or the other as far as technologies go. They are complementary, like all transit modes.


:previous: I think by complete accident you summed up the entire situation perfectly..........

Haha, this "One magic cheep tram solution" really has become dumb and dumber....

This guy sounds like one of the a-holes in Georgetown who have fought (successfully, I might add) to keep the metro out of their neighbourhood. It hasn't stopped crime in that part of DC either. My ex-girlfriend got mugged right on M street--equivalent to Robson Street.

Yup, some residents of the West Side believe they are the cream of the crop after all. Aren't they proud to be caretakers of the last bastion of civilization in Vancouver. :D

Let's just say it here. If COV gives way to NIMBYS and Zwei's group, I will officially declare the COV to be the dumbest gov't of any size in the whole world, one that's run and influenced by far-left loonie special interest groups. I mean, where the f**k are you going to build a separate OMC for streetcars first of all? There's simply NO LAND to build it. Second, where the f**k are you going to build the stations on Broadway, without sacrificing parking spots and traffic flow??? Third, do you really want commuters to transfer just because of the train technology????

MAN, I'M SERIOUSLY GETTING F*****G PISSED OFF WITH ZWEI AND CO. AND BARSTA!!! THE PROBLEMS WITH STREETCARS (NOT LRT) ON BROADWAY IS SO APPARENT, AND THEY CAN'T EVEN SEE IT???? ANYONE WHO GOES THERE TO LISTEN TO THEM AND COMING OUT BELIEVING THEM SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY LOSE 10-20 IQ POINTS FROM THE GET GO. READING AND LISTENING TO ZWEI AND CO. AND BARSTA IS LIKE LISTENING TO RUSH LIMBAUGH AND SEAN HANNITY ON FOX!!! THEY DISGUST ME.

And from now on, don't even call the Broadway rapid transit LRT an LRT. It's a freakin' streetcar. I'll officially call that a streetcar system from now on. I hope everyone here on the board does too.

I think given the geography and conditions of Broadway (esp in Kits and Fairview areas), a streetcar to UBC is just a gloried version of the 99B, while wasting over $1billion without any improvement. Now, that's a "bridge to nowhere".


Just a few examples of discourse here. In my defense, my language was certainly no worse than theirs. But please, don't hesitate to ban me, by all means.

[deasine]

Not jumping to conclusions. I personally don't care whether you are for or against streetcars.

I understood the issue is not what get's built if Skytrain isn't chosen; but rather ensuring that some form of grade separated rapid transit is built.

I have to disagree with your statement that it is one or the other as far as technologies go. They are complementary, like all transit modes.

I would like to have streetcar and SkyTrain, but realistically, it's not going to happen, nor is needed. Want is different from need. And with our financial situation, only one will be built. The discussion is: Streetcar (which isn't considered in Provincial Study), Bus, SkyTrain, or LRT.

Just a few examples of discourse here. In my defense, my language was certainly no worse than theirs. But please, don't hesitate to ban me, by all means.

Again, jumping to conclusions. If I'm addressing your post, it doesn't mean I'm sending out warnings or threatening to suspend anyone. But if you like me to ban you for whatever reason, we can discuss this via PM.

[Metro-One]

:previous: Yeah, the discussion at hand here is not whether we like tram / streetcars, because most of us here do, the discussion is that when it comes to mass transit, skytrain is the appropriate choice for the Broadway corridor.

There is a movement going on only to build street level LRT (essentially a street car) to act as both the local and mass transit option along Broadway. We believe this is a major mistake and that skytrain needs to be built first beneath Broadway before any surface level trams are built along the same route.

That is what this thread is about.

And by the time skytrain is completed, that will ave taken away the vast majority of the regional transit traffic from the surface buses, leaving them much more open for local use, and therefore the need for surface streetcar along Broadway after skytrain is built will be many many decades away.

[mezzanine]

Just a few examples of discourse here. In my defense, my language was certainly no worse than theirs. But please, don't hesitate to ban me, by all means.

I'm no mod, i can't ban you. But IMO your comments are still not adding to the discussion. quoting other forumer's comments out of context doesn't advance your argument.

But it's just my opinion. Carry on then, we'll see what happens...:)

[tybuilding]

Yes we could have an LRT something like the C train in Calgary, but it would have to be in a tunnel or elevated. It doesn't fit well with ground stations.

Elevated could work but has obvious issues:

Besides the Nimby issue elevated would have some physical space trouble. The elevated skytrain station at Brentwood mall is 26m wide. It is supported on a single piers in the centre of the road. The narrower areas of Broadway in Vancouver is 26m building edge to building edge. Some north south streets would have to be closed for station access. It would be a tight squeeze but it is possible.

With elevated only 1 lane would be required for the concrete piers in the centre of the road. Depending on the spacing of the piers this does allow for left turn usage.

Parking would limited to one side of the street but would available 24 hrs a day, local trolley bus service would now go in the regular travel lanes much like the middle of the day.

Construction would close the middle 2 lanes for the foundations. There would also be 2 lane closures when the guideway is being lifted into place with the crane.

Of course as a rider I would prefer elevated!

[trofirhen]

It has always seemed to me that 4th Avenue is the logical place for an LRT or streetcar, while Broadway obviously needs to be connected to the regional system.

Could you enumerate why? I'd be interested.

[Prometheus]

Skytrain will not (and should not) be elevated west of Fraser Street.

[Kwik-E-Mart]

Exaggerating quotes from others such as mine, while failing to understand the essence of sarcasm, does not help in fostering constructive discussion and criticism.

I didn't make up the cream of the crop quote. In fact, it was mentioned by one Pam Sauder of the Arbutus Corridor Residents Association waaaay back in 2000. It would be wise if you research first before jumping to conclusions.

http://www.spec.bc.ca/about/downloads/SpectrumVol28_No_1.pdf

"We are the people that live in your neighbourhood. We are dentists, doctors, lawyers, professionals, CEOs of companies. We are the creme de la creme in Vancouver. We live in a very expensive neighbourhood and we're well educated and well informed. And that's what we intend to be." That’s what Arbutus resident Pamela Sauder told a packed Vancouver City Council chambers on July 10, 2000 that she and her well-heeled neighbours want no transit on the Arbutus Corridor.

Otherwise, I will not offer anymore responses given your deliberate tactics in getting your point through.

[Vonny]

The logical location for any transit investment should be where it is needed, where there is sufficient demand to justify the cost, not where it fits.

Someone here once suggested streetcar should run along the seawall rather than on Broadway because there it would fit and not interfere with left turns and what not.

How about somewhere between Saskatoon and Edmonton or Inuvik. Lots of room there. It boggles the mind.

The only reason grade separated LRT makes any sense on Broadway is because there is assuredly enough demand there.


No, that is not the only reason, but one among other...


Since you mention Switzerland, let's talk about time.

You will have noticed that the Geneva's streetcars don't go farther than 5km out of the downtown center...

a ride to the end of the line at 20km/h will take 15mn, but most will ride it barely more than 2/3 of it, so average trip length on the Geneva streetcar is 10mn...
if it was a subway at 40km/h, trip length on the subway could be 5mn, but we will agree that trip could be longer due longer access time to the station...so time saving could be relatively marginal.

On Broadway, it is another story, B line is 14km length.
average trip is 7km, so half of the length.
so time difference between 2 transportation become pretty significant, 10 mn instead of 20mn...

and yes time matter, even in Geneva, and that is the reason why geneva streetcar lines are short, because if people want to travel further than 5km, they don't use a streetcar anymore, they use the Geneva's RER (train network)!

Geneva like any other good European city use streetcar for what they are designed for: local service. for regional service they tend to favor faster transportation mode.

[lezard]

Exaggerating quotes from others such as mine, while failing to understand the essence of sarcasm, does not help in fostering constructive discussion and criticism.

I didn't make up the cream of the crop quote. In fact, it was mentioned by one Pam Sauder of the Arbutus Corridor Residents Association waaaay back in 2000. It would be wise if you research first before jumping to conclusions.

http://www.spec.bc.ca/about/downloads/SpectrumVol28_No_1.pdf



Otherwise, I will not offer anymore responses given your deliberate tactics in getting your point through.

I hope my tactics are deliberate, I would hate for them to be accidental.

I exaggerated nothing. The quote is exactly as you yourself quoted it. I was simply trying to justify my belief that I had not been more offensive than anything else written here. You, I hope, do not believe that what you wrote was offensive, whether it was yours originally or someone else you quoted. So please accept my apologies for having mislead you.

That goes for all the posts I quoted, none of them were offensive. Which was the point I had wished to make, that mine were no more offensive than yours. Someone here called me out for throwing insults around, I want to know what was insulting in what I posted.

If some are referring to my reaction to Zassk, I now realize it might have been clarified that I agreed with his post. I was not aiming my sarcasm at him. I hope, Zassk you will accept my apologies.

As for jsbertram, I found his objections to be weak and posted on that. It may have been harshly formulated, but I do not believe it was insulting. I did not cast aspersions on his character. Please, jsbertram, accept my apologies.

To all those who were offended, I tender my sincerest apologies.

Anybody else that I have offended, please let yourself be known. I stand by what I post and take full responsibility for causing offense.

[lezard]

No, that is not the only reason, but one among other...


Since you mention Switzerland, let's talk about time.

You will have noticed that the Geneva's streetcars don't go farther than 5km out of the downtown center...

a ride to the end of the line at 20km/h will take 15mn, but most will ride it barely more than 2/3 of it, so average trip length on the Geneva streetcar is 10mn...
if it was a subway at 40km/h, trip length on the subway could be 5mn, but we will agree that trip could be longer due longer access time to the station...so time saving could be relatively marginal.

On Broadway, it is another story, B line is 14km length.
average trip is 7km, so half of the length.
so time difference between 2 transportation become pretty significant, 10 mn instead of 20mn...

and yes time matter, even in Geneva, and that is the reason why geneva streetcar line are short, because if people want to travel further than 5km, they don't use streetcar anymore, they use the Geneva's RER (train network)!

Geneva like any other good European city use streetcar for what they are designed for: local service. for regional service they tend to favor faster transportation mode.

I am going to have to ad a post scriptum to all my posts. Streetcar is not RAPID TRANSIT in my opinion, it is local transit. I agree with you all on this.

I did not engage in a debate over whether streetcar can replace B-line; I don't, myself believe it can. I merely commented on my belief that Broadway does not pose any greater technical challenges than any other street in the world running streetcars, such as those in Geneva.

[nname]

Check out this blog post (http://stevemunro.ca/?p=3439) for the analysis of St. Clair streetcar line in Toronto. For 3 of the 5 days tracked (26, 28, 29), there are major delay of an hour or more. And for the other time, the wait time is anywhere between 0 and 40 minutes, when the scheduled headway is less than 5 minutes!

Imagine a "LRT" on Broadway, can it do any better than this? If not, imagine what'll happen if we have a backbone system with this kind of reliability...

[cabotp]

I am going to have to ad a post scriptum to all my posts. Streetcar is not RAPID TRANSIT in my opinion, it is local transit. I agree with you all on this.

I did not engage in a debate over whether streetcar can replace B-line; I don't, myself believe it can. I merely commented on my belief that Broadway does not pose any greater technical challenges than any other street in the world running streetcars, such as those in Geneva.

In other words because of the demand on Broadway the train line built has to be grade separated. Even still Broadway could still handle a street car type system, in fact most streets could depending on the grade. But that would be only after a skytrain type of system was built on Broadway.

[lezard]

In other words because of the demand on Broadway the train line built has to be grade separated. Even still Broadway could still handle a street car type system, in fact most streets could depending on the grade. But that would be only after a skytrain type of system was built on Broadway.

In other words, yes. I spoke to the fitness of Broadway for at grade LRT, not the fitness of at grade LRT for what Translink was proposing.

Just today, I read in a local weekly, someone was praising North American grid type street lay outs as opposed to the traditional streets and avenues Genevan Urban planners were confronted with.

L'Hebdo, N 4, 2010, "POLITIQUE/Urbanisme: Genève se rêve piétonnière"
http://www.hebdo.ch/geneve_se_reve_pietonniere_42792_.html

[jlousa]

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

[lezard]

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

Good question. Probably not.

To the second question: I don't know of any. But London had once been considering just that kind of duplication on Oxford Street.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5301366.stm

And TfL are still looking for a solution.

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/oxford-street-congestion-to-be-investigated/20098464

[Zassk]

^ That was why I suggested 4th Avenue for the streetcar. Broadway will be serviced by SkyTrain. Why not choose another arterial route through Kits for the streetcar.

[jsbertram]

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

I'm not sure about the length of Market Street in San Francisco, but I remember from my last visit that there is a lower tunnel for BART, an upper tunnel for Muni "light rail", plus street-level tracks for the rebuilt "PCC" streetcars and rebuilt antique streetcars to use, and also regular buses and trolley-buses on the street.

Plus cars and trucks, and on-street parking.

[jsbertram]

^ That was why I suggested 4th Avenue for the streetcar. Broadway will be serviced by SkyTrain. Why not choose another arterial route through Kits for the streetcar.

Why not tunnel under 10th Ave (using barely noticeable TBMs) for the SkyTrain from Fraser to UBC, and let Broadway (effectively 9th Ave) remain the surface transit corridor using buses -- keep using the 9 for local stops every block or so, and 99B for 'express bus' service? If 10th Ave SkyTrain doesn't grab enough of the Broadway transit users, or the natural population increase starts to clog Broadway buses again, then a Tram / Streetcar / LRT can be put on Broadway as a 'transit relief' line.

[jsbertram]

Good question. Probably not.

To the second question: I don't know of any. But London had once been considering just that kind of duplication on Oxford Street.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5301366.stm

And TfL are still looking for a solution.

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/oxford-street-congestion-to-be-investigated/20098464

"One of London's busiest and most congested shopping streets could become a traffic-free zone with a tram running from end to end, the mayor has said."

In other words, private vehicles banned from using the street. Trams and buses only. And people strolling around & shopping.
Does anyone actually believe that will happen on Broadway for even a few blocks?

[JoeBugliati]

Why not tunnel under 10th Ave (using barely noticeable TBMs) for the SkyTrain from Fraser to UBC, and let Broadway (effectively 9th Ave) remain the surface transit corridor using buses -- keep using the 9 for local stops every block or so, and 99B for 'express bus' service? If 10th Ave SkyTrain doesn't grab enough of the Broadway transit users, or the natural population increase starts to clog Broadway buses again, then a Tram / Streetcar / LRT can be put on Broadway as a 'transit relief' line.

Translink would never spend over 2.6 B on skytrain extension to ubc and keep the 99. It would defeat the purpose of building skytrain.

The Benefit of LRT, albeit slower than skytrain, is that it would replace bus service entirely on broadway.

Translink could re-instate a rapid bus to UBC along a similar path as the 84, however, that is something they probably wouldnt do because they would want to push people to the LRT line.

Joe

[WarrenC12]

Translink would never spend over 2.6 B on skytrain extension to ubc and keep the 99. It would defeat the purpose of building skytrain.

The Benefit of LRT, albeit slower than skytrain, is that it would replace bus service entirely on broadway.

Translink could re-instate a rapid bus to UBC along a similar path as the 84, however, that is something they probably wouldnt do because they would want to push people to the LRT line.

Joe

Once again, what is the cost/benefit of LRT vs. the amount of new #99 and #9 buses you could buy?

Skytrain under Broadway would at least allow the cancellation of the #99 entirely (ideally for a B-Line route in Surrey if not already in place), and possibly a reduction in #9 buses, based on observed demand.

I imagine reduced service for all lines that go from existing Skytrain stations to UBC as well, including 84, 41, 49, etc. All of these buses and labour hours could be better used in the SOF.

Here's an interesting question. Based on what we know of Skytrain operating costs, how many "bus hours" worth of costs would it be to maintain the UBC extension, vs. ridership. I'm betting that operationally, Skytrain would save money for the people it will move.

[JoeBugliati]

Once again, what is the cost/benefit of LRT vs. the amount of new #99 and #9 buses you could buy?

Thats a good question and it would be great to see an unbiased study on that.

I don't know how translink or the province can afford 2.6 - 3B to build skytrain to ubc.

At least with the canada line the airport authority and federal government contributed two thirds of the cost. Unless ubc and ottawa step up, i don't think skytrain is financially feasible, even though the ridership and demand is there.

joe

[CLC]

The Benefit of LRT, albeit slower than skytrain, is that it would replace bus service entirely on broadway.

No offence. But I am not sure if you really know there are several different bus routes run on Broadway.

About LRT replaces entire bus route(s) in a key transit corridor like Broadway. Other big cities example tell you that it will never happen. For instances, there are still so many bus routes, minibus routes run on the Yuen Long Main Road in Northwest Hong Kong.

Remind that a single LRT route is not as flexible as several bus options from transit customer point of view. Some locals sure will complain about losing "one-seat-bus-ride"(say #17, #16) with forced transfer to LRT. Of course Skytrain has the same issue, but at least it is way more reliable and faster even "with transfer".

Rather than waste money on "hard-to-know-exact-outcome" LRT/streetcar. I do agree that Translink should experiment a real rapid bus route to UBC (not necessary on Broadway though), and see how people react with dedicated bus lanes.

[JoeBugliati]

No offence. But I am not sure if you really know there are several different bus routes run on Broadway.



None taken. My previous post was no entirely clear. I meant that the 9 and 99 would be entirely removed.

But regardless of whether skytrain or a tram is built along broadway, other bus routes, on top the 99, would be discontinued or re-aligned. Consider Translink discontinued the 98 on granville as to funnel people to the Canada line to pad ridership numbers.

Consider the 16. If skytrain was built i seriously doubt translink would keep that line even though its convenient.

joe

[deasine]

Nope, the 9 will not be removed. The stops aren't close enough to replace a local service. In Europe, if the Broadway corridor was replaced by something else, the local routes would also be eliminated, but not in North America.

And for the record, I'm not saying we should have more frequent stops either.

[trofirhen]

None taken. My previous post was no entirely clear. I meant that the 9 and 99 would be entirely removed.

But regardless of whether skytrain or a tram is built along broadway, other bus routes, on top the 99, would be discontinued or re-aligned. Consider Translink discontinued the 98 on granville as to funnel people to the Canada line to pad ridership numbers.

Consider the 16. If skytrain was built i seriously doubt translink would keep that line even though its convenient.

joe

I think you mean that when a major east-west ( or north-south) connecter is made, like an ALRT line, there is a tence to "shuttle" peole toward it on perpendicular lines, and drop some of the parallel lines.

My reading of your statement was Vacouver has, in the main WBroadway corridor, two buses /99 & 98/ which SHOULD be dropped, but that you fear for other east-west routes, which, authorities will say, are now un-necessary due to their proximity to the alrt. I agree with you totally.

It's ironic, but up until the 1970's Vancouver had numerous N>S< routes as now, but only the Broadway and 41st. Then came the 49th, then the King Edward 25th (I think this operates more in the eastern part of the city; not sure on that one), and, as the say, the 16th.

I wonder, too how much modification there will be on the 4th Ave. bus?

Anyway, back to your statement, it would be great if they maintained the 16th. As it runs through Pacific Spirit Park, in another direction from proposed alrt, it could remain viable if there were sufficient densities along its route.

What sort of density does it transverse now? And What are its route boundaries. This is the downside of getting alrt - sometimes a good bus route is lost.

[JoeBugliati]

Nope, the 9 will not be removed. The stops aren't close enough to replace a local service. In Europe, if the Broadway corridor was replaced by something else, the local routes would also be eliminated, but not in North America.

And for the record, I'm not saying we should have more frequent stops either.

If skytrain is built, keep 9, remove 99

if tram is built, no 9 or 99. Stops would be 400-500m apart. Longer stops than 9.

But with either option there would still be alternations in other lines that run on broadway.

Joe

Joe

[ozonemania]

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?Hong Kong Island has a Metro that runs roughly the same route as the tramline/streetcar system above. The streetcar is very old, but extremely popular still and very inexpensive. I don't know the ridership for the streetcar line for this 8+ million population city but as you very well know it is a very dense city indeed.

[CLC]

I don't know the ridership for the streetcar line for this 8+ million population city but as you very well know it is a very dense city indeed.
^
Hong kong Tramways (@Hong kong Island): 233000/day (2005 figure), 1.5 minutes headway at peak.

Hong kong MTR light rail (@Northwest): at least 370000/day, 1.3 minutes headway at peak through Yuen Long Main Road.

Both are losing money as of now. The Hong kong Island Tramway was just completed bought by Veolia Transport, and declared that it intends to "expand" the tramline.

[cabotp]

Once again, what is the cost/benefit of LRT vs. the amount of new #99 and #9 buses you could buy?

Skytrain under Broadway would at least allow the cancellation of the #99 entirely (ideally for a B-Line route in Surrey if not already in place), and possibly a reduction in #9 buses, based on observed demand.

I imagine reduced service for all lines that go from existing Skytrain stations to UBC as well, including 84, 41, 49, etc. All of these buses and labour hours could be better used in the SOF.

Here's an interesting question. Based on what we know of Skytrain operating costs, how many "bus hours" worth of costs would it be to maintain the UBC extension, vs. ridership. I'm betting that operationally, Skytrain would save money for the people it will move.

Possibly a reduced service on the 84. But I don't think you would see a reduced service on the 41 or 49. At least not right away. If ridership drops drastically sure they would probably drop the service level of those two routes.

[twoNeurons]

Possibly a reduced service on the 84. But I don't think you would see a reduced service on the 41 or 49. At least not right away. If ridership drops drastically sure they would probably drop the service level of those two routes.

Depends on how much their traffic relies on SkyTrain pickup. 41 and 49 will lose almost ALL their UBC traffic that doesn't originate along the line... but that probably isn't a great deal. These routes also serve other destinations. UBC is not the be all and end all, after all.

84 will likely be discontinued if Skytrain is chosen to continue from VCC Terminus and IF it goes all the way to UBC. 84 directly parallels the route and purpose. Anyone who picked up the 84 enroute would need to travel 6-8 blocks to catch the M-Line.

On the other hand, if the M-Line only goes to Cambie or Granville ( a more real possibility than people here realize, I think ), the 84 would likely continue.

If it's LRT with 400-500m stops, the 84 will be faster.

On that point, the grid system not only allows faster LRT, but also much faster car travel as well. In dense European centers, it doesn't matter if the LRT is slow... the cars are slow too. Here, we are competing with an arguably more efficient street grid ( for surface transit ).

Another point for transit in its own ROW.

An LRT/Tram would work well west of Burrard. From that point, however, I would probably institute an Streetcar connecting to the Arbutus ROW and run it along 4th avenue.

[cornholio]

I am going to have to ad a post scriptum to all my posts. Streetcar is not RAPID TRANSIT in my opinion, it is local transit. I agree with you all on this.

I did not engage in a debate over whether streetcar can replace B-line; I don't, myself believe it can. I merely commented on my belief that Broadway does not pose any greater technical challenges than any other street in the world running streetcars, such as those in Geneva.

Now that we all agree I hope we can all agree that the problem on Broadway is not local transit, infact the local transit is the best local transit in the entire region. The number 9 is incredibly frequent, comfortable and stops ever few hundred meters and the 99 takes people on the longer trips.

The problems are, A) congestion, B) travel time and reliability, C) costs to operate.

Like you said your self a tram on Broadway is local transit and solves problems associated with local transit. For the problem with rapid transit on Broadway it would ease congestion(and to what extent is questionable), and thats it. You would still have your problems with reliability, travel time and costs to operate.

In other words its useless to build a tram down Broadway as it isnt a solution for the problem.

Broadway needs rapid transit not more local transit of which there is plenty, you agreed, so why still advocate a tram down Broadway. Lets focus on solving our problems first before we focus on novelty items like trams.

[cabotp]

Depends on how much their traffic relies on SkyTrain pickup. 41 and 49 will lose almost ALL their UBC traffic that doesn't originate along the line... but that probably isn't a great deal. These routes also serve other destinations. UBC is not the be all and end all, after all.

84 will likely be discontinued if Skytrain is chosen to continue from VCC Terminus and IF it goes all the way to UBC. 84 directly parallels the route and purpose. Anyone who picked up the 84 enroute would need to travel 6-8 blocks to catch the M-Line.

On the other hand, if the M-Line only goes to Cambie or Granville ( a more real possibility than people here realize, I think ), the 84 would likely continue.

If it's LRT with 400-500m stops, the 84 will be faster.

On that point, the grid system not only allows faster LRT, but also much faster car travel as well. In dense European centers, it doesn't matter if the LRT is slow... the cars are slow too. Here, we are competing with an arguably more efficient street grid ( for surface transit ).

Another point for transit in its own ROW.

An LRT/Tram would work well west of Burrard. From that point, however, I would probably institute an Streetcar connecting to the Arbutus ROW and run it along 4th avenue.

I think people who live along 41st or 49th. Would love to see some of the UBC ridership disappear. Those routes are jammed full as it is.

Right now the #41 has about a 5-7 frequency at rush hour. That could possibly change to 7-10 minutes. But that would only be after seeing what the ridership is like with the UBC extension done.

[deasine]

If tram is built, no 9 or 99. Stops would be 400-500m apart. Longer stops than 9.

Stops are only going to be frequent between Cambie and Oak. For the majority of the route, it's the same stops as there will be on SkyTrain, as per 1999 Technical CoV Study.

Cabotp, I'm not sure if there will be a substantial decrease in ridership in 41 and 49 because it really isn't THAT much faster, even with the upgrade. At least for me anyway...

[WarrenC12]

Thats a good question and it would be great to see an unbiased study on that.

I don't know how translink or the province can afford 2.6 - 3B to build skytrain to ubc.

At least with the canada line the airport authority and federal government contributed two thirds of the cost. Unless ubc and ottawa step up, i don't think skytrain is financially feasible, even though the ridership and demand is there.

joe

Major transit expansion will require a re-do of Tranlink's powers and funding options. Shirley Bond said recently that "changes are coming" but would not elaborate. The current model is unsustainable.

There is more federal stimulus coming in 2010, but not after that. It would be great to see some of that earmarked for a UBC line. We can dream.

UBC won't be footing any bills. And there's always P3.

[mrjauk]

Major transit expansion will require a re-do of Tranlink's powers and funding options. Shirley Bond said recently that "changes are coming" but would not elaborate. The current model is unsustainable.

There is more federal stimulus coming in 2010, but not after that. It would be great to see some of that earmarked for a UBC line. We can dream.

UBC won't be footing any bills. And there's always P3.

I think that UBC should fund two stations on campus.

[Metro-One]

:previous: I feel the same way. The Airport did its share on the Canada Line, I believe Burnaby built the Lake City Way station for its future plans, and if a Gondola is ever built to SFU, I believe SFU will be paying the bill.

I feel it would be in bad taste for UBC not to, and maybe we should built the M-Line extension as far as UBC's property boundary and have all the students transfer there on a bus (and I am sure that will cause the students lobby UBC pretty hard to complete its portion, or at least pay for part of its portion).

And if UBC does not pay for at least a fraction of its portion than it should have little say in the alignment.

[jsbertram]

:previous: I feel the same way. The Airport did its share on the Canada Line, I believe Burnaby built the Lake City Way station for its future plans, and if a Gondola is ever built to SFU, I believe SFU will be paying the bill.

I feel it would be in bad taste for UBC not to, and maybe we should built the M-Line extension as far as UBC's property boundary and have all the students transfer there on a bus (and I am sure that will cause the students lobby UBC pretty hard to complete its portion, or at least pay for part of its portion).

And if UBC does not pay for at least a fraction of its portion than it should have little say in the alignment.

And let's not forget the lobbying influence of the "creme de la creme" living around 10th and Blanca who will be displeased with the UBC crowd milling around their Safeway waiting to transfer between the UBC Shuttle and the SkyTrain Sasamat Station.

They might be not like having Sasamat Station in the neighbourhood, but will be less amused by having it as the UBC Transfer Hub. Given that option, they will push for end-of-line at UBC instead.

[mr.x]

I think that UBC should fund two stations on campus.

I certainly agree. I wouldn't have UBC pay for the entire segment west of Blanca like the YVR arrangement for the Canada Line, but I would have UBC pay for the construction of the stations on campus.

With that said, I would look at building one station only considering the high costs ($80-million station)...it would most likely be underground. They could perhaps fit in a "future station" somewhere.

[RosstheBoss]

Ok so correct me if I'm wrong but i heard that the cost to build grade separated LRT is almost the same as building skytrain. When they do finally put rapid transit down Broadway they will have to use grade separation or it will be chaos. I say if we do wind up using grade elevation might as well use skytrain as it will allow trains to be run closer together therefore allowing a higher capacity on the new expansion.

[cabotp]

Stops are only going to be frequent between Cambie and Oak. For the majority of the route, it's the same stops as there will be on SkyTrain, as per 1999 Technical CoV Study.

Cabotp, I'm not sure if there will be a substantial decrease in ridership in 41 and 49 because it really isn't THAT much faster, even with the upgrade. At least for me anyway...

I tend to agree as well. There might be a slight drop. But it will depend on how much faster in time the Broadway line is and how far the line actually goes.

But I don't see the ridership dropping so much to see a drop in service.

[JoeBugliati]

:previous: I feel the same way. The Airport did its share on the Canada Line, I believe Burnaby built the Lake City Way station for its future plans, and if a Gondola is ever built to SFU, I believe SFU will be paying the bill.

I feel it would be in bad taste for UBC not to, and maybe we should built the M-Line extension as far as UBC's property boundary and have all the students transfer there on a bus (and I am sure that will cause the students lobby UBC pretty hard to complete its portion, or at least pay for part of its portion).

And if UBC does not pay for at least a fraction of its portion than it should have little say in the alignment.

UBC should hike tuition to pay for skytrain..

[Canadian Mind]

As if it wasn't high enough already.

[jsbertram]

I tend to agree as well. There might be a slight drop. But it will depend on how much faster in time the Broadway line is and how far the line actually goes.

But I don't see the ridership dropping so much to see a drop in service.

Even with a SkyTrain to UBC in the Broadway corridor, and the resulting shift in transit riders to use it rather than buses to UBC or other destinations in the Broadway corridor, there are other major locations that aren't along Broadway that draw a fair amount of East-West transit traffic.

I'm thinking of Langara College and Oakridge Mall as I'm typing this, but there are other locations that could be easier to get to using East-West buses, rather than using SkyTrain on Broadway and then a North-South bus.

[CLC]

^ don't touch #49, it needs at least 25% increase in service , not decrease :D

Of course, I can't give an accurate estimate how much people who lives west of Cambie use #49 to UBC. But from what I observe, UBC-bound passengers is no more than 20% of overall #49 customers.

[Lindberg]

Could this be the solution?

http://trensquebec.qc.ca/?Le_TrensQu%E9bec

Each wagon is self motorized with wheel based electric motors. It is supposed to be much less expansive than a subway or a train system.

[racc]

Could this be the solution?

http://trensquebec.qc.ca/?Le_TrensQu%E9bec

Each wagon is self motorized with wheel based electric motors. It is supposed to be much less expansive than a subway or a train system.

No. The capacity would not be anywhere near enough as the cars are way too small. There would also be a lot of opposition to the elevated guideway and stations. It would also require passengers to transfer at Commercial.

It would also take years to develop, test and prove such a system.

There are about a million of such ideas floating around on the Internet. They always seem to underestimate the costs and overstate the benefits.

[mr.x]

Why is this so complex? It has be SkyTrain. Period. This is ridiculous.

[The_Henry_Man]

Even with a SkyTrain to UBC in the Broadway corridor, and the resulting shift in transit riders to use it rather than buses to UBC or other destinations in the Broadway corridor, there are other major locations that aren't along Broadway that draw a fair amount of East-West transit traffic.

I'm thinking of Langara College and Oakridge Mall as I'm typing this, but there are other locations that could be easier to get to using East-West buses, rather than using SkyTrain on Broadway and then a North-South bus.

Kerrisdale, QE Park/BC Children's Hospital, PNE, Champlain Mall. I'm sure there are others.

[trofirhen]

Why is this so complex? It has be SkyTrain. Period. This is ridiculous.

AGREED. TOTALLY. FOR THE RECORD.

[GeeCee]

It would be stupid to not use SkyTrain to UBC. We don't need another Canada Line.

[Overground]

Why is this so complex? It has be SkyTrain. Period. This is ridiculous.

:tup: It's a bloody no-brainer that I can't even bother to waste energy reading about anything else about it.

[cabotp]

Why is this so complex? It has be SkyTrain. Period. This is ridiculous.

I'm voting you in as the dictator of transit. Now go and build and don't listen to anything anyone says. And if they don't like it tough. :cheers:

That is pretty much what is needed.