Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut
That's basically what a tram is: a B-Line on rails.
We're definitely not going to have both light and heavy rail on this corridor. True on electrification costs, but the ROW is defunct anyway - CP has hauling rights, that's it.
Problem is that we're an Asian-sized city with a European population. Unlike KGB/104th or Fraser, West Newton-Cloverdale isn't going to need SkyTrain until 2100, and they'll all be driving in the meantime. Build a tram though, and they're covered for the next 50+ years.
|
True. Though in our region, a tram is a bit better, since it has full ROW, but you could do that for buses on that corridor too (even though B-lines rarely have them).
Though, once you have full bus priority, one would wonder how much LRT is necessary.
An analogy is Maple Ridge. Should we be build LRT on Maple Ridge, because it's possible without cutting down the lane #. Or the Millennium Line. The entire existing Millennium Line could have been LRT without reducing the number of vehicle lanes (OK, let's assume the section west of Renfrew is grade-separated).
Even the Evergreen Extension could have been LRT by following the Southeast Corridor on Lougheed Hwy.
Decided to use Waves' calculator- a new line, stretching on Hwy 10 from 120st to Fraser Hwy. Perhaps not the most realistic, but a thought experiment.
[Image Removed without Citation]
LRT on old ROW with new lanes is 1.6x less expensive than Skytrain- a lot, but note that this is $2.2B vs $1.3B (saving $0.9B). Not unsubstantial, but both are in the 'large project' area that requires provincial and federal funding.
It's owned by BNSF, as dual-tracked, and actually dual-tracked, being part of Deltaport logistics. It's far from defunct.
Quote:
|
Doubtful. Unless there's a commuter rail network somewhere that has a branch with just two stations? Not every freight line makes for a good passenger line.
|
GO Transit.
https://www.gotransit.com/file_sourc.../train-map.png
Quote:
|
Hopefully, yes... though I've yet to hear from a credible source (and not a Letter to the Editor) why Iona could become a ferry terminal.
|
The problem is that most of the studies are old (like 80s-90s old), and the idea hasn't been revisited since for numerous reasons (Fast Ferries, and Duke Point).
Archives of the studies do exist, and it was part of a Vancouver Is. Fixed link study. Both are not available online, though they can presumably be requested.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/t...nk#Preliminary Studies
https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/...a-island-ferry
This gives some insight, though.
http://ferriesbc.proboards.com/threa...ola-short-link
Quote:
Originally Posted by waves
Rapid Bus Transit is defined in the NSATP as anything that might have one or some of the following: "Dedicated right of way, separate lane or mixed with traffic, limited stop or transit priority measures. Service frequency 2 – 15 minutes."
Run the 229/230 at 15 min frequencies staggered 7.5min apart. You could run the 229 with limited stops through CNV to provide a faster option for getting to the Quay versus 230 local service. Alternatively, you keep the 230/229 at current 15-30min frequencies, cut stops in the CNV so that they stop at 23rd/15th/13th/3rd/Quay only, and implement a new 10min local service bus from the Quay to 23rd.
Both these options would improve Lonsdale to a Rapid Bus Network but neither are a B-Line.
|
Were B-lines ever built on routes designated as 'frequent transit', like the 210?
