SkyTrain Billions Better Spent on Trams: Study

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Jared

why not? what exactly makes something a "regional thing"? municipal boundaries are arbitrary, and dont nessecarily dictate people's commuting patterns. UBC students and workers along the Broadway corridor come from all across the region, hence the entire region will benefit. Same goes for every large scale project like this.

i'm thinking of it like this - like san francisco

skytrain = bart
the new tram network = muni

what skytrain does now is pretty good and what could be done is have smaller lines branching off of it

the new map shows at least two different lines into UBC thats better than 1 isn't it?

[Nutterbug]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

i'm thinking of it like this - like san francisco

skytrain = bart
the new tram network = muni

Market Street in San Francisco actually has three layers of rail transit running along it: BART, Muni Metro and the F-Line Streetcar.

Since this tram network would run entirely at street level, I'd place it more on the same level as the F-Line.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

"A high speed system is best if the main intention is to move riders quickly from one side of the region to the other. Lower operational speeds are better if your intention is to best serve city districts with easy access within them and to support a long term objective to create more complete communities, less dependent on twice-daily cross-region transit trips."

I think that sums up the UBC extension in particular... getting people from the Broadway & Commercial transit hub out to UBC in a pretty quick fashion. At the same time it will help alleviate traffic on Broadway.

You can argue tram vs. train for various other parts of the city, but not the UBC or Airport links.

[officedweller]

I agree that for a backbone system - streetcars/trams are insufficient.

Streetcars/trams can be built as feeder systems into the Skytrain - that's what is planned for Richmond (and Surrey, until the most recent announcements). Heav(ier) rail to connect regional town centres and streetcars could provide in-fill.

Trolley buses are a more flexible alternative to the streetcar (because they can divert around accidents and can run off-wire for short distances). Another cost that is rarely mentioned is the cost of relocating utilities under roadways to build streetcar tracks. It's the same requirements as building an LRT - move the utilities - water, gas, sewer, telephone, cable - so that the transit service will not be interrupted in the future when repairs to the utilities are required.
Remember talk of the compensation required for businesses along Martin Luther King Way in Seattle for the Link Light Rail - due to business disruption? That was for surface tracks.

[lightrail]

Would this be a horse-drawn light rail system? Seriously, 2.8 billion would barely buy the trams. LRTscars in traffic is a waste of money - it won't work. Typical academic thinking - but not practical.

BTW - why keep saying Portland is a great example - their ridership is not that great. SkyTrain is the real success story.

[WarrenC12]

I agree with officedweller. Lets make the best use of our existing infrastructure of trolley buses and expand that system incrementally... in big increments.

[Rusty Gull]

Condon makes one mistake. He assumes that the Skytrain is being built for the sake of the "west side". As a previous poster mentioned, this line is being built to connect the Broadway/Commercial hub to UBC in as short order as possible -- with crucial stops at Main, Cambie and Granville.

A tram to UBC is a terrible idea, in my opinion -- and would actually have the unintended effect of ONLY serving the west side.

[officedweller]

That's a very good point. UBC really is a "long haul" destination - attracting and supplying more riders than many of the regional town centres.

[GMasterAres]

Trams in Vancouver are silly for the following reasons:

1) They are no different than bus so why not just increase bus service?

2) They do not have right of ways and require road space and this region is allergic to roads so with no road expansion that means traffic gets WORST in Vancouver as a result of trams not better.

Smart transit requires to main things. A feeder muni system and a backbone system. You can't compare tram to skytrain because they service different parts. I would argue Vancouver itself lacks on backbone infrascructure compared to feeder infrastructure. I'd also argue that the Lowermainland has substandard backbone infrastructure compared to cities like New York or Paris and as such the focus should be ont he expansion of the backbone.

So because of that, if I had a vote, it would be for the UBC line. I just have an issue with the UBC line being done before the Expo expansion out in Surrey. I think both should happen at the same time and we shouldn't have to wait until 2020 for the Surrey expansion to be complete. 2015 would be reasonable to me. 2020 is stupid for 6-8 km. But that's just me.

The only people pushing for street cars and trams are those that still think teh Lower Mainland has a population of 200,000 people not 2.2 million and growing. And the reason why highways and the sort in other regions haven't solved traffic issues is because they are always constructed to present not future expansion.

There is also a big reason you can't compare Vancouver to any major city on this planet. The one thing that is often missed about major cities is that very FEW don't include with them major bypass highways. Vancouver does NOT include a major bypass highway. That means if you want to go into Vancouver or through it, you have to take dinky roads. Highway 1 doesn't count it just barely touches Vancouver.

And look at why there is no expansion of Highway 99. It's not because it isn't needed or because it wouldn't pay for itself very quickly. It's because Vancouver doesn't have the road infrastructure to support increased roads when every other city in the region does.

No trust me trams are the last thing Vancouver needs. This utopian fantasy that assumes that everyone and their dog can afford $1 million homes on 0.005 acre lots in Vancouver and don't need to commute anywhere is just that, a utopian fantasy. People have to get used to the fact that we need roads and we need transit backbone infrastructure. Trams and street cars are not backbone infrastructure and they REDUCE road infrastructure so they are a double slam of negativity.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I agree with officedweller. Lets make the best use of our existing infrastructure of trolley buses and expand that system incrementally... in big increments.

I'd argue that most of Vancouver's road infrastructure is reaching a point where even expanding the bus service will have a negative impact on the city's traffic. I think there are 2 major things that have to happen in the region and they are:

1) Increase in backbone infrastructure for transit to allow the larger region to access areas without the need for cars OR buses aka UBC line, Expo expansion, Evergreen line.

2) The other cities have to smarten up and start becoming true regional centers and Surrey has to keep the gas going in becoming a second regional downtown so that not everyone has to go to Vancouver and the regional travel is less focus based.

Let's face it, buses don't move faster than cars. I have yet to drive anywhere in the Lower Mainland where a bus has beat me to a destination. If I'm stuck in traffic, the bus is also stuck in traffic. So we need to do something else.

[obscurantist]

Originally Posted by mr.x2

Now that's one awesome idea.....but I think you'd have to boot Falcon out of office to do that, he won't be letting it go anytime soon, though I think the Campbell and the cabinet wouldn't mind a change of plans.

You're joking, right? Campbell's leadership style is such that he picks and holds onto cabinet ministers on the basis of how willing they are to do exactly what he tells them to, or at least exactly what he would have done in their position. And Falcon's been Transportation Minister for, what, four and a half years?

That doesn't exactly suggest to me that he's a loose cannon. That, combined with Campbell's own statements about Gateway, suggests to me that it's Campbell's pet project. And that he sees Falcon as the best person to push it through, and possibly as a protege. If Falcon gets shuffled out of Transportation, I don't expect him to be demoted or dropped from cabinet.

[mr.x]

^ it's just that i remembered reading somewhere that Gateway was Falcon's brainchild, and it was created so fast immediately after the RAV Translink votes that neither Campbell nor the cabinet had really any say on it. The cabinet wasn't too happy with Gateway.

[obscurantist]

I don't know whether Gateway was Falcon or Campbell's idea. But based on what we know about Campbell, I can't imagine him going ahead with such a major project if he didn't approve of it, let alone keeping the project's originator in the same ministry in order to see it through. And if Campbell's onside, then the opinion of other cabinet members doesn't count for much.

But I'd love to be proven wrong about that, and about the prospects for Falcon, who seems to me like the Liberal equivalent of Glen Clark.

[MistyMountainHop]

The only way I could see LRT working would be if it was mostly separated from traffic. SkyTrain is necessary for Broadway though.

[ssiguy]

This idea is exactly what I have been suggesting forever and getting booed over it at SSC.
I see extending the SkyTrain to Cambie/RAV and maybe Arbutus to connect with a Arbutus LRT but nothing aftr that.
LRT is a far better use of limited funds. With ROW, limited stops, and coordinated lights LRT can be quite effective and fast.
This is why Toronto area will be building 200km of LRT and 300km of upgraded/expanded Commuter rail and some subway extetions but only 16km worth.
LRT with ROW can be very effective but that would require Translink/Metro to put their balls where their ideas are and expropriating lanes for ROW. That is what Toronto and to a lesser degree Montreal are doing. Do you want a city fo cars or people?

Most cities in the West are building new LRT with relativly few subway due to the huge expense of subway and timerequired to build them .
The idea of elevated SkyTrain is a good one {whether you agree with technology itself} a it eliminates the huge underground costs. But now they are tunneling SkyTrains and that negates the costs of the system's advantage of taking the far less expensive elevated option.

I don't agree with bulding streetcars for the sake of it but if it is LRT then it is money FAR better spent especially in a city like Vancouver with such diverse city centres and decentralized employment centres.

[MistyMountainHop]

For a destination like UBC and a corridor like Broadway, I think SkyTrain is necessary. The LRT proposed in this article wouldn't be much faster than a B-Line bus.

[deasine]

But then again, Toronto already has an established subway system. They've invested millions (billions in todays money) into their subway system and they are building/upgrading StreetCars/LRT on top of that.

[fever]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Another cost that is rarely mentioned is the cost of relocating utilities under roadways to build streetcar tracks.

The cost difference should be particularly significant for the Broadway corridor because utilities are under Broadway itself. Presumably, a Skytrain M-Line extension would be built under 10th Avenue, avoiding the mess of utilities under Broadway that a surface rail line would have to factor into its costs.

Otherwise, I generally agree that streetcars should be built on some arterials to facilitate and encourage infill.

[mezzanine]

BTW, if you want a good laugh, 'D. Malcom Johnson' is going apesh*t about this on stephen rees and the tyee. At stephen ree's site, he is being countered and parried in the comments section to good control.....

I do agree that UBC is a regional draw, and a tram would be frustrating to those trying to commute from places other than the west side. The need to relocate ultilities even for a tram ROW is a good and easily forgotten point, as with the need for multimodal transit - skytrain/streetcar, S-Bahn/U-Bahn, BART/Muni. Grade separated, automated mini-metro should be the back-bone.

Honestly, though, they need to expand transit options in south fraser first before they consider vancouver tram/LRT...

From the great sage, D. Malcolm himself....

SkyTrain is still full of flaws, including a high suicide rate.

[Rusty Gull]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

BTW, if you want a good laugh, 'D. Malcom Johnson' is going apesh*t about this on stephen rees and the tyee. At stephen ree's site, he is being countered and parried in the comments section to good control.....

I'm not sure why Malcolm Johnson and Stephen Rees need to resort to Skytrain bashing all the time, in favour of light rail/trams. It's not an either/or proposition.

We need long-haul mass transit to UBC, and trams don't provide that -- at least not effectively.

I do agree that trams or streetcars would be effective in the town centres or high-density neighbourhoods themselves (ie, Lonsdale, False Creek, Main Steet, etc).

Anyways, the people will vote with their feet. Rees and Johnson can call Skytrain a failure all they want, but the crowded Skytrain cars at any given time tell a different story. Bottom line: lots of people use it and like it.