HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1721  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2014, 12:31 AM
makr3trkr makr3trkr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
They live on Fraser highway. They should be able to handle RRT going by. I mean my street has forced setbacks for the condos on the south side for 50 years from now when the north shore gets RRT and it's not even as busy or a truck route.
Now to convince everyone on University Blvd. the same.

For that matter, 15-20 years ago south Cambie Street wasn't vastly more dense than Fraser Highway is now, and had similar amounts of traffic.

Didn't prevent the threat of litigation though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1722  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2014, 3:58 AM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is online now
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by makr3trkr View Post


I agree 100% that RRT, preferably Skytrain, would be best along Fraser Highway.

*However* tens of thousands of home owners and many, many businesses along Fraser Highway would be affected, so who knows if it would be litigated.
The width footprint of SkyTrain-on-roadway is actually narrower than LRT. The results would be the same either way, really. Hopefully Fraser Hwy can get the North Rd treatment of a road expansion done before construction - but during those 4 years, all Fraser Hwy riders will be screwed along the way regardless of what gets built. Then again, it wasn't extremely long ago that there was only one lane/direction on Fraser Hwy.

It gives me big concerns as to whether rapid transit should even be built in some places - for example, the construction effects on 104 Ave narrowing traffic to one lane/direction permanently - but also with NO sort of transit priority DURING construction - would essentially alienate Guildford from Metro Vanouver by cutting off any reliable transit connection and doubling travel times to Central until the line is complete. Given the poor business case of LRT and the good travel time/capacity of the 96 so far (almost matching the plan), it's questionable whether "rapid transit" in terms of a dedicated median R.O.W. would be worthwhile at all here.

Last edited by xd_1771; Apr 23, 2014 at 4:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1723  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 12:51 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is online now
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
The width footprint of SkyTrain-on-roadway is actually narrower than LRT. The results would be the same either way, really. Hopefully Fraser Hwy can get the North Rd treatment of a road expansion done before construction - but during those 4 years, all Fraser Hwy riders will be screwed along the way.

It gives me big concerns as to whether rapid transit should even be built in some places - for example, the construction effects on 104 Ave narrowing traffic to one lane/direction permanently - but also with NO sort of transit priority DURING construction - would essentially alienate Guildford from Metro Vanouver by cutting off any reliable transit connection and doubling travel times to Central until the line is complete. Given the poor business case of LRT and the good travel time/capacity of the 96 so far (almost matching the plan), it's questionable whether "rapid transit" in terms of a dedicated median R.O.W. would be worthwhile at all here.
That's more or less what I'm thinking too. Until the 96 gets to 99 level congestion, it really doesn't need to be upgraded. Obviously rail transit would be preferable, but at the moment is it really necessary?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1724  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 2:26 AM
Track Track is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 66
It doesn't seem to be part of the plans, but would it be feasible to run a BRT line that remained separated down King George Boulevard but integrated with traffic down 104th? That might have too much of an adverse effect on travel times, but I'm wary of any plan that cuts 104th to one lane in each direction.

Given the 4 choices, though, I'm in favor of RRT1. It seems to have the highest potential ridership, and the cost increase isn't that much in the long run.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1725  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 2:33 AM
GMasterAres GMasterAres is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 3,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbertram View Post
In all of these discussions, I've heard very little about how (or if) Delta will be getting BRT /LRT /RRT that might tie into what Surrey is doing.
Only thing Delta would need would be a line down Scott Road and that could benefit Surrey to a degree too. Still not that dense though along that route and I think it would be well after the fact. For South Delta, they have fine bus service imho. Heck they have better service than much of South Surrey.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1726  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 2:41 AM
GMasterAres GMasterAres is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 3,055
And that graphic basically shows the option I'd put money on will end up being done, RRT1.

I've said it for years, SkyTrain from Surrey Central -> Langley Center because SkyTrain = Backbone regional transit. BRT to Guildford and Newton until LRT can be justified. Better bus access to White Rock/South Surrey from Newton with the busses freed up along 104th and KGB.

Done like dinner. If LRT gets built it will only be if Surrey ponies up the money I believe and I don't buy their argument that SkyTrain cuts communities in two. It certainly hasn't done that anywhere else so far why would Surrey magically be different?

I just think developers have to think more with their brains and start integrating designs and development around SkyTrain stations to make them more inclusive. And city hall needs to hold them to account. If you hold real-estate next to SkyTrain, you should be required to integrate somehow.

Either way if they build SkyTrain to Langley like the option presented, we won't talk about rapid transit through Surrey to Langley for the next 30 years I guarantee it.

Does anyone ever talk about the traffic between Metrotown and Vancouver anymore? Nope.

"Oh there was a lot of traffic on Kingsway when I was driving from Main Street to Metrotown" says complainer.
"Get your but on SkyTrain" says everyone else.

Case closed.

Get it done right the first time. It's $2.2 billion today, it's $8 billion tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1727  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 5:56 PM
makr3trkr makr3trkr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 592
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhausner View Post
And that graphic basically shows the option I'd put money on will end up being done, RRT1.

I've said it for years, SkyTrain from Surrey Central -> Langley Center because SkyTrain = Backbone regional transit. BRT to Guildford and Newton until LRT can be justified. Better bus access to White Rock/South Surrey from Newton with the busses freed up along 104th and KGB.

Done like dinner. If LRT gets built it will only be if Surrey ponies up the money I believe and I don't buy their argument that SkyTrain cuts communities in two. It certainly hasn't done that anywhere else so far why would Surrey magically be different?

I just think developers have to think more with their brains and start integrating designs and development around SkyTrain stations to make them more inclusive. And city hall needs to hold them to account. If you hold real-estate next to SkyTrain, you should be required to integrate somehow.

Either way if they build SkyTrain to Langley like the option presented, we won't talk about rapid transit through Surrey to Langley for the next 30 years I guarantee it.
Does anyone ever talk about the traffic between Metrotown and Vancouver anymore? Nope.

"Oh there was a lot of traffic on Kingsway when I was driving from Main Street to Metrotown" says complainer.
"Get your but on SkyTrain" says everyone else.

Case closed.

Get it done right the first time. It's $2.2 billion today, it's $8 billion tomorrow.
Agreed. It doesn't cut communities in two, and it would have been significantly cheaper, faster, easier to expand, and a whole lot less disruptive to have the Canada Line elevated say from, 19th or 20th Avenue southward all the way along Cambie.

However, the project would have been mired in lawsuits and it never would have gotten built.



Cambie south of 20th was an extremely good candidate for an elevated guideway, even better than Fraser Highway is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1728  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 7:32 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,192
The "Cambie Heritage Boulevard" is a direct result of the proposal to build elevated SkyTrain down Cambie in the early 1990s (by Vander Zalm's Socreds). The City also planted many additional trees on the boulevard at the time. When the NDP came into power, the focus shifted to the NDP's eastern suburbs (M-Line).

Last edited by officedweller; Apr 23, 2014 at 8:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1729  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 7:54 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
Yup, the Socreds would have had the Richmond line built next immediately after the SkyBridge and Surrey extension, to serve loyal Socred ridings. The "heritage boulevard" designation was a purely defensive manoever by a city council that wanted the rail line built on Arbutus instead. I suppose that means it was done during Gordon Campbell's tenure as mayor of Vancouver? After the NDP came into power, suddenly the Richmond line was delayed by 25 years until 2017, and planning began immediately on the "T" line (now M-Line) which ran through loyal NDP ridings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1730  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 10:06 PM
logicbomb logicbomb is offline
Joshua B.
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 959
Snipped

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhausner View Post
And that graphic basically shows the option I'd put money on will end up being done, RRT1.

I've said it for years, SkyTrain from Surrey Central -> Langley Center because SkyTrain = Backbone regional transit. BRT to Guildford and Newton until LRT can be justified. Better bus access to White Rock/South Surrey from Newton with the busses freed up along 104th and KGB.

Done like dinner. If LRT gets built it will only be if Surrey ponies up the money I believe and I don't buy their argument that SkyTrain cuts communities in two. It certainly hasn't done that anywhere else so far why would Surrey magically be different?
My jaw dropped when I heard that back in 2012. Did it divide Collingwood? Mount Pleasant? There is a tremendous potential to densify the areas around the 3 Surrey Skytrain Stations (well, even Scott Road); and it’s infuriating whenever I hear the seemingly persistent bullshit about Skytrain “fragmenting communities.” Why on earth did the City fork out prime money to build its new City Hall near a Skytrain Station? Dividing communities my ass

The City of Surrey can continue to clamour about wanting LRT but any planner or engineer outside of the municipality sees it as a damn near impossible endeavour to both incorporate the new LRT network and maintain 4 lanes of traffic down Fraser Highway and 104th (without extensive rezoning and property acquisition).

I’m with you here; it has to be RRT down Fraser Highway with 1 or 2 BRT networks feeding into the system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1731  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 10:13 PM
Pinion Pinion is offline
See ya down under, mates
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,167
"Divides communities" sounds a bit like code for "brings undesirable people to the neighbourhood" more than the literal sense like highways.

And undesirable to some could be as little as "not middle aged."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1732  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 10:18 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is online now
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
"Divides communities" sounds a bit like code for "brings undesirable people to the neighbourhood" more than the literal sense like highways.

And undesirable to some could be as little as "not middle aged."
I think that ship has sailed either way. With Surrey and Langley becoming the cheapest places to live, young people are going to continue to move out there after they leave mom and dad's.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1733  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 11:10 PM
logicbomb logicbomb is offline
Joshua B.
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
"Divides communities" sounds a bit like code for "brings undesirable people to the neighbourhood" more than the literal sense like highways.

And undesirable to some could be as little as "not middle aged."
It does, but I was under the impression that the City was trying to prevent a division to the built form. There would be a swath of complaints from developers and homeowners due to the "unsightly" elevated guide-way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1734  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 11:29 PM
VancouverOfTheFuture's Avatar
VancouverOfTheFuture VancouverOfTheFuture is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,252
if the guide-way is such a problem. then Translink should pay for RRT1 option, elevated and Surrey should fork over the difference to turning it into an underground system. Translink just deals with the elevated amount and Surrey gets a good look through their own money. that seems the best way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1735  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2014, 11:33 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is online now
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture View Post
if the guide-way is such a problem. then Translink should pay for RRT1 option, elevated and Surrey should fork over the difference to turning it into an underground system. Translink just deals with the elevated amount and Surrey gets a good look through their own money. that seems the best way.
let's get er done
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1736  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2014, 3:23 AM
spm2013 spm2013 is offline
More Towers
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,312
....

Last edited by spm2013; Nov 16, 2014 at 9:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1737  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2014, 4:29 AM
Spork's Avatar
Spork Spork is offline
Shoebox Dweller
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,784
I hope that Surrey gets the money approved and Translink gets to choose how to apply it, choosing to fast-track their selected expansion of choice (RRT+BRT?). No city should be going around Translink and developing a non-integrated system. It is bad enough when there are multiple transit authorities in the wider metro area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1738  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2014, 6:00 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,839
The 1 shortcoming of BRT vs LRT is capacity. Volvo's follow the leader autonomous vehicle technology will change that. LRT is dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1739  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2014, 6:06 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is online now
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
It's not like Surrey's potential rapid transit corridors are exactly bursting at the seams right now anyway. If a B-Line conversion to RRT once it is warranted can work in the rest of the region, it can certainly work in Surrey, rather than succumbing to the worst trend in urban planning right now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1740  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2014, 9:29 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 38,192
At least it only mentioned 104 and King George Highway - not Fraser Highway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:23 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.