HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 1:42 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,143
SkyTrain Billions Better Spent on Trams: Study

SkyTrain Billions Better Spent on Trams: Study


Map on left shows the conceptual location of the $220-million-per-kilometre Broadway SkyTrain line proposed by the province. On the right is an illustration of how much tram infrastructure you could install for the same price. Map shows heritage streetcar routes as solid lines, and a conceptual expansion of that historic system in dashed lines.

Money for single UBC subway line could pay for region laced by light rail.


The planned SkyTrain subway spur along Broadway and out to the University of British Columbia campus will cost taxpayers 15 times what it would take to build a tram line along the same route.

In fact, for the $2.8 billion cost of the single 12 kilometre SkyTrain tube from Commercial Drive to UBC, Vancouver could build 175 km of tram lines crisscrossing the city and beyond.

That is the finding of a study led by Prof. Patrick Condon of the UBC Design Centre for Sustainability. His team based their calculations on the recent experiences of Portland, Oregon, and various European cities with light rail transit.

"This study demonstrates that the money needed for one 12 km subway line would be more than enough to rebuild and substantially expand the region's entire historic streetcar system," state the authors, noting that Vancouver and surrounding communities were built along trolley lines dating back to 1890.

Portland success story

But isn't Vancouver now too congested with traffic to make room for street cars on major thoroughfares?

Not if your guide is Portland, which is about the same size as Vancouver and in the last decade has installed tram lines along former street car routes long ago abandoned to busses and autos. Not only did Portland's trams not clog traffic, they stimulated real estate development along their routes, which vitalized neighbourhoods, sparking a building boom that created more tax revenue for the city.

"Within a one-block distance from the streetcar, new net development increased more than three times as rapidly as in any other block-distance," the report's authors calculate.

The demand for cost efficient public transit in Portland came directly from voters, who shot down a bond measure that would have funded a more expensive system. That message from the citizenry caused planners to seek out tram technology that is two thirds cheaper than more common light rail options and vastly less expensive than the SkyTrain system.

Portland tram trips are much slower than SkyTrain, but could be made speedier than automobile travel by coordinating street light changes as the tram travels through intersections, and by giving the tram a dedicated right of way over parts of routes, say the report's authors.

Slower can be better

The tram's pace may be better suited to the cross town UBC run than a faster subway with fewer stops, the authors assert.

"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."

The report doesn't portray the SkyTrain as a white elephant -- nor is it the all purpose solution to big city transportation needs.

European cities such as Berlin, Vienna, Paris and Dublin offer a model of how to balance "expenditures between high speed trains, subways and light rail, and cheaper and lighter tram systems to serve more complete urban districts."

"There is no doubt that such a system would not be as fast as a subway," concludes the UBC team. "However based on the Portland experience, the benefits may be an improved quality of life in many neighbourhoods, an improved investment climate for higher density homes and job sites, enhanced access for citizens within their own districts and to other parts of the city (especially for the rapidly expanding seniors' demographic) and a substantially reduced cost per ride.

"As our region pushes towards a goal of 80 per cent reduction in per capita greenhouse gas production, it behooves public officials to look carefully at how taxpayer dollars can be most effectively used towards the creation of a very different pattern of transportation than the one we know today. A return to a pattern known before the rise of the automobile may merit a careful re-examination," wrote the authors.

'Take a hard look' urges prof

The $2.8 billion earmarked for the SkyTrain subway line to UBC is "a huge amount of money for a line to serve just the west side," Condon told The Tyee.

"The good news is we have time to figure out how to best use our limited transit money to make a more sustainable city. Portland has used very modest transit investments to make their neighbourhoods better places to live and work; transit for neighbourhoods, not simply through them. We should take a hard look at their experience before it's too late," said Condon, who holds the UBC James Taylor Chair in Landscape and Liveable Environments and is helping to develop a sustainable town for 15,000 residents in Surrey.

The report, co-written with Condon by UBC Landscape Architecture students Sigrid Gruenberger and Marta Klaptocz, can be read here


http://thetyee.ca/News/2008/06/05/UpWithTrams/
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 1:55 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Interesting read, but I highly doubt you could build $2.8-billion worth of streetcar at that price.

With the completion of the SkyTrain extensions to UBC, Coquitlam, and within Surrey, it would also basically mark the completion of our ALRT/SkyTrain network. Afterwards (after 2020), it would be a great idea to go forward with a tram network. The tram network would funnel passengers into the higher capacity and more rapid SkyTrain network......meanwhile, we've just bought $250-million worth of electric trolleys that will probably be good for 15-20 years.



Quote:
"There is no doubt that such a system would not be as fast as a subway,"
Bingo. Speed is a huge factor for attaining ridership, thus making LRT a terrible choice for being the backbone of our transit network.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 2:01 AM
MistyMountainHop's Avatar
MistyMountainHop MistyMountainHop is offline
I worship Led Zeppelin
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,233
Why not cancel the Gateway Project and do both?
__________________
Bill: Be excellent to each other.
Ted: Party on, dudes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 2:05 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmorek View Post
Why not cancel the Gateway Project and do both?
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 2:10 AM
ravman ravman is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 560
we need to reduce the single occupancy cars and open it up for com vehicles ... instead of a twin of bridge... build a train that goes from langley or where ever that way and goes to lougheed station and restrict one lane on the bridge for comm vehicles only... i believe there was a project to add one lane to the portmann bridge by the ndp and it was cancelled by the liberals...they did half of it and then new govt came in and the project cancelled...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 4:02 AM
myshtern myshtern is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 806
What's the difference? Is the skytrain just elevated?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 4:08 AM
en2 en2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 54
A bus on rails isn't going to get people to ditch their gas guzzling vehicles.

This isn't the early 20th century where there were few cars on the road.

I have ridden the LRT in Portland and in the downtown area, it goes SO slow.

Our so-called experts should study transit systems in Asia, no major city in Asia is building any trams/streetcars/light rail as the backbone of their public transportation network.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 4:11 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by myshtern View Post
What's the difference? Is the skytrain just elevated?
SkyTrain is a computer-run/automated elevated subway. It's a bit faster, much more frequent, and the stations are farther apart.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:05 AM
leftside leftside is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by en2 View Post
Our so-called experts should study transit systems in Asia, no major city in Asia is building any trams/streetcars/light rail as the backbone of their public transportation network.
Out of interest, what are they building?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:12 AM
MistyMountainHop's Avatar
MistyMountainHop MistyMountainHop is offline
I worship Led Zeppelin
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravman View Post
we need to reduce the single occupancy cars and open it up for com vehicles ... instead of a twin of bridge... build a train that goes from langley or where ever that way and goes to lougheed station and restrict one lane on the bridge for comm vehicles only...
That would be a good idea.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x2 View Post
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.
A cabinet shuffle could help things a bit. It seems kind of superficial that while the Liberals are proposing a carbon tax to be more environmentally friendly (great), they are still moving forward with backward-thinking projects like gateway.

Instead of replacing the SkyTrain, augment it. After all, $4 billion could build a lot of LRT!
__________________
Bill: Be excellent to each other.
Ted: Party on, dudes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:14 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
Subways, subways, subways. But you have to see many of them do have a streetcar/light rail system: for instance, Hong Kong with their double decker trolleys.

I like the idea of this article. How about adding an additional $2.8 billion to the transportation plan =) We could create small LRTs (expandable to larger ones):
- Arbutus/Marine (Downtown-Vancouver-Burnaby-New West)
- Victoria (Downtown-Vancouver [all the way to East fraserlands)
- Hastings/Park Royal (Burnaby-Vancouver-Downtown-West Vancouver)
- King George/Guildford/Lougheed (White Rock-Surrey-Coquitlam)
- Interurban (Scott Road-Langley)
- Ambleside/Lonsdale (West Van-North Van)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:15 AM
The_Henry_Man The_Henry_Man is offline
HA
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: St. Cloud, MN/Richmond, BC
Posts: 872
^I think the main point that The Tyee and the researchers cited in this article totally missed is that whether we should build the tram network as the backbone of the Vancouver's rapid transit network, or should we build the tram network to supplement and funnel commuters from smaller communities to the main network, the Skytrain network.

I think the answer is pretty obvious.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:20 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,143
i think skytrain brings in people from burnaby, new west, surrey and soon to be richmond pretty well

a network of trams for the city of vancouver alone is money better spent i think

we can't look at the UBC extension as a regional thing IMO
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:37 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
I dunno I tend to disagree. Just looking at Vancouver is very selfish thing to do. The South of Fraser needs many public transportation upgrades and they won't be getting a lot, at least not in the current plans up to 2031. Anyway, we do need a mixture of transportation modes in Metro Vancouver, not just SkyTrain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 5:53 AM
Jared's Avatar
Jared Jared is offline
senior something
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
we can't look at the UBC extension as a regional thing IMO
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.
__________________
My Diagrams My Photos

I'm not the guy from Subway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 6:08 AM
quobobo quobobo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Henry_Man View Post
^I think the main point that The Tyee and the researchers cited in this article totally missed is that whether we should build the tram network as the backbone of the Vancouver's rapid transit network, or should we build the tram network to supplement and funnel commuters from smaller communities to the main network, the Skytrain network.

I think the answer is pretty obvious.
Great point.

Also, if they're looking for some extra funding to build tram lines after the subway, why not tie the provincial subway money to significant densification along the corridor (to ensure higher ridership and fare revenue)? Probably can't go too much higher/denser between Granville and Main, but east and west of that is ripe with potential.

Demands like that would royally piss off the COV, but oh well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 6:16 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
I dunno I tend to disagree. Just looking at Vancouver is very selfish thing to do. The South of Fraser needs many public transportation upgrades and they won't be getting a lot, at least not in the current plans up to 2031. Anyway, we do need a mixture of transportation modes in Metro Vancouver, not just SkyTrain.
I'm sure the $2.8-billion could also go towards streetcar lines in Surrey, not just Vancouver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 6:18 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,694
What's the difference between trams and the electric buses that currently serve Broadway? A slightly smoother ride? Travel times are the most important factor to consider and it takes forever to get around in Vancouver's core. Trams are fine to feed a core rapid transit system, but Vancouver doesn't have much of one at this point. The article mentions Berlin, Vienna, Paris, etc., but Vancouver has nothing approaching the core subway systems of those cities.

I'm not sure how you could fail to consider UBC a destination of regional importance. It has something like 50,000 students, employees, and faculty, many of whom commute in every day from other parts of the city. Broadway has a similar number of employees (the city website says over 40,000 in 1996, roughly 1/3 of downtown employment).

In other words, half of the line serves a very core part of the city and the other half connects a very key destination. For it to be adequate it needs to have a decent capacity and dedicated ROW.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 6:35 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 12,805
^ I couldn't agree more.....but I should correct you, UBC has 50,000 students alone not including staff and faculty.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2008, 6:37 AM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,446
For me it would be ideal to have both the M-Line extension to UBC and an extensive tram network (I'm sure most of you would agree). But if I had to make a choice I think I would choose the M-Line extension. For all practical purposes, I think the current bus network is probably pretty comparable to that tram network in terms of service (though perhaps has lower capacity and slightly slower speed). Fixed rail and tram cars might attract more users but at this point the system is moreso in need of meeting the current high demand rather than worrying about boosting ridership.

The fact of the matter is, the city needs something to replace and improve upon 99 B-Line service. A slow-ish, more frequently stopping tram will not help to reduce trip duration over the 99 nor will it improve capacity all that much over the current articulated buses (especially considering the high frequency of the 99). We need something that retains limited stops and basically has as much capacity as we can get.

The 99 fills a certain role in the system that caters to specific transport needs. When people need to go long distances fast they use the 99 and based on the popularity of the 99 service, we clearly need to replace it with something that continues to fill that same role. A tram would moreso be filling the role of something like a 17... something that you only need to shuttle yourself a few blocks over.

EDIT: I also agree with someone123's post.
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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:12 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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