HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 10:57 PM
cganuelas1995 cganuelas1995 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,270
I think Ladner and Tsawwassen would be too far away for rapid transit to remain rapid. It would be better served with a regional rail connection.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 12:24 AM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 12,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
I had the pleasure of riding the Union Pearson Express for the first time last month and its a whole level above the Canada Line experience. I fully realize it is currently losing money etc. but as a passenger it was much better.
UP is great if you're going to one place, the financial core withing a 5-10 minute walk from Union. Otherwise I think the vast majority of Torontonians seem to prefer a Canada Line solution.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 1:13 AM
Reecemartin's Avatar
Reecemartin Reecemartin is offline
YouTube Creator
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Vancouver/Toronto
Posts: 1,776
[Deleted]

Last edited by Reecemartin; Nov 17, 2020 at 7:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 3:21 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
It's a little much to be thinking of that now. I love thinking of wild Tokyo-style transit systems for Vancouver as much as anyone, but you have to be realistic for what a city of 2.5 million can accomplish.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 3:23 AM
Reecemartin's Avatar
Reecemartin Reecemartin is offline
YouTube Creator
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Vancouver/Toronto
Posts: 1,776
[Deleted]

Last edited by Reecemartin; Nov 17, 2020 at 7:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 4:06 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 16,806
Grass is always greener.

We have had this same conversation before many times.

The Canada Line can still expand to 2.5 times its current passenger volumes via previously planned expansions (50 meters, more frequent trains, third C car).

Given that the current ridership is already well over 100 000 daily and the region that it services, doubling the current ridership is far more difficult than people think. This is not an LRT currently moving 30 000 people a day, where the idea of ridership doubling with a few tweaks to land management is far more achievable.

The only mid-term improvement I would like to see that were not planned expansions would be a new South entrance onto Robson street from VCC, a new entrance at Bridgeport, and Spanish solution 2nd platforms at YVR and Brighouse (YVR looks to be already considering this).

Outside of that, the Canada Line won't need any major expansions until it is older than the current age of the Expo Line is now (and seeing how major upgrades are being done on the Expo Line at this point, that makes sense).
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 5:36 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,848
I'm not sure if The Canada Line will need expansion even in the next 70 years. Ridership depends on the high employment density downtown, but that employment density can't grow too much more as the peninsula is close to being built out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 5:44 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 8,337
Ridership downtown is only half the equation. If you took the southbound trains, you'd know that the other half of the ridership is from people going to/from Oakridge, Langara, Richmond, and YVR - and that number is going to keep growing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:01 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,848
I would be surprised if the passenger loads outside of City Hall/Downtown section were even close to comparable. Never seen those numbers though...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:10 AM
Sheba Sheba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
I would be surprised if the passenger loads outside of City Hall/Downtown section were even close to comparable. Never seen those numbers though...
2015 Transit Service Performance Review
Check Vol 3 Appendix F1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:22 AM
Rico Rico is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 318
[QUOTE=Metro-One;7715191]Grass is always greener.

We have had this same conversation before many times.

The Canada Line can still expand to 2.5 times its current passenger volumes via previously planned expansions (50 meters, more frequent trains, third C car).

Given that the current ridership is already well over 100 000 daily and the region that it services, doubling the current ridership is far more difficult than people think. This is not an LRT currently moving 30 000 people a day, where the idea of ridership doubling with a few tweaks to land management is far more achievable.

The only mid-term improvement I would like to see that were not planned expansions would be a new South entrance onto Robson street from VCC, a new entrance at Bridgeport, and Spanish solution 2nd platforms at YVR and Brighouse (YVR looks to be already considering this). [Quote]

You are missing the most likely sources of extra ridership....the future infill stations at Capstan, 33rd and 57th as well as an increase transfering onto the Broadway corridor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:35 AM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
I'm not sure if The Canada Line will need expansion even in the next 70 years. Ridership depends on the high employment density downtown, but that employment density can't grow too much more as the peninsula is close to being built out.


Nope, plenty of room for high rises, especially in the West End. The number of low-rises actually is a bit surprising, considering it's constantly compared to Manhattan and all.

And if worse comes to worse, they can always build East and gentrify East Hastings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cganuelas1995 View Post
I think Ladner and Tsawwassen would be too far away for rapid transit to remain rapid. It would be better served with a regional rail connection.
The issue is if that's worth it. We would need a new rail George Massey to connect Lander to Richmond.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One View Post
Grass is always greener.

We have had this same conversation before many times.

The Canada Line can still expand to 2.5 times its current passenger volumes via previously planned expansions (50 meters, more frequent trains, third C car).

Given that the current ridership is already well over 100 000 daily and the region that it services, doubling the current ridership is far more difficult than people think. This is not an LRT currently moving 30 000 people a day, where the idea of ridership doubling with a few tweaks to land management is far more achievable.

The only mid-term improvement I would like to see that were not planned expansions would be a new South entrance onto Robson street from VCC, a new entrance at Bridgeport, and Spanish solution 2nd platforms at YVR and Brighouse (YVR looks to be already considering this).

Outside of that, the Canada Line won't need any major expansions until it is older than the current age of the Expo Line is now (and seeing how major upgrades are being done on the Expo Line at this point, that makes sense).
And if it gets too close for comfort, they can always revisit Arbutus for Rail, and hope the NIMBYs have moved on one way or another in a few decades. It can't go on forever. The City will live on without them, with not a tear shed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon View Post
The number you need to worry about between double and triple the current ridership. If it doesn't triple the ridership, then it's not a big problem.

The Canada Line can still fit a lot more people, but at a certain point the stations will probably need additional escalators and stairs. Not the biggest problem. If the Canada Line ever gets near Expo Line levels of ridership, something has vastly changed in the region.
At double, I would think you would need to at least extend the Canada Line Stations by 10m at minimum.

At triple, you would need to rip up Cambie to extend the stations, and rebuild the Sea Island and Richmond Spurs.

or am I missing something?


It could get that kind of ridership if there was a Skytrain to Steveston. Also, Chinese Immigrants really like Richmond. I wouldn't be surprised if it literally becomes 90%+ East Asian by 2050.

Also: www.richmond.ca/discover/about/demographics.htm
http://www.surrey.ca/business-econom...ment/1418.aspx
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Vancouver

Quote:
Surrey has had an average growth rate of 2% over the last 10 years.
Quote:
[Richmond] 2006 to 2011 population change (%) 9.2%
Quote:
[City of Vancouver] 2011 603,502 +4.4%

I don't think the Canada Line will reach future Expo Line usage, but I do think it will hit current Expo Line usage.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TransitFreak View Post
Get to two minute headways on the trunk first (extra train orders will do that)
Waterfront can activate both platforms - one side Richmond, one side YVR, that way it can recover and reset to two minute headways
Once the frequency is locked down and maxed out - Phase II would be ordering middle car 10-15 metre extension and extending the platforms to 50M for all elevated stations except Richmond, which is built out
I suspect the middle car with be nothing but bench seating and bike/wheelchair space - this allows max loading at the centre with dispersal to the sides
15M middle car can work if they go with the cab overhang, and all doors land on platform

I think people will really notice the increased frequency first, that will help sweep away the congestion and improve station circulation. Also, I think you'll notice at Landsdowne the Waterfront bound train will use the first switch to move over, which allows the outbound train to leave Landsdowne and queue up to enter the single track section. The reverse will happen after Sea Island, where the Airport bound train will queue up at the last switch, wait for the Waterfront train to clear, then go into the single track portion.

Lastly, I wouldn't be surprised to see the spanish solution on both the YVR (as officedweller mentioned) as well as the Richmond-Brighouse station as a means to help offload the train faster. I think that comes next if the increased frequencies don't alleviate station flow

What about dual tracking both YVR and Richmond Spurs?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut View Post
Sure, but a No. 3 route lets the Canada Line connect to Riverport, and possibly Ladner, instead of just confining it to Richmond; Steveston might be better served by a tram down the Railway Avenue corridor.
As I said earlier, Lander has had very little historical growth (largely due to the lack of land- there is some, particularly along the river coast, that isn't ALR, but only a bit more than Fort Langley had before it was redeveloped).



Even if we did, a Skytrain to Lander would have so little potential for growth, and so little current usage, it would essentially be a very expensive bridge to nowhere. Such a Skytrain would connect to Tswassen to be viable, and at that point, you might as well build commuter rail there, and build a BC Ferry terminal at Iona Island and save everyone an hour (literally)

Commuter Rail or even BRT makes more sense- we have the rail for the headways on both ends, just no bridge (and there is SFPR land if we want to extend to Tswassen)


You can also still technically connect to Lander from Steveston, though a bit of a detour.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:46 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant
Posts: 6,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
Thank-you. A gold mine of information.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:57 AM
Metro-One's Avatar
Metro-One Metro-One is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 16,806
[QUOTE=Rico;7715270][QUOTE=Metro-One;7715191]Grass is always greener.

We have had this same conversation before many times.

The Canada Line can still expand to 2.5 times its current passenger volumes via previously planned expansions (50 meters, more frequent trains, third C car).

Given that the current ridership is already well over 100 000 daily and the region that it services, doubling the current ridership is far more difficult than people think. This is not an LRT currently moving 30 000 people a day, where the idea of ridership doubling with a few tweaks to land management is far more achievable.

The only mid-term improvement I would like to see that were not planned expansions would be a new South entrance onto Robson street from VCC, a new entrance at Bridgeport, and Spanish solution 2nd platforms at YVR and Brighouse (YVR looks to be already considering this). /
Quote:

You are missing the most likely sources of extra ridership....the future infill stations at Capstan, 33rd and 57th as well as an increase transfering onto the Broadway corridor.
No I didn't, because I did not need to mention those sources (or any source) directly.

Yes, those developments will add passengers, but again outside of the few additions I mentioned, larger improvements won't be needed for a longtime.

Again, 2.5 times the current ridership can still be achieved under the originally planned for expansions.

That is around 200 000 more daily passengers. I don't think people on here actually understand how large of a number that is for a transit line serving this specific corridor, even with all the developments happening / planned.

And by the time that does happen, the age of the line will require a major upgrade anyways, or our region will have matured to the point where a new north / south corridor is required and / or a rapid commuter rail system.
__________________
Bridging the Gap
Check out my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/306346...h/29495547810/ and Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV0...lhxXFxuAey_q6Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 4:16 PM
Jebby's Avatar
Jebby Jebby is offline
........
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mexico City
Posts: 3,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredinno View Post
And if it gets too close for comfort, they can always revisit Arbutus for Rail, and hope the NIMBYs have moved on one way or another in a few decades. It can't go on forever. The City will live on without them, with not a tear shed.
Arbutus is not a viable option as a relief line for the Canada Line. I would bet that a very small percentage of ridership along the CL is coming from west of Granville.
__________________
In the heart of a busy metropolis skyscrapers are a vivid reminder of the constant yearning of the human spirit to rise to God
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 4:32 PM
Bdawe Bdawe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunrise
Posts: 535
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jebby View Post
Arbutus is not a viable option as a relief line for the Canada Line. I would bet that a very small percentage of ridership along the CL is coming from west of Granville.
Marpole, Kerrisdale, and West Broadway are not insubstantial
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 5:41 PM
Caliplanner1 Caliplanner1 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut View Post
Ridership downtown is only half the equation. If you took the southbound trains, you'd know that the other half of the ridership is from people going to/from Oakridge, Langara, Richmond, and YVR - and that number is going to keep growing.
...not to mention the growing number of (international/national) YVR customers/commuters who are discovering the convenience of the Canada Line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:26 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,263
I can't believe a SkyTrain line to Ladner is being talked about on here. The population base and density simply aren't there, and both us and Tsawwassen are pretty much fully built out to the ALR. Not to mention that you'd probably have 90% of the people here fight against it. I mean, never say never, but that's a 150+ year idea.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:32 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
I can't believe a SkyTrain line to Ladner is being talked about on here. The population base and density simply aren't there, and both us and Tsawwassen are pretty much fully built out to the ALR. Not to mention that you'd probably have 90% of the people here fight against it. I mean, never say never, but that's a 150+ year idea.
Well, we are apparently building a 10 lane bridge there, so...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2017, 6:39 PM
Jebby's Avatar
Jebby Jebby is offline
........
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mexico City
Posts: 3,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliplanner1 View Post
...not to mention the growing number of (international/national) YVR customers/commuters who are discovering the convenience of the Canada Line.
How many is that? Like 500 a day max?
__________________
In the heart of a busy metropolis skyscrapers are a vivid reminder of the constant yearning of the human spirit to rise to God
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 7:03 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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