HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted May 16, 2010, 2:49 PM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpikePhanta View Post
I like the Bordeux one!
Yes! It's very sleek and futuristic. The main problem with these trams is that they don't go very fast.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted May 16, 2010, 4:20 PM
johnjimbc johnjimbc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 766
I'd take any of them
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted May 17, 2010, 7:36 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbertram View Post
An article on the Arbutus Corridor in the recent Vancouver Courier with some background on CPR vs City, and a plan to get the biking and jogging trails fixed up along the corridor.

http://www.vancourier.com/business/t...683/story.html
Wow, that's a looooong story.

It says in the story that the ROW ranges in width from 15m and up. That's quite wide. Once you remove the telephone poles and overgrown trees and shrubs, it would be more than wide enough for a walking and biking path, and a tramway.

I think when it comes to the Arbutus corridor you need to look beyond just the corridor itself. Not only would it be good for local tram service, it also connects downtown through to the Fraser. If a downtown streetcar network were to be introduced, the Arbutus corridor would provide access from downtown to various Tranlink properties, like their main service yard at Marpole. It also connects through to more track ROW to the east. The corridor could be used to bring in LRT's to downtown that travel through the southern side of Burnaby and Vancouver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 7:12 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, ON
Posts: 2,366
So, any update on this corridor - would be great to see some sort of LRT running on here, same with the Interurban route in Surrey/Langley.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 7:42 AM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 2,434
There's no real reason to put anything down this corridor. Arbutus is high value residential whose residents will never allow LRT. I also believe that it still belongs to CP Rail. There are also far more important projects, such as the line to UBC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 7:59 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pacific Canada
Posts: 6,565
With the existing Cambie corridor and the eventual Broadway - UBC corridor, I also think there will be no need for Arbutus to be developed for a long time to come.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 8:39 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 29,544
developed in which way? as a transit corridor?
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 5:10 PM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
developed in which way? as a transit corridor?
Assuming that ownership could ever be wrested from CP Rail, I'd love to see it developed as a pedestrian/cyclist greenway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 8:59 PM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Assuming that ownership could ever be wrested from CP Rail, I'd love to see it developed as a pedestrian/cyclist greenway.
I'd love to see that, too, only with a subway underneath that linked into a line going under the Bay, through the West End, downtown, then along E. Hastings. Extravagant? yes of course. Feasible? No way, naturally. But that's what I'd like, for better or for worse.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2013, 11:44 PM
Jebby's Avatar
Jebby Jebby is offline
Make America Great Again!
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mexico City
Posts: 3,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Assuming that ownership could ever be wrested from CP Rail, I'd love to see it developed as a pedestrian/cyclist greenway.
If the city does take it over, then it should remain rail (tram) with a bike/ped path alongside. If rail is to be discarded then I think CP should retain ownership and be allowed to develop it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2013, 12:08 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pacific Canada
Posts: 6,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
developed in which way? as a transit corridor?
Yes, I meant it doesn't need to be developed as an LRT type transit corrridor . . . yet
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2013, 12:24 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, ON
Posts: 2,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Architype View Post
Yes, I meant it doesn't need to be developed as an LRT type transit corrridor . . . yet
I think to retain the corridor for rail for long-term planning is important here. The rails are there, the signals are all present - although I doubt they'd work anymore if a train used the rails (need some rewiring and the like)

10-15 years, as a relief line to the Canada Line - I don't see how that would hurt, with a 15-30 min LRT frequency that could be upped over time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2013, 4:17 AM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,009
When the CPR stopped using the Arbutus corridor for rail traffic and tried to redevelop the lands, the City of Vancouver held public hearings and created a "Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan" to provide a guideline of what could and couldn't be developed on the old railway ROW, and passed a related bylaw.

CPR sued, claiming the City couldn't interfere with their use (or re-use) of CPR property, and after a CPR victory at trial, and then a City of Vancouver victory on appeal, the CPR appealed to the Supreme Court who ruled the Bylaw was legal, and dismissed the CPR appeal.

I think the CPR still owns the ROW and it appears the ODP is in effect for the Arbutus lands, so any use has to be for transportation (rail, transit, or bike paths); or greenways (pedestrian paths, bike paths, nature trails).


Interesting to see that the ODP specifically excludes allowing "a grade-separated rapid transit system elevated, in whole or in part, above the surface of the ground," like Skytrain. If it has to be grade-separated tracks, it will need to be built underground.


The details of the case and a history of the Arbutus corridor can be read here:
A Railway, a City, and the Public Regulation of Private Property: CPR v City of Vancouver
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/plpr/2011...aking_2011.pdf

(just in case the hockey reboot this weekend gets boring )
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2013, 11:18 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeCee View Post
There's no real reason to put anything down this corridor. Arbutus is high value residential whose residents will never allow LRT. I also believe that it still belongs to CP Rail. There are also far more important projects, such as the line to UBC.
Never say never. The high value on the property in the area along the Arbutus corridor is going to put a lot of pressure on owners to sell to developers. Who else is going to buy them? There just aren't that many millionaires who want to live in a regular sized home in the world.

There are some great streets in the area, but many of the houses are old style CPR tract housing. They are very narrow lots so that they could be close to the station (or streetcar stop). These are NOT multi-million dollar homes. You can't build any kind of nice house on these properties. But the land is worth a million. So you get to this point where the property is too crappy for a rich person to buy, too expensive for a normal person to buy, so the only person who can buy it are developers.

They buy a few adjoining properties and mush them together and put in tiny town homes or condo blocks. Look at what is happening in certain areas of Oak and Victoria, even on Granville. Areas that are considered by us to be "rich" but the properties (individually) are so overvalued. But they are so highly valued, that even in these "rich" areas you are starting to see density, because it is the only way to bring prices to levels the market can bare (by selling the same lot to 30 different people via strata).

These are the homes right now that are not selling at all. The market has dried up; the price has exceeded the value of a single family home. The area around the Kerrisdale village will feel the pressure the most, because they are in an area already being urbanized.

In a traditional city, these areas throughout Vancouver City would already have been Urbanized. However, Skytrain has relieved that pressure as the train made places around Metrotown and New Westminster just as close (time travel wise) as Kerrisdale. Now that those areas have been developed, the focus is coming back to Vancouver.

And as the area, and Vancouver City as a whole, densifies, it will put a lot of pressure on the Canada line and relief lines will be needed. The #16 is already the 5th busiest bus in Metro Vancouver (and the #7 is no slouch either). Arbutus could easily become one of the higher density corridors in Vancouver (it already is to some extent because of Kerrisdale).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2013, 4:56 PM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 2,434
Well, I agree that some day it will be densified, but not in the near future, especially considering the NIMBYism in the area and the current zoning..

Either way though, the Broadway/UBC line and some kind of rapid transit (LRT) in Surrey are by far priorities. Something along the Arbutus corridor is a long, long ways off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2013, 1:07 AM
Conrad Yablonski Conrad Yablonski is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by aberdeen5698 View Post
Assuming that ownership could ever be wrested from CP Rail, I'd love to see it developed as a pedestrian/cyclist greenway.
If you knew anything at all about the area you'd know that's exactly what it's been for decades.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2013, 3:28 AM
Porfiry Porfiry is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad Yablonski View Post
If you knew anything at all about the area you'd know that's exactly what it's been for decades.
Right, and it has all the charm you'd expect from an abandoned railroad. Surely by "greenway" he means something, you know, nice?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2013, 12:44 PM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrad Yablonski View Post
If you knew anything at all about the area you'd know that's exactly what it's been for decades.
Well the cycle path is a little lacking, and the way is pretty much impassable due to brambles for a block or two south of 41st avenue. And I hate having to use an unnatural stride in order to walk on the ties...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2013, 11:58 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 24,546
The problem is that is you improve it too much, you'll never be able to take it out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2013, 7:04 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is online now
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 5,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
The problem is that is you improve it too much, you'll never be able to take it out.
Like the bike paths downtown? Hehehe... couldn't resist.

@BCPhil... one of the more thoughtful future-thinking posts I've seen here in a long while. Well said.

A lot of the people on those properties are getting older. The kids inheriting the land will be under greater pressure to sell. Residential real estate overall in Canada is likely entering a long protracted decline. Boomers will be retiring for the next 15 years, many of them liquidating their big asset (house) and will be adding a lot of property to the market, further putting pressure on the market.

If we do end up in a long slide back to affordability, many buyers will hold, hoping for an increase in value, the smart will get out early, and masses will sell when we near the bottom.

Over time as the market returns to balance, properties in good locations, like the west side of Vancouver will hold their value better than others, but properties further out will collapse. If selling a tiny house in Kerrisdale means you can buy a house or three in other parts of Vancouver or Burnaby for less... it suddenly becomes an attractive opportunity.

It will be interesting to see.
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 5:51 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.