Portland and Vancouver

[GMasterAres]

I haven't seen a specific topic related to Portland and how it as a city has been used as kind of the "big brother" from a transportation standpoint to Vancouver (and Surrey recently with discussion of LRT in Surrey). That "we look up to be like" topic.

I spent some time in Portland recently and it got me thinking, and observing what is done right and what is done wrong in my opinion and I thought (and hopefully this is the right subforum to have this discussion) I'd open up a discussion about transportation specifically in Portland.

1. Street Cars

Need to start here. I stayed at a hotel right next to 3 main street car lines (green, blue, and red) less than 1 block from the convention center.

What I first noticed was how convenient this was going to be for me and my wife as we wanted to travel downtown and check out the shops. We simply walked 1 block, bought ourself a day pass @ $5 per person (wow bargain), then were wisked (wisked being relative, the trains don't move that quickly though they are faster than walking most of the time) us downtown wherever we wanted. With the day pass we could hop on and hop off wherever we wanted.

The second thing I noticed was how ABSOLUTELY LOUD being beside such lines is from a livability standpoint. The trains shake the ground and the entire building every time they go by which with 3 lines meant 6-12 times every 20 minutes. They made a racket too like a freight train and something I didn't realize, with the tracks over road, cars traveling on the 2 main roads beside across the tracks make a near constantly "pop pop pop pop pop" sound as their tires rattle over 2 sets of tracks on 2 roads x 4 lanes each road.

The third thing I noticed, specifically on Sunday, was the frequency of street car trains. It actually amazed me how early the frequency went from often to non-existant. Not only that but every station we would stand at even during the day, had a board showing when the next train would be and I think that board was correct twice. This was more pronounced on Sunday when we waited 45 minutes for a green line train when the board said there would be one every 20 minutes. Then suddenly we had 2 trains in a row and were scratching our heads as there was absolutely no car traffic on any road so we were curious "what the delay was?"

Conclusions:

So my conclusions from spending time there and without my car which stayed parked firmly at the hotel was that from a tourist standpoint they are great. It is easy to jump on and jump off, they seem to move around the city without much issue though admittedly I think the week days were low traffic, would like to see it with traffic jams.

From a livability standpoint though, I would hate to live next to a line that's for sure, or at least within a block or so. They are so amazingly loud and I'd hope any system in metro Vancouver was a lot quieter though I doubt that is possible since they are effectively trains. I'm sure living beside SkyTrain though is no picnic either so that's probably the price you somewhat pay for living next to major traffic.

The thing with cars is they tend to make a woosh sound which is kind of white noise background imo. Trains don't though, they are very specific to the point where it is difficult to ignore they are there as they rumble your entire place. Same reason as I live close to King George Skytrain I tend to never hear the SkyTrain but only pick the sound out when the trains do a track switch because it stands out. And I've lived there over a year now and it still catches my attention.

2. Busses

Here is where, as a tourist, I was maybe missing something. I found that I saw a lot of busses wizzing around the city but found it difficult to actually find a bus stop anywhere. I also found that at the street car stations which had nice maps of the system, there was absolutely no mention of busses anywhere.

So I can't comment on the bus system itself only that it seemed so amazingly disconnected from the rest of the system. That's something I think that has been done much better in metro Vancouver with our other rapid transit lines though maybe not as great downtown where you don't have quite as visible exchanges.

That said, when you get off Canada Line at Bridgeport, you see the bus lines and there are signs showing them. Same with Metrotown, Surrey Central, Scott Road, etc. etc. I found in Portland at least for someone that doesn't live there that the busses seemed to be these things that wizzed by and we couldn't access or even start to figure out how to access.

Also asking some locals most said "just use the street cars" when we tried to understand how to access busses. Would love to hear someone else fill me in on how busses are good or bad there.

3. Roads

Here is an area I was actually surprised at. I have been through Portland a lot but this was one of the first times in the last decade I actually spent time in Portland. I have in the past but 10 years is a long time.

What struck me was that while I constantly hear about how amazing Portland is for transit from a livability standpoint, the shear number of lanes of traffic surprised the heck out of me. So much so that i would argue as a downtown core that seems to be about the same size in geography but a population 1/10th that (10,000 people live downtown Portland vs 80,000+ in downtown Vancouver) it has a disproportionate amount of lanes compared to Vancouver given having 4 streetcar lines.

Let's compare bridges:

Vancouver Downtown Bridges and Viaducts = 27 lanes.
Portland Downtown Bridges = 34 lanes.

So they have trains going downtown, street cars, and 7 more lanes of vehicles, entering a downtown with 1/10th the population.

Let's compare highways:

Vancouver downtown, and mainly all of Vancouver = 0 major highways. I don't count Grandview as a highway and let's face it, Highway 1 just skirts the city.

Portland, has 3 major and 2 minor. The 405 skirts the left side of downtown, I5 skirts the right side of downtown (not the city of Portland, DOWNTOWN), and the 84 feeds in from the East. For minor you have the Sunset Highway 26 feeding the west, and the #30 in the north though that mainly addresses industry.

Now if you look at Portland as a whole, a city with a population marginally less than Vancouver (just shy of 600,000) they have 1 additional major highway, that being the 205.

So Vancouver has: 0 major freeways.
Portland has: 4 major freeways + 2 minor highways.

Conclusion:

My conclusion from analyzing Portland for a number of years and spending time now in the city traveling it by transit and by car, I think for Metro Vancouver we definately need to continue the discussion towards more transit options but that we should seriously consider moving away from the discussion of "TRANSIT OR CARS."

Now I don't live in Portland but I talked to quite a few people there and asked them about transit and cars and such. Most lived near downtown or a line and didn't really need a car per say but I found moving around the city with my car I had no issues at all.

I've seen people on these forums and elsewhere tell me the reason for that is because of all the transit options. I would argue it isn't just the transit options but that they have a very healthy road infrastructure too, something Vancouver and frankly most of Metro-Vancouver doesn't have.

We seem to have this notion that roads are evil and that they make a city unlivable. All I heard while in Portland was that it seemed like the most livable city in the US. Many people even said "the only reason I am still in the US" or "the only reason I came to this city" was because of that aspect.

YET, they have more road infrastructure than Vancouver has bar none. And I'm talking major road infrastructure. They also have bike infrastructure all over the place NOT at the expense of roads. You can drive around the city in the middle of the day without much issue I found once you get your head around the 1 way street configuration through most of downtown.

Then you can jump on a major highway and be wherever you want quickly.

So you have choice. And that's my big thing. There are still cars and A LOT OF THEM in Portland. Probably as many if not more than in Vancouver. Yet they have all these options. While I couldn't figure out their bus system or how to even use it, I did see a lot of busses wizzing around fairly full so that means it is there. The street cars were well used and easy to use. And I've heard (though I have not experienced it) that the trains into Union station are pretty good too.

But it didn't seem like I had to pick transit over driving. Nobody seemed to be "Oh you have a car and are driving around? That's stupid." It was just another mode of transportation.

Portland seems more about choice than decision.

Vancouver seems to be about decision, decisions that 1 mode is better than others and the others should not be there.

I guess what I'm ultimately trying to say is:

1. We definately need to look at LRT and/or street cars not just in Vancouver but I think Surrey too in building Surrey up.

2. I think we need to keep working on an integrated system. As I found with their bus system, if you don't integrate, it can be extremely confusing especially for a visitor. We do a good job I think in MetroVan, better than in Portland in integrating the different modes.

3. We need to learn from Portland and continue to build road infrastructure and not just shun it as a 1 or the other. Portland is not unique, you look at any other city with the "livability" term that Vancouver is compared to, they don't forget road infrastructure. They have major freeways, major highways, and still manage to build vibrant cities. We hear right now about how the viaducts in Vancouver should be torn down to make a better community, yet most "livable" cities elsewhere have no issue with these pieces of infrastructure.

4. I want choices not decisions. I'd like to see a trend in Vancouver and all of Metro-Vancouver where the discussion isn't "give me transit not roads" and "give me roads not transit." We need both it's that simple. Do we need more transit? Absolutely! Do we need transit at the expense of continuing to maintain and expand road infrastructure where needed? Not a chance.

Thoughts? Discussion? Counter opinions?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by jhausner

I spent some time in Portland recently and it got me thinking, and observing what is done right and what is done wrong in my opinion and I thought (and hopefully this is the right subforum to have this discussion) I'd open up a discussion about transportation specifically in Portland.

I've been on 2 trips to Portland in the last year or so. Thanks for making this topic. There are a lot of people that hold Portland up to be this amazing place we should all emulate, but there are some issues.

Originally Posted by jhausner

Need to start here. I stayed at a hotel right next to 3 main street car lines (green, blue, and red) less than 1 block from the convention center.

The Portland street car is in fact one line that goes N-S through the city. I think you're referring to their LRT lines. The Street Car was built and is operated by the city, $1 ride, but no transferable tickets from other transit modes.

My comment on the LRT system is that it takes up a lot of space on downtown Portland streets. Every street down there is one way, and every one that has a train track has no parking. I don't think people understand that impact.

Originally Posted by jhausner

Here is where, as a tourist, I was maybe missing something. I found that I saw a lot of busses wizzing around the city but found it difficult to actually find a bus stop anywhere. I also found that at the street car stations which had nice maps of the system, there was absolutely no mention of busses anywhere.

I would agree that signage and information is poor with busses. We also waited a long time for a bus to and from the east side of the river. I'm not sure if that was a fluke but the posted times and actual times were horribly off.


Overall I think it comes down to funding. Somehow Portland has built lots of transit despite poor overall ridership (compared to Vancouver), and has found the money for numerous un-tolled bridges and highways into downtown. I don't suggest we start building more highway lanes in Vancouver, but the bottom line is we aren't going to see another bridge in the Metro Vancouver area that isn't tolled. So it's all about funding sources no matter what you are looking to improve.

[Metro-One]

Besides the highways I have never seen Portland as a Big Brother example for Vancouver, in regards to trains and buses I feel it is quite the opposite. Vancouver's system overall feels far more big city and complete with superior technology (skytrain).

And for the record, the Canada line is amazingly quiet, living next to it would be no problem at all.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Besides the highways I have never seen Portland as a Big Brother example for Vancouver, in regards to trains and buses I feel it is quite the opposite. Vancouver's system overall feels far more big city and complete with superior technology (skytrain).

And for the record, the Canada line is amazingly quiet, living next to it would be no problem at all.

I agree about the Canada Line lack of noise.

If it was on the surface or overhead like Expo/Millennium, I think it would be unbearable to live within a few blocks of it. Especially if you were high enough or close enough to be in 'line of sight' of the tracks.

The construction chaos almost made me move away, but I stuck it out when the landlord lowered my rent to keep me there. And now as a thank-you for staying, my rent increases have been less than the other units in my building.

[Metro-One]

The elevated portions of the C-Line are amazingly quite as well though (much more so than the E/M lines). I am often walking / jogging beside it on the North Arm bridge or around bridgeport and the noise is surprisingly low.

If you want to hear loud trains, try living next to a Japanese Hanku or JR commuter rail.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The Portland street car is in fact one line that goes N-S through the city. I think you're referring to their LRT lines. The Street Car was built and is operated by the city, $1 ride, but no transferable tickets from other transit modes.

That's interesting to know. The people at the hotel and most of the "citizens" of Portland we talked to called it either the "street cars" or "the met". That's why I called them the street cards but you're right it would be the LRT then. The green, red, yellow, etc lines that run through downtown.

Thus the confusion. When people living there call it such I just assumed.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

My comment on the LRT system is that it takes up a lot of space on downtown Portland streets. Every street down there is one way, and every one that has a train track has no parking. I don't think people understand that impact.

I did notice that. I didn't notice parking being an issue only because like I said we parked at the hotel and didn't really drive around. I went and got some new tires for my car and we did drive around the city outside (not downtown) but no issues parking because we didn't attempt to. I can see how it may be an issue though on those main roads though in fairness the lines take 4 roads total worth of parking away out of 30 or so blocks east/west.

It would have an impact though because I'm sure in Vancouver they'd slap them down streets with major street parking.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I would agree that signage and information is poor with busses. We also waited a long time for a bus to and from the east side of the river. I'm not sure if that was a fluke but the posted times and actual times were horribly off.

Yah like I said, same with us on the LRT. The times seemed way off. I can understand when you're at the mercy of traffic and I did see an LRT train actually get stopped for a few minutes while someone ahd their car door open. The train driver was ringing their horn a pile and the person looked back and then continued doing what they were doing.

I actually commented to my wife "If that were me I'd just drive through his damned door. What a dick."

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Overall I think it comes down to funding. Somehow Portland has built lots of transit despite poor overall ridership (compared to Vancouver), and has found the money for numerous un-tolled bridges and highways into downtown. I don't suggest we start building more highway lanes in Vancouver, but the bottom line is we aren't going to see another bridge in the Metro Vancouver area that isn't tolled. So it's all about funding sources no matter what you are looking to improve.

Interesting take. I did read the paper though when I was there that the big planned project for a bridge replacement that includes major transit between Portland and Vancouver was declined by the state of Washington and after spending 125 million in planning, it is effectively down the drain and killed.

So the money isn't endless apparently. Oregon seemed to want to do it from the Portland side but Washington state said "no money sorry." Was front page when I was there, kind of a "what now?"

Maybe it's underlining an overall issue in the US, this building on credit. And you make another fine point, that Translink and other parts of government really need to fix our funding situation first (if possible).

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Besides the highways I have never seen Portland as a Big Brother example for Vancouver, in regards to trains and buses I feel it is quite the opposite. Vancouver's system overall feels far more big city and complete with superior technology (skytrain).

And for the record, the Canada line is amazingly quiet, living next to it would be no problem at all.

Agreed. The issue on Expo and Millenium line for noise I think would come down to the Mark 1 trains which are very noisy compared to the Mark 2s (and I'd imagine 3s when they come), and the track switching. There isn't much you can do about track switching, it's simply part of life.

And honestly living close to SkyTrain the track switching is so minor that I don't even give it a second take when it does catch my attention simply because the convenience so grossly outweighs the noise once in a while.

From trains moving though I'd say SkyTrain is so much quieter. I kid you not each time the LRT trains went by we felt it and we were on the 3rd floor. It felt like a giant coal train going by and the noise. Convenience though? Sure.

But I could imagine the outpour of complaints if such a system was running 4 lines straight through downtown through the west end. People complain there about car horns or emergency vehicles late at night. Could you imagine trains rumbling down Davie or Granville with all the houses.

That's why I made the point that in Portland downtown you have less than 10,000 people living for the same square km of downtown vancouver that has 80,000+. People couldn't handle the Vancouver Indy making noise 3 days out of the year. While they aren't as loud as Indy cars, LRT running by every 5-10 minutes 365 days a week... hrmm.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I agree about the Canada Line lack of noise.

If it was on the surface or overhead like Expo/Millennium, I think it would be unbearable to live within a few blocks of it. Especially if you were high enough or close enough to be in 'line of sight' of the tracks.

The construction chaos almost made me move away, but I stuck it out when the landlord lowered my rent to keep me there. And now as a thank-you for staying, my rent increases have been less than the other units in my building.

I do live within eye shot of King George where they do track switching. Definately not unbearable and I find the Mark 1s are the loudest as when they change track they make a lot more screeching sounds + their motors make that all too familiar noise of reving when they leave or come in.

The mark 2s are very very quiet compared.

I don't live such that I hear the trains moving at full speed though so can't comment on that. Would be interesting to see what people living in Joyce/Collingwood think because there are a lot of residential units nearly beside the elevated track there as trains wisk by.

I wonder if we have any forumers living in any of those towers that can comment.

[nname]

I did took some walk around the SkyTrain guideway before (Renfrew and Royal Oak area). What I've observed is that when the train moving at full speed, away from any switch and big curves, it is actually quieter and less intrusive than accelerating or breaking. With MkII train and near-by vehicle traffic, I can hardly notice any train movement above me until I see its shadow.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Portland ...............
3. We need to learn from Portland and continue to build road infrastructure and not just shun it as a 1 or the other. Portland is not unique, you look at any other city with the "livability" term that Vancouver is compared to, they don't forget road infrastructure. They have major freeways, major highways, and still manage to build vibrant cities. We hear right now about how the viaducts in Vancouver should be torn down to make a better community, yet most "livable" cities elsewhere have no issue with these pieces of infrastructure.

There is this "mindset block" if I may use that term, here in Vancouver, that major road infrastructure such as you mention in Portland, or even one major expressway going near the city centre is evil, will cut off neighbourhoods, create dead zones, etc.

A typical - and very current example - is the Viaducts issue. I don't think the viaducts are beautiful to sit and contemplate, but they do carry a large volume of traffic quicly in and out of downtown every day. (with no linking freeway either, even over the portside railtracks or, better still, partly underground.)
Over and above the virtues or evils of expressways, however, is an issue I consider of even greater importance. Simply, a city with a low ratio of lane space on major roads is going to have overspill on residential streets with pedestrians, cyclists, kids playing, etc.

Due to skill overall city planning with high-quality transit, a lot of people living in or near downtown, there is IMO less risk now that more expressways would bring massive, choking traffic jams downtown and throughout the city.
Nonetheless, there are already a lot of cars and trucks out there, and we do need a properly-designed system to put them on.
But tunnels or expressways in Vancouver? Forget it. It'll get shouted down. Never mind the cyclists, or the kids playing in the streets.

[xd_1771]

This was more pronounced on Sunday when we waited 45 minutes for a green line train when the board said there would be one every 20 minutes. Then suddenly we had 2 trains in a row and were scratching our heads as there was absolutely no car traffic on any road so we were curious "what the delay was?"

I subscribe to a number of Portland transit riders/sources on Twitter, and I often find myself staring at a number of Portland LRT delay reports on my Twitter feed... statistically the on-time reliability of the system is about 80%, but it has occasionally dropped to 74% averaging out over a month.

They are so amazingly loud and I'd hope any system in metro Vancouver was a lot quieter though I doubt that is possible since they are effectively trains. I'm sure living beside SkyTrain though is no picnic either so that's probably the price you somewhat pay for living next to major traffic.

Well, as a matter of comparison, I remember being responded to on these forums by some guy who lived or used to live level with the SkyTrain track at Commercial Broadway and he mentioned that there's really little-no noise to face from SkyTrain - it whizzes by, no clickety clack, no squealing, no etc. So, this is really an LRT-specific problem.

Good thing you weren't near a section where the line curves, however. I've read news articles from Calgary on resident complaints from how loud the LRT is coming around the curves, due to the non-articulated bogeys.

What struck me was that while I constantly hear about how amazing Portland is for transit from a livability standpoint, the shear number of lanes of traffic surprised the heck out of me.

I've always thought it silly that Portland has somehow turned itself into some sort of example. By other standards, it would be sensationalism. I don't think a city where the city's best transit service runs at a 20 minute frequency on Sundays and other off-peak periods is much of a good example. Maybe an average United States resident facing that kind of service in weekday peak hours would, but not me - not even close.

The reason that Portland is lauded as being so great for transit from a livability standpoint is because it's one of the most tolerable in a country where just about every major city is far, far behind. If more people knew about the subsidies behind all their transit-oriented developments, the low off-peak frequencies, the traffic jams heading INTO downtown at the PM rush hour on the US 26, the reliability issues... I'm sure Portland would not be talked about so much at all. But, then again, (at least for those American cities) it's better to at least have a poor example than none at all.

[moosejaw]

Its interesting that the this topic was brought up and being American i find it interesting that Portland was compared to as its not really a major American City but it does have a very good public transit system but extrtemely low ridership levels. Its not even in the top 20 in north america


I wanted to point out that in regards to public transit, Vancouver has the one of the highest ridership levels for a commuter rail system in North America falling behind NYC, Toronto, Montreal, Boston, DC, and i believe a tie with San Fran. That's an amazing feat for such a small population. Seattle which has a direct line now connecting the airport to downtown barely has any people on it.

In fact Bus Ridership figures acc to translink are right on par with Los Angeles County! Its all in the mindset....transit is convenient for everyone in Greater Vancouver. With high ridership numbers i have to question why its so expensive compared to other cities? Perhaps due to funding, perhaps due to public transit being run privately like in Vancouver.

DC is very similar to Vancouver in the fact they also revolted against a freeway plan and instead built the DC Metro to serve its transportation woes. DC still has one of the highest congestion rates in the country but has a reliable metro system.

Portland has three interstates which get funded by feds, state and local levels and owned by the state. There is a gas tax of about 18.4cents/gallon which goes to fund these highways. Keep in mind that Metro Portland also includes Washington state which also contributes to maintenance and upgrades. The other highways are state funded. Same goes for their bridges. In BC does gas taxes pay for road funding? Not so sure....

If a expressway were to be built in Vancouver say to relieve knight street of truck traffic, how much would it cost? who would pay for it? would it be toll based? Like other posters have mentioned it would be met with fierce opposition and protests. I personally love it when the thought of a developing a 4 lane BC superhighway gets wind and immediately the protestors take to the streets with their comparison pictures of los angeles.

Finally there is no room to expand in the lower mainland. People keep coming and more and more condos keep going up. Unlike other metro areas, the lower mainland is saddled with farmland, delicate ecosystems and mountain ranges which curtail growth. I for one would like to see a direct access 4 lane expressway east west and north south throughout Vancouver with no trafic lights. It would definitely split the city up which isn't good. But neither are 18 wheelers roaring down residential streets. I think the bicyclists would rather have the latter.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

I for one would like to see a direct access 4 lane expressway east west and north south throughout Vancouver with no trafic lights. It would definitely split the city up which isn't good. But neither are 18 wheelers roaring down residential streets. I think the bicyclists would rather have the latter.

When you say "4 lane expressway..." do you mean two lanes in each direction? (I presume so, otherwise do you mean an 8-lane "interstate"-type of expressway fond in larger US cities?)
Sorry if this seems a dumb question, but 2 + 2 lane "freeways" up here (and I can cite the Richmond Freeway, having lived this) ... at rush hour the taffic is jammed together and bottlenecked for long periods. Nothing moves.
Are you therefore suggesting maintaining the Canadian (or rather, Vancouver) status quo of 2 + 2 lanespace, or the American 4 + 4. ?
(I hate to be a turncoat, but I prefer the interstate concept.)

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jhausner

We simply walked 1 block, bought ourself a day pass @ $5 per person (wow bargain), then were wisked (wisked being relative, the trains don't move that quickly though they are faster than walking most of the time) us downtown wherever we wanted. With the day pass we could hop on and hop off wherever we wanted.

The trolleys and buses in downtown Vancouver can be used in exactly the same way. They also have better frequency throughout the day and are far less noisy. And of course we also have rapid transit connections to the suburbs.

Transit in downtown Vancouver is already very good, streetcars really aren't going to make it any better.

[xd_1771]

With high ridership numbers i have to question why its so expensive compared to other cities? Perhaps due to funding, perhaps due to public transit being run privately like in Vancouver.

It's not. Perhaps it seems like it because some studies/audits are citing a higher cost per passenger compared to other transit agencies, but there's also more transit service being provided per dollar spent. (At least I confirmed this when comparing against Toronto, not sure for other cities but it'd probably be similar). See [HERE]

Transit in downtown Vancouver is already very good, streetcars really aren't going to make it any better.

And, that's exactly why it's not a priority.

Sure, people want it. It's probably going to look nice, and in some cases it might add a new level of convenience. However, it's not going to create any huge mobility improvements. Most sources cite Portland's streetcar investments to be about community shaping and redevelopment; however this is still extremely unclear, given the parallel role and existence of the subsidy-bureau called the Portland Development Commission. As mobility, even transit experts are calling it out for its poor and just about useless service. So, you know, reasons to doubt - there, and also here - especially given the amount of redevelopment we seem to be achieving in this metro without any streetcar - heck, without rail-based rapid transit within a 15 minute walk in some cases (i.e. Edmonds Town Centre, Yaletown pre-C-Line growth).

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

When you say "4 lane expressway..." do you mean two lanes in each direction? (I presume so, otherwise do you mean an 8-lane "interstate"-type of expressway fond in larger US cities?)
Sorry if this seems a dumb question, but 2 + 2 lane "freeways" up here (and I can cite the Richmond Freeway, having lived this) ... at rush hour the taffic is jammed together and bottlenecked for long periods. Nothing moves.
Are you therefore suggesting maintaining the Canadian (or rather, Vancouver) status quo of 2 + 2 lanespace, or the American 4 + 4. ?
(I hate to be a turncoat, but I prefer the interstate concept.)

Yeah two lanes in each direction. I think 8 lanes would take too much space but then again would it be enough to take the majority of trucks and buses off the streets? Perhaps an additional HOV Lane would help too. And even though the 91 is jammed pack, its the only road that's there. At least richmond is accessible via highway at other times (with less congestion) whereas Vancouver is not.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The trolleys and buses in downtown Vancouver can be used in exactly the same way. They also have better frequency throughout the day and are far less noisy. And of course we also have rapid transit connections to the suburbs.

Transit in downtown Vancouver is already very good, streetcars really aren't going to make it any better.

Yes, I fail to see how our busses are worse than Portlands streetcars in this comparison, other than the cool factor. And they're a lot more flexible.

[nname]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

With high ridership numbers i have to question why its so expensive compared to other cities? Perhaps due to funding, perhaps due to public transit being run privately like in Vancouver.

Longer trip and bigger service area means higher cost. If you travel in route similar to Surrey to Downtown Vancouver in other cities, most likely you'll be either using two transit agencies (ie. YRT and TTC) or with regional agencies (ie. Sound Transit). The actual cost of fare would most likely be higher than it seems.

Also, the target fare recovery for Canadian agencies is much higher than the US - either we or the government don't want to pay for them. TransLink's operational cost recovery is at around 54%, or about 40% including capital cost. Sound Transit in Seattle, for example, only recover about 22% of its operational cost, or just a mere 10% including capital. In fact, people in Seattle pays way more into transit in the form of taxes, but most of the people there won't know how much they actually paid since they aren't explicitly labelled as "TransLink's gas tax" or "TransLink's property tax"...

[xd_1771]

I know that Seattle largely relies on sales taxes for funding, and there's some reliance on that in Portland.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by nname

Also, the target fare recovery for Canadian agencies is much higher than the US - either we or the government don't want to pay for them. TransLink's operational cost recovery is at around 54%, or about 40% including capital cost. Sound Transit in Seattle, for example, only recover about 22% of its operational cost, or just a mere 10% including capital. In fact, people in Seattle pays way more into transit in the form of taxes, but most of the people there won't know how much they actually paid since they aren't explicitly labelled as "TransLink's gas tax" or "TransLink's property tax"...

I don't know the source of the funding, but for the Seattle LRT, the public approved the billions in funding as ballot measures. It's like asking people here if we should spend ~$3B on the UBC line. You'll get lots of support.

If you turn around and say it will mean gas tax up 10% and property tax up 10%, you'll get a much lower result.

In the end there's only one taxpayer though, whether it's property, gas, income, carbon, sales, etc tax.