Arbutus: Greenway & Future Streetcar | Proposed

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Any realistic (Translink) study of LRT on Arbutus should first be done after building a B-line on the route, as usual.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Yes, and the B-Line should be introduced when it's needed - not before.

At least they have a nice greenway.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Let's come back here in 10 years and see how far the streetcar has gotten .

That's what I said in 2008 when the demonstration line was being proposed for the Olympics.

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Yes, and the B-Line should be introduced when it's needed - not before.

You could make a case for a B-Line bus route on virtually every bus corridor that runs through the city of Vancouver based on ridership. It would greatly boost ridership and since its faster, you may not even have to add that many buses.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

You could make a case for a B-Line bus route on virtually every bus corridor that runs through the city of Vancouver based on ridership. It would greatly boost ridership and since its faster, you may not even have to add that many buses.

I think we'd have to wait until the Canada Line starts hitting capacity limits on peak hour to get B-line, though.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I think we'd have to wait until the Canada Line starts hitting capacity limits on peak hour to get B-line, though.

Not necessarily, they're usually created when the buses start overflowing.

The top 10 busiest routes from 2016 has the 16 in 6th place; 41st is getting a B-Line, King Ed and 49th are mostly UBC traffic, so that leaves Commercial and Arbutus as prime candidates. TransLink could probably just use excess artics from the 99 for both.

[lokyin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not necessarily, they're usually created when the buses start overflowing.

The top 10 busiest routes from 2016 has the 16 in 6th place; 41st is getting a B-Line, King Ed and 49th are mostly UBC traffic, so that leaves Commercial and Arbutus as prime candidates. TransLink could probably just use excess artics from the 99 for both.

That makes sense and 16 does show great stats for justifying it. And it's the least complicated considering the corridor is kinda already in place!

Also, I wonder whether there's another way to look at the traffic too, based on the arterials where the buses converge. Like, would Hastings deserve to be prioritized for an LRT based on the ridership on various bus routes that go through there? Like, combine the volume on the hastings stretches of 14, 16 and 20 (or something like that)?

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not necessarily, they're usually created when the buses start overflowing.

The top 10 busiest routes from 2016 has the 16 in 6th place; 41st is getting a B-Line, King Ed and 49th are mostly UBC traffic, so that leaves Commercial and Arbutus as prime candidates. TransLink could probably just use excess artics from the 99 for both.

So, after the Broadway Extension? So ~2030?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

So, after the Broadway Extension? So ~2030?

Sounds about right. And many of the under-construction projects between Arbutus Ridge and Marpole will be complete, which'll be useful for gauging ridership.

Originally Posted by lokyin

That makes sense and 16 does show great stats for justifying it. And it's the least complicated considering the corridor is kinda already in place!

Also, I wonder whether there's another way to look at the traffic too, based on the arterials where the buses converge. Like, would Hastings deserve to be prioritized for an LRT based on the ridership on various bus routes that go through there? Like, combine the volume on the hastings stretches of 14, 16 and 20 (or something like that)?

Hastings deserves to be prioritized for something, alright - it already has a B-Line and high levels of people moving along it. Though I'm guessing that light rail would have the same flaws as Surrey's.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not necessarily, they're usually created when the buses start overflowing.

The top 10 busiest routes from 2016 has the 16 in 6th place; 41st is getting a B-Line, King Ed and 49th are mostly UBC traffic, so that leaves Commercial and Arbutus as prime candidates. TransLink could probably just use excess artics from the 99 for both.

Would that change when the Skytrain gets to UBC?

[waves]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Would that change when the Skytrain gets to UBC?

Would it though? Arbutus isn't really developing at a breakneck speed. Is it planned to?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by waves

Would it though? Arbutus isn't really developing at a breakneck speed. Is it planned to?

I meant whether after the extension to UBC is opened, would there still be a demand for B Line service?

[waves]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I meant whether after the extension to UBC is opened, would there still be a demand for B Line service?

Ah, sorry, misinterpreted. I can't imagine there would. Skytrain would serve all the same stops the 99 does right now. They canceled the coquitlam B-Line when the evergreen line went in I think?

[jollyburger]

As people have mentioned those really long routes that go through Downtown need more of a breakdown before you start calling for a B-Line.

Seems like it's more likely they'll add more east/west route capacity before they add an Arbutus B-Line.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I meant whether after the extension to UBC is opened, would there still be a demand for B Line service?

41st? Most likely, there seems to be enough demand in South Vancouver for two E-W routes, albeit thirty-ish blocks apart. Forgot about Metrotown and Langara, so the 49 might still be busy, but I'm pretty sure that most of the existing 25/33 ridership will slowly shift north or south to the 99/Millennium and (let's say) the new 91.

Commercial and Arbutus? Same answer. N-S routes would be perpendicular to the two, and so they could feed off each other.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

41st? Most likely, there seems to be enough demand in South Vancouver for two E-W routes, albeit thirty-ish blocks apart. Forgot about Metrotown and Langara, so the 49 might still be busy, but I'm pretty sure that most of the existing 25/33 ridership will slowly shift north or south to the 99/Millennium and (let's say) the new 91.

Commercial and Arbutus? Same answer. N-S routes would be perpendicular to the two, and so they could feed off each other.

I mean, could you run a B Line along the existing corridor and it be busy enough to warrant it?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I mean, could you run a B Line along the existing corridor and it be busy enough to warrant it?

ATM the 16 gets about 14k riders from Kits to Marpole on weekdays (18-19k if combined with the 50); the 95 gets about 20k and the 96, 15k.

"After the extension to UBC is opened," that's a definite yes.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Would that change when the Skytrain gets to UBC?

when the m-line gets to UBC, the buses currently going to UBC will likely no longer go to the UBC loop - likely they would turn at the loops east of UEL and pacific spirit park like sasamat, dunbar, blanca, marpole - to encourage (or should i say force) bus riders to use to skytrain to get to UBC

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

when the m-line gets to UBC, the buses currently going to UBC will likely no longer go to the UBC loop - likely they would turn at the loops east of UEL and pacific spirit park like sasamat, dunbar, blanca, marpole - to encourage (or should i say force) bus riders to use to skytrain to get to UBC

Some buses maybe, but not all of them. I think TransLink realizes they need to still have local service from the West Side through to UBC... and after the clustershag with the Surrey light rail, that too many forced transfers are a bad idea.

[Migrant_Coconut]

City awards $2.5-million contract for detailed design of two sections of Arbutus Greenway

PWL Partnership Landscape Architects has been awarded the contract for the detailed design of the first two sections of Arbutus Greenway that will be built.

The design contract is worth $2.5 million. The Vancouver firm has previously been involved in projects including Garden City lands in Richmond, Dockside Green in Victoria, Coal Harbour waterfront and the Vancouver Convention Centre green roof.

City council approved the contract award at its May 29 standing committee on city finances and services, with only NPA Coun. Colleen Hardwick opposed.

The city bought the corridor from CP for $55 million in 2016. Buildout of entire Greenway is expected to take place over decades.
Last July, council endorsed the design vision and implementation strategy for the project, which included the development of the first two of the eight sections or “character zones” along the route — the Lookout (zone eight) and the Ridge (zone three).

(link)

Why am I not surprised?

[officedweller]

From the South False Creek thread.

Streetcar route noted on the drawing.

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/false...ember-2019.pdf

Originally Posted by officedweller

Thanks - that's how I figured they'd route the streetcar.

Hopefully they engineer that the curvature on that corner to allow for longer articulated streetcars in future if demand on the line increases.

If they are installing a wye, they may as well install a triangle junction to allow streetcars from Senakw to head straight south to the future Arbutus Station on the Broadway Extension.