Transit Fantasies

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

That’s what I’ve been saying: Port Coq really just needs its own extension (currently planned), and then they’re relatively happy. So it makes no sense to include them in the Ridge Meadows catchment: that extension has to stand on its own... or not.

Metro Van’s got plans for bus lanes and for limited signal priority, sometimes even both at the same time; none of the corridors so far justify 100% BRT except for the 99, and that’s not going to be around by 2050. Anybody who's been near Kootenay knows it really doesn’t anchor anything, Metrotown-Oakridge isn’t really an urgent priority at the moment, and the 319’s been around much longer than the R2 has, so direct comparisons are a little unfair; a fairer one would be how the R2 gets over twice the ridership of the R3 despite both opening the same year – that’s another nail in the latter’s coffin.

The SkyTrain won’t go to Cap, no. What happens is that it’ll make it easier to get to the buses that do, and yes, that’s a pretty big deal.

“Densifiable mall” - given location, demand and somewhat more urbanist politicians, Park & Tilford is probably getting an overhaul long before any of the strip malls along 120th or Lougheed Highway. I’ve already conceded that Newton-Scottsdale had a decent case, while guessing most R6 passengers will (when it opens) switch to a future Newton SkyTrain and leave it empty from there to Scott Road Station, highrises or no.

See previous report: the DNV actually outnumbers Maple Ridge at present; ditto West Van and Pitt Meadows. And no matter how you cut it, the North Shore contains a lot more municipal targets than they, Hastings or Scott Road do.

Ironically, KGB/104th and Scott Road are in a weird middle ground between the wide corridors of the post-2010s suburbs with wide sidewalks and the pre-1970s suburbs with parking lanes.

Plus, you could use the BRT argument for the North Shore too- Marine actually has parking lanes for most of its length.

King George actually needs to get an extra lane of width for even a BRT-lite service (by removing the bike lanes).
Technically, you could use the left-turn lanes, but that only works outside the major intersections (it does reduce the amount of road widening you have to do, though.)

The bridges would still be a problem, but they aren't the biggest congestion sources anyways.


And 'full BRT' is not built for capacity so much as speed. Otherwise, you use trains.



Kootenay isn't a very important exchange (relatively speaking), but it would allow you to transfer directly onto a NS bus if R2 and 245 were extended across the 2nd Narrows.
It also allows you to transfer onto 130- and is still the 4th most-used stop on the R5.

It would be better to terminate at SFU- but you would need a 2nd SFU gondola for that.

Hence, the best solution would be to eminent-domain Shellburn Oil Terminal and sell it to a developer for a new FTN.

You could also turn the line south to Brentwood, I guess.

There are quite a few options here.



If they're going to Surrey Central, maybe.
Otherwise, they'll still use the R6.

I've pointed out before that it's a mistake to assume bus routes will empty because a SkyTrain service is built nearby that sort-of-parallels the original network, because historically, those routes bounce back fairly quickly unless the bus line and SkyTrain line follow exactly the same route.
Ridership falls ~33% initially, and recovers a few years later.
See: 19, 123, 160, etc.

R5 is also arguably a parallel to Millennium, and is further away from Millennium (2.3 for Hastings and 3.2 for Scott Road <> King George).

Yet, we still need a Hastings SkyTrain.
People don't transfer to Millennium from Hastings to get to Downtown.


Note that FTNs and Town Centres are guidelines.
There's no enforcement mechanism.

West Vancouver is the worst example of this, but municipalities have discretion with their actual zoning.
No one can force West Van to up the density of Ambleside (yet).

This is why FTNs/Town Centers can be misleading.
This is also why I pointed out the total build-out density of the current Maple Ridge Town Center zoning is higher than the total-build-out population of the North Shore (sans Lonsdale).



To put in perspective the under-zoning of the FTNs in the NS (even outside West Vancouver), Lynn Creek only allows buildings over 2 FSR (basically midrises) on 90,000 m2.


The towers going up right now are basically half of all the towers that will ever be allowed in Lynn Creek.


Meanwhile, basically all the strip malls and commercial lots in Maple Ridge town center are zoned at4 FSR.

The Carvloth Plan has 160,000 m2 of land zoned at 2.5-3 FSR.


ie. Lynn Creek has a comparable density and maximum buildout population in its core are to Carvloth.


(Both of these centers have high % of offices and industrial as a % of their area, despite Carvloth being larger. Both also have major bus exchanges.)


One of these is expected to get SkyTrain service in the next 30 years, BTW.




NS centers are limited by zoning and political will.
SoF centers are limited by the number of people who want to move out there.


It's far more likely that the Metro Plans will adapt to the zoning on the ground than the other way around.
And growth projections for Maple Ridge do not expect a complete build-out any time soon.

Maple Ridge's town center growth is more limited by being difficult to get to than bad municipal policy.
Hence, the low growth rate.


Build a SkyTrain there, and suddenly, the 4.0 FSR actually makes sense.


Metro plans since the 90s have also overestimated the future population of DNV and West Van because they always under-zone.

---
Yes, you're right. 319 is at a disadvantage vs R1 because it's a local bus.

It's not like local buses didn't (and don't still) use the same route as the R1.

[Migrant_Coconut]

King George has 6-8 lanes through Whalley already; downsizing to 4-6 will more than likely turn out fine. It also seems fair to assume the right-turn lanes at the intersections and the stroad lane are mostly superfluous.

Most Kootenay buses go past the loop, not to it (save for the 14 and 160 which end there) - it’s not a true exchange like Lonsdale, Phibbs or Newton. And the R2 or 245 are never going across the Narrows because anything that gridlocks the bridge (i.e. almost everything) will effectively cut those lines in half until traffic flows again, so that use for the loop doesn’t work either.

The R5 covers several important destinations, including Commercial Drive, the PNE/Playland and SFU at the terminus. I’ll ask a third or fourth time: what’s anchoring the R6 between Scottsdale and the Expo so that its ridership bounces back? Is it the Superstore, or the Walmart, or the Indian diners?
NB there’s really only Whalley or the Expo to NoF, and SB there’s only Scottsdale’s malls and KPU - since the rest of Surrey would likely prefer SkyTrain to Newton for all of those, the R6 would likely be relegated to local traffic and errand-running.

Like or not, those designations are what all planning policy in the metro is based off... designations which do happen to mark Carvolth as an FTDA, but I believe you said that a RapidBus to them past Port Kells was unworkable for some reason.
There’s only two regional centres (orange) left to cover, and pretty much all the facts point to Lonsdale being a much bigger priority than Maple Ridge. Again, I don’t care how much “potential” ALR zoning the latter has, they evidently have every intention of squandering it when their idea of a non-Grand Bargain development is twenty-six detached homes on a First Nations fishing ground. The NDP had to intervene on that one; never thought I’d see the day when a government David Eby was a part of said “no” to more housing, but Maple Ridge somehow managed it.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

....Plus, you could use the BRT argument for the North Shore too- Marine actually has parking lanes for most of its length....

You may want to revisit the North Shore or scroll through Google Maps. Unless you're referring to Ambleside and further west in Wes Vancouver, Marine Drive does not have many parking areas left especially after construction for the R2. There are a handful of parking bays but no extra lanes; there's little or no parking along the "main road" stretch of West 3rd, Forbes, Esplanade (being rebuilt with reduced parking), and Main Street.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Ironically, KGB/104th and Scott Road are in a weird middle ground between the wide corridors of the post-2010s suburbs with wide sidewalks and the pre-1970s suburbs with parking lanes.

Plus, you could use the BRT argument for the North Shore too- Marine actually has parking lanes for most of its length.

King George actually needs to get an extra lane of width for even a BRT-lite service (by removing the bike lanes).
Technically, you could use the left-turn lanes, but that only works outside the major intersections (it does reduce the amount of road widening you have to do, though.)

The bridges would still be a problem, but they aren't the biggest congestion sources anyways.


And 'full BRT' is not built for capacity so much as speed. Otherwise, you use trains.



Kootenay isn't a very important exchange (relatively speaking), but it would allow you to transfer directly onto a NS bus if R2 and 245 were extended across the 2nd Narrows.
It also allows you to transfer onto 130- and is still the 4th most-used stop on the R5.

It would be better to terminate at SFU- but you would need a 2nd SFU gondola for that.

Hence, the best solution would be to eminent-domain Shellburn Oil Terminal and sell it to a developer for a new FTN.

You could also turn the line south to Brentwood, I guess.

There are quite a few options here.



If they're going to Surrey Central, maybe.
Otherwise, they'll still use the R6.

I've pointed out before that it's a mistake to assume bus routes will empty because a SkyTrain service is built nearby that sort-of-parallels the original network, because historically, those routes bounce back fairly quickly unless the bus line and SkyTrain line follow exactly the same route.
Ridership falls ~33% initially, and recovers a few years later.
See: 19, 123, 160, etc.

R5 is also arguably a parallel to Millennium, and is further away from Millennium (2.3 for Hastings and 3.2 for Scott Road <> King George).

Yet, we still need a Hastings SkyTrain.
People don't transfer to Millennium from Hastings to get to Downtown.


Note that FTNs and Town Centres are guidelines.
There's no enforcement mechanism.

West Vancouver is the worst example of this, but municipalities have discretion with their actual zoning.
No one can force West Van to up the density of Ambleside (yet).

This is why FTNs/Town Centers can be misleading.
This is also why I pointed out the total build-out density of the current Maple Ridge Town Center zoning is higher than the total-build-out population of the North Shore (sans Lonsdale).



To put in perspective the under-zoning of the FTNs in the NS (even outside West Vancouver), Lynn Creek only allows buildings over 2 FSR (basically midrises) on 90,000 m2.


The towers going up right now are basically half of all the towers that will ever be allowed in Lynn Creek.


Meanwhile, basically all the strip malls and commercial lots in Maple Ridge town center are zoned at4 FSR.

The Carvloth Plan has 160,000 m2 of land zoned at 2.5-3 FSR.


ie. Lynn Creek has a comparable density and maximum buildout population in its core are to Carvloth.


(Both of these centers have high % of offices and industrial as a % of their area, despite Carvloth being larger. Both also have major bus exchanges.)


One of these is expected to get SkyTrain service in the next 30 years, BTW.




NS centers are limited by zoning and political will.
SoF centers are limited by the number of people who want to move out there.


It's far more likely that the Metro Plans will adapt to the zoning on the ground than the other way around.
And growth projections for Maple Ridge do not expect a complete build-out any time soon.

Maple Ridge's town center growth is more limited by being difficult to get to than bad municipal policy.
Hence, the low growth rate.


Build a SkyTrain there, and suddenly, the 4.0 FSR actually makes sense.


Metro plans since the 90s have also overestimated the future population of DNV and West Van because they always under-zone.

---
Yes, you're right. 319 is at a disadvantage vs R1 because it's a local bus.

It's not like local buses didn't (and don't still) use the same route as the R1.

Zoning plans and regulations can really suck monkeyfuck sometimes

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

You may want to revisit the North Shore or scroll through Google Maps. Unless you're referring to Ambleside and further west in Wes Vancouver, Marine Drive does not have many parking areas left especially after construction for the R2. There are a handful of parking bays but no extra lanes; there's little or no parking along the "main road" stretch of West 3rd, Forbes, Esplanade (being rebuilt with reduced parking), and Main Street.

Because the 2nd parking lane was turning into bike lanes, which can and should be moved off Marine.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

King George has 6-8 lanes through Whalley already; downsizing to 4-6 will more than likely turn out fine. It also seems fair to assume the right-turn lanes at the intersections and the stroad lane are mostly superfluous.

Most Kootenay buses go past the loop, not to it (save for the 14 and 160 which end there) - it’s not a true exchange like Lonsdale, Phibbs or Newton. And the R2 or 245 are never going across the Narrows because anything that gridlocks the bridge (i.e. almost everything) will effectively cut those lines in half until traffic flows again, so that use for the loop doesn’t work either.

The R5 covers several important destinations, including Commercial Drive, the PNE/Playland and SFU at the terminus. I’ll ask a third or fourth time: what’s anchoring the R6 between Scottsdale and the Expo so that its ridership bounces back? Is it the Superstore, or the Walmart, or the Indian diners?
NB there’s really only Whalley or the Expo to NoF, and SB there’s only Scottsdale’s malls and KPU - since the rest of Surrey would likely prefer SkyTrain to Newton for all of those, the R6 would likely be relegated to local traffic and errand-running.

Like or not, those designations are what all planning policy in the metro is based off... designations which do happen to mark Carvolth as an FTDA, but I believe you said that a RapidBus to them past Port Kells was unworkable for some reason.
There’s only two regional centres (orange) left to cover, and pretty much all the facts point to Lonsdale being a much bigger priority than Maple Ridge. Again, I don’t care how much “potential” ALR zoning the latter has, they evidently have every intention of squandering it when their idea of a non-Grand Bargain development is twenty-six detached homes on a First Nations fishing ground. The NDP had to intervene on that one; never thought I’d see the day when a government David Eby was a part of said “no” to more housing, but Maple Ridge somehow managed it.

I'm saying outside Whalley for KGB.

The right-turn lanes are superfluous, but not the left-turn lanes at the intersections.
KGB needs to be widened at the arterial intersections at a minimum.

And in any case, again, why can you use this as an argument against non-NS SkyTrains?

---

TBF, tons of buses go over the First Narrows, so...

Most of the congestion there is actually on the Cassiar Tunnel section and would be mitigated with bus lanes bypassing the congestion from Hastings to the Bridge.

And 'going past' vs 'terminating' is a distinction without a difference.


---
The fact Delta treats Scott Road as a FTN and is approving towers there to meet its population targets?

That's what's anchoring R6.
---

That's because putting the buses on the expressway would be much faster and more effective.

TransLink is proposing to go on the 'slow road' so it can have R-bus past industrial lots, parks, and development reserve (Port Kells) because... reasons.

Just turn 509/501 into a regular bus service and extend 555 to FTN levels.
Not everything needs to be an R-bus.

And TransLink DOES plan to turn 200 St. into an R-bus, so that explains the FTDA.

---

Pretty sure we don't need to worry about breaking the Grand Bargain in Maple Ridge any time soon, considering the amount of commercial lands available.
The current Grand Bargain zoning fill-out is nowhere near the current population projections, and 4.0 FSR isn't that extreme.
If you extended the FSR all the way across to Pitt Meadows (eg. Maple Meadows area), you'd double the developable area without destroying a single SFH.

Also, those homes you're mentioning is 'rural' suburban suburban reserve outside of the development area that some developer wanted to build homes on outside the Urban Containment Zone without sufficient consultation.

Most of the greenfield suburban development in the area is on the mountain slopes away from the river (Silver Valley), where there's plenty of un-ecologically-sensitive lands up to the 1200ft barrier....

The Alouette River area is currently in limbo. This is also a bit of a red herring.

---
Yes, Lonsdale...and no where else.
Maybe a bit in Lynn Valley.

That implies a BRT from Lynn Valley to Seabus, since Seabus isn't slower than SkyTrain assuming similar frequencies.

I have my doubts whether SeaBus frequencies of 2 min would be allowed by the Port.
If that's the case, then yes, it's time to whip out SkyTrain, because that means it's the only option for fast service for Lonsdale.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I’m saying Newton-Guildford hasn’t been passed over for political reasons: if they get BRT, they're effectively just as covered as they would be under LRT, and so TransLink can move on to the next item. Note how both are municipal centres, not regional.

Park Royal and Lonsdale are fairly solid anchors. Kootenay isn’t. And no, there’s often congestion on Hastings and the Phibbs side as well.
It’s an important distinction – by that logic, South Granville is an “exchange” too, but most people would call you an idiot for saying so.

SW Marine Drive and Garden City Road have a lot of density... and not many passengers; ditto the Sheppard Line in Toronto. It’s a bit more than just “build it and they will come” - the route has to serve a regional purpose too.

Maple Ridge is currently just sitting on its commercial properties too, and they're far too NIMBY for 4 FSR all the way down Lougheed, so most of SSP (and the powers that be) will remain skeptical. They’re predicted to be only slightly above par with the DNV (and Pitt Meadows will continue to be a lame duck) come 2050, and if StatsCan is correct that many of their commuters stay on their side of Pitt River, interregional travel isn't really a priority.

Also Park Royal, Norgate, Moodyville, and Lower Lynn, each currently having much more TOD than Scott Road or Maple Ridge, though Phibbs Exchange's importance to the overall network would likely justify SkyTrain all on its own. And we’ve been over this: the Purple Line’s not competing with SeaBus, it’s competing with the 28/130/etc and whichever RapidBus takes over their route. Lynn will probably get one of their own, yes, there’s an equal amount of density along that corridor.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I’m saying Newton-Guildford hasn’t been passed over for political reasons: if they get BRT, they're effectively just as covered as they would be under LRT, and so TransLink can move on to the next item. Note how both are municipal centres, not regional.

Park Royal and Lonsdale are fairly solid anchors. Kootenay isn’t. And no, there’s often congestion on Hastings and the Phibbs side as well.
It’s an important distinction – by that logic, South Granville is an “exchange” too, but most people would call you an idiot for saying so.

SW Marine Drive and Garden City Road have a lot of density... and not many passengers; ditto the Sheppard Line in Toronto. It’s a bit more than just “build it and they will come” - the route has to serve a regional purpose too.

Maple Ridge is currently just sitting on its commercial properties too, and they're far too NIMBY for 4 FSR all the way down Lougheed, so most of SSP (and the powers that be) will remain skeptical. They’re predicted to be only slightly above par with the DNV (and Pitt Meadows will continue to be a lame duck) come 2050, and if StatsCan is correct that many of their commuters stay on their side of Pitt River, interregional travel isn't really a priority.

Also Park Royal, Norgate, Moodyville, and Lower Lynn, each currently having much more TOD than Scott Road or Maple Ridge, though Phibbs Exchange's importance to the overall network would likely justify SkyTrain all on its own. And we’ve been over this: the Purple Line’s not competing with SeaBus, it’s competing with the 28/130/etc and whichever RapidBus takes over their route. Lynn will probably get one of their own, yes, there’s an equal amount of density along that corridor.

The other lines on the current list of future lines in Transport 2050 have not been passed over. Yet.

KGB was delayed to post-Langley because Langley was further along in planning, and McCallum wanted SkyTrain.
Ditto what happened with 104th.
It's even more narrow than KGB or Marine.

It's entirely possible every line on that list will be developed by 2050, except the NS line- which is what happened with the Newtown-Guildford L-Line, which was in the 1990s LRSP and still doesn't exist, either are BRT or rail (we have Langley Expo instead.)

---

TBF, my favored option is still to get Hastings SkyTrain to Shellburn, then have a 2nd Gondola to SFU (which IS an anchor).

The only reason I'm proposing Kootenay is because the potential possible redevelopment around Shellburn/Lochdale are highly reliant on the fate of the former refinery lands, which will probably have to be taken from Shell by force.

---

Garden City Road is literally within walking distance to SkyTrain.
SW Marine Dr? Are you talking about River District?
Because Marine Dr. Station has comparable ridership to Yaletown-Roundhouse and Edmonds.


Maple Ridge SkyTrain does the same thing for Maple Ridge that Langley Expo does for Langley, which is a transit spine for the buses.

Silver Valley would become transit sprawl the same way Burke Mountain is.

Density is slower in Maple Ridge, but it is coming:
https://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/...n-maple-ridge/
Most of the development is midrises right now (both on strip malls and SFHs) (like https://www.mapleridgenews.com/news/...et-a-new-look/), actually, probably because the cost/benefit ratio of towers just isn't there. yet.

---

Most travelers in NS stay within their region. Also SoF. This is not a unique thing.

---
You pointed out Lonsdale as having high population growth and density, which I agreed with, and that this would be adequately serviced by SeaBus and BRT up the hill.

Marine Dr. is pointless if it's only Lonsdale and nowhere else.
Ditto the Squamish Lands, which might change the picture.

You're looking at the 'theoretical' zoning of those places, as if Lower Lynn and Maplewood will get tens of towers going up every year for the next 30 years like Burquitlam.


I'm looking at the actual policies.

Unless DNV re-does its OCP every 10 years (not likely), the current policies will stick for a while.

You're seeing a massive burst in TOD that will halt within the next 10 years because there's no land left to build on under current policies.

[Migrant_Coconut]

The problem with Hastings is that it loses demand past the PNE, and really loses demand past Willingdon. You’d need another anchor partway - let’s say, a connecting SkyTrain line - to boost it.

Just like how 120th is within “walking” distance of KGB? There’s enough space for a whole mall between Garden City and No. 3, and neither are exactly transit villages yet. And while Marine Drive Station has ridership, the #100 which connects to it does not – that’s the analogy here.

The SeaBus is fine for getting downtown or to the Canada Line; Lonsdale currently has a hard time getting to anywhere that’s not those places (e.g. Burnaby, Surrey, Tri-Cities, etc etc). A SkyTrain would change that.
Nah, I’m looking at the actual density going up all along the R2: Moodyville’s at four floors, and Park Royal, Norgate, Lonsdale and Lower Lynn are all at twenty-plus. Meanwhile, despite all Maple Ridge’s definitely theoretical zoning, they have... one planned block of highrises and one planned block of townhomes? That’s adorable.
And no, their amount of actual greyfield gets them maybe one and a half Lower Lynns.

The only reason your argument is even somewhat possible is because Maple Ridge is designated as a single entity. Langley combined is about to be one of the biggest municipalities in BC... counted separately, the City or District of Maple Ridge wouldn’t even be some of the biggest in the outer suburbs.

[GMD]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The problem with Hastings is that it loses demand past the PNE, and really loses demand past Willingdon. You’d need another anchor midway - let’s say, a connecting SkyTrain line - to boost it.

Actually, demand holds up pretty well all the way down Hastings (Capitol Hill and Kensington boardings match/exceed anything on North Shore outside of Park Royal/Phibbs/Lonsdale). Plus there is more room in the right of way past Willingdon, so the costs would be lower for that section. Plus, the 160 would short-turn at Kensington, presumably. Overall, I don't see that as an issue with a Skytrain down Hastings with a gondola to SFU at the end. The main issue with a Hastings line is just that it doesn't create a lot in the way of regional connections (aside from the North Shore/Willingdon link, and the 160 connection to tri-cities) and runs through two municipalities unlikely to upzone along the line unless forced to do so.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by GMD

Actually, demand holds up pretty well all the way down Hastings (Capitol Hill and Kensington boardings match/exceed anything on North Shore outside of Park Royal/Phibbs/Lonsdale). Plus there is more room in the right of way past Willingdon, so the costs would be lower for that section. Plus, the 160 would short-turn at Kensington, presumably. Overall, I don't see that as an issue with a Skytrain down Hastings with a gondola to SFU at the end. The main issue with a Hastings line is just that it doesn't create a lot in the way of regional connections (aside from the North Shore/Willingdon link, and the 160 connection to tri-cities) and runs through two municipalities unlikely to upzone along the line unless forced to do so.

The Lochdale Plan is pretty good.
CoV has also been upzoning a lot of its inner suburbs lately.
Except Grandview-Woodlands.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The problem with Hastings is that it loses demand past the PNE, and really loses demand past Willingdon. You’d need another anchor partway - let’s say, a connecting SkyTrain line - to boost it.

Just like how 120th is within “walking” distance of KGB? There’s enough space for a whole mall between Garden City and No. 3, and neither are exactly transit villages yet. And while Marine Drive Station has ridership, the #100 which connects to it does not – that’s the analogy here.

The SeaBus is fine for getting downtown or to the Canada Line; Lonsdale currently has a hard time getting to anywhere that’s not those places (e.g. Burnaby, Surrey, Tri-Cities, etc etc). A SkyTrain would change that.
Nah, I’m looking at the actual density going up all along the R2: Moodyville’s at four floors, and Park Royal, Norgate, Lonsdale and Lower Lynn are all at twenty-plus. Meanwhile, despite all Maple Ridge’s definitely theoretical zoning, they have... one planned block of highrises and one planned block of townhomes? That’s adorable.
And no, their amount of actual greyfield gets them maybe one and a half Lower Lynns.

The only reason your argument is even somewhat possible is because Maple Ridge is designated as a single entity. Langley combined is about to be one of the biggest municipalities in BC... counted separately, the City or District of Maple Ridge wouldn’t even be some of the biggest in the outer suburbs.

Get out a measuring stick.
120 St is 3.2km from King George Highway.
Garden City is 990 m from No. 3 Rd.

It's not even close.

---

Cool, and those towers are close to half of all that's allowed there.
Again, unless they change the zoning, that's all that'll be there until 2050.
Have fun with that.

Maple Ridge is limited by transportation infrastructure, not regulations.
That's the point I'm making.

If you build SkyTrain to DNV, there's literally no development potential because the District has already 'locked-in' a low density outside of a few blocks of towers.

This was the problem with the West End Plan, and what Broadway did that was better than it.

Broadway's maximum FSR is lower than that of the West End- but you're allowed to rezone to higher and the default zoning is spread out over a much larger area.

Thus, the overall maximum build-out density is much higher.


---
Only about a third of the current expected eventual population of River District is there.
Also, average FSR of the current plans is 1.6. That includes parks and such, but still.
The original plans' FSR was 1.5-2 FSR, so even with the recent upzoning, you're still looking at zoning closer to what you'd see in Willowbghy.

Shocking that the Port was so mad at the Fraser District.

---
Once you get to Waterfront, you can connect to the rest of the SkyTrain system.
Same thing if you go to Phibbs and down to Brentwood.
---

Here's Lower Lynn.


Here's Maple Ridge Center:

The red here and the dark purple in Lower Lynn are of comparable density.

Let's see DNV extend the dark purple on Lower Lynn to the rest of the FTDA first, and then your case makes more sense.

---
I would argue that that's a foolish case- Maple Ridge has Pitt Meadows.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Catchment radius of a SkyTrain is ~800m or less; anything beyond that favours a bus. So no, Garden City is not within walking distance of the Canada Line.

Zoning can indeed be changed. The City and the District of North Van are overhauling their community plans as we speak, and I already provided West Van’s. The DNV has actual density and population right this minute, but Maple Ridge only has the theoretical density and population that you’re accusing the former of; it’s two, maybe three islands of greyfield development in a sea of SFHs and farmland that are likely staying that way and not getting rezoned at all.

Because Surrey’s already receiving a SkyTrain, and that moves them down the list - that’s not politics, that’s just not letting them double dip. Also, the R2’s already got bus priority lanes, so its optimization ceiling is much lower than the R1’s; Lonsdale to Lynn Valley? Go for it.

Getting across the Second Narrows easier in the first place is kind of a big reason for SkyTrain to the North Shore – even Phibbs can be a pain. It also lets them access Park Royal and other parts of North Van, and hooks up other parts of the metro to the network. Aside from Scottsdale and KPU, R3 or R6 SkyTrains would just be nowhere to nowhere.

Your maps aren't proportionately sized. Scale them appropriately, and you'll find that my case already makes sense.

The same Pitt Meadows which in 2050 will be the size of Ladner? Very bad argument.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Catchment radius of a SkyTrain is ~800m or less; anything beyond that favours a bus. So no, Garden City is not within walking distance of the Canada Line.

Zoning can indeed be changed. The City and the District of North Van are overhauling their community plans as we speak, and I already provided West Van’s. The DNV has actual density and population right this minute, but Maple Ridge only has the theoretical density and population that you’re accusing the former of; it’s two, maybe three islands of greyfield development in a sea of SFHs and farmland that are likely staying that way and not getting rezoned at all.

Because Surrey’s already receiving a SkyTrain, and that moves them down the list - that’s not politics, that’s just not letting them double dip. Also, the R2’s already got bus priority lanes, so its optimization ceiling is much lower than the R1’s; Lonsdale to Lynn Valley? Go for it.

Getting across the Second Narrows easier in the first place is kind of a big reason for SkyTrain to the North Shore – even Phibbs can be a pain. It also lets them access Park Royal and other parts of North Van, and hooks up other parts of the metro to the network. Aside from Scottsdale and KPU, R3 or R6 SkyTrains would just be nowhere to nowhere.

Your maps aren't proportionately sized. Scale them appropriately, and you'll find that my case already makes sense.

The same Pitt Meadows which in 2050 will be the size of Ladner? Very bad argument.

OK, so literally just beyond the walking distance of the Canada Line?
Yeah, some people are still going to walk.


That would be nice.
Too bad they seem to be moving in the opposite direction:
https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/di...e-size-3110434

The majority of the current council ran and won in the 2018 municipal election on a message that development in the district should be slowed and that the 2011 OCP was in need of a critical look.

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/fo...-mayor-3086144

One of the first crucial votes awaiting Little as mayor is the Maplewood Innovation District, a massive project including 680 rental units, 220 units for Capilano University students, and an employment hub estimated to generate 4,500 jobs. Council elected to deal with the proposal after the election.
“The community is not prepared for a massive planned community of that scale in that area,” Little said, suggesting he would sit down with the developer to determine “something more modest.”

Note that Mike Little won re-election.
I guess nothing is going to change.



TBF, Surrey is also the 2nd biggest municipality.
Also, Vancouver is arguably already double-dipping with Broadway + UBC.


OK, but how does that help Lonsdale residents?
Upgrading Lonsdale Ave and Marine to BRT would help them get around the NS. SeaBus gets them out.


OK, sure:


The entire Lynn Creek FTDA (not the 4.0 FSR section) is the size of just the 4.0 FSR Maple Ridge T. Center zoning.


Pitt Meadows population 2021: 19,000
City of Langley population 2021: 29,000
Ladner population 2021: 23,000

Yes, City of Langley will grow faster, and eventually blow Pitt Meadows out of the water - for the same reasons Maple Ridge will grow slower than ToL (mostly bad transportation infrastructure.)

City of Langley also struggled to attract population up until the 2010s.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Some people can walk for 2km, others call it quits after a few blocks. On average (especially given the lack of pedestrian-friendliness), it’s fair to say that most people at Garden City won’t.

Mike Little’s the tiebreaking vote; he rejects some and approves others. The fact that such developments are even being considered puts them kilometres ahead of Maple Ridge.

It’s one extension in two phases – even then, nobody’s entirely sure if UBC or North Van will come first. And going to Metrotown or Coquitlam via SeaBus? If you're trying to make a connection to me saying the Newton SkyTrain is good enough for the R6 riders, it's not a very good one.

I said one and a half – that’s the entire red area and the maroon area. “Ground-oriented multi-family” is multiplexes, “single-family residential” is detached housing and “conservation” isn’t developed at all, so I’m not sure why those are being counted.
More to the point, that’s all of Maple Ridge’s future density against just one planned town centre in North Van, so the winner seems obvious.

Location, location, location: both City and Township are right in the middle between the interior, the US border and the rest of the metro, so they'd have grown even without a SkyTrain. Ridge Meadows is none of the above. Also, Pitt Meadows is effectively a suburb of Maple Ridge, not a city centre, so replace Langley City with Aldergrove (which won't grow either).

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

....

Sorry, but for all your talk about the North Shore - and my apologies if I'm incorrect - your comments over the past few months seem to indicate that you're not actually here all that often. As I've suggested before, you may want to familiarize yourself with these municipalities as it would help you in structuring arguments that better reflect the actual needs and conditions on this side of the Inlet.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Mike Little’s the tiebreaking vote; he rejects some and approves others. The fact that such developments are even being considered puts them kilometres ahead of Maple Ridge.

Mike Little is both a career politician and a resident of the east side of the DNV. He has no issues with towers without public backlash that aren't in his backyard or lowrise developments that are in his backyard as long as neither threaten his electoral chances. Jim Hanson is also not necessarily anti-development, he just wants development to be in his utopian democratic socialist style (i.e. 150% below market rental with an integrated homeless shelter, daycare, and a vending machine that gives out free money to seniors and single mothers).

As long as a developer can pander to either Mike Little or Jim Hanson, I don't think it's that difficult to get a development through the DNV council. Back has always been a reliable YIMBY voice, Pope has shown herself to be more of a YIMBY than even Bond was, and Mah seems to be more developer friendly than Curren was. Just have to get one other vote.

This isn't even getting into the CNV where I think the urbanist electorate has completely drowned out the suburban electorate and development is steamrolling ahead now (much to the chagrin of the angsty DNV suburban electorate).

The North Shore might be developing relatively slowly by percentages, but the population centres are already there or being built and the foundation is shaky but there for continued growth. The North Shore Skytrain should be a no-brainer.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Some people can walk for 2km, others call it quits after a few blocks. On average (especially given the lack of pedestrian-friendliness), it’s fair to say that most people at Garden City won’t.

Mike Little’s the tiebreaking vote; he rejects some and approves others. The fact that such developments are even being considered puts them kilometres ahead of Maple Ridge.

It’s one extension in two phases – even then, nobody’s entirely sure if UBC or North Van will come first. And going to Metrotown or Coquitlam via SeaBus? If you're trying to make a connection to me saying the Newton SkyTrain is good enough for the R6 riders, it's not a very good one.

I said one and a half – that’s the entire red area and the maroon area. “Ground-oriented multi-family” is multiplexes, “single-family residential” is detached housing and “conservation” isn’t developed at all, so I’m not sure why those are being counted.
More to the point, that’s all of Maple Ridge’s future density against just one planned town centre in North Van, so the winner seems obvious.

Location, location, location: both City and Township are right in the middle between the interior, the US border and the rest of the metro, so they'd have grown even without a SkyTrain. Ridge Meadows is none of the above. Also, Pitt Meadows is effectively a suburb of Maple Ridge, not a city centre, so replace Langley City with Aldergrove (which won't grow either).

Why are we counting "commerical", "industrial", or "low-density apartment" in Lynn Creek then, and comparing it with the red and maroon in Maple Ridge?
Why are we only doing this for 1 center and not the other?

---

ToL has a freeway going though it.
That's why it's grown even without SkyTrain.

Also, City of Langley growth was slow up to the mid-2010s.

---

UBC is the only solid one in the plans that is absolutely being built.
It's going first.

I don't understand why everyone is thinking NS is always just the 'next one' on the list.

---

OK, so to go to Metrotown from Lonsdale:
Bus<>SeaBus<>Expo
vs:
Bus<>Marine SkyTrain

Not sure why this is such a massive problem.
It's 1 extra transfer.

---

So, can you show me that Maple Ridge is rejecting large numbers of dense developments?

Or is it, as I suspect, that there's no easy way to get to Ridge Meadows that's the actual problem over them being NIMBY and against growth (the transportation reason is the reason cited by Maple Ridge itself, BTW.)?

DNV is less NIMBY than West Van, but it's still very NIMBY.
Do you believe they'll really be re-doing their OCP to higher density every 10 years?
---

In either case, NS is not competing with Maple Ridge.

The main argument is that it's competing with Surrey and Vancouver, and DNV has lower demand growth/potential or existing demand than any of the current proposed lines.

This is why I believe NS should not be on the list of future lines, or at least be put to the back of the list- so before Maple Ridge (maybe), but behind everything else.

This is the statement you haven't been able to refute so far, and the main argument against NS, and the entire point to this deabte.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Better yet, why are we getting hung up on this? The original point of the comparison is that if just one town centre has almost as much approved density as all of Maple Ridge, then the whole DNV definitely has more overall. And since Maple Ridge is the equivalent of the CNV and DNV combined, North Van wins outright. All the math points that way from every angle - I’m not sure what the problem is.
Maple Ridge has a freeway too - only difference is that unlike Langley, it’s very much not in the middle of anything.

The North Shore’s being studied too. None of the others (Hastings, 41st, Newton, etc) are yet... nor do they hit as many regional targets, nor cover as many destinations, so why would they go before it?

That transfer also includes 12 minutes crossing time and up to 15 minutes waiting. I’m getting tired of saying this: the SeaBus is faster than any SkyTrain crossing (Norgate, Phibbs, etc) when you’re going downtown; if you don’t need to, the Purple Line would spit you out at Metrotown by the time the SeaBus gets you to Waterfront.

I can’t find anything rejected or approved: development-wise, Maple Ridge is one big blank. That’s the problem.
Every NIMBY uses infrastructure as an excuse. Next to a bridge? On top of a subway? The cry is always “too much traffic.” That dog won’t hunt – Guildford and the CNV are near peak roadspace, yet they’re building like there’s no tomorrow.
No, I expect the DNV’ll revisit it every 20-30 like all the other municipalities. When’s the last time Maple Ridge looked at theirs? And again, Maple Ridge is effectively the DNV and CNV combined – together, North Van’s definitely a bigger muni with more growth.

Funny, I thought the argument was that the North Shore as a whole (combined with Willingdon or Hastings, or on its own) had more ridership than anything else on the list save maybe UBC, covered more places that the entire metro wants to get to, and provided a new major axis of travel through the region instead of duplicating an existing one - so far, you haven’t refuted any of those. I don't even know why we're talking about the DNV, because any North Shore line from Second Narrows will hit all three cities including the big one, but whatever.
NS isn’t competing with anybody: Willingdon was always going to be near the top, and if they’re doing Willingdon, they might as well do Phibbs, Lonsdale and Park Royal as well.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I can’t find anything rejected or approved: development-wise, Maple Ridge is one big blank. That’s the problem.

Every NIMBY uses infrastructure as an excuse. Next to a bridge? On top of a subway? The cry is always “too much traffic.” That dog won’t hunt – Guildford and the CNV are near peak roadspace, yet they’re building like there’s no tomorrow.

No, I expect the DNV’ll revisit it every 20-30 like all the other municipalities. When’s the last time Maple Ridge looked at theirs? And again, Maple Ridge is effectively the DNV and CNV combined – together, North Van’s definitely a bigger muni with more growth.

Maple Ridge is actively approving a lot of 5 and 6-storey woodframe projects, (and seeing them built). They're between around 1.6 and 2.5 FSR. Nobody has built a tower yet.

There was a 2020 Bucci 20-storey tower at a shopping centre they owned, but they gave up and sold it to Revs who are not planning on any changes. There's a couple of 18 storey towers proposed with some 6-storey too, by a Surrey developer, but it's on a sloping historic slide area with a trailer court and motel full of low-income tenants, so that could take a while, and won't be billion-dollar-transit density either.

There are two 30ish storey towers proposed by a Richmond developer (well, 30 really as the podium is the parkade). They were proposed in 2018 and 2020, and there was even a 2020 deal announced for rather nice frameless Finnish balcony glass. Just no towers to install them. Or a permit to build the towers. The developer is currently active - building 21 SFDs in West Vancouver with two other developers. Not a stretch from there to a couple of 250 unit towers.

There were three towers proposed in the mid 2010s, but that project lapsed. So at the moment there's one 13 storey non-market rental tower in Maple Ridge. And if there's an incident on a building site, the fire brigade can only reach the sixth floor.

Maple Ridge could certainly benefit from better transit connections as it sees a steady delivery of mid-rise woodframe apartments and condos. If there was an existing rail line operating, there should be stations. But there isn't, and at current development densities there won't be - certainly not compared to the densities on the North Shore. (Except maybe the West Van SFDs)

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Better yet, why are we getting hung up on this? The point of the comparison is that if just one town centre has almost as much approved density as all of Maple Ridge, then the whole DNV definitely has more overall. And since Maple Ridge is the equivalent of the CNV and DNV combined, North Van wins outright. All the math points that way from every angle, so I’m not sure what the problem is.
Maple Ridge has a freeway too - only difference is that unlike Langley, it’s very much not in the middle of anything.

The North Shore’s being studied too. None of the others are yet... nor do they hit as many regional targets, nor cover as many destinations, so why would they go before it?

That transfer also includes 12 minutes crossing time and up to 15 minutes waiting. I’m getting tired of saying this: the SeaBus is faster than any SkyTrain crossing (Norgate, Phibbs, etc) when you’re going downtown; if you don’t need to, the Purple Line would spit you out at Metrotown by the time the SeaBus gets you to Waterfront.

I can’t find anything rejected OR approved: development-wise, Maple Ridge is one big blank. That’s the problem.
Every NIMBY uses infrastructure as an excuse. Next to a bridge? On top of a subway? The cry is always “too much traffic.” That dog won’t hunt – the CNV’s maxed out, but they’re building like there’s no tomorrow.
No, I expect the DNV’ll revisit it every 20-30 like all the other municipalities. When’s the last time Maple Ridge looked at theirs? And again, Maple Ridge is effectively the DNV and CNV combined – together, North Van’s definitely a bigger muni with more growth.

Funny, I thought the argument was that the North Shore as a whole (combined with Willingdon or Hastings, or on its own) had more ridership than anything else on the list save maybe UBC, covered more places that the entire metro wants to get to, and provided a new major axis of travel through the region instead of duplicating an existing one - so far, you haven’t refuted any of those. I don't even know why we're talking about the DNV, because any North Shore line from Second Narrows will hit all three cities including the big one, but whatever.
NS isn’t competing with anybody: Willingdon was always going to be at the top, and if they’re doing Willingdon, they might as well do Phibbs, Lonsdale and Park Royal as well.

I already pointed out how R2 is literally the worst-performing RapidBus in terms of ridership other than R3 (and is closest to that line in ridership), and you came up with every excuse in the book to ignore the problem and pretend as if people in NS sans Lonsdale actually use transit.

I addressed all those points, and you've just ignored them.

No, R4 will not lose all of its riders because of Broadway.
Neither will R6 because of Newton SkyTrain, because no sane person will walk 3km to a SkyTrain stop instead of just taking the R6 bus.
R5 has an anchor possible other than Phibbs.
Using the 'bus lane' argument for R1 is dumb because it can also apply to NS (other than the bridges themselves.)

'Duplication' is just a dumb red herring argument.
By that argument, the Millennium Line between Brentwood and Lougheed should never have been built because it 'duplicates' the Expo, and the Expo could have connected to Broadway as a new line via a spur at Commerical-Broadway.

Why does Toronto have 2 north-south railways spaced 3km out from each other?
How could they ever be both used sufficiently and independently attract riders?
Why couldn't they just have Yonge instead of 'duplicating'?


If we go by (current) ridership, R2 will be built out after all the other current RapidBus lines, except R3.
That is more than enough line up to 2050.

And I believe by the time that happens, R3 will be competing directly for R2's ridership numbers.

---

So the population and TODs will stagnate out, as I predict, because of the poor zoning.

R2 will continue to underperform, and NS should thus be ignored until R1, R4, R5, and R6 are SkyTrain.
Great.

2014. Maple Ridge created their OCP in 2014.

---

Yes, because Langley would have the exact same population as it does now without Hwy 1.
That makes no sense.

Also, I've pointed out that the City of Langley had the same problems as Maple Ridge until SkyTrain was going to go through.
If not, they'd just continue building midrise apartments, as they have been for the last decade. The population stagnated for a decade before that.

The only reasons the population projections are so good for Langley is SkyTrain.
Why would Maple Ridge be different?

---

We've been over this- you're the one who wanted to keep SeaBus because transit times vs Norgate were similar and they could up the frequency and so they shouldn't use that crossing and instead use 2nd Narrows for SkyTrain.

You've just undermined your own crossing.


If we use that as a baseline, yes, there's not much benefit for Lonsdale itself if you up the frequency to SkyTrain levels.

[GMD]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

if they’re doing Willingdon, they might as well do Phibbs, Lonsdale and Park Royal as well.

Since this is the fantasy thread, I always thought a line that started at SFU, connected to Hastings via Gondola, went down Hastings, through downtown, across first narrows to Park Royal, across North Shore to Phibbs and across 2nd narrows and down Willingdon (overlapping itself for a few blocks between 2nd narrows and Willingdon) to Metrotown and then across 41st to Kerrisdale and up through UBC from the South to the exchange would be a pretty kick-ass line. Figure you could either call it the University Line, the Sea2Skyline, or just the @ line (based on the route map).

At about 60km, it shouldn't cost more than, what, 30bn?