Transit Fantasies

[scottN]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It does though. You got people off grade, leaving more space for everything else. Also presumably there's less car use per capita.

Pulling all the busses off the Lions Gate and 2nd Narrows bridges would probably only free up 3% of the road capacity. To make a difference to traffic you need to entice people who are presently driving to take transit instead. Part of the success of the Canada line is that long distance bus commuters from Ladner and South Surrey were forced off the buses and onto the Canada Line at Bridgeport. Did this make the Oak Street bridge less busy? Not really. Did it speed up bus riders commutes? Not really. Did it save Translink a small pile of money on bus operating costs? Yes. Did it make the Canada line look like a runaway success? Absolutely. Similarly funnelling bus riders into a north shore skytrain line isn't going to benefit anyone and it isn't going to offer a significant relief of bridge congestion.

I doubt very many people who live within walking distance of Lonsdale Quay and work downtown presently drive for their commute today. So to attract drivers the Skytrain line needs to appeal to people who live outside of lower lonsdale and commute downtown, or people who live in lower lonsdale and commute to other places or people who commute from other places to the north shore. The 2nd narrows bridge is arguably more congested going northbound in the morning and southbound in the evening due to people who commute to the north shore.

[jollyburger]

Tunnel plan keeps resurfacing



https://www.6717000.com/blog/2002/02...s-resurfacing/

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Yes, Skytrain is. It was originallydesigned for 16,000pphpd (as Zwei will constantly remind you), and if we haven't reached it by now, we will soon. We're upgrading the system to go beyond that because the system as a whole wasn't designed for the foot traffic it's getting.

So what you're saying if we should build a West End subway?

And a relief line between Stadium and Yaletown... doesn't sound worth it. People going to Richmond from the East are going to be using the Broadway.

Yeah, I don't know either. Either way, Translink does not make that much money off its RE. It could- and should on its DT Stations (esp. Waterfront), but losing their money isn't that big a deal. An MTR Mall, the Waterfront shops are not. On the grand scheme of things, the amount of money TransLink makes off retail is negligible (0.5M is nothing when the Translink budget is in the Billions- it's literally couch pennies)
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/tran...n-retail-space
https://www.mtr.com.hk/en/corporate/...g_centres.html

I'm not too concerned about the River District (it's not worth building a Skytrain line down there just for 1 megadevelopment), but I am about getting there from the north (BCIT). To get to Metrotown Station requires a connection 1 block east. Either you demo Crystal Mall, the Burnaby Public Library, or go under the SFH and medium-density zoned properties to the north. Though, I THINK the BC government owns the land underground unless stated otherwise, but mineral rights =/= subsurface rights(https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/fa...nfoupdate7.pdf).
Care to help?

Yeah, maybe. But if a line connecting to the Millennium only gets you limited relief, than extending it to the Expo won't either if it's only the in-between stops that benefit. The line is necessary for other reasons, but not for relief. You'd be better spending money on commuter rail if that was your goal.

Sir, the SeaBus terminus on Waterfront is 72m wide x 83m long. Unless you can operate it off 1 berth, it's pretty wide. The existing Kits and Ambleside docks are not good for such a service. The latter one is not designed for boat docking at all, and the former is 15min away from an LRT Station on Pennyfarthing.

But it's not maxed out at 15-16k like the Canada Line is. The new theoretical maximum is 25-38k (depending on whose numbers you're using), which is what the TTC and STM are dealing with right now; if we'd tried to get a SkyTrain on that scale back in '86, we'd never even have gotten the Expo funded!

I repeat, West End passengers going in and out at West End stations would means less foot traffic in the CBD stations. Though yes, in hindsight, there aren't a lot of people getting on at City Centre and off at Yaletown.

Fair enough, but it's still nice to have somewhere to eat before/during/after a commute.

The River District is icing on the cake (and can also connect to a tram on Marine); a tunnel under McKay can have an entrance coming right out at the mouth of the Metrotown Station stairway with no need to demo any malls or libraries, though we might have to kiss some SFH in the north goodbye. Most people will still be headed to downtown/Commercial, yes, but a lot of people who aren't will not be. The R4 on 41st will help as well.

Which is roughly the size of the Kits and Ambleside docks - and I believe you wanted a tram to Vanier. It's not any more implausible than 75% of the thread so far.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

But it's not maxed out at 15-16k like the Canada Line is. The new theoretical maximum is 25-38k (depending on whose numbers you're using), which is what the TTC and STM are dealing with right now; if we'd tried to get a SkyTrain on that scale back in '86, we'd never even have gotten the Expo funded!

I repeat, West End passengers going in and out at West End stations would means less foot traffic in the CBD stations. Though yes, in hindsight, there aren't a lot of people getting on at City Centre and off at Yaletown.

Fair enough, but it's still nice to have somewhere to eat before/during/after a commute.

The River District is icing on the cake (and can also connect to a tram on Marine); a tunnel under McKay can have an entrance coming right out at the mouth of the Metrotown Station stairway with no need to demo any malls or libraries, though we might have to kiss some SFH in the north goodbye. Most people will still be headed to downtown/Commercial, yes, but a lot of people who aren't will not be. The R4 on 41st will help as well.

Which is roughly the size of the Kits and Ambleside docks - and I believe you wanted a tram to Vanier. It's not any more implausible than 75% of the thread so far.

Who's getting 38k on the Skytrain? And yeah, I get your point, but my point is that modifying the Skytrain network is inevitable. So building large hubs in these upgrade projects makes sense.

Oh, ok, I wasn't getting it. Yeah. Want to avoid a previous argument, but those stops don't matter anywhere near as much if you extend Skytrain to the NS. So the actual benefit may be lower than you think.

Isn't that basically what I said?
And admittedly, I want Crystal Mall to be redeveloped. So identifying THAT mall as the issue... that's part of the reason.

And there's still not enough a reason to extend the line beyond Metrotown. Unless you redevelop the Ocean View Cemetery.
I have NO idea if that'd even be considered acceptable. I don't think so.

Yeah, before Senakw. I still hope it's feasible, though.

I still think you'd be best off with a small ferry service. At least at first. SeaBuses are pretty big, and suck for tourism anyways (you can't go outside). Plus, if it doesn't succeed, there's less risk, and there's less potential NIMBY blowback with a smaller dock.

Originally Posted by scottN

Pulling all the busses off the Lions Gate and 2nd Narrows bridges would probably only free up 3% of the road capacity. To make a difference to traffic you need to entice people who are presently driving to take transit instead. Part of the success of the Canada line is that long distance bus commuters from Ladner and South Surrey were forced off the buses and onto the Canada Line at Bridgeport. Did this make the Oak Street bridge less busy? Not really. Did it speed up bus riders commutes? Not really. Did it save Translink a small pile of money on bus operating costs? Yes. Did it make the Canada line look like a runaway success? Absolutely. Similarly funnelling bus riders into a north shore skytrain line isn't going to benefit anyone and it isn't going to offer a significant relief of bridge congestion.

I doubt very many people who live within walking distance of Lonsdale Quay and work downtown presently drive for their commute today. So to attract drivers the Skytrain line needs to appeal to people who live outside of lower lonsdale and commute downtown, or people who live in lower lonsdale and commute to other places or people who commute from other places to the north shore. The 2nd narrows bridge is arguably more congested going northbound in the morning and southbound in the evening due to people who commute to the north shore.

https://humantransit.org/2010/07/wha...gestion-1.html
https://humantransit.org/2010/07/wha...ongestion.html

Now and then, someone mentions that a particular transit project did not reduce traffic congestion, as though that was evidence of failure. Years ago, politicians and transit agencies would sometimes say that a transit project would reduce congestion, though most are now smart enough not to make that claim.
To my knowledge, and correct me if I’m wrong, no transit project or service has ever been the clear direct cause of a substantial drop in traffic congestion. So claiming that a project you favor will reduce congestion is unwise; the data just don’t support that claim.

Still, in real-world transit politics, selling transit projects to current motorists is a necessity, and the current motorist is likely to see her problem as one of congestion. So it’s important to be clear on what transit can readily do for her.

It can provide an alternative to driving which may be faster, more cost effective, and less stressful. This argument can be put quite selfishly: Good transit won’t eliminate congestion in your city, but it can eliminate it from your daily life.

Transit helps reduce government spending on social services by enabling transit disadvantaged groups to participate in the economy. This obviously has a range of health and wellness benefit apart from its economic role.

It can increase the level of prosperity at a fixed level of congestion.

Its exclusive lanes protect emergency vehicles from congestion-related delays, potentially saving lives.

Skytrain is also faster than buses on Granville in general as well due to congestion.

And I don't think anyone here is suggesting only Lonsdale is important. More just where the Crossing should be and if the NS should have transit to begin with. Obviously you eventually want Skytrain radiating out from Lonsdale Quay.

Originally Posted by scottN

Since this is the only option that doesn't skip Coal Harbour and the west end I think it's the only one that is politically feasible. Note that it would be slower than the seabus for Lonsdale - Waterfront trips, but faster than transferring to the seabus coming from any other station. So there's really no point to interchanging with the seabus at all. As such I think it would be better to go along 3rd rather than Esplanade because the stations would pick up a larger catchment and it would be closer for transferring bus riders.

Note that even Waves' Commercial Drive option is only marginally faster than Skytrain if you are going from Lonsdale Quay to waterfront, and even then only if there is a Hastings Skytrain in place. The total distance via Hastings is about 7km which ought to take about 9 minutes. However if you are going just about anywhere else (i.e. Broadway or Metrotown or even other parts of downtown) then Skytrain via Commercial Drive is far superior to Seabus, and to a first narrows option.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

It's slower by 1-2 minutes, but it's also capable of 9x the frequency. Even with the increased service, just barely missing the SeaBus and waiting ten minutes for the next one is an absolute PITA.

At any rate, this - but with 3rd instead of Esplanade, as you suggested - is a good alignment that kills a lot of birds with one stone.



I think the best defence here is a good offence. An extended alignment all the way to Lynn via Lonsdale (complete with bus loop and park & ride) could stop a lot of car trips right at the source. Now the people up on the higher slopes, they might be a problem...

TBF, it's probably actually closer to 3-5 min. max frequency, since that's the amount of time the SeaBus takes to unload. https://www.cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php/...vice_Frequency

I'd have gone with Waves' alignment. It's better unless there's something that stops you from using the alignment (NIMBYs in Grandview-Woodlands, cost, etc.) Also, it prevents there from being 3 NS lines (one to Lynn Valley, one across Marine Dr., one to connect from DT to the NS)


I went Espanade because it's the area the CoNV is focusing on as the heart of Lonsdale (Shipyards Redevelopment), and more importantly, the large bus loop is literally irreplaceable. 3rd is 5 min away from the bus loop, compared to Espanade, which is right next to it.
Basically, it's a better hub stop.

I would actually go on Robson on the Coal Harbour alignment (which I actually forgot about) for better connectivity to Burrard Station and the Robson Strip, which would get you 14.25 min. That excludes the inevitable transfer on Marine Dr., but Seabus loading times can be 3-5 min, so that balances out.



Eh, unless you develop the Upper Levels, it shouldn't be too big a deal. Most people live on the lower slopes anyways.

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

For clarity, I'm presuming that you mean Central Lonsdale? Upper Lonsdale is the part above the freeway, which is mostly residential (and largely single-family homes once you leave the City for the District).

Yes, Central Lonsdale.

[jollyburger]

Former CNV mayor suggested a single rail tunnel under Burrard Inlet with dual tracking on either end

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Who's getting 38k on the Skytrain? And yeah, I get your point, but my point is that modifying the Skytrain network is inevitable. So building large hubs in these upgrade projects makes sense.

Oh, ok, I wasn't getting it. Yeah. Want to avoid a previous argument, but those stops don't matter anywhere near as much if you extend Skytrain to the NS. So the actual benefit may be lower than you think.

Isn't that basically what I said?
And admittedly, I want Crystal Mall to be redeveloped. So identifying THAT mall as the issue... that's part of the reason.

And there's still not enough a reason to extend the line beyond Metrotown. Unless you redevelop the Ocean View Cemetery.
I have NO idea if that'd even be considered acceptable. I don't think so.

Yeah, before Senakw. I still hope it's feasible, though.

I still think you'd be best off with a small ferry service. At least at first. SeaBuses are pretty big, and suck for tourism anyways (you can't go outside). Plus, if it doesn't succeed, there's less risk, and there's less potential NIMBY blowback with a smaller dock.

Trying to find it. Note that the 25k estimate assumes four-car trains, not five-car (which gets you 32k).

Large hubs would definitely be useful... but how? My other point is that the current hubs are pretty boxed in - there's almost nowhere to go without land acquisition and/or temp station shutdowns.

Without trying to restart said argument, there's a whole lot of present and future ridership that's going to the West End, not through it.

Yes, yes it is - now I'm the one not getting it. Poor communication for everybody!
Problem with Crystal Mall is that the owners and customers seem to like it as it is; much easier to move a dozen homeowners. And while the River District on its own doesn't necessarily justify an extra 3-4 klicks, a neighbourhood rezoning and a connection to a Marine Drive tram might...

Sure, just seems like a waste to scrap a perfectly good fleet of catamarans.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Former CNV mayor suggested a single rail tunnel under Burrard Inlet with dual tracking on either end

Suddenly, Derek Corrigan sounds like a genius.

[Bdawe]

If you're going to go all the way over to Georgia, why dive back to Waterfront in the first place? To connect to the West Coast Express?

Remember, Waterfront is, well, on the water front. It's catchment area contains a lot of...water. And rail yards. And docks. and other things that don't generate many trips

Stick to Georgia at that point, and you'll catch a lot more jobs and residences within 800 meters of stations, with reasonable connections to existing lines to boot

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

If you're going to go all the way over to Georgia, why dive back to Waterfront in the first place? To connect to the West Coast Express?

Remember, Waterfront is, well, on the water front. It's catchment area contains a lot of...water. And rail yards. And docks. and other things that don't generate many trips

Stick to Georgia at that point, and you'll catch a lot more jobs and residences within 800 meters of stations, with reasonable connections to existing lines to boot

It's on Robson. Also, see what I said earlier about Hub Stations. Also, the Streetcar would connect there, as well as any potential commuter rail.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Trying to find it. Note that the 25k estimate assumes four-car trains, not five-car (which gets you 32k).

Large hubs would definitely be useful... but how? My other point is that the current hubs are pretty boxed in - there's almost nowhere to go without land acquisition and/or temp station shutdowns.

Without trying to restart said argument, there's a whole lot of present and future ridership that's going to the West End, not through it.

Yes, yes it is - now I'm the one not getting it. Poor communication for everybody!
Problem with Crystal Mall is that the owners and customers seem to like it as it is; much easier to move a dozen homeowners. And while the River District on its own doesn't necessarily justify an extra 3-4 klicks, a neighbourhood rezoning and a connection to a Marine Drive tram might...

Sure, just seems like a waste to scrap a perfectly good fleet of catamarans.

TBF- Now that I think about it that actually might be me you're referencing. 35-38k is pretty much the ballpark from my calculations. Sorry. And no, the 38k assumes 72s frequency. 25k is TransLink, and assumes 5-car, 90s.

Then acquire new lands. I mean, Waterfront is the easiest place for that in DT. (Though obviously still expensive/difficult) Honestly, it's worth it, even with a West End Subway, which isn't likely to capture any of the buses from the south or East (most of the post-NS Skytrain bus traffic). The current bus bays also aren't exactly high-capacity either.

Anyways, I don't even think you'd have to move the homeowners, since any Skytrain on Willingdon would almost certainly be tunneled. Hence asking about the land rights underneath a home- if TransLink would have to acquire any land rights.



Side note, would it be better to leave the Stations in the DTES as 'future stations' to avoid having to deal with the DTES on Hastings (at least until it stops being such a ghetto)? Yes, Skytrain would probably help with revitalization, but that's not exactly a guarantee (Whalley).

[waves]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

If you're going to go all the way over to Georgia, why dive back to Waterfront in the first place? To connect to the West Coast Express?

Remember, Waterfront is, well, on the water front. It's catchment area contains a lot of...water. And rail yards. And docks. and other things that don't generate many trips

Stick to Georgia at that point, and you'll catch a lot more jobs and residences within 800 meters of stations, with reasonable connections to existing lines to boot

I have been following along and have much to add, but in my typical fashion, it takes a while for me to get the time to put stuff together. However, Bdawe's comment on WCE got me thinking of something: West Coast Express/LRT Submerged Tunnel. Max depth is 15m along the whole route and there is ample space to accommodate a 2% grade. LRT local service, WCE peak service to Squamish and Whistler. You'd essentially get a two-for-one commuter and rail rapid transit (albeit with manual drivers). I imagine it would be well after a Skytrain link to Central Lonsdale, whenever that is. West-Vancouverites would probably love it (yeh know LRT euopean craze whooha and all). Buying the railway back would be an issue. The seafloor is thick cap river sediment so it should be easy to dredge.

I might put out something more detailed later when I have time but for now:

[scottN]

Originally Posted by waves

I have been following along and have much to add, but in my typical fashion, it takes a while for me to get the time to put stuff together. However, Bdawe's comment on WCE got me thinking of something: West Coast Express/LRT Submerged Tunnel. Max depth is 15m along the whole route and there is ample space to accommodate a 2% grade. LRT local service, WCE peak service to Squamish and Whistler. You'd essentially get a two-for-one commuter and rail rapid transit (albeit with manual drivers). I imagine it would be well after a Skytrain link to Central Lonsdale, whenever that is. West-Vancouverites would probably love it (yeh know LRT euopean craze whooha and all). Buying the railway back would be an issue. The seafloor is thick cap river sediment so it should be easy to dredge.

I might put out something more detailed later when I have time but for now:

It looks like there is enough space to double or triple the track through Ambleside if necessary. Dundarave could probably be handled with 2 tracks - one for LRT and one for freight and commuter trains. Unlike other LRT / streetcar proposals, this one makes a lot more sense because there's minimal interaction with street traffic. Interchange with west van busses at park royal is poor though. Either the bus interchange or the LRT track would need to move.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by scottN

It looks like there is enough space to double or triple the track through Ambleside if necessary. Dundarave could probably be handled with 2 tracks - one for LRT and one for freight and commuter trains. Unlike other LRT / streetcar proposals, this one makes a lot more sense because there's minimal interaction with street traffic. Interchange with west van busses at park royal is poor though. Either the bus interchange or the LRT track would need to move.

Yeah, but it’d require getting the tracks closer to the Ambleside Apartments and removing the trackside parking on Ambleside.

The lack of interaction means LRT is fast. Either way, you’re pissing off NIMBYs (then again, you’re pissing them off most likely no matter what you add, so... )

I would think you’d want a spur eastwards to NV as well, and THAT would be difficult.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Yeah, but it’d require getting the tracks closer to the Ambleside Apartments and removing the trackside parking on Ambleside.

Well, it is the "Transit Fantasies" discussion, so for the purposes of this discussion, West Van will welcome triple tracks out to Horseshoe Bay, along with RapidBus to Dundarave and up through the British Properties.

(/s heavily implied... )

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

TBF- Now that I think about it that actually might be me you're referencing. 35-38k is pretty much the ballpark from my calculations. Sorry. And no, the 38k assumes 72s frequency. 25k is TransLink, and assumes 5-car, 90s.

Then acquire new lands. I mean, Waterfront is the easiest place for that in DT. (Though obviously still expensive/difficult) Honestly, it's worth it, even with a West End Subway, which isn't likely to capture any of the buses from the south or East (most of the post-NS Skytrain bus traffic). The current bus bays also aren't exactly high-capacity either.

Anyways, I don't even think you'd have to move the homeowners, since any Skytrain on Willingdon would almost certainly be tunneled. Hence asking about the land rights underneath a home- if TransLink would have to acquire any land rights.



Side note, would it be better to leave the Stations in the DTES as 'future stations' to avoid having to deal with the DTES on Hastings (at least until it stops being such a ghetto)? Yes, Skytrain would probably help with revitalization, but that's not exactly a guarantee (Whalley).

Heh. Regardless, the Bombardier lines' minimum headway is 75 seconds, not 90, and that multiplied by five-cars means ~32k pphpd. Maybe 38k can happen after another round of platform extensions in the far future.

Whether or not the Waterfront Hub Framework is practical, it's not much more than a pipe dream as long as CP and the Port won't budge. And we're going to have a much harder time giving Granville/City Centre, Commercial, or Metrotown the same level of expansion. As for the bus loops, I can't think of any that'd warrant the full UBC treatment.

Sure, but a SkyTrain's probably going to come with a rezoning. Might as well kill two birds here - Burnaby Council's pretty expropriation-happy as it is.

That could work... or it could end up like the 33rd and 57th stations. Hard to say.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by waves

I have been following along and have much to add, but in my typical fashion, it takes a while for me to get the time to put stuff together. However, Bdawe's comment on WCE got me thinking of something: West Coast Express/LRT Submerged Tunnel. Max depth is 15m along the whole route and there is ample space to accommodate a 2% grade. LRT local service, WCE peak service to Squamish and Whistler. You'd essentially get a two-for-one commuter and rail rapid transit (albeit with manual drivers). I imagine it would be well after a Skytrain link to Central Lonsdale, whenever that is. West-Vancouverites would probably love it (yeh know LRT euopean craze whooha and all). Buying the railway back would be an issue. The seafloor is thick cap river sediment so it should be easy to dredge.

I might put out something more detailed later when I have time but for now:

RRT would be operating a different speeds and frequencies if using the same corridor (meaning you'd need passing rails at stations), and the differing rolling stock could be problematic in a potential collision.

Considering how against anything West Van NIMBYs are, fast trains are also going to anger them. I mean, the ROW is fairly windy, but... still.

Also, I'd imagine there'd be the need to expand the Horseshoe Bay rail tunnel if you want to get past that with.

But the rail ROW is at least wide enough for 1 new rail, so you may not need to buy anything back. Especially if you can keep the grade to less than 1%, freight rail may be able to use it to complement the 2nd Narrows crossing assuming WCE.

But looking at this... if this was planned for, I don't think we'd have Coal Harbour as it is today!

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Heh. Regardless, the Bombardier lines' minimum headway is 75 seconds, not 90, and that multiplied by five-cars means ~32k pphpd. Maybe 38k can happen after another round of platform extensions in the far future.

Whether or not the Waterfront Hub Framework is practical, it's not much more than a pipe dream as long as CP and the Port won't budge. And we're going to have a much harder time giving Granville/City Centre, Commercial, or Metrotown the same level of expansion. As for the bus loops, I can't think of any that'd warrant the full UBC treatment.

Sure, but a SkyTrain's probably going to come with a rezoning. Might as well kill two birds here - Burnaby Council's pretty expropriation-happy as it is.

That could work... or it could end up like the 33rd and 57th stations. Hard to say.

35-38k was accounting for a seating ratio of 2 (ie. turning all middle seats into folding seats)
72s is the minimum theoretical headway of LIM - automatic control. Skytrain isn't designed for that, being older, as far as I know.

The Port and CP have generally been pretty open to the idea of repurposing the land above the railyards historically, as long as it doesn't interfere with their operations (Project 200, Whitecaps)

City Center is literally a couple blocks north of Waterfront. Metrotown seems to have a ton of excess capacity (a lot of express and limited service bays with a ton of regular routes with headways >10min..., the DT stops get closer to 1x every 2 min, and you could probably go higher in theory.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrotown_station
Commercial is a pain, but I think we already went over this before. If you're really desperate for more space though, the Woodlands plan kept the area directly north of the station pretty much unscathed...so it should be feasible to build a bus loop there, on the SFHs/duplexes and build a mall on top of the loop to make money off it if for some reason going on the proposed plazas or on top of the rail tracks doesn't work.
The biggest issue is probably the NIMBYs, who WILL most likely be mad if you try to put a bus loop anywhere (especially on homes, at least building on the rail tracks you can say you are getting rid of a disgusting hole in the ground, and so is best if you can make it work.)


Well, out of 10 Skytrain 'infill stations', 2 have been built, none of which are underground- and the Southlands and George Pearson redevelopments didn't lead to any new stations. So probably no, at least until TransLink feels it's worth the cost to justify it so someone is willing to pay out the cash for it.
So for the most part, that means they (assuming a Station at Gore and at Campbell) don't get built.

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Well, it is the "Transit Fantasies" discussion, so for the purposes of this discussion, West Van will welcome triple tracks out to Horseshoe Bay, along with RapidBus to Dundarave and up through the British Properties.

(/s heavily implied... )

Look, I at least want my fantasies to be fairly realistic.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

35-38k was accounting for a seating ratio of 2 (ie. turning all middle seats into folding seats)
72s is the minimum theoretical headway of LIM - automatic control. Skytrain isn't designed for that, being older, as far as I know.

The Port and CP have generally been pretty open to the idea of repurposing the land above the railyards historically, as long as it doesn't interfere with their operations (Project 200, Whitecaps)

City Center is literally a couple blocks north of Waterfront. Metrotown seems to have a ton of excess capacity (a lot of express and limited service bays with a ton of regular routes with headways >10min..., the DT stops get closer to 1x every 2 min, and you could probably go higher in theory.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrotown_station
Commercial is a pain, but I think we already went over this before. If you're really desperate for more space though, the Woodlands plan kept the area directly north of the station pretty much unscathed...so it should be feasible to build a bus loop there, on the SFHs/duplexes and build a mall on top of the loop to make money off it if for some reason going on the proposed plazas or on top of the rail tracks doesn't work.
The biggest issue is probably the NIMBYs, who WILL most likely be mad if you try to put a bus loop anywhere (especially on homes, at least building on the rail tracks you can say you are getting rid of a disgusting hole in the ground, and so is best if you can make it work.)

Well, out of 10 Skytrain 'infill stations', 2 have been built, none of which are underground- and the Southlands and George Pearson redevelopments didn't lead to any new stations. So probably no, at least until TransLink feels it's worth the cost to justify it so someone is willing to pay out the cash for it.
So for the most part, that means they (assuming a Station at Gore and at Campbell) don't get built.

Hey, anything to save us another big renovation job.
Daryl explained it better - the only limit is the switches and the staffing levels. Waterfront may be capable of 72 seconds, and can do/has done 75.

That's the problem: there's no real good way to expand over the railyard without interference. The CWHF (which is almost exactly what you're looking for) means realigning freight tracks and limiting expansion, so its future looks dicey.

City Centre/Granville also handles the bulk of Expo-Canada transfers. That, without additional expansion may be a problem in the far future. WRT Commercial ... one can only hope that Woodlands has mellowed out when the time comes, I suppose.

A station near Main is probably unavoidable, if only for bus/tram connections. Maybe build a station at Quebec from the get-go (one foot in Gastown, so less trouble), then put the infill station at Hawks/Heatley.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Who's getting 38k on the Skytrain? And yeah, I get your point, but my point is that modifying the Skytrain network is inevitable. So building large hubs in these upgrade projects makes sense.

Oh, ok, I wasn't getting it. Yeah. Want to avoid a previous argument, but those stops don't matter anywhere near as much if you extend Skytrain to the NS. So the actual benefit may be lower than you think.

Isn't that basically what I said?
And admittedly, I want Crystal Mall to be redeveloped. So identifying THAT mall as the issue... that's part of the reason.

And there's still not enough a reason to extend the line beyond Metrotown. Unless you redevelop the Ocean View Cemetery.
I have NO idea if that'd even be considered acceptable. I don't think so.

Yeah, before Senakw. I still hope it's feasible, though.

I still think you'd be best off with a small ferry service. At least at first. SeaBuses are pretty big, and suck for tourism anyways (you can't go outside). Plus, if it doesn't succeed, there's less risk, and there's less potential NIMBY blowback with a smaller dock.


https://humantransit.org/2010/07/wha...gestion-1.html
https://humantransit.org/2010/07/wha...ongestion.html






Skytrain is also faster than buses on Granville in general as well due to congestion.

And I don't think anyone here is suggesting only Lonsdale is important. More just where the Crossing should be and if the NS should have transit to begin with. Obviously you eventually want Skytrain radiating out from Lonsdale Quay.




TBF, it's probably actually closer to 3-5 min. max frequency, since that's the amount of time the SeaBus takes to unload. https://www.cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php/...vice_Frequency

I'd have gone with Waves' alignment. It's better unless there's something that stops you from using the alignment (NIMBYs in Grandview-Woodlands, cost, etc.) Also, it prevents there from being 3 NS lines (one to Lynn Valley, one across Marine Dr., one to connect from DT to the NS)


I went Espanade because it's the area the CoNV is focusing on as the heart of Lonsdale (Shipyards Redevelopment), and more importantly, the large bus loop is literally irreplaceable. 3rd is 5 min away from the bus loop, compared to Espanade, which is right next to it.
Basically, it's a better hub stop.

I would actually go on Robson on the Coal Harbour alignment (which I actually forgot about) for better connectivity to Burrard Station and the Robson Strip, which would get you 14.25 min. That excludes the inevitable transfer on Marine Dr., but Seabus loading times can be 3-5 min, so that balances out.



Eh, unless you develop the Upper Levels, it shouldn't be too big a deal. Most people live on the lower slopes anyways.


Yes, Central Lonsdale.

Actually, if you do this route to Marone drive over the short and easy tunnwl section, you should drive along Capiano to the Upper levels.

Develop the cloverleaf there as an exchange only - a la Phibbs Exchange

buses could get all over the north shore with ease

[scryer]

Originally Posted by waves

I have been following along and have much to add, but in my typical fashion, it takes a while for me to get the time to put stuff together. However, Bdawe's comment on WCE got me thinking of something: West Coast Express/LRT Submerged Tunnel. Max depth is 15m along the whole route and there is ample space to accommodate a 2% grade. LRT local service, WCE peak service to Squamish and Whistler. You'd essentially get a two-for-one commuter and rail rapid transit (albeit with manual drivers). I imagine it would be well after a Skytrain link to Central Lonsdale, whenever that is. West-Vancouverites would probably love it (yeh know LRT euopean craze whooha and all). Buying the railway back would be an issue. The seafloor is thick cap river sediment so it should be easy to dredge.

I might put out something more detailed later when I have time but for now:

Another genius post that's going to have me redoing my fantasy instead of sleeping...

Let me get this straight: you would have LRT connect from Waterfront to West Van, WCE to Horseshoe Bay, and a Skytrain connection (whichever route that may take)? At the moment it seems like overkill with the LRT part as the North Shore would then have all of those modes of transportation PLUS seabus. But I am definitely one for investing for future growth. It sounds so crazy that it just might work .

Any clarity on your vision would be greatly appreciated.

[scottN]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Commercial is a pain, but I think we already went over this before. If you're really desperate for more space though, the Woodlands plan kept the area directly north of the station pretty much unscathed...so it should be feasible to build a bus loop there, on the SFHs/duplexes and build a mall on top of the loop to make money off it if for some reason going on the proposed plazas or on top of the rail tracks doesn't work.

Presently the only bus that terminates at Commecial - Broadway station is the 99, and it will be gone in 5 years when the broadway extension opens. If necessary the existing 99 layover area on grandview highway could be turned into a small bus loop. But with the #9 and #20 busses going straight through on Broadway and on Commercial, why would you even do this at all? 3 of the 4 stops are already right in front on the station, and the 4th is just across the street with a mid block pedestrian crossing to reach the station entrance.

I live in the grandview woodland neighbourhood and I can tell you that there was basically zero opposition to the commercial-broadway phase 3 expansion that added platform 5. I fully expect that platform 6 will be needed when the broadway extension opens. People in this neighbourhood are accustomed to skytrain, and I doubt there would be much opposition to a tunneled skytrain under the street north of the station. An elevated solution would require buying up and demolishing all the buildings on one side of the street (it's only 66-80 feet wide) which would certainly see huge opposition as there are numerous heritage buildings on both sides of the street. NIMBYism around here is focused mainly on heritage architecture and how buildings look and not who is going to be attracted to the neighbourhood. The refugee welcome centre at 11th and Victoria was fairly well received, as was the Co:here housing project at 1723 Victoria Drive. The addiction treatment centre at 1st and Clark got a fairly rough ride though.

Where do you think a north shore skytrain to commercial drive would go south of broadway? Or would broadway be the end of the line permanently? It seems like it would be feasible to follow the existing Expo line right of way south for a little while but you run out of room at the Croatian Cultural centre.

Perhaps instead of emerging from a tunnel and going elevated over the gradview cut the line could turn eastward to below grade platform north of platforms 1&2. From there it could continue east via the grandview cut to Nanaimo???

[Migrant_Coconut]

An entirely below-grade solution would probably have to go under the Cut; I'm not seeing any good way to use it that doesn't mess with the Millennium's tracks.