HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1361  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2017, 10:25 PM
Sheba Sheba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chikinlittle View Post
I would agree that the North Shore should be added to the list and study the alternatives.

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytr...er-north-shore

Here's one... (also showing a possible Hastings line that would continue west through Coal Harbour, down to and across English Bay to Kits, and connecting to the Millennium line at Arbutus (which could then also conceivably continue down Arbutus, or connect to an LRT/Streetcar line that could run down Arbutus and around False Creek, as per the city's old streetcar line plans.
The problem I have with that is the river crossings - they seem to be at pretty much the widest points (and bridges are expensive to build). I'd have one from the North Shore twinning the Lions Gate Bridge, through Stanely Park (we all know how well that would go over), down Georgia to connect with Expo Line at Burrard Station, and then over and across Burrard St Bridge before joining up with the future Arbutus Line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1362  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2017, 6:18 PM
Chikinlittle Chikinlittle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
The problem I have with that is the river crossings - they seem to be at pretty much the widest points (and bridges are expensive to build). I'd have one from the North Shore twinning the Lions Gate Bridge, through Stanely Park (we all know how well that would go over), down Georgia to connect with Expo Line at Burrard Station, and then over and across Burrard St Bridge before joining up with the future Arbutus Line.
By rivers do you mean the Burrard Inlet and English Bay?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1363  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2017, 11:50 PM
waves's Avatar
waves waves is offline
waves
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 366
I looked at the question of how to get a skytrain under the Burrard inlet previously here
and here using a bathymetric map.

The problem with a Lonsdale to Waterfront option is that the depth is deepest there (70m). Secondly going straight up lonsdale is not going to work anyways as the hill from the Quay to 13th is too steep.

I re-looked at my previous analysis and did some more refining in terms of route alignment. I think there are three feasible options:
  • Option A: Lonsdale Quay to Broadway via Commercial Dr. (5.5km total/2.2km Bored underwater/1.2km Bored underland/2.1km Cut&Cover/5 stations)
  • Option B: Stadium-Chinatown Station to Park Royal via Stanley Park (6.2km total/0.5km Bored underwater/3.6km Bored underland/1.3km Cut&Cover/6 stations/0.8km widened Dunsmir Tunnel)
  • Option C: Capilano University to Metrotown via Willingdon Ave. (10.5km total/0.9km Bridge/4.4km Above Grade/5.2km Cut&Cover/8 stations)

Option A seems the most preferable to me because the highest density in North Van is there it would make Commercial-Broadway even more of a transit epi-center than it already is. It would be great for those looking to connect North Van with Broadway, UBC, Burnaby, Tri-Cities, Surrey and Langley (hopefully). Likely would have the highest ridership of the three options. Some cons are it wouldn't replace the Seabus unless the Expo line was extended from Waterfront along Hastings. It likely also wouldn't be better for those going to YVR or Richmond than the Seabus.

Option B is interesting because it doubles the Dunsmir Tunnel and provides a quick connection East-West across downtown (Chinatown to Denman to Stanley Park). It would eliminate the need for buses to travel across the lions gate bridge completely (except for the 258). Park Royal would have to figure out how Park and Ride would work - maybe Translink can buy the lesser used North-East Parkade. Cons are this would never replace the Seabus unlike A which could eventually. The reason I have an extension up to Cap and Hwy 1 is because it would the 257 could then be changed to connect Horseshoe Bay to Phibbs Exchange as a B-Line. It would also be a good place for a park and ride (which would be highly popular). This option has the shortest underwater section of 450m and since the narrows is quite shallow wouldn't have to be super deep supposing that rock and not sand is found to far down...

Option C would really elevate Capilano University and Maplewood Town Center as it would connect with Brentwood, Metrotown and BCIT. This would fit with the DNV's OCP for growth in the area. This line has the interesting opportunity to connect further south with the new River district, Richmond and YVR. It might alleviate some of the traffic on the second narrows bridge. Would be good for SFU students as it would provide easy connection to the 95 B-Line. Cons of this option are it, again, doesn't replace the Seabus, it is a long route, and Burnaby already has 2 skytrain lines. Of the options I would expect this option to see the least ridership across Burrard Inlet, but I really have no idea what to expect for this one.


Stars are terminus stations/Diamonds are transitions between C&C, bored, Above Grade, At Grade, ect./Circles are stations

Google Map: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Fh...Fo&usp=sharing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1364  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2017, 12:43 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 8,337
Whoa, that must've taken a while. Damn fine work.

Tough call - all of these crossings look useful. Perhaps A and B, connected via LRT down Marine/3rd/Main, and a gondola to Cap U?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1365  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2017, 2:49 AM
waves's Avatar
waves waves is offline
waves
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 366
LRT down Marine Dr is interesting, but also worrying, there is not a lot of room between Capilano Rd and Capilano Mall (the cross section is only 22m wide).


Current:

LRT:



Street Mix Cross Section
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1366  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2017, 4:33 AM
waves's Avatar
waves waves is offline
waves
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 366
LRT got me thinking about about alternate routes then the assumed 3rd, Main connection. So I did a design down 15th street straight to CapU then down to the fantasy Phibbs Exchange if they ever decide to convert that section of highway to a tunnel (probably never..). Lot of Left Hand Turn Restrictions would be required. In this design in particular I have LTs prohibited between McGuire and Phillip, Phillip and Pemberton, Pemberton and Hamilton, Forbes and St. Georges, St. Georges and Grand Boulevard, and SB Lillooet on to Purcell.

On the smaller residential streets, cars would share the same lane as the LRT but since they are low traffic streets, it's not that big of a problem. Engineers would have to convince residents the trains can be super quiet. It would probably go over better if the design was done as a electric BRT (quiet engines, no metal on metal tracks, local roads aren't altered significantly).


Google Map

Last edited by waves; Oct 16, 2017 at 4:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1367  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2017, 4:54 AM
Pinion Pinion is offline
See ya down under, mates
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by waves View Post
LRT got me thinking about about alternate routes then the assumed 3rd, Main connection. So I did a design down 15th street straight to CapU then down to the fantasy Phibbs Exchange if they ever decide to convert that section of highway to a tunnel (probably never..). Lot of Left Hand Turn Restrictions would be required. In this design in particular I have LTs prohibited between McGuire and Phillip, Phillip and Pemberton, Pemberton and Hamilton, Forbes and St. Georges, St. Georges and Grand Boulevard, and SB Lillooet on to Purcell.

On the smaller residential streets, cars would share the same lane as the LRT but since they are low traffic streets, it's not that big of a problem. Engineers would have to convince residents the trains can be super quiet. It would probably go over better if the design was done as a electric BRT (quiet engines, no metal on metal tracks, local roads aren't altered significantly).


Google Map
That wouldn't serve many of the high density neighbourhoods and would be awfully hilly. Plus the NIMBY revolt would be incredible. Enjoying your ideas/images on this page though.

LRT at the expense of lanes on Marine is an absolute no-go, Marine is already a shit show and a lot of the traffic turns north at some point. I think a skytrain/bus loop at any one of Park Royal/Lonsdale/Phibbs would be good enough, with an east-west tunnel along the coast from Park Royal to Phibbs being the ideal fantasy. The northern burbs aren't gonna tolerate anything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1368  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2017, 6:13 AM
waves's Avatar
waves waves is offline
waves
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinion View Post
Plus the NIMBY revolt would be incredible. Enjoying your ideas/images on this page though.
I could feel the Nimbyism like pins in my skin while drawing it haha. I agree with you that taking lanes away from Marine Drive would be nightmarish and any rapid transit realistically would either have to fit in (BLine) or go underground.

Thinking of alignment for an underground route:
  • A: Marine>Kieth>W 13th>E 13th (Bored starting at Grand Blvd)>Brooksbank (Bored)>Brooksbank>Main
  • B: Marine>Kieth>HWY>Phibbs
  • C: Marine>Kieth>Brooksbank>Main
  • D: Marine>3rd>Main

My general sense is that any kind of east-west transit better than a B-Line is more unlikely than any of the three Skytrain crossing options I mentioned earlier.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1369  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2017, 9:38 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
I'm sorry but I don't know that many of you seem to understand the current traffic issues/patterns, neighbourhoods or density plans on the north shore. So many of these proposals seem to miss the major centres and/or have alignments in totally unnecessary areas. For any future thoughts, please keep in mind the following:

1. The biggest issue facing local traffic on the north shore is east-west between Park Royal and Phibbs Exchange. Any rapid transit has to deal with this issue first, and then think about the relationship to Vancouver (downtown and/or east van)

2. Do not bother with rapid transit in West Van except for Park Royal. Not only are West Van residents likely the biggiest nimbys in all of Vancouver, but they also have pretty much no density west of Park Royal (nor an OCP that supports more than 1.2 FSR/3 stories).

3. Marine Drive, Lonsdale Quay and Phibbs exchange have to be included in any alignment. Marine Drive between it is the major source of non-Hwy 1 gridlock, and Lonsdale Quay/Phibbs exchange because they are the major hubs which the entire rest of North Van's transit system is based around.

With this in mind, my thoughts are here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-A...h4&usp=sharing I thought that I had shared this previously, but maybe not?



While not a perfect loop (as both Park Royal and Kootenay Loop stations would be in-and-out stations) this layout/alignment would likely be easier to build than going all the way around/under Park Royal and tunneling underneath the hill just east of the 2nd narrows.

The loop would hit all density centres except Central lonsdale and Lynn Valley, both of which pose issues regarding grades/hills, and Lynn Valley would essentially be building a line to nowhere. Buses can serve these areas.

I've tried to envision the line connecting to Vancouver in areas that could be or are either future areas for rapid transit (West End/Denman/Stanley Park & (East Hastings), but the line could be built just from Park Royal to Phibbs exchange.

Due to limited road space much of the line is underground, either cut/cover or bored, but I have tried to take advantage of the rail right-of-way between Fell and Lonsdale Quay.

Lastly, this system would operate in addition to the SeaBus (with improved service of course). It's going to be faster to get on a skytrain at Capilano and Marine and going west making a stop at Park Royal before heading downtown than going east through North Van and crossing under the inlet at Lonsdale Quay and the route will do a better job at addressing east-west traffic which is the biggest issue on the North Shore.
__________________
Flickr

Last edited by wrenegade; Oct 23, 2017 at 10:33 PM. Reason: image
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1370  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2017, 9:56 PM
Chikinlittle Chikinlittle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenegade View Post
2. Do not both with rapid transit in West Van except for Park Royal. Not only are West Van residents likely the biggiest nimbys in all of Vancouver, but they also have pretty much no density west of Park Royal (nor an OCP that supports more than 1.2 FSR/3 stories).
Ambleside does have some significant density.

Don't disagree with you regarding the nimby-ism, however.

Your plan doesn't seem to be all that realistic since it includes two crossings, at a time when we don't have even just one being studied or considered seriously.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1371  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2017, 10:05 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
The line could be built without a crossing, or only one (First Narrows) and achieve much of the same results. The bulk of vehicle traffic going over the Second Narrows isn't going North Van to Downtown (or the reverse) but from the eastern suburbs to areas all over North Van. Most of these trips cannot be replaced by transit of any type. If the North Shore could solve its local east-west issues there would be far far less pressure on Highway 1.

Perhaps the ideal solution is to build the North Shore line (Park Royal to Phibbs exchange) first, with the eventual plan to connect across both narrows to expanded transit lines in Vancouver. Surely there will be a skytrain line down Hastings street at some point and a future phase could build the connection from the Kootenay loop (or Hastings Park) to Phibbs exchange.

With regards to Ambleside and density, its very well served by bus routes now. Adding rapid transit (and a massive cost) would only improve transit times incrementally but would bring with it a huge increase in capacity which is totally unnecessary. The buses aren't full until Park Royal (whereas there are pass-ups on Marine Drive in North Van) and there is no future increase in density coming to Ambleside. Aside from the Grosvenor project (where units are $2000psf, and many owners will be only part-time residents) the only other proposed project between 13th and 22nd is a 3 story mixed-use building with 16 units.
__________________
Flickr

Last edited by wrenegade; Oct 18, 2017 at 10:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1372  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2017, 10:08 PM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 8,337
Well obviously it's not going to get built all at once. Better to have two lines rather than one line that tries to solve everything and fails.

Start with building a Willingdon line and a Hastings Line, then extend them one at a time over Burrard Inlet. Probably best to start with the Lions Gate crossing - it's cheaper, and it connects with Stanley Park and the future streetcar.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1373  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2017, 3:21 AM
waves's Avatar
waves waves is offline
waves
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Vancouver
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrenegade View Post
1. The biggest issue facing local traffic on the north shore is east-west between Park Royal and Phibbs Exchange. Any rapid transit has to deal with this issue first, and then think about the relationship to Vancouver (downtown and/or east van)
I may be biased as someone from Lynn Valley but from my perspective the connection between Phibbs and Park Royal is not nearly as important as Central Lonsdale and Park Royal. There is a reason that the 240 starts at 15th and Grand Boulevard and the 241 starts in Upper Lonsdale before going over the Lions Gate: For people south of 15th it's faster for them to take the Seabus. By building rapid transit between Lonsdale Quay and Park Royal you aren't moving any traffic away from the Seabus, the 240, 255, or the 241. If rapid transit were to go up to 13th/15th you could move 229, 230, 232, 228 traffic bound for downtown, cap mall, marine drive, park royal way faster. The 239 is more than adequate to satisfy the needs of Lower Londsale's Density moving east-west in my opinion.

Between Phibbs and Park Royal the issue is not with the amount of transit service, the issue is transit can't go anywhere because all the cars are trying to get on to the bridge. Getting a bus HOV lane EB down 3rd should be a priority.

Also, as someone who was on the OCP update committee for the DNV, careful with the assumptions you make about people. You might come off rude.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1374  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2017, 10:54 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by waves View Post
I may be biased as someone from Lynn Valley but from my perspective the connection between Phibbs and Park Royal is not nearly as important as Central Lonsdale and Park Royal. There is a reason that the 240 starts at 15th and Grand Boulevard and the 241 starts in Upper Lonsdale before going over the Lions Gate: For people south of 15th it's faster for them to take the Seabus. By building rapid transit between Lonsdale Quay and Park Royal you aren't moving any traffic away from the Seabus, the 240, 255, or the 241. If rapid transit were to go up to 13th/15th you could move 229, 230, 232, 228 traffic bound for downtown, cap mall, marine drive, park royal way faster. The 239 is more than adequate to satisfy the needs of Lower Londsale's Density moving east-west in my opinion.
As you've noted, Central Lonsdale is very well served by existing bus routes, whether it is to connect to the SeaBus, Park Royal or to head downtown. Traffic moves well 13th Street between Lonsdale and Marine Drive, so improved bus service should be doable. It's also quite a slope that is not the easiest thing to deal with when it comes to Skytrain.


Quote:
Between Phibbs and Park Royal the issue is not with the amount of transit service, the issue is transit can't go anywhere because all the cars are trying to get on to the bridge. Getting a bus HOV lane EB down 3rd should be a priority.
This is exactly the reason I believe the Phibbs Exchange-Lonsdale Quay-Park Royal route needs Skytrain/Rapid Transit as the corridor is so often a parking lot. With physically no space to add more traffic lanes (there isn't even on-street parking for about half the route) and improvement has to be grade separated.
__________________
Flickr

Last edited by wrenegade; Oct 24, 2017 at 6:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1375  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2017, 3:39 AM
cganuelas1995 cganuelas1995 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,270
This is a bit different than most of the fantasies here, but mine is for a transit system serving a larger region. Think of this like GO Transit but serving Metro Vancouver and the surrounding regions.

The regions served will be Metro Vancouver (the core), Fraser Valley Regional District, and Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, and Capital Regional District, with Sunshine Coast in the future when a permanent road link is established and demand is high enough.

Operations of the West Coast Express, after a new contract allowing extended hours and bidirectional service in exchange for funding for track upgrades, including dedicated tracks with overhead lines, is signed, will be handed down to this agency (maybe name it RegionLink or something with "Link" slapped on the end) and Compass Card can be used as payment and will allow for a 90 minute transfer window to TransLink services (longer depending on distance trip was started from TransLink service area). All buses will be coaches similar to the models that CMBC uses for highway express routes.

Routes will be as follows: (All termini are serviced, stops that are flag stops only are marked with an asterisk)

1 Vancouver/Hope via Mission City: West Coast Express will remain as-is with coach service serving all stations when train service in unavailable for maintenance or during times of low ridership, with a coach service extending to Hope via Hatzic*, Dewdney*, Deroche*, Lake Erroch*, Harrison Mills*, Agassiz*, Bridal Falls*, and Floods*

2 Vancouver/Chilliwack: Vancouver Waterfront Station to Chilliwack Downtown Exchange via Metrotown Station, 22nd Street Station*, Surrey Central Station, Carvolth Exchange, Langley Centre, Aldergrove*, and Abbotsford Bourquin Exchange

3 Vancouver/Whistler: Vancouver Waterfront to Whistler via Park Royal exchange, Horseshoe Bay, Sunset Beach*, Ocean Point Drive*, Lions Bay, Brunswick Beach*, Brittania Beach*, Squamish South, and Squamish North

4X Vancouver Express/Capital Express: Vancouver Waterfront to Downtown Victoria via Bridgeport Station, Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal (trips to Victoria only), and Swartz Bay Ferry Terminal (trips to Vancouver only)

Thoughts? Feedback? Just wanna take a shit on it and tell me how it will never work?

Go for it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1376  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2017, 6:50 AM
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by cganuelas1995 View Post
This is a bit different than most of the fantasies here, but mine is for a transit system serving a larger region. Think of this like GO Transit but serving Metro Vancouver and the surrounding regions.

The regions served will be Metro Vancouver (the core), Fraser Valley Regional District, and Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, and Capital Regional District, with Sunshine Coast in the future when a permanent road link is established and demand is high enough.

Operations of the West Coast Express, after a new contract allowing extended hours and bidirectional service in exchange for funding for track upgrades, including dedicated tracks with overhead lines, is signed, will be handed down to this agency (maybe name it RegionLink or something with "Link" slapped on the end) and Compass Card can be used as payment and will allow for a 90 minute transfer window to TransLink services (longer depending on distance trip was started from TransLink service area). All buses will be coaches similar to the models that CMBC uses for highway express routes.

Routes will be as follows: (All termini are serviced, stops that are flag stops only are marked with an asterisk)

1 Vancouver/Hope via Mission City: West Coast Express will remain as-is with coach service serving all stations when train service in unavailable for maintenance or during times of low ridership, with a coach service extending to Hope via Hatzic*, Dewdney*, Deroche*, Lake Erroch*, Harrison Mills*, Agassiz*, Bridal Falls*, and Floods*

2 Vancouver/Chilliwack: Vancouver Waterfront Station to Chilliwack Downtown Exchange via Metrotown Station, 22nd Street Station*, Surrey Central Station, Carvolth Exchange, Langley Centre, Aldergrove*, and Abbotsford Bourquin Exchange

3 Vancouver/Whistler: Vancouver Waterfront to Whistler via Park Royal exchange, Horseshoe Bay, Sunset Beach*, Ocean Point Drive*, Lions Bay, Brunswick Beach*, Brittania Beach*, Squamish South, and Squamish North

4X Vancouver Express/Capital Express: Vancouver Waterfront to Downtown Victoria via Bridgeport Station, Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal (trips to Victoria only), and Swartz Bay Ferry Terminal (trips to Vancouver only)

Thoughts? Feedback? Just wanna take a shit on it and tell me how it will never work?

Go for it.
I think it sounds ambitious and great. Gonna cost mega$$$$$ but with the future growth of the South Coast region, will come into its own in due time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1377  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2017, 8:34 PM
cganuelas1995 cganuelas1995 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
I think it sounds ambitious and great. Gonna cost mega$$$$$ but with the future growth of the South Coast region, will come into its own in due time.
Probably shouldn't require toooooo much money, aside from the WCE debacle. Other than that, it's just buses and drivers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1378  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2017, 9:35 PM
Sheba Sheba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by cganuelas1995 View Post
Probably shouldn't require toooooo much money, aside from the WCE debacle. Other than that, it's just buses and drivers.
Oh these things always take longer and cost more than we expect them to.

Some kind of regional service will need to exist if we don't want the roads to be clogged with SOV's 12+ hours a day. One of the problems is who runs it - TransLink (Metro Van) or BC Transit (the rest of BC). For the most part I vote for BC Transit. Then you've got to figure out payment (Compass is TransLink only). I see an inevitable pissing match about who does what and who pays what percent for this service to exist.

The WCE will need it's own tracks if we ever want to see bidirectional service. Freight has first dibs on the existing tracks and already causes delays to the limited WCE service we have. That's something we should seriously be looking into.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1379  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2017, 9:55 PM
cganuelas1995 cganuelas1995 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba View Post
Oh these things always take longer and cost more than we expect them to.

Some kind of regional service will need to exist if we don't want the roads to be clogged with SOV's 12+ hours a day. One of the problems is who runs it - TransLink (Metro Van) or BC Transit (the rest of BC). For the most part I vote for BC Transit. Then you've got to figure out payment (Compass is TransLink only). I see an inevitable pissing match about who does what and who pays what percent for this service to exist.

The WCE will need it's own tracks if we ever want to see bidirectional service. Freight has first dibs on the existing tracks and already causes delays to the limited WCE service we have. That's something we should seriously be looking into.
I think it should be a consortium between TransLink and BC Transit, most importantly to figure out the payment and zoning, as well as transfers and schedule synchronization. The payment system should be compatible with Compass, and TransLinks services should be compatible with their payment system too, so users outside TransLink/Compass jurisdiction don't have to carry two cards and those inside TransLink/Compass jurisdiction can start using the regional system immediately and seamlessly
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1380  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2017, 7:18 PM
YVR_Future YVR_Future is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Take a Wild Guess
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by cganuelas1995 View Post
I think it should be a consortium between TransLink and BC Transit, most importantly to figure out the payment and zoning, as well as transfers and schedule synchronization. The payment system should be compatible with Compass, and TransLinks services should be compatible with their payment system too, so users outside TransLink/Compass jurisdiction don't have to carry two cards and those inside TransLink/Compass jurisdiction can start using the regional system immediately and seamlessly
Integration of the Compass system at a regional level would be great, especially if it could work with BC Ferries as well.

As for names, I'd suggest something like CoastalLink (CoastLink)? as ideal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

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


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:21 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.