Transit Fantasies

[crazyjoeda]

^Thats not bad and would be great for rapid bus service to White Rock/South Surrey.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by nname

If the Canada Line is ever going to extend south (in like 35-75 years), then I think it would be something like this (dark red - elevated; lighter red - at grade)


13.5km and 7 stations (Richmond Centre - Brighouse - Francis - Steveston - Horseshoe Way - Ladner North - Central Ladner - Ladner Exchange)


Anyways, back to the topic, a new quarterly report has been released:
http://www.canadaline.ca/files/uploads/docs/doc1134.pdf

Now the testing proceed to the switch north of Broadway-City Hall station.

that made me laugh
cause ladner is nothing really right now
hell even north delta doesn't have much in place to put major use to something like skytrain

I think Delta should inspire to be like Richmond a lot more
and they can start by building up their airport for a south of the fraser airport lol

[DKaz]

Until Delta/Ladner gets out of the notion of being a sleepy community, they won't get anything more than Rapidbuses. Densifying does not need to be hardcore, they could do planned neighbourhoods consisting of rowhouses, townhouses, and 3 storey condos over commercial retail units lining a pedestrian oriented high street sorta thing, like Univercity.

Even then I don't see any rapid transit south of Richmond before 2040, otherwise the last 640m of the Canada Line would not have been single tracked so back on topic folks.

[arashi_1987]

I was just thinking are there any new routes introduced with the Skytrain opening besides the current proposed reroutes? We could use a new E-W connection to provide better local services within Vancouver:

#57 Dunbar / Joyce (Google Map link)

Dunbar and 33rd --> 33rd to Cambie --> Cambie to 49th (good for local service on Cambie) --> to Main --> to 57th --> to Knight / Argyle Drive / 54th --> to Champlain Mall --> and might as well make it to Metrotown or up to Joyce Station.

Imagine the time and transfer savings from say 33rd+Arbutus to QE Park (currently 3 buses.16-->41-->15) or Main+57th (16-->41-->3)! And it will sure be a good link for commuters transferring off of the Canada Line at Oakridge or 49th!

[deasine]

I like that route ('cuz I live nearby and I wish i wouldn't have to walk to Champlain Square all the time) but I think it would be better if:

- the route runs all the way to Boundary and turns on 49th Avenue instead of 45th Avenue

[arashi_1987]

Originally Posted by deasine

I like that route ('cuz I live nearby and I wish i wouldn't have to walk to Champlain Square all the time) but I think it would be better if:

- the route runs all the way to Boundary and turns on 49th Avenue instead of 45th Avenue

You mean like this? LINK

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by arashi_1987

You mean like this? LINK

Wow! Why do we not have that route yet!

[arashi_1987]

Originally Posted by DKaz

Wow! Why do we not have that route yet!

I think this city is in serious need of more bus routes that don't just go in a straight line...but lines that start on numbered avenues, turn onto named streets and onto another numbered avenue (or other way around)...to avoid transfers.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by arashi_1987

You mean like this? LINK

Exactly like that. I don't think the City of Vancouver wants to remodify 45th Avenue (i.e. removal of the traffic circles, pedestrian bulges, etc.) so putting in down 49th avenue would be nice.

This route also serves Langara which is kinda underserved right now. 49th bus is always full!

This route could be only every 15 min. initially, then of course if it is needed, more service could be added.

[arashi_1987]

Originally Posted by deasine

Exactly like that. I don't think the City of Vancouver wants to remodify 45th Avenue (i.e. removal of the traffic circles, pedestrian bulges, etc.) so putting in down 49th avenue would be nice.

This route also serves Langara which is kinda underserved right now. 49th bus is always full!

This route could be only every 15 min. initially, then of course if it is needed, more service could be added.

Cool! I didn't know 45th is full of bumps and circles. I obviously don't go around that area...just a planner wanna be drawing lines on a map haha!

15 minute-frequency should be sufficient...note that the route will overlap with the 15 Cambie, 49 and 3 Main so that will improve the bus services for those areas especially for Langara, Oakridge Mall, and Champlain Mall (none are places I go to so NIMBY residents please don't hunt me down there)!!

I wonder if or 33rd and 57th for this particular route are wide enough for buses...does anyone know?

[deasine]

Not 100% sure about 33rd, but there should be enough room... though I have to say anything west beyond Arbutus I have no clue at all.

54th Avenue and 57th Avenue are quite wide so there is plenty of room.

[argon007]

with a success of #125 (from patterson to BCIT) i think translink should upgrade the 41 or 43 to B-Line (i know there is a plan for upgrading) extended to BCIT or Brentwood station.

with canada line operates, i think there should be more frequency and changed.

like 98 b-line and 424 should be replaced
480 and 430 should be terminated at bridgeport station.
100 and 25 and 41 (or 43) and 99 b-line should be frequency

and more....(you can discuss what you think about the plans.)

[Whalleyboy]

so i sent this map i made of a proposed b-line to transit
and they called me up and want to look into it
i'm curious what other think now of this line of mine
here is what i told transit this this line could serve are
-Kwantlen University in Surrey students
-People want to go from Surrey centre to Richmond centre
-People working on the Annacis Island in Surrey, Delta, and Richmond
-People south of the fraser to get to YVR via surrey centre
-People traveling between Richmond, North Delta, Newton, Surrey City Centre


here is my B-line proposal i sent them
http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF...11055&t=h&z=13

[proudcanuck]

Originally Posted by Whalleyboy

so i sent this map i made of a proposed b-line to transit
and they called me up and want to look into it
i'm curious what other think now of this line of mine
here is what i told transit this this line could serve are
-Kwantlen University in Surrey students
-People want to go from Surrey centre to Richmond centre
-People working on the Annacis Island in Surrey, Delta, and Richmond
-People south of the fraser to get to YVR via surrey centre
-People traveling between Richmond, North Delta, Newton, Surrey City Centre


here is my B-line proposal i sent them
http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF...11055&t=h&z=13

I like it. I am curious though, why would you not route it along the 99 from the 91 to Bridgeport rather than Alderbridge to Garden City?

I would think this would be the elimination of the 301 route as it would duplicate the majority of the route.

[Whalleyboy]

i dont know the richmond area all that much but i figured instead of trying to make this route on highways use roads where people would get more use out of it

[DKaz]

There's almost nothing along Garden City. lol. I think the route would be better off going to Richmond Centre past the Richmond Kwantlen campus.

[Whalleyboy]

no clue where that is i mean as i said i dont know the richmond area very well but it would be smart to go past the kwantlen college in richmond thus serving two of there campus then

main reason i really sent it in is cause i would like a connection between the two lines that isnt making me have to transfer or go all the way to vancouver

[teriyaki]

Originally Posted by argon007

with a success of #125 (from patterson to BCIT) i think translink should upgrade the 41 or 43 to B-Line (i know there is a plan for upgrading) extended to BCIT or Brentwood station.

with canada line operates, i think there should be more frequency and changed.

like 98 b-line and 424 should be replaced
480 and 430 should be terminated at bridgeport station.
100 and 25 and 41 (or 43) and 99 b-line should be frequency

and more....(you can discuss what you think about the plans.)

Yes, there should be a B-line along 41st avenue, possibly the 43rd being one, with an extended and more frequent schedule.

I don't agree with the 480 terminating at Bridgeport though, that would defeat the purpose of the line completely. That is basically the route of the 403. 480 is and always should be a direct link between Richmond and UBC. If and when the UBC skytrain extension is built, then they can think of replacing this crucial bus line (Yes, I ride this bus everyday)

[Millennium2002]

By request from Deasine...

Originally Posted by Allen

save Arbutus for a LRT line

Originally Posted by deasine

I'm actually thinking the same. You could even have it go to the Interurban via Bridgeport where they have rail, that way, giving commuters another option to go to downtown faster and relieve congestion on the Canada Line.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Ya the Canada Line sure is overcrowded...

Originally Posted by paradigm4

You seriously think a high speed rail line would run through a residential area in the West side?!

Good luck even turning that corridor into LRT. If high speed rail ever went through Vancouver, it would be along the Grandview cut.

Originally Posted by agrant

Yea. It would have to be a 30-40 km/h high speed rail line through the Arbutus corridor. That'd be a waste. Any high speed line should be completely free of road crossings, if you want the speed. And I agree that it would have to go through the Grandview cut, but they'd still need to do some major work there.

Originally Posted by deasine

For me it's not necessarily high speed... there's practically no way you can do that with all those at-grade crossings but something along the lines of the Ottawa's O-Train would be nice.

Originally Posted by Allen

That vision would really happen...and it really should be like this:



The LRT line should go down Arbutus, pass Marine Dr. then all the way to Braid.
People can then transfer to Scott Road and to the Fraser Valley.

Map from Fever of SSP

Originally Posted by NetMapel

There is an existing train bridge besides the Petallo bridge so I think the exchange point between the two rail line should be at New Wesminster instead of near Braid station. I have coloured the two train lines from that previously posted map to show how I think the two lines should work. They were all grey before so I don't know what line goes where. I have separated them into a purple and sky-blue colour. The purple line goes from downtown all the way to south of Fraser so there is no need for any exchange. The solid red line there is where the train bridge is, so that purple line really should be crossing the Fraser river via the dotted red line to the solid red line.

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

The only problem about the NewWest - Surrey Swing Bridge is that it's old and that it was not designed to handle current and future traffic loads. This is a huge bottleneck in getting Cascades to expand schedules in Vancouver. A replacement is due soon... and with that replacement new needs will have to be met (e.g. high train capacity with more curvature to support high-speed-train operation.

- Allan Kuan

Originally Posted by Canadian Mind

If any of the bigwigs were looking ahead I'd hope they would be considering the replacement to either be able to handle both freight and passanger traffic on separate ROEs, or have two separate bridges, so that a freight replacement can be immediate, with funding already set aside to develop a separate passanger train bridge for a south fraser line.

Originally Posted by NetMapel

I see then. That makes sense with Braid station being located close to some major roads like Hwy 1 and Lougheed Hwy. Ultimately, for these two lines to work well, they must have really good timing. What frequency would you guys recommend for these two lines ? Also, how fast do you think those trains should run ? I am hoping that it will only take a max of 30 minutes to go from Langley to Vancouver downtown... 50 minutes from Abbortsford to Vancouver downtown. Hope they can achieve that.

Originally Posted by Bureaucromancer

Personally I think the best use for Arbutus for the immediate future is off peak, eventually all day, commuter service that runs over to the Interurban. I'm thinking something along the lines of Talents (like the O-Train), with this being a peak only branch of an all day Langely - Downtown line.

This should give a better idea of how Arbutus could fit into a comprehensive regional rail system. Just ignore the transparent tunnels, they'd be nice, but its not happening any time soon, and even then I don't really think the one from Burrard makes sense. Just adding another streetcar across Burrard from Broadway to Waterfront would seem like enough, and better for something that might become LRT.

PS, realised I forgot to link to the second part of the map, here's what I see as the eventual regional LRT network; aside from Hastings its really more of a Tram Train system than conventional North American light rail, but we really do need the regulations allowing that anyway. I more or less imagine it as a continutation of the program that creates the map I showed above, but really don't have any good idea of phasing (although basing it around the North Van tunnel seems logical).

Originally Posted by NetMapel

^^^ A line to White Rock will be... so awesome...

Originally Posted by SpongeG

there was talk about a new traffic bridge from sapperton to surrey using that island and that it could accomodate LRT or Rail - I remember it was in the paper or something a while back - I remember hearing some chatter on the radio once around the time

Originally Posted by CBeats

So that map's good, but the waterfront rail on the North Shore would never be used. That CN rail right of way goes through industrial areas, docklands, and native reserves in North Van - places with few residents and no desirable destinations. I really don't think the link to Horseshoe Bay is necessary - there wouldn't be much ridership other than people wanting to go to the ferry terminal.

And about the tunnel to Londsdale from Waterfront...I don't think that'll happen for a long long time. It's (very likely) incredibly expensive, and for such a short connection relative to the rest of the system, it's not worth it. It's just like how the Sea-to-Sky Highway went with the overland route through Eagleridge Bluffs instead of tunneling through the mountain; for such a small portion of the highway, the expense was too great. Other jurisdictions would probably complain about the high costs and how they aren't getting as much transit service anyway.

The seabus will just have to do...

Originally Posted by Spork

I believe that that was an optional alignment for the new Patullo bridge. If I also am remembering correctly, that was the most expensive and least desirable of the options.

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

I am looking at some of the maps people made but there are a few criticisms I have to point out:

- The current tracks in South Vancouver serve mainly industrial areas. Surely some gentrification and conversion to residential is possible through the whole corridor but that may not be well received by Vancouver city council.

- Arbutus corridor is a good route for a joint streetcar and bikeway right-of-way. The slower speed of the streetcar would make it have less of a competitive advantage over the Canada Line but it will probably do well serving areas just around the line. Placing passenger rail on those tracks isn't desirable due to inevitable criticism from nearby residents.

- The interurban plans have two problems. For one, the mainline duplicates the routing of the Millenium Line in multiple places. Two, the section to Upper Lonsdale would require tunneling and be expensive (as well as the tunnel through the Burrard Inlet). There's also a problem of route duplication on both the interurban and regional rail plans.

This map below is incomplete but here are my suggestions:

Regional Transit in Vancouver

- The Pacific Mountain Express (PMX) will service the Sea-to-Sky corridor. It will be a high-speed rail line running from Lonsdale Quay, with multiple intermediate stops. For this to occur many improvements will have to be made to the current rail line (e.g. smoother curves, more viaducts/tunnels, double-tracking, signalling upgrades).

- The current West Coast Express will be divided into two and both will be extended. The North Fraser Express (NFE) will stop at the current Mission station and will continue to head east north of the Fraser River, terminating at Agassiz. The South Fraser Express (SFE) will stop at a new station at Mission (with connections to the old) and head south into Abbotsford before turning northeast into Chilliwack and Rosedale.

- A third line, the South Shore Connector (SSC) will start at Pacific Central Station and head south to White Rock through a new tunnel under the Fraser River.

- A fourth line, the Surrey Langley Connector (SLC) will not be a high-speed rail line like the others due to the number of level crossings involved. Rather, it will be a normal commuter rail service connecting Vancouver, Surrey, Cloverdale, Langley, and Fort Langley.

I also have in mind several streetcar networks but that will have to come at a later time.

- Allan Kuan

Originally Posted by Allen

^ HSRs

It seems like the city council wants to keep that land for industrial purposes...

Originally Posted by Bureaucromancer

####
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan
I am looking at some of the maps people made but there are a few criticisms I have to point out:
- The current tracks in South Vancouver serve mainly industrial areas. Surely some gentrification and conversion to residential is possible through the whole corridor but that may not be well received by Vancouver city council.
####

True, which is why I'd put commuter rail on it for now.

####
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan
- Arbutus corridor is a good route for a joint streetcar and bikeway right-of-way. The slower speed of the streetcar would make it have less of a competitive advantage over the Canada Line but it will probably do well serving areas just around the line. Placing passenger rail on those tracks isn't desirable due to inevitable criticism from nearby residents.
###

Keep in mind I'm talking more about diesel light rail than locomotives and bi-levels. I'm also only talking about peak hour service. I think it probably does largely depend on how well the community can be convinced that Talents are more like LRVs than heavy rail trains, but thats not a reason to dismiss the idea outright IMO.

###
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan View Post
- The interurban plans have two problems. For one, the mainline duplicates the routing of the Millenium Line in multiple places. Two, the section to Upper Lonsdale would require tunneling and be expensive (as well as the tunnel through the Burrard Inlet). There's also a problem of route duplication on both the interurban and regional rail plans.
###

Ahh, multi part response, but here goes:

There isn't actually any duplication between the LRT and Regional maps, my idea is that the LRT will replace the regional lines sometime after they open. It would still have a regional focus, but be double tracked, electrified and run all day service, so I'm calling it rapid transit rather than regional rail. Except for West Coast Express and possibly Whistler (which should probably be electrified fully) I see the regional lines as using Talents, making them more LRT than GO/West Cosat Express like, mostly worth noting since it makes upgrades for one system entirely usable for the replacement (especially since neither Talents or LRVs are heavy rail certified/certifiable). Think of the service type as RER/BART with trams and less than total grade seperation.

No question the Vancouver part of the Interurban duplicates the M-Line; my thinking is that it becomes an express route, probably only stopping once after Lougheed before Pacific Central. You'd be looking at about a 15 minute ride versus the (if I recall correctly) 30+ on Skytrain from New Westminster, and avoiding dumping all the Surrey passengers onto the Expo line. Again, peak hour commuter is more suitable for now, leave LRT for an upgrade once demand is built up.

As for the the Lonsdale and North Van tunnels they really are intended as long range vision kind of things, even more so than the express line; I'm guessing 20+ years out, sometime in the 2030s maybe. Certainly tough to justify now, but at least the Burrard Inlet part becomes easier to justify if its part of the line to Whistler. The Seabus is fine locally, but it does become a rather long ride out to Horsehoe from downtown via Lonsdale (which is why the bus out there takes the bridge), and is also a pretty long connection for tourists from Whistler coming in by train.

[Millennium2002]

Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan
I am looking at some of the maps people made but there are a few criticisms I have to point out:
- The current tracks in South Vancouver serve mainly industrial areas. Surely some gentrification and conversion to residential is possible through the whole corridor but that may not be well received by Vancouver city council.
####

True, which is why I'd put commuter rail on it for now.

Two other things that I should add about that line... there are few residents on the line and those that are beside the line will complain. This does not just include Arbutus corridor... there's people living along the Fraser River as well that won't like it either.

####
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan
- Arbutus corridor is a good route for a joint streetcar and bikeway right-of-way. The slower speed of the streetcar would make it have less of a competitive advantage over the Canada Line but it will probably do well serving areas just around the line. Placing passenger rail on those tracks isn't desirable due to inevitable criticism from nearby residents.
###

Keep in mind I'm talking more about diesel light rail than locomotives and bi-levels. I'm also only talking about peak hour service. I think it probably does largely depend on how well the community can be convinced that Talents are more like LRVs than heavy rail trains, but thats not a reason to dismiss the idea outright IMO.

Another problem I should add... if LRVS / heavy trains start running with definite schedules along the Arbutus corridor it can lead to some really bad traffic problems especially in the 41st Avenue - West Boulevard area as the trains will be expecting to have right-of-way. For streetcars, however, the slower speed makes it possible for us to actually make sure that they cross when West Boulevard gets the green light and therefore avoid the need of protecting the right-of-way for trains.

###
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan_kuan View Post
- The interurban plans have two problems. For one, the mainline duplicates the routing of the Millennium Line in multiple places. Two, the section to Upper Lonsdale would require tunneling and be expensive (as well as the tunnel through the Burrard Inlet). There's also a problem of route duplication on both the interurban and regional rail plans.
###

Ahh, multi part response, but here goes:

There isn't actually any duplication between the LRT and Regional maps, my idea is that the LRT will replace the regional lines sometime after they open. It would still have a regional focus, but be double tracked, electrified and run all day service, so I'm calling it rapid transit rather than regional rail. Except for West Coast Express and possibly Whistler (which should probably be electrified fully) I see the regional lines as using Talents, making them more LRT than GO/West Cosat Express like, mostly worth noting since it makes upgrades for one system entirely usable for the replacement (especially since neither Talents or LRVs are heavy rail certified/certifiable). Think of the service type as RER/BART with trams and less than total grade seperation.

No question the Vancouver part of the Interurban duplicates the M-Line; my thinking is that it becomes an express route, probably only stopping once after Lougheed before Pacific Central. You'd be looking at about a 15 minute ride versus the (if I recall correctly) 30+ on Skytrain from New Westminster, and avoiding dumping all the Surrey passengers onto the Expo line. Again, peak hour commuter is more suitable for now, leave LRT for an upgrade once demand is built up.

I see. From the perspective of regional travellers the LRT service will probably be a well-accepted idea... but it may conflict with plans to connect other cities in the region/province with high-speed rail if one type can't travel on the other.

As for the the Lonsdale and North Van tunnels they really are intended as long range vision kind of things, even more so than the express line; I'm guessing 20+ years out, sometime in the 2030s maybe. Certainly tough to justify now, but at least the Burrard Inlet part becomes easier to justify if its part of the line to Whistler. The Seabus is fine locally, but it does become a rather long ride out to Horseshoe from downtown via Lonsdale (which is why the bus out there takes the bridge), and is also a pretty long connection for tourists from Whistler coming in by train.

If we look at the interchange designs for Eagleridge and the interchange just before that we will find out that apparently the government decided that there was going to be little traffic heading to the ferries from Whistler, as there is no dedicated ramp from highway 99 to highway 1/101. (Rather one must do a U-turn at exit 4 or so?) There can be access to that place from Whistler... which may involve a community shuttle route from Lions Bay... but I'm not sure about the demand for such a service. The service to Vancouver will probably continue in its present form for the indefinite future because the ferry terminal's location makes it quite difficult for people to build a rail line down there.