Transit Fantasies

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I mean development. It's stalled out for a while, while Yaletown is effectively an extension of downtown now.

Manhattan is an entire borough several times larger than the West End.

The size comparison is actually closer to the entire CoV, not the West End.


Burrard to corner of Davie and Denman is 26 min walking. That can go under 15 min.


Skytrain gives an excuse to revisit the West End Plan (the main blockage) so it actually allows a large amount of new development.


Also, it allows a station sort of near Stanley Park.

I wasn't comparing the West End to Manhattan, just pointing out that the West End is incredibly dense by NA standards.

I think it makes sense that West End development is slower than the rest of the city; the West End is already very well developed. But development has not "stalled out". There are several proposals and a few projects reaching completion all over the neighborhood. There are three towers planned for the temporary dog park on Georgia. Landmark and Kengo are reaching completion. Fifteen Fifteen is currently being excavated. There's a large proposal at the Haro / Smithe diversion and another down Thurlow at Barclay.

But how is your preferred alignment helping anyone one within the West End? If your only stop is at Georgia and Denman most people will continue walking, biking, or taking the Robson bus. If someone wants to go from Pac Centre to English Bay you think they're going to walk 1 kilometre across the peninsula from the Georgia station to Beach Ave? Robson already does that route but drops passengers right at their destination. Transit stops within the West End needs to be fine grained, not 1.5 kilometers apart.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I mean development. It's stalled out for a while, while Yaletown is effectively an extension of downtown now.

Skytrain gives an excuse to revisit the West End Plan (the main blockage) so it actually allows a large amount of new development.

It's not 'stalled out' and there is no blockage - you really continue to show you have no idea what you're talking about.

Thanks to the development permitted by the West End Plan, in the past 5 years 10 towers were completed with over 1,400 units. There are five towers under construction with over 1,100 units. There are another 16 towers approved for development, with over 3,800 more units. There are current applications for 8 more towers with 2,400 more units, and there are sites known to have been acquired by developers for 12 more towers.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It's not 'stalled out' and there is no blockage - you really continue to show you have no idea what you're talking about.

Thanks to the development permitted by the West End Plan, in the past 5 years 10 towers were completed with over 1,400 units. There are five towers under construction with over 1,100 units. There are another 16 towers approved for development, with over 3,800 more units. There are current applications for 8 more towers with 2,400 more units, and there are sites known to have been acquired by developers for 12 more towers.

Thanks for bringing the specifics. Basically, the West End could soon have about 10% (~60k) of Vancouver's population (~650k) despite having less than 2% of Vancouver's land.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Changing City

It's not 'stalled out' and there is no blockage - you really continue to show you have no idea what you're talking about.

Thanks to the development permitted by the West End Plan, in the past 5 years 10 towers were completed with over 1,400 units. There are five towers under construction with over 1,100 units. There are another 16 towers approved for development, with over 3,800 more units. There are current applications for 8 more towers with 2,400 more units, and there are sites known to have been acquired by developers for 12 more towers.

I'm not saying no development ever takes place.

But the West End Plan clearly limits where towers can be built and building heights (especially off the commercial corridors and Burrard) rather than basically extending downtown to the rest of the Peninsula.
It's underwhelming compared to newer plans like Broadway.

But yeah, I obviously have no idea about anything because I'm not impressed by 6200 units over the next couple years literally right next to the city center during the middle of a major housing shortage and consider it too slow.

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I think it makes sense that West End development is slower than the rest of the city; the West End is already very well developed. But development has not "stalled out". There are several proposals and a few projects reaching completion all over the neighborhood. There are three towers planned for the temporary dog park on Georgia. Landmark and Kengo are reaching completion. Fifteen Fifteen is currently being excavated. There's a large proposal at the Haro / Smithe diversion and another down Thurlow at Barclay.

But how is your preferred alignment helping anyone one within the West End? If your only stop is at Georgia and Denman most people will continue walking, biking, or taking the Robson bus. If someone wants to go from Pac Centre to English Bay you think they're going to walk 1 kilometre across the peninsula from the Georgia station to Beach Ave? Robson already does that route but drops passengers right at their destination. Transit stops within the West End needs to be fine grained, not 1.5 kilometers apart.

It allows people easy access to Robson and easier access to Stanley Park and Coal Harbour as well as the West End.

I guess you're right that plenty will still use the buses instead- though 15min catchment is usually considered the maximum catchment area for a station, that's still high. It's more up to Nelson Street that it's convenient to walk to and from that new station, which is still half of the West End.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I'm not saying no development ever takes place.

But the West End Plan clearly limits where towers can be built and building heights (especially off the commercial corridors and Burrard) rather than basically extending downtown to the rest of the Peninsula.
It's underwhelming compared to newer plans like Broadway.

But yeah, I obviously have no idea about anything because I'm not impressed by 6200 units over the next couple years literally right next to the city center during the middle of a major housing shortage and consider it too slow.

Putting a station in on a line that might be built at some undetermined point in the future that allows residents to get to the North Shore, or North Shore residents to reach the West End won't make any difference to the affordability of housing in Vancouver.

If 6,200 units in 24 towers doesn't impress you, remind me how many towers are currently planned for affordable Langley now it's getting a SkyTrain?

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Putting a station in on a line that might be built at some indetermined point in the future that allows residents to get to the North Shore, or North Shore residents to reach the West End won't make any difference to the affordability of housing in Vancouver.

If 6,200 units in 24 towers doesn't impress you, remind me how many towers are currently planned for affordable Langley now it's getting a SkyTrain?

Putting a station in on a line that might be built at some indetermined point in the future that allows residents to get to the North Shore, or North Shore residents to reach the West End won't make any difference to the affordability of housing in Vancouver.

Did I said it would?

I said the West End plan probably wasn't ambitious enough in its current state (especially by the time a NS line is built), and a West End Station might further increase density on the West End beyond the current planning documents in the future, maybe and open up more land for housing.

Obviously, it's not an immediate solution.

You seem personally insulted by that opinion.


You may notice one of those places is walking distance to the CBD and the other is on the opposite side of the Metro.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Did I said it would?

I said the West End plan probably wasn't ambitious enough in its current state (especially by the time a NS line is built), and a West End Station might further increase density on the West End beyond the current planning documents in the future, maybe and open up more land for housing.

Obviously, it's not an immediate solution.

You seem personally insulted by that opinion.


You may notice one of those places is walking distance to the CBD and the other is on the opposite side of the Metro.

Fair enough - it's the transit fantasy thread, and your obsession with finding reasons for a route that's not favoured isn't my problem. Adding a station in the West End might further increase permitted densities. Or it might not. If you think that makes a difference to the route that will eventually be chosen, have at it, but I don't think it will.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It allows people easy access to Robson and easier access to Stanley Park and Coal Harbour as well as the West End.

I guess you're right that plenty will still use the buses instead- though 15min catchment is usually considered the maximum catchment area for a station, that's still high. It's more up to Nelson Street that it's convenient to walk to and from that new station, which is still half of the West End.

There are essentially three commercial areas in the West End that are actually popular: Robson from Burrard to Broughton, Denman from Robson to English Bay, and Davie from Burrard to Jervis. I think you've repeatedly said there should only be one station between Waterfront and the NS, and I assume that will go somewhere near Georgia and Denman to provide access to Stanley Park. Your station location would provide access to all of Robson, most of Denman (although English Bay will be right on the edge of a 15-minute walk), some of Stanley Park (the Aquarium would be a stretch and Third Beach is out of the question), and none of Davie.

In reality, I think your station would only increase access to Stanley Park. If someone wants to get to English Bay it will be far faster to take the 23 that runs along Beach (unless they're coming from the NS). If someone wants to get to Robson and Bute they will take the 5 or walk. If someone wants to get to Davie Village they will take the 6 or walk. I have no doubt people who live north of Denman would love your station, but that's a very small slice of the West End.

What I would actually love for the West End is to route a tram from BC Place up Robson and to close Robson to all other traffic. Robson past Burrard has very wide back lanes to facilitate commercial vehicles so this would not be disruptive to deliveries for the restaurants and stores. This would be a lot more central to the West End and it could be fine-grained with stops every couple blocks. At a pace slightly faster than walking it would be useful to residents but it would also be a great way for tourists to traverse the downtown.

[Migrant_Coconut]

If the Main Street-Senakw streetcar ever becomes a thing, it shouldn't be impossible to tunnel around the stadiums (maybe use Expo) and come back up on Robson near the VPL. That's a pretty big "if," though.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

If the Main Street-Senakw streetcar ever becomes a thing, it shouldn't be impossible to tunnel around the stadiums (maybe use Expo) and come back up on Robson near the VPL. That's a pretty big "if," though.

Well, TBF, if the viaducts never get removed(maybe), there's excess capacity for a rapid streetcar on Expo-Pacific Blvd.
The problem is the Davie and Denman are pretty narrow, and even reducing it down to 1 lane in each direction would make it difficult to fit in cars at the same time (sidewalks are too narrow to give enough space for station areas).

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

There are essentially three commercial areas in the West End that are actually popular: Robson from Burrard to Broughton, Denman from Robson to English Bay, and Davie from Burrard to Jervis. I think you've repeatedly said there should only be one station between Waterfront and the NS, and I assume that will go somewhere near Georgia and Denman to provide access to Stanley Park. Your station location would provide access to all of Robson, most of Denman (although English Bay will be right on the edge of a 15-minute walk), some of Stanley Park (the Aquarium would be a stretch and Third Beach is out of the question), and none of Davie.

In reality, I think your station would only increase access to Stanley Park. If someone wants to get to English Bay it will be far faster to take the 23 that runs along Beach (unless they're coming from the NS). If someone wants to get to Robson and Bute they will take the 5 or walk. If someone wants to get to Davie Village they will take the 6 or walk. I have no doubt people who live north of Denman would love your station, but that's a very small slice of the West End.

What I would actually love for the West End is to route a tram from BC Place up Robson and to close Robson to all other traffic. Robson past Burrard has very wide back lanes to facilitate commercial vehicles so this would not be disruptive to deliveries for the restaurants and stores. This would be a lot more central to the West End and it could be fine-grained with stops every couple blocks. At a pace slightly faster than walking it would be useful to residents but it would also be a great way for tourists to traverse the downtown.

North of Denman? So Denovian Harbour Park?

There's not really any clear station spacing or location in the reports (other than terminuses) and it's explicitly not really firm on purpose.

Having more stations slows down the SkyTrain (a bit) but I assumed 2 stations. It's around 14 min for 5 stops (analogy 29th Ave to Waterfront on Expo.)

Assuming the same distance between stations in the West End as in Downtown, you'd have a station around Bute/Jervis and Pender/Dunsmuir and 1 around Westin Bayshore/Marina Square. (that one would likely be a bit deep though.)

It's a 5-4 minute walk from the new station to Bute + Robson vs the current 9 minute walk from Burrard Station.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

...North of Denman? So Denovian Harbour Park...

Denman and other such streets on the downtown peninsula run southwest-northeast, unlike much of the rest of the city. "North of Denman" would likely correspond to the streets between Denman and Stanley Park.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

North of Denman? So Denovian Harbour Park?

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Denman and other such streets on the downtown peninsula run southwest-northeast, unlike much of the rest of the city. "North of Denman" would effectively refer to the streets between Denman and Stanley Park.

Since the downtown is diagonal it is difficult to use directions, but I meant the area bounded by Denman, Stanley Park, Beach, and Georgia.

I should have said "above" or "northwest of" Denman.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Well, TBF, if the viaducts never get removed(maybe), there's excess capacity for a rapid streetcar on Expo-Pacific Blvd.
The problem is the Davie and Denman are pretty narrow, and even reducing it down to 1 lane in each direction would make it difficult to fit in cars at the same time (sidewalks are too narrow to give enough space for station areas).

The road grid under the viaducts is kind of a mess right now - gotta fix that before adding trams, and the least-complicated way to fix it is removing the viaducts.

I distinctly recall me and Farmer saying "Robson" and not either of those streets; the City wants Quebec, Water/Cordova and part of Drake.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The road grid under the viaducts is kind of a mess right now - gotta fix that before adding trams, and the least-complicated way to fix it is removing the viaducts.

I distinctly recall me and Farmer saying "Robson" and not either of those streets; the City wants Quebec, Water/Cordova and part of Drake.

Obviously if there was a tram around False Creek (Senawk to Science World) and another on Robson it would make sense to combine the two. But there's too many moving pieces with the removal of the viaducts, expansion of Andy Livingstone Park (or whatever the new name would be), and all the proposed property developments are NEFC to know exactly how.

If the tram could handle the grade it could go Pacific > Georgia > Beatty > Burrard but that would certainly slow down traffic flow or the tram, or both if those crossings are at-grade.

[Migrant_Coconut]

True. I'm bringing up False Creek because it's the only one with a possible depot right now; Robson by itself does not.

HERESY - a True Urbanist (TM) would say "damn the traffic" and plow the streetcar full speed into whatever congestion (and negative consequences of plowing into congestion) lay ahead! /s

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

HERESY - a True Urbanist (TM) would say "damn the traffic" and plow the streetcar full speed into whatever congestion (and negative consequences of plowing into congestion) lay ahead! /s

I think the best option without a bit of tunneling would be to transition the tram from the median of Quebec to the south side of Pacific. Then you go elevated shortly before Georgia at the level of the BC Place concourse, cross over Pacific, and run alongside the concourse until the Terry Fox statue where the tram would turn onto Robson. But that might require purchasing the properties between BC Place and Beatty and there are redevelopment plans for 720 Beatty.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I think the best option without a bit of tunneling would be to transition the tram from the median of Quebec to the south side of Pacific. Then you go elevated shortly before Georgia at the level of the BC Place concourse, cross over Pacific, and run alongside the concourse until the Terry Fox statue where the tram would turn onto Robson. But that might require purchasing the properties between BC Place and Beatty and there are redevelopment plans for 720 Beatty.

720 Beatty is beyond planning - they've already dug about 2m down, and are busy trucking the muck away.

The City's streetcar plan includes a spur that heads along Pacific to Granville past the Canada Line station at Davie. It's partly why the median is so wide on Pacific.


[Daily Hive 2019]

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Changing City

720 Beatty is beyond planning - they've already dug about 2m down, and are busy trucking the muck away.

The City's streetcar plan includes a spur that heads along Pacific to Granville past the Canada Line station at Davie. It's partly why the median is so wide on Pacific.

Yes, I'm aware that the downtown streetcar has been conceptualized as running on the north and south sides of the peninsula. But my "fantasy" is a pedestrianized Robson with a tram, and I was just hypothesizing how that could be plugged into the False Creek streetcar.

My dream likely won't become a reality, but every time I walk down Robson's already wide but packed sidewalks, or stroll down the underused alleys, I am struck at how a pedestrianized Robson with major plazas at Bute, Robson Square, Granville, and BC Place would be an urbanist's dream

[GenWhy?]

Using Drake is such a poor move. It just... ends

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Using Drake is such a poor move. It just... ends

Can't understand why it's never Pacific -> Davie. It's literally already a trolley route.