Transit Fantasies

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by mcj

Awesome! Thank you for this!

I do notice the slope is in degrees and not % gradient, so a 3 degree average slope for Lonsdale is a 5.2% grade, with a 6.6 degree max being 11.6%. Probably a bit steep for an off the shelf LRT/Streetcar, but possible some modern interpretation of the historical one.

Ahh good catch!

[Migrant_Coconut]

One small problem with funiculars: you can only have two per line (they're counterweights).

[BaddieB]

Here's my proposal for what should actually happen with the Arbutus Corridor. Instead of a streetcar as slow as a bus no one will use, why not install a fully separated automated regional rail that connects the entire region together. My proposal calls for maximizing existing ROW to reduce costs, while also keeping straight alignments with spaced out stations to boost speeds. This would allow for a top speed of 110 km/h, and average speeds of 50 to 70 kmh depending on the section.

• Green - At grade or trenched
• Blue - Elevated
• Brown - Cut and Cover
• Black - Bored

A benefit of this configuration is it provides service to a lot of neighbourhoods lacking good public transit. Examples include the West End, Granville Island/Senakw, Kerrisdale, the River District, Fraser Mills, Guildford, Willoughby, South Richmond and South Surrey/White Rock.

Another benefit is it provides a link between Vancouver's suburbs that lack fast connections on the Skytrain.

For example, a trip from Richmond-Brighouse to Surrey Central currently takes about 1 hour and 7 minutes at 4pm on transit today. This is extremely slow. On this route, it would take 9 minutes on the Canada Line to Marine Drive, 13 minutes on the regional rail going to 22nd, a cross-platform transfer to the Expo Line, where it would take another 12 minutes. In total, including 2 minutes for each transfer, is a total journey that takes 38 minutes, or 33km/h as the crow flies. This is competitive with driving, which Google Maps says would take about 35 to 75 minutes at 4pm. Although this route doesn't go to either town centre, it provides a link between them via the Skytrain.

But the main benefit is how cheap it would be to build. Much of the length would run at-grade, either along highway medians, or along abandoned rail tracks like at Big Bend in Burnaby, which would significantly save costs. Another would be converting lanes on the Port Mann and New Massey for rail, instead of building an expensive new bridge from scratch.

Additional benefits are Expo and Canada Line relief.

Drawbacks include

1. Skipping Downtown Surrey/Whalley. It would be pretty difficult to route it towards there. A Port Mann alignment saves on costs as it would be using the existing bridge, just with minor adjustment. It already has Expo Line service, and as I said would allow for transfers at 22nd. However, for the sake of discourse, I've added what an alignment that reaches Surrey Central would look like. It would be significantly more expensive however.



2. No New Westminster Station. Can't add extra tracks to this station as there is significant development around that station. A station is added adjacent to it (by where the train tracks are now) but transfers are done at 22nd or Sapperton, or by foot in New Westminster.

You can argue about where you think stations should really go. The main point of this alignment is to maximize speed and reduce costs by reusing old ROWs, keep that in mind. Anyone have any estimates for price?

[mcj]

The Southern Railway in New Westminster is pretty heavily used for non-mainline tracks. While the corridor exists, you'd also have to elevate the line quite high to get around the existing road overpasses as well. You could maybe locate a high elevated station over the McInnes Street overpass and add a connection to the New Westminster Skytrain station that way. You'd then need to demolish the River Market and Fraser River Discovery Centre to build a bridge to Surrey, they're due for a facelift at some point in the future anyways, in particular the River Market is quite small for how much New West has grown. Redeveloping those buildings into a new Market / Museum that integrates with the bridge/station and maybe has a tower or two on either side would compliment the line well (and likely bring costs for that station alone into the billion dollar range).

I like the concept, but logistically this would be pretty difficult to implement from 22nd Street Station until you either hit Fraser Mills/Highway 1 or cross the Fraser into Surrey.

Also I'd probably add a spur to the airport so that there would be a direct airport connection from Surrey (something that needs to happen imo, but will likely take the form of a bus in reality).

[Migrant_Coconut]

WRT the south branch, I'd end it at Ladner. Not a lot of White Rock residents going downtown, let alone via Richmond.

Even then, that's 51 km from downtown to Carvolth; GO's expansion cost about $70m/km, so that's $3-4 billion, probably more if it's elevated... likely even more when you consider West Side NIMBYs already rejected an Arbutus SkyTrain - and the city's agreement with CP only allows for a streetcar - so commuter rail on the Greenway might have to be buried. Might as well go full blue sky, slap on an extra billion or two on and tunnel through Whalley.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

GO's expansion cost about $70m/km, so that's $3-4 billion, probably more if it's elevated... likely even more when you consider West Side NIMBYs already rejected an Arbutus SkyTrain - and the city's agreement with CP only allows for a streetcar - so commuter rail on the Greenway might have to be buried.

Yeah I was going to comment on that.

I also find it humorous that some people seem to think good transit means Skytrain while TransLink is planning for way more RapidBus / BRT (as it's cheaper and faster to implement). It's hard to find much of anywhere in the CoV that doesn't have good transit service - it's got better service than the rest of the region.

I like the idea of running separated express rail along highways but the reality is if we actually get anything it's much more likely to be a bus (hopefully in it's own lane). The two 'legs' you show are already bus routes - and I second Migrant Coconut about ending one of them in Ladner and not White Rock.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I also find it humorous that some people seem to think good transit means Skytrain while TransLink is planning for way more RapidBus / BRT (as it's cheaper and faster to implement).

Small point of order, Skytrain quite obviously has a significantly higher capital cost compared to RapidBus, but the running costs are naturally going to be significantly lower. No diesel, no (well almost no) collisions, no tires, no engines, and most importantly no drivers!

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Yeah I was going to comment on that.

I also find it humorous that some people seem to think good transit means Skytrain while TransLink is planning for way more RapidBus / BRT (as it's cheaper and faster to implement). It's hard to find much of anywhere in the CoV that doesn't have good transit service - it's got better service than the rest of the region.

TBF their frame of reference is the existing buses with no lanes or priority lights; SkyTrains come every 2-3 minutes and don't get stuck in traffic. If you know driving is faster, or you're spoiled by visits to other countries where all transit routes come every 5-7 minutes at peak (which also explains the tram fanbois), then yeah, North American sucks by comparison.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

TBF their frame of reference is the existing buses with no lanes or priority lights; SkyTrains come every 2-3 minutes and don't get stuck in traffic. If you know driving is faster, or you're spoiled by visits to other countries where all transit routes come every 5-7 minutes at peak (which also explains the tram fanbois), then yeah, North American sucks by comparison.

A lot of CoV buses have pretty frequent service vs the rest of the region has the occasional RapidBus and is excited if the bus is only every 20 mins (there are still plenty of 30+ min routes around). Yes if we get actual BRT in separated lanes then that's even better.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Sheba

A lot of CoV buses have pretty frequent service vs the rest of the region has the occasional RapidBus and is excited if the bus is only every 20 mins (there are still plenty of 30+ min routes around). Yes if we get actual BRT in separated lanes then that's even better.

Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that; while the 'burbs obviously need more service in order to make low ridership high, it's also understandable that TransLink sees more potential in making the core's high ridership higher.

[BaddieB]

Here's a map of 2016 transit ridership in Vancouver superimposed by the Skytrain network at that time



I would say transit ridership is a function of density and skytrain access. Dense areas will naturally have more ridership as busses can work, like along Broadway, but you can see that areas long the Expo Line like around Joyce Collingwood and Metrotown have way better ridership despite being a bit less dense. As opposed to South of Fraser, which outside of Whalley has abysmal ridership because there is zero Skytrain service, despite having some denser areas too. I think with this in mind the SLS will be best option boost transit ridership, as Skytrain is the spine of transit in the region. You need skytrain to have a good bus network too. There are many places in the region where I see Skytrain needing to go in to expand the spine of transit, like along King George and a Willingdon/North Shore route.

The opposite for the Broadway Extension. Ridership will probably increase, but less per km of track as opposed to the Surrey-Langley extension. It is nonetheless needed because the busses have gotten way too packed and the headways are at their peak. It's more a case of Skytrain going in because busses cannot do the work alone anymore. I don't see anywhere else in the region that needs a train because of too much density like this.

[CB-Thompson]

I like this map, mostly because it somewhat parallels ideas that I was already thinking about in terms of connecting the wider region. It forms an orbital line and really shortens the travel times between suburban destinations. For that reason, I'd ask the question "what purpose does each section of this line serve?"

This line really misses out on skipping Surrey Central in my opinion and, despite the added cost, should have that option included. It reinforces the idea that Surrey Central is a downtown in it's own regard and becomes a more efficient feeder route into Surrey. The extension east would then capture more travel that stays SoF and not just another feeder for the inner City and suburbs.

The second change I would make is adding stations to the Arbutus section. Specifically at King Ed, 49th, and maybe 57th. Once you're on this N-S section it is competing with Cambie and Expo for travel speed going downtown. Skipping these stations may save 5 minutes on travel time, but it skips over an area of the city that is adding a lot of mid-rise apartments and developments such as at the old Arbutus Mall. After the UBCx I expect the 25 and 49 routes to have fewer passengers, but they will still be busy arterials that have Canada Line connections which makes them good corridors for density that is served by a frequent local bus. I'd also cut-and-cover bury this section.

But it's a nice line and something that I could see considered if the Canada Line starts bumping up on it's capacity.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

Here's a map of 2016 transit ridership in Vancouver superimposed by the Skytrain network at that time

Source? I'm guessing it's proportion using transit as a mode of commuting, rather than overall use which has a slightly different pattern, but it's not clear.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that; while the 'burbs obviously need more service in order to make low ridership high, it's also understandable that TransLink sees more potential in making the core's high ridership higher.

Originally Posted by Changing City

Source? I'm guessing it's proportion using transit as a mode of commuting, rather than overall use which has a slightly different pattern, but it's not clear.

Here's the pdf of TransLink's Frequent Transit Network map. It includes current Skytrain, RapidBus and FTN routes. You'll notice that almost every route in the CoV is an orange FTN route vs most of the rest of the region barely has any FTN routes. It's kind of a chicken and egg thing - people are more likely to ride a bus in CoV due to all the regularly spaced frequent routes. Meanwhile people in the rest of the region are more likely to drive due to not having much bus service.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Why is why TransLink is rolling out a BRT for Willingdon and the North Shore, and two and a SkyTrain for Surrey/Langley (plus a bunch of RapidBuses). Even then, it's understandable why they preferred to start with green areas like Lonsdale, 41st or Hastings where high demand is already guaranteed.

[BaddieB]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Source? I'm guessing it's proportion using transit as a mode of commuting, rather than overall use which has a slightly different pattern, but it's not clear.

Yes, I should have wrote by commutes. I rewrote that post a few times and I guess I erased it. It is from censusmapper under "transit to work 2016"

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

Yes, I should have wrote by commutes. I rewrote that post a few times and I guess I erased it. It is from censusmapper under "transit to work 2016"

The pattern looks a bit different when you add in students (and other riders) using the system, but there isn't a source of that information mapped, that I've seen.