Transit Fantasies

[Migrant_Coconut]

As above, the theoretical maximum with three ferries an hour is 5k pphpd, (more than the current Canada Line Richmond branch can handle), but that assumes the ferries are fully-booked and every passenger rides the train - not likely to happen within any of our lifetimes.

Get BC Ferries to run catamarans out of downtown or YVR and call it a day.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

As above, the theoretical maximum with three ferries an hour is 5k pphpd, (more than the current Canada Line Richmond branch can handle), but that assumes the ferries are fully-booked and every passenger rides the train - not likely to happen within any of our lifetimes.

The point is it could be higher with increased pedestrian demand. They would need different ship configurations. Smaller boats that could load more people more quickly, etc.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The point is it could be higher with increased pedestrian demand. They would need different ship configurations. Smaller boats that could load more people more quickly, etc.

The province doesn't seem inclined to spend billions on a "could be" - not when BC still needs seven or eight different SkyTrains, a gondola, dozens of BRTs and rapid transit for Kelowna and Victoria.

[officedweller]

This belongs in the HSR thread... but
Given the route and destinations of the HSR, it makes no sense for the HSR to go to YVR.
Passengers flying in to YVR are not going to take an HSR train to Seattle or Portland.
HSR passengers from Seattle and Portland are not going to fly out of YVR.
It's not the same as in Europe where the trains act as a distributor system from an airport.
There will be no local distribution via the HSR around Vancouver - just one line to Seattle and Portland.
(and an HSR is not intended for a local one stop from YVR to Downtown Vancouver).
The HSR should stop in Downtown Vancouver or a close enough SkyTrain or Canada Line station to access Downtown Vancouver easily (Pacific Central probably fits the bill).

The express buses from Bridgeport Station serve the BC Ferries well, as do the express buses to Horseshoe Bay.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by waves

The fact that the ferry terminal does not look like a huge transit draw today is rather obvious. A large share of the people who would otherwise be walk-on passengers are sitting in cars, paying to bring the car, because the non-car trip is awkward: SkyTrain, transfer, express bus, ferry, then another bus at the other end. Add on luggage, kids, bikes, or travel bags and the bus being fast enough becomes somewhat moot. The research has similar findings when they look at peoples preference for travelling to an airport (2% for bus vs 25% for rail, Colovic et al. 2022).

Consider the fare structure. On the main Victoria route, the adult passenger fare is about $20, while taking a standard vehicle is about $90 before even counting the passenger fare. So a car-and-driver trip is roughly five times the price of a walk-on passenger trip. Even with 3 adults, the price with a car per person is $50, 2.5x greater than if they didn't go by car. That price difference should be, and to a large part is, pushing people toward walk-on tickets. Walk-on passengers have indeed risen significantly over the past 10 years. But even then, the scarcity of space for vehicles is very evident. Nowadays 70–90% of vehicle deck space is bookable and people are needing to book further and further ahead to secure a vehicle spot. The access experience is wider than just the experience of the express bus, and that experience is bad enough that many people are still paying a major premium to avoid it.

People prefer rail based solutions when long-distance travel is involved and better rail-based access could shift people out of cars before they ever reach the terminal. That means fewer cars competing for deck space, more people moved per sailing, lower pressure for expensive vehicle capacity, better access for people who cannot or do not want to drive, and more realistic possibilities for passenger-focused service patterns (imagine having passenger-only or smaller-vessel services interspersed with vehicular vessels). This is also not to mention the other various economic benefits with reduced pollution, time savings, improved reliability and expanded accessibility.

Anyways, citing suppressed numbers as proof that better access is unnecessary is circular logic and ignores the fact that BC Ferries is under significant strain. Providing more car based ferry service might just be, equally, a huge waste of money.

Well consider the alternative, what if a passenger/freight rail line was connected from the island the mainland but it literately had to go all the way to campbell river before coming back down to Victoria. Like, this IS the obstacle to just connecting the mainland in the first place. The coast of BC is basically just massive underwater valleys.

I think realistically, if YVR is a terminus of a HSR line, it makes sense because that allows the same customs/international terminals to do everything. Right now the only rail terminal that does that is Pacific Central, and only when you take the Amtrak.

YVR could also be the terminus of a ferry to the Island as well, the Tsawwassen terminal exists where it is, because it is the shortest distance for the ferry to Victoria, not the most convenient for the car/passenger. No, instead I would think that the Horseshoe bay terminal would be replaced, and the vehicle traffic would be diverted to Tsawwassen-Duke Point, while the new route becomes Sea Island-Departure Bay (which has transit connections.) This doesn't solve the "how do I get to Victoria" part, which would require reopening the island Rail Corridor using commuter rail vehicles.

But it would likely cost less just to make the Canada Line go all the way to Tsawwassen, and then develop Skytrain/Light Rail from Swartz Bay to downtown Victoria.

[Migrant_Coconut]

If you're taking a bullet train from Portland or Seattle to Vancouver, then you most likely aren't trying to get to Vancouver's airport. Whalley and then Pacific Central would seem to satisfy the most demand for the least hassle.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

If you're taking a bullet train from Portland or Seattle to Vancouver, then you most likely aren't trying to get to Vancouver's airport. Whalley and then Pacific Central would seem to satisfy the most demand for the least hassle.

Surrey Central you mean?

[waves]

Originally Posted by mcj

I was wondering to see what you think about an interchange in Surrey being left open for a modern high speed metro down King George Blvd that could also serve HSR? Sort of a backbone of a regional rail system that can be phased in over time using the HSR capable tracks. Using KGB you could get reasonably fast travel times from Surrey Central to the Airport using the trainsets you suggest.

I'm not sure I understand exactly of the vision you have in terms of routing, but the idea of the HSR line being multi-purpose for regional trains is both interesting, and already common in most of Europe*. If we are already going to be spending 10 figures on the HSR routing, it would be valuable to also consider how might be able to take advantage of the tracks for more than just HSR.

To do a pie-in-the-sky example, you could do an alignment under 152nd street the whole way, new rail bridge near the Port Mann, and connect into the CPKC Branch Track at the Cape Horn Interchange, then go through the Grandview cut all the way to Pacific Central. On such an alignment, you could theoretically build in the ability to have regional trains run Peach Arch » Semiahoo » 32nd Ave » East Panorama » Fleetwood (transfer to Skytrain) » Guildford » Braid » Pacific Central with HS only stopping Pacific Central and Fleetwood.

*except Spain, but even then, Spain is expanding their standard gauge network with the aim of permitting international freight traffic along TEN-T rail freight corridors

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The province doesn't seem inclined to spend billions on a "could be" - not when BC still needs seven or eight different SkyTrains, a gondola, dozens of BRTs and rapid transit for Kelowna and Victoria.

I don't think anyone disagrees with you there. But if you are already building a HSR, I argue it would make sense to be forward thinking and plan for it to have the ability to tag on cheaper branch lines eventually, even if they may not happen until after all the other things happen.

For a YVR alignment, it could be any of White Rock, Langley, Tsawwassen. For a Ladner-Tsawwassen tag-on, it would mean building only 3 stations, at-grade, on a basically straight and flat alignment where transit priority could be used for the 4 traffic lights. The only thing that could make it cheaper than it already is would be if the highway already had space vacant in the median. I would be surprised if it cost more than $1b CAD.

For a Pacific Central, it could be any of South Surrey, Newton, even Abbotsford perhaps.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by waves

I'm not sure I understand exactly of the vision you have in terms of routing, but the idea of the HSR line being multi-purpose for regional trains is both interesting, and already common in most of Europe*. If we are already going to be spending 10 figures on the HSR routing, it would be valuable to also consider how might be able to take advantage of the tracks for more than just HSR.

To do a pie-in-the-sky example, you could do an alignment under 152nd street the whole way, new rail bridge near the Port Mann, and connect into the CPKC Branch Track at the Cape Horn Interchange, then go through the Grandview cut all the way to Pacific Central. On such an alignment, you could theoretically build in the ability to have regional trains run Peach Arch » Semiahoo » 32nd Ave » East Panorama » Fleetwood (transfer to Skytrain) » Guildford » Braid » Pacific Central with HS only stopping Pacific Central and Fleetwood.

*except Spain, but even then, Spain is expanding their standard gauge network with the aim of permitting international freight traffic along TEN-T rail freight corridors

It's also common in the USA, at least with what they currently have in terms of HSR, even CAHSR will end up mixed with Caltrain. IF HSR ever happens it'll obviously be dictated by whatever system the US chooses, but in the meantime we should be setting aside a ROW for regional rail that can be adapted for last-50 km HSR (like the Caltrain corridor) and we should build that regional rail network as soon as possible.