Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[CLC]

^ Look at it with another perspective, according to previous month news Central Link already gained bigger ridership than any Metro bus route down there. It seems that general unpopularity of transit usage being a larger factor than a wrong route chosen.

[SpongeG]

yah people don't ride the loser cruiser much down there

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

The only proper solution for Broadway is grade separated rail (AKA the Millennium Line skytrain extension)

Please see the "I support Skytrain to UBC" thread.

I totally agree with you Metro, but please let that grade separation be UNDERGROUND, and not on pylons.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I totally agree with you Metro, but please let that grade separation be UNDERGROUND, and not on pylons.

I know the character of the West Side very well. An elevated transit system would never be allowed in that area.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by CLC

^ Look at it with another perspective, according to previous month news Central Link already gained bigger ridership than any Metro bus route down there. It seems that general unpopularity of transit usage being a larger factor than a wrong route chosen.

I think you hit the nail pretty much dead on the head.

It actually does shock me how a city that has about 1-2 million more people than we do can't even come close to the numbers that some of our regular bus routes encounter.

All though this is only a guess. I wonder if the fact that we have a lack of freeways being one of the biggest reasons as to why our numbers are much higher per capita than theirs. Also I think our higher density is a factor as well. More people in an area, means more transit riders, meaning more buses on a route. So the service gets better. Of course the only downside is the crowded buses

[agrant]

And I think you hit the nail on the head there. Sounds like they'll need to start building more around stations. At least Seattle now has something to start with.

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I know the character of the West Side very well. An elevated transit system would never be allowed in that area.

I totally agree. People won't have it, and the fact there really isn't room for a guideway. It's not like the Lougheed Highway...

[Rusty Gull]

Part of the issue is cultural. In Vancouver, and indeed other Canadian major cities, taking transit is an acceptable form of transport. But in most US cities (except for those with subways), people discriminate against those who take the bus to work.

I used to live in the states, and if you took the bus to a job interview or some social gathering, people would be like, "what the hell is wrong with you?" The bus really is the loser cruiser there, sorry to say.

Seattle is really no different in this regard than Kansas City or Indianapolis or L.A. or Atlanta. Maybe LRT will help build a pro-transit culture in Seattle, but it's not there yet.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by Rusty Gull

Part of the issue is cultural. In Vancouver, and indeed other Canadian major cities, taking transit is an acceptable form of transport. But in most US cities (except for those with subways), people discriminate against those who take the bus to work.

I used to live in the states, and if you took the bus to a job interview or some social gathering, people would be like, "what the hell is wrong with you?" The bus really is the loser cruiser there, sorry to say.

Seattle is really no different in this regard than Kansas City or Indianapolis or L.A. or Atlanta. Maybe LRT will help build a pro-transit culture in Seattle, but it's not there yet.

I agree that transit has a bad reputation in the US other than in the cities that have good subway. Either way I'll only live in the US when pigs fly so if they feel transit is a looser cruizer let them.

I also think the price of housing, and rental rates has a major impact on transit usage. So if people choose to they can live further away for cheaper housing, but they have to contend with the traffic. Or they can choose to live closer but because of the cost of housing choose to either not own a car or if they own one they don't drive it regularly.

[seaJ]

Originally Posted by Rusty Gull

Part of the issue is cultural. In Vancouver, and indeed other Canadian major cities, taking transit is an acceptable form of transport. But in most US cities (except for those with subways), people discriminate against those who take the bus to work.

I used to live in the states, and if you took the bus to a job interview or some social gathering, people would be like, "what the hell is wrong with you?" The bus really is the loser cruiser there, sorry to say.

Seattle is really no different in this regard than Kansas City or Indianapolis or L.A. or Atlanta. Maybe LRT will help build a pro-transit culture in Seattle, but it's not there yet.

This is only partly true. Say the U.S. was the same size as Canada population wise and consisted of only three or four major cities. Let's say New York, Boston, and Chicago. All of these cities have well established public transit/subway systems. Culturally it is very acceptable to use public transit in those cities. The U.S. however, being as large as it is with so many large cities, there are definitely places where public transit is not thought of as a great alternative to the automobile. Cities like Phoenix, Houston etc.. were established mostly in the 20th century, so are more car centric.
I think it's easier to get everyone on the same page when you have such a small population. If you lived in Toronto or Montreal and you wanted to move to Vancouver, you would have experienced and come to expect the city to have a subway or LRT. Being that there is only one large west coast city in Canada, the resources and will of the people to make it happen is much easier.

[jlousa]

I don't think the number of cities that Canada has comparatively to US cities is a valid argument. It just appears that Canadian cities are able to substain public transport easier then the equivalent sized us cities. Besides our big 3 there are numerous cities across Canada with lrt systems that for numerous reasons attract higher ridership then Seattle's line. Why that is I couldn't tell you, probably dozens of small reasons more then any one big reason though.

I look forward to riding your new line next time I'm visiting.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I know the character of the West Side very well. An elevated transit system would never be allowed in that area.

Not even if it was routed through an alley, rather than the main street? Well, I guess not. I know some people who live there, and I agree about the attitude factor.

Richmond council feared the pylons would destroy No. 3 Road... as if No. 3 Road had any ambiance worth retaining before... but the fact is that it has completely enhanced the route, and given a lot of dubious properties an incentive to redevelop and incorporate the guideway.

Personally, while I love the little shops and cafes in places like Kits and Kingsway, I feel that the actual buildings and pedestrian spaces themselves lack any character. Putting an elevated track down Broadway and giving it 10 years to densify would not necessarily turn out worse than what is there today.

But I say that as an outsider whose voice will be ignored...

[deasine]

Originally Posted by Zassk

Not even if it was routed through an alley, rather than the main street? Well, I guess not. I know some people who live there, and I agree about the attitude factor.

Richmond council feared the pylons would destroy No. 3 Road... as if No. 3 Road had any ambiance worth retaining before... but the fact is that it has completely enhanced the route, and given a lot of dubious properties an incentive to redevelop and incorporate the guideway.

Personally, while I love the little shops and cafes in places like Kits and Kingsway, I feel that the actual buildings and pedestrian spaces themselves lack any character. Putting an elevated track down Broadway and giving it 10 years to densify would not necessarily turn out worse than what is there today.

But I say that as an outsider whose voice will be ignored...

The problem is: there isn't enough room, or else many people wouldn't be so insistent on SkyTrain over LRT. Even if you elevate it, they pylons/columns take room, and that would come at the expensive of pedestrians, drivers, and cyclists on Broadway.

~~~

Anyways, in other transit updates (don't have photo this time sorry), TransLink installed new signs at Granville, Main Street, and Stadium Stns. Platforms are now numbered, with a route map of what stations are served by the trains departing from the platforms. The route map ones look quite temporary, but the platform numbering ones look great, albeit small.

[vansky]

taking public transit is a loserish thing, but as long as you enjoy it, who cares.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by vansky

taking public transit is a loserish thing, but as long as you enjoy it, who cares.

Why is taking public transit a "loserish" thing? I'm curious. Is it because it says you can't afford a (snazzy) car, and therefore have not "made it in life," or what ? ?

[cabotp]

I'm actually curious as well. What makes taking transit such a looserish thing.

On a personal note I've actually decided to give up my car and just use transit. I might be a looser for it but I'm saving about $70 a month. I'm also personally fed up with driving. I feel like sometimes running over other idiotic drivers and would do it with a wicked smile.

Now I can understand if you happened to live in bum frack know where in the valley where you might see a bus when that pig flies buy. Then yes you need to drive. Because you have no other choice.

But in the city of Vancouver transit is not all that bad. The only downside is that it is too popular.

Besides one of the benefits is that it forces you to walk more. Something I think a lot of people in North America need to do.

[vansky]

if u have no car then u would take transit, so some ppl feel ppl who take transit dont have cars....but it's changing, as many switch to transit, and they do have cars...

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by vansky

if u have no car then u would take transit, so some ppl feel ppl who take transit dont have cars....but it's changing, as many switch to transit, and they do have cars...

I guess the reverse is true as well. If you have no transit then you would purchase a vehicle.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by cabotp

I'm actually curious as well. What makes taking transit such a looserish thing.

Somehow the bus is not cool, yet something like the NYC subway is cool. Can't say I understand it too much...

I don't think we have that problem.

Seattle is taking a transit beating here. As somebody who has friends there and visits often, they do have a pretty pro-transit attitude, but I think they are just playing catch up in terms of infrastructure.

These LINK systems seem incredibly expensive, and they are, but these are being implemented based on public referendums attached to the ballot, so they are certainly things that people believe in.

Consider that the potential $3B UBC Skytrain expansion will be a capital expense funded by the provincial government. Now if you put that on the ballot in 2012, do you think it would pass? Province wide, I'm not so sure...

[deasine]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Seattle is taking a transit beating here. As somebody who has friends there and visits often, they do have a pretty pro-transit attitude, but I think they are just playing catch up in terms of infrastructure.

These LINK systems seem incredibly expensive, and they are, but these are being implemented based on public referendums attached to the ballot, so they are certainly things that people believe in.

Like spongeg said earlier, one of the issues with the current LINK LRT is that it doesn't take you anywhere. On top of that, Sound Transit hasn't made the effort to make decent connections between the different modes of transit. With the Canada Line, aside from the fact that the route connects many major destinations in Vancouver and Richmond, connections to he Canada Line are simple and quick. I'm sire that the airport connection will improve ridership somewhat, but I think it shortening the commuter express buses to Takwalia International, forcing commuters onto the LRT will see a decent rise in ridership (ie bridgeport stn)

[twoNeurons]

Also... getting into Seattle by car outside of rush hour is easy, fast, and comes with plenty of cheap parking.

There are three freeways converging on downtown.