Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by deasine

It's good for tourists. You often see "YVR-Airport to Vancouver City Centre in 25 min" advertisements at the Airport as opposed to "YVR-Airport to Waterfront" for that reason.

Yeah, but if you are local or a tourist you should know where Georgia Street is. It's like our main drag through downtown. Granville station is simply Granville and people know where it is.

But to make it clear and marketable to tourists, it could easily have been called "Georgia St.-Downtown", which is much more accurate and descriptive.

And WRT multiple Broadway stations, it's really not that confusing. At least we don't have 6 completely different 23rd street stations like New York.

[mrjauk]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I couldn't agree more. I always though "Georgia" station would eloquently say it all. Apparently not.

I don't really care about the name as much as I'm annoyed that there is no direct exit to Robson street. Yes, I understand that nobody ever wants to go to Robson street but what would it have cost to have an entrance there similar to the one on the south side of Waterfront station?

[Yume-sama]

I think you over estimate how many tourists know what Georgia street is. I'm betting it's a very low % before they come here. As for no Robson St. exit. I do think that was a missed opportunity. Every time I am down there someone asks me for directions to where Robson St. (or rarely other streets like Denman) is. I don't know why they always ask me, perhaps they figure I'm a nice tourist like them since I usually have my camera, and not a mean old Vancouver local

[nname]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I dont know what you are talking about... TTC still uses the paper transfers Translink got rid of a decade ago. The TTC infrastructure is about 20 years behind translink, their token machines (yes they still use tokens) dont even take debit or credit... neither do their manned kiosks. In fact there is only one place in the entire system that takes debit or credit which is Union station.

Dont even get me started on the piss poor TTC infrastrucutre, I could go on for hours. You guys dont know how good you have it with translink.

SF Muni uses paper transfer too, and I just got one a week ago. Even though the underground portion have fare gates, they have staff at each station to manually open the gate for you if you uses a paper transfer from buses...

[mr.x]

Ideally, the station should have been called "Robson" or "West Georgia" or "Robson-West Georgia".

Perhaps they were trying to replicate "Central Station" in Hong Kong (where the CBD is...IFC, HQ's, HSBC, Government House, etc.)?

[Yume-sama]

I think the name is good. City Centre describes where you are going quite well. As does Waterfront. And Yaletown. And Olympic Village.

Let there be no confusion by throwing in the name of roads, etc.

[Zassk]

The VCC name was requested by the City of Vancouver, was it not? I believe CoV was allowed to propose the names of their stations, and it was by their choice that VCC, Olympic Village and City Hall were given those names. City of Richmond also altered several station names from the original proposals (i.e. Brighouse and Aberdeen).

[red-paladin]

I sent this letter to Translink:

Hello,

I know that 33rd Ave, 57th Ave, YVR 3, and Capstan way are potential station sites on the Canada Line. It is my understanding that Capstan and YVR 3 are planned to be constructed, while the Vancouver stations are possible but unlikely to be constructed in the foreseeable future. Is this correct?

I also wanted to ask if any potential station sites exist on the Expo and Millenium lines. I know that Woodlands, Grandview, and Boundary were talked about in the past. Is it still possible to build stations that those locations, however unlikely?

One final question. Are there any track segments on the Expo or Millennium line segments where an unplanned station could be constructed, such as along Stewardson Way in New West?



Here is the response I got:

Hello,

Line by line, on the Canada Line:

· Capstan Way station came very close to being constructed but it was contingent on a substantial contribution from the developer of an adjacent property and the economic downtown destroyed the economics of the project so it is not currently proceeding but is likely to come back.

· YVR3 was planned to support an expanded airport terminal - if the Airport Authority proceeds with that expansion, the station would proceed as well. The Airport Authority’s strategic plan may have more detail on it.

· 33rd and 57th Avenue stations would only be built with a large developer contribution, should future land use plans support developments of the necessary scale. 33rd would be a particular challenge given the adjacency to Queen Elizabeth Park.

On the Expo Line, the geometry allowed for future stations at: Clark Drive and Kingsway (E of Boundary Rd). These could still be built if desired.

The section along Stewardson Way has excessive gradients (1.4% and greater, when SkyTrain stations need to be on a 0.5% grade or less) as well as very few tangent (straight) track sections of sufficient length.

On the Millennium Line, the geometry only allows for a future station at Woodlands – most of the line has excessive gradients and curvatures between the original stations. Where flat and straight sections exist, they are often too close to existing stations to be of consideration (e.g, approx 500 m E of Commercial-Broadway station).

<end>

I always wondered about these things and since we talked about it, I thought it would be great to see what the official word is. The letters have some portions removed. The mention of Clark drive was very intriguing and news to me, although with VCC-Clark already built, there may never be a reason for it.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

There's no money and not a lot of political will for the UBC Extension, so why do you say that will happen first?

Because, despite South Fraser clamouring for options, a 6km SkyTrain extension wouldn't satisfy our demands anyway. Broadway has been the region's priority (after Evergreen) and will remain so. Considering the insane ridership the B-Line gets (and how little that can be done to speed up the buses), and that the corridor is the second busiest in the region, the political leadership and money will be found to make it a reality.

Realistically, anything other than SkyTrain would be an absurd waste of cash.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That being said, I think a strategy needs to be developed now for the new PMB. There will be a lot of people wanting to switch to transit rather than paying a toll.

That I doubt very much. Golden Ears tolls haven't caused a mass exodus onto the bus - the 595 gets terrible ridership despite decent frequencies and an express service routing.

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

I sent this letter to Translink:

Hello,

I know that 33rd Ave, 57th Ave, YVR 3, and Capstan way are potential station sites on the Canada Line. It is my understanding that Capstan and YVR 3 are planned to be constructed, while the Vancouver stations are possible but unlikely to be constructed in the foreseeable future. Is this correct?

I also wanted to ask if any potential station sites exist on the Expo and Millenium lines. I know that Woodlands, Grandview, and Boundary were talked about in the past. Is it still possible to build stations that those locations, however unlikely?

One final question. Are there any track segments on the Expo or Millennium line segments where an unplanned station could be constructed, such as along Stewardson Way in New West?



Here is the response I got:

Hello,

Line by line, on the Canada Line:

· Capstan Way station came very close to being constructed but it was contingent on a substantial contribution from the developer of an adjacent property and the economic downtown destroyed the economics of the project so it is not currently proceeding but is likely to come back.

· YVR3 was planned to support an expanded airport terminal - if the Airport Authority proceeds with that expansion, the station would proceed as well. The Airport Authority’s strategic plan may have more detail on it.

· 33rd and 57th Avenue stations would only be built with a large developer contribution, should future land use plans support developments of the necessary scale. 33rd would be a particular challenge given the adjacency to Queen Elizabeth Park.

On the Expo Line, the geometry allowed for future stations at: Clark Drive and Kingsway (E of Boundary Rd). These could still be built if desired.

The section along Stewardson Way has excessive gradients (1.4% and greater, when SkyTrain stations need to be on a 0.5% grade or less) as well as very few tangent (straight) track sections of sufficient length.

On the Millennium Line, the geometry only allows for a future station at Woodlands – most of the line has excessive gradients and curvatures between the original stations. Where flat and straight sections exist, they are often too close to existing stations to be of consideration (e.g, approx 500 m E of Commercial-Broadway station).

<end>

I always wondered about these things and since we talked about it, I thought it would be great to see what the official word is. The letters have some portions removed. The mention of Clark drive was very intriguing and news to me, although with VCC-Clark already built, there may never be a reason for it.

interesting about Clark.....but there is a lot of straight track there so I see where it could be. I think much better use of the $$ would be to connect the E and M line at that exact place.

[whatnext]

Watch your wallets at YVR. I notice in the Transit Police warning about Olympic pickpockets it was mentioned:

“We have had recent dealings with pick pocket groups attempting to work the new Canada Line in the airport area,” said Transit Police spokesperson Sgt. Tom Seaman. “Our plain-clothes unit was onto them pretty quickly and the incidents ceased.”
http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/News/local/2010/01/28/12655401.html

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

I sent this letter to Translink:

...
On the Expo Line, the geometry allowed for future stations at: Clark Drive and Kingsway (E of Boundary Rd). These could still be built if desired.

<end>

I always wondered about these things and since we talked about it, I thought it would be great to see what the official word is. The letters have some portions removed. The mention of Clark drive was very intriguing and news to me, although with VCC-Clark already built, there may never be a reason for it.

Cool - thanks for the info.

A second tranfer station at Clark (Expo)-VCC-Clark (M-Line) could alleviate congestion at Commercial Broadway if the walking distances are roughly the same (i.e. not like Tornoto's St.George vs. Spadina scenario). Although, if the flow is all one way, it may not do much as peple will get on at the "earlier" station.

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

interesting about Clark.....but there is a lot of straight track there so I see where it could be. I think much better use of the $$ would be to connect the E and M line at that exact place.

I'd like to see a link between the two tracks as part of the Evergreen Line, so Evergreen Line trains could go to Waterfront and M-line trains could go to VCC. It would really help reduce the load on Commercial-Broadway.

[Kwik-E-Mart]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

I'd like to see a link between the two tracks as part of the Evergreen Line, so Evergreen Line trains could go to Waterfront and M-line trains could go to VCC. It would really help reduce the load on Commercial-Broadway.

Hmm... wouldn't it defeat the purpose of WCE?

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by Kwik-E-Mart

Hmm... wouldn't it defeat the purpose of WCE?

Not really, the WCE also serves PoCo, Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge, and Mission, so it wouldn't be totally redundant. Running Evergreen Line trains to Waterfront would give everyone between Commercial and Lougheed the option of a one-seat trip to downtown, hence the reduced strain on Commercial-Broadway.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

I'd like to see a link between the two tracks as part of the Evergreen Line, so Evergreen Line trains could go to Waterfront and M-line trains could go to VCC. It would really help reduce the load on Commercial-Broadway.

They won't do that because it would reduce the capacity of the Expo Line between Broadway & Commercial and Waterfront since a portion of the trains would branch off to the M-Line (meaning fewer trains would run the Expo Line to Metrotown and beyond). They can maintain higher throughputs by keeping the lines separate.

See Page 54 of this "Beyond the B-Line" document - which says that a merge could be in place for 20 years before capacity constraints would occur.

http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/transport/rto/ubcline/pdf/beyondthebline.pdf

Note that the decision not to connect the two lines was also partly based on the assumption that the M-Line would be extended to meet the RAV Line in the 5-10 year timeframe (from M-Line completion), which hasn't happened. It seems that it would be too late now to build it (the solution being to build out west and - uhhhh - adding transfers to the Canada Line).

[The_Henry_Man]

Originally Posted by Zassk

The VCC name was requested by the City of Vancouver, was it not? I believe CoV was allowed to propose the names of their stations, and it was by their choice that VCC, Olympic Village and City Hall were given those names. City of Richmond also altered several station names from the original proposals (i.e. Brighouse and Aberdeen).

But the names of the stations that COR proposed and eventually accepted were much much better than the ones by COV.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Zassk

The VCC name was requested by the City of Vancouver, was it not? I believe CoV was allowed to propose the names of their stations, and it was by their choice that VCC, Olympic Village and City Hall were given those names. City of Richmond also altered several station names from the original proposals (i.e. Brighouse and Aberdeen).

I'm still hearing confusion from tourists confusing Bridgeport with Brighouse, and some mashing them up as Bridge-House and Brig-Port.

Was it really that hard to find two station names in Richmond on the same new Skytrain line that didn't have such similar-sounding names? It's especially confusing for people whose first language isn't english.

Was "Richmond City Centre" or "Minoru Park" worse than Brighouse? At least they wouldn't be confused with Bridgeport.

[The_Henry_Man]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I'm still hearing confusion from tourists confusing Bridgeport with Brighouse, and some mashing them up as Bridge-House and Brig-Port.

Was it really that hard to find two station names in Richmond on the same new Skytrain line that didn't have such similar-sounding names? It's especially confusing for people whose first language isn't english.

Was "Richmond City Centre" or "Minoru Park" worse than Brighouse? At least they wouldn't be confused with Bridgeport.

Minoru Park is too distant from the station (much closer to Gilbert) and is not avisible landmark from the station. I don't like the name "Richmond City Centre" because of the same reasons as I stated above for "Van City Centre".

[trofirhen]

If "VANCOUVER CITY CENTRE" station is going to retain that name, as seems probable, then it would be a very good investment to improve access to the Expo and Millenium Lines.

Just being a "city centre" seems to imply that it's a crossroads, an epicentre, and that the other transit lines should always be accessible from there during operating hours.