The next GVRD rapid transit line? - Page 7

bugsy · #**121** Posted **Jan 27, 2008, 11:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DubbleD

Network map:

OH SHI-
Now that's what I call a real rail network!

DubbleD · #**122** Posted **Jan 27, 2008, 10:33 PM**

Well, if you want people to get out of their cars . . .
And if you're looking to encourage density . . .

bugsy · #**123** Posted **Mar 2, 2008, 9:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

I have a rather simplistic idea. What if we simply asked (and subsidize if necessary) a private, FOR-PROFIT company to contract the owners of the existing railways in Vancouver to run ELECTRIFIED (overhead lines, not 3rd rail) commuter trains on all of them? Not Bombardier's peices of 🞵🞵🞵🞵 built by stolen taxdollars of course, Kawasaki Heavy Industries (manufacturer of JR trains, Shinkansen, New York City Subway) comes to mind.

By that I mean not trampling of property rights by "zoning bylaws", pandering to socialist labor union hacks with their BIG GOVERNMENT MUST RUN EVERYHTING mindset, and stomping out NIMBYism and the anti-development luddites the Significant Projects Streamlining Act.

Now you suddenly have a Japan quality railway system serving ALL of Vancouver! If such a huge system existed, I would bet most people would never drive to work again.

jlousa · #**124** Posted **Mar 3, 2008, 3:24 AM**

Most of those rail lines are used quite heavily, and the rail companies would be very hesitant on renting them out as you put yourself in a bind if you need to expand and you've leased out your extra capacity. Some of the lines could probably be used though.

cornholio · #**125** Posted **Mar 3, 2008, 5:24 PM**

^yes like you said most of those lines are not only used heavily but are congested. Also freight traffic and commuter rail dont mix, these freight trains are slow, long and often need to use the tracks as holding space to stop and wait for the congested lines and yards to make room for them. If you want anything more then infrequent peak hour rail service like the WCE then you need to build dedicated commuter rail, or at the very least double our rail infrastructure and build more rail yards.

bugsy · #**126** Posted **Mar 6, 2008, 6:46 AM**

Unfortunate. Is there no hope for commuter rail in Vancouver? And by that I don't mean light rail's glorified street cars.

Henbo · #**127** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 12:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by officedweller

Guess its time to haul out the old Province newspaper articles again - dating from 1990. So remember that these
PREDATE Translink, the LRSP, the Westcoast Express and the M-Line.

I wonder what ever happened to that study on bringing Skytrain to North Vancouver?

spm2013 · #**128** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 1:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henbo

I wonder what ever happened to that study on bringing Skytrain to North Vancouver?

No idea, but here's some other tunnel ideas for the North Shore.

http://www.6717000.com/blog/2002/02/tunnel-plan-keeps-resurfacing/

Will it ever happen? Not anytime soon, but maybe if there's ever round the clock gridlock. Or they'll just toll the Lion's Gate.

spm2013 · #**129** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 1:36 AM**

Some more on the North Shore rapid transit proposal (but this is in the 1970s):

http://voony.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/the-case-for-rapid-transit-in-1970/

If they ever do build a tunnel, I hope its for rapid transit and not cars.

aberdeen5698 · #**130** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 1:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henbo

I wonder what ever happened to that study on bringing Skytrain to North Vancouver?

It died when the question of how to deal with the aging Lion's Gate Bridge was decided.

Klazu · #**131** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 2:12 AM**

For viewing convenience. I don't see the point of the 2002 proposal. Also all those proposals with tunnel head in the open water would have looked horrible.

http://www.6717000.com/blog/2002/02/tunnel-plan-keeps-resurfacing/

Tetsuo · #**132** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 4:29 AM**

Woah Boundary Road Skytrain line, interesting.

I'd imagine that it would have very likely happened if the WEM developers had their way in developing their super mall in the Boundary area near Lougheed.

trofirhen · #**133** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 6:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henbo

I wonder what ever happened to that study on bringing Skytrain to North Vancouver?

Wasn't it deemed as simply too complex and costly, engineering-wise? (at least for a mid-harbour crossing)...... too deep, etc etc

WarrenC12 · #**134** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 3:16 PM**

I think Transit is the only way to go. Would a branch off the Canada Line, say around City Centre, be reasonable? I've heard that's it's impossible to extend the line at Waterfront, is that due to elevation?

Zassk · #**135** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 5:14 PM**

By far the easiest and cheapest way to get a SkyTrain line across Burrard Inlet would be to build it under the car deck on the Second Narrows Bridge. There is space in the superstructure for it, and I'm sure the bridge could handle the weight (since there is a design out there to double the car deck's width, which would surely weigh more). But this would not be the direct link to downtown Vancouver that most people on the North Shore are probably looking for. The total travel time from Lonsdale to Waterfront would probably be equal to the existing SeaBus ride.

officedweller · #**136** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 9:14 PM**

That 1990 study used Second Narrows, because the destinations of North Shore commuters were more diverse than Downtown Vancouver.

djmk · #**137** Posted **Apr 11, 2014, 10:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zassk

By far the easiest and cheapest way to get a SkyTrain line across Burrard Inlet would be to build it under the car deck on the Second Narrows Bridge. There is space in the superstructure for it, and I'm sure the bridge could handle the weight (since there is a design out there to double the car deck's width, which would surely weigh more). But this would not be the direct link to downtown Vancouver that most people on the North Shore are probably looking for. The total travel time from Lonsdale to Waterfront would probably be equal to the existing SeaBus ride.

No, it's not a direct to downtown. However, a stop on Hastings for the 135 or kootney loop would make a big difference.

Also, I'm sure capilano uni is a big draw by itself to warrant a station. Possibly even that Superstore.

trofirhen · #**138** Posted **Apr 12, 2014, 12:17 AM**

Somewhere at an already-exisiting transit node / poplation hube seems the most logical to me, and for me that's around the foot of Lonsdale.
However, alas, that seems unfeasible - at least with the Canada Line.
Extending the Expo Line east, parallel to the shore, descending it into a deep tunnel, then curving the tunnel across the inlet and back westward to the the foot of Lonsdale might be a way to go, depending on harbor depth and geology.
(pie in the sky, no doubt)

Bcasey25raptor · #**139** Posted **Apr 12, 2014, 12:39 AM**

Most definitely the broadway corridor.

trofirhen · #**140** Posted **Apr 12, 2014, 2:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

Most definitely the broadway corridor.

Yeah, you got that right !!!! (don't know how I drifted into the North Shore future crossing ....)
But you're right on about that being the next phase ASAP ! The east-west "backbone has to be top priority
(although a North Shore link may happen,
I think it's decades away, unless similar funding for the quasi-absurd Sunshine Coast bridge tunnel can be found.)....
....(strange how some project ideas get funding and not others, but I'll leave that to the SSP finance people to explain that one

)