Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Sheba]

The people I talked to said the Expo / Millennium lines weren't closed until about 15 mins *after* the earthquake. I don't know when the trains stopped. There were in-train announcements but not system wide in-station announcements.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by dpogue

It sounded to me like there isn't a documented earthquake plan. Control operators were told that they needed to stop all trains and to direct field staff to evacuate passengers and close stations. Nobody seemed to know what the plan was beyond that. The control supervisor called the VP of maintenance, who said they should be able to resume service after doing a full sweep of the guideway to check for damage.

I'm curious about Canada Line since they didn't appear to do anything in response to the earthquake.

Presumably Protrans BC has different protocols than BCRTC

[Waders]

Originally Posted by dpogue

I'm curious about Canada Line since they didn't appear to do anything in response to the earthquake.

The Canada Line — which connects Vancouver to the Vancouver International Airport (YVR) — was not affected as it is a newer system with more advanced seismic building codes.

Source

For Expo Line, news report mentioned Translink were concerned about the "Demo" section built for the Expo 86 using older seismic building codes.

[MIPS]

You mean the Terminal Avenue Prebuild. It's the only portion of the line that had to be retrofitted before the MK II could be used but otherwise the columns are each anchored by a half dozen pilings.

[Waders]

Not sure which portion of the guideway has seismic concern.
Follows is the original news article.
I wonder when Translink would do the seismic upgrade in order to withstand the 'Big' one.

The concern over SkyTrain safety revolves mainly around certain sections of the Expo Line’s guideway structures. Some sections of the guideway were completed in 1983 as part of a demonstration project, before the Expo Line opened in time for the 1986 World’s Fair – when seismic building codes were less advanced.

The Millennium Line is also affected by the shut down as its route also partially operates on Expo Line track.

The Canada Line is not affected due to its seismic resiliency.

[xd_1771]

Some statements from TransLink were that when the earthquake struck it actually triggered many of the track intrusion alarms (probably the ones on the Expo Line). Earthquake or not when you have that sort of thing going on then a line closure does have to take place.

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Some statements from TransLink were that when the earthquake struck it actually triggered many of the track intrusion alarms (probably the ones on the Expo Line). Earthquake or not when you have that sort of thing going on then a line closure does have to take place.

You probably do not want to know what kind of hell unleashes when we get a good snowfall.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by MIPS

You probably do not want to know what kind of hell unleashes when we get a good snowfall.

I know... I live near Edmonds Station and snow causes the alarms there to go off pretty much constantly. Not just major (for us) snow either - I think more than 1cm sets off the alarms. 29th Avenue Station is probably the same, due to them both being at ground level.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by MIPS

You probably do not want to know what kind of hell unleashes when we get a good snowfall.

from Twitter

[Sheba]

[jbrizzy]

I'm posting this over from the River District thread where the topic of bus service to the area came up...

Here's a map of the closest bus routes and their destinations, as well as most of the streets in the River District mapped out in white. The two bolder streets should be the more commercial ones.



The only one currently FTN is the 100.

A simple way to get FTN service through the area would be to reroute it like so:



But cutting off the Champlain section completely wouldn't be a great idea, so it could be an alternating service. That would make that section not FTN however...

Now the 116 runs really close by and could possibly be integrated down some combination of streets. However, many of the streets that have been built in Phase 1 are definitely not bus-width so I would not be surprised if most of the streets in the project will not be able to handle bus traffic.

But, forgetting that, the route could be slightly extended like this:



While this would provide access to Metrotown, it isn't currently FTN, and isn't likely to become FTN IMO given the extended route through the Big Bend office area. So while I don't think it would be the backbone of transit in the area, it would be an easy enough change for Translink to make with decent benefit.

Now, the 26 is a little trickier being a U shaped route and layout of the streets in the area. The bottom of the U is the closest to River District, and to connect from there requires a back and forth route down the hill, like this:



You could imagine that to be quite an inconvenience for someone trying to get from one side of the U to the other...

So instead, there could be an alternate service that is much more direct in accessing the River District area, like this:



The downside to this routing is that Kerr and Boundary have absolutely nothing on them for about 60% of the way down the hill, and splitting the routing would reduce service frequency. I do like it for the direct access of the hill to the Expo Line though.

----

While I'm not sure there's a better option for service along Marine and to the Canada Line than alternating the 100, I feel like the changes to the other routes will be more drastic. I think Translink would (and should) go for a complete reworking of the 26 and 116, and creation of a new route in the process, in order to provide direct access to Metrotown going eastbound and Joyce/29th going westbound from River District, and at the same time allow the existing 26 and 116 to be less circuitous in their routings.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by jbrizzy

I'm posting this over from the River District thread where the topic of bus service to the area came up...

Here's a map of the closest bus routes and their destinations, as well as most of the streets in the River District mapped out in white. The two bolder streets should be the more commercial ones.



The only one currently FTN is the 100.


While I'm not sure there's a better option for service along Marine and to the Canada Line than alternating the 100, I feel like the changes to the other routes will be more drastic. I think Translink would (and should) go for a complete reworking of the 26 and 116, and creation of a new route in the process, in order to provide direct access to Metrotown going eastbound and Joyce/29th going westbound from River District, and at the same time allow the existing 26 and 116 to be less circuitous in their routings.

You can try suggesting the route changes to TransLink but I wouldn't want you to hope for much. Here's their suggested change to the 49 and 26 routes: large image so url instead of an image link

Instead of following their Managing The Transit Network Primer (pdf) ideals, they seem to want to make a bunch of their routes even more convoluted than they are now. They've done nothing to straighten out the mess that is the bus routes in Burnaby - the overlap of the 116, C6 and C7 south of Metrotown being particularly obnoxious.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Sheba

...they seem to want to make a bunch of their routes even more convoluted than they are now.

This is a great example of what happens when you don't stick to a simple street grid. The Champlain area is pretty to look at, but it's a real nightmare to get around in.

[Bdawe]

I'm not sure I follow.

They're taking a crowded high frequency route and straitening it and convoluting and already convoluted less frequent route to get around the surprisingly strong political support for service to the strip mall.

It's a net improvement to your typical bus user in the area (who is on the 49).

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

I'm not sure I follow.

They're taking a crowded high frequency route and straitening it and convoluting and already convoluted less frequent route to get around the surprisingly strong political support for service to the strip mall.

It's a net improvement to your typical bus user in the area (who is on the 49).

The issue isn't with the 49 (I support straightening it too). It's with routes like the 26, which are a mess. Take a look at the bus maps outside of CoV and you'll mostly find:
1) a lot of north - south routes with few to no east - west routes (why a lot of people SoF drive instead of taking transit)
2) a rats nest of tangled indirect routes (look at the 116, C6 and C7 south of Metrotown to see a prime example)

TransLink likes to talk about efficient bus routes and a grid-like setup, but once you step outside of Vancouver that's pretty much non-existent.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Sheba

The issue isn't with the 49 (I support straightening it too). It's with routes like the 26, which are a mess. Take a look at the bus maps outside of CoV and you'll mostly find:
1) a lot of north - south routes with few to no east - west routes (why a lot of people SoF drive instead of taking transit)
2) a rats nest of tangled indirect routes (look at the 116, C6 and C7 south of Metrotown to see a prime example)

TransLink likes to talk about efficient bus routes and a grid-like setup, but once you step outside of Vancouver that's pretty much non-existent.

That's because there are no strong east or west anchors in the suburbs. Vancouver has UBC to the west and the Expo Line to the east. Neither Surrey nor Richmond, who probably have the best grids outside of Vancouver in the region, have anything like this. Richmond has Steveston to the west, but it's in a corner, and I guess there's Riverport and New Westminster to the east, but Riverport is also in a corner and New Westminster is too far. Neither of these have as much ridership potential as Vancouver's routes do. I don't know as much about Surrey, but there are definitely no obvious anchors there either. It is a challenge, and hopefully in the future there will be more east-west routes, but at the moment there just isn't the ridership to justify it. One of Richmond's only east-west routes had its frequency cut in half recently due to low ridership, so I wouldn't count on it anytime soon.

[TransitJack]

The River District does need some sort of incorporation to the local network, particularly an option to go North without transfer. I like your idea of bringing the 26 down. What about having the bus from 29th come down Kerr to river district and then going back up Champlain and connecting to its existing route back to Joyce, then having the bus from Joyce go down Boundary and up Champlain connecting to existing route back to 29th. Both sides of the existing "V" of Champlain Heights would still be served, and it could be a good argument to reinstate the hours for the 26 (density in RD).

Champlain Heights were build similarly to Fraserview's to the West -- Curved streets that follow the terrain. Pretty and calm, but much more difficult to serve with transit. Though like Westwood Plateau, its hard to just have a grid system on a steep hillside.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

That's because there are no strong east or west anchors in the suburbs.

You mean Richmond and Surrey themselves aren't anchors? It wasn't until the recent past that there was a route connecting the two. Before that you were looking at a 2 - 3 hour trip each way. Go figure people drive instead.

Originally Posted by TransitJack

The River District does need some sort of incorporation to the local network, particularly an option to go North without transfer.

Hmmm, I'm having flashbacks to "the 'burbs" (mostly Surrey) getting blasted for building car dependant housing developments that aren't served by transit - and then Vancouver does the same thing...

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Though like Westwood Plateau, its hard to just have a grid system on a steep hillside.

I disagree. There are plenty of sections of the south slope east and west of Champlain that are just as steep (Patterson, Royal Oak) where the streets are still in a grid pattern. The grid is less complete in Burnaby because they didn't pave over the creeks to the same extent that Vancouver did, but most streets are still essentially straight and oriented east/west or north-south.

Champlain was designed as it was because it's a relatively new addition to Vancouver that was built during the "suburbia" craze where grids were seen as boring. Boring they may be, but far easier to service with decent transit.

[Migrant_Coconut]

They could try crossing over the 116 and 26 so that the 116 runs Joyce>49th>Boundary>River District>Edmonds and the 26 runs 26th>Kerr>River District>Marine Way>Metrotown, but somebody probably thought of it and rejected it for some reason or another.