Arbutus: Greenway & Future Streetcar | Proposed

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by Axe

The guy i talked to said this is false. Bridge will be repaired.
They wouldn't abandon it, they would try to sell Marpole spur to Southern rail

Don't see how they are going to repair it without building a whole new span. They are even removing the approaches.

They already tried to sell the spur to SRY Rail in 2011.

[GlassCity]

City of Vancouver video flying through the corridor.

• Video Link

All I can see when I look at it is how much sense it would make as a cut and cover tunnel with a greenway on top. One can dream.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

City of Vancouver video flying through the corridor.

• Video Link

All I can see when I look at it is how much sense it would make as a cut and cover tunnel with a greenway on top. One can dream.

Vancouver is a passively progressive city as opposed to an actively progressive one. To the city of Vancouver, being "progressive" involves preventing development and change, even if it means a lack of projects relating to sustainability. It would appear that blocking non sustainable development is more important to the city than putting forward proposals for possible alternatives. It's really not all that surprising when you consider that inflated real estate prices mean city politics are dominated by West End NIMBY's.

If the city is serious about being progressive it should be ambitious, and actively shape its own destiny as a sustainable city by going ahead with big projects. As you say, Arbutus could be a very effective transit and cycling corridor if a cut and cover tunnel was put in, and covered with a greenway. Alas the city of Vancouver would never do anything that ambitious.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

Vancouver is a passively progressive city as opposed to an actively progressive one. To the city of Vancouver, being "progressive" involves preventing development and change, even if it means a lack of projects relating to sustainability. It would appear that blocking non sustainable development is more important to the city than putting forward proposals for possible alternatives. It's really not all that surprising when you consider that inflated real estate prices mean city politics are dominated by West End NIMBY's.

If the city is serious about being progressive it should be ambitious, and actively shape its own destiny as a sustainable city by going ahead with big projects. As you say, Arbutus could be a very effective transit and cycling corridor if a cut and cover tunnel was put in, and covered with a greenway. Alas the city of Vancouver would never do anything that ambitious.

Sadly, that is so true
And all the more ironic, the city likes to think of itself as "avant garde," which it is not.

[mcminsen]

I spent the afternoon today with my other half walking the Arbutus corridor going north between 41st Ave. in Kerrisdale to King Edward Boulevard with a stop at Quilchena Park to sit on a bench and admire the view. We've done it several times now and plan to take some friends from New York to see it this summer. It's a nice place to go that lets you see a local neighbourhood and avoid the tourist crowds. The scenery from some vantage points out to Howe Sound/English Bay is amazing.



April 17 '16, my pics

[officedweller]

I'm sure the owners of this house will be ecstatic about a greenway path outside their window:

Originally Posted by mcminsen

April 17 '16, my pics

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

City of Vancouver video flying through the corridor.

All I can see when I look at it is how much sense it would make as a cut and cover tunnel with a greenway on top. One can dream.

The Arbutus ROW width ranges between 15 and 20 metres. That's plenty of width for ground level streetcar and multiuse path. 2 tracks, overhead wires, and 2m buffers/stations on each side of the tracks leaves room for a 4.5m wide path in the 15m wide sections.

There's no reason so spend $200 million/km for a subway when you could do it for under $50 million/km as streetcar.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

The Arbutus ROW width ranges between 15 and 20 metres. That's plenty of width for ground level streetcar and multiuse path. 2 tracks, overhead wires, and 2m buffers/stations on each side of the tracks leaves room for a 4.5m wide path in the 15m wide sections.

There's no reason so spend $200 million/km for a subway when you could do it for under $50 million/km as streetcar.

I simply don't believe in at-grade rapid transit, especially on rails. Accidents can shut down the line, and you affect both vehicle traffic as well as the rail line's speed and efficiency. Grade-separated metro or bust. The Canada Line can't be the only true north-south rapid transit line in the city forever. Eventually, you'll need others to help it out, and this seems like a great candidate.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I simply don't believe in at-grade rapid transit, especially on rails. Accidents can shut down the line, and you affect both vehicle traffic as well as the rail line's speed and efficiency. Grade-separated metro or bust. The Canada Line can't be the only true north-south rapid transit line in the city forever. Eventually, you'll need others to help it out, and this seems like a great candidate.

I guess when you really like hammers, every problem looks like a nail.

There are different tools for different jobs. I don't think the Arbutus corridor serving the residents of Kerrisdale and the West Side requires the same level of on time reliability and speed advantages as a major trunk line carrying tens of thousands of people from far flung cities and town centers.

Would you rather have light rail transit within 10 years, or wait 30+ years for a subway? The area is in a state where they can really benefit from an increase in transit, but wouldn't really benefit from the hundreds of millions in additional spending.

There are plenty of roads that can be dug up for buried transit in the future and tunnel boring machines can do amazing work, but this is one of the only ROW in all of metro Vancouver that gives you the opportunity to build at grade rail incredibly cheaply while keeping it very segregated from traffic.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I simply don't believe in at-grade rapid transit, especially on rails. Accidents can shut down the line, and you affect both vehicle traffic as well as the rail line's speed and efficiency. Grade-separated metro or bust. The Canada Line can't be the only true north-south rapid transit line in the city forever. Eventually, you'll need others to help it out, and this seems like a great candidate.

The Corridor practically is grade-separated. Only ten intersections, and it should be relatively inexpensive to build and maintain ten overpasses, short tunnels and/or level crossings. The one advantage of light rail is that you can build it over and under and at ground-level. Case in point - and since the Corridor is separate from the main road, trains could reach Skytrain speeds on the straight stretches.

I'm usually pro-Skytrain, but the Canada Line and (upcoming) Millennium extension already provide the frequency in the area, down the busy corridors. Not much demand for a second north-south Skytrain so close to the existing one, not when it could service its own area down Dunbar or Willingdon.

I'm seeing the Arbutus Line as semi-rapid transit to provide coverage; no need to wait 20 minutes for the bus and spend another 10 riding to the Canada Line, when you can just wait 5-10 for the LRT. And it makes the Downtown/False Creek tourists happy.

[swimmer_spe]

It is less than 4 km from the Canada line.

I cannot see that being built as mass transit unless every house in the area is torn down and condos are put up.

We know that likely wont happen either.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

It is less than 4 km from the Canada line.

I cannot see that being built as mass transit unless every house in the area is torn down and condos are put up.

We know that likely wont happen either.

Have you never been to Kerrisdale or perused this forum to see what's happening at places like Arbutus Ridge? There is easily just as much, if not more density today along Arbutus than there was along Cambie prior to the Canada Line.

Besides, since when has transit expansion come only after density in this city? Streetcars are a major factor in encouraging TOD.

The 016 is a very busy bus, and the area can't support much more density without expanding transportation capacity. And at the price properties are at now, without the capacity, you will probably be more likely to see properties in the area amalgamate into mansions instead of subdivide into Stratas. Who would want to pay all that money to move someplace they can't "live"?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Have you never been to Kerrisdale or perused this forum to see what's happening at places like Arbutus Ridge? There is easily just as much, if not more density today along Arbutus than there was along Cambie prior to the Canada Line.

Besides, since when has transit expansion come only after density in this city? Streetcars are a major factor in encouraging TOD.

The 016 is a very busy bus, and the area can't support much more density without expanding transportation capacity. And at the price properties are at now, without the capacity, you will probably be more likely to see properties in the area amalgamate into mansions instead of subdivide into Stratas. Who would want to pay all that money to move someplace they can't "live"?

Lets be realistic for a moment.

In the next 5-20 years, Broadway to UBC and Surrey lines will be built. Arbutus will not see transit on it until after that.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Lets be realistic for a moment.

In the next 5-20 years, Broadway to UBC and Surrey lines will be built. Arbutus will not see transit on it until after that.

I'm not saying those projects shouldn't be done. But by building at grade on an existing rail ROW, you can build a rapid transit line for a fraction of the cost of those other projects.

Lets be even more realistic for a moment. Vancouver cannot support the housing market as it is progressing at the moment. They either need to encourage densification of these multi million dollar properties or sit idly by while the empty homes are treated as investment commodities by foreign investors until the market crashes and we are beyond recovering.

Investment in rapid transit in Surrey is to encourage densification in suburban, sprawlling areas; to encourage things other than detached homes from being built. The same should be done inside the CoV, but it can be done on a much smaller scale as the lines don't need to be as fast as those to the suburbs because people have much shorter distances to travel in the city.

[MIPS]

I'm just hoping that in the future the next person in City Hall will have the nerve to piss on Vision's grave and repurpose it back for rail. Such a corrupt waste to turn it into a greenway.
I also hope that this idea that densification on the West end will die as well. Unlike some people not everyone likes living like sardines in buildings they don't own.

It's like how the East Side used forced Urban Renewal 50 years ago in an attempt to clean the area up.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Would you rather have light rail transit within 10 years, or wait 30+ years for a subway?

Originally Posted by BCPhil

I'm not saying those projects shouldn't be done. But by building at grade on an existing rail ROW, you can build a rapid transit line for a fraction of the cost of those other projects.

This is an argument that pro-streetcar/LRT people use all the time, and it makes their argument even less endearing. It's like saying "it will take 30 years to build one large school, let's just build portable classrooms in the parks which are closer until there are no more parks" just because that space is there, doesn't mean it has to be used today before there is a demand use for it.

I'd rather wait for the Subway and have it built right rather than cut off the entire , West Side, Kerrisdale, Point grey and Kitsilano neighbourhoods with Streetcar/LRT trains that cause traffic accidents.

It might be overly optimistic to have all of Metro Vancouver's rapid transit built within 60 years when other cities like NYC and London have had 114 and 153 years respectively to build out their systems.

[logan5]

Using Translink's Surrey Rapid Transit study as a guide, a true BRT route along Arbutus could be had for 22.5 million/km x 11km (70th Ave. to Waterfront) = 247 million. A very low cost for a service that would run as fast as the Canada Line (note that Calgary's LRT runs at the same average speed as the CL).

A BRT system will never need upgrading to LRT as autonomous technology will give BRT heavy rail like capacity.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Kisai

This is an argument that pro-streetcar/LRT people use all the time, and it makes their argument even less endearing. It's like saying "it will take 30 years to build one large school, let's just build portable classrooms in the parks which are closer until there are no more parks" just because that space is there, doesn't mean it has to be used today before there is a demand use for it.

I'd rather wait for the Subway and have it built right rather than cut off the entire , West Side, Kerrisdale, Point grey and Kitsilano neighbourhoods with Streetcar/LRT trains that cause traffic accidents.

It might be overly optimistic to have all of Metro Vancouver's rapid transit built within 60 years when other cities like NYC and London have had 114 and 153 years respectively to build out their systems.

It's not just about building it just because the right of way is there, it's about obvious land use planning. The opportunity to build transit oriented development so close to the core is golden. Even a BRT route would trigger TOD's.

We should have plan in place for Arbutus like we do for Cambie.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by logan5

It's not just about building it just because the right of way is there, it's about obvious land use planning. The opportunity to build transit oriented development so close to the core is golden. Even a BRT route would trigger TOD's.

We should have plan in place for Arbutus like we do for Cambie.

We should have a plan in place but we are talking about 20-30 years from now since we have a plethora of other projects to address. We are hoping that future governments, planners and citizens will see the same vision. My hope is that the current generation that were vocal against any rapid transit line going down that corridor will be gone by the time any decision is made regarding the Arbutus Corridor.

Fortunately we have made good use of abandoned ROW's in Metro Van. We were fortunate that the BCER's old ROW wasn't abandoned sooner in the 70's or else we wouldn't have an Expo Line.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Kisai

This is an argument that pro-streetcar/LRT people use all the time, and it makes their argument even less endearing. It's like saying "it will take 30 years to build one large school, let's just build portable classrooms in the parks which are closer until there are no more parks" just because that space is there, doesn't mean it has to be used today before there is a demand use for it.

There is a demand for Arbutus Light Rail. Even more once the Broadway extension gets built.
On the other hand, Arbutus Skytrain would be redundant. It's only 4km from the Canada Line, as swimmer keeps pointing out; resources for such a Skytrain line would be better spent down 41st or Willingdon. Like I've said before, the Millennium and Canada Lines already provide rapid transit frequency for the West Side; what this area needs is semi-rapid transit coverage.

I'd rather wait for the Subway and have it built right rather than cut off the entire , West Side, Kerrisdale, Point grey and Kitsilano neighbourhoods with Streetcar/LRT trains that cause traffic accidents.

I'm guessing that some forumites haven't actually walked along or even seen the railway:



This is the configuration for nearly the entire stretch, completely grade-separated from road traffic. There's a total of 10 intersections along 11 klicks of track; 10 level crossings (with car barriers), overpasses and/or short tunnels is pretty inexpensive compared to one big, 11 km tunnel. We're not talking about the same straight-down-the-middle plan for Broadway; if built right, there's practically no chance of an N-sticker Corolla turning left into an oncoming train.