Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[xd_1771]

Yeah the Alex Fraser was shutdown from 1PM until 5 or so and as you can expect it wreaked havoc on the 340, 301 and other nearby routes which most likely also included the 410, 319, and other New West routes operating out of HTC. From what I could see on Google Maps' traffic display from my office, it was basically carmageddon: Highway 99 backed up over the OSB from 70th, 91 backed up to I think halfway to No 6 Rd, Scott backed up northbound past nordel, KGB backed up right through City Centre, congestion on the PMB and in Guildford, 108/104/100 Aves EB all congested approaching 152nd St and even 96 Ave was getting heavy. I really feel for all the transit commuters dealing with the cold day and the waiting... the great news was that SkyTrain was working pretty well throughout all this so anyone with forethought could have found some other route going over the Fraser.

[SpongeG]

It's weird cause i don't ever recall the alex fraser being closed before when we have had this kind of weather.

[ssiguy]

Toronto's Metrolinx has being buying up rail from CP& CN for the introduction of RER and now owns 80% of all GO commuter track up from 6% 16 years ago. Is this an option for the WCE corridor?

[nname]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Toronto's Metrolinx has being buying up rail from CP& CN for the introduction of RER and now owns 80% of all GO commuter track up from 6% 16 years ago. Is this an option for the WCE corridor?

It's pretty much the only tracks to the port... So I doubt they're willing to sell...

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Toronto's Metrolinx has being buying up rail from CP& CN for the introduction of RER and now owns 80% of all GO commuter track up from 6% 16 years ago. Is this an option for the WCE corridor?

No.

GO benefits from a number of things that make what they do possible that don't really work in Vancouver

Firstly, in the 1960s the Federal Government built a new CN Mainline around Toronto, away from the old Grand Trunk along the Lake shore and through Union Station, routing all through freight around Toronto and opening up a large swath of downtown land for development. This also reduced traffic on CN lines inside the new bypass line, which now only saw local freight. As carload freight has declined in importance and Toronto, this has made these lines more useful as passenger lines at the same time.

This cannot really be done in Vancouver, since the Vancouver waterfront originates significant amounts of containers and grain being loaded through the Port. While the CP Mainline isn't the only line serving the south shore of Burrard inlet, it is superior to the alternate CN/BNSF route from False Creek Flats, which is single tracked, has many grade crossings, a slow speed limit, and requires that all CP tracks be blocked by trains accessing the waterfront from False Creek.

Perhaps in the future technological or economic changes will render Vanterm and Centerm in Vancouver obsolete, and the line will be rendered available in a similar manner as the Caltrain line to San Francisco, but there's no evidence of that today.

Otherwise, GO and the Ontario Government have built their own tracks along side freight tracks in the right of way, some of which dates back to abortive preparations for GO-ALRT which were re-purposed for conventional GO Trains. Perhaps that could be done for WCE, but I don't know if it would be cost-effective to squeeze more tracks in.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by Waders

Eastbound West Coast Express delayed 80 hours over last 47 days, says TransLink


LRT? Skytrain?

It should be Skytrain. And if we are going to loose WCE in 8 years, then I think they should start planning the Skytrain extension as soon as possible. After all, why else would they have built those track switches and guideway at Coquitlam Central Station? I doubt they are there to be permanent eyesores forever...

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

It's weird cause i don't ever recall the alex fraser being closed before when we have had this kind of weather.

The Port Mann bridge raised the awareness of the ice bomb issue because some of its cables cross overhead of the road surface and so a pretty large number of motorists were hit during the first winter. They're supposed to have fixed the Port Mann by using scrapers that run along the cables, but there hasn't been a similar fix forthcoming for the Alex Fraser. That may be because the problem isn't as bad (none of the cables actually cross over the roadway), or because the solution used on the Port Mann can't be implemented on the Alex Fraser (the scrapers on the Port Mann have to be deployed from the gallery in the towers where the upper ends of the cables are anchored and the design of the Alex Fraser may preclude that).

My suspicion is that in light of the Port Mann problems they've realized that a big enough ice bomb falling at just the wrong time could actually kill someone. Once you've become aware of that possibility it becomes a pretty serious ethical issue to just ignore it.

The big question is whether they're working on some sort of remedial solution for the Alex Fraser, or whether the new policy is just going to be to close the bridge in marginal weather. I can't imagine that a bridge closure policy would be politically palatable if it were made known to the public.

[MIPS]

Worth pointing out it seemingly has never been a problem on the AFB. Even the Global news crew could not remember any time in the past 30 years in which this had happened.

[SpongeG]

they posted pictures the other day, i think they were from thursday, of crews prepping and clearing the bridge.

Crews prepare bridges for snow by Province of British Columbia, on Flickr

Crews prepare bridges for snow by Province of British Columbia, on Flickr

Bridge crews hard at work in anticipation of second snowfall by Province of British Columbia, on Flickr

Bridge crews hard at work in anticipation of second snowfall by Province of British Columbia, on Flickr

[Waders]

Transit Fare Review Phase 1 report is out.

According to the Buzzer blog,

Here are the top six priorities survey respondents want to see in a fare system:

1. Make fares lower for people who use transit frequently
2. Make fares lower for shorter distance trips
3. Provide more fare product options for different periods of time
4. More fare product options to make transit more affordable for families
5. Make it easier to understand and predict how much you’ll pay
6. Make fares lower for people with less ability to pay

Source

[Meraki]

Originally Posted by Waders

Transit Fare Review Phase 1 report is out.

According to the Buzzer blog,


Source

The only thing that made me raise an eyebrow was "Almost half of survey respondents said the 90-minute transfer window is not long enough."

Considering you have 2 hours to complete the trip (or longer if your last tap in is a bus) that just sounds like people wanting to get two stored value trips for the price of one.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Meraki

The only thing that made me raise an eyebrow was "Almost half of survey respondents said the 90-minute transfer window is not long enough."

Considering you have 2 hours to complete the trip (or longer if your last tap in is a bus) that just sounds like people wanting to get two stored value trips for the price of one.

I think this goes hand-in-hand with a lower minimum fare for short trips. I often have the opportunity to choose a 1-2 station ride for an errand, vs walking, or something else. I'd be much more likely to choose transit if I could do that trip for $2 round trip, for example.

[Sheba]

The TransLink Listens Dec newsletter goes into a little bit more detail. The top five most commonly selected priorities:

TransLink Listens Market Research Panel Survey

#1 Make fares lower for shorter distance trips

#2 Make fares lower for people with less ability to pay

#3 Make it easier to understand and predict how much you’ll pay

#4 Make fares lower at less busy times

#5 Provide more fare product options for different periods of time (e.g., 3-day, weekly)

Public Online Survey

#1 Make fares lower for people who use transit frequently

#2 Make fares lower for shorter distance trips

#3 Provide more fare product options for different periods of time (e.g., 3-day, weekly)

#4 Provide more fare product options to make transit more affordable for families to travel together

#5 Make it easy to understand and predict how much you’ll pay

In early 2017, we will launch Phase 2 of the Transit Fare Review using feedback from Phase 1 to help define and evaluate the options for varying fares by distance travelled, time of travel, and service type. We will also begin to map out the options for different types of products and passes, user discounts, and rules around connections (or transfers) between services.

We look forward to hearing your preferences to help us narrow down the range of options to a short-list for Phase 3 and a recommended approach in Phase 4.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Meraki

The only thing that made me raise an eyebrow was "Almost half of survey respondents said the 90-minute transfer window is not long enough."

Considering you have 2 hours to complete the trip (or longer if your last tap in is a bus) that just sounds like people wanting to get two stored value trips for the price of one.

There are certain trips when it really isn't long enough. For example, fairly regularly I have to go to a remote location in Langley from my remote location in Ladner. My last transfer falls outside of the 90 minute window, and I have to pay twice.

[Migrant_Coconut]

It's something to think about, at least - perhaps (for example) TransLink could raise one-zone fares to $3.75, but extend the window to 150 minutes.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

There are certain trips when it really isn't long enough. For example, fairly regularly I have to go to a remote location in Langley from my remote location in Ladner. My last transfer falls outside of the 90 minute window, and I have to pay twice.

if this is a regular trip, would a daypass or monthly pass work out to be cheaper than having to pay double on a trip (and double again on the way back) ?

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

It's something to think about, at least - perhaps (for example) TransLink could raise one-zone fares to $2.75, but extend the window to 150 minutes.

isn't the one-zone fare already $2.75?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

isn't the one-zone fare already $2.75?

Thanks, fixed.

[aberdeen5698]

I'd love them to simply eliminate the daypass and cap the maximum daily fare at the equivalent price. I used to keep a spare daypass in my wallet, since you can't buy them on the buses where I usually first access the transit system. But with Compass you have to load them onto your card and when you do they're the first thing that gets used whether you need them or not. Stupid system, IMHO.

[memememe76]

I agree. This is particularly true in bad weather. If it snowed really bad this week, I would take transit. But I take the bus first, so I have to get it online. But it doesn't upload to your card ASAP. But the weather hasn't been so bad this week, so I am stuck with using a day pass when I don't need to use it.