Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion - Page 880

GlassCity · #**17581** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 4:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

With how important Broadway is I'm amazed anyone would say that

In my few years on this forum, I have tried, but I'm not sure if I can truly outline how much I hate light rail.

I actually don't think Corrigan will make that big a difference, and I don't see the mayors all of a sudden scrapping both rapid transit projects and then doing them the right way in a bit. I'm just thinking out loud here, that if that was an option, I'd take it.

GlassCity · #**17582** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 4:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

With the entire poorly planned Surrey LRT fiasco and now the Broadway Subway potentially being delayed again due to mayoral stupidity, it goes to show that despite what many were claiming early maybe the mayors in general really don’t know what they are doing and should not be responsible for deciding our regional transit expansions.

Maybe this also shows that we should not give them similar powers in our highway system............ *cough GMB *cough

It's funny, because in Toronto/Ontario right now they're actually having talks about how local governments don't have enough power over their transportation.

It's complicated. I tend to think that senior governments are better at looking at projects rationally, as opposed to cities which see them as ways to build their image or attract capital rather than move people (*cough* Surrey *cough*). But at the same time, the US Interstate program decimated a bunch of inner city cores because the states controlled them and ignored local conditions. So it goes both ways.

s211 · #**17583** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 6:01 PM**

Reduced lanes on Broadway.

What the serious f*ck?

Xerx · #**17584** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 6:09 PM**

Good thing that mayor’s council votes are weighted by population.

Sheba · #**17585** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dcman72

After listing and reading this Globalnews - Burnaby’s Derek Corrigan named mayors’ council chair it seems to be that the other mayors didn't want the two cities that will receiving dollar billion projects also the ones heading up the council.

One sticking point seems to be the Broadway Subway project, if the engineers come back and say that it can be done above ground then they want Vancouver to pay the difference to make it a subway. Coquitlam had wanted the evergreen line to be partially a subway but that was reject and Coquitlam didn't have the money to cover the shortfall.

Votes are still weighted, eg Vancouver has the most votes, followed by Surrey and so on. Council elections are 1 mayor, 1 vote. Seems to me that the mayors are still moving forward with their 10 year plan, this isn't a revolt, they just don't want the ones in the leadership roles to be not the ones receiving the most benefits

I won't be surprised that behind closed doors the mayors knew this was coming. Linda Hepner didn't attempt re-election, and the District of North Vancouver Mayor Richard Walton got the vice chair position.

edit: The cynical person in me thinks that Corrigan will be viewed as fair and balanced as he didn't vote for the 10 year plan so he'll be able to sell it better than any other mayor.

The Mayors Plan already said Vancouver would be paying the difference to have the Broadway extension as a subway (vs elevated). That's not new news.

I have no doubt that this is about the two most populated areas (that are also getting mega projects) not being the ones in charge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's funny, because in Toronto/Ontario right now they're actually having talks about how local governments don't have enough power over their transportation.

It's complicated. I tend to think that senior governments are better at looking at projects rationally, as opposed to cities which see them as ways to build their image or attract capital rather than move people (*cough* Surrey *cough*). But at the same time, the US Interstate program decimated a bunch of inner city cores because the states controlled them and ignored local conditions. So it goes both ways.

I can remember before TransLink when it was Victoria doing transit planning. As much as we bash TransLink, local planning has made a big difference. We just need to find a balance between local and provincial.

trofirhen · #**17586** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 7:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xerx

Good thing that mayor’s council votes are weighted by population.

Please: How does that work (the mechanism) and how would cities vote?
Would the 'yes' side win; if so how? Any risk of downgrade to LRT?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlassCity

In my few years on this forum, I have tried, but I'm not sure if I can truly outline how much I hate light rail.

I actually don't think Corrigan will make that big a difference, and I don't see the mayors all of a sudden scrapping both rapid transit projects and then doing them the right way in a bit. I'm just thinking out loud here, that if that was an option, I'd take it.

Sign me up, please, as another light rail hater. All you have to do is think of Houston

and that'll do it! Otherwise, it's slow, pokey, and accident prone.

Migrant_Coconut · #**17587** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 8:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheba

I can remember before TransLink when it was Victoria doing transit planning. As much as we bash TransLink, local planning has made a big difference. We just need to find a balance between local and provincial.

That balance is why TransLink exists. Local planning would be "leave it all to the mayors," and then we'd have one LRT project every ten years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Sign me up, please, as another light rail hater. All you have to do is think of Houston

and that'll do it! Otherwise, it's slow, pokey, and accident prone.

Houston drivers' stupidity aside, LRT isn't that bad if you've got a dedicated off-road ROW like Arbutus.

Xerx · #**17588** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 9:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Please: How does that work (the mechanism) and how would cities vote?
Would the 'yes' side win; if so how? Any risk of downgrade to LRT?

Sign me up, please, as another light rail hater. All you have to do is think of Houston

and that'll do it! Otherwise, it's slow, pokey, and accident prone.

https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documen...cilRulesofProcedureAdoptedApril72017.pdf

Rules 12.2, 12.3, and 12.4 are of relevance, seems like most investment decisions are done by weighted vote. So Vancouver and Surrey would still be the most powerful voting bloc. Corrigan got elected based on one vote per council member.

dpogue · #**17589** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 10:29 PM**

I wish their Board Meeting agenda still contained a status report on the McNeil upgrades for SkyTrain. It's been almost a year since we had a comprehensive status update on that...

Relatedly, does anyone happen to be able to access the document for the SkyTrain Customer and Operations Telecommunications (SCOT) upgrades? FOI requests are so slow and I have to ask for specific documents instead of just getting all the docs for the project. I wish they would have just kept posting them publicly as PDF files on translink.ca

Sheba · #**17590** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 10:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpogue

I wish their Board Meeting agenda still contained a status report on the McNeil upgrades for SkyTrain. It's been almost a year since we had a comprehensive status update on that...

Relatedly, does anyone happen to be able to access the document for the SkyTrain Customer and Operations Telecommunications (SCOT) upgrades? FOI requests are so slow and I have to ask for specific documents instead of just getting all the docs for the project. I wish they would have just kept posting them publicly as PDF files on translink.ca

Have you tried e-mailing the Buzzer Blog staff about it?

Sheba · #**17591** Posted **Dec 9, 2017, 10:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Houston drivers' stupidity aside, LRT isn't that bad if you've got a dedicated off-road ROW like Arbutus.

On-ground rail (LRT, Commuter rail, etc) could work SoF along highways that don't have development right next to it (aka all but Fraser Hwy). Trying to fit it in down the middle of the road isn't the right place for it - that's when we hear about constant accidents.

Reecemartin · #**17592** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 4:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheba

On-ground rail (LRT, Commuter rail, etc) could work SoF along highways that don't have development right next to it (aka all but Fraser Hwy). Trying to fit it in down the middle of the road isn't the right place for it - that's when we hear about constant accidents.

Hearing about constant accidents is usually just from SkyTrain for Surrey and Anti LRT people. I've lived in Toronto years and not hear of a serious accident between a car and a streetcar.

Reecemartin · #**17593** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 4:11 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s211

Reduced lanes on Broadway.

What the serious f*ck?

I would respond the same way to your post, how do you think they build a subway? Just magically will it into existence? No they need to use construction equipment etc.

Migrant_Coconut · #**17594** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 6:27 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Hearing about constant accidents is usually just from SkyTrain for Surrey and Anti LRT people. I've lived in Toronto years and not hear of a serious accident between a car and a streetcar.

No offence intended, but how much local news do you read? A simple Google search for "toronto car streetcar collision" reveals a fatal one literally two months ago.

Reecemartin · #**17595** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 4:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

No offence intended, but how much local news do you read? A simple Google search for "toronto car streetcar collision" reveals a fatal one literally two months ago.

I should have specified I'm mostly talking about routes such as 510 and 512 that run in their own lanes. King Street just recently also got new priorities.

Sheba · #**17596** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 6:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I should have specified I'm mostly talking about routes such as 510 and 512 that run in their own lanes. King Street just recently also got new priorities.

You just accused me of being anti-LRT when I brought up on-ground rail separate from traffic, and here you are talking about LRT in their own lanes...

The variety of LRT that's been proposed here has been about LRT mixed in with traffic - which is prone to accidents. That's one reason why we're against it.

Pinion · #**17597** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 8:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I would respond the same way to your post, how do you think they build a subway? Just magically will it into existence? No they need to use construction equipment etc.

Tunnel boring usually doesn't require closure of the road above it...? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I thought they learned their lesson from cutting and covering Cambie, guess not.

Gordon · #**17598** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 9:48 PM**

Millennium Line extension:

The trolleys will still need to get around the Station construction areas maybe that is the reason for bus service changes planned>

Alex Mackinnon · #**17599** Posted **Dec 10, 2017, 10:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinion

Tunnel boring usually doesn't require closure of the road above it...? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I thought they learned their lesson from cutting and covering Cambie, guess not.

It shouldn't. Maybe some lane closures for grouting works, but probably not full road-width closures.

The stations on the other hand are likely to be more complicated.

Reecemartin · #**17600** Posted **Dec 11, 2017, 1:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinion

Tunnel boring usually doesn't require closure of the road above it...? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I thought they learned their lesson from cutting and covering Cambie, guess not.

Mined stations aren't very common, yes the line will be bored however the stations will require ground level closures at intersections so they can be dug out, I'd possibly expect some closures at Broadway City Hall too.