Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

The Burnaby Gondola is cheap. Less than 100 million IIRC nowhere near the cost of a rt line.

Why don't they do a funicular?

[Mac Write]

Not enough capacity. The gondola would have 35 person cabs departing every 45 seconds.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Seeing those numbers is my concern. When it gets crowded dwells mean that your capacity deteriorates.

Extra dwell time come from the driver holding the doors to wait for more people... and if it's automated, there's no driver, meaning nobody to hold the doors. 15-20 second dwells, even with the existing "overcapacity" crowds on the Expo and Canada, seem to be enough for 99% of commuters.

Besides, 75-90 seconds means the trains will be just over a minute apart. People won't all cram into the current train when they can see the next one coming.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

We also (idk why) haven't seen a single 5 car train.

"Not having enough train cars" would seem to be a good enough reason.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

//please excuse the editing///.. down to 115 seconds, but 75-90 is perfectly doable for Vancouver - for Aslan's sake, the Expo does 90 seconds all the way down the line!

We've got the frequencies, that's for sure!! My question here is: does that apply to the Canada Line? (wrong thread, excuse me pls) If yes, add the trains and keep it to 75-90 and voilà.

I also though that if, in fact the Millenium Line West will stop permanently at Arbutus, something like this would do. However, given that several of the Eglinton stations are "mined" (bored tunnel) it would better to try for an eventual Skytrain for UBC. I say this based in the link you provided, but that would not upload in the message. Thank you.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

We've got the frequencies, that's for sure!! My question here is: does that apply to the Canada Line? (wrong thread, excuse me pls) If yes, add the trains and keep it to 75-90 and voilà.

Good question. The Canada has the same signalling infrastructure as the Expo and Millennium (so it might be possible), but it uses conventional motors (so it might not be).

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I also though that if, in fact the Millenium Line West will stop permanently at Arbutus, something like this would do. However, given that several of the Eglinton stations are "mined" (bored tunnel) it would better to try for an eventual Skytrain for UBC. I say this based in the link you provided, but that would not upload in the message. Thank you.

Sorry, I don't follow... you're saying that bored tunnels or train frequency might prevent a UBC extension?

[nname]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

We also (idk why) haven't seen a single 5 car train.

Not needed... it haven't even reached min frequency yet. Right now it's only running every 133s. The goal is to get it down to at least every 90s first before using longer trains.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Good question. The Canada has the same signalling infrastructure as the Expo and Millennium (so it might be possible), but it uses conventional motors (so it might not be).



Sorry, I don't follow... you're saying that bored tunnels or train frequency might prevent a UBC extension?

No, I'm saying that there is a consensus among certain parties that the skytain should end at Arbutus, with an eventual light rail continuation to UBC, which personally I'd be against.
Looking at the Eglinton LRT plan in Toronto, they'll have an underground section, part cut-and-cover, partly deep bored "mined" as they call it, tunnels.
IMO it makes sense to continue skytrain to UBC. Toronto needs it, and we need it even more. Bored tunnel, that is.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

No, I'm saying that there is a consensus among certain parties that the skytain should end at Arbutus, with an eventual light rail continuation to UBC, which personally I'd be against.
Looking at the Eglinton LRT plan in Toronto, they'll have an underground section, part cut-and-cover, partly deep bored "mined" as they call it, tunnels.
IMO it makes sense to continue skytrain to UBC. Toronto needs it, and we need it even more. Bored tunnel, that is.

There may be a consensus among nimbys who don't want the 'crime train' travelling through their neighbourhood. Who else is against it?

The only issue I've seen (which ties in with it being Phase 1 to Arbutus) comes down to money - mainly that we don't have the money to pay for all of it, esp when there are other areas that need improved transit too. Most of the region needs more buses, Surrey needs Skytrain, Burnaby Mountain needs a gondola, and the entire North Shore is a mess that we haven't even begun to look at. Who is going to tell people that there won't be any improvements in their area because the money is all going to the Broadway extension?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Sheba

There may be a consensus among nimbys who don't want the 'crime train' travelling through their neighbourhood. Who else is against it?

The only issue I've seen (which ties in with it being Phase 1 to Arbutus) comes down to money - mainly that we don't have the money to pay for all of it, esp when there are other areas that need improved transit too. Most of the region needs more buses, Surrey needs Skytrain, Burnaby Mountain needs a gondola, and the entire North Shore is a mess that we haven't even begun to look at. Who is going to tell people that there won't be any improvements in their area because the money is all going to the Broadway extension?

What might you suggest as an alternative if the UBC extension is not built; if it terminates at Arbutus? Surely BLine busses can't fill the role. LRT? What?

[ClaytonA]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

What might you suggest as an alternative if the UBC extension is not built; if it terminates at Arbutus? Surely BLine busses can't fill the role. LRT? What?

Buses for the 99 when it opens at Arbutus, will be even more crowded than right now with some shifting at the margin to the Broadway corridor from parallel ones. Because it will save 10 min and have much higher frequency during the rush, the current bus line ups will may even get up to 10 min longer by 2025 or whenever it actually opens.

The bigger line-ups might move the UBC extension up the project queue, as it focuses ridership more on the 99 from 41 Ave, West 4th, etc.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

Buses for the 99 when it opens at Arbutus, will be even more crowded than right now with some shifting at the margin to the Broadway corridor from parallel ones.

I'm not convinced of this, given that much of the ridership in the Broadway Corridor doesn't go beyond Arbutus anyway. The hospital district is the second largest employment centre after downtown, and it's the destination and origin of a very substantial portion of the current Broadway B-line ridership.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by ClaytonA

Buses for the 99 when it opens at Arbutus, will be even more crowded than right now with some shifting at the margin to the Broadway corridor from parallel ones. Because it will save 10 min and have much higher frequency during the rush, the current bus line ups will may even get up to 10 min longer by 2025 or whenever it actually opens.

The bigger line-ups might move the UBC extension up the project queue, as it focuses ridership more on the 99 from 41 Ave, West 4th, etc.

If the new Broadway extension to Arbutus makes the 99 B-line route half the distance it is today (and misses the most congested section), even if Translink run the same number buses they have running today, surely there will be twice as many running between Arbutus and UBC? If there is significant diversion from the parallel routes (like the 44 or 84) then presumably even more resources could be diverted to the 99 route.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Typically in systems with drivers the issue isn't the driver (they are on a schedule) themselves it's people rushing the doors, that's just as much an issue on systems (without?) drivers. And if you think another train coming will stop people from trying to jam into the first one I'm really not sure thats the case. If it was alot of frequent bus lines would have less bunching issues.

A) Those occur because the driver can't close the door on the crowd; automated trains do it all the time. All TransLink needs is an attendant to say "this one's full, wait a minute for the next one," which they already have at some stations during rush hour.

B) Again, the crowding in the future will be much like the crowding today (more people, but also more doors, larger trains and larger platforms). 15-20 seconds is/will be enough for both.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Well not having enough train cars probably is not the reason. When they order a train they could choose to have 3 c cars. And while maybe doing it now isn't necessary they mas as well order the MK3's at their full length.

There's no such thing as a "full-length" train; each city has different needs, so they buy individual cars from the manufacturers and link them into trainsets later. And since three-car and four-car trains (plus the cars they just ordered) are enough for demand right now, TransLink doesn't see the need to eat up free room in the budget - all of which they'll need for the subway and LRT - just to demonstrate that five-car trains are possible.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm not convinced of this, given that much of the ridership in the Broadway Corridor doesn't go beyond Arbutus anyway. The hospital district is the second largest employment centre after downtown, and it's the destination and origin of a very substantial portion of the current Broadway B-line ridership.

Originally Posted by Changing City

If the new Broadway extension to Arbutus makes the 99 B-line route half the distance it is today (and misses the most congested section), even if Translink run the same number buses they have running today, surely there will be twice as many running between Arbutus and UBC? If there is significant diversion from the parallel routes (like the 44 or 84) then presumably even more resources could be diverted to the 99 route.

This, and this. Half the ridership, half the distance and (roughly) just as many buses means that crowding won't be a problem. The real problem is what happens when all those 99 buses reach Arbutus and have to turn back around; no through roads up ahead for them to loop around, nor any good spot for a bus loop near Arbutus that won't cause serious congestion problems.

The only solution I can think of is to NOT terminate at Arbutus - keep going down Broadway, turn left on Burrard, and continue to the 44 terminus downtown (the 44 can go to VCC-Clark instead).

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

This, and this. Half the ridership, half the distance and (roughly) just as many buses means that crowding won't be a problem. The real problem is what happens when all those 99 buses reach Arbutus and have to turn back around; no through roads up ahead for them to loop around, nor any good spot for a bus loop near Arbutus that won't cause serious congestion problems.

The only solution I can think of is to NOT terminate at Arbutus - keep going down Broadway, turn left on Burrard, and continue to the 44 terminus downtown (the 44 can go to VCC-Clark instead).

Why wouldn't they turn left on Yew, then right on 8th and Arbutus and back to UBC on Broadway? They can wait on Arbutus, although the gas station is a bit inconvenient.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Why wouldn't they turn left on Yew, then right on 8th and Arbutus and back to UBC on Broadway? They can wait on Arbutus, although the gas station is a bit inconvenient.

8th Ave is a tight residential street. both side of the street would need to become a NS Anytime. plus there is the school that has driveways onto the street; who knows how they use those. there are also speed bumps which would need to be ground down.

Yew is also currently a right-in/right out; that would need to be changed. 1 side of parking would need to be made a NS Anytime, at the minimum. there is no left-turn-lane on Broadway and no way to put one in. that means traffic would be impacted a lot considering a bus would be turning every ~3mins; they would bunch up due to on coming traffic being busy. it would need to become fully actuated with a dedicated left-turn-signal that can detect a bus and not a car which is more complicated; there are only 2 true bus actuated lights in the CoV. 3, if you consider a standard signal in a bus-only area.

then there is the idea of NIMBY's not wanting their quite 8th Ave alternate bike-route becoming a bus highway with large, 60ft buses every ~3mins. and the fact they would loose all their street parking.

i am sure i am missing something else as well. but that is what i can think of off the top of my head.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

8th Ave is a tight residential street. both side of the street would need to become a NS Anytime. plus there is the school that has driveways onto the street; who knows how they use those. there are also speed bumps which would need to be ground down.

Yew is also currently a right-in/right out; that would need to be changed. 1 side of parking would need to be made a NS Anytime, at the minimum. there is no left-turn-lane on Broadway and no way to put one in. that means traffic would be impacted a lot considering a bus would be turning every ~3mins; they would bunch up due to on coming traffic being busy. it would need to become fully actuated with a dedicated left-turn-signal that can detect a bus and not a car which is more complicated; there are only 2 true bus actuated lights in the CoV. 3, if you consider a standard signal in a bus-only area.

then there is the idea of NIMBY's not wanting their quite 8th Ave alternate bike-route becoming a bus highway with large, 60ft buses every ~3mins. and the fact they would loose all their street parking.

i am sure i am missing something else as well. but that is what i can think of off the top of my head.

Some of those conditions sound to present some fairly significant issues. I thought the school was between Broadway and W10th, not Broadway and W8th. I think the parking and NIMBY issues will be a problem wherever the loop gets created. I guess turning left on Arbutus and round via 8th and Maple is easier, although obviously the residents of Maple wouldn't be happy.

I can't see Translink seriously running buses all the way Downtown just because turning them inconveniences a block of residents, but I guess we'll see how it's dealt with. Obviously there's some sort of solution already designed, and the City's website refers to rapid bus from Arbutus to UBC, although obviously that might not be where the bus route ends (although that's how it reads).

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by Changing City

....

and the City's website refers to rapid bus from Arbutus to UBC, although obviously that might not be where the bus route ends (although that's how it reads).

I remember TransLink talking of turning all B-Lines into BRT-style routes but I didn't know there was already a plan for this for the remainder of the 99.
Can you provide a link to the documents?
(http://http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-2017-kevin-desmond-rapid-bus-b-line)

I'd also like to add it's crazy how the 99 B-Line was the first B-Line yet it'll probably be the longest lasting. With introduction in 1996 and partial truncation in 2002 with the Millennium Line, then soon-to-be truncation to Arbutus in about 2026 (they said 2025 before but it's probably been delayed) , the whole thing will be replaced by about 2035 or so, by my predictions. That's 40 YEARS! Compare this with the
-97 B-Line: 2002-2016 (Evergreen Extension), 14 years
-98 B-Line: 2000-2009 (Canada Line), 9 years
-96 B-Line: 2013-? 2025 ? (with likely opening of Surrey LRT), 12 years

Now with another 9 or 11 (I've seen varying numbers) B-Lines to be added in the 10-Year Vision (as the 95 is already in) , I find it unlikely that we'll be seeing anything remotely close to the 10-15 year "replace with SkyTrain" timeline. Of course this doesn't hold true with the planned Fraser Highway B-Line (LRT or SkyTrain extension planned), so I can see why they would want to implement them as BRT routes given the likely long wait period before replacement with SkyTrain. A longer term makes that fixed upfront investment worth it. However, I would argue if the goal is to build ridership and development on the corridor to justify the SkyTrain, then BRT should be the standard to aim to. Better stations and faster speeds make the difference for the marginal commuters.