Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[trofirhen]

Would it be feasible to have a "fork" to YVR for Seattleites wanting to go to Oceania (4 cities), Delhi, and secondary Chinese cities unserved from SEA-TAC?
(The train would need to "split" somehow, but the engineers would figure that one out, I'm sure)
Similarly, would it be feasible to have a continuation to down to SEA-TAC for Vancouverites heading to Singapore, Dubai, and other cities that are Seattle's domain? Just an idea.

[Changing City]

California is giving up on connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco with high speed rail. A shorter route is still being planned to Merced and Bakersfield.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Where exactly is the ridge?
Maybe viaduct leading to it and trenching on top of it?

Remember that the Sunbury neighbourhood in North Delta lobbied for a tunnel in the area for SFPR and also about impacts to Burns Bog.
May be tough to get an HSR train viaduct through there as well.
http://www.sunburyneighbourhood.ca/SFPR.htm

Approx. 58Ave to Colbrook Ave on KGB. Goes from 0-80m above Sea level at 6% grade on average.

You could put it though the ALR, grades on Harvie Rd. are below 4%. Though that removes any potential useful Surrey Station.

Originally Posted by lokyin

Since the next stop south would be Bellingham, is there any potential for a straight line north-south with the 539 (US side) & 13 (CA side), basically the Lynden border crossing, and shooting the train straight up along 264th all the way across the Fraser River (seems pretty narrow there to cross) to merge with the rail on the north shore along the Fraser to basically run along the same route as West Coast Express?

That way maybe the terminus can end simply at Waterfront Station (if they expand to have a building on the Waterfront Road side), or even go to Pacific Central. Instead of stupidly in Surrey. Even if the HSR ends up running at slower speeds once it reaches a shared corridor, it still makes more sense... at least you're not switching trains to get downtown for another 40 minutes plus transfer times & wait times. Encouraging business use and encouraging incoming travel is important here, gotta bring it much closer to downtown as a higher priority to make this HSR worthwhile for our economy.

Probably unrealistic due to congestion on the CP route. WCE is already delayed constantly due to freight traffic, and CP is trying to add even more rails, and grade-separate the route. There's not really much space left; thus, HSR would likely have to go on the same tracks as WCE or frieght

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Would it be feasible to have a "fork" to YVR for Seattleites wanting to go to Oceania (4 cities), Delhi, and secondary Chinese cities unserved from SEA-TAC?
(The train would need to "split" somehow, but the engineers would figure that one out, I'm sure)
Similarly, would it be feasible to have a continuation to down to SEA-TAC for Vancouverites heading to Singapore, Dubai, and other cities that are Seattle's domain? Just an idea.

Wouldn't it just be cheaper for SEA-TAC to make flights to those cities, and vice-versa?

I mean, let's be real, most people are still going to use their own cities' airports. Maybe they could connect it to a ferry terminal on Iona Is. getting down to 40min from Iona Is. to Gabriola Is by using Fast Ferries- but Nanaimo is just too small to justify an entire rail spur just for it (~95,000, including Gabriola Is, similar to Everett).

Though maybe Nanaimo could eventually become a Vancouver Exurb?

Originally Posted by Changing City

California is giving up on connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco with high speed rail. A shorter route is still being planned to Merced and Bakersfield.

Oof. Anyone going to bet the project is just going to get canned, and the existing construction ending up as a useless partially-complete viaduct?

Maybe not, but Phase 1 only seems pretty useless overall. Then again, $77B was probably too much to swallow.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Would it be feasible to have a "fork" to YVR for Seattleites wanting to go to Oceania (4 cities), Delhi, and secondary Chinese cities unserved from SEA-TAC?
(The train would need to "split" somehow, but the engineers would figure that one out, I'm sure)
Similarly, would it be feasible to have a continuation to down to SEA-TAC for Vancouverites heading to Singapore, Dubai, and other cities that are Seattle's domain? Just an idea.

It would make more sense for passengers connecting through YVR to fly in from Seattle.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Approx. 58Ave to Colbrook Ave on KGB. Goes from 0-80m above Sea level at 6% grade on average.

You could put it though the ALR, grades on Harvie Rd. are below 4%. Though that removes any potential useful Surrey Station.

Thanks.
I've seen it from Hwy 99 then.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by NotToScale

I second this. As someone who uses Amtrak Cascades every couple months having terminus at pacific central would be ideal overall. having a secondary station in Surrey makes sense as well for the surrounding area. With another secondary stop somewhere along the way on the US side before Seattle.

If I had to take the skytrain to Surrey to use HSR or if the terminus on the Seattle side was not downtown Seattle, I would rather drive or fly, not worth taking the train then.

Even if the train operates at 400 km/h, which is what they are seriously considering?

I can understand someone saying they would rather drive (no transferring, direct door to door ride, full freedom of movement) but how would flying be better?

I just don’t get the logic of, “OMG, I have to take skytrain (or drive) to the HSR train in Surrey with a direct transfer in the station / hub (presumably). — that, instead I am going to take the train (or drive) and transfer at the airport that is also not located downtown to the other airport that is also not located downtown and transfer again there to a train / rental car”

What if the airport was in Surrey and the HSR station on Sea Island, would that make it better?

If the proposed rail station had no direct link to Skytrain I would understand the opposition, but that is not the case.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Changing City

California is giving up on connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco with high speed rail. A shorter route is still being planned to Merced and Bakersfield.

Probably didn't help that they had to detour around every mildly-irritated NIMBY that lived along the way.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Changing City

California is giving up on connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco with high speed rail. A shorter route is still being planned to Merced and Bakersfield.

well, that will probably be the end of ours then to. if a state with a population more than that of our country, and they cant make a god of it, how could we possibly do it? California has a population ~3x that of BC and Washington state.

[lokyin]

Came across an article on Seattle Transit Blog, thought I'd share.

A piece on location of terminals:
https://seattletransitblog.com/2017/08/09/seattle-vancouver-high-speed-rail-part-4-terminals/

A piece on route options from the border into Vancouver:
https://seattletransitblog.com/2017/07/3...eed-rail-part-3-bellingham-to-vancouver/

A few images from those posts that are particularly relevant:




The alignment along south side of Highway 1 makes sense for a final high-speed stretch before slowing down around Guildford / Fraser River crossing. Faster than any existing rail line.

And definitely coming around on a Waterfront Station terminus over Pacific Central. Gotta remember this terminus is a destination (which is the business case for it, not the convenience of some Vancouverites' departure if they live in Surrey). It's to facilitate businesses & economic growth, for tourism, etc. It's gotta go downtown.

As an argument for "last mile", although I love Pacific Central's accessibility & room for growth, ultimately Waterfront Stn is crucial. It's directly connected to Expo Line, Canada Line, Seabus, West Coast Express and all those busses on Pender. Direct connections to rest of Van, WV, NV, Bby, Richmond/YVR, NW/Surrey/Coquitlam and more. One transfer in almost all directions.

Surrey Terminus just can't compete!

The author suggests a grade separation & double tracking for the CN Burrard Inlet Line for 2/3 mile ($100-150 mil), which is small on the grand scheme of total budget. Worthwhile!

If the train slows to 40km/h (hypothetically) from Guildford to Waterfront or Pacific Central, would that mitigate issues of turns, grades and noise restrictions?

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

It would make more sense for passengers connecting through YVR to fly in from Seattle.

?? In layman's terms?

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Even if the train operates at 400 km/h, which is what they are seriously considering?

I can understand someone saying they would rather drive (no transferring, direct door to door ride, full freedom of movement) but how would flying be better?

I just don’t get the logic of, “OMG, I have to take skytrain (or drive) to the HSR train in Surrey with a direct transfer in the station / hub (presumably). — that, instead I am going to take the train (or drive) and transfer at the airport that is also not located downtown to the other airport that is also not located downtown and transfer again there to a train / rental car”

What if the airport was in Surrey and the HSR station on Sea Island, would that make it better?

If the proposed rail station had no direct link to Skytrain I would understand the opposition, but that is not the case.

I'd rather spend an extra few Billion to get it near downtown, rather than spend up to 10B later on to upgrade/build a parallel line to the Expo, because it's going to funnel even more people onto the Expo...

If we're going to go Maglev on this line, we may as well go all the way in.

Originally Posted by lokyin

Came across an article on Seattle Transit Blog, thought I'd share.

A piece on location of terminals:
https://seattletransitblog.com/2017/08/09/seattle-vancouver-high-speed-rail-part-4-terminals/

A piece on route options from the border into Vancouver:
https://seattletransitblog.com/2017/07/3...eed-rail-part-3-bellingham-to-vancouver/

A few images from those posts that are particularly relevant:




The alignment along south side of Highway 1 makes sense for a final high-speed stretch before slowing down around Guildford / Fraser River crossing. Faster than any existing rail line.

And definitely coming around on a Waterfront Station terminus over Pacific Central. Gotta remember this terminus is a destination (which is the business case for it, not the convenience of some Vancouverites' departure if they live in Surrey). It's to facilitate businesses & economic growth, for tourism, etc. It's gotta go downtown.

As an argument for "last mile", although I love Pacific Central's accessibility & room for growth, ultimately Waterfront Stn is crucial. It's directly connected to Expo Line, Canada Line, Seabus, West Coast Express and all those busses on Pender. Direct connections to rest of Van, WV, NV, Bby, Richmond/YVR, NW/Surrey/Coquitlam and more. One transfer in almost all directions.

Surrey Terminus just can't compete!

The author suggests a grade separation & double tracking for the CN Burrard Inlet Line for 2/3 mile ($100-150 mil), which is small on the grand scheme of total budget. Worthwhile!

If the train slows to 40km/h (hypothetically) from Guildford to Waterfront or Pacific Central, would that mitigate issues of turns, grades and noise restrictions?

Dunno about the Burrard Inlet Line, CN already got funding to double track that section- and Commuter Rail/HSR would need its own tracks- there's not enough space for 4 tracks on the spur. Revive the downtown rail tunnel? http://www.vancouverhistory.ca/archives_skytrain_tunnel.htm

Pacific Central also allows a direct connection to the Millennium, and thus UBC, Brentwood, and Coquitlam.

Well, the Skytrains are slowed down around Commercial-Broadway due to Nimbyism...

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by fredinno

?? In layman's terms?

In terms of passenger convenience.
Connecting in an airport terminal is easier than the time and potential uncertainty of transferring modes from different locations.
Potentially, there would just be one check-in and passage through security (and customs?) at your departure airport terminal, assuming that luggage is transferred for you from plane to plane. If not, you'd have to collect from the carousel, which, agreed, would be a hassle.
If you take an international train - there's check-in, security and customs to board and enter Canada, then you leave on a international flight, and there's check-in and security again at YVR.

************

Looking at that second map above, how about an HSR terminal on the False Creek Flats next to VCC-Clark Station?
You could build a new station on the Expo Line at Clark Drive, so the HSR terminal would have connectivity to both Expo Line (downtown) and Millennium Line (UBC & SFU), without having to navigate the Burrard Line RoW.
That's better than Pacific Central Station, which only connects to the Expo Line.

[Bdawe]

The Ideal station isn't Pacific Central, outside the CBD since it was built and only getting further from downtown's center of gravity since that time - it's Waterfront Station.

Compare that to putting the terminal further out in the suburbs than the airport and you can see the pound-foolishness of truncating a high speed rail line at the South Westminster junkyard.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

The Ideal station isn't Pacific Central, outside the CBD since it was built and only getting further from downtown's center of gravity since that time - it's Waterfront Station.

Compare that to putting the terminal further out in the suburbs than the airport and you can see the pound-foolishness of truncating a high speed rail line at the South Westminster junkyard.

I think you're dead right on all counts. Waterfront is "where it's at," and putting the terminus in Whalley to connect with Skytrain would be an embarassment (& a messy slow-up).

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

well, that will probably be the end of ours then to. if a state with a population more than that of our country, and they cant make a god of it, how could we possibly do it? California has a population ~3x that of BC and Washington state.

It also cost 90B, or about 3x what it'd cost to build it here (average of the estimates).

They're still getting Phase 1, San Jose to Bakersville. It's connected to the San Fran Subway, so yay?

Originally Posted by officedweller

In terms of passenger convenience.
Connecting in an airport terminal is easier than the time and potential uncertainty of transferring modes from different locations.
Potentially, there would just be one check-in and passage through security (and customs?) at your departure airport terminal, assuming that luggage is transferred for you from plane to plane. If not, you'd have to collect from the carousel, which, agreed, would be a hassle.
If you take an international train - there's check-in, security and customs to board and enter Canada, then you leave on a international flight, and there's check-in and security again at YVR.

************

Looking at that second map above, how about an HSR terminal on the False Creek Flats next to VCC-Clark Station?
You could build a new station on the Expo Line at Clark Drive, so the HSR terminal would have connectivity to both Expo Line (downtown) and Millennium Line (UBC & SFU), without having to navigate the Burrard Line RoW.
That's better than Pacific Central Station, which only connects to the Expo Line.

Not sure if that's possible on the triangle-shaped lot:

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Not sure if that's possible on the triangle-shaped lot:

I was thinking elevated over top of the BNSF yard - south of the VPD shooting range -
but that looks pretty tight.
Or better yet - convert the VPD shooting range into the HSR station.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

The Ideal station isn't Pacific Central, outside the CBD since it was built and only getting further from downtown's center of gravity since that time - it's Waterfront Station.

Compare that to putting the terminal further out in the suburbs than the airport and you can see the pound-foolishness of truncating a high speed rail line at the South Westminster junkyard.

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I think you're dead right on all counts. Waterfront is "where it's at," and putting the terminus in Whalley to connect with Skytrain would be an embarassment (& a messy slow-up).

Except Waterfront isn't capable of handling large amounts of passenger traffic or a customs checkpoint; Pacific Central still is.

It's not that big a loss. Between NE False Creek and the False Creek Flats redevelopment and the Broadway extension rezoning, Strathcona's going to be part of downtown by the time the HSR opens. The rest is a short SkyTrain ride away.

[officedweller]

Burrard Line and Grandview Cut line twinning officially announced:

https://www.cn.ca/en/news/2019/02/national-trade-corridors-fund-vancouver-fraser-port-authority-an/

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cn-railway-vancouver-grandview-cut-twinning

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/ca...couver-aimed-at-hiking-imports-from-asia

[lokyin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Except Waterfront isn't capable of handling large amounts of passenger traffic or a customs checkpoint; Pacific Central still is.

It's not that big a loss. Between NE False Creek and the False Creek Flats redevelopment and the Broadway extension rezoning, Strathcona's going to be part of downtown by the time the HSR opens. The rest is a short SkyTrain ride away.

I definitely wouldn't mind the Terminus being at Pacific Central. But Waterfront Station is more advantageous as an economic driver. IMO it could be capable of handling larger amounts of passenger traffic.

It's a small footprint now, but it's not impossible. Union Station in Toronto was able to find space for airport express and it's been constructing an expansion. In our case it doesn't need to be integrated into the existing Waterfront Station building, it just needs to be connected / walkfriendly between concourses.

How about:
1. That lot to the east of Waterfront Station building. That was supposed to be an office tower right? Did that get shot down? It's not as small as it looks.
2. Build over the tracks? Or even obliterate that ugly Waterfront Centre brown dirty waffle-looking tower and integrate a new terminus+commercial tower!
3. On the waterfront lot where Helijet currently is. Do the Aquilinis still own this land for their supposed "mls stadium"? This is a great option, it's a large empty flat lot, further away from the Gastown complainers. It's not gonna be much else for development now that Centerm is expanding west and blocking this site's view to the north... Potential site for terminus?

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Say, while we're at it, wouldn't a HSR connection between downtown and Whalley reduce SkyTrain demand? Run a local train every hour or so, charge 5-10 bucks, watch the Expo Line get another couple decades' worth of shelf life.

It would take a VERY small number away from SkyTrain. Speeds into Vancouver from Surrey wouldn't be HSR anyhow. It would be something like London's HSR from Paris was for a long time.

Surrey is unfortunately a bit far from Vancouver to be considered the main station, but who knows... over time, it could become the main center of the area. It reminds me of Shinagawa in Tokyo. Shinagawa is going to be the main terminal for the new Maglev between Tokyo and Osaka (Basically the Richmond of Tokyo). Some complained that it's not being stretched to Tokyo Station... but in reality it's cost prohibitive to do so, at least at first. The busiest station in Japan is actually Shinjuku station on the west side of downtown making it a great place for a station, but that station is controlled mostly be JR East. JR Central is building the line and they want more of a clean slate, so over the next 20 years Shinagawa will be built up.

For the most part, this is perfectly fine. It's slightly less convenient, particularly for anyone transferring from stations north of Tokyo who will be forced to transfer twice if they want to get on the Maglev, but overall, taking the Maglev is like getting on a plane. An extra 30 minutes won't matter for occasional passengers and companies may choose to locate closer to Shinagawa... as that becomes a more desireable place to work due to its convenience.

Likewise, if Surrey gets the terminus, build it with a plan to build out the area around it. Sure, it's more romantic to build it right into Vancouver, but Vancouver's got more going for it than a train. In fact, I'd probably built the HSR to terminate at Surrey but then build proper commuter rail from that terminal to downtown. Far more useful for locals. You'd just need to time the commuter train to be waiting for the passengers when they got off for a nice and easy cross-platform transfer ( this, of course would require Canadian customs to happen stateside, perhaps in Bellingham )

[red-paladin]

I think Pacific Central is the best location for HSR from Seattle to stop.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Burrard Line and Grandview Cut line twinning officially announced:

https://www.cn.ca/en/news/2019/02/national-trade-corridors-fund-vancouver-fraser-port-authority-an/

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/cn-railway-vancouver-grandview-cut-twinning

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/ca...couver-aimed-at-hiking-imports-from-asia

I bet these people are just going to love all the construction and the new double track rumbling past their homes!!

I guess if you move next to a rail line, you have to deal with what comes with it.