Transit Fantasies

[SpongeG]

this is Delta though, on paper, it sounds like a city, in reality, it's not. The housing population is in the small community of Ladner, Tsawwassen and North Delta is more a part of Surrey than it is Delta.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

it's a lot of money though, there are better ways to spend limited funds. The kind of people who go to the ferry by bus are the kind of people who go to the ferry on a bus. Tourists will either drive on or take a charter bus. It's like a premium service for a select few.

That's still a large number of commuters though. You've got around 50k people moving every day between Richmond, Delta and Surrey four and a half years ago. Run a B-Line (Canada terminus to Langley Station) to start, wait for it to burst, upgrade to an S-Bahn. Should take some pressure off the Massey Bridge.

And isn't this the fantasy thread? What about 2050 or later, when everything's built out? Not hard to see tourists from the States hopping off the Surrey HSR terminal and riding the tram to the ferry.

Originally Posted by SpongeG

this is Delta though, on paper, it sounds like a city, in reality, it's not. The housing population is in the small community of Ladner, Tsawwassen and North Delta is more a part of Surrey than it is Delta.

Annacis Island, right? This is also Delta. Not much, but people do live there - Prince Rupert is technically a city too.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Steveston itself is enough of an anchor for a B-Line. I'm suggesting light rail because of the old ROW.



SkyTrain'd work better going to Ladner, though. Regionally speaking - as waves pointed out - Steveston's a dead end, better suited for a semi-rapid line.

Maybe ditch the commuter rail. The track is there, but the ridership isn't, and CP is still using the track regularly. Light rail'd need a couple of lane closures, yes, but it's a much more direct route with a larger catchment; not many people needing to get to the Holiday Inn.

Well, nobody's ever accused Richmond of having good long-term planning or an urban mindset.
Although a road might work better in the near future. The only major source of ridership would be the new condos around Capstan and the Oval - everything in-between is strip malls and warehouses.

Apples and oranges methinks. If a parking lot at the mall floods, you take the bus or stay home. If your home floods....

There's not much left of that ROW inside Richmond City Centre though, which is the problem. Which means reducing Granville Av. to 2-3 lanes, resulting in the same problem with putting LRT down 104 Av @ Surrey (ok, maybe not AS bad, but it's still a major arterial). Either that, or elevate it there- which means you may as well just extend the Canada down there and double-track the Landsome-Brigehouse section, killing two birds with one stone.

"Regularly" is an overstatement. It's one of CN's least used Rail spurs in Vancouver. http://cnebusiness.geomapguide.ca/

Also, I just noticed that there's a Rail spur paralleling the Expo to Central Park. Wut? I thought that was abandoned?

It would be better for long-distance transfers than LRT or Skytrain. And it may be cheap enough to justify it vs extending the Canada.

Though I'm not sure if NIMBYs would prevent building a lot of the 'new' Sections. The part in Steveston in particular is literally right behind a school and Apartments.

You lose your car?
Still a big deal.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Yeah, there's a lot less development potential in south Richmond and South Delta due to all the farmland.

South Delta north of Steveston is mostly suburbs, though.

Originally Posted by waves

It's not just Ladner that would get served though. With a Park and Ride station just on the south end of the new bridge, plus a terminus at the Ladner Bus Loop it would serve all of Delta, Tsawwassen (and the ferries), White Rock, South Surrey and even potentially some Langley commuters. It would be an excellent anchor point for a new Commuter Light Rail Line from the ferries, to Ladner, then South Surrey, Langley and maybe even Abbotsford and Chilliwack.

I hope that's not Skytrain.

Originally Posted by SpongeG

it's a lot of money though, there are better ways to spend limited funds. The kind of people who go to the ferry by bus are the kind of people who go to the ferry on a bus. Tourists will either drive on or take a charter bus. It's like a premium service for a select few.

TBF, you could use that argument against B-lines. Efficient, fast transit attracts people to use it via induced demand.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

That's still a large number of commuters though. You've got around 50k people moving every day between Richmond, Delta and Surrey four and a half years ago. Run a B-Line (Canada terminus to Langley Station) to start, wait for it to burst, upgrade to an S-Bahn. Should take some pressure off the Massey Bridge.

And isn't this the fantasy thread? What about 2050 or later, when everything's built out? Not hard to see tourists from the States hopping off the Surrey HSR terminal and riding the tram to the ferry.



Annacis Island, right? This is also Delta. Not much, but people do live there - Prince Rupert is technically a city too.

Walnut Grove population: 23,295
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta,_British_Columbia#Communities
Ladner population: 21,112
Tsawwassen population: 20,933

Tram this far out is overkill. Ladner and Tsawwassen themselves aren't really destinations or large bedroom communities (except maybe the mall and Ferry Terminal), and thus, most people need to go far and fast, which is not really what LRT and Light Metro are designed for. They're intermediate urban transit systems, and as you're almost always going to be travelling at full acceleration, that time not accelerating even faster is wasted time; There's likely to be only 2 stops on the way to the Ferry Terminal, after all: one at Ladner and Tsawwassen for cover service.

Hence commuter Rail.

However, I'm not sure if building a commuter rail bridge at the GMB is really cost-effective.

[waves]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I hope that's not Skytrain.

Light Blue = Canada Line Extension
Royal Blue = Expo Line Langley Extension
Dark Grey = At Grade Light Rail

Originally Posted by fredinno

Most people need to go far and fast, which is not really what LRT and Light Metro are designed for.

Ladner/Delta/South Surrey, these are all semi-urban areas. It's these kinds of areas where Light Rail works BEST!

• Line travels through both suburban and non-urban areas. Some stations need to be close together and some farther apart. For commuter rail, all the stations have to be far apart.
• LRT trains can be lower than commuter trains meaning stations are less bulky and cheaper.
• Faster acceleration and deceleration times for LRT vehicles over commuter rail vehicles means that LRT can run on roadway medians instead of only on heavy rail right-of-ways.
• The suburban and non-urban nature tends to have more roadway medians and other right-of-way land available than inner city. LRT is not a good choice for urban options because the land is only available with significant consequences to other transportation modes.
• Large suburban grid structures mean that signal timing can be achieved relatively easily without big effects on cars and without delaying the trains.
• Commuter trains are more expensive to operate and have higher minimum headways due to lower deceleration capabilities. (trains will come less often)

Originally Posted by fredinno

..you're almost always going to be travelling at full [speed], [and] time not accelerating even faster is wasted time..

LRT vehicles are capable of 100+ km/hr if so desired. Portland's max operating speed is 95km/hr. Travelling at 100 km/hr from South Surrey to Ladner and then from Ladner to the ferries would be perfect in my opinion and it would definitely convince many people to switch to it rather than driving and paying for parking at the ferries.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

There's not much left of that ROW inside Richmond City Centre though, which is the problem. Which means reducing Granville Av. to 2-3 lanes, resulting in the same problem with putting LRT down 104 Av @ Surrey (ok, maybe not AS bad, but it's still a major arterial). Either that, or elevate it there- which means you may as well just extend the Canada down there and double-track the Landsome-Brigehouse section, killing two birds with one stone.

Sure, but drivers on Granville are pretty sparse.... on second thought though, they're Richmond drivers, so elevated might be best.

Again, trying to get the Canada to Delta.

Originally Posted by fredinno

"Regularly" is an overstatement. It's one of CN's least used Rail spurs in Vancouver. http://cnebusiness.geomapguide.ca/

Also, I just noticed that there's a Rail spur paralleling the Expo to Central Park. Wut? I thought that was abandoned?

It would be better for long-distance transfers than LRT or Skytrain. And it may be cheap enough to justify it vs extending the Canada.

Though I'm not sure if NIMBYs would prevent building a lot of the 'new' Sections. The part in Steveston in particular is literally right behind a school and Apartments.

I'll concede CP, but the other points stand - it's only cheap and fast because it starts nowhere, goes nowhere and ends nowhere. Doesn't even connect with the Canada Line or most of the buses... and since it avoids almost everybody's houses, the NIMBYs probably wouldn't care.

Originally Posted by fredinno

You lose your car?
Still a big deal.

Somehow, I doubt that even the Christmas rush would make people park in a swimming pool during a flood. Whereas water in your basement would means that half your home is kaput.

Originally Posted by fredinno

TBF, you could use that argument against B-lines. Efficient, fast transit attracts people to use it via induced demand.

Walnut Grove population: 23,295
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta,_British_Columbia#Communities
Ladner population: 21,112
Tsawwassen population: 20,933

Law of diminishing returns. Same reason there won't be a SkyTrain to Lions Bay.

Ladner is useful as a junction. Tsawwassen isn't. Sorry, but Walnut Grove is in the same "halfway" position as Sunbury or Annacis.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Tram this far out is overkill. Ladner and Tsawwassen themselves aren't really destinations or large bedroom communities (except maybe the mall and Ferry Terminal), and thus, most people need to go far and fast, which is not really what LRT and Light Metro are designed for. They're intermediate urban transit systems, and as you're almost always going to be travelling at full acceleration, that time not accelerating even faster is wasted time; There's likely to be only 2 stops on the way to the Ferry Terminal, after all: one at Ladner and Tsawwassen for cover service.

Hence commuter Rail.

However, I'm not sure if building a commuter rail bridge at the GMB is really cost-effective.

Most of Delta's intracity commuters head to Richmond or Surrey. A Canada Line extension solves one, and an S-Bahn the other. As for "far and fast," getting to the ferry right now takes at least an hour anyway.

Originally Posted by waves

Ladner/Delta/South Surrey, these are all semi-urban areas. It's these kinds of areas where Light Rail works BEST!

• Line travels through both suburban and non-urban areas. Some stations need to be close together and some farther apart. For commuter rail, all the stations have to be far apart.
• LRT trains can be lower than commuter trains meaning stations are less bulky and cheaper.
• Faster acceleration and deceleration times for LRT vehicles over commuter rail vehicles means that LRT can run on roadway medians instead of only on heavy rail right-of-ways.
• The suburban and non-urban nature tends to have more roadway medians and other right-of-way land available than inner city. LRT is not a good choice for urban options because the land is only available with significant consequences to other transportation modes.
• Large suburban grid structures mean that signal timing can be achieved relatively easily without big effects on cars and without delaying the trains.
• Commuter trains are more expensive to operate and have higher minimum headways due to lower deceleration capabilities. (trains will come less often)

LRT vehicles are capable of 100+ km/hr if so desired. Portland's max operating speed is 95km/hr. Travelling at 100 km/hr from South Surrey to Ladner and then from Ladner to the ferries would be perfect in my opinion and it would definitely convince many people to switch to it rather than driving and paying for parking at the ferries.

Correct. Almost zero complaints about light rail on highways - it's when they start entering the city and using street space that the problems start piling up.

That said, the Langley stretch likely needs to be elevated, and a heavier train might be better for ferry passengers' luggage.

[waves]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

That said, the Langley stretch likely needs to be elevated, and a heavier train might be better for ferry passengers' luggage.

Getting through Langely (city) would be tricky for sure. You might be able to do it at grade but there might be a loss of a two lanes along 56th from bypass to bypass. An alternative might be to use to turn north off of 56th when going EB onto the heavy rail right of way up to Logan and then following Logan all the way back to the Fraser Highway.

I really don't think we need a heavier train for luggage, just better interior design. The trains could be 120m long so they got lots of space to work with if they want.

[fredinno]

Those are some interesting points wave. I'm still not convinced (lack of integration into the rest of the network, forcing a transfer for anyone wanting to go anywhere but Cloverdale and Langley)
There's not a lot of stop-and-go highways that you could attach LRT on in Metro Vancouver without causing massive pain for other road users. You end up always, on a bus, or on Skytrain.

Commuter Rail has the potential to allow you to connect from Chilliwack to Coquitlam to the Ferries without transferring once, and quickly. And it hits the same town Centres, so the loss is in the in-between stations, not the hubs. Panorama Ridge isn't even a Newton.

LRT from 192st is listed as 35min-1hr at AM rush hour, ignoring stations, travelling alongside traffic (non-grade-separated means you go at the same speed as the cars for the most part).

Commuter Rail is listed as 39 min at WCE average speed, ignoring stations.

Also, a bit of advice, it's probably better off following the 99 ROW south of Burns Bog, due to the higher speed limit vs Lander Trunk Rd.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Sure, but drivers on Granville are pretty sparse.... on second thought though, they're Richmond drivers, so elevated might be best.

Again, trying to get the Canada to Delta.




Somehow, I doubt that even the Christmas rush would make people park in a swimming pool during a flood. Whereas water in your basement would means that half your home is kaput.



Law of diminishing returns. Same reason there won't be a SkyTrain to Lions Bay.

Ladner is useful as a junction. Tsawwassen isn't. Sorry, but Walnut Grove is in the same "halfway" position as Sunbury or Annacis.



Most of Delta's intracity commuters head to Richmond or Surrey. A Canada Line extension solves one, and an S-Bahn the other. As for "far and fast," getting to the ferry right now takes at least an hour anyway.



Correct. Almost zero complaints about light rail on highways - it's when they start entering the city and using street space that the problems start piling up.

That said, the Langley stretch likely needs to be elevated, and a heavier train might be better for ferry passengers' luggage.

Eh, I always preferred handing over the YVR spur to a Skytrain down Victoria and Cambie as a parallel to the Canada.

LRT on elevated Rail is basically Light metro (Skytrain) anyways, though.

CF Richmond's parking lot is half-designated for the residences built on top. Where in the world are you going to park all those cars in a flood?

Walnut Grove is a Junction- more than Lander, which is a 3-way Junction. Walnut Grove is a 4-way junction: one down towards Langley City, one towards Maple Meadows, one towards 104th and Coquitlam, and one down Hwy 1 to Abbotsford.
All are potential Rapid Transit lines.

My point is that even within the context of Transit Fantasy, South Delta has bad prospects in terms of priority, and is beaten by other similar-sized suburbs. Having kms of farmland on the Expo Extension to Langley is acceptable when Langley Centre is (somewhat) urban and it's a 4 way junction surrounded by huge amounts of greenfield being developed into townhomes and apartments.

The law of diminishing returns applies here too. I remember using Waves' cost calculator to get the cost of extending the Canada Line to Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal. It exceeded $3B, mostly due to sheer distance. That's about as much as extending the Expo from Langley Memorial to UFV.

I can probably make the numbers again, though if it's needed. Admittedly, I deleted it because I looked at the preliminary calculations, and wrote it off as dumb.

Lander has nearly no greenfield (I guess except the Lander Marina lands that were taken out of the ALR), and Tsawwassen has greenfield, but the fact that you'll never really fully 'own' your home on FN land is an issue for people wanting to move there. it's also entirely SFHs right now; Walnut Grove is a mix of Duplexes and SFH, and will be combined with the even more dense Carvloth.

Steveston is a dead end, sure, but it also has a mix of Apartments, Quadplexes, and SFHs, is less NIMBY, and has been slowly developing into denser form over the years. It's surrounded by endless swathes of SFHs.
It's not a destination, yet, but it has a head-start.

The commuter spur connects at Bridgeport to the Canada. Did it need another connection?


We can cut that down to 40min on Commuter Rail. A Car on the route Waves proposed on Hwy 10 is listed at 40min-1hr at rush hour, which is, TBF, not as bad as I thought.

Of course, putting the entire thing on highways raises the question of not just putting a BRT system, which would integrate better with the rest of the network and achieve the same net effect.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Those are some interesting points wave. I'm still not convinced (lack of integration into the rest of the network, forcing a transfer for anyone wanting to go anywhere but Cloverdale and Langley)
There's not a lot of stop-and-go highways that you could attach LRT on in Metro Vancouver without causing massive pain for other road users. You end up always, on a bus, or on Skytrain.

Commuter Rail has the potential to allow you to connect from Chilliwack to Coquitlam to the Ferries without transferring once, and quickly. And it hits the same town Centres, so the loss is in the in-between stations, not the hubs. Panorama Ridge isn't even a Newton.

LRT from 192st is listed as 35min-1hr at AM rush hour, ignoring stations, travelling alongside traffic (non-grade-separated means you go at the same speed as the cars for the most part).

LBH, transfers are inevitable. The real PITA comes from either being "forced" off a line for no reason (Ladner and Langley are natural dead ends), or from waiting for the connection (with this particular line, there should be enough reliable frequency).

Clarify? There's no possible network that runs from Coq to Tsawwassen without at least one transfer and an hour-long wait... and since the Fraser Valley Express bus has ridership in the dozens right now, I think we can rule out anything larger than a tram until 2075 or later.

192nd to Langley, right? True, that's the "urban" part of the line - any kind of train is definitely going to be elevated or buried to avoid all the conflicts.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Eh, I always preferred handing over the YVR spur to a Skytrain down Victoria and Cambie as a parallel to the Canada.

LRT on elevated Rail is basically Light metro (Skytrain) anyways, though.

Yeah, the YVR spur's going to be handed off to another line eventually; 12-minute frequency to Richmond will be completely unacceptable someday.

You're suggesting the Canada branch to Steveston then? Still gotta get to Delta, if only to relieve the new Massey crossing (which is probably going to be clogged again).

Originally Posted by fredinno

CF Richmond's parking lot is half-designated for the residences built on top. Where in the world are you going to park all those cars in a flood?

Somehow, I highly doubt that the planned underground parking is for mall residents.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Walnut Grove is a Junction- more than Lander, which is a 3-way Junction. Walnut Grove is a 4-way junction: one down towards Langley City, one towards Maple Meadows, one towards 104th and Coquitlam, and one down Hwy 1 to Abbotsford.
All are potential Rapid Transit lines.

My point is that even within the context of Transit Fantasy, South Delta has bad prospects in terms of priority, and is beaten by other similar-sized suburbs. Having kms of farmland on the Expo Extension to Langley is acceptable when Langley Centre is (somewhat) urban and it's a 4 way junction surrounded by huge amounts of greenfield being developed into townhomes and apartments.

The law of diminishing returns applies here too. I remember using Waves' cost calculator to get the cost of extending the Canada Line to Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal. It exceeded $3B, mostly due to sheer distance. That's about as much as extending the Expo from Langley Memorial to UFV.

I can probably make the numbers again, though if it's needed. Admittedly, I deleted it because I looked at the preliminary calculations, and wrote it off as dumb.

Lander has nearly no greenfield (I guess except the Lander Marina lands that were taken out of the ALR), and Tsawwassen has greenfield, but the fact that you'll never really fully 'own' your home on FN land is an issue for people wanting to move there. it's also entirely SFHs right now; Walnut Grove is a mix of Duplexes and SFH, and will be combined with the even more dense Carvloth.

Steveston is a dead end, sure, but it also has a mix of Apartments, Quadplexes, and SFHs, is less NIMBY, and has been slowly developing into denser form over the years. It's surrounded by endless swathes of SFHs.
It's not a destination, yet, but it has a head-start.

Langley's the junction for SoF though, as per the Regional Centre Plan - with future SkyTrain lines about 10-20 minutes north and south of it, Walnut Grove's odds are slim. And unlike it or Tsawwassen, Ladner's making attempts to densify via townhouses and be more like Steveston. Stopping there should chop up to a billion off that $3B Tsawwassen estimate.

Originally Posted by fredinno

The commuter spur connects at Bridgeport to the Canada. Did it need another connection?


We can cut that down to 40min on Commuter Rail. A Car on the route Waves proposed on Hwy 10 is listed at 40min-1hr at rush hour, which is, TBF, not as bad as I thought.

Of course, putting the entire thing on highways raises the question of not just putting a BRT system, which would integrate better with the rest of the network and achieve the same net effect.

What about Broadmoor, Southarm or Riverport? Plenty of ridership at SilverCity alone, let alone Watermania and the Ice Centre and the OSF.
Speed is a concern, yes, but if it's the only concern, cut out the useless stops and just have a straight shot from Bridgeport to Steveston, or send it to the ferry instead.... otherwise, any new rapid transit in Richmond should try to better service Richmond's main corridors.

Well, duh. Start with BRT, upgrade to something more effective when the situation demands it. Though I'm not seeing how a bus would "integrate better" - a stop is a stop.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

LBH, transfers are inevitable. The real PITA comes from either being "forced" off a line for no reason (Ladner and Langley are natural dead ends), or from waiting for the connection (with this particular line, there should be enough reliable frequency).

So, is it a Junction or a dead-end?

Clarify? There's no possible network that runs from Coq to Tsawwassen without at least one transfer and an hour-long wait... and since the Fraser Valley Express bus has ridership in the dozens right now, I think we can rule out anything larger than a tram until 2075 or later.

Probably better for an express bus, but:
Assuming a new spur on the 91-99 interchange, and double-tracking.

Extending the Tilbury Is spur down 17 is an alternate option that would be faster, but more costly.

TBF, Dozens of buses, but still.
I guess we're not going with reviving the Fraser Valley Interurban?

192nd to Langley, right? True, that's the "urban" part of the line - any kind of train is definitely going to be elevated or buried to avoid all the conflicts.

No, 192nd St in Clayton to the Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal via Ladner Trunk Rd. I should have made that clear.

Yeah, the YVR spur's going to be handed off to another line eventually; 12-minute frequency to Richmond will be completely unacceptable someday.

You're suggesting the Canada branch to Steveston then? Still gotta get to Delta, if only to relieve the new Massey crossing (which is probably going to be clogged again).

12-minutes? Where'd you get that number from? The max frequency on the mainline is 120s, so 240s, or 4 minutes on each spur.

90s if we remove the single-tracks sections.

I'm suggesting Canada to Steveston, and commuter R. to Steveston and Tsawwassen.

Canada has one benefit; that you MIGHT be able to use the GMB, but is counteracted by the required grade-separation and electrification; also, it's not going to be done if the GMB is congested.

Somehow, I highly doubt that the planned underground parking is for mall residents.

Feast your eyes:

Langley's the junction for SoF though, as per the Regional Centre Plan - with future SkyTrain lines about 10-20 minutes north and south of it, Walnut Grove's odds are slim. And unlike it or Tsawwassen, Ladner's making attempts to densify via townhouses and be more like Steveston. Stopping there should chop up to a billion off that $3B Tsawwassen estimate.

The RGS also designates Carvloth/Walnut Grove West as a FTDA.
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...cel-basedLandUseDesignationMapPoster.pdf

It's secondary to Langley Centre (obviously), but it shouldn't be handwaved off. Walnut Grove proper is generally too new to be redeveloped (it's a 90s-00s suburb), except infill.

Carvloth, on the other side of the highway, isn't.

...And if you end at Lander, it removes one of the biggest drawers on the line, the Ferry Terminal...

What about Broadmoor, Southarm or Riverport? Plenty of ridership at SilverCity alone, let alone Watermania and the Ice Centre and the OSF.
Speed is a concern, yes, but if it's the only concern, cut out the useless stops and just have a straight shot from Bridgeport to Steveston, or send it to the ferry instead.... otherwise, any new rapid transit in Richmond should try to better service Richmond's main corridors.

Well, duh. Start with BRT, upgrade to something more effective when the situation demands it. Though I'm not seeing how a bus would "integrate better" - a stop is a stop.

I don't think ANY of the options would get you to Riverport. It's such a massive detour for any RT mode.

Commuter Rail technically passes though Southarm (though away from the centre), though Broadmoor is definitely a loss.

My commuter Rail map had no stops between Steveston and Bridgeport. All stations were 'future stations'. Speed was the primary concern, to compete with a Canada Line extension on the old interurban down Granville and Railway Av.

Express bus can be implemented across the entire freeway network (ok, that's an exaggeration, the SFPR doesn't have HOV, but you get the idea.). You can route secondary routes from far-off locations without routing everything to a RT route to recoup the cost of construction, like what happened in Richmond once the Canada Line was created.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

So, is it a Junction or a dead-end?

Word I was looking for yesterday was "terminus." Stop the N-S routes, continue with a connecting E-W route.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Probably better for an express bus, but:

Assuming a new spur on the 91-99 interchange, and double-tracking.

Extending the Tilbury Is spur down 17 is an alternate option that would be faster, but more costly.

TBF, Dozens of buses, but still.
I guess we're not going with reviving the Fraser Valley Interurban?

You'd still need a Ladner extension to anchor that one. But it's a good idea - one line to Coquitlam, another to Langley.

Sheba observed that the interurban's still in use. No-go on any kind of service other than peak hour.

Originally Posted by fredinno

No, 192nd St in Clayton to the Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal via Ladner Trunk Rd. I should have made that clear.

I don't recall any light rail AM rush hour study for that stretch...

Originally Posted by fredinno

12-minutes? Where'd you get that number from? The max frequency on the mainline is 120s, so 240s, or 4 minutes on each spur.

90s if we remove the single-tracks sections.

I'm suggesting Canada to Steveston, and commuter R. to Steveston and Tsawwassen.

Canada has one benefit; that you MIGHT be able to use the GMB, but is counteracted by the required grade-separation and electrification; also, it's not going to be done if the GMB is congested.

That's the peak frequency (also not really acceptable). In the evening, it drops to six and twelve minutes. I've learned that the hard way.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Feast your eyes:

Well that's weird. Like (I think) I said though, people stand to lose a lot more stuff in a basement flood.

Originally Posted by fredinno

The RGS also designates Carvloth/Walnut Grove West as a FTDA.
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...cel-basedLandUseDesignationMapPoster.pdf

It's secondary to Langley Centre (obviously), but it shouldn't be handwaved off. Walnut Grove proper is generally too new to be redeveloped (it's a 90s-00s suburb), except infill.
Carvloth, on the other side of the highway, isn't.

...And if you end at Lander, it removes one of the biggest drawers on the line, the Ferry Terminal...

Fair enough, but the proximity problem doesn't go away. Delta's got no rail transit at all, which is a bit more important to TransLink 2075. WG'd have the M-Line in Maple Ridge and the Expo in Langley, so they'd run a B-Line between the two and pick up everybody along the way. Maybe the Tsawwassen-Langley Line could jump onto 208th (instead of Fraser to Aldergrove)?

With a 5-10 minute suburban rail connection, getting from Lander to the ferry isn't really a problem.

Originally Posted by fredinno

I don't think ANY of the options would get you to Riverport. It's such a massive detour for any RT mode.

Commuter Rail technically passes though Southarm (though away from the centre), though Broadmoor is definitely a loss.

My commuter Rail map had no stops between Steveston and Bridgeport. All stations were 'future stations'. Speed was the primary concern, to compete with a Canada Line extension on the old interurban down Granville and Railway Av.

Express bus can be implemented across the entire freeway network (ok, that's an exaggeration, the SFPR doesn't have HOV, but you get the idea.). You can route secondary routes from far-off locations without routing everything to a RT route to recoup the cost of construction, like what happened in Richmond once the Canada Line was created.

The Canada'd go down Steveston Highway anyway - Riverport, cross the Fraser, dismount at Deas. IIRC waves already tried such an alignment somewhere in the archives.

What's the frequency for that c-rail to Steveston anyhow? When you include getting off the Canada and waiting for the transfer and making those extra stops, you'd likely save about five minutes over a SkyTrain. Not worth the operating cost.

Before the C-Line, after the C-Line. Biggest change is that Delta buses now stop at Bridgeport instead of Marpole. It's not like intra-Richmond trips are "bus, SkyTrain, bus" now. Nor would a train line wreck service to White Rock or Surrey or Langley.

[waves]

I revamped my Rail Rapid Transit Cost Calculator. It is now all in 2018 dollars and has the new Broadway Study numbers in it. I have also done the calculations to allow more specific calculation of Skytrain vs. Canada Line vs. LRT and ect.

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AjWWltw_HSwziMxlv1-Ki8hc5t2YRw


Without contingencies:

• Canada Line Extension to Ladner (14km/7stations): $1.53 billion
• Ladner to Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal LRT (11km/3stations): $818 million
• Ladner to Langley LRT (31km/9stations): $3.05 billion
• Langley to Abbotsford LRT (27.2km/11 stations): $2.98 billion

Since these are very long term projects, Surrey, Delta, Langley, MOTI and others could prepare for these improvements before hand which may bring down costs significantly (for LRT). For instance, utility replacement or road repaving could be completed along highway 10 with right of way accommodation for a future LRT line in the median. Also, when intersections are improved, they could be built with future LRT handling capabilities. Especially for such a long distance, having all of these things slowly get implemented incidentally and negligibly through other programs would significantly reduce the costs above. I would even hazard to say by up to 50%.

[waves]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The Canada'd go down Steveston Highway anyway - Riverport, cross the Fraser, dismount at Deas. IIRC waves already tried such an alignment somewhere in the archives.

Here is my post on why Riverport isn't really feasible for getting a station on the line. The problem is with the approaches necessary to attain the height required to cross the Fraser. If the Canada Line is extended Riverport won't be connected because of this technical complexity, unless they opt for a tunnel.

Originally Posted by waves

I did some more visualization to show the parts of each of the lines that would be needed at a 3.5% grade to reach a bridge height of 55m from 8m (essentially 1.5km on each side of the center of the span). I also calculated out the different distances of new track needed for each option and the "clear-span" widths...

...Height of Riverport Station above Ground: 40m...

...See the post to see the image...

After all of this my preference is very much starting to trend towards the George Massey Bridge Option. Maybe with the review that is going to take place with the bridge they can incorporate cross section space for the skytrain along the west edge of the bridge with pedestrian and cyclist cross sections on the east edge. If we can get an 8 lane bridge with pedestrian, cyclists and skytrain cross sections, the project will have beyond exceeded my expectations.

Previous Post on doubling Brighouse Station

Originally Posted by waves

Previous Post of George Massey Bridge with reserved space for the Canada Line.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by waves

I revamped my Rail Rapid Transit Cost Calculator. It is now all in 2018 dollars and has the new Broadway Study numbers in it. I have also done the calculations to allow more specific calculation of Skytrain vs. Canada Line vs. LRT and ect.

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AjWWltw_HSwziMxlv1-Ki8hc5t2YRw


Without contingencies:

• Canada Line Extension to Ladner (14km/7stations): $1.53 billion
• Ladner to Tsawwassen Ferry Terminal LRT (11km/3stations): $818 million
• Ladner to Langley LRT (31km/9stations): $3.05 billion
• Langley to Abbotsford LRT (27.2km/11 stations): $2.98 billion

Since these are very long term projects, Surrey, Delta, Langley, MOTI and others could prepare for these improvements before hand which may bring down costs significantly (for LRT). For instance, utility replacement or road repaving could be completed along highway 10 with right of way accommodation for a future LRT line in the median. Also, when intersections are improved, they could be built with future LRT handling capabilities. Especially for such a long distance, having all of these things slowly get implemented incidentally and negligibly through other programs would significantly reduce the costs above. I would even hazard to say by up to 50%.

Well, yeah. You still have to put in the tracks, OMC, rolling stock...

~$5.5B is still $5.5B. What's the Cost-Benefit Ratio to service 40,000 people with rapid transit? Diesel LRT to Abbotsford-Chilliwack on the SRY corridor was expected to have a cost/Ride of $63.9/passenger, and Abbotsford has 141,400 people, though ridiculously spread out. Even with the much higher ratio of people leaving South Delta to the rest of Metro Van (about 27000, vs 14000 for people leaving Abbotsford for Metro, or about double), is it really going to be profitable any time soon?

Commuter Rail isn't much more profitable, but it has far lower capital costs- closer to $100M on existing corridors than $5.5B (TBF, ignoring double-tracking requirements, a new rail bridge, etc, but trams have their capital costs way worse.)

I don't like to think in terms of beyond 2070ish, because that's 50years away, and by that time, Vancouver may start stagnating in population with the rest of the continent, changing the dynamics enormously. Or birth rates rise or death rates decline, and it doesn't. I feel there's too much that would change. Of course you can justify anything on long enough time scales.


Though from that line of thinking, abandoning the rail idea entirely and just going with express buses is probably most likely.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Word I was looking for yesterday was "terminus." Stop the N-S routes, continue with a connecting E-W route.



You'd still need a Ladner extension to anchor that one. But it's a good idea - one line to Coquitlam, another to Langley.

Well, yeah, it's probably not going to be full-size, and you need something in between Ladner and Richmond to support those commuters.

Canada Line trains running every 10 minutes on small, high frequency trains are going to be hard to synchronize with large, low-frequency trains arriving every hour, though.

I don't recall any light rail AM rush hour study for that stretch...

I used road AM rush hour (I think I noted that already), so take it with a grain of salt. I don't think ANYONE has made any RT study for Cloverdale-Newton.

Fair enough, but the proximity problem doesn't go away. Delta's got no rail transit at all, which is a bit more important to TransLink 2075. WG'd have the M-Line in Maple Ridge and the Expo in Langley, so they'd run a B-Line between the two and pick up everybody along the way. Maybe the Tsawwassen-Langley Line could jump onto 208th (instead of Fraser to Aldergrove)?

With a 5-10 minute suburban rail connection, getting from Lander to the ferry isn't really a problem.

Well, there's a B-line that could be upgraded to RT proposed on Scott Rd. does that count as 'Delta?'

Western West Van and Deep Cove are unlikely to have rapid transit by the 2060s either, despite their proximity to downtown.

200th's probably better, 208 is too narrow as is. 200th is 6 lanes, with room for bus lanes on each side.

What's the frequency for that c-rail to Steveston anyhow? When you include getting off the Canada and waiting for the transfer and making those extra stops, you'd likely save about five minutes over a SkyTrain. Not worth the operating cost.

It was for long-distance transfers, not short-distance ones- which is what commuter Rail is for in general.

And as I said earlier, there's no stops between Steveston and Bridgeport, only 'roughed in' ones @ Cambie and Steveston to accommodate Skytrain and express bus, respectively.

A line down to Tsawwassen, vs subsidized passenger Ferry service to Victoria at Waterfront or Iona is a different debate altogether, of which I'm not sure of.

Before the C-Line, after the C-Line. Biggest change is that Delta buses now stop at Bridgeport instead of Marpole. It's not like intra-Richmond trips are "bus, SkyTrain, bus" now. Nor would a train line wreck service to White Rock or Surrey or Langley.

Fair enough.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Well, yeah. You still have to put in the tracks, OMC, rolling stock...

~$5.5B is still $5.5B. What's the Cost-Benefit Ratio to service 40,000 people with rapid transit? Diesel LRT to Abbotsford-Chilliwack on the SRY corridor was expected to have a cost/Ride of $63.9/passenger, and Abbotsford has 141,400 people, though ridiculously spread out. Even with the much higher ratio of people leaving South Delta to the rest of Metro Van (about 27000, vs 14000 for people leaving Abbotsford for Metro, or about double), is it really going to be profitable any time soon?

Commuter Rail isn't much more profitable, but it has far lower capital costs- closer to $100M on existing corridors than $5.5B (TBF, ignoring double-tracking requirements, a new rail bridge, etc, but trams have their capital costs way worse.)

I don't like to think in terms of beyond 2070ish, because that's 50years away, and by that time, Vancouver may start stagnating in population with the rest of the continent, changing the dynamics enormously. Or birth rates rise or death rates decline, and it doesn't. I feel there's too much that would change. Of course you can justify anything on long enough time scales.


Though from that line of thinking, abandoning the rail idea entirely and just going with express buses is probably most likely.

$5-6B is indeed a dealbreaker. Thought I'd like to observe that much of the western part of the route is rural or suburban, so (theoretically) we could go beside the highway instead of on it.

The problem with the SoF track is that it was built exclusively for freight, and so it avoids populated areas. It's not impossible for passenger rail to use it, but having many of the "downtowns" so far away is less than optimal.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Well, yeah, it's probably not going to be full-size, and you need something in between Ladner and Richmond to support those commuters.

Canada Line trains running every 10 minutes on small, high frequency trains are going to be hard to synchronize with large, low-frequency trains arriving every hour, though.

Hence a non-heavy rail. One light/medium-sized train every ten minutes should do the trick.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Well, there's a B-line that could be upgraded to RT proposed on Scott Rd. does that count as 'Delta?'

Western West Van and Deep Cove are unlikely to have rapid transit by the 2060s either, despite their proximity to downtown.

200th's probably better, 208 is too narrow as is. 200th is 6 lanes, with room for bus lanes on each side.

That B-Line should go ahead, but LBH, North Delta's really just West Newton.

True. Dunderave and Phibbs might, though; maybe even Maplewood. Likewise, Ladner might have RT, Tsawassen definitely won't.

Originally Posted by fredinno

It was for long-distance transfers, not short-distance ones- which is what commuter Rail is for in general.

And as I said earlier, there's no stops between Steveston and Bridgeport, only 'roughed in' ones @ Cambie and Steveston to accommodate Skytrain and express bus, respectively.

A line down to Tsawwassen, vs subsidized passenger Ferry service to Victoria at Waterfront or Iona is a different debate altogether, of which I'm not sure of.

Is Bridgeport-Steveston really long-distance though? It's a creative solution, just doesn't seem worth it.

Waterfront (and the Inlet in general) is kinda maxed out. And I believe there's been other reasons listed for why there's nothing but waste treatment in Iona... for one, the Canada Line dead-ends at YVR.

[waves]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

$5-6B is indeed a dealbreaker. Thought I'd like to observe that much of the western part of the route is rural or suburban, so (theoretically) we could go beside the highway instead of on it.

The problem with the SoF track is that it was built exclusively for freight, and so it avoids populated areas. It's not impossible for passenger rail to use it, but having many of the "downtowns" so far away is less than optimal.

When you only have to lay track rather than rip up the ground it can save you $50 million a km. Look at the cost difference per km of at-grade in Alberta vs. at-grade Kitchner/Victoria.

Characterizing it as $5.5 billion is a bit unfair as a Langley-Tsawwassen LRT would not be built at the same time as a Canada Line Extension to Ladner. You could, however, see a B-Line go in and then 10 years down the road have it replaced with LRT. With that in mind, you are looking at likely looking at a $2 billion Canada Line Extension + B-Line combo which is very reasonable.

You could of course send the line on the existing rail right of way from Ladner to Langley but it would bypass the suburban areas and it would be a missed opportunity for more development and ridership within the urban containment zone. (Green rather than Black). The better prepared a right of way is for LRT, the cheaper it becomes. LRT that has been put in place on exisiting rails and is single tracked has been know to cost as little at $1.5million/km. Where they have to put in rail, $10-15million/km. I imagine that if the governments are smart about setting aside land and utility locations they could reach the $20 million/km range. If they can reach that, they could get an LRT to Langley for under $1.5 billion.



I'm not thinking much about Langley to Abbotsord at this point. Other than a BLine or something will probably go in when the Langley Skytrain extension opens.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I can somewhat see the advantage of using the CP track from the ferry up to Highway 91 (catches YDT as well) and Newton to Cloverdale. Agreed otherwise.

[goldenboi]

With all of the opposition of the North Shore B-Line, I decided to make a fantasy map of Metro Vancouver. I think B-Lines are our best tool in public transportation at the moment, and I would like to see them all over the region.

Obviously the local routes would have to be redesigned to connect with the B-Lines better, but I have decided not to take that on at the moment. My main goal was to tie together the entire region with B-Lines.

Hope you like it, and I would love some feedback.

[Aroundtheworld]

^ Awesome map! If I were to nitpick, I would say there doesn't have to be so many stops between Lynn Valley and Lonsdale for that B-Line.

[Dengler Avenue]

LOL every single arterial roads in Vancouver Proper should be coloured orange.

But B-Line down 200th Street? How long will it take for Maple Meadows, Willoughby, and Willowbrook to get dense enough for that??

[officedweller]

Cool.
Another comment: The hill on Arbutus is probably too steep for a B-Line between Cornwall and 4th Ave. and between 4th and Broadway,
the RoW is very narrow, so it would have to go up Burrard to Broadway, 12th or 16th then turn onto Arbutus.

On the downtown end, the Arbutus B-Line could also take Howe, Fir St off-ramp up to Broadway, 12th or 16th then Arbutus
- depends on how much it is intended to serve lower Kits.