Transit Fantasies

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Is that really possible? You say it is next to nigh impossible to have, but please just imagine for a moment that it were; could you apply it to that possible LRT Vancouver map?
I would love to see some renders of what it might be like!

I'll reply to everything later, but http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=231197
if you're interested. I need to update it. :/

Also, spending more money on LRT means less for bus networks. Ottawa has the Transitway. Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLAST_network

BRT has never really been done too well in NA in general. I think the problem is mostly that BRT only works to its strengths on secondary routes in NA, the routes that get less money and attention. Most cities haven't gone to that point.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by scryer

I think that I have repeated my opinion a few times on the idea of Street-Level LRT for Vancouver so I do apologize if I sound like a broken record. I almost feel like the idea of streetcars in Vancity should be a thread of its own.

(plays fanfare). That said, since there's always newbs - or lazy regulars (you know who you are ) - in need of a refresher, it's more than fine to bring up the old arguments again... though preferably not very often.

Agreed, streetcars on Granville/Davie/Denman/Water are incredibly wishful thinking without a full road closure, and that's not going to happen without a high-capacity route doing the heavy lifting. Though I'd like to point out that most other Canadian cities (and some American ones) have had the common sense to put their downtown segments in tunnels, so that's always an option.

Re: capacity... it depends. On one hand, yes, the average single tram outdoes the average single bus in terms of people-moving.
On the other hand, I and others have argued that two buses every four minutes is better than one tram every seven.
On a third hand, the recent strike proves that we might not have enough vehicles or drivers to do that, and so streetcars might make sense as a trolley replacement.
On a fourth hand, both buses and street trams are confined to less than 10k pphpd, whereas grade-separation gets you up to 20k+, so TransLink'll have to consider which routes are going to see a lot of growth, but not that much growth.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

(plays fanfare). That said, since there's always newbs - or lazy regulars (you know who you are ) - in need of a refresher, it's more than fine to bring up the old arguments again... though preferably not very often.

Agreed, streetcars on Granville/Davie/Denman/Water are incredibly wishful thinking without a full road closure, and that's not going to happen without a high-capacity route doing the heavy lifting. Though I'd like to point out that most other Canadian cities (and some American ones) have had the common sense to put their downtown segments in tunnels, so that's always an option.

Re: capacity... it depends. On one hand, yes, the average single tram outdoes the average single bus in terms of people-moving.
On the other hand, I and others have argued that two buses every four minutes is better than one tram every seven.
On a third hand, the recent strike proves that we might not have enough vehicles or drivers to do that, and so streetcars might make sense as a trolley replacement.
On a fourth hand, both buses and street trams are confined to less than 10k pphpd, whereas grade-separation gets you up to 20k+, so TransLink'll have to consider which routes are going to see a lot of growth, but not that much growth.

Why’d you have to close them?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Why’d you have to close them?

Because they're only four lanes wide - two in Water's case. So TransLink can either build a median and reduce them to two lanes and no left turns (bad), or do it like King Street in Toronto and make them practically impossible to drive on (also bad).

Easier to close the entire road.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Because they're only four lanes wide - two in Water's case. So TransLink can either build a median and reduce them to two lanes and no left turns (bad), or do it like King Street in Toronto and make them practically impossible to drive on (also bad).

Easier to close the entire road.

Water takes traffic from Powell, so unless you remove the parking from Cordova AND turn Powell into a transit mall...

That also kills the idea of any West End or Coal Harbour Streetcar too. We've already been doing the 'ban left turns' thing when we've been adding new bike lanes and removing the Granville Loops.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Water takes traffic from Powell, so unless you remove the parking from Cordova AND turn Powell into a transit mall...

That also kills the idea of any West End or Coal Harbour Streetcar too. We've already been doing the 'ban left turns' thing when we've been adding new bike lanes and removing the Granville Loops.

Don't know about those (no parking on Cordova isn't a big loss though), but closing Water is definitely on the table. That part of Carrall's already one way, so Powell should be fine. Granted, the new and future City Councils might have something different in mind.

Yeah, and the multiple restrictions make it harder to navigate downtown in a car; knowing what we know of Gregor Robertson and friends, that was probably deliberate. IMO having one road exclusively for transit and another exclusively for cars is much more intuitive.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Don't know about those (no parking on Cordova isn't a big loss though), but closing Water is definitely on the table. That part of Carrall's already one way, so Powell should be fine. Granted, the new and future City Councils might have something different in mind.

Yeah, and the multiple restrictions make it harder to navigate downtown in a car; knowing what we know of Gregor Robertson and friends, that was probably deliberate. IMO having one road exclusively for transit and another exclusively for cars is much more intuitive.

Ok, yeah, maybe Water. But it doesn't work for many other streets. Vancouver is a grid, but not a perfect Grid. There's not really any viable road to properly replace Davie all that nearby, let alone Pacific.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Agreed entirely -and a median ROW or mixed-traffic option isn't viable either for the same reasons. Drake might work, if they can solve the problem of getting on and off Pacific.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Agreed entirely -and a median ROW or mixed-traffic option isn't viable either for the same reasons. Drake might work, if they can solve the problem of getting on and off Pacific.

Drake is a Laneway in the West End, which is a serious problem. The ROW isn’t all that wide, and even if it was, all the stuff that you don’t want facing the road, and drivers/potential customers is on the laneway. Like trash. Not to mention a lack of sidewalks, the fact that a semi-private area is not public...

The broadway plan assumed a median ROW with Left- Turn restrictions.

[officedweller]

Just a note that Water St. and Cordova St. provide a one-way couplet system.
Water St. is westbound, Cordova St. is eastbound.
If one is to be closed, the other must become 2-way.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Just a note that Water St. and Cordova St. provide a one-way couplet system.
Water St. is westbound, Cordova St. is eastbound.
If one is to be closed, the other must become 2-way.

Not necessarily.

Water Street could conceivably be closed to vehicle traffic between Carrall and Cordova. The city has explored the idea of converting Columbia Street into a two-way street, which could help divert downtown-bound traffic on Powell Street to East Hastings, or over to the new road network planned in Northeast False Creek.

https://urbanyvr.com/gastown-water-street-tiles-crumbling

[Migrant_Coconut]

A two-way Columbia would likely be connected to the newly-straightened Quebec when the NEFC rework kicks in. It'd definitely help if Cordova were two-way as well.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Drake is a Laneway in the West End, which is a serious problem. The ROW isn’t all that wide, and even if it was, all the stuff that you don’t want facing the road, and drivers/potential customers is on the laneway. Like trash. Not to mention a lack of sidewalks, the fact that a semi-private area is not public...

The broadway plan assumed a median ROW with Left- Turn restrictions.

Huh, so it is. That explains why that particular Pacific Spur concept ends at Granville.

You'll recall that Broadway's streetcar was overwhelmingly considered a Very Bad Idea and rejected, as was Surrey's. Davie wouldn't be much different.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

A two-way Columbia would likely be connected to the newly-straightened Quebec when the NEFC rework kicks in. It'd definitely help if Cordova were two-way as well.



Huh, so it is. That explains why that particular Pacific Spur concept ends at Granville.

You'll recall that Broadway's streetcar was overwhelmingly considered a Very Bad Idea and rejected, as was Surrey's. Davie wouldn't be much different.

There's a Columbia Street in DT Vancouver?

Eh, LRT did decently- just not as well as the subway idea. Both LRT and BRT's biggest concerns besides speed was capacity.
https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documen...natives_Evaluation_Executive_Summary.pdf

Thing is, this isn't Broadway, and there's definitely no money for more than one, maybe not even 1, West End Subway.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

There's a Columbia Street in DT Vancouver?

Eh, LRT did decently- just not as well as the subway idea. Both LRT and BRT's biggest concerns besides speed was capacity.
https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documen...natives_Evaluation_Executive_Summary.pdf

Thing is, this isn't Broadway, and there's definitely no money for more than one, maybe not even 1, West End Subway.

Quebec turns into a one-way Columbia Street north of Keefer. No relation to the Columbia in Mount Pleasant AFAIK.

No, the West End isn't Broadway - it's much, much denser. Even ignoring decreased mobility for other street users and mode share transfer, then sooner or later demand within and through downtown will overwhelm a streetcar-only network.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Quebec turns into a one-way Columbia Street north of Keefer. No relation to the Columbia in Mount Pleasant AFAIK.

No, the West End isn't Broadway - it's much, much denser. Even ignoring decreased mobility for other street users and mode share transfer, then sooner or later demand within and through downtown will overwhelm a streetcar-only network.

It's also a geographic cul-de-sac and doesn't benefit much from speed when relative distances are small. I mean, you can walk to DT from the West End. There's a reason that it was able to densify long before any decent transit.

"Difficult to Drive" describes the entirety of the West End area. Either tons of traffic, or traffic calming measures have been put in place that makes the secondary gridded streets a pain.

No one here wants a full DT LRT/BRT only network. The majority to transportation in DT is in and out of DT, and that's going to be Skytrain (with some exceptions proposed, like Main and Arbutus.)

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

With a station at, let's say, Denman and Robson, people at both locations could just go to it instead of Burrard. But yes, this hypothetical Robson Line would have to be part of some other, more important SkyTrain project (Hastings?); it doesn't have a chance in hell of being built on its own.

I'd once again caution against underbuilding, especially downtown. If BRT/LRT is already insufficient for Central Broadway, then that applies even more so to the West End.

Eh, Arbutus would adhere closer to the "tram" part of that term. Modern Vancouver doesn't have a very S-Bahn friendly layout, and the "train" part can't properly kick in until Marine. That said, city planning teams have suggesting road closures and a hedge/fence-separated ROW, so the final product could end up anywhere between ION and Eglinton-Crosstown.

1/2 of the ridership on Broadway is headed to UBC/West Pt. Grey, meaning half the ridership is long-distance. The only thing like that here is Lions Gate, which is likely to be bypassed for the most part once Skytrain gets to the NS.

Modern Vancouver doesn't have a very S-Bahn friendly layout, and the "train" part can't properly kick in until Marine.

I mean, the Artubus was originally an S-Bahn of sorts ( a really terrible one, but )... But even considering that, they should be able to by minimizing the station # to the main centers only (Kerrisdale, Marine Drive, False Creek, Broadway, maybe Artubus Village and West Marpole.) So 2.6-1.77km/station on average.

city planning teams have suggesting road closures and a hedge/fence-separated ROW

They have?
As far as I know, they're suggesting sharing the ROW with pedestrians and cyclists, and none really seems to have any fences in place. I know the one Victoria 'active' rail line has fences separating it from the ped path on the same ROW. There should be space for something like that on most of the ROW, just the renderings never seem to include fences.

[dandor31]

I believe Translink also has a desire to see Cordova turned in a two-way street. At least the existing one-way portion between Richards and Cambie. This will allow the 5/6 loop to provide a much better transfer point to Waterfront Station and the Seabus. Currently the 5 Downtown travels on W Pender, but could be moved north to travel along Cordova both directions.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Not necessarily.

2-waying Columbia may work, but I expect people would prefer to take Pender, rather than Hastings.
Columbia would be better than using Carrall and sending people into DTES ground zero at Pigeon Park.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

2-waying Columbia may work, but I expect people would prefer to take Pender, rather than Hastings.
Columbia would be better than using Carrall and sending people into DTES ground zero at Pigeon Park.

Carall is being closed off at Pacific in the NEFC plan.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by scryer

In fact I included this kind of surface LRT into a fantasy of my own.

Do you have one made?

Next counterpoint - why not spend the same amount of money on BRT? The only problem that I personally have with BRT is that I don't think that it has ever been executed well in Canada. Winnipeg's BRT is a disaster and the Rapid Bus program in Vancouver is just a bunch of money to paint some articulated buses with fancy signs. I think that BRT is totally feasible to implement but Canada has a pretty bad track record of doing BRT adequately which isn't a good enough reason to be against BRT but it is something that I do keep in mind.

Ottawa does it well.
Let's be fair, Vancouver's system was created for literally pennies on the dollar in comparison to an actual BRT. It's a B-Line with some improved priority features and a rebranding (possibly to avoid the inevitable 'Y9D' bug when they run out of 9X #s.)

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

^I honestly don't see streetcar/LRT making sense for Vancouver except for the Arbutus Corridor and False Creek.

There's no point building a streetcar that will just sit in mixed traffic and won't have signal priority except being a colossal waste of money. I also don't trust the planners here to do a proper job and implement those things.

Look at Sydney, Australia. They just spent $3B on a light rail line that goes 15 minutes slower than the bus it replaced.

You mean CoV or TransLink? Because the latter isn't spearheading the project.

And with Syndey, it seems like the actual transit time is on average only slightly faster than bus. Basically if Surrey went ahead with the LRT. bad.https://www.reddit.com/r/sydney/comments/ebahnk/why_sydney_light_rail_l2_is_slow_and_how_to_fix_it/

Originally Posted by scryer

- West 1st or West 2nd/West 6th avenue; and Quebec Street look like they could be good candidates for SLGI LRT routes.

- The connection to Waterfront station could be messy-ish, especially if the LRT has to go through Gastown. I know that it would be cool for historical purposes but I would rather have it behind Gastown (north) adjacent to the service road that is adjacent to all of the rail.

Waterfront Road is limited service and is primarily limited for the Port's trucks. They will never allow streetcars on a 2-lane road like that.

There is a reserved ROW in South False Creek that used to be a spur of the Pacific Mainline owned by the city.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It's also a geographic cul-de-sac and doesn't benefit much from speed when relative distances are small. I mean, you can walk to DT from the West End. There's a reason that it was able to densify long before any decent transit.

"Difficult to Drive" describes the entirety of the West End area. Either tons of traffic, or traffic calming measures have been put in place that makes the secondary gridded streets a pain.

No one here wants a full DT LRT/BRT only network. The majority to transportation in DT is in and out of DT, and that's going to be Skytrain (with some exceptions proposed, like Main and Arbutus.)

Now we're back where we started. The other reason for the West End densifying is it being a part of downtown; again, it's just as much a destination as it is a throughfare. SkyTrain'd mean less people crowding the Burrard or Granville/Van Centre entrances or the 5 or 6, and less people on Georgia to/from the North Shore, because they're all getting on and off further out from the CBD.

Yeah, navigation is a nightmare. Doesn't mean we should make the area even less driveable without adding a better option. The Broadway light rail saved about five minutes over the 99 (ten minutes over the 9?) and naturally had much less people switching to transit as a result. Ditto the Portland Streetcar, where locals seem to agree that it's easier to walk or bike than to wait for it and ride the same distance; unless that's the objective, a tram doesn't seem to justify a 50% roadspace reduction by itself.

Originally Posted by fredinno

You mean CoV or TransLink? Because the latter isn't spearheading the project.

Technically, the City's jurisdiction is the Greenway and its ROW; once that's finished, they'll hand it off to TransLink. I know it's not possible for everybody, but attending an open house gives you a lot more information than just the PDFs and renders.