Transit Fantasies

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Overhead wires sounds suspiciously like PRT, and we all know how effective that one is. Sounds better and easier to just outfit every rest stop with charging stations.

Isn’t that just Trolley buses?

[flipper316]

https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/colum...ome-1.24096785

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by flipper316

https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/colum...ome-1.24096785

Opinion piece by someone with no expertise in the area. Whether he's right or not, he's not really worth listening to.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Opinion piece by someone with no expertise in the area. Whether he's right or not, he's not really worth listening to.

Actually, the chap has some points.

Basically, north Shore RR transit has a long time to wait. Broadway to UBC is a great bet, Surrey to Langley is a good bet.

Both are extensions, natural extensions, of line we are already going to build.

Easy to imagine and easy to slip into the queue.

RR transit to the north shore via the railroad bridge is actually feasible but not really good since it puts the station at the end of the north shore.

The really viable line would be up Lonsdale to the Upper Levels or up Cap Road to the upper levels.

The reason is that the Upper levels is the "joker in the deck". once you get an end station anywhere along that artery, you can run buses from Horseshoe Bay (even Squamish/Whistler) to the Phibbs exchange. Buses to the three ski hills during the ski season are a natural ... making those areas available to everyone on RR anywhere in the Lower Mainland.

You can also run buses that "dip down" below the Upper Levels into neighbourhoods and "dip up" into the areas above the Upper Levels as well.

Marine drive has little value from HB to Park Royal, at that point.

He does have some points, although his speech about the "odds" is questionable.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually, the chap has some points.

Basically, north Shore RR transit has a long time to wait. Broadway to UBC is a great bet, Surrey to Langley is a good bet.

Both are extensions, natural extensions, of line we are already going to build.

Easy to imagine and easy to slip into the queue.

RR transit to the north shore via the railroad bridge is actually feasible but not really good since it puts the station at the end of the north shore.

The really viable line would be up Lonsdale to the Upper Levels or up Cap Road to the upper levels.

The reason is that the Upper levels is the "joker in the deck". once you get an end station anywhere along that artery, you can run buses from Horseshoe Bay (even Squamish/Whistler) to the Phibbs exchange. Buses to the three ski hills during the ski season are a natural ... making those areas available to everyone on RR anywhere in the Lower Mainland.

You can also run buses that "dip down" below the Upper Levels into neighbourhoods and "dip up" into the areas above the Upper Levels as well.

Marine drive has little value from HB to Park Royal, at that point.

He does have some points, although his speech about the "odds" is questionable.

I reckon there should be an express bus like the 620 but from Waterfront to Park Royal to Horseshoe Bay.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

I reckon there should be an express bus like the 620 but from Waterfront to Park Royal to Horseshoe Bay.

Umm they already have that, Horseshoe Bay Express.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

I reckon there should be an express bus like the 620 but from Waterfront to Park Royal to Horseshoe Bay.

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Umm they already have that, Horseshoe Bay Express.

On the North Shore, you can also use the R2 RapidBus to get to Park Royal and then transfer to the 257 express for Horseshoe Bay.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually, the chap has some points.

Basically, north Shore RR transit has a long time to wait. Broadway to UBC is a great bet, Surrey to Langley is a good bet.

Both are extensions, natural extensions, of line we are already going to build.

Easy to imagine and easy to slip into the queue.

RR transit to the north shore via the railroad bridge is actually feasible but not really good since it puts the station at the end of the north shore.

The really viable line would be up Lonsdale to the Upper Levels or up Cap Road to the upper levels.

The reason is that the Upper levels is the "joker in the deck". once you get an end station anywhere along that artery, you can run buses from Horseshoe Bay (even Squamish/Whistler) to the Phibbs exchange. Buses to the three ski hills during the ski season are a natural ... making those areas available to everyone on RR anywhere in the Lower Mainland.

You can also run buses that "dip down" below the Upper Levels into neighbourhoods and "dip up" into the areas above the Upper Levels as well.

Marine drive has little value from HB to Park Royal, at that point.

He does have some points, although his speech about the "odds" is questionable.

Yeah, I really think there should be some sort of integrated bus system to the ski resorts. We have one for Grouse, but none for the other 3 other than very expensive charter buses that are private and lack proper integration to the rest of the network. They likely wouldn't make money (Grouse has a lot of riders, but the buses up to the other 2 would need likely have to be specially modified or at least have snow tires due to going all the way up the mountain), but the economic benefits may justify the cost.

[Migrant_Coconut]

So long as it's a Greyhound line; skis and snowboards clog up a regular bus real fast. Might be easier to add an loading/unloading space at Upper Levels station and have the charters run from there.

Come to think of it, you could also service Cap U and the suspension bridge directly from the Upper Levels.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So long as it's a Greyhound line; skis and snowboards clog up a regular bus real fast. Might be easier to add an loading/unloading space at Upper Levels station and have the charters run from there.

Come to think of it, you could also service Cap U and the suspension bridge directly from the Upper Levels.

I take the bus up to Grouse when I go there. Half the people don't even take equipment up anyways, so it's still workable without a greyhound.

The problem with the charters is the cost and lack of connectivity with the rest of the network. They do actually connect to Skytrain at their end.

Though, note, the problem with Upper Levels is both Cap U and the Suspension Bridge are exactly at the edge of the walk boundary (15 min).

[Bdawe]

I believe seymour bus tickets are part of the seasons pass, and they run out of Rupert Station. Reasonably integrated IMO

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The problem with the charters is the cost and lack of connectivity with the rest of the network. They do actually connect to Skytrain at their end.

Though, note, the problem with Upper Levels is both Cap U and the Suspension Bridge are exactly at the edge of the walk boundary (15 min).

But there's regular bus service to Grousewoods and BP - there's already a network for the area.

Not sure how you're getting those numbers. The Suspension Bridge is 2.5 klicks from Lonsdale Overpass as the crow flies (further because you have to take Queens and Edgemont), and that's around half an hour on foot. Uni's even farther, and across a river and up a hill.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

But there's regular bus service to Grousewoods and BP - there's already a network for the area.

Not sure how you're getting those numbers. The Suspension Bridge is 2.5 klicks from Lonsdale Overpass as the crow flies (further because you have to take Queens and Edgemont), and that's around half an hour on foot. Uni's even farther, and across a river and up a hill.

I'm assuming stops on the Upper Levels at Capilano and Lynn. I don't think the Upper Levels is good enough mind you for transit connections.

BP at Cypress, the area proposed to be densest so far in the BP, isn't connected. So there could be demand in the summer season as well. Seymour would have to be winter only unless the CMHC lands get liquidated.

I guess it depends on if more buses vs fewer buses makes sense and that is context dependent.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I'm assuming stops on the Upper Levels at Capilano and Lynn. I don't think the Upper Levels is good enough mind you for transit connections.

BP at Cypress, the area proposed to be densest so far in the BP, isn't connected. So there could be demand in the summer season as well. Seymour would have to be winter only unless the CMHC lands get liquidated.

I guess it depends on if more buses vs fewer buses makes sense and that is context dependent.

Wouldn't it be better to separate skiers/tourists from residents? The former want to go almost straight from Point A to Point B with little to no local stops (doubt they want to get off at Edgemont Village) and doesn't care about crowding, while the latter are almost the exact opposite. So one group takes the resort buses and the other gets increased local service.

As far as I'm concerned, the only way to adequately serve Cypress Bowl by transit is with a gondola, and even that's a little iffy. Seymour... is on its own.

[officedweller]

I wonder how social distancing impacts the feasibility of the SFU gondola?
Maybe a change for a couple of large ca bins to lots of smaller ones?

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I wonder how social distancing impacts the feasibility of the SFU gondola?
Maybe a change for a couple of large ca bins to lots of smaller ones?

I think I read something about it being okay to forgo social distancing in situations where it's difficult to social distance, so long as everyone is wearing a mask.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I wonder how social distancing impacts the feasibility of the SFU gondola?
Maybe a change for a couple of large ca bins to lots of smaller ones?

How so? How would it be any different from the feasibility of a SkyTrain extension or a new bus route?

[officedweller]

I think the plan was to have 2 gondolas like Peak-to-Peak, versus a lot of smaller gondolas like Sea-to-Sky.
Numerically, if a big gondola is restricted to, say, 10 people, would 30+ smaller cabins be better (don't know what number would be)?

Different considerations come up though, as the bigger cabin with more people may be safer from a CEPTD perspective (ie assaults) than smaller cabins (that's one reason the Expo 86 monorail (which was compartmentalized, with only one door per compartment) was not installed in the West End, as was once proposed - that was also a time when the West End had a lot of prostitution and violence, and the road barriers were installed to prevent johns from circulating).

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think the plan was to have 2 gondolas like Peak-to-Peak, versus a lot of smaller gondolas like Sea-to-Sky.
Numerically, if a big gondola is restricted to, say, 10 people, would 30+ smaller cabins be better (don't know what number would be)?

Different considerations come up though, as the bigger cabin with more people may be safer from a CEPTD perspective (ie assaults) than smaller cabins (that's one reason the Expo 86 monorail (which was compartmentalized, with only one door per compartment) was not installed in the West End, as was once proposed - that was also a time when the West End had a lot of prostitution and violence, and the road barriers were installed to prevent johns from circulating).

Source for the West End Monorail?

[waves]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think the plan was to have 2 gondolas like Peak-to-Peak, versus a lot of smaller gondolas like Sea-to-Sky.

The are 28 Peak to Peak gondola cabins. Each holds 28 people; 22 seated and 6 standing. Source

Also, by the time the SFU Gondola is built and operating COVID19 will be a few years behind us and likely not a concern anymore. I very much doubt that this virus will have any impact on it's design.