Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

We just need more people. It's not out of reach it's just we're not there yet.

Explain Rigaud then.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Explain Rigaud then.

Looks like an old farming village

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Explain Rigaud then.

The station that closed due to lack of passengers...? You might want another example.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

We just need more people. It's not out of reach it's just we're not there yet.

Say no more.

Switzerland is highly mountainous and has 8 mil inhabitants, with towns and villages spread out all over the country and regions. We have about 2.5 mil here in the Lower Mainland. At a third of Switzerland's population, we should be able to have at least one complete train line into the valley right?

Look at Switzerland's rail network here:

http://midas400.blogspot.com/2014/11/getting-around-on-swiss-travel-system.html

Call it like it is: we are simply a car-reliant, backward country when it comes to public transportation.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Vin

Call it like it is: we are simply a car-reliant, backward country when it comes to public transportation.

I think we all agree on that, so it's not as simple as "just build something different".

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by chowhou

The station that closed due to lack of passengers...? You might want another example.

How about Hudson QC?

Originally Posted by Vin

Say no more.

Switzerland is highly mountainous and has 8 mil inhabitants, with towns and villages spread out all over the country and regions. We have about 2.5 mil here in the Lower Mainland. At a third of Switzerland's population, we should be able to have at least one complete train line into the valley right?

Look at Switzerland's rail network here:

http://midas400.blogspot.com/2014/11/getting-around-on-swiss-travel-system.html

Call it like it is: we are simply a car-reliant, backward country when it comes to public transportation.

And everyone thinks that a bus can do the job of a train. It is referred to as bustution.
https://transitmap.net/vancouver-city-suburban-lines-1923/

Originally Posted by chowhou

I think we all agree on that, so it's not as simple as "just build something different".

The problem is it could be that simple.
Why can't it be as simple as just build it?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Switzerland has the advantage of being located between several major countries and being barely larger than the entire Lower Mainland. It's much easier to fly from Vancouver to Calgary or Seattle than dig another train line; if it were "that simple," it would already be done by now.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Yet Coquitlam deserves Skytrain and WCE.....
Population of 148,625


And Niagara Region does not get anything else except for a GO train.... at almost 3 times the population.

Context is key. The Tri-Cities (with a combined population of 234k, not 148) are part of Metro Vancouver and its growth plan, are an hour away from downtown, and are "easily" integrated with existing train networks. If Abbotsford was any combination of those three, they'd be considered for rail service too.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Switzerland has the advantage of being located between several major countries and being barely larger than the entire Lower Mainland. It's much easier to fly from Vancouver to Calgary or Seattle than dig another train line; if it were "that simple," it would already be done by now.



Context is key. The Tri-Cities (with a combined population of 234k, not 148) are part of Metro Vancouver and its growth plan, are an hour away from downtown, and are "easily" integrated with existing train networks. If Abbotsford was any combination of those three, they'd be considered for rail service too.

So, why not push for commuter rail to Surrey. After all, it is the second largest population in the area. There are rail lines there. That line is not CP. What excuse do you want to use this evening?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, why not push for commuter rail to Surrey. After all, it is the second largest population in the area. There are rail lines there. That line is not CP. What excuse do you want to use this evening?

Surrey already has a SkyTrain, and it's getting another. Its heavy rail corridor, as mentioned, is Class 1, and the route itself really —. There's perfectly logical and understandable reasons why commuter rail isn't a thing, and the Fraser Valley is fine with more bus service... but you'd rather throw a temper tantrum on the internet until you get your way.

[ssiguy]

The issue here is planning for the future and not just providing needs today.

Vancouver is NOT a high density area as much as some downtown elites would like you to believe. Vancouver sprawls just as much as any city in NA reflected by the fact that the 3 fastest growing cities in GV are the suburban wastelands of Surrey, Langley, and Maple Ridge. There is absolutely no reason to believe why this trend will not continue.

SkyTrain to Olympia and beyond is not financially viable not is it good for the travelling public. Rapid transit is not built to provide fast regional transit in a comfortable way. Vancouver needs a fast and effective regional transit network which does not have and, unfortunately, seems to have no intention of providing.

You don't build transit to serve your needs for the next decade but rather for the next century. In Vancouver's case this means a suburban rail system. Translink/Victoria should be buying up every single piece of rail/hydro corridor it can get it's hands on and forbade any development right up against those lines to guarantee them as transport corridors.

If Victoria has done this in the FV for it's highways, the province could affordably build a southern route from Abb to Twas but they didn't and allowed development to take place anywhere it wanted. Now such a route would cost exponentially more and face huge political backlash because it would mean the destruction of potentially hundreds of homes to do it. BC blew it with the highways so they should make sure that they don't blow it with their transit corridors as well.

There is no city on this planet that is expanding rapid transit to the hinterlands because it doesn't work and why Vancouver thinks it can somehow be an exception to this rule truly boggles the mind.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Vancouver is NOT a high density area as much as some downtown elites would like you to believe. Vancouver sprawls just as much as any city in NA reflected by the fact that the 3 fastest growing cities in GV are the suburban wastelands of Surrey, Langley, and Maple Ridge. There is absolutely no reason to believe why this trend will not continue.

Which is why the Langley extension is being accompanied by high density transit-oriented development in Fleetwood and Langley. The WCE stations, after 27 years, are still parking lots.

In the short term, a Valley train doesn't work. In the long term, a Valley train doesn't work. In the very long term, it finally works, and only with a completely different ROW. Meanwhile, we need something to bridge the gap in the first two terms... and in all three terms, the entire GVRD needs more SkyTrain.

Also, North Van and Coquitlam are the third and fourth fastest-growing cities in the metro (sometimes New West as well). Maple Ridge is fifth.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

You don't build transit to serve your needs for the next decade but rather for the next century. In Vancouver's case this means a suburban rail system. Translink/Victoria should be buying up every single piece of rail/hydro corridor it can get it's hands on and forbade any development right up against those lines to guarantee them as transport corridors.

Could've, would've, should've... didn't. This is the situation now, and we've got to handle it; the useful corridors are already train lines.

[cganuelas1995]

Perhaps Abbotsford, Chilliwack, and Mission should be amalgamated into the Metro Vancouver Regional District

[EMD710]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Is there a timeline for the double tracking of the Grandview cut?

There needs to be a dedicated track for passenger trains arriving and leaving Pacific Central Station without having to wait for freight traffic to get out of the way. The Grandview cut should have been double tracked decades ago.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by EMD710

There needs to be a dedicated track for passenger trains arriving and leaving Pacific Central Station without having to wait for freight traffic to get out of the way. The Grandview cut should have been double tracked decades ago.

While that would be an ideal solution to the passenger train delays, with CN adding the extra track to allow 2-way operation of container trains, it might just add another track that has a freight train in the way when the Amtrak / VIA train is trying to get in or out of the station! Let's hope they at least follow through and add the other track.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

...Also, North Van and Coquitlam are the third and fourth fastest-growing cities in the metro (sometimes New West as well). Maple Ridge is fifth...

Not trying to argue against a SkyTrain to the North Shore - we need something - but I'd suggest that the North Shore's growth should be taken in context. (BTW the Rennie link is old, based on the 2011 and 2016 census reports.) The City of North Vancouver did grow by 7.5% between 2016 and 2021, but that growth rate is based on a 2021 population of only 59 576 people. The North Shore as a whole - both North Vans plus West Van - gained less than 3 000 people from 2020 to 2021.

North Shore News: Population up across North Shore in 2021: StatCan

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Not trying to argue against a SkyTrain to the North Shore - we need something - but I'd suggest that the North Shore's growth should be taken in context. (BTW the Rennie link is old, based on the 2011 and 2016 census reports.) The City of North Vancouver did grow by 7.5% between 2016 and 2021, but that growth rate is based on a 2021 population of only 59 576 people. The North Shore as a whole - both North Vans plus West Van - gained less than 3 000 people from 2020 to 2021.

North Shore News: Population up across North Shore in 2021: StatCan

Those are annual estimates. The census numbers are more reliable, and the 2021 data shows a 5% increase in population over 5 years, adding 9,104 people. That's the highest number since the 1990s.

West Vancouver added more people than it had in decades, 1,649 of them (3.9%). N Van District had a lower rate of growth, only 2.6%, but still 2,333 more, but N Van City saw a 9.9% increase with 5,222 more residents.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Not trying to argue against a SkyTrain to the North Shore - we need something - but I'd suggest that the North Shore's growth should be taken in context. (BTW the Rennie link is old, based on the 2011 and 2016 census reports.) The City of North Vancouver did grow by 7.5% between 2016 and 2021, but that growth rate is based on a 2021 population of only 59 576 people. The North Shore as a whole - both North Vans plus West Van - gained less than 3 000 people from 2020 to 2021.

North Shore News: Population up across North Shore in 2021: StatCan

True, but ssiguy was measuring growth rate - in fact, if we line up all the municipalities, not just the cities, the fastest-growing ones in 2016-2021 are actually Tsawwassen and Bowen Island!

In terms of actual growth (i.e. the total amount of new residents), it's Surrey in first place at ~50k, followed by Vancouver at ~30k. Burnaby, Langley Township and Richmond each have ~10-16k, and unless one counts the Tri-Cities or North Shore as a single group, everybody else is in the quadruple digits or less.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Surrey already has a SkyTrain, and it's getting another. Its heavy rail corridor, as mentioned, is Class 1, and the route itself really —. There's perfectly logical and understandable reasons why commuter rail isn't a thing, and the Fraser Valley is fine with more bus service... but you'd rather throw a temper tantrum on the internet until you get your way.

Shut up on the classes. That is like saying a road is dirt so it is useless. Just like Skytrain tracks get built, so too can class 6 heavy rail.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Which is why the Langley extension is being accompanied by high density transit-oriented development in Fleetwood and Langley. The WCE stations, after 27 years, are still parking lots.

In the short term, a Valley train doesn't work. In the long term, a Valley train doesn't work. In the very long term, it finally works, and only with a completely different ROW. Meanwhile, we need something to bridge the gap in the first two terms... and in all three terms, the entire GVRD needs more SkyTrain.

Also, North Van and Coquitlam are the third and fourth fastest-growing cities in the metro (sometimes New West as well). Maple Ridge is fifth.

The issue becomes the fact that there will come a point where the Skytrain will not have the capacity. That is the real problem. At what point do you look at the extensions and lengthening of stations as a futile move and add heavy rail express passenger service?

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Could've, would've, should've... didn't. This is the situation now, and we've got to handle it; the useful corridors are already train lines.

And now.... still can. Just because they didn't do something back when, does not mean they cannot do something now.

Originally Posted by EMD710

There needs to be a dedicated track for passenger trains arriving and leaving Pacific Central Station without having to wait for freight traffic to get out of the way. The Grandview cut should have been double tracked decades ago.

With only 1-2 trains a day, there really isn't the need for dedicated tracks just for passenger service. However, if the desire is to expand passenger service, then, yes, it does make sense to double track it.

Originally Posted by Changing City

While that would be an ideal solution to the passenger train delays, with CN adding the extra track to allow 2-way operation of container trains, it might just add another track that has a freight train in the way when the Amtrak / VIA train is trying to get in or out of the station! Let's hope they at least follow through and add the other track.

With double track, and bidirectional operation, you can time trains better. You can also add more trains. That means that CN's customers can get more service from them.That means the parts of the port they serve can see better movement. This may see the need for a new yard in the Lower Mainland before the CN/CP joint usage of track for bidirectional.

For Amtrak, Via, or a new WCE, there could be space for them to be better timed.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Vin

Switzerland is highly mountainous and has 8 mil inhabitants, with towns and villages spread out all over the country and regions. We have about 2.5 mil here in the Lower Mainland. At a third of Switzerland's population, we should be able to have at least one complete train line into the valley right?

There are a few things working in Switzerland's favour:
1. Switzerland has a number of medium-sized cities (by NA standards). Zurich, Geneva, Basel, Bern and Lausanne range from 400k to 1.3 million inhabitants. Since Switzerland is small, and since most of those cities are in a straight line on the Swiss plateau, they lend nicely to generating a TON of inter-city trips. Compare that to mainland BC where we essentially have Metro Vancouver, the Fraser Valley, and the Okanagan. Most of Metro Vancouver is well served (not perfectly) by buses and Skytrain, and those other regions are either two far away, too sprawling, or have too small a population to generate significant trips.
2. As Migrant mentioned, Switzerland also sees a lot of international train travel. A line from Zurich to St. Gallen, which has a 165k people (still larger than any of the valley cities) may not be justified on its own, but a train from Zurich to Munich with St. Gallen halfway in the middle makes too much sense. What large city is on the other side of Abbotsford to make a Valley train a slam dunk?
3. Switzerland has 130 fewer vehicles per 1,000 people than Canada. That might not seem like a lot, but it makes a difference in how people move around.
4. The development pattern of Switzerland is significantly different from Canada. And I'm not talking about the large cities. I lived in an Austrian town of 7k people for a year. This farming town was compact and walkable. Even the nearby dairy farmers walk or ride their bikes into town, because the rural areas are served by bike paths and sidewalks. Basically, towns of <15k people in Switzerland generate trips on the railways. But do you think anyone living in Aldergrove would catch a train to Murrayville?

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

The City of North Vancouver did grow by 7.5% between 2016 and 2021, but that growth rate is based on a 2021 population of only 59 576 people. The North Shore as a whole - both North Vans plus West Van - gained less than 3 000 people from 2020 to 2021.

The North Shore will probably never get another vehicle crossing to Vancouver. And even expanding the existing crossings will be difficult (if the Lions Gate Bridge was six lanes, how would all that traffic travel into downtown? and do we really see the TCH on both sides of the harbor being widened to support a large IWM?). So adding rapid transit is really the most feasible way to add transportation capacity for the North Shore. Also, the North Shore's sprawl will be physically constrained by the forest and topography. So looking into the future, North Vancouver will be a very dense city if it wants to continue growing.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Shut up on the classes. That is like saying a road is dirt so it is useless. Just like Skytrain tracks get built, so too can class 6 heavy rail.

The issue becomes the fact that there will come a point where the Skytrain will not have the capacity. That is the real problem. At what point do you look at the extensions and lengthening of stations as a futile move and add heavy rail express passenger service?

And now.... still can. Just because they didn't do something back when, does not mean they cannot do something now.

Running with this analogy, if all you've got is a dirt road, upgrading it to a superhighway instead of widening the existing one (or adding bus lanes) needs a really good business case that so far doesn't exist.

About the same time that any commuter rail service in Canada gets more than 1/7th or even 1/8th of its respective subway's ridership; the TTC could absorb GO's ridership if all service stopped that day, but not vice versa. All the present and future chokepoints in the SkyTrain network are most effectively solved with another SkyTrain.

Not when the rail corridor — and everything else is highways or ALR. Best you could do is put rail down the highway, and even that's a long way off.