Transit Fantasies

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

1. Seabus doesn't have a outdoor deck which would make it good for tourism.
2. Seabus will probably see its demand drop by 80%+ due to a North Shore Skytrain at First Narrows/Norgate, making it uneconomical to maintain, as shown previously due to the ferry's lower speed.
3. Port Metro Van would really like to see Seabus die, as it competes for port space and traffic and cuts across the entire harbor.

I never suggested it was a tourist-specific vessel, just that it is a transit feature that is very attractive to tourists. Everyone I know who's come to visit the Vancouver area has enjoyed the ride on the SeaBus. Even though you're not outside on a deck, you are travelling on the water with great views of the city skyline, the active port and the North Shore mountains. It's fun, fast and cheap, with lots to see and do on both sides of the harbour.

Plus, I don't understand your focus on a Norgate/First Narrows route when TransLink and the local councils appear to prefer the Second Narrows route options. Do you have any studies to support such a drop in demand or that the Port prefers to remove the SeaBus? Even if a line were to go from the Quay along Marine Drive, through Norgate and on to Waterfront, you're looking at a distance comparable to the Waterfront-Nanaimo run on Expo which is roughly the same time-wise as the SeaBus. A large percentage of SeaBus traffic comes from the Lonsdale area anyway, so it won't be a big time-saver. Rapid transit to the North Shore would best serve the population if it can introduce a new route, not replace an existing one that works well.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

If they keep a North Shore-DT ferry service, it would most likely be a new, smaller ferry.

Unlikely - downtown to Lonsdale is a high-demand route on its own, it's just not the only high-demand route. What you could maybe see is a drop in frequency back to 15 minutes.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Which groundwork? Other than mayoral support. I haven't been following things as much as I should.

Also, with the likely future expansion of the Ironworkers Memorial Bridge, having a bus/HOV lane from Metrotown/Brentwood/Carvolth to Phibbs should be possible (as well as cheaper than Skytrain, at least on 2nd Narrows.)
That + Skytrain at Norgate-Waterfront would hit all the crossings and demand for a North Shore crossing.


I know.

Which seating study? Do you have a link? Just curious.


Pac Central isn't a good terminus for regional service.
They didn't put WCE on Pac Central, after all (even though it predates the addition of overpasses over the SRY spur to the flats, so they could just have put a wye there to get to Pac Central and share the platforms used by VIA.)

Pac Central is better if you want to take a taxi or interregional bus, though, but you may as well just use the Surrey station for that.

One can usually tell which corridors are on the SkyTrain list because TransLink gives them a RapidBus first. There's one currently in the works for Phibbs to Metrotown (with bus lanes to match); meanwhile, First Narrows gets nothing.
Well, you've covered the corridors to the North Shore... but not the North Shore itself, which is a large part of the traffic and demand. Any SkyTrain worth its salt needs to do the entire Park Royal < - > Phibbs stretch and pick up the SeaBus terminal on the way, which Norgate does not; it also takes Dunderave and Ambleside off the table. I believe we've been over this.

It's somewhere in the SoF Rapid Transit thread; ATM I don't really feel like clicking through until I find deasine's post.

Meh, Pacific's no better or worse than Waterfront as a terminus, especially in 2035 or beyond. Richmond, Delta or YVR? Expo to Granville, change at City Centre. Broadway? Same thing. Mission? Bus/taxi/(streetcar?) over to Waterfront. North Shore? Same thing, or bus/SkyTrain via Second Narrows. Literally anywhere else? Pacific may very well be closer to it than Waterfront is.

The WCE's basically only there because it's a straight shot from Mission to downtown on a single corridor (i.e. they didn't have to detour, or negotiate with both CP and CN at the same time) - law of parsimony and all that. The HSR's coming up with its own ROW, and so it can basically go anywhere it wants to.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

2. Seabus will probably see its demand drop by 80%+ due to a North Shore Skytrain at First Narrows/Norgate, making it uneconomical to maintain, as shown previously due to the ferry's lower speed.

Pac Central isn't a good terminus for regional service.

A crossing at First or Second Narrows will hardly erode the demand for Seabus. People who take the Seabus (unless they live right by Waterfront Station) are travelling to Lonsdale. People who take buses on the Lionsgate or IWM bridges are travelling to Upper or Lower Lynn, CapU, Norgate, Park Royal, etc. Building Skytrain across Second Narrows and west along Main/3rd/Marine would take care of all the eastern non-Lonsdale destinations and make it much faster to connect from Seabus to the western destinations. If anything, Seabus traffic might increase since Seabus + Skytrain may be the faster route to get from, say, Richmond to Norgate whereas now the fastest option is Canada Line + the 240 bus. Or for me, when I travelled from the West End to the UHaul by Phibbs Exchange the fastest route was the 210/211 over IWM. But change the R2 to Skytrain and suddenly it may be faster to take the Seabus instead.

Good thing HSR wouldn't be a regional service. PCS would be the inter-city hub while Waterfront would be the regional hub and they would only be three stops away from each other.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

One can usually tell which corridors are on the SkyTrain list because TransLink gives them a RapidBus first. There's one currently in the works for Phibbs to Metrotown (with bus lanes to match); meanwhile, First Narrows gets nothing.

FYI this is not strictly true, the next phase of RapidBus expansion has Ambleside + Lynn Valley/Lonsdale <-> Downtown via the First Narrows as priorities.

[Linky]

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

One can usually tell which corridors are on the SkyTrain list because TransLink gives them a RapidBus first. There's one currently in the works for Phibbs to Metrotown (with bus lanes to match); meanwhile, First Narrows gets nothing.
Well, you've covered the corridors to the North Shore... but not the North Shore itself, which is a large part of the traffic and demand. Any SkyTrain worth its salt needs to do the entire Park Royal < - > Phibbs stretch and pick up the SeaBus terminal on the way, which Norgate does not; it also takes Dunderave and Ambleside off the table. I believe we've been over this.

It's somewhere in the SoF Rapid Transit thread; ATM I don't really feel like clicking through until I find deasine's post.

Meh, Pacific's no better or worse than Waterfront as a terminus, especially in 2035 or beyond. Richmond, Delta or YVR? Expo to Granville, change at City Centre. Broadway? Same thing. Mission? Bus/taxi/(streetcar?) over to Waterfront. North Shore? Same thing, or bus/SkyTrain via Second Narrows. Literally anywhere else? Pacific may very well be closer to it than Waterfront is.

The WCE's basically only there because it's a straight shot from Mission to downtown on a single corridor (i.e. they didn't have to detour, or negotiate with both CP and CN at the same time) - law of parsimony and all that. The HSR's coming up with its own ROW, and so it can basically go anywhere it wants to.

IIRC Translink has stated that building BRT from DT to Lonsdale via First Narrows AND building BRT from Metrotown to Park Royal via Second Narrows are BOTH among the 10-year priorities. It is the mayors that are pushing for Metrotown to Park Royal to be the top priority for both BRT and a subsequent upgrade to Skytrain. Translink has not stated a preferred alignment between First Narrows, Vancouver Harbour, or Second Narrows for North Shore rapid transit.

When a preliminary study of North Shore rapid transit was performed the Vancouver Harbour (Seabus replacement) had the highest ridership projection. But a Skytrain link would be marginal speed improvements over Seabus for the highest cost (completely rebuilding the Expo platform at Waterfront or reconstructing the Canada Line past Yaletown to achieve depths of 50 metres plus tunneling and building another deep, deep platform at Lonsdale would be far more expensive than a bridge). So you would shoot your whole load extending the Canada or Expo Lines by one stop and have no money leftover for the east/west North Shore line.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by chowhou

FYI this is not strictly true, the next phase of RapidBus expansion has Ambleside + Lynn Valley/Lonsdale <-> Downtown via the First Narrows as priorities.

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

IIRC Translink has stated that building BRT from DT to Lonsdale via First Narrows AND building BRT from Metrotown to Park Royal via Second Narrows are BOTH among the 10-year priorities. It is the mayors that are pushing for Metrotown to Park Royal to be the top priority for both BRT and a subsequent upgrade to Skytrain. Translink has not stated a preferred alignment between First Narrows, Vancouver Harbour, or Second Narrows for North Shore rapid transit.

Clarification: while there are plans for a First Narrows line, IIRC it's the Second Narrows line that's coming out within the next few years, plus bus lanes.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

I never suggested it was a tourist-specific vessel, just that it is a transit feature that is very attractive to tourists. Everyone I know who's come to visit the Vancouver area has enjoyed the ride on the SeaBus. Even though you're not outside on a deck, you are travelling on the water with great views of the city skyline, the active port and the North Shore mountains. It's fun, fast and cheap, with lots to see and do on both sides of the harbour.

Plus, I don't understand your focus on a Norgate/First Narrows route when TransLink and the local councils appear to prefer the Second Narrows route options. Do you have any studies to support such a drop in demand or that the Port prefers to remove the SeaBus? Even if a line were to go from the Quay along Marine Drive, through Norgate and on to Waterfront, you're looking at a distance comparable to the Waterfront-Nanaimo run on Expo which is roughly the same time-wise as the SeaBus. A large percentage of SeaBus traffic comes from the Lonsdale area anyway, so it won't be a big time-saver. Rapid transit to the North Shore would best serve the population if it can introduce a new route, not replace an existing one that works well.

From http://www.instpp.ca/uploads/1/2/1/6/121600566/instpp-full-report.pdf



The Centerm expansion only goes up to the point where they need to leave space for the Seabus. It's not like they don't have the demand.
Removing Seabus would allow for another 1-2 terminals on Centerm by docking boats North-South and filling in the area between CRAB and Centerm.


Seabus frequencies are around 15 minutes and crossing times are 12 min.

Even just comparing average speeds (Skytrain would not have stops through the inlet, so it's even worse for Seabus), you're looking at Skytrain being faster even if you double the length of Skytrain.

The reason we want Skytrain to NS is because Seabus sucks.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Clarification: while there are plans for a First Narrows line, IIRC it's the Second Narrows line that's coming out within the next few years, plus bus lanes.

Yeah, and the 2nd Narrows line doesn't need to be Skytrain.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

From http://www.instpp.ca/uploads/1/2/1/6/121600566/instpp-full-report.pdf


The Centerm expansion only goes up to the point where they need to leave space for the Seabus. It's not like they don't have the demand.
Removing Seabus would allow for another 1-2 terminals on Centerm by docking boats North-South and filling in the area between CRAB and Centerm.


Seabus frequencies are around 15 minutes and crossing times are 12 min.

Even just comparing average speeds (Skytrain would not have stops through the inlet, so it's even worse for Seabus), you're looking at Skytrain being faster even if you double the length of Skytrain.

The reason we want Skytrain to NS is because Seabus sucks.

That's traffic from the North Shore; to the North Shore is a bit more varied.

If we're going to spend billions on a SkyTrain, it'd better "suck" less than the SeaBus by more than a couple of minutes; since no reasonable alignments allow such time savings, then it should instead cover an alternate corridor and destinations while SeaBus service increases to 7-10 minute headways. And there's no reason why a Centerm expansion can't include a new SeaBus terminal as part of the deal; that's a win-win for both commuters and the Port.

Originally Posted by fredinno

Yeah, and the 2nd Narrows line doesn't need to be Skytrain.

Neither does First Narrows - so long as the whole North Shore is covered by SkyTrain, a Lions Gate RapidBus can terminate at Park Royal or Norgate.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Removing Seabus would allow for another 1-2 terminals on Centerm by docking boats North-South and filling in the area between CRAB and Centerm.

Would allow, but is there any indication that Centerm is actually pushing for removal of the SeaBus or that Vancouver wants it??

Originally Posted by fredinno

Seabus frequencies are around 15 minutes and crossing times are 12 min. Even just comparing average speeds (Skytrain would not have stops through the inlet, so it's even worse for Seabus), you're looking at Skytrain being faster even if you double the length of Skytrain.

With the third SeaBus, frequency is ten minutes in peak hours and (as you mentioned) a 12-minute crossing. The Waterfront-Nanaimo run - roughly the same distance as a Waterfront-Norgate-Lonsdale Quay route - takes approximately 13 minutes with six stops according to Google. The Norgate route would have at least three or four stops and might even stop in the West End if they're building that way, the point being that you're not going to get significant time savings over the SeaBus. Plus, you're not really going to help the West Vancouver traffic because that will still probably go by the more direct Lions Gate route unless SkyTrain is at Park Royal.

Originally Posted by fredinno

The reason we want Skytrain to NS is because Seabus sucks.

You, perhaps, but I'd wager that's not a majority opinion. I'd suggest instead that most would want SkyTrain in addition to SeaBus, not as a replacement for a beloved local feature.

[Migrant_Coconut]

^ This. If your entire argument for a North Shore SkyTrain is to get between Lonsdale and downtown faster, then you've lost the moment you started - the ride's already as fast as it can be, and not everybody hates it.

But if you're trying to get between the North Shore in general and the CoV in general, First and Second Narrows are effectively the same... and between the North Shore and Burnaby/Surrey/Coquitlam, it's definitely Second.

[LeftCoaster]

Having grown up on the NS, the seabus is only really useful if you live in lower Lonsdale and want to go somewhere in the immediate vicinity of Waterfront Station or thereabouts, anyting else was faster to bus.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

^ This. If your entire argument for a North Shore SkyTrain is to get between Lonsdale and downtown faster, then you've lost the moment you started - the ride's already as fast as it can be, and not everybody hates it.

But if you're trying to get between the North Shore in general and the CoV in general, First and Second Narrows are effectively the same... and between the North Shore and Burnaby/Surrey/Coquitlam, it's definitely Second.

You, perhaps, but I'd wager that's not a majority opinion. I'd suggest instead that most would want SkyTrain in addition to SeaBus, not as a replacement for a beloved local feature.

The problem is, as I pointed out several times , if we're getting a Hwy 1 Expansion, there's no point to use the exact same route for Skytrain. Both are at the same rough level of planning (preliminary).
The NS crossing study also presumes Ironworkers will not last all that much longer either, which is why they got rid of using the existing bridge under-deck.

You don't use Freeway corridors for rapid transit, and that's what Brentwood-Phibbs is.

My goal is to get from NS and the rest of Vancouver faster, and both crossings will be covered by rapid transit. Just not Skytrain.
I'm not sure why this is so controversial. Not every problem is best fixed with Skytrain.

Just because people like Seabus, doesn't mean we should go out of its way to keep it. A lot of people like LRT/streetcars too.


The 1st Narrows/Norgate options were preferred in the NS crossing study due to offering the highest decrease in auto demand and highest decrease in travel times for most users, while being cheapest (it wasn't a cost study, though.)

Which is usually what we want in transit...

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Having grown up on the NS, the seabus is only really useful if you live in lower Lonsdale and want to go somewhere in the immediate vicinity of Waterfront Station or thereabouts, anyting else was faster to bus.

Having also grown up on the North Shore, the Seabus is also a great kiss and ride option for the whole North Shore, especially once the Canada Line opened. I have a family member that regularly needs to go to the airport for work trips, and for short trips with a single suitcase it's easy and convenient to drop them at the Seabus for the Canada Line connection to the airport. It's also a great option for heading home to the North Shore after a day in Vancouver (especially late nights coming home). Phone home when the Seabus is pulling in and since traffic is generally pretty light at night it'll be less than a 15 minute drive from most of North Vancouver to the Seabus. The SeaBus can be depended on and it's a comfortable place to wait, unlike North Shore bus stops/exchanges during off-peak times. Phibbs is a great place at 10pm when it's pouring rain.

[jollyburger]

I just want rapid transit on the North Shore to see the first 50 storey tower built.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

You don't use Freeway corridors for rapid transit, and that's what Brentwood-Phibbs is.

What? The Second Narrows crossing is the only place where this line would run next to the freeway. The remainder of the line goes down Willingdon, Hastings, Main, 3rd, and Marine, connecting two regional and two municipal town centres.

Also, the traffic modelling didn't evaluate the Second Narrows crossing with a Metrotown extension. I have a feeling that would increase the auto demand reduction of that option.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

I just want rapid transit on the North Shore to see the first 50 storey tower built.

Over the current DNV council's dead body. The current council thinks a 12 story building is a "tower format not appropriate for the Maplewood area". The most recent election replaced a YIMBY with a YIMBY and a fence sitter with a fence sitter. The obstructionist NIMBY faction is still going strong on DNV council unfortunately.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The problem is, as I pointed out several times , if we're getting a Hwy 1 Expansion, there's no point to use the exact same route for Skytrain. Both are at the same rough level of planning (preliminary).
The NS crossing study also presumes Ironworkers will not last all that much longer either, which is why they got rid of using the existing bridge under-deck.

You don't use Freeway corridors for rapid transit, and that's what Brentwood-Phibbs is.

My goal is to get from NS and the rest of Vancouver faster, and both crossings will be covered by rapid transit. Just not Skytrain.
I'm not sure why this is so controversial. Not every problem is best fixed with Skytrain.

Just because people like Seabus, doesn't mean we should go out of its way to keep it. A lot of people like LRT/streetcars too.


The 1st Narrows/Norgate options were preferred in the NS crossing study due to offering the highest decrease in auto demand and highest decrease in travel times for most users, while being cheapest (it wasn't a cost study, though.)

Which is usually what we want in transit...

By that logic, the Expo, Millennium, Canada and Evergreen shouldn't exist either because they "just" duplicate the existing road grid.
The TCH goes from Phibbs to the PNE to a random Walmart to kinda-sorta BCIT to Port Coq and Guildford; the Purple Line would go from Phibbs to Brentwood to BCIT to Metrotown. Not the "exact same route" at all.

Norgate is only fast for one specific type of commute (West Van < - > downtown), while Phibbs is fast for the whole North Shore and most of the metro. You're right, there shouldn't be any controversy at all.

The study doesn't go into cost or ridership. What we do know is that none of the First Narrows options made it to the follow-up study. Of that one, Gold (Phibbs-downtown, similar to Norgate) is marginally better in reducing travel time overall, but Purple is marginally better in reducing travel time and demand within the North Shore proper, and at spurring TOD. It's really a question of whether Metro Van prefers to have a spoke-and-hub network or a distributed grid, and the current paradigm leans toward the latter.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The study doesn't go into cost or ridership.

I believe Stage 1 of the BIRT Study included some ridership projections. I cannot find Stage 1 anywhere on the internet but there is this blurb in reference to option 2A (Burrard Station to Lonsdale via First Narrows) on page 32 of the Stage 2 study:

Largest reduction in auto demand across Burrard Inlet compared to other options.

But again, the BIRT Study did not factor a Metrotown extension into projections per this bullet point regarding the Second Narrows alignment on page 30:

Extension to Metrotown provides opportunity to connect both the Expo and Millennium Line to the North Shore. * Note: this scenario was not considered in Stage 1

What I find interesting is that under fredinno's favourite option neither the Seabus nor a North Shore Skytrain line would terminate at Waterfront, slightly weakening their case that Waterfront would be the regional transportation hub and should be the HSR terminus as a result.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

What? The Second Narrows crossing is the only place where this line would run next to the freeway. The remainder of the line goes down Willingdon, Hastings, Main, 3rd, and Marine, connecting two regional and two municipal town centres.

Also, the traffic modelling didn't evaluate the Second Narrows crossing with a Metrotown extension. I have a feeling that would increase the auto demand reduction of that option.

The cost/benefit would still favour the Norgate/1st Narrows options.


And yeah, I wouldn't want Expo to become a spur at Burrard (at minimum, because it would shut down that section of Expo partially- and it may not even be possible anyways due to underground infrastructure.)
It's also a preliminary crossing study, so the routes shown are more guidelines rather than firm commitments.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

By that logic, the Expo, Millennium, Canada and Evergreen shouldn't exist either because they "just" duplicate the existing road grid.
The TCH goes from Phibbs to the PNE to a random Walmart to kinda-sorta BCIT to Port Coq and Guildford; the Purple Line would go from Phibbs to Brentwood to BCIT to Metrotown. Not the "exact same route" at all.

Norgate is only fast for one specific type of commute (Lonsdale + West Van < - > downtown), while Phibbs is fast for the whole North Shore and most of the metro. You're right, there shouldn't be any controversy at all.

And yet none of the First Narrows options made it to the follow-up study. Of that one, Gold (Phibbs-downtown, similar to Norgate) is marginally better in reducing travel time overall, but Purple is marginally better in reducing travel time within the North Shore proper, and at spurring TOD. It's really a question of whether Metro Van prefers to have a spoke-and-hub network or a distributed grid, and the current paradigm leans toward the latter.

I said freeways, not roads.

Also, I was assuming the Purple line, because Gold is basically 2 lines slapped together (so I don't think it's fair comparing just the crossing location.)

I will concede I was wrong with how close Purple is to TCH, though.

In that study:

The Gold and Purple alignments shown in Figure 2-3 were chosen
for this study. They do not indicate recommended or approved alignments.

So we're basically arguing over whether having bus lanes going from Rupert/Brentwood to Phibbs is 'not good enough' despite both offering fast service to Phibbs from Skytrain from Burnaby/Coquitlam/Langley.


You're looking at a time savings from Skytrain over bus of a few minutes from Brentwood to Phibbs at most (mostly due to the time to get in and out of the street grid).
There's not really any big demand generators (maybe PNE) between the Millennium and Phibbs.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The cost/benefit would still favour the Norgate/1st Narrows options...

Either way, you're crossing Burrard Inlet; the only way to reduce cost over Second Narrows would be to cut out Park Royal, and the only way to increase benefit would be to add it back.

Originally Posted by fredinno

I said freeways, not roads.

Also, I was assuming the Purple line, because Gold is basically 2 lines slapped together (so I don't think it's fair comparing just the crossing location.)

I will concede I was wrong with how close Purple is to TCH, though.

In that study:



So we're basically arguing over whether having bus lanes going from Rupert/Brentwood to Phibbs is 'not good enough' despite both offering fast service to Phibbs from Skytrain from Burnaby/Coquitlam/Langley.


You're looking at a time savings from Skytrain over bus of a few minutes from Brentwood to Phibbs at most (mostly due to the time to get in and out of the street grid).
There's not really any big demand generators (maybe PNE) between the Millennium and Phibbs.

Purple is basically three lines slapped together - Willingdon, Hastings and the R2 (all roads, no freeways) - so IDK what the angle is here.

Only one crossing has been studied for traffic reduction and housing numbers, so we'll agree to disagree.

... As opposed to big demand generators such as Cap Mall, Indian Reserve 5 and Stanley Park? Once again, they're pretty evenly matched destination-wise.

I see you haven't taken transit over the North Shore very often; having been stuck on multiple buses for multiple half-hours just for said Brentwood-Phibbs stretch, I can very much confirm that it'll be more than a few minutes at peak.
There's already a perfectly workable ferry to downtown; it's been explained by actual locals that a Norgate SkyTrain would actually be longer than the SeaBus is. By contrast, there's not many ways to A) cross Burrard Inlet from east of Main, B) get from Park Royal to the SeaBus to Phibbs, C) switch from the Expo to the Millennium, or D) get from the North Shore to Brentwood to BCIT to Metrotown (or a combination of C and D).