North Shore Updates

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Again, what you're proposing would only marginally reduce the distance from the bus loop to the SeaBus station while greatly increasing pedestrian-vehicle interactions. It's not just north-south transit users, there's the steady stream of pedestrians moving east-west; the transit road would clash with travel between Lonsdale Quay and Waterfront Park. I'd imagine that TransLink would also be loathe to increase reliance on Chesterfield and its rail crossing; that's probably the reason that most bus traffic goes up Rogers instead of Chesterfield.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not opposed to your idea of improving access in principle. It's just that, based on my experiences in that area and my familiarity with the local roads and pedestrian routes, I don't think your proposal would work in that location.

Not to mention Chesterfield's only a temp bus throughway. It's too traffic-calmed to be a permanent one.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not to mention Chesterfield's only a temp bus throughway. It's too traffic-calmed to be a permanent one.

So you would keep the bus loop where it is?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by logan5

So you would keep the bus loop where it is?

You haven't made a good argument for moving it to where you want it.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

You haven't made a good argument for moving it to where you want it.

So you would keep the bus loop in the same spot? You don't seem to want to answer, but since there will need to be a parkade for the new residential buildings, and you would want some retail at street level, don't you think it would be a good idea to explore options for a new bus loop location?

[jollyburger]

More important is what colour should the new building be? I am in favour of keeping the same seafoam blue.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Maybe a different shade. Seafoam is so Nineties.

Originally Posted by logan5

So you would keep the bus loop in the same spot? You don't seem to want to answer, but since there will need to be a parkade for the new residential buildings, and you would want some retail at street level, don't you think it would be a good idea to explore options for a new bus loop location?

You don't seem to want to ask a non-leading question. Know that if you ever go to the North Shore, you'll find that Lower Lonsdale, Lonsdale Quay Market and the Shipyards are more than enough street retail for all future tenants. As for parking, they're literally on top of a SeaBus and next to a future SkyTrain.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Maybe a different shade. Seafoam is so Nineties.



You don't seem to want to ask a non-leading question. Know that if you ever go to the North Shore, you'll find that Lower Lonsdale, Lonsdale Quay Market and the Shipyards are more than enough street retail for all future tenants. As for parking, they're literally on top of a SeaBus and next to a future SkyTrain.

I'm giving you multiple reasons why the bus loop should be moved to different location, you criticize, which is fine for most part, except your approach isn't great, and you want me to post drawings of my ideas, but you're afraid to even say if the bus loop should be relocated when I asked you. Now you seem to be saying that hundreds of new residential units don't need parking at all because they are on top of the Seabus.

No parking for up to 1000 new residential units is far crazier than anything I suggested.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by logan5

I'm giving you multiple reasons why the bus loop should be moved to different location, you criticize, which is fine for most part, except your approach isn't great, and you want me to post drawings of my ideas, but you're afraid to even say if the bus loop should be relocated when I asked you. Now you seem to be saying that hundreds of new residential units don't need parking at all because they are on top of the Seabus.

No parking for up to 1000 new residential units is far crazier than anything I suggested.

If you can't follow along by context, I can't help you.

None of them are good reasons, which is why I've debunked all of them; Tvisforme, who's actually in the area, even more so. Your proposal makes it harder for pedestrians to get around, and only marginally easier for bus passengers. The existing loop is already very well-connected to the SeaBus terminal and already has a seamless transfer. There's more than enough retail and F&B. It's a solution which doesn't actually have a problem - try taking the SeaBus to the North Shore instead of just Google Mapping it and you'll see it my way.

What's "crazy" is Senakw getting away with 866 stalls for 6000 units; if that's a thing, then this one (even closer to transit) should be able to do ~144 for 1000. You don't need the entire loop for 144 parking spots... you don't even need the loop at all.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

None of them are good reasons, which is why I've debunked all of them

That's my issue with you, going back quite a ways, you're main objective is purely to "debunk" people instead of an exchange of ideas, which is the spirit of what these discussions should be.

I bet you 20 Costco hotdogs that the bus loop gets moved to a different spot. We will find out when the 1st proposal comes out in 3 or 4 years hopefully.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by logan5

That's my issue with you, going back quite a ways, you're main objective is purely to "debunk" people instead of an exchange of ideas, which is the spirit of what these discussions should be.

I bet you 20 Costco hotdogs that the bus loop gets moved to a different spot. We will find out when the 1st proposal comes out in 3 or 4 years hopefully.

I treat civility with the same. Show me a good idea, and I'll discuss or at least critique it, as I have with Tvisforme's proposal last page, and hundreds of others before that one.
No poster here is under any obligation to just automatically accept what they consider a flawed idea based on a flawed premise - if we're going to pull up history, you've done the same as me (sometimes to me) on multiple occasions, and I've held no grudge. That's how the forum works.

I'll raise you to 30. And it needs to physically move its boundaries, not just shrink (which is also unlikely).

[madog222]

Here's a quick concept I came up with using the Brighouse bus loop and surrounding buildings.
The bus loop would need to be with angled bays which would take up a bit more room, I can't be bothered to be that detailed.


Image made with Google Earth sourced satellite imagery.

[Migrant_Coconut]

[BaddieB]

I hope they address a future skytrain station there too. What are our odds we get a North Shore skytrain as an election promise?

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

I hope they address a future skytrain station there too. What are our odds we get a North Shore skytrain as an election promise?

As been discussed on the North Shore rapid transit thread there's a low probability you ever see a station close to the quay. Seems more likely a funding announcement will be more 2030 than this year..

Though I wonder if the Lonsdale Quay exchange could be a lot smaller in the future if you have a somewhat high frequency East/West rapid transit line? The Lynn Valley buses could just as easily terminate at some Moodyville station. The Grouse Mountain bus could do some loop from a Capilano Mall station? Yes, it's far away from the SeaBus.. maybe some covered moving sidewalks

https://cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php/Translink_Lonsdale_Quay

[djmk]

Why not also move the seabus terminal?

Put it in front of the polygon gallery so it's more accessible to this fabled future skytrain on 3rd. And the the bus loop would be carrie cates

[BaddieB]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

As been discussed on the North Shore rapid transit thread there's a low probability you ever see a station close to the quay.
https://cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php/Translink_Lonsdale_Quay

People have been saying that but I dont understand why. You could elevate it entirely down Low Level and Esplanade.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by BaddieB

People have been saying that but I dont understand why. You could elevate it entirely down Low Level and Esplanade.

It can't be elevated along Esplanade, the street is narrower than Broadway.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by madog222

It can't be elevated along Esplanade, the street is narrower than Broadway.

Even if Esplanade was a viable option (forget about the width, Skytrain guideway pillars are impossible when there's a rail tunnel underneath), that approach gets you from the Second Narrows to Lonsdale Quay. What's the plan for westward expansion?

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

....Though I wonder if the Lonsdale Quay exchange could be a lot smaller in the future if you have a somewhat high frequency East/West rapid transit line? The Lynn Valley buses could just as easily terminate at some Moodyville station. The Grouse Mountain bus could do some loop from a Capilano Mall station....[/url]

Some lines could possibly be tweaked to terminate at other SkyTrain stations, but many of the routes bringing passengers to the Quay from Lynn Valley and other corners of North Vancouver do double duty to provide local service in the lower levels. The 228, for example, provides local service on East 3rd to replace the 239, which was cancelled when the limited-stop R2 launched. The 249 and 255 do the same thing along West 3rd. The other issue is that, unless the future SkyTrain station is at the Quay, it would change what is now a direct connection (such as the 236 from Grouse Mountain to Lonsdale Quay) to a multi-stop route (236 to Capilano Mall, SkyTrain to 3rd/Lonsdale, walk or bus to the Quay).

[Migrant_Coconut]

Now if the SkyTrain one day branches all the way to Upper Lonsdale or Lynn Valley, then we can talk about truncating and replacing buses... but I suspect this is the wrong thread for that.