Transit Fantasies

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually, if you do this route to Marone drive over the short and easy tunnwl section, you should drive along Capiano to the Upper levels. Develop the cloverleaf there as an exchange only - a la Phibbs Exchange. Buses could get all over the north shore with ease

I'm guessing you don't use the Upper Levels all that often...

[waves]

Originally Posted by scottN

Perhaps instead of emerging from a tunnel and going elevated over the gradview cut the line could turn eastward to below grade platform north of platforms 1&2. From there it could continue east via the grandview cut to Nanaimo???

This has been the solution I have been working on the past few days haha. Oh well, I guess my surprise will be spoiled.

[scottN]

Originally Posted by waves

This has been the solution I have been working on the past few days haha. Oh well, I guess my surprise will be spoiled.

Well your presentation is so good that I'm still looking forward to it.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Hey, anything to save us another big renovation job.
Daryl explained it better - the only limit is the switches and the staffing levels. Waterfront may be capable of 72 seconds, and can do/has done 75.

That's the problem: there's no real good way to expand over the railyard without interference. The CWHF (which is almost exactly what you're looking for) means realigning freight tracks and limiting expansion, so its future looks dicey.

City Centre/Granville also handles the bulk of Expo-Canada transfers. That, without additional expansion may be a problem in the far future. WRT Commercial ... one can only hope that Woodlands has mellowed out when the time comes, I suppose.

A station near Main is probably unavoidable, if only for bus/tram connections. Maybe build a station at Quebec from the get-go (one foot in Gastown, so less trouble), then put the infill station at Hawks/Heatley.

He also uses numbers he states later to be crush capacity... So I would take them with a couple grains of salt... Do you have any other source? Have you seen the trains operate at 72-75s?


The more interesting part is the talk about removing a metal rail for widening the Skytrain. I think I've seen it- but I would imagine it's there for safety reasons. Do you have any clue about that possibility? The link used for the source is dead.

Thanks anyways.

...
Wait, 2012? How long have you been here?

And yes, I've been looking at the thing. One would wonder why CPR got rid of Coal Harbor in the 90s without at least building over it (instead of getting rid of the rail tracks) if they don't have sufficient waterfront rail capacity to build over the current rail tracks before the current industrial boom and port expansions... I know the land is expensive, but really? Dumb decision on their part, though the neighborhood is kind of nice.

Anyways, I did that based off the study. They don't have a bus loop, but there's plenty of space for one (will is another story, the current plan is just to put bus stops on the street... )

The base strategy is to put new rails north of the current ones (as I proposed). There's plenty of space in that direction- and if (as the study suggests they may need) they need even more space, they'd have the possibility of forcing the Canadian Fishing Company to move to other port land (there's a fair amount of unused port-designated land in Burnaby below Cambridge Park) and removing CRAB Park.

Again, they've been open to the idea, just make sure you compensate them.
And even then, as I pointed out earlier, you may not even need that if you can get 200 Granville to cooperate. It's just the rail lands are much better for the long term (more space) and more likely to work out.

City Centre/Granville also handles the bulk of Expo-Canada transfers.

[Citation Needed]. Aren't the two stations not even connected?
The Woodlands probably don't need that big a bay anyways once the 99B leaves. The current ones just kind of suck, though technically capable capacity-wise. The proposed plaza over the rail should be big enough for both a small bus loop and concourse.

Broadway-City Hall is actually more concerning in my opinion, since there's literally nowhere for a loop to go.


Hmm. I was thinking a Gastown Station would be at Carrall/Abott, so that would be 330m to the next station. The issue is that the theoretical best place to put the next station would be Main-Hastings at about 520m. Hence the selection of Gore.

Heatley is probably better than Campbell though.

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually, if you do this route to Marone drive over the short and easy tunnwl section, you should drive along Capiano to the Upper levels.

Develop the cloverleaf there as an exchange only - a la Phibbs Exchange

buses could get all over the north shore with ease

Upper Levels is pretty terribly used in terms of transit. I'm not sure I need a citation for that.

Also, the Capilano Cloverleaf is already used.

Originally Posted by scottN

Presently the only bus that terminates at Commecial - Broadway station is the 99, and it will be gone in 5 years when the broadway extension opens. If necessary the existing 99 layover area on grandview highway could be turned into a small bus loop. But with the #9 and #20 busses going straight through on Broadway and on Commercial, why would you even do this at all? 3 of the 4 stops are already right in front on the station, and the 4th is just across the street with a mid block pedestrian crossing to reach the station entrance.

I live in the grandview woodland neighbourhood and I can tell you that there was basically zero opposition to the commercial-broadway phase 3 expansion that added platform 5. I fully expect that platform 6 will be needed when the broadway extension opens. People in this neighbourhood are accustomed to skytrain, and I doubt there would be much opposition to a tunneled skytrain under the street north of the station. An elevated solution would require buying up and demolishing all the buildings on one side of the street (it's only 66-80 feet wide) which would certainly see huge opposition as there are numerous heritage buildings on both sides of the street. NIMBYism around here is focused mainly on heritage architecture and how buildings look and not who is going to be attracted to the neighbourhood. The refugee welcome centre at 11th and Victoria was fairly well received, as was the Co:here housing project at 1723 Victoria Drive. The addiction treatment centre at 1st and Clark got a fairly rough ride though.

Where do you think a north shore skytrain to commercial drive would go south of broadway? Or would broadway be the end of the line permanently? It seems like it would be feasible to follow the existing Expo line right of way south for a little while but you run out of room at the Croatian Cultural centre.

Perhaps instead of emerging from a tunnel and going elevated over the gradview cut the line could turn eastward to below grade platform north of platforms 1&2. From there it could continue east via the grandview cut to Nanaimo???

Eh, you don't need to, admittedly. There's aren't that many buses other than the 99.

A new parking-lot like structure in the center of the Woodlands is kind of different than a new platform.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

An entirely below-grade solution would probably have to go under the Cut; I'm not seeing any good way to use it that doesn't mess with the Millennium's tracks.

Well you kind of have to do a deep bore here for that reason, as well as Lonsdale. I don't see the point of going east to Nanaimo though.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

He also uses numbers he states later to be crush capacity... So I would take them with a couple grains of salt... Do you have any other source? Have you seen the trains operate at 72-75s?


The more interesting part is the talk about removing a metal rail for widening the Skytrain. I think I've seen it- but I would imagine it's there for safety reasons. Do you have any clue about that possibility? The link used for the source is dead.

Thanks anyways.

...
Wait, 2012? How long have you been here?

And yes, I've been looking at the thing. One would wonder why CPR got rid of Coal Harbor in the 90s without at least building over it (instead of getting rid of the rail tracks) if they don't have sufficient waterfront rail capacity to build over the current rail tracks before the current industrial boom and port expansions... I know the land is expensive, but really? Dumb decision on their part, though the neighborhood is kind of nice.

Anyways, I did that based off the study. They don't have a bus loop, but there's plenty of space for one (will is another story, the current plan is just to put bus stops on the street... )

The base strategy is to put new rails north of the current ones (as I proposed). There's plenty of space in that direction- and if (as the study suggests they may need) they need even more space, they'd have the possibility of forcing the Canadian Fishing Company to move to other port land (there's a fair amount of unused port-designated land in Burnaby below Cambridge Park) and removing CRAB Park.

Again, they've been open to the idea, just make sure you compensate them.
And even then, as I pointed out earlier, you may not even need that if you can get 200 Granville to cooperate. It's just the rail lands are much better for the long term (more space) and more likely to work out.

[Citation Needed]. Aren't the two stations not even connected?
The Woodlands probably don't need that big a bay anyways once the 99B leaves. The current ones just kind of suck, though technically capable capacity-wise. The proposed plaza over the rail should be big enough for both a small bus loop and concourse.

Broadway-City Hall is actually more concerning in my opinion, since there's literally nowhere for a loop to go.


Hmm. I was thinking a Gastown Station would be at Carrall/Abott, so that would be 330m to the next station. The issue is that the theoretical best place to put the next station would be Main-Hastings at about 520m. Hence the selection of Gore.

Heatley is probably better than Campbell though.

Long enough to know that A) the Expo can do ~60 seconds if need be, and B) Daryl knows what he's talking about. He also runs SkyTrain for Surrey.

... The discussion concerns removal of platform edges (the yellow tiles), not rails.

TransLink's numbers show a considerably drop in volume between Granville/City Centre and Waterfront; for the Expo, it drops in half to Burrard and half again to WF. There could be any number of explanations, but the simplest one is that people would rather pick the difficult connection that's closer up the line than the difficult connection that's farther up the line.

The City's unlikely to let go of CRAB Park... and I suspect that CP wants the WF space for the same reason you do. At any rate, serious discussion probably won't come up again until NEFC is finished.
As for bus loops, WF doesn't really need any - the only route that terminates there is the 44, everything else goes past it. Ditto Commercial and City Hall.

You can always go Victory Square>Quebec>Heatley with an entrance at Abbott; if the idea is to avoid the DTES, then we should avoid the DTES. Quebec also connects to the streetcar better.

[fredinno]

I know EXACTLY who Daryl (I followed SkytrainforSurrey) is, which is why I also know he can sometimes use misleading (though technically not wrong) numbers and statements when trying to prove a point. I’d do follow him, but there’s a reason I take a grain of salt with me if he can’t cite anything.

You really don’t have to be passive-aggressive here. He’s no Zwei. I just don’t 100% trust him either when it comes to this kind of thing. :/

And yeah one was talking about metal rails and others the platform edges. Point is, I’m curious widening would actually be feasible, because I can’t find anything on it. I would presume they’re currently there for safety purposes.

[Migrant_Coconut]

You asked questions, I gave the answers in one sentence. TransLink themselves give 75 seconds as the sustained minimum. Not sure how passive-aggression comes into play here... or how anybody can inflate headway numbers without outright lying.

I've got no idea about metal rails, but removing platform edges just means a skinnier platform - move the yellow tiles inward and have everybody back up a bit, then all's well.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

You asked questions, I gave the answers in one sentence. TransLink themselves give 75 seconds as the sustained minimum. Not sure how passive-aggression comes into play here... or how anybody can inflate headway numbers without outright lying.

I've got no idea about metal rails, but removing platform edges just means a skinnier platform - move the yellow tiles inward and have everybody back up a bit, then all's well.

...In general, you should theoretically go to higher than maximum frequency on a given transit line at the risk of bunching or having to slow the vehicles.

The report says that’s the recovery headway, meaning the extra headway is a precaution in case trains have to catch up, meaning it likely can’t be sustained for general operation. Though it also says the tracks at Waterfront are the bottleneck for any improvements in frequency... so they’d still need to rebuild those tracks for 75s frequency.

It can be hard to gauge nuance and intent through a computer screen. Sorry. It just seemed you were kind of angry at me.

Either way, it doesn’t matter.

[Galaxy]

I wouldn't mind if Translink demolished that box that's on the entrance east to the transfer point kind of like they did away with that old elevator at commercial and Broadway Station a few years ago. Every time I go by that spot at Waterfront Station[Expo] it's always in the way and really can create a pinch point at say at rush hour for example... Just thought I would say that's on my wish list for Waterfront Station upgrades...

[jollyburger]

Someone posted this from a Skytrain RFP back in 2008:

The current system can and does on occasion dispatch a series trains from Waterfront station an average of 77 seconds apart in the aftermath of a delay. This provides for some schedule recovery, although it would not be a practical design headway for regular reliable service. There are, however, further refinements in ATC algorithms which could be implemented, at some effort and cost, which could likely reduce the minimum (delay recovery) headway further, and provide additional margin for short scheduled headways. It must be recognized, however, that longer trains (6-car Mark I’s, 4-car Mark II’s, or the potential 5-car Mark II) take longer to clear a given section of track, and thus will further limit headway.

Sustaining a more frequent service reliably would require further resources in terms of staffing, technical reliability improvements, operating system enhancements, and potential track changes. A 75-second headway implies the operation of up to 80 trains, requiring upgrades to the ATC system to enable operating staff to manage such an operation effectively.

https://forum.skyscraperpage.com/sho...postcount=1917

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I've got no idea about metal rails, but removing platform edges just means a skinnier platform - move the yellow tiles inward and have everybody back up a bit, then all's well.

These should help. The metal railing is in the center.

Though logically, it's probably not better than lengthening the trains (more complex, possible complete rebuilding of station platforms and more space to the back required to compensate for removed capacity, + modified trains may be either too heavy to one side or be too close to the train on the opposite track).

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

TransLink's numbers show a considerably drop in volume between Granville/City Centre and Waterfront; for the Expo, it drops in half to Burrard and half again to WF. There could be any number of explanations, but the simplest one is that people would rather pick the difficult connection that's closer up the line than the difficult connection that's farther up the line.

The City's unlikely to let go of CRAB Park... and I suspect that CP wants the WF space for the same reason you do. At any rate, serious discussion probably won't come up again until NEFC is finished.
As for bus loops, WF doesn't really need any - the only route that terminates there is the 44, everything else goes past it. Ditto Commercial and City Hall.

You can always go Victory Square>Quebec>Heatley with an entrance at Abbott; if the idea is to avoid the DTES, then we should avoid the DTES. Quebec also connects to the streetcar better.

Note that Waterfront is literally one station away. One would wonder why one would go through the hassle when it doesn't take much longer, if longer at all if you count extra walking time.

I think you misunderstood. I was asking why CP gave up waterfront rail yard land in Coal Harbour when it needed it for future capacity anyways.

I know that. Thing is, the city doesn't NEED to unload CRAB Park. But considering expanding the rails all around the area may result in it becoming an urban park equivalent of a needle house. Which is not something anyone wants. Plus, it give you more space.

I wasn't aware bus loops need to have bus routes that terminate at the loops?

Thing is, Abbott takes you directly south to NEFC, Tinseltown, and International Village (though Victory Square is right next to VCC-Downtown...)
Is the parkade on Beatty Street being redeveloped? (I DID find this: https://pricetags.ca/2014/03/11/the-...beatty-street/)

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Note that Waterfront is literally one station away. One would wonder why one would go through the hassle when it doesn't take much longer, if longer at all if you count extra walking time.

I think you misunderstood. I was asking why CP gave up waterfront rail yard land in Coal Harbour when it needed it for future capacity anyways.

I know that. Thing is, the city doesn't NEED to unload CRAB Park. But considering expanding the rails all around the area may result in it becoming an urban park equivalent of a needle house. Which is not something anyone wants. Plus, it give you more space.

I wasn't aware bus loops need to have bus routes that terminate at the loops?

Thing is, Abbott takes you directly south to NEFC, Tinseltown, and International Village (though Victory Square is right next to VCC-Downtown...)

Probably some of them don't know, the rest don't care. It's almost as much of a hassle at WF - either way, you're going up to ground level, out of the fare paid zone and back down again- and the Expo has two stations, so that's six minutes of extra train time on top of the walking time. Counterintuitively, the CC/G transfer is actually somewhat easier.

Found this. From what I can tell, Coal Harbour was considered redundant and better off as a housing district.
Mostly politics. There's a chance CRAB'll actually get bigger and more accessible as part of the Centerm expansion.

They don't. But if the only couple of bus routes are passing through, do they really need to waste time going in and back out? Just add a couple of shelters and be done with it - there's room for those at City Hall when the block gets turned into an annex.

Add an entrance at Abbott? WF's got one at Howe.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Probably some of them don't know, the rest don't care. It's almost as much of a hassle at WF - either way, you're going up to ground level, out of the fare paid zone and back down again- and the Expo has two stations, so that's six minutes of extra train time on top of the walking time. Counterintuitively, the CC/G transfer is actually somewhat easier.

Found this. From what I can tell, Coal Harbour was considered redundant and better off as a housing district.
Mostly politics. There's a chance CRAB'll actually get bigger and more accessible as part of the Centerm expansion.

They don't. But if the only couple of bus routes are passing through, do they really need to waste time going in and back out? Just add a couple of shelters and be done with it - there's room for those at City Hall when the block gets turned into an annex.

Add an entrance at Abbott? WF's got one at Howe.

Either way, the transfer's mostly bypassed once the Millennium goes through.

I got the impression that was the answer too. It may be cheaper to just build rails north of the current yard them when they needed them. Or it's just short-sightedness. I'm probably never getting the answer. No use crying over spilt milk then. Though it would at least be nice for them to have kept a corridor somewhere for a subway/rail line. Clearly no one was thinking all that far ahead on those sorts of things.

I doubt it'll actually go though. Port Metro's current position is that it's not that big a deal anyways (https://www.portvancouver.com/develo...nsion-project/), plus they have no real incentive, plus, expanding the park would kill any rail yard expansions.

Thing is, the current Waterfront stops definitely can't hold enough buses to be a true bus hub, especially when you remember the space in front of waterfront has to be shared by...everything else (taxis, charter buses, rideshare). It's also a maybe 250-300m detour (depending on how big the concourse is), and you can cut a hole though 200 Granville's Parkade for a direct connection.

It's strange for most of the major centers in Metro Van to have central bus/transit hubs except, really, the main one.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Either way, the transfer's mostly bypassed once the Millennium goes through.

I got the impression that was the answer too. It may be cheaper to just build rails north of the current yard them when they needed them. Or it's just short-sightedness. I'm probably never getting the answer. No use crying over spilt milk then. Though it would at least be nice for them to have kept a corridor somewhere for a subway/rail line. Clearly no one was thinking all that far ahead on those sorts of things.

I doubt it'll actually go though. Port Metro's current position is that it's not that big a deal anyways (https://www.portvancouver.com/develo...nsion-project/), plus they have no real incentive, plus, expanding the park would kill any rail yard expansions.

Thing is, the current Waterfront stops definitely can't hold enough buses to be a true bus hub, especially when you remember the space in front of waterfront has to be shared by...everything else (taxis, charter buses, rideshare). It's also a maybe 250-300m detour (depending on how big the concourse is), and you can cut a hole though 200 Granville's Parkade for a direct connection.

It's strange for most of the major centers in Metro Van to have central bus/transit hubs except, really, the main one.

But then that shifts the burden over to Commercial and City Hall. And you're still going to have cross-flow from within downtown.

Perhaps. Either way, it's dead in the water until CP's ready to talk.

And there's still minimal need for a loop. Buses going straight through on Cordova is relatively easy - turning in and out, not so much. Granville Square is unlikely to work well with all the entrances and exits, so your best bet is closing off that block of Seymour and rebuilding the parking lot in the SE corner for the 3/8/10 while the 4/7/44 carry on as normal; me, I don't see the point.
EDIT: Forgot about 555 West Cordova; so now even the parking lot's a no-go.

Waterfront's not really the "main" hub, everything just goes through it right now. Things may be different 20-30 years from now with a bunch of other ways to access the North Shore and East Van, making a CWHF more of a real estate opportunity than a transportation one (unless the HSR moves in).

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

But then that shifts the burden over to Commercial and City Hall. And you're still going to have cross-flow from within downtown.

Perhaps. Either way, it's dead in the water until CP's ready to talk.

And there's still minimal need for a loop. Buses going straight through on Cordova is relatively easy - turning in and out, not so much. Granville Square is unlikely to work well with all the entrances and exits, so your best bet is closing off that block of Seymour and rebuilding the parking lot in the SE corner for the 3/8/10 while the 4/7/44 carry on as normal; me, I don't see the point.
EDIT: Forgot about 555 West Cordova; so now even the parking lot's a no-go.

Waterfront's not really the "main" hub, everything just goes through it right now. Things may be different 20-30 years from now with a bunch of other ways to access the North Shore and East Van, making a CWHF more of a real estate opportunity than a transportation one (unless the HSR moves in).

I realize that. City Hall's expansion would mostly just result in a giant cavern, and I'm not going over Commerical again. The former is definitely underbuilt, but that's neither here nor there. Either way, neither are long-term potential bus hubs. Grids in this case probably trumps bus hubs.


Same thing with City Center. BTW, it's also 3 minutes from Granville to Waterfront on the Expo, not 6.

The need is that the lack of bus loop capacity currently means the stations are distributed all across that area of DT. Sacrificing a few minutes to get to a bus loop is not that big a deal when it takes that long to walk to the bus station to begin with as a consequence of this.
http://infomaps.translink.ca/System_...anuary2020.pdf
There's also the fact that the current bus stops queue and spill out people into fairly narrow sidewalks and therefore have currently limited queing space and capacity.(https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2838...7i13312!8i6656https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.28515...7i16384!8i8192 )
Also, convenience and accessibility are important factors. We already went over this, I think.

Yes, you would need to put in dedicated left-turn lights for buses turning left onto Water Street, which is the only real potential problem (and isn't that big a deal). It would be directly connected to Granville Street with the Granville Street Extension with the plans to 'punch through' the parkade. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanc...framework-plan

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I realize that. City Hall's expansion would mostly just result in a giant cavern, and I'm not going over Commerical again. The former is definitely underbuilt, but that's neither here nor there. Either way, neither are long-term potential bus hubs. Grids in this case probably trumps bus hubs.


Same thing with City Center. BTW, it's also 3 minutes from Granville to Waterfront on the Expo, not 6.

The need is that the lack of bus loop capacity currently means the stations are distributed all across that area of DT. Sacrificing a few minutes to get to a bus loop is not that big a deal when it takes that long to walk to the bus station to begin with as a consequence of this.
http://infomaps.translink.ca/System_...anuary2020.pdf
There's also the fact that the current bus stops queue and spill out people into fairly narrow sidewalks and therefore have currently limited queing space and capacity.(https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2838...7i13312!8i6656https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.28515...7i16384!8i8192 )
Also, convenience and accessibility are important factors. We already went over this, I think.

Yes, you would need to put in dedicated left-turn lights for buses turning left onto Water Street, which is the only real potential problem (and isn't that big a deal). It would be directly connected to Granville Street with the Granville Street Extension with the plans to 'punch through' the parkade. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanc...framework-plan

True, that horse is effectively dead and should be left un-beaten.

Don't forget that you have to get back to Granville-CC. That's ~3 minutes there, ~2 minutes back (or vice versa), so 5-6 minutes, plus transfer time. No real advantage over going up, crossing the street twice, going back down and being on your way.

Ah, okay. Mistook it for an extra train station.
Still not seeing a clear advantage for centralization though. You're talking about a hypothetical hub for three routes, four if you reroute the 17 and 20, six if you have the 4 and 7 make a pointless detour when passengers can just cross the street. That's a very underutilized hub and a very busy road grid.
And if you want to reroute the West Van and/or Burrard Station routes, Granville, Howe and Seymour would effectively become a bus parking lot. There's a reason why they're scattered all over the place - that, and the fact that Yaletown's West Georgia and the CBD's Pender need service too. It's not like a lot of people get on at the terminus.

Decentralization OTOH spreads the load. Have most of the West Van buses operate from the Park Royal hub and run a RapidBus across the Lions Gate down Georgia to the new NEFC, or have them unload at a Stanley Park SkyTrain hub. The 22/210/214 can stay as-is, or terminate at said hub. If confusion's really that big a deal, merge the 5 and 6 with the 20 and 17 (though an unexpected jam downtown might make that a bad idea).

We'll have to agree to disagree on the width of Hastings/Pender/Cordova. There's usually room for both the line of passengers queuing, and for a maximum of five passengers getting off.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

True, that horse is effectively dead and should be left un-beaten.

Don't forget that you have to get back to Granville-CC. That's ~3 minutes there, ~2 minutes back (or vice versa), so 5-6 minutes, plus transfer time. No real advantage over going up, crossing the street twice, going back down and being on your way.

Ah, okay. Mistook it for an extra train station.
Still not seeing a clear advantage for centralization though. You're talking about a hypothetical hub for three routes, four if you reroute the 17 and 20, six if you have the 4 and 7 make a pointless detour when passengers can just cross the street. That's a very underutilized hub and a very busy road grid.
And if you want to reroute the West Van and/or Burrard Station routes, Granville, Howe and Seymour would effectively become a bus parking lot. There's a reason why they're scattered all over the place - that, and the fact that Yaletown's West Georgia and the CBD's Pender need service too. It's not like a lot of people get on at the terminus.

Decentralization OTOH spreads the load. Have most of the West Van buses operate from the Park Royal hub and run a RapidBus across the Lions Gate down Georgia to the new NEFC, or have them unload at a Stanley Park SkyTrain hub. The 22/210/214 can stay as-is, or terminate at said hub. If confusion's really that big a deal, merge the 6 and 7 with the 20 and 17 (though an unexpected jam downtown might make that a bad idea).

We'll have to agree to disagree on the width of Hastings/Pender/Cordova. There's usually room for both the line of passengers queuing, and for a maximum of five passengers getting off.

The 4 and 7 are currently making two turns to get onto Cordova. If anything, the pointless detour is the current routing. Pender still has service via the 22. Obviously most of the West Van buses should be diverted to a West End station. It’s really just the buses that have stops in a few blocks from Waterfront that should bother. They’re passing by the neighborhood anyways. And the Streetcar/BRT system, which is going to pass by the area and would inherently be designed for higher capacities would accelerate ridership growth. It’s not going to be built for a few decades at least anyways, and BRT/LRT (if Vancouver goes all in with the streetcar) requires you to build median (or at least not basic curbside) lanes, requiring you to build new bus stops. The space is not easy to find in DT. Even if we cheap out and decide curbside lanes is good enough, you still have to deal with the faster system funnelling more people onto the sidewalks at shorter intervals. It works on Broadway fine, but on the narrower Cordova? Where it’s supposed to connect to Skytrain?

You will eventually need more space than the curbside can handle.

Hence why you put in Bus lanes. They actually improve traffic flow in high- bus capacity conditions.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The 4 and 7 are currently making two turns to get onto Cordova. If anything, the pointless detour is the current routing. Pender still has service via the 22. Obviously most of the West Van buses should be diverted to a West End station. It’s really just the buses that have stops in a few blocks from Waterfront that should bother. They’re passing by the neighborhood anyways. And the Streetcar/BRT system, which is going to pass by the area and would inherently be designed for higher capacities would accelerate ridership growth. It’s not going to be built for a few decades at least anyways, and BRT/LRT (if Vancouver goes all in with the streetcar) requires you to build median (or at least not basic curbside) lanes, requiring you to build new bus stops. The space is not easy to find in DT. Even if we cheap out and decide curbside lanes is good enough, you still have to deal with the faster system funnelling more people onto the sidewalks at shorter intervals. It works on Broadway fine, but on the narrower Cordova? Where it’s supposed to connect to Skytrain?

You will eventually need more space than the curbside can handle.

Hence why you put in Bus lanes. They actually improve traffic flow in high- bus capacity conditions.

That's TransLink being forced by the one-way streets to enact a very inefficient routing system. Ideally, you want to make Cordova two-way and run both the 4 and the 7 in that direction, instead of going from two turns to three turns.

This is downtown though, not Broadway. Every E-W through road needs continuous bus service, the streetcar can't be on every single one of them, and it's pretty much a waste of time for everybody to be stuck at multiple reds for a megahub that's literally an extra 2-4 minutes on foot from the existing stop. Waterfront =/= Lonsdale.

Most you need is a small/medium one for a few N-S routes and maybe the 44. That's it. Remember that even the 10 is a series of local buses, not BRT; Granville at rush hour rarely has more than a half-dozen disembarking a bus at once.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

That's TransLink being forced by the one-way streets to enact a very inefficient routing system. Ideally, you want to make Cordova two-way and run both the 4 and the 7 in that direction, instead of going from two turns to three turns.

This is downtown though, not Broadway. Every E-W through road needs continuous bus service, the streetcar can't be on every single one of them, and it's pretty much a waste of time for everybody to be stuck at multiple reds for a megahub that's literally an extra 2-4 minutes on foot from the existing stop. Waterfront =/= Lonsdale.

Most you need is a small/medium one for a few N-S routes and maybe the 44. That's it. Remember that even the 10 is a series of local buses, not BRT; Granville at rush hour rarely has more than a half-dozen disembarking a bus at once.

I realize that. It's actually still 2 turns- one turn to get into the bus loop, one to get off it- the connection from the Cordova connector to Canada Place would be removed (it's not necessary, just make it a ped mall)
In fact, I don't even think the connection from Granville to the waterfront is necessary (at least not as an actual road open to general traffic) either nor the Canada Place Extension. Just make them all ped malls/plazas. That would turn the connection to 1 real turn- the turn onto Cordova, which is required no matter what.

You can't put the bus lanes everywhere, and the 4 and 7 would likely be moved onto Cordova next to Waterfront if it was practical. If Powell turns into a transit/ped mall, as has been proposed, and the Coal Harbour Streetcar spur gets built, there's literally high-capacity bus funnels from 3 ends into a single area. Under the current system, the long-route buses would spread out into the surrounding road and sidewalk network. Under this system, you'd design designated corridors that can hold all the buses and is optimized for transit. If you think the former is better, we may have to just agree to disagree.

I would honestly have just put the 'bus loop' on Cordova itself if it had enough space to do so. Move the charter bus and taxi bays to the back of the station.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I realize that. It's actually still 2 turns- one turn to get into the bus loop, one to get off it- the connection from the Cordova connector to Canada Place would be removed (it's not necessary, just make it a ped mall)
In fact, I don't even think the connection from Granville to the waterfront is necessary (at least not as an actual road open to general traffic) either nor the Canada Place Extension. Just make them all ped malls/plazas. That would turn the connection to 1 real turn- the turn onto Cordova, which is required no matter what.

You can't put the bus lanes everywhere, and the 4 and 7 would likely be moved onto Cordova next to Waterfront if it was practical. If Powell turns into a transit/ped mall, as has been proposed, and the Coal Harbour Streetcar spur gets built, there's literally high-capacity bus funnels from 3 ends into a single area. Under the current system, the long-route buses would spread out into the surrounding road and sidewalk network. Under this system, you'd design designated corridors that can hold all the buses and is optimized for transit. If you think the former is better, we may have to just agree to disagree.

I would honestly have just put the 'bus loop' on Cordova itself if it had enough space to do so. Move the charter bus and taxi bays to the back of the station.

Pretty sure your OP was two turns with an unaltered Cordova. If we're talking about total turns now, that's five - two from Powell to Pender, one onto Granville, two in and out of the hub WB, or two in and out onto Cordova EB. But now we're splitting hairs.

Do you mean closing Water? Powell's staying as-is.
Again, don't mistake any of the bus routes for high-capacity like a BRT; they're all quiet feeder routes that converge and create the illusion of capacity. Bus lanes are almost entirely unnecessary even by the time the streetcar opens.

What we could do is just reclaim the EB curb lane of Granville-Richards, add bus shelters, and make that a limited interchange for the 4/7 and the N-S routes; it already is, more or less, but this makes it official. Solves your confusion problem and doesn't depend on CP saying yes.

Speaking of the streetcar, there's not a lot of options for it past Water. You'd have to either make Cordova two-way and run the trains in mixed traffic in the centre or curbs (bad idea), or dedicate the WB lanes to the ROW; the latter might work if it terminates at WF for good, but that means the 4 and 7 are stuck on the current route. Probably not going to make it to Coal Harbour either way.