daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 12th, 2009, 10:48 PM   #3441
lightrail
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 205
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
That's true.

Same with the headways.
Same goes for number of drivers, length of trains, colour of trains, voltage of power supply, etc.

These arguments are stupid. Who cares. ALRT, LRT - does it really matter so long as they move people from A to B?
lightrail no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 13th, 2009, 02:45 AM   #3442
OettingerCroat
Disenfranchised
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Oakland (USA) // Split (CRO)
Posts: 7,678
Likes (Received): 22

awesome progress!!!
OettingerCroat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 03:08 AM   #3443
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by lightrail View Post
Same goes for number of drivers, length of trains, colour of trains, voltage of power supply, etc.

These arguments are stupid. Who cares. ALRT, LRT - does it really matter so long as they move people from A to B?
There is no argument. Mr. Christine loves to attempt to make up these LRT vs. whatever debates, even though he did state that ART was Light in a previous thread. Notice no one really responds to his posts anymore. Especially since his post tend to be misleading. He clearly has a biased against LRT for some reason.

Translink has been flip-flopping on the technology choice for this line. First it was supposed to be part of the Millenium Line, then it was found that LRT is better, now suddenly Skytrain is the preferred choice. The business case was tweaked to make Skytrain the better choice.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 04:57 AM   #3444
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
...
Same with the headways.
Unlike Skytrain, light rail wouldn't be operated at 3-minute headways because:

1. The lower speed of light rail would result in lower passenger loads. The passenger demand wouldn't warrant closer headways.

2. Skytrain can operate short trains at close headways without any significant cost penalty because the trains are unmanned. The cost of staffing trains motivates transit agencies to run longer trains at longer headways for non-automated systems.

3. If traffic signal priority is used, the minimum headway between light rail trains would be five or six minutes in order to minimize adverse impacts to motor vehicle traffic on cross streets. The typical traffic signal light cycle at a major intersection is one minute. Trains operating in two directions at six-minute headways would disrupt every third traffic signal cycle on average.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 05:10 AM   #3445
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

In a previous study, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority recommended that the Evergreen/Coquitlam Line be light rail. Several alternatives were considered including Skytrain, light rail, and GLT (Guided rubber-tired trams such as Translohr or Bombardier's GLT system). The study found that Skytrain would produce the highest ridership but would have the highest construction cost. GLT would produce the lowest ridership but had by far the lowest construction cost. Light rail would produce ridership modestly higher than GLT at a cost not much lower than Skytrain. At the end of the report, Skytrain was dismissed as exceeding a predefined cost cap and GLT was dismissed as unproven technology. Light rail prevailed by default.

The title of the report is “Northeast Sector Rapid Transit Alternatives Project, Phase 2 - Evaluation of Rapid Transit Alternatives, Final Technical Report”. A copy can be found at the following link:

http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/Pub...01/Attach2.pdf

The following are some numbers from the report:

Operating Cost per Vehicle-Hour - Table 3.6
SkyTrain: $150 - $170
LRT: $150 - $200
GLT: $110 - $140

Operating Cost per Passenger Capacity - KM - Table 3.6
SkyTrain: $0.025 - $0.035
LRT: $0.03 - $0.04
GLT: $0.04 - $0.05

Maximum Acheivable Speed - Table 5.1
SkyTrain: 80 km/h
LRT: 90 km/h
GLT: 70 km/h

Travel Time from Lougheed Station to Coquitlam City Hall - Table 5.2
SkyTrain: 13 min.
LRT: 21 min.
GLT: 23 min.

Peak Directional Passenger Demand for 2021 - Table 7.1.1
SkyTrain: 5900
LRT: 2600
GLT: 2200

Capital Costs - Demand Based Vehicles - Table 7.2.1
SkyTrain: $834.0 M
LRT: $660.4 M
GLT: $277.6 M

Annual Operating Costs - Table 7.3.3
SkyTrain: $13.8 M
LRT: $10.6 M
GLT: $9.4 M

The cost cap now seems to have gone away. The transportation authority now recommends Skytrain for the route.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 06:37 AM   #3446
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

We are building SkyTrain. There's a dedicated thread somewhere here for it.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 03:38 PM   #3447
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

This IS the skytrain thread, and the discussion has not veered away from that topic.

It is about Skytrain, and why Translink decided to switch to LRT, and then back to Skytrain. The travel patterns in Vancouver still seem to be very much core oriented, and it just makes sense to stick with the original plan of building an extension of the Millenium Skytrain Line to Coquitlam instead of switching to LRT. Like Mr. X said it just makes more sense to extend to the regional system to Coquitlam, instead of building one orphan LRT line. Time, and money was wasted getting to this point.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 07:26 PM   #3448
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Quote:
Maximum Acheivable Speed - Table 5.1
SkyTrain: 80 km/h
LRT: 90 km/h
GLT: 70 km/h
Those are a bit useless as LRT and GLT would be required to abide local speed laws of 50 km/h as it will travel down city streets.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2009, 07:28 PM   #3449
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_christine View Post
Unlike Skytrain, light rail wouldn't be operated at 3-minute headways because:

1. The lower speed of light rail would result in lower passenger loads. The passenger demand wouldn't warrant closer headways.
Tell that to a pro-LRT organization in Vancouver that is against the SkyTrain extension to UBC:

It is not speed that attracts customers to transit, rather it is the overall ambiance of the system including ease of use, ease of ticketing, vehicle comfort (seating) and the seamless or no transfer journey.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 12:32 AM   #3450
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
This IS the skytrain thread, and the discussion has not veered away from that topic.

It is about Skytrain, and why Translink decided to switch to LRT, and then back to Skytrain. The travel patterns in Vancouver still seem to be very much core oriented, and it just makes sense to stick with the original plan of building an extension of the Millenium Skytrain Line to Coquitlam instead of switching to LRT. Like Mr. X said it just makes more sense to extend to the regional system to Coquitlam, instead of building one orphan LRT line. Time, and money was wasted getting to this point.
There's no point in discussing about it when that topic has been discussed for over four years... dragging to this point. SkyTrain is the choice, construction and design plans are already being done, and will be built.

Right now, the discussion is about M-Line extension... which I have no idea what LRT supporters are thinking.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 01:25 AM   #3451
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
...
It is not speed that attracts customers to transit, rather it is the overall ambiance of the system including ease of use, ease of ticketing, vehicle comfort (seating) and the seamless or no transfer journey.
No, it is speed that attracts customers to transit. The ambiance of a transit vehicle can never match the ambiance of getting out of bed a few minutes later in the morning or arriving home a few minutes earlier in the evening.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 01:38 AM   #3452
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

If 4 minute difference is such a big deal, you may as well just drive.

Accessibilty is far more important than speed. The Skytrain could use a few more stations. What is the point of speed, when the savings is lost getting to a station?
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 03:11 AM   #3453
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

^ the UBC SkyTrain extension would simply mirror the existing 99 B-Line rapid bus service.

The station spacing is fair, located at all the major retail and transit interchange sections. There are stations on major north-south street arteries.




From VCC to Arbutus, the average station pacing would be about 1-km. This is Central Broadway.

Past Arbutus to less dense areas, station spacing would be about 1.5-kms...which again, is fair. Stations at Macdonald, Alma, and Sasamat could have ridership that is higher than many of the existing SkyTrain stations....these three stops on the 99 B-Line already see significant boarding/exit counts.

Just remember that this is the regional backbone, it shouldn't be a stop-and-go every 500-metres or less. And there would still be frequent local trolley service along Broadway to complement the SkyTrain extension.

I would agree with you though that the Evergreen Line could use one additional station to make it a 7-station line including the two terminus stations.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 04:28 AM   #3454
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
I would agree with you though that the Evergreen Line could use one additional station to make it a 7-station line including the two terminus stations.
I don't know... I'm fine with the Evergreen Line at it's present state. I much rather future stations so once there is enough development, they can construct the station.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 04:04 PM   #3455
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
^ the UBC SkyTrain extension would simply mirror the existing 99 B-Line rapid bus service.

The station spacing is fair, located at all the major retail and transit interchange sections. There are stations on major north-south street arteries.


From VCC to Arbutus, the average station pacing would be about 1-km. This is Central Broadway.

Past Arbutus to less dense areas, station spacing would be about 1.5-kms...which again, is fair. Stations at Macdonald, Alma, and Sasamat could have ridership that is higher than many of the existing SkyTrain stations....these three stops on the 99 B-Line already see significant boarding/exit counts.
The 99 runs along Broadway, no? Looking at Virtual Earth Bird's eye view, your station spacing seems too wide. You are going to leave out large number of residents between the stations. Again, I am using images to come to this conclusion, but that area looks to be quite vibrant, and a small station spacing, say around 750-850 metres would better serve that area, and attract many more riders without a significant increase in travel time.
I am starting to see why people want surface LRT in that corridor. But Skytrain can still do the job of a regional system, but 1-1.5km spacing will only hurt ridership for this corridor, in my opinion.

Quote:
Just remember that this is the regional backbone, it shouldn't be a stop-and-go every 500-metres or less. And there would still be frequent local trolley service along Broadway to complement the SkyTrain extension.
A regional system doesn't automatically assume large spacings. Look at SF's, and Washington system. They are regional with wide stations in the fringes, but the stations are significantly closer in the core.
What if the locals want stop spacing of 500 metres? Here in Toronto, some residents are concerned that they will not have a station in their community. In theory speed may sound good, but in reality, people prefer accessibilty in the long run.
I think people would be happy enough not having to transfer to the 99 B-line anymore. A few extra stops to UBC probably will not mean much for them.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2009, 01:57 AM   #3456
greg_christine
Registered User
 
greg_christine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Smithfield, VA
Posts: 1,008
Likes (Received): 142

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
If 4 minute difference is such a big deal, you may as well just drive.

Accessibilty is far more important than speed. The Skytrain could use a few more stations. What is the point of speed, when the savings is lost getting to a station?
That's the point. If the system is slow, people will drive.

I am sure the transportation authority took into account the proximity of the stations to the areas where people live. Skytrain was still predicted to generate a far higher ridership than light rail.
greg_christine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2009, 04:46 AM   #3457
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
The 99 runs along Broadway, no? Looking at Virtual Earth Bird's eye view, your station spacing seems too wide. You are going to leave out large number of residents between the stations. Again, I am using images to come to this conclusion, but that area looks to be quite vibrant, and a small station spacing, say around 750-850 metres would better serve that area, and attract many more riders without a significant increase in travel time.
I am starting to see why people want surface LRT in that corridor. But Skytrain can still do the job of a regional system, but 1-1.5km spacing will only hurt ridership for this corridor, in my opinion.



A regional system doesn't automatically assume large spacings. Look at SF's, and Washington system. They are regional with wide stations in the fringes, but the stations are significantly closer in the core.
What if the locals want stop spacing of 500 metres? Here in Toronto, some residents are concerned that they will not have a station in their community. In theory speed may sound good, but in reality, people prefer accessibilty in the long run.
I think people would be happy enough not having to transfer to the 99 B-line anymore. A few extra stops to UBC probably will not mean much for them.
You wouldn't be able to tell from Google Earth or what not that the station locations west of Arbutus are located in the centre of the retail areas on Broadway and also on 10th Avenue.

These stops, Macdonald, Alma, and Sasamat, are all the epicentres of the retail districts around them. All of the proposed stations mirror the existing 99 B-Line rapid bus service.

A station every 750-850-metres would be extremely expensive and time consuming.

If they want local service, then take the trolley. It'll still exist, with likely a trolley at least every 10-minutes during the day and peak.
__________________
"My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is NOT a porn star." - Abe Simpson

"Preparations for the Vancouver 2010 Olympics are progressing so well, it's boring. We'd like there to be some challenges, so we [the IOC] could shout at them." - IOC (Sept. 2007)


"In medieval Europe if you didn't like somebody's argument and couldn't think of a real response you called them a witch and demanded they be burned at the stake. In the US you call them unpatriotic, and in Canada you call them racist."
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2009, 06:12 AM   #3458
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
If they want local service, then take the trolley. It'll still exist, with likely a trolley at least every 10-minutes during the day and peak.
The Broadway trolley leaves like at least every five minutes... and it's not like it's the only trolley that serves Broadway... buses like 17, etc. also use Broadway. West of Alma to UBC, there are a lot of other buses as well.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2009, 04:09 PM   #3459
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_christine View Post
That's the point. If the system is slow, people will drive.
The point is, if your schedule is so tight, that you cannot afford a few extra minutes you may as well drive. You shouldn't be even using transit. No one really cares about spending a few minutes extra on a train, if it means they are a bit closer to home, and have better accessibility.
Speed alone does NOT attract ridership. The total commute time attracts ridership, in which speed, AND accessibility(distance from a station) plays a part. To focus entirely on speed does not make a very-user friendly system.


Quote:
I am sure the transportation authority took into account the proximity of the stations to the areas where people live. Skytrain was still predicted to generate a far higher ridership than light rail.

This is not a LRT vs. Skytrain debate. This is an issue of station spacing, and accessibilty. The Skytrain extension was already projected to cost over 2 Billion. What's a few more stations? If you're going to build it, build it right.
But since you want to debate LRT, the ridership along the same corridor would be 140,000 riders. With Skytrain, and a bus service it would be 150,000 riders. SPending 2.2 Billion to attract 10,000 more riders? hmmm..

Mr. x, that is exactly what proponents of the Sheppard Subway said. Well, the subway is barely used, and trafffic on Sheppard is worse than ever. And it is costing the TTC 10 million dollars a year to operate.

Speed does NOT attract drivers.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2009, 09:16 PM   #3460
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 858

Comparing Sheppard to Broadway is absurd. Broadway is similar to Toronto's Bloor in terms of population density and commercial/gov't/hospital/education services.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
british columbia, canada, vancouver

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium