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 15th, 2009, 09:24 PM   #3461
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2 View Post
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.
So why build a Skytrain line with 1 to 1.5 km spacing? I did a bit of research on the Broadway, and I am more convinced, that if money is spent on underground skytrain, the spacing must be at least between 750 to 850 metres. Any spacing greater than that will only hurt the corridor, and probably will not attract a large number of riders, except for when University is in session.

The B-D line is actually quite fast, considering the relatively short station spacing.

I am not against Skytrain, even it is fricking expensive, and proprietery. But I am against any idea of a regional system that only satisfies the needs of long distance travelers, and forgoes local communities the line travels through.

Last edited by JustinB; May 15th, 2009 at 09:34 PM.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 16th, 2009, 02:19 AM   #3462
lightrail
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 205
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
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.





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.
Where are you pulling these numbers from? Source?

Think long term. LRT at grade will be full the day it opens, and then there will be arguments over costly expansion plans in the future.
lightrail no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2009, 10:36 AM   #3463
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
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.
That's not really the point you want to get to. We want transit to attract commuters OUT of their car... not put them back in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
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.
Your correct. Speed alone isn't the only thing. Accessibility isn't the only thing as well. Also note that SkyTrain will be very accessible even though it's underground. As the SkyTrain system is under 10th Avenue, it will be practically aligned with Broadway, meaning only ramps are needed to get from platform to street level.

Spacing of the stations won't differ much from Light Rail. We are pretty much following the existing B-Line in terms of station spacing. Light Rail will be the same.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2009, 02:48 PM   #3464
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
Where are you pulling these numbers from? Source?
From here:

http://ubcskytrain.wordpress.com/22points/

A pro-Skytrain site

And I repeat: I am not against SKYTRAIN Technology. Only the idea of sacrificing local accessibility to accomodate long distance travellers. But Mr. Christine is so gung-ho against LRT, he cannot help not talking about it.

Quote:
Think long term. LRT at grade will be full the day it opens, and then there will be arguments over costly expansion plans in the future.
That's a crock of crap. The capacity of LRT, and Skytrain is actually quite similar, especially if you run LRT in it's ROW, and at the same frequencies as Skytrain. There is a silly assumption that the maximum headway for LRT is 5 minutes, which is absolutely false. There are installations in Europe that run as little as 90 seconds. You run the LRT at the same frequencies as SKytrain, and with the same stops, and you have similar capacity. I am pretty sure the "train length is limited by the city blocks argument" is going to pop up sometime.
I would argue that considering the financial situation in Vancouver concerning transit, this Skytrain extension might suck up all available funds for future project. If you want to think about the future, then I would question spending 2-3 Billion on one line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine
That's not really the point you want to get to. We want transit to attract commuters OUT of their car... not put them back in.
And focusing soley on speed will not attract anyone out of their cars. Again ACCESSIBILITY, ease of use, is key. You are proposing attracting a few thousand long distance traveller at the sacrifice of alienating far more LOCAL drivers out of their cars. Drivers who may use their cars for short trip. Why are you ignoring them, and relegating them to taking a bus to a far flung station?

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine
Your correct. Speed alone isn't the only thing. Accessibility isn't the only thing as well. Also note that SkyTrain will be very accessible even though it's underground. As the SkyTrain system is under 10th Avenue, it will be practically aligned with Broadway, meaning only ramps are needed to get from platform to street level.

Spacing of the stations won't differ much from Light Rail. We are pretty much following the existing B-Line in terms of station spacing. Light Rail will be the same.

Again, I am not against SKytrain. Vancouver spent enough money on it. If the station spacing serves the community well, then I have no problem with it. 750-850m is fine in my opinion. any spacing greater, will only hurt the community it is running through it. I do have a feeling any SKytrain extension will be very expensive though. I think there is going to be a rethink of what will be built to UBC.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2009, 10:35 PM   #3465
spongeg
Registered User
 
spongeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 8,033
Likes (Received): 1731

slow or fast - the attraction is convenience and knowing there is the line

I have some friends interested in the Cambie neighbourhood now because of the line and its direct access to downtown and the airport - they would have never thought of the area before - even though it was served by bus

there are many people who will not get on the loser cruiser aka BUS but will gladly get on the skytrain even though the loser cruise can often be more direct and faster
__________________
below it all
spongeg está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 17th, 2009, 09:08 AM   #3466
nname
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 126
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
Again, I am not against SKytrain. Vancouver spent enough money on it. If the station spacing serves the community well, then I have no problem with it. 750-850m is fine in my opinion. any spacing greater, will only hurt the community it is running through it. I do have a feeling any SKytrain extension will be very expensive though. I think there is going to be a rethink of what will be built to UBC.
VCC-Clark
-> Finning (no connection) : 700m
-> Main (3, 19) : 1200m
-> Cambie (15, 50, Canada Line) : 1100m
-> VGH/Oak/Willow (17, 50) : 800m
-> Granville (10) : 900m
-> Arbutus (16, future streetcar) : 1050m
-> Macdonald (22) : 1100m
-> Alma (7, 32, C19) : 1300m
-> Sasmat (no connection) : 1500m
-> UBC (bus loop) : 3100m

These are all the major north/south roads and bus route crossing Broadway, except Burrard (500m west of Granville, no bus connection) and Blanca (400m west of Sasmat, connect to #4, which run parallel, 450m north of Broadway). So I don't see there's a way to make the stations 750m apart without missing some of the major streets, bus connections, and commercial areas. The only station that would actually make sense is probably a station between Macdonald and Alma, but does that area really need 650m station spacing?

Last edited by nname; May 17th, 2009 at 09:16 AM.
nname no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2009, 09:36 AM   #3467
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
That's a crock of crap. The capacity of LRT, and Skytrain is actually quite similar, especially if you run LRT in it's ROW, and at the same frequencies as Skytrain. There is a silly assumption that the maximum headway for LRT is 5 minutes, which is absolutely false. There are installations in Europe that run as little as 90 seconds. You run the LRT at the same frequencies as SKytrain, and with the same stops, and you have similar capacity. I am pretty sure the "train length is limited by the city blocks argument" is going to pop up sometime.
LRT in Europe and LRT in North America are practically are quite different. LRT in Europe, which doesn't usually have this title, or tram, serves locally acting as a branch from Metro systems. They serve locally and not as an actual rapid transit option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
I would argue that considering the financial situation in Vancouver concerning transit, this Skytrain extension might suck up all available funds for future project. If you want to think about the future, then I would question spending 2-3 Billion on one line.
I wouldn't think that would be a problem. Normally, the Provincial Government and Federal Governments make up a large portion of the project. A project partner may be involved depending if it was P3 project. If it is, it wouldn't be that much would it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
And focusing soley on speed will not attract anyone out of their cars. Again ACCESSIBILITY, ease of use, is key. You are proposing attracting a few thousand long distance traveller at the sacrifice of alienating far more LOCAL drivers out of their cars. Drivers who may use their cars for short trip. Why are you ignoring them, and relegating them to taking a bus to a far flung station?
You haven't done your research on this part: the problem is that a lot of people coming to and from the Broadway Corridor are long distance commuters. The City of Vancouver has recognized that they have failed to meet their goals of putting more of these travelers onto transit, on to bikes, and on to their foot. SkyTrain will dramatically decrease the reliance on cars and we might actually see numbers closer to the downtown core in terms of % of people using different transportation modes.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 18th, 2009, 04:35 PM   #3468
Allen2
Registered User
 
Allen2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
You haven't done your research on this part: the problem is that a lot of people coming to and from the Broadway Corridor are long distance commuters. The City of Vancouver has recognized that they have failed to meet their goals of putting more of these travelers onto transit, on to bikes, and on to their foot. SkyTrain will dramatically decrease the reliance on cars and we might actually see numbers closer to the downtown core in terms of % of people using different transportation modes.



Exactly. For people living in the subhurbs of metro Vancouver, it is better for us to transfer only 2 times: bus and then SkyTrain to reach our destination. For example, if I were to come from north Delta to UBC, I would take the bus to my nearest SkyTrain station: 22nd Ave Station. Then, I stop at Broadway to transfer to the UBC line.
__________________
Illusion is needed to disguise the emptiness within. - Arthur Erickson
Allen2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2009, 05:14 PM   #3469
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by deasine View Post
LRT in Europe and LRT in North America are practically are quite different. LRT in Europe, which doesn't usually have this title, or tram, serves locally acting as a branch from Metro systems. They serve locally and not as an actual rapid transit option.

LRT in Europe, and North America is the exact same. Europeans are not just impatient as Americans, and can deal with 400-500m station spacings. There are many LRT systems in Europe that are line-haul systems.


Quote:
I wouldn't think that would be a problem. Normally, the Provincial Government and Federal Governments make up a large portion of the project. A project partner may be involved depending if it was P3 project. If it is, it wouldn't be that much would it...
Didn't your government recently declare that the Canada Line metro will take 200K cars off the road? What happens, if this does not occur?
You do realize that with a P3, a private investor would expect a return on their investment, and zero risk?
I wouldn't shrug off 2 Billion for one line. It's a lot of money to go to a University.


Quote:
You haven't done your research on this part: the problem is that a lot of people coming to and from the Broadway Corridor are long distance commuters. The City of Vancouver has recognized that they have failed to meet their goals of putting more of these travelers onto transit, on to bikes, and on to their foot. SkyTrain will dramatically decrease the reliance on cars and we might actually see numbers closer to the downtown core in terms of % of people using different transportation modes.
It doesn't matter that "a lot" of people are long distance. You focus on improving local travel first, regional travel second. A lot of people may come from long distances, but I bet a lot more people travel locally within the corridor. If someone is going to travel long distances, a extra 3-4 minutes is not going to kill them. The city failed, because they have been focusing solely on regional travel, sacrificing local travel in the process.
Skytrain has NOT dramatically decreased reliance on cars, and it most likely never will. You cannot tell people that they can take a infrquent bus service to a station, just because you want to convenience a few thousand travellers from afar.
JustinB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 01:24 AM   #3470
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
LRT in Europe, and North America is the exact same. Europeans are not just impatient as Americans, and can deal with 400-500m station spacings. There are many LRT systems in Europe that are line-haul systems.
Out of curiosity, can you give an example?

You must remember that in Europe, competing with roads is a lot easier. The cities aren't built on the grid and surface transportation is slower. LRTs, proportionally aren't running that much slower than road vehicles in these situations.

Saying Europeans are more patient is a blanket statement with no backing. One could just as easily say Europeans are more lazy because they expect not to walk the additional 150-200m to get to the station.

In North America, surface transportation can more frequently get to 50km/h, which makes an LRT with frequent stops much slower.

Quote:
Skytrain has NOT dramatically decreased reliance on cars, and it most likely never will. You cannot tell people that they can take a infrequent bus service to a station, just because you want to convenience a few thousand travellers from afar.
Nope. It's not intended to. Transit never does although politicians like to use this lie to get the support of car drivers. It HAS provided people with an option, however. These users will not be all travellers from afar. They will be locals as well. Adding one or maybe two stops will not serve to convenience many of these travelers who will likely be taking a North-South bus to transfer to the line or will be on foot. People in Vancouver don't mind walking. Perhaps in Europe, they prefer to be picked up and dropped off at their destination with minimal effort?

Anyway, two questions:
  • What would you consider infrequent bus service?
  • Where would you propose putting these extra stops?

People aren't going to jump on a train to travel two stops, they'll jump on whatever comes first, which would probably be a bus, facilitating local transportation. The buses will more than suffice for local traffic. People who are traveling further will walk the extra 150-200m to take the train. The only place I can see tighter Station spacing would be between Cambie and Granville, where you could have a station at Willow and Alder... giving the hospital 2 stations with close proximity, and four stations with 500-600m station spacing.

Remember that each station is 80m long, which adds some potential to shrink station distances.

What many here fail to think about is that it's likely that for the busiest part of the corridor, LRT would likely be put underground.

Here's an idea... let's do both. Extend the Streetcar/LRT West along 4th avenue terminating inside Jericho Beach Park and SkyTrain down 10th.

Win/Win

Last edited by bluemeansgo; May 20th, 2009 at 01:50 AM. Reason: addendum
bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 01:26 AM   #3471
spongeg
Registered User
 
spongeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 8,033
Likes (Received): 1731

Canadians suck - we expect too much and we are spoiled
__________________
below it all
spongeg está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 02:04 AM   #3472
bluemeansgo
Registered User
 
bluemeansgo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 451
Likes (Received): 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
If someone is going to travel long distances, a extra 3-4 minutes is not going to kill them. The city failed, because they have been focusing solely on regional travel, sacrificing local travel in the process.
Correct, an extra 3-4 minutes to walk an extra 150-200m to the station is not going to kill you. Humans walk about 6-7km/h. Let's say 6000m/hour... which is about 100m/min. Do you seriously think an extra 90-120seconds (let's say on each side of a trip) is a FAILURE?

Remember, that an LRT, unless it's grade-separated would run less frequently (with longer trains) than SkyTrain would and would force a transfer.

Besides, local transit, as has been mentioned, will be taken care of by frequent trolley buses. Currently the #9 runs every 300 seconds (5 minutes).

It's likely this bus would even receive a few more people given the station access time for local travel, so local transit will not suffer in the slightest... it may even get a bit better, now that the 99 wouldn't be taking up so much road space.

If we really wanted, we could just block off some lanes, which would do the same as LRT for serving local transit and offer the flexibility of making these "bus-lanes" peak-only service.
bluemeansgo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 02:29 AM   #3473
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
LRT in Europe, and North America is the exact same. Europeans are not just impatient as Americans, and can deal with 400-500m station spacings. There are many LRT systems in Europe that are line-haul systems.
No LRT serves as a secondary haul option, not as a primary one. The LRT systems that are used as a primary system are pretty much mostly separated from traffic. Porto Metro, for instance, is underground in the city centre and at-grade in the suburbs.

Broadway can be considered as an extension of the city centre, meaning it deserves to be fully segregated. LRT cannot be fully segregated and even if it is, it won't cost much more to upgrade it to SkyTrain, making it interline with the current infrastructure system.

It also brings another question if it's LRT: where would we put another OMC?

I understand you think station distances should be close together, but LRT and SkyTrain are practically the same in terms of the number of stations.


Source: City of Vancouver


Source: City of Vancouver

These are the route maps by the City of Vancouver during the 1999-2000 Rapid Transit to UBC study. As you can see, LRT has more stations only between Granville and Main. Some of the stations, like Willow, Birch, and Oak are way too close to each other. There's no point of putting stations when they are like within two blocks walking distance. And that area is really well served by rapid transit, especially when the Canada Line opens and the Canada Line bus integration kicks in. More trolleys will be diverted in the area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
Didn't your government recently declare that the Canada Line metro will take 200K cars off the road? What happens, if this does not occur? You do realize that with a P3, a private investor would expect a return on their investment, and zero risk? I wouldn't shrug off 2 Billion for one line. It's a lot of money to go to a University.
TransLink (or the Provincial Government) will be paying InTransitBC if ridership doesn't meet projections, but there is no way it wouldn't meet projections. If you add up all the suburban bus routes that go to Downtown (that will be feeding into the Canada Line), plus the 98 B-Line, the second busiest B-Line in Vancouver, plus the local Cambie-15 bus (though I know not all of it will use the Canada Line), you already meet the projection. I'm not even adding the amount of people who will be using the Canada Line to get to the airport plus the people who will be using the line getting out of their cars.

The P3 model used on the Evergreen Line and potentially the UBC Line will differ quite differently from the Canada Line as these will be running with the existing Millennium Line. It would be a lot closer to the Docklands LRT model used in London.

Broadway is the busiest corridor in the City of Vancouver. There will be no problem (unless the Government is stupid...) for a P3 model to be used for the UBC Line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
It doesn't matter that "a lot" of people are long distance. You focus on improving local travel first, regional travel second. A lot of people may come from long distances, but I bet a lot more people travel locally within the corridor. If someone is going to travel long distances, a extra 3-4 minutes is not going to kill them. The city failed, because they have been focusing solely on regional travel, sacrificing local travel in the process.
Skytrain has NOT dramatically decreased reliance on cars, and it most likely never will. You cannot tell people that they can take a infrquent bus service to a station, just because you want to convenience a few thousand travellers from afar.
By taking people off the local bus routes, you are improving local travel already. Like I said, there are electric trolleys that run on Broadway already. Maybe we should build Streetcar but that's AFTER we build the SkyTrain line.

They didn't fail because of focusing on regional travel. Technically, the city has limited powers in our transit system anyway. We aren't Toronto or Calgary, the Provincial Government, private sector, plus regional governments controls how the public transit work in Vancouver. The City has input, but it can't do much. What we have done is implement bus priority lanes and improve neighboring cycling routes. But it's now to a point where Broadway is congested, buses aren't moving any faster than they were, and so we have to invest in a faster transit option to get people moving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
Remember that each station is 80m long, which adds some potential to shrink station distances.
THANK YOU.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
What many here fail to think about is that it's likely that for the busiest part of the corridor, LRT would likely be put underground.
Unfortunately not. And if it is, why not just put SkyTrain in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
Here's an idea... let's do both. Extend the Streetcar/LRT West along 4th avenue terminating inside Jericho Beach Park and SkyTrain down 10th.

Win/Win
That's the City's long term goal.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 06:06 AM   #3474
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

JustinB, if I were you I wouldn't give my opinion on the project unless I've visited the corridor myself (or even better, if i live there)...not merely look at maps, reports, and pictures.
__________________
"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 20th, 2009, 07:13 AM   #3475
spongeg
Registered User
 
spongeg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 8,033
Likes (Received): 1731

people who live in north delta/surrey and work at or attend UBC should be shot
__________________
below it all
spongeg está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 07:25 AM   #3476
dleung
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Point Grey
Posts: 2,629
Likes (Received): 131



Another Canadians-are-dumber-than-we-think post:

Quote:
Amtrak Customs Hold-up Temporarily Disappearing
by Andrew Smith

Amtrak Cascades has wanted to run another daily train from Seattle to Vancouver, but Canada’s customs agency has been asking Amtrak Cascades to cover the costs of Canadian customs service on the new run - around $1,500 a day - and Cascades doesn’t have the money. Because that money isn’t budgeted, the new service has been delayed. Thankfully, the Canadian Government’s hold-up has continued to get press from our northern neighbours (that’s the way they spell it, anyway), and the hold-up is going to go away, though only briefly ” before, during and for a short time after” Vancouver’s 2010 Olympic games. Here’s Jon Ferry in the Province (H/T to Lloyd):

Quote:
Responding to increasing pressure, however, federal Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has finally agreed to waive the customs cash grab “immediately before, during and for a short time after the 2010 Winter Games.” The only problem is the extra trains are needed right now for what will undoubtedly be a critical summer tourist season.

[Discovery Institute's Cascadia Center Director Bruce] Agnew points to a Washington state Department of Transportation study showing that Amtrak passengers currently spend nearly $16 million Cdn a year in the Vancouver area. With a second train on the Vancouver-Seattle run, that could soar to as much as $49 million.

Saying they plan to temporarily waive the border fee may be a way for the Canadian Federal Government to save face and pray for a successful Olympic Games despite the worst economy in generations, but I’d take the Canadian Government’s position at face value. Anyone who dreams about Vancouver-Seattle-Portland high speed rail needs to pay attention to this topic: the US Federal Government is going to take a look at this customs issue before to making any long-term investments in high speed rail on Amtrak Cascades. If the Canadian government isn’t willing to chip in $1,500 a day - at most $547,500 a year - to make a second daily run possible, what hope is there of several daily runs, or anywhere near enough runs to make an investment by the federal government on this side of the border worthwhile?

This hard-line stance may have earned political points in Canada during the Bush administration, but I can’t imagine this is popular today. I’d hate it if Ottawa’s stinginess over just the customs fees on a second run jeopardized our chance of regional high speed rail. Come on, Ottawa, the train is going to get you guys millions in tourist dollars and you only have to pay the customs fees. Get on the ball.

source: http://seattletransitblog.com/
There was also an article on it in the Vancouver Sun today imploring Ottawa to stop being stupid, but it's more interesting to hear it from the Americans.
dleung no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 08:18 AM   #3477
nname
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 126
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
Besides, local transit, as has been mentioned, will be taken care of by frequent trolley buses. Currently the #9 runs every 300 seconds (5 minutes).
I think after the UBC line, the #9 wouldn't run the full length on Broadway anymore. It'll probably just terminate at Cambie (and maybe going north into Downtown), and the rest of Broadway would be taken care of by the #50, #17, #16, and #4.
nname no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 09:39 AM   #3478
raccc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 28
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinB View Post
Didn't your government recently declare that the Canada Line metro will take 200K cars off the road? What happens, if this does not occur?
You do realize that with a P3, a private investor would expect a return on their investment, and zero risk?
That was the premier speaking off the cuff. He might have been talking about 20 years down the road. Who knows? Anyway, the initial target once the line is up and running is 100,000 boardings per day which seems reasonable. Maybe a bit high but certainly in the realm of possibility. TransLink is taking 90% of the ridership risk as they control the fares and the buses feeding the line.

Quote:
It doesn't matter that "a lot" of people are long distance. You focus on improving local travel first, regional travel second. A lot of people may come from long distances, but I bet a lot more people travel locally within the corridor. If someone is going to travel long distances, a extra 3-4 minutes is not going to kill them. The city failed, because they have been focusing solely on regional travel, sacrificing local travel in the process.
Skytrain has NOT dramatically decreased reliance on cars, and it most likely never will. You cannot tell people that they can take a infrquent bus service to a station, just because you want to convenience a few thousand travellers from afar.
People travelling shorter distances already have good options. The buses work fine and a lot of people cycle. In fact, the UBC Line goes through several of the neighbourhoods with some of the highest levels of cycling in North America with mode shares of between 5 and 10 percent. A street car or LRT with lots of stops will get get people off the buses, off their bikes and off their feet. It will not reduce car travel.

According to Patrick Condon, the average streetcar trip is 2km, the average LRT trip is 7km while the average SkyTrain trip is over 10km. It is obvious that SkyTrain serves trips where the only other reasonable option is a car. Long car trips cause traffic, noise, pollution and congestion in the neighbours throughout the city and the region. I suspect these people are more likely to speed as well. In the future, small slower speed neighbourhood electric vehicles are also a possibility for shorter trips as well. It will be a while if not forever before affordable electric vehicles are suitable for long trips.

If you want proof that SkyTrain is an alternative to driving, according to the 2006 census, between 1996 and 2006, the transit mode share for the region only increased from 14.3% to 16.7%. Meanwhile, the transit mode share increased dramatically in the cities that the Millennium Line serves. In Burnaby, the mode share increased from 16.8% to 25% while the people driving decreased from 70.3% to 62.8%. In New West, the transit mode share increased from 20.1% t0 26.8%, higher than than Vancouver's 25.1%. Driving decreased from 65.7% to 60.3%. Even more impressive, in Burnaby, the number of transit trips increased by 75% and in New West, the increase was 69%.

Meanwhile, in cities with just LRT, the regional transit mode shares are lower. Calgary is the best at 15.6%.
raccc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 10:47 AM   #3479
deasine
=)
 
deasine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,452
Likes (Received): 57

I've read too much about that... it just angers me every time I see it.
deasine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2009, 03:42 PM   #3480
JustinB
Registered User
 
JustinB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,633
Likes (Received): 30

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemeansgo View Post
Correct, an extra 3-4 minutes to walk an extra 150-200m to the station is not going to kill you. Humans walk about 6-7km/h. Let's say 6000m/hour... which is about 100m/min. Do you seriously think an extra 90-120seconds (let's say on each side of a trip) is a FAILURE?
It's going to be longer than 3-4 minutes walking, not to mention the time to actually ascend/descend AND to wait for a train. Compared to 3-4 extra minutes sitting on your ass on a train. Huge difference. You are not going to attract walkers, and locals to stations that are far apart.

Quote:
Remember, that an LRT, unless it's grade-separated would run less frequently (with longer trains) than SkyTrain would and would force a transfer.
LRT can be built on a dedicate ROW, with frequencies as great as any automated metro system. It's already been proven. if you're crazy enough to take transit over long distances on a metro, a transfer probably will not kill you. Again. Focus should be on local travel first, regional second.

Quote:
Besides, local transit, as has been mentioned, will be taken care of by frequent trolley buses. Currently the #9 runs every 300 seconds (5 minutes).
Let's face reality here. You just built a potentially 3 Billion transit line. Do you honestly think Translink is going to run frequent trolley service to parallel it? It's not going to happen. It's sounds good on paper, but will it happen? Here in Toronto, we had frequent bus service, until the Sheppard Line opened. When the line opened, the frequency was reduced to 20 minutes all day.

Quote:
If we really wanted, we could just block off some lanes, which would do the same as LRT for serving local transit and offer the flexibility of making these "bus-lanes" peak-only service.
Which would speed up the bus, and negate the need for such a costly investment.
JustinB 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 11:44 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