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 November 5th, 2004, 08:55 AM   #21
Palal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Travelling the world
Posts: 117
Likes (Received): 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by en
... Translink after all, known for making stupid decisions and flip-flops
This seems to be a world-wide problem in transportation planning.
Palal no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 5th, 2004, 09:06 AM   #22
bs_lover_boy
POUND THE ALARM!!!
 
bs_lover_boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hong Kong / Vancouver
Posts: 385
Likes (Received): 12

If they Build at-grade system, there will be LONGER traffic jams in the Alderbridge, No3 road intersection, then we will have a S**T system. On the other hand, if they build the Skytrain, it will be better and WAY MORE efficient. ALso, can anyone tell me what was the system that RAVxpress proposed (the company with Siemens, MTR, Balfour Beatty etc.)?
__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NIMBY – Not In My Back Yard
YIMBY - Yes In My Back Yard
LULU – Locally Unwanted Land Use.
NOPE – Not On Planet Earth
BANANA – Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything

Anymore????
bs_lover_boy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2004, 12:48 PM   #23
npinguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 164
Likes (Received): 0

actually it wouldn't be too hard to build it at-grade in richmond considering the two central lanes are reserved for the B-line anyway.


having said that though, what happens between waterfront and 49th? Underground? That can't be can it? Too expensive I heard...
npinguy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2004, 09:19 PM   #24
en
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 144
Likes (Received): 1

I hope the company that includes MTR wins the contract. The current SkyTrain lines are so badly run. Terrible unsafe stations, old and dirty, no controlled access (fare gates). Currently SkyTrain is know as "CrimeTrain" because it provides "free" and easy access to bums and drug dealers.
en no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2004, 08:14 AM   #25
Palal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Travelling the world
Posts: 117
Likes (Received): 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by en
I hope the company that includes MTR wins the contract. The current SkyTrain lines are so badly run. Terrible unsafe stations, old and dirty, no controlled access (fare gates). Currently SkyTrain is know as "CrimeTrain" because it provides "free" and easy access to bums and drug dealers.

That's not what I saw when I was there last summer, and I rode at all times of the day.
Palal no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2004, 10:21 AM   #26
Vancouver_rocks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 33
Likes (Received): 0

Bombardier has been recomended over Lavalin. I really hope they go with Bombardier as a trolley system would be impracticle.
Vancouver_rocks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2004, 05:53 AM   #27
yesheh
Registered eccentric
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: lotusland
Posts: 55
Likes (Received): 0

Note that if they went with the Lavilin bid, the new northeast line will follow this technology unfortunatly. The lines would not link up though, but a future line out to UBC might also be LRT. LRT may work extremley well in a city like portland, where it is grade/traffic separated a good 2/3ds of the way, but in vancouver down No. 3 road it would not work. you cannot have a main street be used for an LRT, as it will tie up way too much traffic. I wish that they'd extend the skytrain out to langley, or at least to newton, but there will never be funding...we can always dream.
yesheh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 19th, 2004, 10:56 AM   #28
officedweller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,379
Likes (Received): 98

The winning bid will be announced tomorrow (Nov 19th).
Global TV News reported rumours that Lavalin has won and that they have bid on the high side ($1.7 Billion) which may require re-examining the scope of the project.
Previous new releases said Lavalin's bid involved automated LRT between YVR and downtown (and manual operation on No. 3 Rd.). So it'll be fast even if it is LRT - most of the line will be underground and automated operation requires an exclusive right-of-way.

WRT Langley, there was mention in the paper some time ago that Translink is studying a light rail connection (possibly diesel light rail) or commuter rail on existing railway tracks from Langley through Surrey to the Scott Road Skytrain Station. Probably a long time off though.
__________________
officedweller
officedweller no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2005, 10:10 PM   #29
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,913
Likes (Received): 18181















Bus @ the Airport Station interchange
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2005, 10:51 AM   #30
rt_0891
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto, Hong Kong, Vancouver
Posts: 2,683
Likes (Received): 30



Wish RAV could be above grade so it can also enjoy the views.
rt_0891 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 27th, 2005, 04:37 AM   #31
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

I think they should go with SkyTrain because all the yards, maintenace are all there.
Anyway you cut it thou SkyTrain is expensive technology especially on the RAV line.
The thing that makes SkyTrain affordable is that it goes over the roads, not underthem so there are no expensive tunneling costs. So much of this line is underground that it negats all those savings.
If you want to see a cost effective, extensive, well used rapid transit system see Calgary's CTrain........LRT.
The service area is just 960,000 but the CTrain carries 225,000 passengers a day. High ridership for a relativly small city.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2005, 07:15 PM   #32
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,913
Likes (Received): 18181

Carr: megaprojects a waste of money
Glenn Bohn
Vancouver Sun
5 May 2005

Green party leader Adriane Carr said Wednesday the B.C. Liberal government is wasting taxpayers' money on the $1.72 billion Richmond-Airport-Vancouver rapid transit line, just as the last New Democratic Party government did when it sunk almost half a billion dollars into fast ferries.

"I believe they were pushing the RAV line as part of their 2010 Olympic vision," Carr said at a sidewalk news conference near the SkyTrain station at Commercial and Broadway.

"For a 17-day event, it's the wrong way to go and a lot of money misspent."

Carr pointed to a document obtained under the B.C. Freedom of Information Act that she said showed the role the premier's office played in selling the RAV line to Greater Vancouver mayors and councillors.

The document, labelled "PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL," is an Aug. 7, 2002 letter to Ken Dobell, Premier Gordon Campbell's deputy minister.

The letter was written by Stephen Beatty, a Toronto-based managing director with KPMG, a huge consulting company that was advising the B.C. government how to manage RAV. The letter was released by the B.C. government to Don Toffaletto, a founder of an anti-RAV group who is now the B.C. Green Party's communications director.

Beatty urged Dobell -- a city of Vancouver manager when Campbell was mayor and once the top bureaucrat at TransLink -- to create a public sector RAV organization as soon as possible.

"The sooner the public sector sponsors can create the vehicle through which to implement the project, the better," Beatty wrote.

"The specific entity created will evolve as project development proceeds, but the entity's creation will be an important symbol of 'getting on with it' and can be used to begin the process of locking in some of the 'love and trust and pixie dust' aspects of the relationships among the various public sectors in this venture."

The B.C. government subsequently set up RAVCO to oversee the rapid transit line's design and construction, but it wasn't love at first sight for the mayors and councillors on the boards of TransLink and the Greater Vancouver regional district.

The local politicians on the TransLink board turned down the project two times before giving it the green light, and the GVRD board narrowly approved RAV by a one-vote margin.

Carr noted the GVRD had wanted to build the rapid transit line extension into Coquitlam first -- a project she supports.

The Green party wants to cancel RAV and the proposed twinning of the Port Mann bridge. Instead of those mega-projects, the party's 55-page campaign platform says the greens would "reduce dependency on single-occupancy vehicle traffic through tax-shifting measures like tolls, increased parking fees and odometer-based automobile insurance on 'pleasure use' vehicles that reward people who used their cars less." The platform document says greens would take the money saved by cancelling transportation megaprojects and spend it on such things as fast buses, mini-buses, passenger-only ferries and bicycle paths.

Greens have also proposed a five-cents-per-litre "pollution tax" on gasoline as part of its "tax-shifting" philosophy to tax the things that harm the environment.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2005, 07:40 PM   #33
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

The RAV line is a huge waste of money. I support the idea idea of the RAV but not at 1.74 billion. Why not LRT for half that price and they could still do the Coquitlam line with the money saved and start on the SkyTrain west ext to Granville where ridership will be much higher and commercial and urban density is higher as well.
Why???........ because its so nice for the politicans to be able to cut a ribbon on a SkyTrain/subway line.
!.74 billion for 80,000 pass a day is highway robbery.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2005, 08:10 PM   #34
mr.x
Ex-mod
 
mr.x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: █♣█ Vancouver
Posts: 7,931
Likes (Received): 486

Vancouver is a city that doesn't have any real highways and rapid transit has to pick up the slack of having incompetent highways. Nobody is going to take transit on something that takes as much time as driving, for example the Coquitlam Line which will be LRT. SkyTrain would take 13 minutes, LRT would take 23 minutes. and how long would LRT take for RAV? 40-45 minutes as suppose to 25 minutes with SkyTrain. Don't forget about that the Vancouver region is smaller and denser than that of Calgary. Also note that SkyTrain is originally planned for the RAV and Coquitlam lines in the GVRD LRS Plan.

Vancouver is a city that thinks ahead 100 years, not 20 years.

and of course, there's always this:





If we're to have LRT for RAV, we might as well keep the 98 B-Line instead.
__________________
"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."

Last edited by mr.x; May 8th, 2005 at 08:17 PM.
mr.x no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2005, 02:38 AM   #35
en
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 144
Likes (Received): 1

The problem with building LRT in Vancouver city limits is that there is no room to put the tracks other than the Arbutus Corridor, because there is no highway system inside Vancouver, people must use regular streets to get around. I don't think there is a single east-west street that can support the elimination of 2 lanes (and I don't think sharing roadway with LRT is feasible). Plus another fact is that half of the area of Vancouver is full of expensive property (full of NIMBYs) and that is the area which rapid transit must go through in order to go to UBC.
en no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2005, 03:43 AM   #36
[email protected]
Philippine Forum Mod
 
queetz@home's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ortigas (Pasig City)
Posts: 3,678
Likes (Received): 3025

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x
and of course, there's always this:





If we're to have LRT for RAV, we might as well keep the 98 B-Line instead.
By your logic, we should not allow buses and cars in roads as well...





And why do these cities shown in this thread uses trams if they are so dangerous?

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...63#post4072063

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy2
The RAV line is a huge waste of money. I support the idea idea of the RAV but not at 1.74 billion. Why not LRT for half that price and they could still do the Coquitlam line with the money saved and start on the SkyTrain west ext to Granville where ridership will be much higher and commercial and urban density is higher as well.
Why???........ because its so nice for the politicans to be able to cut a ribbon on a SkyTrain/subway line.
!.74 billion for 80,000 pass a day is highway robbery.
I agree with ssiguy2 and it is highway robbery indeed. Note that the only reason why RAV is expensive is because creme de la creme doesn't want to see a cheaper elevated system (aka Sky-train...a train high up in the sky) at their side of Main Street.

Last edited by [email protected]; May 9th, 2005 at 04:02 AM.
queetz@home no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2005, 04:58 AM   #37
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857


The thing that makes SkyTrain atleat cheaper than a subway and still can handle decent ridership levels is the fact that it is elevated. No land aquisitions and no expensive tunnels. They have completely negated the coost savings by having it underground. Thanks Campbell.......both of you.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2005, 04:12 AM   #38
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,913
Likes (Received): 18181

Vancouver rail line defended: Ravco head stresses importance of line to battle congestion
John Greenwood
13 May 2005
National Post

VANCOUVER - The head of the company set up to watch over construction of Vancouver's $1.8-billion airport rapid transit line played down fears yesterday that the project will hurt local businesses along the route, arguing the project is essential for the economic health of the city.

"This is one of the fastest-growing regions in Canada," said Jane Bird, chief executive of Ravco. "Even if we wanted to, we just don't have the space to add the kind of road capacity that we need. The alternative to building [the line] is to be paralyzed by traffic congestion."

The project -- one of the biggest public-private partnerships (known as P3s) ever undertaken in Canada -- was unveiled in connection with the 2010 Olympics and has received more than $1-billion in government funding.

The 20-kilometre rail line would mostly run underground, connecting Vancouver with the international airport and the suburb of Richmond.

But RAV, as it's known, faces mounting opposition from merchants and homeowners who fear their lives will be disrupted by the line's construction, set to begin in August. They worry businesses along the route will suffer losses and may even be forced to close.

Opposition from the small group has become so intense that some officials close to RAV warn the project could be cancelled.

The rail line is meant to alleviate Vancouver's notorious traffic problems, which are already hurting economic growth.

The north-south corridor between Vancouver and Richmond, not now served by rapid transit, is one of the most densely populated and congested in the Lower Mainland.

Ms. Bird said the project would add transportation capacity equivalent to 10 new road lanes. "Unless we figure out a way to move people through the city we are going to have significant long-term impact on our quality of life."

According to government surveys, more than 80% of city residents are in favour of RAV.

Nevertheless, last month the province announced it was extending the approval process for RAV after a group called Do RAV Right filed a petition in the British Columbia Supreme Court alleging environmental regulations weren't being followed.

The group has warned it is ready to take its battle to federal court if necessary.

Observers say RAV will eventually win the necessary approvals.

The problem is there have already been so many delays that unless construction starts on schedule in August, the line might not be completed in time for the Olympics -- one of the conditions in the contract signed by SNC-Lavalin Group Inc., the leader of the private consortium building the project.

Any more holdups could be "catastrophic," said one source.

The project is being watched closely by companies in the P3 sector. Not only is RAV one of the most ambitious of such projects, it is also one of the first in British Columbia. If it goes well, there will likely be strong interest in further P3s in the province: if poorly, the impact could be felt for years.

The RAV is part of a string of major infrastructure projects -- many of them P3s -- announced by the provincial Liberals when they came to power in 2001.

Public-private partnerships, like RAV, have been fiercely opposed by the labour movement from the beginning.

When the Vancouver transit authority was debating whether to go ahead with RAV last year, the Canadian Union of Public Employees ran ads in B.C. newspapers criticizing the P3 model and accusing the government of wasting money.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2005, 04:29 AM   #39
ssiguy2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 5,404
Likes (Received): 857

I hope they manage to get the whole thing delayed enough so it is cancelled.
If they want the RAV just make it LRT. Have downtown in exclusive ROW....just as fast as a tunnel ie Granville.
Just run it over Cambie Bridge on ROW to Broadway and then a tunnel to KingEd and then atgrade along Cambie which widen enough for its own ROW. All the way to Richmond/Airport.
So simple. I just saved 7km of tunnel which is about 700 to 800 million on a train that will be just as fast on a system that is more user friendly. Also on its own ROW that section is already built saving more m,oney AND it could update and use the existing RailBridge over the Fraser saving yet more millions. I just cut the cost of this lline in half on a system that will be just as quick and carry just as many passengers.
ssiguy2 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2005, 04:46 AM   #40
[email protected]
Philippine Forum Mod
 
queetz@home's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ortigas (Pasig City)
Posts: 3,678
Likes (Received): 3025

I too hope the whole thing is delayed enough so it is cancelled. RAV is such a sham its not even funny. The regional transportation priorities is skewed big time because of this unnecessary subway and it has divided the region so much. And now, it seems RAVCO has lied to the public about the construction method and is now feeling the heat. I feel for those merchants along Cambie St because they supported the project based on a lie and now will pay dearly for it by being bankrupt after all their lifetime of hard work. And why? So that bitch Jane Bird can keep her $1000 per day job? WTF? Why not just elevated it and truly make it a Sky-train, a train high up in the sky, just like what you find in the rest of the Lower Mainland?

Go DO RAV RIGHT GO!!!
queetz@home 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 01:51 PM.


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