Quote:
Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut
And sometimes you misunderstand mine, and I have to explain later... like how you’ve skimmed over my entire explanation for why Queensbury doesn’t work as an exchange. Not a big deal.
False Creek was a streetcar in tandem with SkyTrain on Broadway, and 16th was a proposal by a professor from Thompson-Nicola. The plan was always to get from VCC to UBC via Broadway and 10th; the question was "how."
... That’s even worse. Enough with the Y-junctions, please. If looping around Waterfront to Hastings is confusing, going to the North Shore backwards with only one Waterfront platform is even more so – and it means a bus bridge from the West End to Burrard every time the switch fails - when it could just ride from one to the other straight and cut out Waterfront altogether. Much simpler for everybody involved.
SkyTrain in general works. TransLink’s First Narrows SkyTrain specifically does not, because the major selling points are replacing the SeaBus and buses by saving significant time downtown or to the other SkyTrain lines, and it can’t, and any kind of “fixes” you come up with keep making the problems worse, or introducing new ones.
It's the Pareto principle in action: we can solve First Narrows for maybe 20% of use cases, or solve Second Narrows for everybody. Pretty obvious choice.
We can wrap this up any time you want. It’s you trying to persuade me (and several other posters) that you have a better solution than TransLink's, when you more than likely don’t; those of us who actually use the SeaBus remain unconvinced. Best to save this one for NIMBY Rails and call it a day.
|
1. I
don't have a better solution than Translink's.
This is Translink's solution, without the Burrard section.
Remember, you're the one proposing to extend Purple all the way to freaking
Royal Oak, something TransLink
didn't propose either, to allow the OMC connection.
2. Fine.
2 new station platforms, same as on the other lines.
No Y-junctions or recursive lines or spurs (outside of the Norgate/Cap Mall split).
You can even have the station platform at Burrard and have Hastings extend there instead (let's pretend Canada-Expo transfers don't exist) if Waterfront isn't viable.
Now consider the Expo extension to NS proposal.
3. TransLink never preferred any option (aside from not 3A). They did the (incomplete) phase 2 for the 2nd Narrows due to lobbying from mayors first. They also did similar things with LRT on Evergreen and Surrey (more complete studies for LRT) for similar reasons before it got canned.
4. Most existing SkyTrain stops in the suburbs have 'mini-exchanges' to catch buses passing near it. Evergreen Extension, for example, has one on nearly every one except Inlet Center (maybe, depending on the definition- it's also the least used one, uncoincidentally.)
I also don't see how this is avoided on a 2nd Narrows crossing.
Not everyone wants (or should) get off on the big exchanges (Lonsdale, Phibbs).
Quote:
SkyTrain in general works. TransLink’s First Narrows SkyTrain specifically does not, because the major selling points are replacing the SeaBus and buses by saving significant time downtown or to the other SkyTrain lines, and it can’t, and any kind of “fixes” you come up with keep making the problems worse, or introducing new ones.
It's the Pareto principle in action: we can solve First Narrows for maybe 20% of use cases, or solve Second Narrows for everybody. Pretty obvious choice.
|
I could say the same thing of you, funny.
Calm down.
Threaded Mode