Transit Fantasies

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

You've got four NoF locals other than me telling you that you're dreaming out loud again. You might want to listen.

I like dreaming out loud.
That's why I moved this discussion.


You might want to be less of a chauvinist if you want any kind of reasonable discussion.


You're not right about everything NoF just because you live there, any more than I am SoF.



It's not really '4 other people'. It's 1 other dude (Spr0kets) that's actually arguing tunnels are the better option.
Tunneling is the obvious solution, but the obvious solution is not always the best one.


I'm looking at all the options before coming to a conclusion.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Not sure what sexism has to do with anything. Dreaming's fine. When you start thinking your dreams are more practical than what's likely happening (and when half the forum tells you it's a crazy idea, and then you start arguing with all of them and coming up with more crazy ideas to defend the first one), that's less fine. I joke about airships from downtown to Whistler or Kelowna, then we all laugh, then I drop it; you've been arguing for five days over as many pages in the Burnaby updates thread.

Again, what's the advantage of elevated through Willingdon and 41st/49th other than saving a little money? I can point out all the disadvantages, which are much, much bigger.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not sure what sexism has to do with anything. Dreaming's fine; when you start thinking your dreams are more practical than what's likely happening (and when half the forum tells you it's a bad idea, and then you argue with all of them to defend said dreams), that's less fine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chauvinism

Chauvinism is the belief in the superiority or dominance of one's own group or people, who are seen as strong and virtuous, while others are considered weak, unworthy, or inferior.[1] Encyclopaedia Britannica describes it as a form of extreme patriotism and nationalism, a fervent faith in national excellence and glory.[2]

Basically, stop acting like you're somehow superior or smarter or right because of where you live.
Neither of us are right all the time.

It's not half the forum.
It's you, and occasionally 1 other person I'm arguing against (except the SeaBus thing, and maybe the Cemetery and Aldergrove thing. All of these I know are controversial (minus initially SeaBus), and partially devil's advocating, so it doesn't bother me.)

Again, if I can't defend my positions (Aldergrove) I give them up.


Also, again, the only solid plans from Translink is UBC, SFU, and Langley.
That's it.
Everything else is just lines on a map and a few, incomplete, studies and statements and letters from Mayors.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by fredinno

It's not really '4 other people'. It's 1 other dude (Spr0kets) that's actually arguing tunnels are the better option.
Tunneling is the obvious solution, but the obvious solution is not always the best one.

I live NoF and grew up SoF

Originally Posted by Sheba

Exactly. That's why I suspect most Skytrain lines NoF will be primarily underground.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I live NoF and grew up SoF

Forgot, 2 other people.
Either way, I'm primarily arguing against Migrant, which is the point.
He's acting I'm arguing against half the forum consistently, which isn't the case.

[Migrant_Coconut]

"Chauvanist" is used mostly in the form of "male chauvinist," unless your name is Carl Sagan. More to the point, I feel like I've explained myself pretty reasonably so far, and that it's you escalating things; I recall someone under the same username flouncing out of SSP a few years ago for a similar argument on this thread also involving multiple posters, so maybe it's more sensitivity on your part than arrogance on mine.

Sheba, Spr0ckets, madog, jollyburger, GenWhy and Future have all explained fairly logically why Ocean View's probably not getting moved... and three of the above have further spelled out why elevating a SkyTrain to justify said moving probably won't happen either... and you've kept going. Colour me skeptical.

I trust TransLink's lines on a map much more than I do yours. Tearing those down doesn't make yours look better, it just makes you sound like zweisystem, Patrick Condon or Bill Vander Zalm.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

"Chauvanist" is used mostly in the form of "male chauvinist," unless your name is Carl Sagan. More to the point, I feel like I've explained myself pretty reasonably so far, and that it's you escalating things; I recall a poster under the same username flouncing out of SSP a few years ago for similar reasons, and from a different poster, so maybe it's more sensitivity on your part than arrogance on mine.

Sheba, Spr0ckets, madog, jollyburger, GenWhy and Future have all explained fairly logically why Ocean View's not getting moved... three of the above have further spelled out why elevating a SkyTrain to justify said moving probably won't happen either... and you've kept going. Colour me skeptical.

I trust TransLink's lines on a map much more than I do yours. Tearing them down doesn't make yours look better.

I stopped posting on SSP due to completely different reasons than 'sensitivity'.
The time before that, when I was suspended for a short while was much more than a few years ago.


Either way, point is- stop being toxic.
You're escalating too.
Stop bringing up where people live, stop trying to dogpile, stop bringing up stuff from several weeks to years ago, etc.

Stick to the facts, and stop making things personal.
You don't know me, and I don't know you.


It's not productive, and it's stupid.
I can go to the Tyee and find plenty of people who disagree with you on everything.


This isn't the 'development fantasy thread', this is the 'Transit Fantasy Thread.'
I'm not talking about cemeteries, and I know it's controversial.


Yes, and TransLink's 'lines on a map' also show a RapidBus across 88 Ave and Brookswood.
Making appeals to authority doesn't make you more right, because it's still dumb.


And I'm not tearing them down.
I'm literally pointing out reality here. None of those lines are solid, and none of those lines are confirmed, in any order, or in any specific line configuration.

TransLink does good work, and I respect them, but nothing this early will look 100% as they did when they were first proposed, or worse, drawn as a rough corridor (which is what we're talking about- it's not even a line, it's a corridor.)

[Migrant_Coconut]

Far as I'm concerned, I get along civilly (most of the time) with almost everybody - despite disagreements here and there - while you're the one typically flying off the handle in an otherwise normal (albeit long) conversation. If you're looking for rudeness, you're probably going to find it.
I don't see what the Tyee has to do with anything. They're a much different audience than SSP; I don't agree with them, but I don't spend weeks posting in their Disqus section every time I disagree, I just move on.

You only end up moving things to the Fantasy thread after people express how sick of it they are in the development and transit update threads. That's a really bad habit.

And yet these days, said lines almost always end up being what TransLink ends up going with. Those maps come true. Yours don't. So I'm putting more stock in one than the other.
One more time: why and how would SkyTrain go elevated through Brentwood and Metrotown, and how would that be more advantageous than tunnels (which TransLink is definitely more receptive to than you think)?

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Joyce-Collingwood doesn't necessarily make for a better rapid transit exchange than Metrotown.

I would argue the exact opposite. Once Translink's rapid transit vision is built out Metrotown will be the only station aside from Waterfront with three different lines intersecting (Expo, 49/41, and North Shore/Hastings). If I had to guess, Brentwood and Metrotown will be the largest NOF town centres outside of Vancouver proper for the foreseeable future so I think transit to Langara, UBC, and YVR should be made as easy as possible for those communities.

[Tvisforme]

Random question, but what would be involved in converting the Canada Line to use the same technology as the rest of the network? Are the guideways and tunnels comparable in size to the Expo and Millennium lines?

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Random question, but what would be involved in converting the Canada Line to use the same technology as the rest of the network? Are the guideways and tunnels comparable in size to the Expo and Millennium lines?

IIRC they're actually bigger.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Random question, but what would be involved in converting the Canada Line to use the same technology as the rest of the network? Are the guideways and tunnels comparable in size to the Expo and Millennium lines?

To use the same technology should be relatively straightforward but would mean a complete rebuild of the electrification, signaling, and probably platforms; this could not be done with the Canada Line in service. Alstom should be capable of producing cars to the Canada Line loading gauge, for what price is another question.
Canada Line trains are 3.0m wide and the JFK Airtrain uses the 'Skytrain' Innovia Metro system with 3.1m cars.

Now to use a compatible fleet is a whole other question. To achieve sufficient capacity the platforms would need to be significantly lengthened which isn't possible without a major rebuild of the guideway.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I would argue the exact opposite. Once Translink's rapid transit vision is built out Metrotown will be the only station aside from Waterfront with three different lines intersecting (Expo, 49/41, and North Shore/Hastings). If I had to guess, Brentwood and Metrotown will be the largest NOF town centres outside of Vancouver proper for the foreseeable future so I think transit to Langara, UBC, and YVR should be made as easy as possible for those communities.

I... don't think we disagree? That plus the existing bus loop definitely would make Metrotown the superior SkyTrain interchange.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I... don't think we disagree? That plus the existing bus loop definitely would make Metrotown the superior SkyTrain interchange.

I wasn't disagreeing. I meant that your "doesn't necessarily" should have been strengthened to "Metrotown is far and away a better place to connect Expo and 41/49".

I think I lost the thread with Fredinno because I can't find where they suggested Metrotown shouldn't be the interchange. And somehow I also missed that Central Park should be picked up and plopped somewhere south of its existing location. The page-length comments have been hard to sort through.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I wasn't disagreeing. I meant that your "doesn't necessarily" should have been strengthened to "Metrotown is far and away a better place to connect Expo and 41/49".

I think I lost the thread with Fredinno because I can't find where they suggested Metrotown shouldn't be the interchange. And somehow I also missed that Central Park should be picked up and plopped somewhere south of its existing location. The page-length comments have been hard to sort through.

Gotcha. Though I believe the "exact opposite" would be saying that Joyce works better.

It was something about how the South Van line should be 41st or 49th, and that 41st to Metrotown would be the "better" option; law of parsimony/Occam's razor would say otherwise.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Gotcha. Though I believe the "exact opposite" would be saying that Joyce works better.

It was something about how the South Van line should be 41st or 49th, and that 41st to Metrotown would be the "better" option; law of parsimony/Occam's razor would say otherwise.

I was going to respond tomorrow when I have more time.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Gotcha. Though I believe the "exact opposite" would be saying that Joyce works better.

It was something about how the South Van line should be 41st or 49th, and that 41st to Metrotown would be the "better" option; law of parsimony/Occam's razor would say otherwise.

I was going to respond tomorrow when I have more time, but no.


From the 2022 TSPR:
13889 western part of 049 between Langara and Metrotown
8483 eastern part
049 stations: 22372 boardings/departures/weekday

R4 + 041 stations: 17575 + 8005 = 25580 boardings/departures/weekday

There's not much difference in demand for the stations between Joyce/Metrotown and Cambie.
You're effectively adding extra line for nothing, and this is only viable if you tunnel the entire way.

049 used to have more demand than 041, as the travel time differential between them was low.
Punjabi Market seems to be the only justifiable reason to move the line south, depsite Main/49th being 3rd in the boarding/departures of 049's stops between Langara and Metrotown.
Ie. Punjabi Market simply isn't important enough to justify moving the line south and adding 1.5km of line.

---

You're not applying the law of parsimony properly.
49th + 41st is not any 'simpler' than 41st-Metrotown.

In any way whatsoever.

You're switching arterials up a km.
That's not 'simpler'.
Also, the fact R4 already is on 41 means demand will grow faster for 41 stops than 49 stops.

Also,
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-plan-transportation-rapid-transit-skytrain-expansion
"He also emphasized that the actual routing and alignment will come at a later date in a future planning process led by TransLink, after a decision is made to prioritize the project."
Yes, it's a corridor, not a firm 'line.'
Even Kennedy Stewart acknowledges this, and he was directly involved in Transport and Metro 2050 and was one of the most influential stakeholders.

I wouldn't be surprised he was the primary person responsible for the line shift, because 'Punjabi Market'.

Metro 2040 assumed 41 all the way down (hence, why R4 is on 41), so this in and of itself is a shift.

----

Also, I've based all my lines directly off TransLink's corridors.
I'm not really 'predicting' anything (other than maybe Maple Ridge SkyTrain, but even that's on the Maple Ridge OCP.

You're just insisting something not even the mayors involved insist of the lines they helped draw.

---

Broadway elevated uses a 50% contingency because it's a 50% contingency for the whole project.
Not just the elevated section.
Most of the tracks overall are still bored, so you wouldn't have a 25% contingency unless you split out the two sections, which Broadway does not do.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I... don't think we disagree? That plus the existing bus loop definitely would make Metrotown the superior SkyTrain interchange.

TBF, the buses take forever to get out of the existing bus loop.

It should either be upgraded, or moved streetside around the station in bus bays, which is something Burnaby has apparently changed its opinion on and wants to build on:
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metrotown-events-convention-centre-burnaby-plan

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Don't forget the existing/future density around the station, and on Victoria near Hastings. There's a possibility of Il Mercato going up for development as well. Overall, the Drive area is much more shovel-ready than Maple Ridge is.

It is: Main or Victoria's commercial areas can be captured by either alignment, but Fraser, Killarney and Langara need the train to be on 49th. Joyce-Collingwood doesn't necessarily make for a better rapid transit exchange than Metrotown.

SLS goes through less-developed areas than Broadway or Willingdon; much of TransLink's cost creep has been rising property values. And nobody really likes trenches, especially one deep enough for 4% grade or less; even cut and cover is preferable.

There's a 99% chance that it gets tunneled all the way through central South Van, making the cost difference between 1km or not fairly marginal; the planners may very well drop a Patterson or Elliott station, and that's $200m saved and no musical greenspace with Central Park or the cemetery which is why we're even talking about SkyTrain in the first place. You've got four NoF locals other than me telling you that you're dreaming out loud again. You might want to listen.

Same thing with Maple Ridge. Development overall there is much faster with the amount of midrises going up, which collectively add up.

Either way, one of the most difficult to access parts of Metro Van having any level of comparison to an area right next to the City Center area in terms of development with both having plans that allow for much higher density is not good.



Langara isn't any closer to the intersection of 49 and Main as a 49th is- which is where they're most likely to put the station (and would have to to hit Punjabi Market.)
Killarney is only an extra few minutes further from 41st.
Fraser is indeed a problem, but it's not by itself worth the extra 1.5km.


If 41st already has bus lanes all the way, and you're rezoning to allow for setbacks to limit shadowing (and 41st is 6 lanes wide) it seems a bit like a waste to go bored, since most of what you need to go elevated is already there.
Tunnelled stations are harder to upgrade vs elevated stations as well.


It's possible to just keep Central Park as is.
It's just not really optimal as-is.
The musical park is not necessarily required.

It's also possible to move Central Park east into the SFHs.


This results in no next increase in parkland, which is why I didn't like this one.


Also, 49th also passes though Central Park and the cemeteries from the south, and both Patterson-49th and Boundary-49th stations would suffer from this.

The 49th stations past Tyne generally have poor ridership, which is one of the reasons why the R4+41 has more/similar boardings/departures between Expo and Canada overall despite 49th theoretically hitting more important locations and connecting directly to Metrotown.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by madog222

To use the same technology should be relatively straightforward but would mean a complete rebuild of the electrification, signaling, and probably platforms; this could not be done with the Canada Line in service. Alstom should be capable of producing cars to the Canada Line loading gauge, for what price is another question.
Canada Line trains are 3.0m wide and the JFK Airtrain uses the 'Skytrain' Innovia Metro system with 3.1m cars.

Now to use a compatible fleet is a whole other question. To achieve sufficient capacity the platforms would need to be significantly lengthened which isn't possible without a major rebuild of the guideway.

Until we connect both systems, which idk where we will connect them and it would probably be an expensive endeavor because it would require a lot of digging as well as shutting down part of the systems to connect them up, then there's really no point in having the same loading gauge across the whole system. That being said, it would be nice to cut down on and make ease of the maintenance and procurement costs

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

Until we connect both systems, which idk where we will connect them and it would probably be an expensive endeavor because it would require a lot of digging as well as shutting down part of the systems to connect them up, then there's really no point in having the same loading gauge across the whole system. That being said, it would be nice to cut down on and make ease of the maintenance and procurement costs

It's also important to look at the cost of other signalling/technology changes throughout the world and not underestimate the costs involved.