Transit Fantasies

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not by their policies, by their actions. The City has been pretty good about keeping themselves compact and dense and close to transit (I predict another rezoning plan when the Lonsdale SkyTrain is finally confirmed).

OTOH, the District recently approved a giant bedroom community halfway to Deep Cove, and is building condos beside the highway on the opposite end from Park & Tilford or Phibbs; all the houses in-between remain untouched. That is not good TOD.

Sorry, but that's not entirely accurate. The Maplewood area is hardly "halfway to Deep Cove" when you consider the nearby Lynnwood redevelopment and the proximity to Phibbs Exchange. There's even talk of eventually extending the upcoming B-Line to the Maplewood area.

Furthermore, while the District's planning certainly isn't perfect, it's not really appropriate to make direct comparisons between City and District. It is a lot easier for development to be "compact and dense" when you're looking at a much smaller area that - by virtue of geography - is already central to the North Shore. By comparison, the District is far larger and much more spread out.

[fredinno]

Sorry, I'm very late, but I'll try to do this the best I can.

Originally Posted by Sheba

My big concern with your map is the spacing between stations - most of them are 600m to 800m apart, which is the spacing for B-Line stops. Even in downtown Vancouver I would try to make them at least 1km apart. The location of the Red spur lie is also very close to Canada Line - maybe something that splits of north of your Robson Mall stop?

I'd also leave the Hastings Line on Hastings and have an underground walkway to connect with Waterfront as it isn't *that* far away.

Most downtown stops are 600m apart on the Expo.

The Red Line is in context, supposed to connect to a parallel line of the UBC Millennium Line Extension- or to the Millennium Line itself-, and looping it around the West End is not efficient. Thurlow St. was about as east as I could put it while still reaching major facilities (like the St. Paul's.) Unlikely to be needed within the plan TL though. It's 11-12 minutes from either Vancouver City Centre and Yaletown-Roundhouse, near the edges of the Canada Line's catchment area.

If it wasn't for the St. Paul's site, I would have gone to Bute St. for the Red Line to capture more of the West End.

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think Maple Tree Square is the best location for a Gastown Station (the line could remain on the waterfront RoW with a walkway from the square).
Hastings would be a problem area for a station.

Stadium Station serves the west side of Chinatown, Main Street Station is close to the other side of Chinatown,
and the future streetcar will provide fine grain connections.

Here's where I'd place the tunnel and stations as an extension of the Expo Line:
(yellow = alternate)

https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.28234...-CA&authuser=0

Except you'd need to buy out 2 of the tracks from CPR, as there's no space for Skytrain. This could potentially interfere with WCE operations, and you need a new tunnel portal on the Expo, as it goes surface-level at the end-track at Waterfront.

Also, it's on the North side, where the GVRD maintains it as industrial land only, limiting the long-term usefulness, and it misses the Woodward's and Chinatown. Gassy Jack is 3 minutes away from Gastown-Chinatown Station.

I guess you avoid the worst of the DTES by going though Railtown, though, however, I don't think anything is going to deter the DTES from invading the stations other than the heavy presence of law enforcement. Those other stations are only a couple blocks from Skid Row, after all.

Also, I planned on cut-and-covering the line though Hastings to PNE/Renfrew (before boring under the Cassiar Tunnel), which is difficult to do at Alexander or Powell St, considering how narrow they are.

Though, perhaps I should move the Gastown-Chinatown Station slightly closer to the Woodward's redevelopment.

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Sorry, but that's not entirely accurate. The Maplewood area is hardly "halfway to Deep Cove" when you consider the nearby Lynnwood redevelopment and the proximity to Phibbs Exchange. There's even talk of eventually extending the upcoming B-Line to the Maplewood area.

Furthermore, while the District's planning certainly isn't perfect, it's not really appropriate to make direct comparisons between City and District. It is a lot easier for development to be "compact and dense" when you're looking at a much smaller area that - by virtue of geography - is already central to the North Shore. By comparison, the District is far larger and much more spread out.

Off-topic, but when is the CMHC forest lot going to finally be developed?

[officedweller]

Station placement is away from Hastings to provide an unintimidating environment for transit users.
Some people would avoid the station because it is located on Hastings.
On your suggested plan, Gastown-Chinatown Station is at the heart of the DTES [drug market] - Carrall & Hastings is at Pigeon Park.
That's neither Gastown, nor Chinatown.

Having the Gastown station at the heart of Gastown draws from the success of Yaletown Roundhouse Station in Yaletown.
The Maple Tree Square station would also connect across the railway tracks to future development on Port Lands west of Crab Park (near the heliport site) and provide a pedestrian overpass to Crab Park.

On my suggested alignment, I would have the line dive underground from the tail track.
The existing tail track may have to be demolished back towards Waterfront to dive down sooner (the tail track section would provide a good length of track to dive down, though I don't know the distance required)
and some WCE switches may need to be shifted (and would have to shift operations during construction).

If that's landfill (probably?) it may be tough to bore through.


https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.28502...-CA&authuser=0

[Migrant_Coconut]

I'm more concerned about the overall geometry of having the Expo loop back on itself. Wasn't that one of the old Millennium's problems? Better to have a separate line branching off to cover Hastings.

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Sorry, but that's not entirely accurate. The Maplewood area is hardly "halfway to Deep Cove" when you consider the nearby Lynnwood redevelopment and the proximity to Phibbs Exchange. There's even talk of eventually extending the upcoming B-Line to the Maplewood area.

Furthermore, while the District's planning certainly isn't perfect, it's not really appropriate to make direct comparisons between City and District. It is a lot easier for development to be "compact and dense" when you're looking at a much smaller area that - by virtue of geography - is already central to the North Shore. By comparison, the District is far larger and much more spread out.

It's about 2/5ths of the way to Deep Cove from Phibbs. Admittedly not halfway, but a transit planner working on a route from Park Royal or Lonsdale might see differently.

True, it's not the District's fault for being bigger or having a smaller, more decentralized population.... but it IS their fault for exacerbating the problem instead of reducing it.
If Council wants to densify, there's plenty of underused space in Lynn Valley and Park & Tilford - sh*t, all the proposed housing could fit comfortably into the run-down SFHs north of Phibbs. If they want to develop Maplewood specifically, there's other areas adjacent to the populated zone. Why rip a hole in the middle of the forest and put your apartments there???

[waves]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I'm more concerned about the overall geometry of having the Expo loop back on itself. Wasn't that one of the old Millennium's problems? Better to have a separate line branching off to cover Hastings.

Wasn't that only a problem because the line was split in two, reducing frequencies for the spur lines? We don't have that issue here.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

True, it's not the District's fault for being bigger or having a smaller, more decentralized population.... but it IS their fault for exacerbating the problem instead of reducing it.
If Council wants to densify, there's plenty of underused space in Lynn Valley and Park & Tilford - sh*t, all the proposed housing could fit comfortably into the run-down SFHs north of Phibbs. If they want to develop Maplewood specifically, there's other areas adjacent to the populated zone. Why rip a hole in the middle of the forest and put your apartments there???

Actually, the DNV has roughly double the population of the City.

As for increased density, there are already plans in the works - and under way - to increase density in several core areas, including Lynn Valley and the area around Mountain highway south of the highway. Many of those homes you mentioned, though, are on native land.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

It's about 2/5ths of the way to Deep Cove from Phibbs. Admittedly not halfway, but a transit planner working on a route from Park Royal or Lonsdale might see differently.

True, it's not the District's fault for being bigger or having a smaller, more decentralized population.... but it IS their fault for exacerbating the problem instead of reducing it.
If Council wants to densify, there's plenty of underused space in Lynn Valley and Park & Tilford - sh*t, all the proposed housing could fit comfortably into the run-down SFHs north of Phibbs. If they want to develop Maplewood specifically, there's other areas adjacent to the populated zone. Why rip a hole in the middle of the forest and put your apartments there???

The same reason the Township of Langley is turning Willoughby/Carvloth into low-rise apartments and townhouses instead of focusing its efforts intensifying around Willowbrook's and western Walnut Grove's strip malls?

Greenfield developments have little risk of NIMBY opposition, and lacking building demolition costs, are almost always cheaper, initially.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Station placement is away from Hastings to provide an unintimidating environment for transit users.
Some people would avoid the station because it is located on Hastings.
On your suggested plan, Gastown-Chinatown Station is at the heart of the DTES [drug market] - Carrall & Hastings is at Pigeon Park.
That's neither Gastown, nor Chinatown.

Having the Gastown station at the heart of Gastown draws from the success of Yaletown Roundhouse Station in Yaletown.
The Maple Tree Square station would also connect across the railway tracks to future development on Port Lands west of Crab Park (near the heliport site) and provide a pedestrian overpass to Crab Park.

On my suggested alignment, I would have the line dive underground from the tail track.
The existing tail track may have to be demolished back towards Waterfront to dive down sooner (the tail track section would provide a good length of track to dive down, though I don't know the distance required)
and some WCE switches may need to be shifted (and would have to shift operations during construction).

If that's landfill (probably?) it may be tough to bore through.


https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.28502...-CA&authuser=0

It's not, it's Sandstone. https://www.cgenarchive.org/vancouver-geomap.html

It'll be unintimidating- until the inevitable happens, and homeless and drug traffickers start frolicking inside and outside the station. The station would attract them like a magnet, so there's the counter-possibility of the station being opposed by Gastown residents themselves for exactly that reason.

Pigeon Park is at the outskirts of Gastown. Note that the nearby area (and Railtown) has and will continue to gentrify over the years.

Note that the Woodward's contains SFU's downtown campus. I was thinking that the line could be moved to Cordova (less traffic disruptions), and/or moved towards the Woodwards, though.

The Waterfront tail track is used to reverse the trains to the opposite side for boarding, so I'm not sure if you could even maintain normal service and dig a deeper tail track.

[officedweller]

Sandstone, cool, thanks.

Woodwards is also only a couple blocks from Stadium Station.

Originally Posted by fredinno

The Waterfront tail track is used to reverse the trains to the opposite side for boarding, so I'm not sure if you could even maintain normal service and dig a deeper tail track.

Waterfront Station also has switches west of the platform, so they could temporarily do what Canada Line does at Waterfront.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I'm more concerned about the overall geometry of having the Expo loop back on itself. Wasn't that one of the old Millennium's problems? Better to have a separate line branching off to cover Hastings.

That was more because of the split and the trains passed through Commercial-Broadway twice.
If there's less demand on the Hastings Line, some Expo Line trains could be short-turned at Waterfront or farther east so fewer trains continue to Hastings.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Waterfront Station also has switches west of the platform, so they could temporarily do what Canada Line does at Waterfront.

The Canada Line platforms turn less than 2/3 the trains that the Expo Line platforms turn at peak

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Sandstone, cool, thanks.

Woodwards is also only a couple blocks from Stadium Station.



Waterfront Station also has switches west of the platform, so they could temporarily do what Canada Line does at Waterfront.



That was more because of the split and the trains passed through Commercial-Broadway twice.
If there's less demand on the Hastings Line, some Expo Line trains could be short-turned at Waterfront or farther east so fewer trains continue to Hastings.

I guess go with Cordova then?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Actually, the DNV has roughly double the population of the City.

As for increased density, there are already plans in the works - and under way - to increase density in several core areas, including Lynn Valley and the area around Mountain highway south of the highway. Many of those homes you mentioned, though, are on native land.

The one typo I don't see - thanks.

I assume the Mountain Highway plan is still pending approval? Because the only densification going on is the Keith/Fern block; everything between it and Phibbs is country-assed suburbia.

WRT First Nations land, the Squamish claim lies between Orwell and Lynn Creek; the Tsleil-Waututh claim is due east of Windsor Park. District Council can most definitely redevelop Park & Tilford/Phibbs/Maplewood as they see fit.

Originally Posted by fredinno

The same reason the Township of Langley is turning Willoughby/Carvloth into low-rise apartments and townhouses instead of focusing its efforts intensifying around Willowbrook's and western Walnut Grove's strip malls?

Greenfield developments have little risk of NIMBY opposition, and lacking building demolition costs, are almost always cheaper, initially.

In that context, I can somewhat understand the decision... but it's still more sprawl. And it doesn't explain why they need to fragment a habitat and create an isolated neighbourhood in the middle; developing the greenfield on the west half (Windridge-Old Dollarton) instead of the east half would integrate the neighbourhoods better and keep the forest intact. The way it is now, they'll need two of everything - one for the Innovation District and another for Maplewood proper - if they don't want everybody driving there and back virtually every day.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by waves

Wasn't that only a problem because the line was split in two, reducing frequencies for the spur lines? We don't have that issue here.

Originally Posted by officedweller

That was more because of the split and the trains passed through Commercial-Broadway twice.

That, and because the original M-Line didn't go anywhere new - it just took you a few dozen blocks north or south of where you started. Might as well take the bus.

Ditto Hastings. A separate line can have the west end go to... the West End (sorry) and beyond.

[officedweller]

True, it would be nice for a line to loop through the West End and if a North Shore line doesn't use the Lions Gate Bridge (ie conversion), the Hastings line makes sense to extend (like Fredinno shows), but I don't think you'd need to go through Waterfront Station, you could create a station at the Bay parkade site with a transfer to Granville Station. That would serve the emerging Amazon district then head south through downtown south and the areas that which missed out when Nelson Station was deleted from the Canada Line, then loop through the West End (Davie, English Bay beach and then Stanley Park).

[scryer]

Stations on East Hastings would be a complete disaster.

East Cordova, a great street, would be something that I would tunnel under, maybe reconnecting onto Hastings beyond the rougher area? That's just me being picky. And I don't care for the social stigma regarding avoiding East Hastings as a transit option; it would straight up be dangerous.

[officedweller]

Yeah, Cordova is better than Hastings.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The one typo I don't see - thanks.

I assume the Mountain Highway plan is still pending approval? Because the only densification going on is the Keith/Fern block; everything between it and Phibbs is country-assed suburbia.

WRT First Nations land, the Squamish claim lies between Orwell and Lynn Creek; the Tsleil-Waututh claim is due east of Windsor Park. District Council can most definitely redevelop Park & Tilford/Phibbs/Maplewood as they see fit.



In that context, I can somewhat understand the decision... but it's still more sprawl. And it doesn't explain why they need to fragment a habitat and create an isolated neighbourhood in the middle; developing the greenfield on the west half (Windridge-Old Dollarton) instead of the east half would integrate the neighbourhoods better and keep the forest intact. The way it is now, they'll need two of everything - one for the Innovation District and another for Maplewood proper - if they don't want everybody driving there and back virtually every day.

That land on the West is largely already occupied by Maplewood Park, which fragments the two neighborhoods as is. I don't think anyone is prepared to remove a park. http://www.vancouvermarket.ca/wp-con...aplewood_2.jpg

Originally Posted by officedweller

True, it would be nice for a line to loop through the West End and if a North Shore line doesn't use the Lions Gate Bridge (ie conversion), the Hastings line makes sense to extend (like Fredinno shows), but I don't think you'd need to go through Waterfront Station, you could create a station at the Bay parkade site with a transfer to Granville Station. That would serve the emerging Amazon district then head south through downtown south and the areas that which missed out when Nelson Station was deleted from the Canada Line, then loop through the West End (Davie, English Bay beach and then Stanley Park).

I dunno, I went with Waterfront because it has the most space to expand (on top of the rail tracks), and in context to the master plan, connects to an expanded commuter rail system.

Originally Posted by scryer

Stations on East Hastings would be a complete disaster.

East Cordova, a great street, would be something that I would tunnel under, maybe reconnecting onto Hastings beyond the rougher area? That's just me being picky. And I don't care for the social stigma regarding avoiding East Hastings as a transit option; it would straight up be dangerous.

I dunno, Gastown probably should have a station, and Railtown is slowly gentrifying (the southern edge of Railtown is Cordova.).

The problem is that Skid Row is literally right next to the more gentrified parts of the city, making these stations actually useful for those commuters, while simultaneously being prime real estate for the DTES to expand into. The most expensive RE in Vancouver is pretty much right next to its worst hole.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I dunno, I went with Waterfront because it has the most space to expand (on top of the rail tracks), and in context to the master plan, connects to an expanded commuter rail system.

I suppose it should have an easy connection to Canada Line to YVR, too, which is at Waterfront.
Just thinking that too much focus on Waterfront may be misplaced because there are other areas downtown
that are getting as much or more office space (like the Post area) and Waterfront is already well-served
with Expo and Canada Lines (so commuters can transfer to get there).

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I suppose it should have an easy connection to Canada Line to YVR, too, which is at Waterfront.
Just thinking that too much focus on Waterfront may be misplaced because there are other areas downtown
that are getting as much or more office space (like the Post area) and Waterfront is already well-served
with Expo and Canada Lines (so commuters can transfer to get there).

I think the transferability is kind of the point...

[Migrant_Coconut]

Personally, I'd want the CBD triangle to be handled by three separate lines: Canada on City Centre-Granville to Waterfront, Expo on CC-G to Burrard, Hastings on Waterfront-Burrard.

Better to evenly split the transfers than to run all three through one station that won't be able to handle that kind of foot traffic.

[Galaxy]

I've always thought maybe one day Sinclair Centre could be a second extension or second hub for the Hastings Line, Canada Line, and Expo Line for transfers between the lines. The Expo Line has a entrance within Sinclair Centre. The Canada Line also has a entrance literally across the street. Hastings also crosses in front of Sinclair Centre.