Transit Fantasies

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by fredinno

...Douglas College (minus the people at the New West Campus) has a comparable # of people to Cap University. Also, a station at Lynnmour would benefit any development on the Cove Forest and CMHC lands, as well as buses on Mt. Seymour Pky in general.

I'm sorry, but as a lifetime resident of the North Shore I'm not getting the sense that you are especially familiar with these municipalities. Mountain Forest - the CHMC lands - and Cove Forest are parkland, and there are (to the best of my knowledge) no proposals in play with the District to change that status.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I agree. The problem is that I've highlighted is that SeaBus does not have a real advantage over Skytrain.
If they keep it even if Skytrain is there, we know ridership isn't going to be what it used to be. Then, questions will start being raised over how useful it is. It's ok if you're directly from Lonsdale and Waterfront, but not great if you're slightly off from those terminuses.

The Seabus will continue to have a real advantage over the Skytrain under both the First and Second Narrows scenarios. Those of us who think the Second Narrows to Metrotown line is preferable understand almost anyone headed to DT Vancouver from the NS will use the east/west segment of the line to access the Seabus and head downtown. Under your scenario, anyone east of Mosquito Creek heading to DT Vancouver OR connecting to the Expo or Canada lines will also still use the Seabus.

BTW, you're talking about Lonsdale as if it is an insignificant piece of the NS. Lower and Middle Lonsdale have a combined population of about 40k which is 20% of the entire North Shore. That's also twice the population of Metrotown, so having a direct connection to DT Vancouver will still be warranted IMO.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So then how do you get from Waterfront to Burrard in your configuration? Pretty sure that’s a “spur.”
Oh, we know: because Burrard allows the main line and OMC 1/2 to run to First Narrows, and Waterfront doesn't. It's the same reason why the Cariboo extension, original Millennium Line and original Nineties Gold Line were all staged out of OMC 1/2 as well.
North Shore riders either take the SeaBus to Waterfront, or ride the 1N to Granville and switch to City Centre; yeah, they have to get out and cross the street first, but that’s what everybody else does already. It is what it is.

At no point in the last forty years has TransLink ever flip-flopped on where to put a depot.

Neither Lincoln nor Gateway are terminus stops – their bus routes do indeed connect to Coq and Surrey Central; having North Shore buses terminate at Queensbury instead of continuing to Lonsdale is somewhat ridiculous. And from my experience, passengers prefer to have one central point where they can transfer from any one bus to any other; Queensbury saves them little to no time, and may in fact waste it.



On the other hand, First Narrows SkyTrain lacks a real advantage over the SeaBus, precluding a reason for it to be built in the next two decades in the first place; they’re evenly-matched if you’re at Lonsdale or anywhere north or east of it.



It helps that Douglas College has the advantage of being near central Coquitlam on a flat plane surrounded by developable land; from personal experience, Cap’s up on a hill in the middle of nowhere with not much room to grow.

Oh, you know?
That's great: I look forwards to an email from the study authors as to the rationale for their assumption of the Burrard Spur location.

Boom:



I never said the buses would ever have to terminate at Queensbury. I said they would have a stop at Queensbury where people could get off for convenience's sake.

The entire reason I proposed the Expo spurs would extend to Queensbury and Ambleside was to reduce the amount of time spent transferring so there's more of an advantage for buses outside Lonsdale proper.

Getting out of Granville and taking a 1-stop transfer to Burrard makes this entire thing pointless.



Yes, because we're going to increase SeaBus frequencies to 2-3 mins like Skytrain at peak by multiplying the number of SeaBuses by 5x (about $500M, for each at $25M).
That still doesn't solve the problem of buses having to travel East-West, so you need a Marine Dr. Skytrain.
That has to be connected to the rest of the network somehow (according to you), so it's either 2nd Narrows or Norgate.
You really want 2nd Narrows, but it's pretty difficult to connect from that end without basically making the bridge crossing itself useless (not the line overall, that's why Gold still has ridership, just not the bridge section.)
Purple's crossing is ok, but it's even more difficult to connect the tracks from that direction than from Waterfront.


I pointed out to FarmerHaight that Skytrain on North Shore (other than a tiny spur to Phibbs itself... for some reason, and I know neither of us want) isn't on Transit 2050 to begin with.

NS is not a major priority unless TransLink starts to change its mind and change its plans anyways.
You'll get your wish of keeping SeaBus for eternity, but only because there's not going to be major improvements in transit in the North Shore.

This is why clinging onto the exact configurations (which are clearly labeled as assumptions rather than exact routes for the purposes of both crossing studies, none of which are preferred as of yet- ie. presumptions for comparison) is a fool's errand.
Doing so makes this entire discussion moot.



Clearly, you're getting very flustered and annoyed.

Slow down, calm down, or let's wrap this up, because we're just going around in circles.

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

I'm sorry, but as a lifetime resident of the North Shore I'm not getting the sense that you are especially familiar with these municipalities. Mountain Forest - the CHMC lands - and Cove Forest are parkland, and there are (to the best of my knowledge) no proposals in play with the District to change that status.

Yes, "if". East NS isn't very densely populated to begin with.
And the Cap Uni spur is a more 'future extension' anyways. I don't expect it anytime soon.

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

The Seabus will continue to have a real advantage over the Skytrain under both the First and Second Narrows scenarios. Those of us who think the Second Narrows to Metrotown line is preferable understand almost anyone headed to DT Vancouver from the NS will use the east/west segment of the line to access the Seabus and head downtown. Under your scenario, anyone east of Mosquito Creek heading to DT Vancouver OR connecting to the Expo or Canada lines will also still use the Seabus.

BTW, you're talking about Lonsdale as if it is an insignificant piece of the NS. Lower and Middle Lonsdale have a combined population of about 40k which is 20% of the entire North Shore. That's also twice the population of Metrotown, so having a direct connection to DT Vancouver will still be warranted IMO.

That's still a fraction of people who use it right now.

Lonsdale gets riders from a much wider area than just Lonsdale itself (eg. Lynn Valley, Cap Mall, etc.) transferring to SeaBus.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I pointed out to FarmerHaight that Skytrain on North Shore (other than a tiny spur to Phibbs itself... for some reason, and I know neither of us want) isn't on Transit 2050 to begin with.

NS is not a major priority unless TransLink starts to change its mind and change its plans anyways.

This is not true. Translink has committed to implementing BRT on the NS within the next 10 years, let alone 2050, and has also committed to studying rapid transit solutions over and above BRT in the same time frame.

A study is just a study, and maybe Translink will instead decide the next rapid rail projects should be UBC, KGB, or something else not on the North Shore. And who knows how BRT-like Translink's BRT lines will be after they are subjected to BRT creep.

But to say the NS is not a priority when Translink has committed to implementing minor improvements and studying major improvements in the next ten years, and when the Mayors Council has pushed for "more, and faster" requires a lot of denial.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

This is not true. Translink has committed to implementing BRT on the NS within the next 10 years, let alone 2050, and has also committed to studying rapid transit solutions over and above BRT in the same time frame.

A study is just a study, and maybe Translink will instead decide the next rapid rail projects should be UBC, KGB, or something else not on the North Shore. And who knows how BRT-like Translink's BRT lines will be after they are subjected to BRT creep.

But to say the NS is not a priority when Translink has committed to implementing minor improvements and studying major improvements in the next ten years, and when the Mayors Council has pushed for "more, and faster" requires a lot of denial.

I meant Skytrain, not BRT.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by fredinno

-snip-

Some people can put two and two together, others need TransLink to literally spell out how their MS Paint line won’t work. Feel free to walk up to them at an open house with all your maps, where they'll say what I just said, if anything.

We’re also not discussing a UBC SkyTrain down 4th or 16th. Nobody’s made a study explicitly confirming they won’t happen, but at this point there’s a 110% chance they’re not, and “clinging” to the options that’ve already been discussed for a decade is just being rational. Did a separate Hastings-Waterfront-Norgate line even make the shortlist? No, it did not; a tunnel under the middle of the harbour did, but yours didn't.

Congratulations, you’ve just given the West End spur 5-10 minute frequencies and thereby ensured the SeaBus’ competitiveness in perpetuity (though even 2-5 minute frequency for 1N only has a marginal advantage). Waterfront over Burrard really doesn’t change anything.

All the buses that go through Queensbury already have stops there, so IDK what your point is. The 232 and 255 don’t need a detour, nor should they stop covering Keith.
Once again, we’re getting a Marine Drive SkyTrain no matter what option we go with, so again, moot point. And it won’t replace regular buses; the 228, for example, is the only local-stop service for Moodyville, so it can’t be truncated, and if it can’t, it might as well continue to Lonsdale.

Nah, Gold would be significantly better for me, but Purple with a Hastings Expo extension makes the most sense for the most people.

I’m not the one posting in all-bold here. Chill.

Originally Posted by fredinno

That's still a fraction of people who use it right now.

Lonsdale gets riders from a much wider area than just Lonsdale itself (eg. Lynn Valley, Cap Mall, etc.) transferring to SeaBus.

And that wide area really doesn't care between 1st N SkyTrain or the SeaBus. The only people saving 10+ minutes with SkyTrain every day live in the West End or Norgate.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Some people can put two and two together, others need TransLink to literally spell out how their MS Paint line won’t work. Feel free to walk up to them at an open house with all your maps, where they'll say what I just said, if anything.

We’re also not discussing a UBC SkyTrain down 4th or 16th. Nobody’s made a study explicitly confirming they won’t happen, but at this point there’s a 110% chance they’re not, and “clinging” to the options that’ve already been discussed for a decade is just being rational. Did a separate Hastings-Waterfront-Norgate line even make the shortlist? No, it did not; a tunnel under the middle of the harbour did, but yours didn't.

Congratulations, you’ve just given the West End spur 5-10 minute frequencies and thereby ensured the SeaBus’ competitiveness in perpetuity (though even 2-5 minute frequency for 1N only has a marginal advantage). Waterfront over Burrard really doesn’t change anything.

All the buses that go through Queensbury already have stops there, so IDK what your point is. The 232 and 255 don’t need a detour, nor should they stop covering Keith.
Once again, we’re getting a Marine Drive SkyTrain no matter what option we go with, so again, moot point. And it won’t replace regular buses; the 228, for example, is the only local-stop service for Moodyville, so it can’t be truncated, and if it can’t, it might as well continue to Lonsdale.

Nah, Gold would be significantly better for me, but Purple with a Hastings Expo extension makes the most sense for the most people.

I’m not the one posting in all-bold here. Chill.



And that wide area really doesn't care between 1st N SkyTrain or the SeaBus. The only people saving 10+ minutes with SkyTrain every day live in the West End or Norgate.

I posted in bold because you keep skimming everything I write.
You only seem to understand if I make it really obvious, otherwise, you just ignore it in your rush to respond.

Hence, why we keep going in circles.

TransLink did actually study transit down the False Creek area and on 16th as alternatives to SkyTrain. Or at least the former. Not sure the latter. As well as people's literal sketches about putting SkyTrain underneath the Ironworkers.


That's my point.
You seem to believe there's no benefit to the line because people always have to get off at Lonsdale anyways. They don't have to. That's a benefit of Skytrain.

Congratulations, you’ve just given the West End spur 5-10 minute frequencies and thereby ensured the SeaBus’ competitiveness in perpetuity (though even 2-5 minute frequency for 1N only has a marginal advantage). Waterfront over Burrard really doesn’t change anything.

Waterfront is no longer a terminus line. It's a station that Expo backs into for 1 stop.
This is the 5th time I've explained how this works. Every time I point this out, you turn around and say it's a spur.

No spur.


I've already shown that Skytrain as it exists today doesn't usually save more than 10 minutes over a bus unless you're at peak anyways for most trips (unless it's pretty far to begin with). It's peak and traffic and frequency and transfers that's the benefit.

You're throwing SkyTrain as a whole under the bus, not this connector.

Nah, Gold would be significantly better for me, but Purple with a Hastings Expo extension makes the most sense for the most people.

Ah, I see.


Please wrap this up. If you genuinely still don't understand, I'd be happy to help. I'm starting to think you're just continuing on for it's own sake. I've addressed every single one of these points so far, and answered them. Go back and read the previous posts.

[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.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I meant Skytrain, not BRT.

And I meant Skytrain (or LRT, or monorail, or whatever "alternatives" Translink always has to study to show they considered other technologies) too:

Translink has committed to implementing BRT on the NS within the next 10 years, let alone 2050, and has also committed to studying rapid transit solutions over and above BRT in the same time frame.

The point is that immediate improvements (BRT) for the North Shore's Marine Drive corridor plus consideration of long-term fixes are well within the scope of Translink's 10-year priorities, let alone the 2050 plan.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Full quote, straight from the horse's mouth (page 39):

Metrotown to Park Royal (BRT + study alternatives)
In recognition of the acute congestion challenges facing the North Shore, the region commits to delivering a traffic-separated rapid transit connection between Park Royal and Metrotown as soon as possible:
• Recognizing that this is a highly complex and constrained corridor, we will immediately begin the required planning work to advance a BRT option so that construction of rapid transit can begin within years 0-5.
• In parallel, we will advance business case development to confirm whether the ultimate technology (i.e. for the corridor) will be Bus Rapid Transit, Light Rail Transit, or SkyTrain (or a combination), and to confirm the associated alignment, terminus locations, and degree of grade separation including options for a dedicated transit crossing of Burrard Inlet.
• In the meantime, the region commits to increased bus service and transit priority measures, as feasible, between Park Royal and Metrotown to improve bus travel times, operating costs, and grow ridership in advance of more permanent rapid transit investment.

Doesn't leave a lot of room for argument.

[SpongeG]

I wonder if an uber boat type service could make it work here.


https://blog.masabi.com/

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

I wonder if an uber boat type service could make it work here.

I think the big issue is that in general not a lot of Metro Vancouverites live or work along the Fraser River or near the ocean and those that do are generally well served by Skytrain lines (YVR, Downtown, Port Moody, Richmond, New Westminster, Kits soon with the Broadway Extension, UBC maybe soon). The significant medium or higher density waterfront population centres right now without a Skytrain connection planned in the short term future are Ambleside, Lower Lonsdale, Steveston, White Rock, and Port Haney. Lower Lonsdale to Downtown is already well served by the Seabus, and the others are all on the extremes of Vancouver and probably would see too little traffic travelling between them to justify a direct connection.

[dleung]

I'm starting to wonder why they haven't considered an inlet crossing just east of Victoria Dr, capturing most of the ridership along Hastings, while beating Seabus times with a shorter route than via 2nd Narrows. No switches/transfers, just an extension of Expo from Waterfront to Ambleside. Shouldn't get too precious about Phibbs, we should be relocating bus interchanges to less-hostile and more-urban/multimodal settings anyway.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by dleung

I'm starting to wonder why they haven't considered an inlet crossing just east of Victoria Dr, capturing most of the ridership along Hastings, while beating Seabus times with a shorter route than via 2nd Narrows. No switches/transfers, just an extension of Expo from Waterfront to Ambleside. Shouldn't get too precious about Phibbs, we should be relocating bus interchanges to less-hostile and more-urban/multimodal settings anyway.

I guess a crossing further west would be slightly worse for connectivity to CapU, North Woods, and Deep Cove. And if the NS end of the crossing was west of the terminals Park & Tilford wouldn't be directly served either.

If Translink follows the purple alignment I can't imagine running Skytrain 2/3 of the way down Hastings between Willingdon and Victoria and not going all the way to DT Vancouver. But then you're dealing with branching and I would hate to cut the Willingdon and Hastings frequencies in half.

If Translink follows the gold alignment maybe crossing right after the denser areas of DTES and Grandview-Woodlands would be considered, but again that feels half-assed. If (when) Hastings gets Skytrain I think there has to be a one-seat ride all the way from DT Vancouver to the PNE.

[Migrant_Coconut]

If anybody's willing to click back through 60+ pages, waves already tried something like that. Made sense at the time, but in hindsight, there's some obvious drawbacks: for starters, crossing the longest and (almost) deepest part of the harbour, further crowding the busiest stretch of the Expo, and not being able to service the entire R2 corridor without either a spur or a separate line.

And don't count on Phibbs being non-urban forever.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by dleung

...Shouldn't get too precious about Phibbs, we should be relocating bus interchanges to less-hostile and more-urban/multimodal settings anyway.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

...And don't count on Phibbs being non-urban forever.

Yes, Lynn Creek is filling out rapidly as one of the District's town centres, and Maplewood on the other side will come sooner rather than later. Phibbs Exchange is right in the middle of those centres. I doubt TransLink would be putting $30 million into overhauling the exchange if they do not see it as having future value.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by dleung

I'm starting to wonder why they haven't considered an inlet crossing just east of Victoria Dr, capturing most of the ridership along Hastings, while beating Seabus times with a shorter route than via 2nd Narrows. No switches/transfers, just an extension of Expo from Waterfront to Ambleside. Shouldn't get too precious about Phibbs, we should be relocating bus interchanges to less-hostile and more-urban/multimodal settings anyway.

The main problem is realistically the fact Grandview-Woodlands is far too hostile to allow any new Skytrain or redevelopment here without a fight.
These are the people who protested the original Skytrain construction.
It's arguably worse to deal with those NIMBYs than Point Grey NIMBYs.

It also requires construction of extra lines east or south from the crossing point (like the 2nd Narrows ones) to make sense- so the cost is higher like the 2nd Narrows options.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The main problem is realistically the fact Grandview-Woodlands is far too hostile to allow any new Skytrain or redevelopment here without a fight.
These are the people who protested the original Skytrain construction.
It's arguably worse to deal with those NIMBYs than Point Grey NIMBYs.

One word: MEGATOWERS

[fredinno]

The main advantage of a Woodlands crossing would be the fact you could transfer from Millennium directly onto NS, and you'd have less demand on the busiest Expo section (Broadway-Downtown) from getting rid of Seabus.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

Yes, Lynn Creek is filling out rapidly as one of the District's town centres, and Maplewood on the other side will come sooner rather than later. Phibbs Exchange is right in the middle of those centres. I doubt TransLink would be putting $30 million into overhauling the exchange if they do not see it as having future value.

$30 million is a rounding error if they ever built a Skytrain extension to the North Shore.