Jump to content

TransLink Future - Dream's and Aspirations


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, buizel10 said:

I think this would be a nice addition to our transit system if this system could be constructed or construction started in a decade.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=192IrQxyFDzSc7r4L1hliS-uK6V8&usp=sharing

An actual question, how many people travel Coquitlam-Surrey on an average day? I know I've seen such a proposed line before, but I don't actually know how many people it would serve and whether or not it would be worth the cost compared to the current two Skytrain transfers.

Second question, is your Arbutus line from 16th Ave to downtown following anything specific, or is it just showing that it continues to downtown?

Lastly, as I mentioned before, I think it will probably be ground-level rail on Arbutus instead of underground, and as for BRT.... In Vancouver I personally don't think BRT will ever be anything more than a B-line, with some signal priority and HOV lanes at best. I could see an express bus on a Guildford-Coquitlam route, but I can't see any bus only lanes being implemented there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, maege said:

An actual question, how many people travel Coquitlam-Surrey on an average day? I know I've seen such a proposed line before, but I don't actually know how many people it would serve and whether or not it would be worth the cost compared to the current two Skytrain transfers.

Second question, is your Arbutus line from 16th Ave to downtown following anything specific, or is it just showing that it continues to downtown?

Lastly, as I mentioned before, I think it will probably be ground-level rail on Arbutus instead of underground, and as for BRT.... In Vancouver I personally don't think BRT will ever be anything more than a B-line, with some signal priority and HOV lanes at best. I could see an express bus on a Guildford-Coquitlam route, but I can't see any bus only lanes being implemented there. 

1. Its mainly from the Surrey Transit plan RRT1A. Which includes it (I think)

Even if it doesn't, you can include all of BRT1 and SkyTrain for the same price as LRT.

 

2. Nah, just a line across the Artubus corridor, literally.

 

3. Yeah, probably, but this would be nice.

 

SkyTrain advocates like to advocate for real BRT in Vancouver, so I included that. @8800GTX has a petition to build SkyTrain and BRT rather than LRT. He did some renders a few months ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, maege said:

I don't believe there is any passenger only service, only the combined vehicle/passenger ferry. Are you saying you would eliminate that?

As @cprted stated, it's low usage (partly due to low population) that's responsible for the gap, and a ferry to downtown doesn't solve that. If congestions is the main concern, I would think the other two ferries coming into Horseshoe Bay that carry many times more passengers and vehicles would be a much larger priority for providing efficient transit.

Basically, I feel like the frequent ferry to downtown isn't a bad idea per se, it's just that Bowen Island doesn't have anywhere near enough population (or tourism) to come anywhere close to making it practical or sustainable, other than maybe for a peak run or two in each direction. I believe it would be better to focus on very good transportation for all people that use Horseshoe Bay, not just Bowen Island, as that would have a larger impact on higher ridership, reduced emissions and reduced congestion.

1. Keep the same service but with a better vessel for the route such as another Century Class or a new 100 car shuttle class.  I think most people might look at the Downtown route as more directly, easier to get Bowen Island and cheaper since it would be three zone transit ticket to ride the route.

2. Actually Bowen Island ferry gets a lot of use because they need increase the car capacity on the vessel. Also Century Class was going to be built for route and the Island Sky was built for spefic route. 

3. It would help out Horseshoe Bay because less people wouldn't go Horseshoe Bay which needs a rebuild which means BC Ferries will need to take one less step on reducing the car and passenger capacity at terminal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, buizel10 said:

1. Its mainly from the Surrey Transit plan RRT1A. Which includes it (I think)

Even if it doesn't, you can include all of BRT1 and SkyTrain for the same price as LRT.

If you are referring to the Rapid Transit Alternatives Evaluation that was published( http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/rapid_transit_projects/SRT/alternatives_evaluation/Surrey_Rapid_Transit_Study_Phase_2_Alternatives_Evaluation.pdf )? There was no line to Coquitlam included in any of those, Surrey, White Rock and Langley were the only municipalities included.

I'm just trying to figure out how many people travel from Surrey to Coquitlam currently so it can be determined if it is anywhere near high enough for detailed consideration. 

15 hours ago, buizel10 said:

2. Nah, just a line across the Artubus corridor, literally.

3. Yeah, probably, but this would be nice.

SkyTrain advocates like to advocate for real BRT in Vancouver, so I included that. @8800GTX has a petition to build SkyTrain and BRT rather than LRT. He did some renders a few months ago.

Gotcha, thanks.

I understand opposition to LRT as proposed with little speed improvement over a bus and minimal separation from road traffic, but a question for you and everyone else:

If Surrey LRT was allowed to achieve full speed (~70-90km/h) and it was decently protected from other traffic, as I described before, with landscaped medians, barriers, railroad arms, etc, would you still be opposed to it, would you be alright with the LRT but still prefer the Skytrain+BRT, or would you be satisfied with the LRT regardless of alternatives, and why?

My second, unrelated, question would be, why not full BRT, why BRT+Skytrain? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

1. Keep the same service but with a better vessel for the route such as another Century Class or a new 100 car shuttle class.  I think most people might look at the Downtown route as more directly, easier to get Bowen Island and cheaper since it would be three zone transit ticket to ride the route.

2. Actually Bowen Island ferry gets a lot of use because they need increase the car capacity on the vessel. Also Century Class was going to be built for route and the Island Sky was built for spefic route. 

3. It would help out Horseshoe Bay because less people wouldn't go Horseshoe Bay which needs a rebuild which means BC Ferries will need to take one less step on reducing the car and passenger capacity at terminal.

1. So you are now saying the same schedule to Horseshoe Bay with more capacity, AND a brand new service to downtown, which would likely have even higher capacity than Horseshoe Bay currently due to a higher frequency?

2. It definitely does get used quite a bit as it is the primary access to the island, but it still only operates roughly once per hour with a 2.5 hour gap in the middle of the day.

3. I'm not saying it wouldn't reduce the usage of Horseshoe Bay, it would some, but a single ferry from Langdale or Nanaimo has over 3x the capacity of a Bowen Island ferry. Additionally, you are now suggesting the larger Bowen Island ferry, which could eliminate some of the reduction. 

It seems makes sense to focus on serving the largest potential user base (all Horseshoe Bay passengers) instead of only a subset (Bowen Island passengers) with a service that would create a significant oversupply, leading to greater operational losses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, maege said:

1. So you are now saying the same schedule to Horseshoe Bay with more capacity, AND a brand new service to downtown, which would likely have even higher capacity than Horseshoe Bay currently due to a higher frequency?

2. It definitely does get used quite a bit as it is the primary access to the island, but it still only operates roughly once per hour with a 2.5 hour gap in the middle of the day.

3. I'm not saying it wouldn't reduce the usage of Horseshoe Bay, it would some, but a single ferry from Langdale or Nanaimo has over 3x the capacity of a Bowen Island ferry. Additionally, you are now suggesting the larger Bowen Island ferry, which could eliminate some of the reduction. 

It seems makes sense to focus on serving the largest potential user base (all Horseshoe Bay passengers) instead of only a subset (Bowen Island passengers) with a service that would create a significant oversupply, leading to greater operational losses. 

1. From 2015 until BC Ferries change all vessel car capacity the Queen of Capilano could carry 100 cars per sailing, so no it is giving Bowen Island route the original capacity back from the upgrade. I don't see BC Ferries building another class of vessels from 44 cars to 100 cars.

2. The Downtown route would be good use to eliminate the gap in service and gave people an alternative to BC Ferries. Bowen Island Community Shuttles can be timed to connect to that route which would have better on time performance.

3. Since Bowen Island is part of Metro Vancouver BC Ferries may want TransLink to lunch a route during construction at Horseshoe Bay. BC Ferries tried a direct bus Downtown to Bowen Island when the Bowen Queen was on route that has been proven to be a complete success and TransLink took over contract of route. So I see passenger only ferry to Downtown being a successful in getting ridership. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, maege said:

If you are referring to the Rapid Transit Alternatives Evaluation that was published( http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/rapid_transit_projects/SRT/alternatives_evaluation/Surrey_Rapid_Transit_Study_Phase_2_Alternatives_Evaluation.pdf )? There was no line to Coquitlam included in any of those, Surrey, White Rock and Langley were the only municipalities included.

I'm just trying to figure out how many people travel from Surrey to Coquitlam currently so it can be determined if it is anywhere near high enough for detailed consideration. 

Gotcha, thanks.

I understand opposition to LRT as proposed with little speed improvement over a bus and minimal separation from road traffic, but a question for you and everyone else:

If Surrey LRT was allowed to achieve full speed (~70-90km/h) and it was decently protected from other traffic, as I described before, with landscaped medians, barriers, railroad arms, etc, would you still be opposed to it, would you be alright with the LRT but still prefer the Skytrain+BRT, or would you be satisfied with the LRT regardless of alternatives, and why?

My second, unrelated, question would be, why not full BRT, why BRT+Skytrain? 

I think I would go for SkyTrain and BRT. It will still be SLOW and will still kill people that are stupid and walk or drive around railroad arms. If it was tunneled or elevated I would be OK, but then why not go for SkyTrain? BRT could be as fast and move as much people as the current LRT plan too. 

 

2. Because it's faster and better. Costs more though.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

1. From 2015 until BC Ferries change all vessel car capacity the Queen of Capilano could carry 100 cars per sailing, so no it is giving Bowen Island route the original capacity back from the upgrade. I don't see BC Ferries building another class of vessels from 44 cars to 100 cars.

2. The Downtown route would be good use to eliminate the gap in service and gave people an alternative to BC Ferries. Bowen Island Community Shuttles can be timed to connect to that route which would have better on time performance.

3. Since Bowen Island is part of Metro Vancouver BC Ferries may want TransLink to lunch a route during construction at Horseshoe Bay. BC Ferries tried a direct bus Downtown to Bowen Island when the Bowen Queen was on route that has been proven to be a complete success and TransLink took over contract of route. So I see passenger only ferry to Downtown being a successful in getting ridership. 

1. If it is 100 with the Queen of Capilano, fair enough, all the numbers I found on BC Ferries still list 87 though. 

2. It could, but the reason for that gap is low usage, and there is a water taxi currently too if needed. A brand new, and much longer ferry route with frequent all day service would be a very expensive way to add 2 additional trips to the current ferry. 

3. I'm assuming that bus became the current 257, which is widely utilized by all passengers at Horseshoe Bay. A ferry has much higher operating costs than a bus and has quite a bit larger capacity, even at the smaller end. I would not be opposed to better Horseshoe Bay to downtown service, but the ferry would have ~30% or less potential user base compared to Horseshoe Bay, and higher operating costs, while at the same time retaining the current capacity on the current Horseshoe Bay -Bowen Island ferry. I guess my main question is how would there be a positive cost/benefit ratio for what you propose, and how would it make sense from a financial perspective? Especially compared to providing better, faster, more frequent connectivity to all of Horseshoe Bay?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, buizel10 said:

I think I would go for SkyTrain and BRT. It will still be SLOW and will still kill people that are stupid and walk or drive around railroad arms. If it was tunneled or elevated I would be OK, but then why not go for SkyTrain? BRT could be as fast and move as much people as the current LRT plan too. 

2. Because it's faster and better. Costs more though.

I think you missed the part where I said this:

12 minutes ago, buizel10 said:

If Surrey LRT was allowed to achieve full speed (~70-90km/h) and it was decently protected from other traffic, as I described before, with landscaped medians, barriers, railroad arms, etc, would you still be opposed to it, would you be alright with the LRT but still prefer the Skytrain+BRT, or would you be satisfied with the LRT regardless of alternatives, and why?

Speed would be very similar, except for a small amount of acceleration advantage Skytrain has. Also, I mentioned before that I would do a dual arm crossing on each side, at a minimum, so it is impossible to drive around. As for walking, the light would still be red, and they would be at the side of the road vs the train in the middle, so there would be some time for them to recognize the train as they were crossing the first half of the street, even if they were crossing on a do not cross signal. For people crossing from the platform to the sides, I would prefer a simple gate mechanism to be closed only when trains were approaching/going by. Also, BRT, assuming you are talking about a full BRT with dedicated lanes as I am, has the same things that would need to be addressed, so how does supporting that BRT in combination with Skytrain differ from LRT in those regards? 

In my opinion, I woudl agree, LRT does not make sense if elevated or tunnelled for more than 20-30% of the route at most. 

2. I'm assuming BRT to be full BRT, dedicated lanes and all, so Skytrain would be nominally faster due to acceleration times, and possibly a slightly higher top speed, but it wouldn't be a massive difference. How do you think it would be "better" since that is a subjective term? Costs about 2.5x more (aka BRT for all the lines costs only 40% of Skytrain+BRT). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, maege said:

1. If it is 100 with the Queen of Capilano, fair enough, all the numbers I found on BC Ferries still list 87 though. 

2. It could, but the reason for that gap is low usage, and there is a water taxi currently too if needed. A brand new, and much longer ferry route with frequent all day service would be a very expensive way to add 2 additional trips to the current ferry. 

3. I'm assuming that bus became the current 257, which is widely utilized by all passengers at Horseshoe Bay. A ferry has much higher operating costs than a bus and has quite a bit larger capacity, even at the smaller end. I would not be opposed to better Horseshoe Bay to downtown service, but the ferry would have ~30% or less potential user base compared to Horseshoe Bay, and higher operating costs, while at the same time retaining the current capacity on the current Horseshoe Bay -Bowen Island ferry. I guess my main question is how would there be a positive cost/benefit ratio for what you propose, and how would it make sense from a financial perspective? Especially compared to providing better, faster, more frequent connectivity to all of Horseshoe Bay?

1. Then reduce without any prior wrong or even doing a new release.

3. It not route that down by TransLink it self. It is operate by Bowen Island Community Transit. BC Ferries may help pay for operations during construction. Horeshoe Bay is or will become over capacity that is why BC Ferries is or did consider eliminating the Horeshoe Bay to Departure Bay route. So Bowen Island could benefit from trying to help capicity at Horeshoe Bay because of the direct route. Hell, the route could be peak hours during off peak season, and all day, seven days a week during peak season.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep talking about Bowen Island as if it is some massive transportation hub ... the island has a population of 3700 people.  If the current service was grossly inadequate, there would be a plan to improve it (the Queen of Cap did get a refit in the winter of 2015/2016 to increase vehicle capacity and add the passenger boarding doors). Having commuted back and forth for almost two years, between BC Ferries and the Water Taxi, things are ok. In that time I never experienced a sailing wait on either side (almost did once on a long weekend but they managed to cram the last few cars onboard).

 

As for foot passengers, the current express bus from Horseshoe Bay to downtown takes 40 mins ... I cannot see a Horseshoe Bay-Waterfront passenger ferry making the 23.5km journey in less time than that. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, maege said:

I think you missed the part where I said this:

Speed would be very similar, except for a small amount of acceleration advantage Skytrain has. Also, I mentioned before that I would do a dual arm crossing on each side, at a minimum, so it is impossible to drive around. As for walking, the light would still be red, and they would be at the side of the road vs the train in the middle, so there would be some time for them to recognize the train as they were crossing the first half of the street, even if they were crossing on a do not cross signal. For people crossing from the platform to the sides, I would prefer a simple gate mechanism to be closed only when trains were approaching/going by. Also, BRT, assuming you are talking about a full BRT with dedicated lanes as I am, has the same things that would need to be addressed, so how does supporting that BRT in combination with Skytrain differ from LRT in those regards? 

In my opinion, I woudl agree, LRT does not make sense if elevated or tunnelled for more than 20-30% of the route at most.

There are still traffic concerns, because the trains would have to speed through the middle of a roadway. With BRT, you just have to have a traffic light timed correctly, like they did with the 98 B-Line. Also, a standard bi-artic bus (Hess_LighTram_in_Groningen.thumb.jpg.9c6f1c6c51383a22986fe4da27b4e4fc.jpgexquicity1801a.thumb.jpg.7b84769f50f23ae4978cb8d1fc0c64fb.jpg) can have the same amount of people as a 5-car LRT train, depending on model. Also, the BRT is just a bus, not a train, so it can detour around accidents. That's one of the benefits.

43 minutes ago, maege said:

2. I'm assuming BRT to be full BRT, dedicated lanes and all, so Skytrain would be nominally faster due to acceleration times, and possibly a slightly higher top speed, but it wouldn't be a massive difference. How do you think it would be "better" since that is a subjective term? Costs about 2.5x more (aka BRT for all the lines costs only 40% of Skytrain+BRT). 

Surrey is set to be the largest city in BC. I think it needs the same treatment as Vancouver. FTN routes on all major streets, etc. If they were to build SkyTrain, it could last for generations with the speed and the capacity compared with LRT. At least the current LRT plan running at 40-50kph. I would be OK with the LRT if it was completely grade seperated, but it isn't. If they had the money, I would recommend being able to fit 10 car trains for the future if they have the money, but it isn't likely.

10 minutes ago, cprted said:

You keep talking about Bowen Island as if it is some massive transportation hub ... the island has a population of 3700 people.  If the current service was grossly inadequate, there would be a plan to improve it (the Queen of Cap did get a refit in the winter of 2015/2016 to increase vehicle capacity and add the passenger boarding doors). Having commuted back and forth for almost two years, between BC Ferries and the Water Taxi, things are ok. In that time I never experienced a sailing wait on either side (almost did once on a long weekend but they managed to cram the last few cars onboard).

 

As for foot passengers, the current express bus from Horseshoe Bay to downtown takes 40 mins ... I cannot see a Horseshoe Bay-Waterfront passenger ferry making the 23.5km journey in less time than that. 

Agreed. Unless it booms due to the "tech" investment plan. Not likely though.

 

 

 

Anyways, I want your opinions about adding another set of bus codes to Surrey. I'm thinking of 750-799, but what do you think? Surrey is almost out of bus codes, except for the first 10 and 39x.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, buizel10 said:

Anyways, I want your opinions about adding another set of bus codes to Surrey. I'm thinking of 750-799, but what do you think? Surrey is almost out of bus codes, except for the first 10 and 39x.

Surrey's got a ton of bus route numbers available. Just from 300 to 349, only 19 out of 50 route numbers are used. The 350 block is for White Rock, so then from 360 to 399 only 7 numbers are actually in use. 64 route numbers being available is nowhere near "almost out of bus codes".

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Stormscape said:

Surrey's got a ton of bus route numbers available. Just from 300 to 349, only 19 out of 50 route numbers are used. The 350 block is for White Rock, so then from 360 to 399 only 7 numbers are actually in use. 64 route numbers being available is nowhere near "almost out of bus codes".

Well, seemed like it because everything is spread out.  Ignore that post.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

3. It not route that down by TransLink it self. It is operate by Bowen Island Community Transit. BC Ferries may help pay for operations during construction. Horeshoe Bay is or will become over capacity that is why BC Ferries is or did consider eliminating the Horeshoe Bay to Departure Bay route. So Bowen Island could benefit from trying to help capicity at Horeshoe Bay because of the direct route. Hell, the route could be peak hours during off peak season, and all day, seven days a week during peak season.

Just checked out that express bus, I didn't know about that. I know Horseshoe Bay is quite busy, and if it is indeed overcapacity, that would indicate there needs to be better transit service there, as people and transit take up many times less space than vehicles. Attempting to redirect a minor percentage of the passengers on a duplicate and costly service is just a waste. I could possibly understand a peak commuter ferry that might be used to serve the North Shore the rest of the day, but that's it. Bowen Island does not have that many tourist passengers, even during summer, compared with the rest of Vancouver or even other ferries. Other than that, I agree with @cprted and will leave it at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, buizel10 said:

There are still traffic concerns, because the trains would have to speed through the middle of a roadway. With BRT, you just have to have a traffic light timed correctly, like they did with the 98 B-Line. Also, a standard bi-artic bus (Hess_LighTram_in_Groningen.thumb.jpg.9c6f1c6c51383a22986fe4da27b4e4fc.jpgexquicity1801a.thumb.jpg.7b84769f50f23ae4978cb8d1fc0c64fb.jpg) can have the same amount of people as a 5-car LRT train, depending on model. Also, the BRT is just a bus, not a train, so it can detour around accidents. That's one of the benefits.

Ummmm.... how is timing the light correctly for BRT any different than timing it different for LRT? They would both run through the middle of the street on the green light with other traffic stopped. Again, I am talking about full BRT, which would have it's own separated bus-lanes, not a B-line, which is basically just a frequent express bus. 

Bi-articulated buses carry 200-300 people, depending on model and configuration. That is essentially the same for any modern LRV that you would buy, so I'm not sure where you are getting that "same as 5-car LRT" from. 

Regarding accidents, what I spelled out is explicitly meant to prevent accidents. After all the infrastructure mentioned is put in place, if there happened to be a rare accident, theoretically a bi-articulated bus could detour around it, but driving a bi-articulated bus in city traffic is far from easy, especially because it has to turn out of the busway, into the road, then back into the busway at the next intersection. Bi-articulation doesn't lend itself to easy turns, so those manoeuvres would be difficult, albeit, possible. 

What would the other benefits be? Lower capital costs, yes, but higher operational/maintenance costs. Other than that, other benefits?

4 hours ago, buizel10 said:

Surrey is set to be the largest city in BC. I think it needs the same treatment as Vancouver. FTN routes on all major streets, etc. If they were to build SkyTrain, it could last for generations with the speed and the capacity compared with LRT. At least the current LRT plan running at 40-50kph. I would be OK with the LRT if it was completely grade seperated, but it isn't. If they had the money, I would recommend being able to fit 10 car trains for the future if they have the money, but it isn't likely.

To be honest, that's a horrible argument. Yes, Surrey will be the largest city by population, but it also covers a massive area. Surrey covers a larger area than Vancouver, Burnaby, New Westminster, Port Moody, Port Coquitlam and North Vancouver combined (plus and extra 30 square km), but only has just over half the population (~518k for Surrey vs ~1.08million). Density is much more important and Surrey has less than one-third the density of Vancouver, about one-third of New Westminster and North Vancouver, about two-thirds the density of Burnaby, and just slightly more dense than Richmond. 

That said, I do agree that when the first phase of the Surrey LRT (or other rapid transit) is completed, the buses should be re-designed into a grid network, much like Vancouver, with route spacing about every 1-1.5km and many of those new routes being part of the FTN. It probably can't be implemented as perfectly as there are more roads that have gaps and breaks in Surrey, but it can be done much better than currently, especially with the new line. 

The capacity is a non-issue. LRT, just like other trains can be added until they are as long as you need. Frequency with drivers would only be 2-3 minutes, vs ~60-70 seconds with Skytrain, but automated LRT can operated at similar headways to Skytrain if needed. I agree that the low speed needs to be addressed and the system designed for higher speeds.

Everything else about Translink's LRT plan being the same, you would be fine with it as long as it was elevated or underground?

I don't think it would be reasonable to build stations at the beginning that can handle 10 car trains. They will start with 2 car trains, and it would be a good idea to have the stations fit 4 car trains from the start. By the time more than 4 car trains are needed, the stations will need to be re-built anyway, so the extra length can be added then, instead of spending more money upfront for something that won't be used until after it is re-built anyway. It would be a good idea to make sure the space is there for at least 6 or 8 car trains, if the platforms need to be extended to that length in the future, but they don't need to build them that length to start.

 

Edit:

Regarding automated LRT, it looks like we will see one in Montreal (REM) after today's federal funding announcement. Project site: https://www.cdpqinfra.com/en/Reseau_electrique_metropolitain

Discussion page: 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment, I don't have a particularly strong opinion between BRT/LRT/SkyTrain for the Newton-Guildford line, but I am curious: many years down the road, would Translink consider expanding it down to White Rock? And if so, would any of the options be better or worse for that expansion? (Purely hypothetical of course - I have no idea if the demand would be high enough, or if it would ever be approved)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ThatBusGuy said:

At the moment, I don't have a particularly strong opinion between BRT/LRT/SkyTrain for the Newton-Guildford line, but I am curious: many years down the road, would Translink consider expanding it down to White Rock? And if so, would any of the options be better or worse for that expansion? (Purely hypothetical of course - I have no idea if the demand would be high enough, or if it would ever be approved)

That's in the plan right now. Even if they go ahead with LRT, there will be a line down to White Rock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ThatBusGuy said:

At the moment, I don't have a particularly strong opinion between BRT/LRT/SkyTrain for the Newton-Guildford line, but I am curious: many years down the road, would Translink consider expanding it down to White Rock? And if so, would any of the options be better or worse for that expansion? (Purely hypothetical of course - I have no idea if the demand would be high enough, or if it would ever be approved)

I believe the current plan is that the 96 will become a Newton to White Rock route once the LRT starts running.  There is demand right now for the 96 to be extended to White Rock, but it's being held back at the moment.  And if they would extend rapid transit to White Rock, I'm sure LRT would be the option that would work best.  White Rock doesn't seem to like it's area disturbed to much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

@maege, the bus route would be eliminated. Sorry, I didn't quote you because it seems not to working. 

I'm assuming you're referring to the Bowen Express bus, which I assumed would likely disappear. The proposed ferry would still duplicate the current ferry and 257 (and any future transit improvements to Horseshoe Bay). If looking at it from just getting to/from Bowen Island, if people aren't going to either downtown or Horseshoe Bay for a final destination, the new ferry would also be duplicating the task of getting to/from the island. 

8 hours ago, ThatBusGuy said:

At the moment, I don't have a particularly strong opinion between BRT/LRT/SkyTrain for the Newton-Guildford line, but I am curious: many years down the road, would Translink consider expanding it down to White Rock? And if so, would any of the options be better or worse for that expansion? (Purely hypothetical of course - I have no idea if the demand would be high enough, or if it would ever be approved)

As @buizel10 mentioned, the current plan proposes "BRT" (not specified if it will just be a B-line - most likely - or full BRT) from White Rock to Newton, connecting with the LRT. As for extending a rail line to White Rock, I would think there would be a better chance of LRT happening sooner than Skytrain as with Skytrain, the only line would be built to Langley, whereas LRT would go to Newton as well, providing a much shorter distance, and therefore cheaper cost, for a  White Rock extension. 

For either Skytrain or LRT to White Rock from Newton, as with the current project, it would come down to cost. LRT costs ~$45-70 million per km, while Skytrain is ~$100-130 million per km. Overall from numbers I have seen, for a given route LRT usually costs ~40% less  than Skytrain, mainly due to Skytrain's need for complete separation with no crossings allowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, maege said:

I'm assuming you're referring to the Bowen Express bus, which I assumed would likely disappear. The proposed ferry would still duplicate the current ferry and 257 (and any future transit improvements to Horseshoe Bay). If looking at it from just getting to/from Bowen Island, if people aren't going to either downtown or Horseshoe Bay for a final destination, the new ferry would also be duplicating the task of getting to/from the island. 

SeaBus has many of 209, 210, 211, 240, 241, 246,  247,  250, 253, 254 and 257 duplicate part of route and hasn't effect the SeaBus ridership that much.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Blue Bus Fan said:

SeaBus has many of 209, 210, 211, 240, 241, 246,  247,  250, 253, 254 and 257 duplicate part of route and hasn't effect the SeaBus ridership that much.

That's because the North Shore has 49x the population of Bowen Island ... you're proposing a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. 

 

If there was enough demand for a direct to Downtown water connection from Bowen, don't you think Cormorant Marine (Water Taxi company) would offer that service?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...