Transport Action BC

2016, July 25

TransLink Plans Should Change With New Circumstances

Filed under: Rapid Transit, Streetcar-LRT — Tags: , , , , — Rick @ 8:50 pm

Long time Transport 2000/Transport Action member, J. Bakker developed a rapid transit scenario for Vancouver as an alternative to the proposed Broadway SkyTrain extension to Arbutus. He based his discussion on several major infrastructure and political changes that have or will/may occur in Vancouver. The changes are significant enough that he feels a major re-think of rapid transit in the city is necessary. He also comments on the City of Vancouver’s apparent antipathy to Light Rail Transit and the limitations created by the length of Canada Line stations. Mr. Bakker sent his proposals to TransLink and the provincial minister responsible for TansLink, Peter Fassbinder. The responses thanked him for his efforts but were otherwise non-committal.

The proposals are presented for discussion and do not represent an official position of Transport Action BC.

=============================================================================================

TransLink Plans should change with new circumstances.

By

J. Bakker

Professor – Emeritus, Civil Engineering, University of Alberta

Recent Changes

  1. The first change is the relocation of St. Paul’s Hospital to a site North of the VIA/Bus station. Transit access to this site is poor and too far away from the Science Centre SkyTrain station.
  2. The second change is to remove the Georgia and Dunsmuir viaducts.
  3. The third change is the acquisition of the Arbutus Corridor.
  4. The fourth change is the destruction of the track between Olympic Village and Granville Island.
  5. The fifth change is that the Federal Government will fund half of the infrastructure costs.

Present Problems

There is an overload of passengers between Broadway and Downtown. Half or more than half (depending on time of year) of the passengers from the [Millenium] Evergreen Line transfer at Broadway to the Expo line causing the congestion. It is a problem now and will be a greater problem in the future. Students from the East extension of the [Millenium] Evergreen Line are more likely to go to Simon Fraser University.

The Canada Line Underground Stations have been under-designed, allowing only one unit trains. It is too expensive to extend the underground stations to lengthen trains to multiple units. While some capacity increase is possible, the Canada Line will not handle the growth forecasted for Metro Vancouver in the future.

First Solution

Extend the [Millenium] Evergreen Line from Clark VCC north along the VIA/Bus station (south entrance) and the future St. Paul Hospital (north entrance) and then go via a station at Hastings to Waterfront. Interline the Expo and [Millenium] Evergreen lines at Waterfront. Passengers can then reach downtown (Waterfront, Burrard and Granville Stations) without a transfer at Broadway/Commercial . This proposal will relieve the Broadway to Downtown section of the Expo Line. It will also provide better connections to the SeaBus (one instead of two transfers) and the Canada Line.

TransLink Rethink-Figure 1

Figure 1.         Map showing proposed [Millenium] Evergreen Line Extension to Downtown Vancouver and with its connections to other rail transit lines  [Base map by ccmaps]

Second Solution

It would mean that the Broadway Line would not use linear motor technology. If the Broadway line is built underground then it should use the same tunnel dimensions as the Canada Line but with longer stations. However initially a surface LRT line would suffice. The LRT [cost] estimate for a Broadway LRT line was high in comparison to an underground line. I suspect the reason was the requirement of a depot. This depot would take a block or so next to Broadway, an expensive land acquisition. With the purchase of the Arbutus Corridor a better location would be near the North Fraser River.

TransLink Rethink-Figure 2  

Figure 2.         Broadway at Cambie looking West with superimposed green Light Rail.

 

The design of a Broadway Line should be kept simple. Between the Broadway/Commercial and Arbutus, the Broadway right of way is adequate to accommodate a surface Light Rail line. If the line then uses the Arbutus right-of-way to 12 Avenue and then west along 12 Avenue to UBC, costs can be kept down. The stretch between Broadway and 12 Avenue on the former CP right of way is an ideal location for an interchange station with the Arbutus line described later.

The space used by the LRT should be grassed and landscaped where possible. The traffic signals would control the operations but would have to be retimed.

If and when the time comes to go underground, which may occur in stages, and then the infrastructure should be designed for the cross-section of the Canada Line, even if Light Rail units would operate there first. In Brussels staged construction was used. First there was surface line, then portions were placed underground, but tram equipment (or LRT) was still used. When the entire line was underground Metro equipment was used. The process took maybe 40 years.

 

 Light Rail is not a Cancer

It almost seems that the City of Vancouver views Light Rail technology as a cancer that must be eliminated. In 2010 the City and the Administrators of Granville Island invested $8.5 million for associated upgrades to the infrastructure to upgrade a Heritage Line. The two month operation used two Light Rail Vehicles (Bombardiers Flexity) from Brussels for the operation. The City considered the streetcar demonstration “a tremendous success”, with over 550,000 boardings during the two months of the experiment.[8] Bombardier received an award for “Exceptional Performance and Outstanding Achievement” at the 2010 CUTA awards, recognizing its operation of over 13,000 one-way trips with zero equipment failures, zero station delays and zero injuries. Mayor Robertson tried to purchase the Brussels streetcars, but was unsuccessful.

It is astonishing that the City is now destroying this investment. It has removed the overhead wire and is about to remove the tracks. This vandalism shows little respect for the taxpayers’ dollars and it should be questioned if Vancouver really deserves any transit infrastructure investment with this attitude.

The excuse is a housing development. Using air rights it is possible, to have both development and to maintain the tracks. However there has to be a will to preserve this path. Unfortunately the city seems to have a will to block any possible Light Rail path.

TransLink Rethink-Figure 3

Figure 3.             Development above LRT tracks in San Diego.

Light Rail is more Cost Effective

Light Rail will give more rail transit per dollar spend. At this point in time there is a great backlog as to where Rail Transit could be used. Rail Transit has a lower coefficient of friction between wheel and rail, than buses have been rubber and asphalt. Because Rail Transit is electrified it will have fewer emissions than diesel buses. Furthermore because of the rail guidance, productivity can be enhanced by coupling units, particularly in peak hours. To spend billions of dollars because some do not want to see transit and put it underground is waste of scarce dollars at this time. Many opponents seem to be unaware what landscaping can do to improve the visual impact of surface Light Rail Transit.

The Third Solution

Develop the Arbutus Corridor. Ultimately this line should go to the North Shore, but initially should go to the future St. Paul’s Hospital. When the North Shore portion is built the Arbutus to St. Paul‘s Hospital would become a shuttle connector.

 

The Design of the Canada Line Stations

The stations were designed to accommodate one unit trains. To limit the size of stations is astonishing, in light of the London Docklands experience. The London Docklands Light Rail was initially built privately by the Canada Warf Development. They built their stations (on overhead structure) for one unit trains (an articulated car with two sections). I visited the Docklands Light Rail project when it was running under test in 1981. The short stations were the first thing I noticed. In Edmonton the underground stations were built for five unit trains even though initial operations only required two units. I questioned my hosts on it and was told it was a cost saving measure. London Transport for London took over the line soon after start of operations. After a number of years it was found that they needed longer trains and so they extended all stations for two unit trains. Barely completed it was found they actually needed to use three unit train lengths. So they kept rebuilding and extending instead of preparing for growth.

The Canada Line this error was repeated, but it is worse because most stations on the Canada line are underground. Extending underground stations means shutting down the entire line for a few years and has a massive reconstruction job. All the station control equipment is located at the end of the platform.

There are ways to increase capacity somewhat. The present trains can be replaced with a three section articulated unit. Using the 3 metre spare space on the stations and having both ends protruding in the tunnel, capacity per train can be increased.

 

Building a Light Rail Relief Line is a Better Alternative

There is an imbalance in loads between the Airport line and the Richmond Line. Together with the limited ultimate capacity of the Canada Line, a relief line from Bridgeport via the Arbutus corridor is the best alternative. It will also be possible to extend this line further south into Richmond. Right of way should be preserved now.

Initially this line could go to the future St. Paul’s Hospital / Station location. However a study should be made if an LRT line can be placed under the Burrard Street Bridge (Space has been reserved for it in the piers), and then underground under Burrard. Such a line should be deep enough so that it can be extended to the North Shore in tunnel under Burrard Inlet. One of the problems with the Canada Line is that it is at the same elevation as the Expo Line at Waterfront and cannot be extended to the North. A deeper station would have made that possible.

With the City acquiring the Arbutus Corridor from the CPR, there are opportunities but also dangers. The critical portion is the curvy section between where the CP right-of-way bends away from Arbutus until it rejoins West Boulevard. The city must prevent encroachment of this right-of-way by gardeners and keep this portion available for two tracks of LRT.

There is a great opportunity though to combine landscape architecture and the Light Rail line. Such a design should include bike and footpaths with grassed Light Rail right-of-way.

TransLink Rethink-Figure 4

Figure 4.         This picture shows a Light Rail unit on a grassed right-of-way in Bordeaux superimposed on the Arbutus right-of-way.

 

TransLink Rethink-Figure 5

Figure 5.                     Schematic Map of the proposed Vancouver Rail Transit

 

Surrey LRT

In Surrey the transfer between the SkyTrain and the LRT should be made as convenient as possible. Cross platform interchange is the best and could be achieved at King George Station and the proposed line to Langley.

The Real Transportation Solution.

The real Transportation solution in the region remains to use cars in areas where there is no congestion and to use transit in areas where there is congestion. The transition is Park – And – Ride. It is unfortunate that TransLink imposed a charge on the South Surrey Park-and-Ride lot. A free parking structure would be a better solution and far more cost effective than a 10 lane bridge.

 

The Fifty Percent Federal Contribution.

The increased Federal contribution for Infrastructure from one third to one half should be applauded. However it should mean that more rail transit lines can be built, not that projects should be made more expensive because someone else is paying for it. The purpose of these investments is ultimately to serve passengers, not ribbon cutters.

With the many projects being submitted only the cost effective proposals should be  considered.

=============================================================================================

J. Bakker was born in The Netherlands in 1929. During World War II he learned what a `no oil’ society was like. In 1946 he went with his parents to the U.K. He went to school in England, graduated from Glasgow University in Civil Engineering in 1954, got his Diploma at Imperial College in 1955 and then went to Purdue University in Indiana. Here he got his M.S.C.E. (Transportation) in 1957. From 1957 to 1959 he was the engineer in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. In 1959 he joined the Faculty of Civil Engineering at the University of Alberta where he lectured in Highway Design and Public Transportation. He took early retirement in 1991 but stayed on half time until 1994. He also served ten years on the Council of St. Albert. In that time period it was taken from near bankruptcy to a thriving, financially sound community with controlled growth.

During his career, he consulted on Transit Networks and Timed Transfers with many Transit Systems. He was an advisor to Edmonton Transit and was involved in the construction of Edmonton’s North-East LRT line – the first North American Light Rail Line built since World War II. He set up the transit systems of St. Albert and Sherwood Park. In 1995 he was sub-consultant to Dillon Consulting Engineers and recommended the diesel LRT (O-Train) in Ottawa.

2016, June 13

Federal Transit Funding – 2

Peter Fassbender, provincial Minister Responsible for TransLink, responded to The David Suzuki Foundation’s open letter to various Metro Vancouver and provincial politicians urging them to come together to ensure Metro Vancouver receives a share of available federal transit funding. Unfortunately, the letter seems more aggravating than conciliatory to the Mayors’ Council.
The Minister re-commits the province’s oft-re-committed $246,000,000 as its contribution to Phase One of the Mayors’ Plan for Metro Vancouver’s transit future. Further in the letter, he states that the province’s “increased funding” (no figures or timing given) will ensure that Metro Vancouver does not miss out on federal funding. Tellingly, he refers to negotiating “bilateral agreements” with the federal government while, separately, working with the Mayors’ Council on local funding details. This seems to be telling the mayors that they are not welcome at the federal table and to let the ‘big boys’ negotiate the major funding agreements while they gather their pennies together.

 
Fassbender also commits the province to work with the mayors, through his Deputy Minister, to investigate how to capture some of the land development benefits (increased property values) that result from transit investments. It should be noted that property value increases are largest along rapid transit lines, which is only one component of the Mayors’ Plan, which includes major increases in bus service and several new B-Line (express) services. Rapid transit construction is long term so any benefits from increased property values are far in the future. How these values can be ‘taxed’ in the near term to support the Mayors’ Plan is not addressed? And in the Lower Mainland’s housing market, how would it be possible to differentiate, for taxation purposes, between increased property values due to transit investment and those caused by market demand.

 
After dictating to the Mayors that the province will handle federal negotiations, that they must deal with a Deputy Minister on taxing future, transit-related property value increases, and that they “confirm details of [their] respective funding commitments.” with him, Fassbender categorically states the province will not change the TransLink governance structure to give the mayors more control over how the agency spends the tax dollars the mayors are mandated to raise.

 
Rather insultingly, he states they can attend TransLink board meetings, as individuals with no voting rights, to “share their views”. Apparently, this could lead to greater confidence that the board is spending tax dollars to benefit the region.

 
None of this augurs well for an early agreement between the province and the Mayors’ Council on the transit funding issue.

 
Minister Fassbender’s letter is attached here – Minister Fassbender Letter to Mayors-2016-05-30.

2016, May 23

Federal Transit Funding

The David Suzuki Foundation  is urging BC and Metro Vancouver’s political leaders to put aside their differences and create a common front to negotiate transit funding with the federal government. The Foundation sent an open letter to various politicians on May 18, 2016. Transport Action BC is a signatory to this letter.
The federal government has started providing funding ($840 million to Toronto; $900,000 to Whitehorse) to other centres so it is urgent for BC’s politicians to work together and put forward a unified stance when dealing Ottawa on the transit funding issue.

The text of the letter follows.

=====================================================================

5/18/2016

The Hon. Christy Clark
Premier of British Columbia
Office of the Premier

Metro Vancouver Mayors’ Council

Cc: Hon. Todd Stone; Hon. Peter Fassbender

Re: A call for leadership to invest in transit and transportation in Metro Vancouver

Dear Premier Clark and Members of the Mayors’ Council,

We the undersigned are a diverse group of organizations from business, labour, health, environment and student associations working together to advocate for investment in Metro Vancouver’s transportation system.

We are writing to urge you to act quickly and take advantage of the opportunity afforded by the recent federal budget to improve transit and transportation in our region. As you know, in its budget, the federal government made a commitment to a $370 million “down payment” toward the 10-year Metro Vancouver Transit and Transportation Plan. The federal government has also shown tremendous leadership by agreeing to pay 50 per cent of all capital transit costs provided agreements can be struck with the province and local mayors.

These commitments have changed the landscape for transit funding in our region, but with this opportunity comes a challenge: we need to be ready with regional and provincial funding, or else these federal dollars, collected from local taxpayers, will go to other cities and provinces that are ready. For the good of our economy and the health and livelihood of citizens, this cannot happen. We are calling on the province and the Mayors’ Council to work together to ensure that we are ready to get Metro Vancouver moving again.

Expansion of transit services — especially when they’re electrified — is crucial for Metro Vancouver to improve air quality and health, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote economic development and job growth.

A growing number of studies confirm that congestion costs our region more than $1 billion each year due to lost productivity, increased operating costs and lost business revenue and regional GDP. It has been estimated that investment in transit could save the health care system at least $115 million annually, and likely considerably more if the benefits of increased physical activity were also included as part of the cost-savings analysis.

We ask you show leadership by putting history and political differences aside to work together and ensure we are ready to take full advantage of federal support and start improving transit and transportation. Adding new federal dollars is an essential prerequisite for moving ahead with stalled transit improvements so badly needed for the Metro Vancouver region, and for B.C. as a whole.

Lastly, we wanted to take this opportunity to highlight the importance of using newly available federal funds to implement the full set of regional transportation improvements outlined in the Mayors’ Council Transportation and Transit Plan rather than a few projects here and there. A regional approach to transportation investments will ensure that Metro Vancouver residents and businesses throughout the region will benefit. Local and provincial governments have the power to help us make history in B.C. and Metro Vancouver through implementation of a world-class provincial and regional transportation plan.

Should you require more information, we would be happy to meet with you or your staff.

Thank you for considering this request.

 BC Federation of Labour
 BC Healthy Living Alliance
 BC Teachers’ Federation
 British Columbia Golf
 Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
 Clean Energy Canada
 Connecting Environmental Professionals – Vancouver Chapter
 The David Suzuki Foundation
 Dialog Design
 Disability Alliance BC
 Downtown Surrey Business Improvement Association
 Downtown Vancouver Association
 Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association
 Dr. Lisa J. Jing Mu, Medical Health Officer, Fraser Region
 ForestEthics
 Gordon Price, Director of the SFU City Program
 Graduate Student Society at SFU
 Greenpeace Canada
 HandyDART Riders Alliance
 HASTe BC
 Heart and Stroke Foundation
 HUB Cycling
 Offsetters
 Perkins+Will Architects
 Peter Ladner, Columnist, Business in Vancouver Media Group
 Public Health Association of BC
 Renewal Funds Company
Transport Action – British Columbia
 Vanterre Projects Corp
 Victoria Lee MD MPH MBA CCFP FRCPC, Chief Medical Health Officer, Fraser Health Authority

2016, April 18

Robson Street to be Closed to Transit

The following was submitted by Transport Action BC to the Vancouver Sun as an op-ed piece. It was written in response to the City of Vancouver staff report recommending that the 800 block (Robson Square) of Robson Street be permanently closed to all vehicles, including transit. This proposal requires a permanent re-route of the 5-Robson bus along Burrard and Pender Streets.

The Sun declined to print the submission.

=================================================================================

Making Robson Square in Vancouver more welcoming to people is a great idea, if it is inclusive, accessible, and is not built at the expense of accessibility to other destinations.

However, if Vancouver wants more than a pedestrian island between two thoroughfares, it should start from a pedestrianisation strategy, making sure that pedestrianisation is not done at the expense of accessibility but enhances it and supports the city’s retail sector. Walking and cycling support many travel purposes but they have limitations in range and the ability to meet certain needs. Weather conditions, cumbersome shopping bags, travelling with children, personal mobility challenges or simply being tired are all issues that factor into a decision on how to travel: a good city transit network is needed to complement other active transportation modes, and to make sure access to the city core does not discriminate against people based on their ability to walk or cycle.

Many European cities recognize that vibrant pedestrian spaces must be accessible and inclusive for people of all abilities. Furthermore, with an ultimate goal to reduce auto usage in their centres, their pedestrian spaces are not built at the expense of transit. Rather, transit is seen as the connecting spine of pedestrian spaces. That is why European cities have mastered the art of seamless and safe integration of transit into their pedestrian realms. This is a recipe also successfully applied in Denver’s 16th Sreet Mall.

The importance of transit to the success of pedestrian places was recognized by Arthur Erickson in 1974, when he was envisioning Robson Square: “The only traffic through the Square will be inner city buses, linking the West End and False Creek. Since buses function as people movers, they are seen as a compliment or enhancement to the pedestrian activity of the civic square…”.

The foundation principles for a good transit network, upon which a good pedestrianisation policy can be built, are well-known, and were recognized in the 1975 Vancouver downtown bus review . The most important is to have direct routes going straight to the center of gravity of an area to minimize walking. That is how the downtown bus grid network was built, why retail strips gather along it, and why the current Robson bus route is well patronized with over 3,000,000 passengers per year. A detour to avoid Robson Square may mean little for a motorist but for a transit customer, it means a less legible route with compromised connections to the rest of the network. It forces transit users on a circuitous routing, eliminates the quickest and most direct connections to the rapid transit system, penalises riders who wish to transfer to southbound buses on Granville, and inserts a gap in the transit grid on one of downtown’s few major east/west transit routes. Ultimately it results in a less accessible Robson retail strip, as well as a less inclusive Robson Square for the most vulnerable people.

Closing Robson Square to transit fails on all counts of accessibility and inclusiveness. Additionally TransLink estimates that the bus detour could add $300,000.00 to the route’s annual operating cost. Will the City cover those additional costs?

Robson Square has been a popular downtown meeting spot but the Canada Line opening and recent proposals for the VAG North Plaza indicate that a square facing Georgia Street could be the new ‘natural’ meeting place downtown since it closer to rapid transit and regional bus services than Robson Square.

Prudence dictates that a decision to close the 800 block of Robson should be delayed until the VAG North Plaza changes are completed and their impact evaluated. A successful public space rehabilitation of the North Plaza could render the Robson closure anachronistic, and even be detrimental to the North plaza success, without granting success to the Robson Square, since the level of pedestrian activity may not be great enough to activate both squares.

Rather than a case by case street closure policy built at the expense of transit and inclusion of people of all abilities, a better approach is to learn from the successes in Europe and North America, to develop an effective and ambitious pedestrian oriented space strategy; which doesn’t necessarily mean full closure of streets; but which is articulated around an efficient transit network, to effectively reduce the presence of cars in downtown without compromising its accessibility and inclusiveness.

2016, February 1

Transport Action BC Meeting Feb 22

Filed under: Announcement, meeting — Tags: , — Matthew @ 9:42 pm

The next Transport Action BC Meeting will be:

Monday February 22nd 2016

7pm to 9pm

Waves Coffee Shop on Howe St at Smithe

Vancouver, BC

 

2015, December 4

Transport Action BC 2015 AGM

Filed under: Announcement, meeting — Tags: , — Matthew @ 11:41 pm

Transport Action British Columbia’s Annual General Meeting will be held this month on Thursday December 10th.

7 pm to 9 pm
Waves Coffee House Howe
100-900 Howe St. (at Smithe Street)
Vancouver, BC
The AGM will occur first, followed by the regular meeting immediately after. We will meet in the small meeting room on the right when you come in from Howe St. It seat eight, but there is room for some more chairs.
RSVP to bc@transport-action.ca
Waves

2015, February 17

Transport Action BC Meeting Thurday Feb 19th

Filed under: Announcement — Tags: — Matthew @ 11:24 am

Transport Action BC Meeting

Thursday Feb 19th 2015
Vancouver BC

http://bc.transport-action.ca/

18:30 – 20:30 (6:30 – 8:30 PM) (Room Available at 18:15)
Terry Salman Library, 4575 Clancy Loranger Way (Route 33 eastbound from King Ed Station)

Terry Salman Branch of the Vancouver Public Library
http://www.vpl.ca/branches/details/terry_salman_branch

TransLink Bus #33
http://infomaps.translink.ca/Public_Timetables/89/tt033.pdf

Open Public Transport Lines Map
http://openptmap.org/?zoom=15&lat=49.24564&lon=-123.11279&layers=0B000TFTT

Meeting Location

Meeting Location details

Meeting Location details

2014, December 17

SkyTrain Expo Line Station Upgrade Project – 1

Filed under: Buses, city transit, Pedestrian, Rapid Transit, Regional transit — Tags: , , , — Rick @ 10:05 pm

TransLink is upgrading several Expo Line SkyTrain stations. The upgrades are needed due to the age (some are almost 30 years old) of the stations and to improve passenger flow, accessibility, capacity and security. This is a large, multi-year project. Details are found here. The second phase of public consultation for Joyce-Collingwood and Metrotown Stations was recently completed. Transport Action BC is supportive of this project but has some concerns based on information provided during the latest round of public consultations.

TransLink (TL) responded to the concerns on January 15, 2015.

Joyce-Collingwood Station : The Joyce-Collingwood Station east station house exits are underused while the bus loop (west station house) generates significant congestion at its exits. Also, note that Route 43 generates pedestrian congestion between Bus Bay 5 (Joyce St., south of Vanness Ave.) and the station. The long-term vision addresses these issues but the current project phasing does not as it only proposes to upgrade the east station house. The re-location of the Joyce-Collingwood Station bus loop should be concurrent with the east station house upgrade to improve the transit customer experience.

TL – The East Station House is being upgraded first as a result of the Upgrade project’s key goal of doubling the Expo Line’s capacity. The project’s funding agreement with senior governments is conditional on addressing this goal.

At the December 1, 2014 open house, it was mentioned that the bus loop re-location required more funding to acquire the necessary land. The City of Vancouver owns this land so an agreement allowing TransLink to use it, without purchasing it, should not be impossible to negotiate. A funding shortfall could be addressed by re-scheduling the installation of the bike storage room.

TL – The land parcel in question is not owned by the City of Vancouver. The purchase cost exceeds the current project’s budget. The land will be acquired when funds become available and a purchase agreement is negotiated.

Issues with the long-term vision include: • There will be several intersections (streets, laneways and bus loop entrances) in this short section of Joyce St. These may negatively impact pedestrian, transit and traffic operations around the station. TransLink and the City of Vancouver should work together and consider merging laneways and bus loop access/egress to mitigate excessive mode conflicts. This will especially be true at the northeast access from Joyce St. as redevelopment of 5050 Joyce St. is proposed.

TL – TransLink and the City of Vancouver are working to improve station area safety. Laneway access issues are within the scope of this effort.

• The bike storage area could be better located next to the east station house rather than in the middle of re-located bus loop which is seen to be very busy.

TL – The proposed bike storage area is within the East Station House as this is the closest station location to the densest part of the neighbourhood. Minimising conflicts between cyclists and other station users is being addressed by TransLink and the City of Vancouver.

• Similarly, the taxi stand could be located nearer the east station house to improve accessibility and visibility from station exits and Joyce Street.

TL – The taxi stand will be located as close to the East Station House as safely possible. Bus stops will be located immediately next to the station house, allowing safe and convenient transfers.

Metrotown Station: The proposed design re-locates the “major bus routes” to the south side of Central Boulevard. Thus, buses will be facing southeast as they load but their destination is west (Routes 49, 430) and north Willingdon (Routes 129, 130). This is a concern because it implies routing these vehicles along Central Boulevard, Imperial Street and Willingdon to route. This will increase passenger travel time by several minutes for those heading west and north. It will also increase operating costs of these routes.

TL – TransLink acknowledges that travel time for routes 49, 129, 130 and 430 will increase by several minutes under the proposed service design using South Central Boulevard. However, these are the busiest routes serving Metrotown. The design allows direct drop-off and pick-up at the station, improving connectivity between SkyTrain and surface routes. The City of Burnaby was involved in the development of this service design, ensuring “neighbourhood integration plans” were considered. [Rick: the decision to increase travel time on Route 49 is somewhat ironic. TransLink’s service optimisation identified the Champlain Heights jog on this route as a candidate for elimination – to reduce customer travel time]

We suggest that Bus Bay assignments be reviewed to reduce passenger travel time and operating costs. For example: • Routes 49, 129, 130 and 430 drop-off on South Central Boulevard and pick-up in the existing bus loop. • Routes arriving from east Central Boulevard drop-off on North Central Boulevard and pick-up on South Central Boulevard, east of the existing bus loop. • Local Routes C6, C7 and 116, serving South Burnaby drop-off and pick-up on North Beresford Street. We also suggest that the design of the station houses be refined to maximize the waiting area for bus patrons along South Central Boulevard and reduce the walking distance between the SkyTrain platform and bus bays. A direct pedestrian access to the bus loop island from the passerelle should be considered as well. These concerns have been given to TransLink. We will update as responses become available.

2014, December 5

“BC on the Move” Online Survey Closes Soon

The BC Government’s online survey for its latest 10 year transportation plan closes on Friday, Dec. 12, 2014.

Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Todd Stone announced the next 10-year transportation plan (“BC on the Move”) and consultation in October 2014. Consultation documents and details are here. Take the survey here.

SFU’s Gordon Price notes that funding for the planned projects is not subject to voter approval even though Vancouver area transit projects are subject to a “Yes” vote in the upcoming transit funding referendum. According to Price, the plan continues the province’s current highway projects with a bit of a sop thrown to cycling and transit.

The plan does mention rail but only as a mode for moving bulk goods and containers efficiently. Improvements to / support of intercity bus and rail passenger services are not considered.

2014, November 13

A Proposal for Transit on Broadway

Filed under: city transit — Tags: , , , , , — Matthew @ 10:06 pm

This proposal for transit linking Broadway/Commercial SkyTrain station to UBC was sent to us from Adam Fitch. It was posted to stimulate discussion about transit options for the Broadway/UBC corridor and doesn’t represent the views of Transport Action BC.

Tunnel_vs_Green

PDF Presentation:  Tunnel Vision vs Green Vision PPP Nov 6 2014

Some of our comments on this proposal are:

  • It misses a lot of the major transit destinations along Broadway such as VGH, Central Broadway business district, West Broadway
  • Some of the areas especially along 16th Ave are quite low density now and likely in the future
  • The cost estimates are ballpark and don’t reflect some of the estimates done in more rigorous studies.
Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.