Frances Bula header image 2

UBC anxiety ramps up at talk of a two-phase approach to building Broadway rapid-transit line

November 27th, 2012 · 159 Comments

Council heard an update today from its engineers on plans for the line which answers some of these questions. I’ll be posting that story later. In the meantime, here’s what I had today

And, for keen readers, here is belatedly the story that came out of council on the city’s position re the Broadway line.

 

Direct light-rail line to campus the way to go, UBC says

By FRANCES BULA

University maintains the mayor’s proposed two-phase project “is just not a solution’

UBC is urging the city to advocate for a rapid-transit line all the way out to the university right away.

Officials say the two-phase system for the Broadway line, which Mayor Gregor Robertson has been pitching, is not workable for them.

UBC has 140,000 people a day coming and going from the campus by transit, with nothing but increases on the horizon. The Broadway B-Line bus service, which currently connects the campus on the western tip of the city peninsula with a Commercial Drive station in east Vancouver, frequently has to pass up people waiting at bus stops during peak hours.

A two-phase rapid-transit line “is just not a solution,” said Pascal Spothelfer, the university’s vice-president of community partnerships. “Over 50 per cent of our passenger volume coming to UBC is by transit. That’s despite the fact that a large number of people are being passed up.”

Having a line all the way out to the university will spark even more of a transformation at UBC in how people get there and how the university develops, he said.

“It is a real game-changer, a generational shift.”

Mr. Robertson said recently the city is advocating to regional transportation authority TransLink for a first phase along Broadway with a tunnelled SkyTrain to Arbutus – an option everyone knows is going to be expensive.

From there, he said, rapid buses could take people the rest of the way to UBC, and a SkyTrain could be extended to the campus at some undefined point in the future.

The extension was supposed to have come quickly after the Millennium Line was built from Coquitlam to Vancouver in 2001.

But it was moved down the queue after the province pushed for the Canada Line to be built in time for the Olympics.

TransLink is currently reviewing plans for the Broadway extension, along with plans for a light-rail extension for Surrey.

But UBC is saying that it might be better to build one cheaper light-rail line in order to get the whole route covered within TransLink’s budget, instead of one expensive SkyTrain for half and then buses for the other half.

“I’d rather see whatever the solution is to be a complete solution,” said Mr. Spothelfer.

Mr. Spothelfer said the two-phase solution just moves the problem down the line for the passengers trying to get across town.

“So if a train is full, do we have 20 buses waiting to take them?”

A two-phase approach also guarantees that UBC wouldn’t get rapid transit until some long-distant new round of funding, because TransLink typically only takes on a big transit expansion once a decade.

“If we miss this opportunity, it’s not like this will come back in the next two years. If a line gets built to Arbutus with no continuation to UBC now, only my grandchildren will get it.”

University officials are hoping that they hear a new message from the city as soon as Tuesday, with Vancouver’s two top engineers scheduled to give an update on the Broadway-line plans.

The university and city have been in a “very active dialogue” since the mayor made his remarks about a two-phase approach 10 days ago, said Mr. Spothelfer.

UBC has seen its students, staff and faculty shift their commuting patterns dramatically in the past 14 years, going from 77 per cent private-vehicle use to 43 per cent.

About 138,900 transit trips are now made to and from the university on an average weekday.

Mr. Spothelfer pointed out that the university is the province’s third-largest employer, with a huge number of commuters. It also has a large number of its medical students and faculty travelling regularly to the growing hospital-and-research precinct near Broadway and Oak, which is about 10 kilometres east of the university.

The mayor’s reference to a two-phase solution with buses came as news to the university.

“I was a bit surprised by him bringing up the buses again,” said Mr. Spothelfer.

He said he understands the city’s priority is serving the density it has along Broadway.

“They’re pretty set in what serves their immediate purpose.”

But he and others at the university are anxious to prove that serving UBC with good transit sooner rather than later is also in the city’s interest.

.

 

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Roger Kemble

    Moronic Blowviator @ #88. . . a presence only at stations every kilometer . . .” and as I understand an exchange from subway to surface at Arbutus. Do you realize what devastation that will bring to Broadway? Do you understand how sparsely spaced that subway access is? Do you understand how unnecessary . . . .

    I am not nearly as well travelled in Europe as Voony et al: indeed it is debt ridden, angry, about to erupt. Biblioteca Tobiac, despite the visible L’s shaped chunks, is 95% underground, well connected to the renowned Paris sewage system. Huh, I prefer the new world.

    Of course the real solution to out TX problems is incrementalization . . .

    http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/1yorkshirelad/vancouver.re-boot/Vancouver.re-boot.html

    . . . but that is way beyond the intellectual capacity of the Trinketeers . . . n’est pas?

    Sin embargo it will dawn eventually: hopefully not too late!

    I attended a Wood Works conference sponsored by the Canadian Wood Council at NCC yesterday: there were maybe 80+/- there.

    Lunch was served in front of E. J. Hughes’ magnificent mural depicting Capt. Malaspina at Nootka. Noticeable, of the 80 or so attendees, not one noticed the mural, NOT ONE. That explains why, as all of a sudden, latterly, as an after thought, street aesthetics has crept into this conversation, it will be long forgot when, and if, the drilling starts.

    We have a long way to go when it comes to urban aesthetics: why have I only read of it here today. I have bin pushing it for months and judging by my stats with huge audience (but very sparse Vancouver: professional jealousy run rampant!)

    An exchange at Arbutus (how many hectares to park awaiting buses) will change the place but for the better is . . . errrrrr . . . problematic: indeed I am very familiar with that intersection but . . .

    Since we are on about European cities, I prefer to cite La Ciudad, were the Chapultepec exchange is, wow, huge: what with turn around and clearance space etc. Of course Vancouver is not DF but proportionately the TXX will still be huge.

    Access every km? When you get old and withered Bloviator you may appreciate the folly of that metric!

    So far as UBC access is concerned, its vice-president for community relations has a more vivid take than all us miss-informed gossips combined.

  • rico

    Rodger, Rodger, Rodger…After the subway gets built you can still take the #9 local. Won’t need to go underground and travel a damp and dark tunnel smelling of sewage and possibly having trolls and ogres living in it.

  • Roger Kemble

    PS For area TXX Arbutus read area TXX UBC . . . a whopper!

    Biblioteca Tobiac = I>Biblioteca Tolbiac . . .

  • Richard

    @Roger

    When I’m old and grey, I will appreciate not having to dodge surface LRT or having to hurry up and scurry along when the train is a comin.

    In Toronto, I saw a woman who was having trouble getting her walker over the tracks in the street. Would be scary if that train was a comin.

    In Sacramento a couple of weeks ago, a person was accidentally dumped out of a wheelchair onto the tracks by the person pushing them. One of them was killed.

    So for me when I’m old, I’d much rather have the train safely underground. There will be the 9 for short trips and electric wheelchairs are getting better all the time.

    Lets hope that three billion buys more than one elevator per station.

    Anyway, they are proposing the LRT only stops every one km anyway. Unless, of course, it has to slam on the breaks to avoid hitting someone.

  • guest

    One of the purported problems with LRT on Broadway is that stops will be LRT-distanced apart – i.e. 1 km apart (it’s an LRT, not a streetcar – see CoV slideshow for distinction between the two).
    But the narrowing of the street (one lane each way for cars west of MacDonald) would make the running of a local No. 9 bus difficult (or at least a hinderance for other road users)

  • Rico

    Good comment Guest, any idea what the plan to deal with that is?

  • MB

    @ Lewis

    Street aspect ratios while an important consideration are not the only metric. Architectural character, lighting, materials selection etcetera can make or break an outdoor room regardless of height to width ratios and sun penetration.

    I also believe that protection from the winter rain is imperative. When the sun is only 18 degrees off the horizon in winter and it’s pelting down one doesn’t worry about building shadows. Winter rain is one of the least mitigated design response here. Your classical geometries seem to be all located in Mediterranean climes. The Coast Salish long house and their orientation to a gravel beach (making a village of West Coast ancient classical aspect and geometrics) could be just as appropriate.

    While there may be some principles derived from Euro centric villages, there is an entire other world out there. I’d say there are guidelines and clues regarding urban design in history, but certainly no rules as hard and fast as the laws of physics.

  • Frank Ducote

    From the ever-helpful web, here is an apt definition of bloviate: “to discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner.”

    I always enjoy adding to my vocabulary. Now knowing what this word means, I think most of us here can figure out who the real bloviater is!

    On a more serious note, can people not figure out how to disagree without name-calling and use of intimidation and bullying tactics?

  • EastVancouverite

    I’ve lived in Toronto for the past year and find myself on St Clair Ave West with some regularity. This corridor was rebuilt to upgrade traditional streetcar service to a higher order mode that benefits from a dedicated right of way with in-street stations and a degree of signal priority. It is quite similar to the Spadina streetcar route, which also has a dedicated right of way, and primarily in-street stations. Translink’s mulitple LRT configurations for the UBC Line all bear a great deal of similarity to the St Clair West streetcar corridor, with the exception of much wider stop spacing.

    Based on my experience the St Clair streetcar route is significantly better than conventional streetcar service. It is noticeably quicker; gets held up at fewer intersections; provides more weather protection than an average streetcar stop; and provides a dramatic increase in safety for disembarking passengers since cars cannot zoom by its open doors. With all of that said, it is not even close to being in the same league as a subway.

    In no way, shape, or form is it a superior option for cross-town travel than the Bloor Danforth subway to the south. Despite numerous intersection closures, the St Clair streetcars still routinely get held up at larger intersections and the presence of these, plus the numerous stops, limits the amount of distance one can ravel in a given amount of time. Moreover, the in-street stations are open the elements and exceptionally narrow. This makes for an uncomfortable passenger experience during peak periods. Most platforms are little wider than the residential sidewalk one would find on a side street. Two people can stand abreast but no more. Furthermore, it takes quite a while to clear the station and many departing passengers miss the crosswalk cycle because of platform congestion and end up crossing during breaks in traffic.

    I think that St Clair-style rights of way are fantastic and are the best-practice for providing streetcar/tram service in-street. If a time comes when Vancouver’s trolleys are upgraded to rail, St Clair-style rights of way and stations are the way to go. However, for a main line of the regional rapid transit network, an in-street light rail system that resembles the St Clair route is not going to be comparable to what can be provided by a metro-style system like a tunnelled extension of SkyTrain to UBC.

    Ultimately I think what is being debated are competing visions of the future of Vancouver. I see it as necessary to connect the 2nd and 3rd largest destinations in Metro Vancouver to the regional rapid transit system. I see it is necessary to put these regionally-important centres of employment, education, services, and housing within reach of the most number of people via the shortest travel times.

    Professor Condon argued that ‘speed is obsolete’ in a well publicized dialogue with transit consultant Jarrett Walker of Human Transit. I respectfully disagree when the UBC Line is concerned. While there are laudable short, medium, and long-term land use benefits from constraining mobility, there are also severe penalties in the form of congestion, discomfort, and time investment for the hundreds of thousands of people who travel to Central Broadway and West Broadway, and UBC every day, to say nothing of those who depart from these locales to destinations throughout the City of Vancouver and the rest of the region. The Network Effect is powerful, and there will be tremendous benefits for the entire network to be gained by extending rapid transit to some of the region’s largest destinations along Broadway and ultimately at UBC.

  • Terry m

    Roger KEmble
    If it wasn’t foryourbloviator reference, your comment would’ve really interesting!

  • Silly Season

    Frank #104 and Terry #105. Hear, hear.

    Children, please…it’s Christmas…

    (or the seasonal holiday of your preference…)

  • Richard

    @MB

    Well said.

    Here I’d settle for some decent rain protection, colour (and no, I don’t consider beige, dull green and grey colour) and high quality smooth walking surfaces (and no, exposed aggregate concrete is not a quality surface). How tall or short the buildings are is far less relevant.

  • Roger Kemble

    I’d be very wary enlisting Lewis’s help Moronic Bloviator @ #103. Lewis, given his head will strut Nazi-Gauleiter like as if he were just off the Admiral Graf Spee (which, I believe secretly, he is)!

    He’ll turn Safeway into an all Krier-like Great Hypostyle Hall, Greekoid Cariatydes standing sentinel at the checkout. I’ve watched him do it.

    And we see the gullible, here, stretch their buttocks to keep in line. Their comments come steeped a morass of Vancouver’s coagulated fear: yunno “ganging up to whistle at the girls across the street (Pierre Berton). Wouldn’t know a pretty place if JCI Vanc put it on a ramp for the fashion mags!

    I’d stick to floggin’ real estate if I were you Bolvie!

    Go back to having tea with the ladies Frank @ #104. What the hell do you know sitting at your desk for eleven years, waiting for your pay cheque. Take that ring out of your nose!

    Good urban design is not about decreeing tram stops every 1km but rather placing them where they are needed: and applying that principle to every aspect of the urban environment.

    My comments ARE interesting Terry m @ #105. Listen up!

    Season’s greetings, all. QED

  • rico

    I guess interesting is relative in general I only skim your comments to see if you said something so offensive it demands a reply. Technically your last comment did not quite cut it but I am a bit bored…by the way most mature transit cities have ‘local’ type services and ‘regional’ type services so if you in a rush or just on your regular commute you can take the Metro or RER etc. If it is abeautiful sunny day and you are afraid of ogres under ground you can take a local bus or tram. Since we already have a good local service #9 and most of the demand is for regional or fast service (compare the ridership of the 99 to the 9) it seems to a waste of resources to put a tram stop every 100m. That is why the options being studied are LRT type services and Skytrain/metro type services. I don’t think any reasonable people are proposing tram services on Broadway.

  • Frank Ducote

    Roger – you are a truly sad and pathetic human being.

  • Norman

    No trams, please. They wouldn’t improve the current capacity problem, they operate at street level, interacting with traffic and worst of all, they require operators. I have no desire to ever again be at the mercy of unionized transit operators.

  • MB

    I miss Urbanisimo. Now all we have Kemble ‘blo’ jobs.

    I’m not offended at the name calling … sticks and stones & all that. But it is amazing that some people have a phenomenal capacity to militate against their own life experience by walking square into a hole they dug themselves.

    Perhaps it’s time for a Zen moment.

    Mo.

  • Roger Kemble

    http://theyorkshirelad.ca/5poetry/About%20ants/about.ants.html

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    Richard 29:

    That was true 50 years ago but times have changed. For young people cell phones and iPads are the shiny trinkets and status symbols. Many can’t be bothered with driving, it distracts from using the iPhone. The auto industry is so freaked out, the are designing cars that are basically giant iPhones with wheels.

    The Golden Ears Bridge is costing taxpayers $30 million a year as the usage is way below peojections. It is turning into the White Elephant Bridge. The Port Mann Bridge will likely be the same. Even American are driving less.

    I’ve seen this point made on various threads where urbanists seem to congregate on the web, that people are driving less kilometres. And based on this notion that their total distances are less, assume to loosely extrapolate to say other things such as there are less drivers or that it’s indicative of a trend.

    But then there’s this that puts the kibosh to all sorts of extrapolations:

    Cdn auto sales on road to near record year, with 1.6M sold in first 11 months

    …”A solid December is widely expected, and Canada has a chance at breaching the 1.7 million unit mark, potentially making 2012 one of the best-ever years for new vehicle sales in this country,” Dennis DesRosiers said in a report…

    http://thechronicleherald.ca/wheelsnews/216974-cdn-auto-sales-on-road-to-near-record-year-with-16m-sold-in-first-11-months

  • keith♠

    The way to pay for these new transit lines is to have separate fares.
    For example; 50,000 riders paying $2 per ride each way over the next 40 years would amount to $4Billion, more than enough for a new Broadway Line.

  • Richard

    @TOTB

    Read it closely. It says “near record”. With increasing population, ever year should be a record year unless, of course, people are buying fewer cars.

    Anyway, car ownership does not mean people are using them a lot. The Netherlands has high car ownership rates but many just sit in the garage while people cycle for their everyday trips.

    The article is mostly auto industry hype. Something they are excellent at.

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    Richard, you were trying to suggest that auto makers are fearful that younger people are opting to replace automobiles with iPhones. The point is that making groundless assumptions based on loose extrapolation is that it appears you are only kidding yourself, as it appears to this cyclist and auto driver.

    I’ve read other anecdotal claims like the millennials are opting not get their driver’s license. Right. So those near record auto sales are thanks in large part to Gen X+ migrants who won’t be driving.

    I also note it’s a CP article, and a story that is being covered by multiple media outlets.

  • Richard

    @TOTB

    Please think about it. Near record means less than record which means fewer than record. Anyway it is spun, it still means less cars are being sold.

    And again, the population is increasing so the per capita sales are decreasing even more.

    As well, many people avoided buying vehicles over the last few years due to the recession. This is just likely a blip as people are buying now after delaying purchases for years.

    The auto industry is really scared because young people just don’t care that much about driving and cars as older people.

  • spartikus

    Analyzing U.S. Department of Transportation statistics, a team from the University of Michigan’s Transportation Research Institute last November found that while 46% of 16-year-olds had a driver’s licence in 1983, that proportion dropped to just 31% in 2008. And it isn’t just a matter of tougher licensing requirements for teenagers. (Virtually all states have moved to graduated licensing and more expensive, privatized driver instruction.) The percentage of 20- to 24-year-olds with licences declined to 82% from 92%.

    http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/90784–car-use-declining-in-north-america

  • spartikus

    And another (it’s probably the same survey)…

    A University of Michigan survey of 15 countries found that in areas where a lot of young people use the internet, fewer than normal have driving licences. A global survey of teen attitudes by TNS, a consultancy, found that young people increasingly view cars as appliances not aspirations, and say that social media give them the access to their world that would once have been associated with cars.

    http://www.economist.com/node/21563280

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    Also from the economist article:

    And more people owning cars—rather than longer journeys—has been the prime driver of traffic growth in the past.

    Pssst, Spartikus a few posts back in the thread about the Arbutus development, you had posted that theatrical attendance was down. You quoted from a source who’s business and interest is renovating theatres to the new niche luxury seating/catering standard. And while they may have sourced their graph from the MPAA, they neglected to indicate that box office revenue was at an all time high.

    Off topic? The point is about being careful extrapolating to make conclusive statements. It seems to be lost here and it doesn’t help with credibility.

  • gman

    I see that two most livable cities reports just came out,one had Vienna as number one and the other had Melbourne as number one.What these two cities have in common are tram systems…….don’t these people understand the carnage these trams cause.LOL

  • gman

    Vienna in the morning,its just crazy,or maybe not.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sXGi20bReE&playnext=1&list=PLFDC297AC2F62EB17&feature=results_video

  • Richard

    Vienna also has great subway and regional rail networks. I doubt that they would even consider a tram or surface rail for a major regional connection like the Broadway Line. Surface trams running at low speeds with lots of stops are fine for short local trips or accessing the Metro but they are not rapid transit.

  • Richard

    Further to my last post, the average speed of the trams is 15.7kph as opposed to 32.4khp for the Metro.

    http://www.spoudmet.civil.upatras.gr/2003/pdf/en/09_04.pdf

  • Richard

    And the Metro gets almost three times the ridership with one third the distance compared to the tram network. That is around nine times the ridership per km. It is pretty clear that people like to use fast grade separated transit.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiener_Linien#section_3

  • gman

    Richard I wouldn’t call a 5 or 6 mile trip to UBC a long run.More cities are looking back to track sharing like Karlsruhe,there is a definite advantage to having a common track gauge that allows different styles of trams and trains to use the same tracks and that’s not possible with skytrains third rail.Modern trams are very capable of speeds equal to skytrain.I believe skytrains average speed is 45kph.But it is track specific and requires separation all the time.Trams are much more versatile for future extensions.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train

    Trams can also be equipped with a retractable shoe to pick up the third rail on already existing sky train lines and leave the elevated line to loop through neighborhoods avoiding huge congestion on platforms.

  • Richard

    @gman

    You miss the entire point. It does not matter how fast the tram can go, it is how fast it can safely go in a given environment. On Broadway, with all the pedestrian crossings, that is not very fast at all.

    What extensions? Where would a tram go from UBC? Naniamo?

    Again you miss another critical point. It is a regional connection, not just a connection from Commercial to UBC. Many people will start in Burnaby, Port Moody or Coquitlam. That is a much longer trip. Faster more frequent SkyTrain and no transfer at Commercial could save many people up to half an hour everyday. That is a huge difference.

  • spartikus

    Off topic? The point is about being careful extrapolating to make conclusive statements. It seems to be lost here and it doesn’t help with credibility.

    Said the person making conclusive statements.

    I’m sorry, should we ignore the trendline of the data of multiple years?

    Box office up. Great! How much money did the The Ridge make? Can you say? Do you think if there was a compelling business model for The Ridge, the developer wouldn’t be so lukewarm and/or there would proposals from third parties? Now, I could be mistaken in that. Are you aware of some? Conversely, perhaps you should send a note to White Hutchison of this opportunity, who not only renovate theatres, but add bowling alleys to them. Win-win!

    And there’s this…

    Cineplex doubled its profits in the third quarter as the movie exhibitor countered a decline in moviegoers with higher priced tickets and more sales at its concession stands.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11/08/cineplex-doubles-profit-ticket-prices_n_2092479.html

    Cineplex multiplexes will survive. For awhile, at least.

    As for car ownership, you didn’t include the whole quote from The Economist, did you?

    Older people retaining their licences may swell the ranks of drivers for a while yet, but eventually young people postponing the use or purchase of cars could reduce them. The total number of people with cars may thus drop. And more people owning cars—rather than longer journeys—has been the prime driver of traffic growth in the past. If ownership stabilises or declines, traffic may do so too.

    So I’m not sure why you think you’ve got a “gotcha” here. Or is there some ulterior motive for both The Economist and the University of Michigan?

    Personally, I prefer to put more stock in trend-lines, rather than statistical fluctuations. And the trend-lines don’t point to a promising future for car or movie theatre companies.

  • gman

    Richard@
    No its you who is missing the point.Can you not see the logic in a more versatile system?Again,trams have the ability to run on any track unlike sky train.And no one said anything about Naniamo…jeez.The very simple concept is that a tram has the ability to leave the mainline and loop through neighborhoods making pickups at simple bus shelters in turn reducing pressure on the extremely expensive sky train stations. The extensions I speak of would be those loops through Burnaby,Coquitlam,New West, Richmond or even Langley or Abbotsford.So really we are talking about from commercial to UBC and that equates to about 9 minutes slower not a huge amount of time.Is that worth 2.8 billion that could be used to further enhance the system throughout the city and region in the future?Drivers will adjust to trams and change their route accordingly without much problem,so trams wouldn’t really slow traffic any more than a bus does.
    Richard I also understand how opposed to trams the bike lobby is because it threatens your ability to put bike lanes on streets,but what moves more people a seasonal bike lane or a tram? I think a tram on Hornby would have been much more successful at moving people than a bike lane.
    We have an opportunity to build on our mistake,sky train,and look at an affordable and more livable system.And try and utilize the rail system that has existed right under our noses and that would enhance our existing neighborhoods instead of enriching developers creating new ones.

  • gman

    Roger Kemble 113,
    You got that right.

  • Richard

    @gman

    Time to do some serious research.

    Trams by themselves do not create a great transit system. Look at any region of our size and you will find that it has regional rail, a metro (like SkyTrain), buses and perhaps trams. Trams are likely the least essential component. Buses can typically provide just as good or better service. As trams are used mostly for shorter trips, they tend to complete more with walking and cycling than driving. Not much point in getting people off their feet and bikes and onto trams.

    If we had a bunch of rail lines sitting around that were not being used, then train-tram might make sense. However, the mainlines are being used for movement of goods and using them for passenger service costs a lot of money.

  • gmgw

    @Richard, Spartikus, et. al:
    This discussion conjures up a vivid memory for me, one I’ve cited here before: That of a then-close friend, one of the wisest, most insightful people I’ve known, rather ruefully telling me back in 1975 (she’d just bought a secondhand car): “Most of us who are buying cars now realize that this will be the last car we buy”. It was one of those uncomfortable moments when you fancy you can see The End approaching in the distance.

    That was, as I say, in 1975; so long ago that a house that same friend bought the following year on a 33-foot lot in Kerrisdale for $65,000 was assessed several years ago at over $900,000. Sadly, I lost touch with her a long time ago, so I don’t know if she held true to her prediction. But I must say: The dinosaur certainly is taking a long time to die…
    gmgw

  • gman

    Richard@
    Richard we already have enough sky train for a region our size,what we need is an affordable way to better the movement of people,I’m surprised you would advocate for more buses when all studies show that comparing a rapid bus system to trams although the original expense of trams is higher it off sets the costs of buses do too its longevity compared to buses. And after all we should be looking to the future.
    And we used to have a pretty efficient rail system it doesn’t take much research to look back at what was a good system that we threw literally under the bus.

    http://www.tundria.com/trams/CAN/Vancouver-1940.shtml

  • MB

    Before we swoon and caress the Arabesque curves of tramophilia let’s take a look at another much more mature city: London.

    The fairly recent extension to the Jubilee Line cost $5.6 billion (Can) and made it possible to move 213 million people a year over its 36 km length in 2011. That’s 585,000 boardings every day on average.

    RRT on Broadway is estimated to top 300,000 a day at half the cost namely because it’s connected to two other high capacity lines, and is about to be extended to Coquitlam.

    Now consider that the London Underground has 11 lines covering 400 km and records 1.7 billion boardings a year. Then you’ve got commuter rail like the 5 lines of the Overground and the $28 billion 118 km Crossrail project currently underway. Add in the Docklands Railway, the Heathrow Express and the many national railways that converge in London at the great rail stations and feed all of the above lines and you’ve got over 600 km of rail and 2 billion boardings a year.

    Greater London has 8.5 million people — 3.5 times Metro Vancouver — and few if any trams on their charming streets and relatively few freeways. Most of the rail is concentrated underground an in historic passenger rail corridors.

    Londoners wouldn’t dream of ripping up their historic roads and spend billions more merely replacing those other icons of efficient transport: the red double decker buses.

    The London public transport system is efficient enough that the Underground recoups 86 percent of its operating costs through the farebox. Moreover, the vehicle congestion charge paid for a major increase in bus service in central London.

    They are light years ahead of us. I’d bet Londoners reading this blog would wonder what all the fuss was about.

  • gman

    MB
    Your comparison to London is just stupid and if you really look at London they are expanding their tram service .
    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/london-tramlink-prepares-to-put-new-trams-into-service.html

    I swear MB if I said shite stinks you’d eat a handful just to try and prove me wrong.

  • Richard

    @gman

    OK, a whole six new cars plus a bit of double tracking, in a city of 12 million, that is a winning argument.

    Seriously, it should be pretty obvious that fast frequent grade separated rapid transit is going to encourage a lot more people to use transit. A tram that may or may not be as fast a bus and will likely not be as frequent (as trams carry more people, they don’t need to come as often) is not going to convince that many people to leave their cars at home.

    Believe it or not, not everyone is a tram fan. They just want fast frequent transportation.

    Indeed, this is what the numbers show from cities all around the world. The core of the system is grade separated transit supported by buses or trams for local trips and access. It really doesn’t seem to make much of a difference if it is trams or buses. You can find great transit cities with no or very few trams. There are also great transit cities with huge tram systems.

    Now many cities that already have great metro and regional rail systems are now starting to use trams. We will have to see how that works out. I suspect it will increase transit use somewhat but in a region like ours, without a great metro network and the only regional rail is the West Coast Express, trams should be seen as a substitute for either.

  • gman

    MB
    You are a very thick person.

  • gman

    MB
    My apologies I meant Richard.

  • ThinkOutsideABox

    Thanks Spartikus for making my point again. During the period between 2005 and 2011, box office revenues have gone from 8.8 to 10.2 billion. The long term trend for revenue is pointing up. Movie theatres draw more people than all theme parks and major U.S. sports combined.

    Worldwide box office revenue between 2007 and 2011 has gone from 26.2 to 32.6 billion

    That other trend you’re clinging to is correct – in that same period, theatrical admissions in Canada/US have gone down from 1.38 to 1.28 billion.

    But you know something that major exhibitors and the hundreds of mom and pop shops who are shelling over hundreds of thousands of dollars per screen upgrading to digital projection don’t. Clearly they’re doing something wrong with the long term trend of revenue on the increase.

    Whether it applies to the circumstance of The Ridge or not, theatrical exhibitors are now in a position where they must upgrade to digital distribution and projection, or shut down if they don’t, with Fox ceasing to distribute prints in 2013 the other studios to follow.

    There, that’s more information than a single long term trend in isolation hawked by a company in the business of renovating theatres from which came forth a plethora of spurious rationale. Remind me not to take your investment advice.

  • Roger Kemble

    Ah Bloviator @ #134 at it again.

    I lived in London but that was a long time ago.

    We were passing thru a couple of years ago.

    We minded-the-gap from Gatwick to Victoria but was fair flummoxed by the break down of the line to Kings Cross. We waited hours for a taxi. Ultimately we boarded BR at KC headed for Edinburgh but we were happy to alight at York.

    At York my erstwhile colleague BR passengers headed for points north and Edinburg had to debark because the lines were out. They were bussed, I understand, the rest of the way.

    Blame it on your great aunt Maggie T. Blovie.

    So please let us “. . . caress the Arabesque curves of tramophilia” in potty little V and rejoice that the delightful Madame B doesn’t kick us off her blog for our constant inanities.

  • Richard

    @gman

    Again, I recommend looking at the facts and numbers with an open mind instead of just anecdotes. I used to believe all the hype about tram but the reality is that if you look at the ridership in cities around the world, it is hard to make the case that they can compete with grade separated transit.

  • rico

    Gman @ 129. You have some seriously pie in the sky ideas about how the simple geometry of a tram line could work unless you are deliberately misleading. Unless you have a single destination at the end of the line all those ‘loops’ you propose won’t be loops they will be transfers. I assume what you are actually advocating for is something like a tramtrain. Tramtrain is a good system but we are unfortunate in Vancouver that we don’t have the geometry to pull it off. We don’t have the available mainline, we don’t have the super powerful destination at the end of the line. Successful tramtrain tends to start at widely spaced suburban rail stations then run on a mainline like an Sbahn then turn into a tram at the destination rich terminus. If the line is too long in tram mode it is too slow and when it is too slow it does not work. Not sure about anywhere that has loopsof trams in the suburbs, probably because buses are more efficient in that situation.

  • Sean Nelson

    @gman #130 “Can you not see the logic in a more versatile system?”

    That’s exactly the same argument that the GM / Firestone / Standard Oil consortium used on transit agencies to get them to rip up their streetcar lines and replace them with buses.

    It’s pretty obvious that the Broadway corridor isn’t going to go anywhere in the next 100 years, nor is the demand to access it going to drop. Your argument that a grade separated system is a bad idea because we can’t reroute it is, frankly, ridiculous – and the impression you give by making it is that you don’t have any serious arguments to offer.

  • MB

    @ gman, I didn’t include Tramlink (London) because it has only 24 vehicles on one 27 km line to Croydon with two branch lines.

    With 38 stations this guarantees it is a local slow service and will be outcompeted by the Underground, the Overground and Crossrail in denser areas.

    You will never have 1.7 billion boardings a year in London with trams. What you will have, though, is a pleasant suburban experience if you’re not a commuter.