ronthecivil Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 you have the evergreen line on the north route. agreed. there's no point....downtown is already pretty walkable, and the whole west end/stanley park thing will be served by a future downtown streetcar. both the no and yes sides have valid arguments to the port mann/highway 1 expansion.....my only argument is that the additional lanes should only be for HOV. Turn 12th and 16th into alternating one way streets, extend 16th as needed to connect directly to the on off ramps of the freeway. hell no, it's fine as is....and nobody wants a freeway through Vancouver. The park board and the province have agreement that by 2035 the Lions Gate Bridge and STanley Park causeway will be handed over to the park board and that cars would no go through the causeway.....if that goes through, i'd like to see the Lions Gate be used for streetcar, cyclist, and pedestrian purposes to the North Shore. And underneath the causeway is a four lane tunnel to the North Shore. Some of your ideas are too car-friendly, considering what we're trying to do is get people out of cars and into transit. Well, if were going to do social engineering, I would rather the single occupant stick by high gas prices rather than gridlock is all. Gridlock is a pretty assinine stick if you ask me. Speaking of which, who is "we". I would like to see what would happen if it was put out the gvrd in the form of a referendum. I.E. "do you feel the planning process should concentrate on not implementing anything that could be deemed as car friendly as it would be a deterrrent to using transit". I might add that nothing I proposed would be a freeway, simply one way streets and an upgrade to a road to bring it to the same standard it is east and west of the one portion that is substandard. Oh, stanley park tunnel should be five minimum, ideally six, with a transit tunnel beside it. If the north shore can live with having the lions gate bridge closed for two year you could actually do it reasonably cheap cut and cover (there can't be that many utilities there) and it would be common sense to have a bike and walking path that doubles as the service corridor above. Could even extend the bike and walking lane across the narrows as well. There a couple of reasons for turning the RAV around towards the west end. It would allow for future ferry service to places like Bowen island and west Van should the population become feasible with a harbour on the border to Stanley Park (can't have seabus like ferries under the Lion's gate), the number of people in the cachtment is simply staggering, shorter walks intice more riders and eliminate feeder buses that last I checked are clogged beyond anything reasonable and have to fight with the same traffic as your hate SOV, and is in line with the most logical extension to the North Shore, which would be a logical thing to be doing if your building a cut and cover tunnel/new bridge structure anways, with that extension having the shortest span to cross and the most logical transit hub just over the water in Park Royal Mall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_time_hockey Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Well they are putting in a bus only lane from Gilbert to Cessna (where the BCIT Aviation Campus is). Should have been done a long time ago. But I just wonder how they are going to stop cheaters from going in there. I mean as it stands now, people in full sized SUVs try and squeeze in the bike lane. Used to just ride the shoulder but BCIT put in yellow barriers at their entrance to stop people from doing that. Then they would cut through the BCIT parking lots. So the RCMP would set up on both sides. If you drove in one end to just go out the other either onto Cessna or Russ Baker again they would ticket you. I am 110% in favour of installing these on all bus only lanes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Well they are putting in a bus only lane from Gilbert to Cessna (where the BCIT Aviation Campus is). Should have been done a long time ago. But I just wonder how they are going to stop cheaters from going in there. I mean as it stands now, people in full sized SUVs try and squeeze in the bike lane. Used to just ride the shoulder but BCIT put in yellow barriers at their entrance to stop people from doing that. Then they would cut through the BCIT parking lots. So the RCMP would set up on both sides. If you drove in one end to just go out the other either onto Cessna or Russ Baker again they would ticket you. If this is true, then I'd love to see it. Currently, the only problem with the 491s and 496s in the mornings is the traffic jams on Russ Baker preventing them from getting onto Cessna Dr. Actually, i'd like to make an Additional HOV lane just north of Cessna, to right before the current start of the HOV lane by Airport Stn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) If this is true, then I'd love to see it. Currently, the only problem with the 491s and 496s in the mornings is the traffic jams on Russ Baker preventing them from getting onto Cessna Dr. Actually, i'd like to make an Additional HOV lane just north of Cessna, to right before the current start of the HOV lane by Airport Stn. There's been at least more than one news story about this problem for 491 and 496, in the Richmond Review and Richmond News. TransLink, of course, remains oblivious until the problem becomes really really bad. Edited September 11, 2008 by BuckyHermit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_time_hockey Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 If this is true, then I'd love to see it. Currently, the only problem with the 491s and 496s in the mornings is the traffic jams on Russ Baker preventing them from getting onto Cessna Dr. Actually, i'd like to make an Additional HOV lane just north of Cessna, to right before the current start of the HOV lane by Airport Stn. On my drive in today they were putting up the sign along the side of Russ Baker. Slated to be complete by the end of the month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 On my drive in today they were putting up the sign along the side of Russ Baker. Slated to be complete by the end of the month. Excellent. You know, it'd be a pretty big waste if there's no more 491 or 496 when the RAV comes. I heard rumors about Translink axeing the 400-express buses to get more peeps to ride the RAV line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) There's been at least more than one news story about this problem for 491 and 496, in the Richmond Review and Richmond News. TransLink, of course, remains oblivious until the problem becomes really really bad. When traffic for both AM AND PM rush is backed up onto the 2 rd bridge and Dinsmore bridge, something's wrong. Edited September 11, 2008 by blue.dragon258 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbug Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 I wish Victoria could get some of this money earmarked for improvements to transit. LRT >>> poorly thought out rapid transit plan (which has been shelved after major opposition from downtown businesses). Then there's the hold-up with the rail line that runs the length of the island...the group that owns the island rail line is still waiting for the province to pony up $35mil for improvements to the line to make it usable for commuter rail and freight traffic. The ownership group has already been promised $35mil from the federal government if the provincial government will match it. That's about 2/3 of the estimated cost of upgrading the rail line. The money required is pocket change compared to what's being spent in Vancouver, yet we still can't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 I wish Victoria could get some of this money earmarked for improvements to transit. LRT >>> poorly thought out rapid transit plan (which has been shelved after major opposition from downtown businesses). Then there's the hold-up with the rail line that runs the length of the island...the group that owns the island rail line is still waiting for the province to pony up $35mil for improvements to the line to make it usable for commuter rail and freight traffic. The ownership group has already been promised $35mil from the federal government if the provincial government will match it. That's about 2/3 of the estimated cost of upgrading the rail line. The money required is pocket change compared to what's being spent in Vancouver, yet we still can't get it. Why would a small city like Victoria need an LRT line for? Now a commuter railroad, they COULD work potentially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starbug Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Why would a small city like Victoria need an LRT line for? Now a commuter railroad, they COULD work potentially. LRT from the Western Communities (which are growing rapidly) to downtown would go a long way to easing the gridlock on the highway. In the morning commute, bumper to bumper traffic starts north of Goldstream and only gets worse as you approach Langford. You stop moving with any speed once you hit Spencer Rd (even before construction started on the interchange). They wanted to put a rapid-transit route along Douglas (I can't remember how far out of town it went) but that's been shelved for now due to significant opposition. Commuter rail up and down the island would be fantastic. There are a lot of people who commute from the Cowichan Valley to Victoria or Nanaimo for work. Right now there is NO transit option, unless you want to pay $20 each way for the greyhound bus. They're going to try out buses running between Victoria and Duncan - 3 trips each in the morning and afternoon, each trip taking 80 minutes from one end of the route to the other - absolutely ridiculous. Everyone complains about congestion on the Malahat. Commuter rail to downtown Victoria could go a long way to reducing that. A couple years ago they did a trial commuter run with the Dayliner and it was packed - there are plenty of people who would ditch their cars and take a train to work. My dad would have done so without thinking twice, especially if there was room for bicycles. Not to mention a train would provide an alternate route between Duncan and Victoria, something lots of people complain about. Improving the rail line would also allow freight to be taken off the roads and moved by rail. The rail ownership group has companies interested in doing this, but the rail line is not currently suitable for heavy freight - the rail line has to be upgraded before significant freight can be moved that way. Taking trucks off the roads would do a few things: - no more slow moving trucks on the Malahat to back-up traffic - reduces wear & tear on the roads - majority of accidents that close the Malahat completely are jack-knifed semis - removing the semis from the road would eliminate a lot of highway closures and traffic tie-ups Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted September 12, 2008 Author Share Posted September 12, 2008 Commuter rail and LRT would work for Victoria, but it doesn't necessarily have to be LRT....streetcar would work fine too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted September 12, 2008 Author Share Posted September 12, 2008 Well, if were going to do social engineering, I would rather the single occupant stick by high gas prices rather than gridlock is all. Gridlock is a pretty assinine stick if you ask me. Speaking of which, who is "we". I would like to see what would happen if it was put out the gvrd in the form of a referendum. I.E. "do you feel the planning process should concentrate on not implementing anything that could be deemed as car friendly as it would be a deterrrent to using transit". I might add that nothing I proposed would be a freeway, simply one way streets and an upgrade to a road to bring it to the same standard it is east and west of the one portion that is substandard. Sometimes, you have to leave up to the professionals (a.k.a. urban and transportation planners) to decide what is good for them. It has been proven over and over again that road expansion simply does not work, creates less sustainable and urban cities, encourages sprawl and for people to live farther and farther away and centralize their mode of transport around the car. Oh, stanley park tunnel should be five minimum, ideally six, with a transit tunnel beside it. If the north shore can live with having the lions gate bridge closed for two year you could actually do it reasonably cheap cut and cover (there can't be that many utilities there) and it would be common sense to have a bike and walking path that doubles as the service corridor above. Could even extend the bike and walking lane across the narrows as well. A future rapid transit extension would actually likely be an extension of the Expo Line under Gastown then making an abrupt turn north for Lonsdale as that is where the densest part of the North Shore is. If you do some research, that suits well for the North Shore's commuting patterns. From there, have two branch lines going west to Park Royal and the other going east. There a couple of reasons for turning the RAV around towards the west end. It would allow for future ferry service to places like Bowen island and west Van should the population become feasible with a harbour on the border to Stanley Park (can't have seabus like ferries under the Lion's gate), the number of people in the cachtment is simply staggering, shorter walks intice more riders and eliminate feeder buses that last I checked are clogged beyond anything reasonable and have to fight with the same traffic as your hate SOV, and is in line with the most logical extension to the North Shore, which would be a logical thing to be doing if your building a cut and cover tunnel/new bridge structure anways, with that extension having the shortest span to cross and the most logical transit hub just over the water in Park Royal Mall. Plans are ongoing to redevelop Waterfront Station and the area around it into a massive transit hub for the region. It'll include a new second ferry terminal (the first being for SeaBus), for ferries such as to Bowen Island as you mentioned or the North Shore. Of course you have have Seabus like ferries going through the Lions Gate. As for turning the Canada Line towards the West End, the Canada Line is not designed for that and it would cost an incredible amount of money to do that....and really, we have much higher priorities. Having a streetcar going to Stanley Park and maybe through Denman and down Davie would be much more more ideal...or better yet, simply improve the existing bus service. A lot of pedestrian activity you see in the West End is all because the neighbourhood is so walkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_time_hockey Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Commuter rail and LRT would work for Victoria, but it doesn't necessarily have to be LRT....streetcar would work fine too. People in Victoria can't drive as it is. Could you imagine the # of accidents if you put streetcars on the road too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted September 12, 2008 Author Share Posted September 12, 2008 People in Victoria can't drive as it is. Could you imagine the # of accidents if you put streetcars on the road too. meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_time_hockey Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 meh. Yeah....but the Times Colonist will be filled with letters from the old people about "Where did these street cars come from?!?!?!?!?! We didn't have them in our day.....oh, never mind" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted September 12, 2008 Author Share Posted September 12, 2008 A little unrelated, but this is the future of downtown Surrey - much of which spurred by the existing Expo Line and its future extensions: ALL SURREY JOKES MUST GO NOW! FINAL SALE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 A little unrelated, but this is the future of downtown Surrey - much of which spurred by the existing Expo Line and its future extensions: ALL SURREY JOKES MUST GO NOW! FINAL SALE! So Surrey is going to be full of blue, green, pink and purple skyscrapers in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinslet Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Hmm ... which bus is the Nova one and which is the new Flyer???! (are those the new trolleys?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 (edited) Hmm ... which bus is the Nova one and which is the new Flyer???! (are those the new trolleys?) Example of a Nova Bus Example of New Flyers: New Flyer D40LF New Flyer D40LFR New Flyer C40LFR (runs on natural gas instead of diesel) New Flyer D60LF New Flyer D60LFR New Flyer E40LFR (trolley) New Flyer E60LFR (trolley) New Flyer D40 (link) New Flyer D60 (link) Edited September 12, 2008 by BuckyHermit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiLBoY Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 I've noticed the increase in the amount of buses on 49th. Now i don't have to worry about missing a bus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now