The Official Transit Thread

[inane]

My point is my point. It may be inconsistent with nitro's, OTH's, or ronthecivil's, but it's consistent with my beliefs of urban planning, my experiences of what Brighouse Stn is like right now, and my experiences of what 3Rd is like.

Provide me with instances where I have taken a point and extrapolated it to the extreme, as I can see nothing of the sort.

With regards to paragraph 2:

Forgive me if I interpreted that you wanted to take a part of 3Rd and make it a pedestrian mall, which is pretty damn much along the lines of putting people as the priority.

I like your logic. So does that mean i can walk in the center lane of Broadway at 4pm and still call myself "traffic?"

That's taking my point and extrapolating it to the extreme. I obviously don't mean this, but you use it as the basis of your argument.

Another extreme is the notion that having pedestrians as the priority therefore means ban cars and turn it into a pedestrian only mall. How do you make that jump in logic?

Having pedestrians as the priority simply means when planning, especially in the heart of the city at the foot of a skytrain exit, then accommodating pedestrians is more important that accommodating cars.

[ronthecivil]

Which brings us back the original question posted by OTH:

Where the hell is that barrier separating people from cars, for as I see it, it doesn't exist. Well, actually, people are breaking down this paper-thin barrier by crossing the current crosswalk on a green light.

There is no barrier. And since mid block crosswalks are very much not the norm, eventually someone is going to be pissed at the person in front of them stopping for what they see as no good reason, and blammo someone is going to get run over, red light for cars and walk sign for peds or not.

That and enough people on the streets always do end up winning against the cars. Walk around downtown after the fireworks, the pedestrians close the streets themselves simply by filling them. What I think is happening here is that these little bursts of people are doing the exact same thing.

Basically, the way I see it, for safety reasons, they either need to put in a ped overpass(a pedestrian traffic sewer!), or close three road to cars. I would look at the former as a short term solution, and the latter as a long term solution that could go in as part of an overall redevelopement scheme. OTH is right,as is, it IS an accident waiting to happen.

[ronthecivil]

That's taking my point and extrapolating it to the extreme. I obviously don't mean this, but you use it as the basis of your argument.

Another extreme is the notion that having pedestrians as the priority therefore means ban cars and turn it into a pedestrian only mall. How do you make that jump in logic?

Having pedestrians as the priority simply means when planning, especially in the heart of the city at the foot of a skytrain exit, then accommodating pedestrians is more important that accommodating cars.

Then did you feel that adding a ped overpass would be eliminating a crossing? I can't see it as anything less than greatly enhancing a crossing.

[inane]

Then did you feel that adding a ped overpass would be eliminating a crossing? I can't see it as anything less than greatly enhancing a crossing.

Adding a pedestrian crossing is extremely expensive and is telling people cars are the priority in this stretch of road. People should stay off the road, that's why there's a crossing. That's not the message you want to send at the foot of a skytrain station, in the downtown of a city. Pedestrian overpasses are good for crossing highways and train tracks, not downtown streets.

[Buggernut]

Uh, if there is a skytrain pillar in the way you would have to realign huge sections of one or the other to make it work. Railroads have much, much flatter curve standards then say a road. You can't just jog your way around, it's operation plow right though in the railway game.

As for how much it cost compared to simply expanding the stations, if you do it like they are doing in New West and tie it in with developement (which is actually completely consistant with even the fruitiest of urban planning theory) it could turn out to be profitable. Regardless of the costs of expanding skytrain, you would never ever do the project your describling because the ridership analysis will result in it having a terrible benefit cost ratio (aka a white elephant). AKA doing just about anything would be a better idea.

I was wondering if it was possible to replace a pillar support with an arch support, that trains can duck under.

Anyways, if they're going to expand the Skytrain trains and their platforms, I hope they can also work out a way to add passing lanes to facilitate express trains.

I was also thinking ahead to such a time as when they got rid of that damned Canada-US border (or relations between the two countries warmed enough), and thought that a Metrotown stop would be a nice addition for Seattle bound trains.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Buggernut

[Common sense]

Adding a pedestrian crossing is extremely expensive and is telling people cars are the priority in this stretch of road. People should stay off the road, that's why there's a crossing. That's not the message you want to send at the foot of a skytrain station, in the downtown of a city. Pedestrian overpasses are good for crossing highways and train tracks, not downtown streets.

What about Metrotown? It's got a Skytrain station linked up to a bus loop, which is then linked up to the mall. Of course, it's got a GIANT parkade underneath that (and apparently, that's a no-no.)

[Common sense]

There is no barrier. And since mid block crosswalks are very much not the norm, eventually someone is going to be pissed at the person in front of them stopping for what they see as no good reason, and blammo someone is going to get run over, red light for cars and walk sign for peds or not.

That and enough people on the streets always do end up winning against the cars. Walk around downtown after the fireworks, the pedestrians close the streets themselves simply by filling them. What I think is happening here is that these little bursts of people are doing the exact same thing.

Basically, the way I see it, for safety reasons, they either need to put in a ped overpass(a pedestrian traffic sewer!), or close three road to cars. I would look at the former as a short term solution, and the latter as a long term solution that could go in as part of an overall redevelopement scheme. OTH is right,as is, it IS an accident waiting to happen.

With the amount of traffic and the traffic jams of 3Rd, pedestrians are hardly to blame for stopping all of the traffic. Education perhaps is an issue. Let people know the hand means stop and the white walking dude means you can cross the road.

Only in Richmond....

[Common sense]

That's taking my point and extrapolating it to the extreme. I obviously don't mean this, but you use it as the basis of your argument.

Another extreme is the notion that having pedestrians as the priority therefore means ban cars and turn it into a pedestrian only mall. How do you make that jump in logic?

Having pedestrians as the priority simply means when planning, especially in the heart of the city at the foot of a skytrain exit, then accommodating pedestrians is more important that accommodating cars.

The notion of having pedestrians as the priority means that you'll be focusing resources towards them, and thus limiting the available resources towards others. What I got from your statement was that 3Rd would become a ped-mall, and until you provide a tangible example of what "pedestrians as the priority means" (banning cars, more buses, more overpasses), mine is still the most reasonable and most logical example.

I'd like for you to try that theory out (the 3rd paragraph) in anywhere outside of Vancouver. we got transit hubs next to giant shopping centers filled with cars. While it says something about the car culture of suburbia, it also says something about the availability of transit 800m away from the hub - that it isn't enough.

Look at RC, Park Royal, Central City/Surrey Ctrl, Metro. What are their similarities? Big transit hub, but even a bigger demand for cars. Accommodating for pedestrians is a good idea if the area you're talking about is densified (like Granville St in downtown), but we're talking about places like King George, Kingsway, and 3 Rd - places that were built around the car and will be built around it for years to come.

[Buggernut]

Can we expect another Canada Line crunch this Saturday with the Apple Store grand opening at Oakridge Mall?

[nitronuts]

Source: www.westcoastexpress.com

[Columbo]

With the amount of traffic and the traffic jams of 3Rd, pedestrians are hardly to blame for stopping all of the traffic. Education perhaps is an issue. Let people know the hand means stop and the white walking dude means you can cross the road.

Only in Richmond....

Jaywalking happens only in Richmond?

[jgcanux]

New Westminster Station renovation renderings plus the new mall being built around it:

Ticket Platform Level - Looking East. Retail South of the guideway:

Ticket Platform Level - Looking East. Retail North of the guideway:

Columbia Street elevation: - what's at grade on Columbia???

Train Platform Level - Looking East at train platform level:

Looking East from McInnis Street Overpass:

Compare with the VIA Architecture rendering -

there does seem to be a tall street wall to the left - but not as massive as the new renders:

How come New Westminster Station is getting one, and such a big one. I want to see all Expo line stations being renovated than one big station.

[Denrik]

Can we expect another Canada Line crunch this Saturday with the Apple Store grand opening at Oakridge Mall?

Seriously?

[Buggernut]

Seriously?

It might not have quite the same level of novelty as the first store, but they are once again giving away t-shirts.

[Denrik]

It might not have quite the same level of novelty as the first store, but they are once again giving away t-shirts.

The level of apple consumerism is just mind boggling. I really don;t get it

[trek]

Source: www.westcoastexpress.com

Go2. OK.

[BuckyHermit]

The level of apple consumerism is just mind boggling. I really don;t get it

That's because you're a PC.

[cj_coolcat]

That's because you're a PC.

And he's four and a half?

[inane]

The notion of having pedestrians as the priority means that you'll be focusing resources towards them, and thus limiting the available resources towards others. What I got from your statement was that 3Rd would become a ped-mall, and until you provide a tangible example of what "pedestrians as the priority means" (banning cars, more buses, more overpasses), mine is still the most reasonable and most logical example.

I'd like for you to try that theory out (the 3rd paragraph) in anywhere outside of Vancouver. we got transit hubs next to giant shopping centers filled with cars. While it says something about the car culture of suburbia, it also says something about the availability of transit 800m away from the hub - that it isn't enough.

Look at RC, Park Royal, Central City/Surrey Ctrl, Metro. What are their similarities? Big transit hub, but even a bigger demand for cars. Accommodating for pedestrians is a good idea if the area you're talking about is densified (like Granville St in downtown), but we're talking about places like King George, Kingsway, and 3 Rd - places that were built around the car and will be built around it for years to come.

I love your first paragraph. Until I 'prove' to you what I mean by pedestrian priority you're going to continue to believe something else even though I've told you that's not what I meant. That's gold.

Pedestrian priority means planning for the movement of people first, not cars. I could write a theses to explain the details but that's the basic gist. That does not mean ban cars or whatever ridiculous exaggeration you want it to mean.

As for your last paragraph, that's where you're wrong. The places you list are perfect examples of where the notion of building around the car is over. Look at the new plan for Surrey Central. It's transit/pedestrian oriented. Richmond, it's pedestrian oriented. You can believe whatever you want, but look at the plans--your philosophy is outdated and no longer what planners do. Deal with it

[Denrik]

That's because you're a PC.

But it's a t shirt. Today at oakridge I saw people taking pictures beside the mac logo like it was a monument for tourists like OMG leaning tower of pisa! I don't go to GM place and take pictures of me beside the canucks logo, I go beside the dressing room. I don't go to Rome and take a picture beside a bottle of european coke I go to the coliseum