old_time_hockey Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Driving home yesterday and it was foggy as hell on the Arthur Laing bridge. Then out of the mist come 2 lights and a RAV train goes over. It was spooky. I just wonder how many accidents that train will cause the first little while. When it went over you could see people slam on the brakes and not paying attention to the road anymore. Bimbo behind me slammed on the brakes and skidded to a stop cause she hadn't noticed traffic had slowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 the right of way is still OWNED by the government and has the capacity for running transit. Out to cloverdale maybe but there is still at very least a lease obligation to allow free flow of freight movement. Past cloverdale I doubt the goverment has any stake whatsoever. If I am wrong by all mean show me some evidence. Bugger: Ya, perhaps, wouldn't hurt to ask. But going around assuming that you can just barge in there and do what you please is problimatic. And it should be pointed out that the deal negotiated with the railroad to do the west coast express results in the highest subsidy per passenger in the entire transit system so it's not necesarily the haven of cost savings people make it out to be. Also, past cloverdale the RR get very, VERY busy so they would have no interest whatsoever in running commuter trains there. A train out to a station in Cloverdale that connects up a scott road, that could work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_1 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Report on Willowbrook-Scott Road Rail Expansion http://www.scribd.com/doc/515139/DRL-Solut...terurban-Report similar projects Ottawa O train http://www.octranspo.com/train_menue.htm Seattle http://www.soundtransit.org/x1171.xml Is $1.5 Billion more spent on a sky train to Willowbrook more beneficial? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted January 16, 2009 Author Share Posted January 16, 2009 Eh? Operation remove the parking that shouldn't be on arterial roads in the first place and replace them with bus lanes. Look ma, I widening the road with a paint brush! Oh course, even if that DID encourage buses while discouraging cars, it would of course increase the road capacity for through traffic, and as you and I both know we can't have THAT. You could easily have those types of bus lanes, similar to what they did with Central Broadway, but what I'm talking about (and what the previous poster was talking about) was No.3 Road type of bus lanes down the middle of the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted January 16, 2009 Author Share Posted January 16, 2009 Recent pictures of the domestic terminal expansion at YVR, from Flickr: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanuck14 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Eh? Operation remove the parking that shouldn't be on arterial roads in the first place and replace them with bus lanes. Look ma, I widening the road with a paint brush! Business would scream blue bloody murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trek Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 That extension is making the terminal wrap around more. Looks more and more like a smaller version of LAX lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Business would scream blue bloody murder. Allow more underground parking. It would be easier to get there if a little pricier to park. Street parking on arterials barely covers the amount of parking needed anyways. Reduce their taxes even a smidge and all will be forgiven. But even being nice it's our road not theirs, and it's meant to serve the public, not them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 You could easily have those types of bus lanes, similar to what they did with Central Broadway, but what I'm talking about (and what the previous poster was talking about) was No.3 Road type of bus lanes down the middle of the road. Sure, and your right, it won't be quite as good as a dedicated bus road, but it would be almost as good and a giant improvement on the status quo. Not to mention it's capital cost would be very very small making it's cost benefit ratio insanely good. But it goes against city policy to keep the car gridlock in place as much as possible, even if it messes up the busses. My favorite example is fourth ave. You can't find a parking spot there anyways, and 95% of the time you just end up bucking up the cash to park under the organic supermarket there. If they got rid of the parking the parking situation would be pretty much the same, but at least you could get there way faster, especially on a bus! At a minimal cost! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Bugger: Ya, perhaps, wouldn't hurt to ask. But going around assuming that you can just barge in there and do what you please is problimatic. And it should be pointed out that the deal negotiated with the railroad to do the west coast express results in the highest subsidy per passenger in the entire transit system so it's not necesarily the haven of cost savings people make it out to be. Also, past cloverdale the RR get very, VERY busy so they would have no interest whatsoever in running commuter trains there. A train out to a station in Cloverdale that connects up a scott road, that could work. Is there room for double tracking? Railways are controlled monopolies that are subject to arbitration, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Allow more underground parking. It would be easier to get there if a little pricier to park. Street parking on arterials barely covers the amount of parking needed anyways. Reduce their taxes even a smidge and all will be forgiven. But even being nice it's our road not theirs, and it's meant to serve the public, not them. I wish they'd do that for Kerrisdale, on 41st between Larch and Maple. Going eastbound along that stretch is just hell (assuming you're actually moving). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted January 17, 2009 Author Share Posted January 17, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Recent pictures of the domestic terminal expansion at YVR, from Flickr: Official YVR Thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_1 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 (edited) Is there room for double tracking? Railways are controlled monopolies that are subject to arbitration, right? there's plenty of room for double tracking but it might be better to create its on elevated running way through langley. Edited January 17, 2009 by tom_1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 But even being nice it's our road not theirs, and it's meant to serve the public, not them. My sentiments exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Yeah, but there may be a way to make an express train that stops only every 10 stops or so... Kind of like a B-Line. What, and just plow through the trains already on the track? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 there's plenty of room for double tracking but it might be better to create its on elevated running way through langley. The traffic load and frequency of the trains may not justify the expense. We're looking at a lot of barren forest and farm land along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckyHermit Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 What, and just plow through the trains already on the track? This post just created the most comical image in my head... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_1 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 The traffic load and frequency of the trains may not justify the expense. We're looking at a lot of barren forest and farm land along the way. but a $2.5 billion sky train expansion makes sensen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 but a $2.5 billion sky train expansion makes sensen? Coquitlam and Vancouver are denser urban areas. 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