Vancouver SkyTrain
A general thread for Vancouver's SkyTrain.
To get things started, for those not familiar with the system, you can check out my new videos on YouTube
Here's a playlist that will play all videos of the Expo Line automatically:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...wC3q3okm26bGOB
And here's the first video as a taste:
Any feedback is appreciated
SKYTRAIN
Fast
Efficient
Economical
Elevated
Completed on time
Connected toTOD's
Everything Edmonton's Metro line and all future lines are not.
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
I saw a modern dance production at the Expanse Festival (back when it was held at the Roxy) that featured a greened monochrome of a similar video of the Skytrain journey as a backdrop. Not sure which stations it featured, but by the end I was somehow able to confirm that it was indeed Vancouver. Might well have been better than the dance.
Let's make Edmonton better.
One big problem with skytrain is that once computer is down , there is no movement till computer is up and running
Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks
^True, a computer they boot with a floppy disk.
I've also read that the automaton didn't really generate any savings. You have tighter more expensive engineering requirements, yes you get less drivers but countering that you need more security.
Reality CheckOriginally Posted by jagators63
Meanwhile the Metro line signaling system is still not working correctly after 2 years past the due date. At least Skytrain works and if it is down for 15 minutes, people freak.
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
Vancouver SkyTrain
I always think comparisons between Edmonton and much larger cities are really a bit silly. Vancouver is twice as big population wise as Edmonton, hemmed in by mountains, the ocean and an agricultural reserve and now seems to be a haven for Chinese investors who have driven home prices higher than the SkyTrain.
It is a beautiful city, but also young working people are now fleeing because they can never afford to buy a home there.
Yes, there is more TOD there - but all development there is denser because the cost of land and severe constraints on expansion. There is some more dense development happening in the older neighbourhoods of Edmonton, but there is also still a lot of resistance to it.
We shouldn't fall for the grass is greener there type of thinking - Vancouver has a lot of nice things, but it also has different challenges and problems than we do.
^edmontons ridership is about a quarter sky train, and the length is about a third (won't be far behind when valley line is complete, although I expect sky train will keep growing). Given population difference, seems pretty good to me.
Is sky train not a provincial endeavour?
Isn't all of transit in BC?
^In the Vancouver Metro Area municipalities have been given the power to institute a regional gas tax. This gas tax forms a fund that helps to pay for transit related projects of a regional scale.
A regional gas tax is one of the primary things I would like to see enabled in the new Municipal Government Act this spring. It could be managed by an organization like the new growth management boards that will replace/evolve out of the CRB and CRP. The funds raised could be used for roads, transit, or other projects of a regional scale (e.g. LRT to St. Albert, regional bus, interchanges, water/wastewater system sharing, etc).
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...511997?cmp=rss
It looks like a private developer is going to be building a new Skytrain stop. Very interesting proposal. Wish we would see things like this in Edmonton.
It's hard to see the economics of that working in Edmonton anytime soon. TOD/Infill have enough challenges here just building around the supplied infrastructure. Imagine Century Park if Procura would have included the transit centre costs as well to pass along to potential customers. The site would still be a crater.
I've finished uploading the Millennium Line.
Here's a playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...AQQsW38pEIjguF
And the first video:
Not as great as my first two playlists (in terms of quality), but here's the Canada Line. I'm hoping to get back out to Vancouver to film the Evergreen Line this fall.
Here's a link to the playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...oQbxSRNtnhzMgO
And the first video:
I use the Skytrain everyday to get to work (Expo Line) and it's fantastic. Totally worth the extra money in my opinion. If the Valley Line had used Skytrain technology the time between TC and DT would be something like 17 minutes
People in the Lower Mainland of BC can be criticized for many things. Building a fast and frequent fully grade separated urban rapid transit system is not one of them.
The Evergreen extension of the Millenium Line opened on December 2 with 3-4 minute peak period frequency between Lafarge-Lake Douglas in Coquitlam and Lougheed Town Centre in Burnaby. Total travel time is 16 minutes. The 6 full service Skytrain stations along the 11 kilometre route are sensibly located at major activity nodes. Each of the station locations are expected to become magnets for high density development just as many of the stations along the existing Skytrain network already are.
More details here: http://www.translink.ca/en/Schedules...nium-Line.aspx
Last edited by East McCauley; 05-12-2016 at 11:03 AM.
I've already scouted out the Evergreen line going all the way to Port Moody. Another beautiful line with a lot of knockout views. Port Moody is a lesser known but wonderful area. Concur with others that the Skytrain is great, really the best civic public transit I've been on and the elevation being perfect for Vancouver as it lifts you into spectacular views almost wherever you are. So preferable to driving in Vancouver.
For sure economically its made a lot of sense as well. Since the Evergreen line was first announced Port Moody and environs real estate has gone up. Basically anywhere in the lower mainland that is serviced by Sky Train the value goes up and to the point that it really makes TOD investment quite lucrative. Even in places like New Westminster which knew little love before skytrain in what was an industrial and dreary residential area. Really so much of the Lower Mainland East and South of downtown have been transformed by Skytrain impetus.
Even far off places like Mission are booming with West Coast Express access.
Thing is even if it takes an hour on rapid transit to get home its equal to or preferable to an hour long drive home commute.
This is not my video of the Evergreen line but I'll link it;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HVocaKUeF0
Here's a timelapse video that's more enjoyable and with background music.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilegx7L2lhY
Last edited by Replacement; 05-12-2016 at 02:21 PM.
"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"
And all that for cheaper than an at grade line here in La La Land...
Edmonton: The place where it takes two years to build a retaining wall
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
^^are you suggesting the vistas offered by our at-grade LRT system are not spectacular? I know I'm always left speechless when riding seeing the traffic piled up at University avenue.
And as for land value, Belvedere has seen an incredible transformation and investment in its nearly 40 years of LRT service
haha^^are you suggesting the vistas offered by our at-grade LRT system are not spectacular? I know I'm always left speechless when riding seeing the traffic piled up at University avenue.
And as for land value, Belvedere has seen an incredible transformation and investment in its nearly 40 years of LRT service
The U of A bore, or is that boring hole is the worst. Also to access. Seems so far down from surface level. Can't wait to get out of that tunnel and see the river, the one worthwhile view of the line. Then back into a tunnel you go...
One irony though. The Skytrain to Surrey is probably the most visually stimulating line, albeit with a non stellar terminus.
"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"
I suppose the Chinese millionaires who bought houses in Vancouver might enjoy the view. The working Canadians who have had to leave Vancouver because it is unaffordable and people from other parts of Canada are refusing job transfers to Vancouver for the same reason will not be riding the Sky Train regardless of how nice the view.haha^^are you suggesting the vistas offered by our at-grade LRT system are not spectacular? I know I'm always left speechless when riding seeing the traffic piled up at University avenue.
And as for land value, Belvedere has seen an incredible transformation and investment in its nearly 40 years of LRT service
The U of A bore, or is that boring hole is the worst. Also to access. Seems so far down from surface level. Can't wait to get out of that tunnel and see the river, the one worthwhile view of the line. Then back into a tunnel you go...
One irony though. The Skytrain to Surrey is probably the most visually stimulating line, albeit with a non stellar terminus.
Nice view, but Vancouver could be a nicer place, if it wasn't so unaffordable and the people weren't so full of themselves.
Agree that its unfortunate real estate pricing in the area is so inflated. Nice place to visit though and actually a lot cheaper than living there. I like Edmonton for its standard of living and being a good jumping off point that helps you appreciate other locales. For instance if I lived in Hawaii I would have much higher expectations on any holiday. The trouble with living in paradise. I would rather visit nice places and have them be comparatively special.I suppose the Chinese millionaires who bought houses in Vancouver might enjoy the view. The working Canadians who have had to leave Vancouver because it is unaffordable and people from other parts of Canada are refusing job transfers to Vancouver for the same reason will not be riding the Sky Train regardless of how nice the view.haha^^are you suggesting the vistas offered by our at-grade LRT system are not spectacular? I know I'm always left speechless when riding seeing the traffic piled up at University avenue.
And as for land value, Belvedere has seen an incredible transformation and investment in its nearly 40 years of LRT service
The U of A bore, or is that boring hole is the worst. Also to access. Seems so far down from surface level. Can't wait to get out of that tunnel and see the river, the one worthwhile view of the line. Then back into a tunnel you go...
One irony though. The Skytrain to Surrey is probably the most visually stimulating line, albeit with a non stellar terminus.
Nice view, but Vancouver could be a nicer place, if it wasn't so unaffordable and the people weren't so full of themselves.
All that said homes are unaffordable in Vancouver and much of lower mainland. But rentals are a much better deal. Its just an adjustment from living in a house to living in a condo, tower, etc. and with the West Coasts outdoor playground possibilities I would be outdoors exploring a lot anyway. Don't buy, rent, in Vancouver.
"if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"
While rail-based transit systems across North America are facing declining or at best stagnant ridership, Vancouver's Skytrain keeps setting ridership records.
According to the APTA Transit Ridership Report (page 35), Vancouver's Skytrain ridership is up 11.5% to 488,900 weekday riders in the first 9 months of 2017 compared to the first 9 months of 2016. Despite fewer stations and overall track length the Skytrain now has 4x as many riders as Portland's MAX Light Rail (page 27).
This is relevant because Portland - not Vancouver - is the model for Edmonton's "urban style" LRT.
http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...rship-APTA.pdf
^Portland isn't the model (Portland's system is a mix of street car, and LRT). The model is Minnesota, with respect to low floor, but Calgary or Edmonton itself with respect to LRT in general (as low floor really is no different from the existing LRT, other than it being a more modern system that typically has less barriers). But its silly to compare like that between Canada and the US, Vancouver, unlike Portland, made a conscious decision to not build freeways - people have no alternative. In Edmonton, while there are no higways into downtown, there is not the traffic mess that Vancouver has. If you want to compare Vancouver skytrain - compare it to a city like NYC.
^No. Portland's MAX is all light rail. Think you're confusing it with the Portland Streetcar which only serves Downtown. The streetcar also being an expensive waste of money.
^Edmonton's system is modeled on Minnesota, which has an equivalent climate. Like I said, Portland is a mix, some parts are LRT like that Minnesota system, some parts are street car. Calgary and Edmonton are both now building modern low floor LRT, Calgary's will also run in street up center street. Vancouver is also now mostly building LRT, albeit elevated LRT in sections, and branded as skytrain - e.g. the Canada Line, which is just automated, elevated or underground in sections, LRT.
But lets see who is right or wrong. If the Millwood's line is a huge success - I will be right and you will be wrong, Edmonton was smart then not to build elevated for most of it. If however, no-one much rides because it isn't as much elevated as Vancouver, then you will be right and I will be wrong.
Last edited by moahunter; 28-12-2017 at 11:19 AM.
^Your point of view would carry more weight if you did a bit of research before posting.
Contrary to your assertion about Calgary's Green Line running in street up Centre Street, the approved phase 1 plan has the entire Centre Street segment running underground from 16 Avenue North across the Bow River and tunneling through Downtown to an underground station at 12 Avenue South.
Details here: http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation...-line/map.aspx
Regarding Vancouver, Skytrain uses automated guideway technology with driverless trains and no overhead catenary. The Broadway line to Arbutus (and eventually to UBC) has been approved as a fully grade separated mostly underground line that connects to the existing Millenium Line at VCC-Clark.
https://www.translink.ca/Plans-and-P...Extension.aspx
A light rail system connecting Guilford and Newton that does not physically connect to Skytrain was approved as mostly street-level LRT at the insistence of the City of Surrey. I share the concerns of the Skytrain for Surrey group about this line:
http://skytrainforsurrey.org/
No - my post is correct you need to do some research, it runs up center street, in the road in its own ROW, north of 16, just like Edmonton's will run in the road in its own ROW at various locations. Just like Minnesota. Calgary has chosen an expensive option through the downtown (I don't think its smart, its goanna flood) - Edmonton by contrast is taking the route Calgary did in its original LRT (which is the most successful LRT in NA in terms of ridership per $). Green line looks just like Millwoods line in most locations, per below:
Last edited by moahunter; 28-12-2017 at 01:07 PM.
you guys need to read each others posts more clearly.
The Center line will run underground from 16 Ave N south to downtown and thru downtown to a south portal, except at the bow river.
The station at 16 ave N will be underground.
^In my post I clearly referenced the approved phase one plan from Shepard to Crescent Heights. The Centre Street component of phase one will be entirely underground.
Regarding future phases north of 16 Avenue on Centre Street, the current plan is an on-street ROW. With Crescent Heights being an underground station, there is still the flexibility to go underground further north possibly as far as McKnight Boulevard at which point Centre Street widens to six lanes from four.
Surrey light rail cancelled in favour of Skytrain extension
Well this is certainly an interesting development, and the correct decision in my opinion:
https://www.surreynowleader.com/news...to-cancel-lrt/As promised, Mayor Doug McCallum and his Safe Surrey Coalition have passed a motion to “cancel” the planned light rail system in the city, minutes after being sworn in Monday night. The motion directs city staff to “stop all work” on the LRT project and immediately start working with TransLink on a SkyTrain extension down Fraser Highway to Langley.
It also requests that the Mayors’ Council and TransLink follow suit and “immediately initiate a new SkyTrain extension,” as well as transfer the approved funding to the project “as soon as possible.”
totally the right decision.
I agree
They get an automated and elevated line with a combined frequency of 2-5 minutes (depending on time of day) that costs about the same as the proposed WSS, West Slow Streetcar.
When will the COE realize that the whole expansion is a scam?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)
"uses fully automated trains on grade-separated tracks running on underground and elevated guideways, allowing SkyTrain to hold consistently high on-time reliability."
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
You're saying the Surrey SkyTrain would cost under $2 billion?! Last I heard their LRT would cost the same as ours.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
This article i read a couple days ago talks about the cost of the 2 options.
http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surre...ovember-5-2018
Basically without contingencies it's 1.5 billion for LRT style or 2.2 billion for Sky Train. The difference in travel time which is one of many factors in the decision is 22 minutes for Skytrain vs. 35 minutes for the LRT.
Often the numbers are not directly comparable, as the way things are accounted for are not consistent across municipalities. My understanding is that Edmonton basically throws everything in to the LRT budget, such as road realignments, rolling stock etc. While numbers cited for other projects do not and only account for the line itself and the stations along it.
I just realized we're talking about the 2 different lines they are proposing. The estimated $1.6 billion Newton-Gilford LRT line (10.5 km) and then the estimated $2 billion Fraser Highway LRT line (17 km). I think these were 2015/2016 estimates for construction starting in 2022. I guess the new Surrey council will see what the Translink mayor's council has to say about new funding.This article i read a couple days ago talks about the cost of the 2 options.
http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surre...ovember-5-2018
Basically without contingencies it's 1.5 billion for LRT style or 2.2 billion for Sky Train. The difference in travel time which is one of many factors in the decision is 22 minutes for Skytrain vs. 35 minutes for the LRT.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
I guess the new mayor better make good on his promise to bring Skytrain at no extra cost.
Personally, I agree with the view that Skytrain would reinforce its status as a bedroom community of Vancouver, whereas the LRT would strengthen its regional status as a secondary CBD. That being said, the local residents have every right to disagree and they did (if only Edmonton's surrounding municipalities felt the same way).
Of course the two options are not mutually exclusive, so the design could be dusted off should people decide to resurrect the project. After all, they are two different routes intended for different purposes.
For anyone transferring between the Expo and Millenium lines, some welcome upgrades to the Commercial-Broadway Station have been completed.
Details and a video explaining the upgrades is available here: https://www.translink.ca/Plans-and-P...-Upgrades.aspx
The upgraded links between the two lines will become even more important once the Millenium Line replaces the 99-B BRT service. The first phase expansion will extend the Millenium Line as far west as Arbutus, and the recently approved second phase all the way to UBC.
Here are the latest stats through the third quarter of 2018 on Vancouver SkyTrain versus Portland Light Rail.
Vancouver Skytrain:
3 lines; 53 stations; 79.6 km track length; 513,200 weekday riders; annual ridership 151 million.
Portland MAX Light Rail:
5 lines; 97 stations; 96.6 km track length; 121,100 weekday riders; annual ridership 38.9 million.
Sources: Vancouver: https://www.apta.com/resources/stati...rship-APTA.pdf and Portland: https://trimet.org/about/pdf/trimetridership.pdf
supplemented by Wikipedia entries for both
Guess which of these cities the Valley Line is being modeled after?
Portland is only an inspiration insofar as it is an successful example of DOT - Development Oriented Transit. I use this term to emphasise the extremely commercialised nature of its recent projects, which really served as a vanity showcase to attract private development as opposed to actually serving the riderbase. As with almost all other US LRT networks, its ridership statistics are abysmal.
Edmonton has always looked to Europe rather than the US for its inspiration with regards to urban rail service. In this case, the more appropriate comparison is to Strasbourg. Whether we successfully make the transition remains to be seen but I think it's a fine model to emulate.
One thing I do envy the Skytrain for is the general state of their station infrastructure - we need to have more substantial / up-to-date structures to provide a comfortable waiting environment, especially in the winter.
That being said, renovations and upkeep are understandably less sexy than brand new, big dollar projects that people can pin their hopes and dreams on.
^Even when it comes to Transit Oriented Development, Portland pales in comparison to Vancouver.
Show me a TOD development in Portland that matches the scale of TOD development adjacent to Skytrain stations like Yaletown, Metrotown, Lougheed Town Centre, New Westminster and Surrey City Centre, among others.
Vancouver Skytrain:
3 lines; 53 stations; 79.6 km track length; annualridership 151 million.
Portland MAX Light Rail:
5 lines; 97 stations; 96.6 km track length; annualridership 38.9 million.
Edmonton LRT:
2 lines; 18 stations; 24.3 km track length; annualridership 36.6million.
Metro Vancouver SkyTrain and Edmonton LRT are very different systems to operatein different Metro areas. Metro Van sees lots of commuting to the DowntownPeninsula from suburban communities/ Cities and has great density and TODs towarrant this development and length of distance. As a regional body, Translinkwas originally built (big fight though over the Millennium Line) to getcommuters into Downtown. Canada Line was built almost exclusively for theAirport and Olympics and has poor ridership in comparison, as well as almosthalf the Millennium Line. Metro Vancouver's numbers are actually not that high.
MetroVan: 854.6/km2 with 2.4 million people- transit use 18.7%
Vancouver:5,249/km2 with 631,486people - transit use 22%
(Censusnotes that almost 21.5% walked/cycled and transit numbers are for “primary mode”.Metro Core Vancouver has as high as over 60% not driving.)
Metro Ed: 123/km2 with 1.8 million people- transit use 10.5%Edmonton: 1186/km2 with 923,500 people -transit use 13%
Metro Port: 129/km2 with 2.3 million people - transit use 7%
Portland: 1,689/km² with 647,800 people - transit use 13%
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
I deliberately rearranged the ordering of the acronym to emphasise the extremely commercial driven nature of Portland's system development. It's a direction I see Edmonton increasingly heading towards, and one I am not in favour of given the inability to attract and retain private commitment (much less investment).
I will second the apples-to-oranges nature of the Vancouver and Portland networks. If you want to drag in metro rail, how does Skytrain stack up against Hong Kong's MTR or the London Underground?
^As GenWhy posted above Vancouver and Portland have remarkably similar populations. They also have similar West Coast climates, and both see themselves as environmentally progressive urban centres.
The major difference between the two is the very different choices made in the system design of their rail-based transit networks. Vancouver decided to build a completely grade separated system and Portland built a largely street-based system.
By any measure Vancouver's rail-based system is superior to Portland's. It is superior measured by ridership where Vancouver's is now over 4x higher than Portland. But Vancouver's is also superior as a catalyst for urban density and transit-oriented development.
Commuters ride Skytrain as a preferred transportation alternative because it offers a speed advantage over travelling by private motor vehicle. MAX Rail does not with predictable results.
I've never advocated for a completely grade separated system in Edmonton. Only that our rail-based system run in relatively straight lines, maximize use of the existing Downtown to University tunnel, and be grade separated at major intersections and activity corridors.
One big difference is that Vancouver's downtown is not central. It's located far to the west. Portland is more like Edmonton with downtown being centrally located. With an off centre downtown like Vancouver or Toronto, people tend to have longer commutes, making rail more efficient. When you can approach downtown from any direction, it's likely a random person will have a longer or more crowded commute.
Most of the SkyTrain system is outside of the City of Vancovuer and does not serve the majority of Vancouver residents, save you the Downtown or transfer stations to get downtown. SkyTrain runs along mainly old rail ROWs and many of the Vancouver stations are underbuilt and under utilized, except downtown. The majority of the MAX is inside the City of Portland and serves local mobility and mobility to the downtown, but less effectively. Edmonton will have both systems and our employment at the moment is not largely centred downtown. Vancouver is a good Metro system but not a good local system. The majority of transit riders in the CofV take buses.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
^Say what? Under-built maybe in terms of platform length at some stations but certainly not underutilized.
Commercial-Broadway is the second busiest station on the Skytrain network and is not Downtown. Neither are Broadway-City Hall or Main Street-Science World which are also in the top ten busiest stations:
https://www.translink.ca/About-Us/Me...ship-data.aspx
Arguably the City of Burnaby is currently slightly better served by Skytrain than the City of Vancouver though the two cities along with the City of New Westminster form a single built up urban area. Also the City of Vancouver will be much better served when the Millenium line extension is built to Arbutus and eventually to UBC.
^^ double "Say what?"
Remember that the Capital line was also built on a railway ROW
As far as being underutilized, Skytrain began in 1985 and has a daily ridership of 513,200
Edmonton's LRT began in 1978, has a daily ridership of 112,805
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
Underbuilt and underutilized station areas (TOD). Broadway-Commercial is a major transfer point with lots of folks using the Millennium Line from the suburbs as well as the Expo Line from the suburbs. A great number of those people are going Downtown. Main Street station and City Hall are also a major transfer points and are considered within the Metro Core employment area (greater downtown), especially when considering the system as a regional system and Vancouver as a Metro city. Outside of downtown and major transfer points that are not on the list are 11 of the 20 stations in the city. Almost all of these stations don't have TOD or updated area plans since the 90's, with the exception of Joyce and Oakridge and Marine. Vancouver planning staff, council, and locals have very little appetite for more density in these largely SF home areas. our LRT for the most part is very similar to the Expo line in Vancouver on the old rail ROW from Joyce to Nanaimo, and Millennium Line at VCC, Renfrew and Rupert. Lots of similarities.
Vancouver will be served similarity and slightly better along Broadway which will replace the 99 B-Line. Current area plans for the length of the extension remain unknown and unresolved with most of the length being maintained for lower density (under utilized, under built). Most of the current and future success of the SkyTrain is and will be non-Vancouver riders and non-Vancouver TOD development mainly in Surrey and Burnaby with those riders heading into downtown and the General Hospital area (the Metro Core). That as my argument. It's a great transit system but very regional, not very similar to MAX or our LRT.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
"Most of the SkyTrain system is outside of the City of Vancovuer and does not serve the majority of Vancouver residents, save you the Downtown or transfer stations to get downtown."
To clarify, most of the lines (track in km) exists outside Vancouver. Most users commute in (suburb) and use the major transfer stations or go straight downtown. Again, Vancouver's system is great but the numbers can be misleading. Edmonton's LRT punches above its weight and we'll be fine with LRT. It's not purely the system, but its context.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
way better than our Metroline.
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
Agree. Most segments of the Skytrain are better than our incomplete NW extension that is yet to operate full at this point.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
if it ever operates properly. If they ever build out to St. Albert, it may be a permanent choke point.
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
GenWhy?, I guess the high density node developing near Olympic Village station on the Canada Line would also be considered part of greater downtown so not be considered an underutilized station. Glad you mentioned Joyce-Collingwood station on the Expo Line which is a rapidly growing high density node within the city limits of Vancouver. The fact that the cities of Burnaby and New Westminster have embraced high density development adjacent to all of their Skytrain stations, and the City of Vancouver has not, hardly disqualifies Skytrain as a TOD success story. I would argue there are only a handful of stations in the City of Vancouver (e.g. Nanaimo, 29th Avenue on the Expo Line) where locals have managed to stymie redevelopment in the name of preserving the low density character of their neighbourhoods.
Nor do I agree that Vancouver is more of a regional system than Portland. They're actually pretty comparable. MAX Rail's track length is significantly longer than Skytrain's and extends to such suburban communities as Hillsboro, Beaverton, Milwaukee, Clackamas and Gresham. It's only when measured by ridership that MAX Rail's is less than one-quarter of Skytrain's.
Map of Portland's Rail System at this link: https://trimet.org/maps/img/railsystem.png
Map of Vancouver Rail System at this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...yTrain_Map.svg
By dint of system type alone there is significant difference. Portland's system is significantly constrained by the size and number of cars that they can field, which in turn directly affects capacity.
The point that both systems are regional in terms of service area is valid. However the intent and purpose of such systems is very different. Vancouver is very much focused on mass transit principles - move as many people as efficiently as possible. Portland does not. They built their system specifically on a value for money approach - in this case, private investment. Yes, the dollar amounts per TOD might be lower than that of Skytrain, but keep in mind a typical Portland LRT 'station' is a glorified bus stop. On a bang-for-buck basis in terms of capital investment dollars Portland succeeds magnificently, and THAT is what is highlighted in case studies - high ridership numbers (by US standards) are simply icing on the cake.
For that matter, I think Edmonton's LRT is pretty much a regional network. When the city is 70% of the built up area of the region, it's rather meaningless to draw a distinction between the two for purposes of service coverage.
Olympic Village Station is actually on the edge, outside, of the South East False Creek redevelopment plan, which includes the former Olympic Village, and is home and will be home to very little regional and City development for the next decade and has seen little development since it was built (height there is greatly limited to mostly max 10-stories due to view cones), most traffic occurs 2 blocks south at City Hall Station. And yes is within the Metro Core. The area plan is being revised in about 5-7 years, maybe, but is currently under review with all rezonings halted.
Joyce saw great success in the 90s and 00s on former industrial land, was recently given a new plan, and has seen a few new proposals, but growth is limited to about 1 city block of total area for redevelopment with the SF homes being largely untouched. Which is sad. SkyTrain is a great TOD success story in the outlying cities, not so much in Vancouver considering the lack of station plans or allowance for TOD to occur (Commercial-Broadway's latest TOD plan restricted a lot of potential development due to community pushback, again). Again, the Broadway subway doesn't look promising for density or affordable housing except for around Oak Street and Granville Stations, with the rest to remain much lower density (Arbutus, Burrard), probably. Not to get off topic, but almost all of development in Vancouver along Cambie was kept at 6-stores due to NIMBYs (with the exception of the Oakridge mall lands itself), same goes for VCC, Renfrew, Rupert, 29th, Nanaimo.
So in saying that, in building our system, it's not just the technology of the system but how you design and build for it / around it.
Not counting SkyTrain serviced communities alone (Richmond, Burnaby, New West., Surrey, Port Moody, and Coquitlam), it is greatly a "go to work and play" downtown from outlying areas system, with TOD largely occurring outside Vancouver. 22 of the 53 are in Vancouver. Half the system and a great amount of ridership is no longer based in Vancouver proper. It's a great system, but I think Edmonton is fine with the technology it has and system design, as long as the areas are planned with the system so they do well. If Edmonton gets more Joyce Stations and less 22nd Ave stations... then that'll be the success of the system. Communities based around TOD, and not building a system and then leaving them as SF homes and parking lots and strip malls.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
Agreed.
Live and love... your neighbourhood.
Foolworm, less than one-quarter the ridership of Skytrain, and by your own admission lower TOD dollar amounts, yet somehow on "a bang-for-buck basis in terms of capital investment dollars Portland succeeds magnificently."
Sorry, not buying whatever the heck you're trying to sell.
I mean on a dollar-for-dollar basis, the amount of private development relative to capital cost for LRT in Portland is extremely high because that was what they built it for, not ridership.
I also argue that it is not a model to emulate for Edmonton, because we shouldn't be treating public transit as an investment sweetener for land developers.
In other words, I think you are right to disagree with Portland's model but for the wrong reasons. You think Portland's LRT poorly serves its intended function of mass transit. I'm arguing that was never its intent in the first place.
I'd argue the Valley line is built with the same drivers. Development over efficient transit system.
I agree with Medwards but add that every candidate for city council or mayor extolls public transit and specifically LRT as a campaign platform and when elected are beholden to the campaign promise.
We were sold that a slow streetcar that was to cost far less than LRT but I see no difference.
What I do see is another mega transit project that has not been fiscally evaluated, (none of the lines have ever been analyzed for a cost benefit ratio) that is more about keeping the powerful transit union happy and the Transportation Department happy than any real benefit to transit users.
Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks