295 replies to this topic

[Galvanized]

lets keep the topic on streetcars or modern trams for Victoria

So keeping ON TOPIC. If you drive by the roundabout on Midland Rd in the Uplands you can see some original track in the grass.

[UrbanRail]

that loop apparently is all there but mostly under the asphalt, except in the grass areas.

[Holden West]

There was a letter to the editor Sunday saying that under the pavement there are still original streetcar tracks from City Hall up to Hillside Avenue. The guy says we should evaluate their suitability for modern rail use before we commit to BRT. I believe him but I doubt they'd be worth saving.

[Baro]

Don't forget that metal rails on a metal track are way more efficient than soft rubber tyres on a road. EXpanding our bus system is a good idea, there's a lot that can be done in this area. But we coudl really use something on a rail, seperate from the road as much as it can. The energy savings alone almost make rail worth while. It's all about surface area and resistance!

[UrbanRail]

There was a letter to the editor Sunday saying that under the pavement there are still original streetcar tracks from City Hall up to Hillside Avenue. The guy says we should evaluate their suitability for modern rail use before we commit to BRT. I believe him but I doubt they'd be worth saving.

Its a nice a idea, but I doubt, after 59 years covered in asphalt, the rails would be worth picking it off. I would assume the wooden ties would have rotted away by now. It isnt the only place rails are still in place, along Government st in front of the Empress (although I am not sure how much of Government St), Burnside Rd, Fort St.

[van-island]

Does anyone know of the difference in maintenance costs between a rail line and ashphalt? Price per kilometre?

I too am suspicious of BRT, mostly because they keep us trapped in the "car as king" mode of doing things, while the BRT would only be a secondary use. The ashphalt road is and always will be made for the personal automobile. That's the way we are.

There is definitely something to be said for the psychological differences between BRT and rail, as seen in the comments made by previous posters.

But I guess the big boys are going to do all they can to keep the gas dependence and all its accompanying industries "trucking" along!

[Ms. B. Havin]

Clark Williams-Derry of [url=http://www.sightline.org/daily_score/:b7e26]The Daily Score[/url:b7e26] (official blog for [url=http://www.sightline.org/about:b7e26]The Sightline Institute[/url:b7e26] based in Seattle) wrote an entry, [url=http://www.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2007/05/15/is-the-skytrain-the-limit:b7e26]Is the SkyTrain the Limit?[/url:b7e26], which compares Vancouver, Seattle, and Portland OR's public transit systems. Vancouver beats the other two hands-down, and Williams-Derry tries to analyze why that is. He concludes that it's not trains vs. buses or more "choice," but rather this:

Far more important is the layout of communities served by transit. In particular, compact neighborhoods can concentrate people and jobs near major transit routes, which helps make transit more convenient and cost-effective. As far as I can tell, Vancouver's transit advantage stems not from any particular feature of its transit system -- the type of trains it uses, or the frequency of bus service, etc. -- but mostly from its comparatively compact urban form.

Quite a few comments on the comments board already, including a couple from Victoria residents, pointing out that Victoria beats Seattle & Portland, too. Another person also points out that unlike Seattle (and Portland), Vancouver (and Victoria) doesn't have a freeway system running through its middle, which also cuts down on car usage.

Anyway, thought I'd link to this; makes a good argument for dense, urban form (vs sprawl & highways).

PS: Instead of starting a new thread, I thought I'd add it to this one, since aaron has already provided so many maps & scenarios, all of which touch on compact urban form as per Williams-Derry's observations...

[G-Man]

^ Good Points. I still kind of cringe whenever anyone holds Vancouver up as a place to emulate WTR to transit or urban sprawl. Spend a couple days in Langley and points east and one can quickly forget that Vancouver is "eco-conscious".

[hungryryno]

Langley is an absolute nightmare, when it comes to traffic conjestion!!!

[rayne_k]

BRT won't make much sense to implement too extensively in the beginning, don't give it it's own right of way. Otherwise we may end up in Curritiba or Ottawa's situation where they don't want to disrupt existing service to improve capacity(ie rail), and we may end up having to build something like how Vancouver is building the Rav, which does disrupt service a little, but costs more to build to eliminate complete disruption of service. Good thing Vancouver didn't put the BRT on a seperate ROW otherwise they'd never be able to build on that route without very expensive measures.

I agree that a separate ROW would be a silly expenditure, much better to dedicate existing roadway to the service (like Transit seems to be planning to do).

[rayne_k]

There is definitely something to be said for the psychological differences between BRT and rail, as seen in the comments made by previous posters.

What about trolley-bus BRT? Imho if they can achieve decent ridership then it can work: reduce other vehicles on the road/emissions and still be preliminary stage to LRT. My concern is that they're falling into the trap of North American rapid bus vs a full service brt (ie one that has proper brt stations with fare-paid, all-door, level-boarding, *and* intergration with existing transit).

The budget for the current project is something like 5 million, while projects like RAV get *billons*. I can see that we can't justify a huge pricetag, but if we take shortcuts that most North American cities seem to take with BRT (ie non-existent stations), we're cutting it off at the knees.

It's decieving that these same cities promo and refer back to successful brts when flogging their projects and then flop out on delivering the same ingredients that those successful brts have.

It's like making a $5 cake and leaving out a $1 or $2 ingredient. What you get might look like a cake, but it won't taste quite right so not nearly as many people will eat it.

I can accept being passed over for the $100 dollar cake, but for chrissakes, give me a properly made $5 cake.

[amor de cosmos]

It looks like Victoria used to be a bigtime streetcar city, that is until just after WW2 & the CRD's population was ~100,000. The last streetcars ran in Victoria at around 1948, at the beginning of the 'oil age' which made them obsolete I guess. Now that we're (apparently) starting to run out of oil & searching for alternative fuels & transportation maybe we should bring them back! check these old pics out:

streetcars lined up in Esquimalt


streetcars lined up on Oak Bay Ave


Fort St


open-air streetcar on the Oak Bay run (Try Duke's Smoking Mixture, Best Tobacco on the Market!)


interior (to deface signs, ask operator for a pencil!)


streetcar/diner in Langford


Yates @ Douglas


Pt Ellice bridge disaster


Government St after the big snow


last run of the streetcars, with execs from the BC Electric Railway Co (which is now the Southern Railway of BC & only hauls freight)


info on the old railway company
http://en.wikipedia.... ... ic_Railway

edit: after watching this clip of the Portland streetcar system I wonder why LRT is being considered, even for far in the future:
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=xL7QEQuRqq0
A streetcar system seems like a much better fit for Victoria. No accessibility issues, whisper-quiet, no expensive stations & platforms, looks like a simpler less obtrusive track setup than LRT.... In another thread I said they could go oly between Humboldt & Fisgard, but now I think they could go wherever that rapid-transit plan said LRT would go, why not?!

edit again: they kind of blur the line between the road & sidewalk. I like how pedestrian-friendly they are. there could be a stop in the middle of centennial square right in front of the new library :-P

[UrbanRail]

Unfortunately our politicians have their heads stuck up their own tail pipes.

Here is what I think is preventing streetcars from coming back.

1)whining from cyclists and pedestrians that they will get stuck in the rails
2)no long term vision from council
3)it costs too much (not true, look how much portlland paid fore theirs)
4)business complaining that they will lose business, because it will reduce car traffic in the core
5)no interest from provincial government to fund such a project
6)BC Transit is more interested in buses not rail
7)NIMBYs


Here are my solutions;
1)there is now technology that prevents cyclists and pedestrians from getting stuck, but whatever happen to personal responsibility and being aware of your surroundings
2)more support from Allan Lowe and council
3)Portland didnt pay a how lot, in fact they paid approx 56million US for their initial system
4)shouldnt we be encouraging more pedestrian traffic in the downtown core not less, a tram/streetcar system would do just that
5)the city has to get tough with the liberals on funding infrastructure projects in Victoria
6)in Portland, the city runs the streetcars but uses drivers from Tri-Met
7)Just build it, once people see it running,they will use it , ans stop complaining

[amor de cosmos]

the more I find out about these the more I like them.

clips on the Toronto streetcar system:
part 1
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=8fTqul6lNvQ
part 2
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=DQ2xZRxeQi4
part 3
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=LDKy4g1_2bE

double-deckers in Hong Kong:
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=i6TspB988xk

san francisco
http://www.youtube.c...h?v=hZtrPKIydvw

[UrbanRail]

I sure do like those video clips.
The streetcar (tram as it is called in Europe) would definitely work here.

[davek]

Light rail costs too much and does too little. http://www.reason.org/ps321.pdf Light rail advocates, if you believe light rail is something the community wants, then please encourage the authorities to remove those regulations that prevent private industry from putting it in place. The rest of us will be grateful if you would please stop encouraging government to help itself to our resources in order to create your own personal vision of how things should be.

[G-Man]

I would love to see a LRT system.

As I have said before there should be one line between downtown and T&C mall on Douglas and one from CFB Esq To UVIC

[amor de cosmos]

Light rail costs too much and does too little. http://www.reason.org/ps321.pdf Light rail advocates, if you believe light rail is something the community wants, then please encourage the authorities to remove those regulations that prevent private industry from putting it in place. The rest of us will be grateful if you would please stop encouraging government to help itself to our resources in order to create your own personal vision of how things should be.

that's a weird personal vision of how things should be. the government is us, last time I checked.

[UrbanRail]

Light rail costs too much and does too little. http://www.reason.org/ps321.pdf Light rail advocates, if you believe light rail is something the community wants, then please encourage the authorities to remove those regulations that prevent private industry from putting it in place. The rest of us will be grateful if you would please stop encouraging government to help itself to our resources in order to create your own personal vision of how things should be.

Well in North Carolina (as in the report u sent), their cities are not affected by any major geographical constraints. Here we are, since we are on an island, which would make putting BRT/LRT/commuter rail fairly easy. About 80% of the population is located on the east coast, between Campbell River and Victoria. With the exception of Mill Bay, Campbell River and the future Bamberton Town Project, the E&N runs through all major urban centres. Think of it as a horizontal elevator. This gives our area an advantage over other areas in North America.

As the case with LRT, the corridors are already there, so buying up land for the corridor isnt necessary. As for cost, yes it does cost money, but there are more rail systems being planned or constructed than BRT systems, so obviously cost isnt that much of a concern.

I do agree with some of the report that more money needs to be put towards to improving transit for those who dont have many transportation choices (increasing the bus pass cost doesnt help).

The problem with all bus transit systems is that they are controlled by development patterns. It should be that transit with bus and rail options be the controlling factors when it comes to development.

As for that rant about having less government and more private involvement. Arent we the government? I really hate when people and organizations like the Canadian taxpayers Association and the Fraser institute who champion more private control and less government.

[UrbanRail]

The rest of us will be grateful if you would please stop encouraging government to help itself to our resources in order to create your own personal vision of how things should be.

So allowing private interests access to our resources is better? The taxpayer has no control there, and u support that?