I'm curious how Vancouver’s Skytrain compares to the monorail options currently being proposed for the Sepulveda line here in LA that have received overwhelming pushback from basically everyone except the wealthy homeowners in Bel Air. I'm not familiar with the details aside from it supposedly being lower capacity, but I wonder if there's a compromise* — rail type? train length? — that gets us a cheaper and faster project with automated service and higher overall capacity. I understand not wanting a half-measure solution but I'm worried that a subway would turn into a decade-long megaproject.
(*a compromise between the proposed solutions, not with the residents, who would obviously prefer nothing to be built at all)
This is a great question - LA is such a big city and the Sepulveda corridor would have massive ridership that makes me extremely skeptical of a monorail/skytrain solution. Additionally, it seems like the monorail in this case would take 50% more time to cross the sepulveda pass than heavy rail. A better use case for Skytrain service would be routes that are currently being planned for light rail, like the east san fernando LRT, or the entirety of Project Connect in Austin.
That said, if LA builds a subway, they need to be running the trains extremely frequently!
How much of Canadian ridership can also be attributed to lower wages and higher cost of living especially in Vancouver and Toronto? In other words, if the average Canadian was as wealthy as the average American, would we see the same ridership numbers? Assuming wealthier people will opt for driving a car over taking transit.
I wouldn't assume that wealthier people will opt for driving over transit. Vancouver provides high quality transit service that's more convenient than driving in many cases - even car owners in the suburbs frequently take Skytrain to avoid traffic.
I'm curious how Vancouver’s Skytrain compares to the monorail options currently being proposed for the Sepulveda line here in LA that have received overwhelming pushback from basically everyone except the wealthy homeowners in Bel Air. I'm not familiar with the details aside from it supposedly being lower capacity, but I wonder if there's a compromise* — rail type? train length? — that gets us a cheaper and faster project with automated service and higher overall capacity. I understand not wanting a half-measure solution but I'm worried that a subway would turn into a decade-long megaproject.
(*a compromise between the proposed solutions, not with the residents, who would obviously prefer nothing to be built at all)
This is a great question - LA is such a big city and the Sepulveda corridor would have massive ridership that makes me extremely skeptical of a monorail/skytrain solution. Additionally, it seems like the monorail in this case would take 50% more time to cross the sepulveda pass than heavy rail. A better use case for Skytrain service would be routes that are currently being planned for light rail, like the east san fernando LRT, or the entirety of Project Connect in Austin.
That said, if LA builds a subway, they need to be running the trains extremely frequently!
Ah I hadn't considered travel time/distance, that's a good reason to prefer heavy rail for such a busy corridor.
yup - the monorail would be a 26 minute journey while the heavy rail options are 16-19 minutes https://twitter.com/streetsforall/status/1592608828960702464
How much of Canadian ridership can also be attributed to lower wages and higher cost of living especially in Vancouver and Toronto? In other words, if the average Canadian was as wealthy as the average American, would we see the same ridership numbers? Assuming wealthier people will opt for driving a car over taking transit.
I wouldn't assume that wealthier people will opt for driving over transit. Vancouver provides high quality transit service that's more convenient than driving in many cases - even car owners in the suburbs frequently take Skytrain to avoid traffic.
Not all stats are up to date, need ridership per capita prior to COVID
In Canada Vancouver was no. 4 in 2019.