Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[SpongeG]

its all a waste of money

use it where its needed first evergren should be like 4th on the list of what should get done in this city

[vansky]

just a 10km project, can't believe it has to be discussed for 5 yrs, and there's no conclusion...hahaha, no hope for the city.

[vansky]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

its all a waste of money

use it where its needed first evergren should be like 4th on the list of what should get done in this city

the number one is real estate price...

how much does gordon cambell's house worth now, probably a huge fortune...

[Vonny]

Originally Posted by mr.x

^ but then, these LRT advocates come up with examples such as the Hong Kong Island streetcar which has a ridership of something like 270,000/passengers per day over a ~12-km route i believe.....which is apples and oranges.

yeah it is,... it all depend of traffic pattern, Line 1 of Paris subway carries an excess of 725,000 /passengers per day over a ~16-km route, and the capacity potential is very similar to the sky-train in term of platform length and train clearance.

It is ridership typical of hop and off move. For longer commute, people will prefer a parallel express train (RER A) in Paris, like in Hong Kong people will use the MTR island line rather than the Hong Kong tram as soon as they need to move efficiently more than a couple of km...
...a bit like people use #99 instead of #9 as soon as they need to travel a bit more than a couple of km...

[Dave2]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009950833_soundtransit27m.html

Count on this at least once/month

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by vansky

just a 10km project, can't believe it has to be discussed for 5 yrs, and there's no conclusion...hahaha, no hope for the city.

5 Years? The issue of 'promised' rapid transit to the Tricities area has been going on for nearly 5 times as long. The original skytrain plan was for a T-line from New West to Coquitlam, and thats from circa 1985

[NucksFanInVan]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

You would still be dealing with trains that have drivers. There are certain safety concerns that prevent you from having a system where fast trains operate with high frequency. If LRT is going to be grade separated and fast, it won't be frequent like Skytrain is (one of the reasons Skytrain is popular here) and thus can't match the capacity.

Evergreen Line LRT would just be as close as you could get to actual Skytrain, just with LRT slapped on the name for the same cost with none of the benefits.

Exactly - we are in violent agreement here.

Skytrain can have drivers, as we saw last winter and regularly during heavy weather. The Scarborough RT uses drivers all the time. Is there a particular reason why we couldn't use SkyTrain as an at-grade LRT in the Evergreen corridor? I don't think anyone here thinks demand will be so great that we'll need high-speed, frequent service right off the mark. (I know we would need some fancy engineering to make the LIM technology workable and safe for at-grade crossings but I don't think it is entirely out of the realm of possibility).

The cost is obvious - as numerous people have pointed out it's the cost of grade-separation rather than the train technology that drives a difference btw Skytrain and other "LRT".

The benefit is that we could have full-time Skytrain operators for the Evergreen stretch treating Lougheed as a single-track terminus like the C-Line. To get a train to Edmonds OMC (or another train to the light OMC on the new line) the driver would just (dis)engage manual control at the station.

Once the ridership approaches the capacity of the "driver-operated" system, we build a couple of kms of additional guideway and complete the dual-track switch at Lougheed - then pull the drivers off and away we go.

As I said - I doubt this would save significant $$ but if it did I can't see why this kind of "no-regret" approach would be such a bad thing.

[mr.x]

^ ALRT tracks aren't designed for roads being paved over them at intersections, and ALRT trains aren't LRT trains in that they are not designed for collisions with vehicles...and having this set up would create a ridiculously and unnecessary high operating cost.

[racc]

Originally Posted by Mininari

5 Years? The issue of 'promised' rapid transit to the Tricities area has been going on for nearly 5 times as long. The original skytrain plan was for a T-line from New West to Coquitlam, and thats from circa 1985

That was the original LRT plan, then Glen Clark changed it to SKyTrain then TransLink switched it to LRT then Campbell switched it to SkyTrain.

All this indecision has cost $10s of millions of dollars in planning and design time in addition to cost escalation of around $700 million dollars due to rising construction costs. Switching back to LRT at this point really won't save much when you consider there will be $10-$20 million in additional design, planning and engineering costs. It would also delay the project by a year or two costing $50-$100 million in construction cost escalation. Perhaps even more if the cost of steel skyrockets after the recession is over.

Lets get on with it.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by NucksFanInVan

Exactly - we are in violent agreement here.

Skytrain can have drivers, as we saw last winter and regularly during heavy weather. The Scarborough RT uses drivers all the time. Is there a particular reason why we couldn't use SkyTrain as an at-grade LRT in the Evergreen corridor? I don't think anyone here thinks demand will be so great that we'll need high-speed, frequent service right off the mark. (I know we would need some fancy engineering to make the LIM technology workable and safe for at-grade crossings but I don't think it is entirely out of the realm of possibility).

The cost is obvious - as numerous people have pointed out it's the cost of grade-separation rather than the train technology that drives a difference btw Skytrain and other "LRT".

The benefit is that we could have full-time Skytrain operators for the Evergreen stretch treating Lougheed as a single-track terminus like the C-Line. To get a train to Edmonds OMC (or another train to the light OMC on the new line) the driver would just (dis)engage manual control at the station.

Once the ridership approaches the capacity of the "driver-operated" system, we build a couple of kms of additional guideway and complete the dual-track switch at Lougheed - then pull the drivers off and away we go.

As I said - I doubt this would save significant $$ but if it did I can't see why this kind of "no-regret" approach would be such a bad thing.

Like Mr. X said, ALRT cars aren't designed to be operated on the road. Notice the Evergreen Line LRT plan, a lot of the LRT line is already fully separated from traffic, namely off the approach of the Lougheed SkyTrain Stn, Burquitlam tunnel area, and Coquitlam Central.

Even if we have ALRT operated on road, it can still be automated, which was once considered for the Canada Line Richmond portion. It makes it much harder to run and the reliability of the system drops significantly. Also, having a third rail power track exposed is not safe. Many of the metros that do cross roads, such as the ones in Japan, all have overhead power lines instead of power rails.


Cited from Wikipedia

Not the best photo (I couldn't find one that crosses traffic), but you can see the overhead power lines instead of the power rail.

[vansky]

ideally, lrt and skytrain should combine to become sth unique, \

having skytrain run on its own tracks just above ground? and have a limited section of elevation

[racc]

This article mentions SkyTrain.

http://www.starbulletin.com/editorials/2...rom_rail_but_make_sure_its_elevated.html

Oahu will benefit from rail, but make sure it's elevated
By Richard Simonetta

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Oct 01, 2009

Since speaking at the Honolulu Rail Transit Symposium earlier this summer, I have closely followed the progress of Honolulu's elevated rail system. It has been exciting to watch your community steadily move forward to groundbreaking for your rail system and an investment that will pay returns for generations.

Investing in rail transit will bring huge benefits to your community, as it already has to the Phoenix area. It will reduce traffic congestion and provide an environmental friendly alternative to the automobile. It will stimulate the economy in both the short term and ongoing. It will create thousands of good paying jobs from rail construction.

New mixed-use developments will spring up around rail stations, allowing sound urban growth to occur where it will be most beneficial. Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa have seen more than $7 billion in new investment along our 20-mile route.

However, it concerns me when I read news accounts about a few advocates who want to change Honolulu's 20-mile elevated rail system to one than runs at least partly on surface streets.

I do not believe that a street-level rail system is the right choice for Honolulu. I say this as the CEO of a 20-mile rail system that runs completely at street level in Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa.

Surface rail works quite well in the Valley of the Sun because we have relative low density and wide arterial streets with ample room for the trains and cars to share the right-of-way.

From my observations, the same conditions do not apply in Honolulu. Widening streets to incorporate a rail system would seriously disrupt communities and be enormously expensive. With the density of development that already exists along your route, hundreds of businesses and residences would be dislocated for right of way. Surface rail would most likely result in the removal of traffic lanes, which would inevitably increase congestion where the desire is to reduce congestion.

The elevated system Honolulu has planned avoids this. With support columns placed in the roadway median, it won't consume through traffic lanes. And while it will require some right-of-way acquisitions, they will be far fewer than a surface route would require.

Honolulu's elevated rail system operating on an exclusive trackway will have other benefits. It will be much faster than surface rail because the elevated trains won't have to compete with other traffic at intersections.

The Phoenix light rail system crosses 149 signalized intersections and takes 65 minutes to travel 20 miles. Increased speed also means more frequent service and more ridership. Honolulu's elevated rail is projected to carry 100,000 riders a day when fully operational. Our system carries about one-third of that.

Finally, an elevated rail line will also be safer for rail passengers, motorists and pedestrians. The Phoenix surface rail line has averaged five collisions per month since opening last December, resulting in personal injuries, costly damage to trains and vehicles, and service delays to passengers.

In contrast, the elevated, automated SkyTrain system in Vancouver, British Columbia, has operated for 23 years without a single accident.

I urge Honolulu to keep moving forward with your elevated rail system. You only have one opportunity to get it right.

In my opinion, you are making the right choice and your community will reap rewards for years to come.

———

Richard Simonetta is CEO of the new Valley Metro Rail system connecting Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa and has 38 years of experience in the transit industry.

[Metro-One]

Save that article

We should use that one for quoting if any of us go to public debates / open houses.

[agrant]

"The Phoenix surface rail line has averaged five collisions per month since opening last December"

Absolutely mind-boggling.

[hollywoodnorth]

Originally Posted by agrant

"The Phoenix surface rail line has averaged five collisions per month since opening last December"

Absolutely mind-boggling.

LOLZ

[Whalleyboy]

speaking of accidents how many accidents have happen with Seattle's lrt so far?

[GeeCee]

Three I believe as of the one that happened last weekend. Article from the last page: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009950833_soundtransit27m.html

[cabotp]

Love how the accident is caused by a selfish driver who thinks they can disregard what a sign says and do what they want, because that sign shouldn't apply to them.

Gee if it says "NO LEFT TURN", don't turn left you ignorant moron

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Love how the accident is caused by a selfish driver who thinks they can disregard what a sign says and do what they want, because that sign shouldn't apply to them.

Gee if it says "NO LEFT TURN", don't turn left you ignorant moron

No doubt. I'd guess that 99% of LRT accidents are the fault of the automobile driver. But if we build LRT to UBC for example, I think we'll be lucky to see 6 or less accidents per month.

[GeeCee]

This video's always a favorite.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CV2rdGX4JYc Several LRT accidents, not sure what city though.