Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[The Lonely Tanner]

I posted this a while back, but thought it relevant to bring up again.

Given the alignment we're using, and taking into account the potential for expansion to PoCo (even if this wasn't in the plans), perhaps the best place for a storage yard would be behind the SuperStore in Coquitlam along Christmas Ave. There's an abandoned steel works plant back there with more than enough room.

It would then be a simple matter of extending the track along the CP-rail line to PoCo just behind the Canadian Tire.

[Mininari]

Originally Posted by The Lonely Tanner

I posted this a while back, but thought it relevant to bring up again.

Given the alignment we're using, and taking into account the potential for expansion to PoCo (even if this wasn't in the plans), perhaps the best place for a storage yard would be behind the SuperStore in Coquitlam along Christmas Ave. There's an abandoned steel works plant back there with more than enough room.

It would then be a simple matter of extending the track along the CP-rail line to PoCo just behind the Canadian Tire.

Not a bad idea, but then you're diverting the line away from Coquitlam Town Center and Douglas College, no?

[NucksFanInVan]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Was that timing mentioned in the discussion paper? So we're saying more frequency for a line expecting less ridership than that Canada Line?

You've got it exactly. Much appreciated if someone can explain the logic here.

[officedweller]

I gather that this location is along the future ROW to Port Coquitlam, i.e. east of the Coquitlam Central Station?

[GeeCee]

Yup, right beside what used to be The Keg..

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=49.272131,-122.794704&spn=0.003402,0.009645&t=h&z=17

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Not a bad idea, but then you're diverting the line away from Coquitlam Town Center and Douglas College, no?

No, it would spur off the main line for use to access the storage yard and for future PoCo/Pitt Meadows extensions.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Unfortunately I don't have a link for this, but here goes:

Some imbecile actually wrote a "letter to the editor" decrying our investments in "light metro." This person went on to say ridiculous things like skytrain doesn't have the ridership (incenuating doesn't have the ridership EVER) to support its use.

^^Even though i assume this is a winnipeg newspaper that you are talking about, i bet you $10000000000 that it is DMJ. I've seen him add comments to the honolulu local media about the overall evilness of skytrain.

If you see 'skytrain' 'ridership' ' light metro' 'gestapo', it is DMJ....

^^^ one major advantage of the business case for skytrain for PMC is that there is less of a need for building a new OMC, as edmonds could be used. i am unsure if this means an additional storage area, also.

(oringinal skytrain vs LRT vs rapidbus assessment planning docs below, circa 2004.)
http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/PubDocs/bcdocs/368601/Attach2.pdf

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Was that timing mentioned in the discussion paper? So we're saying more frequency for a line expecting less ridership than that Canada Line?

In my view this is not a problem with the Evergreen Line, but a problem with the Canada Line, where more trains should have been ordered and initial frequencies should have been increased (especially the evening ones). There is no reason for the Evergreen Line to be dragged down because of the Canada Line's mismanagement.

I have no idea why they don't simply increase the evening and night frequencies ASAP.

[mr.x]

^ i think the Expo Line crowds will be manageable during the Olympics, but i can't say the same for the Canada Line...simply not enough trains.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Mininari

Unfortunately I don't have a link for this, but here goes:

Some imbecile actually wrote a "letter to the editor" decrying our investments in "light metro." This person went on to say ridiculous things like skytrain doesn't have the ridership (incenuating doesn't have the ridership EVER) to support its use.

This is an open message to ANYONE else out there who believes this crap: Come ride the millenium line with me tomorrow at 7:30am. Come on down... and oh, wait, thats not even the BUSY line that necessitates expansion (expo line).

Where do these crackpots come from?
Again, sorry I don't have a link to this letter, but it doesn't really matter -- I'm just flabbergasted that we have people around here who believe that any investment in rapid transit is a waste of money.

well maybe he caught it late night - i caught it a few times after work around midnight - the m line from brentwood to lougheed and it was empty me and maybe 1 other in the whole station once on the train it was also pretty much i would have a whole car to myself

anyway i got a thing in the mail about the evergreen line a bunch of open houses coming up if anyone wants the dates i can post em

[kylemacmac]

After the Evergreen extension is built, I bet the skytrain system routes will be:

VCC-Douglas (Evergreen Millennium)
Waterfront - King George (Expo)

with either a dedicated shuttle running between Lougheed and Columbia, or every 2nd or 3rd train on the expo line going up to Lougheed.

Interlining to a larger extent was tried in Toronto in the 60s, and just resulted in a slew of problems, as any incident somewhere in the system backed everything up:


The TTC found that when the extra time waiting for a train from the correct route was considered, the time savings were not significant. Interlining was discontinued because of the confusion and delays

Here's a cool article about how transfers can be good:

http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

[DKaz]

I think they were suggesting that... Millennium Line could run from Waterfront to Production Way-University to reduce transfers for SFU students.. Evergreen Line would be VCC to Douglas.

[mr.x]

Could we call VCC to Douglas the Millennium Line instead? I much prefer that name, instead of *cringe* "Evergreen"....let the shuttle section between Columbia and Lougheed have that name.

[BCPhil]

The other thing to keep in mind is that with more track and more riders there is less need to keep trains somewhere (IE they are running on the system instead of sleeping). As the system grows the natural capacity on the tracks for trains grows too. I don't think a large space will be needed to keep extra trains, Especially if they put in proper sidings and stubs at the terminus. There is quite a bit of room at VCC to keep more trains during the low period, and they could do the same in Coquitlam.

For example, the Canada Line has a huge yard that is empty most of the time. And on the Millennium line, at the end of the day when the trains leave service they are first put on sidings then put to rest right on the tracks around Lougheed.

The yard would only be needed for the difference in trains between peak service and low service, which in the future I don't think will be that much as the popularity of off peak travel grows.

In fact, it might just be cheaper to run a few extra trains a day instead of buying land and maintaining infrastructure to keep them sitting.

[mr.x]

^ if it were just about one or two dozen cars, i'd agree...but we're talking about potentially 100+ cars over the next 10 years.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

In my view this is not a problem with the Evergreen Line, but a problem with the Canada Line, where more trains should have been ordered and initial frequencies should have been increased (especially the evening ones). There is no reason for the Evergreen Line to be dragged down because of the Canada Line's mismanagement.

I have no idea why they don't simply increase the evening and night frequencies ASAP.

I'd argue the M-Line needs more frequency during off hours than the C-Line right now.

Either way, they have the trains, they just don't run them enough. As discussed here before, there are idle C-Line trains at all times of the day. For a driverless system, it's a little ridiculous.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by DKaz

I think they were suggesting that... Millennium Line could run from Waterfront to Production Way-University to reduce transfers for SFU students.. Evergreen Line would be VCC to Douglas.

I don't think a lot of students are coming from the COV to SFU. How about an addition at Columbia allowing trains from KG to VCC. Is that impossible at this point?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Could we call VCC to Douglas the Millennium Line instead? I much prefer that name, instead of *cringe* "Evergreen"....let the shuttle section between Columbia and Lougheed have that name.

All of the names are cheesy. Leave the naming to stations, we should have gone with numbers or colors, like every other place.

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I don't think a lot of students are coming from the COV to SFU. How about an addition at Columbia allowing trains from KG to VCC. Is that impossible at this point?

SFU students from CoV use Millennium Line. I'm talking about those coming in from Burnaby, Richmond (via 410/22nd St Station), New Westminster, Surrey. Trains clear at Production Way-University from both directions and fills up in either direction in the afternoon.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

After the Evergreen extension is built, I bet the skytrain system routes will be:

VCC-Douglas (Evergreen Millennium)
Waterfront - King George (Expo)

with either a dedicated shuttle running between Lougheed and Columbia, or every 2nd or 3rd train on the expo line going up to Lougheed.

Interlining to a larger extent was tried in Toronto in the 60s, and just resulted in a slew of problems, as any incident somewhere in the system backed everything up:


The TTC found that when the extra time waiting for a train from the correct route was considered, the time savings were not significant. Interlining was discontinued because of the confusion and delays

Here's a cool article about how transfers can be good:

http://www.humantransit.org/2009/04/why-transferring-is-good-for-you-and-good-for-your-city.html

It depends on the transfer though.

It didn't work in Toronto because the headway between trains was pretty long. So waiting for the right train took some time. Also, their system was flawed as at Bay street station there were 2 platforms, and trains to a single destination would alternate between the two floors. So if you were entering the station, you wouldn't know which platform your train was going to be on so people would wait in the stairs between floors.

In Vancouver where headways are short that is not as much of a problem. As well, we wouldn't have the multiple platform problem that Toronto had. At Lougheed, each destination would have it's dedicated platform.

I really don't think a shuttle would work, mainly because of Columbia. When trains are arriving ever 2 minutes in both directions, having a train enter the station and fully unload and fully load, then reverse direction would be a bottle neck. If shuttles are used, service levels on the Expo line need to be maintained, meaning more trains coming out of Surrey. The shuttle would slow them down a lot.

If the two lines are separated it would have to be at Lougheed where the 3 platforms would allow a train to rest while other trains flow through the station. The problem is that the switches there still require trains to cross each other's path, which to me isn't the greatest idea.