Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[mr.x]

^ not business activity, but the overall potential ridership of having it right near/along Broadway.

[BCPhil]

Well, a lot of the ridership along Broadway is business driven. Every one underestimates the number of offices along Broadway. I believe its the second highest concentration of jobs outside downtown. As great as it would be to get people to Granville Island, it's hardly a top 10 destination, and the area from VGH to Arbutus along Broadway is #2 or 3 in the lower Mainland. And currently, a rather low number of people working in the area take transit, so a line serving the business district there would help get many, many people out of cars. Granville Island is a place a lot of people visit once a month, Broadway is home to tens of thousands of middle class jobs (the kind of people who take Skytrain, but avoid the bus).

[ozonemania]

I think this person is under the impression that this would be a commuter line, connecting UBC to the other SkyTrain lines.

I do believe alot of Vancouverites still see the role of rapid transit as merely a commuter line connecting suburbs to the city core. Lines like Canada Line and a UBC extension are and should be of a different function.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by ozonemania

I do believe alot of Vancouverites still see the role of rapid transit as merely a commuter line connecting suburbs to the city core. Lines like Canada Line and a UBC extension are and should be of a different function.

Exactly! This is what is different about Vancouver's Rapid Transit system. It's not like people go from Point A to Point B, with the stations in between picking up passengers to Point B, people get on and off everywhere. This is quite evident already on a new piece of infrastructure: Canada Line.

[GMasterAres]

I still don't understand how people (the quoted article) don't understand the difference between skytrain and community rail concepts. The Skytrain is a backbone transit infrastructure. The purpose is high-volume high-ridership and core development (bringing centers to the core).

It shoudln't be used for things like connecting Granville or Douglas College. I think his idea has potential but as an addition to the skytrain infrastructure. For example, you build the UBC extension along Broadway which carves out a main transportation hub lane dealing with a large part of the ridership (businesses, University students, etc.) You then take the 6th/2nd route which is currently just old tracks with grass growing on it (at least through Kits) and you convert it into a usable streetcar or community transit link (LRT?). Have it go up and down Arbutus, have a station at Broadway and Arbutus connecting it to Skytrain, then again have it link near the Olympic Village. That way you have a lighter, cheaper, transportation alternative for people wanting to go to Granville Island, or for people that live up and down the Arbutus strip or 4th Avenue that can reduce bus and car traffic. But the main Skytrain link remains along Broadway as the backbone.

People in the Lower Mainland are so fixated with this black and white garbage. A OR B OR C!! WE DON'T WANT A AND C!! WE DON'T WANT B AND C! Build a highway OR transit. Build a Skytrain OR Streetcars. Put more busses OR invent transporters. People need to add the word "AND" to their vocabulary more imo.

Skytrain AND community transit. Transit AND more highways. Yes it all costs money but plans should take into account everything and push for everything.

[Overground]

In regards to light rail accidents.

LA's Metro Blue Line(light rail), which is apparently the second busiest light rail line in the US, has seen it's fair share of fatalities since 1990. As of Sept last year it's had 91 fatalities(la times link) and 795 accidents(source wiki). This line travels from downtown LA to Long Beach. It's mainly at grade with island platforms http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/blue_line/

Here's it's ridership stats. August 2009 - 79,200 avg. weekday boardings. http://www.metro.net/news_info/ridership_avg.htm



Another good read with some stats if you go to the USA Today link. Some quotes from it below.

Most collisions result from cars and trucks making left turns in violation of signals, often in front of an unseen train approaching from behind. Vehicles or walkers dodging crossing arms or ignoring flashing signals account for most other accidents.

Wendell Cox, a Belleville, Ill., transit consultant, says cities choose light rail for two reasons: "voters think it reduces traffic congestion" — it doesn't, he says — and civic boosters covet a trolley as an "urban jewel," like a stadium or convention center.

"In the long run, until you grade-separate these systems, you're going to have these problems," Cox says. The MTA's 5-year-old Green Line, built atop a freeway median, has had only one fatality, a suicide.

Moving the Blue Line off the street would cost up to $1.6 billion, about twice the original $877 million construction cost, the MTA estimates. Since that's a non-starter, the MTA is trying a public education campaign.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-01-06-blue-line-usat_x.htm

[metroXpress]

Originally Posted by deasine

Exactly! This is what is different about Vancouver's Rapid Transit system. It's not like people go from Point A to Point B, with the stations in between picking up passengers to Point B, people get on and off everywhere. This is quite evident already on a new piece of infrastructure: Canada Line.

And that's because these lines were built or will be built in already-developed, dense, urban areas. Look at all the places you can go along the line~

[racc]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Excuse me, but if cut and cover would "absolutely ruin" the boulevard, what would an eyesore like big ugly overhead guideway pylons do for it? If it's cut-and-cover, sure it's bad during the construction stage, but heals up afterward.

Overhead guideways? Imagine putting them down the Stanley Park causeway, claiming they enhance the view and benefit everbody.
I'm sorry but your logic escapes me on that one.

The suggestion I was responding to was to use cut and cover down UNIVERSITY BLVD which has a lot of trees on it. My suggestion is to use Chancellor instead. Elevated would be fine as their are no trees. Even better, build it on the south side and have it cover the bike path.

[officedweller]

From Metro Newspaper today:

Imagine the London Tube in Vancouver
09 October 2009 01:11

I’m in London, England, this week.

In London, you can’t ski, golf, or sail all in the same day. But if you want to see what you get for more than a century of vision, patience and industry, you must ride the Tube. The London Underground, as it has been called since 1908, is a miracle of mass and rapid transport. Since I arrived, I’ve been zipping around this city of 12 million — armed with an Oyster pass and a route map — like Superman. There is now a congestion fee of $13.50 to drive into central London, but it’s hard to believe anyone would bother, as the Tube goes everywhere. There are 11 lines, and with 270 stations, a station is always nearby.

Vancouver is a much smaller city, yet feels more difficult to get around. I took the Tube from Kensington to Bloomsbury yesterday and it took 18 minutes. That’s like downtown Vancouver to UBC and at 18 minutes I’d still be trying to get over the Granville Bridge. Walking by City Centre station at Granville and Georgia, you get an inkling of the mobility a good subway system brings to a city. Just walk off the pavement onto a train, and you’re on Broadway or the airport. Add another 267 stations to that little string of options, and you begin to understand how it feels to have one of the world’s greatest cities at your feet.

It’s not all sweetness and light in the London Underground. You have to be relatively fit and feisty. There are 412 escalators and 122 elevators to help you get around, but everything doesn’t always work. You can find yourself, as I did the other day, negotiating 175 stairs. But because they’ve been at this since 1908, there’s (almost) always a workaround.

If you’re a SkyTrain skeptic who worries about the value of the Evergreen Line or the legendary line to UBC, I hope you get a chance to ride the London Underground. As big and congested as London is, the Tube makes it manageable. If you can’t imagine how Vancouver will ever build out its system, try to imagine London without the Tube. Then see where your imagination takes you.

[cabotp]

When you really think about about the only reason that the London Underground, or Paris Metro, or New York Subway, or the the Metro System in Toyko (can't think of the name) to name a few feel so good.

Is that they all have a massive amount of multiple lines. They have all been around for ages, our system is still an infant. And because they have been around for a long time the density has grown to support such extensive and vast systems. Density is the key to a successful transit system.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by cabotp

When you really think about about the only reason that the London Underground, or Paris Metro, or New York Subway, or the the Metro System in Toyko (can't think of the name) to name a few feel so good.

Is that they all have a massive amount of multiple lines. They have all been around for ages, our system is still an infant. And because they have been around for a long time the density has grown to support such extensive and vast systems. Density is the key to a successful transit system.

You hit the nail right on the head ! !

[CLC]

Originally Posted by cabotp

When you really think about about the only reason that the London Underground, or Paris Metro, or New York Subway, or the the Metro System in Toyko (can't think of the name) to name a few feel so good.

Is that they all have a massive amount of multiple lines. They have all been around for ages, our system is still an infant. And because they have been around for a long time the density has grown to support such extensive and vast systems. Density is the key to a successful transit system.

While everyone agrees that density matter, I don't think whether the system have been "around for ages" has any correlation to success. Shenzhen (a booming city bordering Hongkong China) subway just got started in 2004 and is arguably operating even smoother than Hongkong MTR (yes Hongkong MTR already shows its sign of aging, with serious technical delays more often this year than ever).

[Millennium2002]

Actually density is sort of related to why the Shenzhen metro was opened.... judging by Google Maps they already have many apartments built near the Metro.

Growth and density here on the other hand is quite slow. I wish it could be faster but at the moment we may be stuck with lines that will take a long time to build. Especially if we don't have the money to afford such a purchase. (China of course has billions and also cheap labour so costs for them are low...)

[racc]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

Actually density is sort of related to why the Shenzhen metro was opened.... judging by Google Maps they already have many apartments built near the Metro.

Growth and density here on the other hand is quite slow. I wish it could be faster but at the moment we may be stuck with lines that will take a long time to build. Especially if we don't have the money to afford such a purchase. (China of course has billions and also cheap labour so costs for them are low...)

Our problem is that we are still wasting billions on highway expansion which is both stealing dollars from transit expansion and creating sprawling development that does not have the density for transit. The provincial government should at least stop the unpopular $1 billion South Fraser Perimeter Road and use the money for the Evergreen Line and other transit improvements.

Always a good idea to send the Premier a quick message [email protected]

[LeftCoaster]

What the government should really do is finish the current round of highway expansions but add more land to the ALR. This will allow for better truck and car transport as it is currently awful but limit the sprawl associated with highway expansion.

Adding an east west limited access route is a long overdue infrastructure project.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

What the government should really do is finish the current round of highway expansions but add more land to the ALR. This will allow for better truck and car transport as it is currently awful but limit the sprawl associated with highway expansion.

Adding an east west limited access route is a long overdue infrastructure project.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by racc

Our problem is that we are still wasting billions on highway expansion which is both stealing dollars from transit expansion and creating sprawling development that does not have the density for transit. The provincial government should at least stop the unpopular $1 billion South Fraser Perimeter Road and use the money for the Evergreen Line and other transit improvements.

Interesting choice of words. I would suggest that SFPR is probably very popular amongst most residents of Metro Vancouver, and is only unpopular amongst a select few. SFPR could bring a potentially huge improvement in quality of life for places like New Westminster and North Delta that are currently stuck with urban streets being used as truck routes.

I would love to see another transit line start up construction today (in addition to Evergreen), but realistically we have needed SFPR since before I was born in 1972.

[Metro-One]

What the government should really do is finish the current round of highway expansions but add more land to the ALR. This will allow for better truck and car transport as it is currently awful but limit the sprawl associated with highway expansion.

Adding an east west limited access route is a long overdue infrastructure project.

100% agree.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by racc

Our problem is that we are still wasting billions on highway expansion which is both stealing dollars from transit expansion and creating sprawling development that does not have the density for transit. The provincial government should at least stop the unpopular $1 billion South Fraser Perimeter Road and use the money for the Evergreen Line and other transit improvements.

Always a good idea to send the Premier a quick message [email protected]

I would think that probably about 99% of the regions residents are in favour of it, and im not kidding. Doubt you can find 25,000 people in the region that oppose it, and 25,000 is only about 1% of the regions population.

[delboy]

Originally Posted by cabotp

When you really think about about the only reason that the London Underground, or Paris Metro, or New York Subway, or the the Metro System in Toyko (can't think of the name) to name a few feel so good.

Is that they all have a massive amount of multiple lines. They have all been around for ages, our system is still an infant. And because they have been around for a long time the density has grown to support such extensive and vast systems. Density is the key to a successful transit system.

London, or New York for that matter, wouldn't be able to afford their extensive systems today had they have not been built when they were.