Canada Line | Completed

[nname]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Wow, did anyone else notice how this new extension of the Calgary C-train had full ROW along its new route? And the only two or three times it did interact with a street at street level was akin to a heavy rail street crossing? This needs to posted n the pro-skytrain group. No more using Calgary's C-train as a Broadway example (The C-train is more akin to skytrain then it would be a street grade LRT down Broadway).

That's why it cost close to 100million/km.

[SpongeG]

but didn't calgary plan the city knowing LRT would be coming to that area? so they had the forsight to plan the right of way

coquitlam did it for an LRT too - thats why they left a blvd along the one street and its not even going to be used for the evergreen

[kylemacmac]

Too bad Skytrain isn't being planned as an completely integrated regional network from the beginning to enhance the transfer stations. For example, in Vienna and Montreal, lines entering newer transfer stations are offset to opposing 45 degree angles so that both lines are parallel at the transfer point. this means that the bulk of transferring riders can simply walk across the central platform to their connecting train, while only the less popular transfer is required to go up or down a set of stairs.

Montreal: Lionel-Groulx Station

from metrodemontreal.com
http://www.metrodemontreal.com/orange/lionelgroulx/index.html

Vienna: Inbound-Outbound Coordination
http://www.humantransit.org/2009/08/vienna-the-network-effect-made-real.html

INBOUND/OUTBOUND coordination like this would've been perfect for Broadway/City Hall between the Canada Line and an extended Millennium Line:



Source: Flickr

*Needless to say, that there is absolutely nothing like this yet in Vancouver, and the Canada Line completely missed the opportunity to make a single fast connection between the Expo/Canada Lines. It sure would be beneficial if a governing body like Translink set the system routing more or less in stone to capitalize on the benefits of great inter-connectibility between lines from the start, rather than missing out by deciding these things later on. Our system will only suffer further from lack of foresight in this regard!

[clooless]

Originally Posted by frinkprof

You Canada Line aficionados may be interested to hear that SNC-Lavalin has just been announced as the winning bidder in the design-build competition for Calgary's West LRT.

Check out my WestLRT thread, with a brand new route animation video here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=168428

Sunalta Station reminds me of the Millennium Line's Brentwood Station. And look at all that seating at the underground station of Westbrook. Do you see that, Canada Line?

Meanwhile, the stations for the NE LRT extension look like glorified bus shelters; a barely adequate roof slapped over a slab of concrete.

[nname]

Originally Posted by kylemacmac

Too bad Skytrain isn't being planned as an completely integrated regional network from the beginning to enhance the transfer stations. For example, in Vienna and Montreal, lines entering newer transfer stations are offset to opposing 45 degree angles so that both lines are parallel at the transfer point. this means that the bulk of transferring riders can simply walk across the central platform to their connecting train, while only the less popular transfer is required to go up or down a set of stairs.

INBOUND/OUTBOUND coordination like this would've been perfect for Broadway/City Hall between the Canada Line and an extended Millennium Line:

*Needless to say, that there is absolutely nothing like this yet in Vancouver, and the Canada Line completely missed the opportunity to make a single fast connection between the Expo/Canada Lines. It sure would be beneficial if a governing body like Translink set the system routing more or less in stone to capitalize on the benefits of great inter-connectibility between lines from the start, rather than missing out by deciding these things later on. Our system will only suffer further from lack of foresight in this regard!

I think making it 45 degree for both lines would be very very expensive... imagine the 120m platform for the Millennium line... most of them would be under someone else's house or business!

I think this is a nice way to put the stations too:


Note: the other platform for the Millennium line would be above the one shown on the diagram. Too bad that the Canada Line is too far north, or otherwise they can use the same elevator for all 3 floors!

[officedweller]

That's what BCPhil was wondering about - we don't think there's enough clearance above the guideway to have the M-Line guideway and platforms above the Canada Line guideway.

At least with the M-Line below the Canada Line guideway, it allows a mezzanine above the M-Line platform (say at the same elevation as the Canada Line Guideway) which gives you flexibility as to whether it is a centre platform or an outside platform station. With the drawing above, you've got the irritating down and up underpass to access the eastbound M-Line platform (even if the westbound connection is convenient).

[deasine]

The 45 degree thing would be nice, but isn't necessarily needed. That would've increased the cost of the Canada Line quite a bit since you have to offset the tracks quite a distance away instead of following the road, meaning you have to tunnel bore.

If you want to go all out, might as well do Hong Kong's. Not only are the lines on top of each other, but transfer stations comes in two, so that each line in each direction are on the same level, so your transfer is only occurs on the platform.


Source: Wikipedia

Nice? Very nice? Worth the price tag? Not really. At least not for Vancouver at its current state.

Originally Posted by nname

I think making it 45 degree for both lines would be very very expensive... imagine the 120m platform for the Millennium line... most of them would be under someone else's house or business!

I think this is a nice way to put the stations too:


Note: the other platform for the Millennium line would be above the one shown on the diagram. Too bad that the Canada Line is too far north, or otherwise they can use the same elevator for all 3 floors!

There isn't enough clearance for the Millennium Line to exist above the Canada Line. Also, in your plan, moving the elevator would be pricey. It's not like elevated stations where you have this flexibility.

[kylemacmac]

Yeah, it doesn't really matter about the stations layouts that much, but a little bit of good pre-conceived system network planning combined with zoning changes to take advantage, and coincide with the opening of, new rapid transit lines could really go a long way to make sure that ridership is a good levels right off the bat. I find the fact that there is still discussion about the technology choice for the Evergreen Line and Broadway line a little bit crazy, and really just stupid. Discussion is good, but when you have the start of a quality system in place like Skytrain, why not build it out, rather than bicker and waste people's time? Vancouver could really benefit from a transportation 'tsar' like Janette Sadik-Khan in New York City. Somebody with vision who sets people's expectations high, and delivers on promises. Or at least tries to. An interesting case study to check out is the expansion of the Metro network in Madrid over the last decade or so, orchestrated by their local gov't. They've effectively taken a quantifiable number of cars off the road in a growing city:

http://www.metromadrid.es/en/comunicacion/prensa/noticia0134.html

I think Vancouver should aim high like Madrid in this respect.

[kylemacmac]

Source: Wikipedia

Wow. Super intense! I should shut up now or somebody at Translink will start looking into getting a feasability study going for something like this and nothing will happen for another few decades while they "try to find the best solution that will offend nobody and get the absolute best price for the most people....ever", as they do.

[whatnext]

I see in BIV that Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc is suing Imperial Oil and various parties for hydrocarbon contamination at 41st and Cambie. I wonder how much they ran into down there.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by officedweller

That's what BCPhil was wondering about - we don't think there's enough clearance above the guideway to have the M-Line guideway and platforms above the Canada Line guideway.

At least with the M-Line below the Canada Line guideway, it allows a mezzanine above the M-Line platform (say at the same elevation as the Canada Line Guideway) which gives you flexibility as to whether it is a centre platform or an outside platform station. With the drawing above, you've got the irritating down and up underpass to access the eastbound M-Line platform (even if the westbound connection is convenient).

We already have the C-Line and M-Line / E-Line crossing paths at Granville / Dunsmuir. Because the Dunsmuir tunnel used by M-Line / E-Line was built close to the surface of Dunsmuir St., the C-Line Granville St. tunnels have to go under the Dunsmuir St. Tunnel. Imagine if there was a C-Line station at Dunsmuir (instead of Georgia), then the portion of the Skytrain station & mezzannine under 'The Hudson' would be expanded westwards under Granville, and have new elevators/escalators installed to connect to the C-Line Dunsmuir St. station.

This sure would have been a better connection between the Skytrain lines than we have right now with the two Waterfront stations connecting through The Station (when it's open) and Granville / VanCityCentre stations connecting though the Bay / Pacific Centre / Vancouver Centre (when they are open)

[lightrail]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

We already have the C-Line and M-Line / E-Line crossing paths at Granville / Dunsmuir. Because the Dunsmuir tunnel used by M-Line / E-Line was built close to the surface of Dunsmuir St., the C-Line Granville St. tunnels have to go under the Dunsmuir St. Tunnel. Imagine if there was a C-Line station at Dunsmuir (instead of Georgia), then the portion of the Skytrain station & mezzannine under 'The Hudson' would be expanded westwards under Granville, and have new elevators/escalators installed to connect to the C-Line Dunsmuir St. station.

—? Have you ever used Granville Station? Notice how you first go down stairs to the ticket hall under Seymour? Then notice the extremely long escalator down to the platforms? Granville Station is the deepest on the system.

The Dunsmuir Tunnel is deep - about 25 to 27 metres below Dunsmuir. The Canada line passes over the top of the Dunsmuir Tunnel (Expo SkyTrain) and clears the top of the Dunsmuir Tunnel by 1 metre. When you ride Canada Line from VCC to Waterfront, you'll see the tunnel actually climb over a "hump" - that's so it can pass over the existing SkyTrain.

Granville Station is actually centred under Seymour with the Hudson entrance being at the west end of the platforms.

Connecting tunnels between VCC and Granville would be long. VCC is south of Georgia Street and Granville is under Dunsmuir and east of Granville. I estimate that the tunnels would be around 300 metres. For comparison, the distance from the west end of Granville Station platform to the east end of the Burrard Station platform is around 350 metres. That's quite a distance to walk underground.

[jsbertram]

I see you've missed a part of my message:
"Imagine if there was a C-Line station at Dunsmuir (instead of Georgia)"

In other words - VCC station would NOT have been built south of Georgia, but a different C-Line station "Dunsmuir Station" could have been built at Dunsmuir instead.

Or VCC Station could have been shifted north one block to sit between Pacific Centre and The Hudson and between the Pacific Centre Food Fare and the Dunsmuir Tunnel.

In either case, the two Skytrain stations (Granville for M-Line and E-Line; the imaginary "Dunsmuir Station" for the C-Line) could have been connected together in a common mezzanine that is open during SkyTrain's operations, rather than relying on the business hours of The Station and Pacific Centre / The Bay / Vancouver Centre to provide convenient interline transfers.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I see you've missed a part of my message:
"Imagine if there was a C-Line station at Dunsmuir (instead of Georgia)"

In other words - VCC station would NOT have been built south of Georgia, but a different C-Line station "Dunsmuir Station" could have been built at Dunsmuir instead.

Or VCC Station could have been shifted north one block to sit between Pacific Centre and The Hudson and between the Pacific Centre Food Fare and the Dunsmuir Tunnel.

In either case, the two Skytrain stations (Granville for M-Line and E-Line; the imaginary "Dunsmuir Station" for the C-Line) could have been connected together in a common mezzanine that is open during SkyTrain's operations, rather than relying on the business hours of The Station and Pacific Centre / The Bay / Vancouver Centre to provide convenient interline transfers.

If the City Centre (CC) was moved closer to Granville (GV), that means the CC platforms would be just under Pacific Centre Food Court, meaning that the ticket concourse must exist below the platforms. It would be rather unusual to have this kind of setup. Access to Pacific Centre would go through the Food Court or Jacob. Of course, the ticket concourse can be where Jacob exists currently, with access to street level via H&M, but Pacific Centre won't let you do that. Moreover, accessing the platforms (centre platform) would require one to use two flights of stairs/escalators/elevators to the ticket concourse/connection corridor to the Expo Line (think Oakridge-41st). This type of configuration won't work well in a busy downtown station. I don't think such a configuration would work because currently, the C-Line goes over top of the Dunsmuir Tunnel, then dips down slightly (I'm pressuming under Pacific Centre), and then goes back up to CC platform. This means that the platforms would be rather slanted.

The alternate method is to have the C-Line go under the Dunsmuir Tunnel, but that would exponentially increase the cost of the station. There will be even longer escalators and elevators, all for the matter of a closer connection with GV.

Here's a good reference video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebodV3UCHpc

Really, I don't see any benefits of having CC north of Georgia so it's closer to GV aside from the direct transfer. Having CC south of Georgia allows greater coverage when more entrances are built, given that the existing structures permit this (i.e. Robson Square fantasy, Robson St. Entrance, Sears Entrance, etc.).

I know your point is to have a direct connection from CC to GV, but there are conceptual plans by the CoV to have a more direct transfer between the two stations. Also keep in mind that there really aren't that many people transferring from the Expo Line/Millennium Line to the Canada Line, at least not yet. Until there is direct connection, CC and GV won't be indicated as an official transfer station. When there is a direction connection, CC and GV will probably be branded as the same station (renamed CC?), similar to Commercial-Broadway. And like I said before, you can transfer from CC to GV via street level, which I really don't find an issue, except when there is snow.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by lightrail

—? Have you ever used Granville Station? Notice how you first go down stairs to the ticket hall under Seymour? Then notice the extremely long escalator down to the platforms? Granville Station is the deepest on the system.

I was going by the 2002 technical report, which indicated that the RAV tunnel was to go under the Dunsmuir Tunnel with a minimum clearance of 1 Metre between (the underside of) the Dunsmuir Tunnel and the top of the RAV tunnel
source: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/docu...w&usg=AFQjCNG56IYtZXcy0CIauaYlyjGzqh79Tw
Page 9, Section 2.1 Tunnel Criteria

You might notice in this report that there were three planned stations under Granville St. - at Cordova St., at Dunsmuir St. and at Nelson St., rather than just the two actually built - at Cordova St. and at Georgia St.

[BCPhil]

I think if you add a Robson street entrance to VCC the station would be perfect. I think having more coverage area provided by the 2 stations is better than a transfer station. Its also amazing how the station mezzanine is right there at mall level, entering the station is like walking into a store.

[metroXpress]

^ It would be better if we can have a direct connection between the two stations. Simply call it ROBSON and have platforms 1, 2, 3 & 4

[Zassk]

^ I would rather focus on having a direct connection hallway at Waterfront...

CC and GV are intended to serve different city blocks.

[mrjauk]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

I think if you add a Robson street entrance to VCC the station would be perfect. I think having more coverage area provided by the 2 stations is better than a transfer station. Its also amazing how the station mezzanine is right there at mall level, entering the station is like walking into a store.

I don't understand why they didn't add a Robson Street entrance. Was this once again to save costs? This was a silly oversight.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by mrjauk

I don't understand why they didn't add a Robson Street entrance. Was this once again to save costs? This was a silly oversight.

It was so a future government could add one in and be considered pro-transit / green / friendly / fuzzy / cuddly... etc..

I jest.