Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[deasine]

The 43... but I don't think it comes often enough. Every 7-10 minutes. Really though, the 41 isn't by that much slower than the 43.

That's the reality of it in Vancouver. There is congestion wherever you go. Rapid transit needs to have its own ROW for most routes in order to have a significant increase in speed. Unfortunately, Vancouver did not lay out its city with super wide boulevards or grassy medians unlike Europe and many parts of the states nor do we have many rail lines running throughout the city, which is why SkyTrain is imporant.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Mininari

There should be one! Reality is there won't be any UBC Skytrain for a while... not unless the province lands another bonanza windfall from resource royalties and suddenly has billions in surpluses again.

There's no reason why the line can't be done in phases. People here say how it will cost a lot more, but if it's planned right, a link to Cambie or Granville can start revenue service ( and thus start paying itself off ) while the rest of the line is built.

Have the new 99 terminus around Cambie. An extra transfer would only apply to people coming in on the Expo line and the speed of the train between Commercial and Cambie would more than make up for the lack of a 99 B-Line. In addition, people can still take the #84 ( move its terminus to Commercial ) or the #41 or the #33 if they're going to UBC.

The transit triangle is an essential part of our transportation infrastructure, if you ask me.

[AMTDGT]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

There's no reason why the line can't be done in phases. People here say how it will cost a lot more, but if it's planned right, a link to Cambie or Granville can start revenue service ( and thus start paying itself off ) while the rest of the line is built.

.

I have often thought that the way to build it is to run 2 TBM's from the finning lands to the Safeway parking lot at Broadway & Arbutus where a spoil access
pit can be built. Then while the TBMs continue to UBC the Finning Lands to Granville section can be brought into revenue service, maybe even 1 station at a time, while the 2nd sections dirt comes out at Broadway & Arbutus, maybe even using the CP Arbutus Rail Line to move out the spoil instead of trucks.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by deasine

The 43... but I don't think it comes often enough. Every 7-10 minutes. Really though, the 41 isn't by that much slower than the 43.

That's the reality of it in Vancouver. There is congestion wherever you go. Rapid transit needs to have its own ROW for most routes in order to have a significant increase in speed. Unfortunately, Vancouver did not lay out its city with super wide boulevards or grassy medians unlike Europe and many parts of the states nor do we have many rail lines running throughout the city, which is why SkyTrain is imporant.

The 43 is nice when you can catch it. The problem is because the 41 runs way more often. Chances are you will see a 41 before a 43. Which sometimes puts me in the dilemma of should I catch the 41 bus or wait for the 43. Sometimes the decision is made for me though with the bus being full.

[trofirhen]

...... but I've wondered ........ if a westbound train at Tenth and Alma (presumably just below street level) is going to emerge around Blanca, then that means it has to climb the Tenth Avenue Hill, which is pretty steep, to pop out at the top.

Conversely, for trains going east (down the hill) they need pretty good brakes.

Can the trains used in Vancouvers rail technology do this?

Or would it be better (though less picturesque, I admit) to have the UBC station deeper underground, and thereby mitigate that steep slope the trains will otherwise encounter?

Any feedback?

[deasine]

Remember, with SkyTrain, it's not like conventional rail technology where brakes have to be applied. In fact, that's really the selling point of ART systems, where ART systems can handle steeper grades relative to other metro systems as well as sharp turning radii. While different technology, the Canada Line handles steep grades from Broadway to the Olympic Village with no problem, albeit the fact that it does travel slower inbound heading into Waterfront.

Having deep stations just drives up the cost of building rapid transit lines significantly. Line 14 of the Paris Metro is just evidence of that. Keep in mind that if we went with your concept, we would skip Sasamat Station or build another deep underground one, which just adds to the cost.

[cabotp]

I believe the sky train technology is able to handle a 6% grade both going up and down. Not sure what the grade of 10th is between alma and sasamat. But I don't think it is 6 %.

I'm sure someone can spend a little time over there with a gps unit figuring out the grade

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

...... but I've wondered ........ if a westbound train at Tenth and Alma (presumably just below street level) is going to emerge around Blanca, then that means it has to climb the Tenth Avenue Hill, which is pretty steep, to pop out at the top.

Conversely, for trains going east (down the hill) they need pretty good brakes.

Can the trains used in Vancouvers rail technology do this?

Or would it be better (though less picturesque, I admit) to have the UBC station deeper underground, and thereby mitigate that steep slope the trains will otherwise encounter?

Any feedback?

Its not the UBC station you need to worry about actually. It Sasamat. There's about 4 km between Alma and UBC and at most 100m elevation to gain. There's about 80m to Sasamat and 1.5km.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Its not the UBC station you need to worry about actually. It Sasamat. There's about 4 km between Alma and UBC and at most 100m elevation to gain. There's about 80m to Sasamat and 1.5km.

Do you have a possible scenario as what might be done / how this might be cosntructed?

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Do you have a possible scenario as what might be done / how this might be cosntructed?

An 80 m gain over 1500 m distance is a 5.3% grade. That can be done by SkyTrain according to what capotp said above, but is close to its limits. More likely, the tunnel would start as close to the surface as possible (maybe even at-grade) at the lower station, and then would have a deep station at the top of the hill, maybe 20 or 25 m deep. That way the grade would be less.

[deasine]

The depth of Granville Stn is approximately 22 metres below street-level, so it's not too bad. Mind you, a lot of money can be saved just building a future station instead.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

ZweiMalcom is insane! I can not even read his posts for more than 5 minutes without getting frustrated.

He seriously reminds me of this family guy skit. (he is the donkey)

Sorry for acting a little childish, but I could think of no other way to describe what I think of him and his approach to arguing (and denial).

That's really a perfect reference. He lives in some bizarro world where demolishing Skytrain would be the best option at this point.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Does anyone else find it annoying how he edits posts by adding his own commentary? I mean, it's his own blog...he can do whatever he wants, but...

Don't forget referring to himself in the 3rd person. As if there wasn't enough evidence of his insanity...

All you have to do is ride the 99. I only have to do it rarely, thank goodness. I do transfer through Commercial-Broadway a lot on the Skytrain though, and I pity the people in line for the 99 B-Line.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That's really a perfect reference. He lives in some bizarro world where demolishing Skytrain would be the best option at this point.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Don't forget referring to himself in the 3rd person. As if there wasn't enough evidence of his insanity...

All you have to do is ride the 99. I only have to do it rarely, thank goodness. I do transfer through Commercial-Broadway a lot on the Skytrain though, and I pity the people in line for the 99 B-Line.

If I may make a suggestion about this guy who is driving you all bonkers with his anti-Skytrain rantings (it seems): TUNE HIM OUT.

Acknowledging and reacting to him only feeds his energy and depletes yours. Like a boorish party guest or an idiotic high-school classmate, don't give him the pleasure of "getting to you."

Turn your attention to more positive stuff, and eventually, he'll wither and fade, like an old balloon.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Zassk

An 80 m gain over 1500 m distance is a 5.3% grade. That can be done by SkyTrain according to what capotp said above, but is close to its limits. More likely, the tunnel would start as close to the surface as possible (maybe even at-grade) at the lower station, and then would have a deep station at the top of the hill, maybe 20 or 25 m deep. That way the grade would be less.

Originally Posted by deasine

The depth of Granville Stn is approximately 22 metres below street-level, so it's not too bad. Mind you, a lot of money can be saved just building a future station instead.

Seems to me a deep station at Sasamat is about the only the way to go.

[deasine]

Not necessarily. The less desirable option is having the station at Blanca, which is a block away. It's not located within the heart of the business area, but then again, neither is King Edward for Cambie Village either.

[mr.x]

^ Living around West Point Grey Village, a station at Sasamat is the way to go...hoards of people get on/off the 99 and the trolleys at Sasamat and it's right at the heart of the commercial activity on that street. It's a bit different from the King Edward context.

But I could see local merchants wanting it be built at/near Blanca, 2 blocks away, as a station Sasamat would most likely require cut and cover construction right at the foot of their businesses.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by mr.x

But I could see local merchants wanting it be built at/near Blanca, 2 blocks away, as a station Sasamat would most likely require cut and cover construction right at the foot of their businesses.

Precisely. And this would probably be the only station constructed that would actually be directly disruptive to a large number of businesses as it would need an open station pit for quite a long period of time, especially since it's such a deep station.

Looks like Zwei is now comparing the Las Vegas Monorail with the proposed Honolulu's Rapid Transit. Quite humorous if you ask me.

[TransitFreak]

Selfishly, I would like to see the station at Sasamat. The accessibility to the heart of the area there would be impressive. I would say it would be similar to the Yaletown station on the Canada Line. What I love about Yaletown is that the station is right at the heart of everything there, makes it a very attractive destination (for me anyways). Anyways, back on course, although more expensive to build, I think you'd get the most impact as well being at Sasamat.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by TransitFreak

Selfishly, I would like to see the station at Sasamat. The accessibility to the heart of the area there would be impressive. I would say it would be similar to the Yaletown station on the Canada Line. What I love about Yaletown is that the station is right at the heart of everything there, makes it a very attractive destination (for me anyways). Anyways, back on course, although more expensive to build, I think you'd get the most impact as well being at Sasamat.

Agreed...ideally, it should be built on Sasamat. But if I were in the shoes of one of the many businesses there, for my own sake I would want it built on Blanca...can't blame there, there's no doubt that it will affect their businesses which rely on borderline profits to survive.

I couldn't agree more with regards to Yaletown, I think the success of that station has been the biggest surprise.