Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[jlousa]

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

[lezard]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

Good question. Probably not.

To the second question: I don't know of any. But London had once been considering just that kind of duplication on Oxford Street.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5301366.stm

And TfL are still looking for a solution.

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/oxford-street-congestion-to-be-investigated/20098464

[Zassk]

^ That was why I suggested 4th Avenue for the streetcar. Broadway will be serviced by SkyTrain. Why not choose another arterial route through Kits for the streetcar.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

I'm not sure about the length of Market Street in San Francisco, but I remember from my last visit that there is a lower tunnel for BART, an upper tunnel for Muni "light rail", plus street-level tracks for the rebuilt "PCC" streetcars and rebuilt antique streetcars to use, and also regular buses and trolley-buses on the street.

Plus cars and trucks, and on-street parking.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Zassk

^ That was why I suggested 4th Avenue for the streetcar. Broadway will be serviced by SkyTrain. Why not choose another arterial route through Kits for the streetcar.

Why not tunnel under 10th Ave (using barely noticeable TBMs) for the SkyTrain from Fraser to UBC, and let Broadway (effectively 9th Ave) remain the surface transit corridor using buses -- keep using the 9 for local stops every block or so, and 99B for 'express bus' service? If 10th Ave SkyTrain doesn't grab enough of the Broadway transit users, or the natural population increase starts to clog Broadway buses again, then a Tram / Streetcar / LRT can be put on Broadway as a 'transit relief' line.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by lezard

Good question. Probably not.

To the second question: I don't know of any. But London had once been considering just that kind of duplication on Oxford Street.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/5301366.stm

And TfL are still looking for a solution.

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/oxford-street-congestion-to-be-investigated/20098464

"One of London's busiest and most congested shopping streets could become a traffic-free zone with a tram running from end to end, the mayor has said."

In other words, private vehicles banned from using the street. Trams and buses only. And people strolling around & shopping.
Does anyone actually believe that will happen on Broadway for even a few blocks?

[JoeBugliati]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Why not tunnel under 10th Ave (using barely noticeable TBMs) for the SkyTrain from Fraser to UBC, and let Broadway (effectively 9th Ave) remain the surface transit corridor using buses -- keep using the 9 for local stops every block or so, and 99B for 'express bus' service? If 10th Ave SkyTrain doesn't grab enough of the Broadway transit users, or the natural population increase starts to clog Broadway buses again, then a Tram / Streetcar / LRT can be put on Broadway as a 'transit relief' line.

Translink would never spend over 2.6 B on skytrain extension to ubc and keep the 99. It would defeat the purpose of building skytrain.

The Benefit of LRT, albeit slower than skytrain, is that it would replace bus service entirely on broadway.

Translink could re-instate a rapid bus to UBC along a similar path as the 84, however, that is something they probably wouldnt do because they would want to push people to the LRT line.

Joe

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by JoeBugliati

Translink would never spend over 2.6 B on skytrain extension to ubc and keep the 99. It would defeat the purpose of building skytrain.

The Benefit of LRT, albeit slower than skytrain, is that it would replace bus service entirely on broadway.

Translink could re-instate a rapid bus to UBC along a similar path as the 84, however, that is something they probably wouldnt do because they would want to push people to the LRT line.

Joe

Once again, what is the cost/benefit of LRT vs. the amount of new #99 and #9 buses you could buy?

Skytrain under Broadway would at least allow the cancellation of the #99 entirely (ideally for a B-Line route in Surrey if not already in place), and possibly a reduction in #9 buses, based on observed demand.

I imagine reduced service for all lines that go from existing Skytrain stations to UBC as well, including 84, 41, 49, etc. All of these buses and labour hours could be better used in the SOF.

Here's an interesting question. Based on what we know of Skytrain operating costs, how many "bus hours" worth of costs would it be to maintain the UBC extension, vs. ridership. I'm betting that operationally, Skytrain would save money for the people it will move.

[JoeBugliati]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Once again, what is the cost/benefit of LRT vs. the amount of new #99 and #9 buses you could buy?

Thats a good question and it would be great to see an unbiased study on that.

I don't know how translink or the province can afford 2.6 - 3B to build skytrain to ubc.

At least with the canada line the airport authority and federal government contributed two thirds of the cost. Unless ubc and ottawa step up, i don't think skytrain is financially feasible, even though the ridership and demand is there.

joe

[CLC]

The Benefit of LRT, albeit slower than skytrain, is that it would replace bus service entirely on broadway.

No offence. But I am not sure if you really know there are several different bus routes run on Broadway.

About LRT replaces entire bus route(s) in a key transit corridor like Broadway. Other big cities example tell you that it will never happen. For instances, there are still so many bus routes, minibus routes run on the Yuen Long Main Road in Northwest Hong Kong.

Remind that a single LRT route is not as flexible as several bus options from transit customer point of view. Some locals sure will complain about losing "one-seat-bus-ride"(say #17, #16) with forced transfer to LRT. Of course Skytrain has the same issue, but at least it is way more reliable and faster even "with transfer".

Rather than waste money on "hard-to-know-exact-outcome" LRT/streetcar. I do agree that Translink should experiment a real rapid bus route to UBC (not necessary on Broadway though), and see how people react with dedicated bus lanes.

[JoeBugliati]

Originally Posted by CLC

No offence. But I am not sure if you really know there are several different bus routes run on Broadway.

None taken. My previous post was no entirely clear. I meant that the 9 and 99 would be entirely removed.

But regardless of whether skytrain or a tram is built along broadway, other bus routes, on top the 99, would be discontinued or re-aligned. Consider Translink discontinued the 98 on granville as to funnel people to the Canada line to pad ridership numbers.

Consider the 16. If skytrain was built i seriously doubt translink would keep that line even though its convenient.

joe

[deasine]

Nope, the 9 will not be removed. The stops aren't close enough to replace a local service. In Europe, if the Broadway corridor was replaced by something else, the local routes would also be eliminated, but not in North America.

And for the record, I'm not saying we should have more frequent stops either.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by JoeBugliati

None taken. My previous post was no entirely clear. I meant that the 9 and 99 would be entirely removed.

But regardless of whether skytrain or a tram is built along broadway, other bus routes, on top the 99, would be discontinued or re-aligned. Consider Translink discontinued the 98 on granville as to funnel people to the Canada line to pad ridership numbers.

Consider the 16. If skytrain was built i seriously doubt translink would keep that line even though its convenient.

joe

I think you mean that when a major east-west ( or north-south) connecter is made, like an ALRT line, there is a tence to "shuttle" peole toward it on perpendicular lines, and drop some of the parallel lines.

My reading of your statement was Vacouver has, in the main WBroadway corridor, two buses /99 & 98/ which SHOULD be dropped, but that you fear for other east-west routes, which, authorities will say, are now un-necessary due to their proximity to the alrt. I agree with you totally.

It's ironic, but up until the 1970's Vancouver had numerous N>S< routes as now, but only the Broadway and 41st. Then came the 49th, then the King Edward 25th (I think this operates more in the eastern part of the city; not sure on that one), and, as the say, the 16th.

I wonder, too how much modification there will be on the 4th Ave. bus?

Anyway, back to your statement, it would be great if they maintained the 16th. As it runs through Pacific Spirit Park, in another direction from proposed alrt, it could remain viable if there were sufficient densities along its route.

What sort of density does it transverse now? And What are its route boundaries. This is the downside of getting alrt - sometimes a good bus route is lost.

[JoeBugliati]

Originally Posted by deasine

Nope, the 9 will not be removed. The stops aren't close enough to replace a local service. In Europe, if the Broadway corridor was replaced by something else, the local routes would also be eliminated, but not in North America.

And for the record, I'm not saying we should have more frequent stops either.

If skytrain is built, keep 9, remove 99

if tram is built, no 9 or 99. Stops would be 400-500m apart. Longer stops than 9.

But with either option there would still be alternations in other lines that run on broadway.

Joe

Joe

[ozonemania]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Here's a better question, should rapid transit be built the Broadway corridor would there even be a need for a streetcar even 20yrs out?
Is there any examples worldwide that has both running the same stretch of road for that amount of distance, and if so what is the population of that city and the ridership of the lines in question?

Hong Kong Island has a Metro that runs roughly the same route as the tramline/streetcar system above. The streetcar is very old, but extremely popular still and very inexpensive. I don't know the ridership for the streetcar line for this 8+ million population city but as you very well know it is a very dense city indeed.

[CLC]

I don't know the ridership for the streetcar line for this 8+ million population city but as you very well know it is a very dense city indeed.

^
Hong kong Tramways (@Hong kong Island): 233000/day (2005 figure), 1.5 minutes headway at peak.

Hong kong MTR light rail (@Northwest): at least 370000/day, 1.3 minutes headway at peak through Yuen Long Main Road.

Both are losing money as of now. The Hong kong Island Tramway was just completed bought by Veolia Transport, and declared that it intends to "expand" the tramline.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Once again, what is the cost/benefit of LRT vs. the amount of new #99 and #9 buses you could buy?

Skytrain under Broadway would at least allow the cancellation of the #99 entirely (ideally for a B-Line route in Surrey if not already in place), and possibly a reduction in #9 buses, based on observed demand.

I imagine reduced service for all lines that go from existing Skytrain stations to UBC as well, including 84, 41, 49, etc. All of these buses and labour hours could be better used in the SOF.

Here's an interesting question. Based on what we know of Skytrain operating costs, how many "bus hours" worth of costs would it be to maintain the UBC extension, vs. ridership. I'm betting that operationally, Skytrain would save money for the people it will move.

Possibly a reduced service on the 84. But I don't think you would see a reduced service on the 41 or 49. At least not right away. If ridership drops drastically sure they would probably drop the service level of those two routes.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by cabotp

Possibly a reduced service on the 84. But I don't think you would see a reduced service on the 41 or 49. At least not right away. If ridership drops drastically sure they would probably drop the service level of those two routes.

Depends on how much their traffic relies on SkyTrain pickup. 41 and 49 will lose almost ALL their UBC traffic that doesn't originate along the line... but that probably isn't a great deal. These routes also serve other destinations. UBC is not the be all and end all, after all.

84 will likely be discontinued if Skytrain is chosen to continue from VCC Terminus and IF it goes all the way to UBC. 84 directly parallels the route and purpose. Anyone who picked up the 84 enroute would need to travel 6-8 blocks to catch the M-Line.

On the other hand, if the M-Line only goes to Cambie or Granville ( a more real possibility than people here realize, I think ), the 84 would likely continue.

If it's LRT with 400-500m stops, the 84 will be faster.

On that point, the grid system not only allows faster LRT, but also much faster car travel as well. In dense European centers, it doesn't matter if the LRT is slow... the cars are slow too. Here, we are competing with an arguably more efficient street grid ( for surface transit ).

Another point for transit in its own ROW.

An LRT/Tram would work well west of Burrard. From that point, however, I would probably institute an Streetcar connecting to the Arbutus ROW and run it along 4th avenue.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by lezard

I am going to have to ad a post scriptum to all my posts. Streetcar is not RAPID TRANSIT in my opinion, it is local transit. I agree with you all on this.

I did not engage in a debate over whether streetcar can replace B-line; I don't, myself believe it can. I merely commented on my belief that Broadway does not pose any greater technical challenges than any other street in the world running streetcars, such as those in Geneva.

Now that we all agree I hope we can all agree that the problem on Broadway is not local transit, infact the local transit is the best local transit in the entire region. The number 9 is incredibly frequent, comfortable and stops ever few hundred meters and the 99 takes people on the longer trips.

The problems are, A) congestion, B) travel time and reliability, C) costs to operate.

Like you said your self a tram on Broadway is local transit and solves problems associated with local transit. For the problem with rapid transit on Broadway it would ease congestion(and to what extent is questionable), and thats it. You would still have your problems with reliability, travel time and costs to operate.

In other words its useless to build a tram down Broadway as it isnt a solution for the problem.

Broadway needs rapid transit not more local transit of which there is plenty, you agreed, so why still advocate a tram down Broadway. Lets focus on solving our problems first before we focus on novelty items like trams.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Depends on how much their traffic relies on SkyTrain pickup. 41 and 49 will lose almost ALL their UBC traffic that doesn't originate along the line... but that probably isn't a great deal. These routes also serve other destinations. UBC is not the be all and end all, after all.

84 will likely be discontinued if Skytrain is chosen to continue from VCC Terminus and IF it goes all the way to UBC. 84 directly parallels the route and purpose. Anyone who picked up the 84 enroute would need to travel 6-8 blocks to catch the M-Line.

On the other hand, if the M-Line only goes to Cambie or Granville ( a more real possibility than people here realize, I think ), the 84 would likely continue.

If it's LRT with 400-500m stops, the 84 will be faster.

On that point, the grid system not only allows faster LRT, but also much faster car travel as well. In dense European centers, it doesn't matter if the LRT is slow... the cars are slow too. Here, we are competing with an arguably more efficient street grid ( for surface transit ).

Another point for transit in its own ROW.

An LRT/Tram would work well west of Burrard. From that point, however, I would probably institute an Streetcar connecting to the Arbutus ROW and run it along 4th avenue.

I think people who live along 41st or 49th. Would love to see some of the UBC ridership disappear. Those routes are jammed full as it is.

Right now the #41 has about a 5-7 frequency at rush hour. That could possibly change to 7-10 minutes. But that would only be after seeing what the ridership is like with the UBC extension done.