Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by crazyjoeda

Skytrain from Vancouver to Langley is dumb. The distance is simply to far it would take 1.5 hours to travel from end to end and the small trains will be full by the time they reach New West. Look at cities like Toronto and London their metro systems serve the densely populated central city districts and fast limited stop commuter rail is used for travel from the suburbs.

Translink needs to develop a new WCE line from Vancouver to Surrey and Langley. Ultimately LRT could one day be built to connect town centres with in Surrey/Langley and commuter rail stations, but for now Translink needs implement new B-Line routes south of the Fraser.

Distance as well as density. Commuter rail would definitely make more sense.

Skytrain / metro for backbone high-density routes, LRT / trams / buses for the inner city as well as less-dense routes and commuter rail for longer distances. It's what a lot of European cities have successfully done (Oslo, Stockholm come to mind. Shoot, even Eastern European cities such as Budapest and Prague do it).

[SpikePhanta]

But if there is a new WCE line what would the route be?

I posted a thread once thinking it could use the grandview cut then down to a new rail bridge next to the pattulo then down until langley ect.

Could either use Pacific Central or Waterfront.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Zassk

Is Langley such a lucrative destination for SkyTrain that it's worth bypassing Newton? I don't think so, I would think that Newton would be the priority. Newton is also a lot closer than Langley. Fraser Hwy goes through mostly rural areas away from town centers. To build 11 km (or whatever) of extra guideway through rural fields just to service Langley seems a little excessive to me. That's a lot of extra trains, a lot of expensive guideway, all to serve a community that ideally should not grow as quickly as Surrey.

But with a Skytrain along Fraser Highway, planners can create new Transit Oriented Developments in new townsites that aren't following the broken car-centric models of the town planning for the last century.

All the proposed buildings around King George Station aren't happening because the land is cheap; they are also encouraged to build that way by zoning that emphasizes livable density in the area around the Skytrain station.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by racc

Actually this is a big problem in Vancouver. There are not enough diesel buses available to allow for all the street closures people want on some weekends. This is why there is only a maximum of three closures on main streets for Car Free day. With rail transit on Broadway, there would even be fewer diesel buses to handle more passengers. Also, with the transit underground, many people can get to the festival by transit instead of clogging up the neighbourhood with traffic. If SkyTrain is used, it would be easy and inexpensive to dramatically increase the service to meet the demand of people getting to Greek Days and other festivals.

I had a good laugh when I read that Car Free day last year had 10,000 people DRIVE to the Car Free day events.

Some people just don't get the concept ....

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

But with a Skytrain along Fraser Highway, planners can create new Transit Oriented Developments in new townsites that aren't following the broken car-centric models of the town planning for the last century.

But aren't Newton and/or Guildford the ideal locations for TODs? Why start from scratch along Fraser Hwy? I don't get the fixation on extending development in the southeast direction. I would think that we want to discourage development in the Fleetwood/Cloverdale region, not encourage it. Perhaps establish a permanent green belt to prevent a continuous sprawl from Surrey to Langley, and to encourage TOD nodes on the west side of the green belt.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by SpikePhanta

But if there is a new WCE line what would the route be?

I posted a thread once thinking it could use the grandview cut then down to a new rail bridge next to the pattulo then down until langley ect.

Could either use Pacific Central or Waterfront.

There are a few options... one would follow the Amtrak/Via rail routing alongside Burnaby Lake. South of Fraser, it would go along an existing ROW from Scott Road through to Newton and then straight along 56th to Cloverdale, eventually terminating near Willowbrook.

This is the old BCER line. You can see a map of it on this page: http://www.fvhrs.org/photos-BCER.htm

[invisibleairwaves]

Originally Posted by Zassk

But aren't Newton and/or Guildford the ideal locations for TODs? Why start from scratch along Fraser Hwy? I don't get the fixation on extending development in the southeast direction. I would think that we want to discourage development in the Fleetwood/Cloverdale region, not encourage it. Perhaps establish a permanent green belt to prevent a continuous sprawl from Surrey to Langley, and to encourage TOD nodes on the west side of the green belt.

There's already a greenbelt in the form of the ALR. But land is cheap on the east side of it, so development is inevitable. Why not work with that and provide transit service to it, rather than covering our eyes and pretending it doesn't exist?

Both Fraser Highway to Langley and King George Boulevard to Newton are important transit routes. Since Holland Pointe is apparently dead, there's room to put a switch just west of King George Station and build a branch down King George Boulevard. This seems like the most effective way to cover all the bases.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

...I think it's more likely that the street festivals would have to be held elsewhere, like on 4th, or the LRT would have to be allowed through the festival ( at a reduced speed, no doubt ) I'm not against LRT, I'm just stating that you can't just shut down a train line for a festival. It's a fixture and should be thought of as somewhat permanent.

And yet Toronto somehow manages with diesel buses when the streetcar lines are blocked for festivals: http://www3.ttc.ca/Service_Advisories/Route_diversions/512_St_Clair_ci.jsp

I'm telling you guys, this is not an issue that will prevent LRT. Any at-grade LRT line on any city street in any city needs a "Plan B" to deal with scheduled closures, be they street festivals or road work. Closures are scheduled for off-peak times so as to make alternatives feasible. It's a fact of life for any transit operator.

Better to stick with more persuasive arguments 'cause you'll loose this one, and you don't really want to give the LRT lobby any victories no matter how small.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I don't like the vehicle levy for the simple reason that it has no relation to the distance traveled. My gf and I find it necessary to keep a car (hard to argue in today's society), but we share a single car, and drive maybe 6000 kms/year. How is that comparable to the average person that commutes 50 kms/day and puts 25,000 kms/yr on their car.

I feel your pain. I drive only about 5000km during off-peak times with my van, and it would be a LOT less if my wife didn't require the use of a wheelchair. Yet I pay just as much insurance as someone who drives 30,000 km/year.

[punface]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

And yet Toronto somehow manages with diesel buses when the streetcar lines are blocked for festivals: http://www3.ttc.ca/Service_Advisories/Route_diversions/512_St_Clair_ci.jsp

I'm telling you guys, this is not an issue that will prevent LRT. Any at-grade LRT line on any city street in any city needs a "Plan B" to deal with scheduled closures, be they street festivals or road work. Closures are scheduled for off-peak times so as to make alternatives feasible. It's a fact of life for any transit operator.

Better to stick with more persuasive arguments 'cause you'll loose this one, and you don't really want to give the LRT lobby any victories no matter how small.

I still think this is still a big disadvantage for LRT/Streetcars, but you are right that we should not overstate our case.

Actually I'm surprised Toronto (or anywhere) would allow a streetcar line to be closed for a festival like that. There are plenty of places in the GVRD I would love to see streetcars on, but I would be pretty angry if they got shut down for some festival.

[SpongeG]

they can always move the festival if its such a big deal

[Metro-One]

I think the point is we can avoid this festival / street closure mess altogether (whether it be moving the festival, having a plan B transit schedule created, etc...) if we simply build the Broadway Line as grade separated (underground) skytrain.

[splashflash]

Surrey competes with Vancouver for next rapid transit extension

By Jeff Nagel - Burnaby NewsLeader
Published: June 30, 2010 4:00 PM
Updated: June 30, 2010 4:29 PM
There are growing signs Vancouver and Surrey are jockeying for position to be next in line for rapid transit expansion.

Vancouver officials are strongly promoting the need for a new line west on the congested Broadway corridor to UBC.

TransLink is studying both that idea and options for rapid transit extension in Surrey – connecting the SkyTrain terminus there to Langley and White Rock.

The transportation authority hasn’t yet decided which extension should get priority.

But the Metro board voted June 25 to urge TransLink to pursue the South of Fraser expansion through Surrey next, after the Evergreen Line is built.

Vancouver Coun. Raymond Louie tried to amend the motion to put the Broadway extension on equal footing, but the board rejected the idea, saying priority for the Surrey extension fits the region’s growth strategy.

“It wasn’t well-received,” Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart said of the amendment.

“Vancouver needs to embrace the rest of the region and the enormous needs the rest of the region has.”

Surrey Coun. Marvin Hunt said much of the growth in the region is expected to come to the South of Fraser area in the decades ahead, adding Broadway merchants – in contrast – are resisting a SkyTrain system and the higher densities that would result.

“It was very clear from the beginning this was Vancouver’s attempt to pull the Broadway line ahead of everything else.”

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I think the point is we can avoid this festival / street closure mess altogether (whether it be moving the festival, having a plan B transit schedule created, etc...) if we simply build the Broadway Line as grade separated (underground) skytrain.

i know its stupid to argue about something that might never happen

but carry on people its amusing

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

There's already a greenbelt in the form of the ALR. But land is cheap on the east side of it, so development is inevitable. Why not work with that and provide transit service to it, rather than covering our eyes and pretending it doesn't exist?

Both Fraser Highway to Langley and King George Boulevard to Newton are important transit routes. Since Holland Pointe is apparently dead, there's room to put a switch just west of King George Station and build a branch down King George Boulevard. This seems like the most effective way to cover all the bases.

I think King George should be the last station for skytrain in Surrey. A new system with central as the main point would work great. This is why i think LRT would easily work on king George to Newton and up 104 ave to Guildford
Currently there is a huge gap between Newton and Central that lacks use for skytrain. Surrey is working on building the gap between central and Guildford though it can be seen in a node area building up between the too on 104ave and 144th street. But the huge gaps between lights would work well with a lrt with its own right away in Surrey.

[Zassk]

There are also several high voltage powerline rights of way crisscrossing Surrey in interesting directions. Several of them converge on or pass close to Surrey Centre. You could run LRT's along those rights-of-way and not need to tear up any lanes of road.

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by Zassk

There are also several high voltage powerline rights of way crisscrossing Surrey in interesting directions. Several of them converge on or pass close to Surrey Centre. You could run LRT's along those rights-of-way and not need to tear up any lanes of road.

It's hard enough to build bike paths along those right-of-ways. I highly doubt BC Hydro/Terasen would allow light rail along the corridors.

[Mac Write]

And get into prime cancer growing area. It will grow like wild-fire along an LRT running beside high-voltage power lines.

[invisibleairwaves]

LRT on KG or FH would be a mistake for the same reasons LRT on Broadway would be a mistake: reduction in capacity and BIG reduction in speed for a relatively minor reduction in cost, compared to Skytrain. Plus, I don't think Surrey drivers are up to the challenge of sharing the road with streetcars.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

LRT on KG or FH would be a mistake for the same reasons LRT on Broadway would be a mistake: reduction in capacity and BIG reduction in speed for a relatively minor reduction in cost, compared to Skytrain. Plus, I don't think Surrey drivers are up to the challenge of sharing the road with streetcars.

Not a great comparison here. Within the South of Surrey region, statistics have demonstrated that the majority of the transit users only take transit within their area. With the Central Broadway District and UBC, which are the key destinations served by the "UBC Line"/Millennium Line, statistics provided by TransLink and the City of Vancouver have demonstrated that the number of people traveling to those districts that do not reside within the City of Vancouver is almost equal to the number of passengers travelling to Broadway from the city itself.

In terms of capacity, while capacity will definitely be reduced compared to SkyTrain, it is possible to build LRT in Surrey with a much higher capacity than on Broadway:

• Street blocks are longer, allowing for longer platforms, thus longer trains. This is a major limitation on Broadway. According to the 1999 Technical Study, platforms can only fit a maximum of 3-cars.
• Fewer cross intersections, allowing for higher speed and better reliability.
• Wider ROW. It isn't hard to widen King George Hwy at this point of time to accomodate larger medians and maintain existing traffic flows.

Not worth the cost? That's another debate. Definitely though, if the LRT chose corridors such as the old Interurban, it would reduce the cost of building such a network by many millions of dollars.