Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[nname]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The only significant comment I have on the presentation is the repeated use of photos of the St. Clair Ave streetcar in Toronto as LRT (after doing a good job of differentiating "LRT" and "Streetcar" in the graphics). i.e. St. Clair looks cluttered because it has close station/platform spacing.

I think that's because the settings in St. Clair is closely resemble the one on Broadway, with similar density, road width, size of city block, etc. MLK way in Seattle feel very suburban even compared to the potential King George LRT. The one in Houston and Phoenix is probably similar.

St. Clair is essentially a LRT in term of protected ROW and stations. The only things it lacks are speed and signal priority, but obviously that's not something you can see from a picture.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by officedweller

...if UBC draws 80,000 trips and Central Broadway draws 80,000 trips, current transfer loads at Broadway & Commercial, if shifted west to Arbutus, could be halved (since only the UBC 80,000 would remain).

Not really. The extension will not be completed for another 7 years; transit ridership to UBC will be substantially higher then. Moreover, according to the city's own presentation, building the extension could double transit ridership on the line, many of whom would be new UBC riders. Thus, UBC may be drawing 120,000 or 130,000 or more along the corridor immediately after completion. That's not a vast reduction from the current 160,000 now

[nname]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

Not really. The extension will not be completed for another 7 years; transit ridership to UBC will be substantially higher then. Moreover, according to the city's own presentation, building the extension could double transit ridership on the line, many of whom would be new UBC riders. Thus, UBC may be drawing 120,000 or 130,000 or even more after completion.

TransLink's daily ridership projection for 2041 is 322,000

[jlousa]

Here's the article for those questioning some of the comments.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/brit...s-the-way-to-go-ubc-says/article5717504/

Also not sure how anyone could argue that the presentation was well put together. Given the fact it didn't appear on the site till the morning of meeting it's seems likely it wasn't finished until the last minute, certainly looks that way.

[WarrenC12]

So with UBC and the CoV onboard with this, I bet the Dix and Clark camps are currently punching votes and $$$s into their calculators to see who will come out with a stance on this first...

[amor de cosmos]

does it have to be underground all the way to ubc? is there any downside to having it underground for part of the route & above ground the rest of the way?

[Xerx]

Above ground might less aesthetically pleasing.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by amor de cosmos

does it have to be underground all the way to ubc? is there any downside to having it underground for part of the route & above ground the rest of the way?

The neighbourhoods it go through have a large amount of influence and the NIMBY argument as well as space constraints in central Broadway mean the line has to be underground for the majority of it's RoW.

Nice to see the slides indicate the CoV is going along with what pretty much 90% of us on here agreed was the best alternative... 5 years ago. 'Grats lads!

[officedweller]

My point was that riders will drop off as the terminus/transfer point is moved westwards. The extent to which ridership growth negates that drop is a different aspect.

[easy as pie]

yeah, hopefully, if it's alrt the entire way, there's some major rezoning around stations and along the entire corridor. just lay the smack down on the anti-growth types that inhabit the hoods along there. that safeway site at macdonald, for instance, could easily support 300 units over 8-10 stories, totally reasonable for the area, but politically unfeasible.

ideally, whatever city politicians make the call would probably love for the provincial government to impose it and draw fire.

[officedweller]

Despite what people say about the current City Council and administration - if the west side is to densify, it'll have to be done by a Council that rams it through like the current one.

The good thing about the Cambie densification is that it's all along the street and involved current consolidation of parcels - whereas previous rezonings were all "opportunistic rezonings" on large historically consolidated parcels (former grocery stores, warehouses and industrial sites).

[quobobo]

Originally Posted by easy as pie

ideally, whatever city politicians make the call would probably love for the provincial government to impose it and draw fire.

I wish they would. Any federal or provincial party that proposed tying infrastructure improvements to upzoning would get my vote in a second - it seems like the only way around excessive localism in municipal politics.

[CBeats]

I don't see why the line couldn't run at grade along University Boulevard, in the middle of the street. It would save a bit of money. Additionally, the people who want at-grade LRT because it looks European and sophisticated could at least have it happen there, hahaha

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by CBeats

I don't see why the line couldn't run at grade along University Boulevard, in the middle of the street. It would save a bit of money. Additionally, the people who want at-grade LRT because it looks European and sophisticated could at least have it happen there, hahaha

The cost difference between elevated and at-grade along University Blvd would probably be negligible.

But most likely, it'll probably end up as cut-and-cover.

Regardless, "future station" sites will probably be planned along University Blvd. to allow for a future station to be built to serve the Musqueam's redevelopment of the area around there....albeit the golf course portion is a long ways off.

[officedweller]

The problem with third rail RRT at grade is that it needs to be fenced - so it's more of a barrier than if it were elevated or in a trench.

It would be nice if it ran elevated into campus (i.e. with a stop at Wesbrook Village too)

This would be nice, with 2 stations one on campus and one nearby - but not elevated on campus.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Here's what I had in mind - you avoid the built up areas of University Boulevard (and cuts throuh Acadia Park student housing) - it could loop further to the south as well. I think it would cut through an area given to the Musqueum near the church.

[jsbertram]

It seems that the Musqueam "Block F" proposal has been in the news recently, but missed by many people here.

From the Van City Buzz:



Community consultation is top priority for the Musqueam Indian Band as it moves ahead with a proposal to redevelop an area known as Block F, a 22-acre parcel situated on the University Endowment Lands (UEL).

The land — a free title, not a band reserve — was returned to Musqueam as part of the 2008 Reconciliation Agreement with the Province of British Columbia. Musqueam’s proposal is for a vibrant mixed-used neighbourhood that will include housing, retail space and a 120-room hotel. The goal is to create a place that Musqueam and UEL community members can be proud of.

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2012/11/musqu...t-of-university-endowment-lands-block-f/


If the Musqueam are serious about building 8,000 to 12,000 housing units (aka condos), plus commercial and hotel space on the property, they would likely be willing to cough up some $$$ to get a transit station included on their property.

This development looks to be similar in size & scope as the proposed build-out of Oakridge, so there should be extra incentive to get Skytrain out to UBC to service this development.

The 10-15 year time frame for building seems to align with the same timeline to have Skytrain to UBC completed.

[squeezied]

Yea there's no point in having an underground subway come up to grade at university boulevard. The potential cost savings from having such a short at-grade length would be diminished from the added costs of engineering the transition from underground to at-grade.

Anyways as excited as I am hearing this news I don't see much point in having this presentation. Given TransLink's financial issues, there's no money to spend on any rapid transit systems in the region. Were CoV's effort's in vain then?

[mr.x]

Food for thought...how many additional SkyTrain cars do you think we'll need in order to serve the Broadway extension in, let's say, 2021? Ideally, I really hope they order some trains that are not only compatible (well it's a given requirement) but also are designed with more noise insulation. The Mark trains are terrible in underground environments, and it's atrocious when the trains run at full speed in the New Westminster Millennium Line cut-and-cover 1-km tunnel.

By 2021, the Canada Line would probably (or I hope) be running with all of its 20 trains (or perhaps more by then?). I'd say at least an additional 10 of the 2-car trains would be needed. The ridership growth from the completion of the Broadway segment will be enormous.

If the Broadway extension goes all the way to UBC as SkyTrain, I wouldn't be surprised to see a 40,000-50,000 jump in daily ridership on the Canada Line overnight - largely coming from Broadway-City Hall Station, obviously. By 2021, at current ridership growth rates (we're already at 134,000/day), even without the Broadway extension the Canada Line could very well be reaching 180,000 riders per day.

- Those traveling on East-West Vancouver buses utilizing the Canada Line to get onto Broadway SkyTrain.
- Those traveling to UBC from south of Fraser (Richmond, Delta, etc.) opting to using the Broadway SkyTrain to get to campus via the Canada Line instead.
- Those traveling from the Expo Line transferring onto Broadway SkyTrain at Commercial-Broadway to use the Canada Line, whether it be to get to Richmond/YVR or Downtown.

And lots more, the list could keep going.

But my point is, we're going to see exponential ridership growth across the region on all services. The Broadway SkyTrain has much more potential to be the game changing transit line for the region than the Canada Line, although much can be attributed that the Canada Line is already built and will be a major feeder line.

Just watch: Broadway-City Hall Station (Canada Line AND Broadway SkyTrain) will be the next Commercial-Broadway Station hub of the region.

[Metro-One]

The presentation is an obvious political maneuver with the provincial election looming.

The hope is to get a transit pledge war occurring between the Liberals and the NDP.

Also with Surrey always voicing their desire for rapid transit this presentation is also done in the hopes of having this project built first.

Any party that pledges to begin building this line within the next few years (along with a Massey Tunnel replacement) would instantly get my vote. Of course, in the end, political promises are not worth very much...

[officedweller]

They're probably getting their ducks in a row for when the NDP take over and want to spend money on transit...(of course they need to convince the regional boards too)

(Unlike Toronto, where the Province was standing with a bucket of cash and the councillors were infighting over LRT vs subway...)