Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Those comments make my head hurt.

I can't read those pro-LRT Broadway opinion pieces and comments anymore, they make me far too frustrated, which then makes me angry, and i am trying to be a happier person, haha!

[nname]

Even the article make my head hurt...

The professor doesn't seems to be able to distinguish between Tram and LRT, or "peak hour capacity" with "crush load"...

The consultation material state an end-to-end travel time of 28min for LRT. Add in 5min each end for layover and recovery, you'll need 22 active trains to run the line every 3min. Assume 3-car trains a 16% spare, 77 cars are needed. With each one cost at least 4M, the minimum* cost for the train alone would be about 26M/km. Just how are they going build the system with only 22M~42M/km shown on that table?

One of the reason that the cost for Vancouver's system is more expensive because it includes everything from consultation, design, train, land, construction, to testing and commission. Many other system report only construction, testing and commission as the project cost.

Anyways... I don't even want to comment on rest of the stuff....

* = Toronto's LRV cost 6M a piece. Using this number will bring the cost of trains to 39M/km.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by mr.x

I'm gonna say this thing will cost $3.2-billion from VCC-Clarke to UBC, and that's the cost of doing it right and not cutting corners in design...the $1.5-billion and $2.8-billion figures from the City seem a bit low, especially considering construction wouldn't theoretically begin for another 3-4 years earliest.
- $1.8-billion from VCC-Clarke to Arbutus
- $1.4-billion from Arbutus to UBC

Contribution breakdown:
- Feds: $800-million
- Province: $1-billion
- Translink: $1-billion
- City of Vancouver: $200-million
- UBC: $200-million (how likely? lol)

Musqueam: How much would they pay to have a station at their new development beside the UBC Golf course?

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by mr.x

I don't think the Musqueam have plans to build 8,000-12,000 housing units. It's a pretty small site, at 22 acres. From what I've heard, their plans is to build enough housing for 3,000-5,000 people...which is similar to the size of the Oakridge development's condo aspect in its 28 acres.

I was told 8,000-12,000 units which I took to mean 'condo units'.
Perhaps the birdie was including hotel rooms in the 'units' figure, but I can't see them building a massive hotel there unless they are also thinking of building a convention facility as part of the complex.
Or a casino?

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I can't read those pro-LRT Broadway opinion pieces and comments anymore, they make me far too frustrated, which then makes me angry, and i am trying to be a happier person, haha!

I like the comment Jerry Dobrovolny made about the impact of rebuilding the entire streetscape of Broadway to make way for an LRT:

"It’s the cut-and-cover without the cover."

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Musqueam: How much would they pay to have a station at their new development beside the UBC Golf course?

No idea, but I'd like to think they would be able to afford $30-50-million. That's what an underground station would cost.

I was told 8,000-12,000 units which I took to mean 'condo units'.
Perhaps the birdie was including hotel rooms in the 'units' figure, but I can't see them building a massive hotel there unless they are also thinking of building a convention facility as part of the complex.
Or a casino?

Somehow I don't think it's 8,000-12,000 units....and definitely not a casino. The planned hotel by the Musqueam has been announced as 120 guestrooms in size. In comparison, the Sheraton Wall Centre - the largest in the city - has 733 guestrooms.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If that is the case, what would the maximum train length on the Broadway line be? How many cars? Four?

Since this would be built as an western extension of the Millennium line, using 80 M platforms (as already exist on the M-Line stations) would let a 6-car Mark I or 4-car Mark II train to use the full platform.

Remember too, the eastern extension from Lougheed Station to PoCo is in the early construction stages (as the Evergreen Line) , and will also have (at minimum) 80M platforms.

By the time the Extension to UBC opens, 100M or 120M platforms may be needed, but before then Translink will try to accommodate the increasing rush-hour ridership by purchasing more cars so they can run full length (80 M) trains, and run these full length trains closer together.


Right now during rush hour, Translink is running a mix of 2-car, 4-car and 6-car Mark I trains and 2-car and 4-car Mark II trains. At the peak of rush hour, it's frustrating not knowing where the first door of the train will be, so everyone crowds in the middle of the platform to ensure they get on even if its a 2-car Mark I that arrives.

If every train was 80 M (the length of the platform) during rush hour, people could spread out along the platform, but that means more cars are making up fewer trains - resulting in fewer 'trains per hour' going through a station even if it is the same number of cars per hour passing through.

[jsbertram]

So now we know the City of Vancouver prefers underground Skytrain to UBC.

Does anyone know when the Translink "UBC Line Rapid Transit Study" will be released?
They've been working on this since early 2009, and it was supposed to be available "Fall 2012"

A Phase II report I saw earlier this year had rejected the other alternatives leaving SkyTrain underground to UBC as their preferred choice. Having a western terminus at Arbutus (with B-Line running from Arbutus to UBC) was an option to lower costs.

[amor de cosmos]

I remember a stat saying the canada line can move as many people as a 10-lane highway (something like that). does anyone have any idea what the number would be for this new extension to ubc?

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by amor de cosmos

I remember a stat saying the canada line can move as many people as a 10-lane highway (something like that). does anyone have any idea what the number would be for this new extension to ubc?

Since it would merely be a seamless continuation of the Millennium Line, which was advertised as 20-lanes back in its day, it would be the same for Broadway...20 lanes.

[Millennium2002]

Metro-One... I agree. Those comments are just intolerable at times...

If the LRT fans are so desperate, they should be pleased that they already have a city (Surrey) who's willing to try it out. But the Broadway corridor should really be left alone from further alterations on the surface aka Cambie corridor.

In some ways, I have to wonder if this is an actual concerted attempt at a money grab from the government given the liability issues that the Canada Line builders had to deal with when they cut off business to Cambie corridor merchants...

[twoNeurons]

You have to understand who the listeners of NW980 generally are. They're not generally the ones who will use the system.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

By the time the Extension to UBC opens, 100M or 120M platforms may be needed, but before then Translink will try to accommodate the increasing rush-hour ridership by purchasing more cars so they can run full length (80 M) trains, and run these full length trains closer together.

Translink has forecast that Skytrain can handle peak hour demand for the Expo Line up until at least 2041, using 80m platforms. Peak demand for Central Broadway should be much lower than DT, so I would think that 80m platforms should be adequate for Central Broadway for many decades to come.

There's some good information from the Expo Line Upgrade Strategy document. The ultimate capacity of Skytrain is 25 700 pphpd, based on 93 second headways. At 75 second headways, that figure jumps to 31 000 passengers per hour.

The existing system was designed to handle a full MKI, 6 vehicles per train fleet operating at recovery headway of 75 seconds. A 6 vehicle MKI train has a length of 76.2 metres. The system’s headway is constrained primarily by the Waterfront Station terminus reversal, and no other major issues were identified relating to trackwork in relation to capacity.

http://www.translink.ca/~/media/document...e%20strategy%20%20project%20summary.ashx

[Meraki]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Right now during rush hour, Translink is running a mix of 2-car, 4-car and 6-car Mark I trains and 2-car and 4-car Mark II trains.

Uh, no.

There are no 2 car Mk-I trains in service, there has never been since the opening of the line. 2 car Mk-IIs were eliminated a while ago as well.

Currently normal service runs 4-car Mk-I, 6-car Mk-I and 4-car Mk-II.

Once the Evergreen line is completed, 2-car Mk-II will run at double frequency (every 3 minutes) between Douglas and VCC-Clark.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Meraki

Once the Evergreen line is completed, 2-car Mk-II will run at double frequency (every 3 minutes) between Douglas and VCC-Clark.

will there still be 4-car Mk-II trains between Lougheed and VCC-Clark, or will it all become two-car trains at double frequency?

[Zassk]

Interesting statement about Waterfront reversal being the limiting factor to capacity. I wonder if anything can be done about that.

[Spork]

There appears to be space to set up some sort of alternative configuration with a third tail track, or extend the tracks about one car length.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Zassk

Interesting statement about Waterfront reversal being the limiting factor to capacity. I wonder if anything can be done about that.

1. Improve signalling and train control software
2. Extend the line toward Hastings and short-turn every second train at Waterfront (with a pocket track)
3. Extend the line (North Shore or West End from Burrard?) and create a split like the one in Bridgeport and Columbia, with alternate trains going toward each branch
4. Extend the line and create a loop so train don't need to turn around

One of the report clearly stated that they're going to do #1 and squeeze a few more seconds out of the system.

If any of 2-4 is done, then the new limiting factor would probably be King George or Commercial-Broadway...

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by nname

1. Improve signalling and train control software
2. Extend the line toward Hastings and short-turn every second train at Waterfront (with a pocket track)
3. Extend the line (North Shore or West End from Burrard?) and create a split like the one in Bridgeport and Columbia, with alternate trains going toward each branch
4. Extend the line and create a loop so train don't need to turn around

One of the report clearly stated that they're going to do #1 and squeeze a few more seconds out of the system.

If any of 2-4 is done, then the new limiting factor would probably be King George or Commercial-Broadway...

Is there a stated hypothetical limit to what the headway can be after these improvements are built?

[mr.x]

Always count on the Georgia Straight to publish something "against the man"....they have a anti-Broadway SkyTrain/pro-LRT article and a big part of it is on Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan's views: http://www.straight.com/article-844381/vancouver/burnaby-mayor-slams-broadway-line-talk

Obviously, he's against it...who didn't see that one coming?