Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[huenthar]

What would be the main technical challenges/where are the major problem spots to running the whole line elevated in the alleyway between Broadway and 10th?

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by huenthar

What would be the main technical challenges/where are the major problem spots to running the whole line elevated in the alleyway between Broadway and 10th?

I think the vertical supports are wide enough that they would block any traffic trying to use the alley.
Alley-ways are barely wider than one lane wide, since they aren't used as much as streets are.

See google streetview of Terminal Avenue for an idea of how wide these are.
Can you see why they are in the middle of the median?

[jsbertram]

Found a website documenting much of the construction os the Canada Line (nee RAV line).

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.ca/

It shows hows difficult and time consuming it was to build even 'quicker and cheaper' cut and cover tunnels and stations.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Found a website documenting much of the construction os the Canada Line (nee RAV line).

http://canadalinephotos.blogspot.ca/

It shows hows difficult and time consuming it was to build even 'quicker and cheaper' cut and cover tunnels and stations.

"Found."

Inside joke: that was probably everyone's favourite website around here while the Canada Line was being built.


I recall one of the common complaints from residents/businesses was that SNC-Lavalin had promised the cut and cover tunnel would be built in segments. They would work on a few blocks at a time only, and then move on to the next after restoring the road. They had worked a 3-month timeline for each segment, but that certainly didn't happen.

Not sure if this was a promise made when they were still going ahead with a pre-cast tunnel, which might have been quicker I'd imagine?

[xd_1771]

Anyone up for a joint debunk?
This guy is misleading people. Bored tunnel construction, to take place under 10th Ave, would pose no disruption to Broadway during the process.

Building an LRT on 16th Ave would cost more as it would not address the need to keep the 99 B-Line on Broadway. Aside from the capital costs, such a venture would have huge operating costs.

Forget about a Broadway subway, think LRT along West 16th

The City of Vancouver is wrong, at this time, to advocate for an underground LRT line along West Broadway to the University of British Columbia. Stop calling it the “Broadway line,” and start calling it the “UBC line,” and you will see my point.
The city’s report compares a Broadway subway with a Broadway street-level LRT. Of course, a streetcar or street-level light rail along Broadway is going to compare badly with a subway in terms of capacity and speed. West Broadway is already severely congested.
Trying to force the most complex and expensive, highest capacity transit line in Vancouver through one of the most congested arterials in Vancouver is pure folly. It would be easier to squeeze a camel through the eye of a needle. It can be done, but at what cost?
The most appropriate solution, with due consideration for costs, regional transit priorities (i.e. Surrey, etc.) and time frame (10 years from now to build the subway at a minimum) is to build a mainly street-level light rail along the CPR corridor, the Arbutus corridor, and West 16th Avenue to UBC. Compare this route with a Broadway subway on cost, construction time and capacity, and it prevails.....

[officedweller]

If you're going so far as to use 16th - why not elevated?
It would deal with the steep grades far better than at-grade.
Of course the problem with Arbutus to 16th to UBC is that there are only a couple of potential TOD hub sites - Arbutus & 16th, Alma & 16th and Wesbrook & 16th. It would certainly provide an express service to UBC - but it would not support the Broadway commercial-retail district 7 blocks away.

Likewise for King Edward (whose median actually intersects with Arbutus (near Arbutus Village Mall), has marginally gentler grades and lines up with a Hydro RoW right through the Endowment Lands to the new Westbrook Place (Triumph area)). Check it out on Google Maps.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&o...156340499852151240.0004690ec637c448214df

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I think the vertical supports are wide enough that they would block any traffic trying to use the alley.
Alley-ways are barely wider than one lane wide, since they aren't used as much as streets are.

See google streetview of Terminal Avenue for an idea of how wide these are.
Can you see why they are in the middle of the median?

I agree. Even the "alley" RoW east of Commercial Drive as SkyTrain approaches Broadway Station occupies a wider RoW than just the width of an alley roadway.

Here's a GoogleMap of the segment. It should give a good idea of the parameters involved. They had to buy a strip of properties to the east. To run it down an east-west alley - you'l have to expropriate a sizable segment from behind properties on both sides of the alley (and the ones fronting Broadway would likely be immovable) - the alternative would be to take the whole RoW strip from the properties to the south, which may sterilize them - or at least force full-scale redevelopment into townhouses, etc.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Anyone up for a joint debunk?
This guy is misleading people. Bored tunnel construction, to take place under 10th Ave, would pose no disruption to Broadway during the process.

Building an LRT on 16th Ave would cost more as it would not address the need to keep the 99 B-Line on Broadway. Aside from the capital costs, such a venture would have huge operating costs.

How often is he even in Vancouver? I see that he's from Kamloops.

We're becoming a big city, and yet we're still arguing for these short-term, half-assed, bandaid solutions? Some of these aren't even solutions, they make little sense. Compared to many cities (regions) of similar size, we really lack road (transportation) infrastructure - and what we lack in road infrastructure here in Vancouver is supposed to be compensated by properly built, frequent, fast, high-capacity and competent transit service.

I give up.

[Millennium2002]

Try not to give up against arguing... because doing so only allows the more radical and crazy elements to win over the audience and the design phase of this project.

[GeeCee]

Surprise surprise.. Watts is mad about CoV's proposal:

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/artic...-at-broadway-corridor-plans-in-vancouver

[WarrenC12]

Old man zweisystem is on CKNW ranting about the usual...

Commentators are shooting him down. He's talking about transit to Chilliwack again.

[Spork]

The man is Vancouver's version of Rob Ford, by the looks of his Facebook page. Rugby rather than Football, however.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

Surprise surprise.. Watts is mad about CoV's proposal:

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/artic...-at-broadway-corridor-plans-in-vancouver

Not like the COV can really do anything, they (along with UBC) basically just came out and said what every sane person is thinking.

[CBeats]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

Surprise surprise.. Watts is mad about CoV's proposal:

http://www.news1130.com/news/local/artic...-at-broadway-corridor-plans-in-vancouver

If you read the article, you can see she's actually being fair. It's just the headline that looks accusatory. She really just wants Translink and the government to come up with a sustainable funding source.

[VanCvl]

Originally Posted by mr.x

"Found."

Inside joke: that was probably everyone's favourite website around here while the Canada Line was being built.


I recall one of the common complaints from residents/businesses was that SNC-Lavalin had promised the cut and cover tunnel would be built in segments. They would work on a few blocks at a time only, and then move on to the next after restoring the road. They had worked a 3-month timeline for each segment, but that certainly didn't happen.

Not sure if this was a promise made when they were still going ahead with a pre-cast tunnel, which might have been quicker I'd imagine?

A pre-cast tunnel wouldn't have made it faster. The cast-in-place was progressing at the same rate as the pre-cast it just was a cost savings.

The soil anchor shoring system is what took so long and required the entire corridor to be opened up. It took 3 days to drill, shoot and excavate one shotcrete panel on an alternating pattern so every 6 working days the excavation would only advance 1.5 vertical meters down. And that is if everything is going perfect - which it never does.

The other problem with the stacked tunnel system is the deeper it was excavated the longer the ramps. So for the King Edward cross-over the tunnel was 18m deep and the excavation need to be opened up from King Edward to almost 29th.

One thing that SNC kept saying after the design was that shallow stations and tunnels (from cut-and-cover) actually increase ridership. Not sure if anyone has references to this.

[amor de cosmos]

edit: never mind, my mistake

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by CBeats

If you read the article, you can see she's actually being fair. It's just the headline that looks accusatory. She really just wants Translink and the government to come up with a sustainable funding source.

Not only is she being fair, but she's being level-headed. If she whole-heartedly endorsed the idea I'd be disappointed.

The approach she takes is that that the line perhaps should go to Arbutus. It's a voice of reason in a sea of over-optimism.

Its like, the column writer just likes the sound of "Watts takes shots..." and played it up a bit.

[wrenegade]

Cost issues on Calgary's (grade separated) LRT:

Originally Posted by Jesse Kline, National Post

The Cost of Calgary's New LRT Should Act as a Warning to Others

[CBeats]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Its like, the column writer just likes the sound of "Watts takes shots..." and played it up a bit.

Exactly.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by VanCvl

One thing that SNC kept saying after the design was that shallow stations and tunnels (from cut-and-cover) actually increase ridership. Not sure if anyone has references to this.

I highly doubt the depth of the station has a noticeable impact on ridership.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

The approach she takes is that that the line perhaps should go to Arbutus. It's a voice of reason in a sea of over-optimism.

I have a feeling that the real reason for the push to UBC is as an opening bargaining position so that Vancouver can be seen to "sacrifice" something when the available funding will only cover a line to Arbutus. That's OK - UBC will still be there and perhaps if they kick in some money on their own they'll get an extension out there some day.