Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by nname

Of course open one station early won't require that much train...

It's a little more complicated than that. If they stop interlining the Millenium line when they open Burquitlam, then they'll have to reallocate trains from the Millenium line to the Expo line in order to maintain Expo lines frequencies from downtown to New West. But they may not want to short turn trains in New West, and in that case they'll need more trains on the Expo line than they have now in order to maintain frequencies.

I don't know how it's all going to play out, but I've always thought that one of the benefits of a separately-run Millenium/Evergreen line is the elimination of the frequency split beyond Columbia, and the resulting additional capacity on the Expo line (more trains originating in Surrey means less fully loaded cars which in turn allows more people onto the trains through New West, Burnaby and Vancouver).

[nname]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

It's a little more complicated than that. If they stop interlining the Millenium line when they open Burquitlam, then they'll have to reallocate trains from the Millenium line to the Expo line in order to maintain Expo lines frequencies from downtown to New West. But they may not want to short turn trains in New West, and in that case they'll need more trains on the Expo line than they have now in order to maintain frequencies.

The plan is to allocate 28 vehicles from the Expo/Millennium Line base to the Evergreen Line. So splitting Millennium line would work without affecting Expo frequency (except some 4-car MkIIs would be replaced by 4/6-cars MkIs) if they can run it within the 28 vehicles. A short calculation shows that the maximum they can offer would be 2-car MkIIs every ~3.6 minutes.

[Canadian Mind]

Originally Posted by nname

I guess you don't take transit frequent enough during peak hours? Expo Line and 99 B-Line are not crowded?

I don't think he rides either regularly.

[TransitFreak]

Originally Posted by nname

There is no longer a VCC-Clark/Waterfront train once the Evergreen Line is completed. It would be:

• Lougheed/Waterfront train every 5.4min peak/6min off-peak with mixed 4/6-car MkI + 4-car MkII
• VCC-Clark/Lafarge Lake-Douglas College (who came up with this name!) train every 3min peak/5min off-peak with 2-car MkII trains

So in effect, Millennium Line will get only slightly more capacity during peak, and a large reduction of capacity off-peak.

The full interlining of Millennium Line would not work - there is just not enough trains. Even if they want to open up the shuttle service early, they'll most likely need to take 1 train off Expo/Millennium for the extra service.

Agreed. My point with the interlining was more during the soft phase only, so they can work the movements in real time, so that they had that dry run should they have to pull it out of their hat. Since the current gap at peak is due to interlining with Expo on the shared Expo line, my thinking was you can seed the Burquitlam train in there without any interruption. Any VCC-Clark/Waterfront trains, take out the MKII's that sometimes get used on this route, replace with 4 car MKI's. Break apart the 4-car MKII's into 2-car MKII's to 'double' the amount of trains you have. We have 108 MKIIs, which is equal to 27 4 car trains, or 54 2 car trains, or a mix of both. Unfortunately I don't know how to calculate the theoretical max, but one could assume a mix of 2/4 car MKII's, and a revised 4/6 MKI split would yield more than the 55 trainset (I see that number thrown around) that we currently run.

Again, I'm not in favour of full interlining once the whole line is done, but I can see the benefits operationally of providing near-like full line Evergreen frequency with the addition of Burquitlam, and live testing of the train movements with the 'Evergreen' operation opposite the curent 'Millenium' line operation.

In another perfect world scenario, I would have liked the inbound Lougheed train from Braid to have had a switch to the outbound Lougheed track so that it doesn't have to do a double manoevure to the outbound track for its platform assignment in its final Evergreen alignment. Think I've mentioned that before, but nonetheless...

[nname]

We run 57 trains now - 32 Expo trains, 23 Millennium trains, 2 Broadway short-turn. After full Evergreen Line, the requirement would be 32 Expo, 16 Millennium, 26 Evergreen, and 2-4 Broadway. The target spare ratio for MkIs is 8% moving toward 12%; for MkII it would be 6-8%; for MkIII, probably 1 trainset?

And you seems to forget about the spares... The actual number of vehicles that can be put in service is about 132-136 MkIs and 100-102 MkIIs.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by nname

I guess you don't take transit frequent enough during peak hours? Expo Line and 99 B-Line are not crowded?

You guys really need to travel more...

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=23944898&postcount=5141

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=29233768&postcount=6151

Yep....a few dozen trains needed solely to service a possible Burquitlam station only opening for sure and we must spend $3 billion to alleviante the...OMG...100k poor souls horribly suffering the overcrowdness in the Broadway corridor...

[nname]

I think we are talking about North America (or Canadian) standard here. Vancouver's train and buses are considered to be very crowded compared to US cities and even some Canadian cities. AFAIK, the same MkI train we used here would be considered "full" in Toronto when there are 55 passengers. Similarly, MkII for them would have a capacity of 70 while we would cram 70 more people onto that vehicle here...

And yes, I do travel to some Asian cities quite often, I can attest that the Expo Line would be as crowded as Taipei MRT during peak hours. The last time I rode Singapore MRT during peak hour was actually not as bad. And we are really approaching the level of crowdiness of HK MRT...

And btw, you see that on the Broadway platform every time after a delay... Just a short delay of ~5min would be enough to produce that!

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

You guys really need to travel more...


Yep....a few dozen trains needed solely to service a possible Burquitlam station only opening for sure and we must spend $3 billion to alleviante the...OMG...100k poor souls horribly suffering the overcrowdness in the Broadway corridor...

Just because something isn't as bad as developing world over crowding doesn't mean that it is ok or that it isn't crowded.

Manilla etc transit service is nothing to strive for nor compare yourself to.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by nname

I think we are talking about North America (or Canadian) standard here. Vancouver's train and buses are considered to be very crowded compared to US cities and even some Canadian cities. AFAIK, the same MkI train we used here would be considered "full" in Toronto when there are 55 passengers. Similarly, MkII for them would have a capacity of 70 while we would cram 70 more people onto that vehicle here...

And yes, I do travel to some Asian cities quite often, I can attest that the Expo Line would be as crowded as Taipei MRT during peak hours. The last time I rode Singapore MRT during peak hour was actually not as bad. And we are really approaching the level of crowdiness of HK MRT...

And btw, you see that on the Broadway platform every time after a delay... Just a short delay of ~5min would be enough to produce that!

I'm sorry nname but there is no way in hell you can convince me that any transit line in Vancouver is "crowded". You want North America...and Canada...here ya go.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=9368969&postcount=106

I realize here in Metro Vancouver, where people think the recent Stanley Cup riot was a *big deal*, that paying a $0.02 gas tax increase "hurts families".

But that does NOT mean that there are "just not enough trains" to service an early opening of the Burquitlam station. It can be done with the current Skytrain fleet now, as you can see other countries rich and poor, including in Canada, have far far more crowded transit systems that what we have here in Metro Vancouver but still make do. Its just a matter of re-allocation of a few existing skytrain cars, and there ya go.

THis is the reason people are so peeved with Translink. They got all this billions of dollars to spend, and yet does not maximize it. They spend so much but produce relatively little. The proposed service cuts on the bus lines is perhaps justified, it may not be great for the users, but at least the resources are allocated more efficiently until such a time they have more stable funding.

Seriously though, people need to get things into perspective here....so you can't get a seat in Skytrain during rush hour.....in the words of Kevin Falcon...."BOO HOO!!!".

[nname]

Put it in context - that was not normal occurrence - that's after a service stoppage. I think that's the conclusion from the rest of that post.

If you stop the Expo Line for 5-10min, then Broadway platform would be like that. If you stop the line long enough, then every station would be like that.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by nname

Put it in context - that was not normal occurrence - that's after a service stoppage. I think that's the conclusion from the rest of that post.

If you stop the Expo Line for 5-10min, then Broadway platform would be like that. If you stop the line long enough, then every station would be like that.

IF there is a service stoppage...

And yes, I know it happpened, and while I may just walk to and from work now, as I mentioned in the Vancouver Transit thread, I did live in Surrey and was talking Skytrain too and from work. I have experience many service stoppage myself (including one that made Granville Station look like the one in Manila).

However, service stoppage is not the norm (or at least, it shouldn't), and with that in mind, its not really why you need a dozen trains just to service one station since service stoppage in Skytrain often means ALL trains are stopped, or certain portions of the line are inaccessible even if you have a hundreds of trains all wanting to reach the crowds.

So with that in mind, am I safe to assume that we are in agreement that, in a hypothetical situation wherein Burquitlam Station is opened early, that a few trains in the existing Skytrain can easily service that one teeny tiny station without any disruption to the rest of the system?

[nname]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

However, service stoppage is not the norm (or at least, it shouldn't), and with that in mind, its not really why you need a dozen trains just to service one station since service stoppage in Skytrain often means ALL trains are stopped, or certain portions of the line are inaccessible even if you have a hundreds of trains all wanting to reach the crowds.

I think the "not enough train" comment was directed to - open the station AND create new Burquitlam-VCC route ON TOP of the existing Watefront-VCC Millennium route. This new 12-stations route would require more than 10 trains and there is definitely not enough train for this without seriously disrupting the existing line. Even after the opening of Evergreen line, Millennium Line would stop at Lougheed and Evergreen Line will take over the existing North Burnaby route. There is not enough train to run the section as an interline of Evergreen AND Millennium Line.

IF they open the new station as shuttle to Lougheed, then I think they would be able to get that ONE train to serve the route, but I do question the effectiveness of this shuttle service in term of public perception and rider benefits.

[xd_1771]

queetz@home, I'm from Manila, and I think it is absolutely unfair that of all the cities you could be choosing to compare with Vancouver, you're choosing Manila - a city that is plagued by many economic and infrastructural problems that I'm not going to bother list for you because there are probably too many for me to even know.

I bet that you really know nothing about the transportation situation in Manila, where public transit is not just crowded - it is overcrowded, and this is happening for a reason. If you ever take the MRT on EDSA, you'll notice that at just about any time of day you have a traffic jam right beside you. Both congestion and transit overcrowding are a problem in Manila. The people there have no choice but to deal with these huge infrastructure shortages, and this is because the city is just so damn dense. Manila is one of the most dense cities in the world (the densities rival or, in some cases, exceed Tokyo), and that is the reason that Manila is an absolute transportation disaster. Only a significant rapid transit expansion with new lines extending all over the city would go the distance in terms of really solving the problems there - and even then, you'd have to go further and address other social issues. Public safety is a massive issue in Manila, and the privacy and safety of the car is attracting many people away from public transit regardless - especially the richer folk. There's a rather fine line between the rich and the poor, and that's another problem because you've got to deal with a decent chunk of population unlikely to ever regularly make use transit because of the aforementioned issue. You'll see what I mean if you ever go to Dasmarinas Village, which is east of Makati, and then cross the C5 expressway and suddenly find yourself in a really dense area that could be described as a shanty-town.

It should be noted how much narrower that Toronto subway platform is compared to our wider centre platforms at the busiest stations.... like Commercial-Broadway, Metrotown and Surrey Central. With more space to be standing around waiting for the train (in a certain sense), our platforms can appear less overcrowded for that reason.

In spite of whatever you're saying about transit not being crowded enough here in Vancouver for your taste... you have to remember that here in Vancouver (and in many other major cities in North America and the world), we have choices. Uness you ask the citizens of Metro Vancouver to suddenly give up their freedoms and live like poor people in shanty towns, there are different crowdedness standards affecting the popularity of transit here. Thinking that we could do with less transit capacity and then advocating for it is like telling most of our transit riders that "driving is better for you!", and that would only result in congestion that would also make transit worse for bus riders.

[queetz@home]

^^ Its not a comparison, but rather to prove a point that:

1) People here have no idea what "crowded" really means.

I just happen to use Manila since I frequent the SSC Philippine Forums a lot, but could have easily used, say India or Japan to point out the true definition of a crowded transit situation. But I don't have the links handy (had to google the Toronto pic), so there ya go. Ultimately, people have to realize that Metro Vancouver's transit situation is simply not as dire and extreme as some people make it out to be.

Yes, rapid transit needs to be expanded, but its done in such a way that it would shape development so that as it grows, it would do so in a sustainable manner, and NOT end up like Manila where the government cannot keep up with the demand due to their tardiness in building their rapid transit lines. Because believe me, at the rate the Canadian government is bringing people in from other countries, this place will be like Manila soon.

Oh btw Daryl, I've been following the saga of the MRT/LRT lines in Manila even before you were born! Even took it frequently from the "Shang" since I lived in Ortigas and all...

2) To counteract's nname's comment on "just not enough trains". And to respond directly to his post, it seems that there is this assumption that Burquitlam would be an end station for a line going from it to VCC Clarke.

There is no reason why you have to have a dedicated fleet of trains just for that brand new route. You can simply assign a few of the existing trains to simply route to Burquitlam instead of moving onwards to New West. It doesn't have to be super frequent, but ultimately, the station can be services, say once every 10 minutes as oppose to two minutes.

In this way, the station can be utilized to the existing residents and new riders with an enhance transit system and all. Once Evergreen is complete all the way to Douglas, then you can have your new trains. But right now, having that lone station open, it can be done and serviced with the existing fleet.

This will be my last word on the issue for now. Before the topic gets hijacked and deviated, some Evergreen Line News...

http://www.tricitynews.com/news/193401291.html

Lanes will also be shifted on Barnet to permit construction as building on the tunnel will essentially be in two phases.

First, a tunnel has to be dug under Barnet Highway for the portal; then, tunnel digging will begin on the west side of the highway. Tunnel construction materials, including concrete segments, will be stored in a staging area near the former Andres Wines site but tunnel boring will be on the west side to avoid contaminating the environmentally sensitive area around Schoolhouse Creek, and for ease of construction, according to the contractors.

[nname]

That would be similar to... Surrey want their B-Line, but there's no money for it. We should just pull 10 buses from the 99 and put them to run a bare minimum 15-min service on the Surrey B-Line. Sure the 99 can cram 40 more people per bus as it is currently not crowded. The Surrey route would have their frequency reduced by half, but hey, people will love it since the B-Line would be a superior service compared to the 321. We can also cancel the 321 north of Newton since everyone would just riding the B-Line. So overall, it would be an enhancement to the transit system and the extra 321 buses can be redeployed to somewhere else.

[SpongeG]

i used to ride into downtown from lougheed town centre, transfer at commercial/broadway and most every morning around 6:30 was pretty busy and every train that came by would be packed and the platform would fill up pretty fast as many people couldn't even get onto a train

[cornholio]

queetz@home: of course there is far, far worse overcrowding but we should NOT be looking at these places as comparisons, nor should we be ever complacent regarding our situation because other places are worse of (though it is nice to be able to put things in perspective and see where we don't want to end up). We should always be striving to improve our situation and never allow complacency and defeat to sink in, something that has been happening a bit too much around here imo(I have my own theories as to why).

Also these places with serious overcrowding issues have developed different cultural standards to deal with these problems, and this took some time so regardless its never a completely fair comparison. If you come from one of these places to Vancouver the first thing that hits you is the slowness, unawareness and over politeness of people here, nothing wrong with that but if you throw a random Vancouverites in to a situation like the ones you depicted I doubt they would be able to handle it (and I have experienced the worst overcrowding possible my self so know exactly what you are depicting...ie.. difficulty breathing and no room to put your hands down along the side of your body because of the packed tightness).

Having said all this overcrowding is going to result in one main thing, reduced ridership because of maxed out capacity. Assuming this happens then translink just needs to react and add capacity, be it more routes or expanded rapid transit.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by nname

I guess you don't take transit frequent enough during peak hours? Expo Line and 99 B-Line are not crowded?

Or Canada line. It is standing room push into the train only from morning up until like 9pm every day on Canada line during the week... clearly comparing apples to Oranges. You can always find a city somewhere that has more traffic, is more crowded, has more pollution, has more crime, has more etc. etc. That's not the point ever. And heck Manila? I mean c'mon. It has a metro population of 12 million. That's 10 times Vancouver.

Duh. London tube rush hour. Trains in many parts of India. Anything in Tokyo, Shanghai, Hong Kong. Hell when you're talking traffic in Vanvouver I could pull out LA, London, Paris, etc. all cities vastly larger with completely different systems.

Silly argument.

[DKaz]

I had to take a train from downtown Tokyo to the suburbs at 4:30PM, I know what a crowd feels like. Vancouver can still be crowded, not super crowded but crowded.

I do remember once having to take a shuttle train from Stadium to Broadway back in 98 or 99 because it was single tracked. THAT was Tokyo packed. There were easily 8 persons per square metre.

[xd_1771]

I refer to transit systems in cities like Manila as "overcrowded" as opposed to "crowded". There's a difference. I can't see how "crowded" is an unreasonable way to describe transit conditions in Vancouver, esp. with, as nname pointed out, comparable crowds at other Asian cities. At cornholio, thank you. You summed that up really well.

That would be similar to... Surrey want their B-Line, but there's no money for it. We should just pull 10 buses from the 99 and put them to run a bare minimum 15-min service on the Surrey B-Line. Sure the 99 can cram 40 more people per bus as it is currently not crowded. The Surrey route would have their frequency reduced by half, but hey, people will love it since the B-Line would be a superior service compared to the 321. We can also cancel the 321 north of Newton since everyone would just riding the B-Line. So overall, it would be an enhancement to the transit system and the extra 321 buses can be redeployed to somewhere else.

A 120 passenger bus every 15 minutes is less capacity than peak-hour 321 (77-passenger buses every 7.5 minutes)