Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

Putting aside the argument that Broadway is "special" and an elevated Skytrain line would somehow bring about the apocalypse, HALF of the rest of the line could be elevated, and you could easily save $500-700+ million dollars and STILL carry the same number of people at the same speed.

Vehicular lanes are being removed everywhere in the city so that people can ride bikes -- why shouldn't one or two lanes on 10th be removed for an elevated train?

You could take that 500 million and give Surrey one of their three LRTs.

If Vancouver wants the Endowment Lands and Point Grey below ground, they can raise taxes and cough up the extra dough, or they can wait.

I'm pretty sure underground all the way was never on the table. So, less drama making is yes?

There's 2 challenges for Point Gray. Making the hill which may require a tunnel anyways, and not getting sued by people with lots of money to blow on lawyers. 6% grade is the max consistent grade for skytrain.

Putting a guideway 15 feet from someones bedroom window is going to be a lawsuit, guaranteed and thats the reality of Broadway and 10th.

A trenched guideway could be a good option for the old garrison lands, and into the Pacific Spirit Park. Theres a few blocks that would need some other options though. Possibly a short tunnel, many millions of dollars of land expropriation, or simply diverting down to the beach and avoiding West Point Grey altogether. The beach option is less useful and carries some geotechnical issues with landslides.

Also, Vancouver has no control over the Endowment Lands.

[LotusLand]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

Approximate population densities (various sources, most data from 2006-2009):

1,430/km² - UBC (permanent population only, that is, those who would be directly affected by a guideway)

2,330/km² - Point Grey

2,900/km² - Whalley

3,200/km² - Fleetwood

4,300/km² - Surrey City Centre

7,900/km² - Kitsilano

If Point Grey and the Endowment Lands deserve a subway, I don't see why the fine citizens in Surrey City Centre and Fleetwood shouldn't deserve one, too.

An elevated Skytrain down Fraser Highway would be smack in front of thousands of houses ... and would also undoubtedly cause massive traffic disruption.

And there are certainly beautiful parks like Green Timbers that would be 'scarred' by an elevated guideway.

You're forgetting a thing called employment density. More people work in the Broadway corridor than anywhere in Surrey. It's B.C's second largest employment region.

Also UBC's daytime population is quite high. I've heard around 40,000 people so yeah put that into your figures as well.

Surrey's deserves better bus service, then when it finally densifies and becomes the city it markets itself to be, maybe a subway or LRT. It's simply not there yet.

People from all over the region use the system in Vancouver because it is the cultural, entertainment, shopping, restaurant, tourist, beaches, parks mecca of Metro Vancouver. There's a lot of people using the system throughout and Broadway is beyond capacity right now. Underground isn't the only option, but we know that is the only palatable option for the west side of the city and so it should be.

Surrey is what? A suburb that funnels people into the city to use all the amenities it has. Then go back home.

In reality UBC should kick in some of the funds to get the line all the way there.

It's not a Surrey vs Vancouver thing. It's a reality thing. Build the subway in Van, then uses the buses normally deployed along Broadway and put them to work in Surrey.

Then once Surreyites stop using park and rides, we can talk about more LRT or maybe even a subway. There about 10 years away from that minimum. The Broadway line should have been built 20 years ago.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I'm pretty sure underground all the way was never on the table. So, less drama making is yes?

The preferred plan is underground the majority of the way all the way to UBC:

http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Pro...ojects/UBC-Line-Rapid-Transit-Study.aspx

".. mainly tunneled from VCC to UBC"

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Putting a guideway 15 feet from someones bedroom window is going to be a lawsuit , guaranteed

The Sktrain guideway is smack in front of thousands of people's bedroom windows throughout the region in Burnaby, New West, Coquitlam, Surrey, Richmond, and Port Moody.

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Also, Vancouver has no control over the Endowment Lands.

The UBC-owned portion could be serviced equally well with an elevated guideway at significantly less cost.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by LotusLand

You're forgetting a thing called employment density. More people work in the Broadway corridor than anywhere in Surrey. It's B.C's second largest employment region.

Also UBC's daytime population is quite high. I've heard around 40,000 people so yeah put that into your figures as well.

I specifically said I left it out because they are not property owners and therefore not subject to negative externalities. An elevated guideway and a subway carry the same number of people.

Originally Posted by LotusLand

Underground isn't the only option, but we know that is the only palatable option for the west side of the city and so it should be.

I'm sure the thousands of people affected on North Road by the noise of an elevated guideway in front of their bedrooms would agree with you.

Originally Posted by LotusLand

Surrey is what? A suburb that funnels people into the city to use all the amenities it has. Then go back home.

The same could be said about Point Grey (not UBC).

Those 40,000 UBC students, however, are still going to ride the train whether it's above or below ground.

Originally Posted by LotusLand

In reality UBC should kick in some of the funds to get the line all the way there.

That's what I'm trying to say, along with anybody living in the west side who is prepared to bring a lawsuit against the city over an elevated train.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

The Sktrain guideway is smack in front of thousands of people's bedroom windows throughout the region in Burnaby, New West, Coquitlam, Surrey, Richmond, and Port Moody.

Almost entirely on existing rail corridors where the buildings were laid to address this issue. The remainder was under development or redevelopment when the Skytrain was built...

The only sections I can think of that has had housing which were directly facing tracks on the Expo line in close quarters is between 29th and Joyce, a little between Metrotown and Royal Oak in Burnaby, but again trains were there before. The setbacks aren't small and the line is mostly trenched or treed in.

All the condos by Commercial backing on the Skytrain? They face away from the tracks. All the townhouses in Burnaby adjacted to the RoW? Built recently and set back from the guideway by atleast 50'.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

The UBC-owned portion could be serviced equally well with an elevated guideway at significantly less cost.

I agree - hopefully before the UEL is incorporated as a municipality.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

Almost entirely on existing rail corridors where the buildings were laid to address this issue. The remainder was under development or redevelopment when the Skytrain was built...

The only sections I can think of that has had housing which were directly facing tracks on the Expo line in close quarters is between 29th and Joyce, a little between Metrotown and Royal Oak in Burnaby, but again trains were there before. The setbacks aren't small and the line is mostly trenched or treed in.

All the condos by Commercial backing on the Skytrain? They face away from the tracks. All the townhouses in Burnaby adjacted to the RoW? Built recently and set back from the guideway by atleast 50'.

Although the preferred option is now LRT, the (hypothetical) Skytrain line on Fraser Highway would front thousands (or tens of thousands) of homes and bedrooms from end to end, but apparently none of those people factored when creating that plan.

[officedweller]

I think the assumption is that the areas will be redeveloped over time, so you can't (shouldn't) built to suit what currently exists.
That said, the M-Line weaves from side to side to centre of Lougheed Highway to stay farther away from single family homes.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I'm pretty sure underground all the way was never on the table. So, less drama making is yes?

There's 2 challenges for Point Gray. Making the hill which may require a tunnel anyways, and not getting sued by people with lots of money to blow on lawyers. 6% grade is the max consistent grade for skytrain.

Putting a guideway 15 feet from someones bedroom window is going to be a lawsuit, guaranteed and thats the reality of Broadway and 10th.

A trenched guideway could be a good option for the old garrison lands, and into the Pacific Spirit Park. Theres a few blocks that would need some other options though. Possibly a short tunnel, many millions of dollars of land expropriation, or simply diverting down to the beach and avoiding West Point Grey altogether. The beach option is less useful and carries some geotechnical issues with landslides.

Also, Vancouver has no control over the Endowment Lands.

Not sure why the old garrison lands are being included in any discussion.

The preferred route is Broadway to Alma; Jog south on Alma to 10th; 10th to University Blvd to UBC.


My variation on this is to have the TBM run from Great Northern Way & south to 10th Ave at Kingsgate Mall (Broadway / Kingsway / Main St) and its now a straight-shot under 10th Ave to UBC. Any surface construction (ie: stations) would impact the cross-streets such as Cambie; Kingsway; Alma, but no construction is needed on Broadway itself, so minimal traffic congestion there.

[quobobo]

Originally Posted by makr3trkr

I specifically said I left it out because they are not property owners and therefore not subject to negative externalities.

They definitely bear fewer negative externalities, I don't know if I would say none. A lot of students rent in Point Grey and Kits, they would have to put up with the elevated line for the duration of their stay.

Completely agreed with your general point that property owners in the area should pay if they want the line buried that badly. Transaction costs seem minimal (just a vote, probably?) so I think the Coase theorem applies here.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Green is elevated, red is underground. The eastern half is run mostly on industrial/commerically zoned streets or lanes without adjacent condos.

I don't see why this wouldn't work.

[nname]

You save even more by putting the 2km+ University Blvd section (east of Allison/Acadia) at-grade. Build a 2-lane overpass at the golf course parking lot that serves as a U-turn route, and make other intersections RIRO.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

[IMG]...[/IMG]

Green is elevated, red is underground. The eastern half is run mostly on industrial/commerically zoned streets or lanes without adjacent condos.

I don't see why this wouldn't work.

Can't be elevated on lanes, because pillars holding up tracks are the width of a laneway. Nobody could use the lanes.


Planning on putting elevated tracks through some of the richest postal codes in the country will keep every lawyer in the city busy fighting against it for their Creme de la Creme clients.
and will ensure any politician for the area will kill the entire project rather than risk losing their seat in the uproar.

In the Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan there is a section that excludes:
any grade-separated rapid transit system elevated, in whole or in part, above the surface of the ground, of which one type is the rapid transit system know as “SkyTrain” currently in use in the Lower Mainland;

If the people around the Arbutus Corridor managed to have elevated tracks banned from their area, you can be sure the even richer people along the UBC Line will get the rules made to block elevated tracks in their area too.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by LotusLand

Surrey is what? A suburb that funnels people into the city to use all the amenities it has. Then go back home.

Err wrong.

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2014/01/08/interactive-map-shows-metro-vancouver-commuting-patterns/

Pay attention to facts please. 78,265 Surrey residents commute every day to work... in SURREY. Only 22,770 commute to Vancouver. 14k to Richmond, 13.4k to Burnaby, etc.

So actually you should have said: Surrey is what? A suburb that funnels 16% of its daily commuting population into the city.

16%. The other 84% don't go anywhere near Vancouver.

Facts are good.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Can't be elevated on lanes, because pillars holding up tracks are the width of a laneway. Nobody could use the lanes.


Planning on putting elevated tracks through some of the richest postal codes in the country will keep every lawyer in the city busy fighting against it for their Creme de la Creme clients.
and will ensure any politician for the area will kill the entire project rather than risk losing their seat in the uproar.

In the Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan there is a section that excludes:
any grade-separated rapid transit system elevated, in whole or in part, above the surface of the ground, of which one type is the rapid transit system know as “SkyTrain” currently in use in the Lower Mainland;

If the people around the Arbutus Corridor managed to have elevated tracks banned from their area, you can be sure the even richer people along the UBC Line will get the rules made to block elevated tracks in their area too.

The lane would be tight, you're correct. But it would probably be doable with some expropriation. The good thing about that stretch is that most of the buildings are 1-2 floors, old, and probably worth less than a tunnel. Elevated down 8th between Cambie and Main would also be an option.

For the West Point Grey section I was more thinking elevated in the sense that it would likely be quite close to grade, and partially in a trench. Like the area East of Edmonds. Elevated to make the grade consistent, at ground level when it works.

If were lucky, ToD could be built around it.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

In the Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan there is a section that excludes:
any grade-separated rapid transit system elevated, in whole or in part, above the surface of the ground, of which one type is the rapid transit system know as “SkyTrain” currently in use in the Lower Mainland;

Could you possibly provide a link?

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by logan5

Could you possibly provide a link?

or google: "Arbutus Corridor Official Development Plan" by-law

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

The lane would be tight, you're correct. But it would probably be doable with some expropriation. The good thing about that stretch is that most of the buildings are 1-2 floors, old, and probably worth less than a tunnel. Elevated down 8th between Cambie and Main would also be an option.

For the West Point Grey section I was more thinking elevated in the sense that it would likely be quite close to grade, and partially in a trench. Like the area East of Edmonds. Elevated to make the grade consistent, at ground level when it works.

If were lucky, ToD could be built around it.

trench?
at grade?
near grade?

worse than elevated.

If Cambie can be tunneled for Canada Line, Point Grey will want nothing less than a TBM subway (after the fiasco of Cut n Cover on Cambie)

[officedweller]

Cut and cover tunnelling down a secondary street like 10th Ave. would work best.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Cut and cover tunnelling down a secondary street like 10th Ave. would work best.

Totally agree. However, what happens when it gets to the escarpment?
Does a guideway surface, and go up the hill, or does a deep bored tunnel get built the rest of the way to UBC?