Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[madog222]

I live close (~3 blocks away) to that noisy section in New West which has actually been "fixed" within the past week. It had been quite bad for what seems like years, they may have been grinding it during that time but it keeps coming back after a month or two. It seems to be between Grimston Park and 18th St. From the South East corner of the park it was almost unbearably loud at times, from my house you could hear it during the day if you listed for it and could drown out a quiet television in the late evening through a single pane window.

From Grimston not that it has been ground trains sound like they are going over a switch so it is definitely a problem with the track and should not really be used to advocated for an underground Broadway line, not that I am against an underground Broadway line.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Not to defend rich NIMBYs; I'm not.
However, the concept that the Broadway-UBC rrt would have to go underground, or face the wrath (and litigation) of wealthy west-siders has
become a bit of a "cause célèbre" here, IMO.
Firstly, a study shows that a tunnelled rrt is faster than other means.
Also, it's must more discreet than columns and guideways hacking up the view.
I think OD expressed it well when he suggested a tunnelled rrt under 10th Avenue that then went double deck (tunnel) up the 10th avenue hill.
Once there, sure, put it at grade level or elevate it, because that's where the really splendid views are anyway.
As has been noted on this thread before, much of the original Expo line could have, and perhaps should have, been tunnelled (cut-cover).
None of this means, however, that the Evil Rich Nimbys are either going to force a tunnel or take to arms (in their case, a massive lawsuit, no doubt).
When I say "tunnel, please," I'm thinking of the aesthetic value of the city "dans l'ensemble."

I get equally angry at rich NIMBYs dictating how things "should" be -- anywhere in the city -- but in this case, I think a tunnelled rrt would be appreciated
by most people in the city, if only for reasons of convenience and travel time alone.

Ultimately, the issue here is fairness above all else. Ask yourself, why is it that people west of Main Street are treated so differently, to the point that large swath of the more disadvantaged part of the region continue to suffer (and pay)? The case for elevated is simple....its CHEAPER. Even if they have to acquire property or force guideways up somehow, it can still be done cheaper and achieve the exact same results in travel time and capacity.

We don't have a lot of resources to build the rapid transit lines the region needs (though there is unlimited resources for highways, bridges, stadium roofs and convention centres), so you have to get the best bang for your buck. Ultimately, everyone pays in the system, whether you are a single mom in Surrey making $12 an hour part time taking a long hour bus ride to work at Tim Horton's, or some trust fund junkee in Point Grey heir to a mining consortium and uses a Hummer to go get groceries in a nearby Urban Faire.

What if for the price of one subway to UBC, we can have one elevated line to UBC and the three LRT Lines (or better yet, one elevated line to Fleetwood with two LRT for the rest), wouldn't that be better?

[spm2013]

^^ That's too logical, you have to think about the NIMBYs.

[Jebby]

It's funny (in a sad, pathetic way) how much hatred there is for the rich in this thread, and the assumption that middle-class people who make up the vast majority of the people who live along this stretch of Vancouver are the 'creme de la creme' to use one of the favourite catch phrases of the Eat The Rich Posse.

[dreambrother808]

But when you use arrogant terminology like sad and pathetic, coupled with the tone of many of your previous posts, you help to justify that negative view of wealthy people.

As for your second point, there is some merit in that.

[SFUVancouver]

Originally Posted by Jebby

It's funny (in a sad, pathetic way) how much hatred there is for the rich in this thread, and the assumption that middle-class people who make up the vast majority of the people who live along this stretch of Vancouver are the 'creme de la creme' to use one of the favourite catch phrases of the Eat The Rich Posse.

I agree. Most of the people who live on the West Side have high net worths due to staggering appreciation in housing prices of which they have been primary beneficiaries. With regards to the 'creme de la creme' dig, that's got historical significance in the context of rapid transit. Arbutus Corridor resident Pamela Sauder spoke before Council during the City's RAV Line consultation process and, famously, gave the following quote:

"We are the people that live in your neighbourhood. We are dentists, doctors, lawyers, professionals, CEOs of companies. We are the creme de la creme in Vancouver. We live in a very expensive neighbourhood and we're well educated and well informed. And that's what we intend to be."

Vancouver Sun, Thursday April 8th, 2004.
Source (Original Vancouver Sun link has since died, so this is an archived version on a real estate website)

It's a long-standing, and highly effective, form of protest to use the words of an individual or group against them. Consider George Bush's surreptitiously recorded speech to a group of business leaders and extremely high net-worth individuals in which he said that they were his base and the foundation upon which he derived political support. Opponents of his presidency could, correctly, quote the president and label big business and the extremely wealthy - later labelled the 1% - as his political base, regardless of protestations that it was social conservatives and the religious right that filled that role.

[spm2013]

Anyone have any guesses on how the provincial/federal government will support funding a Broadway line? Or will they just go along with it if Translink/Metro Vancouver want it?

PS. I love rich people.

[Genauso]

You could more easily build a line further away from Broadway, but Broadway is where a line should go to get the best results. It would cost a lot of wasted time, money, and planning to reorient away and change to keep the initial capital spending by Translink lower. 30-40 years ago it would have been easier to do something differently, but now they might as well do the obvious underground bored tunnel and try to make even more money off a more popular line. If it were underground the whole way, it would have higher reliability, lower maintenance costs, and offer greater profits from real estate upzoning/commercial rents/advertising. I don't see a contradiction between going elevated in areas where service is preceding demand, and going underground when that demand is already matured.

[casper]

Originally Posted by spm2013

Anyone have any guesses on how the provincial/federal government will support funding a Broadway line? Or will they just go along with it if Translink/Metro Vancouver want it?

PS. I love rich people.

My guess: The feds want to pay no more than 33%. They like the idea of using Canadian technology (e.g. Skytrain) especially if it is technology that is exported to other parts of the world.

In parts of the city with lower tax values Trasitlink can buy land and knock down buildings or build over them to make overhead skytrain work.

Along broadway the property values are higher, you want to keep the road capacity anyway. Look at a Google map or Broadway, where are you going to build a station and the overhead infrastructure for a station at Broadway and Kingsway. Where are you going to do that at Cambie and Broadway.

Underground is the only viable option. Yes it is expensive. But so is purchasing land that has or can accommodate 10+ story buildings.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by spm2013

Anyone have any guesses on how the provincial/federal government will support funding a Broadway line? Or will they just go along with it if Translink/Metro Vancouver want it?

PS. I love rich people.

Didn't Todd Stone say the province would fund 1/3 of any capital transit project? I would assume that includes the Broadway Line.

Assuming the Feds can be convinced to kick in another 1/3, that's still a heck of a lot of money for Translink to come up with... I don't think they have the pockets to call Todd Stone's bluff.

[Ehlun]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Didn't Todd Stone say the province would fund 1/3 of any capital transit project? I would assume that includes the Broadway Line.

Assuming the Feds can be convinced to kick in another 1/3, that's still a heck of a lot of money for Translink to come up with... I don't think they have the pockets to call Todd Stone's bluff.

Only the Pattullo Bridge replacement.

[ssiguy]

SkyTrain is the way to go due to not having to transfer. They will have to tunnel as Broadway is a busy corridor with a lot of large employers to say nothing of the fact that it is home to the largest hospital in the province so ambulances can't get clogged up on a street with an LRT ROW. That said, even if they 500 meters on each side of Broadway
they would still tunnel it. This is after all Vancouver and this is going thru the Westside.

The thing I disagree with is it going all the way to UBC, a gross waste of funds. Going to Alma should be the furthest west it should go. After that the BLine is fine as it is a very free flowing roadway to UBC and Hastings is a FAR busier section from downtown all the way to Kootenay Loop. The Hastings corridor has 7 bus routes using it just in regular hours with much higher ridership in a much slower moving area of the city.

At some point Alma to UBC makes sense but Hastings is a far larger priority.

[KPELLY]

I'm not sure how you could ever think that going all the way to UBC is a "gross waste of funds". Have you ever ridden the 99? Anybody trying to get on the bus at McDonald, alma, or sasamat gets passed up multiple times every morning on the way to UBC with 2 minute frequencies. And the 99 is only one of 8 busses that run up Broadway, 4th and 16th to UBC. There are 50,000 students and over 10,000 staff at UBC and growing every year, it's the 3rd largest employment centre in metro Vancouver. With some of the highest transit ridership of any area in the country, ending the line at alma would be the worst possible thing they could do. Since the line would also replace the 84, and take riders from the 14, 4, 44, 9, you would have an average over 150 people per minute trying to get on busses for the last leg of the trip during peak times. It would be worse than it is now for those riders.

Unfortunately, The broadway line will only ever happen if it's bored tunnel till at least Blanca. From there maybe at grade or in a trench along university blvd or elevated. But I think if it's going to happen at all it will have to involve all 3 levels of government funding, UBC and maybe a private partner.

[spm2013]

If you're going to do anything on Broadway you might as well invest in the long-term and go out to UBC. Having people transfer to buses at Alma would be stupid along with having to dedicate buses to shuttle people to campus. And not to mention all the new housing on the campus lands.

[usog]

I think the topic of whether to go all the way to UBC or not has been gone over several times. I'm against it because I'd rather see the $1billion+ it would cost spread out over the entire system rather than benefiting mainly UBC students. The benefits of extending skytrain under broadway to Cambie or Granville are undeniable but after that you get diminishing returns imo. Also it'd be politically unacceptable for such a full line investment to UBC once the rest of Metro Vancouver catches on.

[Ehlun]

Originally Posted by usog

I think the topic of whether to go all the way to UBC or not has been gone over several times. I'm against it because I'd rather see the $1billion+ it would cost spread out over the entire system rather than benefiting mainly UBC students. The benefits of extending skytrain under broadway to Cambie or Granville are undeniable but after that you get diminishing returns imo. Also it'd be politically unacceptable for such a full line investment to UBC once the rest of Metro Vancouver catches on.

My guess it won't be going all the way to UBC. What the Todd Stone has asked the Mayor's Council to do is come up with a plan of what they want to build and at what cost.

There's no way they will be able to build the Millennium Line extension all the way to UBC and rapid transit in Surrey. Vancouver won't agree to full rapid transit plan in Surrey and no Broadway Line. Surrey won't agree to no rapid transit in the city and full UBC line.

Meet in the middle. Millennium Line extension to Arbutus. 99 B-Line shortened to run between Arbutus and UBC. Surrey, I have no idea.

[GlassCity]

I just don't get that. Broadway all the way to UBC clearly NEEDS Skytrain, whereas Surrey just wants it because they think it's not fair they don't have it. Let Surrey fill it's B-Line to 50,000 people a day and then we can talk about it.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Ehlun

Only the Pattullo Bridge replacement.

Not according to this article in the Vancouver Sun:

Stone did add, however, that the province would pay a third of the capital costs for rapid transit projects or the Pattullo Bridge replacement.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Provinc...UPDATED/9477726/story.html#ixzz2sqGAF4Ki

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I just don't get that. Broadway all the way to UBC clearly NEEDS Skytrain, whereas Surrey just wants it because they think it's not fair they don't have it. Let Surrey fill it's B-Line to 50,000 people a day and then we can talk about it.

Amen. Extending Skytrain all the way out to UBC may not be necessary, but it certainly has more justification than any Skytrain in Surrey at this point.

[rsxstock]

skytrain and underground along broadway is a must. i'm mixed on having the rest if the way to ubc elevated given the way all the other elevated lines look. i think if they can do something different like integrating the line and some stations with malls and buildings, i'll be fine with that