Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Really, now we are complaining about 80 meter platforms?

Fuck, it never ends on this forum.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Kwik-E-Mart

To those who wanted shorter platforms:

The max 50m platforms on the Canada Line and the 100,000 projected ridership not being realized until 2013.

Platform length will not be the limiting factor on the Canada Line until Translink maxes out the number of trains running on the line. They can easily double capacity by buying and running 20 more trainsets. There won't be any need to lengthen platforms until those additional trains are still unable to cope with demand, something that won't happen for at least a couple of decades.

[Metro-One]

God, we have to go over this every couple months don't we? We should have some pre-made responses ready for these annoying comments in the message tab next to the quote function.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

well sorry for asking the question guys. i take it back. i didn't realize it would be this places equivalent of Pandora's box.

though canada line cant be compared to the evergreen/millennium/expo since the cars are a fair amount wider and hold more people with less length.

[Metro-One]

I see you have 110 posts, so you must be kind of new, there are a handful of forum members that every few months spout off the same nonsense that the Canada line is at capacity already, etc..., so it is kind of a super tired conversation.

[Vancity]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I see you have 110 posts, so you must be kind of new, there are a handful of forum members that every few months spout off the same nonsense that the Canada line is at capacity already, etc..., so it is kind of a super tired conversation.

C-Line will be okay for another couple of years.

The Broadway Line is the line that I think needs to get done. But don't know if there is enough political will power to get it done. More buses won't do it. There needs to be subway through Broadway all the way through to UBC. Having rapid bus from Arbutus to UBC is half-ass planning. If they're going to do it, do it all the way. I'm sick and tired of having planners that are short sighted for this city of ours.

This weekend's vote is between two evils. Gregor and Lapointe. Wish we had better candidates. sigh....

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

...there are a handful of forum members that every few months spout off the same nonsense that the Canada line is at capacity already, etc..., so it is kind of a super tired conversation.

To be fair, the Canada Line is very busy, and it may well actually be at capacity during peak times given the equipment that's currently in service. But extending the platforms is (a) by far the most expensive way to add capacity, and (b) won't make any difference whatsoever unless Translink also buys more rolling stock. Since the latter would need to be done anyway, and since it alone expands capacity with no station modifications needed, there's absolutely no point in expanding the platforms until we have enough trains to max out service frequency.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

To be fair, the Canada Line is very busy, and it may well actually be at capacity during peak times given the equipment that's currently in service. But extending the platforms is (a) by far the most expensive way to add capacity, and (b) won't make any difference whatsoever unless Translink also buys more rolling stock. Since the latter would need to be done anyway, and since it alone expands capacity with no station modifications needed, there's absolutely no point in expanding the platforms until we have enough trains to max out service frequency.

That's because the average person is not a railfan, and wouldn't know that.

Even I fell into the "Canada Line is at capacity" discussion before elsewhere while being aware of this fact. Sure it's "at capacity" given the trains Translink was paying to operate when it opened. There's certainly more capacity for rolling stock, just like there's more capacity on the Expo line. Until you start seeing trains every 75 seconds ( http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportat...sportation-systems/automated-metros.html (maximum 6 car configuration,)) it's unlikely at capacity. People holding the doors open tends to ensure that we don't see that.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Kwik-E-Mart

To those who wanted shorter platforms:

The max 50m platforms on the Canada Line and the 100,000 projected ridership not being realized until 2013.

...

I don't need to say more, especially given the extra train that was added just recently.

With the current growth around the Evergreen Line stations, Poco, and Ridge Meadows, I can safely predict the 70,000 figure by 2021 will be met within 2 years of operation.

2 years eh? Care to make a wager on that?

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Kisai

That's because the average person is not a railfan, and wouldn't know that.

Even I fell into the "Canada Line is at capacity" discussion before elsewhere while being aware of this fact. Sure it's "at capacity" given the trains Translink was paying to operate when it opened. There's certainly more capacity for rolling stock, just like there's more capacity on the Expo line. Until you start seeing trains every 75 seconds ( http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportat...sportation-systems/automated-metros.html (maximum 6 car configuration,)) it's unlikely at capacity. People holding the doors open tends to ensure that we don't see that.

Expo Line is close to every 75 seconds on the main trunk (Waterfront-Columbia) during peak hours.

Reconfiguring the lines when Evergreen comes online will help. My anecdotal observations during rush hour show me that the Surrey line is much more popular, and could benefit from "exclusive use" of that Waterfront-Columbia stretch.

And of course we need a UBC line to at least Cambie to provide relief and redundancy to the downtown area.

Does anybody know Translink's capital spending plans on rolling stock? Obviously some will show up for Evergreen, but is there a best/worst case plan for more on the C-Line or Expo based on yes/no referendum funding?

[Kwik-E-Mart]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

2 years eh? Care to make a wager on that?

Seeing that you hail from Yaletown, if you have a chance to visit the Tri-Cities area I would highly encourage you to do so.

(No worries, the folks here won't bite!)

People have to understand the difference between:

i). the zero development along the Millennium Line at the time of completion (2002), and
ii). the numerous high rises that are already there/under construction/planned to be built before the Evergreen Line begins service in 2016.

Yes, I also forgot to mention about the extra commuters anticipated from
(1) routes like 701 and 188,
(2) the rerouting/reduction/elimination of major routes like 97B, 160, and 169, (see Bridgeport Station)
(3) WCE, with traveling options broadened to Burnaby and other parts of Vancouver (outside of Downtown) as a result of transferability to the Evergreen Line.

[WarrenC12]

My judgement may have been a bit off. I was under the impression the Canada Line had 100,000 daily riders today, when in fact it seems to be more like 120,000.

Since the Canada Line is the closest thing we have to compare to Evergreen (new line in previously bus-only area), that's where I started. But the Evergreen line has nothing like the destinations or even existing density in a lot of the areas served by the Canada Line.

Millenium was a dog early for many reasons, but to me that was more about where it was built and why (politics).

For Evergreen, I think the reality will be a lot closer to the predictions than was the case for Canada Line. 70,000 by 2021 was the original, you are saying 2 years (2018), I'd split the difference and say mid-2019 we might see that.

In all honestly, the Evergreen line is half political and half demand based. If we can put aside regional bias, I think the priority for rail transit should have been:

1. Broadway
2. Surrey
3. Tri-Cities

But it is what it is, and I always hope any transit line beats projections. Not that it seems to change the direction of any spending...

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Expo Line is close to every 75 seconds on the main trunk (Waterfront-Columbia) during peak hours.

75 seconds is the theoretical minimum headway. Currently during rush hour on the main trunk the headway is 108 seconds.

From http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Corporate-Overview/Operating-Companies/BCRTC/Quick-Facts.aspx:

During peak service, 55 trains run an average of 108 seconds apart between Waterfront and Columbia stations; 162 seconds between Columbia and King George; and 324 seconds on the Millennium Line between Columbia and VCC-Clark.

Lougheed station is getting closer and closer to resembling an actual platform. Glass is going up along the north wall, metal posts are installed at the ends of the platform, the track looks like it's mostly clipped into place now, and side walkways are being installed along the curved guideway.
Video from yesterday morning (finally a day where the window wasn't covered in raindrops and condensation!)

[WarrenC12]

Thanks dpogue.

When they reference 75 seconds, I assume that means zero time for any issues, even as small as somebody holding the door open.

The train2main already causes minor train stoppages, most commonly outside Broadway/Commercial at peak times. Do you know if this section is currently close to 75s between trains at peak times?

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Thanks dpogue.

When they reference 75 seconds, I assume that means zero time for any issues, even as small as somebody holding the door open.

The train2main already causes minor train stoppages, most commonly outside Broadway/Commercial at peak times. Do you know if this section is currently close to 75s between trains at peak times?

No, 108s is the closest they run them with the current system. I suspect they'd need more trains to be able to run at 75s, but it's also not possible until the power rails upgrades are finished along the Expo line.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

In all honestly, the Evergreen line is half political and half demand based. If we can put aside regional bias, I think the priority for rail transit should have been:

1. Broadway
2. Surrey
3. Tri-Cities

But it is what it is, and I always hope any transit line beats projections. Not that it seems to change the direction of any spending...

The only one that has a regional bias here is you. There is a reason why the Evergreen Line has been the regional priority, even more so than the Canada Line. All these years, the Metro Vancouver mayors (alas, even both Vision and NPA mayors) agree that the Evergreen Line is a priority, even more so than Broadway or Surrey. And even though I don't agree with all of them 100%, I trust their judgement on this than some Yaletowner who probably don't even have any sort of exposure on how the rest of the region outside of the city of Vancouver move around.

Originally Posted by Kwik-E-Mart

Seeing that you hail from Yaletown, if you have a chance to visit the Tri-Cities area I would highly encourage you to do so.

(No worries, the folks here won't bite!)

People have to understand the difference between:

i). the zero development along the Millennium Line at the time of completion (2002), and
ii). the numerous high rises that are already there/under construction/planned to be built before the Evergreen Line begins service in 2016.

Yes, I also forgot to mention about the extra commuters anticipated from
(1) routes like 701 and 188,
(2) the rerouting/reduction/elimination of major routes like 97B, 160, and 169, (see Bridgeport Station)
(3) WCE, with traveling options broadened to Burnaby and other parts of Vancouver (outside of Downtown) as a result of transferability to the Evergreen Line.

This is so spot on!

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

When they reference 75 seconds, I assume that means zero time for any issues, even as small as somebody holding the door open.

The trains can run at "catch-up" speed, somewhat faster than the normal service speed, in order to regain schedule after those kinds of delays.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

The only one that has a regional bias here is you. There is a reason why the Evergreen Line has been the regional priority, even more so than the Canada Line. All these years, the Metro Vancouver mayors (alas, even both Vision and NPA mayors) agree that the Evergreen Line is a priority, even more so than Broadway or Surrey. And even though I don't agree with all of them 100%, I trust their judgement on this than some Yaletowner who probably don't even have any sort of exposure on how the rest of the region outside of the city of Vancouver move around.

Tri-Cities over Broadway and Surrey? You're the one with the bias.. give me a break.

[Metro-One]

Broadway should have been the first of the three to be built.

But, the Evergreen Line does make more sense to build before an extension in Surrey (removing all politics).

So, all politics removed:

1. Broadway
2. Evergreen
3. Surrey (to Langely)

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Tri-Cities over Broadway and Surrey? You're the one with the bias.. give me a break.

He's probably the most biased pro-Evergreen Line poster here.

Broadway is a much bigger priority right now than building the Evergreen Line in 25 years would be.