Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

It is withing federal purview to contribute as much as they want to any project they see fit. There are a lot of projects that might be of significant importance that they contributed more to.

While the 1/3 model works great to fund things that are of local importance (it basically puts all the decision making into local hands and turns the other levels of government into a bank), when something of significant importance that might bankrupt local bodies to build, the federal government can step in and make up any funding gaps.

Something like the UBC line is so important to the region (heck, it's important to Western Canada) but hard to fund regionally, it's important for the feds to step in (that's the reason we are a federation afterall).

I agree. I think that while he lives in Montreal, his heart is actually in BC. He spent far more time than he had to in BC to win the election. I think it meant a lot to him personally to get as many ridings in BC as possible.

He definitely has more BC in him than John A Macdonald (that's a Canadian history joke).

Did Justin get the Point Grey/UBC riding in the election????

[andasen]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

Did Justin get the Point Grey/UBC riding in the election????

He got both Quadra and Granville. The Former is point Grey to Arbutus, the latter is Arbutus almost to Main.

On the other hand he also got the ridings on the Fraser Highway corridor out to Langley City

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by andasen

He got both Quadra and Granville. The Former is point Grey to Arbutus, the latter is Arbutus almost to Main.

On the other hand he also got the ridings on the Fraser Highway corridor out to Langley City

Well let's hope his election victories help spur these mass rail projects. With any luck Skytrain will be extended down the Fraser Highway to Langley thus opening up additional middle class suburban housing options (at least over the short term till the housing speculators catch up/drive home prices up)!

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

That being the case, would he be any more receptive to include the Broadway-UBC skytrain as part of the national infrastructure program he stated? Hope so.

Trofirhen : J Trudeau may be the only politician who would be 100% in favour of the line - all the way to War Memorial gym.

He is an alumnus .. and as far as that goes .. he will try to do some favour for them, along the way.

The number one thing UBC (and Vancouver) needs is that line. I am sure that the Chancellor of UBC will be on the line, encouraging him to do so.

Besides, didn't the Libs get some of the seats in Vancouver this time around. Won't those new members be advocating for some "strong infrastructure"?

[red-paladin]

Perhaps an arrangement is possible like this:

40% Federal Gov't
33% Provincial Gov't
22% Metro Van / Translink
5% UBC

[Large Cat]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

Trofirhen : J Trudeau may be the only politician who would be 100% in favour of the line - all the way to War Memorial gym.

He is an alumnus .. and as far as that goes .. he will try to do some favour for them, along the way.

The number one thing UBC (and Vancouver) needs is that line. I am sure that the Chancellor of UBC will be on the line, encouraging him to do so.

Besides, didn't the Libs get some of the seats in Vancouver this time around. Won't those new members be advocating for some "strong infrastructure"?

O please let this be so.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Perhaps an arrangement is possible like this:

40% Federal Gov't
33% Provincial Gov't
22% Metro Van / Translink
5% UBC

I think it's quite possible the Federal government could contribute more than 33%, but I would expect Clark/Fassbender to want at least 50% of the overage to count towards their own funding commitments.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I think it's quite possible the Federal government could contribute more than 33%, but I would expect Clark/Fassbender to want at least 50% of the overage to count towards their own funding commitments.

Solution: get rid of Clark next election!

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Caliplanner1

Well let's hope his election victories help spur these mass rail projects. With any luck Skytrain will be extended down the Fraser Highway to Langley thus opening up additional middle class suburban housing options (at least over the short term till the housing speculators catch up/drive home prices up)!

I wouldn't be surprised for Skytrain to be running down Fraser Hwy at least as far as Fleetwood first, simply because it would be aboveground and so faster to build. Plus aboveground projects have more opportunities for photo ops.

As much as JT might want a line out to UBC, how long were they predicting it would take just to get to Arbutus (about half of the way to Blanca / the edge of UBC). Will he have to win another election to see it completed? So while it might be important, I suspect he'll only agree to Arbutus for the time being.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I wouldn't be surprised for Skytrain to be running down Fraser Hwy at least as far as Fleetwood first, simply because it would be aboveground and so faster to build. Plus aboveground projects have more opportunities for photo ops.

As much as JT might want a line out to UBC, how long were they predicting it would take just to get to Arbutus (about half of the way to Blanca / the edge of UBC). Will he have to win another election to see it completed? So while it might be important, I suspect he'll only agree to Arbutus for the time being.

The cost for RRT straight to UBC is 3,010 million, the cost for Combo 2 is 1,970 million (that's the RRT to Arbutus, and a parallel BRT from UBC as-is.) The BRT as-is is 410 million. So logically the RRT portion of Combo 2 is 1,460 million. Compared to LRT2 on both those routes at 1,330 million.
Source: http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...natives_Evaluation_Executive_Summary.pdf

I don't want to see any LRT at all in Metro Vancouver, so it's Skytrain/Subway the entire way or it's not worth doing. If we're only going to see it get as far as Arbutus and there's no Adam Fitch's trying to convince CoV that they want slow transit to derail it, then I think it's safe to assume that whatever Provincial/Federal government is in power by the time the TBM gets to Arbutus should reasonably fund the rest of it. On the other hand, we could see the city council get brainwashed like in Surrey and insist on light rail despite the business case being even worse for the UBC corridor than the Surrey proposed corridors.

So we need to remind the politicians every time someone says light rail, that light rail has the worst business case and worst return on investment every where it's in use.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Kisai

The cost for RRT straight to UBC is 3,010 million, the cost for Combo 2 is 1,970 million (that's the RRT to Arbutus, and a parallel BRT from UBC as-is.) The BRT as-is is 410 million. So logically the RRT portion of Combo 2 is 1,460 million. Compared to LRT2 on both those routes at 1,330 million.
Source: http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...natives_Evaluation_Executive_Summary.pdf

I don't want to see any LRT at all in Metro Vancouver, so it's Skytrain/Subway the entire way or it's not worth doing. If we're only going to see it get as far as Arbutus and there's no Adam Fitch's trying to convince CoV that they want slow transit to derail it, then I think it's safe to assume that whatever Provincial/Federal government is in power by the time the TBM gets to Arbutus should reasonably fund the rest of it. On the other hand, we could see the city council get brainwashed like in Surrey and insist on light rail despite the business case being even worse for the UBC corridor than the Surrey proposed corridors.

So we need to remind the politicians every time someone says light rail, that light rail has the worst business case and worst return on investment every where it's in use.

I'm not a fan of light rail here either - hence why I said Skytrain down Fraser Hwy.

The kind of money you're talking about for the Broadway Line is pocket change to the feds. They're going to be more interested in how much can be finished during their watch, which likely means phased subway construction.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

I agree this is good news for transit. Interestingly the Fraser highway corridor have liberal MPs and I see a lot of stars-in-place for skytrain down Fraser Highway. Langley City is held now by Liberal MP John Aldag. Ken Hardie, the former spokesman for translink, is the (surprise) MP of Fleetwood.

My 2 cents - somehow, an evergreen-line like 11th hour announcement to some sort of property tax increase to put up translink's share to start getting what federal (and provincial) infrastructure money there is. And ongoing strong motivation to have surrey's plan, going thru liberal constituencies, start sooner than vancouver's...

The red sweep in Surrey does probably play well for the probability of rapid transit in Surrey.

However, you also have to look at the next election (so early, I know). If you were to move forward with the UBC project today, it would be nearing completion around the next election. Most of the major construction would be over and every one would be anticipating its opening as they go to the polls. It goes right through an NDP riding that might change hands if they got something they wanted.

I think the Liberals did better than expected because in the days leading up to the election they were talking about the Broadway line. I don't think they want to leave the promise on the table for the next election.

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

Dear Mezzanine

Did you write a "Skytrain" to Langley???? I thought it was to be light rail.

It is a great idea, at least to Fleetwood, with perhaps light rail to Langley to pick up some feeder traffic. The volume on the system would double at Fleetwood, on the way in from Langley. Why not extend the "heavy metal" to Fleetwood and have light rail make two stops, once at 176th (picks up cloverdale) and once at Langley.

Some things you need to keep in mind:

1) Switching tech half way down the Fraser Highway would be expensive. To build Skytrain and LRT would probably cost you the same or more as just Skytrain. Fraser Highway doesn't have a lot of reserved space for LRT, so it will need a lot of reworking the entire length. I would think it would be one of the most expensive ground level LRT projects per KM in North America.

It would also cost more to operate 2 different techs over the next 40 years.

2) There is a surprising amount of existing density in Clayton and Langley City, and a lot of space still reserved for even higher density developments near the proposed route.

3) Skytrain hasn't historically been built to areas of existing high density. Building it through Surrey to Langley would have the same impact as the Millennium line had in Burnaby (there was nothing along it when it was proposed, it is all TOD). I rode the Millennium line for years right after it opened. I would often be the only rider in a train car. Now it is impossible to be alone. When the Expo line opened and ended at New Westminster Station, the line ran with 2 car MK I trains. The only reason there is density waiting for Skytrain in Coquitlam is because it was supposed to be built 10 years ago (when there was nothing there).


Yes, the Broadway line would have a lot of riders on day one. But existing ridership is not the only reason to build it. It would also spur even more TOD in the Broadway area. What's there now is just the tip of the iceburg of what's possible if there was a Subway under the corridor.

The Canada Line was built to serve some demand, but also encourage growth. If you were to go just by 98B line ridership, 2 car trains on 40m platforms was overkill. There are far more people living along it today (near Marine and on No 3 Road) than what many thought possible before it was proposed. Richmond is unrecognizable compared to pre-Canada Line Richmond.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Perhaps an arrangement is possible like this:

40% Federal Gov't
33% Provincial Gov't
22% Metro Van / Translink
5% UBC

Red Paladin has just posted the makings of a very good idea.

he added UBC as a prime beneficiary of a complete UBC line.

now, when the Canada Line went in, Vancouver Airport jumped at the chance to put in some money. They charged, at that time, 5, 10 and 15 dollars for each flight that left Vancouver. They paid at least 100 million to the cost. In exchange they got a RR line from downtown to the airport. When I use the YVR train on my flights, it seems that every 7th person has luggage.

Brilliant, smart and makes YVR much more valuable.

So .. let's examine the value prop for UBC. Most people think that saving 15 minutes on some travel time from Burnaby is the value prop. IT is not.

The real value prop is housing. Forget tuition, the real cost of higher EDU is housing. Burnaby is 25 to 40% cheaper than "west of Dunbar" and is probably better than the typical moldy (and Illegal) basement suite.

Let us say the student can save 400 a month by living in Burnaby. With a Millennium/Evergreen line/artery running door to door every 3 minutes for 17 hours a day, the distance is immaterial because .. I can do things on a RR system like the Canada Line that I cannot do on a rocking, noisy bus.

4 months over 1 semesters is 1,600 saving. Say 30,000 students prefer that deal. That is a saving of 48 million a semester and there are three of those every year.

150 million in student savings .. every year ... forever.

That pays a lot of interest (at 3%) ... like on 5 billion worth of debt. And the whole line from Clark to UBC is just 3.5 billion.

Red paladin has a great suggestion. Get UBC in on the pay side.... and for more than 5% ... 5% of 3.5 billion is just one years savings.

how about a campaign that entices students to voice approval by saying that cheaper housing will save them 12,800 (8 semesters times 1,600) plus accumulated interest over 4 years off their student loans.

The complete line makes great economic sense just on that one calculation.

All the stuff about less surface traffic, less pollution, etc is a bonus.

And there is one hidden social benefit. I will bet you that if combined tuition and housing costs could be reduced by the 12,800 in principal (plus interest) there would be at least one more student who would get a higher education as a result ... and not give up after high school.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I'm not a fan of light rail here either - hence why I said Skytrain down Fraser Hwy.

The kind of money you're talking about for the Broadway Line is pocket change to the feds. They're going to be more interested in how much can be finished during their watch, which likely means phased subway construction.

They will simply put two TBMs to work. One starting at Clark and the other, probably starting at Arbutus.

The box at Arbutus will stay open after the UBC TBM leaves, to pick up the Clark TBM when it gets there.

Double the distance in half the time. A TBM only costs about 10 million to buy and is good for between 40 to 60 miles before it is junk.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

The red sweep in Surrey does probably play well for the probability of rapid transit in Surrey.

However, you also have to look at the next election (so early, I know). If you were to move forward with the UBC project today, it would be nearing completion around the next election. Most of the major construction would be over and every one would be anticipating its opening as they go to the polls. It goes right through an NDP riding that might change hands if they got something they wanted.

I think the Liberals did better than expected because in the days leading up to the election they were talking about the Broadway line. I don't think they want to leave the promise on the table for the next election.

Some things you need to keep in mind:

1) Switching tech half way down the Fraser Highway would be expensive. To build Skytrain and LRT would probably cost you the same or more as just Skytrain. Fraser Highway doesn't have a lot of reserved space for LRT, so it will need a lot of reworking the entire length. I would think it would be one of the most expensive ground level LRT projects per KM in North America.

It would also cost more to operate 2 different techs over the next 40 years.

2) There is a surprising amount of existing density in Clayton and Langley City, and a lot of space still reserved for even higher density developments near the proposed route.

3) Skytrain hasn't historically been built to areas of existing high density. Building it through Surrey to Langley would have the same impact as the Millennium line had in Burnaby (there was nothing along it when it was proposed, it is all TOD). I rode the Millennium line for years right after it opened. I would often be the only rider in a train car. Now it is impossible to be alone. When the Expo line opened and ended at New Westminster Station, the line ran with 2 car MK I trains. The only reason there is density waiting for Skytrain in Coquitlam is because it was supposed to be built 10 years ago (when there was nothing there).


Yes, the Broadway line would have a lot of riders on day one. But existing ridership is not the only reason to build it. It would also spur even more TOD in the Broadway area. What's there now is just the tip of the iceburg of what's possible if there was a Subway under the corridor.

The Canada Line was built to serve some demand, but also encourage growth. If you were to go just by 98B line ridership, 2 car trains on 40m platforms was overkill. There are far more people living along it today (near Marine and on No 3 Road) than what many thought possible before it was proposed. Richmond is unrecognizable compared to pre-Canada Line Richmond.

To BCPhil :

One thing you have to keep in mind is that a RR system has to be sold on some kludgey set of arguments about existing conditions. Your arguments are absolutely right but they are rational and forward looking.

Five years after the Canada Line opened, 6 to 7 story development is slated for Cambie from 25th to 73rd. Now everyone "sees it"

But if you had advanced that as an argument in 1997 before they announced the line, people would have called you a "dreamer" and your ideas "lunacy".

You and I both know what an explosion of development will happen when the artery goes all the way to War Memorial gym.

We may be the only two. Keep the faith, Bro, and feed 'em the pablum they want to hear.

[Ridgerunner]

To BCPhil

QUOTE 3) Skytrain hasn't historically been built to areas of existing high density. Building it through Surrey to Langley would have the same impact as the Millennium line had in Burnaby (there was nothing along it when it was proposed, it is all TOD). I rode the Millennium line for years right after it opened. I would often be the only rider in a train car. Now it is impossible to be alone. When the Expo line opened and ended at New Westminster Station, the line ran with 2 car MK I trains. The only reason there is density waiting for Skytrain in Coquitlam is because it was supposed to be built 10 years ago (when there was nothing there).
QUOTE


I did not realize but you may be right about the density possibilities in Langley. I had thought that a RR line to Fleetwood would cause that area to "go vertical" but you are suggesting two other areas could become pearls on the necklace.

All trains would not have to go through to Langley. Half of them could run a fast shuttle from Surrey to waterfront, turning around at King George.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

To BCPhil

QUOTE 3) Skytrain hasn't historically been built to areas of existing high density. Building it through Surrey to Langley would have the same impact as the Millennium line had in Burnaby (there was nothing along it when it was proposed, it is all TOD). I rode the Millennium line for years right after it opened. I would often be the only rider in a train car. Now it is impossible to be alone. When the Expo line opened and ended at New Westminster Station, the line ran with 2 car MK I trains. The only reason there is density waiting for Skytrain in Coquitlam is because it was supposed to be built 10 years ago (when there was nothing there).
QUOTE


I did not realize but you may be right about the density possibilities in Langley. I had thought that a RR line to Fleetwood would cause that area to "go vertical" but you are suggesting two other areas could become pearls on the necklace.

All trains would not have to go through to Langley. Half of them could run a fast shuttle from Surrey to waterfront, turning around at King George.

I think TransLink's already said that if SkyTrain was built to Langley, it would in fact short turn at King George and only have every 2nd train go to Langley.

Also I just wanna point out, it's funny how some people (not you guys) say Broadway shouldn't get SkyTrain past Arbutus because it's not dense enough, yet support SkyTrain to Langley. Like if you think Fraser Highway is dense enough for SkyTrain, surely West Broadway is as well.

[OhioGuy]

Vancouver, Surrey mayors eager to get transit moving with Ottawa cash

Newly elected Liberal MP John Aldag sent a letter to the Surrey mayor’s office last week, even before he was elected in Cloverdale-Langley City, reassuring Linda Hepner that he’d be advocating to get transit money to the underserved suburb.

So Ms. Hepner knows the new Liberal government, which will have four Surrey MPs in it, is on her side as she fights to get money for a $2.1-billion light-rail line.

Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson also believes his city’s four Liberal MPs will lobby for transit.

It won’t be much of a fight, because Liberal prime-minister-designate Justin Trudeau made a point of announcing funding for a Broadway line during the campaign from the deck of a Vancouver building. The Broadway line “certainly got a boost,” said Mr. Robertson.

For the mayors of Surrey and Vancouver, the problem now is that the region and the province are deadlocked on how to pay for the local share.

[Sheba]

I don't think the Broadway Line should go past Arbutus *right now* due to:
1) Show me the money...
2) People want instant gratification - and a tunnel takes a looong time to dig. They want to see to see value for their money right now, not at some distant point in the future.

That's why I want to see Skytrain along Broadway phased in. Once people can start riding the first phase, they're more likely to want to pay for the second phase.

[bardak]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I think TransLink's already said that if SkyTrain was built to Langley, it would in fact short turn at King George and only have every 2nd train go to Langley.

Also I just wanna point out, it's funny how some people (not you guys) say Broadway shouldn't get SkyTrain past Arbutus because it's not dense enough, yet support SkyTrain to Langley. Like if you think Fraser Highway is dense enough for SkyTrain, surely West Broadway is as well.

Well Broadway already has a bus every two and a half seconds at rush hour unlike the SoF where you are lucky to get a bus every second Tuesday during a full moon in the year of the rat. Also only those cheap ass students who don't even pay to use transit would benefit in any way. There would not be any network benefits in anyway if the line was to go all the way to UBC. /s


To be honest I think the most people who really champion Skytrain down Fraser highway also support going all the way to UBC as well.