Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[BCPhil]

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.

I don't think you would need to short turn half the trains at King George. The trains currently arrive almost completely full at Surrey Center and King George, with many of those people transferring to buses that head east of 148 St. And expanding Skytrain into Fleetwood would attract a lot of riders that are currently in a transit no mans land that would become a 5 minute bus ride to a station. You could easily run every Expo line train to 168 St and they would be pretty full.

Now, I would love to see Skytrain all the way to UBC.

But you do have to consider the cost. While it might actually generate more passengers per km than Skytrain in Surrey, and maybe even more new passengers per dollar spent, the sum of money you need at one time might be beyond what we are capable of assembling.

Skytrain to UBC might be the most beneficial project we could do in BC right now; we might get the most benefit out of doing it; it could even be profitable; but the money might be impossible to assemble. if it is a $5+ billion project to build to UBC, it might just be a sum of money we cannot come up with at one time for one project.

I do actually think they should all be done in stages. Skytrain to Langley should first be built out to 168 St as Phase 1, then completed to Langley Center later. And Broadway should be built to Arbutus as phase 1, and out to UBC later as phase 2. You would get immediate gains in both areas (that would be huge game changers for so many people) while still having plans for the future.

The full lines should be identified as our long term goals, something we will do for sure, and build them as money becomes available. You could even further phase in the Langley line. Just build it a couple stations at a time. That's they approach they started using with expansion in Surrey (first to Scott Road, the King George).

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Hmm. I wonder the options are for an underground OMC...

Unless the TBM runs into Yamashita's gold, none!


I would expect 2/3 of Expo Line trains to travel to King George and 1/3 to go to Production Way.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

I don't think you would need to short turn half the trains at King George. The trains currently arrive almost completely full at Surrey Center and King George, with many of those people transferring to buses that head east of 148 St. And expanding Skytrain into Fleetwood would attract a lot of riders that are currently in a transit no mans land that would become a 5 minute bus ride to a station. You could easily run every Expo line train to 168 St and they would be pretty full.

Now, I would love to see Skytrain all the way to UBC.

But you do have to consider the cost. While it might actually generate more passengers per km than Skytrain in Surrey, and maybe even more new passengers per dollar spent, the sum of money you need at one time might be beyond what we are capable of assembling.

Skytrain to UBC might be the most beneficial project we could do in BC right now; we might get the most benefit out of doing it; it could even be profitable; but the money might be impossible to assemble. if it is a $5+ billion project to build to UBC, it might just be a sum of money we cannot come up with at one time for one project.

I do actually think they should all be done in stages. Skytrain to Langley should first be built out to 168 St as Phase 1, then completed to Langley Center later. And Broadway should be built to Arbutus as phase 1, and out to UBC later as phase 2. You would get immediate gains in both areas (that would be huge game changers for so many people) while still having plans for the future.

The full lines should be identified as our long term goals, something we will do for sure, and build them as money becomes available. You could even further phase in the Langley line. Just build it a couple stations at a time. That's they approach they started using with expansion in Surrey (first to Scott Road, the King George).

If they have any sense (which is always questionable) they'll build the Skytrain down Fraser Hwy a few stations at a time and then open them while building the next few. I could easily see them doing this until 168th and then taking a break before continuing to Langley in exactly the same manner.

Broadway on the other hand... Tunnelling is going to be a long expensive process. Would it be possible to move the end pit as they go, and so open to Cambie and then Arbutus (I honestly have no idea if it's possible). I foresee Arbutus to UBC being in the distant future solely due to lack of money. Unless someone gifts the money for it, I really can't see how we can afford that long of a bored tunnel.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Unless the TBM runs into Yamashita's gold, none!

Well if it's the Evergreen OMC and they dig down now (kind of like for underground parking for towers) then yeah sure it's possible. Digging it bored tunnel style though, uhm

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Hmm. I wonder the options are for an underground OMC...

You don't really need that. You don't need every train to be in the OMC overnight, you can store trains at the terminal stations and other areas along the line (such as pocket tracks) and only have those trains that need maintenance/cleaning at the OMC overnight.

[MIPS]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Well if it's the Evergreen OMC and they dig down now (kind of like for underground parking for towers) then yeah sure it's possible. Digging it bored tunnel style though, uhm

cut and cover under Broadway and burrard.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Jebby

You don't really need that. You don't need every train to be in the OMC overnight, you can store trains at the terminal stations and other areas along the line (such as pocket tracks) and only have those trains that need maintenance/cleaning at the OMC overnight.

They can certainly do that. Before the yard expansion in 2008, it only have enough space to store 114 of the 150 MKIs. The other 36 MKIs were stored on the mainline track overnight. Now there is enough space to store all vehicles, but not every vehicle go back at night.

[xd_1771]

^ The ability to have on-track storage is definitely one of the few underappreciated traits of our SkyTrain system driver-less design, as it really allows us to reduce the land footprint needed for train storage, in a metropolitan area with one of the highest land prices on earth. Our linear motor propulsion also means that we don't need large facilities for maintenance because there isn't a lot to maintain anyway. So I think that's a key reason why the Evergreen Line's OMC is only being built as a "partial" facility. It's likely it's that we can have some sort of facilitation for what would otherwise be a separate line on our system (with incoming extensions of its own).

Trains don't have to be stored on tail/side tracks when it's out-of-service time. Sometimes when I arrive at the King George Station area (current place of residence) after hours, there are usually multiple trains parked on the tail track beyond the station but also on both tracks in the station itself, probably ready to be activated for morning service. In effect the entire system is like one big train yard since there's no need for drivers to walk up to the train in the morning and away from them at the end of the night. At this point, OMC need is probably more about strategic position so that cars that do need maintenance do not need to, say, loop around the entire system to get to the yard.

So a Broadway extension or a Surrey extension may not even need any new OMC-related development - especially as newer-generation vehicles will probably create even less maintenance needs with newer parts and systems. Both rapid transit expansion studies (Broadway, Surrey RTS) assumed some sort of vague OMC need - but effectively that would be finalized in the phase 3 planning process. We'll know sometime for Broadway, although harder to say for Surrey (since the Mayors' Council dictation has basically shut down all work on anything that isn't LRT so at the moment there isn't a chance we'll know)

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by MIPS

Hmm. I wonder the options are for an underground OMC...

Why go underground, when the new Broadway line runs south of the Rocky Mountaineer station and between the BNSF yards and the new Emily Carr campus?

Build a new OMC over part of the existing train yards between Home Depot and the new GNW campus.

[jlousa]

Or you can build it over the home depot parking lot, customers get cover and you can connect it to both the M-Line and E-Line easily. I'm j/k.
Don't think there is another need for a OMC at this point, and if the Surrey line does become skytrain you can build one out east cheaper.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by jlousa

O
Don't think there is another need for a OMC at this point, and if the Surrey line does become skytrain you can build one out east cheaper.

A big train yard could be built between Surrey and Langley on cheap land.

[AMTDGT]

Originally Posted by Jebby

A big train yard could be built between Surrey and Langley on cheap land.

They were coring today (Saturday) in the middle of Broadway on the west side of Cambie.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Sheba

If they have any sense (which is always questionable) they'll build the Skytrain down Fraser Hwy a few stations at a time and then open them while building the next few. I could easily see them doing this until 168th and then taking a break before continuing to Langley in exactly the same manner.

Broadway on the other hand... Tunnelling is going to be a long expensive process. Would it be possible to move the end pit as they go, and so open to Cambie and then Arbutus (I honestly have no idea if it's possible). I foresee Arbutus to UBC being in the distant future solely due to lack of money. Unless someone gifts the money for it, I really can't see how we can afford that long of a bored tunnel.

Maybe this is where Justin might help out.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Maybe this is where Justin might help out.

You could say he's 'Just-in' time to save the day. I should be him for Halloween next year.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

You could say he's 'Just-in' time to save the day. I should be him for Halloween next year.

Try it out. It might work.

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Try it out. It might work.

Haha. I already voted for the guy.

[jsbertram]

I just noticed a crew taking core samples north of Broadway @ Laurel today.

Not sure if this is part of the Broadway / UBC extension pre-engineering, but it kinda makes sense to have the Oak station running from Oak to Laurel - and have station entrances at each street.

The new building on the SW corner of Broadway @ Oak is being built with a station entrance ready to connect to the station mezzanine.

An entrance at Laurel would make access by the VGH staff easier.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Not sure if this is part of the Broadway / UBC extension pre-engineering, but it kinda makes sense to have the Oak station running from Oak to Laurel - and have station entrances at each street.

I really, really hope they don't cheap out like the Canada Line did and have only one entrance per station. One of the things I always loved about the Toronto subway system was the plethora of entrances for the stations, with major intersections getting entrances on all four corners.

[Rico]

I would be surprised if they did not learn from the Canada Line experience combined with the need to add entrances to Expo line stations during the upgrades....that said I would guess they will limit access to 2 per station because of cost.

[TransitFreak]

Not primarily cost it's CPTED accommodations. Given the openness of the system community response was to have one entry point for safety reasons. Also why the extensive use of glazing for station houses instead of mesh. One direction escalators are cost items