Quote:
Originally Posted by ronthecivil
What does Vancouver do once the expo line is at capacity? It's almost there, and there's not much that can be done in terms of longer trains or faster frequency, both are already very close to maxed out.
|
I hardly think it's maxed out, otherwise we would have 6-car Mark II/III trains with the lead/tail car sticking out past the station to take advantage of the articulated vehicle. (Which is basically the only cheap option and can only be done as long as there's no switch on both sides of the station.) Imagine "D" cars with no doors and additional standing room as the end cars.
There are benefits and downsides to nearly every option:
1: Status quo - Once we run out of train headway (I'm sure the software could be tuned or a train every 15 seconds if we wanted, there just wouldn't be enough space to allow it to operate at optimal speed and not bunch up outside stations) we do nothing.
2: Build a parallel line across the busiest section and connect it to the same tracks. The busiest section is Likely the Waterfront to Broadway segment, but that is a result of what is at Broadway, the 99 B-line, which is capacity constrained. The Expo line tends to be maxed out on the inbound track by the time it gets there. This results in maxed out trains at Main street as well in both directions. So this can't really be considered until VCC Clark to Arbutus is built, as UBC traffic will be redirected to the Millennium Line, and those who are on the line will transfer at Cambie if they want to go downtown instead of going to Commercial Drive and then backtracking. Likewise people going to the Ferry will take the Millennium Line and transfer at Cambie to leave at Bridgeport.
When a Parallel line is needed, it would be the Hastings Line, it would be built from the existing Waterfront station (eg the Expo line would just continue since it basically turns around at Waterfront) and continue eastward down Hastings. Or a new line entirely can go from Hastings to under Stanley Park and into North/West Vancouver.
3: Build larger wider cars. This idea has been floated here before, Bombardier makes a wider version. The problem? It would require replacing all the existing guideway. I'm sure replacing it one piece at a time is possible given the construction method, and then upgrade the stations once the guideway is widened, the problem is that it would require shutting down pieces of the track for years, and then the stations. 2.65m to 3.2m. That adds just 0.55m. (Canada Line trains are 3m.) This is essentially the same as rebuilding the entire system, and would cost about the same as a new system.
4: Build taller cars. Hey if you can't wider, maybe go taller. Making room for all the above-grade stations would be possible, but not for the tunneled stations (Burrard, Granville) or the new evergreen line tunnel. There may also be weight restrictions for the existing guideway and bridge. A "double deck" set of cars would likely only run from Stadium to Surrey, and even then due to the location of switches, it would likely only go to the third platform at Stadium. Assuming this was possible, (I'd have to wonder if the trains wouldn't be knocked over during high winds) you would get a capacity increase similar to a double-deck bus from a regular 40' bus. This would also require reprogramming the computer systems to avoid sending taller cars into areas that they don't fit. From a safety point of view you wouldn't want to do this option.
5: Double-deck the guideway. Similar to the previous option, build another deck over the existing deck. The NIMBY's will howl over this, but it's the only option that doesn't require appropriating additional land. It would however require removing a floor from the Vancity building at Main street, and to expand the tunnel between Main street and Waterfront. This would require shutting down the entire segment while they blast/mine out the Dunsmuir tunnel, and that has it's own stability questions. They would then likely need to expand those stations so that boarding can be done from both sides. From an engineering point of view, this might be the better option since the original elevated stations would just get additional floors. This of course would be the same as building an entirely new line, so it likely would be seriously considered only after other parallel line options (eg Hastings, 41st or 49th) have been exhausted.
All of the above have been considering the east-west direction. If we consider the north-south direction instead:
- Build a perpendicular line at Willingdon in Burnaby, thus the commuters that are trying to get to Burnaby from terminus points at the Expo line don't have to switch at Commercial/Broadway. This connects Brentwood to Metrotown and a future Hastings Line. Thus people who need to get to to/from Burnaby have three options. This provides relief to the Expo line since commuters coming from north Burnaby, wouldn't try to get on the Expo line from the Millennium Line. But again, the requirements for this pretty much requires a second route into downtown Vancouver (eg Hastings), but could also terminate in North Vancouver (at Capilano University.)
- Build a perpendicular line at PNE, Rupert Station, Joyce Station, and then go West on 41st, connecting to Cambie and Arbutus through Kerrisdale and back up to UBC. This assumes something may eventually be built at Arbutus.
- Build a subway under Arbutus, under False Creek, under Stanley Park and into North/West Vancouver at around Marine Dr. The Lions gate area is less than 20 meters deep while most of port area has depths up to 40 meters. If this line existed, it would provide relief to the Expo Line by virtue of eliminating the Seabus. This would also be a dangerous excavation since the sea would want to push into the tunnels. Keep in mind that shipping concerns may way to dredge the Lions Gate bridge area.
So things to consider:
a) Where does the commuter traffic come from. The current numbers suggest that the Seabus (Expo Terminus), Main Street, and Broadway/Commerical Drive (due to the 99) are the choke points into Vancouver, but the traffic direction of the 99 is towards UBC
So extending the Millennium Line to UBC, makes the most sense at present. Once that is done, the commuter traffic should re-arrange itself so that students take the Canada Line to get to the Millenium Line instead of the Expo Line. This doesn't solve the Seabus problem.
b) The Seabus is a choke point, one that we can't fix by adding more ships, because marine traffic is not predictable. The existing terminals support two ships at each end, in theory they could make them support additional ones, but it's really a question of where to store the ones that aren't in service. One medical emergency or mechanical problem with the ship or the terminal and everything comes to a halt.
At some point there will be some serious thought into running a Subway under Stanley Park, somewhere between Brockton Point and the Lions Gate Bridge. This will run into opposition by those who wish to build a car tunnel or replacement of the Lions Gate bridge to North Vancouver instead. What makes the most long-term sense is a permanent tunnel, but it's not unreasonable to build a new bridge/third crossing and incorporate a rapid transit component into the bridge design.
c) A Hastings Line makes the most sense for a parallel line that goes into Downtown Vancouver and through Burnaby. If there is no Arbutus line to cross into North Vancouver at the first narrows, then the next possible option is with a Hastings Line at either the First Narrows (Lions Gate) or Second Narrows (Ironworkers Memorial Bridge) could be done. However a second narrows crossing makes more sense with North-South route (eg Willingdon)
d) A Willingdon Line would probably be the most logical route to connect to North Vancouver through the second Narrows, and go all the way to at least Metrotown (Connecting the PNE, Brentwood, BCIT, and Metrotown)
This is all trying to think 30 years into the future. For the most part, whatever benefits Downtown Vancouver tends to benefit the entire region, but this assumes that the majority of the traffic has it's destination as downtown. Both Burnaby and Surrey have commercial and Retail cores that are connected already to the Expo Line, and as such there should be a similar demand in traffic to reach these city cores. If people instead take a potential Arbutus or Hastings Line out of downtown, then people will not be heading to these destinations.
In the case of a Canada Line, it's the only line that is going to be going to the Airport. If an Arbutus line is built, it will not also terminate at the Airport, rather it would require a transfer to the Canada Line at some point, which means it needs to connect to connect to Bridgeport or Marine Dr., even though Templeton might be closer. So I believe what is going to happen whenever something is done with Arbutus, is that it will likely just end at 49th and something else run perpendicular with it. If it goes any further south, it would come with a requirement to redevelop all the single family homes into highrises.
Prev
Linear Mode
