Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Only 2 trains had seats removed, and essentially they took out a set at the other doors to allow better movement of people in and out of the trains.

Ah, interesting - I guess I haven't been on that trainset since they modified it. Thanks very much for the info and the links!

[bardak]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Imo the seating arrangement on the Canada Line was very poorly thought out, towards the end of the train the flow is not very good, the aisle is narrow as well, ai think adding in some longitudinal seating like on alot of systems would have made alot of sense.

2 + 1 transverse seating like in the newer Mk2 and 3 actually maximizes combined seated and standing capacity. People tend to miss how much room peoples legs take up with longitudinal seating. Think of how little space there is in Mk1 where the longitudinal seating is.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by bardak

2 + 1 transverse seating like in the newer Mk2 and 3 actually maximizes combined seated and standing capacity. People tend to miss how much room peoples legs take up with longitudinal seating. Think of how little space there is in Mk1 where the longitudinal seating is.

Don't forget all the minor irritations of being seated side-by-side (groceries, manspreading, etc). If things get really bad, TransLink should just install single transverse seats on either side of the train.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Imo the seating arrangement on the Canada Line was very poorly thought out, towards the end of the train the flow is not very good, the aisle is narrow as well, ai think adding in some longitudinal seating like on alot of systems would have made alot of sense.

The flow is pretty bad at the stations too. Shouldn't have skimped on it.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Hooknose]

I just heard a rumour from more than one person that Broadway is not going to be the route for the new Broadway Line.
One person told me it would be 10th.
Another told me it would be along 8th.
The tunneling costs are just too high and so "cut and cover" is going to be used.
The disruption costs for cut and cover along Broadway are just too high and so the alternate routes are under some very serious consideration.
Anyone?

[Feathered Friend]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

I just heard a rumour from more than one person that Broadway is not going to be the route for the new Broadway Line.
One person told me it would be 10th.
Another told me it would be along 8th.
The tunneling costs are just too high and so "cut and cover" is going to be used.
The disruption costs for cut and cover along Broadway are just too high and so the alternate routes are under some very serious consideration.
Anyone?

A quick search of this thread would have given you an answer
There is zero truth to those rumors.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

I just heard a rumour from more than one person that Broadway is not going to be the route for the new Broadway Line.
One person told me it would be 10th.
Another told me it would be along 8th.
The tunneling costs are just too high and so "cut and cover" is going to be used.
The disruption costs for cut and cover along Broadway are just too high and so the alternate routes are under some very serious consideration.
Anyone?

I recall, a good year or more back where, while not officially rubber-stamped, boring under 10th and connnecting to station entranceways on Broadway itself. was the most accepted.
This seemed the most logical thing to do for many people on SSP, and perhaps elsewhere, the main opponents no doubt the residents of 10thW. But Cut-cover Broadway was OUT.
If it were to go directly under Braodway, unless I am wrong, it would be bored tunnel. Perhaps other SSpers more knowledgeable could direct you to some stats.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

I just heard a rumour from more than one person that Broadway is not going to be the route for the new Broadway Line.
One person told me it would be 10th.
Another told me it would be along 8th.
The tunneling costs are just too high and so "cut and cover" is going to be used.
The disruption costs for cut and cover along Broadway are just too high and so the alternate routes are under some very serious consideration.
Anyone?

The engineering study that was done in 2012 said it looked at 200 possible alternative within the corridor and narrowed it down to 7.

Details at: http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...natives_Evaluation_Executive_Summary.pdf

I would be surprised if at some point in time someone had not modelled those various route and rejected them for one reason or another since today the Broadway option appears to be the only one on the table.

[Hooknose]

I guess the speculation about the UBC/Arbutus line is a little like the old saying about oil drilling.

The BS stops when the drill bit drops.

So does anyone have any inside goop on when the final and official announcement is supposed to be made ???

Pre election in May?? Post election in September??

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

I just heard a rumour from more than one person that Broadway is not going to be the route for the new Broadway Line.
One person told me it would be 10th.
Another told me it would be along 8th.
The tunneling costs are just too high and so "cut and cover" is going to be used.
The disruption costs for cut and cover along Broadway are just too high and so the alternate routes are under some very serious consideration.
Anyone?

The Broadway "Corridor" has always been somewhere between 8th and 10th.

8th Ave has a GVRD trunk sewer under it so it's a no go from the start.

The early favourite was 10th Ave with entrances from Broadway built into the hillside in some locations. The less commercial nature of this street would allow cut and cover (unlike Broadway itself) but would have some impacts through the hospital district. It would also have less underground services than Broadway itself so would require less rerouting of services. However, cut and cover is political suicide post-Canada Line (even if it is the most cost effective) and would mean disruption of the 10th Ave bikeway - now being renovated in the hospital district.

Under Broadway itself is a political choice because it generally precludes the use of cut and cover (following the impacts of Canada Line construction on a heavily commercial retail street). However, station box excavation will still involve large open pits near major intersections, even if a tunnel boring machine is used. Different solutions may be possible, like a double decker bore with side-loaded platforms to reduce in-street excavation. Temporary road decks can also be erected over the excavations (this was done on Seymour St. when Granville Station was built).

So it'll either be Broadway or 10th - the choice will probably be more political rather than cost efficient.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The Broadway "Corridor" has always been somewhere between 8th and 10th.

8th Ave has a GVRD trunk sewer under it so it's a no go from the start.

The early favourite was 10th Ave with entrances from Broadway built into the hillside in some locations. The less commercial nature of this street would allow cut and cover (unlike Broadway itself) but would have some impacts through the hospital district. It would also have less underground services than Broadway itself so would require less rerouting of services. However, cut and cover is political suicide post-Canada Line (even if it is the most cost effective) and would mean disruption of the 10th Ave bikeway - now being renovated in the hospital district.

Under Broadway itself is a political choice because it generally precludes the use of cut and cover (following the impacts of Canada Line construction on a heavily commercial retail street). However, station box excavation will still involve large open pits near major intersections, even if a tunnel boring machine is used. Different solutions may be possible, like a double decker bore with side-loaded platforms to reduce in-street excavation. Temporary road decks can also be erected over the excavations (this was done on Seymour St. when Granville Station was built).

So it'll either be Broadway or 10th - the choice will probably be more political rather than cost efficient.

I counted three uses of "political" in your reply.

No objection to that but it points out just how heavily this issue is going to be swayed by considerations that are not strict engineering.

I agree with you. "Political" is the elephant in this room.

[jsbertram]

Harcourt wants subway to UBC.

http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/mike-harcourts-train-of-thought-build-a-subway-to-ubc

“It’s crazy to end it [at Arbutus],” Harcourt said. “You should take it to Jericho and out to UBC.”

...

But asked about the worst-case future for the region, he cited “this really stupid idea of the bridge to replace the Massey Tunnel.

“If it gets built, all it does is shift the congestion from the tunnel to Richmond and the Oak Street Bridge. And then some blockhead is going to say, ‘Oh well, we can fix that. Let’s just build an eight-lane bridge and freeway down Oak Street.’”

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Harcourt wants subway to UBC.

http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/mike-harcourts-train-of-thought-build-a-subway-to-ubc

He wants a lot more than that - he's talking about a four-track line with local and express trains. I like his thinking! If the Massey Tunnel replacement gets 10 lanes then I think Broadway deserves at least 4, no?

[officedweller]

Personally, I'd rather see 2 tracks for Broadway and 2 tracks for 41st, rather than 4 tracks for Broadway.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

He wants a lot more than that - he's talking about a four-track line with local and express trains. I like his thinking! If the Massey Tunnel replacement gets 10 lanes then I think Broadway deserves at least 4, no?

Express Skytrain would be very fast. Even at just 2.5 km station spacing, Skytrain averages 60 km/h. And that's the curvy section between New west and Royal Oak station.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by logan5

Express Skytrain would be very fast. Even at just 2.5 km station spacing, Skytrain averages 60 km/h. And that's the curvy section between New west and Royal Oak station.

The technology used probably hasn't been used in that configuration before, but I think the weakness is in where would you do a 4-track configuration. Every time you put a switch in, you slow down the maximum speed.

Let's assume for the minute that they 4-tracked the entire space from Commercial Drive to Arbutus, with the Express track between Commercial and Cambie (City Hall), where else would it make sense? Broadway is busy, but it's not not made less busy by only having two endpoint stops.

[Metro-One]

Is this not the same man who killed the transit referendum and the HST?

While I agree with his vision for Skytrain (though in Japan lots of trains run express services without 4 rail beds, just more platforms in stations and maybe a third rail along shared lines) it annoys me how he is fanning the classic rod vs. transit debate which ends up just being toxic for improving both.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

would 4 tracks even be useful for this? UBC to VCC-Clark is only ~12kms. and with a regular speed of 60km/h would it really be necessary? i don't think it would.