SkyTrain Station Renovations

[Rico]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i still cant believe they are going through all this trouble, all this money, all this inconvenience and the platforms aren't getting any longer.

At first it really annoyed me but I have decided to give translink the benefit of the doubt. Obviously Translink thinks the combination of the Mark IIIs, maximizing frequency and the Broadway line (a Broadway line is forecast to divert a couple of thousand riders per hour north of Commercial) will be sufficient for the next 20 years and decided not to spend the money now.

[gillty]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i still cant believe they are going through all this trouble, all this money, all this inconvenience and the platforms aren't getting any longer.

Metrotown has never had an issue with platform length. The issue was the single entrance/exit, the concourse elevation changes, and the central passerelle.

Given traffic will now be dispersed between three fully functional— and much improved in capacity—entrances/exits I don't see the need for longer platforms.

Frankly, I just don't see any station in the system (sans Canada Line) needing longer platform lengths. The issue, and always will be the issue IMO, is passenger flow which tends to oversaturate one end of a platform, e.g. Waterfront, Broadway, Surrey Central, due to a variety of issues such as escalator/stair capacity and/or train frequency (on the Surrey branch) or passerelle capacity (Broadway-Commercial).

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by gillty

Frankly, I just don't see any station in the system (sans Canada Line) needing longer platform lengths. The issue, and always will be the issue IMO, is passenger flow which tends to oversaturate one end of a platform, e.g. Waterfront, Broadway, Surrey Central, due to a variety of issues such as escalator/stair capacity and/or train frequency (on the Surrey branch) or passerelle capacity (Broadway-Commercial).

Metrotown used to be really bad with that too - people would bunch up just past the top of the escalator. I quickly learned to move past them as not only was I more likely to get a seat, but then when the train stopped at my station I was right at the exit.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Anorak]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Increasing passenger flow etc is definetly an oft overlooked way of drastically improving capacity and reducing dwell times, however in the end we are still limited to 5 car Mark 3's even a slight platform length increase by 10 M or so should be able to accommodate six car trains something we will probably be looking at sooner than most realise with all the growth South of the Fraser and the extension down Fraser Highway.

I think what the previous commenter wasn't saying that its impossible that we will reach a point when we need longer platforms, but that for the next 20 years or so we should be fine with 5 car Mark III/IV/whatever version there is then at max frequencies and by the time 20 years rolls around it'll be time for a major system upgrade and/or replacement

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Transiteer]

To increase passenger capacity on the system I believe TransLink's current strategy is to use more trains with smaller intervals between each train, and the idea of platform extension has been pretty much abandoned.
Some station platforms cannot be extended without huge disruption or even a system shut-down, because there are physical limitations to extending the platforms. Granville and Burrard for example might require rock quarrying and tunneling. 29th Avenue has station structures at both ends of the platforms, with no room to grow. I'm sure there are others with similar problems (e.g. Metrotown as someone else mentioned). There could be other infrastructure problems too, such as pocket tracks and maintenance facilities may not be able to accommodate longer trains than the system is currently designed for. Before the first longer train can be put into service all of these expensive and time consuming upgrades would have to be completed across the entire system in readiness, whereas buying some new extra (but regular length) trains is a relatively easy capacity upgrade, ostensibly cheaper, and with quicker return on investment in terms of better quality of service. I support TransLink construction projects, but I think that the money saved from not extending platforms across the system is better spent buying new rolling stock to add to the fleet. More trains more frequently means less waiting and less crowded trains. Just my 2c.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Transiteer]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Of course but, there's a hard limit with more trains in terms of peak frequency that's the issue.

Granted, however I guess my point is there's still quite a bit of Expo/ Millenium Line capacity expansion room left before those hard headway limits are reached, (if the SkyTrain Wikipedia page is to be believed). Currently they run using a 108 second headway (33.33 trains per hour), but they can run at 75 seconds (48 Trains per hour). That's an increase of 44% of train service to what we have right now. Then there's also additional passenger space that the mark 3s offer and potentially more space by adding 'C' cars to the Mark 2s to maximize their length. I'm guessing that could mean an extra 50% to the peak passenger capacity on top of what we have today, without lengthening the platforms.
I think everyone agrees at some point in the future the limit will be reached - the question is when it will be reached. From 2015 to 2016 annual ridership increased by 4.5%, however this tells us nothing about how the peak hour ridership is increasing on a year to year basis - and that's the data that counts for this particular problem; it could be that most of the new passengers ride at quiet times for example. No doubt the compass system is very useful for collecting this ridership data and helpful for making predictions on when peak capacity might be reached, and I'm sure there's someone far more clever than myself working on this problem.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i still cant believe they are going through all this trouble, all this money, all this inconvenience and the platforms aren't getting any longer.

I actually agree with this -
not for necessarily for longer tains in fuure, but just to accommodate more of a holding area at platform level.

The new station houses place the holding areas at grade, which assumes that trains will be efficiently clearing the platform.
We all know that delays occur and passengers can pile up on the platform level.

As an example, Lougheed Town Centre Station was built with much longer platforms than required for the trains themselves - and are glassed off which creates a circulation / holding area for passengers.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Transiteer

I think everyone agrees at some point in the future the limit will be reached - the question is when it will be reached.

I expect that there will be quite a significant jump in ridership when the Broadway Extension goes into service because it will bring the hospital district online and it will also benefit from a much stronger network effect with the Canada Line. And a line extension towards Langley along with Surrey rail transit will doubtless also increase ridership.

I've used the Expo Line since it first opened and ridership growth has been relentless. I'd expect that we're going to be running at maximum capacity within the next few decades. If station expansion is a potential option then now would be the time to start dealing with it, particularly with all of the station renovations that have been taking place.

[Transiteer]

Originally Posted by officedweller

I actually agree with this -
not for necessarily for longer trains in future, but just to accommodate more of a holding area at platform level.

According to the posted Metrotown Phase 2 and 3 info there will be extended floor area at both ends of the platform level due to the upgrades.

It looks like the new floor is the section between the top of the escalators and the end hoop truss of the old platform as seen in the below image.

Source: http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Pro...Upgrades/Metrotown-Station-Upgrades.aspx

.

I also found this "Expo Line Upgrade Strategy" report on the TransLink website which, although 7 years old, it describes the general approach that is being followed, predictions for ridership, required upgrades etc.

http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...de%20Strategy%20%20Project%20Summary.pdf

[officedweller]

It would be nice if they had a bigger area added.

If you compare that rendering to the photo:
- on the rendering, the beam on the roof support structure could be compatible with a longer platform (with added support)
- on the photo, the beam on the roof support structure would block a platform extension (compare height with train doors).

Originally Posted by Transiteer

Another tweet from VIA Architecture, looking the other way.

Source: https://twitter.com/viaarchitecture/status/850403046056116224

[Rico]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I expect that there will be quite a significant jump in ridership when the Broadway Extension goes into service because it will bring the hospital district online and it will also benefit from a much stronger network effect with the Canada Line. And a line extension towards Langley along with Surrey rail transit will doubtless also increase ridership.

I've used the Expo Line since it first opened and ridership growth has been relentless. I'd expect that we're going to be running at maximum capacity within the next few decades. If station expansion is a potential option then now would be the time to start dealing with it, particularly with all of the station renovations that have been taking place.

The forecast is for more riders on the Expo line following Broadway.....but fewer north of commercial....and the segment north of commercial is where the crush problem is....so Broadway helps the Expo line capacity problem and helps balance demand along the line.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Rico

The forecast is for more riders on the Expo line following Broadway.....but fewer north of commercial....and the segment north of commercial is where the crush problem is....so Broadway helps the Expo line capacity problem and helps balance demand along the line.

True enough. But ridership growth all along the Expo line is still going to cause problems soon enough that any station expansion plans need to be in the works now, because that would be a multi-decade project.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Hate to sound like a broken record, but changing the seating arrangement and adding a fifth car should significantly increase capacity. Bench seats are significantly more space efficient, and fold up seats even more so. Kuala Lumpur already utilizes a higher capacity arrangement :

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/727/33089447230_3d9352fbce_h.jpg

In addition adding platform screen doors or gates (see here: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/ek20120117wha.jpg) can help improve the safety on crowded platforms.

If we absolutely maximize our current infrastructure we should be able to grow the line capacity even further, we may need to be innovative but thankfully systems in Asia have done most of the hard work for us!!!

I wonder if there is a platform screen doors-like system that can work with any rolling stock.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

I wonder if there is a platform screen doors-like system that can work with any rolling stock.

There is, but those systems will cause a delay of a couple of seconds per stop.

[ilikeredheads]

platform screen doors will not happen until the Mark Is are phased out and we are left with the MkIIs and MkIIIs The problem isn't that we have different rolling stocks, but that the trains have varying lengths and number of doors. Even if there are doors that can accommodate, they will be extremely expensive to install and maintain because these doors have to constantly shift back and forth depending on the trains.

Same thing with the Canada Line. Until all the stations have been expanded to 50m and all the trains are running with the C cars, it is pointless to talk about platform screen doors.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

Same thing with the Canada Line. Until all the stations have been expanded to 50m and all the trains are running with the C cars, it is pointless to talk about platform screen doors.

it is pointless to talk about them since we really don't need them. why would we want to increase dwell time? it doesn't matter when you have 3mins between trains with operators, but with very short headway's it can make a difference.