Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Feathered Friend

http://vanmapp1.vancouver.ca/roadahead/events/details/43ca3818-c005-49c0-85c8-0ac5bdeb9df0



Looks like they'll be on that stretch until the end of the week.

the industrial way of hunting for easter eggs!

[jollyburger]

They were also drilling a bit east of Main maybe for station entrances?

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

They were also drilling a bit east of Main maybe for station entrances?

Since every station is an excavation, you actually don't need to drill the site .. you just "empty it".

Drilling is for tunnels and TBMs.

If I were to guess .... they found something along Broadway between Cambie and Main when they drilled. It could be clay and sand lenses, it could be "sloppy soil" (waterfilled, quicksand-like material), etc.

The drilling east of main is to discover how far this inferior material for drilling actually extends.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Since every station is an excavation, you actually don't need to drill the site .. you just "empty it".

Drilling is for tunnels and TBMs.

If I were to guess .... they found something along Broadway between Cambie and Main when they drilled. It could be clay and sand lenses, it could be "sloppy soil" (waterfilled, quicksand-like material), etc.

The drilling east of main is to discover how far this inferior material for drilling actually extends.

They still need to find out what is there for the station excavations. For the design of deep stations you need to make sure the walls won't fall and that the floor won't have uplift potential. If either happens, you could have sinkholes or settlement of the buildings around the excavation.

If there's even a hint of instability, then the neighbouring building owners could sue the pants off Translink, the designer and the prime contractor.

Just look at that sinking tower in San Francisco. They're suing the transit operator for the Transbay Terminal excavation, alleging that it's their fault their building is sinking, even though it was plainly sinking before the excavation started.

[M00dy]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Since the system is completely automated is there actually any advantage to having an OMC there? Seems to me that expanding the one on the Evergreen Line makes more sense.

I've heard rumours there are tentative plans to purchase the BCHydro property at Falcon and expand the yard there.

[bloomtronzero]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

They still need to find out what is there for the station excavations. For the design of deep stations you need to make sure the walls won't fall and that the floor won't have uplift potential. If either happens, you could have sinkholes or settlement of the buildings around the excavation.

If there's even a hint of instability, then the neighbouring building owners could sue the pants off Translink, the designer and the prime contractor.

Just look at that sinking tower in San Francisco. They're suing the transit operator for the Transbay Terminal excavation, alleging that it's their fault their building is sinking, even though it was plainly sinking before the excavation started.

Absolutely right. Geotech guys go in ahead of basically every project, be it roadbuilding or just new residential lots, and do a little soil sampling this way.

[AMTDGT]

Originally Posted by bloomtronzero

Absolutely right. Geotech guys go in ahead of basically every project, be it roadbuilding or just new residential lots, and do a little soil sampling this way.

When they look at the soil samples, do they also look for contaminants, (e.g. hydrocarbons from leaky tanks a 100 years ago). My guess is they would need to take care of stuff like that, especially with underground stations, but probably even with a bored tunnel.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It would make a ton of sense, I imagine its something we would definitely need to see as part of Broadway when you factor in fleet expansion and the fact that they would most likely want to double the length of trains running on the Millenium Line.

I've actually been somewhat curious if we will see something along the lines of all the MK 1's getting shifted to the M-Line and then 4 or 5 car Mk 3's and Mk 2's providing 100% of Expo Line Service, similar to how Toronto has consistently transferred it's older cars off the busiest line so that they can maximize capacity.

I'm not sure how they can "double the length of trains running on the Millenium Line" if the platforms stay at 80 M length.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

I'm not sure how they can "double the length of trains running on the Millenium Line" if the platforms stay at 80 M length.

They're currently running half length trains - either a 2 car Mark 1 or 1 double car Mark 2. Doubling that would bring it up to 'normal' length trains.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Sheba

They're currently running half length trains - either a 2 car Mark 1 or 1 double car Mark 2. Doubling that would bring it up to 'normal' length trains.

Are 80 meter platforms too short for 'normal length' trains. I would asume so. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[officedweller]

80m is the standard for 6-car MKI trains.
4-car MKII or 4-car MKIII trains fit on 80 m platforms with room to spare.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by officedweller

80m is the standard for 6-car MKI trains.
4-car MKII or 4-car MKIII trains fit on 80 m platforms with room to spare.

5 car MKIII would fit on 80m, correct?

[Reecemartin]

[[Deleted]

[Meraki]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Yes, that is the design maximum, however a little creativity might allow for a redesigned Mk 4 train to extend beyond 80 meters depending on how the door layout works.

Imo building the platforms for these stations to even 100m makes a lot of sense. I can't imagine the cost today would be much compared to the cost of tearing up the road to extend them sometime in the future.
Then again as was mentioned they are currently running 2 car trains on the M-Line so this is something that will be easily shot down.

We know the demand is there on the Broadway side, and there's a switch between VCC/Clark and Commercial/Broadway that would allow for 2 car or lower frequency Arbutus-Lafarge Lake/Douglas with longer trains short turning and running as Arbutus-Commercial/Broadway

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Hot Rod]

So idiotic not building Canada Line platforms to 80m. I honestly would have built them to 100m; no earthly idea who is running or designing Vancouver's system but they sure are low balling it.

Expo Line should be at least 120m. CB area to Commercial could also be 120m using the Express/short turn long train idea during rush hours and crush loads; having the remaining M-Line stations being 80m using 'short' 4-car trains.

No reason why Vancouver's daily metro ridership shouldn't already be 500,000 and eclipse 750,000 at the 'start' of the Broadway opening, and 1M per day for the system with the MLine extension to UBC and Expo down Fraser Hwy. Today, we're half-baking it.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[swimmer_spe]

If they were to use cars equaling 80m and having them spaced as frequently as possible, is there any part of the lines that would be at capacity?

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

So idiotic not building Canada Line platforms to 80m. I honestly would have built them to 100m; no earthly idea who is running or designing Vancouver's system but they sure are low balling it.

The RFP spec for the "ultimate capacity" for Canada Line was for 14,000 passengers per direction per hour based on regional growth projections.
That's versus 25-30,000 passengers per direction per hour for SkyTrain lines.

Richmond is not a "growth concentration area" because of the floodplain and earthquake risk, whereas Coquitlam and Surrey are on bedrock so they are growth concentration areas that will require higher levels of rapid transit service in future.

The Canada Line cars are fatter / wider than SkyTrain MKII/III cars (3.0 m versus 2.6 m) - so the perception of being small scale is exacerbated by the fat short trains. It's been discussed ad nauseum in other threads that the current level of service on Canada Line is no where near its ultimate capacity.