Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

If the 99 B-Line length is cut in half and if the peak capacity is also cut in half, then it could reduce the B-Line vehicle requirements by 75%, which would mean over 35% of the fleet would be freed.

On the other hand, Skytrain to Arbutus is likely to focus more riders onto that route, so it's unlikely that we'd see those kinds of savings.

by the time the broadway subway opens in 10 years, todays b-line fleet will be ready to be retired, and may be replaced with fewer new vehicles to save $$

with all the new mk iii skytrain cars arriving as 4-car trainsets in the next few years, will this mean they're moving all the (reliable or refurbshed or not) mk i trains to millennium line to run on the broadway subway, with newest mk ii or mk iii cars on expo?

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

with all the new mk iii skytrain cars arriving as 4-car trainsets in the next few years, will this mean they're moving all the (reliable or refurbshed or not) mk i trains to millennium line to run on the broadway subway, with newest mk ii or mk iii cars on expo?

The Broadway extension contract will have its own order of Mark III cars included.

The Mark I cars will be retired as they get replaced with Mark IIIs. There are currently 100 6-car Mark I trains, and we're ordering 100 4-car Mark III trains over the next few years (which have more capacity than the older 6-car trains).

[dleung]

Before we start trying to rationalize extreme under-building of rapid transit along North America's most congested corridor, let's remember that this industrial hellscape in suburban Toronto now has 5 new subway stations at $150m each, with 2 stations dedicated to a far less prominent university:

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by dleung

Before we start trying to rationalize extreme under-building of rapid transit along North America's most congested corridor, let's remember that this industrial hellscape in suburban Toronto now has 5 new subway stations at $150m each, with 2 stations dedicated to a far less prominent university:

So, are you suggesting something other than Skytrain to UBC?

[Metro-One]

Yeah, I am not quite sure what his point is...

Extension of the Millennium Line as a subway under Broadway is not under building IMO.

That extension in Toronto has been labelled as a massive waste by many, especially seeing how the crosstown has been cheapened out as a surface LRT for a significant portion of its length.

[dleung]

Even the ridership from 15 years ago would've justified taking it all the way to UBC. To accept truncating it at Arbutus is as insane as a developer proposing a 60 storey tower in the middle of your SFH neighbourhood and you coming around to accept 40 stories.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

cumulative implies the numbers should increase from commercial (0 % disemark) to ubc (100 % disembark)


they dont

Due to rounding - there's only 1% difference.
- like when they discontinued the penny....

Originally Posted by jsbertram

it wasnt mis-read, just pointing out that it can easily mis-read to imply that most people wont go farther than arbutus, whereas the numbers appear to show that 52% (a majority) need to go past arbutus to ubc or other stops between arbutus and ubc

or, in other words, more people will be using the train just to end up on the b-line from arbutus to ubc (or stops en route) than will be using the train to exit at a stop before arbutus

It also means that the 99 B-Line buses will be 47-48% emptier than they are currently.

If they want to build a line to serve everyone using the available funds, they could build a cheaper LRT(?!?)

*****************

PS - Remember that UBC students don't pay full fare - so while they may represent ridership,
they don't represent full fare $$$$ revenues.

So any justification formula for an extension to UBC needs to account for low revenue from that extension of the line
(from that 44% getting off at UBC)

If you take a direct comparison to the YVR branch of the Canada Line (guideway & stations paid for by YVR)
- the YVR branch has the additional surcharge - not an additional subsidy.

[jollyburger]

What's the breakdown between students vs staff/workers going all the way to UBC?

[Metro-One]

I fully support the idea the like YVR, UBC should subsidize part of the extension to the campus.

The same way that maybe SFU would also partially fund the gondola.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I fully support the idea the like YVR, UBC should subsidize part of the extension to the campus.

The same way that maybe SFU would also partially fund the gondola.

SFU's president has repeatedly said SFU would be willing to fund the gondola. With an estimated $25 million difference between running the buses versus the gondola over 25 years, and 35,000 students, this is less than $40 per student per year if SFU were to pay for the entire difference. Its very feasible for SFU to cover this completely - and as an SFU student myself I would not have a problem paying for this. It sure beats waiting 45 minutes for a bus at 12:00 AM.

[GeeCee]

With the mayor against the gondola, it's pretty unlikely that it's going to happen anytime soon, regardless of funding.

[Hot Rod]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Due to rounding - there's only 1% difference.
- like when they discontinued the penny....



It also means that the 99 B-Line buses will be 47-48% emptier than they are currently.

If they want to build a line to serve everyone using the available funds, they could build a cheaper LRT(?!?)

*****************

PS - Remember that UBC students don't pay full fare - so while they may represent ridership,
they don't represent full fare $$$$ revenues.

So any justification formula for an extension to UBC needs to account for low revenue from that extension of the line
(from that 44% getting off at UBC)

If you take a direct comparison to the YVR branch of the Canada Line (guideway & stations paid for by YVR)
- the YVR branch has the additional surcharge - not an additional subsidy.

Im not so sure I agree with your thinking that the UBC students are low revenue.

Are you really saying that UBC ticket price is lower than a normal one? In other words, a UBC ticket can be bought for X% cheaper than a non-student ticket?

OR

Are you confusing the fact that UBC tickets are subsidized by the University/Province such that the STUDENT him/hersef only pays a lower price for the ticket? The full fare of the ticket (I presume) is still paid, it just doesn't all come from the student.

This (2nd point) is the case in Seattle with its U-Pass (I went to the UW, omg more than 25-years ago); I'd assume that should be the case with the much larger, more commuter UBC. Students are not considered low paying but instead are high yield (in Seattle's case), reliable users of the SoundTransit LRT.

I know the scale of SkyTrain is much much larger and that Broadway is a midtown business district (commanding nearly 50% of the traffic in the corridor), but I'd also imagine that once the subway is extended that even more passengers would ride, including students; the percentages might not change but the numbers definitely will - since more students alone would take the subway filling those B-line buses such that there wouldn't be much noticeable difference in what's used now. The only way to truly remove the Bline buses is to extend the subway all the way.

One final point, more than just students commute to UBC; there's the faculty and staff who might be driving today but likely would opt to the subway once it is available (thereby again, increasing the crush transit ridership of the corridor).

[Hot Rod]

I do agree that the universities should partner for the routing and stations within their boundaries. On that note, I'd love to see more than just one UBC station - It'd be nice to see some coverage of the residential areas and more than one within the sprawling institutional section.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

Im not so sure I agree with your thinking that the UBC students are low revenue.

Are you really saying that UBC ticket price is lower than a normal one? In other words, a UBC ticket can be bought for X% cheaper than a non-student ticket?

OR

Are you confusing the fact that UBC tickets are subsidized by the University/Province such that the STUDENT him/hersef only pays a lower price for the ticket? The full fare of the ticket (I presume) is still paid, it just doesn't all come from the student.

This (2nd point) is the case in Seattle with its U-Pass (I went to the UW, omg more than 25-years ago); I'd assume that should be the case with the much larger, more commuter UBC. Students are not considered low paying but instead are high yield (in Seattle's case), reliable users of the SoundTransit LRT.

I know the scale of SkyTrain is much much larger and that Broadway is a midtown business district (commanding nearly 50% of the traffic in the corridor), but I'd also imagine that once the subway is extended that even more passengers would ride, including students; the percentages might not change but the numbers definitely will - since more students alone would take the subway filling those B-line buses such that there wouldn't be much noticeable difference in what's used now. The only way to truly remove the Bline buses is to extend the subway all the way.

One final point, more than just students commute to UBC; there's the faculty and staff who might be driving today but likely would opt to the subway once it is available (thereby again, increasing the crush transit ridership of the corridor).

Here are some excerpts from the UBC U-Pass website.

What are the benefits of U-Pass BC?

The U-Pass BC program provides all eligible members of UBC’s Alma Mater Society (AMS) with lower transit fares across all zones–including unlimited use of bus, SkyTrain and SeaBus services within Metro Vancouver. Most students at UBC-affiliated colleges are eligible for the program. Discounted fares on the West Coast Express are also available.

Is U-Pass BC mandatory?
Yes, the program is mandatory. The success of the program relies on a bulk purchase so that UBC students pay only $41.00 per month which is a significant discount in comparison to the retail price $180 for a three-zone pass. Students who voted in the Spring 2016 AMS Referendum overwhelmingly elected to participate in the new program at the cost of $41.00 per month.

https://planning.ubc.ca/vancouver/transportation-planning/u-pass-compass-card/u-pass-faq

It's like a health club membership - TransLink and UBC are relying on some students not using the U-Pass program to help pay for the overall program.

Came across this from a 2005 Report linked at Wikipedia, which basically says
- TransLink is getting the same amount of revenue compared to if the U-Pass system had not been implemented
- but the unspoken caveat is that it's same revenue, but more riders.

It's stated in the middle of the quote:
"... TransLink does not gain any additional revenue from the increase in transit usage from the U-Pass program..."
That still means that U-Pass student ridership is not equivalent - on a farebox basis per student - to full paying customers.


http://trek.ubc.ca/files/2010/08/U-PassReview.pdf

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Here are some excerpts from the UBC U-Pass website.


https://planning.ubc.ca/vancouver/transportation-planning/u-pass-compass-card/u-pass-faq

It's like a health club membership - TransLink and UBC are relying on some students not using the U-Pass program to help pay for the overall program.

Came across this from a 2005 Report linked at Wikipedia, which basically says
- TransLink is getting the same amount of revenue compared to if the U-Pass system had not been implemented
- but the unspoken caveat is that it's same revenue, but more riders.

It's stated in the middle of the quote:
"... TransLink does not gain any additional revenue from the increase in transit usage from the U-Pass program..."
That still means that U-Pass student ridership is not equivalent - on a farebox basis per student - to full paying customers.


http://trek.ubc.ca/files/2010/08/U-PassReview.pdf

Well, TransLink has now discussed (if I recall correctly) possibilities of doing a UPass-like program but for businesses, so i guess we'd better not build anything ever. From what I've seen though you sound like Rail For the Valley (or D. Malcom Johnston).

[casper]

I would look at the UBC situation differently. It is a bulk purchase.

No different than a large corporate account going to Air Canada or the Fairmount and saying: looks if we agree to a certain annual spend, what kind of deal can we make. Some of these are backend rebates others special codes that unlock the discounted fare when booking.

In the case of UBC they went to translink and made a deal. Sometimes the service provider is trying to make a profit sometime it just lets them get scale.

A good example of scale is UPS and Amazon. Amazon is UPS largest customer. Some news articles floating around suggest UPS actually loses money on the deal but does it for cash flow and scale. Just having that extra volume mean bigger more efficient aircraft, more efficient truck routes and local distribution centres. End result is it makes the higher margin customers more profitable.

Could see the same thing with Translink. The extra volume from the students justifies bigger busses, increased frequency, doing a subway etc. Because of the improved service level they attract more higher margin customers.

[officedweller]

All I'm saying is that revenue generated is one of many factors to be considered in deciding whether to build the subway now or rely on the 99 B-Line for the time being (and maybe shift priorities to 3-zone commuters from Langley), especially when the subway to Arbutus will handle the most congested part of the corridor and bus capacity will free up for the UBC riders.

WRT the bulk purchase aspect, I would imagine that you still need to keep an eye on the revenue to service level aspect.
There could be a point where providing the [existing] service becomes uneconomical, or the quality of service is compromised (due to crowding), but I suppose that's why the price has increased a couple dollars (i.e. businesses can go bankrupt by issuing too many Groupons)

[Metro-One]

Here is the thing, these projects are half demand and half political.

The cost of building skytrain in one go all the way too UBC sadly would be too much for the mayors of other communities to handle.

The best compromise is indeed to build it as Skytrain in phases, phase one to Arbutus (which honestly handles the most important portion of the project) while allowing projects to be built elsewhere in the region (Surrey's misguided LRT, hopefully skytrain to Langley, Pattullo Bridge, etc...).

The other realistic compromise is the bad compromise, and that would be a cheaped out surface LRT built all the way to UBC in one go. Now that would be an appropriate use of the term, "under building."

[GlassCity]

I really think it should go straight to UBC. Money, cost-effectiveness, whatever. TransLink isn't a business. There are thousands and thousands of transit users headed to UBC every day and the bus system is having a very hard time accommodating them. A higher-capacity solution is needed, it's just logical. We can't just keep spending all those bus resources and straining the system because UBC students pay reduced fares.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

......./edit/.........
The best compromise is indeed to build it as Skytrain in phases, phase one to Arbutus (which honestly handles the most important portion of the project) while allowing projects to be built elsewhere in the region (Surrey's misguided LRT, hopefully skytrain to Langley, Pattullo Bridge, etc...).

The other realistic compromise is the bad compromise, and that would be a cheaped out surface LRT built all the way to UBC in one go. Now that would be an appropriate use of the term, "under building."

I think you nailed it, Metro. Doing it in chunks (Broadway RRT) would cover the most significant part, and allow a go-ahead on other regional projects.
*
As for underbuilding, perhaps giving credit to the fact that the city has grown so fast, underbuilding is rampant in the Vancouver region.
The 401 (Highway One) was originally underbuilt with only 4 lanes. The Richmond Expressway has only 4 lanes (and boy, I remember a time being stuck in gridlock on that).
The Canada line stations are (soime would argue) "underbuilt" on order to ram the project through on time.
The risk with underbuilding is twofold, and they're equally nefarious.
First, they provide insufficient transport (or whatever function) from Day One, and then, sooner or later, they have to be rippped up and rebuilt bigger.
Getting it right the first time is so very much the best way ... and doing more of that in Vancouver would be most welcome to most people here, I am sure.