Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[misher]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Well, that's one way of seeing it. But elevated SkyTrain doesn't seem to be ruining Richmond or Metrotown or the Tri-Cities (etc etc etc); if anything, it gives those parts of the suburbs a "big city" vibe.

If Cambie were as narrow and dense as Broadway, I'd say yes, it'd be a bad fit. Otherwise, there's no reason development couldn't have simply shaped itself around the stations and and made them a complementary element; Marine Gateway, for example.

Speaking to this, it is quite loud in richmond when it goes, we're lucky we have so much space here that we don't have the echo tunnel that this would create down a narrow corridor. A reminder that we also shut it down late at night and only run have the trains down richmond (other half go to the airport) which reduces the nuisance. I suspect the future is having more cars running 24/7 which would be very annoying so underground makes sense long-term.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by misher

I suspect the future is having more cars running 24/7 which would be very annoying so underground makes sense long-term.

We can't have any of the existing lines run 24/7 without deferring maintenance. Some of the areas in the US that run such service routinely have fires and at times the line(s) need to be shut down for months at a time to do maintenance and repairs - exactly the kind of stuff that gets done at night here.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

In any case, it doesn't matter a whole lot. This is like arguing whether pizza or burgers are better - the right answer is the one you have!

Nah, I get it. It's like the ageless Mac vs PC argument.

So long as we don't have anybody saying that computers are obsolete and smartphones are the future, of course...

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by misher

Speaking to this, it is quite loud in richmond when it goes, we're lucky we have so much space here that we don't have the echo tunnel that this would create down a narrow corridor. A reminder that we also shut it down late at night and only run have the trains down richmond (other half go to the airport) which reduces the nuisance. I suspect the future is having more cars running 24/7 which would be very annoying so underground makes sense long-term.

I've stood right under the Lansdowne section - you'll probably get more ear damage from a Cineplex preshow (I'm serious, the sound system is TOO effective).

Might be a different story if you're above the tracks, but again, nothing a transparent sound barrier can't fix.

Originally Posted by Sheba

We can't have any of the existing lines run 24/7 without deferring maintenance. Some of the areas in the US that run such service routinely have fires and at times the line(s) need to be shut down for months at a time to do maintenance and repairs - exactly the kind of stuff that gets done at night here.

We could build redundant tracks - so one of them can be repaired while the other one's in use - but I doubt we have the money for it.

[scryer]

As poetically illustrated before, this is a burgers vs pizza argument.

Do I like the look of elevate rail in the middle of the city, and understand the cost savings of elevated rail? Yes.

Do I understand that keeping it underground is less disruptive? Yes.

Again this extension is meeting my bottom-line (the fact that it is completely grade-separated) so at this point I am all for cost-savings, practicality, functionality, and intelligent station design (read: Broadway-City Centre). Again function > aesthetics.

[Firebrand]

Whether Phase II will be underground or elevated, we can all agree that it cannot be an at-grade middle-of-the-road light rail with NO barriers from car traffic (in other words, a 99 B-Line with tracks).

[Feathered Friend]

Millennium Line Town Hall Reveals Need for SkyTrain and West Side Fears that Transit to Nowhere Will Divide the Community like a Highway

With the hot summer weather, where else would Darren and I head on a beautiful Saturday than to a Town Hall meeting at the unairconditioned Pacific Spirit Church. This event was hosted by Vancouver Quadra’s MP Joyce Murray, who was joined by Vancouver’s Chief Engineer, UBC’s Associate Vice-President of Campus and Community Planning, as well as representatives from Translink and the West Broadway BIA.

The very hot room was filled with about 100 members of the public, including council hopeful Catherine Evans, members of the The University Neighbourhoods Association, the West Point Grey Residents Association, and even a high level representative from Hong Kong’s diplomatic mission. The event was also live-streamed on Facebook, which may have reached a younger demographic than the roughly 100 people who attended the event.

The meeting began as the table laid out a vision for the future and why it was felt grade separated Skytrain was the best choice. The representative from UBC highlighted that the campus hosts at least 24,000 people at night, and has a daytime population nearing the size of Kamloops. This large population is extremely reliant on transit, with over 1,000 buses a day passing through the bus exchange. With a total of 80,000 trips a day, it is also the busiest bus corridor in North America. Naturally, as UBC’s population is expected to double within 20 years, the university not only supports the Skytrain expansion, but desires two stations

Continued at :
https://cityduo.wordpress.com/2018/08/07...ill-divide-the-community-like-a-highway/

[misher]

Originally Posted by Sheba

We can't have any of the existing lines run 24/7 without deferring maintenance. Some of the areas in the US that run such service routinely have fires and at times the line(s) need to be shut down for months at a time to do maintenance and repairs - exactly the kind of stuff that gets done at night here.

We can always have 3 tracks or at least three tracks at stations so we can shuffle between stations (night service doesn't need to be fast or plentiful. Or perhaps shutting down for a couple hours 1-2 days a week. Either way, the current system of closing around 11pm feels a bit early and given how growing metropolitan centres move towards multiple shift work the demand for late night transit will only rise.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by misher

We can always have 3 tracks or at least three tracks at stations so we can shuffle between stations (night service doesn't need to be fast or plentiful. Or perhaps shutting down for a couple hours 1-2 days a week. Either way, the current system of closing around 11pm feels a bit early and given how growing metropolitan centres move towards multiple shift work the demand for late night transit will only rise.

I'm not sure if you're talking about SkyTrain or not but the last Expo Line train leaves Waterfront at 1:11am, and there are "extra-late" trains leaving King George and Production Way to New West at 1:28 and 1:31. Even on Sundays it runs past midnight.

The system is only shut down for about four hours every weeknight, slightly longer on weekends.

[Steveston]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I've stood right under the Lansdowne section - you'll probably get more ear damage from a Cineplex preshow (I'm serious, the sound system is TOO effective).

Might be a different story if you're above the tracks, but again, nothing a transparent sound barrier can't fix.



We could build redundant tracks - so one of them can be repaired while the other one's in use - but I doubt we have the money for it.

Well, the elevated/underground debate is moot in Richmond, because tunneling is impossible due to the soil and water table. At the time of Canada Line (then RAV) planning, in fact, Richmond Council actually wanted the line to run AT GRADE, with human drivers overriding the automatic controls.

Now THAT would have been a clusterf**k of the highest order.

My two cents on the Canada Line is that elevated was the only real solution, given that the system was going to be automated. As for the 'who gets the view' debate, in a flat place like Richmond, anytime you get up above the ground, you're going to get a view of some kind. As a regular rider of the system, I'm glad that there's something to look at while riding the CL through Richmond.

Personally, I don't think that the guideway is particularly ugly or obtrusive. The fact that it runs generally N-S, in line with the view to the mountains means that blockage of that view is minimized.

The only real unfortunate part of the CL was the cost-cutting that resulted in short station platforms and the cut-and-cover (vs. TBM) on Cambie, that gave us the "slow screeching" around QE Park.

[Sheba]

Millennium Line Town Hall - July 28th 2018

Similarly, a frequent Vancouver Sun Columnist expressed they didn’t have a question, but wanted to make a statement that they didn’t want to see money spent on this line, and would prefer a street car grid throughout the city. They felt foreign students and expensive arterial developments were the greatest problems, and believed that the expansion would result in everything from 16th to the water, and from the University to wherever this thing goes being rezoned for higher density. They thought there was better places to focus transit spending other than this “corridor to nowhere.”

In response, the board explained they had considered over 200 alternative options, and that a city-wide street car system would not solve the capacity issues affecting Broadway and the University. They further noted that Vancouver’s trolly bus system actually handles 10 times more passengers than Portland’s urban LRT Lines.

Conversely, one West Point Grey resident expressed their irritation that more development/housing may be needed to generate the fees to pay for this line. They explained they, and their neighbours, were irritated, as it’s not like they would use this line anyways. Though they acknowledged the need for transit service to bring in customers to the stores, they felt like they were the only ones adversely affected by the diesel buses, and wanted a better, slower option instead. They were clearly frustrated, as they believed they lived in a small community, and that transit was dividing it up like highways.

I'm having flashbacks to before the Canada Line. Does this person not understand that it will undoubtedly be a subway and that there will be far less transit vehicles on the road and it would make their small community cleaner and quieter?

[CivicBlues]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Similarly, a frequent Vancouver Sun Columnist expressed they didn’t have a question, but wanted to make a statement that they didn’t want to see money spent on this line, and would prefer a street car grid throughout the city. They felt foreign students and expensive arterial developments were the greatest problems, and believed that the expansion would result in everything from 16th to the water, and from the University to wherever this thing goes being rezoned for higher density. They thought there was better places to focus transit spending other than this “corridor to nowhere.”

Let me guess, that Vancouver Sun Columnist is named Douglas Todd.

[aberdeen5698]

[QUOTE=Sheba;8274781]Millennium Line Town Hall - July 28th 2018

...They further noted that Vancouver’s trolly bus system actually handles 10 times more passengers than Portland’s urban LRT Lines...

This is exactly why I just don't get the whole "Arbutus Streetcar" bandwagon. It parallels an existing trolley route that doesn't even have enough volume to run the articulated trolleys that service other routes.

We are so far away from needing anything more than what can deliver without a rail solution that it's ridiculous. Having a nice right of way doesn't justify rail transit - demand does.

And that all applies to Surrey as well, of course.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

This is exactly why I just don't get the whole "Arbutus Streetcar" bandwagon. It parallels an existing trolley route that doesn't even have enough volume to run the articulated trolleys that service other routes.

We are so far away from needing anything more than what can deliver without a rail solution that it's ridiculous. Having a nice right of way doesn't justify rail transit - demand does.

You'd have a point if they were starting work on a rail line now to open next year - but they're not. I'm not even sure if it's in the 10 year plan. What they're doing is preserving the RoW and doing basic planning on what it would look like, so that when they get around to doing the work there'll be a lot less people crying about a train running through their backyard.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Sheba

You'd have a point if they were starting work on a rail line now to open next year - but they're not. I'm not even sure if it's in the 10 year plan. What they're doing is preserving the RoW and doing basic planning on what it would look like...

Sure, but I'm talking about people on these forums who seem to want it yesterday and are enthusiastic about things like a "downtown streetcar".

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Sure, but I'm talking about people on these forums who seem to want it yesterday and are enthusiastic about things like a "downtown streetcar".

As long as they don't work for C0V or TransLink, then I think we're fine. There's no harm in being hyped about a project - I wish the Station Square development was finished already.

I did a bit more reading and the Arbutus streetcar will replace the bus - not run alongside it. It'll mostly have it's own RoW and I think we can all agree that that's a good thing for transit lines.

[Steveston]

Originally Posted by CivicBlues

Let me guess, that Vancouver Sun Columnist is named Douglas Todd.

I believe it was actually Elizabeth Murphy.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Sure, but I'm talking about people on these forums who seem to want it yesterday and are enthusiastic about things like a "downtown streetcar".

Likely because the other side is arguing that we don't need it and never will. It's less "yesterday" and more "some day" (2030? 40?).

[scryer]

Seeing as how we are now veering off-topic to other potential transit projects...

I was wondering what the realities are if we were to cut-and-cover for phase 2 after Arbutus? Would the Cut-and-Cover technique stall bus service too much? Does the Millennium line extension all have to be done only using one technique? Would the NIMBYs burn down our forests over this? Thoughts?

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by scryer

Seeing as how we are now veering off-topic to other potential transit projects...

I was wondering what the realities are if we were to cut-and-cover for phase 2 after Arbutus? Would the Cut-and-Cover technique stall bus service too much? Does the Millennium line extension all have to be done only using one technique? Would the NIMBYs burn down our forests over this? Thoughts?

The Nimbys would try burning down the entire city if cut-and-cover was even hinted at. After the mess that was Cambie, CoV doesn't want to do cut-and-cover for pretty much anything.