HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6901  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2019, 12:49 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 10,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
The hydro-ways are 30 meters, up to 140 meters wide. There is plenty of room for a 8 meter wide bus-way. And in the realm of mass transit infrastructure, rebuilding a bike lane is nothing. As for the other technical challenges, like getting through the sub station area, those are not difficult challenges either. The hydro-way that runs parallel to 96th Ave would be perfect for a bus-way. It runs nice and straight, and would tie in nicely with a KGB bus-way that leads to Skytrain and City Centre, and it's also in close proximity to residential areas. Shouldn't be much property acquisition along a hydro route.
And what would that solve that a B-Line down 96th or 88th wouldn't? The ridership potential's not high enough to justify a viaduct now or in the future, and if it were, we might as well build a train.
     
     
  #6902  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2019, 1:03 AM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 10,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Express691 View Post
None of those links are working
Probably because those links (and the post) are from 2008. Every four years or so newspapers get bored of their site layout and overhaul it, losing a lot of their old articles in the process.
     
     
  #6903  
Old Posted Aug 14, 2019, 6:22 AM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Your comments would make sense if there was a Phase 2 which would take it to Langley Centre but of course there is no Phase 2. The EARLIEST the SkyTrain will make it to Langley is 2040. There will be nothing done between that time as there are other priorities namely extensing the Broadway subway to at least Alma and eventually UBC, a Hastings route to Kootenay loop, 41st Ave LRT, and of course a massive expansion of stations along the current SkyTrain system and doing what they can with the Canada Line McStations.
If that's what you think then nothing ever would have been done of the Fraser Highway.

Under the LRT plan, funding was only secured for the Newton-Guildford L line. The LRT to Langley fell under unsecured funding. There have been plenty of promises, and Translink carefully budgeted it so that its sources of revenue could cover its share.

That's why they are comparing 2 prices at the Mayor's meeting. One number was how much track can we build with phase 1 funding; the other was what can we build and how much would it go over the originally planned full roll out funding envelope.

Translink had planned a $3.5 billion transit plan for SoF. $1.6 billion was secured for the L line. The rest (Fraser Highway) was doable because Translink could cover their share, they just needed formal agreements.

As it is, Skytrain all the way to Langley falls well under the $3.5 billion envelope if we only make natural upgrades to the 96B line. It actually comes in under the funding envelope by about $400 million.

Skytrain + 96B line is cheaper than the original all LRT plan.

The alternatives looked at in the recent meetings are to examine the possibility and cost of doing more. For example, upgrading the 96B line to full BRT would only cost at most $500 million more than the original envelope. OR, for only an extra $500 million above that, we can have Skytrain to Newton too.

But really, my point was at the end of the day, all the money that Translink was counting on for the SoF Rapid Transit plan is as there as it ever was...

So, if in your opinion, there is no phase 2 money to extend Skytrain from Fleetwood to Langley, then there would have been no money for LRT on Fraser Highway either (as that would have actually cost more).

Do you get that?

When we go to secure funding for phase 2 of Skytrain to Langley, we will need less money than what would have asked for phase 2 of LRT.

Do the math. Skytrain is a $3.12 billion project. We have $1.63 billion. Meaning, we need $1.49 billion to finish.

For LRT, it was a $3.55 billion project. We had $1.63 billion. Meaning we needed $1.92 billion to build the Fraser LRT.

If the $1.92 billion was for some reason a no brainer last year, then $1.63 billion seems like an even easier catch.

And that's not even taking the contigency into account. These prices all include a 25% contingency fund set aside. And if recent history is anything to go by, Vancouver is pretty good at delivering Skytrain on budget and on time, but many jurisdiction struggle to deliver LRT on budget and on time. So really, it's very likely that we will have up to $400 million dollars from the phase 1 budget left over. Now we only need $1 billion to finish Skytrain, and will probably end that project with funds left over.

Why do some people feel this is in doubt?
     
     
  #6904  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 5:38 AM
rpvan rpvan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 519
Surprise, surprise!

Quote:
Full 16-km-long SkyTrain to Langley should be built in one phase: TransLink CEO
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-skytrain-langley-one-phase
     
     
  #6905  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 12:16 PM
Dengler Avenue's Avatar
Dengler Avenue Dengler Avenue is offline
Road Engineer Wannabe
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Côté Ouest de la Rivière des Outaouais
Posts: 8,682
That’s a bit ambitious. Did Scheer promise that much money when he was touring in Vancity?
__________________
My Proposal of TCH Twinning in Northern Ontario
Disclaimer: Most of it is pure pie in the sky, so there's no need to be up in the arm about it.
     
     
  #6906  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 2:45 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,707
It's perfectly obvious it should be built as a single phase, and this seems to be messaging laying out an intention to wait for the full budget to be secured before proceeding.
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis
     
     
  #6907  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2019, 6:34 PM
Migrant_Coconut's Avatar
Migrant_Coconut Migrant_Coconut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Kitsilano/Fairview
Posts: 10,161
Probably should've been declared this in September, so the Big Three could fall all over themselves promising to fund a one-stage to Langley if elected.
     
     
  #6908  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2019, 2:24 AM
Xrayal's Avatar
Xrayal Xrayal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Westminster
Posts: 174
Part of Translink announcement of 100 million dollars towards ped/cycling/road projects. Under the surrey tab they show 2.8 million towards road widening through green timbers. (140st to 148st)
Road
Quote:
This project will widen Fraser Highway from the existing two lane road to four lanes through Green Timbers Park and provide new and improved cycling facilities through raised and separated bike lanes, new or improved sidewalks, additional street lighting and boulevard improvements.
Cycle
Quote:
This project widen Fraser Highway to four lanes through Green Timbers Park and will include improved cycling facilities through raised and separated bike lanes, new or improved sidewalks which will run parallel to the future Surrey / Langley Skytrain.
Link
     
     
  #6909  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2019, 4:46 PM
jlove390 jlove390 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Surrey
Posts: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xrayal View Post
Part of Translink announcement of 100 million dollars towards ped/cycling/road projects. Under the surrey tab they show 2.8 million towards road widening through green timbers. (140st to 148st)
Road

Cycle

Link
I wish they were also doing this between 140th and King George. Glad to see it happen though. Maybe 140-KGB will happen when they're doing work for the Skytrain.
     
     
  #6910  
Old Posted Oct 17, 2019, 5:05 PM
jlove390 jlove390 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Surrey
Posts: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlove390 View Post
I wish they were also doing this between 140th and King George. Glad to see it happen though. Maybe 140-KGB will happen when they're doing work for the Skytrain.
Hmm, I see some of this was funded in 2018, actually.

Fraser Highway Widening & Improvements Whalley Blvd to 140 Street

The Fraser Highway Widening & Improvements project is to widen Fraser Highway from the existing 2 lane road, to 4 lanes and provide new and improved cycling facilities through raised and separated bike lanes.


So now in total we have Fraser Hwy from Whalley Blvd to 148 covered for doubling the lanes and adding bike lanes I guess. Hopefully they start work soon.
     
     
  #6911  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2019, 11:32 PM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London, ON
Posts: 2,406
Here's something interesting I've gleaned...

It looks like Fraser Highway from Highway 15 (176 Street) east to Highway 13 (264 Street) is being uploaded by the Province (via the Langley Bypass) and will be known again formally as Highway 1A as of January 1, 2020.

I wonder if it's rapid transit related (SkyTrain) and perhaps will get Fraser Highway widened through Langley?

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/drivin...ety/highway-safety/lki/lki_bc_201907.pdf

Go to page 79 as written within the PDF.
     
     
  #6912  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2019, 11:21 PM
fredinno's Avatar
fredinno fredinno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
Here's something interesting I've gleaned...

It looks like Fraser Highway from Highway 15 (176 Street) east to Highway 13 (264 Street) is being uploaded by the Province (via the Langley Bypass) and will be known again formally as Highway 1A as of January 1, 2020.

I wonder if it's rapid transit related (SkyTrain) and perhaps will get Fraser Highway widened through Langley?

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/drivin...ety/highway-safety/lki/lki_bc_201907.pdf

Go to page 79 as written within the PDF.
Strange. Really Strange. The only thing I could think of that makes any sense for 1A to be brought back from the dead is because Pautello is a provincial project now- but that's clearly not the case. I guess it'd make some sense that they want to avoid attracting more traffic in NEFC and New West.

1A doesn't really need to be widened for Skytrain as there's already infill space for new lanes from HWY 15 to Langley Bypass. LRT would have needed more space, and there's no reason to extend the revived 1A all the way to Aldergrove.

Maybe it's related to truck traffic in South-Central Langley- but unless there's plans to turn the Salmon River Uplands into a industrial park, there's not much to service on that section. That'd require a ALR and Metro Vancouver RGS amendment though. That's the only thing I can think of that makes sense.

Strange. Very Strange.



Also, side note, nobody seems have any real clue where HWY 7 starts or ends. Perhaps the reason the signage for most of the old highways remain is BECAUSE the old secondary highway network is "technically" still there. There's no 'Metro Vancouver/TransLink Highway' designation, so they just keep the old highways in limbo territory where they can pretend the old highways simultaneously exist and not exist. Quantum Highways. (Except for HWY 10 from HWY 1 to Albion Ferry, for obvious reasons)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:British_Columbia_Highway_7

Another side note: I find it hilarious HWY 99A still technically exists as the 2 segments where 99 and 99A used to connect. It's not like that for 7A/Hastings, and they removed that for 1A on Georgia.

Last edited by fredinno; Oct 29, 2019 at 11:32 PM.
     
     
  #6913  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 9:49 PM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
An update: SLS is now moving into detailed consultation with a new survey and set of open houses, plus new display boards showing conceptual guideway locations, cross-sections, and details of the Green Timbers and Serpentine Valley segments.

Display boards: https://surreylangleyskytrain.ca/Documents/Phase%202_Display%20Boards%20for%20Web.pdf
Survey (HAVE YOUR SAY): https://translink.checkbox.ca/surrey-langley-skytrain-phase-2-engagement
Open house dates: https://surreylangleyskytrain.ca/community

Conceptual regional SkyTrain map after SLS and Broadway-Arbutus extensions:


Conceptual alignment. The vast majority of the corridor will now be a NORTH SIDE guideway, including around 152 St and 160 St, unlike earlier concepts. Median running alignments (like North Road in Coquitlam) will still be used for short segments from KG STN to 96 Ave, 148 St to 152 St, and 192 St to 196 St.


Guideway through Green Timbers will be mostly south side, with transition to median prior to 148 St. There will be a pocket track between 140 St and 96 Avenues.


Through Fleetwood, Serpentine Valley and Clayton, on the north side of Fraser Highway.


Willowbrook to Langley City will divert north of Fraser Highway and onto Industrial Avenue to enter Langley Centre. The terminus will have a centre platform layout similar to Lafarge-Lake Douglas.


OF NOTE: Two additional documents which are the environmental screening review process summary and terms of reference, with additional details including the framework for a staged project. Under a staged process, no new OMC is built for the extension to Fleetwood; that is instead pursued when the line is given a full extension to Langley. My guess is the likelihood of an OMC in Langley City.

https://surreylangleyskytrain.ca/Documen...reening%20Review%20Process%20Summary.pdf
https://surreylangleyskytrain.ca/Documen...iew%20Draft%20Terms%20of%20Reference.pdf

Last edited by xd_1771; Nov 1, 2019 at 10:11 PM.
     
     
  #6914  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 9:54 PM
WarrenC12's Avatar
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 24,652
Thanks for posting. The full map really illustrates the magnitude of this extension. There are some huge gaps between stations too.

Is the max operating speed of Skytrain still around 90-100km/h? Are the trains capable of higher speeds if the track is designed appropriately?
     
     
  #6915  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 10:01 PM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
Thanks for posting. The full map really illustrates the magnitude of this extension. There are some huge gaps between stations too.

Is the max operating speed of Skytrain still around 90-100km/h? Are the trains capable of higher speeds if the track is designed appropriately?
The speedometer on Mark III trains maxes at 100 km/h (I once had a look at the open controls and it showed a 100 max on it). Theoretically yes, the guideway could be designed to support faster running speeds than the Expo Line's existing 80 km/h and then be run at those speeds. 90 km/h operation would be nice. But it will depend on BCRTC and whether they feel good about approving 90km/h operation of our trains on any segment. Might require retirement of Mark Is first.
     
     
  #6916  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 10:26 PM
Sheba Sheba is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: BC
Posts: 4,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
An update: SLS is now moving into detailed consultation with a new survey and set of open houses, plus new display boards showing conceptual guideway locations, cross-sections, and details of the Green Timbers and Serpentine Valley segments.
I'm looking through the display boards now. One thing that's come up: 6 - 8 minutes during peak periods, 10 minutes off peak. Obviously they're not planning on running every train out to Fleetwood / Langley.
     
     
  #6917  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 10:43 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
An update:
Conceptual alignment. The vast majority of the corridor will now be a NORTH SIDE guideway, including around 152 St and 160 St, unlike earlier concepts. Median running alignments (like North Road in Coquitlam) will still be used for short segments from KG STN to 96 Ave, 148 St to 152 St, and 192 St to 196 St.
Great to hear!

That will greatly simplify station design with side-of-road stations (like along No. 3 Rd in Richmond).
That also allows the guideway to be at a lower elevation, so it doesn't "loom" too high.
Both aspects will lower costs too.
     
     
  #6918  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 11:09 PM
idunno idunno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 948
Very exciting! I can't wait until 2022 when we get to watch two huge Skytrain projects U/C across the region.
     
     
  #6919  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 11:26 PM
jlove390 jlove390 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Surrey
Posts: 107
I’m a little confused on if the 140 street station will be in the middle of Fraser Hwy or on the southeast corner of Fraser and 140th. Also what is a pocket track section?
     
     
  #6920  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2019, 11:53 PM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
The speedometer on Mark III trains maxes at 100 km/h (I once had a look at the open controls and it showed a 100 max on it). Theoretically yes, the guideway could be designed to support faster running speeds than the Expo Line's existing 80 km/h and then be run at those speeds. 90 km/h operation would be nice. But it will depend on BCRTC and whether they feel good about approving 90km/h operation of our trains on any segment. Might require retirement of Mark Is first.
The only thing that really defines how fast the trains can go is the third rail, and how quickly the LIM's can cool down. They might have only designed and tested it to hit 100kph, it could likely go faster, but might just consume more energy and need more braking distance. It's transit, not a roller coaster, and not equipped like a roller coaster. It's likely "speed limited" rather than "maximum speed attainable."
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:31 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.