SkyTrain Station Renovations

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

I wonder if Swanguard became a full fledged MLS "Stadium" if the case for a boundary station would have been bolstered, the Telus Boot is massive but how utilized/full is it? North of Kingsway there isn't much to redevelop with increased density, with a fair amount of new townhome developments having been built in the past twenty years.

If Expo were to be built today, I'd argue Boundary would have been a better spot than Patterson, it also allows for a better feeder to Burnaby Hospital/BCIT/employment centre. And RT line to UBC via Kingsway/41st

There's also Wall Centre Central Park which has over a thousand residential units in it right there, that's north of Kingsway and right where a Boundary SkyTrain station would be.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

I wonder if Swanguard became a full fledged MLS "Stadium" if the case for a boundary station would have been bolstered, the Telus Boot is massive but how utilized/full is it? North of Kingsway there isn't much to redevelop with increased density, with a fair amount of new townhome developments having been built in the past twenty years.

If Expo were to be built today, I'd argue Boundary would have been a better spot than Patterson, it also allows for a better feeder to Burnaby Hospital/BCIT/employment centre. And RT line to UBC via Kingsway/41st

ICBC bought the Telus Boundary building in November 2000

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o...dings-for-19225-million/article18427240/

[Tetsuo]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

There's also Wall Centre Central Park which has over a thousand residential units in it right there, that's north of Kingsway and right where a Boundary SkyTrain station would be.

Was mostly referring to the Burnaby side but yes, Wall managed great density on that site.

I thought the original Boundary station was planned for the straight segment where the line crosses Kingsway above the Telus boot parking lot/bottle return centre, greek restaurant.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

Was mostly referring to the Burnaby side but yes, Wall managed great density on that site.

I thought the original Boundary station was planned for the straight segment where the line crosses Kingsway above the Telus boot parking lot/bottle return centre, greek restaurant.

That's correct, I found this old Burnaby Metrotown ALRT document and it even has the Boundary station penciled in on the last page.

Calls it "Future ALRT station"

https://search.heritageburnaby.ca/media/...s/Unrestricted/1984/14-May-1984/3309.pdf

[red-paladin]

I emailed Translink nine years ago and asked about a list of potential Skytrain stations.

They confirmed that a station could still be built at that location.

Sorry for the delay in responding to your email – I just received it as it was circulated rather widely given the involvement of different staff for the different lines…



Line by line, on the Canada Line:

· Capstan Way station came very close to being constructed but it was contingent on a substantial contribution from the developer of an adjacent property and the economic downtown destroyed the economics of the project so it is not currently proceeding but is likely to come back.

· YVR3 was planned to support an expanded airport terminal - if the Airport Authority proceeds with that expansion, the station would proceed as well. The Airport Authority’s strategic plan may have more detail on it.

· 33rd and 57th Avenue stations would only be built with a large developer contribution, should future land use plans support developments of the necessary scale. 33rd would be a particular challenge given the adjacency to Queen Elizabeth Park.

On the Expo Line, the geometry allowed for future stations at:

· Clark Drive

· Kingsway (E of Boundary Rd)



These could still be built if desired.



The section along Stewardson Way has excessive gradients (1.4% and greater, when SkyTrain stations need to be on a 0.5% grade or less) as well as very few tangent (straight) track sections of sufficient length.



On the Millennium Line, the geometry only allows for a future station at Woodlands – most of the line has excessive gradients and curvatures between the original stations. Where flat and straight sections exist, they are often too close to existing stations to be of consideration (e.g, approx 500 m E of Commercial-Broadway station).



Hope this assists, let me know if you have questions.

[WarrenC12]

A 33rd Ave. station on the Canada Line would be a perfect addition to the Heather Lands development, and the C&W hospital complex. Parking around there is a nightmare for staff and the community.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

A 33rd Ave. station on the Canada Line would be a perfect addition to the Heather Lands development, and the C&W hospital complex. Parking around there is a nightmare for staff and the community.

The volcanic bedrock is very close to the surface there. I think it's why they started construction in the middle of the line, as they anticipated the difficult of cutting through rock for the cut and cover trench, rather than the easier glacial material on either side of the volcanic plug, which runs from 29th to 37th, (where Cambie Street diverts from the grid to go round it). Building a 33rd station therefore has less development potential (as the park takes 50% of development land) and construction would be more expensive.

[casper]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

ICBC bought the Telus Boundary building in November 2000

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o...dings-for-19225-million/article18427240/

I don't that means Telus is moving. From the article it sounds more like Telus just wanted to get out of owning its building and instead lease the space.

Insurance companies (including ICBC) are like pension funds in they have investment funds to back some of their liabilities. Not to familiar with why that happens.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by casper

I don't that means Telus is moving. From the article it sounds more like Telus just wanted to get out of owning its building and instead lease the space.

Insurance companies (including ICBC) are like pension funds in they have investment funds to back some of their liabilities. Not to familiar with why that happens.

Yeah, I didn't know ICBC bought the building. Thought it might be an option for ICBC to use in the future if they want to leave North Vancouver.

[Tetsuo]

It's an old article from 2000, IIRC once the BCLiberals came into power they told ICBC to sell off their properties (such as Surrey Central, developed by ICBC) stating that the insurance company shouldn't be in the RE business...

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Tetsuo

It's an old article from 2000, IIRC once the BCLiberals came into power they told ICBC to sell off their properties (such as Surrey Central, developed by ICBC) stating that the insurance company shouldn't be in the RE business...

Telus building got sold off in 2003.

There's a ton of space up for lease in the building

https://www.collierscanada.com/en-CA/Pro...rnaby-british-columbia-canada/CAN2000322

H&R REIT and Crestpoint Real Estate are the current owners I believe. And last August (2019) H&R bought a 50% interest the parking lot next door at 3779 Kingsway for "future re-development" from Imperial Oil.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

I emailed Translink nine years ago and asked about a list of potential Skytrain stations.

They confirmed that a station could still be built at that location.

Shows that the 33rd & 57th station areas along the Cambie Corridor are way underbuilt without the appropriate contributions from developers. Richmond is obviously doing a way better job in this case. Within a few short years, they have already accumulated more than enough funding for the new station at Capstan. Another Vancouver fail IMO.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Vin

Shows that the 33rd & 57th station areas along the Cambie Corridor are way underbuilt without the appropriate contributions from developers. Richmond is obviously doing a way better job in this case. Within a few short years, they have already accumulated more than enough funding for the new station at Capstan. Another Vancouver fail IMO.

as much as i think Richmond has done this perfectly, and Vancouver has 100% dropped the ball... in Vancouver's defence building underground is much more difficult and expensive. i also think a station at 33rd Av is pointless. it is low rises and half of the land is park-space that wont be developed.

but 57th Av should and must 100% happen. there is already a fairly substantial rental development there, and they are adding what, another 8ish towers? the city talks about green, no cars, blah blah blah, but with no station at 57th, that is the 100% opposite of all their talking.

they need to walk the walk and get 57th built.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

as much as i think Richmond has done this perfectly, and Vancouver has 100% dropped the ball... in Vancouver's defence building underground is much more difficult and expensive. i also think a station at 33rd Av is pointless. it is low rises and half of the land is park-space that wont be developed.

but 57th Av should and must 100% happen. there is already a fairly substantial rental development there, and they are adding what, another 8ish towers? the city talks about green, no cars, blah blah blah, but with no station at 57th, that is the 100% opposite of all their talking.

they need to walk the walk and get 57th built.

Remind us how The City of Vancouver get a station built, if Translink are reluctant to build it? They ballpark the costs at $90m+, and expect the City to raise the full costs. Capstain is costing $28m.

(Edit - this was from February last year in the Cambie Corridor thread). It seems as if TransLink are the ones pouring cold water on the idea. They wrote a letter on February 26, 2016 to the City that said "Constructing a new below grade station on operable tracks is unprecedented and presents significant engineering challenges that increase the complexity of station construction.”

“The station project would require full funding from a third party” and that “Such funding would be required to cover all costs, including (but not necessarily limited to)” all capital costs – “including station construction, additional fleet to maintain service hours to account for longer travel times, upgrades to train control and power systems, and changes to system wayfinding” – as well as all operating costs, all planning, engineering and implementation costs (including the cost of maintaining service during construction), and all costs to amend various agreements (e.g., with YVR and the Canada Line owner), and costs “associated with service disruption or slower total travel times resulting from station construction.”

They also said “even if the [57th Avenue] station is fully funded by a third party, the implementation timeline is expected to be no less than ten years and may be prolonged” due to significant engineering challenges that would increase the complexity of station construction.

That doesn't sound like a willing partner, hot to trot, but it explains why the station may not show up any time soon. Obviously priorities can be changed, and there will be a replacement for The Mayors' Council on Regional Transportation 2014 plan, which didn't include a station at 57th Avenue.

[officedweller]

Couple that with Vancouver wanting generally wanting handouts rather than taking a hard line with Translink or developers.
The City of Vancouver should impose a levy for construction of the station.
Even if it's not enough now, it's better than starting from zero in the future.
(ie. if they don't collect from developers now, CoV will have its hand out to TransLink and the Province to make up for its failure to raise funds).
What you may end up with is a Woodlands Station scenario where New West dropped the ball.

What's the total CAC Onni is contributing for the Pearson Lands?

Originally Posted by Changing City

...They wrote a letter on February 26, 2016 to the City that said "Constructing a new below grade station on operable tracks is unprecedented and presents significant engineering challenges that increase the complexity of station construction.”

North York Centre Station was built on the operating Yonge Line in Toronto during the 1990s.

[Prometheus]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Remind us how The City of Vancouver get a station built, if Translink are reluctant to build it? They ballpark the costs at $90m+, and expect the City to raise the full costs. Capstain is costing $28m.

Richmond raised $33 million entirely from developers in exchange for extra density near the station over the course of just 7 years, notwithstanding the substantial constraints of federal aviation regulations which severely limit building height. Vancouver could easily support density around 57th (and along the Cambie Corridor) that is many times greater than Capstan Way. What is stopping Vancouver from pursuing Richmond's formula and fully funding a station at 57th, creating much needed housing in the city and doing so adjacent to mass public transit?

[Changing City]

The City are collecting funds to pay for a station. I'm not sure what the CAC for Pearson is in total, but the station payment from Onni is $20m, and also the site for a station. Again, from February 2018

"The construction of the Canada Line allowed for a future station to be located at 57th Avenue and Cambie Street and the proponent has agreed to a financial contribution towards the future construction, which is further discussed in the transportation section below."

They're just not sure if they can extract enough, as the amount that was anticipated to be needed to build a new station is apparently a lot less than is now thought to be needed.

Nevertheless; "The plaza (at 57th) will also accommodate a station entrance at grade should a potential Canada Line Station be realized at this location."

Here's the longer version from the rezoning report;

"Though it is desirable to achieve a future station at 57th Avenue there are a number of key challenges. Currently, the station is not considered in regional transportation plans and is not considered a regional priority such as the Broadway Corridor line. Existing transit access and the lack of east-west bus connectivity is also a challenge. While the existing design of the Canada Line considered future stations at 57th and 33rd Avenue, the design provided no access or tunnel connection to the line and construction is anticipated to be technically complex and highly costly. Given this, the future station is considered a longer term possibility.

Staff see the benefit of continuing to pursue this opportunity in future updates to transit plans and agreements. Securing the land through dedication for a station entrance and seeking a financial community amenity contribution from development is key to continuing to explore and advance the potential of a future station at this location in the long term. Policy planning for Pearson Dogwood occurred in 2013/2014, after the Canada Line was operational August, 2009. The need for a station is associated with community planning for this site as well as Langara Gardens, currently undergoing a policy planning process. The timing of local area planning relative to the onstruction and operation of the Canada Line has necessitated a unique, site-specific approach with a developer contribution to advance the potential of a future station at this location.

As part of this rezoning application an 8,000 sq. ft. parcel will be dedicated to the City at the northeast corner of the site at 57th Avenue and Cambie Street to accommodate a potential station entrance and sub-ground connections. As well, a $20,000,000 cash contribution will be secured from the applicant in the first two phases of development as a contribution towards the construction of a future station. Staff will seek similar contributions from future major project rezoning proposals adjacent to the site while also pursuing opportunities and discussions with TransLink and other key stakeholders to pursue the potential to realize a future station."

[Migrant_Coconut]

So if 57th were elevated or trenched, we'd have almost enough funding right now?

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So if 57th were elevated or trenched, we'd have almost enough funding right now?

If it had been an elevated line (which was never contemplated) and the cost was similar to Capstan, then yes. Presumably a trenched line would allow a station to be achievable too - although with some difficulty if the road and property access was maintained during construction.

The Langara Gardens Policy Statement, adopted in 2018 also establishes that when that rezoning proceeds the developers will also contribute to a future station. It doesn't seem realistic that those two projects could be expected to generate $90 to $100m to cover the anticipated costs, if Translink change their current stance and support construction of an additional station. Other funds will have to be found to make up the final cost.

The city seems to be doing everything they can to make it happen; reserving a site and collecting cash (in a protected fund). It's just not nearly as easy as the Richmond station.

[officedweller]

Thanks for posting.
That sounds somewhat reassuring, although it sounds like the CAC is being limited to the 2 big sites - Pearson and Langara Gardens. It should apply to all projects (at a specified rate, rather than on-off negotiations) within walking distance (500m radius?).