Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Xerx]

If you want to save costs, you'd use cut and cover for most of the tunnel.

[logan5]

Moved to Transit thread...

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by misher

Think its going at ground level at UBC? That last station looks like an expensive addition.

Hmm, I wonder if they're maybe thinking ahead and going to send it back down 41st. Probably not any time this decade.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Kisai

Hmm, I wonder if they're maybe thinking ahead and going to send it back down 41st. Probably not any time this decade.

That would be my guess, too - the same way the guideway at King George Station points down Fraser Highway.

It would be head-scratcher like the [future] Douglas-Lake Lafarge spur if they went to Wesbrook Village first, then UBC transit exchange.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by logan5

Was just thinking as an alternative to Skytrain subway that costs 3 billion to go to Arbutus, how much would a bus tunnel cost? A bus tunnel would be much simpler, ie no rail infrastructure, and far less electrical infrastructure for a battery powered bus, just a simple roadway. Driverless technology would mean a BRT service could match the capacity of Skytrain, while still realizing the labour cost benefits.

Maybe down the road consider bus tunnels for Hastings or 41st. There are some serious cost savings and system advantages to such a set up.

1) the tunnel must be wider to handle non-rail bound vehicles that have less predictable clearances.

2) the rails themselves aren't that complicated

3) the batter powered bus is going to need substantial electrical infrastructure to bring a lot of power to one place a one time to charge the bus. trolley wire isn't thaaat complicated

4) if you can't do BEBs good, you are absolutely making this more complicated if you have to deal with ventilation

5) driverless technology for buses doesn't exist, and therefore isn't cheap.

[Migrant_Coconut]

6) The tunnel is the really expensive part, so you might as well make it the highest-capacity option possible.

7) The rails are the reason why trains can have more capacity than buses. Long-enough buses can't corner or pass efficiently (with or without a driver), meaning a wider and more expensive tunnel.

Originally Posted by officedweller

That would be my guess, too - the same way the guideway at King George Station points down Fraser Highway.

It would be head-scratcher like the [future] Douglas-Lake Lafarge spur if they went to Wesbrook Village first, then UBC transit exchange.

I'd argue that a separate 41st Line makes more sense than having the Millennium double back. Last thing we need is a repeat of its Phase 1.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I'd argue that a separate 41st Line makes more sense than having the Millennium double back. Last thing we need is a repeat of its Phase 1.

But that's just an operational issue.
Having connected track allows the transfer of vehicles or another storage yard, etc.
If they are smart, they'd install the spanish solution or a 3rd or 4th track at UBC Station for a future 41st line terminus and reversing trains
- even just to accommodate expected UBC crowds.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

1) the tunnel must be wider to handle non-rail bound vehicles that have less predictable clearances.

2) the rails themselves aren't that complicated

3) the batter powered bus is going to need substantial electrical infrastructure to bring a lot of power to one place a one time to charge the bus. trolley wire isn't thaaat complicated

4) if you can't do BEBs good, you are absolutely making this more complicated if you have to deal with ventilation

5) driverless technology for buses doesn't exist, and therefore isn't cheap.

Look up the Silver Line BRT in Boston. They did this.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

4) if you can't do BEBs good, you are absolutely making this more complicated if you have to deal with ventilation

Yeah, during the transition to battery electric buses you have to provide for route coverage with conventional diesel buses in case you have vehicle or charging infrastructure issues. You can't really count on the benefits of full BEB operation until you've got enough redundancy in the fleet and in the charging infrastructure that you don't have to plan for contingencies.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by officedweller

If they are smart, they'd install the spanish solution or a 3rd or 4th track at UBC Station for a future 41st line terminus and reversing trains.

if we had the money, i would say make an express track for the Broadway subway. though that would never happen.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by logan5

Was just thinking as an alternative to Skytrain subway that costs 3 billion to go to Arbutus, how much would a bus tunnel cost? A bus tunnel would be much simpler, ie no rail infrastructure, and far less electrical infrastructure for a battery powered bus, just a simple roadway. Driverless technology would mean a BRT service could match the capacity of Skytrain, while still realizing the labour cost benefits.

Maybe down the road consider bus tunnels for Hastings or 41st. There are some serious cost savings and system advantages to such a set up.

Do you have the article showing that the tunnel itself is that much cheaper than adding in rails?

I've yet to see 4-car articulated buses (it doesn't even seem practical due to turn radius), meaning capacity-wise, it can't really compete.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Do you have the article showing that the tunnel itself is that much cheaper than adding in rails?

I've yet to see 4-car articulated buses (it doesn't even seem practical due to turn radius), meaning capacity-wise, it can't really compete.

I can't find that document that was previously on-line, but I did find a post of mine from 2012 where I quote the numbers from that document.

Originally Posted by logan5

The 2.5 km bored tunnel section of the Canada Line - the more expensive method - cost $55 million/km for the tunnel and stations with just the bare concrete lining.

With the average cost to build the C-Line at 110 million/km, the more expensive tunnel boring section would likely be in the 150 million/km range, so just a third of the cost is for the tunnel itself.

Like I mentioned before, emerging technologies will allow buses to match capacity of LRT, while having the flexibility to travel anywhere on the road network.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by logan5

With the average cost to build the C-Line at 110 million/km, the more expensive tunnel boring section would likely be in the 150 million/km range, so just a third of the cost is for the tunnel itself.

It's a lot worse than that, because with a tunnel you don't have all of the utility and street works costs that are part of that $110M/km figure.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by logan5

I can't find that document that was previously on-line, but I did find a post of mine from 2012 where I quote the numbers from that document.



With the average cost to build the C-Line at 110 million/km, the more expensive tunnel boring section would likely be in the 150 million/km range, so just a third of the cost is for the tunnel itself.

Like I mentioned before, emerging technologies will allow buses to match capacity of LRT, while having the flexibility to travel anywhere on the road network.

That would be fine for most bus lines. This route is the busiest route in Canada. This is busier than the busiest Streetcar route in Toronto.

Get the idea of using buses out of your head. Skytrain cars hold more people and can move them more often than buses. Extending the Skytrain is the only smart move.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

That would be fine for most bus lines. This route is the busiest route in Canada. This is busier than the busiest Streetcar route in Toronto.

Get the idea of using buses out of your head. Skytrain cars hold more people and can move them more often than buses. Extending the Skytrain is the only smart move.

I was suggesting a BRT subway system. That would easily handle Broadway.

Obviously Skytrain is going down Broadway at this point. I was suggesting corridors where medium capacity makes sense, like 41st or Hastings. Given the proper transit-way, a BRT system can match the capacity of LRT or even Skytrain. Driverless technology will allow BRT to match LRT or Skytrains operating cost advantage.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Any bus route capable of running at 75-second headways and carrying 300+ people/vehicle is most definitely going to be more expensive than a SkyTrain, tunnel or not.

[officedweller]

For UBC route options, check out this article from January 2019:
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/ubc-skytrain-route-options

[djmk]

I was talking to someone at UBC the other day and it seems the construction of the skytrain at UBC is going to be a big worry because it could disturb and rattle some very sensitive research equipment.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by djmk

I was talking to someone at UBC the other day and it seems the construction of the skytrain at UBC is going to be a big worry because it could disturb and rattle some very sensitive research equipment.

If it can take an earthquake, it can take construction of a tunnel.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

If it can take an earthquake, it can take construction of a tunnel.

There's a difference between an earthquake lasting a minute, after which you can recalibrate things within a day to a week, and a construction project lasting months, if not years.