Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by mellowyellow

Genuine question out of my lack of knowledge, but would there be a good case for extending the skytrain line from Arbutus to UBC as one long extension with no other stops? And provision for stations to be added in the future as developments come through with higher density along the way (if ever)?

Originally Posted by Mac Write

The cost to add the stations after would be double triple or more and take dacade each to build as you have live traffic in the tunnel. Alma, McDonald, and other stops are needed right away.

I seem to recall seeing a graphic or study (for the life of me I can't find it anymore, so this might be wrong) that said ~47% of westbound 99 trips terminated west of Arbutus, but around ~40% terminated at UBC. Sasamat, Alma, and Macdonald picked up only ~7% of the entire route, with something like ~5% weighted on Macdonald. (These are all ballpark numbers but they were roughly what I remember)

On one hand, Translink seems perfectly content to pencil in future infill stations if they make sense. Capstan is going ahead, and there's two planned stations for the Evergreen Extension.

On the other hand, that's a lot of track to run for only one station that currently makes sense. Perhaps once the Jericho lands are online an Alma station might make sense.

[santak003]

Originally Posted by scottN

Laurel is better for pedestrian access to VGH, pedestrian access to false creek and cyclist access to bike routes north and south of Broadway. Since the #17 turns at broadway it stops at Laurel in both directions so transit access is not dimished.

The connection to Charleson park is quite nice

[santak003]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Surface transit requires operators for each train, which makes it too expensive to run trains frequently during off-peak hours.

There's a lot of talk about transit times, which are certainly important, but frequency is just as important. Having to wait 10 or 15 minutes for an off-peak LRT train makes the system far less user friendly than RRT trains arriving every 4 or 5 minutes all day long.

Since most people will access the route by transferring to or from it, those wait times become significant when looking at the overall transit time for a typical trip. When you add that to the faster, congestion-proof transit times of a grade separated route it's pretty obvious which one most people will prefer.

A grade separated solution will attract more ridership, justifying the increased construction cost and giving us a better system.

All valid points for a more resilient system. With all the engineering and science we have, I just wonder why not autonomous and reliable and less congestion. I'm not s subject matter expert and still don't understand why they don't focus more on autonomous lrt like they do for cars.

50% of the people are still single car occupancy and it's psychological (same argument you are making above). You can't push square pegs through round holes, so I'm all for the best solution given the limitations. I wonder which one will stand the test of time.

[Klazu]

I am most happy about the fully integrated City Hall station. Great news!

[santak003]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the business case of RRT to UBC isn't the issue, nor is the feasibility, nor is the fact it is the right decision to do it all at once.

the issue is, funding. the Feds seem happy to throw a billion dollars at a private "charity", but they don't seem to be willing to do this.

the only way we would get this funded is if we were in Quebec, or also involved in corruption; without those, we are out of luck. oh well. the Feds have rarely like BC at any time, let alone the current Feds or the Feds of the current PM in Ottawa.

Funding is always a missing link between why and why not: I concur

This document below dated Feb 4, 2020 is asking for 4 billion a year from the feds starting 2027 and is asking for the remaining capital amounts pledged for the phase 3 capital plans for the metro Vancouver region by spring of next year 2021. Interestingly, the UBC line was never part of the phase 3 plans. The langley extension is the regional priority. Part of phase 3 and depending on the funding from the feds is the mobility pricing. I'd like to see mobility pricing start (although some people will dislike this opinion for sure) .

"Renewing the Government of Canada's partnership with Metro Vancouver: Investments to Address growing demand for public transport"
Feb 4, 2020
Mayor's council on Regional Transportation

https://www.curecongestion.ca/wp-content...uncil-Federal-Budget-Submission-2020.pdf

[Migrant_Coconut]

Sans grade separation, I suspect that any kind of autonomous public transit will have to either A) wait for collision avoidance to reach 101% effectiveness, or B) end up limited to ~20km/h.

[santak003]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Sans grade separation, I suspect that any kind of autonomous public transit will have to either A) wait for collision avoidance to reach 101% effectiveness, or B) end up limited to ~20km/h.

I don't think we'll implement anything as a level 1 adoption level (pioneering). So we have to wait until others have shown us the reliability. Being on a straight track with no steering and just braking, it should be much simpler than car based autonomy.

For example:

https://www.knorr-bremse.com.au/en/press/pressreleases/press_detail_34112.jsp

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I am most happy about the fully integrated City Hall station. Great news!

Since the contract is a 'design-build' contract, it may be up to the proponent to design the connections to Broadway - City Hall Station.
It depends on how prescriptive the Province is in the contract regarding that publicized design (which was a very nice (and expensive) design).

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by santak003

I don't think we'll implement anything as a level 1 adoption level (pioneering). So we have to wait until others have shown us the reliability. Being on a straight track with no steering and just braking, it should be much simpler than car based autonomy.

For example:

https://www.knorr-bremse.com.au/en/p...tail_34112.jsp

There's a big difference between more automation to aid a driver, and full autonomy. Airplanes have a million different technologies to automate flying processes, but we still put humans in the pilot's seat because someone has to control those automated processes and deal with the hardest parts (and deal with those automated processes failing). It seems like we're still a bit away from full autonomy.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Since the contract is a 'design-build' contract, it may be up to the proponent to design the connections to Broadway - City Hall Station.
It depends on how prescriptive the Province is in the contract regarding that publicized design (which was a very nice (and expensive) design).

The publicized station is a very sexy design and it seems like Translink put in a lot of effort to advertize the station locations and designs. It'll be strange and sad if the rug gets pulled out from underneath.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by chowhou

There's a big difference between more automation to aid a driver, and full autonomy. Airplanes have a million different technologies to automate flying processes, but we still put humans in the pilot's seat because someone has to control those automated processes and deal with the hardest parts (and deal with those automated processes failing). It seems like we're still a bit away from full autonomy.

i think the 737 is the perfect example of what happens when people think computerization is the cure all saviour of everything.

other examples include any software, anywhere. there is nothing but patches and holes and glitches in all version of software. if we cant get the software on a cellular phone right, how do we expect to get it right in a fully autonomous, nonhuman-at-all vehicle? if we cant, is 99% reliable acceptable? 99.5%? what is the threshold? if it is less than 100%, who is liable? maybe there would just be a victims fund from every robot vehicle sold so when people are run over by the robot cars they just get money from there.

for fully autonomous vehicles to be the norm, we need to figure these things out. 100% accuracy is nearly impossible, and the 737 has shown us just what can happen at what would be considered a great engineering company.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

I think translink is obligated to complete Surrey before even thinking of the UBC extension isn't it?

Actually not ...

The Broadway Line and the new Surrey Line have two, completely natural extensions ... UBC for Broadway and Langley for Surrey Fleetwood.

My guess ... these two "completion extensions" are short, cheap and easy. They are designed for our dynamic fearless leaders to announce.

They are also real critical because those two extensions "take the edge off" the traffic.

If you can get from Coquitlam to UBC (with 500 amenities along the line) you are living large.

If you can get from Langley (with 20 bus feeder routes) through Surrey (with 20 feeder bus routes and an ALRT, Newton to Guildford - still coming) all the way to downtown, you are also living large.

Figure in ten years, the two completion extensions to be finished or , at least, substantially underway.

What's left ??? Obvious.

A killer north south route (with something more than the brain dead 40 meter stations of the Canada Line - let us all hope we can yell loud enough to make sure that never happens again) from south of the South Fraser to the North Shore, again with bus feeder exchanges in as many places as we have the foresight to provide.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the business case of RRT to UBC isn't the issue, nor is the feasibility, nor is the fact it is the right decision to do it all at once.

the issue is, funding. the Feds seem happy to throw a billion dollars at a private "charity", but they don't seem to be willing to do this.

the only way we would get this funded is if we were in Quebec, or also involved in corruption; without those, we are out of luck. oh well. the Feds have rarely like BC at any time, let alone the current Feds or the Feds of the current PM in Ottawa.

Bingo

This post nailed it. Politics, not logic or good sense, is what drives Lower Mainland traffic plans.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I am most happy about the fully integrated City Hall station. Great news!

I agree, fully integrated is perfect.

Anyone out there with updated plans or proposals on this?

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually not ...

The Broadway Line and the new Surrey Line have two, completely natural extensions ... UBC for Broadway and Langley for Surrey Fleetwood.

My guess ... these two "completion extensions" are short, cheap and easy. They are designed for our dynamic fearless leaders to announce.

They are also real critical because those two extensions "take the edge off" the traffic.

If you can get from Coquitlam to UBC (with 500 amenities along the line) you are living large.

If you can get from Langley (with 20 bus feeder routes) through Surrey (with 20 feeder bus routes and an ALRT, Newton to Guildford - still coming) all the way to downtown, you are also living large.

Figure in ten years, the two completion extensions to be finished or , at least, substantially underway.

What's left ??? Obvious.

A killer north south route (with something more than the brain dead 40 meter stations of the Canada Line - let us all hope we can yell loud enough to make sure that never happens again) from south of the South Fraser to the North Shore, again with bus feeder exchanges in as many places as we have the foresight to provide.

yes but if goes to plan Surrey will be ready by 2025 and UBC by 2030 at the earliest.

[casper]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the business case of RRT to UBC isn't the issue, nor is the feasibility, nor is the fact it is the right decision to do it all at once.

the issue is, funding. the Feds seem happy to throw a billion dollars at a private "charity", but they don't seem to be willing to do this.

the only way we would get this funded is if we were in Quebec, or also involved in corruption; without those, we are out of luck. oh well. the Feds have rarely like BC at any time, let alone the current Feds or the Feds of the current PM in Ottawa.

I think the issue of the "charity" is not overly relevant. The federal government and especially the province of BC have over the past two-three decades work hard to limit the number of direct government employees by contracting to third party companies/organisations to delivery services. Many of these contractors are non-profits. The issue in that specific case is a poorly written contract and sole sourcing when there were other alternatives.

As for transit funding I think they have tried to roughly match projects on a per-capita basis.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually not ...

The Broadway Line and the new Surrey Line have two, completely natural extensions ... UBC for Broadway and Langley for Surrey Fleetwood.

My guess ... these two "completion extensions" are short, cheap and easy. They are designed for our dynamic fearless leaders to announce.

They are also real critical because those two extensions "take the edge off" the traffic.

If you can get from Coquitlam to UBC (with 500 amenities along the line) you are living large.

If you can get from Langley (with 20 bus feeder routes) through Surrey (with 20 feeder bus routes and an ALRT, Newton to Guildford - still coming) all the way to downtown, you are also living large.

Figure in ten years, the two completion extensions to be finished or , at least, substantially underway.

What's left ??? Obvious.

A killer north south route (with something more than the brain dead 40 meter stations of the Canada Line - let us all hope we can yell loud enough to make sure that never happens again) from south of the South Fraser to the North Shore, again with bus feeder exchanges in as many places as we have the foresight to provide.

I would hope the Arbutus station is design to accommodate an Arbutus extension.

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by chowhou

The publicized station is a very sexy design and it seems like Translink put in a lot of effort to advertize the station locations and designs. It'll be strange and sad if the rug gets pulled out from underneath.

Of all the stations, I think Broadway-City Hall is the only one where such a detailed design was shown, and I think that's partly because of the agreement they had to negotiate with the Canada Line over integration with the existing station.

So I suspect that the design for Broadway-City Hall is more of less set in stone (or at least, set in a legal agreement), while the rest are more open to changes.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by casper

I would hope the Arbutus station is design to accommodate an Arbutus extension.

Like a spur before Arbutus station

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

Like a spur before Arbutus station

Shouldn't be too hard to have a spur west of Arbutus station: keep tunnelling for an extra block or so, lay the tracks and signals, let it sit there while the trains run until we're ready for round two.

A spur east of Arbutus station OTOH is a Dumb Idea.

[jsbertram]

in case you missed it, the Sept 3rd babble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILCv3lRO2Xw

some official info, but nothing new i think