Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

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.

I assumed that he was talking about switches and very a short length of dead-end track which could lead to a potential future southbound branch line down Arbutus. Personally I'm still skeptical that we'll ever live to see enough density to justify it, though.

[santak003]

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.

There's a lot going on for the drivers. I wonder if we can get to two minute headways with some form of autonomy, which increases the throughput. The problem will be the test cases of a non-segregated system. It's not finite. Proving it's safer...I'm not even sure you can convince anyone. However, if someone told me about automated cars going mainstream, I would've told them..you're nuts..it's not safe, but here they are. Engineers have been competing forever in the mouse in a maze, which is the precursor to automation with all it's sensors..for over 50 years.

Having said all that, the skytrain to ubc document is quite well studied (Jan 2020 document) and it lays out it's argument against lrt vis a vis many different factors, using a complex model that incorporates human psychology and contains all the bus routes and feeder lines and forecasts when they will be at capacity (thing #4, #25, #84, #33..all to ubc for eg). It states that by 2030 the current #99 bus system will be overcrowded. I hope that in the least they will study it again come 2025 when the arbutus exchange starts operation AND they continue to refine the model they use to best compare to existing production (real life) system.

[vango]

The posted Broadway-City Hall Station design states that it's a "preliminary conceptual station design". Probably no chance of a second entrance?

https://www.broadwaysubway.ca/about/stations/

[logan5]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I assumed that he was talking about switches and very a short length of dead-end track which could lead to a potential future southbound branch line down Arbutus. Personally I'm still skeptical that we'll ever live to see enough density to justify it, though.

Is there enough density west of Arbutus to justify spending 3 billion dollars on 7 km's of subway? Almost 2 km's of that goes through a golf course, and a forested area. And there is going to be strong opposition from Point Grey and Kits West to re-zoning those neighbourhoods, which have a high concentration of character homes.

A LRT line down Arbutus would cost far less than the 3 billion it's going to cost the UBC line. Arbutus is just as dense as West Broadway (past Arbutus), and you would have an easier path towards re-zoning to higher densities.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by vango

The posted Broadway-City Hall Station design states that it's a "preliminary conceptual station design". Probably no chance of a second entrance?

https://www.broadwaysubway.ca/about/stations/

No chance of a second entrance in 2025, which sucks, but there's plans for K.O. panels toward City Hall and the opposite corner (the A&W) that can become entrances if the need arises. It helps that much of the current in/out traffic is B-Line riders.

[Klazu]

Anyone seen any mention of how many new trains we will get? Will Millennium Line finally see full size trains?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by logan5

Is there enough density west of Arbutus to justify spending 3 billion dollars on 7 km's of subway? Almost 2 km's of that goes through a golf course, and a forested area. And there is going to be strong opposition from Point Grey and Kits West to re-zoning those neighbourhoods, which have a high concentration of character homes.

At least there's a huge employment and education complex on Point Grey, one that's significant enough to have a half-dozen jam-packed bus routes running to it. It's hard for me to see that happening down the Arbutus corridor any time soon, precisely because of that same strong opposition to densification in the area. An area that's well served with a single, non-articulated trolley that runs every 10 minutes during the peak of rush hour.

I keep seeing posts that salivate over the transit possibilities of the Arbutus corridor. But you don't build rapid transit because you happen to have land available, you build it because you've exhausted all the cheaper options to move the necessary volume of people. The Broadway corridor has that need, the area around Arbutus does not and will not for a long time.

[casper]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

At least there's a huge employment and education complex on Point Grey, one that's significant enough to have a half-dozen jam-packed bus routes running to it. It's hard for me to see that happening down the Arbutus corridor any time soon, precisely because of that same strong opposition to densification in the area. An area that's well served with a single, non-articulated trolley that runs every 10 minutes during the peak of rush hour.

I keep seeing posts that salivate over the transit possibilities of the Arbutus corridor. But you don't build rapid transit because you happen to have land available, you build it because you've exhausted all the cheaper options to move the necessary volume of people. The Broadway corridor has that need, the area around Arbutus does not and will not for a long time.

My suggestion was not built an Arbutus line, but to design the Arbutus status to accommodate such a line in the future.

I think the motivation for an Arbutus line will come form a combination of the Canada line reaching capacity and demand along Arbutus. There are a few other lines and extensions that are higher priority than this one. That does not mean we should box ourselves in a corner.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by casper

My suggestion was not built an Arbutus line, but to design the Arbutus status to accommodate such a line in the future.

Yeah, that's what I figured you meant. And I get the concept of future-proofing, it makes sense. But I still think it's going to be generations before we see anything built down the Arbutus corridor.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

No chance of a second entrance in 2025, which sucks, but there's plans for K.O. panels toward City Hall and the opposite corner (the A&W) that can become entrances if the need arises. It helps that much of the current in/out traffic is B-Line riders.

Agreed. While a second entrance would be nice, I'm more concerned about the internal transfer capacity. This station will be the next Commercial/Broadway in terms of direct transfers between lines.

[WarrenC12]

If we actually get a UBC line started before 2030, it will be the last line that touches the CoV in a long time IMO.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Agreed. While a second entrance would be nice, I'm more concerned about the internal transfer capacity. This station will be the next Commercial/Broadway in terms of direct transfers between lines.

With respect to this, and the Canada Line, if I recall correctly some of the stations on the CL may pose problems in terms of expanding the platform length. I wonder if there would be any merit to expanding platform length at key stations (such as Waterfront, Broadway, Marine and Brighouse) and then use longer trains with one car that only loads and unloads at those stations. It would not improve travel time, but it could potentially alleviate passenger congestion between major destinations.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I assumed that he was talking about switches and very a short length of dead-end track which could lead to a potential future southbound branch line down Arbutus. Personally I'm still skeptical that we'll ever live to see enough density to justify it, though.

I'm talking about something like the spur just before Coquitlam Central Station as can be seen on Google Maps here

[scryer]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

If we actually get a UBC line started before 2030, it will be the last line that touches the CoV in a long time IMO.

Agreed but it also kind of depends. The COV will always be the best served transit municipality in the Lower Mainland no matter what because it is the employment centre of BC so it's always going to exhibit that kind of an influence on any transit decisions.

After the UBC line is done, methinks that either the North Shore will scream for transit OR the SOF municipalities will want some more rapid transit infrastructure.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Agreed. While a second entrance would be nice, I'm more concerned about the internal transfer capacity. This station will be the next Commercial/Broadway in terms of direct transfers between lines.

I personally think that our transit experts are underestimating how many transit users will be using Broadway City Hall as their interchange station. Specifically I think that they are underestimating the 5pm rush hour when you have two lines with two different sized trains exchanging passengers at the same time. But I digress and I will wait to see it for myself.

[logan5]

Also the walk between lines at City Hall Station will be much shorter, and will be indoors.

[WarrenC12]

By 2025 COVID19 will be a distant memory, and the Day 1 ridership for the extension will be incredible I'm sure.

Hopefully the Canada Line will get another capacity improvement by then (more cars).

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

By 2025 COVID19 will be a distant memory, and the Day 1 ridership for the extension will be incredible I'm sure.

Hopefully the Canada Line will get another capacity improvement by then (more cars).

Distant? Not likely, but, hopefully by then we aren't needing to be concerned about it anymore.

[ilikeredheads]

Looking at the rendering of their concept, I don't think it's a bad design. Passenger heading for M-line will turn left coming from the fare gates, bypassing the C-Line's platforms altogether (and there will escalators for both up and down directions WOW!). That being said, it is a missed opportunity to not further future-proofing the station by adding a second entrance, even if they predict majority of passenger will only transfer between lines. At least add more fare gates ffs. The current 5 won't be able to handle the extra capacity during rush hours.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

That being said, it is a missed opportunity to not further future-proofing the station by adding a second entrance, even if they predict majority of passenger will only transfer between lines. At least add more fare gates ffs. The current 5 won't be able to handle the extra capacity during rush hours.

See above.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

i think they should be adding in the Crossroads entrance when they build this station. it would be the right thing to do. there is no reason not to. this is the perfect time to do it. literally, only 5 fare gates? that is insane.

realistically, the SW corner should have provisions for an entrance. that way the NW, SW, & SE corners get entrances.

the future NE corner should have provisions as well so that, just in case, all 4 corners have options for entrances. that would be the ideal world.