Broadway Subway - Millennium Line Extension to Arbutus | U/C

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

only when they need to run longer trains would it be an issue. at one point no one thought we would need longer trains for the Expo-Line, and yet they are talking about extending platforms.

it seems shortsighted to me to not even build in the future possibility to do it. with a UG station, it will be extremely difficult to extend them if one day they decide to extend other ones. this system will exist for over a century. do we really think in 100yrs that the Broadway Corridor, 2nd biggest employment centre, might not need longer platforms? is this a bet we are making? it appears so. i think it is short sighted. but only time will tell.

If they had more money they could overbuild the stations/platforms but they obviously aren't that flush with cash since they can't even do the logical thing and build to UBC right away.

[Helvetia]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

If they had more money they could overbuild the stations/platforms but they obviously aren't that flush with cash since they can't even do the logical thing and build to UBC right away.

We haven't really overbuilt anything since the original M-Line/Evergreen Extension (80 meter platforms for only 2-car trains) unfortunately

[Migrant_Coconut]

Overbuilding or underbuilding seems fairly academic when even the busiest part of the network has room for more capacity at 80m... and when UBC, the North Shore, Willingdon, Hastings and 41st are still unfunded.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Overbuilding or underbuilding seems fairly academic when even the busiest part of the network has room for more capacity at 80m... and when UBC, the North Shore, Willingdon, Hastings and 41st are still unfunded.

When the 80m station length of the current Skytrain lines becomes the actual limiting factor for capacity then it's probably more effective to build a new relief line than it is to try to extend all the stations. A relief line would bring the benefits of redundancy, expand service to new areas, and make the whole system more effective through the benefit of the network effect.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by Helvetia

Couldn't the north-western end of the station be extended? You'd have to demolish and rebuild some switches and all the track, sure, but it seems feasible.

The track immediate west of the station does a small S curve which is not ideal for station platform, and since there's an island platform so you essentially have to rebuild the guideway, which causes major service disruption long term. It's anything but "feasible".

At the end of the day, the platform length is a non issue. M-line currently runs 2 car trains every 3-4 min at its peak frequency. There's still plenty of capacity to add. By the time it's running 5 car trains at sub 90s headways, you are better off building a relief line.

[Jimbo604]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

If they had more money they could overbuild the stations/platforms but they obviously aren't that flush with cash since they can't even do the logical thing and build to UBC right away.

Not even a little bit flush and keep going until Alma/Dunbar.

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by Jimbo604

Not even a little bit flush and keep going until Alma/Dunbar.

If they could do 2 more stops at Macdonald and Alma that would be so good. From there only 5-7 mins to UBC by bus. And those 2 stops are straight forward regarding location and that they will be underground. Other 2-3 stop have a variety of options that would require more research done.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by madog222

Remember that currently 2-car trains on the line. It's going to be a very long time before >5-car trains are required.

Once the line connects to UBC, I'd expect the volume on the line to reach a point where 5 cars may be needed during peak times. That would mean that they are future proofing the line for when it is needed.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

When the 80m station length of the current Skytrain lines becomes the actual limiting factor for capacity then it's probably more effective to build a new relief line than it is to try to extend all the stations. A relief line would bring the benefits of redundancy, expand service to new areas, and make the whole system more effective through the benefit of the network effect.

Yes. 80m trains running every 90 seconds or whatever the minimum headway is will strain the capacity of the stations themselves and everything around them.

[Helvetia]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

By the time it's running 5 car trains at sub 90s headways, you are better off building a relief line.

Perhaps we're looking at this the wrong way and this current underbuilding is TransLink's megabrain strategy to force additional rail construction in the future by necessitating a relief line

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by Lexus

If they could do 2 more stops at Macdonald and Alma that would be so good. From there only 5-7 mins to UBC by bus. And those 2 stops are straight forward regarding location and that they will be underground. Other 2-3 stop have a variety of options that would require more research done.

Actually, this suggestion is not a bad one.

The trip from Arbutus to Alma is not challenging in any way. IT is a short, flat, and obvious extension (just as the Columbia extension from New West was).

This sets up the "hill climb" and the final run in to UBC as a shorter shot. (just as the Columbia extension set up the jump across the Fraser to Scott Road)

Alma would have three centers of traffic, Dunbar bus, UBC bus and also the Jericho lands (15,000 people at a minimum) so there is a reasonable excuse to do that portion sooner rather than later.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Lexus

If they could do 2 more stops at Macdonald and Alma that would be so good. From there only 5-7 mins to UBC by bus. And those 2 stops are straight forward regarding location and that they will be underground. Other 2-3 stop have a variety of options that would require more research done.

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually, this suggestion is not a bad one.

The trip from Arbutus to Alma is not challenging in any way. IT is a short, flat, and obvious extension (just as the Columbia extension from New West was).

This sets up the "hill climb" and the final run in to UBC as a shorter shot. (just as the Columbia extension set up the jump across the Fraser to Scott Road)

Alma would have three centers of traffic, Dunbar bus, UBC bus and also the Jericho lands (15,000 people at a minimum) so there is a reasonable excuse to do that portion sooner rather than later.

It might even help the case for the UBC extension by reducing the apparent cost in terms of public dollars. Obviously, the whole line will still cost whatever it all adds up to. However, adding two relatively easy stops onto the portion that is already under construction might be an easier ask in the short term. By the same logic, the now-shortened UBC extension will have a lower price tag while still offering the same benefits (massive increase in ridership from UBC, the UEL and the Jericho lands). Given that so much of this infrastructure funding depends on political will...

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Lexus

If they could do 2 more stops at Macdonald and Alma that would be so good. From there only 5-7 mins to UBC by bus. And those 2 stops are straight forward regarding location and that they will be underground. Other 2-3 stop have a variety of options that would require more research done.

Originally Posted by Hooknose

Actually, this suggestion is not a bad one.

The trip from Arbutus to Alma is not challenging in any way. IT is a short, flat, and obvious extension (just as the Columbia extension from New West was).

This sets up the "hill climb" and the final run in to UBC as a shorter shot. (just as the Columbia extension set up the jump across the Fraser to Scott Road)

Alma would have three centers of traffic, Dunbar bus, UBC bus and also the Jericho lands (15,000 people at a minimum) so there is a reasonable excuse to do that portion sooner rather than later.

Yes. I think that a terminus at Alma with buses radiating out in three directions is a great idea. An so, so, so much cheaper than building rrt, either above ground (UG-ly)
or underground (even more $$$ expensive)

[Changing City]

There's a seperate thread for the Arbutus to UBC section. Hoever good an idea it might have been to find more money to keep digging, it wasn't found. The contracts are leased, the construction has started, and there's a (slightly slipped) timeline to completion.

There were several years of geotechnical surveys, test drilling and property purchase to allow the construction as far as Arbutus. I'm not sure any of that has happened yet on the final stretch to UBC, including from Arbutus to Alma.

I wonder what the business case for extending to Alma would be anyway? The ridership big numbers will be from Jericho (in time) and UBC. My guess is the intermediate stations will be justified because they're on the route to somewhere that generates significant ridership, not (for the time being at least) as destinations in their own right.

[Jimbo604]

Well, what can you do, it's the same as always - everyone wants everything and nobody wants to pay for it. So we manage to squeeze a train expansion into the budget pretty infrequently and repeat the cycle. Political will hasn't been there to escape from this.

I suppose be glad we're getting Arbutus and Langley and look forward to the bore arrival at Main Street station.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Jimbo604

So we manage to squeeze a train expansion into the budget pretty infrequently

i dont know if i would say "infrequently..."

- 1985
- 2000
- 2009
- 2016
- 2026
- 2028

we also had stations added between 1985-2000 as well. it doesn't look that infrequent to me. we have built what is in the top 5 of transit systems in the world in about 35yrs.

it may not be as fast as some of you want, but i would not call it "infrequent."

[NewfBC]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

i dont know if i would say "infrequently..."

- 1985
- 2000
- 2009
- 2016
- 2026
- 2028

we also had stations added between 1985-2000 as well. it doesn't look that infrequent to me. we have built what is in the top 5 of transit systems in the world in about 35yrs.

it may not be as fast as some of you want, but i would not call it "infrequent."

Top 5 transit system in the world? Ours? LOL

Don't travel much?

Ron.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

we have built what is in the top 5 of transit systems in the world in about 35yrs.

This is not accurate. HOWEVER, I would say our system may be the best for a city of Vancouver's size in NA. Many of our peer cities in NA don't even have mass rapid transit, and is there any city in NA that has a better bus network than ours? Every time I travel to another city and see 30-minute headways on major bus routes I shake my head.

But I have to limit the scope to NA because there are a lot of smaller European cities that kick 🞵🞵🞵 when it comes to public transit. Don't even get me started on Vienna, my favorite city I've ever travelled to transit-wise.

[WarrenC12]

At least the pace of expansion is improving. The Canada Line, Evergreen, and Broadway lines have been telegraphed for so long they seem painfully slow. Once UBC is built, it will feel fast if we keep getting a line or expansion every 4-5 years.

[mcj]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

This is not accurate. HOWEVER, I would say our system may be the best for a city of Vancouver's size in NA. Many of our peer cities in NA don't even have mass rapid transit, and is there any city in NA that has a better bus network than ours? Every time I travel to another city and see 30-minute headways on major bus routes I shake my head.

But I have to limit the scope to NA because there are a lot of smaller European cities that kick 🞵🞵🞵 when it comes to public transit. Don't even get me started on Vienna, my favorite city I've ever travelled to transit-wise.

Vienna, while certainly an example of an excellent transit system, also has been at approximately Vancouver's size (i.e. 2M - 3M people in the metro area) for over 100 years and like most European cities had a well established rail network built over the 19th and early 20th centuries. It's also the country's capital and was the capital for what was once one of the most powerful empires in the world during the exact period when rail development was in full swing worldwide. It's an understatement to say that they had a massive head start.