HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #521  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 9:55 PM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCPhil View Post
The thing with Paris though is that it's metro system has almost all of it stations within an area less than the size of the city of Vancouver. Except for a few stations, the trains barely leave downtown, so its all hub (and the lines that do leave downtown don't cross away from downtown). If you live out in a Paris suburb and want to travel to your neighbor suburb, you pretty much have to ride the Metro, or RER into the downtown area, switch trains, then travel back out.

London doesn't really have a super dense downtown, where there are super tall buildings concentrated in a comparatively small area, so the "downtown" is spread over a large area. Thus there are multiple lines that crisscross the city core, most of which enter and leave (pass through) the downtown area. I believe all the Underground lines pass through Farecard Zone 1. So it really is a hub and spoke system, but the hub is just a large area, not a single station.
My experience of Paris is there is no "set downtown." What makes up their city are a collection of hubs within about 10 of the 16 districts that make up the Paris City Proper. If one defines downtown as a place as the area of a city with a central business district, than La Défense outside of Paris, can be considered as Paris' downtown. La Défense, only has Metro 1, T2, and RER-A, that reaches the area.

With regards to London, what about Canary Wharf? Its only serviced by the Jubilee Line along with local DLR services.

Another city that comes to mind is Hong Kong. Central on Hong Kong island is the city's "downtown" so to speak, but there are many other busy business districts within Kowloon, Tsuen Wan, etc.

When I brought up the "hub and spoke" planning, I really should have been more specific. I'm talking about typical "one hub, spokes around the hub" planning, and not "multiple hubs and spokes."

My point is, Vancouver's growth isn't just about developing one major city core, it's developing multiple ones within a small area. Looking back at all the cities I've discussed, yes, there is a historic city centre (Paris/City of London/Hong Kong Central), but there are also a lot of regional supporting hubs (La Défense/Canary Wharf/Tsuen Wan and Kowloon).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #522  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 9:57 PM
DKaz DKaz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Kelowna BC & Edmonton AB
Posts: 4,299
Sheesh New York gets a subway running under every street or every second street and no one bats an eye. Someone here suggests a line down Hastings and OH NO THERE'S THE M-LINE 2.4KM AWAY! WALKING DISTANCE!



When I came back from Japan I drew up a bunch of lines I would've liked to see, mostly revolving around a Hastings-Willingdon-41st-Arbutus loop similar to the Yamanote Line with a few spurs coming off of it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #523  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 10:06 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
If you turn some trains around at Waterfront, which should be easy as the station is on a rail yard, scheduling and routing will be balanced.
But it will be impossible for users to understand. We do not have such a complicated network. Your proposed train movement patterns make a simple network very, very complicated.

I see what you are trying to do: reduce transfers for downtown commuters. But in doing so, you are reducing frequencies on most lines, and/or making them less predictable. I would rather see one or two high-volume transfer points, with high frequencies on both of the intersecting lines.

Our network is already overly complicated with M-line trains looping around themselves. This will end in the near future. Evergreen will spell the end of the great M-line loop, and the train movements will finally become logical.

Quote:
Considering Millennium Line's proximity to Hastings St (1.6 to 2.4 km away), it should be Millennium line that serves this area.
But Expo Line's terminus at Waterfront is the closest point to Hastings Street, and is even pointed in the correct direction to serve Hastings Street with a simple extension, and even has a reasonable right-of-way along the rail yard from Waterfront to at least Main Street.

Millennium is designed to serve Central Broadway.

You seem to be suggesting that more commuters need to reach Hastings than Central Broadway. That assertion seems far-fetched to me. Central Broadway is a very important corridor, and a worthy destination for Millennium Line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #524  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 10:25 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant - The New Downtown South
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk View Post
You seem to be suggesting that more commuters need to reach Hastings than Central Broadway. That assertion seems far-fetched to me. Central Broadway is a very important corridor, and a worthy destination for Millennium Line.
I was suggesting more commuters need to reach Downtown than Central Broadway. M Line commuters would have access to Granville, Burrard, etc., stations. I was saying the M Line runs parallel to Hastings for about 10 km at about 2 km away.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #525  
Old Posted Jul 7, 2011, 11:50 PM
BCPhil BCPhil is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk View Post
But it will be impossible for users to understand. We do not have such a complicated network. Your proposed train movement patterns make a simple network very, very complicated.

I see what you are trying to do: reduce transfers for downtown commuters. But in doing so, you are reducing frequencies on most lines, and/or making them less predictable. I would rather see one or two high-volume transfer points, with high frequencies on both of the intersecting lines.

Our network is already overly complicated with M-line trains looping around themselves. This will end in the near future. Evergreen will spell the end of the great M-line loop, and the train movements will finally become logical.



But Expo Line's terminus at Waterfront is the closest point to Hastings Street, and is even pointed in the correct direction to serve Hastings Street with a simple extension, and even has a reasonable right-of-way along the rail yard from Waterfront to at least Main Street.

Millennium is designed to serve Central Broadway.

You seem to be suggesting that more commuters need to reach Hastings than Central Broadway. That assertion seems far-fetched to me. Central Broadway is a very important corridor, and a worthy destination for Millennium Line.
What I think Logan is getting at is having all of it. Extend M-Line to UBC, Extend Expo Line down Hastings, and then have a connecting spur between the extended M-Line and Waterfront.

This could result in a much simpler routing than what everyone so far has mentioned. You could still do all this with 3 lines.

1) Expo Line: Hastings St <-> King George (or further) via Waterfront.
2) Evergreen Line: Douglas <-> UBC
3) Millennium Line.

The Millennium line could be a line that runs in full loops. Trains could travel Waterfront -> Broadway -> Columbia -> Lougheed -> Commercial -> Waterfront. Then repeat the figure 8 loop. Then other trains would run the loop in reverse full time. This would mean that trains serving the M-Line don't need to turn around anywhere in the middle of other lines. The M-line trains don't need to be dedicated either, when they reach Waterfront they could be shifted to Expo Line service to King George depending on scheduling or demand.

Yes it is more complicated in that riders need to figure out which lines are which and which go where, but it does offer some advantages over turning trains around (riders coming in from Lougheed could single seat ride to Burrard, Granville or even Stadium if desired). Something like this might be required in the future.

Demand into downtown is high, and it is getting higher. Expo line as it is is packed in the AM rush entering downtown, and transfers from the Millennium line to the Expo line can be difficult (to put it mildly). Once the Evergreen line built, there will be more people trying to make the transfer, along with ever increasing Expo Line users. In the near future, making the transfer at Commercial Broadway could be near impossible in the AM peak.

Extending the Millennium line past the Canada Line would be a great help to this. Travelers on the Evergreen line would have 2 options for getting into downtown, depending on where they are going.

But even that possibility might be short lived. The Canada Line is busy today. Even with planned service increases and longer trains/platforms, it might be difficult for the Canada Line to keep up with the crush loads, without having to deal with passengers being dumped off at City Hall. It will work for a while, but eventually it is possible that travel from the east into downtown (the only direction the city is expanding in) could be so great another way in may be needed.

I would agree with the sentiment that the priority should be extending to UBC from the existing track. UBC and the Broadway business district is a top regional destination and could benefit from further densification that Skytrain can bring. This is a fantasy for a world where travel into Downtown ever increases as the regional population grows. Like Logan theorizes, a short connection from around VCC-Clark to Waterfront could be required as a relief line into downtown at a rather affordable price. If Evergreen riders don't have to transfer at Commercial Broadway to get Downtown, it can offer some relief to a sure to be crowded Expo Line, and encourage further Evergreen ridership and growth around its stations. Its not without its problems (like regarding frequency on the Broadway line) but it is one of the better theories about handling Expo Line capacity into downtown from the East that I've heard.

An additional benefit of the connector would be its proximity to the Rail Station. In the future it could be a major transportation hub, with high speed trains departing and arriving from the USA. The station might also be used for SOF commuter rail trains that reach out into the Valley. Having another Skytrain station, even closer to the terminal, might benefit travelers in and out of the city.

To further this Fantasy, I would say you also need a Hastings line. At least a short one through the DTES (preferably at least as far as Hastings Park or even under Burrard Inlet to the North Shore). That way you have a line that Expo Line trains can turn around on without conflicting with incoming Millennium line trains. It would be too many movements in one area if trains turned around near Waterfront. It would also go a long way to encourage growth and gentrification in the DTES and East Van if the line extended through Gastown and down Hastings a ways.

Of coarse there are a lot of other things to do first, like improve transit SoF, Broadway Line, increase capacity on major Vancouver bus lines with high capacity trams, but one day the need might come for some Expo line relief or a DTES catalyst, and this could be a rather simple solution.

And to address deasine concerns, this could create a real meshwork of lines through a large section of relatively under developed downtown real estate, providing the potential for an even denser downtown to expand Eastward, to Strathcona and the False Creek Flats.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #526  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 12:31 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant - The New Downtown South
Posts: 8,157
I have a saved image from Google Earth. Could somebody please tell me how to post a saved image?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #527  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 1:09 AM
Canadian Mind's Avatar
Canadian Mind Canadian Mind is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
I have a saved image from Google Earth. Could somebody please tell me how to post a saved image?
upload it onto a public image host, such as photobucket, then post the image link in image tags.
__________________
"you're eating chicken periods" - Vid
"I love eggs, especially the ones with runny yolks" - Me
"EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, you're disgusting!" - Vid
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #528  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 1:46 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant - The New Downtown South
Posts: 8,157


There we go. Thanks.

Just posting for practice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #529  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 2:22 AM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
I'm not so supportive of the extension of - among other lines - the expo line down Hastings. That is just making an already long, long line unnecessarily longer and creating a lot of complications in terms of frequency or whatever. I honestly wouldn't expect someone at the eastern end of Hastings to ride this line all the way into Surrey, via downtown, either; more likely they would just take a 130 down to the M-Line or Expo Line and go from there. Thus making the "ride thru" potential rather useless. For the same reason, I stick to the 410 from 22nd St Station going from Surrey - Richmond rather than go through downtown. There's quite a lot of redundancy created, and quite a lot of money wasted that could be put towards projects that benefit even more people.

Having to get to playland/PNE via downtown? It really doesn't look good on the map, once you do look. Even if you do get a one seat ride to the PNE, the trip is 2-3x longer than it should be. A lot of people will not actually go through downtown and instead get of at 29th Ave and take the 16 bus north to the PNE grounds. More people would rather deal with the highway.

Though I understand that forcing people into downtown for that transfer is a benefit to downtown/outward development, this really can't be done all the time. We may end up creating a line on which certain movements are rather infeasible and perhaps even unused, and even be inconvenicing more users. It's sort of like the situation in Paris as previously mentioned.

My view on a Hastings rapid transit line is that it should be a separate line that proceeds east along Hastings, then south along Willingdon connecting Metrotown. PNE, a major regional centre, is at the dead centre of the line and easily accessible from both directions. Population and development along the Hastings portion is served with connection either into downtown or to another major centre to the southeast. BCIT will have the option of a one seat ride into either downtown or Metrotown. You are also giving a third transfer option for Evergreen Line users to get into downtown in the Brentwood Town Ctr vicinity.

This idea gets even better; such a line can be extended even further westward to serve and relieve the very busy east-west 49th avenue corridor. There is so much demand and so many important destinations both on the way and even outside of the line area that can be served.

Why do you think certain cities that have constructed bypasses, ring roads, or other such infrastructure that go around the city core (whether closer or farther), that actually work really really well? You can't actually bring everyone through the city core, because 1. not everyone is actually going there, 2. there may be more of these people on a certain line, than people we actually convenience by creating a direct downtown link, and 3. you are creating a very crowded and much less easily manageable downtown core.

For similar reasons I'm not entirely agreeing with an extension of the M-Line past VCC-Clark and back into downtown Vancouver. There's quite a lot of redundancy created, and quite a lot of money wasted that could be put towards projects that benefit even more people. Do we really need such a line to go directly into downtown anyway? [Last comment overruled]

Not to mention the huge trouble of constructing Skytrain (underground i assume) along Main ST. This is Chinatown, folks. The short term impact would be so much bigger and so much worse than the construction of the Canada Line on Cambie, unless we use a much more expensive and deep TBM.

If linking VCC-Clark with Main Street via a separate connection has to be so necessary, perhaps a smaller people mover type connection such as a monorail or suspended monorail would work? I don't really find any huge need to prioritize a new $300m Skytrain connection, esp. when the money could be put into other more useful things.

Last edited by xd_1771; Jul 8, 2011 at 6:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #530  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 3:25 AM
bardak bardak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Consider Toronto. They never bothered to remove a transfer between the crosstown Bloor-Danforth line and the other subway lines into downtown, and yet the rapid transit system still manages to work very effectively.
Well They did try. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_(TTC)#Lower_Bay

Last edited by bardak; Jul 8, 2011 at 3:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #531  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 6:58 AM
jsbertram jsbertram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,245
I realise this is transit fantasies, but sometimes making changes to get a one-seat ride into downtown doesn't make much sense.

City of Vancouver is proposing a streetcar system - demonstrated during the Olympics - that has the additional benefit of connecting to stations of all three SkyTrain lines.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The yellow line is the streetcar line that the City wants to build to connect downtown with the Olympic Village & Granville Island.

The blue line is my extension of the Streetcar line to VCC-Clark.

These proposed streetcar lines would then have connections to the Canada Line at Olympic Station; to the Millennium Line at VCC-Clark; to the Expo and Millennium lines at Main St station; to the Canada, Expo and Millennium lines at Waterfront station.


Most commuters using the Millennium line might find it easier to transfer to the empty Streetcar at VCC-Clark (where it starts its journey) instead of fighting to get on an already-full train at Broadway-Commercial to get downtown.


Having the Streetcar available as an alternative to get downtown would be quite handy when the Expo line between Waterfront and Commercial gets shut down (as has happened several times in the last year or so). It may not have the capacity that a SkyTrain has, but it does have more capacity than a hastily-arranged Bus Shuttle when SkyTrain is gummed up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #532  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 8:36 AM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
I find it more likely the M-Line's extension will intersect the streetcar line at some point, so extending that line to create a spur to VCC-Clark may actually be unnecessary. It'll probably better to have the M-Line meet it around main/great northern way before turning southward to meet with whatever east-west corridor it takes for the sake of there being less property to interfere with on the way and integrating with other transit options.

That makes for a fourth good alternative then (the third [hopefully] being a Hastings-Willingdon-49th line that just seems to make so much more sense to me as the next rapid transit expansion in Vancouver - after other transit priorities are dealt with beforehand of course).

As much as it would make the interlining in Vancouver easy with the M-Line forming a loop, I find that extending the Millenium Line to loop back into downtown is silly; it just creates even more redundancy and wastes money, even if we indeed have exhausted all our other transit expansion options before building it. There is just so much better way of spending the money, and even without it, plenty of alternatives to choose from in the end. In fact, perhaps more people would be inconvenienced by such a thing. By looping M-Line trains back into downtown instead of continuing them down to UBC interlined with the Evergreen Line, you are removing a doubled frequency (with both M-Line and Evergreen Line trains) that may be necessary to effectively serve the Broadway corridor. Similar to how the Expo between Vancouver & Columbia has both Expo and Millenium trains and an important doubled (well not exactly doubled, more like 2 Expo/1 Millenium, but I think you get my point) frequency to serve this more important corridor.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #533  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 1:24 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 13,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Consider Toronto. They [corrected] don't have a transfer between the crosstown Bloor-Danforth line and the other subway lines into downtown, and yet the rapid transit system still manages to work very effectively.
You must be kidding. Yonge station is a complete disaster every morning. Lineups are often 2-3 trains deep and it takes a dedicated staff of nearly a dozen people just to perform crowd control. Trains show up at crush load capacity, take a few more people then depart, meanwhile the transfer line grows and grows.

The system is nowhere near effective, hence why there have been calls for a "downtown relief line" for decades.

Broadway is an absolute cakewalk in comparison.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #534  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 6:02 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
You must be kidding. Yonge station is a complete disaster every morning. Lineups are often 2-3 trains deep and it takes a dedicated staff of nearly a dozen people just to perform crowd control. Trains show up at crush load capacity, take a few more people then depart, meanwhile the transfer line grows and grows.

The system is nowhere near effective, hence why there have been calls for a "downtown relief line" for decades.

Broadway is an absolute cakewalk in comparison.
Curious... do they have flip-up seats on the subway in Toronto?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #535  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 6:30 PM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster View Post
You must be kidding. Yonge station is a complete disaster every morning. Lineups are often 2-3 trains deep and it takes a dedicated staff of nearly a dozen people just to perform crowd control. Trains show up at crush load capacity, take a few more people then depart, meanwhile the transfer line grows and grows.

The system is nowhere near effective, hence why there have been calls for a "downtown relief line" for decades.
Yonge Station? I'd think the lineups would be more likely to occur at Bloor Station on the southbound platform, but I'll believe you. Surprisingly the last time direct-to-downtown lines were tried in Toronto, it resulted only in great disaster for the whole system.

There will definitely be more alternatives on the Vancouver side of things so it may more easily work here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #536  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 6:54 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 13,131
No they don't have flip up seats, they sure should though. The new trains might have them but they havent entered service yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Yonge Station? I'd think the lineups would be more likely to occur at Bloor Station on the southbound platform, but I'll believe you. Surprisingly the last time direct-to-downtown lines were tried in Toronto, it resulted only in great disaster for the whole system.

There will definitely be more alternatives on the Vancouver side of things so it may more easily work here.
Bloor-Yonge is the name of the station, they are one in the same. The southbound Yonge platform is where the worst of the backups occur.

I would imagine they also occur at St George, but I cannot comment as that isnt part of my daily commute.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #537  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 7:00 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant - The New Downtown South
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Yonge Station? I'd think the lineups would be more likely to occur at Bloor Station on the southbound platform, but I'll believe you. Surprisingly the last time direct-to-downtown lines were tried in Toronto, it resulted only in great disaster for the whole system.
The point is that there are too many people being fed onto the Yonge Line. Millennium running down Broadway is the Toronto equivalent of Bloor, and we see the problems at Bloor and Yonge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #538  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 7:15 PM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
Well in Vancouver the case seems different. Toronto seems a bit more limited in options with only 2 alternatives into downtown, but we can provide better alternatives in Vancouver. Firstly, we can extend the Millennium from VCC-Clark back to waterfront, forming a redundant connection and potentially inconveniencing travellers along the Broadway corridor due to the lack of a double frequency train that may be necessary to serve this high-volume corridor... or we can put that $300 million towards the first phase of a new, more useful Skytrain line: a Hastings-Willingdon line connecting downtown, Brentwood, BCIT and Metrotown, with potential for expansion along the 49th Ave corridor. Not only are you then providing a 4th alternative for Millenium Line riders to get into downtown, but you are also benefiting significantly more people than otherwise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #539  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 7:47 PM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant - The New Downtown South
Posts: 8,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post
Well in Vancouver the case seems different. Toronto seems a bit more limited in options with only 2 alternatives into downtown, but we can provide better alternatives in Vancouver. Firstly, we can extend the Millennium from VCC-Clark back to waterfront, forming a redundant connection and potentially inconveniencing travellers along the Broadway corridor due to the lack of a double frequency train that may be necessary to serve this high-volume corridor...
How is it a redundant connection if it relieves pressure at an already crowded Broadway Station and Expo Line? And how much capacity do you think Broadway needs? A 3 minute headway along Broadway would give a capacity of over 10 000 pph. The Canada line has a capacity of 8000 pph while serving both Central Broadway and a much busier Downtown Vancouver.

The densities around M/EG line are low compared to the E Line and the C Line, so the M Line needs the drawing power of the whole Metro Core in order to realize its capacity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #540  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2011, 8:35 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,303
Ideally, after M-line is extended, everyone west of Commercial and some of the people from east of Commercial will all use Canada Line to get downtown.

There are known issues and costs associated with increasing the capacity of the Comerical-Broadway transfer point. The transfer point at Broadway-City Hall is yet to be constructed, so it can be built for high volumes from the start, and no doubt cheaper than retro-fitting Commercial-Broadway. A better transfer could encourage more riders to use Cambie to get downtown, even if they pass through Commercial to get there.

We are under-utilizing the second set of tracks into downtown, and until we maximize their usage, it seems pointless to add a third set. C-Line just needs trains added, it's not a hard problem to solve. Certainly nothing like extending platforms on Expo Line or building another track into downtown. I would expect that any project to extend M-line will include the cost of more C-line trains in its budget.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:37 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.