Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Lest anyone complain about Translink's propensity for Skytrain track closures in order to do track maintenance, this piece by Jarrett Walker on the sorry state of some US transit systems is worth a read. IMHO Translink is doing very well by managing to keep the system well maintained despite the provincially imposed budget crunch.

Toronto was often performing downtown subway maintenance, similar to the nature we had for SkyTrain (i.e. to improve reliability), which caused full closures of entire system portions on weekends.

I experienced the delays on our system for years and honestly I would say that the flexibility of our driverless technology has made a huge difference. I don't think Toronto would have been able to have trains enter the single track mere seconds after the train going in the opposite direction exited it like on our system here. There would certainly have been no flexibility to maintain Main St station access during the era of the Train2Main shuttle - not without serious penalties to mainline service.

[usog]

All the track ties that run along the expo line between Royal Oak and Edmonds being removed right now, wonder why they're doing it now.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by usog

All the track ties that run along the expo line between Royal Oak and Edmonds being removed right now, wonder why they're doing it now.

Weird as on TransLinks alerts page it says there's no rail replacement for this month.

It also says for Metrotown station "Next scheduled work to begin in May". Yeah ok, so they're going to take time off when they're already behind schedule...

[usog]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Weird as on TransLinks alerts page it says there's no rail replacement for this month.

It also says for Metrotown station "Next scheduled work to begin in May". Yeah ok, so they're going to take time off when they're already behind schedule...

Sorry, I mean the really, really old track ties for the track that runs underneath the guide way lol.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by usog

All the track ties that run along the expo line between Royal Oak and Edmonds being removed right now, wonder why they're doing it now.

The old Central Park Spur was still being used till 1996, but ultimately abandoned in 1997 (it was "officially" abandoned in 2001).

They are doing it now to build a multipurpose trail since the entire stretch between Edmonds and Nelsen is seeing rapid development. Should have been done 15 years ago.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Of interest:
http://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/edit...till-a-reality-in-a-mass-transit-future/

Also of interest. The Seattle Link light rail extension to the University opened on the weekend, ahead of schedule and under budget.

http://komonews.com/news/local/light-rail-extension-to-uw-opens

Those 2 new stations sure are nice!

[nname]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Also of interest. The Seattle Link light rail extension to the University opened on the weekend, ahead of schedule and under budget.

The project was 6 months ahead of its 8 years construction schedule and $200M under its $1.95B USD budget. The extension is about 5km long (entirely in bored tunnel) with 2 stations and a projected ridership of 21,500 by 2030.

Comparing this to Evergreen Line (4 years incl delays, $1.43B CAD, 11km, 6 stations, 70,000 by 2021), seems like we really got the value for the money....

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by nname

and a projected ridership of 21,500 by 2030.

This makes our proposed investment in Broadway rapid transit look puny by comparison.... when you look at the capital cost per added rider (which nobody actually does these days )

At least the University Link extension is likely to tie into a decently designed and potentially very competitive extension further north. I checked out some of the design videos. Looks like it's going to be almost fully grade-separated, and the designers aren't going to pull any of the shortsightedness that previous designers did on MLK way....

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

This makes our proposed investment in Broadway rapid transit look puny by comparison.... when you look at the capital cost per added rider (which nobody actually does these days )

At least the University Link extension is likely to tie into a decently designed and potentially very competitive extension further north. I checked out some of the design videos. Looks like it's going to be almost fully grade-separated, and the designers aren't going to pull any of the shortsightedness that previous designers did on MLK way....

That's good. Honestly, I don't have a problem with LRT if it's done properly, but after seeing how it's been implemented in the United States, I don't trust transit agencies with it. There are so many examples where it is not even rapid transit, with poor frequencies and signal priority missing.

The good thing with ALRT and grade separation is you know you will at least have rapid transit at the end of the day, even though it will be more expensive.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

The good thing with ALRT and grade separation is you know you will at least have rapid transit at the end of the day, even though it will be more expensive.

ALRT as embodied in our Skytrain system isn't just the grade separation, it's also the automation which makes high frequencies possible. That's a double whammy over conventional at-grade LRT, and arguably just as important to drawing ridership IMHO.

[nname]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

At least the University Link extension is likely to tie into a decently designed and potentially very competitive extension further north. I checked out some of the design videos. Looks like it's going to be almost fully grade-separated, and the designers aren't going to pull any of the shortsightedness that previous designers did on MLK way....

The Lynnwood Link is fully grade separated; the East Link is fully grade separated until past Downtown Bellevue, and a few at-grade crossings onward to Redmond (Overlake).

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Those 2 new stations sure are nice!

But crazy deep!

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

ALRT as embodied in our Skytrain system isn't just the grade separation, it's also the automation which makes high frequencies possible. That's a double whammy over conventional at-grade LRT, and arguably just as important to drawing ridership IMHO.

Very good point. Honestly, all systems should be automated where possible, although it's tough when you have transit unions.

[Sheba]

Does anyone know what's going on with the Canada Line City Center station? There's scaffolding over the stairs from street level down to ticket level.

[SOSS]

I like the statement regarding increasing the federal share for projects from 1/3 to 1/2. Hopefully the provincial government will rethink their firm stance of 1/3 funding share.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s first budget has pegged $11.9 billion in infrastructure investments over the next five years, split between public transit, housing, and green projects. It represents just a fraction of what the Liberals intend to spend over the next decade.

British Columbia will receive $460.5 million for public transit, which is 13.63% of the $3.38 billion allocated for the national Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. This includes $370 million for public transit projects in the Metro Vancouver region, an amount that has been termed as the federal government’s “initial” commitment.

But it is a drop in the bucket to cover the costs of Metro Vancouver’s multi-billion dollar transit projects.

Surrey wants to build a $2.6-billion, 27-kilometre-long light rail transit network while Vancouver wants a $1.9-billion, six-kilometre-long underground extension of SkyTrain’s Millennium Line beneath Broadway from VCC-Clark Station to Arbutus Street.

The remaining bulk of the funding needed for these two major projects will come from the second phase of infrastructure investments beginning in 2021, after the next federal election. This means construction on these projects will not likely begin for about another five years, but today’s budget at the very least provides funding to accelerate planning work.

“The budget’s commitment to provide federal funding to accelerate design and engineering work on major projects like the Broadway Subway and light-rail transit in Surrey is good news for the tens of thousands of people using transit in our region, and who desperately need expanded, more efficient service,” said Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson in a statement, on behalf TransLink’s Mayors’ Council.

The federal government says it will cover up to 50% of transit project construction costs, effectively replacing the existing one-third model used by previous governments.

“The new funding and flexibility dedicated to transit will help us get moving on improving transit in Vancouver and throughout the region, and will both grow our economy while protecting our environment,” Robertson continued. “The changes the federal government has made to transit funding reflect the needs of cities across Canada and is good news for transit riders.”

At this time, it is unclear whether Premier Christy Clark’s provincial government will be willing to increase its commitment levels beyond the 33% based on the traditional one-third funding model between levels of federal, provincial, and municipal governments.

However, a higher level of federal commitment could significantly lower the required municipal level commitment from TransLink. Last year’s failed transit plebiscite in Metro Vancouver would have raised $2.5 billion over 10 years through a regional half per cent tax, covering one-third of the Mayors’ Council ambitious $7.5 billion transportation plan.

SEE ALSO: Spending galore: $29.4 billion deficit set for Canada in 2016/17
Federal funding allocations for transit projects will also depend on the estimated ridership levels of the proposals presented by provincial and municipal proponents, which will likely benefit high-ridership projects like the Broadway subway and Surrey light rail transit.

Today’s federal budget also consists of $8.4 billion over five years for indigenous programs, including education, clean water treatment, housing, and social infrastructure.

There will be $3.4 billion to help maintain and improve national parks, federal airports, border infrastructure, harbours, and clean-up costs of contaminated federal sites. Stimulating green initiatives, a priority for this government, include $2 billion for a low carbon economy fund, $62.5 million for electric car subsidies, and $135 million for clean energy research.

The stimulus spending is expected to boost the national GDP by 0.5% in 2016 and 1% in 2017.

The spending commitments will push this year’s federal budget deficit to $29.4 billion, three times what was promised during the fall election campaign when Trudeau promised to invest $60 billion into infrastructure projects across the country over 10 years, including $20 billion towards public transit projects. This first slate of spending promises is expected to boost the national GDP by 0.5% in 2016 and 1% in 2017.

Altogether, over the next 10 years, Trudeau plans on spending $120 billion on infrastructure.

Vancity Buzz

[waves]

The new 50% funding model is great but $370 million is no where near the amount we need for either Broadway or Surrey.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by nname

The project was 6 months ahead of its 8 years construction schedule and $200M under its $1.95B USD budget. The extension is about 5km long (entirely in bored tunnel) with 2 stations and a projected ridership of 21,500 by 2030.

Comparing this to Evergreen Line (4 years incl delays, $1.43B CAD, 11km, 6 stations, 70,000 by 2021), seems like we really got the value for the money....

We get great value for our money for some reason. I actually think that if Seattle didn't already have the Transit Tunnel in downtown that they wanted to use (and keep mixed use), they probably would have built something like Skytrain. The design of most of their system and extensions is 90% of the way to fully segregated. But alas, sometimes you just have to work with what you already have.

It's still pretty remarkable by US experience that it is actually under the projected budget and timeline.

I also think that quoted ridership projection is small. When combined with North Link and Lynwood, I think they are projecting 70,000 from that segment, and 114,000 system wide (not counting East link, I think). It is very confusing how they break down the estimates by different segments of the same line...

I think once ST2 is fully built out (North, South, and East), they estimate all of Link will see 280,000 daily riders in 2030 (and that is without the impacts of the yet to be voted on ST3).

The interesting thing though, is if projects come in under budget, that surplus money is put back into the ST2 program and used on "bonus" plans. Like if University, Northgate, and Lynnwood save enough money, they can put that money into building to Everett immediately instead of making it a part of ST3.

Originally Posted by xd_1771

This makes our proposed investment in Broadway rapid transit look puny by comparison.... when you look at the capital cost per added rider (which nobody actually does these days )

At least the University Link extension is likely to tie into a decently designed and potentially very competitive extension further north. I checked out some of the design videos. Looks like it's going to be almost fully grade-separated, and the designers aren't going to pull any of the shortsightedness that previous designers did on MLK way....

The Northgate extension is already under construction (since 2012). They basically moved the tunnel boring machines from the University to Northgate mall right when they were done. One of the machines just had some trouble last month, but I think they are more than half done the tunneling portion of the project. It should be done in 2021.

And MLK Way isn't shortsighted. For being in a street median, it is very segregated. Most side streets are made right turn in/out only. And the street itself is still 4 lanes wide, with turning lanes at intersections where turning is permitted and has plenty of pedestrian space. It also passes through an area that is not too busy and runs parallel to I-5 and Rainier Ave about 1km away. Trains have signal priority and don't stop between stations. It's a great location to run at grade to save some money.

However, considering that the Pacific Highway south of Seatac is pretty much the same as MLK Way, and they are going to run it elevated there, I'm surprised they did run it at grade on MLK.

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

And MLK Way isn't shortsighted. For being in a street median, it is very segregated. Most side streets are made right turn in/out only. And the street itself is still 4 lanes wide, with turning lanes at intersections where turning is permitted and has plenty of pedestrian space. It also passes through an area that is not too busy and runs parallel to I-5 and Rainier Ave about 1km away. Trains have signal priority and don't stop between stations. It's a great location to run at grade to save some money.

However, considering that the Pacific Highway south of Seatac is pretty much the same as MLK Way, and they are going to run it elevated there, I'm surprised they did run it at grade on MLK.

And yet MLK way has bean an accident magnet. Headlines like "Link Light Rail collision" or "Man struck by light-rail train" have become so common in Seattle media that it's common to find only one news outlet doing coverage on an LRT accident when it happens.

It's pretty understandable, to be honest - on-street running is one of the chief flexibilities of light rail systems, and you're right that MLK did seem to present a great opportunity to save on the capital by doing what is seen as "maximizing" the design flexibility of light rail technology. So it really is a matter of curiousity why no such on-street designs have been included in any future extensions of Link so far (including the new extension south of Seatac, despite that - as you said - it's practically the same as MLK). It seems like Seattle has realized the inherent drawbacks of an on-street alignment. The compromises in safety, reliability and travel times are making a wreck of what's supposed to be a "regional" transit system and a major replacement for express buses - and after experiencing these compromises, Sound Transit just isn't interested in building any more MLKs and living with the drawbacks and damage repair costs. I think we oughta learn from that.

[ssiguy]

Apparently a lot of the reason why US cities go with LRT & other non-grade separated systems is due to the federal government's funding.

A grade separated system has a higher threshold in terms of funding so ridership must be higher for grade separation than non-grade separation. I don't know the inns and outs but as an example............if an at grade LRT was expecting 30,000 passengers a day it might get funding but a grade separated system with 30,000 passengers wouldn't.

The really weird thing is that if both those systems of 30k/day were to cost the same amount of money, it wouldn't matter..........the LRT would get funding but the Metro/subway system wouldn't.

[aberdeen5698]

Here's another piece by Jarrett Walker that seems as if it could have been written about Translink, which has become a whipping boy for problems that are mostly beyond its control.

Mad at how bad your transit service is? Maybe the problem is with people and cultures at the agency now, but maybe it’s because of decisions made at higher levels — regional, state, and federal — often outside the agency. It’s easier if all those people if the frontline staff takes the blame, and are trained to just apologize all day. But that never solves the problem, and what’s more, it’s abuse.