PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : $14 Billion For Transit



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 1:21 AM
i guess this pretty much kills any of our opposition to Gateway....

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 1:21 AM
Awesome! Well, if it's true. I hope the poor tunnel workers want to stick around with all the shit the unions put them through. Are they still talking about tunneling down Broadway? I would have almost guaranteed that 10th Avenue would be the preferred route.

I think they would kill for any open job.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 1:22 AM
If only the province had this kind of attitude for the Canada Line, instead of contracting it out.

officedweller
Jan 15, 2008, 1:28 AM
From my perspective I hope they use Sweet Leilani for the Evergreen Line first and simultaneously start the M-Line extension (I seriously hope they do not rename this line the UBC Line) as cut and cover under 10th Ave, then swing back and use Sweet Leilani for the commercial/retail sensitive part of the M-Line - on 10th Ave. near the West 10th village. A TBM staging area / starting point could be built near the University Golf Course to head eastwards to meet the cut and cover, then head back or be disassembled and the second tunnel bored.

*****

WRT the streetcar, that has always been a City initiative because it duplicates Translink routes. It's really a City pet project. As I've mentioned before, my view is that it would operate as a feeder line to the numerous rapid transit stations along the streetcar route (Waterfront, Yaletown-Roundhouse, Main Street, Olympic Village). The only unique destinations along the streetcar line would be Granville Island, Vanier Park and Stanley Park. That's a tough sell when weighed against areas with no rapid transit.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 1:33 AM
Apparently, Derek Corrigan wasn't invited to the announcement :D and on CKNW, he's saying it's too expensive - that we cannot afford it.

squeezied
Jan 15, 2008, 1:54 AM
^^ haha thats funny

bils
Jan 15, 2008, 1:54 AM
Apparently, Derek Corrigan wasn't invited to the announcement :D and on CKNW, he's saying it's too expensive - that we cannot afford it.

that's precisely why he wasn't invited :haha:

giallo
Jan 15, 2008, 1:54 AM
This news is a perfect political move. Who won't vote for the liberals after hearing this? I can't imagine anyone not wanting to see these projects go through.
Saying that, I'm really proud of our province and government for putting this kind of infrastructure on the front burner. It's a huge commitment, but one that most cities could only dream of.

excel
Jan 15, 2008, 1:57 AM
Lots of great news. Thanks for all the posts.

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 2:19 AM
Wow...just wow. I totally did not see this one coming at all, I am completely blown away.

The plan certainly has a few gaps, notable no WCE expansion, and some of the BRT lines should be connected together (i.e. the one that crosses Golden Ears should go to Langley Town Center).

I am VERY happy the line is going all the way to UBC, not just to Granville or whatever. But I'm glad I'll be done my degree by 2011 and wont be lining up for the B-Line in 2019...

The Evergreen Line will hopefully be SkyTrain. The current Operations Centre @ Edmonds cannot handle so many extra trains (UBC Line, Expo Expansion), the Coquitlam yard seems like a sensible place do build another one (lord knows the West Side NIMBYS would not tolerate one...).

I am someone surprised they are not going under 10th avenue...I thought it was preffered as Broadway has all sorts of utilities and sewers under it. It also seems like a Waste to tunnel bore the whole thing, I guess cut-and-cover is just too much of a hot potato after the Cambie fiasco....


I'm temped to send a snarky email to the "Underground Bus Loop" person at UBC who laughed at my suggestion that the UBC Line might be announced before 2015.

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 2:23 AM
oh, and good news about the smartcards, hopefully they'll switch to a pay-by-distance rather than a zone system, so people living near the zone boundaries don't keep getting screwed over.

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 2:32 AM
Even though I am a proud provincial liberal supporter, I have to say I see the thin line of thread in this. It is a perfect political setup. Who will we look towards in the polls? I'm sure many of us have answered this already in this topic. But then here NDP doesn't respond really well... all I heard so far was for that Transportation critic who didn't really reject the plan... just said I wanted to see fares go down -_- I was expecting someone saying it's only a package of all the goods planned for the region together...

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 2:32 AM
I'm temped to send a snarky email to the "Underground Bus Loop" person at UBC who laughed at my suggestion that the UBC Line might be announced before 2015.

lol, i can just imagine it right now....

The designer is sitting on his couch, working on the design of the underground bus loop with the blueprints in front of him on his coffee table. He turns on the tv, and the News Hour comes on with "$14 billion transit plan: UBC Line, etc."

what i've always imagined is a multi-level underground transit centre at UBC. You have the ground level entrance, followed by the bus loop level as well as the SkyTrain station concourse. You have 12 fare gates, and beyond that are 6 escalators leading to the train platform.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 2:33 AM
Even though I am a proud provincial liberal supporter, I have to say I see the thin line of thread in this. It is a perfect political setup. Who will we look towards in the polls? I'm sure many of us have answered this already in this topic. But then here NDP doesn't respond really well... all I heard so far was for that Transportation critic who didn't really reject the plan... just said I wanted to see fares go down -_- I was expecting someone saying it's only a package of all the goods planned for the region together...

The existing zone fares wouldn't matter with the introduction of smart card and a distance-traveled fare payment system.

I heard the station platforms on the Expo would be extended by 2010!


I'm amazed that the News Hour at 6 spent 26 minutes of their 42 minute program on this story.

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 2:55 AM
The existing zone fares wouldn't matter with the introduction of smart card and a distance-traveled fare payment system.

I heard the station platforms on the Expo would be extended by 2010!


I'm amazed that the News Hour at 6 spent 26 minutes of their 42 minute program on this story.

Go tell that to the NDP transit critic...

oooo i like expansion. Yeah I had a cousin from hk come here for the entire summer (her parents forced her) and when we past under a skytrain guideway in car... I said that's our SkyTrain... she was like... uhhh is that it? why is it so short? and I'm sure u know HOW LONG the MTR trains are... yet they are still packed....

I'm amazed how they spent so long on the story too... I was expected for CTV to do the same 'cuz they usually make a big deal out of not-so-big things... like having a Canucks game with like three reporters down at GM Place... ahem.

alta-bc
Jan 15, 2008, 3:02 AM
Everybody is talking that the Evergreen Line will now be Skytrain. Who said that? For the last couple years all the proposals looked to be LRT. Is the route changing too?

Interesting that they are extending the Expo line platforms, makes me think even more what a shortsighted mistake the 40m platforms on the Canada Line will be.

Great news though, my jaw dropped when I heard the announcements today. Looks like our bus system will get a major overhaul too.

Stingray2004
Jan 15, 2008, 3:11 AM
Well, I was only expecting the Evergreen Line announcement this month.

The proposed new rapid transit lines are still conceptual... but now have a firm 40% provincial funding commitment.

It's important to note, that both of the previous federal administrations have come on board financially on any provincial initiative over the past five years.

During the next 12-year period, this strategic plan may also be viewed as a bit static... new initiatives may also be put in place during that time frame... for example, new WCE routes, streetcar routes, etc.....that's what history has shown!

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 3:11 AM
Everybody is talking that the Evergreen Line will now be Skytrain. Who said that? For the last couple years all the proposals looked to be LRT. Is the route changing too?



1) the route is the northern one, for which skytrain is a posibility

2) the price has jumped up significantly, skytain is more expensive than a glorified streetcar

3) provides an opportunity for a new skytrain maintanance center at coquitlam. the current one cannt handle all the extra trains from expansions and capacity upgrades

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 3:11 AM
Interesting that they are extending the Expo line platforms, makes me think even more what a shortsighted mistake the 40m platforms on the Canada Line will be.

I told you so. -_-

AKA-007
Jan 15, 2008, 3:14 AM
What that NDP transit critic failed to mention is that the overall population density in HK is far greater than metro vancouver. I guess if we had a population of 7 million we might have a system comparable to the MTR.

On another note, it would be nice if the North Shore got some rapid bus improvements. So far it looks like it's probably going to get some much needed new busses. The extra seabus was probably added into the $14b to make that number just that much larger. The new seabus could increase frequency, but not travel times.

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 3:31 AM
What that NDP transit critic failed to mention is that the overall population density in HK is far greater than metro vancouver. I guess if we had a population of 7 million we might have a system comparable to the MTR.

On another note, it would be nice if the North Shore got some rapid bus improvements. So far it looks like it's probably going to get some much needed new busses. The extra seabus was probably added into the $14b to make that number just that much larger. The new seabus could increase frequency, but not travel times.

Exactly my thoughts... I would like to see one from West Vancouver - North Vancouver - then perhaps to Burnaby. There are many bus routes to go from Northshore to Vancouver Downtown (and vice versa) but not many routes from Vancouver to the rest or the region.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 3:42 AM
I'm wondering if the rapid bus platforms would be similar to what they have in Bogota. Platform doors (dreaming), with turnstiles:
http://richmondva.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/brt_bogota.jpg

http://www.depapaya.org/mm/image/transmilenio%20bogota.jpg

http://bogowiki.org/img/transmilenio%20entrada%20a%20estacion%20calle%20127

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 3:53 AM
I would want more... HAHA... I think we need to shine our BRT routes in Vancouver. Make the stations more like the... umm... Sea Island Centre Station with the platform doors =) That would look really nice around Lougheed Hwy - Hwy 1 corridor. And it can also act as the "rapid transit southeast corridor"

alta-bc
Jan 15, 2008, 4:19 AM
Here is a quick photoshopped 6-car MkII train...

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/alta-bc/MkIIskytrain6Car.jpg

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 4:32 AM
Curious too as to why they would show that route on their map. I guess it's probably to have a stop as close as possible to Guildford even though it's almost a mile away. Still odd even though it's conceptual.

theres probably more ridership just south of guildford than north of it?

there isn't much free route land near guildford that i can think off

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 4:37 AM
here's a pretty good graphic of what is being planned, from the Vancouver Sun:
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3200/87644015hl5.jpg

bils
Jan 15, 2008, 4:52 AM
with the de-centralization of metro vancouver, do you guys think we should be putting less emphasis on moving people solely into the downtown core? the resulting vast majority of rapid transit in our region extends in a NW-SE direction.

has a SW marine drive route ever been explored? i'm thinking marine drive station (@ cambie) => new west... seems like that would add a beautiful connection from YVR to all points of the lower mainland.

AKA-007
Jan 15, 2008, 4:55 AM
6 car trains...lets see...

approx 120m? platforms accomodating 6 car MkII trains for Expo Line

VS

40m platforms accomodating "toy trains" for Canada Line

I'd like to see a capacity and length comparisson between Canada Line, Expo line and Expo line expanded trains just to see how many people we can cram into these trains when we have to.

Also, would we be able to fit 8 car MKI trains into these epanded stations? Or would that make the trains too large to handle?

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 4:58 AM
with the de-centralization of metro vancouver, do you guys think we should be putting less emphasis on moving people solely into the downtown core?

Are you talking about a Los Angelesization of Metro Van?

bils
Jan 15, 2008, 4:59 AM
Are you talking about a Los Angelesization of Metro Van?

no i mean, with densification occurring not only downtown but also, if not mostly, in the burbs

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:00 AM
hmm, for the Slurrey (:p) extension, it could run along 96th and then turn north towards Guilford once it passes that park. That would keep it near the more dense parts of Surrey and areas that can be really densified, rather than just sprawl along 104th. I also think it would be curious to see how they integrate the station with Guilford Mall, if they choose to go there. Would be kinda neat to have the station built into the mall.

At the same time, running along 96th they miss the giant Superstore, which while not that big of a deal, is still slightly saddening. I don't have a problem with big box stores as long as they are served by transit, this is a BIG big-box store, and as such should be served by large volume transit, in addition to the parking lot it has.

As for the UBC run, keep it underground until you get to the university.


104th is served pretty well by transit now

in a car from guildford to Surrey Central is less than 10 minutes - its not too far - so people can get to skytrain as it is now within a reasonable amount of time by existing busses along 104th

i think running along fraser is the best route with feeder busses to the stations

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:03 AM
with the de-centralization of metro vancouver, do you guys think we should be putting less emphasis on moving people solely into the downtown core? the resulting vast majority of rapid transit in our region extends in a NW-SE direction.

has a SW marine drive route ever been explored? i'm thinking marine drive station (@ cambie) => new west... seems like that would add a beautiful connection from YVR to all points of the lower mainland.

yesterday, when we knew about the long-awaited announcement was going to be today i was actually predicting a lot was being planned for the Fraser Valley. Sadly, that isn't happening...but what is being proposed is definitely welcomed and needed. Surrey and the Fraser Valley need more rapid transit rail (and the WCE needs a rehaul). so yea, i do agree that we should be focusing more on other areas rather than Downtown Vancouver...these Transit 2020 improvements should be the last of what the Downtown core will ever receive for a long time to come.

with regards to the SW marine drive route, i've always envisioned some sort of diesel service similar to the Bombardier Talent trains used in Ottawa's O-Train. Either that, an upgrade of the Arbutus streetcar to light rail and an extension of it to Marine Drive Station and to New Westminster SkyTrain Station via Marine Drive.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:13 AM
6 car trains...lets see...

approx 120m? platforms accomodating 6 car MkII trains for Expo Line

VS

40m platforms accomodating "toy trains" for Canada Line

I'd like to see a capacity and length comparisson between Canada Line, Expo line and Expo line expanded trains just to see how many people we can cram into these trains when we have to.

Also, would we be able to fit 8 car MKI trains into these epanded stations? Or would that make the trains too large to handle?

Each Mark II car is 18-metres in length, so that should mean a 30-metre platform extension is being planned...up from today's 80-metres to about 110-metres. And yes, we would be able to fit 8-car Mark I's into these extended station platforms. In fact, you could fit one more car than that: 9-car Mark I.


1-car Mark I (12 metres): 80 passengers
(||||||||||||-

1-car Mark II (18 metres): 130 passengers:
(||||||||||||||||||-

1-car Canada Line (20.5 metres): 167 passengers (the recent 400 passenger train figure is bogus)
(||||||||||||||||||||-

----------------------------

6-car Mark I train (72-metres): 480 passengers
(||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||)

Future 9-car Mark I train (108-metres): 720 passengers
(||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||)

2-car Mark II train (36 metres): 260 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)

4-car Mark II train (72-metres): 520 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)=(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)

Future 6-car Mark II train (108-metres): 780 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)=(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)=(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)

1-car 2009 Canada Line (41-metres): 334 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||||)

Future Canada Line train with 10-metre middle C-car (51-metres): ~400 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||||)

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 5:15 AM
104th is served pretty well by transit now

in a car from guildford to Surrey Central is less than 10 minutes - its not too far - so people can get to skytrain as it is now within a reasonable amount of time by existing busses along 104th

i think running along fraser is the best route with feeder busses to the stations

I would have prefered it go south towards Newton, where it can reach out to both Cloverdale/Langley and S. Surrey/White Rock, and perhaps also one day hook up with a commuter rail line on the Souther Railway line.

What's more, it would help to redirect most of the S. Surrey/White Rock commuter buses towards Skytrain instead of the C-Line, considering the Skytrain is going to be doubled in capacity, whereas the C-Line is stuck with its 40m limits, and without having to squeeze though the bottleneck of the Deas Tunnel.

AKA-007
Jan 15, 2008, 5:20 AM
I had an abstract thought about 2020. I thought of 2 possible states of mind when we reach that end date for all of this. We could be using this utopia of expanded transit lines and be able to get everywhere in this city...or we could look at it and say "make more." If vancouver expands and densifies even more over the next 12 years, there will be an even greater demand on rapid transit. Will this result in us looking at these new rapid bus routes and thinking "that is a good place for a train." Or make new lines elsewhere in the LM.

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:26 AM
$2.8 billion to build a new, 12 kilometre line from Broadway Station to University of British Columbia by 2020

so its not an m-line extension but a complete new line?

Canadian Mind
Jan 15, 2008, 5:27 AM
Each Mark II car is 18-metres in length, so that should mean a 30-metre platform extension is being planned...up from today's 80-metres to about 110-metres. And yes, we would be able to fit 8-car Mark I's into these extended station platforms. In fact, you could fit one more car than that: 9-car Mark I.


1-car Mark I (12 metres): 80 passengers
(||||||||||||-

1-car Mark II (18 metres): 130 passengers:
(||||||||||||||||||-

1-car Canada Line (20.5 metres): 167 passengers (the recent 400 passenger train figure is bogus)
(||||||||||||||||||||-

----------------------------

6-car Mark I train (72-metres): 480 passengers
(||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||)

Future 9-car Mark I train (108-metres): 720 passengers
(||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||-||||||||||||)

2-car Mark II train (36 metres): 260 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)

4-car Mark II train (72-metres): 520 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)=(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)

Future 6-car Mark II train (108-metres): 780 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)=(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)=(||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||)

1-car 2009 Canada Line (41-metres): 334 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||||)

Future Canada Line train with 10-metre middle C-car (51-metres): ~400 passengers
(||||||||||||||||||||-||||||||||-||||||||||||||||||||)

Can there be 9 cars in a Mark I train? I thought they too had to be pairs of two. And what about Mark II trains with a middle C car? What capacity would those trains have?

Also, why 110 Meter platforms instead of 120 Meter platforms (As I recall reading somewhere they were capable of being extended too?)

AKA-007
Jan 15, 2008, 5:27 AM
thanks mr.x

MistyMountainHop
Jan 15, 2008, 5:29 AM
so its not an m-line extension but a complete new line?

No, it's an extension (SkyTrain).

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:31 AM
I had an abstract thought about 2020. I thought of 2 possible states of mind when we reach that end date for all of this. We could be using this utopia of expanded transit lines and be able to get everywhere in this city...or we could look at it and say "make more." If vancouver expands and densifies even more over the next 12 years, there will be an even greater demand on rapid transit. Will this result in us looking at these new rapid bus routes and thinking "that is a good place for a train." Or make new lines elsewhere in the LM.

this is only the tip of the iceberg of whats needed

some predict in the next 50 years Vancouver could be home to 10 million

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:31 AM
No, it's an extension (SkyTrain).

it doesn't say that though - it says a New line from Broadway

Clark isn't mentioned ??

Canadian Mind
Jan 15, 2008, 5:34 AM
10 million by 2060? I'd venture to guess 6-8 million, but anything is possible I suppose.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:34 AM
Can there be 9 cars in a Mark I train? I thought they too had to be pairs of two. And what about Mark II trains with a middle C car? What capacity would those trains have?

Also, why 110 Meter platforms instead of 120 Meter platforms (As I recall reading somewhere they were capable of being extended too?)

Mark I trains don't have to be in pairs of two, it's the Mark II's that need to be.

The Mark II middle C-cars should have approximately the same capacity as a A or B-car Mark II, which is 130 passengers.

I'm assuming it's a platform extension to 110-metres since they said 6-car Mark II. So, 6 x 18 metres = 108-metres.

I believe officedweller said the platforms were expandable to 8-car Mark I, which is 96 metres. For the $3.1 billion price tag they're putting on the Expo SkyTrain Line, which includes a 6-km extension, i'm guessing they're planning some very extensive modifications and expansions (perhaps even entire station renovations for every station?)....doubling the capacity from today's 16,000 pphpd to 30,000-35,000 pphpd.

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 5:35 AM
I had an abstract thought about 2020. I thought of 2 possible states of mind when we reach that end date for all of this. We could be using this utopia of expanded transit lines and be able to get everywhere in this city...or we could look at it and say "make more." If vancouver expands and densifies even more over the next 12 years, there will be an even greater demand on rapid transit. Will this result in us looking at these new rapid bus routes and thinking "that is a good place for a train." Or make new lines elsewhere in the LM.

one thing at a time. turning all those Express Buses into RT would be absurd at this point. I believe all this new transit will serve as a catalyst for a lot of densification throughout the region (provided no inane political bickering), but I certainly don't think we'll look back and say this is a bad decision. More along the lines of "time for a couple more lines..."

Edit:Or were you asking whether we think the bus routes will turn into RT, rather than saying they should be turned into RT right now? In readign your question again, I think I might have misinterpreted it.

bils, I don't quite understand your concern about too much for downtown. Really, the only new project is the Expo upgrade, and it's pretty obvious that its needed given how packed the trains are. The new SFU BRT is simply an upgrade of existing bus lines. I guess you could argue the Canada line is also a project, but again, this doesnt just serve downtown, and will be much more useful one it connects to the Mline at Cambie.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:37 AM
it doesn't say that though - it says a New line from Broadway

Clark isn't mentioned ??

if you look carefully at the map the ministry has provided, it starts at VCC-Clarke Station. as well, the Premier and Falcon said it would be SkyTrain and bored underneath around Broadway. The actual route is still pending, but it is quite obvious that it "has to be SkyTrain", as Campbell and Falcon mentioned, and that it will start at VCC-Clarke. Construction could start as early as 2009, when the tunnel boring machine for the Canada Line is free.


The new SFU BRT is simply an upgrade of existing bus lines.

It's interesting to see how the ministry added the already long-planned Hastings/SFU B-Line and 41st Avenue/Joyce Station B-Line to their plan....nothing more than a reannouncement.

bils
Jan 15, 2008, 5:37 AM
this is only the tip of the iceberg of whats needed

some predict in the next 50 years Vancouver could be home to 10 million

we'd have to grow at a rate of 3% for that to occur.... which is possible i suppose...

there's prolly an upper limit/saturation point for metro vancouver.

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 5:40 AM
this is only the tip of the iceberg of whats needed

some predict in the next 50 years Vancouver could be home to 10 million

God forbid. The world's, and hence the region's, population couldn't top out soon enough.

What are their population projections for the other major cities around the world by that time?

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 5:41 AM
It's interesting to see how the ministry added the already long-planned Hastings/SFU B-Line and 41st Avenue/Joyce Station B-Line to their plan....nothing more than a reannouncement.


...and the Canada Line! It's been u/c for over 3 years! :haha:

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:42 AM
God forbid. The world's, and hence the region's, population couldn't top out soon enough.

What are their population projections for the other major cities around the world by that time?

by then, Hong Kong would've filled in Victoria Harbour until it was no more than a small stream that you could simply hop over to the other side....new population: 60 million.:haha:

AKA-007
Jan 15, 2008, 5:43 AM
10 million by 2060? I'd venture to guess 6-8 million, but anything is possible I suppose.

I guess if our population reaches that we may have that 80% transit ridership that that NDP transit critic was talking about. I won't be driving in that.

one thing at a time. turning all those Express Buses into RT would be absurd at this point. I believe all this new transit will serve as a catalyst for a lot of densification throughout the region (provided no inane political bickering), but I certainly don't think we'll look back and say this is a bad decision. More along the lines of "time for a couple more lines..."

Edit:Or were you asking whether we think the bus routes will turn into RT, rather than saying they should be turned into RT right now? In readign your question again, I think I might have misinterpreted it.



I was thinking that, given time, these bus routes might turn into RT given densification. I'm not critisizing the current expansions. I think the're the best thing to come to the LM. I'm just thinking 30 or 40 years down the road.

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:43 AM
if you look carefully at the map the ministry has provided, it starts at VCC-Clarke Station. as well, the Premier and Falcon said it would be SkyTrain and bored underneath around Broadway. The actual route is still pending, but it is quite obvious that it "has to be SkyTrain", as Campbell and Falcon mentioned, and that it will start at VCC-Clarke. Construction could start as early as 2009, when the tunnel boring machine for the Canada Line is free.




It's interesting to see how the ministry added the already long-planned Hastings/SFU B-Line and 41st Avenue/Joyce Station B-Line to their plan....nothing more than a reannouncement.

i am just nerding out as it seems some in here are ;) :haha:

some of y'all are going to minute details on a little info thats is all still speculative

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:45 AM
I guess if our population reaches that we may have that 80% transit ridership that that NDP transit critic was talking about. I won't be driving in that.



I was thinking that, given time, these bus routes might turn into RT given densification. I'm not critisizing the current expansions. I think the're the best thing to come to the LM. I'm just thinking 30 or 40 years down the road.

Our region would need to be a lot more denser to achieve 80% ridership. We're talking about Hong Kong density....so, i'll say about 70 million people living in Metro Vancouver.:D

At 6-8 million people, you'll probably reach 30-35%.

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:48 AM
i heard that number from some famous architect somewhere

he said Vancouver needs to prepare now and anticipate being a city of 30 million in the future - this was back in the 90's when he said it

and that he said Vancouver could easily become 8-10 million in the next 50 years

and as such we need to put in what is needed and prepare blah blah blah and stop thinkinf we are some little fishing village like some people want to think we are

bils
Jan 15, 2008, 5:51 AM
8-10M in 50 years would require a huge amount of single family housing in the region to be demolished and replaced with highrises (a la hong kong). i find it highly doubtful this will occur in 50 years.

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 5:51 AM
I guess if our population reaches that we may have that 80% transit ridership that that NDP transit critic was talking about. I won't be driving in that.



I was thinking that, given time, these bus routes might turn into RT given densification. I'm not critisizing the current expansions. I think the're the best thing to come to the LM. I'm just thinking 30 or 40 years down the road.

ah, gotcha. Yes, I assume they would be likely candidates. There's already BRT planned because demand is strong, and it makes sense to build where demand is strong.

It wont be long before our transit maps start looking like a plate of spaghetti :banana:

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 5:53 AM
i heard that number from some famous architect somewhere

he said Vancouver needs to prepare now and anticipate being a city of 30 million in the future - this was back in the 90's when he said it

and that he said Vancouver could easily become 8-10 million in the next 50 years

and as such we need to put in what is needed and prepare blah blah blah and stop thinkinf we are some little fishing village like some people want to think we are

Was he making those projections based on proportional growth over the last 50 years?

The world's population is expected to top out in the next 50 years. I guess there will still be a flood of people from the overpopulated regions of the world to the relatively sparse.

David
Jan 15, 2008, 5:53 AM
It's interesting to see how the ministry added the already long-planned Hastings/SFU B-Line and 41st Avenue/Joyce Station B-Line to their plan....nothing more than a reannouncement.


Based on watching the BCTV news report, I think the plan for these 7 "RapidBus" routes include bus-only lanes, which greatly differentiates the plans from regular B-Lines and certainly warrants a "reannouncement"!!

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:54 AM
8-10M in 50 years would require a huge amount of single family housing in the region to be demolished and replaced with highrises (a la hong kong). i find it highly doubtful this will occur in 50 years.

that was part of the whole discussion

he said we need to stop spreading east making single family homes and start building highrises and dense town centers now and we should start now as if this population will occur

instead of hitting 30 -50 years in the future and being screwed with the small town thinking that goes on because he invisioned Vancouver ebing an important city in the future and in order to live up to that we need to start planning and doing today

he seemed to be - build it and they will come

bils
Jan 15, 2008, 5:54 AM
It wont be long before our transit maps start looking like a plate of spaghetti :banana:

vancouver 2060, except replace japanese characters with chinese ones of course :banana:

http://web.syr.edu/~eihsieh/tokyosubway.gif

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:55 AM
i heard that number from some famous architect somewhere

he said Vancouver needs to prepare now and anticipate being a city of 30 million in the future - this was back in the 90's when he said it

and that he said Vancouver could easily become 8-10 million in the next 50 years

and as such we need to put in what is needed and prepare blah blah blah and stop thinkinf we are some little fishing village like some people want to think we are

Hmmm....what we need is a communist crackdown of Hong Kong, and a Chinese invasion of Taiwan...maybe Japan as well! That should do it.:tup:

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 5:56 AM
vancouver 2060, except replace japanese characters with chinese ones of course :banana:

http://web.syr.edu/~eihsieh/tokyosubway.gif

in that case, instead of spaghetti we'll say they look like a plate of chow mein. :haha:

SpongeG
Jan 15, 2008, 5:56 AM
Was he making those projections based on proportional growth over the last 50 years?

The world's population is expected to top out in the next 50 years. I guess there will still be a flood of people from the overpopulated regions of the world to the relatively sparse.

no it was a discussion and i can't remember the specifics - it was on CBC radio in the 90's

and i think it was a series about the coming millenium and he was predictiing based on his own thoughts and dreams i suppose

but his ideas were right great - he was against sprawl and said we need to densify and go up in order to house what could be a city 5 times the size without expanding the foot print of what we have

Canadian Mind
Jan 15, 2008, 5:58 AM
Hmm, in the long run, when we can't lengthen stations anymore, would it be feasible to widen them? Thus allowing more trains to be in the station at any one moment in time, which means greater frequency of trains. For instance; when there is a station with two platforms for a single direction, and there is a train once every minute and a half, any one train could be in a station for up to three minutes to load and unload before leaving.

Jared
Jan 15, 2008, 6:00 AM
well, there's the physical space issue, I'm not how many stations would actually have space to do this. It would be pretty complicated for somewhere like Main Street Station, which runs through a building.

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 6:05 AM
vancouver 2060, except replace japanese characters with chinese ones of course :banana:

http://web.syr.edu/~eihsieh/tokyosubway.gif

Just my guess, but is the pink region on the map the downtown area?

Wouldn't better urban planning have travel over these shorter distances take place on surface transit (such as streetcars) instead of this convoluted subway network that they'd have to dig so many holes and make passengers go down and up so many levels for?

Rusty Gull
Jan 15, 2008, 6:45 AM
Some of the key lines are actually elevated -- including the red circle, which is a JR loop line. It would take you to many of the key destinations in Tokyo, including Shinjuku, Shibuya, and Ueno.

EastVanMark
Jan 15, 2008, 7:09 AM
i guess this pretty much kills any of our opposition to Gateway....

Yes, and I think that some on here owe Minister Falcon an apology.

EastVanMark
Jan 15, 2008, 7:17 AM
Apparently, Derek Corrigan wasn't invited to the announcement :D and on CKNW, he's saying it's too expensive - that we cannot afford it.

Derek Corrigan has got to be the biggest f*ckup in politics today... (maybe he should run for the NDP leadership).:haha:

This comes from the same guy who helped bumble, and fumble away the Olympic Oval, and now doesn't like the cost of this transit deal. How dumb do the citizens of Burnaby have to have been to have voted this obvious nimby moron into office?
:shrug:

G-Slice
Jan 15, 2008, 7:22 AM
Some of the key lines are actually elevated -- including the red circle, which is a JR loop line. It would take you to many of the key destinations in Tokyo, including Shinjuku, Shibuya, and Ueno.

The red circle is the Toei Oedo Line, actually, and it doesn't pass through Shibuya. The JR Yamanote line is the dotted black and white loop line. Ironically, the Oedo line is not elevated and actually contains some of the deepest stations in the whole network. BURN!

All that is true, but at the same time, I am kiiiiind of making fun of all the nerdy internet nitpicking that goes on here, hehe...

EastVanMark
Jan 15, 2008, 7:30 AM
i heard that number from some famous architect somewhere

he said Vancouver needs to prepare now and anticipate being a city of 30 million in the future - this was back in the 90's when he said it

and that he said Vancouver could easily become 8-10 million in the next 50 years

and as such we need to put in what is needed and prepare blah blah blah and stop thinkinf we are some little fishing village like some people want to think we are

Did this guy hang out a lot with either or both Marc Emery or Tommy Chong by any chance?:haha: :drunk: :jester:

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 7:32 AM
Yes, and I think that some on here owe Minister Falcon an apology.

lol, somebody drag queetz back here. he's the one that's been calling the death threats.

i guess some road capacity is needed, and Gateway is just that. i would think all the opposition against that project helped produce what we saw today.

Canadian Mind
Jan 15, 2008, 8:06 AM
I was one of the few people on here that liked gateway, being one of the members that has to travel from Horseshoe Bay to Surrey on a reasonably regular basis, and there isn't much of an alternative to driving it. Thats my personal like for it. I also like it because I do think that freight shipping and goods distribution in Vancouver needs to be upgraded dramatically if Vancouver is to continue to prosper.

Now add this 14 billion dollar announcement, and I'm in love with the Liberals again.

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 8:19 AM
Exactly my thoughts... I would like to see one from West Vancouver - North Vancouver - then perhaps to Burnaby. There are many bus routes to go from Northshore to Vancouver Downtown (and vice versa) but not many routes from Vancouver to the rest or the region.

The North Shore should also have gotten something out of it, like a B-Line that combines the present 239 and 130 routes that connect Park Royal, Lonsdale Quay, Phibbs Exchange, PNE, Brentwood, BCIT and Metrotown.

The Gaglardi-Hastings BRT should be extended across the Lions Gate to Park Royal.

mezzanine
Jan 15, 2008, 8:21 AM
I would have prefered it go south towards Newton, where it can reach out to both Cloverdale/Langley and S. Surrey/White Rock, and perhaps also one day hook up with a commuter rail line on the Souther Railway line.

What's more, it would help to redirect most of the S. Surrey/White Rock commuter buses towards Skytrain instead of the C-Line, considering the Skytrain is going to be doubled in capacity, whereas the C-Line is stuck with its 40m limits, and without having to squeeze though the bottleneck of the Deas Tunnel.

I totally agree. I think that the proposed alignment will be a big headache for the city of surrey planners.

It cuts thru a park with limited upzoning potential. The attempt to try to swing north to include guildford is awkward and half-hearted, and the turn back to FH is also awkward and leads to a large green belt (limited zoning, i think, ALR? certainly, it is very prone to flooding) before it hits clayton/langley. Certainly, with upzoning around the areas it will be good, but there is a lot more potential for more intense use along KGH.

Disappointed about the lack of DMUs along the southern rail line, but I think there maybe more prep work involved with negotiations with the company for access to the line. I would also think that an announcement about this would also surprise the city of surrey, who i suspect have not done a lot of work to study this, and give the further appearance of the province dictating transit priorities to local communities (i suppose they are, now...). Still, if skytrain went south to newton, that likely would facilitate DMUs along the old intterurban as it could bypass the busier (car-wise) and less-grade separated section of the southern line.

Surprised (pleasantly) about the UBC extention. The evergreen line will be interesting - unless the province outright dictates a route and a mode, I would expect another death match between skytrain vs. LRT proponents..

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 8:29 AM
I also wonder why the Expo Line couldn't have been built a little further south to Surrey Memorial Hospital when it was extended to Surrey in the first place. A hospital should be a priority destination, no?

raggedy13
Jan 15, 2008, 9:34 AM
Wow, this thread got huge over the last 24 hours, and I haven't even contributed to it yet.

I think this is all amazing news. As has been said, most of it isn't exactly new info but the fact that the Province has now officially shown its support for all these projects I look forward to seeing some actual action start soon. I'm really looking forward to finding out some of the details too, like when the UBC extension will be started/completed, and when some of these rapid bus routes will be implemented.

It'll be really interesting to see where we're at by 2020. While these projects might make up for present demand, the demand in 2020 will likely be all the more stronger after 12 more years of growth and increased access to transit in previously transit-limited areas.

raggedy13
Jan 15, 2008, 9:39 AM
It is interesting to think that even if we aren't a metro of 8-10 million in 50 years, we could for sure be a metro roughly the size of present-day Toronto (~5 mil). I can barely imagine such a thing... cramming the GTA's population into the footprint of Metro Vancouver! Sounds intense to say the least.

hollywoodnorth
Jan 15, 2008, 9:42 AM
I also wonder why the Expo Line couldn't have been built a little further south to Surrey Memorial Hospital when it was extended to Surrey in the first place. A hospital should be a priority destination, no?

ummm the distance from King George Station to Surrey Memorial.....is the same as Sapperton to Royal Columbia........


what do you need Stations in the emergency rooms for you to be happy?

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 9:50 AM
ummm the distance from King George Station to Surrey Memorial.....is the same as Sapperton to Royal Columbia........

Not according to this map:

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=49.181759,-122.843714&spn=0.031587,0.085745&z=14&om=1

It looks to be almost a 1 km walk.

Hourglass
Jan 15, 2008, 10:00 AM
Did this guy hang out a lot with either or both Marc Emery or Tommy Chong by any chance?:haha: :drunk: :jester:

Actually, it was Arthur Erickson who said it....

hollywoodnorth
Jan 15, 2008, 12:33 PM
Not according to this map:

http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=49.181759,-122.843714&spn=0.031587,0.085745&z=14&om=1

It looks to be almost a 1 km walk.

I was sort of joking but yes it is about 2 times the distance in all honesty.....which still is very close.

Nutterbug
Jan 15, 2008, 1:26 PM
I was sort of joking but yes it is about 2 times the distance in all honesty.....which still is very close.

It's about as far from King George Stn. as KGS is from Surrey Central. So they could have just run it one more station south.

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 4:47 PM
Delete

twoNeurons
Jan 15, 2008, 4:49 PM
But KGS and Surrey Central are too close together now. In reality, King George Station should've been situated a little closer to SMH, rather than build another station.

Regarding Falcon saying the UBC extension is going under Broadway (as opposed to 10th): Don't pay much attention to that.

To the average Joe, it serves two purposes:

The average Joe would wonder: Why build it under 10th? What's on 10th? We want it down Broadway!!!
It gives them a "political" way to minimize impact.


Under Broadway = Under 10th. The station entrances will be on Broadway if it's on 10th anyway. It's just easier for people to understand.

Another thing. Imagine the announcement: "We've done studies and decided that in order to minimize impact on the businesses on Broadway and to save your tax money, we've heard your cries! We will be building under 10th, where there aren't as many businesses, and we will have perfect sloping entrances from Broadway which are accessible and pleasant."

In reality, of course, the utilities under Broadway preclude any other solution, but by not directly announcing the route, it gives politicians a way to appease people.

It's no different than including the Canada Line, and a few of the Rapid Bus Routes in the 14$ billion.

So, when you hear, we'll build it along/under broadway... it likely means under 10th. I wouldn't read anything else into it.

I, too, am more curious about the Expo Line extensions... $3.1 Billion!!! I can see $1 Billion for the Extension (it's elevated), $100 Million for 50 more trainsets.... ($2 Million each?) that leaves $2 Billion for station upgrades. 2 underground, 16 above ground, 2 at grade. $100 Million per station. That's seems like a lot... unless they're thinking of increasing the capacity of the M-Line while they're at it. It would make sense. In addition, given that underground stations are MUCH more difficult to make longer, make the UBC extension platforms 120m to start.

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 4:58 PM
The North Shore should also have gotten something out of it, like a B-Line that combines the present 239 and 130 routes that connect Park Royal, Lonsdale Quay, Phibbs Exchange, PNE, Brentwood, BCIT and Metrotown.

The Gaglardi-Hastings BRT should be extended across the Lions Gate to Park Royal.

Exactly... and I am pretty sure (even though I'm not a bus rider around North Shore) is that they would probably use it too. I heard many people complain about the lack of buses from North Shore to Suburbs and East Vancouver.

mr.x
Jan 15, 2008, 5:56 PM
I, too, am more curious about the Expo Line extensions... $3.1 Billion!!! I can see $1 Billion for the Extension (it's elevated), $100 Million for 50 more trainsets.... ($2 Million each?) that leaves $2 Billion for station upgrades. 2 underground, 16 above ground, 2 at grade. $100 Million per station. That's seems like a lot... unless they're thinking of increasing the capacity of the M-Line while they're at it. It would make sense. In addition, given that underground stations are MUCH more difficult to make longer, make the UBC extension platforms 120m to start.

I doubt the Surrey extension would cost $1 billion...it's only 6 kms. I'd say $600-800 million.

i doubt any of the Expo's $3.1 billion budget is allocated to buy additional cars. That's what the $1 billion rail car budget is for, which should get us about 300 Mark II CARS. And this plan does not include upgrades for the Millennium Line.

MistyMountainHop
Jan 15, 2008, 5:59 PM
i guess this pretty much kills any of our opposition to Gateway....

Not for me.

SFUVancouver
Jan 15, 2008, 6:36 PM
Major speculation ahead using pulled-out of thin air numbers.

I think that the upgrades to the Expo Line will eat up a hell of a lot more money than some think. Say each Expo Line station gets a $50 million structural upgrade to extend the platforms, double-elevator the core, new lighting, and don't forget fare gates. This is a very generous doubling of the major station renovations on the books for Main Street, Broadway, and Metrotown at about $25 million a pop.

There are 20 Expo Line stations. Some would clearly be more costly to upgrade, namely Waterfront, Burrard, Granville, Stadium, and Columbia. Triple the $50 million figure for those five up to $150 million a pop. That gives us a running total of $750 million for the easy 15 stations and another $750 million for the hard five for a total of $1.5 billion. That leaves $1.6 billion. I think the track work will cost somewhere in the ball park of $500 million (again out of thin air, fun isn't it? Almost like being in government). That remaining $1.1 billion buys the extension and new stations in Surrey, all built to the new standards of 100+ metre platforms, fare gates, accessible, etc.

The bottom line is that we have no idea how that $3.1 billion for Expo Line upgrades will be spent, if that figure ever fully materializes. There will need to be a new OMC yard to handle the many, many dozen new Mk2 trains, new staff, possibly a new operations control suite, who knows, maybe even a reopening of the Bombardier factory in Burnaby. Maybe sections of the Expo Line will be triple tracked to allow express service, bypassing the "flyover stations" between Columbia and Metrotown. Maybe they will do an outright tear-down of some of the current stations and build them anew as part of mixed-use projects. We can be sure that every possible cost will be aggregated into that ballpark figure.

We can also be sure that this will all be done in phases and through P3s. I would not be surprised if a major P3 was cobbled together with the promise of an operating contract for all of metro Vancouver's rapid transit a la The Canada Line. I just hope we can test drive that concession agreement for a while before any final decisions are made.

Lastly, we've been discussing what will happen to the Canada Line when it gets full, and my hunch is the reintroduction of the 98 B-Line along Granville with a Marine Drive station southern terminus and a Burrard Station northern terminus or maybe it would continue on to West Van and Horseshoe Bay and maybe, maybe, all the way to Squamish. Another plausible option to alleviate crowding on the Canada Line would be an extension of the Downtown Vancouver Streetcar up along the Arbutus corridor and along the CPR tracks into New West through the East Fraser Lands precinct, meeting up with the major Canada Line Marine Drive stn on the way.

Rusty Gull
Jan 15, 2008, 6:41 PM
Media Release | Jan. 14, 2008
UBC Welcomes Transit Announcement

UBC welcomes the provincial government announcement today of a $14 billion province-wide transit investment to include $2.8 billion for the UBC Line in addition to increased bus service.

"Congratulations to the Premier and his colleagues on their leadership to improve transit service and address climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions," said Prof. Stephen Toope, President of UBC. "With UBC's Vancouver campus the second largest transit destination in the region, this investment helps us continue our shift from being a car-oriented campus to a transit-centred one. We are also pleased that RapidBus service will be expanded to Kelowna, thus providing sustainable choices for our UBC Okanagan community."

When the new line arrives at UBC in the proposed date of 2020, it will provide a complete transit hub for UBC's Vancouver campus, Toope said. The hub will then be composed of the proposed rapid transit line, a bus terminal that will continue to service the very significant bus travel from parts of the region not served by the rapid transit line, and a shuttle bus to address more local transit movements. The below-grade new bus terminal that UBC and TransLink are building is sized to fit with the development of the new rapid transit service.

UBC will work closely with TransLink and others to plan the UBC Line and ensure that a new station integrates with the new University Boulevard neighbourhood that marks the entrance to the Vancouver campus, Toope said.

There are currently 54,000 daily transit trips to and from UBC. This is almost half of all trips to and from UBC, and transit is the single most popular mode of travel to the Vancouver campus. Students have been a driving force in improving transit use through their adoption of the U-Pass in 2003.

- 30 -

officedweller
Jan 15, 2008, 8:05 PM
Mark I trains don't have to be in pairs of two, it's the Mark II's that need to be.
....

I believe officedweller said the platforms were expandable to 8-car Mark I, which is 96 metres.

The MKIs are still in "married pairs" - they cannot be separated. It may have to do with the motors or electrical systems.

Yeah, way back in the 80s when the Expo Line was built, they said it could be expanded to fit 8-car MKI trains. The guideway splits far enough away from centre platform stations to easily insert additional platform length.
@ Waterfront Station it isn't really underground (it's below the viaducts) so extending the platform there shouldn't be a problem.
@ Stadium, you'd extend it to the east. That would allow stairs down to the GM Place side of Expo Boulevard and eliminate the traffic cops there on game nights.
@ Granville & Burrard it will be expensive unless there is contingency that we don't know about. The excavation will have to be "mined".

Hmm, in the long run, when we can't lengthen stations anymore, would it be feasible to widen them? Thus allowing more trains to be in the station at any one moment in time, which means greater frequency of trains. For instance; when there is a station with two platforms for a single direction, and there is a train once every minute and a half, any one train could be in a station for up to three minutes to load and unload before leaving.

Personally, I think this is feasible for Broadway Station when the Safeway is demolished. Not necessarily adding tracks, but adding outside platforms to the station to allow for "one-way" movement into and out of the trains on opposite sides of the train. i.e. doors on the centre platform would open first, allowing passengers to exit and a second later, doors on the outside platform would open, allowing passengers to enter. This would eliminate the face to face combat of entering a train.

I totally agree. I think that the proposed alignment will be a big headache for the city of surrey planners.

It cuts thru a park with limited upzoning potential. The attempt to try to swing north to include guildford is awkward and half-hearted, and the turn back to FH is also awkward and leads to a large green belt (limited zoning, i think, ALR? certainly, it is very prone to flooding) before it hits clayton/langley. Certainly, with upzoning around the areas it will be good, but there is a lot more potential for more intense use along KGH.

Disappointed about the lack of DMUs along the southern rail line, but I think there maybe more prep work involved with negotiations with the company for access to the line. I would also think that an announcement about this would also surprise the city of surrey, who i suspect have not done a lot of work to study this, and give the further appearance of the province dictating transit priorities to local communities (i suppose they are, now...). Still, if skytrain went south to newton, that likely would facilitate DMUs along the old intterurban as it could bypass the busier (car-wise) and less-grade separated section of the southern line.

I agree as well, but including Guildford is important. I suspect that the Skytrain extension (wherever it would have gone if it missed Guildford) would delay the 104th Ave LRT, so better now than never.
Hopefully some provision will be included for extending Skytrain south to Newton and the Southern Railway line for a DMU transfer point in future (i.e. a wye switch).

*********

Jared and SFUVancouver make a good point that a new Skytrain storage yard will be required.
Obvious locations are False Creek Flats and UBC Endowment lands (but given the timing, the endowment lands would come on line too late to serve the Expo enhancements, the Surrey extension (and the Evergreen Line if it is Skytrain), which are to be implemented first). False Creek Flats is a viable possibility if it is expedited - it is on the Millennium Line which is more convenient that shuttling trains to and from the Expo Line. There already is a third siding at the end of the tail track west of VCC-Clark Station - that could easily become a ramp for access to from a yard IF property is available in the area (and there's no indication that BNSF would give property up, especially with increased port traffic and the history of prolonged negotiations required for VCC-Clark Station's ROW).
As mentioned by Jared, if the Evergreen line is Skytrain, a yard could be built along Lougheed Highway where the LRT train yard would have been built - that also provides a yard along the Millennium Line.

BTW - Vaughan Palmer is his article today also suggests that given the increased cost, the Evergreen line will be Skytrain.

**********

Media Release | Jan. 14, 2008
UBC Welcomes Transit Announcement

"UBC will work closely with TransLink and others to plan the UBC Line and ensure that a new station integrates with the new University Boulevard neighbourhood that marks the entrance to the Vancouver campus," Toope said.

- 30 -

You'd think UBC would adopt the YVR funding formula and add a second station in the south campus area to serve its burgeoning residential population. Hopefully that is being considered. Ultimately, does the UBC Skytrain Station need to integrate as a transfer station to/from buses? I suppose if there's one more station at the south campus, but otherwise, who's going to transfer when its the end of the line?

*********

As for the continuing comments on the 40m-50m Canada Line platforms, remember that Richmond is NOT a "growth concentration area" under the Livable Region Strategic Plan, so ridership is forecasted to be well below that on the Expo Line.

lightrail
Jan 15, 2008, 8:25 PM
Here is a quick photoshopped 6-car MkII train...

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/alta-bc/MkIIskytrain6Car.jpg

Please - I hope they buy some middle cars so we can have trains that can be walked through - more capacity - all those end cabs are a waste of space and money

officedweller
Jan 15, 2008, 9:42 PM
KL rendering for "C" cars from Bombardier website:

http://www.bombardier.com/en/1_0/ml/7915/2_KLext-LR.jpg

cornholio
Jan 15, 2008, 9:58 PM
there are several stations that have potential to be redeveloped and lengthened as a p3 project where towers/buildings can be incorporated in to them. Nanaimo with the purchase of a few lots can accommodate a few towers integrated in to the station if Vancouver allows it or if the new Translink has powers like has been hinted to trump the cities decisions around station. Royal Oak station can be a massive redevelopment if the underused lots to the north are rezoned and if they were im sure it wouldn't take long to see something massive. Edmond s can have a few towers if the abandoned rail line to the south is snapped up. 22 nd street station really should be up zoned by New Westminster at least on the station block which would only need a dozen lots purchased if even that...and most of them are being rented out as far as I know so there inst much of a owner attachemnt. This could become another massive project. So theres several stations I think that could be much improved and expanded/rebuilt in a partnership with a developer.

officedweller
Jan 15, 2008, 10:17 PM
The only way I could see the municipalities raising funds would be through a Development Cost levy type scheme - but I don't think they have the legislative authority to impose a fee on a transit-related basis. It may need new legislation.

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 10:28 PM
The MKIs are still in "married pairs" - they cannot be separated. It may have to do with the motors or electrical systems.

Yeah, way back in the 80s when the Expo Line was built, they said it could be expanded to fit 8-car MKI trains. The guideway splits far enough away from centre platform stations to easily insert additional platform length.
@ Waterfront Station it isn't really underground (it's below the viaducts) so extending the platform there shouldn't be a problem.
@ Stadium, you'd extend it to the east. That would allow stairs down to the GM Place side of Expo Boulevard and eliminate the traffic cops there on game nights.
@ Granville & Burrard it will be expensive unless there is contingency that we don't know about. The excavation will have to be "mined".

Personally, I think this is feasible for Broadway Station when the Safeway is demolished. Not necessarily adding tracks, but adding outside platforms to the station to allow for "one-way" movement into and out of the trains on opposite sides of the train. i.e. doors on the centre platform would open first, allowing passengers to exit and a second later, doors on the outside platform would open, allowing passengers to enter. This would eliminate the face to face combat of entering a train.
.

Well the Mark I trains can run single - they just would never do such a stupid thing. And we have seen TransLink run five-car Mark I trains in the past, during last year's snowstorm after the SkyTrain breakdown.

Waterfront Station platform can be extended. The walkway between the Sinclair Centre/Waterfront Mall Exit (on the West side) is pretty long and I think it was designed for a platform.

With regards to the Burrard and Granville stations - yes that would be pretty expensive and tough. You cannot extend the platform westwards at Burrard as there an immediate turn, so the only option is East. And also note between Burrard and Granville - it isn't completely straight. There is a slight turn too but I'm not sure where in between.

I like the one-way platform movement. They were thinking of doing that at Metrotown - my first reaction is do it at Broadway first.

AKA-007
Jan 15, 2008, 10:35 PM
Please - I hope they buy some middle cars so we can have trains that can be walked through - more capacity - all those end cabs are a waste of space and money

I can just picture a train with 4 middle cars in it. A-C-C-C-C-B :D

g35
Jan 15, 2008, 10:50 PM
I think the Expo line should have been extended down King George HWY with a BRT along KG from 72 to 64, then down 64 to Langley instead of going down Fraser HWY. Coming from someone in Surrey, though I admit i'm far from an urban planner.

Dave2
Jan 15, 2008, 11:03 PM
They actually ran 6 car MK-I trains during last years snow event.

alta-bc
Jan 15, 2008, 11:18 PM
Please - I hope they buy some middle cars so we can have trains that can be walked through - more capacity - all those end cabs are a waste of space and money


Here we go!

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/alta-bc/MkIIskytrain6c-Car.jpg

deasine
Jan 15, 2008, 11:50 PM
=D I like it. Nice and long =) Just about 59% of the total length trains in Hong Kong, namely the Kwun Tong, Tsuen Wan, Island, and Tseung Kwan O Lines or just a little longer than the Disneyresort Line