[mr.x]

Over at the Vancouver forum, the members are creating an organization in hopes of countering a NIMBY and pro-LRT organization's antics to derail an extension of our regional SkyTrain system across the City of Vancouver to the University of British Columbia. Our organization does support LRT in the region, but we simply do not think it's the right mode for this vital, dense, regional corridor.

I'm bringing this discussion to Calgarians and Edmontonians solely to see what you guys think of the advantages and disadvantages between the (mainly) ground-level LRT mode and the automated and completely grade-separated SkyTrain mode in regards to (1) speed, (2) frequency, (3) travel times, and (4) convenience. Also, how important are these 4 factors to you in ditching the car and riding on public transit?

What is being proposed for the Broadway corridor:
GROUND-LEVEL LRT (11-kms)
- right-of-way to be built down the middle of a busy 6-lane cross-city artery road called Broadway Street
- driver system
- approx. 16-stations
- travel time estimated at 35-45-minutes
- lots of intersections, traffic lights, left turn bays every 500-metres
- note: Broadway corridor currently serves 100,000 bus riders every single day over a 11-km stretch

SKYTRAIN (completely underground, 12-kms)
- completely underground on Broadway Street
- completely grade separated with automation/no drivers
- approx. 9-10 stations
- travel time estimated at 15-minutes
- estimated ridership: 200,000/day
- note: Broadway corridor currently serves 100,000 bus riders every single day over a 11-km stretch

BROADWAY STREET
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/5/4699317_331d99ee76.jpg


We think it's important that this line be part of our regional SkyTrain rapid transit backbone rather than the "community-friendly line" the pro-LRT supporters would like it to be. It's a very important, dense, and busy corridor...the second largest employment centre in the region outside of Downtown Vancouver.


We would like to hear some of your thoughts, especially from individuals who have been on the C-Train, Edmonton LRT, and SkyTrain. In other words, we would like some testimonials. We do not mean to make this a city vs. city discussion.

[wild wild west]

My 2 cents is that LRT need not be grade-level. It can and indeed should be grade-separated in high-density corridors.

[Beltliner]

^^^ Outside of Calgary's downtown core, grade separation is something of a red herring, because the C-Train system runs on its own right of way through most of the city. Once you do get downtown, street-side running does create congestion and delays, which is why the city is actually getting serious about planning and building metro segments through the downtown core. That said, the only functional differences between the northwest leg of the C-Train from University to Crowfoot and Toronto's Spadina Subway from St Clair West to Yorkdale, as a case in point, are that Toronto's trains are longer than ours and that they operate from a third rail.

While there are significant operational differences between the SkyTrain and the C-Train, either mode would be appropriate for an extension to UBC. The sense I'm getting from you, though, is that what's being advocated by the no-SkyTrain squad is more of a Spadina Car, which while nice to have as a local circulator is probably not robust enough to handle the passenger throughput one would anticipate between downtown Vancouver and UBC.

[ue]

what about edmonton lrt ??

[Beltliner]

^^^ Downtown Edmonton to the U of A is a pretty good example of a light metro implementation of LRT, with the rest of the system operating almost identically to the C-Train.

[LeftCoaster]

I think the primary issue raised by Mr X is of grade separation. The reason why Skytrain is advocated as the grade separated alternate is that the line will tie into the existing millenium line and function as an extension of sorts, which is already skytrain. Underground LRT could certainly be used in a similar scenario but in this case if the project is going to be tunneled it would make no sense not to go with bombardier's skytrain.

[mr.x]

What we're proposing, or rather supporting, is a SkyTrain extension of the line that is yellow....from VCC/CLARK STATION TO UBC STATION:
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_2syn56cxREE/SfZRyDrDeCI/AAAAAAAAEOQ/CdkV367Tfvw/s1280/Drawing274545.jpg
map by deasine.

[freeweed]

the only functional differences between the northwest leg of the C-Train from University to Crowfoot and Toronto's Spadina Subway from St Clair West to Yorkdale, as a case in point, are that Toronto's trains are longer than ours and that they operate from a third rail.

Can't be stressed enough. I often am told that Calgary's LRT is a "joke" compared to the vaunted TTC subway - yet a good chunk of Toronto's line is basically an LRT in everything but name. We could have longer trains with simple station rebuilds and I don't think the average commuter gives a damn how they're powered.

I've jokingly referred to the Toronto LRT many times just to get a rise out of people. Really though, the 2 systems have far more in common than they differ - outside of a few blocks in Calgary's downtown.

PS: good job on creating a thread with the word "vs" in it, that isn't closed yet. :D

[You Need A Thneed]

I think it makes much more sense to extend the skytrain. The technology is already in use, grade seperation is quite essential down that corridor it appears, and it allows the project to be an extention of the current system, which means the same cars can be used, and they can be stored/serviced in the same facilities.

15 minute travel time vs 35 minutes is a HUGE difference.

[Riise]

My 2 cents is that LRT need not be grade-level. It can and indeed should be grade-separated in high-density corridors.

I think it makes much more sense to extend the skytrain.

I'm going to combine these two posts to form my two cents. They should apply what most median running Light Rapid Transit lines should, trench the Skytrain in the median of Broadway.

[Yume-sama]

I don't feel like I'm going to be stabbed on the LRT.

That's about the only difference... though the SkyTrain is more convenient than the LRT, and has a much broader reach... going to the Airport is a big +++++

[Calgarian]

I've never been on the skytrain, but I've ridden the C-train about 10 000 000x so maybe my input could still be valid. I would say the best option is to bury it (obviously the mose expensive), followed by elevating it (next most expensive), then at grade in it's own ROW (obviously the cheapest). Having at grade crossings car be a hinderance to traffic (Mcleod and 25th Ave in Calgary is testament to that).

Just my $.02

[Ferreth]

36th St N.E Calgary I think is most similar to Broadway (I have limited familiarity with Broadway, and know 36th too well) LRT snarled up 36th, particular regarding left hand turn, and to a lesser extent, cross 36th movements.

Broadway, from what I remember, is WAY busier than 36th is even now, so I'd say any "at grade LRT" is going to impact things worse than 36th. I'd also say above grade not so good - not nice to have an apartment beside this, and it would totally ruin the street scape I remember; this is 15 years back, so I'm sure it's changed some. Underground is the only way to go, especially considering the travel time.

I see Skytrain would work out to 1.2km station spacing; I think this is fine and works well in Calgary with similar spacing; the 2/3km spacing of the LRT seems excessive. Nothing stopping them from putting a few stations closer together where warranted.

Is there a BRT already running along Broadway these days, it might help bridge the gap until expensive underground works get built.

Hope my first post helps...:)

[Wentworth]

Outside of the student population, I'd say the Broadway corridor would be better served with a light rail system with more stops/stations. Students would be better served by investing the money saved in more on-campus housing.

I speak as a former Vancouver resident and former UBC student.

[You Need A Thneed]

I'm going to combine these two posts to form my two cents. They should apply what most median running Light Rapid Transit lines should, trench the Skytrain in the median of Broadway.

Looking at the pictures of the traffic, total grade separation is the way to go. if the city of Vancouver has spent the money to do that, there's no reason to not go Skytrain.

Cut and cover or elevated.

Saves a transfer too for people who go in between the university and places along the millennium line.

[entheosfog]

Good god Broadway Avenue (sorry to be a nit-pick!!) is bad enough now without an at-grade lrt making it more of headache to navigate. One thing that I found 'interesting' about Calgary's downtown lrt, is how the train has to stop at traffic lights, rather than having the right of way. Maybe that's unavoidable though? Would the Broadway lrt do this, too? I found Calgary's lrt pretty good otherwise but, yeah, going underground downtown would make it that much better.
I think for the extra cost of burying the skytrain underground, it'll be well worth it in the long run, especially as Broadway gets built up more and more.

I also heard talk of a tram for Broadway?? Thoughts??

[srperrycgy]

Extending SkyTrain from VCC/Clark to UBC using existing technologies is the most logical way to go. Run the alignment underground for the majority of the route. Costs would be higher, but BC doesn't seen to have a problem getting signifigant Federal funding for transit projects, unlike ourselves. I would expect that the NIMBYs in the area would be a problem, particularly in the more wealthy areas. Gordon Campbell lives in Point Grey, right?

[fever]

It's Broadway, damnit. No street. No avenue. Just Broadway. You can put an East or a West in front, though.

[frinkprof]

I think it makes much more sense to extend the skytrain. The technology is already in use, grade seperation is quite essential down that corridor it appears, and it allows the project to be an extention of the current system, which means the same cars can be used, and they can be stored/serviced in the same facilities.

15 minute travel time vs 35 minutes is a HUGE difference.I concur with YNAT here 100%. Skytrain is the highest order of transit in Vancouver, and I do not see a reason why this corridor (which has at its end a major institutional and employment destination) should be served with anything less.

To answer a couple questions above:

Broadway, as I understand it, is not currently served by true BRT, but an express bus (98 or 99 B-Line, not sure of the number) that is basically the busiest bus route in Vancouver.

@entheosfog: The streetcar, as I understand it, was proposed as an alternative to LRT and Skytrain in the corridor. Basically a stupid idea, given the passenger volume that it would need to serve.

I have been somewhat following the formation of your group that is advocating for Skytrain in the corridor. I think it is a great idea and fully support your efforts. If similar NIMBY antics rise up in Calgary (once SELRT planning gets further along, for example), I would like to see some of us take the initiative you guys have and form such a group. It would have been nice to see something to counter the BWLRT group.

[PROSTSHOCKER]

Having rode both the C-Train and the Skytrain, I'd say the c-train is perfect for getting suburban populations into and out of the core. The problem with Broadway is that much of its length is very dense and it's the busiest artery of the city south of the downtown core. I can't imagine the traffic nightmare in the event of an LRT train breakdown in an intersection. The only logical method is to tunnel beneath from Cambie and surface toward UBC.

[AirGuitarChampion]

Pro underground skytrain here. Most points have been covered in the above posts.

However to add something new, I think the Skytrain sounds way cooler than the C-Train. If I recall correctly it goes something like this: Baaaaiiiiii-hooooooo-urrrrrrrrr-eeeeeeee. Whereas C-train is like a slow build to eeeeaaaaahhhhh (but only when going really fast).

[mr.x]

36th St N.E Calgary I think is most similar to Broadway (I have limited familiarity with Broadway, and know 36th too well) LRT snarled up 36th, particular regarding left hand turn, and to a lesser extent, cross 36th movements.

Broadway, from what I remember, is WAY busier than 36th is even now, so I'd say any "at grade LRT" is going to impact things worse than 36th. I'd also say above grade not so good - not nice to have an apartment beside this, and it would totally ruin the street scape I remember; this is 15 years back, so I'm sure it's changed some. Underground is the only way to go, especially considering the travel time.

I see Skytrain would work out to 1.2km station spacing; I think this is fine and works well in Calgary with similar spacing; the 2/3km spacing of the LRT seems excessive. Nothing stopping them from putting a few stations closer together where warranted.

Is there a BRT already running along Broadway these days, it might help bridge the gap until expensive underground works get built.

Hope my first post helps...:)

All of your comments certainly help, thank you.

As for the BRT, there is one on Broadway already. It's called the 99 B-Line, and it has a pretty significant ridership of 60,000/passengers per weekday on its 10-km route. That's even more than a few of Toronto's streetcar lines.

In total, there are 100,000 daily bus riders on Broadway: 60,000 from the above mentioned rapid bus service and 40,000 from local trolley bus service.

[Stang]

I'd have to agree with all of the arguments FOR going underground. For a minute here, let's try and think like said NIMBYs. :)

What are the arguments, advantages, etc. to the at-grade LRT option?

Cost, obviously, is something that they'd be arguing. I can't think of many others. Is the pro-LRT group fearing that unsavoury sorts will be able to get to Broadway easier? Being underground will deprive people of vitamin D? ;) These arguments are usually a stretch, so let's hear them!

I'm just curious to hear "the other side of the story" because, unless I'm missing something, there aren't a lot of reasons NOT to go underground and extend the existing system.

Edit: And I see the "community friendly" part, which I assume is one of their arguments. Is that their pièce de résistance?

[frinkprof]

^I believe one of their arguments is that construction of an underground line would be more disruptive to businesses along the route, of course citing the very recent Canada Line construction along Cambie Street.

[Stang]

^I believe one of their arguments is that construction of an underground line would be more disruptive to businesses along the route, of course citing the very recent Canada Line construction along Cambie Street.

True enough. It sounds like the Cambie merchants have had a rough go of it.

I wonder if their concerns can be addressed through some help from the government. I'm not talking handouts, but maybe some promotion of the area during construction, low or no interest financing to help get them through, property tax breaks for the landlords that they can pass onto the business owners, etc.

Hopefully the government and the transit people can improve on their PR which might be enough to get the merchants on board.

Although I certainly don't want to marginalize the concerns of the Broadway businesses, it would be a shame if a less-than-ideal solution was settled on when the area would benefit more in the long run by doing it properly while they have the chance.

Eventually, the traffic congestion (which may result from the LRT option) may make the area less desirable for shopping anyway.

[entheosfog]

It's Broadway, damnit. No street. No avenue. Just Broadway. You can put an East or a West in front, though.

Not to play semantics (ok, yes to play semantics) it's officially called Broadway Avenue. It runs east-west after all. But no one ever says the avenue part of it.
Anyway....

[fever]

The city's map and street signs show only West Broadway and East Broadway. A handful of city documents, police records and the like, refer to Broadway Avenue. The city's archives have many records of West Broadway and East Broadway, but only one of Broadway Avenue. King Edward Avenue, for comparison, is referred to 32 times in the archives.

I can't find any official list, though. Canada Post wasn't any help. It'll list postal codes on Broadway Street, Broadway Avenue or just Broadway.

[The Chemist]

Pro underground skytrain here. Most points have been covered in the above posts.

However to add something new, I think the Skytrain sounds way cooler than the C-Train. If I recall correctly it goes something like this: Baaaaiiiiii-hooooooo-urrrrrrrrr-eeeeeeee. Whereas C-train is like a slow build to eeeeaaaaahhhhh (but only when going really fast).

Pretty sure that has something to do with the type of electric motors it uses. The subway trains here in Shanghai actually make a similar sound to the Skytrain (I always thought the Skytrain sounded like a racecar :D ).

[jlousa]

My understanding is Fever is correct, the name is simply Broadway, much like Kingsway which was actually Kings Way in the beginning. Broadway was a little different in that it was 9th ave but was replaced witht eh name broadway to add more glamour back in the ~30s.

I haven't been to Calgary in almost a year now, is there any expansion of the C-Train in the works?

[Bigtime]

Does it really matter what people are calling Broadway here? I thought the whole point of this thread was to discuss the situation you folks are dealing with in Vancouver?

I'm not quite the transit geek that some of our Calgary forumers are (you guys still rock!), but when I look at that picture of Broadway and picture an LRT running at grade I just think of the mess that 36th street is in Calgary. So based on that image alone I like the idea of the Skytrain underground first, followed by above ground second.

[frinkprof]

My understanding is Fever is correct, the name is simply Broadway, much like Kingsway which was actually Kings Way in the beginning. Broadway was a little different in that it was 9th ave but was replaced witht eh name broadway to add more glamour back in the ~30s.

I haven't been to Calgary in almost a year now, is there any expansion of the C-Train in the works?
Go to the forum this thread is in and check it out.

West LRT thread (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=168428). Construction begins in the fall.

Calgary Public Transit thread (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=118079&page=416) for all smaller expansions. 1 station (Crowfoot) and 4 km of track opens on the NW line in June. 2 other smaller extensions in the beggining stages: NE line will add 2 stations (Martindale and Saddleridge), and NW line will add 1 station (Rocky Ridge-Tuscany), both extensions are scheduled to be open by 2011.

7th Avenue refurbishment is seeing all downtown platforms rebuilt and extended to 4 LRV length. 3 are done, 2 more are being worked on right now, and 4 more to go. Should be done by 2012.

In the medium term, SELRT is the top priority and is awaiting funding. Downtown Subway options are being studied. Funding still to come.

[Dado]

What's the passenger turnover like? Are we talking about a corridor where people get on and stay on until they get downtown, or one where every station/stop would have a lot of on/off movement due to people going just a few stops? Just because there is a large ridership on the corridor doesn't necessarily mean that Skytrain is the way to go.

This is not an issue unique to Vancouver. Here in Ottawa we've been having a similar discussion with respect to one of our major east-west thoroughfares, Carling Avenue, and whether an LRT service on it should be tram-like or metro-like. Toronto too has been having a debate about Eglinton iirc and whether it should have mainly at-grade LRT (with some tunnelization at major intersections) or if it should be a new subway line.

I haven't spent much time in Vancouver but looking at the corridor on Google I see it bypasses downtown (much like Carling does in Ottawa and Eglinton in Toronto). Without knowing anything further, my first inclination would be mainly at-grade LRT but then looking a bit closer I see it would be an actual extension of an existing line rather than just an "extension of the system". It looks like there's a difficult-to-resolve tension between serving the distant UBC campus while providing improved local transit service on what appears to be a major corridor. I think in the end I'd go with Skytrain but only because there's a line to tie in with; otherwise I'd stick with my initial inclination of mainly at-grade LRT but with underpasses at major intersections.

[lightrail]

What's the passenger turnover like? Are we talking about a corridor where people get on and stay on until they get downtown, or one where every station/stop would have a lot of on/off movement due to people going just a few stops? Just because there is a large ridership on the corridor doesn't necessarily mean that Skytrain is the way to go.

This is not an issue unique to Vancouver. Here in Ottawa we've been having a similar discussion with respect to one of our major east-west thoroughfares, Carling Avenue, and whether an LRT service on it should be tram-like or metro-like. Toronto too has been having a debate about Eglinton iirc and whether it should have mainly at-grade LRT (with some tunnelization at major intersections) or if it should be a new subway line.

I haven't spent much time in Vancouver but looking at the corridor on Google I see it bypasses downtown (much like Carling does in Ottawa and Eglinton in Toronto). Without knowing anything further, my first inclination would be mainly at-grade LRT but then looking a bit closer I see it would be an actual extension of an existing line rather than just an "extension of the system". It looks like there's a difficult-to-resolve tension between serving the distant UBC campus while providing improved local transit service on what appears to be a major corridor. I think in the end I'd go with Skytrain but only because there's a line to tie in with; otherwise I'd stick with my initial inclination of mainly at-grade LRT but with underpasses at major intersections.

Broadway corridor cuts east west south of the downtown Vancouver peninsula. The area is home to the Vancouver General Hospital, over 5 million square feet of office space and millions of square feet of retail and high density housing. While it bypasses downtown Vancouver, it runs through an area that is the second largest commercial and business centre in BC (after downtown Vancouver).

Broadway is lined with shops and business for most of it's length. Traffic is a mix of long distance and local; hence the need for the fast b-line and the local trolley.

bus service is provided as follows:

9 Broadway (electric trolley bus) runs from Broadway/Commercial station to Granville Street every 2-3 minutes in the peak and every 4-5 minutes during the day and every 10 minutes at night, the last bus is at 2:30am.

9 Broadway (electric trolley bus) extends east of Broadway Commercial to Boundary Loop every 2-3 minutes in the peak and every 8-10 minutes in the day and every 20 minutes at night to 2:30am

9 Broadway (electric trolley bus) extends west to Alma from Granville every 4-6 minutes in the peak, every 8-10 minutes in the day and evening, last bus around 12:30am

N9 Broadway Night Bus runs along Broadway between Granville and Lougheed Highway (from downtown and extends east to Coquitlam) every 30 minutes starting at 2:00am and last bus leaves Vancouver at 3:10am, ending at 4:30am.

16 Arbutus (electric trolley bus) provides service on Broadway between Granville and Arbutus every 10 minutes peak, 15 daytime and evening, last bus at 1:00am.

17 UBC/Downtown (electric trolley bus) runs west from Granville to UBC every 10 minutes peak, 10-12 minutes daytime and 15 minutes in the evening. Last bus at 2:00am.

N17 UBC Night Bus runs from downtown along Broadway west of Granville to UBC. Starts at 2:00am and last bus leaves Vancouver at 3:10am, ends at 3:40am - runs every 30 minutes, with an extra trip at 3:00am

99 B-Line (articulated express) provides limited stop (LRT style) service along Broadway from Commercial/Broadway Station to UBC. Buses run every 2 minutes in the peak, every 4 minutes in the daytime and every 10 minutes in the evening - last bus at 12:00am. All door boarding is used at all stops.

[SFUVancouver]

There are really four options on the table, all of which are being studied right now.

1. SkyTrain underground to the University of British Columbia.

This was endorsed by the Provincial Government and represents the highest order transit solution. Estimated cost $2 - $3.5 billion, depending on construction technique, station size. The line would run under Broadway, or the parallel 10th avenue (Broadway is technically 9th) with the stations entering from Broadway. When interlined with the proposed SkyTrain Evergreen Line this extension of the SkyTrain network would allow a single-seat trip from the upper east part of the region to the furthest west; approximately 35 - 40 km. This would create a robust regional rapid transit system with north-south, east-west, and northwest-southeast main line service across approximately 2/3rds of the entire Metro Vancouver region.


2. LRT to UBC

This is the second "rails" option being considered. As previously mentioned it would run down the centre of Broadway, which does not have a median, from the Commercial-Broadway SkyTrain station to UBC. There have been no cost estimates so far. Stations would be built in the centre of the street with real-time passenger information screens, on-street parking and left turns would be eliminated, and total signal priority would be provided. This system would potentially branch out at Arbutus Street, which has been identified as a route for a north-south LRT line along the unused Canadian Pacific Railroad right of way through Vancouver. The downtown Vancouver Streetcar is envisioned to meet up with whatever form of rapid transit is chosen at Broadway and Arbutus.

3. Bus Rapid Transit to UBC

This would upgrade the current saturated curbside 99 B-Line express service to the highest order of bus service and would see two separated lanes run down the centre of Broadway. Signal priority would be given and the line would use standard, and possibly double (or even triple!) articulated buses at high frequencies.

4. LRT or SkyTrain to Arbutus Street and then express buses to UBC

This is the "best of both worlds" scenario. The vast majority of the trip generators on Broadway are in the Central Broadway commercial core, which as mentioned by others is the city's second downtown with the second highest concentration of jobs in the Province after downtown. Central Broadway extends a little past Arbutus but it is the last major street and it is home to an envisioned north-south LRT/streetcar line along the old CPR tracks. Either SkyTrain or LRT would run along/under Broadway from the Commercial-Broadway SkyTrain station to a terminus at Arbutus. There the 99 B-Line express bus service would continue on to UBC. The advantage of this scenario is that the massive trip generator of Central Broadway would be served by a form of rail transit and there would be excellent connections with the north-south and northwest-southeast SkyTrain main lines while the popular and cost-effective express bus service could continue to serve the balance of Broadway and the students, residents, and staff of UBC. The Arbutus terminus could easily anchor the north-south LRT/streetcar line and, as mentioned, if LRT is selected it could even turn south and continue through the heart of the west side of Vancouver before turning east and running along the Fraser River, meeting up with the SkyTrain Canada Line and later the Expo and Millennium Lines in New Westminster. If SkyTrain were used instead of LRT the Arbutus terminus could be considered temporary until an extension to UBC is warranted some years down the line, so to speak.

There are big advantages and disadvantages to each scenario. The cost of each scenario varies wildly too. BRT service could be up and running for a few hundred million, including the rolling stock, stations, signal priority, and civil engineering. SkyTrain to UBC would be the "Cadillac" scenario (as our media loves to call it) and offer the fastest trip time, lowest operating cost, largest attractor of choice riders, and most complete integration into the rapid transit system. LRT is attractive because it is at street level with the much lower civil engineering costs, can have very high capacities (as the C-Train continues to illustrate with verve), and could serve as the catalyst to wean ourselves off of ALRT/automated Metro. It is arguable that the UBC Line is the last place in the region where an entirely new line is likely to be required for the next several decades. The BRT scenario could work but the cramped nature of buses of any sort will limit the line’s appeal to choice riders. BRT would undoubtedly have the highest operating cost of the lot due to the short life of the vehicles, compared to rail, fuel and maintenance needs, and the smaller passenger to operator ratio than LRT.

I think that the C-Train has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that LRT in the North American context can be exceptionally effective as a city’s primary mode of rapid transit. The brilliant foresight to reserve LRT right of ways throughout the city ought to warrant the placement of a few statues in honour of Calgary’s city planners. The reality for Vancouver is that we only did this in a handful of locations and this was largely due to Provincial ownership of one and Vancouver’s successful litigation against the CPR for the other. The Expo and Millennium SkyTrain lines run down the former and the latter is the one adjacent Arbutus Street. The bottom line for now is that both the Province of British Columbia and Translink, Metro Vancouver’s transportation authority are broke, so nothing more than studies are going to be happening for a while. We were fortunate enough to secure the financing of the Canada Line while the boom was still on.

Lastly, I woud like to extend a genuine thank you to Alberta for the $50.8 million dollars contributed by the Federal Government on your behalf to the Canada Line. That’s $14 from each and every one of you.

[Ferreth]

I'd say, do it like Calgary and spend the 100 or so mil and build the BRT soon, and build the full out subway in 10 -20 years time when there is money again. As far as the $14 goes, I only hope that someday you can return the favor. I hear there is a push on here for an expensive subway up Centre Street north that could use some Federal moola...

[fever]

The bottom line for now is that both the Province of British Columbia and Translink, Metro Vancouver’s transportation authority are broke, so nothing more than studies are going to be happening for a while. We were fortunate enough to secure the financing of the Canada Line while the boom was still on.

There will be a lot of money spent on transportation infrastructure in Metro Vancouver over the next few years. The province isn't really broke, it just has other priorities.

[SFUVancouver]

I'd say, do it like Calgary and spend the 100 or so mil and build the BRT soon, and build the full out subway in 10 -20 years time when there is money again. As far as the $14 goes, I only hope that someday you can return the favor. I hear there is a push on here for an expensive subway up Centre Street north that could use some Federal moola...

I really hope we can too. A C-Train subway through downtown Calgary would be fantastic, and I'm sure it would be much appreciated on cold winter days. In general how has Calgary fared at securing cost sharing for the C-Train from the Federal Government?

BC, and Metro Vancouver in particular, have honestly fared very well over the last four or five years when it comes to Federal support for our infrastructure projects. The Canada Line saw upwards of $400 million invested by the Feds, hence the naming rights for the line, and that is the single largest amount ever invested in a transit project by our senior level of government. The planned SkyTrain Evergreen Line has received about $260 million in Federal support and we should start construction next fall, maybe a year or two after that if the fiscal situation of Translink does not sufficiently improve. The massive Gateway Program of bridges, highways, border infrastructure, ports, and rail upgrades has garnered well in excess of a billion from the Feds. The total fleet replacement, and fleet expansion, of our celebrated electric trolley buses in Vancouver was made possible with the help of the enhanced gas tax transfers. Then of course you have the Federal investment in the Olympics...

With all that in mind it makes me cringe when I hear the odd person railing about how Ottawa ignores the West.

[sauril]

Some background: I grew up in Montreal and now live in Calgary. I used the Metro and the suburban commuter train (heavy rail) a lot, and don't use the C-Train much, but that's probably because I lived in the suburbs of Montreal and live inner-city Calgary. I've visited Vancouver many times, but have never taken the Skytrain. Mostly because we had a car or the bus went where we needed it to.

I think that burying the line is by far the best way to go. While it may be disruptive in the short term to the business owners along Broadway, an at-grade C-Train style LRT will be way worse in the long run, as it eliminates parking and makes it a stretch of street to avoid.

The underground, as long as it has enough stops, will be just as good for moving people to and from the area for shopping.

[frinkprof]

I really hope we can too. A C-Train subway through downtown Calgary would be fantastic, and I'm sure it would be much appreciated on cold winter days. In general how has Calgary fared at securing cost sharing for the C-Train from the Federal Government?In short, not very well.

Although Calgary has stepped up its LRT expansion efforts over the last decade, and especially over the last couple years, it has mostly been in an ad-hoc one-project-at-a-time fashion. For instance, the newest NW and NE extensions were partly a throw-in to sweeten the LRT extension package Bronconnier was offering in the last election, which of course included WLRT. I have a suspicion that another small extension will be thrown in with the SELRT line in the same fashion for the 2010 municipal election. Coupled with that, Calgary still has a difficult time attaining a secure source of funding. While the province stepped up where the feds have not, the funding is not entirely secure in that it was restructured this year, which led to the NW line extension getting significantly delayed (from 2012 to 2014).

This isn't, of course, to say that the feds have been entirely absent. They chipped in to a recent odds-and-sods package that will see real-time arrival time displays, advanced electronic payment infrastructure, and station refurbishment/extensions. They also helped fund the purchase of 33 new LRVs that have been in service for almost 2 years now. I believe the latter was funded through gas tax transfers. Still though, the feds have fallen well short of the proportion of funding that Vancouver and Toronto public transit projects have seen. Well short.

As illustrated earlier, I personally think that there are 2 issues at play. One is that Calgary has not put together an enticing package of projects that the feds can get behind, similar to Transit City in Toronto, or BC's $14B in 10 years package. I'd like to see Calgary come up with a package that includes the SELRT, downtown subway, phase III NE extension (96th Ave. and Country Hills), west extension (85th St.), 4/5 LRV capacity platform extensions, and some other smaller improvments. 10 years, $5-6B. The second issue, at least in my perception, is that Calgary and Edmonton are being largely shunted by the feds, at least when it comes to public transportation funding. Whatever the reasoning is (votes not for sale), I think it's apparent.

Anyway, that's not to take away from the funding Vancouver is getting, especially with the Olympics coming. Good for you guys. I'm cool with you guys having 14 of my dollars to build a pretty good project in the Canada Line.

[Doug]

SkyTrain technology has 2 critical flaws:
1) It requires a dedicated ROW
2) It is a customer technology provided by one manufacturer meaning it will alway be expensive

The best option for Broadway would be LRT that is mostly grade separated. I can't remember the entire route, but I would suspect that are at least short sections were shared ROW could be used to save a bit of money without causing significant conflicts.

The much maligned 36st alignment of the CTrain could be easily fixed:
1) Extend the existing tunnel about another .5km to the north. This would avoid the busy cross streets around the Marlborough Mall area. A trench might work as well
2) Grade separation at the 16th Ave interchange.

That is the great thing about LRT technology. In 1984, an at grade ROW along 36th made sense. Now that congestion has increased, the ROW can be upgraded at the pressure points.

[lightrail]

SkyTrain technology has 2 critical flaws:
1) It requires a dedicated ROW
2) It is a customer technology provided by one manufacturer meaning it will alway be expensive

The best option for Broadway would be LRT that is mostly grade separated. I can't remember the entire route, but I would suspect that are at least short sections were shared ROW could be used to save a bit of money without causing significant conflicts.

The much maligned 36st alignment of the CTrain could be easily fixed:
1) Extend the existing tunnel about another .5km to the north. This would avoid the busy cross streets around the Marlborough Mall area. A trench might work as well
2) Grade separation at the 16th Ave interchange.

That is the great thing about LRT technology. In 1984, an at grade ROW along 36th made sense. Now that congestion has increased, the ROW can be upgraded at the pressure points.

HI Doug

Agree with the need for grade separation, but most subways in thw world are grade separated. LRT does have level crossings, something skytrain cannot do.

You are wrong that only one manufacturer makes the Linear Induction technology. there are actually several now so competitive bids are possible. It is more expensive to build due to the need for the reaction plates between the rails, but there are no moving parts, so the trains are inexpensive to maintain and last a long time.

LRT down the middle of Broadway is not a solution - at least not a long term solution. The buses on Broadway handle well over 80,000 a day and a rail system, grade separated, is expected to move over 200,000 per day in that corridor. The problem with the at grade LRT down the middle of broadway:
1. slices the street in half making pedestrian access across problematic and will slow the speed of the LRT cars
2. would bock interesections, again creating a barrier
3. trains would be slow to avoid pedestrian and have to wait for traffic lights
4. train lengths would be limited due to short blocks and stopping distances
5. while I have no problem removing two lanes of traffic for LRT, the stations would require more room which I don't beleive Broadway can handle given the pedestrian traffic demands expected
6. stations would become overcrowded and unsafe in a short-time period.
7. LRT would require a break of jouney at Commercial-Broadway Station - through trains to the east would be better
8. LRT would introduce yet another (third) technology making maintenance and operations more expensive - better to go with a proven technology
9. LRT will be much slower and carry less passengers than Skytrain - LRT will be less attractive and less likely to encourage high density development - Skytrain may have cost more, but the Expo Line is directly responsible for over $5 billion dollars in development around the station

[Dado]

HI Doug
[quote]
5. while I have no problem removing two lanes of traffic for LRT, the stations would require more room which I don't beleive Broadway can handle given the pedestrian traffic demands expected
This one might be solvable with the use of gauntlet tracks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauntlet_track) (interleaved tracks) at the stations, like this example from the Netherlands:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Tram_rails_not_quite_joining.JPG/800px-Tram_rails_not_quite_joining.JPG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tram_rails_not_quite_joining.JPG)

A variation would be to "pick a side" and sacrifice one lane on one side to get a single platform that is the width of an entire lane. The basic version works better though if buses will be stopping as well.

Using switches rather than gauntlet track is an option but trains can go through gauntlet tracks faster than through switches (since there's no, well, switching of tracks) and in this kind of setup extraneous delays would want to be avoided.

Gauntlet track introduces small bottlenecks but the decrease in capacity is not all that drastic if the stations are not too numerous and/or frequency is not too high. For example, on a 5 minute headway with dwells of 30 seconds a train leaving the gauntlet in one direction would not be followed by another train for another 4½ minutes. A train in the opposite direction would then have a ~4 minute window to enter and clear the gauntlet.

Naturally the signalling system would consider the section of gauntlet track along with a suitable length of the double track either side of it to be a single block so a train on one track would lock out a train from entering the gauntlet on the other track.

It may not be appropriate on this corridor, especially if your list of other issues is correct, but on other corridors with similar space constraints it would be an option.

[MalcolmTucker]

In short, not very well.

Although Calgary has stepped up its LRT expansion efforts over the last decade, and especially over the last couple years, it has mostly been in an ad-hoc one-project-at-a-time fashion. For instance, the newest NW and NE extensions were partly a throw-in to sweeten the LRT extension package Bronconnier was offering in the last election, which of course included WLRT. I have a suspicion that another small extension will be thrown in with the SELRT line in the same fashion for the 2010 municipal election. Coupled with that, Calgary still has a difficult time attaining a secure source of funding. While the province stepped up where the feds have not, the funding is not entirely secure in that it was restructured this year, which led to the NW line extension getting significantly delayed (from 2012 to 2014).

This isn't, of course, to say that the feds have been entirely absent. They chipped in to a recent odds-and-sods package that will see real-time arrival time displays, advanced electronic payment infrastructure, and station refurbishment/extensions. They also helped fund the purchase of 33 new LRVs that have been in service for almost 2 years now. I believe the latter was funded through gas tax transfers. Still though, the feds have fallen well short of the proportion of funding that Vancouver and Toronto public transit projects have seen. Well short.

As illustrated earlier, I personally think that there are 2 issues at play. One is that Calgary has not put together an enticing package of projects that the feds can get behind, similar to Transit City in Toronto, or BC's $14B in 10 years package. I'd like to see Calgary come up with a package that includes the SELRT, downtown subway, phase III NE extension (96th Ave. and Country Hills), west extension (85th St.), 4/5 LRV capacity platform extensions, and some other smaller improvments. 10 years, $5-6B. The second issue, at least in my perception, is that Calgary and Edmonton are being largely shunted by the feds, at least when it comes to public transportation funding. Whatever the reasoning is (votes not for sale), I think it's apparent.

Anyway, that's not to take away from the funding Vancouver is getting, especially with the Olympics coming. Good for you guys. I'm cool with you guys having 14 of my dollars to build a pretty good project in the Canada Line.

Calgary hasn't really fallen behind in commitments from the federal government. It is just we sometimes forget that we are a CMA of 1 million versus 2.1 for Vancouver and 5.5 million for Toronto. We get around the same amount per capita, per year.

It is totally up to city council how that amount is allocated, and in Calgary we have lots of important smaller projects that are useful uses of money. The West LRT quite frankly is because the province brought financing to the next level. We cannot expect the feds to match at one third everything we do just because we do it. Right now Calgary has ~$1.1 billion dollars of transit expansion on the books: the XRT, NELRT, WLRT, plus stimulus projects (four car trains, SE BRT completion/LRT prep, and a grab bag of others).

At the same time Vancouver has one major project on the go: the Evergreen Line that won't be complete until 2014 it looks like, and the federal contribution is ~$400 million. We (Calgaryians) can't expect the same level of funding as a city twice as big.

[kap384]

Can someone confirm/deny whether Vancouver has an additional gas tax that feeds directly to transit there? I was told this but don't necessarily believe it.

Thanks

[frinkprof]

Calgary hasn't really fallen behind in commitments from the federal government. It is just we sometimes forget that we are a CMA of 1 million versus 2.1 for Vancouver and 5.5 million for Toronto. We get around the same amount per capita, per year.Well, I did say they fall short of the proportion of funding seen by Vancouver and Toronto. I.e., even after accounting for the population difference, it still seems to me that federal funding is lacking.

At the same time Vancouver has one major project on the go: the Evergreen Line that won't be complete until 2014 it looks like, and the federal contribution is ~$400 million. We (Calgaryians) can't expect the same level of funding as a city twice as big.So the federal contribution to transit projects in Vancouver through 2014 is ~$400M. So, proportionally, Calgary should be seeing $150 - $200M over the same time period. All of Calgary's transit projects are also to be done by 2014 and the only federal funding going toward transit that I'm aware of is the $90M going toward the "odds and sods" package I mentioned before (4 car platforms, electronic fare payments, p&r for SEBRT, etc.). After taking into account that the City makes decisions on how to spend the federal funding they get, where is the supposed proportional funding going?

I'm sure you're right about actually getting equal treatment, but my point is that if you look at federal funding going toward transit when comparing Vancouver and Calgary, something is amiss.

[Doug]

HI Doug

Agree with the need for grade separation, but most subways in thw world are grade separated. LRT does have level crossings, something skytrain cannot do.

You are wrong that only one manufacturer makes the Linear Induction technology. there are actually several now so competitive bids are possible. It is more expensive to build due to the need for the reaction plates between the rails, but there are no moving parts, so the trains are inexpensive to maintain and last a long time.

LRT down the middle of Broadway is not a solution - at least not a long term solution. The buses on Broadway handle well over 80,000 a day and a rail system, grade separated, is expected to move over 200,000 per day in that corridor. The problem with the at grade LRT down the middle of broadway:
1. slices the street in half making pedestrian access across problematic and will slow the speed of the LRT cars
2. would bock interesections, again creating a barrier
3. trains would be slow to avoid pedestrian and have to wait for traffic lights
4. train lengths would be limited due to short blocks and stopping distances
5. while I have no problem removing two lanes of traffic for LRT, the stations would require more room which I don't beleive Broadway can handle given the pedestrian traffic demands expected
6. stations would become overcrowded and unsafe in a short-time period.
7. LRT would require a break of jouney at Commercial-Broadway Station - through trains to the east would be better
8. LRT would introduce yet another (third) technology making maintenance and operations more expensive - better to go with a proven technology
9. LRT will be much slower and carry less passengers than Skytrain - LRT will be less attractive and less likely to encourage high density development - Skytrain may have cost more, but the Expo Line is directly responsible for over $5 billion dollars in development around the station

Linear induction isn't the only thing about SkyTrain technology that makes it custom. For example, it also uses a custom gauge. Is there any company that makes technology that is completely interchangeable with Bombardier?

[MalcolmTucker]

Linear induction isn't the only thing about SkyTrain technology that makes it custom. For example, it also uses a custom gauge. Is there any company that makes technology that is completely interchangeable with Bombardier?

Skytrain is standard guage. And I am pretty sure it isn't proprietary. One of the SE asian systems (I believe Malaysia?) just bought more cars from another manufacturer. Now you might have to license some technology, like the control system, but that isn't any different than for any other rail control system.

[lightrail]

Can someone confirm/deny whether Vancouver has an additional gas tax that feeds directly to transit there? I was told this but don't necessarily believe it.

Thanks

Yes - Vancouver (Translink) receives a gas tax direct from the Province - it's a tax on all gas sold within the region and is included in the pump price. I'm not sure at the amount, but it was 5.5% (and I think there an additional amount for the road function bringing the total gas tax up to around 9% or so). Greater Victoria also has a gas tax of 3.5%.

[kap384]

Thanks:tup:

[lightrail]

Skytrain is standard guage. And I am pretty sure it isn't proprietary. One of the SE asian systems (I believe Malaysia?) just bought more cars from another manufacturer. Now you might have to license some technology, like the control system, but that isn't any different than for any other rail control system.

SkyTrain is standard gauge. Toronto's subway and streetcars, on the other hand, are not - they're 2 inches wider than standard gauge for historic reasons.

[jeffwhit]

As an occasional visitor to Vancouver, I'm hardly an expert, but it seems like it would be impossible to run anything but a tunneled line to UBC, be it down Broadway, or a more southern alignment. 36th Street in Calgary is practically a freeway compared to Broadway, and it's a mess. I can't imagine anyone who lives west of Main wants elevated track along a Broadway alignment, or frankly almost any east-west alignment.

[DarkKeyo]

Having just been to Vancouver and ridden the B-line down Broadway from the UBC to the Canada line... my 2 cents are: surface rail would not work at all. Built it as a SkyTrain extension underground.