Canada Line races toward capacity

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Changing City

1999 was when the City report was published, but it's referencing back to the early 1990s. Assuming it's correct, presumably there was no reason why an elevated transit station couldn't have been light rail, rather than SkyTrain? I think they were looking at all the options for both routes.

Yeah, the map above shows the Arbutus option, too, but the opposition was stirred by just the elevated possibility on Cambie.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

One of the reasons that Bombardier's proposal was more expensive, was because there's supposedly a massive BC Hydro line and a water main under the Cambie median, so placing a trench there would have incurred the cost of moving that infrastructure.
InTransitBC wisely chose to dig their temporary trench and place the guideway under the northbound roadway, avoiding relocation of the BC Hydro facility.
That was smart thinking.
PS - InTransitBC did not end up using the "innovative method" and ended up doing cast-in-place because of delays in project approval.
The innovative method was precast tunnel segments which required moving in one direction from one end to the other end,
but with the shorter time frame, it was faster to pour concrete at multiple work sites.

Note that the BC Hydro line only goes up to Oakridge.

Why didn't they just propose having a trench on the side of the road (on the NB lanes) instead of the median then (and narrowing the median), as the Canada Line does between the tunnel portal and Marine?

I guess that means reconstructing the road, but cut-and-cover required road reconstruction anyways.

Also, do you have the full copy of that and Bombardier's proposal?

[jollyburger]

Not sure if this is new or not to this discussion. This Downtown Transportation Plan from 2002 has a bunch of the possible alignments for the Canada Line.

https://council.vancouver.ca/020528/dtp-2.pdf

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Note that the BC Hydro line only goes up to Oakridge.

Why didn't they just propose having a trench on the side of the road (on the NB lanes) instead of the median then (and narrowing the median), as the Canada Line does between the tunnel portal and Marine?

I guess that means reconstructing the road, but cut-and-cover required road reconstruction anyways.

Also, do you have the full copy of that and Bombardier's proposal?

Bombarier's proposal was not publicly released.
There's only a few tidbits disclosed in the Best and Final Offer (BAFO) report.
Only what's presented can be evaluated (you can't manipulate the proposals to favour one outcome).

Here, you can see that Bombardier did propose a trench on the northbound lanes (east side of street),
but it would appear it was only a part of its alternate streetcar proposal (right side below).



Here's SNC-Lavalin's:



There were also the "Essential Elements" which included no net loss of greenspace on the Cambie Heritage Boulevard,
so maybe that factored in too.
You can also see the vehicle and pedestrian crossing requirements over the trench if a trench were used.
I think the full tunnel probably was the determining factor favouring SNC Lavalin.

[jollyburger]

This lawsuit around the Canada Line has some more data for anyone else interested.

https://www.bcexpropriationassociati...-Vancouver.pdf

[twoNeurons]

The bids were also not allowed to use the existing efficiencies of using the same technology on both lines for things like Maintenance efficiencies in their cost benefits.

That would allowed more creativity for the Bombardier proposal.

At the time, there was still some sentiment that SkyTrain was niche technology that Vancouver was saddled with... that it was some fancy one-of-a-kind gadgetbahn. Of course, since then... automated systems have popped up all over, even ones using LIM. I'm sure any number of rail operators could have built replacement trains or extended the line as the technology and automated nature of the SkyTrain system isn't all that special after all.

There was a Light Rail boom in North America overall. Much of that sentiment has died down, even in the US... so there was an appetite for so-called conventional off-the-shelf systems.

Also part of the reason they went with the Rotem cars was perhaps not to not "tie" themselves to one manufacturer.

RavXPress trains were not only faster, but they'd have longer platforms. Admittedly, though, the wider Rotem trains are nice, especially with trains that go to the airport. I didn't know that they planned an additional station at the airport. I'm curious where that would have gone. As it stands now, there are only 3 stations... (with one future space for an expanded international terminal station) but RavXPress had 5 stops. Burkeville, perhaps?

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Not sure if this is new or not to this discussion. This Downtown Transportation Plan from 2002 has a bunch of the possible alignments for the Canada Line.

https://council.vancouver.ca/020528/dtp-2.pdf

Thanks for this.

Looks like RavXPress would likely have been shifted slightly east downtown down Cambie possibly with an additional station at Vancouver Library and South of Gastown perhaps around Victory Square. That certainly would have changed the dynamics of the line. You wouldn't need an explicit super convenient transfer point to the existing lines like the Canada Line kind of benefits from at Granville as most would just opt to stay on the train going to Burrard or Granville.



We basically got a hybrid of the different plans:


With one stop dropped downtown (I think it was at Nelson?)

Okay, I'll stop whining now.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Thanks for this.

Looks like RavXPress would likely have been shifted slightly east downtown down Cambie possibly with an additional station at Vancouver Library and South of Gastown perhaps around Victory Square. That certainly would have changed the dynamics of the line. You wouldn't need an explicit super convenient transfer point to the existing lines like the Canada Line kind of benefits from at Granville as most would just opt to stay on the train going to Burrard or Granville.



We basically got a hybrid of the different plans:


With one stop dropped downtown (I think it was at Nelson?)

Okay, I'll stop whining now.

The earlier plans that officedweller showed also showed the Canada connecting to the Expo via a parallel track to the Dunsmuir Tunnel that would eventually reach the same depth and connect with it (using otherwise the same alignment, whi8ch has better catchment than shifting the tunnel eastwards.)

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The earlier plans that officedweller showed also showed the Canada connecting to the Expo via a parallel track to the Dunsmuir Tunnel that would eventually reach the same depth and connect with it (using otherwise the same alignment, whi8ch has better catchment than shifting the tunnel eastwards.)

Those aren't really 'plans', they're more 'possibilities'. They're from the Downtown Transportation Plan (adopted in 2002), and they were included because when the Plan was written (in 1999) that was all that existed to suggest how a Richmond/airport link might get built downtown. It was taken from the 1990 report for TransLink by N D Lea, that also considered routes down Cambie, and Arbutus. It also considered technology, Light Rail and SkyTrain.

It seems as if no conclusions on preferred routes were reached, (or the City wouldn't have shown all the alternatives). I think that was because it became apparent that funding wasn't going to be available, although as noted above, apparently 'Until June 1998 all levels of government were anticipating a conventional light rail system'.

The decision to build something in the early 2000s started a whole new exercise to examine both route choice and technology, but this time with some clear parameters about funding, opertation and route - and timing was critical too as it was intended to be operational before the Olympics.

At the time the Arbutus route actually 'served' more jobs and residents as they existed in 2001, because of picking up higher densities at Kerrisdale, Granville Island etc. But the Cambie route was more direct, didn't involve having to buy the right-of-way from CP (who had their own ideas about its value and development potential), and had a chance to 'shape' future development, passing sites like Oakridge Centre.

[officedweller]

That's right, those "possibilities" are really old from the 1990 proposals, not the Canada Line / RAV era.

I don't recall a parallel track to the Dunsmuir Tunnel in the concept alignments for Canada Line.
Dunsmuir Station would have a perpendicular track above or below the Expo Line (no siding or wye).
Even for the RAV Express proposal, it's unknown how their track would have connected to the Expo Line at Waterfront (or Dunsmuir) - if at all.
All the concept alignments for RAV / Canada Line went down Granville, which would prevent interlining with Expo Line's tail track (as considered in the early 1990s).

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I didn't know that they planned an additional station at the airport. I'm curious where that would have gone. As it stands now, there are only 3 stations... (with one future space for an expanded international terminal station) but RavXPress had 5 stops. Burkeville, perhaps?

I was wondering that too...
... or South Terminal?

[jollyburger]

Was this a Capstan proposal?

Fast + Epp collaborated with Perkins&Will Architects to develop a novel concept design for a new Skytrain station on the existing Canada Line in Richmond, BC. Given that there were no accommodations made in the existing guideway design for this addition, the station had to be designed to be completely independent of the guideway structure while still maintaining the strict vertical and horizontal displacement criteria at their interface.

https://www.fastepp.com/portfolio/pr...nfill-station/

[SkytrainCar026]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Was this a Capstan proposal?





https://www.fastepp.com/portfolio/pr...nfill-station/

Yes! Dailyhive ran an article about it a while back.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/caps...ternate-design