New Seabus: Burrard Pacific Breeze

[Rusty Gull]

John Colebourn
The Province

Thursday, June 12, 2008


TransLink said yesterday it has signed an agreement to build its long-planned third SeaBus for Burrard Inlet.

The $25-million vessel will be built at the Washington Marine Group shipyard in Victoria and is to go into service in summer 2009.

TransLink chairman Dale Parker said the addition of a third SeaBus will cut wait times during peak hours by five minutes.

At peak times, the SeaBus will run every 10 minutes compared to the current 15 minutes.

The new SeaBus initially will replace one of the two older vessels during its refit. The two existing boats were built 31 years ago.

Parker said all three 400-passenger vessels will be in service by early 2010, in time for the Winter Olympics.

"This is a key piece of our expansion," said Parker. "This is a big day for us."

Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon said B.C. will chip in $4.8 million of the cost.

"By 2010, all three vessels will be running and once every 10 minutes during peak times, so that's great for folks using the system."

Malcolm Barker of the Washington Marine Group said the vessel will be as fuel-efficient as possible.

"This vessel will be the greenest of vessels," he said.

"The vessel will be built on budget and will be on time."

He said the project will allow the company to keep existing apprentices fully employed.

North Vancouver Mayor Darrell Mussatto said that with the high price of gasoline, the SeaBus addition "couldn't come at a better time."

"People are looking for alternatives to driving," he said.

North Vancouver District Mayor Richard Walton said cutting wait times by five minutes will be a huge bonus for commuters.

"It does get very crowded during the rush hour," he said. "This is really good news."

Student Emilia Pelech, 21, said she uses the SeaBus daily and would welcome better service.

"I like the SeaBus and this is good for commuters," she said.

She would like to see the SeaBus run every 15 minutes during non-peak hours.

"It would be nice if they ran it every 15 minutes on weekends," she said.

jcolebourn@png.canwest.com

© The Vancouver Province 2008

[bugsy]

Would it be possible to extend the Canada Line from its current terminus at Waterfront Station to North Vancouver someday?

[Jared]

Originally Posted by bugsy

Would it be possible to extend the Canada Line from its current terminus at Waterfront Station to North Vancouver someday?

From what I understand, the tunnel is too shallow at Waterfront to be able to dive under the seabed, the trains simply cant handle the type of grade needed to stay underground. Maybe they could try one of those floating tunnels, but I can't see that happening for a long time - they're rather unproven, and obviously very expensive.

[Hed Kandi]

Forget the new $25 Million Sea Bus and the costs of running the other two, Translink and the City of Vancouver should construct a bridge for the skytrain to North and West Van. All three of the municipalities and translink should split the costs of constructing the new line and bridge.

[jlousa]

I'm postive West Van would not chip in at all as they would not want skytrain running anywhere near them. Pretty sure North Van feels the same way.

[agrant]

^^ True. West Van residents are hyper nimbies. There's no way they'd want skytrain running through. Besides, everyone has access to a Bentley or something of that nature.

Probably not worth the money right now anyway. If you wanted to go with the most direct route, as opposed to running skytrain over to the second narrows, I would think you'd want a George Massey Tunnel type of option. A bridge of that length, I'm guessing, would be a hell of a lot more expensive. Anyway, as long as the seabus can handle the demand there won't be much talk of a skytrain crossing, other than from us.

[SpongeG]

they could always link belcarra and deep cove and give better access from the eastern suburbs/fraser valley to north and west van

the seabus does a good job as is

people here are so lazy they don't wanna make transfers

lame

[Rusty Gull]

The problem isn't the transfer. It's the duration of the trip.

The crossing is 12 minutes in length, roughly. But don't forget that during peak hours, the congestion up the runway to Waterfront Station can add another 5 to 10 minutes.

A Skytrain crossing over Burrard Inlet would take... what... 4 or 5 minutes tops?

[SpongeG]

thats not that bad

most people seem to enjoy the relaxation

we aren't toronto after all where its a rat race

[Rusty Gull]

^ Good point. A SkyTrain link-up would be nice, but it would also change the nature of the North Shore forever. Goodbye "small-town" North Van... hello "power suburb" ala Burnaby or Richmond.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by Rusty Gull

^ Good point. A SkyTrain link-up would be nice, but it would also change the nature of the North Shore forever. Goodbye "small-town" North Van... hello "power suburb" ala Burnaby or Richmond.

I'm fine with keeping the SeaBus as is... funny thing is that I don't think people notice it's a 10 minute ferry ride since it's such an enjoyable experience.

I had a vision where the Hastings LRT extended over the Lions Gate Bridge (vehicles use tunnel near the bridge) to Ampleside, and then LRT to Lonsdale. But still keeping the SeaBus.

[SpongeG]

its not like the north shore is going to be able to get any bigger either

i think a simple streetcar up lonsdale and one that runs along the waterfront - as it did back in the day would serve it pretty well

it would cost way too much money to justify the cost of serving a fairly stagnant population

north vancouver is also a place where you choose to live knowing your limited transport options

[LeftCoaster]

I agree. As a north shore resident i would love to see rapid tranist to make my life easier it is just not needed badly enough at this point. Perhaps a few dozen years down the road but there are other places in the region that need it so much more than here.

Originally Posted by deasine

I had a vision where the Hastings LRT extended over the Lions Gate Bridge (vehicles use tunnel near the bridge) to Ampleside, and then LRT to Lonsdale. But still keeping the SeaBus.

Yeah I could see that going over well... a rapid transit line linking Hastings directly to West Van!

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by deasine

I'm fine with keeping the SeaBus as is... funny thing is that I don't think people notice it's a 10 minute ferry ride since it's such an enjoyable experience.

Personally I like the seabus, especially on a sunny day, but I ride it about 3 times a year. If you were commuting on it every day, I think you'd be pretty sick of it, especially on rainy/windy winter days.

[twoNeurons]

Run LRT down the centre of Lion's Gate re-institute a toll and make the bridge one-lane in each direction. The Park board's happy (less car traffic through Stanley Park) the North Shore gets excellent transit, and use the toll to buy carbon credits (The environmentalists are happy).

one problem... the British Properties.

[SpongeG]

they should build some of these puppies



source

[Smooth]

Originally Posted by tintinium

Run LRT down the centre of Lion's Gate re-institute a toll and make the bridge one-lane in each direction. The Park board's happy (less car traffic through Stanley Park) the North Shore gets excellent transit, and use the toll to buy carbon credits (The environmentalists are happy).

one problem... the British Properties.

I'm pretty sure the Lion's Gate bridge would not be able to support the additional weight of LRT. Large trucks are not even allowed on the bridge. The third lane is also vital for clearing accidents.

[eduardo88]

Originally Posted by Smooth

I'm pretty sure the Lion's Gate bridge would not be able to support the additional weight of LRT. Large trucks are not even allowed on the bridge. The third lane is also vital for clearing accidents.

Well the extra weight of the LRT would be offset by the reduction in weight from less cars and trucks being on the bridge

[twoNeurons]

Large trucks are not allowed on the bridge because the lanes are so narrow. In addition, they want truck traffic going over the 2nd narrows.

The Lion's Gate can Easily support the weight of a tram. You COULD make it trams and buses only during rush periods. You could still use the lane in the event of an accident.

[officedweller]

Marginally related ....

Last updated June 18, 2008 10:49 p.m. PT

Panel studies adding trains to I-90 bridge
Structure will need protection from stray current
By LARRY LANGE
P-I REPORTER

Putting commuter trains on the Interstate 90 bridge will require protecting the structure against damage from stray electrical current and may require innovative ways to attach the rails to avoid damaging the span, a panel of experts told state lawmakers Wednesday.

A Sound Transit project manager said the trains would likely have to slow for a few seconds while crossing joints between the floating bridge and its approaches. And who would pay for what part of the project is still being worked out.

"This is very new to us, the idea of putting light rail on a floating bridge," said state project manager Theresa Greco.

A five-member team of engineers and corrosion experts told the Joint Legislative Transportation Committee that additional detectors and expert staff should be used to watch for damage from stray electrical train current to the steel structural members and concrete.

Engineer Thomas Ballard said the direct current will flow from overhead wires into the trains and onto the tracks, making a loop back to the substation, and some could get into the bridge itself, corroding the steel and cracking concrete.

"Every rail system in the world has this happen, so we have to expect that it's going to happen" on this bridge, he said.

Ballard, the leader of the team, said the bridge "is so important, it's well worth the cost" to keep detectors to monitor "stray current" and hire expert staff to watch for damage and initiate repairs.

The team didn't give cost estimates, but team member and corrosion expert Ali Akbar Sohanghpurwala said it would be "a drop in the bucket" compared to the overall cost of extending light rail service from Seattle to the Eastside.

Sound Transit officials proposed such an extension last year, but voters rejected it as part of a $47.2 billion roads-and-transit tax measure. Sound Transit is considering whether to submit a smaller, transit-only package this year, and Eastside rail service is included in the proposals under study.

Sound Transit's East Link project manager, Don Billen, said his agency will monitor the current to prevent damage. Billen also said the agency is testing different methods of attaching the rail to the center portion of the bridge, to avoid pushing so far into the concrete that structure reinforcing steel is damaged. He said at the very least, radar can be used to locate steel, so it won't be damaged if the rail blocks are attached with dowels driven into the deck, a conventional method.

Ballard said attaching rail pads with adhesives is one option, though any method will have to be extensively tested. He said the challenge won't be as great as at Boston's "Big Dig" tunnel, where crews used adhesives to attach concrete panels to ceilings; several failed, killing the passenger in a car. On the I-90 bridge, gravity will help hold the tracks to the deck in addition to other fasteners.

The tracks will have to be built on special short "bridges" to get across expansion joints connecting the floating span to approaches on each side of Lake Washington. Billen said trains will have to slow for the slight elevations over the joints, to avoid jostling or injuring riders, but that they'll run at 55 mph between the joints and on either side of them.

Details are still being worked out, he said, but he estimated the slowdowns would add about 30 seconds to the cross-lake train ride between Rainier Avenue and Mercer Island, "a relatively small impact."