Broadway Rapid Transit Corridor Discussion | Proposed

[jlousa]

Really strange that it's now back up. I've saved locally it just incase.

[Waders]

Hmm. The link is still broken as of Saturday night at 7:30pm

Edit: Not sure whether Translink really wanted to remove the report.
But I discovered a link that displays the report as HTML at here

[allan_kuan]

More like the person who's maintaining the website tonight was slightly drunk and/or sleep deprived consequently did a slightly messy job inserting those links and attachments in there. =S

However it's good to hear that RRT is supported by the majority... finally... (hopefully) no more rule of the tyranny! =O

[racc]

This one works:
http://www.translink.ca/~/media/docu...%20report.ashx

[Waders]

Thanks, saved the pdf file.
The link's behaviour is really strange.

[jsbertram]

Here's the link to the "What We Heard" page of the UBC Line Rapid Transit Study:

http://www.translink.ca/en/Be-Part-o...-We-Heard.aspx

This page has been updated with a summary of the results of the Phase 2 consultations and it has the official link to the Phase 2 summary report PDF.


The final Phase 2 public consultations in 2012 will narrow the choices for the alignment & technology down to the preferred alternative, which can then be presented to the decision-makers (Translink, City of Vancouver, Provincial Government, UBC, UBCEL, GVRD) for their approval.


Phase 3 of this study will start once a preferred alternative is selected so the design details, potential phasing and a timeline for implementation will be created.

[jlousa]

Okay the good news it appears the COV is expecting something to happen and possibly very soon. They just issued a NOITC on the corridor with a very short deadline.

Re: Consulting Services for Active Transportation Whitepaper on the Broadway Corridor

The City of Vancouver (City) has identified an immediate need by means of single source curement process to obtain consulting services to hire an expert in the field of active transportation planning to produce a whitepaper for active transportation on the Broadway corridor to assist with the UBC Line study.
The requirements that any interested suppliers will be required to demonstrate to the City’s satisfaction will include but not necessarily be limited to:
1. To review the existing Broadway corridor conditions and summarize the active transportation uses of the corridor (including local streets parallel to Broadway).
2. To identify current strengths and issues for active transportation along the corridor as it exists today.
3. To review opportunities for active transportation improvements to the corridor under the existing transit scenario, potentially including further traffic calming, more separated bike lanes, etc.
4. To identify issues and potential active transportation improvements in the corridor should a grade-separated UBC Line option be chosen and assuming that two travel lanes were to be reallocated.
5. To identify issues and potential active transportation improvements should a UBC Line surface option be chosen.
6. To conduct a comparative review and evaluation of the positive and negative aspects of both surface and underground options for the UBC Line from an active transportation perspective.

Review Area

The review will encompass the Broadway corridor rapid transit study area (Broadway from Commercial Dr to Alma St) and include parallel active transportation corridors between 2nd/4th/6th Aves/Great Northern Way and 12th Ave.

Deliverables

The primary deliverable will be a “whitepaper” which describes active transportation in the Broadway corridor, and includes the following:
- current strengths and weaknesses
- impacts and potential improvements of potential surface and underground transit systems
- recommendations about the future of active transportation on the corridor in relation to a long-term rapid transit choice.

This whitepaper would assist the City in evaluating technology options for the Broadway corridor rapid transit system. Ideally, the final whitepaper is relatively brief (up to 20 pages) and should be a document that is readable and well illustrated. It should include a short executive summary up-front to communicate the high-level findings. Technical details should be provided in appendices.
The main technical work for the UBC Line study is expected to be complete in early fall 2011.
The whitepaper completion would ideally correspond with that. The planned deadline for the final deliverables is September 30, 2011.

The only issue I have is it seems to imply a desired result just like they commissioning of the Viaduct study. Really wish they would leave items open and let the paper speak for itself.

ie item 4 assume 2 travel lanes be removed if grade separated is chosen. While personally I don't have an issue with this and would love to see the parking lane remain with curb outs at all intersections so that the parking lane would never be a driving lane but only parking and busstops while making crossing the street easier and offering a buffer for pedestrian activities. I just do not like to see options removed and instead options removed based on the paper itself not by politics.

[Prometheus]

It only encompasses the area between Commercial and Alma. That doesn't get you to UBC.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Prometheus

It only encompasses the area between Commercial and Alma. That doesn't get you to UBC.

Lets see if anyone at CoV is reading this thread and this NOITC gets changed to include 10th Ave from Alma to Blanca as part of the 'Broadway Corridor'.

West of Blanca isn't CoV jurisdiction.


Or is someone accidentally hinting that the new UBC Line will end at Alma?

[jlousa]

Since they are calling for a Broadway whitepaper I can understand why it only calls for the study area until Alma. But it certainly seems to hint that the line will go past Granville and even Arbutus so I think all the way to UBC is the goal.

Here's an article in todays Sun.

“This rate of growth is a clear signal that we need to start expanding the network again.”

TransLink’s figures over the first six months of the year suggest 2011 ridership will outpace 2010’s tally of 211.3 million riders by a large margin. To date this year, the company has logged 114.4 million passengers.

Year-over-year increases in ridership is nothing new to the transportation authority, with TransLink reporting nine straight record breaking years.

It is now pushing the public to support a plan to expand bus routes, increase SeaBus sailings, upgrade SkyTrain stations, and build a rapid transit line to the University of B.C.

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Rec...944/story.html

[logan5]

You need only look at the popularity of the already overcrowded C Line to see how the city will utilize rapid transit. And the Broadway Line would be no different. With each new RRT line, there is a ripple effect that makes our transit system as a whole, exponentially better, and will draw more and more people out of their vehicles and decrease demand for vehicles as well.

I know people would go apeshit, but I would like to see a 10 cent gas tax levied at the pump. Then maybe some of these more realistic transit ideas can become a reality. Maybe we could start building the Broadway Line next year instead of... well, who knows when.

[ssiguy]

Vancouver has done and excellent job of mass/rapid transit construction in the last 30 years.
Remember that Vancouver was the last of Canada's 6 largest cities to get rapid transit and now is already tied with Tor/Mon.
I hope to hell they don't make the same stupid mistake they did on the Canada Line and build the station under capacity. They should build the station at 100 meters to accomodate 3 MK11 trains.

[red-paladin]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Vancouver has done and excellent job of mass/rapid transit construction in the last 30 years.
Remember that Vancouver was the last of Canada's 6 largest cities to get rapid transit and now is already tied with Tor/Mon.
I hope to hell they don't make the same stupid mistake they did on the Canada Line and build the station under capacity. They should build the station at 100 meters to accomodate 3 MK11 trains.

Well I would say build it the same 80m as normal but make it expandable to 120 like the rest of the system.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Well I would say build it the same 80m as normal but make it expandable to 120 like the rest of the system.

Yeah there's no point in building out to 100m if the rest of the M line can only handle 80m trains. It's really important that they make it expandable to 120m from the beginning though.

[logan5]

I guess translink had the mark1 trains in mind when they allowed for 120m platforms (I assume that figure is correct), as that would allow for 10 car mark1 trains but would allow for 7 car mark2 trains. When the time comes it would make the most sense to extend right to 120m.

Just for fun I calculated that a 7 car train would have a capacity of over 1000 people. A 10 car mark1 train would hold 800 passengers. Using mark2 trains the system would be capable of handling over 40 000 pphpd.

[Zassk]

I'd love long stations too, but if it is a choice between 120m stations to Arbutus or 80m stations to UBC.... given that money is not growing on trees currently.... I would accept the tradeoff of smaller stations to get a longer line on day one.

[LeftCoaster]

Agreed, as long as the system is built to handle current capacity and expansions in the future I don't care if platforms are 20m long.

Build us what we need for today and make it easy to expand tomorrow. Clearly the most sensible option.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Remember that Vancouver was the last of Canada's 6 largest cities to get rapid transit and now is already tied with Tor/Mon.

Find that kind of hard to believe since Ottawa still doesn't have rapid transit... unless you count BRT.

Regardless your point still stands that it has seen fantastic growth. Hopefully this trend continues.

[ssiguy]

Yes I was including Ottawa's Transitway. It is both rapid and has very high ridership levels.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Find that kind of hard to believe since Ottawa still doesn't have rapid transit... unless you count BRT.

Transit is "rapid" when it has grade separation, not because it uses a particular type of vehicle. This is why I have such a big problem with at-grade LRT - it's simply not "rapid".

[bardak]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Transit is "rapid" when it has grade separation, not because it uses a particular type of vehicle. This is why I have such a big problem with at-grade LRT - it's simply not "rapid".

If done properly using level crossing like Calgary does outside of downtown at grade LRT is fine but that is not what is being proposed.