Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion II

[Migrant_Coconut]

In fairness, the YVR branch averages pretty low boardings compared to the rest of the network (roughly 10k out of 100k+). Unless TransLink starts ramping up the off-peak frequencies and extending late hours - or better yet, retrofitting Bridgeport to make YVR work as its own independent spur line - flyers will likely continue riding taxis into the city, not max out SkyTrain demand.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

In fairness, the YVR branch averages pretty low ridership compared to the rest of the network. Unless TransLink starts ramping up the off-peak frequencies and extending late hours (or better yet, retrofitting Bridgeport to work as its own independent spur line), flyers will likely continue riding taxis into the city rather than add to SkyTrain demand.

On the other hand, as the Skytrain network continues to expand, Skytrain will become more and more of a viable choice for people to get to the Airport quickly. Right now if you live in Burnaby it's doomed to try to Skytrain to YVR, but the equation will change a bit once the Broadway Extension is up and running. I know my family in North Vancouver is often happy to do drop offs and pickups at the Seabus for flights without serious baggage.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Right now if you live in Burnaby it's doomed to try to Skytrain to YVR...

You can take buses from Burnaby along Hastings, Broadway or 49th Ave to the Canada Line in order to get to the airport. I live in East Vancouver and have gone to (and from) the airport using the 41st Ave bus a few times in the past year.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

You can take buses from Burnaby along Hastings, Broadway or 49th Ave to the Canada Line in order to get to the airport. I live in East Vancouver and have gone to (and from) the airport using the 41st Ave bus a few times in the past year.

I'm glad that works for you, but with a carry-on and a suitcase I think a lot of people would prefer not to stand outside waiting for a bus that might not even have a seat.

All I'm saying is that as transit gets better in Vancouver, more people that are on the edge of being convinced are going to see it as their preferred option.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Maybe. I'd argue that the main use of the Canada Line (south of 41st, at least) is getting in and out of Richmond. The line itself is only at 60% of its potential capacity, and north of 41st, there's options for relief lines.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Maybe. I'd argue that the main use of the Canada Line (south of 41st, at least) is getting in and out of Richmond.

We can just look at Translink's numbers.

Currently 1 in 3 riders south of Vancouver are in or outbound to YVR.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The ultimate capacity of the Canada Line (15,000 ppdph?) WAS the result of Metro Vancouver long term planning, which limited the growth prospects of Richmond because it's on a flood plain prone to liquefaction in an earthquake (it was excluded from the Growth Concentration Area).

Political pressure had it subsequently included in the Growth Concentration Area.

Page 5 of this Richmond Rapid Transit report from 2002 sort of addresses it.

https://citycouncil.richmond.ca/__sh...item172087.pdf

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Currently 1 in 3 riders south of Vancouver are in or outbound to YVR.

More like 1 in 4 (15.8k/63.8k); 1 in 2 are Richmond riders. The remaining quarter are presumably boarding/disembarking at 49th or Marine.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

More like 1 in 4 (15.8k/63.8k); 1 in 2 are Richmond riders. The remaining quarter are presumably boarding/disembarking at 49th or Marine.

Okay 1 in 4 then if you want to calculate that way. It's still not chump change.

As jollyburger's link suggests, in 2001 Richmond was extremely aware that the Richmond-YVR-Vancouver corridor was getting busy and was only going to get busier. (It's interesting to note that the report came out December 2001 and they specifically mention that they expect the events of 9/11 to only temporarily affect air travel.) The idea that the Canada Line was actually built with long term planning in mind is a little bit of a cope in my mind. Both Brodie and Corrigan were intentionally trying to get it as underbuilt as possible, that's just the sad history of the line.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by chowhou

- snip -

TransLink's numbers, not mine.

I'm not suggesting it was built with foresight, I'm suggesting that even the value-engineered version we got will just barely do the job. The Canada's future capacity is roughly the Expo's current capacity; the same link indicates the latter is currently handling 100k+ daily volumes between Main and Edmonds, and that's with all of Metrotown, New West and Surrey to carry - difficult, but not impossible.

There's also the possibility of relief lines once the Canada finally maxes out: provide alternate express routes to Oakridge, Langara, Kerrisdale, Broadway, downtown et al, and now the south-of-41st crowd has more room on the train.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

TransLink's numbers, not mine.

Gotta defend myself here, I clearly said south of Vancouver and you're calculating south of 41st, so those are your numbers.

I'm not suggesting it was built with foresight, I'm suggesting that even the value-engineered version we got will just barely do the job. The Canada's future capacity is roughly the Expo's current capacity; the same link indicates the latter is currently handling 100k+ daily volumes between Main and Edmonds, and that's with all of Metrotown, New West and Surrey to carry - difficult, but not impossible.

There's also the possibility of relief lines once the Canada finally maxes out: provide alternate express routes to Oakridge, Broadway and downtown, and now the south-of-41st crowd has more room on the train.

Then I'm not arguing with you, I'm arguing with the person who said that the Canada Line was built with future projections in mind. It clearly was not and the historical record backs that up.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by chowhou

- snip -

Fair... so that's one-third against two-thirds. My point was that Richmond's the bigger destination.

It was built to be expandable. Whether the projections were too conservative is another discussion, but it's pretty much a fact that the Day 1 capacity was not intended to be the maximum.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Do you think the Growth Concentration Area meant zero growth in Richmond? Richmond in 2021 actually had almost the exact expected 15 year population growth proposed in the 1996 Liveable Region Strategic Plan... Unless you think the Canada Line was designed with 1990 numbers in mind and they failed to update their projections 15 years later, no they clearly did not build the Canada Line with a lot of long term planning in mind.

Not to mention that YVR only continues to expand...

No, it wouldn't have meant zero growth, but the RAV system RFP specifications were based on that 15,000 number, so that's what the bidders designed to.

... and remember that naysayers were saying that it would never reach capacity.

See Appendix B Essential Elements here:

The System must be capable of expansion to 15,000 passengers per hour per day without
significant changes to the existing physical infrastructure.

https://www.infrastructurebc.com/fil...2April2006.pdf

That figure is close to half what the ultimate capacity of the Expo Line (28,000?) would have been projected to be.
From the outset, it was requested to be a smaller scale system than the Expo Line.

There's a map here (1996 LRSP, I think) that shows the Growth Concentration Area excluding Richmond, in favour of areas on higher ground/bedrock.
https://www.sfu.ca/geog/geog496sprin...0City%20Center.

I found a bit of LRSP history in this article:
https://uwaterloo.ca/applied-sustain...rowth_mgmt.pdf


https://uwaterloo.ca/applied-sustain...rowth_mgmt.pdf

[Migrant_Coconut]

tl;dr - Richmond pushed for more development and worse transit... now they're pushing for the opposite. The Canada Line's planners couldn't have accounted for Brodie and co. being flat-out incompetent.

[jollyburger]

I think there were also some weird municipal/provincial political dynamics as well at play on who got to be included in the group.

By the time the Proposals were passed into binding law on July 9, 1975, the recommendations had been significantly watered down. The GVRD Board, Chaired by Mayor of Surrey, Bill Vander Zalm, amended the original document to reflect an intention to begin preparing the conditions for a Surrey RTC immediately. And because Surrey was included, Coquitlam’s RTC was also approved. As it turned out, amending the plan made little difference. That same year, the newly elected Bill Bennett Social Credit provincial government quickly began to send signals that support for regionalism would be reduced.

Within two years, a whole set of previously dismissed Regional Town Centres were named. North Vancouver’s Lonsdale RTC was designated, rationalized in part by the prior establishment of the head offices for ICBC. Richmond RTC was rationalized in part because of the establishment of head offices for another crown corporation, the Workers Compensation Board and the recent construction of the Richmond Centre Mall. Langley RTC was designated thanks to intensive lobbying pressure by then-City Mayor Marlene Grinell, while Maple Ridg RTC was established for no apparent reason other than that Langley was already designated, so why not?

https://urbanshift.ca/projects/burna...-centre-model/

[WarrenC12]

We'll see how much the Arbutus extension adds to Canada Line YVR traffic.

As a tourist I always want to take a train from the airport when I arrive. But if my journey requires a bus connection, I switch to a cab/uber.

[GenWhy?]

A colleague was checking City Hall Watch to see where some complaining on their project was coming from (they had to redraw some shadows) and she stumbled upon this gem from Oct. 6:

"Construction has not started yet on SLS and now is the time to stop this bad project."

[GenWhy?]

Followed by:
"Over the last 25 years millions of dollars have been wasted on studies and reports"... then...
"All these major projects have been delayed and the final costs might be even higher.

The longer we wait the longer it will take and the costs will keep going up."