Canada Line | Completed

[Unregistered]

New bike bridge connects Richmond and Vancouver

A new $10-million bike and pedestrian route linking Richmond and Vancouver will open Friday, three days ahead of the grand opening of the Canada Line, Metro Vancouver's new rapid-transit route.

The one-kilometre route hangs beneath the Canada Line's North Arm Bridge, which connects the Bridgeport and Marine Drive stations across the Fraser River south of Vancouver.

Arno Schortinghuis, president of the Vancouver Area Cycling Coalition, said he's pleased to see the new bridge will keep cyclists away from traffic and out of the rain.

"It will be a great experience," he said. "There won't be the traffic roaring by. There won't be the fumes. I think it will be an idyllic ride across the river.

"It's partially covered, so if there's wind from the east in the wintertime — and that's the typical direction of the wind — and it rains, you can actually get out of the rain, which is excellent. You're underneath and to one side of the guideway, so the trains will sort of rumble overhead."

For those who want to take their bikes on the train, the Canada Line trains are also designed to be very bicycle friendly, said TransLink spokesman Drew Snider.

"We'll be able to take bicycles on any direction any time of day — a slight deviation from the SkyTrain system, where they're not allowed during the peak periods and the peak direction," said Snider.

Metro Vancouver's newest addition to its rapid transit system, the Canada Line, will officially begin service on Aug. 17, two months earlier than originally scheduled. Passengers will be able to ride for free on the first day.

The new route connects Vancouver and Richmond and includes a stop at the Vancouver airport. It uses similar technology to the two existing SkyTrain routes.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbi...ada-line-bike-route-opening.html?ref=rss

[mr.x]

The train guideway is awfully close to the walkway....why do I see idiots climbing onto it? And considering there are no sensors on the tracks outside of stations, there's the issue of suicides.

[nname]

Originally Posted by mr.x

The train guideway is awfully close to the walkway....why do I see idiots climbing onto it? And considering there are no sensors on the tracks outside of stations, there's the issue of suicides.

It is much quicker and easier to just jump down the bridge....

[crazyjoeda]

Originally Posted by mr.x

The train guideway is awfully close to the walkway....why do I see idiots climbing onto it? And considering there are no sensors on the tracks outside of stations, there's the issue of suicides.

Doesn't look that easy to me. That picture is deceiving the tracks are much further away than it appears.

[Metro-One]

My concern is i see lots of losers (who have no sense of respect for public or private pace) spraying Graffiti on that stretch

[mr.x]

^ And they will. I assure you, there will be grafitti on it within days.

[quobobo]

I don't think many people are capable of climbing between that railing and the tracks. Maybe the perspective of that photo is misleading, but it looks like the risk of falling a long, long way is pretty high - it looks like you'd have to jump from the railing and then hope to grab onto the concrete.

edit: oops, other people beat me to it.

[Millennium2002]

Okay... looking at the signs again I think the font is something similar to Candara.

As to the retailer issue. I'm a little torn over what to support. On one hand a business did lose revenue due to a construction method that wasn't publicized until the very last minute, and it is known that many businesses packed up during the two to three years of construction that occurred. On the other, the case can complicate efforts to improve transit in other areas with available monies if pricier options have to be considered and/or businesses claim in lawsuits that the construction constitutes a nuisance. I am not sure about how much income she lost as well with people on one side saying that she lost a lot and people on the other saying that the amount she lost was insignificant and that she could still survive with the remaining. In the end, I don't have enough information to complete the train of thought yet.

But back to the disagreement over the lawsuit. It's normal for disagreements to occur. It's normal for thoughts to run against each other. But we shouldn't let those disagreements turn into bad insults and jokes against someone. It wouldn't help solve the main issue, and it may cause more to arise.

- Allan Kuan

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by quobobo

I don't think many people are capable of climbing between that railing and the tracks. Maybe the perspective of that photo is misleading, but it looks like the risk of falling a long, long way is pretty high - it looks like you'd have to jump from the railing and then hope to grab onto the concrete.

Not to nitpick but it's probably easier to just simply jump off the bridge than to go through all the trouble of climbing onto the tracks. One could probably lose their grip and plunge into the river trying anyway.

[quobobo]

My thoughts exactly, if someone is that determined to get run over by a train then nothing is going to stop them.

[deasine]

I think the issue is what the business owner is GETTING. See I feel for the business owners, but at the same time, I don't think she deserves $600 000. Like many have pointed out, she made profit still during the construction. Yes, she probably made less, but she still made money. Even half the amount of $600 000 is too much already.

How do we settle the case for other business owners then? No one is going to pursue a court case until this one is over and this one is going to set a guideline for other lawyers. How can we determine how much money each business gets? By the size? What about Best Buy, Canadian Tire, Save-On-Foods, and Capers?

[mr.x]

^ if Translink and others win appeal, we'll just take her house.

[dreambrother808]

I have sympathy for her and agree that some kind of precedent needs to be set so that such endeavours are less disruptive in the future, but really, who is going to suffer here?
The taxpayer, the transit user, future projects, the environment, etc. I don't see how suing is the right approach, especially when your business has already survived the construction.
Nevertheless, it is a bit of a catch-22 and there are no easy answers, no clear-cut right and wrongs here.

[Millennium2002]

i sort of agree with dreambrother808... it is a controversial decision and there's no easy answer... then again i don't think it helps the discussion if people keep using some near extreme replies to criticize the decision, like the quote that mr.x put up earlier. Sure the decision may be bad and I sort of agree... this ruling does set a somewhat precarious precedent for future construction projects until the appeal goes around... and she still earned enough money to pay for expenses maybe, but I dunno how adding statements wishing that so-and-so loses their house or gets bad signs put up beside their business would help the discussion. It just doesn't.

But anyway... anybody willing to agree with the font suggestion I made? =O Or does someone know what font they used?

- Allan Kuan

[deasine]

Originally Posted by allan_kuan

But anyway... anybody willing to agree with the font suggestion I made? =O Or does someone know what font they used?

- Allan Kuan

It is Candara. I noticed the lower numbers at 49th today. The signage at Canada Line and Millennium Line Stations (TransLink standards) are different.

[johnjimbc]

I appreciate that others have agreed that the needless lashing out at the merchant are uncalled for . . . that's what really bothered me. I appreciate that there could be legitimate disagreement with the ruling itself. So thanks for that feedback.

I don't want to rehash the whole thing, but my understanding is she had to take out a second mortgage on her home and racked up over $100,000 plus in credit card debt after the construction began. Earning revenue and making a profit are two different things. My sense from everything I read was she went from having a profitable business to one running in the red during the construction. I thought the business might have even folded since that time . . . I thought the shop was sitting empty when I drove by the other day. Even if not, nothing I ever read indicated she was still making a profit after the construction began. Making revenue, perhaps, but again that is not the same as making a profit.

All of that was thoroughly hashed in the trial, so in the end it doesn't matter.

Bottom line is I think it's fine if folks disagree with the verdict. But I just think it's unseemly to attack her personally. It almost seems a little like blaming the victim, especially as it continues on - even more comments today. Just let the personal aspect go. it's really disrespectful.

[SpongeG]

shes moved to main street - shes moved to the crappy part too - I wonder if she will complain about her new location

[nova9]

Well, justice spoke and in this case, it spoke in her favour - appeals aside. And as citizens of a democracy that includes this inconvenient but fortunate balance of power, we must accept it. (just like when criminals are convicted, sentenced, and then serve the entirety of their crime - we cannot turn around and say they didn't serve enough, too bad he got a short term).

What you can do then, is choose to NOT support her establishment and choose to not shop at Hazel & Co. (that's her store non?)

[Metro-One]

Bottom line is I think it's fine if folks disagree with the verdict. But I just think it's unseemly to attack her personally. It almost seems a little like blaming the victim, especially as it continues on - even more comments today. Just let the personal aspect go. it's really disrespectful.

Why is it unseemly to attack her personally? She is the person who spearheaded this outcome, it was her ambition to win this money, that, in my opinion, she does not deserve. So to me, it is personal, because that money and all the future money that is going to be wasted on transportation projects to meet these massive demands because of this precedent is going to be coming from my tax dollars.

To me she is not the victim, she is the villian here. In my eyes during the construction process above average attention was directed towards the Cambie merchants (and the Graville/Yaletown merchants) compared to most transit projects that occur around the world.

What in your eyes will be enough? What is your magic solution? Isn't Translink already in a credit crunch to expand transit? Are you willing to pay the extra 100s of millions of dollars it will take to please the merchant's every need?

Vancouver does not live in the real world, these merchants along Cambie will now have amazing success compared to streets that do not have a raid transit line at their doorstep. I know that while living in Metro-town 90% of my leisure and shopping business when to facilities/stores within walking distance of a skytrain station.

Simply put, this adds another expensive NIMBY roadblock to an already heavily congested avenue towards getting any mega project started in this province.

She made it personal long ago, and just because you think she is the victim, does not mean that i can not attack her.

[lightrail]

I work in the public service and you'd be amazed at how many people seem to see the public service as a cash cow and the demands they make in law suites are unbelievable. What is more unbelievable is how many make it to Court and in some case the decisions of the judges defy logic. The good news is most of these are overturned on appeal.

It's one thing if you are seriously harmed; another if you lost some profit over a short period of time (she only lost profit, she still made money just not as much as she did before construction began).

The Courts need to uphold the right to do infrastructure work unencumbered by profit motives of business that may be affected - it a basic Canadian common law rooted in old English common law. This judge turned that on its ear, going instead for the "private property rights" of the American system. I'm confident the higher Court will see the harm here and reverse the judgment. It is a shocking decision because it has wide-reaching implications all across Canada - not just for subway construction but for any repair work undertaken on public roads and rights-of-way.

Having said that, Canada Line was done on the cheap and there are ways the construction could have proceeded, restoring the road sooner than they did. But the judgment was wrong.