Canada Line | Completed

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Really oh wise one?

Then I'd find it hard to believe you've ever ridden the C-Line out from Richmond during rush hour when its capacity limitations are painfully obvious. And all this before the Olympics, the alleged justification for building it before the Evergreen Line.

And perhaps you've never taken this "airport line" with luggage, where the drawbacks of a cost cutting "one escalator" policy becomes painfully obvious as you wait for the elevator.

Blame those who wrote the specification for the line, not those who built it to match the specification.

[mr.x]

There's a lot of grey area or overlap to who is at fault here....basically everyone involved in the project is at fault. But it doesn't mean P3's are failures (quality public-private systems around the world would say quite the contrary to what has happened with the Canada Line), it just means this particular P3 system that was made for the Canada Line did not work.

[CLC]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I can't remember if there are down escalators at airport stations now... are there?

yes, in ALL of three sea island stations

[Metro-One]

People, please remember that the current overflow is not 100% the design's fuilt either, it is the stupid contract that they have drawn up deciding frequencies and the # of trainsets we have. Capacity can be increased by almost 150% simply by ordering more cars and running more trains (this is without adding the C-car or extending stations).

So a big part of the problem right now is simply the stipulations put forward in the current operations contract.

[Zassk]

Well, I am just glad it was built. I save my wrath for all the politicians who opposed the Canada Line project. Not enough demand/density/growth, yeah right, whatever. What other corridor aside from Broadway had a proven, immediate and growing demand for transit infrastructure? It seems to be a popular position for politicians from other jurisdictions to wish that Richmond would just stop growing and go away, and how dare we spend on any infrastructure there. The Livable Region plan is oblivious to the idea that people might actually want and choose to live in Richmond rather than in other anointed high-growth jurisdictions. Argh... this strikes a nerve with me, I'll stop writing and go get some air now. :-)

Edit -

Originally Posted by Metro-One

So a big part of the problem right now is simply the stipulations put forward in the current operations contract.

So, does anyone know whether any of the terms of the contract are renegotiable, or at least open to discussion?

[deasine]

Originally Posted by Zassk

So, does anyone know whether any of the terms of the contract are renegotiable, or at least open to discussion?

Everything is negotiable as long as you have money.

What I can say is that TransLink is very tough on ProTransBC, especially compared to it's treatment with BCRTC.

[mr.x]

^ if only they had been tougher during the design, consultation, and construction process.

Not only would I use the contract for toilet paper, I'd also use every page in the LRSP as well....they foolishly used it to base their requirements on the Canada Line. It speaks to how out of touch civic planners and politicians are.

Where are these people today who once said there wouldn't be enough ridership to support it?


The entire project is a [email protected] love Jon Stewart.

[twoNeurons]

Look at the bright side. A year from now when this project is firmly in the black and at capacity, it will look good for a M-Line West extension.

It it were another Billion dollars, it would take longer to "look" busy and at capacity. It would be nice if the revenue earned could start paying down the capital to build the line. What would naysayers say then?

[Metro-One]

We will never hear from them again, that is until we want to extend skytrain down Broadway where they will again claim not enough ridership or some other non sense and call that a white elephant.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Not only would I use the contract for toilet paper, I'd also use every page in the LRSP as well....they foolishly used it to base their requirements on the Canada Line. It speaks to how out of touch civic planners and politicians are.

The entire project is a [email protected] love Jon Stewart.

Yeah, I don't get how the LRSP applies in this case. I mean, really, most of the line is in Vancouver, which is a growth region in the LRSP.

I can't wait to see the ridership by station.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Look at the bright side. A year from now when this project is firmly in the black and at capacity, it will look good for a M-Line West extension.

It it were another Billion dollars, it would take longer to "look" busy and at capacity. It would be nice if the revenue earned could start paying down the capital to build the line. What would naysayers say then?

I think it's a mistake to not go with the UBC extension first...I do think that ridership on the Evergreen will be low, in relative ridership per km and ridership per station terms.....11-kms, 5-stations (one already exists). And it'll be even worse if we build it in phases, with the $850-million we already have for the project.

There will be people (you all know who) that will start claiming how the SkyTrain extension will be a failure, and it'll provide even more "ammo" to the Broadway LRT folks.

That, and the fact that Broadway's ridership is exploding. I think we would be lucky to see the full 11-km Evergreen achieve a ridership of 40,000-50,000 in its first year.

[Metro-One]

Yes, but then on the flip side the Cambie street memories are far to fresh and the same "You know who" people will point at the C-line and say "see, ALRT can not even handle these riderships" etc... Remember, they are spin doctors and will twist it any way they want, whether it is a system bursting at the seems or almost empty.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Yeah, I don't get how the LRSP applies in this case. I mean, really, most of the line is in Vancouver, which is a growth region in the LRSP.

I can't wait to see the ridership by station.

I mean, the LRSP is old...it's outdated, the region has grown beyond the realms of what the LRSP had planned for. How could it not be obvious to them? Sure, Richmond is an agricultural zone plus is prone to liquefaction during earthquakes and that's a huge reason why they lowballed the requirements. But it's almost as if they didn't even visit Richmond or consult with Richmond city planners before building the line.



RAVCO: what are your development plans? I assume there will be very little growth, given that's what the LRSP has called for.

Richmond: Actually, we've seen a ton of development in the last decade and a half and we're going to try to triple our "downtown" population (the precinct around Canada Line stations) from 40,000 today to 120,000 in about 30 years.

RAVO: I couldn't care, I'm following the LRSP anyway.



Either they did it out of ignorance or they knew the falsities of following the LRSP but did it anyway.

Aren't we also criticizing similar ivory tower scholars (and certain regional mayors) on the same thing with their views on the M-Line extension being LRT? They're so preoccupied with numbers, datum, and studies done in the office...but have they even tried out the 99 B-Line for a month during the school year?

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Yes, but then on the flip side the Cambie street memories are far to fresh and the same "You know who" people will point at the C-line and say "see, ALRT can not even handle these riderships" etc... Remember, they are spin doctors and will twist it any way they want, whether it is a system bursting at the seems or almost empty.

This is the attitude I want to see from the provincial gov't/Translink when it comes to dealing with these people:


LALALALALALA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I'M GONNA SIGN THE CONTRACT ANYWAY TO START CONSTRUCTION! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! YOU SAY WHAT? I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW YOU WERE THERE! NOBODY ELSE IS IN THIS ROOM!




Unfortunately, it's quite difficult to ignore them given how obnoxious and persistent they are in the media.

[Metro-One]

Also it seems that the paper media around here loves them, such as the Georgia Straight (which is a rag IMO) The only decent section of theirs is the arts.

[WarrenC12]

I think the Canada Line is perfect. What would happen here if our $2b animal had the ridership of the new line in Seattle?

Answer: we'd never see more Skytrain in our lifetimes. Evergreen, UBC, whatever.

In my mind the buses have the biggest problem with over crowding right now.

Step 1: get more damn C-line trains running
Step 2: Shovels in the ground for Evergreen
Step 3: More buses (ideally all new should be zero emission/trolley)
Step 4: more C-Line cars

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Sure, Richmond is an agricultural zone plus is prone to liquefaction during earthquakes and that's a huge reason why they lowballed the requirements.

We're due for a 9.5 earthquake within 500 years, practically no structure in Metro will survive that, regardless of its location or building code. Liquefaction is a minor issue in terms of overall survivability of such a disaster. Lulu Island is almost at the high tide line anyway, it wouldn't fill to the brim with water like New Orleans if breached. And Hurricane Katrina obviously didn't dissuade people from choosing to live or work in Richmond. But I doubt anyone involved in planning the Canada Line considered such things.

[mr.x]

^ would our region resemble New Orleans after the "Big One"? There are still huge swaths of neighbourhoods with destroyed or severely damaged homes, obviously nobody lives in these neighbourhoods.

And 4 years later, the population of the city is still at 250,000...just before the storm, it was 450,000.

[Metro-One]

Haha, this is very ironic, i am actually writing a paper on Hurricane Katrina as of this very moment!

[mr.x]

New rapid transit Canada Line is just the ticket to ride
One of the greatest side effects of the Olympics is the sleek and silent 26-minute marvel transporting passengers from YVR to downtown

By Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun
October 22, 2009

It surely is an unusual occurrence to become besotted with a municipal infrastructure project.

But there you have it: I'm in love with the Canada Line.

While never particularly enthusiastic about Vancouver's 2010 Olympics bid, I now believe the associated inconvenience, costs and even a few minor infringements on civil liberties will have been worth it -- because, as a result, we were able to finance the sleek and silent 26-minute marvel that, since Aug. 17, has glided effortlessly from YVR to the downtown harbour.

The city that never had freeways within its limits now, at last, is possessed of the healthy pumping artery it has long needed through its core area, providing a robust 19.2-kilometre, 16-station rapid transit experience that rivals counterparts in Toronto and Montreal.

Our line arguably is more boast-worthy, featuring a link to an international airport; Vancouver is the first Canadian city to offer this convenience.

My initial Canada Line experience came last month when I set off from home to catch a transatlantic flight.

The journey to YVR, by bus and Canada Line, was effortless, saving me $22 over cab fare.

My second flirtation came during an October downpour, waiting too long for a regular bus. I hopped aboard an alternative which took me to the Oakridge Station.

I then zipped -- yes, zipped -- to the Waterfront terminus, discovering I'd shaved 15 minutes from my commute.

I was hooked.

More recently, I've come to appreciate the quiet of the ride -- for some reason, passengers are less inclined to use cell- phones -- and the complete cleanliness.

A transit official this week appeared on a train, requesting proof of tickets. Everyone complied.

After experiencing rapid transit in Paris and Rome where hideous graffiti is scrawled everywhere -- on cars and between stations -- the spotless grey Canada Line reveals an impressive civility.

It's not surprising that just two months after its opening, the Canada Line is at 80-per-cent capacity -- 82,000 passengers daily.

This augurs well for future stations, planned at West 33rd, West 57th and Sea Island. (PLEASE DON'T BUILD 33rd and 57th!)

While governments sometimes waste taxpayer dollars, this $2-billion project, four years in the building, shows off government expenditure and cooperation at its best.

The feds anted up $450 million, which arguably they might not have, had Vancouver not snared the Olympics.

B.C. kicked in $435 million and the city, $29 million.

Other contributors: YVR: $300 million, TransLink: $334 million and private partner InTransitBC, owned by SNC-Lavalin, the Investment Management Corporation of B.C., and the Caisse de Depot et Placements de Quebec: $750 million.

The Canada Line came in three months ahead of schedule and on budget, albeit hurting Cambie Street's business owners.

If there's a quibble, it's that the stations, signage and South Korean-built cars are too plain, giving no sense of what sort of city Vancouver believes itself to be.

Subway lines can make valuable contributions to urban personalities.

Toronto, with clean and functional signage and stations, says "I am a clean, safe city."

Paris, with its curly-Q wrought-iron "Metro" branding, flashes its style.

The Canada Line's lack of charm results from the fact that "everything was cost-driven," according to Mayor Gregor Robertson, who came to office confronting a big unanticipated tab for Olympic Village construction.

Once the Games conclude, Robertson should assign a task force to develop a civic-identity branding for the Canada Line, which is fast becoming a terrific source of pride for this city.

[email protected]
© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun





The ridership is what it is because of the quick travel times, yet she wants more stations? Build YVR 3 and Capstan, and leave it at that.