Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[Zassk]

^ That makes no sense. It's a waste of time to funnel Abbotsford/Langley people through Ladner or Richmond, and the delay would seriously reduce its ridership.

For that matter, it's a waste of money to take them any further inbound than the Surrey SkyTrain, at least for a phase 1 implementation.

Ladner and Richmond are well enough situated with the Canada Line and bus priority. Ladner is a seriously small and low-priority part of the Metro region. The rest of the SoF needs transit solutions that are independent of Ladner.

[Mininari]

I can't believe I was actually WORRIED about evergreen line tunnel construction in front of my building almost 4 years today when I decided to put my place up for sale. They seemed so close to starting construction on the LRT plan back then...

Regarding these funding innovations... last I checked, the Province is broke, closing schools, etc. So what's it going to be, a fourth transit zone to help pay for skytrain expansion? A private partner that assumes development rights to lands around stations?

[NucksFanInVan]

Originally Posted by Zassk

^ That makes no sense. It's a waste of time to funnel Abbotsford/Langley people through Ladner or Richmond, and the delay would seriously reduce its ridership.

For that matter, it's a waste of money to take them any further inbound than the Surrey SkyTrain, at least for a phase 1 implementation.

Ladner and Richmond are well enough situated with the Canada Line and bus priority. Ladner is a seriously small and low-priority part of the Metro region. The rest of the SoF needs transit solutions that are independent of Ladner.

Wow, thanks for your opinion. Don't think you've taken the Expo or Canada skytrain lines recently, it would make no sense to set up a new commuter rail service and dump passengers onto the existing local service. And you think routing non-stop heavy rail through Richmond would add too much time?

Ultimately to serve the valley we should be looking at modal diversification (think Toronto GO vs TTC if you don't want to go farther afield). It just doesn't work to load more and more people onto SkyTrain.

As far as I know there are only really two remaining active options for getting trains downtown - the existing CP / WCE line along Burrard Inlet and the CN/BNSF Still Creek sub. Restoring the Arbutus corridor would provide a third option.

[Zassk]

^ Ok, so explain to me the cost/benefit of running a commuter rail from the valley through Richmond. Because I don't see it.

Keep in mind that:

1) Richmond (the urban part) is actually farther west than downtown Vancouver.

2) You'd have to build two new Fraser River crossings, rather than one if you crossed at New West or zero if you crossed at Mission.

As for your comment about dumping the passengers on Expo Line... isn't Surrey supposed to be turning into the hub of the Fraser Valley within the next 10-20 years? Won't a large amount of the commuters from the Fraser Valley be ending their trips in Surrey?

As for South Delta traffic, yes, the Canada Line can handle additional traffic from there, at a mere cost of a few more train cars, far cheaper than building a parallel heavy rail line to downtown.

[NucksFanInVan]

Originally Posted by Zassk

^ Ok, so explain to me the cost/benefit of running a commuter rail from the valley through Richmond. Because I don't see it.

Keep in mind that:

1) Richmond (the urban part) is actually farther west than downtown Vancouver.

2) You'd have to build two new Fraser River crossings, rather than one if you crossed at New West or zero if you crossed at Mission.

As for your comment about dumping the passengers on Expo Line... isn't Surrey supposed to be turning into the hub of the Fraser Valley within the next 10-20 years? Won't a large amount of the commuters from the Fraser Valley be ending their trips in Surrey?

As for South Delta traffic, yes, the Canada Line can handle additional traffic from there, at a mere cost of a few more train cars, far cheaper than building a parallel heavy rail line to downtown.

I agree with you on a couple of points, first that extending the current WCE to Abbotsford via the Mission bridge is a no-brainer from a commuter perspective (but the railways guard that bridge jealously). Second, if we actually could get WCE on either of the two existing heavy rail lines serving downtown it would be much, much cheaper. Of course, if we could do that we'd already have more than 5 trains per day, weekdays only...

Bridge crossings are expensive but politically simple. The more difficult issue is track right-of-way. Coming in from the south fraser via Delta could use the existing tracks out toward deltaport (note these are heavily used so we'd probably need to do some twinning or at least build some sidings, but the land is mostly agricultural so not a big problem). Then build a new crossing of the south arm Fraser and link up with the existing rail right-of-way running north-south on Lulu Island near No 5 Road. Then cut over and utilize the existing North Arm Fraser rail bridge near Sea island. Not sure where the link is/was to the Arbutus ROW but may need some new construction.

The killer cost that would sink this idea would be getting under False Creek and across downtown. But I still think this would be easier than trying to obtain a whole new ROW all the way in from Burnaby / New West.

Keep in mind this was only proposed under the "pipe dream" category. We would rather argue about funding than build badly needed infrastructure in Vancouver anyway, and a SOF WCE is far from badly needed at present.

[punface]

This story was in the 24 Hours commuter newspaper on Thursday: http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/News/local/2010/03/31/13429041.html

[officedweller]

Application Information Requirements (i.e. the requirements for the content of the EA application, not the application itself) were approved by the Environmental Assessment Office on March 26, 2010. Nothing new, but wheels are still turning...

http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/docu...519d990460571aeebd0051ef1402fbd177a9.pdf

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Application Information Requirements (i.e. the requirements for the content of the EA application, not the application itself) were approved by the Environmental Assessment Office on March 26, 2010. Nothing new, but wheels are still turning...

http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/docu...519d990460571aeebd0051ef1402fbd177a9.pdf

The opening paragraph seems to confirm some suspicions that BCGov't has taken the lead on this project.

"The British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (BC MoT) is proposing to construct an Advanced Light Rapid Transit (ALRT) line connecting Coquitlam City Centre, Port Moody, Burquitlam, and Lougheed Town Centre in Burnaby"

[officedweller]

They took the lead a long time ago when the project was changed from LRT to ALRT.

[The_Henry_Man]

Uh Oh.....

TransLink to yank Evergreen Line funding
Last Updated: Thursday, July 16, 2009 | 9:53 AM PT
CBC News

The Evergreen rapid transit line proposal for northeastern Metro Vancouver could remain little more than an artist's conception after years of delays. The Evergreen rapid transit line proposal for northeastern Metro Vancouver could remain little more than an artist's conception after years of delays. (TransLink)The start of the much-delayed Evergreen rapid transit line, could be delayed once again, because TransLink says it's running out of money.

Spokesman Ken Hardie said TransLink is now facing a $450 million annual deficit with no solution in sight, and it won't have the money to build the 11-kilometre rapid transit line linking Lougheed Town Centre in Burnaby to the Coquitlam Town Centre.

"We do not have the money to build the Evergreen Line," said Hardie on Wednesday. "And in fact, unless we find new revenue, starting probably in 2010, 2011, we are going to have to start cutting transit service."

The regional transit authority had committed to pay $400 million of the line's $1.4 billion estimated price tag, with the federal and provincial government also chipping in to cover the cost.

TransLink is expected to make a final decision on the fate of the line by October, but Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart says the line must go ahead.

"Well, we can't hope to keep transit going unless we continue to expand the rapid transit, the rail transit portion of it, and this is the only place that's next," he said.
New taxes needed: mayor

The mayor would like the provincial government, which controls TransLink, to give the transit authority more options for generating revenue.

"Perhaps a fuel tax, perhaps there's a carbon tax, perhaps there is some way to work this out to allow us the tools or find the existing tools and give us the cash," said Stewart.

Previously, TransLink has considered several new taxes on Metro Vancouver residents to raise revenue, including parking taxes and vehicle levies, but all have met a great deal of public resistance.

Plans for the Evergreen Line have been awaiting funding since it was first announced about 20 years ago. Construction was finally expected to start in 2010 after the federal government committed $350 million to the project in February.

The province had also committed $400 million, but even with TransLink's previous $400 million commitment, the project was still almost $173 million short of its expected cost of $1.4 billion.

That gap that was supposed to be made up by project partners, including a possible public-private partnership and transit-oriented land development.

The Provincial gov't needs to take over Translink ASAP, and get rid of its responsibilities of maintaining regional roads (that should've been either a municipal or provincial responsibility anyways). Translink cannot run a hot dog stand, and will continue to be an embarrassment to BC. We don't need another layer of bureaucracy. Thanks NDP......

[Zassk]

Transit service has improved greatly under TransLink's watch, but I don't know how much of that can actually be attributed to TransLink. I just can't help worrying that we will take a big step backward by not having local advocates involved in transit planning.

Of course, all that planning and expansion has led to the current financial crisis, so perhaps the situation that I want to preserve is unsustainable.

[nname]

Originally Posted by The_Henry_Man

Uh Oh.....



The Provincial gov't needs to take over Translink ASAP, and get rid of its responsibilities of maintaining regional roads (that should've been either a municipal or provincial responsibility anyways). Translink cannot run a hot dog stand, and will continue to be an embarrassment to BC. We don't need another layer of bureaucracy. Thanks NDP......

Last Updated: Thursday, July 16, 2009

[deasine]

Lol

[s211]

Originally Posted by The_Henry_Man

Uh Oh.....



The Provincial gov't needs to take over Translink ASAP, and get rid of its responsibilities of maintaining regional roads (that should've been either a municipal or provincial responsibility anyways). Translink cannot run a hot dog stand, and will continue to be an embarrassment to BC. We don't need another layer of bureaucracy. Thanks NDP......

You do realize you're posting a news article that's almost a year old?

[The_Henry_Man]

oops.....my bad.

[BCPhil]

The story might be a year old, but still, the province is in a public relations nightmare. They need to put something up on the board that enough people see as a positive to quell the rebellion.

The province is in a bit of a bind, as we need money, and people want services and infrastructure. All they see at this very moment are cuts, projects being cancelled, programs disappearing... and an increase in taxes.

I would think the best solution would be to offset what people see as the HST tax grab. The carbon tax was created to be revenue neutral, and frankly, now that it's in people seem to have lost their die hard opposition to it. The province just needs to get people over the sticker shock. The best way would be to tell them where money is going to go.

What I would propose is that they change the Carbon tax to go directly to capital purchases for green initiatives, like Transit. Yes, the carbon tax is revenue neutral, and that is where the HST comes in. You explain the gain in the HST is used to offset the loss to general revenue by sending carbon tax money directly to BC Transit.

That way the carbon tax will go to green initiatives, yet still give rebates back to people who are green themselves, and the HST (another consumption tax) will go to general revenue to keep schools and hospitals open.

The money from the carbon tax, pumped right into transit capital purchases around the province could easily get us to our green goals in record times. Imagine a few hundred million a year that has to be spent on projects. It would go a long way to getting Evergreen line built, and finance it without requiring lots of debt. After that is done, the continuing source of money that needs to be spent on transit could be spent on LRT in Victoria, then UBC rapid transit, then Rapid bus in Kelowna, then LRT in Surrey. As it is there always has to be political will, and money needs to be taken from somewhere else for projects like this (that we need). If it were dedicated money, it would be easier to get projects off paper and and built.

[spaceprobe]

the thing is..the HST is basically revenue neutral in the long run. It's not meant to (nor will it) generate revenue in the long run. The public doesn't seem to understand this. They think it's a tax grab...and that's just plainly NOT true. If people would only learn about the tax before listening to some old retired politician.

[deasine]

Originally Posted by spaceprobe

the thing is..the HST is basically revenue neutral in the long run. It's not meant to (nor will it) generate revenue in the long run. The public doesn't seem to understand this. They think it's a tax grab...and that's just plainly NOT true. If people would only learn about the tax before listening to some old retired politician.

Well the Gov't has been trying to educate the public but haven't been very successful and it is completely understandable. Instead of going on the offensive, like what the Gov't has been trying to do, it would be more effective for the Gov't to do what BCPhil has suggested.

Back to the Evergreen Line now...

[GeeCee]

Does anyone have an idea where Lincoln Station would go? I'd imagine it would need to go in the middle of the street and have the exit on the grounds of Coquitlam Centre..

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by deasine

Well the Gov't has been trying to educate the public but haven't been very successful and it is completely understandable. Instead of going on the offensive, like what the Gov't has been trying to do, it would be more effective for the Gov't to do what BCPhil has suggested.

Back to the Evergreen Line now...

Haha, well I was trying to tie my HST talk into the Evergreen line. The thing holding back the Evergreen line at the moment is money. There is no strong opposition against it, not many NIMBY's protesting. The only question is, where's the money? The problem with projects like this is that they come from the general revenue pot, both in the province AND Translink.

The feds had a good idea, when the economic crisis hit, they set aside the money first, then looked for things to spend it on. Here, we have things we want to spend money on but no money set aside.

If there was a provincial transit capital expenditure slush fund, an annual stream of money that had to be spent on environmental capital purchases in this province every year, then we could get a lot more done with a lot less bickering.

To build Evergreen line, Translink needs to spend money it would otherwise spend on bus drivers, the province needs to take money away it could spend on health or roads or schools. If there was a dedicated stream of money reserved for bringing us into the green century, there wouldn't be 3 years of debates. And at the end of the day, spending $1.4 billion over the next 4 years isn't that huge an expense. It's just sticker shock on pre-set budgets. Look at what they are doing with hospitals, instead of set budgets that lead to long wait lists and the withholding of services, the province is not going to a pay per user system.

The carbon tax is supposed to bring in $1.85 billion over the first 3 years. In Quebec their carbon tax goes mostly towards transit spending. We can still make it "revenue neutral" and make up for shortfalls with the small gains we get in HST. If we said that the carbon tax was going to transit purchases, funding Evergreen wouldn't be an issue at all, and we could move on to find out what we should spend the next $2 billion over 3 years on.