Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[mooks28]

That $5 surcharge is in line with most other cities that have a train running to the airport. Nothing to see there.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by mooks28

That $5 surcharge is in line with most other cities that have a train running to the airport. Nothing to see there.

Except that the surcharge at other airports is because the airport rail service is an express service, whereas the Canada Line is not.

[CLC]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Except that the surcharge at other airports is because the airport rail service is an express service, whereas the Canada Line is not.

Canada Line is also way busier than most "express" airport rail elsewhere, and given the uncomfortably in a packed train at peak hours, I tend to agree that the surcharge is somewhat questionable.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by CLC

Canada Line is also way busier than most "express" airport rail elsewhere, and given the uncomfortably in a packed train at peak hours, I tend to agree that the surcharge is somewhat questionable.

The Canada Line, with a daily ridership that now reaches 103,000, already breaks even on its operational costs...I'd say the surcharge to get out of the airport is just a money grab from tourists. It's no longer necessary to have any sort of airport surcharge to break even on the operational costs of the Canada Line...that is, until more trains are added into regular service for a much-needed higher frequency.

The mentality that we should — our visitors dry is a bit wrong.

And considering how packed the trains get, being not just an airport line but also a mainly a busy commuter line, is it really worth that $5.00? At that point, I'm sure some will consider taking a taxi.

[nname]

Originally Posted by mr.x

The Canada Line, with a daily ridership that now reaches 103,000, already breaks even on its operational costs...I'd say the surcharge to get out of the airport is just a money grab from tourists. It's no longer necessary to have any sort of airport surcharge to break even on the operational costs of the Canada Line...that is, until more trains are added into regular service for a much-needed higher frequency.

But remember, since Canada Line is a P3 project, the goal is not break even here.. the goal is actually making close to 1 billion of profit in the next 35 years to pay for part of the construction cost..

I remember the last time I was in San Francisco, and got charged a $4 surcharge both going in and out of the airport (so $8 in total).. and that's not an express train either.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by CLC

Canada Line is also way busier than most "express" airport rail elsewhere, and given the uncomfortably in a packed train at peak hours, I tend to agree that the surcharge is somewhat questionable.

Yup, but also get an empty train when you're leaving for YVR so it doesn't seem like its nearly as big of a problem at the time of actually paying for the train.

I took it counter-flow this morning to the airport and the train had maybe half the seats full. It's not particularly bad unless you take it with the rush hour flow.

[Zassk]

I don't think the airport actually has a "rush hour"... The people who are paying the $5 surcharge are almost certainly getting seats since they're at the beginning of a mostly non-commuter line.

That said, I really wish that Translink had just made Sea Island zone 3... it would have made things a lot clearer.

[racc]

Originally Posted by nname

But remember, since Canada Line is a P3 project, the goal is not break even here.. the goal is actually making close to 1 billion of profit in the next 35 years to pay for part of the construction cost..

That is not relevant to the surcharge discussion. The fare revenue goes to TransLink, not the private partner. The private partner gets paid for the delivering of the service required. The partner does get 10% of ridership revenue from but that is peanuts compared to the performance payments.

[nname]

Originally Posted by racc

That is not relevant to the surcharge discussion. The fare revenue goes to TransLink, not the private partner. The private partner gets paid for the delivering of the service required. The partner does get 10% of ridership revenue from but that is peanuts compared to the performance payments.

But Translink is the one who has to pay them, right? If they don't get money from the line, how would they pay them?

[CLC]

The traffic turmoil caused by Edmonton South LRT already made a reporter there looks for alternative:
http://www.metronews.ca/edmonton/comment...-a-lesson-for-edmonton-transit-expansion

[jsbertram]

Just a reminder that a TransLink consultation session about the Broadway Corridor is happening Thurs (today) at West Pt. Grey United Church (4595 W8th Ave) from 18:00 to 21:00

[squeezied]

so did anyone go to the workshop? i imagine there was more opposition to skytrain/rrt this time compared to the first workshop at ubc

[BCPhil]

I wasn't there, but saw it on CTV late night news. All the people they put on camera were quite adamant in favor of having a Skytrain subway.

[cabotp]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

I wasn't there, but saw it on CTV late night news. All the people they put on camera were quite adamant in favor of having a Skytrain subway.

My thoughts aren't about the Broadway project.

But I've always thought. How do we know that the media in this case CTV. Didn't interview quite a few people. But only showed the interviews of people who supported skytrain. This isn't a complaint against CTV. But really with the media in general.

[punface]

I went to the Community Consultation Meeting on Tuesday, May 4th. There were ~100 people there, mostly 50+ years old.

The meeting started with a presentation on what has been done so far, and then we were split into smaller discussion groups (~15 people) to look at each option in greater detail. I was the only person in my group who did not live in the immediate area.

The most important thing I was reminded of this night is that the people who live in this area (Broadway+Alma) are extremely anti-streetcar. They are already against the 99-BLine. If they had their way, no large, frequent busses or trains would go through the Broadway area (especially West of Alma.)

They didn't like the SkyTrain options much either, mostly because Translink's display posters showed the underground, at-grade, and elevated versions. They were terrified at the thought of an elevated or at-grade line going through their neighborhood. They were terrified at the thought of cut-and-cover construction. A bored tunnel vs. cut-and-cover was briefly discussed - a bored tunnel still bothered them, but possibly not as much (their concerns were now cost, drugs, and crime.) The only idea they actually liked was re-routing all busses that terminate at UBC to 41st Avenue (someone in the group suggested this and everyone nodded approvingly). However if the locals were forced to decide amongst the options presented by Translink, I think an underground SkyTrain tunnel would be their preferred one.

There were a few poorly behaved activists present who must go to these things often since the frustrated Translink staff knew them on a first-name basis. One recognizable former politician & streetcar proponent (whose name I forget) hopped between discussion groups to interrupt Translink's presentation and name-drop Patrick Condon and his miracle-trams. But by that point, our group had already seen the streetcar presentation and everyone who lives in the area was already dead-set against both that option and the combination alternative (an option I approve of in the short-term.) I think Patrick Condon might have some trouble convincing his neighbors of the benefits of tram.

The people who live in the area were friendly, smart (asked pretty good questions about capacity/frequency/tram overhead wires/grade/other cities/etc.), but also huge NIMBYs. For people who want a tunneled SkyTrain to UBC, these people seem like they could be made convenient allies if they can be convinced that some change is coming regardless.

[metroXpress]

Originally Posted by punface

I One recognizable former politician & streetcar proponent (whose name I forget) hopped between discussion groups to interrupt Translink's presentation and name-drop Patrick Condon and his miracle-trams.

Stephen Rees ?

***
Anyways, good to hear that they oppose the idea of at grade/elevated SkyTrain or streetcar. However, their NIMBYism views will have to change to get the SkyTrain extended all the way to Broadway.

[jsbertram]

Was able to get to Tues event, but was late so just sat back and listened to all the presentations. It was apparent to me there were some people around the table who were pushing for their own agenda, but the Translink people were putting up with it as part of the consulting process. A few people were quite happy to jump all over someone who dared to make a counter-argument that they disagreed with, even trying to shout them down.

I think the locals could be persuaded that bored tunnel SkyTrain is the least-worst choice they have after looking at the alternatives.

I was reminded of Churchill's famous dictum:
"Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)

[mr.x]

Thanks for the update.

Was the guy that poorly behaved named Mel? (i forgot his last name) He tried to run for MLA against Gordon Campbell as part of the NDP in the last election and he was quite adamant about being against SkyTrain and pro-LRT.

[wrenegade]

In some respects I'm glad so many of the locals are against streetcar/LRT. It really is a poor idea for the line that would create such a mess of the roads out there with very little time-savings/benefit. If I can't have Skytrain to UBC, I'd rather have Skytrain to Arbutus with the B-Line continuing from there, hopefully with the eventual completion to UBC at a later date. Streetcar/LRT is a half measure and shouldn't be implemented in any fashion on this route, especially as a temporary fix.

In other news, I heard some crazy nimbies on CKNW this morning saying that the line should go down King Ed or 41st instead, not Broadway. I don't understand how people are so clueless.

[jsbertram]

I didn't catch the names, but there were a few who were trying to take over the discussions and steer everyone towards their views.