Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[RosstheBoss]

SkyTrain, Canada Line not good transit

In the Metro Vancouver region, we have placed all our hopes for rail transit on the very expensive light-metro model and philosophy that forces all bus riders on a light-metro trunk line to their destinations or next transfer. Indeed, TransLink admits that 80 per cent of SkyTrain’s customers first take the bus to the metro. This is not good transit.

TransLink has been singing hosannas that the newly opened Canada Line is carrying 94,000 people a day and is nearing capacity. TransLink forgets to mention that nearly 45,000 former bus customers have been cascaded onto the new metro line, which translates to about 90,000 trips a day. Only about 2,000 to 3,000 new transit customers are using the over $2.5 billion metro system.

The sad fact about the Canada Line is that due to escalating construction costs, the scope of the project was cut back so much that a much larger $1.5-billion cheaper LRT network, with much higher capacity, could have been built instead.

The Light Rail Committee and the Rail For the Valley group, in conjunction with several transportation experts, will be offering a much cheaper and proven alternative to hugely expensive light-metro, in the form of TramTrain.

TramTrain is simply a light rail vehicle that can operate on existing railways and on its own tracks, greatly reducing rail transit costs while at the same time providing a much larger light rail network.

As an example, for the cost of a SkyTrain Evergreen Line, we could build a Vancouver-to-Chilliwack TramTrain and a Vancouver-to-Maple Ridge TramTrain. A larger rail network, servicing more destinations, at a cheaper cost should be the number-one planning goal for TransLink.

Sadly, what I see from the ivory towers on Kingsway is more of the same – plans for hugely expensive metro lines, with no realistic way to fund them.

Malcolm Johnston

Light Rail Committee

Delta




Sorry not sure how to insert article, i found this looking up news for evergreen line under BCLocalNews. What a one sided piece of — article. It was done by a member of Light rail committee which seems to be similar to rail for the valley. I don't know why papers take the weirdest people and splash their retarded half truths for the masses to read all over their papers.

[racc]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

great stuff! Go Gordo and Black Go!

Not sure if "go" is the best term after they delayed the project by over 10 years but it is nice to see it move slooooooowly forward.

[madmigs]

Originally Posted by RosstheBoss

SkyTrain, Canada Line not good transit

In the Metro Vancouver region, we have placed all our hopes for rail transit on the very expensive light-metro model and philosophy that forces all bus riders on a light-metro trunk line to their destinations or next transfer. Indeed, TransLink admits that 80 per cent of SkyTrain’s customers first take the bus to the metro. This is not good transit.

TransLink has been singing hosannas that the newly opened Canada Line is carrying 94,000 people a day and is nearing capacity. TransLink forgets to mention that nearly 45,000 former bus customers have been cascaded onto the new metro line, which translates to about 90,000 trips a day. Only about 2,000 to 3,000 new transit customers are using the over $2.5 billion metro system.

The sad fact about the Canada Line is that due to escalating construction costs, the scope of the project was cut back so much that a much larger $1.5-billion cheaper LRT network, with much higher capacity, could have been built instead.

The Light Rail Committee and the Rail For the Valley group, in conjunction with several transportation experts, will be offering a much cheaper and proven alternative to hugely expensive light-metro, in the form of TramTrain.

TramTrain is simply a light rail vehicle that can operate on existing railways and on its own tracks, greatly reducing rail transit costs while at the same time providing a much larger light rail network.

As an example, for the cost of a SkyTrain Evergreen Line, we could build a Vancouver-to-Chilliwack TramTrain and a Vancouver-to-Maple Ridge TramTrain. A larger rail network, servicing more destinations, at a cheaper cost should be the number-one planning goal for TransLink.

Sadly, what I see from the ivory towers on Kingsway is more of the same – plans for hugely expensive metro lines, with no realistic way to fund them.

Malcolm Johnston

Light Rail Committee

Delta




Sorry not sure how to insert article, i found this looking up news for evergreen line under BCLocalNews. What a one sided piece of — article. It was done by a member of Light rail committee which seems to be similar to rail for the valley. I don't know why papers take the weirdest people and splash their retarded half truths for the masses to read all over their papers.

I don't get how these people can go off that by having most people take a bus to the rapid transit route is bad transit and then suggest an alternative that would also require bus feeders in order to work. And also a lot of times these people are only considering construction costs, not running costs(which over the lifetime of the line can be substantial). Automated systems like the ALRT(skytrain) can be run at higher frequency with marginal cost increase, driver-based systems costs increase rapidly as say you would need at least two shift changes, probably more a day, which adds up to what $80K+ once wages/benefits/etc are factored in, per train per year! And you would still need transit cops and general attendants. I didn't include maintenance or train capital costs, as most likely the cost differences aren't hugely different.

And somehow the numbers for the Canada Line don't make sense, if there was 90,000 trips on the replaced bus routes per day(45,000 each way) and when the Canada Line started, it was below 90,000 trips even though the bus routes were removed and other routes were changed to feed the Canada Line. That doesn't add up, did people suddenly start driving because the bus routes changed to feed a faster system thus shortening their commute?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by RosstheBoss

TransLink admits that 80 per cent of SkyTrain’s customers first take the bus to the metro. This is not good transit.

We've been through this in the Metro Vancouver Transit thread. It's a stupid, nonsensical statement, rather like saying "80% of car drivers first walk to their car. This is a poor way to use a car".

[jlousa]

Rumour has it that there will be another Evergreen announcement tomorrow...
Your guess is as good as mine so don't bother asking.

[Kwik-E-Mart]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Rumour has it that there will be another Evergreen announcement tomorrow...
Your guess is as good as mine so don't bother asking.

Looking forward to it tomorrow.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

Probably not after how we treated them with going with Rotem trainsets for the Canada Line right after they finished building a factory in Burnaby

I was surprised to see that Canada Line was using a different type of train technology, but at least its automated so it will be cheaper to operate. The LAST thing we need is to introduce yet another incompatible technology (LRT) on the UBC Line.

Bombardier was part of the losing bid group for Canada Line so 'its just business'.

As I understand it, the Bombardier facility in Burnaby east of Edmonds OMC was built as a sweetener to get the BC Gov't & Translink to buy the first set of MkII cars. All the cars were actually built in Ontario & shipped to Burnaby to be finished at the Burnaby facility & tested for acceptance by Translink.

Bombardier had hoped that before this contract was finished they would have sold more MkII cars to Asian customers & have them built in Ontario with final assembly in Burnaby before being shipped overseas. This didn't happen so Bombardier closed the Burnaby facility & triggered a clause in their contract that made the BC Gov't buy the building from Bombardier.

I think the BC Gov't still owns the building & site, so I've thought that the building could be reconfigured as the 'East Edmonds OMC' for the MkII car maintenance, and leave the original Edmonds OMC as the maintenance building for the MkI cars.

Or the building on the site could be levelled to make the entire site an expanded storage area for new trains when Skytrain adds more cars in the future.

[Gordon]

A fully integraed model like Translink uses is the most efficient way of operating a systen, I would assume most major transit systems operate in this way.

The only logical thing is to have the UBC line as the M line extension

I would suspect rapid transit expansion is Surrey may end up being light rail, which is aooearantly what Surrey wants.

[twoNeurons]

RavXPress ( Bombardier was part of ) didn't give Translink much choice. By coming that much higher than the estimate they pretty much assured the other bid would win.

The political climate at the time was very much on the line when it came to approving this line. If Joe Public found out about the cost differential, there would be cries for blood.

In fact, I bet even people HERE would cry for blood... and we'd be in endless debates today on why we paid so much to stick with the current SkyTrain system.

Zweisystem-like people would be far more common, and would have more ground to stand on.

As for the bus to SkyTrain argument.

100% of Canada Line SkyTrain riders used to use the bus when on public transit. This proves nothing.

Portland INCREASED its bus system when it implemented LRT. You need feeders. It is a good thing.

[Gordon]

The final stage of bidding required a bored tunnel & intransit B.C. bid the contract as cut and cover ssaving $400 million.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Not so much gold plating, but long-term thinking and not expecting local officials to be retarded enough to build the system we have today - a half-assed system.....SNC-Lavalin was all about money even if it screws the whole region, and they know it. The Bombardier option could have been $1.8-billion if it were to be integrated with our SkyTrain system, but RAVCO rejected it in favour of a "fair competition" instead of opting to save all of us money both in present construction costs, future expansion costs, and operational costs.

But it would not have been integrated at all. The 3-meter MKII cars of the RAV line would have been incompatible with the other lines, and could not even have travelled through the Expo stations to reach the Edmunds OMC. So you would still have had a completely incompatible line (albeit built by the same manufacturer), with no track connections, and still a separate OMC. And you would have had an ugly trench for 25 blocks in south Vancouver instead of tunnel.

Admit it, it was a bad bid by Bombardier. Yes, in an ideal world, we would have had another line with compatible 2.5-meter MKII cars and a shared OMC, but that was never submitted as a bid. Your guess is as good as mine as to why.

And I still don't see how you can think of 3-meter cars and 80-meter platforms as "forward thinking". Building stations long enough for 5-car trains with wider cars than E/M Line? That's capacity for something like 1000 passengers per train. Why does Canada Line need that? That would be a dubious proposition even for the Broadway line. The RAV line will never have enough ridership for that, even if it is extended all the way to Ladner and Tsawwassen.

It was just a bad proposal and that's why it lost.

[BCPhil]

Provincial competition laws made it so that the purchase of additional MKII cars at a discount if Bombardier won the bid illegal. The original plan was to basically throw in the 48 MK II cars we bought into the bid, so when all was considered, 80m stations, integrated system, additional cars for both networks, would cost just a bit more than Protrans + MKII cars we bought (for a better allround experience). But that wound up being illegal, so the vehicles couldn't be included.

Also, I think Bombardiers bid included a significant elevated section all the way from King Ed to Marine. The elevated guideway would have offset the cost of doing a bored tunnel from King Ed to downtown, but there were a lot of protests to save the trees that are on the Cambie Median, such that Vancouver council declared a couple of the trees heritage items (like the one that was a gift from the Emperor of Japan) thus raising the price of Bombardier's bid. It also meant that even the cut and cover couldn't be done under the median and had to be done under lanes of traffic, impacting traffic more than it needed to.

WRT people taking buses to get to the train, how else is it supposed to work? That's the point! You funnel people off costly price per rider trips onto mass transit, saving money on operations. It's a pretty simple concept. The train is more efficient so you get as many people on to it as possible. What's the alternative? LRT that meanders down every road so that anyone can walk to it? That much LRT is just as expensive as Metro+buses and doesn't get any increase in ridership. Probably fewer riders because now it's a longer trip as feeder buses are quite efficient in what they do.

[Gordon]

To the best of my knowledge there was no elevated section in Vancouver, there may have been a trenched section at the south end of the Vancouver section of the line.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by Zassk

But it would not have been integrated at all. The 3-meter MKII cars of the RAV line would have been incompatible with the other lines, and could not even have travelled through the Expo stations to reach the Edmunds OMC. So you would still have had a completely incompatible line (albeit built by the same manufacturer), with no track connections, and still a separate OMC. And you would have had an ugly trench for 25 blocks in south Vancouver instead of tunnel.

Admit it, it was a bad bid by Bombardier. Yes, in an ideal world, we would have had another line with compatible 2.5-meter MKII cars and a shared OMC, but that was never submitted as a bid. Your guess is as good as mine as to why.

That's incorrect. Bombardier presented an alternate plan that would have integrated our existing SkyTrain infrastructure utilizing the existing Translink SkyTrain fleet, with rail infrastructure that uses the same specifications as the Millennium and Expo Line. That means 2.5-metre wide Mark II cars. And it likely included 80-metre platforms.

The cost came at $1.8-billion.

RAVCO said no, wanting a "fair bidding process". It rejected Bombardier's integration plan, even though it would have saved you and I money, and told Bombardier to go back to the drawing board and build a new separate system with 3-metre wide trains, etc.

SNC-Lavalin won the bid with its $1.76-billion proposal, which later became $2.05-billion.

And I still don't see how you can think of 3-meter cars and 80-meter platforms as "forward thinking". Building stations long enough for 5-car trains with wider cars than E/M Line? That's capacity for something like 1000 passengers per train. Why does Canada Line need that? That would be a dubious proposition even for the Broadway line. The RAV line will never have enough ridership for that, even if it is extended all the way to Ladner and Tsawwassen.

It was just a bad proposal and that's why it lost.

Who says that Bombardier's resubmitted 3-metre wide train proposal included 80-metre platforms? Besides 3-metre wide trains, nobody really knows much about the second Bombardier plan. These cars could also have theoretically been longer than the Mark II's we have - meaning at full length 3-metre, four 20-metre car, Mark II trains.

And with 3-metre wide trains and 80-metre platforms, that gives the Canada Line a capacity of about 28,000 pphpd. That's on par with the Millennium and Expo Lines.

Never say never...back in the day, those who planned and built the Expo Line could never fathom the success it has become today.

Regardless, Bombardier had the right proposal the first time. But the we call planners rejected it.

[mr.x]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Provincial competition laws made it so that the purchase of additional MKII cars at a discount if Bombardier won the bid illegal. The original plan was to basically throw in the 48 MK II cars we bought into the bid, so when all was considered, 80m stations, integrated system, additional cars for both networks, would cost just a bit more than Protrans + MKII cars we bought (for a better allround experience). But that wound up being illegal, so the vehicles couldn't be included.

Absolutely retarded.

Also, I think Bombardiers bid included a significant elevated section all the way from King Ed to Marine. The elevated guideway would have offset the cost of doing a bored tunnel from King Ed to downtown, but there were a lot of protests to save the trees that are on the Cambie Median, such that Vancouver council declared a couple of the trees heritage items (like the one that was a gift from the Emperor of Japan) thus raising the price of Bombardier's bid. It also meant that even the cut and cover couldn't be done under the median and had to be done under lanes of traffic, impacting traffic more than it needed to.

"Heritage boulevard" my —. We could have saved quite a bit if that whole section was elevated, and the construction process would have been much shorter.

Most of those trees could have been easily moved and replanted elsewhere, like Queen Elizabeth Park.

WRT people taking buses to get to the train, how else is it supposed to work? That's the point! You funnel people off costly price per rider trips onto mass transit, saving money on operations. It's a pretty simple concept. The train is more efficient so you get as many people on to it as possible. What's the alternative? LRT that meanders down every road so that anyone can walk to it? That much LRT is just as expensive as Metro+buses and doesn't get any increase in ridership. Probably fewer riders because now it's a longer trip as feeder buses are quite efficient in what they do.

We really don't want to get into how Malcom/Zwei's mind works, good logic just isn't there.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Also, I think Bombardiers bid included a significant elevated section all the way from King Ed to Marine. The elevated guideway would have offset the cost of doing a bored tunnel from King Ed to downtown, but there were a lot of protests to save the trees that are on the Cambie Median, such that Vancouver council declared a couple of the trees heritage items (like the one that was a gift from the Emperor of Japan) thus raising the price of Bombardier's bid. It also meant that even the cut and cover couldn't be done under the median and had to be done under lanes of traffic, impacting traffic more than it needed to.

Nope - it called for a permanent open trench from 49th or so to 63rd or so. So with the requirement for no net loss of greenspace, the sides of the trench would have had to be greened, probably taking away a lane of traffic. It also would have been expensive because it would have had to dip as low as the InTransitBC tunnel to allow 57th or 59th (and the odd pedestrian crossing) to cross over and the major BC Hydro cable (or is a a BC Gas main?) that runs under the median would have had to have been relocated. It would also have been a true east-west barrier.

[twoNeurons]

And if it took away a lane... then there would be no space for Gregor to put a dedicated bike lane down Cambie!

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by mr.x

Absolutely retarded.



"Heritage boulevard" my —. We could have saved quite a bit if that whole section was elevated, and the construction process would have been much shorter.

Most of those trees could have been easily moved and replanted elsewhere, like Queen Elizabeth Park.




We really don't want to get into how Malcom/Zwei's mind works, good logic just isn't there.

I heard that some trees had to be moved anyhow, and the compromise was to have them temporarily relocated during construction & brought back to the Boulevard. However when they went to put the temporarily relocated trees back, they found that some had died from the move, and others 'went missing' during the 4 years of construction. Some of the 'heritage trees' that were replanted after construction were actually new replacements.

[DKaz]

I heard back in 2003 that the platforms for the RAV Line would've been 105m long if SNC-Bombardier got it. Enough for 6-car MKIIs from the get go.

The only thing disappointing about the Canada Line really is the lack of LIM system for faster acceleration and deceleration, and the lack of banked curves around QE Park.

That said, I hope they've smartened up and put in a competitive bid this time for Evergreen. If Mitsubishi or Siemens or whoever can also build a compatible LIM system, I say bring on the competition.

[mooks28]

Originally Posted by mr.x

SNC-Lavalin was all about money even if it screws the whole region, and they know it.

You can't blame SNC-Lavalin for that. Customer orders and a company delivers.

What business isn't all about the money? SNC-Lavalin is certainly not a charity.