Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[Porfiry]

Relevant bit from the report:
http://mayorscouncil.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/MayorsCouncil_Vision_June-12-2014.pdf

This Vision calls for rapid transit between Commercial Drive and the University of British Columbia. The first 10 years of the Vision targets implementing the first phase: extending the Millennium Line westward from its current terminus at VCC-Clark to Arbutus, with frequent B-Line bus connections continuing to UBC from Arbutus. This project will also result in greater frequency on the Millennium and Evergreen Line (2016), which will benefit riders from across the region. During the design process for the first phase, all stakeholders will work together to conclude how and when to complete the next phase of rail to the Point Grey campus.

This line will bring provincial, regional and local value. The region is committed to constructing and operating the extension as a tunnelled alignment along Broadway, contingent upon a Partnership Agreement being established with the City of Vancouver. The City of Vancouver will be responsible for the incremental cost associated with any additional tunnelling beyond technical or functional requirements consistent with operational capacity for other rapid transit systems within TransLink. The Partnership section of this Vision outlines the basis by which the region and municipalities will formalize these partnerships. This Agreement will outline the reciprocal commitments by TransLink and the City of Vancouver in respect to land-use assumptions and actions, investment in connecting municipal infrastructure, and direct financial contributions.

This project also depends upon funding partnerships from other governments and the private sector. This funding will also be pursued as a matter of priority to ensure early implementation can occur.

Sadly the Arbutus phase is 6-10 years out. The UBC phase could be at least a generation away.

[Metro-One]

Good news, this now makes it almost a sure thing that the extension will indeed be an extension of the M-Line underground.

Also it will push UBC to cough up some money (similar to YVR) if it wants the line to be fully extended to the campus.

Last it is a great political maneuver to make sure that both Vancouver and Surrey are happy and shows a form of compromise without compromising the technology (the right technology half the way is far superior than the wrong technology the entire length).

And one last note, seriously, people are now complaining about large station house entrances????

Really?????

I can guarantee that if the Canada Line station house entrances were all tiny everyone would be complaining what a penny pinching maneuver that would have been and posting images of the largest, grandest underground entrances they could find

[Zassk]

This is good news!

The province has already offered up money to pay for a significant part of the Patullo costs. To me this indicates they are willing to have a stake in it.

I would not be surprised if the province "rewards" the mayors by relieving them of the Patullo project completely, perhaps in exchange for having Translink build the complete line out to UBC. This is just my own speculation.

[Zassk]

Well... that was fast:

B.C. rejects Metro Vancouver mayors' plan to use carbon tax to help fund $7.5-billion transit boost

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/r...bon+help+fund+billion/9932710/story.html

One interesting tidbit from this article:

The plan also calls for a four-lane $980 million Pattullo Bridge, which can be expanded to six lanes later on.

[Jimbo604]

It is crazy dark and dingy underneath underneath the overhead lines in NY and Chicago I found. Not something we should replicate in Vancouver.

Anyways, recently released Mayors 30yr transportation plan calls for:
"Millennium line extension in the form of a subway to Arbutus."

At least they got the subway part right. Lame, though - if you are not going all the way to UBC at least go to Alma street instead of stopping way short at Arbutus.

Source:
Cknw

[Xerx]

He did leave the option of a separate regional carbon tax open through. And that can be voted on in the referendum.

But he did say the province would be willing to discuss with mayors the option of forming a separate regional carbon tax for Metro Vancouver, to help fund the mayors' proposed $7.5-billion transit investment plan.

Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by Xerx

He did leave the option of a separate regional carbon tax open through. And that can be voted on in the referendum.

Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun

And that is good news. In the document, it did say...

If the Government of British Columbia chooses not to pursue a reallocation of the existing BC Carbon Tax, another option is to increase the existing BC Carbon Tax rate (currently at $30/tonne since 2012), for the Metro Vancouver Region specifically to support regional transportation investment.

So unlike attempts to get Carbon Tax reallocation before, the mayors were already anticipating that the Province will reject it. The fact that Todd Stone is saying he is open to a separate carbon tax shows there is a good chance this particular plan will move foward.

Ultimately, it is up to the voters but given the compromise with building Broadway Skytrain only up to Arbutus and ensuring the Surrey LRT lines gets built as part of this plan, it certainly has *my* vote.

[makr3trkr]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The Arbutus extension is priced at $1.9B in the plan (2015 dollars).

The LRT in Surrey is priced at $2.4B.

Sounds like they are trying to divide things fairly from a $$ perspective.

If in fact 1.9B is the cost just to go to Arbutus, that's around 5 billion for the whole line. In today's dollars.

I really hope they consider elevated somewhere west of Arbutus for cost savings.

[YYCguys]

UBC is a pretty major player in the transit corridor. I wonder if they could pony up a good share of the cost to bring the line all the way to the Campus. What percentage of the cost did YVR contribute when Canada Line was built?

[SFUVancouver]

The Province's instantaneous response that the existing Carbon Tax was off the table just goes to show that they had preemptively developed policy positions and talking points well in advance of the Mayors' Council plan being drafted and made public. I'm not terribly surprised that the Province is sticking to its guns that the Carbon Tax wasn't an option, or at least the existing Carbon Tax was off the table. Any new Provincial tax requires the new legislation, which leaves them in control.

I think that the decision to end the Millennium Line extension at Arbutus is fine and I can live with that. I would certainly have liked it to go out to UBC in one go, just to bite the bullet and get the thing done so we can realize the maximum benefit from day one. I can see UBC needing time to find a mechanism to raise the money that I think they will be expected to contribute, however I don't think that the students would pass a referendum to levy themselves with any contribution to UBC's share of the SkyTrain extension. Instead, I would suggest that UBC should implement a Tax Incremental Finance (TIF) district on its non-academic development lands to service the bond it would float to pay for it's $150M to $200M share of what would likely be at least a $1.5B extension of SkyTrain from Arbutus to UBC. In addition, UBC could levy a commercial parking stall tax to raise some more revenue and perhaps implement a soft ceiling (maximum) on parking spaces in all new development that could be exceeded at a significant cost per space, the revenue from which would be added to the UBC SkyTrain debt servicing. However it wouldn't be a dependable or predicable source of revenue and, thus, couldn't be relied upon for debt servicing. Bottom line, I think diverting any academic funds to the SkyTrain is a non-starter. We wouldn't expect a hospital or local school district to contribute to transportation, so I'm not sure why there would be an expectation that a university would do so. Nor were funds required from VCC, Langara, or Douglas College for rapid transit connections to their colleges. YVR is an inherently commercial entity and is, thus, incomparable to a university.

I am not surprised that Jordan Bateman and the anti-tax Canadian Taxpayers Federation were quick to call the Mayors' Council proposal "un-affordable". Of course the economic benefits of the project haven't been calculated so we don't know whether it's affordable or not, let alone whether we should still go for it even if there isn't a clear cost-benefit win. I do think the lack of persuasive cost-benefit analysis is part of transit's PR problem. If the presser for the Mayors' transit plan were built around sound-bites and 'sticky messaging' like... "We will together invest 7.5B over 10 years to improve X, Y, Z transit services - which people want and will use - and provide faster/better train and express bus commutes for this-many hundreds of thousands of people each day from day one. It will create this many million person years of employment during construction that will inject this much into the local economy, this many thousand permanent good family-supporting tax-paying jobs that will return this many tens of millions a year in new payroll taxes that will pay for blah blah blah schools and healthcare investments, this many billion in guaranteed local contracts that will spin off this many direct and indirect jobs that wouldn't be obviously related to transit, this many hours saved every week that parents can spend with their kids, etc., etc." I mean, it's politics. You've got to sell your idea, particularly if there's a price tag attached.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Instead, I would suggest that UBC should implement a Tax Incremental Finance (TIF) district on its non-academic development lands to service the bond it would float to pay for it's $150M to $200M share of what would likely be at least a $1.5B extension of SkyTrain from Arbutus to UBC. .

I just have a problem with this....I cannot imagine how can anyone justify $1.5 billion to extend any rapid transit to service only students and a few staff. If UBC wants the extension, it should definitely contribute far more than the figure you quoted, and yes, all funding sources including academic funds. And they should also consider developing much of the campus to allow for more non-student and affordable housing, commercial and office buildings, and so on.

Why should taxpayers from other places spend that much money just so that students and university staff (who are few and paid extremely well compared to most workers) can have a quick, convenient access? This especially since length of the extension is essentially the same as Commercial to Arbutus. For that money (and subsequent operating costs), the school can build on campus housing for all its student and staff...

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I am not surprised that Jordan Bateman and the anti-tax Canadian Taxpayers Federation were quick to call the Mayors' Council proposal "un-affordable".

Jordan Bateman has one purpose in life....to whine and complain for every tax increase, regardless of what benefits it brings. Always whining, no solutions. I don't know why the media even pays attention to him, he is just another Donald Malcolm Johnson like clown with his own set of issues.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

I just have a problem with this....I cannot imagine how can anyone justify $1.5 billion to extend any rapid transit to service only students and a few staff.

I am pretty sure there are more than zero people living between Arbutus and UBC.

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

I just have a problem with this....I cannot imagine how can anyone justify $1.5 billion to extend any rapid transit to service only students and a few staff. If UBC wants the extension, it should definitely contribute far more than the figure you quoted, and yes, all funding sources including academic funds. And they should also consider developing much of the campus to allow for more non-student and affordable housing, commercial and office buildings, and so on.

You have to realize that UBC isn't just the third biggest employment centre in Metro Vancouver - as in, there are seriously more jobs out here than there are in Surrey City Centre - it's also growing quickly through various developments of all purposes, and often plays host to important meetings, conferences and events like the annual Northwest Fan Fest coming up later this month.

I think it's reasonable to have UBC be a contributor, but looking at this I think you vastly underestimate the importance and value of this anchor.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

to service only students and a few staff.

oh yes "a few staff." lets not forget how many people work there who ARE NOT professors. lets also not just railroad students because they are just students. why cant we railroad the people SOF? because they live far away they should expect crappy roads and transit? they pay less in taxes.

see? it is a bad attitude to have and it can go many different ways.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

I am pretty sure there are more than zero people living between Arbutus and UBC.

There are far more people elsewhere in the region that has no access to transit that could benefit even from a fraction of that $1.5 billion than there are people between Arbutus and UBC. And I doubt those people living between Arbutus and UBC would be giving up their BMWs, Range Rovers, and Ferraris for a transit pass soon...

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

oh yes "a few staff." lets not forget how many people work there who ARE NOT professors. lets also not just railroad students because they are just students. why cant we railroad the people SOF? because they live far away they should expect crappy roads and transit? they pay less in taxes.

see? it is a bad attitude to have and it can go many different ways.

Oh wah wah wah! Those people working at the university must be so disenfranchised that everybody else in the country must give them $1.5 billion woth of infrastructure to ensure their comfort and speed when getting to work. What about the people who work in SFU Burnaby Mountain? UVic? Where is their $1.5 billion worth of infrastructure?

Originally Posted by xd_1771

I think it's reasonable to have UBC be a contributor, but looking at this I think you vastly underestimate the importance and value of this anchor.

If they are so important, I'm sure they can easily convince all their alumni, students and businesses to raise the funds for it.

[squeezied]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

There are far more people elsewhere in the region that has no access to transit that could benefit even from a fraction of that $1.5 billion than there are people between Arbutus and UBC.

What makes you think those people would take transit if they had the chance? Just because they're poor? They made a decision and compromise to live where they live knowing what the transit situation is like. If transit is important to them, they would have live elsewhere. There are many places around the region that are affordable with convenient access to transit. Providing transit to a person who does not care to take transit is not exactly the wisest choice. I'd argue that generating ridership is more important that ensuring transit coverage across the region. Transit is more than a social service.

And I doubt those people living between Arbutus and UBC would be giving up their BMWs, Range Rovers, and Ferraris for a transit pass soon...

Quotes like this says something about your credibility. Most people do not drive fancy cars. Just because most of the west side is taken up by single family detached ($2M+) housing does not mean most residents are wealthy and live in single family detached housing. Apartments and townhomes are not as conspicuous but house a lot more people. The west side has a lot more average, everyday working people than you give credit for. These people are a lot more willing to take transit than someone who living in the suburbs.

Oh wah wah wah! Those people working at the university must be so disenfranchised that everybody else in the country must give them priority in terms of comfort and speed to get to work.

Tone down on the drama. UBC is the third regional destination, rapid transit is warranted. It has the ridership to justify rapid transit. It has nothing to do about the "unfortunate" highly paid professor having to sit on a bus like the rest of us. The fact that rapid transit to UBC services people across the region is something you continue to forget or ignore.

It is becoming more evident to me that you view public transit solely as a social service rather than also a tool to encourage transit ridership across the region.

[memememe76]

They made a decision and compromise to live where they live knowing what the transit situation is like. If transit is important to them, they would have live elsewhere. There are many places around the region that are affordable with convenient access to transit.

Such as...

[Genauso]

Well, whether the Mayors Council realized it or not at the time, that was the end of Translink .

[Genauso]

(wrong thread)

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by Zassk

I would not be surprised if the province "rewards" the mayors by relieving them of the Patullo project completely, perhaps in exchange for having Translink build the complete line out to UBC. This is just my own speculation.

If desired, Translink could sell its old bus yard at 41st and Oak, use the gas tax account for capital projects, or cut operating subsidies where the burden is greatest. The Broadway Line is a hostage that keeps everyone else fed. Before Campbell's grand bargain, Broadway was first, Airport second, and Evergreen 3rd due to B-Line ridership. UBC could be a pain to negotiate with, but they cannot be impossible and there is no public indication there has even been an attempt yet.