Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[gary92]

Originally Posted by Jebby

He's probably the most biased pro-Evergreen Line poster here.

Broadway is a much bigger priority right now than building the Evergreen Line in 25 years would be.

i would say a million years

[GeeCee]

Clearly none of you have ever tried to drive anywhere through the Tri-Cities at rush hour.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by GeeCee

Clearly none of you have ever tried to drive anywhere through the Tri-Cities at rush hour.

I couldn't make it, I was stuck in traffic along Broadway/passed up by the 99.

[red-paladin]

Thanks for the video dpogue, they are always appreciated!


Evergreen Line was a higher priority than Surrey for these reasons:

1) It had been planned for a long time as the 2nd or 3rd line, since the early 1980s.
2) Because of those plans, planning, zoning, development and construction was undertaken to take advantage of the expected line
3) Compact TODs are actually already half-developed in the Tri-cities, Inlet Centre station and all the stations in Coquitlam's downtown are already surrounded by towers, and more are on the way. Surrey on the other hand has nothing like this on any of the three right of ways.
4) Every station on the evergreen line is in a currently or near term walkable neighbourhood that is becoming a TOD, The vast majority of Surrey potential station locations are not.
5)Evergreen Line provides interchange stations with the WCE that will: Divert some riders from the east to skytrain, allow more riders in the tricities to access WCE, and create synergistic efficiency on both lines.
6)It was the second planned phase of the millenium line, so essentially the millenium line had capacity already built that the evergreen line will finally take advantage of, it's allowing the millenium line to be utilized to the full potential that was already there in the initial investment
7)It will free up the B-line buses and other articulated buses (160,169) that can be redeployed in places like Surrey without affecting Translink's buget.
8)It allows Burquitlam to be a hub for transit to SFU, and allows optimization of the SFU bus routes.
9)Coquitlam Central Station's giant park and ride will soar in value and Translink will be able to sell / redevelop some of the space for profit.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Broadway should have been the first of the three to be built.

But, the Evergreen Line does make more sense to build before an extension in Surrey (removing all politics).

So, all politics removed:

1. Broadway
2. Evergreen
3. Surrey (to Langely)

Why do you say that? Surrey's transit system and end node skytrain stations are far busier than anything in the Tri-Cities. And the Tri-Cities already has WCE for commuters.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Why do you say that? Surrey's transit system and end node skytrain stations are far busier than anything in the Tri-Cities. And the Tri-Cities already has WCE for commuters.

Not everybody in the Tri Cities works 9 to 5 in downtown Vancouver. Just look out your window and you see condos, condos, and mostly more condos, as oppose to office towers.

I don't have that chart (maybe officedweller can post it) but it has been determined long ago that Tri Cities (and other suburban residents) typically commute from suburb to suburb, as oppose to suburb to downtown. Hence WCE is a non-factor in determining whether its a substitute for the much needed (and finally getting built) Evergreen Line.

Expanding the Skytrain within the suburbs will benefit the region more so as a whole than simply enhancing the ridership of some UBC students within the city of Vancouver that, as the Economist Magazine says, have some of the world's best transit service already.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

Not everybody in the Tri Cities works 9 to 5 in downtown Vancouver. Just look out your window and you see condos, condos, and mostly more condos, as oppose to office towers.

I don't have that chart (maybe officedweller can post it) but it has been determined long ago that Tri Cities (and other suburban residents) typically commute from suburb to suburb, as oppose to suburb to downtown. Hence WCE is a non-factor in determining whether its a substitute for the much needed (and finally getting built) Evergreen Line.

Expanding the Skytrain within the suburbs will benefit the region more so as a whole than simply enhancing the ridership of some UBC students within the city of Vancouver that, as the Economist Magazine says, have some of the world's best transit service already.

It's not just to do with us UBC students (although getting there really sucks.)

In 2013, the 96 had an average weekday ridership of 8,950. The 97 had 11,250. The 99 had 55,000. It's pretty clear which corridor needs SkyTrain the most. While I agree that rapid transit in the suburbs is very important, Broadway is an enormous problem area and we can't keep putting it on the backburner. It would be the biggest change to the entire system since the Expo Line.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Broadway should have been the first of the three to be built.

But, the Evergreen Line does make more sense to build before an extension in Surrey (removing all politics).

So, all politics removed:

1. Broadway
2. Evergreen
3. Surrey (to Langely)

Agreed.

Broadway will always win the present demand and future interest argument.

However, it was important from a regional connectivity POV to connect the Tri-Cities to the rest of the rapid transit network. Right now, they seem to exist as a bit of an appendage to the rest of the region, even though they have over 200,000 people between them.

In general, I like the direction that rapid transit expansion is going in the region:

- build grade-separated heavy rail lines to quickly move people around the various major regional nodes (Downtown, Surrey Centre, Coquitlam Centre, Richmond Centre, Metrotown, Broadway Corridor) and then use express buses or light rail to connect these nodes to lower-order sub-regional nodes and communities (Newton, Guilford, UBC, Langley, etc.).

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

It's not just to do with us UBC students (although getting there really sucks.)

In 2013, the 96 had an average weekday ridership of 8,950. The 97 had 11,250. The 99 had 55,000. It's pretty clear which corridor needs SkyTrain the most. While I agree that rapid transit in the suburbs is very important, Broadway is an enormous problem area and we can't keep putting it on the backburner. It would be the biggest change to the entire system since the Expo Line.

Blame Kevin Falcon for putting Broadway into the backburner. If he didn't prioritize the low priority Canada Line, both the Evergreen and Broadway Line could have been built by now (I believe the schedule back then was 2006).

Ultimately, all those who push for the Broadway to be first is all about enhancing the existing ridership experience such as the "pass ups" and crowdedness. But not one Broadway supporter has ever looked into "designated growth" or "commuting patterns".

These are the REAL issues that need to be prioritize. After all, being passed up by the 169 at Braid, which does happen, can really ruin your afternoon as oppose to being passed up by the frequent 99.

Originally Posted by hipster duck

However, it was important from a regional connectivity POV to connect the Tri-Cities to the rest of the rapid transit network. Right now, they seem to exist as a bit of an appendage to the rest of the region, even though they have over 200,000 people between them.

You're spot on and actually don't realize how important your argument is. And note that the Evergreen Line does not only service the Tri Cities, but also those who live in the rest of the Northeast Sector, as well as Mission (i.e. they will be able to commute via WCE, then Skytrain, to a Burnaby or Surrey job site, not just downtown).

[hipster duck]

^I know this isn't on any transit official's books, but it might be valuable to build two wyes: one just east of Lougheed that allows through running from the Evergreen line to Braid, and another wye that allows west-bound Millennium trains coming from Sapperton to access the Skybridge.

This would allow a one seat Tri-Cities to Surrey ride at relatively minimal cost (assuming that the two wyes cost about $150 million total). You could give it a unique line name and print it a different colour on the maps, too.

I guess you can do it under the current arrangement, too, if people are okay with traveling in reverse twice and the scheduling at Columbia and Lougheed allows it.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

Blame Kevin Falcon for putting Broadway into the backburner. If he didn't prioritize the low priority Canada Line, both the Evergreen and Broadway Line could have been built by now (I believe the schedule back then was 2006).

Ultimately, all those who push for the Broadway to be first is all about enhancing the existing ridership experience such as the "pass ups" and crowdedness. But not one Broadway supporter has ever looked into "designated growth" or "commuting patterns".

These are the REAL issues that need to be prioritize. After all, being passed up by the 169 at Braid, which does happen, can really ruin your afternoon as oppose to being passed up by the frequent 99.

Well I'm not gonna get too mad about that considering I've grown up in Richmond/South Delta so the Canada Line has been a huge benefit to me personally

But regardless of that, I think Broadway should have been built before Evergreen, but that didn't happen. And now Surrey is convinced that it should get rapid transit before Broadway too. And who knows, after that another suburb will feel slighted and try to keep pushing Broadway back. While lots of people live in the suburbs, many of them also commute to Vancouver, whether for work or for fun. If the suburbs all have rapid transit but few destinations in the city do, it's really not all that useful.

We push for Broadway because it is a major employment node/recreation destination and the fact that it has terrific bus service should not hinder it from getting even better transit. I guess our main disagreement is based on how rapid transit should be used: if I understand you correctly, you want to use rapid transit as a development booster and ridership attractor, whereas I think that rapid transit should be a reward for existing high ridership.

With Broadway being a destination for people all over the region, it would increase ridership everywhere, because now people living in Coquitlam who don't want to bus there but don't mind SkyTraining will go. Whereas, next to nobody will use the Evergreen Line except the people that live there.

I never go to the Tri-Cities so I'm not going to argue with you about things like pass-ups, but the solution should probably have been more buses, rather than a SkyTrain line. High ridership should be rewarded, rather than trying to increase ridership in places where it's lower by over-compensating. While Broadway obviously has great transit service, it doesn't meet demand. It's not fair to keep Broadway from getting better service just because it already has it good. If you think busses are good enough for Broadway, why aren't they good enough for the suburbs?

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

I never go to the Tri-Cities so I'm not going to argue with you about things like pass-ups, but the solution should probably have been more buses, rather than a SkyTrain line. High ridership should be rewarded, rather than trying to increase ridership in places where it's lower by over-compensating. While Broadway obviously has great transit service, it doesn't meet demand. It's not fair to keep Broadway from getting better service just because it already has it good. If you think busses are good enough for Broadway, why aren't they good enough for the suburbs?

The issue with the 169 that I mentioned cannot be resolved by adding more buses. The issue is mainly because the Evergreen Line wasn't built. Braid was never meant to be the transit hub that it is today, but because it is the closest Skytrain station to Coquitlam Town Centre, PoCo, Maple Ridge and so on, almost all the Skytrain bus connections coming from those areas have to go there. Add to the fact that the bottle neck of the Highway One / Brunette interchange, and you have one hell of a clusterf*ck.

So a pass up by the 169 isn't a minor inconvenience, waiting for the next bus to come after 5 or 10 minutes as what happens in Broadway. Because of the bottle neck, you got cars, trucks and buses all stuck (I was once stuck at a 169 bus 30 minutes in front of IKEA, no movement whatsoever) and simply cannot get to Braid Station onwards. So if you miss or cannot board the 169 bus already in the station, we're talking about over an hour of waiting for the next one, simply because of the Brunette bottleneck.

Its instances like that which Northeast Sector residents face on a daily basis, and why transit is simply NOT AN OPTION for most. Add all the buses you want, at the end of the day, the current design of the infrastructure cannot move things efficiently. Kevin Falcon's 3 billion bridge and highway improvements did little to resolve it as well.

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

So a pass up by the 169 isn't a minor inconvenience, waiting for the next bus to come after 5 or 10 minutes as what happens in Broadway. Because of the bottle neck, you got cars, trucks and buses all stuck (I was once stuck at a 169 bus 30 minutes in front of IKEA, no movement whatsoever) and simply cannot get to Braid Station onwards. So if you miss or cannot board the 169 bus already in the station, we're talking about over an hour of waiting for the next one, simply because of the Brunette bottleneck.

At this point, 30 minutes stuck in traffic around Brunette is normal. My bus ride spends as much time stopped on Lougheed waiting to turn onto Brunette as it does going from Maple Ridge to the end of United Boulevard.
But New West wants to ban traffic, so I'm sure that will help

Realistically, Evergreen Line was always intended from the beginning as "Millennium Line phase 2". Although construction only started in the past two years, it's been in the works since the Millennium Line opened. Broadway was phase 3 of that original plan, and while a Broadway Line would probably make a bigger impact in 2014 than the Evergreen Line, it hasn't been actively in the works for the past 10+ years. Unfortunately Evergreen Line is still playing catch up to where it was intended to be years ago.

Canada Line being forced ahead of schedule definitely pushed the Evergreen and Broadway Lines back a few years, but the proposed plan by the Mayor's Council might get it all evened out in the end.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

getting stuck in traffic, on a bus for crazy times? that reminds me of when i used to have to bus down Broadway at rush hour. crawling along at a glacial pace in the middle of June at 3:00/3:30pm. slowly working towards the 98B-line which then became Canada-line.

the only reason evergreen line was built before Broadway was not because it is more needed/important, but because of all the little things done when millennium was built. realistically Broadway is hands down more important. its already saturated with buses, pass-ups happen more often then you'd think, and traffic down that corridor is a mess. car or bus it is hell either way.

the 99 doesn't just transport students like many people seem to think. a lot of people work at UBC and, of course, don't forget about the hospital. i remember there always being tons of hospital people on those buses. Broadway has a lot of jobs and just because it already has okay bus service now it doesn't mean that it doesn't deserve SkyTrain.

the only reason evergreen went ahead first was because it was always the furthest along, not the most needed. just look at ridership numbers. why should some place with ridership of less then 1/2 of Broadway get SkyTrain first? wouldn't it make more sense for high ridership areas to get transit that will attract more people and not be horrible?

its hard to include Canada line as that was more forced because of the Olympics, had they not happened there wouldn't be a Canada line. you cant really use that as a justification saying "they got it why don't we get it?" that goes for all the places complaining about Canada line being built first. it was a different circumstance with different reasons and variables.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

getting stuck in traffic, on a bus for crazy times? that reminds me of when i used to have to bus down Broadway at rush hour. crawling along at a glacial pace in the middle of June at 3:00/3:30pm. slowly working towards the 98B-line which then became Canada-line.

And here lies the difference. You get stuck in the 99 during rush hour. 169 gets stuck in all but the wee hours, for as long as there is truck and freeway traffic trying to get to and from New Westminster. Having several sets of stop lights doesn't help either, and dpogue already mentioned the city of New West factoring in.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the only reason evergreen line was built before Broadway was not because it is more needed/important, but because of all the little things done when millennium was built. realistically Broadway is hands down more important. its already saturated with buses, pass-ups happen more often then you'd think, and traffic down that corridor is a mess. car or bus it is hell either way.

No, Broadway is not more important. The regional planning has always stated Evergreen Line and its previous incarnations always go first. I do think Broadway is more important than the Canada Line. And I know people here in this forum think they are better than the people who actually run the cities and region, but there is a reason why regionally, the Evergreen Line has always been the priority.

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

the only reason evergreen went ahead first was because it was always the furthest along, not the most needed. just look at ridership numbers. why should some place with ridership of less then 1/2 of Broadway get SkyTrain first? wouldn't it make more sense for high ridership areas to get transit that will attract more people and not be horrible?

The Evergreen Line being "further along" was no accident. Sequentially, it was suppose to go after the initial Millenium Line. There is nothing stopping Millenium Line being extended west right now, but Translink, Regional and Provincial politicians of all stripes and party lines all agreed that Evergreen has to go first.

As an example, Gregor Robertson, the current champion of the Broadway subway, even ensured the Evergreen Line gets built first! And guess what? Suzanne Anton and the NPA agreed with him!

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

its hard to include Canada line as that was more forced because of the Olympics, had they not happened there wouldn't be a Canada line. you cant really use that as a justification saying "they got it why don't we get it?" that goes for all the places complaining about Canada line being built first. it was a different circumstance with different reasons and variables.

I have yet to hear any argument from anyone who thinks Broadway should go first do so for the right reasons. Its all about enhancing the speed and comfort of those that already use the Broadway corridor.

And as much as I don't agree with all the municipal, provincial, federal leaders, as well as Translink planners, I'd take their arguments supporting the Evergreen Line going before Broadway anyday than ANYBODY in this forum....

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Do we have a source for that?

Really you need a source. Has anyone in this forum worked on a jobsite. And understand the dynamics of how things are built. I posted a picture of the top of the column being removed. The cost of going back to modify the column is incredible. The other columns on north road were scaffolded up and had concrete cutting companies trimming down the underside to maintain clearance. They were wrapped in shrink so no one could see the repairs.

[rsxstock]

heres a sensitive and overly vague one: isn't the point of living away from the core to save money from housing in exchange for longer travel time?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by rsxstock

heres a sensitive and overly vague one: isn't the point of living away from the core to save money from housing in exchange for longer travel time?

The only reason people live where they live is how important their quality of life is.

I don't want to live in a illegal basement suite firetrap (hint, if the unit has no mailbox, it's an illegal unit. If there are no windows, it's not a bedroom.) Yet that's pretty much your only "cheap" option in all of Metro Vancouver.

Secondary Suite links:
http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/creating-a-secondary-suite.aspx
http://www.surrey.ca/city-government/7617.aspx

When I see stuff like this, I just cringe:
http://globalnews.ca/news/1668699/update-one-man-dead-after-house-fire-in-east-vancouver/

The house was home to nine people, a family of three and six others.

Insurance companies won't cover groups of people who are unrelated to each other as well. And unless the cities want to be inspecting every secondary suite, we're going to see more of these events.

With the Evergreen line being built the Tri-cities looks like a better place to move to than Surrey, if one has to move farther from the center of Metro Vancouver.

This was headline news today:
http://globalnews.ca/video/1677465/rental-crisis

The site is at http://bcnpha.ca/rhi/

The average person in Metro Vancouver pays more than half their income into rent+utilities. Surrey is 150$/mo less than Burnaby or Vancouver. But the average is still around 1000$/mo . Just look at padmapper, the 3 closest bachelor suites to me (in neighboring buildings of equal age and at risk of redevelopment) are all 25% higher than what I'm paying.

[st7860]

Originally Posted by Kisai

The only reason people live where they live is how important their quality of life is.

I don't want to live in a illegal basement suite firetrap (hint, if the unit has no mailbox, it's an illegal unit. If there are no windows, it's not a bedroom.) Yet that's pretty much your only "cheap" option in all of Metro Vancouver.

Secondary Suite links:
http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/creating-a-secondary-suite.aspx
http://www.surrey.ca/city-government/7617.aspx

When I see stuff like this, I just cringe:
http://globalnews.ca/news/1668699/update-one-man-dead-after-house-fire-in-east-vancouver/


Insurance companies won't cover groups of people who are unrelated to each other as well. And unless the cities want to be inspecting every secondary suite, we're going to see more of these events.

With the Evergreen line being built the Tri-cities looks like a better place to move to than Surrey, if one has to move farther from the center of Metro Vancouver.

This was headline news today:
http://globalnews.ca/video/1677465/rental-crisis

The site is at http://bcnpha.ca/rhi/

The average person in Metro Vancouver pays more than half their income into rent+utilities. Surrey is 150$/mo less than Burnaby or Vancouver. But the average is still around 1000$/mo . Just look at padmapper, the 3 closest bachelor suites to me (in neighboring buildings of equal age and at risk of redevelopment) are all 25% higher than what I'm paying.

$1000 for how many bedrooms?

[officedweller]

Burquitlam Station - November 10, 2014:


Construction on the Burquitlam station on the Evergreen SkyTrain Line in Coquitlam, B.C., November 10, 2014.
Photograph by: Arlen Redekop, Vancouver Sun
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/com...uver/10389780/story.html?__lsa=100d-007a