Millennium Line - Evergreen Extension | Completed

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Ill take underground Subway instead of concrete guideway down the centre of the street any day.

( I realize you're talking about the capacity )

I prefer elevated systems, especially ones with good views such as beautiful multi million dollar mansions and spawling universities.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Ill take underground Subway instead of concrete guideway down the centre of the street any day.

Sure, we all love being in a dark tunnel with the noise of the train reverberating around us. Who in their right minds would want to see the sky, mountains and inlets?

[dpogue]

Video from yesterday morning at Lougheed showing the Blue Light posts, the electrical disconnect switch, and the electrical grounding switch. You can also see the cable shroud on the Lougheed platform for the running frieze.

[SFUVancouver]

^ Thanks for the video.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Sure, we all love being in a dark tunnel with the noise of the train reverberating around us. Who in their right minds would want to see the sky, mountains and inlets?

Those that would rather have to spend 30 minutes in a tunnel than spend the rest of the day looking at cold concrete guideways cutting through town.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Those that would rather have to spend 30 minutes in a tunnel than spend the rest of the day looking at cold concrete guideways cutting through town.

Those that would rather have other people spend 30 minutes in a tunnel than spend the rest of the day looking at cold concrete guideways cutting through town.

[Jebby]

I've commuted on both types of systems (elevated and underground) and I honestly could not care less which one I'm on. This whole "people get a view of the mountains" thing is compltely overblown. Usually trains are so packed during morning/evening rush hour that no one gives a damn about whether they'll be able to see mountains (which really aren't all that special) on the ride to work/back home.

[TransitJack]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Sure, we all love being in a dark tunnel with the noise of the train reverberating around us. Who in their right minds would want to see the sky, mountains and inlets?

Really?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest my point was that the urban form is best served by an underground subway. The line will be there for many years to come as the city grows around it.

Plenty of ways to see the sky, mountains, and inlets...

Transportation systems are intended to move people from A to B, not provide a scenic tour of the region. Granted, sometimes you can have both, but it's hard to argue that those riding high above Lougheed and North Road are some how more entitled to a view of the scenery than those on ground level who know have a concrete monster snaking through the community.

Cambie Street vs North Road. HUGE difference in the urban form, but then... you'll be able to see the mountains and sky.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

well we have to have an elevated line to see the mountains! anyone living here knows they are only around for the morning commute/end of day commute! gotta see them while you can before they go into hiding!!!

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Those that would rather have other people spend 30 minutes in a tunnel than spend the rest of the day looking at cold concrete guideways cutting through town.

I live in Ladner. I take the Canada Line all the time, and spend much less time above Cambie Street than I do under it. However, I'm glad I'm not ruining that entire stretch for the people who do spend time there. The little bit of time you spend on a train, that are usually too crowded to even see the windows let alone the mountains, is not worth ruining the landscape permanently. I get that it's a nice thing to have, and I'll admit that I always rush to the front seat to look out the window but I would give that up if it meant beautifying the streets.

[SOSS]

Personally I think cost, practicality, and politics trump any above/below grade debate. Take the evergreen line, I makes sense to run it above grade along north road considering lougheed is above grade. And it makes sense to run it below grade to get to PoMo because of the 6% grade required and land acquisitions required otherwise. The section through PoMo is mostly politics but I am glad it runs along side the rail line since that already divides the community. Through coquitlam, cost makes above grade the best choice. For Canada Line, it was mostly politics that ran it below grade where the boulevard could have easily accommodated an above grade section.

[queetz@home]

Originally Posted by SOSS

Personally I think cost, practicality, and politics trump any above/below grade debate. Take the evergreen line, I makes sense to run it above grade along north road considering lougheed is above grade. And it makes sense to run it below grade to get to PoMo because of the 6% grade required and land acquisitions required otherwise. The section through PoMo is mostly politics but I am glad it runs along side the rail line since that already divides the community. Through coquitlam, cost makes above grade the best choice. For Canada Line, it was mostly politics that ran it below grade where the boulevard could have easily accommodated an above grade section.

This is really the crux of it all. I guess I would have to agree with finalcoolman's Canada Line bashing when he says the Evergreen Line is what Canada Line should have been. From your post, it seems that Evergreen Line is simply built more practically with the minor exception of the at grade section of PoMo.

At the end of the day, the source of the bone of contention of Canada Line has always been the fact that it is underground on a certain part where it shouldn't. It added costs which pressured its contractors and the government to seek cost cutting measures elsewhere within the project and regional priorities. The result? Screwed up Cambie merchants and now the stigma of the more cost effective and less risky cut and cover within the City of Vancouver. Plus the never ending issue of underfunding the rest of the region, something which we still struggle today and why we have a referendum at the first place.

Originally Posted by officedweller

Those that would rather have other people spend 30 minutes in a tunnel than spend the rest of the day looking at cold concrete guideways cutting through town.

Yeah, this pretty much sums it up too. Who in the right mind would prefer to be underground than to be above the ground seeing beautiful views. After all, isn't that the sole selling point of living in Vancouver?

Its not the job market, its not the business opportunities, and it most certainly not the rain. All these news outlets and ads advertise mountains, inlets and so on brag as Vancouver's main selling feature. Even the elevated Skytrain itself is a tourist attraction (as seen in a Border Security episode ). So why would anyone desire an underground system if nothing more than to make sure that they, those that live in the area, don't see cold concrete guideways?

[WarrenC12]

Above ground stations are much more comfortable. The Canada Line gets muggy even in our fairly mild summers.

Above ground trains give you something to look at when you're traveling, time passes more quickly. It doesn't have to be mountains.

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Above ground stations are much more comfortable. The Canada Line gets muggy even in our fairly mild summers.

Above ground trains give you something to look at when you're traveling, time passes more quickly. It doesn't have to be mountains.

Above ground or underground really has very little impact for me -- especially if I'm stuck standing in a car at or near capacity. The cost issue resonates more with me. World class metro systems such as HK, Singapore and London have all have significant parts of their system elevated - and often in areas that are probably higher density than Vancouver.

[Large Cat]

I don't really buy what a lot of people are saying, that Skytrain guideways have in any way the same effect as elevated freeways, or train lines, or what have you. The guideways are actually cool, they don't create extensive shadowy areas, they add something positive to the streetscape. I think North Road looks much better now that the Evergreen guideways have gone in (which admittedly is partly because guideway installation provided incentive for other kinds of beautification, i.e. landscaping). Even on Broadway I think they could be made to work. But I'll still be satisfied with underground if that's how they can pull it off.

[Procrastinational]

For the most part I don't mind the elevated sections of skytrain. The one exception to this is in Richmond where I think the Canada line has made No. 3 Road particularly ugly.

On the other hand, I quite like what they've done with the evergreen line. The guideway over white spot is pretty cool

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by queetz@home

Who in the right mind would prefer to be underground than to be above the ground seeing beautiful views. After all, isn't that the sole selling point of living in Vancouver?

The mild climate is a big draw, especially for people coming from points east.

Originally Posted by Large Cat

I don't really buy what a lot of people are saying, that Skytrain guideways have in any way the same effect as elevated freeways, or train lines, or what have you.

I completely agree. Anyone who thinks the Skytrain guideways are oppressive has obviously never been underneath Toronto's Gardiner Expressway.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Large Cat

I don't really buy what a lot of people are saying, that Skytrain guideways have in any way the same effect as elevated freeways, or train lines, or what have you. The guideways are actually cool, they don't create extensive shadowy areas, they add something positive to the streetscape.

Just look how often it appears in locally filmed TV shows, like :

Motive
The Flash
Arrow

[Metro-One]

Everyone here knows I love elevated transportation infrastructure. It creates a real urban feel IMO, a metropolis feel for a lack of better words.

Everyone raves about European and Asian cities, and guess wheat, these cities are crisscrossed with elevated rapid transit, regional rail, bullet train, and highway networks.

#3 in Richmond feels much more like a real city now and the entire stretch under the guide way is 10 times better than it was before.

Not to mention how advantages such structures are for photographers

[Olden Retreiver]

Originally Posted by gary92

i laugh when people complain about the sinkholes. they're boring out a f*cking tunnel underneath a city, what does everyone expect, flawless execution?

People are upset because something very close to "flawless execution" is what was promised of (and sold to) them. EGRT said there would be no traffic disruptions caused by tunnelling. EGRT said after the first sinkhole that it wouldn't happen again. When it happened again (at the very next possible recurrence) they took expensive and disruptive measures that delayed the project for 6 months. When it happened YET again (at the very next possible occasion) there was even more severe disruption.

People don't like being lied to, even though I do think the recent complaints from Glenayre were over the top.


And people don't like "bait and switch" like the Klahanie elevated section, and the cut-and-cover at Cambie, and now apparently, at Inlet Centre Station.

Many comments are made here complaining about people being uninformed. The root cause of this is that people are repeatedly mis-informed by "experts"

The foul language and goofy icon in your post are rude insults to people (residents, neighbours, voters, taxpayers) who are genuinely concerned.