HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 7:20 AM
EastVanMark EastVanMark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,173
Canada Line races toward capacity

The new Canada Line is nearing capacity three years ahead of schedule, prompting TransLink to look at "tactical options" to help ease pressure on the 19-km route.

The line has been recording an average of 94,000 trips per day -- just shy of its capacity of 100,000 riders, a number TransLink had not expected to reach until 2013. It now anticipates it could reach that number as early as next year.

While immediate options to ease overcrowding include running an extra train from Brighouse during peak periods, passengers won't see any more trains running regularly between Vancouver and Richmond until the summer of 2011.

TransLink believes passenger numbers are higher than projected due in part to the Olympic need to get drivers off the roads, as well as a push to funnel suburban bus commuters to the new line.

"You make your projections on what you know ... years in advance of the project startup," TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie said. "It's probably the Olympics that have been the key difference [between] what we were expecting and what we have."

Ridership on the $2-billion Canada Line has been growing steadily since it began operating last August.

Hardie didn't have a total count of how many new riders are taking the train, but according to TransLink figures, the number of daily commuters from south Surrey and White Rock using the No. 351 bus was up 38.9 per cent in May from last June.

Weekend traffic also rose by 52.5 per cent on Saturdays and 53.2 per cent on Sundays.

That increase, as well as a rise in commuters from Richmond, Delta and Vancouver, has contributed to passenger crunches along the Canada Line.

The squeeze is particularly severe at Brighouse, the transit hub for all local Richmond buses, and Bridgeport, where buses shuttle long-haul commuters from Delta, south Surrey and White Rock, during rush hour.

For Percy Bond, this means he never gets a seat when he boards the train at Brighouse for his commute into Vancouver. The only way he can do so, he said, is to get off at Bridgeport and take the airport train, which is usually empty, into downtown.

"I like [Canada Line] except for the fact it's always full," he said. "What surprises me is they can't put three cars on ... it would be nice to see in the rush hour."

Hardie said that now, TransLink typically runs 14 of its 20 Canada Line trains, each with two cars, at 3.5-minute intervals, with another two trains added at rush hour.

By August of 2011, the transit authority plans to regularly run 16 trains, which will represent a 12-per-cent lift in service, every 3.33 minutes.

Hardie wouldn't say how much this would cost.

But he noted that when "we run more transit, we spend more money."

But that doesn't mean commuters won't see any improvements this year, he said, as TransLink has the option to improve service during peak periods to deal with severe overcrowding or pass-ups.

Options include adding extra trains to the Brighouse line during "peak of peak" periods, he said, as well as having buses scheduled for Brighouse shifted to Bridgeport, where commuters can catch a second, nearly empty train, from the airport.

While the airport trains don't have the same passenger numbers, Hardie said TransLink isn't considering moving some of those trains to the Brighouse line. He noted a new park and ride facility at Templeton on the YVR line is drawing more transit users and airport traffic is expected to rise. The park and ride is for airport workers and passengers, who are travelling on the Sea Island route.

The YVR line carries an average 9,300 passengers per day, or 10 per cent of the total ridership, compared with 15 per cent on the Richmond line.

Hardie noted the Canada Line has only been running for less than 10 months so it's still early days and variables such as high fuel costs or parking can have an effect on transit use.

Vancouver commuter Ken Law, who lives at 49th and Cambie, drove downtown regularly until the Olympics. He said transit has proven to be more convenient, faster and cheaper, especially with higher parking prices expected with the HST.

"I find it okay," he said. "If you can save money and don't have to drive, there's less stress."

Hardie noted he expects ridership to continue to grow, especially as municipalities continue to densify areas around the transit stations.

Richmond has been densifying its city centre since 2000 in anticipation of huge transit use of the Canada Line. "There was a pent-up demand for effective, reliable transit in the Richmond, Vancouver transit corridor," Mayor Malcolm Brodie said. Hardie noted there is another silver lining for Trans-Link if the Canada Line reaches its capacity by next year.

The rapid transit line was built as a public-private partnership, with TransLink guaranteeing to subsidize ridership shortfalls of less than 100,000 per day. It must also provide operator InTransitBC with some capital, as well as debt-service costs of $38 million to $39 million over the life of the 35-year agreement.

SkyTrain nears 100,000 riders per day three years ahead of schedule after Olympics brought the crowds out

By Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun



Once it hits an average 100,000 riders, Canada Line will reach the break-even point in covering its own operating costs, similar to the Expo and Millennium lines. "With a lift in capacity next year, that could move [ridership] pretty darn close," Hardie said, but added: "All signs still point to Trans-Link having to hustle to meet up with the demand."

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/C...#ixzz0pg5YUUSN

Last edited by EastVanMark; Jun 2, 2010 at 7:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 7:34 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 29,102
i wonder how much it would help if they just let the old white rock bus routes run straight into downtown like they used to - so many of those riders complained when they were forced to transfer
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 8:28 AM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
i wonder how much it would help if they just let the old white rock bus routes run straight into downtown like they used to - so many of those riders complained when they were forced to transfer
That would be an inefficient use of the resources.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 8:34 AM
GeeCee's Avatar
GeeCee GeeCee is online now
zoom zoom
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Posts: 2,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
i wonder how much it would help if they just let the old white rock bus routes run straight into downtown like they used to - so many of those riders complained when they were forced to transfer
IIRC those buses had the worst cost recovery of the entire TransLink network..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 8:37 AM
mrjauk mrjauk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 555
Quote:
The line has been recording an average of 94,000 trips
per day -- just shy of its capacity of 100,000 riders, a number TransLink had not expected to reach until 2013. It now anticipates it could reach that number as early as next year.
Another "journalist" who knows nothing about the subject s/he is writing about. And people wonder why newspapers are losing readership and why blogs are becoming increasingly popular.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 8:46 AM
cabotp cabotp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjauk View Post
Another "journalist" who knows nothing about the subject s/he is writing about. And people wonder why newspapers are losing readership and why blogs are becoming increasingly popular.
I wouldn't say it is a case of not knowing what he/she is talking about. But a case of poor editing and not catching the glitch in the wording.

That line should of read. "Just shy of its expected boardings of 100,000 riders
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 11:36 AM
Hourglass Hourglass is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Here and there
Posts: 638
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjauk View Post
Another "journalist" who knows nothing about the subject s/he is writing about. And people wonder why newspapers are losing readership and why blogs are becoming increasingly popular.
Yes, it is misleading. It implies therefore that the Canada Line needs to run at full capacity to meet its operating costs which, if true, sure isn't an attractive business case.

Out of curiosity (can't be bothered to look it up), can anyone tell me what IS the capacity of the Canada Line?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 4:06 PM
Gordon Gordon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 918
I think the capacity depends on headways . Canada Line combined headways are around 200s as opposed to 108s for combined e\m line.

Why does Protrans keep 20% of it's capacity off line when when E&M Lines keep 7 or 8% capacity offline during peak times?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 4:24 PM
flight_from_kamakura's Avatar
flight_from_kamakura flight_from_kamakura is offline
testify
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: san francisco and montreal
Posts: 1,319
my guess is that ~100k is, at any rate, likely the equilibrium point, at least until capacity is significantly increased. seems nuts to me that this line, in this iteration, is supposed to last another 100 years though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 4:32 PM
cc85 cc85 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Island City
Posts: 451
they f'd us up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 4:48 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,267
Remember the outcries - it was too expensive, it would never reach the target numbers. What actually got built was not the 100-year version. It is more like the 50 year version. Based on the 2061 projections, if the line is fully upgraded as scheduled, it should still have enough capacity - barely.

But that doesn't consider other unforseen developments that could add to the ridership. Some things you can't predict - it would be nice to have spare capacity for such unforeseen things. There could be a connecting LRT along Marine or 41st or in Richmond, or a major complex of some kind being built near the south end.

YVR's long term plan is to move all of its employee parking off of Sea Island to reduce car traffic on the bridges. This would significantly increase the load on Canada Line.

What if a major ferry terminal is built in Richmond 30 years from now? What if a major university campus is built somewhere along the route?

But at least the line was built... in some form.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 4:48 PM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,087
Sorry, but they should have had the foresight to build longer platforms and three-car trains ........

At least this is evidence of just how successful more of skytrain rrt on other routes would be ... if & when we get it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 5:07 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,267
^ You'll get no argument from me: the line should have been built for 3 cars from the start. But there was no money on the table for that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 5:12 PM
wrenegade's Avatar
wrenegade wrenegade is offline
ON3P Skis
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lower Lonsdale, North Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,515
Can they not still run 3 car trains in the future and have the end doors computer controlled not to open?

Anyways, I'm not surprised at the numbers, and it's a shame the line wasn't built to more capacity, but it's ridiculous ProTrans only runs 14/20 trains normally. In the future the Marine Gateway and further development at Oakridge will stress this line. They need to hurry up and order more trains soon, and figure out a way to get a 3 car option working.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 6:02 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
One big sigh....albeit an obvious ridership success. I can't believe they're still using only 14 trains, and next year's increase will only add 2 trains for a total of 16. It needs 18 today! Unbelievable.

If this were BCRTC-operated SkyTrain, there wouldn't be any of this nonsense...it doesn't cost THAT much to immediately put 2 or even 4 more trains onto the system. The only thing that's obviously stopping them is the P3 contract.




"You make your projections on what you know ... years in advance of the project startup," TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie said. "It's probably the Olympics that have been the key difference [between] what we were expecting and what we have."


The Olympics has increased ridership marginally, I certainly wouldn't put the spotlight on the effect of the Games entirely...we saw the numbers before the Games started and they were already quite high.

You sure did screw up on the ridership projections, Translink...or RAVCO, whatever. It was incredibly clear from the beginning, during the planning process, that this line would see high ridership.

It's almost unheard of that a new rapid transit rail service is near/at capacity 10 months after opening, and on top of that not much will be done to alleviate congestion.

I said it a gazillion times before, and I'll say it again...It's a clusterf@ck.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 6:13 PM
djh djh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastVanMark View Post
...
Hardie said that now, TransLink typically runs 14 of its 20 Canada Line trains, each with two cars, at 3.5-minute intervals, with another two trains added at rush hour.

By August of 2011, the transit authority plans to regularly run 16 trains, which will represent a 12-per-cent lift in service, every 3.33 minutes.

Hardie wouldn't say how much this would cost.

But he noted that when "we run more transit, we spend more money."
...
What is the explanation for this? Why does it cost more to add existing trainsets to an automated system? It's automated, there are no drivers needed, it's computer-controlled so the software handles it...so why does it cost more?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 6:23 PM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by djh View Post
What is the explanation for this? Why does it cost more to add existing trainsets to an automated system? It's automated, there are no drivers needed, it's computer-controlled so the software handles it...so why does it cost more?
There's a set timeline in the concessionaire contract for when additional trains willl be added into service. If Translink wants more trains earlier than the set contract timeline, it'll cost them more on top of the additional operating costs of those trains.

You're right, it should be cheap to send out more trains...that's one of the reasons why we built automated. But given the complexity of adding more trains, it's almost as if this is a driver system. We don't have the same service flexibility as BCRTC-operated SkyTrain...

Clusterf@ck.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 6:27 PM
Zassk Zassk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,267
Surely the contract specified additional trains when certain ridership milestones were reached, not when certain years were reached...? What if the ridership never materialized?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 6:29 PM
Yume-sama's Avatar
Yume-sama Yume-sama is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver / Calgary / Tokyo
Posts: 7,526
Would it be wrong to blame the fact the line is already at capacity on the shortsightedness of the opposition who didn't deem the line necessary... at all ?

Surely what exists now was a compromise~
__________________
Visit me on Flickr! Really! I'm lonely.
http://www.flickr.com/syume
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2010, 6:33 PM
aberdeen5698 aberdeen5698 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 2,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
I said it a gazillion times before, and I'll say it again...It's a clusterf@ck.
The silver lining is that it's great press that underscores the need for rapid transit. Much better than if they overbuilt it and numbers were merely "as expected".
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.