add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
| advertise add site services publishers database health videos
| | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Line Correction in Toronto Ontario... artoffacialsurgery.com | Line Filler, Frown Lines & Fine Lines Remover, Anti Aging Skin Care... skinrxclinic.com | Clinics Canada: Sleep Disorders Clinics Canada Sleep Clinics Canada - merrellclinic.com | Main Line Dentists - The Excellence Of Main Line Dentist Dr. Matt - Main... brynmawrcosmeticdentist.c... |
"RAV" redirects here. For other uses, see RAV (disambiguation).
The Canada Line is a new rapid transit line in the Metro Vancouver region of British Columbia, Canada. This metro is the third line in TransLink's SkyTrain network, servicing Vancouver, Richmond, and the Vancouver International Airport. It is coloured turquoise on route maps. The Canada Line comprises 19.2 kilometres (11.8 mi) of track; the main line goes from Vancouver to Richmond, while a 4 km spur line from Bridgeport Station connects to the airport.[1] The line opened August 17, 2009, fifteen weeks ahead of the originally scheduled opening of November 30, 2009, and well in advance of the 2010 Winter Olympics in February.[2] The Canada Line saw an average of 82,500 passengers per day in its first six weeks,[3], or approximately 8,000 users per hour, which is about 80 per cent of its initial capacity.[4] The new service is expected to experience 100,000 boardings per day by 2010 and 142,000 by 2021.[5] Governance of the project was through Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc. (CLCO), formerly RAV Project Management Ltd. (RAVCO, a reflection of the original "Richmond-Airport-Vancouver" name).[6] The line was built by SNC-Lavalin, which will also operate it for 35 years. The Canada Line is operationally independent from the SkyTrain's existing Expo and Millennium lines,[7] but is considered part of the SkyTrain network.[8]
[edit] Route The Canada Line begins in Downtown Vancouver at Waterfront Station (0.0 km) in a cut-and-cover tunnel beneath Granville Street. It quickly transitions into twin bored tunnels, heading southwest beneath Granville Street, then curving southeast to follow Davie Street through Yaletown. The tunnels then dive deeper to pass below False Creek before rising back up to Olympic Village Station (2.7 km). There, the line transitions back to a cut-and-cover tunnel (which is noted by the tunnel going from being circular to square shaped) heading south under Cambie Street, some portions of which have the two sets of tracks stacked vertically on separate levels. The line finally emerges from the ground just south of 64th Avenue, climbing to an elevated guideway.[9]  The line continues elevated across the North Arm Bridge over the North Arm of the Fraser River, leaving Vancouver and entering Richmond. Just beyond Bridgeport Station (11.1 km), the line splits, with the Richmond branch heading south on elevated tracks along No. 3 Road and terminating at Richmond–Brighouse Station (14.5 km). The airport branch turns west and crosses the Middle Arm Bridge over the Middle Arm of the Fraser River, connecting to stations on Sea Island and terminating at YVR–Airport Station (15.0 km). Portions of the airport branch are at-grade in order to accommodate a future elevated taxiway for aircraft over the line. Both branches narrow to a single track as they approach their respective terminus stations. Just before the Bridgeport Station is the OMC (Operations and Maintenance Centre) facility which houses the trains when not in use. [edit] Stations
 Station construction was designed as a two-stage process. Sixteen original stations opened at the same time as the line itself. Three additional stations are planned for, and may be built in the future. The stations are listed below. Each station along the Canada Line is slightly different in appearance, and designed to blend in with the surrounding neighbourhood. For example, Langara – 49th Avenue Station is designed to fit into the area's low density residential neighbourhood.[citation needed] Most station platforms are 40 metres long, extendable to 50 metres. The YVR terminus and the Richmond-Brighouse terminus are single-tracked, whereas Waterfront Station terminus is double-tracked. The double tracking is necessary to accommodate the 3 minute headways between trains on the Waterfront-Bridgeport portion of the line. King Edward Station is the only station with a stacked configuration and Broadway – City Hall Station is the only station with a double height ceiling over the platforms. Vancouver City Centre Station is linked to Pacific Centre Mall and Vancouver Centre Mall in addition to having street level access. All direct transfers to the Expo and Millennium Lines must be made at Waterfront Station; there is no direct connection from Vancouver City Centre Station to Granville Station. However, it is possible to transfer between those two stations via a short walk through Pacific Centre or Vancouver Centre Mall. Stations are configured to allow for the future installation of fare gates if required. Every station has an up-escalator and elevator, but only the three terminal stations have down-escalators.[10] [edit] Vancouver sectionAll Vancouver stations are underground except Marine Drive which is elevated.
[edit] Richmond sectionTrains outbound to Richmond's commercial centre stop at:
[edit] Airport sectionTrains outbound from Vancouver to Vancouver International Airport split from the main line after Bridgeport Station, stopping at:
[edit] Post 2010Provisions have been made to allow for the addition of the following stations at some time in the future:
A future station at Capstan Way (No. 3 Road and Capstan Way) in Richmond was originally planned, but was cancelled in March 2009. Pinnacle International and Concord Pacific, the developers of the Sun Tech City project couldn't fund the $15 million required to build the station. The developers could only offer $1 million up front, but was deemed unacceptable by TransLink and the City of Richmond.[11] [edit] Travel times between stationsThe trip from Waterfront to either Richmond–Brighouse or YVR–Airport takes 25 minutes in either direction. During the day, trains run every 7½ minutes on both branches, interleaved to provide service every 3¾ minutes on the combined section between Waterfront and Bridgeport.
[edit] Transit connections A large number of transit services connect with the Canada Line and form an important part of the service. With the opening of the line, most bus routes in Richmond, as well as connecting services from White Rock, Tsawwassen, and Ladner, are doubling their service frequency. Waterfront Station provides connections to Expo and Millennium Lines, West Coast Express and SeaBus. Broadway – City Hall provides a connection to 99 B-Line service. Except for night service, when trains are not running, there is no longer any TransLink bus service to the airport. The Airport Station bus loop was closed on September 7, a few weeks after the opening of the line. Bus routes that used this loop were discontinued (as in the case of the 424 and the 98 B-Line), short-turned (as in the case of the 100, renamed 100 Marpole Loop), or are being redirected to Bridgeport Station (as in the case of the 620, C90 and C92).[12] There is a proposal to extend the Millennium Line west along Broadway to Cambie Street, allowing for a transfer to the Canada Line at Broadway – City Hall Station. As indicated in material presented by the City of Vancouver at public meetings in early 2006, this station is being designed with such a future extension in mind. A "knock-out" panel was installed in the concourse that would allow them to easily build a connection between the station and the Millennium Line. The Canada Line uses the same fare system as the rest of the transit system managed by TransLink with an additional surcharge, the YVR AddFare, for some passengers using the airport branch. This surcharge will be waived until sometime in 2010. Sea Island residents, airport employees, and certain passes are expected to be exempt from this surcharge.[1][13] [edit] Technology The Canada Line uses a dedicated fleet of trains built by Rotem, a division of Hyundai Motor Group. Rather than the linear induction motors used by the existing system's Bombardier ART trains, they are powered by conventional electric motors. They are wider and longer than existing SkyTrain cars, but driven by similar automated third-rail technology.[7] The selection of Rotem was largely a consequence of the Request for Proposals process for the Public-Private Partnership, whose terms did not allow Bombardier to consider efficiencies in combining operations or rolling-stock orders for the new line with those for the existing system. This placed all bidders on a level playing field, albeit at the cost of not necessarily picking the most efficient choice for long-term operation. The RFP also required that the system have an ultimate capacity of 15,000 passengers per hour per direction (leaving the choice of technology and platform length to the proponent) and required a maximum travel time between YVR and downtown Vancouver of 24 minutes.[14] The fleet consists of 20 fully-automated 2-car articulated trains. The capacity of the new trains is estimated at 334 people per car (comfortably), with a top speed of 80 kilometres per hour (50 mph). Married pairs of gangway-connected cars are 41 metres long and 3 metres wide, similar in dimensions to Ottawa's O-Train, but both longer and wider than the Bombardier ART fleet used by the current SkyTrain lines. There are electronic displays on each train indicating the next station and the terminus station; an important feature, considering the line has two branches. [edit] Canada Line ROTEM XG specifications
[edit] Name of the lineDuring the stages of planning and public consultation, the line was known as the "Richmond-Airport-Vancouver Line", or RAV for short. The name "Canada Line" was officially adopted in 2005 to coincide with the beginning of construction.[15] Some early documents also refer to it as the "Olympic Line",[16] in honour of the 2010 Winter Olympics, continuing the practice by which the Expo and Millennium lines were named after significant events occurring at the time of construction; this name has since been adopted for the demonstrator streetcar service along the Downtown Historic Railway that is to accompany the Olympics.[17] [edit] Canada Line from conception to realization: timeline
[edit] Project fundingThe Canada Line was built as a public-private partnership. Funding was provided by both government agencies and a private partner, the proponent. As of March 2009, the entire project was expected to cost $2.054 billion. The premier of BC has furthermore stated that the project is on budget and ahead of schedule.[30] When approved in December 2004 the cost was given as $1.76 billion.[31] The public contributions to the budget comes from the following sources:
These sums are all in 2006 dollars, except for the Government of Canada's contribution which will be paid out when constructed, and is estimated to be equivalent of $419 million 2003 dollars.[33] The private partner was expected to contribute $200 million, as well as being responsible for any construction cost overruns.[34] As of November 7, 2009, InTransitBC has invested $750 million. InTransitBC is a joint venture company owned by SNC-Lavalin, the Investment Management Corporation of BC (bcIMC) and the Caisse de Depot et Placements de Quebec.[35] The British Columbia government initially committed $370 million but when the bid came in over budget, they contributed an extra $65 million. TransLink also put in extra money by committing money from the sale of the Sexsmith Park and Ride in Richmond and from the introduction of a special fare in the Airport Zone.[31] In November 2004, bid costs were reduced by postponing the construction of a walkway between Waterfront Station and the Cruise Ship terminal, by removing Westminster Station and moving Richmond Center Station and the end of the line several hundred meters north. TransLink would further pay for the cost of reinstallation of the trolley wires along Cambie. As a way to further reduce the Best and Final Offer, RAVCO no longer required that the proponent provide for 59 ticket vending machines and 38 ticket validating machines, or for a police unit to operate on the RAV line. RAVCO also shifted responsibility for moving trolley wires from SNC-Lavalin to TransLink.[36] Costs were also decreased due to decisions to single track sections on the Richmond and Airport Branches. The Richmond branch was single tracked from Ackroyd Road onwards in large part due to Richmond City Council pressuring for the visual profile of the overhead line to be reduced for aesthetic reasons. On July 11, 2006, decision is made to relocate Broadway station half a block north at a cost of $3 million to allow for better integration of the station with Broadway and a new development in the area. The funding is provided as follows: one third from the city of Vancouver, one third from TransLink, and one third from surplus funding available to CLCO.[37] In February 2007 TransLink approved the addition of a pedestrian and bike path to the Canada Line Bridge and agreed not to postpone the construction of a station at 2nd Avenue (Olympic Village Station), but instead build it to be ready when the line opens. The $10 million cost of the bridge bike path is paid for by TransLink and is not considered part of the cost of the Canada Line. The Olympic Village Station will cost an additional $29 million.[38] RAVCO was set up by the agencies funding the transit line to oversee project design, procurement, construction and implementation. This TransLink subsidiary, later renamed Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc (CLCO), made distributions to the builder as work progressed. The table below lists the year by year contributions (in million dollars) made by various partner governments on a year by year basis up to December 31, 2008:[39][40] Contributions by TransLink are total disbursements minus contributions by the City of Vancouver, the government of British Columbia and the government of Canada. Calculations show that TransLink has contributed $271 million to date. It has committed an additional $52 million in its 2009 budget.
The private sector will operate the line for 35 years in return for a share in the operating revenue of the line. Early 2006, TransLink decided not to install turnstiles at Canada Line stations, but stations would be designed to accommodate controlled access to allow TransLink to install them for less cost if it wished to do so in the future.[41] On April 9, 2009, TransLink, the Provincial Government, and the Government of Canada announced joint funding of $100 million to introduce turnstiles at all 49 ALRT stations. The turnstiles were to be installed starting in Spring 2010, however have been delayed until at least 2012 [42]. While a large portion of this funding will be used on the Expo and Millennium Line, a portion will be used on the Canada Line stations further increasing the total cost of the project. The federal government is contributing $30 million and the province is adding $40 million, which will go to what it calls Faregate, or controlled access gate. [edit] ConstructionConstruction began in October 2005 and was completed in August 2009. The line comprises the following construction elements:
In addition to the 18.4 kilometres of track above, there is about 500 metres of track in the OMC.
[edit] ControversiesOpponents have claimed that the approval process was undemocratic and dishonest. They say that the projected ridership figures were grossly inflated;[43] if actual ridership levels are less than projection, taxpayers and transit passengers may have to cover the shortfall in revenue. Opponents also claim that the official claim the project had nothing to do with Vancouver's bid to host the 2010 Winter Olympics was not credible.[44] [edit] Public-private partnershipsOpponents of the RAV line's public-private partnership (P3) believe it was politically motivated and that it will cost more money because of the private involvement. The private involvement has, however, allowed for the construction costs to be known and fixed up-front. After raising their contribution to $435 million the B.C. Minister of Transport and the Premier reaffirmed that this is the final contribution and that any cost overruns will be the responsibility of the proponent.[45] Canadian Union of Public Employees opposed the use of P3 to design, build and operate the Canada Line. The P3 process did not allow precise plans to be developed with public consultation, but limited discussion to certain abstract parameters, while leaving the actual design details to the private partner. [edit] Ridership projectionsRidership projections have financial implications for TransLink as they have assumed ridership risk. TransLink is required to guarantee 90% of projected ridership and to make up the shortfall in revenue if this is not achieved. [edit] Sources of funding for TransLinkAs the funding is likely to be provided by at least partially by property taxes collected from throughout the Lower Mainland. The western North Shore municipalities, for example, have the highest real estate prices in the Lower Mainland and therefore the highest property taxes, would relatively contribute more per capita than areas with lower real estate prices. [edit] Alignment and grade separation[edit] VancouverAlthough the latest proposal for rapid transit did not include an option for rapid transit down the Arbutus corridor along the abandoned CPR right of way, Vancouver council reopened debate on this issue. Given that the rail right of way is currently zoned for transit use with space available for transit lines, running the line down the Arbutus corridor may have been more cost-effective than tunneling under Cambie. The planners and RAVCO, however, countered that the Arbutus corridor does not have the major concentration of transit destinations and origins that exist along the Cambie Street corridor, such as Vancouver City Hall, Vancouver General Hospital, Oakridge Centre, and Langara College that are necessary to provide the ridership required for this project to be successful. Also the Arbutus corridor is longer than the Cambie corridor and would cause longer travel times. Cambie corridor further had greater potential for future ridership growth.[46]. The Project Definition Report further specified that any service be able to travel from Waterfront station in Downtown Vancouver to the Airport in 25 minutes or less. At-grade transit, either along Cambie or the Arbutus corridor was ruled out as a result. The reason or origin for this exact requirement was not specified, although travel times were considered an important factor in attracting new riders and in retaining existing riders who were now required to make an extra transfer relative to the existing bus service. All partner contributions were made upon the specifications set in the Project Definition Report. Any "significant change" would allow each partner to reconsider their respective contribution. As the Arbutus corridor proposal could not meet the specifications this could put participation of funding partners in jeopardy. Residents along Cambie Boulevard created the Cambie Boulevard Heritage Society in 1994 which opposed any alteration to a wide green center median that is currently a grassy area with various species of trees including cherry trees donated by the city of Yokohama on occasion of the 1967 Canadian Centennial. The residents had already been mobilized in 1989 in response to the possibility of elevated rail along Cambie Boulevard.[47] In effect the residents were opposed to surface, trench or elevated rail along much of Cambie Street. Even cut and cover raised concerns over construction impact and temporary traffic diversions. Cost and ridership risk were also concerns to property tax-paying residents. Ads asked residents to join "to prevent Vancouver's worst traffic nightmare and from burdening ourselves and our children with unnecessary tax risks for years to come". The society suggested that the line instead be constructed along Arbutus where its impact and cost would be minimal.[48] Despite the concerns of the Society, one of the final two proposals for the Canada Line in 2004 involved a trench in the center of Cambie Street from 49th to 64th avenue. On June 18, 2004, the TransLink Board voted 6–6 to oppose sending the project to the "Best and Final Offer" stage. Opponents to the project were favouring a proposal to build a line along the Cambie corridor involving a minimal amount of tunneling at a saving of about $300 million over the previously fully grade separated proposal. The province responded to the suggestion by withdrawing funding until after the 2010 Olympics; the Minister of Transport Kevin Falcon said that such a change of scope could no longer be accommodated in the time left before 2010. Mayors and councillors sitting on the TransLink Board, however, could not come to an agreement on this alternate plan of action.[49] The impasse created a stir in the business community with business community joining together and calling for the province to take over control of the RAV project. "The Coalition FOR a Lower Mainland Rapid Transit Solution" in a newspaper ad called on the premier to "please rescue our rapid transit". The Vancouver Board of Trade and the Council of Tourism Associations, and Tourism Vancouver lead the call on the premier.[50] While the board ultimately voted to proceed, the incident had lasting repercussions for the TransLink organization. The City of Vancouver plans to run a streetcar line down the Arbutus corridor and in February 2006, won a Supreme Court of Canada decision against the Canadian Pacific Railway, upholding the City's right to rezone the lands for a transportation corridor (the CPR had wanted to develop the corridor with housing).[1] [edit] Richmond CentreWhen the results of the bidding process indicated that an elevated option in Richmond was the winning bid, Richmond council engaged in some last-minute opposition to the RAV line and refused to give RAVCO the green light. Objections to the elevated line included its visual impact, and the impact and cost of any extensions into Richmond. The line would have varied impact on businesses along No. 3 Road. It was said[by whom?] that an at-grade option would cost an extra $90 million due to the need to purchase cars that could accommodate drivers. In order to meet travel-time criteria it was also argued that several intersections would need to be closed. It was also said that an at-grade-option would require a large wall to protect the track along No. 3 Road. In November 2004, a survey of 11,750 people was conducted by RAVCO to determine if people in Richmond supported an elevated or at-grade service in Richmond. 58 percent of the respondents favoured an elevated option.[51]  Even after the survey, however, another option was brought forward. On November 22, 2004, Richmond council considered whether an elevated guideway along No. 3 Road in Richmond was appropriate. If an at-grade service was not feasible, council had instructed staff to look into the possibility of relocating the elevated guideway further west along Minoru Boulevard. In response, residents along Minoru Boulevard presented a petition containing 666 signatures opposing the Minoru alignment. In the petition they "indicated that if Translink and RAVCO were not prepared to construct an at-grade system on No. 3 Road, then the project should be abandoned in favour of bus service on No. 3 Road." [52] When further surveys and public consultation conducted by city staff in December indicated that residents did not support the realignment along Minoru Boulevard, council was left to either turn down the development or support the Best and Final Offer. They chose to go ahead with the project. As a final compromise, part of the elevated track in Richmond was single tracked to reduce visual impact. [edit] Impact on local businesses  For the entire consultation process it was assumed that any underground construction along the Cambie corridor would be by bored tunnel.[citation needed] It was only upon the publication of the winning bid that it became apparent that the portion of the line from 64th avenue to 2nd avenue would be constructed using cut and cover construction. This raised concern over the disruption of local business on Cambie Street. Business in Yaletown and No. 3 Road in Richmond would also be affected by the construction. Although construction in the Downtown was mostly by bored tunnel, businesses in Yaletown were caught off-guard when it turned out that Yaletown station would be north of Pacific Boulevard on Davie Street, rather than to the south of Pacific Boulevard.[53] InTransitBC responded by launching an advertising campaign promoting local business on the line.[54][55] Despite these efforts businesses on Cambie Street experienced significant loss of business. After numerous failed appeals to the provincial government for compensation, store operators sued for compensation. Susan Heyes, owner of Hazel & Co., was awarded $600,000 by the B.C. Supreme Court due in part to the fact that there was insufficient action to mitigate the effects of Canada Line construction on Cambie Street merchants.[56] [edit] Impact on expansion of other transit optionsSome observers claim that the portion of the cost of the Canada Line that TransLink is covering will be at the expense of improving bus service in Greater Vancouver. It has been pointed out that construction of the Canada Line will do nothing to improve transit or alleviate congestion on the Broadway corridor, which serves a majority of the more than 100,000 weekday trips to the University of British Columbia, Greater Vancouver's most frequent weekday destination after the downtown core. In addition, the Evergreen Line rapid transit project has been delayed (until 2014). As TransLink is solely responsible for funding bus operations, any shortage of funding may translate into cuts in bus service. Increasing debt and debt service payments mean that TransLink must have access to more funding sources. TransLink spokesman, Ken Hardie, frequently states that if more funding sources are not found, needed transit expansion will not occur and service cutbacks may be implemented. Until 2013 TransLink will continue to enjoy significant fuel tax revenue, but beyond 2013 this is again subject to federal or provincial government approval. [edit] Regional Growth StrategyThe Canada Line is expected to spur housing development in Richmond. Lansdowne Mall in Richmond, for example, is designed to develop into a new high rise community. This growth is contrary to the Regional Growth Strategy agreed upon by the GVRD, an organization of regional municipalities. Growth was meant to be concentrated in Surrey, Coquitlam, and the Burrard peninsula. Richmond was excluded from this area due to its existence on the flood plain, as well as to reduce pressure on development of its agricultural land. This deviation from the Regional Growth Strategy was an important reason for opposition to the Canada Line by municipal representatives on the TransLink Board. The act defining the TransLink organization states as its purpose that it support the Regional Growth Strategy. [edit] Hiring practicesThere have been several labour disputes related to wages and unionization between employees and contractors working on the construction of the Canada Line. On September 21, 2006, Canada Line construction workers planned a strike over racial issues, claiming that foreign workers were being hired at a fraction of the pay of Canadians working on the line. The BC Labour Relations Board, however, has ruled otherwise, taking into consideration the fact that the workers were being paid for their stay in Vancouver while doing tunneling work. The BC Human Rights Tribunal has not ruled on the complaint as of this writing.[57] On November 13, 2007, the BC Human Rights Tribunal ruled that a group of Latin-American workers had been intimidated from being represented in a union by the Canada Line contractors.[58][59] The tribunal found that the workers were forced to sign a petition in the fear of possibly losing future job prospects with their employer. The petition would have prevented them from being represented by a union before the tribunal, and it would also have created evidence that could have jeopardized the ongoing investigation by the tribunal over perceived inequalities between foreign and domestic workers.[60] [edit] See also[edit] References
[edit] External links
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |
