TransLink shutdown of Metrotown elevator comes at a bad time for those who want a yes vote in transit plebiscite
Sometimes, I wonder if the powers that be really want to improve transit service in the Lower Mainland.
The premier says she's going to vote "yes" in an upcoming plebiscite to invest $7.5 billion in Lower Mainland transit and transporation over 10 years. But Christy Clark won't seek public assent in a plebiscite to spend billions more on a new bridge to replace the George Massey Tunnel.
Meanwhile, TransLink is hoping for a "yes" to bring forth more B lines and significantly expand the bus network, which will result in fewer transit vehicles zipping by stops full of passengers.
Increased transit ridership also frees up more space on the roads, reducing traffic congestion, improving goods movement, and enhancing the economy.
Yet TransLink has launched a major upgrade of Metrotown Station, disrupting passenger traffic, weeks before ballots are going out to the public.
Yesterday, the regional transportation authority announced that it's taking the elevator out of service for a year while three new elevators are being installed.
For reasons that will elude those who want this plebiscite to pass, TransLink is beginning this work at the worst possible time.
The elevator shutdown comes just as the "no" campaign is looking for reasons to demonstrate that the people in charge of the transit system are inept and shouldn't be given more money.
TransLink's solution to the inconvenience of having no elevator is to provide a HandyDart shuttle for passengers to go from Metrotown to Patterson Station, thereby lengthening travel times.
Passengers with strollers can take a community shuttle, thank you very much.
TransLink's vice president of infrastructure management and engineering, Fred Cummings, promises that these "much-needed improvements...will give our customers a facility that is more accessible, safe and secure".
What Cummings didn't mention in his canned statement is that the timing of this upgrade means that this accessible, safe, and secure facility could conceivably come at the cost of three light-rail lines in Surrey, 400 extra buses, big improvements to cycling infrastructure, and innumerable other transportation initiatives.
That's because if this plebiscite narrowly goes down to defeat, it can likely be blamed, in part, on media cacophony and passenger dissatisfaction created by the elevator closure at one of the Expo Line's busiest stations.
I don't blame everything on TransLink. It has to do what its political masters demand.
Previous premiers Glen Clark and Gordon Campbell pushed for rapid-transit projects like the Millennium Line and Canada Line in areas with low population densities.
The Millennium Line barreled through five NDP constituencies, and that trumped building rapid transit where ridership could justify the cost.
The Canada Line zipped through constituencies held by B.C. Liberals. This was more important to the premier than the need to alleviate more serious traffic congestion going east-west across the region.
So in effect, those rapid transit lines were built to stimulate real-estate development, not benefit existing transit users. They contributed to higher fares because had the provincial government pushed for more cost-efficient technology, like street-level light rail, it would have freed up more funds for other uses.
It now costs $5.50 to ride one-way from Surrey Central to Waterfront Station on the Expo Line before 6:30 p.m. on weekdays.
To ride from Metrotown Station to Commercial Broadway Station, the adult fare is $4 before 6:30 p.m. on weekdays. And for that price, passengers don't even have access to an elevator to get to the Metrotown Station platform.
Comments
9 Comments
steve y
Feb 27, 2015 at 2:04pm
Don't blame one elevator for this mess. Clearly this was going down to a no vote before this. I feel the whole point of skytrain is to do real estate development in a sustainable manner. Which is exactly why the broadway line is a terrible idea. No matter how much it is used, it will never generate a profit. The expected cost savings is 8 M dollars a year. And for that it will cost 3 B dollars. Where is the profit in this? Clearly done by the same people who ran the math for the compass card system.
J.M.T.
Feb 27, 2015 at 2:07pm
Way to go... losers. I vote 'NO'.
Julio B Aguilar
Feb 27, 2015 at 2:39pm
Are you alluding to yourself when you say "media cacophony"? I'm sure riders(especially ones who use the elavator at this station) are smart enough to see that the elavator closure is only to improve(increase single elavator to three) their commute.
No Thanks
Feb 27, 2015 at 3:23pm
This is yet another example of waste & ineptitude or simply not caring about Transit Users.
0.5% PST
Even if Voted Yes and implemented it does NOT on it's own provide for all the increase in capacity.
That would require more Funding by the Province and Ottawa neither of whom have shown any interest in providing this Funding, thus the PST plebiscite to get us the Tax payer to pay separately.
Than there is the small issue of Waste Grossly misdirected Funds at Translink.
Compass Costs $200 Million + $84.5 Million just in 2014 (Translinks figures 2014 Budget).
Compass is Budgeted at $25 per year in Direct Operational Costs (it will never pay for itself).
There is also at least $250 Million per year in poorly allocated Funds within Translinks Budget.
Efficiency and cutting Gross Waste would negate the need for added Taxes and Funding.
Also a Yes Vote only gets us 11 New Buses in 2 Years (2017). Translink pays (their Budget 2014 figures) about $805,555 per Bus.
The rest of the capacity increase at Translink for Trains, Light Rail etc would have to come from the Provincial & Federal Governments block payments / commitments.
Again neither have shown any interest in Funding Translink to increase capacity going forward. No real commitments have been made.It is Non Binding after all.
I am not getting conned by the Yes side, No Thanks.
I am Voting No as would most reasonably informed people without special interests in this.
edoherty
Feb 28, 2015 at 9:37am
I am voting Yes, and would really like to be able to vote No to Premier Clark's scheme to subsidize exports of US thermal coal via a $3 billion bridge to replace the Massey Tunnel.
I am starting to see Clark as the de-facto leader of the No side in the transit referendum. She seems to want the No side to win to avoid a competition for federal and provincial capital funds between rapid transit and her freeway bridge scheme.
Thanks Charlie
Feb 28, 2015 at 9:42am
I have to thank Charlie for clearing my view on this issue.
The article states: "So in effect, those rapid transit lines were built to stimulate real-estate development, not benefit existing transit users."
Yes indeed. And what makes me think if I hand over another .5%, it will be spent differently?
I vote NO.
James Blatchford
Feb 28, 2015 at 12:30pm
..and it's not like any of the residents - who flocked to purchase these real estate developments - ever benefit by having transit right at their door. Oh, I guess they don't count in this analysis.
Sukmi Wang
Mar 1, 2015 at 8:21am
Didn't they jack up the fares just over a year ago? It's time someone slapped them into reality and told them to get the job done with the billions we're already giving them. No more contributing to a cycle of waste, inept management, lack of accountability.
Vancouver complains
Mar 2, 2015 at 8:27am
I understand the inconvenience of an elevator out of commission for a whole year and I feel for those who rely on it. But would you rather the station be closed for the duration of construction? As for "That's because if this plebiscite narrowly goes down to defeat, it can likely be blamed, in part, on media cacophony and passenger dissatisfaction created by the elevator closure at one of the Expo Line's busiest stations." Really...a narrow no vote margin because of "dissatisfaction created by the elevator closure". Hyperbole much?