Canada Line Criticisms Endorsed
I have been reading an article on the Daily Hive by Kenneth Chan this morning that pretty much repeats every one of the criticisms I have levelled over the years at the Canada Line.
POSTSCRIPT I should have noticed this publication date at the top of the article Aug 14, 2014 9:58 am
It was underbuilt, and the P3 cost more than conventional funding. Among the problems that has caused are trains and stations that are too small, too slow and too inconvenient. It has been far more successful than its initial critics claimed, and Chan does come up with some inventive ways of tackling these issues. I think he is very informative on the parochial nature of local politicians and their very limited vision, and how they managed to hobble the project from the start. Sadly too many of them are still warming seats on their respective councils and regional bodies alike.
There needs to be change. Hopefully we can make a start on some of these sooner rather than later as at least we have got a change in provincial government, and realistic probability of federal funding – which was why the name of the line was chosen in the first place!
Stephen Rees's blog 
Stephen, this is tremendously helpful for understanding the Canada Line expansion potential. If the BC government recognizes the opportunity to turn the Massey Tunnel Replacement Project into the Massey Thruway Renewal Project, optimal ways must be determined to support the core transit element centred on the tunnel with better access, most evidently via the Canada Line. I think that means the potential will again need to become actual a lot sooner than foreseen.
kewljim
October 12, 2017 at 12:20 pm
Whoops, I totally missed the publication date too. Still relevant, though.
spartikus
October 12, 2017 at 1:49 pm