ever-12Yesterday Councillor George Affleck and Rob McDowell got a preview of Evergreen (formally, the Evergreen Extension of the Millennium Line) – and sent some shots from the initial run.
PT welcomes your impressions as you get a chance to try out what is now (again) the longest automated light-rail line in the world.  (Theological arguments aside on the definition of light rail when it comes to SkyTrain.)
The 11-km $1.43 billion line took long enough to reach Coquitlam (PoCo, not surprisingly, thinks it would have made more sense to cross the river to them).  But at last it’s open – connecting at Lougheed.
And then through the Motordom landscapes of the northeast part of region.
Entering a six-km tunnel – apparently the coolest part of the trip, according to George.
Paralleling the main line of the CPR and serving Port Moody, still industrial and port-serving in ways not seen from the road.
ever-4Moving on to the residential and commercial centre of Coquitlam.
Evergreen already has a lot of intermodal connections with the frequent bus network and West Coast Express, and there is already a substantial amount of residential density near some of the stations. There will be about 40,000 passengers a day anticipated on the line, rising to 70,000 in about five years.
Transit lines are century-long commitments to city building.  There will be short-term impacts (the crowding induced elsewhere along the rapid-transit network), medium-term (more affordable housing options with better transit links) and long-term (the movement of job centres into some of these locations to make them truly complete communities).
Evergreen is a manifestation of the half-century-long regional vision (“cities in a sea of green”) – still proving to be far-sighted once we make the commitment to actually follow through on its intentions.


  1. Nice to see this finally opening after all the delays. I also think we should take a moment to remember that the federal money for this was available partly because the Metro Vancouver board voted to oppose the Port Mann bridge boondoggle. And the TransLink money was available partly because folks in New West stopped the North Fraser Perimeter Road boondoggle. In case you forget the NFPR story, see http://www.straight.com/article-394189/vancouver/eric-doherty-gateways-united-boulevard-extension-cancelled-applause-new-westminster

  2. Transit lines are century-long commitments to city building.
    Amen to that.
    It’s sad, though, that it takes half a century to build an incomplete system while priority (i.e. more tandem truck loads of public money) is given over to road building.
    It’s also no mystery that politics got in the way of sound transit planning and therein Broadway, with potentially five times the ridership and orders of magnitude more jobs and population than Evergreen, remains the glaring missing link.
    Broadway and SoF LRT are theoretically next in line, but surely their schedules and funding should be given much greater emphasis along with beefing up the bus fleet. Further, now is a good time to look at the region beyond the Metro and plan for coordinated commuter rail (Chilliwack, Whistler …) with exemplary connectivity to the urban rapid transit network.

  3. From these shots the station architecture appears to be distinctly underwhelming. The Client can account for that. Already we see steps on the Canada Line crumbling. Where is the vision and hundred year commitment to durable construction and a quality passenger experience?

    1. Not enough stations. More people should be within walking distance. More stations can be built, but it would have been cheaper the first time. SKIP STOP Every 2nd train could stop at every every 2nd station. All trains stop at high volume stations

      1. More than enough stations for a rapid transit line. Adding little used stations decreases ridership by increasing travel times for the vast majority of users. Plus better to focus development around a few stations to get the critical mass needed for walking oriented neighbourhoods.
        Also, more stations increases cost for stations and more trains are needed for a given ridership level.
        Better to invest in frequent bus service for stations.

        1. (1)If the ( A) train stops at 6 stops and the (B) train stops at 6 stops the travel time is the same.(2) Developers would pay more than the cost of the extra stations for their projects to be within walking distance (3) Would need the same number or train carriages for same ridership

      2. How and where are the trains to pass each other? The distance between stations is irregular. If you had switches or pull-outs, they would restrict the ability to increase frequency. Third or forth tracks would be expensive. More generally, I can’t imagine where the extra money for track and stations would come from – and surely it would be better spent on expanding the network. Are you aware of any existing similar elevated systems that operate as you describe?

        1. Geof Wikipedia can explain SKIP STOP better than i can. No pullouts or double track needed.They don”t pass each other.

    2. Why should money be wasted on fancy stations? It would be better spent on more busses. Can you name a memorable NYC subway station design?

Leave a Reply to Liz Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *