From the North Shore News – TransLink’s budget woes tied to SkyTrain
Liz James is one of the few media scribes that has actually taken the time to study and understand our “tricky dickey” regional transit, as brought to you by TransLink.
With most of the mainstream media in Translink’s pocket, little real news and views are offered and instead a pablum of regurgitated “tax and spend” TransLink speak is printed or reported, with the ultimate hope that everyone is too bored to care. With added taxes and car levies on the horizon, many of the public are waking up as to how incompetent TransLink is and the demands forAi??new money is being met with ever increasing resistance. Before any new taxes or levies are implemented, a complete audit by BC’s Auditor General must be done.
Oh sorry, our present Auditor General was treated as a leper by the premier and the Liberal caucus and he is soon going to greener pastures.Ai?? I wonder if there was any truth in the rumour that the AG was going to finally sink his teeth into the TransLink/SkyTrain mess?
Back to the big issue, SkyTrain and/or light metro. Does not one civic, regional, provincial, and/or federal politician ponder the question of why Vancouver’s SkyTrain and theAi??Canada Line are orphan transit systems;Ai??that no other city in North America and EuropeAi??seriously uses SkyTrain for urban or regional transit? SkyTrain has been rejected by transit planners for over 35 years andAi??with Vancouver being a SkyTrain example, that no one cas copied,Ai??for 33 years and has anyone bothered to ask; “Why?”
TransLink’s budget woes tied to SkyTrain
By Elizabeth James, Special to North Shore NewsFebruary 13, 2013
“In my view, TransLink should respect the discipline of the planning regimeAi?? set forth in the [South Coast BC Transportation Authority Act s207], whichAi?? requires that TransLink use its best efforts to implement the official plan inAi?? place.”
Martin Crillly, Jan. 11
I am still optimistically hoping for political accountability and integrityAi?? as discussed last week. In that vein, here are the bare bones of a story aboutAi?? accelerating issues at TransLink.
If you are counting along from my last column, this is: ProvincialAi?? #3/Regional #1.
The “official plan” referred to above by Regional Transportation CommissionerAi?? Martin Crilly is this year’s version of the “three-year base plan and seven-yearAi?? outlook report TransLink is required to prepare every year under the South CoastAi?? British Columbia Transportation Authority Act.”
Addressing the need for the agency to carry out its mandate, District ofAi?? North Vancouver Mayor Richard Walton, chairman of the regional mayors’ council,Ai?? told Global TV last Wednesday, “TransLink cannot provide the services if itAi?? doesn’t have the money.”
Fair enough. Problem is taxpayers have been burned once too often.
To alleviate what TransLink refers to as a funding problem, one of the latestAi?? proposals from the mayors is to replace the rejected vehicle levy andAi?? property-tax ideas with a 0.5 per cent hike in the provincial sales tax.
That begs these questions:
? Why does TransLink look everywhere but in the mirror to find the source ofAi?? its financial problems?
? Why not modernize its technology choices to save the millions of dollarsAi?? needed to fund its operation?
? What corporate and political interests have influenced the agency’sAi?? intransigence over the past 15 years?
The answers sit at the feet of the provincial government, because by taking aAi?? hands-off stance in anything but TransLink’s governance structure and capitalAi?? projects, Victoria exerts a direct and detrimental effect on the agency’sAi?? ability to manage its budget.
That began when former NDP premier Glen Clark refused to fill the twoAi?? provincial seats he allowed for when he established the founding board ofAi?? TransLink and it continues to this day.
Recognizing that accountability-avoidance tactic for what it is, manyAi?? taxpayers argue that ongoing provincial governments are entirely responsible forAi?? the dysfunctional operational reality of the agency.
That said, it’s to their detriment that TransLink and its guiding boards,Ai?? committees and councils have never sought the backing of the people in a demandAi?? that the province become a full – and transparent – participant in theAi?? governance structure.
So while the province pulls the strings as to the choice of rapid transitAi?? routes, transit technology, constructors and deadlines, a variety of appointedAi?? executives and elected politicians are left to clean up what remains of theAi?? budget to fund operational costs and service the accumulated debt. How many taxAi?? dollars have been spent since 1998 to support all those boards, committees andAi?? consultants’ reviews?
That takes us back to the Report Card on TransLink’s Efficiency, officiallyAi?? released to the public on Feb. 1, 2013 by Commissioner Crilly.
The Report Card, is backed by a 37-page (Shirocca) consultant’s reportAi?? entitled Progress Report on TransLink Efficiency Review. Readers can find itAi?? under What’s New at translinkcommission.org.
Noting TransLink’s decision to “budget rather conservatively to the tune ofAi?? some $40 million per year,” Crilly explains that is quite different than “costAi?? efficiency.”
Mixing metaphors, what the comment suggests to this laywoman is thatAi?? TransLink can budget expenditures as low as it chooses to paint a nice picture,Ai?? but that means nothing if the organization is unable to cut its clothAi?? accordingly.
So while efficiencies can, indeed, be achieved by optimizing bus routes and transit schedules andAi?? by reducing the need for buses to run empty, there is still no discussion aboutAi?? the costs of the elephant in TransLink’s room: SkyTrain.
Following an earlier column, a young Surrey resident whose opinion is at oddsAi?? with the call for light-rail by Mayor Diane Watts, upbraided me for my ongoingAi?? opposition to SkyTrain technology.
I make no apologies for that. No one connected with TransLink has everAi?? contradicted my comments about the comparative costs of SkyTrain versus theAi?? alternatives – with or without supporting documentation.
Nor, to my knowledge, has anyone disputed similar data in TransLink’s ownAi?? documents – 2001 information received by Peter Boothroyd, a former professorAi?? with the Centre for Human Settlements at the University of British Columbia, inAi?? response to his requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
More recently, UBC professor Patrick Condon, who in the past may have leanedAi?? toward SkyTrain, wrote in his May 2009 Foundational Research Bulletin #8 “. . .Ai?? we found that for the (costs of the Canada Line) the government could finance aAi?? 200-kilometre modern tram network that would place 80 per cent of residents inAi?? Surrey, White Rock, Langley and the Scott Road district of Delta within aAi?? 10-minute walk of a modern, European-style tram.”
After doing some digging, I have discovered it would be possible to have anAi?? arms-length transportation consultant produce a comparative-costs report -Ai?? including mention of the North Shore – for around $6,000.
So to all three councils: Would it be a worthwhile investment to pay $2,000Ai?? each for a report that, among other things, would tell North Shore residentsAi?? whether they are better off continuing to support the increasing costs of anAi?? as-is version of TransLink, or whether they would receive more value for theirAi?? transit dollars by going-it alone?
In the meantime, have a happy Valentine’s Day tomorrow!
Footnote: Links to cited reports can be requested by email to: rimco@ shaw.ca.
Read more: http://www.nsnews.com/columnists/ransLink+budget+woes+tied+SkyTrain/7957678/story.html#ixzz2Kn9JmXSh
Ai?? Copyright (c) North Shore NewsRead more: http://www.nsnews.com/columnists/ransLink+budget+woes+tied+SkyTrain/7957678/story.html#ixzz2Kn8pPYW3
Excellent article – sky train by TransLink is a boondoggle and sham. Delta, North Vancouver and Surrey would be wise to split from TransLink to form their own transit organizations and to run transit the right way with tram trains.
UBC tram train and sky train compared – case study
The “operating cost” of a tram service for UBC to move about 5,000 pphpd would be about $14 million annualized over 25 years compared with $18 million for sky train service. This does not include maintenance costs which are very much higher for the sky trains operating on an above or below grade line compared with the tram trains operating on an at grade line.
While the tram line construction to UBC would be expensive and possibly up to $100 million per kilometre along Broadway where utilities would have to be relocated to allow access to utilities, the tram line construction along West 16th Avenue on the grass median would be very inexpensive at about $30 million per kilometre.
To facilitate sky train to UBC, the cost of the tunnel is $3,000 million. For the tram line to UBC, the tram line would possibly cost $900 million. Both the operating costs and capital costs for sky train line to UBC greatly exceed the operating costs and capital costs for the tram line to UBC.
Sky trains don’t cut it
Sky trains with stations spaced 1,500 metres apart on average can’t function without buses transferring riders to the sky trains and without transit police acting as a crime deterrent to make up for the lack of drivers on automated sky trains. These are extra and expensive requirements which the tram trains don’t need.
Transfer-buses costing $115 per service hour add millions of dollars to the cost of the sky train operation. This cost is buried with creative accounting techniques used by the accountants running TransLink – explaining the need for accountants rather than engineers in decision making positions at TransLink.
The combined walk to the sky train and commute on the sky train is less than about five minutes faster than the combined walk to the tram train and commute on the tram train – for the median commute of five kilometres in Vancouver. That is, in practical terms, sky train saves essentially no time in the life of someone commuting for the 1,440 minutes in the day (5 minutes / 1,440 minutes = 0%).
To add insult to injury, buses required for sky train increase carbon emission. In other words, the decision makers at TransLink aren’t making smart decisions. The sooner Delta, North Vancouver and Surrey split from TransLink to run tram trains, the better.