TransLink Referendum Mayhem

Welcome to the BC Liberal world of transit, where transit or should I say transit mega-projects are a means for winning elections, nothing more.

The Canada Line is a good example, where ten BC Premier wanted to showcase a transit P-3, but the problem arose that SkyTrain, being a proprietary railway, made near to impossible to have a real P-3.

The project soon went “South” when the SNC Lavalin (also was on the Bombardier bid) lead consortium underbid Bombardier and SkyTrain to win. The problem was, the consortium were never allowed to do any real engineering before the bid process and TransLink’s incompetence over the subway section of the Canada Line, lead to costs spiraling ever upwards.

The concessionaire of the Canada line then “reneged” on assuming risk on the project, leaving the provincial government hold the bag, so to speak for cost overruns. Real P-3’s, the concessionaire assumes risk on the project.

As the Canada Line’s costs increased ever upward, the scope of the project was reduced; single track construction was used in Richmond and YVR; stations were made smaller, excluding escalators and elevators and some even omitted; station platforms were designed with a length of only 50 metres (some stations only have 40 metre platforms); a switch was made from bored subway construction to cheaper cut-and-cover subway construction; and no compensation was to be paid to merchants and businesses disrupted by cut and cover subway construction.

Still the final cost of the Canada Line was in excess of $2.5 billion a far cry from the original budget of $1.3 billion. No one really knows the real cost of the Canada Line though media reports put the cost from $1.9 billion to $2.3 billion depending which politician or bureaucrat they were interviewing. It is interesting that the Susan Heyes (losing) lawsuit against TransLink for compensation had evidence that the final cost of the Canada Line was in excess of $2.7 billion! The presiding judge, the Honourable Judge Pittfield, called the Canada Line P-3 a charade!

And a charade the Canada line was, the only heavy rail subway in the world, built as a light metro and having less capacity than a simple streetcar line.

Enter the TransLink referendum, which is supposed to extort more money from the taxpayer to fund Liberal transit mistakes and even maybe a SkyTrain subway under Vancouver. Enter transportation Minister Todd Stone, from the “Hurtlands”, who hasn’t a clue about regional transit issues, hasn’t a clue about SkyTrain; hasn’t a clue for what is needed for transit to improve, leading the charge for a “yes” vote in a referendum that we still don’t know what the question or questions will be?

It certainly looks like the current premier wants a no vote so she can continue the great BC practice of highway and new bridge construction. BC politics at its best!

 

Vaughn Palmer: Will transit referendum sink like a Stone without the bossai??i??s support?

Transportation minister Todd Stone is committed to success; but it sounds like the premier is hedging her bets on vote outcome

By Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun columnist January 9, 2014

Cuiaba, Brazil – new LRT won’t be ready for World Cup

Light rail in Brazil not ready for World Cup

The Associated Press

RIO DE JANEIRO — The head of World Cup projects for Brazil’s far-western Mato Grosso state has acknowledged a light rail system in the city of Cuiaba meant to help football fans move around the city during World Cup matches there won’t be ready in time for the tournament.

Mauricio Guimaraes has said the 13 mile-long train lines won’t be completed until December, more than five months after the end of the World Cup.

Speaking Monday in an interview with TV Centro America, the Globo television network’s local affiliate, Guimaraes blamed “various delays” for the setback, adding that “from now on, it will be fast.”

Brazil has faced harsh criticism from world football’s governing body FIFA over delays in delivering the 12 stadiums that are to host World Cup matches.

The Future through Zwei’s (not so) Crystal ball

There is not much detail given as about the proposed referendum or even if a “no” vote will be allowed and it may be condemned prisoners Hobson’s choice of death by firing squad, electrocution, or hanging. In other words we may get choice of road pricing, higher property taxes or an auto levy or a combination of all three.

Zwei believes the referendum is merely a funding formula for the $3+ billion Broadway SkyTrain subway as there are no more schools, hospitals and such left to be closed as what happened coincidentally with the past SkyTrain lines built. The cupboard is bare for transit.

What I do think will happen is that the Millennium Line will be extended to Arbutus then an enhanced B-Line will continue to UBC. A shorter subway would suit the likes of Bombardier and SNC Lavalin for now. If this option is chosen, it spells a transit disaster for the region; a very expensive and user unfriendly transit service to TransLink’s top transit destination.

Nothing is going to happen in Surrey unless the present mayor. Dianne Watts, flexes her political muscle and gives TransLink and the province an ultimatum, either fund our LRT or we will split. Dianne Watts is seen as a future Liberal Premier and as the love affair with our current Premier, Christi Clark is waning thin, there well may be a another Liberal coup d’etat with Watts dumping Clark over transit, in the not too far future. With the City of Surrey overtaking Vancouver in population by the end of the decade, there just may well be enough political muscle to build light rail.

Out of this mess we may get some sound transit planning because the south of the Fraser can only afford LRT (seeing that SkyTrain as a Vancouver/TransLink debacle) and with LRT will come real P-3’s as well as other funding options building affordable light rail and hopefully a realized Vancouver to Chilliwack TramTrain.

New Prague streetcars reverse noise pollution

An overlooked benefit of streetcars is the reduction in noise pollution associated with bus and car traffic. In fact, some pedestrians in Prague say the newest streetcars from Skoda are too quiet!

Latest streetcars in historic Prague.

An article from iDnes, a Czech news portal, describes the experiences of operators of the new 15T streetcarsbuilt by Skoda for the Czech capital’s tram system. Operators of the new streetcars have to be alert to pedestrians who may not hear them approach.

http://tinyurl.com/nju9g4f

Other improvements include cruise control and the addition of an electric motor for each wheel. Operators can also now control each motor individually.

Tram Train

A summary of the latestAi??EuropeanAi??Tram Train developments at the end of 2013.

UK – Manchester:

What $536 Million Will Buy You, Part 2 – A Rail for the Valley TramTrain

What $536 Million Will Buy You – A UBC to BCIT LRT!

Mr. Haveacow made the following important observation; “I am also surprised that few have picked up on that the LRT portion of the contract is only $536,000,000 for 19 km of surface route.”

Zwei, referring to his ‘Google’ maps found that 19km of LRT would stretch from UBC, down 10th Ave. onto Broadway, then along Broadway and the Lougheed highway to past Willington in Burnaby. BCIT is only 1.5 km from the Lougheed Hwy., on Willington.

Why a BCIT to UBC LRT makes sense? Light rail would replace TransLink’s busiest transit corridor with a transit line connecting the University of Vancouver to the BC Institute of Technology, providing a far better service (which in turn will attract more transit customers) with much cheaper operating costs. Much smaller construction costs, means less tax burdens on the local taxpayers.

By using Broadway and other streets for LRT, would greatly improve capacity along this transit corridor at a far cheaper cost than a subway. As most of the Broadway route previously operated with streetcars, much of the infrastructure is in place for the OHE, thus further reducing the cost of construction. The most expensive piece of engineering would be a span over Hwy. 1 to connect to UBC.

It all makes sense, why then doesn’t TransLink and the City of Vancouver ‘get it‘?

So when TransLink and the C0V and their hangers on go on and on for the need of billions more in new taxes & user fees, why not a LRT P-3 connecting UBC to BCIT for around $536 million. What is said that can’t be done in Vancouver,Ai?? is being done in Kitchener Ontario.

Canada Line airport surcharge to hit more (ghost) riders

Maybe, just maybe that the expected numbers of people expected to take the Canada line to YVR was grossly overestimated to secure YVR’s money for a light-metro/subway connection to Vancouver.

YVR contributed about $300 million to the Canada Line on the condition that a downtown to YVR service would be no longer than 25 minutes. This demand has shaped the Canada Line’s construction and operation but it seems much fewer people are taking the mini-metro to the airport, than was originally estimated.

Zwei has always wondered why a surcharge was authorized, while at the same time offering free service on the Sea Island portion of the CanadaAi?? Line. Getting tourists in a “gotcha” position with a transit surcharge is not the best way to greet tourist and with YVR being so central to Vancouver, taking the taxi is a viable option, especially if two or more people are traveling.

I believe the truth of the matter is that fewer people are taking the Canada Line option to YVR and TransLink, refusing to believe that, are applying the surcharge to more people in hopes of generating more revenue and in the end probably deter even more transit customers to the airport in the future.

Canada Line airport surcharge to hit more riders

byAi?? Jeff Nagel – Richmond Review

posted Dec 27, 2013 at 12:00 PM

TransLink wants to make many more passengers pay a $5 surcharge to ride the Canada Line branch from Vancouver Airport to Bridgeport Station in Richmond.

The YVR AddFare is currently charged only for Canada Line riders who pay in cash to take the rapid transit line off Sea Island.

But with the introduction of the Compass card in 2014, TransLink is proposing to apply the same $5 additional fee to Compass cardholders who pay with stored value.

The YVR AddFare was approved in 2010 to generate extra cash to help cover TransLink’s shortfall in funding the Canada Line to Richmond and YVR.

TransLink officials say large numbers of people who now pay in cash at the airport are expected to switch to Compass cards next year, resulting in a $1.4-million drop in annual revenue if nothing is done.

Extending the AddFare’s reach to more people is forecast to generate an extra $1.7 million.

Many savvy transit riders dodge paying the $5 surcharge by instead buying a day pass or a booklet of FareSaver tickets from a retail outlet at the airport, instead of paying at the station ticket machines.

But they’ll be out of luck once the Compass cards roll out and FareSavers are discontinued.

TransLink also proposes to charge the AddFare on day passes sold on Sea Island either by retailers or from the ticket vending machines.

The machines at Sea Island stations are currently disabled from offering day passes but TransLink says riders want to have the option to buy them there and are willing to pay the premium.

YVR employees and Sea Island residents would be exempt from the revised AddFare, as would holders of monthly passes, U-Passes, B.C. Government bus passes and CNIB passes.

The AddFare hasn’t been generating as much revenue as TransLink originally expected ai??i??Ai??the cumulative shortfall was $5.4 million at the end of 2012 and that’s forecast to grow to $12.2 million by the end of next year without changes.

TransLink Commissioner Robert Irwin will make a final ruling on the application and has asked for public comment by Jan. 31. Comments can be emailed to info@translinkcommission.org.

Three bidders vie for Waterloo LRT contract

Improving Metro Vancouverai??i??s public transit system

It seems you can’t teach an old dog new tricks, especially ex GVRD types.

Mr. Spaeth has, like many other GVRD/Metro Vancouver types, have deluded themselves that transit has taken cars of the road in Vancouver.Ai?? The reason for declining car use is the changing nature of the city, but this has not translated to modal shift from car to transit. For many, downtown Vancouver is a no-go area.

Though Spaeth understands that the proprietary SkyTrain mini-metro is very expensive for what it does, he fails to understand that the Canada Line is more of the same, except that spiraling construction costs, truncated construction resulting in a $2.5 billion mini-metro system, that has less capacity than a modern streetcar line at one tenth the cost! Subways do not guarantee faster service, nor greater capacities, rather it is the quality of R-o-W; the number of stations per route km. and the station platform length, which can accommodate trains, trams, etc. The Canada Line’s 40 to 50 metre station platforms can only accommodate two car trains, which happens to be about the length of a modern tram, the Canada Line can’t operate four car trains, but a modern streetcar could operate in couples sets.

Yet Spaeth seems to be naive about modern light rail and calls it by its American name Light Rapid Transit, which is a misnomer meant to hide the fact that streetcars and LRT are one and the same, with the quality of R-o-W determining the difference between LRT and a streetcar or tram.

Zwei offers his opinion in the following article.

By Douglas Spaeth, Vancouver Sun December 26, 2013

It takes less than a busload per minute to replace a whole lane of rush-hour traffic. Our transit is rated the best in North America, and ridership has grown significantly in the last decade, particularly into downtown Vancouver while downtown traffic has decreased. With improved transit more people will ride, but only if there is actually usable service in suburban areas and adequate capacity on the most heavily traveled city routes.

(Zweisystem replies: The fact is transit mode share in Metro Vancouver has not changed much since 1994, with auto use remaining at 57% and transit use a mere 14%, an increase of 3% in 20 years!)

However, before spending more money on transit, TransLinkai??i??s must cut waste, and deliver service cost-effectively.

Three major aspects of transit expenditures should be scrutinized: First, discretionary spending on rapid transit; Second, the operating costs of the bus system; And third, ways to attract more revenue producing riders to fill empty seats on some routes and during the ai???off-peakai??? times.

Rapid transit

The biggest costs looming on the horizon are billions for the Evergreen Line, Broadway Line and potential rapid transit south of the Fraser. SkyTrain, light rapid transit, streetcars and other descriptions are misleading. What is important is how many people a rapid transit line can carry, how fast and how conveniently. The bottom-line is how to get the most lines for the buck.

How much subway we really need? Tunnels are enormously expensive. It is highly unlikely that Metro will go ahead with needed extensions if every NIMBY gets a subway. TransLink in public consultation needs to develop common-sense criteria for when subways are justified. For example, does subway, surface or overhead best support the character of the area served? Is a subway the only way to achieve desired speed and capacity?

(Zweisystem replies: As noted above, subways do not guarantee faster travel times, nor greater capacity than surface transit. The Canada Lines 40-50 metre station platforms mean that only short trains can be used. A simple streetcar line, costing a tenth to build, has a higher capacity than the Canada Line. Subways tend to offer slower point to point travel times due to longer station spacings, transfers, and entrance and exit from subway stations.)

Despite popular perception, surface rapid transit can fit into the community in ways that are functional and attractive. (The old B.C. Electric interurban traveled from Commercial Drive to New Westminster only two to three minutes slower than SkyTrain today, mostly because the tracks had few street crossings.)

(Zweisystem replies: Spaeth fails to take into account that there were 26 stations/stops between Broadway and New Westminster on the old Central Park Interurban Line, versus only 9 stations on the SkyTrain Expo Line. That the Edwardian era Interurban only took a few minutes longer for the same journey, while servicing 17 more stations is a remarkable feat and had little to do with road crossings!)

The Canada Line started a transition away from expensive, 25-year old SkyTrain technology that has not been widely adopted elsewhere. It uses widely available off-the-shelf equipment, rather than the customized technology that locks Metro into a single supplier. Particularly in Surrey and other suburban areas we need to learn from other cities and build inexpensive lines with conventional technology, at-grade tracks, overhead power, traffic priority and other features characteristic of the 20 to 30 systems built or upgraded recently in North America.

(Zweisystem replies: The Canada Line is nothing more than ALRT/ART SkyTrain in drag. Spaeth doesn’t acknowledge that it is light-metro and the light-metro philosophy of operation that has made mini-metro very expensive. It costs almost the same to build and operate a heavy-rail metro, than a light-metro, and of course modern LRT has made light metro like Skytrain and the Canada Line obsolete. Spaeth is out of his depth here.)

Bus operations

Although less obvious, much of TransLinkai??i??s costs go to day-to-day bus operations and there are clearly savings to be had by tightening up this part of its business.

The big potential savings can be achieved by moving buses more smoothly and quickly in traffic with even more bus-only lanes, as well as procedures and equipment to get people on and off the bus faster, investment in off-street ai???mini-lotsai??? to get parked cars off of busy bus routes, enforcement of ai???yield for busesai??? in traffic, and advanced traffic signal technology that always gives buses a green light at intersection. Some of these measures to tighten up bus schedules are being implemented by TransLink acting alone, but the real challenge is for municipalities, Metro and the B.C. Ministry of Transportation to join to make bus priority on Metroai??i??s roads a top job.

(Zweisystem replies: if one wants to increase capacity at no cost, operate the bus system to a European standard with bust stops every 350m to 400m apart. This would effectively remove about 40% of the bus stops in the region, reducing journey times and increasing bus efficiencies.)

Ridership

TransLink can increase ridership on bus routes and at times of day when there are empty seats by learning from transportation providers that are more consumer oriented.

Take the airlines industry for example. Frequent Flyer programs offer privileged membership and demographically targeted benefits as an encouragement to travel on their under-capacity routes. St. Johnai??i??s Metrobus picked up on this idea and claims it is the first transit authority anywhere in the world to partner with AirMiles and reward its passengers with consumer loyalty points for every bus ride. We should be actively attracting riders to fill empty bus seats, particularly police and fire workers who contribute to the safety on the bus.

The broader challenge is for TransLink to move forward from the era of billboard and paint-the-bus advertising to take aggressive advantage of multimedia and social network technology. Online pass purchase, more real-time bus arrival/departure information, better technology for trip planning, targeted advertising via SMS text messaging from shops near a riders stop ai??i?? these are just a few of the ideas that other North American transit authorities are pursuing.

Both public transit and roads are heavily influenced by what kind of urban development occurs in Metro Vancouver. The last article addresses how we can encourage the right kind of development for more affordable transportation.

(Zweisystem replies: To improve transit, TransLink must make the public transit user friendly, which today, with forced transfers and shoddy service it is definitely not. In the 21st century, public transit is seen as a product and if the product is good, people will use it, if not, they will take the car instead.)

Doug Spaeth is the former Transportation and Regional Town Centres Program Manager for the GVRD Livable Region Plan, and subsequently owned an information technology company supplying information systems to public transit authorities in North America and overseas.

Ai?? Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun