Mr. Harcourt, Shut the H*ll Up.

Former one term wonder as BC’s Premier, Mr. Harcourt suffers the same sort of dementia as do most other regional and provincial politicians, he firmly believes he is a transit expert. Both Harcourt’s term as Vancouver mayor and BC Premier, was much ado about nothing. A notable fence sitter, Harcourt waxed and waned as the public opinion wind blew.Fast forward a decade and Harcourt championed the Canada Line, the only heavy rail metro in the world designed and built to have less capacity than a streetcar. Instead of of much cheaper light rail, Harcourt joined the SkyTrain bandwagon and trumpeted the virtues of subways to anyone who cared to listen.Strangely, he remained deaf to the pleas of one Susan Heyes who was nearly bankrupted by cut-and-cover subway construction and years of litigation, but former Premiers have always remained deaf to the pleas of the small person whose rights are being trampled by the thugs of big government.

Well Harcourt is back at it again, build a gondola to SFU; build a subway under Broadway; and let Surrey build LRT – the man just hasn’t a clue about transit, transit mode, and transit finance, but he is a media favourite and most of his ill-thought out musings is given airtime.

Well Mr. Harcourt, chew on these apples:

1. For the cost of our three mini-metro lines, we could have today a light rail network stretching from Chilliwack to UBC.
2. If we had built LRT on the Arbutus corridor, we would be carrying more passengers at a far cheaper cost.
3. If we had built with LRT instead of light-metro, TransLink would not be in a financial crisis.
4. Subways are notorious expensive to maintain and lead many operating authorities to financial chaos, cities that build with light rail do not have the same financial distress.
5. Modern LRT has a higher capacity than SkyTrain or light-metro, yet can be built at a fraction of the cost of a SkyTrain or light-metro.

The folly of Mr. Harcourt and his inane musings is that people (especially those of the NDP persuasion) listen to him.

So Mr. Harcourt, until you actually understand what you are talking about, do everyone a favour and shut the hell up!

The tram (streetcar) line on Karlsruhe’s Kaiserstrasse, sees peak hour headways

of 45 seconds, offering peak hour capacities in excess of 40,000 persons per hour per direction.

Newly-elected govai??i??t needs to improve transit: former premier

Mayors of Vancouver and Surrey have made their cases

Jesse Johnston May 17, 2013

LOWER MAINLAND (NEWS1130) ai??i?? One of BCai??i??s former premiers says the Lower Mainland needs better transit service and the newly-elected government needs to make that happen.

Mike Harcourt feels there are three areas in particular that should be priorities.

ai???There are three lines in Surrey, the line out to UBC, and the gondola up to SFU,ai??? Harcourt tells News1130. ai???Get them all done. Give people a really good transit system.ai???

There has been much debate in Metro Vancouver over which is a bigger priority: The line out to UBC or expanding transit routes south of the Fraser River. The mayors of Vancouver and Surrey have each made cases for their own cities.

Buses to UBC are stuffed with students every day and Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson wants to see a subway line to the university.

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts says her city has waited patiently with no significant transit upgrades while major projects, such as the Evergreen Line and Canada Line, have been built in other communities. Her cityai??i??s transportation committee is eying light rail transit down 104th Avenue and Fraser Highway toward Langley as possible solutions.

Council is also looking at possibilities to serve South Surrey.

Harcourt says both mayors should get their wish. ai???We have to finish the transit system. We got three quarters of it done; letai??i??s finish the rest.ai???

He adds improving relationships with First Nations groups and making housing more affordable should also be on the new governmentai??i??s to-do list.

A Liberal Victory Means “No Transit For You!”

The BC Liberals have won yesterday’s election which means the transit status quo will remain, no new transit for south of the Fraser River.

Regional transit issues were ignored by both the BC Liberals and the NDP and for good reason, TransLink is in a financial mess and unless new revenue streams are forthcoming, there will be the start of a gradual reduction of bus service, especially South of the Fraser. SkyTrain desperately needs an expensive shadow bus service to make the mini-metro viable, which means loads of empty or near empty buses in operation during all hours of operation and translates in reduced service hours elsewhere.

A good example is South Delta, where bus service has been reduced to pre Canada Line days because the projected ridership did not materialize (it is also note worthy that South Delta has elected and has now reelected an independent) and with basic bus service, transit becomes unattractive to potential customers.

What the Liberals will try do now is create new and higher taxes to fund new SkyTrain expansion, which maybe the big election issue in the 2017 election and may lead us into the world of ‘road pricing‘ or a user fee (in addition to bridge tolls and gas taxes) to drive on public roads. The question is; “Will the nightmare of the HST debacle derail any road pricing initiative.”

What has all been ignored by both political parties is the RftV/Leewood Report for a TramTrain service from Vancouver to Chilliwack. The RftV/Leewood Report could provide the framework for an initial Vancouver to Chilliwack interurban service, using diesel LRT, which could be installed for about $600 million, with trains running every 90 minutes or so to start with.

Sadly, lobbyists for major engineering firms and cement manufacturers are already grooming newly elected MLA’s to support more and more SkyTrain construction, especially the $4 billion or more Broadway SkyTrain subway, so they can make more and more money off the BC taxpayer.

BC politics, it has been ever thus.

New Surrey coalition to push for light-rail transit south of the Fraser

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts would like to see light rail connect transit corridors in Surrey. Above, a Bombardier Flexity Light Rail Vehicle or tram

Photograph by: City of Surrey, PROVINCE

Surrey business and community groups are launching a new campaign to get light-rail transit on track for south of the Fraser.

The Surrey Board of Trade announced a new coalition ai??i?? Light Rail Links ai??i?? which is joining the call for an LRT solution to the regionai??i??s lack of rapid transit infrastructure.

Mayor Dianne Watts has been pushing for years without success for approval of an LRT line rather than a SkyTrain option. She wants to see three light-rail corridors connecting Surrey town centres: one between City Centre and Guildford, along 104th Avenue; one connecting City Centre to Newton, along King George Boulevard; and one connecting Surrey to Langley along the Fraser Highway.

Without new transit investment in the near future, Board of Trade CEO Anita Huberman said, ai???our ability to attract businesses to Surrey will be compromised. If we donai??i??t have good transportation, which is the foundation of our economy, it will suffer.ai???

Increased traffic in Surrey as the population grows is a very real threat, she added, noting it took her 50 minutes by car to get from South Surrey to the Board of Trade office at 104th and 144th Avenues.

Light Rail Links stressed that Surrey ai??i?? the fastest-growing municipality in the region ai??i?? is expected to grow 50 per cent to 750,000 residents by 2041. Yet it has not had any significant transit infrastructure in almost 20 years. Less than seven per cent of the $6.6 billion spent on rapid transit in the Lower Mainland has gone south of the Fraser.

Surrey residents are fed up with the lack of action on transit, said Elizabeth Model, CEO of the Downtown Surrey Business Improvement Association.

ai???Everyone is frustrated. Weai??i??re the last one in the pecking order [to get transit upgrades], but weai??i??re the largest economic engine in the region.ai???

The bus-based system is unworkable for residents without cars, said the Surrey Crime Prevention Associationai??i??s Karen Reid Sidhu.

ai???Youth are struggling to get around the city,ai??? Sidhu said, noting her 240 youth volunteers find it hard to make it to their commitments via transit. It takes some up to 1A? hours by bus to get from Central City Shopping Mall to Cloverdale.

Mayor Watts said it was time for city residents to speak up.

ai???They need to let their voices be heard,ai??? she said in an interview.

From government and TransLink, Watts said, ai???there needs to be a recognition that in Surrey, we are building a city. Seventy per cent of growth is coming from south of the Fraser and we need that infrastructure.ai???

Scott Olson, a realtor and past president of the Fraser Valley Real Estate Association, said light rail was also the cheaper option.

ai???For the price of one extension of SkyTrain, we could create a complete infrastructure with LRT.ai???

Fleetwood Community Association president Rick Hart said commuters and seniors in his neighbourhood were poorly served: the Fraser Highway B-Line is often full when gets to Surrey via Langley, and buses and SkyTrain pose mobility and safety issues for seniors.

ai???LRT is something that will assist those people and help them age in place,ai??? he said.

Other citizensai??i?? groups have already been working on the issue. The Rail for the Valley Society has been advocating for a light-rail passenger train system running on the existing Interurban line out to Chilliwack.

But not all Surrey community member endorse light rail.

The citizenai??i??s group Better Surrey Rapid Transit makes a case for SkyTrain as the better option for the region, arguing LRT will get half the ridership of a new SkyTrain line and will continue to cause congestion as it runs along existing roads.

ai???Current options look forward to this cityai??i??s transportation needs to 2041 … but do not look forward to what the needs will be in 30 to 50 years and beyond,ai??? Better Surrey Rapid Transit member Daryl Dela Cruz said in an email.

ai???We want to tell Mayor Watts and TransLink that the solution that Surrey needs is bigger than what everyone wants, and weai??i??re advocating for that bigger solution that Surrey needs ai??i?? an expansion of SkyTrain.ai???

Learn more about Light Rail Links at www.lightraillinks.com.

Learn more about Surreyai??i??s light rail plans visit surrey.ca/RapidTransitNow.

eoconnor@theprovince.com

twitter.com/elainereporting

Ai?? Copyright (c) The Province

Regional Transportation and the Provincial Election – The NDP’s & BC Liberal’s Dirty Little Secret

What has been ignored by both major political parties, vying for the electorate’s vote, is the thorny question of regional transportation and TransLink. In fact the silence has been deafening.

It seems both the NDP and the BC Liberals have bought into the TransLink and SkyTrain Lobby’s ‘kool-ade‘ that the region needs to come up with ways to gouge massive new taxes from the motorists to pay for SkyTrain heaven; or more pointedly, Vancouver’s $4.5 billion Broadway/UBC SkyTrain subway.

BC Auditor General, Ken Doyle, gave the City of Vancouver and the SkyTrain lobby a gift, with his “back of an envelope” calculations that; “SkyTrain and not light rail was the best option because of its greater capacity at similar costai??i??.ai???.

It seems no one had told the Auditor General’s Office that “capacity was a function of headway” and that light rail could be built for about one half to one quarter of the cost of SkyTrain, yet obtain higher capacities if need be.

The damage has been done and SkyTrain, which has been on the market for over 35 years and has been made obsolete by modern LRT, with its cheaper costs, yet superior capacities, is now the miracle transit system’ in the Metro Vancouver Region.

Whoever mislead the Auditor General’s Office, with misleading and erroneous information did a good job, because it is this false claim of SkyTrain superior capacity that will ensure planning for a $4.5 billion SkyTrain subway under Broadway and continue TransLink’s wild ride into financial oblivion.

Planning for SkyTrain means higher property taxes in the near future and the spectre of road pricing being forced on the region to build more of the obsolete proprietary SkyTrain mini-metro, will hang over the beleaguered taxpayer’s heads. Both the NDP and the BC Liberals know this and is the reason they are keeping quiet during the election campaign because SkyTrain construction brings massive profits to friends of the government because of the huge amount of the public’s money spent on SkyTrain mega-projects.

What is so galling is that Vancouver will demand and get a $4.5 billion Broadway subway on a route that has peak hour traffic flows under 5,000 pphpd, about a quarter of that would justify subway construction in the real world! South of the Fraser cities and municipalities, as usual, will get nothing but transit crumbs, but will be expected to pay forAi??Vancouver’s expensive subway construction and this is the NDP’s and the BC Liberal’s dirty little election secret.

A switch problem causes rush hour chaos on the Canada Line

A switch problem caused rush hour chaos on the Canada Line Thursday night, but not reported that if a switch fails on a LRT/tram line, the problem is local and can be dealt by locally by a (in the English vernacular) a temporary ‘pointsman’. The failed switch can be operated manually, until it can be repaired after the line ceases operation for the night, causing little or no customer delay – simple.

Customer delay or inconvenience is a concept that the SkyTrain lobby never address because they just do not care.

Ai??By Mike Hager, Vancouver Sun May 2, 2013

Power rail problem halts SkyTrain service in New Westminster

Ai??By Mike Hager, Vancouver SunApril 25, 2013

Ottawa LRT

CFRA News-Talk Radio posted this report on April 22nd about a possible alignment for the leg of the Ottawa starter light rail line west of downtown.

http://www.cfra.com/News/Ottawa-Regional-News/City-likes-tunnel-under-Richmond-Road-for-next-pha
The route dubbed Richmond Underground is the favourite of city officials for the second phase of the light rail transit route that would link Tunney’s pasture to the Baseline Station.

Deputy city manager Nancy Schepers called it an “elegant solution” that would run west from Tunney’s to Dominion station, and follow the former Canadian Pacific Railway line, then continue via a shallow trench parallel to the Sir John A Macdonald Parkway, before eventually running under Richmond Road via a tunnel.

It would cost $900 million (USD $877.4 million). That’s considered a Class D estimate, and the final cost could be as much as 25% higher or lower.

“It is the shortest, it is cost effective investment, and it improves community and network service.”

The city studied more than 15 options, but several of those drew sharp criticisms from neighbourhood groups, including Kitchissippi residents.

This option keeps trains off the Sir John A Macdonald Parkway and doesn’t cut through the Bryon Linear Park (a stretch of land popular with pedestrians and cyclists).

Councillor Katherine Hobbs represents the ward containing the latter and she’s happy with the new option.

“This is an area that been poorly served by rapid transit in the past, they will get that as a result of this.”

Schepers made it clear that light rail along Carling Avenue is not a favourite of the different options.

It’s the most expensive at $2.3 billion, would add up to 13 minutes per ride for passengers, and certain parts of the route, mainly through major intersections, would have to be elevated.

The cheapest option comes via the Sir John A Macdonald Parkway at $630 million. But after repeated refusals by NCC executives, the city acknowledges that it infringes too much upon the green space and water front.

The western section wouldn’t be built for a decade, and a final decision on the preferred route will be made by council in June.

An open house for the public is scheduled for Thursday [April 25th] at city hall starting at 6:30 p.m.

Limiting in Honolula

The Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project (HHCTCP) is the official name for the plan to construct an elevated rapid transit line serving the City and County of Honolulu on the island of Oahu.

http://www.honolulutransit.org/

The line will use 128Ai??ft (39Ai??m) trains carrying about 390 passengers each, similar in weight to light rail systems elsewhere in the United States (such as the MAX in Portland, Oregon, as opposed to heavier, and thus more expensive, lines found on rapid transit systems like the subways and elevated systems of Chicago and New York City.^[9] Physically, the Honolulu system will have a good deal in common with light rapid transit systems such as SkyTrain in Vancouver, British Columbia or the Copenhagen Metro.

Rolling stock for the line will initially include 80 cars in 40 two-car consists, built by a joint venture between AnsaldoBreda and Ansaldo STS named Ansaldo Honolulu. (AnsaldoBreda and Ansaldo STS previously collaborated on the construction and operation of vehicles for the Copenhagen Metro.)

It is a proprietary package that has been purchased from AnsalsoBreda including cars, electrification, automatic train control, as in KA?benhavn.Ai??You will not be able just to buy someone elses metro cars and put them on the Honolulu system,Ai?? just likeAi??Ai??Vancouver’s Ai??Canada Line.

We wait for the protests from the Skytrain juveniles, Rico, De La Cruz & Richard on the comparison with Skytrain

A Tale of Two Letters

Mr. Daryl Dela Cruz in your story laments at possibly not being able to attend college because there is currently no transit [sky train] to take him to Kwantlen College – so sad, makes me want to weep listening to the melancholy song on the web radio from Munich operating high quality trams using much less electrical energy than the crappy, inefficient and costly elevated trains operated by TransLink.Ai?? Germans arenai??i??t stupid and have no use for sky train.

Sometimes the 99 B-Line lineups extend all the way up the escalators proclaims cheery faced Ms. Julienne Cajes in your story.Ai?? If TransLink operated express and articulated buses on West 4th Avenue every two minutes like it does along Broadway served by the 99 B-Line articulated buses – to provide an alternative for students, Broadway would no longer be the busiest bus route (by design) in North America.Ai?? Ms. Julienne Cajes would be able to get to UBC without the lineups giving her the (occasional) excruciatingly long five minute or slightly longer wait (what TransLink terms 2,000 pass-ups daily) for the next available 99 B-Line bus at Commercial Drive.

Both Ms. Julienne Cajes andAi?? Mr. Daryl Dela Cruz represent the insignificant faction of transit users traveling exceedingly long distances, and the median travel distance in Metro Vancouver is a mere seven kilometres.Ai?? Their travel plights on transit are self-imposed and sky train to UBC would not be sustainable – it promotes longer transit commutes while doing nothing to reduce vehicle traffic.Ai?? Both Ms. Julienne Cajes andAi?? Mr. Daryl Dela Cruz are captive riders who are stuck on transit due to personal and financial reasons and giving them long distance transit to travel farther to work or school only increases carbon emissions and transit costs.Ai?? Transit for them does not remove cars from the roads as they are unemployed students and are not potential drivers in any case.

As Jordan Bateman says in your story, we already pay far too much in taxes for transit ai??i?? over $500 annually for most residents in Metro Vancouver when you add up the property, gas, parking and other taxes paid to TransLink ai??i?? for TransLink executives doing nothing useful for their pay to live the good life.Ai?? TransLink has no incentive to cut down on waste when it can just raise taxes to continue to be inefficient.

Look at the 99 B-Line today on Sunday April 21st, for instance – all the express 99 B-Line buses have few people on board and TransLink is still operating mostly empty regular trolley buses as well along side the 99 B-Line diesel buses, anyhow.Ai?? There is lots of fat to cut at TransLink and cutting the express 99 B-Line service on weekends would be a good start in a few days when transit demand drops even further to almost nothing after UBC students stop attending UBC for the next four months.

Eric Chris, Vancouver

A Question of Capacity – A Transit Primer For BC’s Auditor General

A Question of Capacity ai??i?? A LRTA Topic Sheet

Contrary to the COV and TransLink, modern LRT can obtain high capacities, on transit routes, by being able to operate

at close headways.Ai??Today, the main tram route through the city is being relocated in a subway because the line was

seeing 45 second headways during peak hours, giving an nominal capacity exceeding 40,000 persons per hour per direction!

A repost from 2009 & 2013.

British Columbia’s Auditor General, claim that, “SkyTrain and not light rail was the best option because of its greater capacity at similar cost….” has raised eyebrows with bona fide transit planners in the UK and Europe, with one UK transit expert stating, “Does BC’s Auditor General do his sums on backs of envelopes?“, An European transit specialist commented, “seems another bureaucrat who slept through his math classes.“

So for John Doyle and the rest of the BC Auditor General’s Office, a primer on capacity.

A Question of Capacity ai??i?? A LRTA Topic Sheet

Maximum capacity is only likely to be required for a few hours during peak hours, and even here there are likely to be variations both day by day and within each hour. The capacity required originates from the routeai??i??s social characteristics.

As for the vehicles, buses have a comfort capacity equal to the number of seats, and a maximum capacity equal to seats plus standing load.

In the case of trams, it is more complicated. The nominal maximum capacity is calculated at four passengers per square metre of available floor space (a reasonably comfortable level), plus the number of seats.

As trams are designed to carry a large standing load, the ratio of standees to seats is quite high. The standing area is also important for the carrying of wheelchairs, pushchairs, shopping and sometimes bicycles. Some manufacturers quote maximum capacity using 6p/m2 while a figure of 8p/m 2 is used as a measure of crush capacity. This last figure is also employed to determine the motor rating of the vehicle.

A further complication is that even when there are seats available, some passengers prefer to stand. This may be because they are only travelling for a few stops, that they want to stretch their legs, or may just prefer to stand.

A tramai??i??s comfort capacity can therefore be considered as the number of seats, plus the voluntary standees who may amount to up to 10-15% of the nominal maximum number of standing passengers.

ELASTICITY

It is the difference between the average passenger load for any particular time and the crush load which gives light rail its Elasticity Factor, allowing it to cope with variations in conditions such as sudden surges or emergency conditions.

Standing is made more acceptable by the design of track and vehicle, reducing the forces acting on the passenger to a minimum. This makes for a smooth ride, as well as ensuring ease of access, good support and the ability to see out without having to stoop.

Where a route is mainly urban with short journey times, the number of vehicles required should be calculated on the nominal maximum. On longer journeys outside the central area, a lower level may be more appropriate, dependent on the routeai??i??s characteristics. Even on rural sections, there are likely to be a a number of short distance riders, and the loading factor will increase nearer to the urban area.

COMPRESSIBILITY

While it might be thought desirable to offer every passenger a seat, it is in fact the ability to carry high loadings in a confined area (the Compressibility Factor) which enables light rail to achieve many environmental benefits, allowinglarge numbers of people to be carried withoutharming, and often improving, the features of a city.

It is city centres where several routes combine that the most capacity is required. A typical situation could be a pedestrian street with six routes operating at 10-minute headway giving 36 double coupled trams per hour each with a capacity of 225. This gives a nominal capacity of16 200 passengers per hour which can be increased to 25 200 pph in extremis without extra vehicles. Light rail is unique in this ability to operate on the surface with its capacity without detracting from the amenities which it serves.A further factor in setting the resources required is the need to lure motorists out of cars. The more difficult the traffic conditions, the higher the loadings will be acceptable. It is however important that crush loads are not allowed for morethan the shortest of periods on an infrequent basis, both to maintain customer satisfaction and prevent elasticity of the system being compromised.

It is vital that public transport can cope with sudden changes in demand, such as extreme inclement weather or air quality violations which can cause private traffic to be halted. This is where the elasticity inherent in light rail is so beneficial in enabling an instant response in an economical fashion. A tram may be crowded, but its infinitelybetter than having to wait in the snow of smog untilextra vehicles are brought into service.

It is this unique combination of Capacity, Compressibility and Elasticity rather than capacity alone which makes light rail so successful as an urban transport mode.

Note Statistics are based on Karlsruhe, using GT/8 cars