Seattle’s Light-Metro Plans……Er, LRT Plans
Seattle’s Sound Transit penchant for planning for light-metro and calling it light rail is leading regional taxpayers into a fincial fiasco. Sound familiar, well it should, it is the same type of regioanl transit policy that TransLink has.
Sound Transit’s first hybrid 22.4Ai??km light-metro/light rail line, costing $3.6 billion (this is the complete cost including debt servicing) has 7.1 km of its route on expensive on elevated guideway; 4 km. in very expensive subway; and 11 km at grade. With about one half of the route being grade separated, hasAi??greatly increased the cost of the transit project, making it a hybrid light-metro/light rail system. Poor ridership on this expensive hybrid transit system leads one to question that the Central LinkAi??is greatly over-engineered for theAi??job it is to accomplish.
Over-engineering seems to be a passion of Sound Transit as the East Link is also going to have kilometers of very expensive subways, that probably will do more to deter ridership than attract it. Also, by greatly increasing the cost of this proposed transit line, means that the chances of it being built at all is very slim.
The following article again shows Sound Transit’s regimen ofAi?? over-engineering is alive and well with the proposed hybrid transit system expansion to Lynwood and I would question Sound Transit’s contention that an elevated mini-metro style transit system would attract more ridership, than say an at-grade (true) LRT operating in the median of Hwy. 99.
Seattle, with its endemic traffic gridlock desperately needs affordable transit solutions, yet Sound Transit, like TransLink and BC Transit, seem incapable in planning for affordable transit solutions and in the end plan build hugely expensive mini-metros and hybrid mini-metros, simply because they are incapable of doing anything more.
I welcome light rail developments in the greater Seattle region, but please do not call it light rail or LRT if the system is to run mostly on very expensive grade separated guideways. Call it a light-metro.
The Snohomish County Business Journal has an article today about Sound Transit’s plan to extend its light rail line north to suburban Lynnwood and says that could lead eventually to track to Everett, which once had an interurban trolley connection to Seattle:
http://www.davesrailpix.com/odds/wa/htm/sei01.htm
Pacific Northwest Traction service from Seattle to Everett ended in February 1939 resulting from trackless trolley conversion of the city streetcar line that provided access to Seattle. Interurban car No. 55 is preserved as a static display at Lynnwood:
http://wtneary.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/lynnwood-trolley.jpg
Under the voter approved Sound Transit plan, LRT will be extended in stages from downtown Seattle to the University of Washington, Northgate and then Lynnwood. Here’s a map:
http://projects.soundtransit.org/Projects-Home/\North-Corridor-Transit-Project.xml
And the news story:
http://tinyurl.com/cnq4eav
“Published: Thursday, December 29, 2011Sound Transit makes a move north
New line from Northgate to Lynnwood will follow I-5
By M.L. Dehm
SCBJ Freelance WriterWhen Sound Transit starts turning dirt on a light-rail line into Snohomish County, the route will most likely follow I-5 between Northgate and the Lynnwood park-and-ride.
In 2008, voters approved a plan and funding for Sound Transit’s North Corridor Transit Project, which would extend light rail from Northgate into Lynnwood.
Later, the line would continue north to Everett and eventually could connect Snohomish County riders south to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport or over to the University of Washington.
So why isn’t anything being built yet?
“I get that question all the time,” said Sound Transit spokesman Bruce Gray. ” `Why does it takes so long to get these things moving?’ “
The project is moving, according to Gray. But the progress that is being made isn’t of the construction variety. There are a lot of steps to complete before turning that first shovelful of earth.
Currently, the project is wrapping up the first stage of development. This “alternatives analysis” stage is the most important part of the project. It gave the public a chance to weigh in on the location of the future light-rail route, which is required to qualify for potential Federal Transit Administration funding.
The recession reduced Sound Transit’s projected revenues over the next several years by about 25 percent, leaving a significant funding gap even when accounting for the sales-tax increase that voters approved in 2008. Without federal funding, it’s possible the long-awaited project could take longer yet to start.
The alternatives analysis explored potential variables and created a preliminary environmental review.
Scoping was completed in order to form an environment impact statement that met governmental guidelines.
Under scoping, Sound Transit officials met with the public, identifying social, economic and environmental issues and identifying alternative routes for the draft stage. The scoping process was recently completed and a capital committee made its recommendations to the Sound Transit board Dec. 8, 2011.
Of the route alternatives that were considered, only two were found to have serious merit. These were a route directly up the I-5 corridor between Northgate and the Lynnwood park-and-ride or an elevated rail line following Highway 99 between Shoreline and Edmonds.
Different routes away from those commuter corridors were eliminated early because it wasn’t clear if those areas could attract enough riders or if right-of-way could be established.
Ultimately, the the capital committee unanimously endorsed I-5 alternative. A route on Highway 99 would have been more expensive because the line would require elevation to separate it from cross traffic. Private property would have to be acquired for rights-of-way and there would have been more construction impact on local neighborhoods.
Route length and travel time also played a role. The I-5 route will cover 8.5 miles with four new stations while the Highway 99 route would cover 10.2 miles and require five new stations. The longer route would extend travel time between Northgate and Lynnwood by about four minutes.
The scoping process also projected more potential riders, perhaps up to 4,000 more, along I-5 compared to Highway 99 within the next 20 years.
Both routes raised some environmental concerns. The I-5 route will pass through some wetlands. On the Highway 99 route, the environmental impacts would have been limited to noise abatement and visual issues created by the elevated line.
Now that scoping for the project is complete, the Sound Transit board will begin to prepare a draft environment impact statement for public comment. After that, preliminary engineering on the project can begin.
After engineering reports, the Sound Transit board will issue a final environmental impact statement and make further decisions about the project.
This review and preliminary engineering stage is scheduled to be completed by 2014 and Snohomish County residents still won’t see any visual progress by the end of that phase.
In 2015, the project should be ready for final design. Permits will be in place and rights-of-way will be established. The final step before construction is to apply for and secure Federal Transit Administration grants to make up for Sound Transit’s funding shortage. This should be completed by 2017 if everything stays on schedule, Gray said.
“The goal here is to get into construction on the north link by 2018 and have it open by 2023,” he said.
Once completed, the project will add about nine miles of reliable commuter rail to the Sound Transit system. More importantly, it will connect Snohomish County to the greater transit hub to the south and take a large number of commuter vehicles off the road.
Public feedback during the scoping process has been fairly positive, Gray said. Only one respondent thought the project was unnecessary. Most people who responded, either at public meetings or by mail, phone or email, supported the concept of light rail, as did several state and local agencies.
The main concerns that citizens voiced about the route had to do with the location of the rail line, parking, where the stations would be located and how well connections would work between the stations and other forms of public transportation.
The cities of Lynnwood, Shoreline and Edmonds and the Muckleshoot Tribe expressed concern about possible environmental impacts while the City of Lynnwood specifically had concerns about traffic.
Although the scoping process is complete, the need for local involvement continues.
Gray said he hopes more citizens will get involved with the planning process. More public involvement and feedback in the early stages will mean fewer surprises down the road when construction finally begins, he said.
“Contact us,” Gray said. “Get on our mailing list, get on our email update list then they can keep up-to-speed on it all the way along.”
On the Web
Learn more about Sound Transit’s North Corridor Transit Project online at http://www.soundtransit.org
2011 Year in Review: A tough 12 months for the TTC – With another tough 12 months to come
With Toronto’s Mayor Ford at the helm, The good ship Toronto is steering directly into a financial iceberg, with is subway only
transit policy.
Ah, The Toronto Transit Commission has had a very tough year and with the election of Mayor “Edsel” will make 2012 even tougher.
The realization that ‘shiny’ new subway lines are very expensive, needing billions of dollarsAi??in newAi??taxes and fare revenue to build and maintain them just hasn’t dawned on tea-bagAi??type Mayor “Edsel“. By following the American right-wing disdain for at-grade/on-street LRT, Mayor “Edsel” will cripple the Toronto taxpayer, burdening them with billions of dollars of public transit debt, while at the same time, greatly increasing traffic gridlock by not providing an affordable public transit alternative.
Pity the Toronto taxpayer, mayor “Edsel” is sailing the good ship TorontoAi??directly into the path of a financial iceberg, with Titanic consequences.
The “City News Toronto” site has a retrospective on Toronto Transit Commission [TTC] events and issues during 2011, concluding it was a tough year for the transit agency:
“2011 Year in Review: A tough 12 months for the TTC
12/25/2011
Marcia Chen, CityNews.caOvercrowding, a stagnant transit plan, service cuts and a pending fare hike. The TTC’s already tarnished image took a hit in 2011, and it has finally admitted there’s a problem. The commission blamed many of its woes on budget cuts, but acknowledged it could improve.
“Customer service will be a big focus in 2012,” said TTC spokesman Brad Ross.
“Fiscal challenges will also be a focus in 2012, but those are the kinds of issues that customers, while they appreciate, don’t necessarily need to care about really. They want to make sure that when they leave their home to go wherever they’re going, they can do so without incident.
“Operational organizations like the TTC are from time to time going to have problems in the system. How you manage those problems ai??i?? and how you communicate them effectively is really the key.”
Despite the troubles, there are signs things may be turning around at the TTC. The transit authority hired a customer service officer, held the first in a series of town halls, and announced changes meant to appease riders.
Here’s a look back at the TTC’s tumultuous year.
QUEEN’S PARK DECLARES TTC AN ESSENTIAL SERVICE
The provincial government stripped TTC workers of their right to strike in March, when it passed an essential service bill ai??i?? the Toronto Transit Commission Labour Disputes Resolution Act ai??i?? with a vote of 69-9. Under the new law, which will be reviewed in five years, a third party must provide binding arbitration when collective bargaining does not work.
Union boss Bob Kinnear called Premier Dalton McGuinty a “lapdog for a union-hating, right-wing mayor.”
MORE DELINQUENT TTC WORKERS, MORE AMATEUR VIDEO
A year after a photo of a sleeping fare collector went viral, riders snapped photos of three different bus drivers texting behind the wheel. The TTC wouldn’t confirm reports the employees were fired.
And months later, a passenger showed CityNews video she took of a TTC supervisor lunging at her and apparently breaking her camera. She had been recording a dispute between a streetcar driver and another rider at the time.
SHINY NEW SUBWAYS, STREETCARS
Although seven months behind schedule, the sleek, new “rocket” train went into service on the Yonge-University-Spadina line in July. The trains hold more people and allow passengers to walk between cars. Wider doorways, security cameras and anti-bacterial poles are among the other features.
The trains will eventually run on an automatic signal system which will allow more vehicles on the line.
In November, the TTC unveiled the design for its new light-rail vehicles. The streetcars will have more seats, larger windows and air conditioning and allow boarding from four doors. They will also accommodate bikes.
The fleet, which Bombardier designed and will build, should start appearing on the streets in 2013.
CONSTRUCTION BEGINS ON SPADINA SUBWAY EXTENSION
All three levels of government turned up in June for the start of construction on a $2.6-billion subway tunnel linking Toronto with the remote York University campus and Vaughan. The 8.6-kilometre track will extend north from Downsview station on the Yonge-University-Spadina line and end at the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre ai??i?? a planned development at Highway 7 and Jane Street.
Service is expected to start in late 2015.
SERVICE CUTS ai??i??
Despite expecting a record 503 million riders next year, the TTC announcedAi?? in November that it would revert to pre-2004 service levels with cuts to dozens of routes in an effort to meet Mayor Rob Ford’s budget demands.
“Customers will experience longer wait times and more crowded vehicles in some cases,” the TTC said in a statement.
Included in the cuts: the Dufferin, Eglinton, Steeles and Finch buses and Bathurst and Queen streetcars.
However, in December, TTC chair Karen Stintz said that because the TTC overestimated diesel costs, the cuts will start in February, one month later than expected.
ai??i?? AND A FARE HIKE
In December, the TTC approved a controversial 10-cent-fare hike every year over the next three years starting Jan. 1. The increase only applies to tokens and passes, not cash fares, and is expected to generate around $30 million a year.
Tokens will increase from $2.50 to $2.60, the monthly Metropass from $121 to $126 and senior/student tickets from $1.65 to $1.75. Cash fares will still be $3.
“WE’RE TALKING ABOUT A CULTURE CHANGE”
Hours after announcing its service cuts on Nov. 24, the TTC held the first of four town halls. Newly-minted customer service officer Chris Upfold chaired the tense meeting, and about 200 people were given a minute each to vent.
“I think it’s important for senior people at the TTC to sit down and to listen and to hear what people have to say so that we can go away and form plans ai??i?? and we are doing that,” spokesman Ross said, looking back at the town hall initiative.
“We know that cleanliness is an issue, reliability of service ai??i?? that is buses and streetcars arriving at the scheduled times. Issues like that ai??i?? we’re working hard to address.”
The initiative stemmed from a report the TTC’s customer service advisory panel released last year.
AND YOU THOUGHT PUBLIC NAIL-CLIPPING WAS BAD ai??i??
In mid-December, police charged a couple with engaging in a lewd act after they had sex in front of fellow passengers on a subway train and on the Spadina platform.
The TTC’s Brad Ross said the pair was extremely drunk and treated in hospital.
“My advice to others who wish to engage in public displays of affection of this nature is to get a room,” he said.
Now our second feature that demonstrates what happens when one single handedly drives up the cost of public transit by building extremely expensive subways on routes that do not have the ridership to support them. Is anyone in TransLink taking notice?
What the hell is happening with transit inAi?? Toronto?
Rob Ford has screwed up transit in Toronto. WeAi?? can endlessly debate the merits and impacts of the mayorai??i??s budget policies, but nothing compares to the long-term damage heai??i??s doneAi?? on the transit file. In less than a year, Ford has taken a fully financed andAi?? designed plan for multiple transit lines in the suburbs and replaced all of itAi?? with an overpriced half-baked tangle of transit ideas, all in various incompleteAi?? stages of funding and design. In doing so, his administration has set transitAi?? expansion back by a decade and replaced near-certainty with gobs of doubt.Ai?? Thanks to Rob Ford, no one is really sure where transit in Toronto isAi?? going.
Fordai??i??s undemocratic transit meddling comes withAi?? an estimated price tag of $65 million, most of which will go toward paying various contractorsAi?? and manufacturers to not do the work they were originally supposed toAi?? do.
Keeping track of Rob Fordai??i??s transit strategy isAi?? an exercise in frustration, as no one is forthcoming with information andAi?? nothing has come to council about any of this. To the best of my knowledge,Ai?? hereai??i??s where thing stand.
Eglinton Crosstown LRT
The one Transit City line that still has aAi?? beating heart, Eglinton represents, in its current incarnation, both a vitalAi?? piece of infrastructure and a massive waste of public money. Writing forAi?? Spacing, John Lorinc called Fordai??i??sAi?? unilateral decision to build the entirety of the 19 kilometre line undergroundAi?? the ai???single most expensive infrastructure mistake in TorontoAi?? history.ai???
Hereai??i??s why: thereai??i??s no ridership projection,Ai?? traffic model or any other kind of reasoned analysis that shows a cost-benefitAi?? for burying the eastern section of the line. No one has made an argument inAi?? favour of burying this section of the line that doesnai??i??t boil down to ai???Rob FordAi?? hates above ground transit.ai??? But thatai??i??s not a sensible reason to make any kindAi?? of public policy decision, much less one that involves spending billions ofAi?? dollars.
There is some hope that cooler heads willAi?? prevail on this one. The existence of the Don Valley ai??i?? sneaky jerk that it is ai??i?? has forced some public conversation about how anAi?? underground line can really work. And TTC Commissioner and Ford ally John ParkerAi?? recently reiterated his support for sticking with the original Transit CityAi?? design on the eastern part of Eglinton. He told the Town Crierai??i??s Karolyn Coorsh that, as planned, Rob Fordai??i??s Eglinton Crosstown lineAi?? will be ai???the goofiest LRT line known to man.ai???
The TTC now pegs the open date for Eglinton atAi?? 2023, a minimum three-year delay over the original window of 2019 or 2020. TheAi?? money weai??i??re set to spend to appease one manai??i??s irrational bias against surfaceAi?? rail could fund major transit infrastructure improvements on key corridors likeAi?? Finch West.
Sheppard Subway Extension
There is no plan to extend theAi?? Sheppard Subway in the near-term. It will never happen. Former Councillor GordonAi?? Chong, hand-picked by the mayor to bring the dream of the privately-fundedAi?? subway to reality, has come clean,Ai?? admitting that private partners are only likely to fund 10-30% of the overallAi?? project cost. And we canai??i??t even know that for sure unless we spend another $10Ai?? million on further analysis.
Fordai??i??s Sheppard gamble always felt like aAi?? face-saving decision. His original transit vision called for the outrightAi?? cancellation of the Eglinton line, funnelling all resources into extendingAi?? Sheppard at both ends. When the province told him this wasnai??i??t likely to happen,Ai?? both sides compromised.
Somewhat inexplicably, Ford has stuck to hisAi?? guns on the long-term viability of the project through his end-of-yearAi?? interviews with various media sources. Citing federal money that was committedAi?? to David Miller several years ago for the Sheppard LRT, Ford told the National Postai??i??s Chris Selley and NatalieAi?? Alcoba that we could see shovels in theAi?? ground on Sheppard in 2012. Sure.
Finch West
N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
When plans shifted away from Transit City, FinchAi?? West ai??i?? a horrendously busy bus route ai??i?? was left with nothing butAi?? a vagueAi?? commitment to ai???Enhanced Bus Service.ai??? No one ever indicated what that meant, andAi?? further details now seem entirely unlikely. Finch West was actually one of theAi?? routes proposed for service cuts under the TTCai??i??s original plan to roll back theAi?? Ridership Growth Strategy in 2012. Fortunately, thanks to some commendable wrangling from TTC Chair Karen Stintz, we got a stay of execution.Ai?? Council will get a chance to permanently preserve service as part of theirAi?? budget debate in January.
The Way Forward: Calling for a new consensus onAi?? transit
As we learn more about the long-termAi?? implications of Rob Fordai??i??s transit vision, it seems more and more like this allAi?? amounts to something resembling the Port Lands fiascoAi?? from this summer. There, Ford backed a short-sighted vision for a major cityAi?? asset that really didnai??i??t hold up to scrutiny. Once the public started pushingAi?? back, councillors who tend to support the mayor started to question whether FordAi?? had things right.
The rest is history. At the eleventh hour, FordAi?? backed a face-saving compromise that saw council unanimously back a way forwardAi?? for the Port Lands. And while thereai??i??s still a lot of questions about theAi?? implications of that new consensus, itai??i??s a hell of a lot better than what wouldAi?? have happened otherwise.
Is a Port Lands-style consensus possible withAi?? these transit plans? Early indications are good. Aside from Ford, very fewAi?? councillors expressed strong objections to the on-street operation of EglintonAi?? and other Transit City routes when they were first proposed. And thereai??i??sAi?? certainly an appetite for more transit in more places, which is what weai??i??d get ifAi?? council rejected Fordai??i??s all-underground scheme for Eglinton and reverted toAi?? something resembling the Transit City plan.
The important thing is to position any changesAi?? as a compromise, and to leave room for the mayor to save face. As much as itAi?? might be fun to see Rob Ford utterly defeated as Transit City rises from theAi?? ashes, weai??i??re far more likely to find a successful way forward with a compromiseAi?? strategy that integrates elements of Transit City with new vision for transit.Ai?? That vision could include a small subway extension (to Victoria Park), a tweakedAi?? plan for surface LRT service on Finch & Eglinton, and even bus rapid transit ai??i?? any and all things that can meet our goal of moving more people moreAi?? efficiently.
This isnai??i??t optional. Letting Fordai??i??s transitAi?? vision move forward unimpeded will only amount to a waste of time and money. InAi?? 2012, council must be given an opportunity to debate these issues and getAi?? transit planning in this city finally and permanently back onAi?? track.
With credentials, any idiot can make all other idiots believe any idiotic claim
A San Fransisco cable car on a city street. Please note the slot on the pavement where the cable car’s “grip”
grips the continuousAi??operatingAi??cable under the street for forward movement. Being cable hauled, cable cars
are very good at climbing steep grades and the main reason they survived in San Fransisco.
The following comment was made on a transit blog lamenting that anyone with an university degreeAi??can call themselves a transitAi??expert, yet those with real expertiseAi??with transit issues, especially those without a degreeAi??are ignored.
The density issue is a good example of this. Only in the Vancouver regional area is the issue of density forAi??new transit construction is taken as an absolute, with much time and study taken with the issue, yet outside our transit region, the question of density barely raises an eyebrow and instead, questions of the seamless (no transfer) journey; transit being user friendly; or transit being affordableAi??being deemed more important. Go to any transit meeting in the Vancouver metro regionAi??and the the term density is used ad naseum by those who really don’t know what they are talking about, promoting the SkyTrain light-metro instead of light rail.
Talk about modern LRT with regional planners and one comes away in wonderment that the mode is used at all, with the litany of complaint about the mode being slow, dated, unable to cater to transit demands, etc. In fact, modern light rail is treated as a pooman’s SkyTrain and is designed as much. This is tantamount to a shortcut to failure and one wonders if the so-called transit experts at TransLink want this to happen.
Just about everyone who has an Engineering degree, whether it be a chemical or electrical or more, feel that they are an instantAi??transit expert, yet so much of what they speak is nothing more than opinionatedAi??baffle-gab, nowhere near being accurate or correct. Professional misconduct comes to mind.
This reminds ‘Zwei’ of a story which happened some years ago in Vancouver.
A transit expert was giving a talk on streetcars and part of his video show were pictures of San Fransisco cable cars, which the chap mistakenly called streetcars. On and on he went misinforming those attending the meeting about how streetcars were small and open to the whether, etc. During the question period I told the chap that what he called streetcars in San Fransisco were in fact cable cars and were powered by an underground moving cable and that San FransiscoAi??streetcars were in fact a mixtureAi??PCC cars and articulate Boeing VERTOL cars, which he had no pictures of.Ai??Oh, no, no, no said the expert, “all of San Fransisco streetcars were once cable hauled and now have been rebuilt with electric motors.”
I again stated that he was wrong, the steam powered cable system was indeed replaced with electric motors but the cable cars themselves were unpowered and that the cable cars he was calling streetcars, were in fact cable cars.
A minder from the Vancouver City Engineering Dept. soon appeared at my side and told me not to disturb the meeting any further, that, “that the city paid good money for this man to speak, he is a qualified engineerAi??and we don’t want any nonsense from the trolley-jolly types, LIKE YOU!”
I haven’t gone to a streetcar meeting since as most what is talked about is dated drivel, by people who haven’t a clue about modern LRT, let alone streetcars.
ThisAi??observation manifested itself with the short lived Olympic (tram) Line long False Creek. The new track was laid to a mainline railway standard complete with welded rail, concrete ties and Pandrol clips, costing about $8 million of aAi??1.5 km. stretch of single track. What ever one wanted to call the Olympic Line, a simple streetcar it was not.
Christmas Greetings
Seasonal Trams & Christmas lights from:
BudapestAi??http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzLNouWQlWg&feature=youtu.be&hd=1
Vienna http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wixBopxlTUI
Graz http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDANZba5Qxc&feature=related
Munich http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXGVFcwE7C0&feature=related
and the Budapest Christmas Tram !http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcEZvwMlKMs&feature=related
E & N Blues
Want to kill a Railway? Starve it of funds and let it rust away and this seems the fate of the E & N railway.
For a want of a mere $15 million to upgrade the tracks, the provincial government has loudly signaled that it wants to wash its hands of the E&N, especially when the same government subsidizes the Vancouver region’s SkyTrain/light-metro network by over $250 million annually and is pumping in billions of dollars on the grossly over engineered lower mainland Gateway project. BC Transit remains deaf, blind and dumb, with modernAi??transit planning centeredAi??on the the E&N (TramTrain?) and remain willfully ignorant of the RftV/Leewood valley TramTrain report. The City Victoria’s civic politicians remain myopic of the advantages of TramTrain operating on the E&N by not including a rail portion of the new Johnson Street Bridge.
Current light rail planning isAi??blundering ahead with a $950 million streetcarAi??line for the Victoria Region, which translates to no LRT because it is too expensiveAi?? (just what BC Transit wants!). Using the E&N railway would be a natural for a regional Tramtrain service and $950 million could provide bothAi?? LRT for Victoria and a Naniamo to Victoria diesel LRT service, providingAi?? a downtown to downtown service, guarenteed to attract ridership!
But no, not in BC, where cheap light rail or tramsAi??in Victoria means we could build cheap LRT or tramsAi??in Vancouver and that is a big no-no with regional planners in the Vancouver metro regions, where new highway planning (rubber on asphalt) trumps all. The result is that the E&N will continue to rust away, with nothing being done because those in the provincial and regional transportation bureaucracies just do not want affordable LRT in BC.
Watchdog will keep eye on rail foundation
Founder of ICF forms group that aims to inform public about challenges facing the E&N line
By Walter Cordery, Daily NewsDecember 19, 2011
One of the founders of the Island Corridor Foundation claims the organization has derailed its plans to be open and transparent.
Thursday, Jack Peake and other concerned rail advocates and professionalsAi?? announced the formation of a new group, which will act as a watchdog toAi?? advise the public about challenges facing the E&N as well asAi?? concerns with the decisions made by the ICF, a consortium of regionalAi?? districts, municipalities and First Nations.
Peake, the former chairman of the ICF board of directors and past mayor of Lake Cowichan, said people aren’t getting timely information from the ICF and is particularly concerned that two ICF committees that advised the foundation no longer exist. It’s one of the reasons he and others formed the E&N Railway Action Group.
“I am concerned that the ICF, a public non-profit organization, is not presenting any detailed plan for the future of the E&N, and has closed out important advisoryAi?? committees from its decisionmaking,” Peake said. “I fear that withoutAi?? input from the public, and professionals who have been involved with the railway for years, the E&N could be lost. Joe Stanhope, chairman of the Regional District of Nanaimo board, also a founding member of theAi?? ICF, agrees “we could always do a better job at communication.”
Right now there’s not much to tell the public as the foundation awaits wordAi?? from federal government to see if it will match provincial funding,Ai?? contingent on Ottawa’s contribution.
“We are in a hiatus right now,” said Stanhope.
He’s been actively corresponding with federal Minister of Transport,Ai?? Infrastructure and Communities Denis Lebel urging him to convince theAi?? rest of cabinet to get on board with the matching funding.
“I’veAi?? been writing letters to Minister Lebel but I’m not hearing much back,”Ai?? Stanhope said. The removal of the E&N’s Rail cars from the IslandAi?? last month shook Peake’s already waning confidence in the direction theAi?? ICF was heading.
“To me that was, unfortunately, the writing on the wall of the railway.”
The ICF acquired the E&N Railway in 2006, as a donation from Canadian Pacific and Rail America.
Last March, daily VIA Rail service between Victoria and Courtenay wasAi?? suspended after the track was found to be no longer safe for passengerAi?? trains. This prompted the ICF to step up its request for $15 million inAi?? federal and provincial funding to fix the E&N’s decayingAi?? infrastructure. However, the ICF has not publicly released any detailedAi?? plans on how this money will be spent.
Until its disbandment, theAi?? ICF received suggestions and information from a rail operations advisory committee, Peake was chairman of the committee. The foundation alsoAi?? received direction from a community advisory committee but that also has been disbanded.
Peake’s new action group has launched a web site, saveislandrailway.org, where people can learn more about the E&N,Ai?? and get involved.
WCordery@nanaimodailynews.com 250-729-4237
Ai?? Copyright (c) Postmedia News
http://www.canada.com/Watchdog+will+keep+rail+foundation/5880953/story.htmlE&N Railway Action Group
E&N Railway News and Opinions
Welcome
Our Most Important Updates!
Our Press Release
New E&N Action Group demands better governance and transparency from Island Corridor Foundation
ICF founder expresses concern that Esquimalt & Nanaimo Railway is in jeopardy
Thursday, December 15, 2011: Vancouver IslandAi?? railway professionals and advocates today announced the formation of aAi?? new E&N Railway Action Group, which will act as a watchdog to advise the public about challenges to the Esquimalt & Nanaimo Railway, and governance issues with the Island Corridor Foundation, which overseesAi?? the E&N rail corridor.
ai???I am concerned that the ICF, a public non-profit organization, isAi?? not presenting any detailed plan for the future of the E&N, and hasAi?? closed out important advisory committees from its decision-making,ai??? says Jack Peake, a co-founder and former co-chair of the ICF, and aAi?? spokesperson for the new Action Group. ai???I fear that without input fromAi?? the public, and professionals who have been involved with the railwayAi?? for years, the E&N could be lost. With the VIA Rail cars having been removed from the island on November 5, this concern has never been more real.ai???
Click here to read our entire press release and post your comments.
Toronto Meet Your New Ride
New Toronto Streetcars
http://lrv.ttc.ca/Ai?? is the website from the TTC on the new streetcars.
The Toronto Transportation Societyai??i??s December newsletter has some interesting thoughts on the vehicle as well as photos of the half mock-up. The first 80 cars will have both pole and pantograph with the remainingAi?? (109 or 116 depending on the order) will be fitted with pantograph only.
http://lrv.ttc.ca/Meet_Your_New_Ride.aspx
Facts about your new ride:
- Accessible
- 100% low floor
- More seats
- Some wider seats
- Boarding from all 4 doorways
- Wide 2nd and 3rd doorways
- Modern
- Comfortable
- Spacious
- Large windows
- Air conditioning, climate controlled
- Bicycle accommodationAi??
This light rail vehicle is part of our new transit legacy. We are committed to working with Torontonians and our current and future customers to make solid design decisions.
In 2007, over 10,000 of you told us what you wanted to see in a new streetcar. We heard.
In June 2009, the path was chosen for one of Torontoai??i??s newest transit rides. The TTC entered into a contract with Bombardier to design and build 204 new low floor, light rail vehicles (LRVs) to replace the existing fleet of streetcars.
Bombardier’s Guided BRT Is A Bust In Caen
With all the hoopla about BRT, it is interesting to note that the Caen TVR (proprietary guided bus) being in operation for a few short years, is being abandoned in favour of LRT. To be competitive with light rail/streetcar, BRT must be guided and if BRT is guided, it must run on its own rights-of-ways, in fact it must operate as a tram. This fact is not lost on promoters of BRT, as they design their buses to look like trams.
The cost of TVR was about 25% less than a tram to install, but it was supposed to attract the same amount of ridership and have similar operating capabilities. In revenue operationAi??TVR didn’t meet expectations and finally added to the mix was the ominous; “it was no longer being actively supported by the manufacturers“, the death knell of proprietary transit systems.
TVR has proven to be an expensive experimental BRT system that has failed, yet in BC, indeed in North America, BRT is being promoted as a successful transit mode, but in most cases (such as BC) what is being presented as BRT is not really BRT at all, just a tarted up express bus service, that offers few, if any, amenities other than having few stops which gives it a faster service. This is something to remember when TransLink and the mainstream media bang the drum for Bus Rapid Transit.
Bombardier Transportation’s “light guided transit” — an electric trolley bus running under overhead wire with a one centered guidance rail — proved to be a bust in the city of Caen which now plans to replace the system with conventional light rail — a conversion that will take 18 months, according to Railway Gazette International. Here’s a view of the technology to be abandoned:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_9fJALTovDT4/TFm0EEpqbjI/\
AAAAAAAAUTw/L29RLoq4R44/s1600/cnlr1.jpg
This Wikipedia article contains a description of “trams on tyres” and shows the guidance systems used by Bombardier and Lohr Industrie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_bus
And the news story:
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/news/single-view/view/\
caen-to-switch-to-light-rail/archiv/2011/12.html
“Caen to switch to light rail
19 December 2011FRANCE: On December 14 Caen transport authority ViacitAi??s confirmed its intention to abandon its TVR rubber-guided light transit route and replace it with conventional light rail by 2018.
ViacitAi??s estimates it will take 18 months to replace the TVR guideway with tram track on the 15 km (9.7-mile) Y-shaped network, at a cost of ai??i??170m $221.2 million USD). The change will require the termination of two concession contracts currently held by and Keolis, and Bombardier-Spie Batignolles consortium STVR.
Following completion of the network at a cost of ai??i??215m ($279.8 million USD), local operator Twisto began TVR operations in November 17 2002, under a 30-year concession. This was two years after a similar TVR service began in Nancy. However, the TVR technology has proved unreliable, and is no longer being actively supported by the manufacturers. Conversion to light rail is expected to pave the way for construction of a second line in the future.
PRESTO – My Bank Account is Drained
With Vancouver soon adopting an automatic fare card system, it is interesting to note, that not all is well in the land of transit fare-cards.
TransLink doesn’t want its new fare card just for transit, oh no, TransLink’s mandarins want the new fare card as a currency, valid for purchases in convenience stores and some major retailers, which mayAi??pose some problems in the future.
TransLink’s Modus Operandi is simple, a bureaucrats reads (or looks at a picture) of some transit development or other elsewhere and deems it would be neat to have in Vancouver. Then to persuade the politico’s of the need of this development, TransLink uses its well oiled public relations machine to manufacture a demand, yet from the beginning not knowing the real reason why this particular development is used transit wise. BRT, U-Pass, fare-gates/fare-cards, transit police, all fall into this category, as TransLink has spent hundreds of millions of dollars implementing them, without really knowing the reason why they are used, except that they look or sound neat.
In Toronto, those holding a Presto Transit card, allows Presto to dip into their bank accounts to top up the card when needed and for some, with rather nasty and expensive results.
The same will happen in Vancouver, but I have great expectations that TransLink will treat the fare-cardAi??customer with the same disdain as it does with all transit customers; “too bad, so sad”.
I can’t wait until the $127 million (and more)Ai??fare-gate/fare card folly begins.
Back to Presto problem taps riders and dips into their bank accounts
Presto problem taps riders and dips into their bank accounts
December 20, 2011
Tess Kalinowski
Adam Field works in customer service for a software company so he knows that computer-based systems can hit the odd glitch. But when the auto-reload function of his Presto card malfunctioned recently it cost him about $150 in bank charges.VINCE TALOTTA/TORONTO STAR
The last thing anybody needs at the holidays is a surprise hole in their budget. So when Adam Field read in a GO riderai??i??s blog that the automatic re-load feature was malfunctioning on some Presto transit fare cards, he decided to check his statement.
Sure enough, there were 11 instances in which the Presto system loaded $40 on Fieldai??i??s transit card before it reached the $20 balance thatai??i??s supposed to trigger a cash injection.
The auto-load feature allows Presto users to trigger a transfer from a bank account or credit card onto their transit smartcard when Presto reaches a minimum balance determined by the user.
Field had his account programmed to take $40 from a bank account if his Presto balance went below $20. Although he doesnai??i??t think his balance ever went under $50 in the affected period, his Presto account received 11 $40 credits.
But the funds werenai??i??t being withdrawn from his bank, so last week, when he discovered the problem, Field found himself overdrawn and on the hook for about $150 in bank fees.
Itai??i??s not the money that irks the Hamilton-Toronto commuter, although he said he had to complain vigorously to get Metrolinx to up its original offer of a $10 voucher to $150 to cover the bank costs. Itai??i??s the fact that he wasnai??i??t notified that annoys the 27-year-old systems administrator.
ai???You have a system where you can just take money out of peopleai??i??s accounts. If thereai??i??s an issue with the system, why was I not told? Why wasnai??i??t I notified?ai??? he said. ai???I work for a service-based company. If something goes wrong, the first thing weai??i??re going to do is tell our customers.ai???
A spokeswoman for the Toronto region transportation agency told the Star on Tuesday that Metrolinx only discovered the issue last week, at which point it emailed or phoned 320 affected customers. The auto-load problem was in effect between Nov. 7 and Dec. 4. The money was deducted from customer bank accounts until Dec. 8, 9 and 10.
ai???About 90 percent of those contacted did not realize that there had been delayed, combined charges. For customers who felt that they were severely impacted by the software issue, we issued them vouchers to reimburse them for any overdraft bank charges,ai??? said Thomas in an email.
ai???In any complex system such as a banking or card payment system, there will be rare glitches. This software error was a rare occurrence,ai??? she said.
But itai??i??s not the first time the Presto system has malfunctioned. On Oct. 27 about 200 electronic Presto readers at six GO stations were out of commission for about five hours. Presto officials told a Metrolinx board meeting in November that problem has been resolved.
The two issues are not related, said Thomas.
The Ontario government paid Accenture $250 million to design, build and operate the Presto system, which has been adopted across GO Transit and all the regional bus services, except the TTC.
The TTC, which has Presto readers in some stations, has agreed to work with Metrolinx to finance its installation. But until itai??i??s widely available on the TTC, one of the main features of the card ai??i?? its transferability across municipal boundaries ai??i?? is of limited use because about 85 per cent of transit riders in the Toronto region use the TTC for some part of their trip.
There are110,000 Presto cards in circulation.
ai???Pass-ups,ai??i?? overcrowding lead to litany of complaints aimed at TransLink
Pass-ups and over crowding of buses all point to one thing, extremely bad management of the transit system.
TransLink’s endemic bad management is easy to understand once one investigates the tiers of bureaucracy that operate our regional transit system. West coast Mountain Bus (WCMB) actually operates the buses, with TransLink setting the routes and operating frequencies. This ‘agency gap’ means that complaints are firstAi??delivered to TransLink, only to beAi??funnled to WCMB at a later date, there is no connectivity.
Customer service was never part of TransLink’s mandate and the transit service provided today shows it. It must be remembered that the then NDP government only created TransLink to save their failing Millennium Line SkyTrain projectAi??after their well orchestrated flip-flop from LRT to SkyTrain. Alienating many in the NDP membership, the political party was desperate to gain some credibilityAi??for the project coerced then GVRD Chair, George Puil, to sign the TransLink Deal (at the same time giving the green light to the Millennium Line) by promising to pay two thirds of SkyTrain only construction west of Commercial Drive in Vancouver! No niceties about customer service were ever mentioned!
Today, TransLink only cares on the amount of bus passengers force fed onto the SkyTrain/Canada Line metros, so they can score political points with the politicians and media.
In the 21st century, for a transit system to be deemed successful, it must be customer friendly, which our system is not and until TransLink puts the customer first and have contingencies in place to ensure customers good service, taking the car will just be a better bet.
ai???Pass-ups,ai??i?? overcrowding lead to litany of complaints aimed at TransLink
By KELLY SINOSKI, Vancouver SunDecember 14, 2011TransLink is being bombarded with complaints by passengers unhappy about being passed up by overcrowded buses or having to wait for drivers who donai??i??t arrive at the stop on time.
A third-quarter report by the transportation authority said the number of complaints from TransLink passengers is higher than it was during the same period last year, partly as a result of expanded channels ai??i?? such as social media ai??i?? on which to log their concerns.
The top two categories of complaints continue to be ai???overcrowding and pass-upsai??? as well as ai???early and late bus arrivals,ai??? according to the report. But TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie said passengers are also voicing concerns on everything from fare disputes to the way theyai??i??re greeted by an operator or the behaviour of another passenger.
ai???We can certainly see when weai??i??re having a bad day … it could simply be because of a traffic snarl somewhere,ai??? Hardie said. ai???When you consider that weai??i??re again going to set a ridership record but doing it with the same fleet [as last year] we anticipated there would be more issues with pass-ups and crowding.ai???
Preliminary year-to-date results to the end of October show just over 192 million transit trips on the system ai??i?? five-per-cent higher than for the same period in 2010, which included the Olympic Games. TransLink said trends indicate that by yearai??i??s end, it will record its 10th annual ridership record in a row.
TransLink said the increase in riders is partly due to reallocating underused buses to routes and time periods where passengers had experienced crowding and pass-ups.
Hardie couldnai??i??t provide the specific number of complaints Wednesday, but said passengers are expressing their grievances in a variety of ways, ranging from emails and phone calls to Twitter. The complaints usually concern buses because they carry about 80 per cent of Metro Vancouverai??i??s transit passengers, but are also rising among HandyDart users.
If TransLink can isolate a particular issue, Hardie said, extra buses can be sent to that area to pick up passengers.
Certain routes, such as the 99B Line, the No. 20 and No. 25, often bear the brunt of the complaints. ai???Those are very long and very complex routes and itai??i??s very easy for buses to get overrun or behind schedule because of traffic conditions,ai??? Hardie said.
The West Coast Express also saw an increase in complaints, mainly due to cancellations, train schedule changes and requests for additional train runs. According to the report, complaints on the Canada Line were down as a result of a commitment to improve customer service
Liar, liar, liar……….
It seems the SkyTrain Lobby has started a wee blog to compete with Rail for the Valley, called Surrey needs SkyTrainAi??and true to form, if one supports light rail, one is a liar.
It is so sad to see so much time and effort is wasted on what is now an obsolete proprietary transit mode, but if it makes the SkyTrain lobby happy, so be with it. In the real world, SkyTrain is classed as a light metro and light-metro is now a ‘niche’ transport system, best suited for theme parks or airports. For the cost of a light-metro, one can build a heavy-rail metro, with the benefitAi??of higher capacity, or on the flip side, one can build several light-rail lines for the cost of one light-metro line, creating the ‘rail’ network that has proven to attract the all important motorist from the car.
What the SkyTrain/light-metro lobby do have, is a profound ignorance of modern public transit and 21st century public transit philosophy and instead pretend that truncated mini-metro lines, force fed bus passengers are a successful way of moving people. Successful light rail lines operating elsewhere are ignored, while every little LRT accident or problem is magnified to such a degree, one wonders how light rail survives today!
What drives the SkyTrain Lobby to continue their vehement attacks on LRT and its proponents is that modern light rail works and works very well; light-rail works so well in fact that it has made the SkyTrain proprietary light-metro mode obsolete, all but killing the market for light-metro. The only way a company can sell light-metro is to ensure that it doesn’t have to compete against light rail for a transit project, such as Vancouver, Honolulu, Kuala Lumpor and the few other cities that have built with light-metro. If modern LRT is to compete directly with SkyTrain and/or light-metro, light rail wins hands down, being far more cheaper to build and operate and much more flexible in operation. In short, one gets a far greater bang for your buck with LRT.
One will not hear that from the SkyTrain Lobby as their daily moan about modern LRT is becoming more and more tiresome with weary taxpayers, who are maxed out paying for prestigious light metro, either in the guise of SkyTrain or a truncated heavy-rail metro like the Canada line.
For the SkyTrain Lobby, money is no object and those who dare to say that there is a cheaper and better way to provide ‘rail‘ transit the refrain is: “liar, liar, pants………………”
Recent Comments