BCLocalNews.com – Study calls for major transit boost
Study calls for major transit boost
The long-awaited Fraser Valley Transit study quietly appeared online Thursday, with a clear focus on local transit improvements.
The study by the province and FVRD with partners BC Transit and TransLink, looked at local, regional and inter-regional transit needs of Fraser Valley communities from Abbotsford to Hope.
Chilliwack Mayor Sharon Gaetz was relieved the $400,000 transit report was finally released so the community can move forward.
A?ai??i??Ai??It gives us a long range vision for local transit in each Fraser Valley community, as well as a vision for regional service.
A?ai??i??Ai??The main part that jumped out for me was the crucial need for new funding sources to be found,A?ai??i??A? she said.
The study pointed out Chilliwack spends $9 annually per capita on transit through property taxes, which is among the lowest in B.C., compared to other mid-sized communities.
Kamloops spends $26 per capita, while Victoria spends $40, as examples.
A?ai??i??Ai??ItA?ai??i??ai???s tough right now,A?ai??i??A? said Gaetz. A?ai??i??Ai??WeA?ai??i??ai???re under pressure to keep taxes low, and we know transit is highly subsidized so we have to look if a share of costs can be borne in other areas. ItA?ai??i??ai???s about finding a new funding mechanism.A?ai??i??A?
More than tripling local bus service is called for under the studyA?ai??i??ai???s vision, going from the current total of 40 buses to 135 by 2040, and the annual costs would then jump from about $10 million to $80 million, contingent on new revenue sources being found.
ThatA?ai??i??ai???s a 600 per cent projected increase in local bus services for Chilliwack according to the study, and about 450 per cent for Abbotsford to support A?ai??i??Ai??primary travel marketsA?ai??i??A? in the valley.
Transit advocate Jennifer Bigham, who called herself the Chill-activist, was impressed by the studyA?ai??i??ai???s recommendations for major increases to local bus service across the valley.
A?ai??i??Ai??ItA?ai??i??ai???s long overdue. My initial reaction is that itA?ai??i??ai???s going to be good for us,A?ai??i??A? she said.
A new transit governance structure A?ai??i??Ai??is exactly what we needA?ai??i??A? to amalgamate services from neighbouring communities, Bigham said.
A?ai??i??Ai??The fact that theyA?ai??i??ai???re ready to do anything is good, but itA?ai??i??ai???s going to take a lot just to catch up.A?ai??i??A?
Finding new funding sources and a new structure is key, agreed Gaetz.
A?ai??i??Ai??No matter what kind of transit service we choose, it underscores that the current model is unsustainable,A?ai??i??A? said the mayor. A?ai??i??Ai??So weA?ai??i??ai???re looking forward to working with BC Transit in the new year to figure out the best options for Chilliwack.A?ai??i??A?
A new governance model, something akin to a Trans Link, might be a good place to start, said Gaetz.
But hands-down the biggest priority for all valley communities is A?ai??i??Ai??growing local ridership,A?ai??i??A? especially since most riders donA?ai??i??ai???t go beyond the city borders, said the mayor.
A?ai??i??Ai??What the study pointed out was the need to expand our local ridership, to make it grow from one per cent to four per centA?ai??i??A? over the next 20 years, said Gaetz.
A?ai??i??Ai??There are some who have said we could do that by putting in an inter-urban rail line from Chilliwack to Vancouver, but what the report indicates is that itA?ai??i??ai???s highly desirable, but cost prohibitive.A?ai??i??A?
The study estimated the rail option would cost $70 million.
So although Gaetz said she agrees with preserving the rail line for future service potential, itA?ai??i??ai???s A?ai??i??Ai??too expensiveA?ai??i??A? right now.
The rationale for rail isnA?ai??i??ai???t supported by the numbers since 80 per cent of trips in the Fraser Valley begin and end in that community.
A?ai??i??Ai??And for the City of Chilliwack it was even more dramatic, with only 10 per cent of daily riders leaving Chilliwack for other communities.A?ai??i??A?
But Rail for the Valley spokesman John Vissers disputes the expensive price tag for rail.
A?ai??i??Ai??I get a sense that they missed the obvious and that is that we have a system available to us at little real cost that would connect communities. Connectivity is absolutely essential,A?ai??i??A? he said.
To continue to ignore rail as a transportation option is actually 20th century thinking, he said.
The problem with the transit vision contained in the study is that it doesnA?ai??i??ai???t offer true sustainability, despite its lofty goals.
A?ai??i??Ai??It doesnA?ai??i??ai???t recognize sustainable growth and how growth will be shaped by affordable and accessible transit,A?ai??i??A? said Vissers.
A?ai??i??Ai??Sprawl canA?ai??i??ai???t be served by buses or trains, theyA?ai??i??ai???re too low density. If we build attractive transportation options it will attract more sustainable growth. So weA?ai??i??ai???re doing things backward by building communities and then trying to serve them with transportation.A?ai??i??A?
The just released study by Urban Systems, Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley, compared different scenarios for local, and inter-regional transit, as well as urban rail and expanded West Coast Express options in a 20- to 25-year framework.
The recommendations lean toward A?ai??i??Ai??optimizing and enhancingA?ai??i??A? local transit in the short term, given that the vast majority of transit trips start and end in the same community.
Within Chilliwack a A?ai??i??Ai??rapid busA?ai??i??A? service would cover the Yale/Vedder corridor with interconnected frequent transit corridors, conventional services and connections with community transit services. It also envisions an express coach bus for inter-regional travel.
Rail did not cut it.
A?ai??i??Ai??Commuter rail may be a long-term option in the future,A?ai??i??A? reads the study summary.
An inter-urban rail service is singled out as A?ai??i??Ai??significantly more than other transit options available.A?ai??i??A?
Either extending the WCE to Abbotsford or creating an inter-urban route A?ai??i??Ai??would require significant investment and both have lower projected ridership than other transit options in the study.A?ai??i??A?
Hence the need to focus on expanding local transit. With population numbers expected to spike in the coming years, the study points out that transit funding and service levels have been A?ai??i??Ai??woefully inadequateA?ai??i??A? in the region.
Gaetz said in order to get ridership up substantially in Chilliwack from the current one per cent up to four per cent, leaves regional transit, such as Chilliwack to Abbotsford of secondary importance to some degree.
A?ai??i??Ai??But having said that, it should not set off alarm bells because regional links are still a priority. So weA?ai??i??ai???ll be looking at that and more in the new year as we continue to analyze the data.A?ai??i??A?
For more on the study, go to www.srtfv.ca or www.th.gov.bc.ca/FraserValleyTransit/
BCLocalNews.com – Study calls for major transit boost.
Buses, not rail, laid out in Valley transit vision
ByAi??Ai??Jeff Nagel – BC Local News
The Fraser Valley needs to get A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??and pay for A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??a much higher level of bus service, but a rail transit service that would wind its way along the old Interurban line is not among the recommended options.
A long-awaited provincial government review of Fraser Valley transit concludes a new commuter rail service on the Interurban corridor from Abbotsford to Surrey would cost $70 million a year A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??almost as much as a much more urgently needed expansion in local, regional and inter-regional bus service that would take the current system from $11 million a year to $90 million.
Providing premium express bus service on Highway 1 in dedicated lanes would be much cheaper than rail, it says, freeing up more money for the improved bus service, which is estimated to serve 20 times as many passengers.
“Although an inter-regional railway service between the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver may be part of a long-term future, a strong foundation of local, regional and inter-regional services as presented in the Vision is an essential starting point.”
A rail service all the way from Chilliwack to Surrey would cost $112 million a year, it says.
That rail option cost is based on a peak-only service using heavy diesel trains like the West Coast Express A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??not the light-rail modern trams that Rail For the Valley fans contend could provide an all-day community-oriented service at modest cost.
More passengers would likely be served using light-rail trains, the analysis shows, but at a higher cost of $108 million per year to Abbotsford and $176 million to Chilliwack.
Rail For The Valley spokesman John Buker said the analysis is flawed and the results are “strongly biased” against light rail, particularly in terms of its ridership estimates.
The report recommends a five-fold increase in local bus service in the Valley to 420,000 service hours over the next 20 years, up from 85,000 today.
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lines would let passengers board every 10 minutes or less on the high-traffic South Fraser Way and Yale Road corridors.
Express bus routes using more comfortable highway coaches would link Abbotsford west through Langley along both the Highway 1 and Fraser Highway corridors to SkyTrain in Surrey or else Burnaby via the new Port Mann Bridge.
Another express route would go north from Abbotsford to Mission and then west through Maple Ridge and on to the Tri-Cities. Others would connect Abbotsford to Chilliwack and Chilliwack to both Agassiz and Hope.
The highway buses would range from service as often as every 10 minutes to hourly (to Agassiz) and five trips per day to Hope.
Also envisioned are grids of interconnected frequent transit corridors A?ai??i??ai??? guaranteeing buses every 15 minutes, 15 hours a day.
Those plans recognize the fact 80 per cent of all trips in the Valley are by residents traveling in their home community, so future service must be largely geared to local destinations, not commuting long distances across the Lower Mainland.
Local transit service should increase from 350 per cent in Abbotsford to more than 600 per cent in Chilliwack, it says, much of it concentrated on the urban areas.
Consultants also looked at extending West Coast Express 11 kilometres across the Fraser River into downtown Abbotsford.
Various upgrades would be required, including new Abbotsford and Silverdale stations, new or expanded park-and-rides and a relocation of the Mission WCE station, along with transit tie-ins.
But the $11.6-million annual cost of the Abbotsford WCE extension would be far greater than the proposed new express bus service to Mission, which would operate much more frequently (every 10 minutes at peak times, 20 minutes off-peak versus 30 minutes for WCE at peak times only, no service at off-peak times.)
Ten per cent of West Coast Express traffic already comes from the Fraser Valley. About 6,000 daily passengers board at Mission A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??10 per cent of total WCE traffic A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??with about 56 per cent of them from Mission and 38 per cent from Abbotsford.
The Interurban assessment assumed nine stations A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??four in Surrey, three in Langley and just one each in Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Adding more, consultants said, would increase trip time and deter passengers.
Since expanded rail isn’t discarded forever, the reports say rail corridors should be retained for a possible future service.
Buker said rail lines shouldn’t be shelved.
“There are some nice ideas presented of enhanced local bus service which deserve a closer look, but the hard truth is it is extremely doubtful that ridership will be high enough to sustain these levels of services without a light rail backbone,” he said.
“If the Fraser Valley can support hourly, or even half-hourly, regional bus service, it can also support light rail, whose operating costs over the lifetime of the vehicles tend to actually be lower, when all costs are taken into account.”
The Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley was conducted by the transportation ministry in partnership with TransLink, the Fraser Valley Regional District and B.C. Transit and analyzed travel patterns across the region.
It warns a paradigm shift in how local communities work together is needed as well as “dramatically different land-use plans” from what community plans now envision, with denser development along transit routes and more mixed uses.
The vision requires “fundamental shifts” that may take up to 30 years to achieve, but it calls on all agencies to work to accelerate the implementation.
Also needed are dedicated bus lanes, queue jumper ramps, and coordinated traffic lights to help speed buses through congestion on key corridors, such as South Fraser Way, Yale Road, Highway 1 and Fraser Highway.
Local cities and BC Transit are to work on shorter-term plans in the next few years to start delivering the 20-year strategy.
‘Modest’ gas tax could revenue to improve dismal transit service
Just one per cent of trips made in the Fraser Valley Regional District are on transit, compared to three per cent in Kelowna and Kamloops, eight per cent in Victoria and 11 per cent in Metro Vancouver.
The findings of the province’s Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley show the region is woefully underserved by transit relative to other areas.
The Valley gets less than 0.5 annual transit service hours per resident A?ai??i??ai??? one-third as much as Kamloops and Kelowna and one-fifth as much per capita transit service as Metro Vancouver.
Even Alberta communities like Strathcona and St. Albert get more than twice as much transit service as the Valley.
Valley residents also pay less in property taxes for transit A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??just $4 to $14 per person compared to $26 in the Okanagan cities and $130 in Metro Vancouver.
The existing transit system in the Valley needs steady revenue increases of 7.6 per cent per year from local, regional and provincial sources.
Higher property taxes, fares, provincial contributions and “new revenue sources” will all be needed to deliver the needed cash.
Adding a one-cent per litre gas tax in the FVRD A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??much less than the 12 cents charged in Metro Vancouver A?ai??i??ai???Ai??Ai??would generate $4.1 million a year, the report shows, by way of example.
The report notes TransLink’s fees and taxes could simply be extended to the Valley.
Or, it says, a Valley transit commission could be set up like one in the Capital Regional District that charges a 3.5 cent per litre gas tax.
“If the FVRD remains outside TransLinkA?ai??i??ai???s service area, a relatively modest fuel tax would be able to provide an adequate funding stream to allow significant improvements to be implemented,” it says.
“Without increased funding which is also more stable and predictable, the needs of the valley residents cannot be planned or developed in an optimum way.”
The FVRD population is projected to climb 70 per cent to more than 450,000 over the next two decades.
The reports target an increase in transit mode share to 4.1 per cent by 2040, up from one per cent in the Valley today.
Summary: Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley
Light rail: SkyTrain most costly route
Light rail: SkyTrain most costly route
LANGLEY ADVANCE DECEMBER 31, 2010
Dear Editor,
While local mayors bicker with TransLink over the funding of yet another grossly expensive metro line for the region, Rail for the Valley, in association with Leewood Projects in the UK, has provided the region with a far cheaper alternative: a TramTrain transit plan for the South Fraser region.
The 84-page RftV/Leewood report found that a basic service (three trains an hour each direction), 98 km Scott road Station to Chilliwack LRT TramTrain could be implemented for as little as $492 million, while a full build 138 km Vancouver/Richmond to Rosedale service could be had for as little as $998.5 million.
Compare that with the $1.4-billion 11 km Evergreen line.
The RftV/Leewood Report has been very well received overseas, with articles on the Valley Interurban in Railway Strategies and the internationally acclaimed Tramways & Urban Transit, yet locally, this very important study has been all but ignored.
TransLink has treated the RftV/Leewood Report with disdain as they continue to plan for multi billion dollar metro lines that the taxpayer just canA?ai??i??ai???t afford.
Gerald Fox, an American transit expert commenting on the Evergreen Line observed that; A?ai??i??Ai??……Vancouver will need to adopt lower-cost LRT in its lesser corridors, or else limit the extent of its rail system. And that seems to make some TransLink people very nervous.A?ai??i??A?
For the cost of the 11 km $1.4 billion Evergreen SkyTrain mini-metro, we could build 138 km of TramTrain From Vancouver, past Chilliwack to Rosedale and have enough money left over to build a 50 km Vancouver to Maple Ridge TramTrain service.
Who builds with SkyTrain today? No one. Yet more than 20 cities, including Paris, France, are building and/or extending TramTrain lines.
In an age of global warming and peak oil, is it not best to get the biggest transit bang for your transit buck, rather than continuing to build with the extremely expensive and now obsolete proprietary SkyTrain light-metro system?
Malcolm Johnston, Rail for the Valley/Light Rail Committee
Ai??Ai?? Copyright (c) Langley Advance
via Light rail: SkyTrain most costly route.
BCLocalNews.com – Fraser Valley Transit Study shows dated thinking about rail
Fraser Valley Transit Study shows dated thinking about rail
Published: December 29, 2010 2:00 PM
Updated: December 29, 2010 2:21 PM
The long awaited $400,000 Fraser Valley Transit StudyAi??Ai??has stale-dated by the September release of the independent Rail for The Valley/Leewood Interurban Report.
The RftV/Leewood gives actual costs forAi??Ai??a 21st centuryAi??Ai??Fraser Valley interurban and the building of an affordable TramTrain in three phases, costing less than $1 billion in total.
The RftV/Leewood Report showed that a phase oneAi??Ai??Scott Road Station to Chilliwack diesel LRT service could be had for under $500 million or just over $5 million per km, much cheaper than new highway construction.
Using established railAi??Ai??operations with similar characteristics, theAi??Ai??phase one diesel LRTAi??Ai??could be operated for under $10 million per annum.
The provincial study, with no foundationAi??Ai??of an actual rail line, was said to cost over $70 million per year to operate.
Really? Why is the cost of operating a rail service so high? Could it be that the author of the report wanted to please his paymasters, the provincial government in order to secure future work?
If the author of the study has got it so wrong with the annual operation costs (were they a mere guess?) for a rail service, then what else has he got wrong with the study?
The timing of the release of the study is key. Releasing the study a little over one week before Christmas, means the the provincial government wants to hide public comment of this anti-interurban report, while giving a foundation for Liberal premier wannabees to quote from, rejecting the Fraser Valley Interurban project.
It is simple old school politics.
Dated studies, combined with dated thinking and anti-LRT/interurban politicians equals transit paralysis in the Fraser Valley, for decades to come.
Malcolm Johnston
Rail For The Valley/Light Rail Committee
via BCLocalNews.com – Fraser Valley Transit Study shows dated thinking about rail.
Rail tracks should be built instead of roads
Rail tracks should be built instead of roads
BY HEIDI GRECO, VANCOUVER SUN DECEMBER 29, 2010
Re: Urgent upgrade pushed for Fraser Valley transit to deal with huge population growth, Dec. 21
It was good to see front-page coverage on the transit overhaul needed for the Fraser Valley. For the most part, I can only agree.
But what I don’t understand is why, in the course of twinning the Port Mann Bridge, the additional lanes are being paved for vehicles rather than being used to construct rail of some sort. Such a link, even if it only went as far east as 200th Street, would be a good beginning. For commuters travelling west, once over the Port Mann, it doesn’t seem it would be all that hard to connect with the Expo Line and even with the proposed new Evergreen Line.
The median between the lanes of Highway One is currently torn up — from the bridge nearly out to 200th. Why not take this opportunity to lay tracks rather than road?
Considering rising fuel costs, air quality, carbon emissions and traffic congestion, it seems to make sense to be looking for ways to get cars off the road, not to encourage more single-passenger trips into the city.
And really, has anyone figured out yet where all the cars streaming over those extra lanes of the Port Mann configuration will go, especially when they arrive at Grandview Highway?
Heidi Greco
South Surrey
Ai??Ai?? Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
via Rail tracks should be built instead of roads.
The cost of improved transit
The cost of improved transit
THE TIMES DECEMBER 24, 2010
Editor, the Times:
“Now we know what we should focus on and what it will cost. It’s a given we have to improve the system,” as quoted from your article (Dec. 21 Times).
This study and many like it seem to be focused on the wrong aspects of travel in the Fraser Valley area. What is the purpose of transit systems? Isn’t it to move people from one location to another in a timely and comfortable manner? What about those people at the other end of the line who want to travel to the valley for Tradex, Heat games, shopping, air flights and other attractions.
Did you know that if I miss the WCE train I could take a bus from Mission to Vancouver? The train would get me downtown in one hour and 18 minutes and the bus would take two hours and 43 minutes.
How much time would it take a bus to travel to the Kingsway or future Evergreen line to make connections? Is time part of the study? Trains keep a timely schedule, buses cannot. Has council ridden one of our buses when it is cold and miserable outside and inside as well. No comfort there.
Would I vote for a bus service? Hardly. Why is council concerned about the cost of light rail. Did cost stop the building of the Abbotsford Entertainment and Sports Centre?
Tax increase you say? There are many ways to decrease costs if you study them.
How much would the city save by having automatic pedestrian cross lights? When the traffic light turns green the walk light comes on also. Get rid of the crosswalk buttons and eliminate the need to repair them when damaged.
Wouldn’t that make it a bit safer for the pedestrian?
John Eby,
Abbotsford
Ai??Ai?? Copyright (c) Abbotsford Times
via The cost of improved transit.
Study goes off the rails
Study goes off the rails
BY PAUL J. HENDERSON, THE TIMES DECEMBER 21, 2010
Proponents of the inter-urban rail line from Chilliwack to Surrey are critical of some of the assumptions underlying the provincial government’s Fraser Valley Transit Study (FVTS) released last week.
Based on economic and demographic projections, the long-awaited report concludes that light rail on the old inter-urban line would cost “significantly more than the other transit options available.”
But Dr. John Buker of the Rail for the Valley group said those doing the calculations aren’t telling the whole story.
The FVTS found that the interurban line from Chilliwack to Surrey would have annual costs in 2031 from approximately $110 million to $175 million for operating, vehicle and capital.
“However, the projected 2031 ridership does not grow to the same degree, resulting in a higher system cost of $100 to $110 per ride,” the report said.
“By digging a little under the surface, one discovers shockingly that the report is actually assuming a regional bus service would attract more than triple the number of passengers of an equivalent light rail service,” Buker said in a press release issued Monday. “That’s more than a little hard to believe given that there are few cases where buses attract equal, let alone greater, ridership.”
The report finds that rapid bus service between Chilliwack and Abbotsford would be the more economical alternative, but Buker said the ridership predictions that allow for this conclusion are doubtful.
“There are some nice ideas presented of enhanced local bus service which deserve a closer look, but the hard truth is it is extremely doubtful that ridership will be high enough to sustain these levels of services without a light rail backbone,” Buker said.
“If the Fraser Valley can support hourly, or even half-hourly, regional bus service, it can also support light rail, whose operating costs over the lifetime of the vehicles tend to actually be lower, when all costs are taken into account.”
For Mayor Sharon Gaetz, she is just happy the FVTS has finally been released by the province so the city can begin to work on its “vision.”
“The main thing is it reinforces the need for new funding sources,” she told the Times. “The way we
are doing things is unsustainable.”
Currently, 47 per cent of transit funding comes from the province, 30 per cent comes from fares and the rest from local property taxes.
Given the fact that 87 per cent of Chilliwack transit rides stay in Chilliwack, Gaetz said the focus needs to be on improving local transit.
“Hourly service is not going to cut it,” she said.
One request Gaetz has heard lately is to add bus service to the new Eagle Landing retail development, something that will require new money.
Rail For the Valley said the organization will present a detailed reaction to the FVTS in the New Year.
Ai??Ai?? Copyright (c) Chilliwack Times
Bus vs trains
Bus vs trains
Transit study favours buses over rail
BY ROCHELLE BAKER, THE TIMES DECEMBER 21, 2010
A much anticipated study about the future of transit in the Fraser Valley has been released, and it favours expanding bus routes over re-establishing the Interurban rail service.
“We’ve been waiting for it for a while and are thrilled it’s out,” said Abbotsford Counc. Patricia Ross and chair of the Fraser Valley Regional District.
“Now we know what we should focus on and what it will cost. It’s a given we have to improve the system, and this is a guide to help us do that.”
The Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley, which covers the FVRD communities of Abbotsford, Mission, Chilliwack, Kent, Harrison Hot Springs, and Hope, was initiated by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure in November 2008.
It set out to determine the best options for transit services within the region and to link up with Metro Vancouver.
One of the more interesting facts to come out of the study was that 80 per cent of all trips in the Fraser Valley end in the region itself, said Ross.
“It clearly shows us we have to improve the system within the Fraser Valley Regional District significantly,” she said.
“We obviously need linkages with communities within the Fraser Valley itself.”
The estimated cost of improving the system is a “staggering,” said Ross.
That new system highlights the development of new regional and inter-regional bus routes over the next 20 year, and would see yearly costs go from approximately $10 million up to $80 million.
The strategy includes increased service at 10-minute intervals during peak periods along Highway 11 between Abbotsford and Mission.
An hourly service between Abbotsford and Chilliwack as well as service from Abbotsford along Highway 1 to Langley and Surrey, and the available RapidBus connections to the SkyTrain and Vancouver.
Mission would also be connected along Highway 7 to Maple Ridge, and its connections to the proposed Evergreen SkyTrain line.
The system would see an increase from approximately 40 buses to more than 75 buses over the next two decades.
Light rail was evaluated but was determined to be too expensive.
“The 2031 annual operating and debt service cost for a commuter rail service along the inter-urban line between Abbotsford and Surrey of approximately $68.9 million would almost equal that of the entire investment required to achieve the [transit] Vision,” stated the report.
John Vissers, spokesman with Rail for the Valley, a group advocating the establishment of light rail in the region, said the provincial numbers are inflated.
“Sure, for a deluxe WestCoast Express style commuter train, if you include all capital costs up front and serve free caviar in the dining car,” said Vissers. “We calculate annual operating costs for a full service light rail tram/train system on the Inter-urban track at less than $3 million.”
Residents in Abbotsford and Chilliwack are among the nations lowest per capita users of public transportation, he said, and buses, while a good thing, primarily attract “captured” riders.
“Trams and Trains attract new riders who choose to leave their cars at home or at a station . . . and add a whole new rider base,” he said.
The provincial study is reactive planning that in fact promotes urban sprawl while light rail encourages sustainable growth along the corridor, he added.
Ross noted all the stakeholders in the process will now set about looking at the information and looking to the community for input before proceeding.
“We [all] still have to discuss it. We’ll have to sit down and evaluate both [the transit strategy and light rail.]”
Ai??Ai?? Copyright (c) Abbotsford Times
via Bus vs trains.
Buses may patch Fraser Valley transit gap, but will they fix it? – Cayo
Buses may patch Fraser Valley transit gap, but will they fix it?
By DON CAYO 21 DEC 2010
Filed under: transit, TransLink
More buses A?ai??i??ai??? a lot more A?ai??i??ai??? are the best bet for commuters in the fast-growing Fraser Valley, according to to a joint report from the Fraser Valley Regional District, TransLink, the Ministry of Transportation, and BC Transit
Sorry, but colour me skeptical.
A story by my Vancouver Sun colleague Tiffany Crawford (accessible here) underlines a few numbers of interest.
A?ai??i??ai??? The population of the region is expected to grow 70 per cent over the next 25 years.
A?ai??i??ai??? Just one per cent of the trips in the region today are undertaken are by transit.
A?ai??i??ai??? In Vancouver, with its much better bus network as well as SkyTrain and SeaBus, 11 per cent of trips are by transit.
A?ai??i??ai??? The increase in bus service hours envisaged by the report is roughly five-fold.
So do the math. Even if a five-fold increase in bus service is able to yield an 11-fold increase in the number of trips taken by transit, I canA?ai??i??ai???t see how this could compensate for the projected population growth. Or the inevitable increase in traffic. Because if the number of trips grows to 1.7 times greater than todayA?ai??i??ai???s volume, this will still create 1.5 times more non-transit traffic than weA?ai??i??ai???re seeing today.
Crawford notes that the report didnA?ai??i??ai???t rule out an eventual expansion of the rail network, and even suggested preserving rail corridors.
And she quotes it as saying, “Although an inter-regional railway service between the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver may be part of a long-term future, a strong foundation of local, regional and inter-regional services … is an essential starting point.”
Given the amount of both money and lead time involved in providing rail, this may well be true. But it seems to me the time to start crafting a long-term solution A?ai??i??ai??? what I would call an essential ending point A?ai??i??ai??? is now, and this report merely postpones a serious attempt to grapple with it.
Follow me on Twitter @DonCayo
via Buses may patch Fraser Valley transit gap, but will they fix it? – Cayo.
Study: not enough demand for rail service to Fraser Valley – News1130
Study: not enough demand for rail service to Fraser Valley
The province will use this information to plan transit projects to the Fraser Valley over the next 25 years
Jesse Johnston Dec 17, 2010 13:24:22 PM
VANCOUVER (NEWS1130) – The province says new research shows there isn’t enough demand for commuter rail service between Greater Vancouver and the Fraser Valley in the short term, but at least some people in the Valley disagree.
The study says people in the Valley make about 800,000 trips every day, one per cent of them are by transit. It also says 80 per cent of people stay close to home when they travel, so at best, rail service is a long term possibility. That’s why the province is suggesting coach bus service instead of rail as the best way to connect the Valley and Metro Vancouver, at least for now.
But John Vissers with the group Rail for the Valley says more people would take transit if it was an option. “The reason numbers are low is because there’s no service. To use low ridership numbers as an argument against a system that doesn’t exist doesn’t make a lot of sense.”
Vissers also says rail service would cost much less than the $70 million a year that the study suggests.
via Study: not enough demand for rail service to Fraser Valley – News1130.
Recent Comments