Surrey mayor calls for transit expansion to be low profile to make sense – From the Vancouver Province

In a few weeks, Rail for the Valley will also join the fray with its plans, which will bolster Mayor Watts demands for light rail.

Ai??Ai??

Surrey mayor calls for transit expansion to be low profile to make sense

By Frank Luba, The Province

The LR55 Rail System – Cheap track for trams!

This item first appeared in August 20,2009, but I think it is so important to reprint the article in light of todays interest in streetcars and light rail in Vancouver and Surrey. The LR55 rail, not only provides a cheaper solution to tram track construction, it makes a quick job of construction, making life a lot easier for those living next to the new tramline. A 20 km. BCIT to UBC tramline could be laid in as many as 125 days (two track gangs) or a little more than 4 months!

————————————————————————-

One of the major expenses of conventional tram projects is the track. This is laid on a concrete raft set under the road. In order to accomodate these rafts the underground services, like gas and water, have been diverted out of the way of the tracks. This process took a considerable amount of time and money in schemes like Manchester and Sheffield. In addition it caused disruption to inhabitants while taking place.

To avoid or reduce these problems NET proposes to use the revolutionary LR55 rail system. This is laid in the road structure itself so that there is little or no disturbance to underground services. Instead a slot is cut in the road and the track laid in. The track exploits the strength of existing highway pavements by transmitting the static and dynamic loads from the upper surface, rather than the foot of the rail as in conventional track. This results in the load on the railhead being distributed onto the sub-base of the highway, being of a sufficiently low value not to require a separate foundation. Up to 100m can be laid in a night.

http://www.lr55-rail-road-system.co.uk/testing1.htm

The track system consists of three main components:-

LR55 RailThe rail carries the weight of the tram, steers the tram and is the return conductor for the electric power supply. The LR55 rail has a wide lip compared to conventional tram rail. This is to allow the road structure to carry the weight of the tram. The rail top surface and the trough unit are treated to provide a compatible skid resistance to the adjacent highway surface.Elastomeric GroutThis is a rubber like compound that prevents vibrations from the tram being transfered to the road and surroundings. Old fashioned trams used to rumble along the street as the tracks did not have this feature. Modern trams are very quiet because of features like this grout. It also insulates the electricity returning to the sub station, so that it does not travel through other cables buried in the road.Precast Trough UnitThis forms the base for the rail and connects it to the road structure. It is fitted into a slot cut into the road.

Track installation

Where there is a road base thicker than 225mm the Trough Unit is bedded into the base.

Where the road base is less than 225mm the Trough Unit is bedded onto the sub-base.

The track can also be laid in concrete pavements, older road construction and block paving. These are outlined in the technical specification for the track.

Should it be necessary to work on services crossing the tramway, the track is self-supporting over a distance of one metre. This allows access trenches to be dug without affecting the tram service. Safe methods of working have been developed to ensure the safety of tramway passengers and staff, as well as utility workers. These methods are already established in existing tram schemes.

There are further details of LR55 track at the LR55 web site.

For more information on LR55 for our more technical visitors:

Metro Vancouver pushes rapid transit for Surrey, not UBC – Why Not Build Both?

It seems that thatAi??Ai??METRO Vancouver’sAi??Ai??chief honcho wants to extend ‘rapid transit’ (read SkyTrain) in Surrey and not on Broadway. But don’t hold your breathe for any action anytime soon. The Tri-Cities have been waiting for their ‘rapid transit’ (read SkyTrain) for over two decades and were pipped at the post by Premier Campbell (and former Vancouver mayor) who used his political will to build the extremely expensive and prestigious Canada Line subway.

The reason that Mr. Carline is mentioning rapid transit to Surrey probably has more to do with the ever growing demand by South FraserAi??Ai??taxpayers to secede from TransLink and if that happens, opens the door to secede from Metro Vancouver altogether. If Metro VancouverAi??Ai??does extend SkyTrain in Surrey, then any public revolt against ponderous and boated bureaucracy on Kingsway (and soon New Westminster) will be near impossible.

The sad fact is, the region can’t afford any moreAi??Ai??SkyTrain lines, which with construction costs of over $100 million/km. has all but castrated TransLink’s ability to provide a useful public transit service!

There is an alternative to the dated SkyTrain metro system and that is light rail transit.

TransLink has always treated light rail and the light rail family as a poorman’s SkyTrain and to this day remain largely ignorant of the world’s most popular ‘rail‘ transit mode. TransLink’s own documents well illustrate their anti-LRT bias.

We do know that we can build TramTrain for under $10 million/km. and simple LRT/tram for under $20 million/km. andAi??Ai??if we deny transit Ai??Ai??bureaucrats from over designing and over building ‘rail‘ transit in the region could have just an efficient light rail transit network at a fraction of the cost of SkyTrain/metroAi??Ai??!

The cost of a usable SkyTrain extension in Surrey would be at leastAi??Ai??$1.5 billion to $2 billion, with no further extensions for many decades, yet for $1.5 billion we could build a Vancouver to Chilliwack TramTrain and a BCIT to UBC/Stanley Park LRT/tram line.

This has always been the choice of transit bureaucrats, cheaper and longer LRT/tram lines or more expensive, shorter metro lines. To date, TransLink bureaucrats have always taken the most expensive route.

In a few short weeks, Rail for the Valley may provide the answer to our expensive ‘rail‘ transit planning with a detailed account how to build affordable ‘rail‘ transit, the problem will be, as it always had been: “Will TransLink, Metro Vancouver, and the Provincial government listen?”

Metro Vancouver pushes rapid transit for Surrey, not UBC

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Metro+Vancouver+pushes+rapid+transit+Surrey/3480197/story.html#ixzz0yZT2Vvgz

By KELLY SINOSKI, Vancouver Sun

VANCOUVER — Metro Vancouver’s chief bureaucrat wants TransLink to bump a proposed rapid transit line to the University of B.C. to the bottom of its priority list and instead boost services in the fast-growing area south of the Fraser River.

Metro chief administrative officer Johnny Carline said Friday that Surrey will bear the brunt of the region’s growth in the next 30 years, and more transit is needed to help shape that city’s development.

The recommendation, included in Metro’s new 2040 Shape our Future draft regional growth strategy, suggests TransLink give priority to connecting Surrey city centre to other growth neighbourhoods following completion of the long-awaited Evergreen Line, which will link Port Moody, Coquitlam and Burnaby.

Only after Surrey gets improved transit should TransLink consider extending rapid transit along the Broadway corridor, the draft strategy says.

TransLink is preparing technical reports for both projects: a UBC rapid transit line and extending SkyTrain in Surrey to the Guildford area.

“We don’t think we’ll be able to afford full-scale investments in the Evergreen Line, south of the Fraser and UBC all in the life of this plan,” Carline told members of Metro’s regional planning committee Friday.

“We can’t afford to have investments going out to UBC that take away from investment in the major growth areas.”

Metro Vancouver is expected to be home to 3.4 million people by 2040 – a million more than now – with a third of the new residents expected to live in Surrey and White Rock, raising that area’s population to roughly the same as Vancouver’s.

Under the regional growth strategy, Metro is proposing to develop more “urban centres” with office, retail, community, culture and higher density housing to keep people living and working closer to home or along transit corridors.

Metro has been struggling for years to concentrate development in these centres, and to curb sprawl from extending into rural areas.

Surrey Coun. Judy Villeneuve said her city is in desperate need of more transit, especially as it’s set to become the second largest metropolitan region in the province. The city is developing its town centres to become more transit-dependent, she said, while also looking at alternatives such as light rail, heritage rail and more community buses.

Surrey city council will visit Portland in October to consider that city’s transportation system, Villeneuve said, and will lobby the federal government for more infrastructure funding.

“Our transit network is very poor,” she said, adding that Vancouver already has a better transit system than Surrey. “Vancouver is a place where you don’t need a car. Surrey is a place where you have to have a car.

“[Vancouver] may have to look at waiting [for transit] just like we have.”

Carline said he has no problem with TransLink investigating rapid transit lines for the Broadway-UBC corridor, but it wouldn’t be prudent to spend its limited pot of money in Vancouver when there is a bigger need in Surrey and other areas south of the Fraser.

“That’s where the region is changing the most and that’s where we need transit,” he said, adding: “It shouldn’t be put off. … If we put rapid transit in there, it would put a big impact on the development community on where it wants to go.”

Carline said it’s more difficult to retrofit a community for high-density transit hubs after it has been developed, particularly if a city has decided to turn swaths of cheap land into low-density, sprawling office parks.

The draft regional growth report – the fifth to be released since the 1960s – has been in the works since 2002. Besides developing more urban centres, it calls for protecting industrial land for manufacturing and processing to create jobs, as well as land for rural and conservation uses.

Carline said the report has been revised to make it more flexible for municipalities to make decisions around their urban centres and other neighbourhoods without having to seek approval from the regional district.

Metro Vancouver will receive comments on the draft strategy until Oct. 15 before going to a public hearing, likely in November. The plan must be adopted by all of Metro Vancouver’s 22 member municipalities, the Tsawwassen First Nation and TransLink.

Why is public transit more expensive than it used to be?

The following article from the American Conservative sums up Rail for the Valley’s long standing worries about the ever escalating cost to build light rail/streetcar.

It is time to get back to basics and build LRT/streetcar cheaply or it will price itself right out of the market! One start, of course, would be to stop planning for LRT on viaduct or in subway as this makes LRT a light metro!

http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2009/05/20/is-lrt-becoming-the-new-light-metro/

http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2010/08/26/prefab-tram-track-fast-construction-friends-of-light-railstreetcar-take-note/

Why is public transit more expensive than it used to be?

by Glen Bottoms

Rail transitA?ai??i??ai???s great enemy isnA?ai??i??ai???t public support or political will but its enormous price tag.

The expense of heavy-rail subway systems has limited recent growth to extensions of existing lines. The last heavy-rail construction completed in the U.S. was a 3.2 mile extension of Washington MetroA?ai??i??ai???s blue line to Largo Town Center, completed in 2004 at a cost of $695 million ($217 million/mile). Phase I of the MetroA?ai??i??ai???s 11.6 mile extension to Dulles Airport is estimated at a staggering $2.65 billion ($242.1 million/mile). The bite for New York City subway extensions is in another reality.

At first, Light Rail seemed to offer a solution, but its cost is steadily rising. The initial segment of SeattleA?ai??i??ai???s 15.6 mile Central Link Light Rail system, which opened in 2009, cost $2.4 billion ($154 million/mile). Portland, OregonA?ai??i??ai???s proposed 7.3 mile MAX Light Rail extension to Milwaukie is estimated at $1.4 billion ($191.8 million/mile).

Now that streetcars have caught on in many U.S. citiesA?ai??i??ai???over 60 are currently planning streetcar projectsA?ai??i??ai???many fear that the cost-escalation virus could infect this mode as well. The price tag on TucsonA?ai??i??ai???s streetcar project, now under construction, has grown by 20 percent. Costs for proposed streetcar projects across the country range from a reasonable $10 million to an eye-popping $60 million per mile.

What accounts for this dramatic escalation? Three key factors: 1) overdesign, 2) lack of technical expertise at the overseeing transit agency, and 3) external factors like political interference and rising material costs.

Consultants retained to design these systems regularly use plans that they already possess without regard to applicability or functionality, selecting higher-speed overhead wire in rail yards and city streets or specifying certain types of rail without regard for cheaper alternatives. Excessive tunneling is also a critical cost driver. Tucking Light Rail in subways to avoid disturbing traffic not only raises costs, it ignores the fact that dedicating lanes to cost-effective transit increases use. The technical knowledge to recognize these inappropriate designs is a critical element of cost control.

Supervisors often cite rising prices of construction components worldwide as the reason for transit projectsA?ai??i??ai??? blown budgets. But this is not a major part of the story. Consider the case of Norfolk, VirginiaA?ai??i??ai???s 7.4 mile Light Rail project, which suffered dramatic overruns as it was being built. One report indicated that 50 percent of the increase could be attributed to A?ai??i??Ai??softA?ai??i??A? costs caused by poor management decisions, like the arrival of vehicles in a storage yard that hadnA?ai??i??ai???t been built yet.

AmericaA?ai??i??ai???s rail infrastructure wonA?ai??i??ai???t be resurrected overnight. But history shows that we can build rail economically and on time. After all, we have been constructing systems of all sizes and complexities in this country for well over a hundred years. Recalling those past experiences today will give us the tools we need to build the trains of tomorrow.

Glen Bottoms is a former longtime Federal Transit Administration employee. He now serves as executive director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation.

http://www.amconmag.com/blog/keep-america-moving/the-real-costs/

Plans for a New, Six Lane Pattullo Bridge Revealed – TransLink’s Next Fiasco!

Ai??Ai??There is no question that the decrepit PutulloAi??Ai??is in dire need of replacement.Ai??Ai??Like the the Lions Gate Bridge, the Pattullo Bridge was a two lane bridge when it opened in the 1930’s and is ill suited for today’s traffic demands.Ai??Ai??The Pattullo Bridge has not aged well and last years fire on the steal and concrete bridge showed how decrepit the bridge has become.

Ai??Ai??What TransLink forgot, as well as METRO Vancouver bureaucrats have seem to have forgotten as well, that next to the fragile Pattullo Bridge, is an even more fragile and decrepit, single trackedAi??Ai??Fraser River Rail swingAi??Ai??bridge, which case for replacement is even greater that the Pattullo’s! The GVRD in the 70’s recognized that both bridges needed replacing and proposed a twin track, six lane andAi??Ai??two LRT line bridge for the location. Provincial politics took over and the Minister of Transportation of the day did not want anyone playing trains on anyAi??Ai??his bridges, thus the proposal was quietly ignored.

Now with increasing passenger rail service to Seattle and beyond, a possibility of a South Fraser TramTrain, and a general increase in rail traffic over the spindly Fraser River Rail Bridge, one would hope that TransLink would plan for a new road/rail bridge across the Fraser River. It is not to be, as TransLink has seem to quicklyAi??Ai??loose interest in ‘rail‘ transit once it crosses the Fraser river.

Rail for the Valley believes a new combined road/rail bridge would be a far better project, addressing the needs for both road and rail traffic.

Plans for a New, Six Lane Pattullo Bridge Revealed

By Damian Inwood, The Province

Surrey and New Westminster residents will soon get a look at TransLinkA?ai??i??ai???s plans for a new, six-lane Pattullo Bridge, slated to cost between $800 million and $1 billion.

And the A?ai??i??Ai??preferred optionA?ai??i??A? for the new bridge sees access moving from Royal Avenue to Front Street on the New West side.

A?ai??i??Ai??We have a couple of open houses coming up on Sept. 14 and Sept. 21,A?ai??i??A? said TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie Wednesday. A?ai??i??Ai??What we will have are a couple of options to look at but one of them will be TransLinkA?ai??i??ai???s preferred option. It will show how the bridge will line up, what the road accesses will be and so on.A?ai??i??A?

Hardie said the preferred option is about 100 metres upstream from the current bridge.

The access on the Surrey side would be A?ai??i??Ai??not much of an issue,A?ai??i??A? he said, although it would require changes to Scott Road and 128th Street.

A?ai??i??Ai??In New Westminster right now we connect to the bridge by McBride Boulevard, Columbia Street and Royal Avenue,A?ai??i??A? he said. A?ai??i??Ai??The preferred option that we want to get reaction from the public to changes that a little bit. We would connect via McBride, East Columbia and Front Street but not by Royal Avenue.A?ai??i??A?

He said after hearing from the public at the open houses, TransLink will come up with a plan for approval by Surrey and New Westminster councils and municipal staff.

Hardie said that while work done on the Pattullo, ending in early 2009, A?ai??i??Ai??is good for another 10 years,A?ai??i??A? TransLink wants the new bridge open earlier than 2020.

A?ai??i??Ai??We want to have it in place well before that so, I would say, 2015 to 2016 would be a good target for us to have a new one ready to go,A?ai??i??A? he said.

Hardie said thereA?ai??i??ai???s been no decision on whether or not the bridge will be tolled.

A?ai??i??Ai??If we can find some other way to pay for it that doesnA?ai??i??ai???t involve tolls, weA?ai??i??ai???ll take that route. On the other hand if it will take tolls to build it, we definitely need to build it. So tolls will be considered but no decision has been made.A?ai??i??A?

The open houses are Sept. 14, from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at Chuck Baillie Community Centre at 13458-107A Avenue, Surrey, and Sept 21, from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the Justice Institute at 715 McBride Boulevard, New Westminster.

Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/Plans+lane+Pattullo+Bridge+unveiled/3470913/story.html#ixzz0yNX31eP5

STREETCARS: THE MISSING LINK? – September 29, 2010

For Immediate Release A?ai??i??ai??? Please circulate!

Ai??Ai??Lawrence Frank, PhD, CIP, ASLA

Bombardier Chair in Sustainable Transportation University of British Columbia

604-822-5387 ph / 604-822-1628 fx

Ai??Ai??Bombardier Active Transportation Lab

http://www.act-trans.ubc.ca/Ai??Ai??

Ai??Ai??——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

UBC School of Environmental Health and the UBC School of Community and Regional Planning are pleased to inform you of our upcoming symposium:

Ai??Ai??STREETCARS: THE MISSING LINK?

September 29, 2010Ai??Ai??(Wednesday)

Ai??Ai??Program:Ai??Ai?? 8:30 am A?ai??i??ai??? 5:15 pm

Reception: 5:30 pm A?ai??i??ai??? 6:30 pm

Ai??Ai??Renaissance Vancouver Harbourside Hotel, Vancouver BC.

Ai??Ai??OVERVIEW:

Ai??Ai??The Olympic Line – VancouverA?ai??i??ai???s 2010 Streetcar demonstration project held during the Vancouver Winter Olympic Games saw urban streetcars return to Vancouver for the first time in almost half a century. The project proved extremely popular and has ignited the idea of reinvesting in streetcars as part of a broader sustainable transportation system for the City of Vancouver and the entire Metro Vancouver region.

Ai??Ai??KEY TOPICS:

Ai??Ai??Streetcars: The Missing Link?Ai??Ai??brings together decisions makers, academics, and community leaders to explore, discuss and debate the potential role of streetcars as a critical link within the transportation system and the idea of bring streetcars back to Vancouver. Key topics of this symposium include:

• Historical role of streetcars in Vancouver
• Implementation costs
• Streetcar impacts on urban form and mobility
• Urban design and modal integration – lessons learned in other regions
• New data and information from the Olympic Line demonstration project.

Ai??Ai??DETAILED AGENDAAi??Ai?? is available here:Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??http://www.soeh.ubc.ca/Continuing_Education/Streetcar.htm.Ai??Ai??

Ai??Ai??REGISTER AT:Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??https://www.eplyevents.com/streetcar_UBC.Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??Please register early as space is limited.

Ai??Ai??A hosted reception will follow the program at the revolving Vistas 360 restaurant/lounge on the 20th floor of the Renaissance Vancouver Hotel Harbourside. Join delegates for complimentary refreshments, appetizers, and additional network opportunities while taking in a 360-degree panoramic view of the city and harbour. Information from UBC students in the Schools of Community and Regional Planning, Architecture and Landscape Architecture, and Environmental Health on streetcar systems and their impacts will be shared at the reception.

Ai??Ai??WHO SHOULD ATTEND:Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??decision makers, municipal staff, developers, community leaders, media, academics, organizational leaders.

Ai??Ai??This event is sponsored by the J. Armand Bombardier Chair in Sustainable Transportation at UBC.

Ai??Ai??Inquiries:

Lydia Ma

UBC School of Environmental Health

Phone: (604) 822-9599

Email:Ai??Ai??lydia.ma@ubc.ca

Web:Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai??http://www.soeh.ubc.ca/Continuing_Education

"Misguided" Busway Part 2

More news about Cambridge’s “Misguided” bus or BRT. Instead of being simple and cheap alternative to a ‘rail’ solution, the Cambridge BRT is ending up costing Ai??Ai??more than reinstating the rail line for DMU/EMU or tram service.

The real question needed to be answered will be: “For all the cost and delay, will the Cambridge guided (BRT) bus attract its projected customers or will it merely be regarded as a local transit curiosity and not attract the all important motorist from the car?”

Guided Busway to Open Next Spring

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Huntingdon-St-Ives-St-Neots/Guided-busway-to-open-next-spring.htm

Chris Elliott

The guided busway may finally be up and running by next spring, the News can reveal.

Sources close to the project have disclosed that at the current rate of progress, it could take about seven or eight months to finish the concrete track completely and get it ready for the first buses to roll.

That will mean an opening date either in March or April 2011 A?ai??i??ai??? making the busway more than TWO YEARS late.

As the News reported a few days ago, Cambridgeshire county councillors are due to examine a progress report on the troubled scheme at a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, September 7.

The report says that contractor BAM Nuttall has still not fixed six defects in the northern section of the busway, which runs between St Ives and Cambridge.

However, the company is making “good progress” on completing the southern section at Trumpington, and is expected to be finished there by mid-December.

If BAM Nuttall does complete the southern section by mid-December, the council will give the contractor a month to rectify the faults on the northern section A?ai??i??ai??? and if that does not happen, the council will step in to do the job itself.

Together with subsequent checks and bus trials, the News understands that this could stretch out the work until March or April A?ai??i??ai??? although if conAi??Ai??struction of the southern section is completed more quickly, the timetable might be brought forward.

The defects identified by the council include raising the level of parts of the maintenance track alongside the busway, which has been flooded, and remedial work on the viaduct at St Ives, where rainwater has leaked through an unsealed joint.

A county council spokesman said the council could not confirm that the busway would open by the spring.

He said: “Whilst the contractor has said they will complete the route by mid-December, we are in their hands until the work has been completed.

Ai??Ai??

“We are very clear that the defects must be rectified and once the route is handed over we will know exactly what work the council will need to carry out and a more precise idea of how long that will take.

Ai??Ai??

“It is frustrating that BAM Nuttall have not finished the job as yet and although damages of over Ai??A?7 million have already been deducted from the contractor all we really want is the work to be completed so we can get the route open and passengers can start using it.”

Ai??Ai??

Mike Mason, South Cambridgeshire district councillor for Histon and Impington, criticised the delays.

Ai??Ai??

He said: “ItA?ai??i??ai???s a political disaster, and itA?ai??i??ai???s never going to make money. The council have completely failed and there is no credibility in any of their statements because theyA?ai??i??ai???ve made so many predictions that havenA?ai??i??ai???t happened.

“Any of the political parties on the council could have stopped this a long time ago, and all three political parties share equal blame, but the Cambridge taxpayer is going to pay the price.”

Ai??A?76m Leigh Guided Busway on hold over cost fears – From the Manchester Evening News

Postings in other blogs have been painting an all too rosy a picture of BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) and this post should level the playing field somewhat. Just as a note, the Cambridge “Misguided Busway” is built on a former railway formation which greatlyAi??Ai??reduced initial cost estimatesAi??Ai??and as the guided bus project now stands, it would have been cheaper to reinstate the railway instead! Imagine, a modern LRT line with lawned rights-of-ways, rather than this start concrete guide way needed for the BRT.

Ai??A?76m Leigh Guided Busway on hold over cost fears

Alan Salter – August 31, 2010Manchester Evening News

A controversial Ai??A?76m busway plan in Greater Manchester has been put on hold.

A review has been ordered into the Leigh Guided Busway project A?ai??i??ai??? which has been on the drawing board since 1996 A?ai??i??ai??? even though contracts for vital preparatory work worth Ai??A?1.3m have already been awarded.

The move comes after Richard Knowles A?ai??i??ai??? an Oldham councillor and Salford University professor of transport geography A?ai??i??ai??? was sent to Cambridge to see a similar scheme.

The Cambridge busway is infamous in the transport world for spiralling costs and delays. The bill for the 25-mile busway, between Huntingdon and Cambridge, has risen from Ai??A?54m to Ai??A?116m and could even reach Ai??A?160m by the time it opens.

Now, the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition which controls the Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority has voted to review the Leigh busway A?ai??i??ai??? despite Labour opposition.

The project A?ai??i??ai??? linking Wigan, Leigh, Salford and Manchester A?ai??i??ai??? would see a special lane built for buses on the East Lancs Road. Four miles of the route A?ai??i??ai??? between Leigh and Ellenbrook A?ai??i??ai??? would see specially-adapted buses using A?ai??i??E?guidedA?ai??i??ai??? concrete tracks along the path of an old railway line.

Keith Whitmore, vice-chairman of the authority, said: A?ai??i??Ai??We are talking about a review which will take weeks rather than months. It would look at the costings and the way it operates in the light of what has happened in Cambridge.

A?ai??i??Ai??I visited Utrecht where they rejected the building of a second busway and decided to build a tram line instead. There is also the question of how the Leigh busway would operate A?ai??i??ai??? who exactly will use it has never really been tackled.

A?ai??i??Ai??If the review shows that everything is fine, then it can go ahead. But there has never been unanimous support for it.A?ai??i??A?

Dubbed the A?ai??i??E?misguided buswayA?ai??i??ai??? by opponents, the project has been seen in some quarters as a sop to Wigan and Leigh A?ai??i??ai??? which are not included in plans to expand the Metrolink.

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/transport/public_transport/s/1315499_76m_leigh_guided_busway_on_hold_over_cost_fears#comments

For more on Cambridge’s ‘Misguided‘ busway:

http://www.noguidedbus.com/

Ai??

A letter from Oslo

This has been forwarded to Rail for the Valley from the Eurotrams e-group.

Now where have you heard similar arguments?

Read RoyA?ai??i??ai???s last two paragraphs, a certain resonance with the situation in the Fraser Valley & Metro Vancouver?

The infrastructure in Trondheim suffers from lack of interest from the city council. The tramway has been threatened with closure for the last half century.

After a kind of compromise back in 1984, when rolling stock was renewed and the network reduced to half the size, costs escalated – which was a cunningly calculated plan to prepare for a total closure, “reduced costs may give you twice as many buses”. But “may give” is not the same as “will give”. After the tramway closure in 1988 the level of bus services was cut back because people were no longer using public transport.

However, what the city council did not know was that there were no potential buyers to the 11 almost new 2.6 metre wide metre gauge trams. Luckily, an attempt to sell them to Cairo was not successful. Meanwhile, the bus substitution service along the still almost intact GrA?A?kallbanen suburban tram line was not working well, so a group of enthusiasts were granted permission to borrow some of the trams and work the line. This proved to be a success, and for some years the reopened tramway was run
without subsidies.

The tracks in the city centre had been torn up only a few days after closure in 1988, a phenomenon well known from cities run by people fearing public demand to reopen. For the past twenty years a plan to extend the line through the city centre to the railway station has been promoted – and stalled – and rejected, over and over again.

The city council has over the last years unwillingly been made to take over the responsibility for the surviving tramway line, and the service is now run by private contractor Veolia. However the city council will still have to pay for maintenance and rehabilitation of the now run down infrastructure. So the city council will once again collect all the arguments they can find to close the tramway again. But of course, many people are fighting the city council on this issue.

After the light rail success in Bergen a proposal to either expand the metre gauge tramway or to build a complete new light rail system was launched. The city council ordered a feasibility study, which concluded that a bus rapid transit system would be fully adequate……and so very much less expensive than light rail (allegedly 90% less). So you have heard that one before? Of course, idiots are equally spread all over the world, we’ve got them too.

Why is public transport on rails so much better? The answer is simple, because people want quality, not cheap buses. By 1960 people in Trondheim made an average of 249 rides by public transport annually, Bergen 266 rides and Oslo 223 rides. By the year 2000 public transport rides had fallen to a 100 rides per citizen in almost tram-less Trondheim, a 105 rides in tram-less Bergen, and risen to a 315 rides in tram and metro city Oslo. Bergen has just turned the trend.

Roy Budmiger, Oslo

World wide Transit and Light Rail News

Nanjing.

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/nanjingmetro/

Lagos.

http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/lagosrailmasstransit/

Ho Chi Minh

http://www.railway-technology.com/news/news94402.html

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/ceremony-launches-work-on-ho-chin-minh-city-metro-line-2.html

Phoenix

http://www.valleymetro.org/metro_light_rail/

Keep rail local, says pteg

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/dataview/News/News_Article.aspx?KeyValue=2262

Edinburgh

http://news.scotsman.com/news/Tram-shifts-for-Pope.6498683.jp

http://news.scotsman.com/transport-news/Platform-Richard-Jeffrey-defends-the.6497807.jp