Seattle’s Light Rail Update – the SkyTrain Lobby Infiltrates Down South
Ai??
The following story from the Seattle Transit Blog clearly illustrates the SkyTrain/metro types still have not read a book on the subject, instead believing that “speed’ and ‘grade separation’ for a transit system are a necessity. What is striking is the anti-LRT attitude of the metro supporting people who post. Like Vancouver, Seattle’s transit authority have done a poor job in educating the public on light rail and in some instances, have done an even poorer job educating themselves!
The Push for East Link on the Westside of 112th Ave
From the Seattle Transit Blog
Last Friday, I explained a potential dilemma between advocates of a 112th Ave west-side alignment for East Link (Option 2), and those of a retained cut on the east-side (Option 4). Ai??Ai??Some construed my post to mean a Surrey Downs vs. Bellevue Club showdown, which I did not intend to be the case. Ai??Ai??On Monday, I spoke with Betina Finley, an early B3 supporter who ran an unsuccessful city council campaign last year, who clarified some of the rationale behind the Bellevue ClubA?ai??i??ai???s letter and subsequent petition.Though the Club has supported B7 in the past, I was told that Bill Thurston, club president, has recognized the wisdom in moving forward on B2M. Ai??Ai??Unlike ThurstonA?ai??i??ai???s rational disposition, Surrey Downs still wants any and every train as far away from them as possible. Ai??Ai??While they are more partial to the east-side retained cut, the prevailing sentiment has still largely been A?ai??i??Ai??B7 or bustA?ai??i??A? as evident by a puzzling new pro-B7 campaign. Ai??Ai??More below the jump.
In addition to the Bellevue ClubA?ai??i??ai???s petition and other support from east-side businesses, another group has signed on to a letter favoring a west-side alignment. Ai??Ai??Interestingly enough, it just so happens that this group is the bulk of the very 46 residences that would be displaced by the line, a collection of condo-owners that would rather move than have the trench in their neighborhood.Ai??Ai?? These homeowners are willing to be displaced and compensated at market-value by Sound Transit. Ai??Ai??This would explain why the west-side running option was so popular at the workshop survey.
Ai??
Unlike the Option 4 trench, the Option 2 west-side running alignment would only be compatible with a Main Street tunnel portal, as opposed to the cheaper and shorter 2nd Street tunnel. Ai??Ai??Entering the tunnel at 2nd Street would require the trains to move away from the 112th west-side alignment to either the east or center of the street, resulting in a kind of A?ai??i??Ai??SA?ai??i??A? curve. Ai??Ai??The turns would be due to avoiding the buildings that are built right up to the sidewalk north of the 112th condos. Ai??Ai??IA?ai??i??ai???ve provided a graphic to the right that explains why this is. Ai??Ai??Touring 112th viaAi??Ai??Google Streetview is also helpful.Despite using the more expensive Main Street tunnel, the entire Option 2 segment would actually incur a greater savings than Option 4, by avoiding the expenses associated with a costly trench. Ai??Ai??Supporters of the west-side alignment have also pointed to the benefits of a new greenbelt buffer that would replace the condos, essentially an extension of the Surrey Downs Park that exists there today. Ai??Ai??Ironically, the alignment would bring trains right up to Surrey Downs doorstep. Ai??Ai??But for a group that has resorted to wild nonsense and desperate attempts to bring back B7, many have grown weary at the obstructionism and just donA?ai??i??ai???t care anymore.
The real issue, of course, is getting the ST Board to recognize these interests. Ai??Ai??What would be most problematic for the Bellevue Club is a misjudged perception by ST that there is a A?ai??i??Ai??holier than thouA?ai??i??A? attitude carried by the rhetoric of preserving tennis courts, patios, and anything deemed A?ai??i??Ai??luxury.A?ai??i??A? Ai??Ai??While I donA?ai??i??ai???t agree that this is the right approach for the Club, emphasizing the commitment of the 112th condo owners to be bought out might make for a more convincing argument for the west-side alignment. Ai??Ai??At any rate, whatever information the Board has will largely shape the decision to pick a preferred option.
Tomorrow, the Sound Transit Capital Committee will meet at Union Station to address the 112th Avenue options and likely make a recommendation to the ST Board to inform a preferred option vote next week. Ai??Ai??Public testimony will be taken at both meetings. Ai??Ai??While there is likely to be a lot of B7 noise present, expect rational-minded residents and stakeholders to testify as well.
Ai??Ai??By the way, if you have interest in seeing Link serve the South Bellevue Park and Ride, there is an Open House tonight at Bellevue City Hall to address that segment of East Link. Ai??Ai??Unlike last weekA?ai??i??ai???s workshop, the meeting will not be interactive and will likely be an open table kind of format.
http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/07/14/the-push-for-east-link-on-the-westside-of-112th-ave/Ai??
More TramTrain news
More TramTrain news (though a wee bit old) from the UK.
Tram plan on track?
Surrey Comet
Friday 16th July 2004
By Simeon Brody
The prospect of electric trams gliding through the streets of Kingston may now be one step closer with the launch of a new lobby group.
South London Trams will campaign for a rapid transit line from the M25 to Kingston town centre, with links to Merton and Sutton.
Although a detailed route has not been decided, it is hoped the tram system, dubbed K-Smart, would start at a proposed park-and-ride site at the M25 in Leatherhead. It would then travel through Chessington and Tolworth, to Kingston.
A second line would travel from the town centre through New Malden and Worcester Park before arriving at Sutton.
The new group, led by the South London Partnership, a coalition of seven south-west London authorities, including Kingston, will also push for an extension of Croydon’s Tramlink to Sutton.
The group believes trams will encourage regeneration, boost the number of shoppers, and help with London’s Olympic bid.
David Cockle, managing director of Leewood Projects Limited, which helped bring trams to Croydon and worked on the Metrolink in Manchester, has been involved in developing the Kingston scheme.
He hopes some sort of system could be up and running by the Olympics in 2012, but admitted it was still a long shot.
The idea of a Kingston tram system was first aired in 2002 with an estimated cost of Ai??A?436million. Most of the money is likely to have to come from Transport for London (TfL).
A TfL spokesman did not appear to offer much encouragement to the scheme, saying Kingston had seen an improvement in its bus and train services.
He said: “TfL also supports Crossrail, which will be a major transport link in London and that will directly serve Kingston, but this is dependent on additional funding by the Government.
“We understand all parts of London have a need for additional transport, but we have limited funds and need to spend them where they will make the most improvement.”
South London Trams is chaired by Kingston Council’s chief executive Bruce McDonald, who spoke at the group’s recent launch.
He said: “Tramlink has brought transport, economic, regenerative and environmental benefits to the whole of the community in the south London area, increasing access, attracting new development and contributing to significant reductions in unemployment in areas that it serves.
“It is a focal point for the community, delivering real benefits. It is important that these benefits are spread to other areas of south London.”
http://www.surreycomet.co.uk/news/510258.tram_plan_on_track/
Budapest trams – an interesting web site!
A Siemens Combino tram in Budapest colours.
A link to Varga Akos aka HamsterA?ai??i??ai???s web site update of trams in Budapest
Ai??Ai??http://hampage.hu/trams/eletkep41/e_index.html
Greenville SC Southern Connector toller files for bankruptcy
From Toll Road News
Greenville SC Southern Connector toller files for bankruptcy
Connector 2000 Association developer and operator of the Greenville Southern Connector tollroad filed for bankruptcy today in US Bankuptcy Court in nearby Spartanburg, South Carolina. The filing done under chapter 9 of the US Bankruptcy code that handles broke government entities has been expected for some time.
The Association defaulted on debt service in January.
Moves in the state legislature to bail out the lenders went nowhere.
Revenues from the Southern Connector are not sufficient to service the debt, the Connector 2000 Association toiler says in its US Court filing because actual traffic and revenues are “substantially less than projected.”
“The debtor is insolvent” their lawyers say bluntly in the Ch 9 filing.Ai??Ai?? $500m was borrowed. Equity was zero of course because the 6320 form allows no equity.
Court papers note Wilbur Smith Associates projected 21k/day in the opening year but fewer than 7.5k showed up. (pro-rated for 10 months we put the number at 8.7k – editor)
Traffic has remained between a third and a half of that forecast by WSA when the association launched the tollroad project in this small South Carolina town in the late 1990s.
Revenue has been even lower and is now under a third of WSA $s.
No purpose
The highway on the southern/southwestern fringe of the city only made sense as an access and development road. The road is too indirect to provide any time savings for long-distance traffic which has stuck to the free interstates. To provide an alternate to I-85 it needed to cross the Saluda River in its western portion to provide a much straighter shot easterly for traffic from Atlanta. It was designed however as an access road to local commercial developments – most of which never happened.
A semi-belt route, 2×2 lanes and 16 miles, 26km long the Southern Connector tollroad gained interstate designation I-185 – totally unwarranted.
Tolls for 2-axle vehicles are $1.00 cash, 75c transponder and 50c at the ramp plazas which are unattended. Tractor trailers pay $3.00/$2.25 sat the mainline plazas and 50c at the ramps.
Trouble is for most trips through the Greenville area the main drag untolled I-85 remains much more direct and quicker. And even for east-west trips traversing the Greenville area to points southAi??Ai?? the old I-85/I-385 combination was quicker than transiting I-185. It swings too far out.
The pike failed also because it was conceived as catering to continued development of Greenville as a light industrial and warehousing hub on the Atlanta-Charlotte corridor in the mid-1990s, just when that particular bubble was bursting. Most of the land on either side of the Connector remains undeveloped.
Revenues are running at barely $5.5m/yr and toll transactions 12.5k/day. Tolls are taken at two mainline and two pairs of ramp toll plazas along the road so vehicles on the road are substantially less than the transaction number. The mainline plazas have two lanes of open road electronic tolling and two or three cash lanes alongside each direction – state of the art for the time.
The last annual financial report available is for 2008.
COMMENT:Ai??Ai??
The road opened Feb 27, 2001. First tolls were collected March 13, 2001.Ai??Ai?? It continues in operation using toll revenues to pay for operational expenses. Traffic at 12k or so vehicles/day would barely justify a 2-lane signalized road, let alone a 4-lane expressway.
No equity investment is involved since this was one of a bunch of not-for-profits that were all the rage as “innovative finance” in the 1990s. They got a special tax advantage and were called 6320s after the tax exemption clause that treated them as a kind of charity.
No-skin-in-the-game ventures encouraged by US tax code
All these unsound no-skin-in-the-game ventures have now crashed.
They were championed by a former federal highway administrator Bob Faris, a former VDOT commissioner Jim Atwell and other prominent officials who came to believe their own salesmanship. ARTBA the DC lobby group were cheerleaders.
And they were eagerly embraced by a road development crew – a motley crew of consultants, engineering firms, financiers and 
construction firms – who made their money in the development, design and construction and had no interest in the viability of the roads as ongoing businesses.
The Greenville Southern Connector was ill-conceived as an interstate standard expressway. Designers, engineers, lawyers, consultants and construction companies made their money in the development and construction and left the resulting mess to Connector 2000 Association a phony public-private entity without any real owners. So much for “innovative finance” as touted by ARTBA and other DC lobby groups.
Lehman Bros NY which collapsed in Sept 2008 was the principal promoter of Southern Connector bonds.
see http://www.southernconnector.com/
filings
http://www.southernconnector.com/Zfilings.htm
http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4808
Two Valley Rail Studies
The following are two studies that have been done concerning ‘rail’ transit in the Fraser Valley.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2527465/City-of-Surrey-Community-Rail-Proposal
http://www.scribd.com/doc/515139/DRL-Solutions-Interurban-Report
Rail For The Valley puts squeeze on city
I find it very strange that The municipality of Chilliwack is not involved with the South of Fraser Community Rail Task Force andAi??Ai??many local residentsAi??Ai??would like to know the reason why? Certainly having a direct rail connection to Vancouver would be a bonus for both local businesses,Ai??Ai??especially tourist oriented businessesAi??Ai??and for local residents, with reliable and timely communication with Abbotsford, Langley, Surrey and Vancouver.Ai??Ai??Being involved withAi??Ai??the South of Fraser Community Rail Task Force would dispel the many myths about ‘rail’ transit and TramTrain, especially the assertion of mayor Gaetz, that trains can’t travel faster than 10 kph on the former BCE route.
Not so, as Rail for The Valley envisions a 90 kph service along the line, not unlike the express interurban trains that once raced along the route for 50 years. The geometry of the track was designed for short wheelbase interurbans (not unlike modern TramTrain) not today’s heavy freight trains, with freight cars up to 25 metres in length on less than adequately maintained track.
It is time for Chilliwack politicians to get involved, as their indifference could be inferred that they don’t care for 21st century public transportation and could mean that the Valley interurban would only go as far as Langley or Abbotsford. Such short sightedness, especially in an age of high fuel prices, global warming,Ai??Ai??trafficAi??Ai??congestion, and pollution,Ai??Ai??theAi??Ai??City of Chilliwack Council could very ‘miss the train’.
Rail For The Valley puts squeeze on city
By Robert Freeman – Chilliwack Progress
Chilliwack is the only municipality in the Lower Mainland not on board a task force lobbying for a community rail system.
A?ai??i??Ai??For the last three years, Rail For The Valley has been pressing the issue of a passenger rail service that would run from Chilliwack to Surrey,A?ai??i??A? said RFTV spokesman Paul Gieselman.
A?ai??i??Ai??Much progress has been made … however, this has not been a unified movement,A?ai??i??A? he said.
The South of Fraser Community Rail Task Force includes representatives from Delta, Langley and Abbotsford – but not Chilliwack.
A?ai??i??Ai??Chilliwack has been invited, but has not decided to get on board,A?ai??i??A? Gieselman said.
An open house is being held in Chilliwack July 8 to inform the public about the work of the task force, and A?ai??i??Ai??put pressure on the cityA?ai??i??A? to join, he said.
Chilliwack Mayor Sharon Gaetz has balked at committing the city to passenger rail until a transportation study by the provincial government is completed.
She is also concerned about the potential cost of restoring the old Inter-Urban rail line that once ran from Chilliwack to New Westminster.
Just upgrading the 17 or 18 rail crossings could cost $500,000 each, according to an estimate by city staff.
But Gieselman said the mayor is getting hung up on the costs instead of the potential benefits.
The Chilliwack open house starts at 5 p.m. at Evergreen Hall on Corbould Street.
http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/theprogress/news/97943464.html
More Light Rail Links
More links for research and general information.
http://www.metromodemedia.com/features/Transitdensity0020.aspx
http://netdensity.net/tag/lrt/
http://kiat.net/malaysia/KL/transit.html
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=4358531
http://southwestlrt.wordpress.com/
http://lightrailjacksonville.webs.com/whylrti.htm
http://www.raisethehammer.org/article/851/main-king_lrt_split_may_be_a_good_idea
http://www.thespec.com/article/716331
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_kc_2007-05a.htm
Research.
http://tris.trb.org/view.aspx?id=909553
Ai??Ai??http://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa01p118.html
Ai??Ai??www.britchammacao.org/download/201003MacauLRTintro.pdf
Ai??Ai??http://www.jstor.org/pss/3551027
Ai??Ai??http://canadianaffairs.suite101.com/article.cfm/edmontons_light_rail_transit_issues
Ai??Ai??www.edmonton.ca/…/LRTRouteEvaluationcriteriaMarch2009.pdf
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2008/09/why-phoenix-lig.html
Ai??Ai??http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_light_rail_in_North_America
Shameful Media Reporting
The real story is, not the ever promised Evergreen Line, but the totally lack of research done by the reporter.
If the reporter in question had any knowledge at all about transit, should would have known that SkyTrain was indeed onceAi??Ai??marketed asAi??Ai??ALRT or Advanced Light Rail Transit in 1980. TheAi??Ai??acronym ALRT was the second given to the UTDC’s proprietary light-metro system after a complete lack of sales for their earlier named Intermediate Capacity Transit System or ICTS. ALRT sales were even poorer than ICTS’s and the acronym ALRT fell out of use by 1990! Ai??Ai??SkyTrain’s nameAi??Ai??was again changed to Automated Light Metro (ALM) andAi??Ai??today SkyTrain is marketed as ART or Advanced Rapid Transit.
Sadly, even regional planners fall into the ALRT trap, as many still call SkyTrain ALRT and advise their political masters of the same. All this indicates is a gross ignorance of local transit issues and gives Translink and the SkyTrain lobbyAi??Ai??ample opportunity to misinform everyone (deliberately or by accident) about ‘rail’ transit issues.
If the media can’t get the story straight, how then can the average citizen come to honest conclusions about transit issues?
Evergreen situation shameful: Burnaby
By Janaya Fuller-Evans, Coquitlam NOW
Politicians in the Tri-Cities have been pushing for years to get funding for the Evergreen Line. Monday, Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan, also an outspoken advocate for rapid transit in the northeast sector, called the current funding situation “shameful.”
The province has to secure funding if the project is ever going to be completed, Corrigan said in an interview before Monday’s Burnaby city council meeting.
“I think it’s shameful,” he said. “It’s not possible to build it with TransLink’s budget.”
Burnaby city council is continuing to press the province to secure funding for the line. Council discussed the issue at Monday’s meeting, just days after TransLink presented its draft 2011 Base Plan and Outlook report to Metro Vancouver. The report indicates that funding will not be available for major expansions, including the Evergreen Line, between 2011 and 2013.
The line is expected to cost $1.4 billion, according to a 2009 news release from the province. The federal government would contribute $417 million, the provincial government would contribute $410 million, project partners would contribute $173 million and TransLink would contribute $400 million.
However, TransLink’s budget only allows it to maintain the current system, not fund major projects. Also, the province has not secured additional project partners to cover the $173 million, according to a report prepared by Burnaby city staff.
Corrigan suggested the government had only agreed to install the Evergreen Line, set to run from Lougheed Town Centre to Coquitlam Town Centre, to get municipal governments in the northeast part of the Lower Mainland to back the Millennium Line project. In 2000, the province decided to build the Millennium Line, but omitted the proposed Evergreen Line from project plans.
The province’s decision to go with a SkyTrain system, instead of one using advanced light rail technology (ALRT), increased the costs exponentially, Corrigan said, adding the decision was made despite studies recommending an ALRT system.
“I think that the province has interfered so drastically in the abilities of local government, in terms of transportation,” Corrigan said.
The project includes fewer stations than originally proposed, and Burnaby council is pressing to have the optional Cameron Station included, since there are physical requirements that would make it impossible to add it to the system at a later stage.
The six primary stations are Lougheed Town Centre, Burquitlam Plaza, the Port Moody West Coast Express station, the Coquitlam West Coast Express station and a station at Coquitlam City Hall, with access to Douglas College. There were four additional spots being considered for two optional stations: Cameron in Burnaby, Queens Street in Port Moody and Falcon Drive and Lincoln Avenue in Coquitlam.
Corrigan spoke out against the “massive deletion of stations,” saying Burnaby would continue to press to have Cameron added to the initial project. City staff prepared the report, requesting that the government secure funding for the project, go with an ALRT system instead of SkyTrain and add Cameron to the plans.
Corrigan said it looks as if construction won’t begin before 2013, adding that it would take “a miracle” to get it done at this point.
The preliminary project schedule estimated construction would begin in the fourth quarter of 2010, to be completed by the third quarter of 2014. However, the project isn’t completely off the books until 2013, according to TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie.
“There is nothing in our plan for 2011 currently,” Hardie said, adding that that could change if funding becomes available. It is up to the province to decide when to begin, he added, pointing out that the province is in charge of the project and its timeline.
Shirley Bond, B.C.’s minister of transportation and infrastructure, was not available for comment by press time.
The government is conducting public consultations in advance of the environmental assessment certificate application for the project. According to the Burnaby city staff report, the project is already behind schedule, as the environmental certificate was to be issued by the third quarter of 2010. As the environmental assessment office usually conducts a 180-day public review, followed by a 45-day ministerial review, it looks as though the project is about six months behind.
– A public open house is set for Tuesday, July 6 at Coquitlam City Hall, another at Cameron Recreation Centre in Burnaby on Wednesday, July 7, and a final one in Port Moody, at the Inlet Theatre and Galleria, on Thursday, July 8. All three open houses are set to run from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m.
http://www.thenownews.com/news/Evergreen+situation+shameful+Burnaby/3227532/story.html
Rail for the Valley Open House – Thursday July 8 – Chilliwack
Hi everyone
Rail For the Valley is holding an open house in Chilliwack this Thursday to showcase the issue of passenger rail service in the Fraser Valley. The goal is to inform the public as to the current state of activities and to gain additional support. This event is open to the public and directed towards the City of Chilliwack.
The open house will offer a chance for the public to see details of the campaign including track details, benefits, and ways to help with the movement. If you have any questions regarding this event, please email rftvfriends@gmail.com.
Refreshments will be served. We hope you can stop by for a few minutes.
Thank you!
http://rftv.wordpress.com/2010/06/20/open-house-july-8th/
Krugman: Lost Decade, Here We Come – Sent by the Light Rail Now Folks
Paul Krugman’s article from several days ago (see below) drives home the point that “deficit hawkism” is NOT just an American lunacy – it’s somehow ascended to the prevailing “conventional wisdom” globally. As I pointed out in a previous recent post, “This has some very bad implications for public transportation funding, the transit budget crisis, public transit services and ridership, and development of crucial improvements such as new rail starts.”
It’s also important for public transportation professionals and advocates to perceive that public transport budget problems – at the agency level and the industry level, in country after country – are occurring in this context of GLOBAL crisis and GLOBAL austerity policies. Public transport supporters need to get this across to the public, in particular to respond to the campaign by transit adversaries to pillory each individual transit system, making it appear that its budget difficulties are the result of incompetent management and planning, budgetary wastefulness, and, most of all, the demon rail.
Lyndon Henry
————————————————————————-
New York Times
June 6, 2010Lost Decade, Here We Come
Paul Krugman
The deficit hawks have taken over the G20:
Those countries with serious fiscal challenges need to accelerate the pace of consolidation, it added. We welcome the recent announcements by some countries to reduce their
deficits in 2010 and strengthen their fiscal frameworks and institutions.These words were in marked contrast to the G20s previous communiquA?Ai?? from late April, which called for fiscal support to be maintained until the recovery is firmly driven by the private sector and becomes more entrenched.
Its basically incredible that this is happening with unemployment in the euro area still rising, and only slight labor market progress in the US.
But don’t we need to worry about government debt? Yes but slashing spending while the economy is still deeply depressed is both an extremely costly and quite ineffective way to reduce future debt. Costly, because it depresses the economy further; ineffective, because by depressing the economy, fiscal contraction now reduces tax receipts. A rough estimate right now is that cutting spending by 1 percent of GDP raises the unemployment rate by .75 percent compared with what it would otherwise be, yet reduces future
debt by less than 0.5 percent of GDP.The right thing, overwhelmingly, is to do things that will reduce spending and/or raise revenue after the economy has recovered specifically, wait until after the economy is strong enough that monetary policy can offset the contractionary effects of fiscal austerity. But no: the deficit hawks want their cuts while unemployment rates are still at near-record highs and monetary policy is still hard up against the zero bound.
But what about Greece and all that? Look, right now sovereign debt problems are taking place in countries with a very specific problem: theyAi??ai??i??re part of the euro zone, AND they’re badly overvalued thanks to huge capital inflows in the good years; as a result theyAi??ai??i??re facing years of grinding deflation. Counties not in that situation are not facing any pressure from the markets for immediate cuts; as of this morning, 10-year bonds were yielding 3.51 in Britain, 3.21 in the US, 1.27 in Japan.
Yet the conventional wisdom now is that these countries must nonetheless cut not because the markets are currently demanding it, not because it will make any noticeable difference to their long-run fiscal prospects, but because we think that the markets might demand it (even though they shouldn’t) sometime in the future.
Utter folly posing as wisdom. Incredible.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/06/lost-decade-here-we-come/
Recent Comments