From the Vancouver Province – Inter-Urban exhibit sparks debate – ‘B.C. Electric Railway: More Than Just a Tram’ an example of light-rail transit

It seems that the momentum for the return of the Fraser Valley Interurban is gaining strength. If we can get the consensus of Valley mayors to support the return of the interurban, the next big hurdle is to take on the SkyTrain/light-metro lobby, because they desperately do not want much cheaper light rail operating any where near SkyTrain, lest it expose the light-metro’s huge construction and operating costs.

TransLink’s transit planning has come off the rails a long time ago and too many bureaucrats are afraid to have their dirty little secret exposed, by the reinstatement of the interurban. The impending $450 million deficit is just more evidence that we are squandering far too much money on transit, that has failed to create the model to attract the motorist from the car. Is it time for TransLink to go and a more locally and fiscally responsive organization should be created?

The valley interurban is coming and sooner than many people think and the great wailing and gnashing of teeth of those against the project is almost laughable; the question to be asked is: “When will METRO and regional politicians realize that modern light rail, track-sharing by using existing tracks,Ai??Ai??can be built as much as one tenth the cost of SkyTrain!” Much cheaper LRT means light-rail can penetrate into areas never dreamed of by current transit planners, creating more destination opportunities, thus attracting for ridership. How long can TransLink resist the power of modern light rail?

Ai??Ai??

Inter-Urban exhibit sparks debate

‘B.C. Electric Railway: More Than Just a Tram’ an example of light-rail transit

By Brian Lewis, The Province – October 17, 2009

The call for establishing light-rail transit throughout the Fraser Valley is strengthening and now some of its advocates are reaching into the past to show us the future.

On Saturday, the Chilliwack Museum officially opened a year-long special exhibit — “The B.C. Electric Railway: More Than Just A Tram” — that tells the story of the Inter-Urban electric rail service that operated from downtown Vancouver to Chilliwack from 1910 until the 1950s.

However, as the exhibits title suggests, the B.C. Electric Company brought far more than a simple rail service to the Fraser Valley.

The private-sector company, which was run by British Empire entrepreneurs out of its London headquarters, also played the major role in establishing and developing the Fraser Valley as we know it today.

Most importantly, it brought electricity to the Fraser Valley, electricity it produced via the region’s first large hydro-electric dam and power station at nearby Buntzen Lake.

Not only did the BCE provide the power and the trains to the valley, it also established the first stores to sell electric appliances and other products to households and industry.

And as the exhibit demonstrates, the BCE’s rail presence had equally huge social and economic implications for the valley.

Farmers could quickly ship their fresh products to Vancouver’s market, food-processing operations became economically feasible all along the Inter-Urban route, valley sports teams joined Vancouver-based leagues, crop pickers from the city were easily transported to valley farms and the region’s towns, lakes and streams were suddenly accessible to city-based tour- ists.

“The idea for this exhibit grew out of the current public discussions on re-establishing rail service in the valley” says Chilliwack Museum executive director Ron Denman.

“We want people who see this exhibit to understand the extent of the long-lasting impacts the first rapid-rail transit system had on the Fraser Valley.

“And we want them to think about what would happen if we had a rapid-transit system in the valley today that was on a similar scale.

“I think it would have a similar effect on our future development and it certainly would be a greener and more efficient way to move people,” he adds.

“The BCE Railway was a green initiative long before going green became popular.” Meanwhile, as the staff at Chilliwack Museum (www.chilliwack.

museum.bc.ca) put the finishing touches on the special exhibit, equally intensive action has been taking place on the political front.

The various community groups that have called for rail in the valley are joining the region’s city councils and post-secondary schools to establish the South of the Fraser Community Rail Task Force.

Under this umbrella, the valley rail campaign is about to enter a more sophisticated phase.

Led by Langley Township Mayor Rick Green, it’s calling on the federal and provincial governments to help establish a full-demonstration project on part of the Inter-Urban line, one that would utilize the latest light-rail technology.

“One of the things we’ve been lacking up to this point is a common voice,” Green explains. “Now this task force will be the unifying voice for the communities we represent.” Details about the new task force will be announced shortly.

http://www.theprovince.com/opinion/Inter+Urban+exhibit+sparks+debate/2116793/story.html

More unhappiness from South of the Fraser – From the Delta Optimist – Train offers miserable experience

It seems that the RAV/Canada Line is not swaying the transit customer’s minds to happily use the metro. It’s crowded, but over crowding could be the result of TransLink deliberately underestimating Richmond and South of the Fraser buses ridership, to crow about packed trains to a very complacent media. Obviously, TransLink isn’t operating enough capacity on the RAV/Canada line, to meet the capacity of buses serving the metro. Why is there not enough cars to handle all the bus traffic serving the metro?

One clue is that TransLink exaggerated vehicle capacityAi??Ai??by 20%, when in fact car capacity is 163 persons as advertised elsewhere by ROTEM and not 200 persons as advertised by TransLink. This translates into a calculated lack of capacity, crowded trains, and unhappy transit customers. The letter also points to the fact that RAV is heavily used by people with concession fares or U-Passes, which means less revenue for TransLink. If one apportions fares for the U-pass, the RAV/Canada Lines share of revenue for a student is $8.33 to $12.50 a month! One can’t fund a metro at those prices and certainly points to the reason why TransLink is in a fiscal free-fall.

Also the RAV/Canada line seems not to have taken a car off the road and those 200,000 car trips off the road as promised by premier Campbell and other politicians are mere ‘pixie dust‘ promises, meant for the ever complacent mainstream media who continually mistake political hyperbole for news.

Here is a question that should cause one to think: “If the RAV/Canada Line is at capacity now, how can it cope with an estimated 30% higher ridership during the Olympics?”

Train offers miserable experience

the Delta Optimist

Editor:

It’s been approximately six weeks now since we lost our direct 601 bus service into Vancouver. I, like a lot of transit users, have had to ride the Canada Line.

For many commuters this means two bus rides and the Canada Line to get to the same place they used to get to by just riding the 601. My transit time has increased by 25 minutes.

It is not only the time and inconvenience of this but the actual experience is miserable. I rarely get a seat on the Canada Line, which is usually crowded with many people dragging luggage, strollers, carrying skateboards and bringing their bikes on board.

Getting on and off is particularly hazardous and the chance of tripping is great, especially for seniors. Plus, on several occasions, I have witnessed pushing and shoving to get onboard. There are few seats on the Canada Line and most people have to stand.

There are no seats or benches at the Bridgeport station where the 601 goes now and many of us have stood and waited for up to a half hour for the bus. If it is later at night you can stand for an hour.

I have heard many stories of how people’s lives have been disrupted since the loss of the 601 into Vancouver. One woman, who is brain damaged, used to ride into town to visit friends. She could do so as it was one bus ride. Now she cannot go as she cannot handle the frustration of transferring and waiting.

A senior who has never driven cannot get off and on the six times involved in going into town and coming back, plus there is no guarantee of a seat.

Another person has a mentally handicapped niece who used to ride from Vancouver to the exchange to visit. She can no longer do this without being accompanied.

Also, I know of many people who are now driving after commuting by transit for years.

For many of us the loss of the direct 601 service into Vancouver is a frustrating, time-consuming experience. For others, it is a barrier and their quality of life and enjoyment has been diminished.

TransLink has to get 100,000 riders on the Canada Line a day or it has to subsidize its private partner. How many lives are affected or what are the transit needs of our community is not a concern for them.

Now TransLink has announced there will be a fare increase for what is essentially a decreased service for many.

I have an appointment in Vancouver this week and I’m driving. I have stood all the way into Vancouver in crowded cars, been pushed by those onboard and been nearly tripped too many times now. Riding the Canada Line is not worth the risk.

http://www2.canada.com/deltaoptimist/news/letters/story.html?id=5fff6694-1e49-4867-b2b9-c2a28489a7a2

From the Vancouver Sun: "Olympic traffic plan could leave a lasting legacy — but it will depend on us". NOT

The editors at the Vancouver Sun have never grasped the realities of the many transit issues in Vancouver, let alone the challenges of the ‘Olympic‘ road closures. The problem in METRO Vancouver is that transit planners have always seized the latest “flavour of the month” in transit operationAi??Ai??from light-metro to GLTAi??Ai??and revenue gathering such as road tolling, congestion charge, etc., but seldom if ever read the fine print. The same transit bureaucrats then create transitAi??Ai??policies espoused by politicians, who again seldom, if ever read the fine print. How manyAi??Ai??Vancouver area bureaucrats and politicosAi??Ai??realize that London’s congestion charge law also provides relief, in the form of subsidies, to merchants and businesses in the congestion charge zone who can demonstrate a loss in business to the congestion fee. Anyone remember Susan Heyes, a Cambie St. merchant who had to take TransLink to court to get compensation for four years of cut-and-cover subway construction devastation?

Again we read of ‘carrot and stick’, a so 1980’sAi??Ai??approach to transit, with the RAV/Canada Line where a Mr. Crilly and the Sun’s editorial board make the critical mistake assuming that the newAi??Ai??metro line is indeed a carrot. The fact is, there is no proof that the RAV/Canada line has taken any cars off the road and for many transit customers, RAV has increased journey times, hardly what one can call a ‘carrot‘ when the new metro line now seems to be a rather nasty stick!

For transit to be a ‘carrot‘ it has to be seen as user friendly and convenient; convenient enough to attract the motorist from the car. The RAV/Canada Line is not perceived so and by forcing unwilling car drivers onto an extremely poorly designed metro system for the duration of the Olympics, will create just more peopleAi??Ai??detesting public transit than before and taxpayers forced onto aAi??Ai??perceived ‘transit stick’Ai??Ai??by higher road charges and taxes, spell political annihilation to politicians supporting such measures, just like what is happening in the UK today.

The only ‘transit‘Ai??Ai??legacy the Olympic traffic plan is that car drivers will realize how shallow andAi??Ai??inept transit planning is in the region and how out of touch transit planners and politicians are about regional transit. The ‘Olympic’ transit plan may finally force provincial and regionalAi??Ai??politicians that years of light-metro only construction has failed and that there has to be a complete rethink how we provide and fund public transit.

The fear of political failure and a loss at election time is a wonderful ‘carrot’Ai??Ai??to demand change fromAi??Ai??politicians.

Olympic traffic plan could leave a lasting legacy — but it will depend on us

The Vancouver Sun – October 15, 2009

The challenge facing traffic planners for the 2010 Olympic Games was relatively straightforward.

All they had to do was figure out a way to avoid gridlock while squeezing an additional 150,000 people into an area that is already congested while at the same time closing some roads and constricting others.

It’s akin to trying to pour two litres of water into a one-litre jug. So not surprisingly, the finely detailed solution they came up with recognizes that no plan will allow us to achieve the impossible. Something has to give.

That means the Olympic traffic plan will work only if businesses and residents in the Lower Mainland start doing some detailed planning of our own.

If anyone hasn’t figured this out yet, like it or not, it will not be business as usual for two months surrounding the Games and especially during the two weeks of competition.

That fact is now chiselled in stark relief with the release of the detailed traffic plan, which while disruptive in itself, counts for its success in achieving a never-before-obtained 30-per-cent reduction in the number of people bringing their cars into downtown Vancouver.

It also urges commuters, even those taking transit, to avoid travelling into the downtown area between 7 and 9 a.m. and between 2 and 7 p.m..

Some people will be able to adjust their schedules or to work from home.

But any significant shift in the timing of rush hour — or several hours, as it has become — will depend on employers getting into the spirit of the Games.

Business owners need to consider whether hours of work can be shifted, whether they can organize around four-day weeks for example, eliminating one day of commuting, and whether their employees can work effectively from home.

While the changes will be onerous for some people and businesses, we hope that they will be undertaken in the spirit of the Games as part of the excitement of being host to the world and as a potential opportunity.

There is also the opportunity to create another Olympic legacy by making permanent a switch from single-occupancy automobiles to ride-sharing, public transit, bicycling and walking to work.

Although this is not overtly part of the plan, by putting up new hurdles to driving downtown, the Olympics are acting as the kind of tool for social engineering called for last month by the regional transportation commissioner, Martin Crilly.

Crilly argued in his report on TransLink’s financial woes that simply building new transit infrastructure won’t persuade commuters to leave their cars at home.

He said carrots, such as the new Canada Line, must be accompanied by the stick of higher taxes that make driving more expensive.

The “stick” aspect of the Olympics is temporary. It will persuade more drivers to take transit.

Whether they go back to their cars after the Games are over will depend in large measure on how well TransLink performs.

In that way, TransLink shares with the rest of us an extraordinary, perhaps once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in hosting the world through the Winter Olympics

As the traffic plan shows, it won’t all be fun and games. But it’s our party and as individuals, families, businesses and a community, whether we laugh or cry is up to us.

Ai??Ai?? Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

London Tube and bus fares going up – From the Independant. Looks like TransLink isn’t alone with its financial woes

Some overseas news. Transport for London is increasing fares for the TUBE by 8% as Transport for London is facing a financial crisis on a far grater scale than our TransLink. What this shows, in part, is that maintaining a large metro network is very expensive, due to many factors including wages, maintenance and renewals to the TUBE and Underground Lines. TheAi??Ai?? Ai??A?1.7bn or CAD $2.9 billion funding gap is staggering.

Also London’s famed congestion charges are rising, but not all is well with the congestion tax; residents in Manchester voted heavily against a congestion charging (with dire consequences for the politicians who supported it) andAi??Ai??congestion is returning to London as it seems now the congestion fees area cost of doing business andAi??Ai??being downloaded onto the consumer. What isAi??Ai?? not being released is the amount of subsidy (a per the congestion charging act) is being paid to merchants and stores negatively affected by the congestion fees, within the congestion tax area.

Could this be a portend of things to come in the region, where the aging SkyTrain (needing a $1 billion refit) is demanding more and more taxpayers money and the METRO area forces congestion charging or road tolls to gather more tax income. Is thereAi??Ai??danger that major businesses will look to relocate South to Seattle or Portland and the cost of goods and services will rise dramatically as the congestion charges or road tolls will be seen as a cost of doing business and be downloaded onto the consumer.

Just a note: Zweisystem filled up the family chariot in Point Roberts Washington, where the price of gas was CAD $0.81 a litre and lovely 1.66 litre box of Tillicum ice cream was on sale for $2.99 or three for $8.00.

London Tube and bus fares going up

By Peter Woodman, Press Association

Thursday, 15 October 2009

Travellers will have to fork out for above-inflation public transport fare rises in the capital in the New Year.

Ai??Ai??And the daily cost of the London congestion charge for vehicles is also going up soon, it was announced today.

Ai??Ai??He also announced that the Ai??A?8 daily congestion charge fee would rise to Ai??A?9 for those choosing to pay by a new automated account system and to Ai??A?10 for those paying by existing methods, with the changes expected to take effect from December 2010.

Ai??Ai??Mr Johnson said that the decision to put up fares had “not been taken lightly” but a small rise was needed now to prevent huge rises in years to come.

Ai??Ai??He said the increases were necessary to protect Transport for London’s (TfL) large investment programme and that he had only sanctioned the increases after ensuring that Ai??A?5bn efficiency savings were being made at TfL.

Ai??Ai??The rises on the underground and on the buses are in stark contrast to the situation for national mainline rail season ticket holders who will actually find their fares going down in January thanks to the retail price index inflation figure being in minus territory.

Asked about this seeming discrepancy between national and London fares today Mr Johnson said that national rail fares were being “depressed artificially for election purposes” and would inevitably rise after the General Election.

TfL is facing a Ai??A?1.7bn funding gap which the rises in fares and the increase in the congestion charge will go some way towards closing over the next three years.

Mr Johnson said today: “Nobody wants to make an announcement like this, especially when Londoners are feeling the effects of the recession. It is not a decision that I have taken lightly.

Ai??Ai??”The mistakes of the past and the current economic climate have conspired to present us with a huge challenge. The crucial thing is that we safeguard the investment in our city’s future and that’s why I’m asking Londoners to accept this difficult decision.”

Ai??Ai??http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-tube-and-bus-fares-going-up-1803057.html

Train crashes into car in Nanaimo: Another example of a car driver ignoring the dangers of a railway level crossings

Here we have another sad example of a motorist ignoring railway signals and driving into the path of a passenger train, with tragic results. Rail For The Valley must deal with two issues before the reinstatement of the interurban.

1) Before any interurban or streetcar service is to begin in BC, a complete review and updating of the motor vehicles act must take place. When the act was written, taking streetcars (and interurban) into account, motorists in BC drove on the left hand side of the road! This was done in the UK, before the Manchester LRT scheme was built and in France, before there was major investment in new tramway’s. It has also been attempted in the USA, but with poorer results ans the anti-LRT lobby has used motor vehicle rules change as the last bastion of defense for their ant-LRT tirades.

2) RFV should advise government that any motorist who ignores a railway signaling device at a level crossing should be given a six month driving ban and any motorist who ignores a railway level crossing signaling device and causes an accident or death, should be given a 10 year driving ban. All interurban signaled controlled level crossings are to be CCTV monitored.

Modern light-rail is one of the safest public transit modes in the world, yet where LRT interfaces with auto traffic, accidents will and do happen and it is best the auto drivers know the law and be compelled to adhere to the law.

The SkyTrain lobby should do well to remember this as well, the annual death rate on SkyTrain is three times higher than the annual death rate on Calgary’s LRT, but that is another story.

Train crashes into car in Nanaimo

A man and woman in their 40s are dead

John Streit NANAIMO (NEWS1130) | Wednesday, October 14th, 2009 8:00 pm

NANAIMO (NEWS1130) – Two people are dead after a passenger train slammed into a car at a railway crossing in Nanaimo. It happened around three this afternoon, an older model car travelling on the Island Highway was turning right when it was hit by the Southern Railway of Vancouver Island dayliner.

There were three people in the car at the time – a man and woman in their 40s are dead, a passenger in her 20s was hurt and taken to hospital with unknown injuries. None of the passengers on the train were hurt. Mounties were told the lights and bells on the train crossing were working at the time.

The Stadler GTW – A new generation of Diesel light rail.

From the langley Advance – Rail task force forming up

Good news, everyone, valley politicians are on the right track.

Rail task force forming up

The Township’s mayor will lead the new organization.

Matthew Claxton, Langley Advance

Published:Ai??Ai??Friday, October 09, 2009

A task force to kick start community rail is being formed in the South of the Fraser area.

Mayor Rick Green brought his plan to his own Township council Monday afternoon, after a summer spent shopping it around to many neighbouring municipalities.

Dubbed the South of the Fraser Community Rail Task Force, the group’s goal is to get a demonstration rail project off the ground.

Green hopes that will be the first step in bringing a permanent service into being.

The Township council debated the idea during its weekly special meeting, and also voted to appoint Coun. Jordan Bateman as a representative to the group.

Green said he hopes the task force will have its first meeting in the first week of November.

His goal is to see a demonstration community rail project underway fairly soon.

“I would hope within the next two years,” Green said.

The long-term planning of major rail routes is not on the radar of the group, he said.

“The whole idea is to promote the benefits and value of a demonstration project,” Green said.

There is already one demonstration project slated, that of the Fraser Valley Heritage Railway Society. They have restored a BC Electric Rail car and hope to see it back on the tracks in Surrey sometime in the near future.

Green said he isn’t sure how far the task force’s demonstration project will run, but he suggested a route between Newton in Surrey and the Gloucester Industrial Park in Aldergrove isn’t out of the question.

For the demonstration project, the train would run only on the existing rails that cross Langley and Surrey.

The passenger rights on the rail line that runs from Surrey through to Chilliwack, the former BC Electric line, were recently renewed.

Green said the plan will go to Lower Mainland business groups and institutes of higher education next for feedback.

Interurban exhibit opening at the Chilliwack Museum

October 18 UPDATE: Article in the Province: Inter-Urban exhibit sparks debate

The call for establishing light-rail transit throughout the Fraser Valley is strengthening and now some of its advocates are reaching into the past to show us the future. (read more)

October 13 UPDATE: Chilliwack Times article: ‘More Than Just a Tram’

If you live in Chilliwack or you’re travelling through, a must-see exhibit at the Chilliwack Museum is about to open. The exhibit is called: The British Columbia Electric Railway – More Than Just a Tram. Included is a section documenting our efforts to re-introduce passenger rail service to the line.

Exhibit opening:
At the Chilliwack Museum, 45820 Spadina Ave, Chilliwack
Saturday, October 17, 12:00pm – 2:00pm

B.C. Electric Railway historian Henry Ewert will attend the noon hour opening. Ewert is well known among rail fans and historians for his research and expertise in regards to the BCER. Rail for the Valley will also have a presence at the opening, where we will be handing out pamphlets and gathering petition signatures. Feel free to come by and lend a hand.

Here is the Press Release from the Museum:

On Saturday October 17 the Chilliwack Museum and Archives will open their newest annual exhibit that explores the history of the BC Electric Railway.Ai??Ai?? The BC Electric Railway: More than Just a Tram looks back at the railway and the impact that it had on all facets of life in the Fraser Valley.

A?ai??i??Ai??We are excited that British Columbia Electric Railway historian Henry Ewert will attend the noon hour opening , sharing his thoughts on the history of the company.A?ai??i??A? Stated museum director, Ron Denman.Ai??Ai?? A?ai??i??Ai??Henry is well known among rail fans and historians for his research and expertise in regards to the BCERA?ai??i??A?.

In 1907 when the announcement was made that a new rail line was going to be built connecting Chilliwack to Vancouver, Reeve Frederick Kickbush expressed the hopes of local residents when he said, A?ai??i??Ai??[The British Columbia Electric Railway] brings us out of darkness into light and the establishing of the tramway will enable us to get out of the bush.A?ai??i??A? At the time that Kickbush uttered these sentiments, Chilliwack was a small rural community with limited resources for taking products to markets. It took three more years but rail service was finally started on October 1, 1910.

The British Columbia Electric Railway Company was incorporated in 1897 and soon began a vigorous program creating a network of electric rail lines throughout the Lower Mainland. To supply power to the lines, a dam was built at Buntzen Lake, north of the Fraser River and east of Vancouver. By 1910, the company was supplying power to most Fraser Valley communities, and operating an efficient passenger and freight service that played a major role in defining the location and shape of towns located along the line. ChilliwackA?ai??i??ai???s residential, industrial and commercial neighbourhoods were shaped by the path that the railway took through our community. New subdivisions sprang up close to the line and industries, now able to ship fresh products to markets, located beside the line. The passenger service continued until 1950 when the costs of upgrading the now forty year old tracks and rail cars proved to be too much, especially in the face of new forms of transit.

The exhibition will be on display for a year at the Chilliwack Museum on Spadina Ave during our regular operating hours: Mon A?ai??i??ai??? Friday 9am A?ai??i??ai??? 4:40pm. The opening is from 12:00pm A?ai??i??ai??? 2:00pm at the Museum.Ai??Ai?? For more information contact: Ron Denman, Director (604A?ai??i??A?795A?ai??i??A?5210)Ai??Ai??Ai??Ai?? cm_chin@smartt.com.

December 2019 – The UBCLiner: Chilliwack to UBC – the 6 am through service.

The following is a short tome on a student’s Monday morning commute from Chilliwack to UBC, via the interurban and the Broadway streetcar line and illustrates what can be realistically achieved with light-rail, for a fraction of the cost of a SkyTrain subway to UBC. The longest tramtrain route on Karlsruhe’s famous Zweisystem is 210km. long where triple articulated cars, including ‘Bistro’ cars offer a 30 minute service from Karlsruhe, to the outskirts of Stuttgart, including on-street operation through towns including Heilbronn.

The time: 6am

The date: December 2, 2019

The 6 amAi??Ai??diesel LRT service from Chilliwack to Vancouver, which Ai??Ai??now terminates at the University of BC on the newly openedAi??Ai??Broadway light rail line, is locally calledAi??Ai??theAi??Ai??UBCLiner. The UBCliner consists of a two car diesel LRT and diesel/electric hybrid LRT train-set;Ai??Ai??the hybrid diesel – electric LRVAi??Ai??is designed to operate both on electrified and non-electrified rail lines.Ai??Ai??

Every morning the UBCliner departs theAi??Ai??Chilliwack loop precisely at 6 am and very shortly traversesAi??Ai??the ‘flat’ crossing with the Canadian National Railway on its mainline. As one passes,Ai??Ai??one can see the foundations for the new rail overpass that will shortly replace the level crossing, which will be needed with theAi??Ai??recently opened Fraser River Rail Bridge which will soon allow an increase of the Interurban service to the Fraser Valley and Chilliwack.

There is light snow falling and local roads are very slippery, but all is unnoticed as the UBCliner speeds on to Vancouver. In the freak blizzard in 2017, the valley interurban was never stopped by ice and snowAi??Ai??and provided a timely transit service throughout the emergency, with trains running 24 hours a day.

The UBCliner, an express service which stops only at Huntington, Abbotsford, Langley, King George Highway, Scott Road, Pacific Central Station, and UBC; not only carries passengers but express mails and courier parcels. The triple articulated diesel – electric light rail vehicle, also has a small parcels compartment and a self serve ‘Bistro’, serving coffee, tea and snacks and is complete having a chemical toilet.

The two car train-set quickly speeds up to 90 kph and sets off through Sardis and Yarrow, which station platforms alreadyAi??Ai??occupied byAi??Ai??customersAi??Ai??waiting for the the 6:10 local service to Vancouver. InAi??Ai??just 25 minutes,Ai??Ai??the UBCLiner stops at Huntington, where a small contingent of passengers board and more mail is loaded. In two minutes the train leaves and shortly passes the uncompleted junction to the Abbotsford airport, which in a few month provide a direct Vancouver to YXX service and minutes later stopsAi??Ai??at theAi??Ai??Abbotsford station, where more passengers embark.

At Clayburn, the train crosses the flat crossing with the Canadian pacific Railway and one can see the nearly completed two track flyover which will replace the old level crossing. In two years time, Abbotsford will see a 15 minuteAi??Ai??through service to Vancouver, which is neededAi??Ai??with the ever increasing passenger loads on the presentAi??Ai??30 minuteAi??Ai??interurban service.

Maintaining a speed of 80 kph to 90 kph, the express train travels through largely rural areas and in a short time joins the the double tracked section shared with the Delta Supper Port coal and container trains. At Glover Road and the Number 10 Hwy. by-pass, is the beginning of construction of aAi??Ai??tram line which will run along the median of the Hwy. 10 to the Serpentine Bridge in Surrey, reconnecting with the old interurban route to Vancouver. Express trains will still continue to track-share along the existing rail route, but local trains will take the Hwy 10 route as it more directly serves businesses, Willow Brook Mall and the proposed 200th street LRT.

After a quick stop in Langley, the UBCliner continues through Surrey, making stops at King George Highway and Scott Road, before descending to the new Fraser River Rail Bridge, which is three track lift span, replacing the rickety swing span, whichAi??Ai??now will provide ample accommodation for freight trains, the Ai??Ai??four return AMTRAK passenger trains servicesAi??Ai??to Portland and the new diesel LRT service to North Delta and White Rock. Speeding up to 90 kph, the UBCliner heads to Pacific Central Station, passing several new overpasses being built to counter increased rail traffic along the Grandview Cut route.

At Pacific Central Station, the UBC Liner uncouples with the second diesel LRTAi??Ai??unit,Ai??Ai??releasing the pantograph to connect with overhead wires and once the mails and courier parcels are unloadedAi??Ai??by 8 am,Ai??Ai??proceeds to Main Street, acting as a streetcar, powered from electricity and continues along Main St. Ai??Ai??toAi??Ai?? the Broadway light rail line.Ai??Ai??Connecting to the new Broadway Line, which routeAi??Ai??operates mostly onAi??Ai??lawned rights-of-way, complete with shrubbery, making a median of Broadway a long linear park. The journey is slower as the UBCliner is operating on tram or streetcar tracks and there are stops every 500 metres or so.

The aroma of coffee pervades the crowdedAi??Ai??interior of the car as passengers drink coffee and/or work on their laptops for the last leg of their journey. This is still an express service and no passengers are picked up at stops, except for the very busy stop for the Vancouver General Hospital. It is morning rush hour and the UBCliner now is followingAi??Ai??a local service to UBC. With full priority signaling the UBCliner continues to its destinationAi??Ai?? going up 10th Ave. from Alma, but as soon University Blvd. is reached the train accelerates to 80 kph to ends its journey at the mall loop at 8:35am.

The UBCliner returns to Pacific Central Station for regular operation valley operation, Vancouver to Chilliwack, but will return to UBC for the 6pm express to Chilliwack, for those who want to take advantage of a direct service to Surrey, Langley, Abbotsford and Chilliwack.

From The Infrastructurist – 36 Reasons Streetcars Are Better Than Buses

Just an interesting article that came Zweisystem’s way. If you have a complaint or comment, please register with the Infrastructurist’s web site:

http://www.infrastructurist.com/2009/06/03/36-reasons-that-streetcars-are-better-than-buses/

The Infrastructurist
Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

36 Reasons Streetcars Are Better Than Buses

Posted on Wednesday June 3rd by The Infrastructurist

If you want a system that really attracts riders and investment, many transit experts will attest that streetcars are the best dollar-for-dollar investment a city can make.

Of course, there are plenty of situations where old-fashioned bus service or newfangled bus rapid transit (which usually has dedicated lanes) are just the thing. But for cities facing a choice between building a streetcar system or high-end BRT and the cost difference can be smaller than might think it’s handy to know that transit riders overwhelming prefer
streetcars. Well, overwhelmingly if the comments section from a recent story on this site can be taken as a fair sample. One reader posed the question, “buses or streetcars?” and the responses from laypeople and transportation experts alike came fast and furious. In the end, we were left with dozens of reasons why streetcars are superior, ranging from the
obvious to the wonderfully creative.

As the comments added up, we became more and more intrigued. So we’ve edited the various reasons into a proper list. Did we miss anything? Do any of these not hold up? Disagree entirely? Let us know in the comments section and we’ll update the story and the headline as worthwhile additions come in.

New streetcar lines always, always, get more passengers than the bus routes they replace.

Buses, are susceptible to every pothole and height irregularity in the pavement (and in Chicago we have plenty). Streetcars ride on smooth, jointless steel rails that rarely develop bumps.

Streetcars don’t feel low status to transit riders. Buses often do.

Mapmakers almost always include streetcar lines on their city maps, and almost never put any bus route in ink. New investment follows the lines on the map.

The upfront costs are higher for streetcars than buses but that is more than made up over time in lower operating and maintenance costs. In
transit you get what you pay for.

There is a compellingAi??Ai?? ‘coolness’ and ‘newness’ factor attached to streetcars.

Streetcars feel safer from a crime point of view.

Steel wheel on steel rail is inherently more efficient than rubber tire on pavement.

Electric streetcars can accelerate more quickly than buses.

Streetcars don’t smell like diesel.

Streetcars accelerate and decelerate smoothly because they’re electrically propelled. Internal-combustion engines acting through a transmission
simply cannot surge with the same smoothness.

The current length limit for a bus is 60 feet, but streetcars can go longer, since they are locked into the rails and won’t be swinging all around the streets, smashing into cars.

Streetcars have an air of nostalgia.

New streetcar and light rail lines usually come with an upgraded street experience from better stops, landscaping, new roadbeds, and better sidewalks, to name a few. Of course, your federal transit dollar is paying for these modernizations, so why wouldn’t cities try to get them!

Perhaps the most over looked and significant difference between street cars and buses is permanence. You’ll notice that development will follow a train station, but rarely a bus stop.

Rails don’t pick up and move any time soon. Once a trolley system is in place, business and investors can count on them for decades. Buses come and go.

Streetcars are light and potentially 100% green. Potentially they could be powered by 100% solar and/or wind power. Even powered with regular power plant-derived electricity, they are still 95% cleaner than diesel buses. [Source? -Ed.]

Streetcars stop less. Because of the increased infrastructure for stops, transit planners don’t place stops at EVERY BLOCK, like they do with buses (SEPTA in Philly is terrible for this). Instead, blocks are a quarter to a half mile apart, so any point is no more than an eighth to a quarter mile from a stop.

People will travel longer distances on streetcars. At one point, in the 1930s, a person could travel to Boston from Washington solely on trolleys, with only two short gaps in the routes.

Buses are noisy. I ride them every day in Chicago, and I am constantly amazed at how loud a diesel bus engine is even on our latest-model buses [and] the valve chatter is an irritant to the nervous system. By comparison, streetcars are virtually silent.

Technological advances already make the current generation definitely NOT your grandfather’s streetcar. Low floors are standard, for easy-on easy-off curbside boarding. Wide doors allow passengers to enter or exit quickly. So streetcar stops take less time than buses.

Passengers can take comfort from seeing the rails stretching out far ahead of them, while ever fearing that the bus could take a wrong turn at the next corner and divert them off course.

Once purchased (albeit at high cost) streetcars are cheaper to maintain and last way the hell longer (case in point, streetcars discarded in the US in the 40’s, snapped up by the Yugoslavs, which are still running).

Streetcar tracks are cheaper to maintain than the roadways they displace.

People get notably more excited about the proposed extension of the streetcar system and expect revitalization of the neighborhoods around the planned stops.

Streetcars create more walkable streets. This is because streetcars, as mentioned above, are more attractive to riders than buses, which in turns prompt to more mass transit usage in general, which in turns prompts to more walking; a virtuous cycle that creates more attractive city streets.

Most European cities and countries kept investing in public transit during the decades when America was DISinvesting. Now I look across the pond and see dozens of European cities extending or building new rail transit systems, including many streetcar lines, and conclude: They probably know what they are doing; we should do some of that too.

You know exactly where a streetcar is going, but have you ever tried looking at a bus route map?

Streetcars are faster than buses or trackless trolleys (aside from 2 lines in Philly, do any other cities run trackless trolleys, or trolley buses anymore?) because trams tend to have dedicated lanes. Even if they don’t, if they operate on streets with multiple lanes, people stay out of the tram lane, because it’s harder to drive a car along tram tracks (the wheels pull to one side or the other as they fall into the groove) {Zweisystem replies: This may have been true in the 20’s when cars has narrow tires, but with a girder railAi??Ai??flangeway a mere 2 cm to 3 cm wide thisAi??Ai??is hardly a problem}.

In buses you’re still jostled by every pothole and sway at every bus stop. I thought bus rapid transit would be a significant improvement – there’s still a bit of sway and they concrete was not installed as smoothly as line of steel rail.

With buses transit planners are pushed by funding formulas to capture every pocket of riders thus you can get a very wiggly route; something that’s less practical on a fixed rail system.

Buses lurch unpredictably from side to side as they weave in and out of traffic and as they move from the traffic lane to the curb lane to pick up passengers. In streetcars turns occur at the same location on every trip, so that even standees can more or less relax knowing the car is not going to perform any unpredictable lateral maneuvers.

Most streetcar riders don’t consciously think about the differences between a bus ride and a streetcar ride. But their unconscious minds the spinal cord, the solar plexus, the inner ear and the seat of the pants, quickly tally the differences and deliver an impressionistic conclusion: The streetcar ride is physiologically less stressful.

An internal-combustion engine is constantly engaged in hammering itself to death and buses tend to vibrate themselves into a sort of metallurgical dishevelment. Interior fittings, window frames, handrails, floor coverings; seats tend to work loose and make the interior look frowzy and uncared- for.

By age 12 the bus is a piece of junk and has to be retired. A streetcar the same age is barely into its adolescence.

Streetcar stops are typically given more attention than most bus routes and the information system is more advanced. In Portland, the shelters even have VMS displays that tell you the times of the next two streetcar arrivals. This valuable information gives people the option to wait, do something else to pass the time, or walk to their destination.

One great advantage of streetcars is that the infrastructure serves as an orienting and way-finding device. The track alerts folks to the route and leads them to stops. Because they are a permanent feature of the streetscape, the routing is predictable and stable (unlike bus routes). So unlike a bus, a streetcar informs and helps citizens to formulate an image of their city, even if folks don’t ride it. It is a feature of their public realm. Because of this, these streets get greater public attention.

When you ride one of the remaining historic cars in Toronto or San Francisco you can tell they’reAi??Ai?? ‘old’ Ai??Ai??in the sense ofAi??Ai?? ‘out of style’, Ai??Ai??but when you look around the interior everything still seems shipshape, nothing rattles, the windows open and close without binding. The rider experiences a sense of solid quality associated with Grandma’s solid-oak dining table and 1847 Rodgers Brothers silver. And that makes everybody feel good.Ai??Ai?? Unlike, say, an aging bus.

For those of you who cannot see the difference between a bus and a streetcar, I suggest riding a streetcar when you get the chance. Then, if you can locate a bus that more or less follows the same route, give that a try. Compare the two experiences.