Five reasons Why Gordo and his ‘Falcon’ don’t want the "Return of the Interurban".
It is all too simple, the tracks are there from Vancouver to Chilliwack, the diesel light-rail vehicles areAi??Ai??available from many manufacturers and have been proven in revenue operation, and the precedent of the Karlsruhe two-system or zweisystem LRT with almost 20 years of safe operation track-sharing with mainline railways, makes the return of the interurban an almost shovel-ready project. Why then does Premier Campbell and his Minister of Transportation, Kevin Falcon, not want the “return of the interurban” for the Fraser Valley. There are five mainAi??Ai??reasons.
1) The interurban is not seen to be a Metro Vancouver rapid transit project. The monied ‘West-side types’ (locally known as the creme de la creme) who run and finance the provincial and federal Liberal Parties, see the interurban as a non-vote getter, thus not essential – not needed. It’s the same Liberal ‘West-side types’ that forced the now $2.5 billion (over $1.2 billion over budget) RAV/Canada line subway on TransLink because they did not want LRT operating on the formerAi??Ai??interurban rapid transitAi??Ai??route, the Arbutus Corridor.
2) Because LRT is much cheaper to build, there is less chance of ‘friends of the government’ or ‘ ‘friends of the bureaucracy’ getting contractsAi??Ai??to work on the project. Simply put, light rail is too cheap to build for political or bureaucraticAi??Ai??benefit.
3) 30 years of the SkyTrain myth has ingrained itself on planning in the region; transit is no longer built to move people affordably, rather it is built to facilitate land development. For developers, the bigger and more expensive a transit project is, the better it is. Building SkyTrain in the region has been like forcing round pegs into square holes.
4) The BC Liberals think ‘valley‘ seats are safe seats and don’t care about any transit improvements because they thinkAi??Ai??FraserAi??Ai??Valley voters, like sheep, will always return Liberal MLA’s to the legislature.
5) The trucking industry and the Road Builders Association are big supporters of the BC Liberal Party and Campbell’s and Falcon’s ‘rubber on asphalt’ transportation policies favour theses two groups. Rail, unless there is political benefit, is not even on the radar screen. ‘Rubber on Asphalt’ is the credo of the Transportation Ministry.
There are many more reasons why the Liberals do not want the ‘return of the interurban’ to the valley, butAi??Ai??here are the top five. It is up to ‘rail’ advocates to make ‘rail for the valley’ an election issue, to force both the BC Liberals and the NDP, to come out of the closet with real (not empty promises) plans for the return of passenger rail service from Vancouver to Chilliwack. The clock for this May’s election is ticking down……………………………..
10 Quick notes on light rail – for quick letters to the Editor.
- Light rail is a mode that can deal economically with traffic flows between 2,000 and 20,000 persons per hour per direction.
- LRT can be uses on-street, on elevated guide-ways (light-metro), in tunnel (subway), or track-share with existing railways.
- Calgary’s LRT (C-Train) carries over 250,000 passengers a day, more than SkyTrain.
- Capacity is a function of headway.
- Commercial speed of LRT is determines by quality of rights-of-way and stations or stops per route km.
- LRT can obtain speeds as high as 100 kph.
- LRT’s operating costs are much lower than the automated SkyTrain.
- The ratio of construction costs for rail transit construction are: tunneling costs about twice as much as elevated construction and elevated construction can cost up to ten times as much as at-grade/on-street construction.
- Ghent Belgium, with a population of about 300,000 has over 29 km. of LRT. Bern, Switzerland, with a population of about 200,000, Ai??Ai??has over 18 km. of LRT (1995).
- In 1991, SkyTrain was subsidized by over $157 million annually, to day the subsidy is over $200 million annually.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR FLOOD: Rail for the Valley, & the new Port Mann bridge
To all supporters of passenger rail service for the Fraser Valley
Last Wednesday, the provincial government announced, out of the blue, an entirely new Port Mann bridge to be built. It will not be a twinned bridge, but a single 10-lane span, and the existing bridge will be torn down, only 45 years into its 75 year lifespan. There will be no light rail component on the bridge when it is forecast to be completed in 2013. The project’s estimated cost is $3.3 billion. (If recent megaprojects are any indication, this cost will likely rise substantially.)
Click here for the story from the Province.
Then, you might want to read these editorials by experts supporting Rail for the Valley:
Government spin that the bridge is designed to accomodate light rail ‘sometime in the future’ is just that – spin. Another word is ‘deception.’ Never in history has this type of bridge been built, and then at a later date had lanes taken away to accomodate light rail.
It appears the BC government is trying to deceive the people of BC, who will likely be expected to pay the equivalent of about $1000 for every man, woman, and child in the province for this single project. (Every premier wants a legacy, I suppose.) While the Pattullo bridge and the Fraser River rail bridge are in true need of replacement, this project will leave the province bankrupt of money for these, and other, important and necessary improvements. Commuters are supposed to cheer the temporary relief of traffic congestion on the bridge, while the light rail needs of the Fraser Valley, and the united pleas of residents across the valley, are completely ignored.
Friends, we can not stand for this!
***What to do right now***
Immediately flood our newspapers with Letters to the editor, cc’ing your elected representatives and opposition candidates.
The government has got to hear the message, loud and clear, from the people of the Fraser Valley, before any contracts for this project are signed.
(Click here for newspaper email addresses)
There is also a facebook event that has been created for this flood
Please pass this on to others who might be interested.
More action to follow.
Thank you for doing your part…
Premier Campbell & Kevin Falcon ‘flips the bird’ to the valley
Gordon Campbell, like all politicians, likes to monument build and with good ‘polling’ numbers has promised a ‘monumental’ 10 lane bridge with all the whistles and bangs to target the car driver in May’s provincial election.Ai??Ai?? The $3 billion plus mega bridge and highways project has nothing to do about good transportation or planning, rather it is all about hucksterism and vote buying by a government that cares little about the environment, global warming, peak oil, and the agricultural land reserve.
The talk of a Langley to Burnaby BRT or rapid bus taking 23 minutes is about as useless a statistic as you can get, but the mediaAi??Ai??keep eatingAi??Ai??it up. The fact is BRTAi??Ai?? doesn’t work, as it has proven not to attract the motorist from the car. Can anyone point to a successful BRT operation? Yet, Falcon prattles on, knowing that the media doesn’t do its homework and just prints ‘verbatim’ what is said, factual or not.
Rail transit is mentioned, but at a later date, “sometime in the future when there is the capacity”. This is just ‘spin doctoring’, to placate the many rail groups lobbying for ‘rail’ transit in the valley and the present government has absolutely no intention to build ‘rail’ transit in the valley. No express highway bridge to date, in the world, has been retrofitted for ‘rail’ transit after it has been opened. No government will eliminate two road lanes for rail and the premier and minister of transportation are disingenuous claiming this will happen.
What Valley politicians and voters should keep in mind that the $1.8 billion dollar difference, from the original twinned bridge conceptAi??Ai??to mega-bridge, would fund a deluxe electrified Vancouver to Chilliwack interurban, with a new Fraser River Rail Bridge, independent LRT lines in Surrey, Langley, and Abbotsford, serving the Abbotsford International Airport!
Premier Campbell and Kevin Falcon have effectively given a ‘Trudeau’ style salute to all valley residents and taxpayers.
The new Port Mann Bridge – A bridge too big!
The provincial governments announcement of a new 10 lane bridge, replacing the Port Mann bodes ill for implementingAi??Ai??good transportation planning for the Fraser Valley. The real winners are the ‘roads lobby’, the trucking industry, and the land developers, as the announced bridge caters directly to their demands.
What theAi??Ai??new bridge does show, is the utter failure of the SkyTrain metro systemAi??Ai??to alleviate auto congestion in the region,with a cost of over $100 million/km. SkyTrain is just too expensive to build in quantity to create the ‘rail‘ network to attract the motorist from the car. The new bridge, a clear winner for car drivers, shows that Gordon Campbell’s transportation policy is strictly ‘rubber on asphalt’.Ai??Ai?? Rapid bus or BRT, is the roads-lobby’s favorite transit gimmick, because BRT buses need new highways to operate, but what has been politely overlooked is BRT’s dismal record in attracting ridership,Ai??Ai??especially the all important motorist from the car. Campbell’s and Falcon’s call for express buses and/or BRT, operating on express bus lanes on the bridgeAi??Ai??is strictly government propaganda; remembering that in 1986, when the Alex Fraser Bridge was opened, the two lanes reserved for express busses lasted for about six months.
The same is true of putting ‘rail‘ transit on the bridge at a later dateAi??Ai?? andAi??Ai??unless the rails are laid during construction itAi??Ai??will neverAi??Ai??happen, unlike the Seattle bus tunnel where rails were laid during its construction and now in use with the new LRT system nearing completion. There is not one single example in the world of an express highway bridge closing traffic lanes and laying track for ‘rail‘ transit. Campbell and his sidekick, Kevin Falcon, speaksAi??Ai??’transit‘Ai??Ai??nonsense strictly for 10 second sound bites for radio and TV.
What the bridge will do is exert great pressure on Valley municipalities to plough under more farmlandAi??Ai??to build houses, increasing population and further putting pressure on our already over-stressed transportation infrastructure. Like the Sea to Sky highway, the new Port Mann Bridge is boon to developers, which should come as no surprise with a developer friendly government. Within five years from opening, the new bridge will be at capacity, what then? With no coherent transportation plan gridlock and traffic chaos will return with a vengeance.
What the new bridge has done is take money away from other important and necessary transportation projects such as the much needed Puttallo Bridge replacement; the Fraser River Rail Bridge replacement, and the return of the interurban.
Gordon Campbell’s Liberal provincial government has played its cards for futureAi??Ai??transportation planning in the Fraser Valley and light rail is not in the hand.
Rail for the Valley: not a left-right issue
In my experience, people on the left sometimes assume Rail for the Valley must somehow be a left-right polarized issue, because of the governing provincial Liberal party’s foot-dragging on such an obvious no-brainer as re-establishing interurban light rail service for the Fraser Valley….. in this time of increasing road traffic, higher gas prices, and concerns regarding climate change and the liveability of our region. Is the government’s foot-dragging based on right-wing ideology?
Not at all.
In my experience as an organizer for passenger rail, Rail for the Valley has received strong support from people on the left, from people on the right, and in fact from people right in the centre, of the traditional political spectrum.
Here is an interesting Letter to the editor of the Chilliwack Times:
Conservatives support light rail
Published: Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Editor:
Regarding Jan. 23 article in the Chilliwack Times by Aidan Chafe, “Rail advocates form society.”
As the B.C. Conservative candidate for the Chilliwack riding, I am pleased to see that members of our community are taking initiative to rally support for a B.C. Conservative Policy which states: “A B.C. Conservative government will re-establish the light rail transit line, in order to connect the Fraser Valley with Metro Vancouver’s transportation system.”
It is upsetting that the current Liberal government has neglected to make this necessary action for the sustainability of growth in our province a top priority, especially now as the 2010 Olympics draw near.
Instead, they continue to mismanage funds through unaccountable measures, such as their all-too-common secretive backroom deals. When a B.C. Conservative government is elected to the legislature it will hold government accountable to ensure the viable needs of the province are met, such as the re-establishing of the eco-friendly light rail transit line in the Fraser Valley.
Benjamin Besler,
B.C. Conservative ,
Chilliwack
Congratulations to the B.C. Conservative Party for making the re-establishment of light rail service for the Fraser Valley one of their Policies.
History shows how quickly the dominant parties can change in British Columbia, usually as a result of government arrogance. The B.C. Liberals would be wise to watch their flank.
Light-rail on Number 10 Highway & The Langley Bypass – An Alternative route to the Valley.
The Light Rail Committee have long advocated for “The return of the Interurban” for the Fraser Valley, as a cost effective way of extending ‘rail’ transit to Langley, Abbotsford and Chilliwack. The LRC advocates that instead of following the original rights-of-ways completely, alterations to the original routeAi??Ai??must be considered to give the ‘interurban’ 21st century usefulness. Using Number 10 highway and the Langley By-pass for LRT, would bring the tram directly to major transit generators, such as KwantlenAi??Ai?? College in Cloverdale; Fraser Downs horse racing facility and Casino; Willow Brook Mall; and businesses along the Langley Bypass.
Using a ‘reserved rights-of-way’ in the median of Highway 10. would not interfere with road traffic, enabling the interurban to penetrate to where the customer wants to go, without the need of long walks or bus transfer.
The proposed 9.5 km. route would diverge from the Souther Railway of BC to Highway 10 at the Serpentine Bridge (164 St.), where there is already a protected rail crossing and proceed in the median (single track), with preemptive signaling at all major intersections. At 175 St. the route becomes two tracks, through Cloverdale to 180 St., where the line again becomes a single track, until it reached the Langley By-pass, where again the routeAi??Ai??is dualAi??Ai??tracked, operating on a ‘reserved rights-of-way’Ai??Ai??until itAi??Ai??rejoins the Coal Port Railway at Glover Rd.
The benefits are many and most importantly giving the interurban 9.5 kilometers of it own route in Langley and Cloverdale, without interference from the mainline railways (this is important, especially if a local service were to be operated), secondly, many businesses and schools would be in easy walking distance tram the interurban, an important consideration if one wants businesses and transit customer support. There is one final benefit of the #10/Langley Bypass route; the proposed 200th St. LRT/streetcar service would feed directly into the interurban, providing a seamless journey to Vancouver, a proven way to attract ridership.
Detractors of the proposed route, mostly the auto lobby, will whine about loss of road space, yet very little road space will be lost, especially if the interurban operates in mixed traffic in Cloverdale. There are hundreds of light-rail operations around the world which operate in such a manner and with proper design the interurban would fit in with minimal disruption. The proposed route would of course cost more to build, about $50 million more than using the existing railwayAi??Ai??rights-of-ways but the benefits would out weigh the added cost or minor traffic disruptions.
The success of the interurban is dependent on how it satisfies the (transit) customer’s needs and a #10 highway/Langley Bypass route, servicing major shopping precincts, commercial businesses, and schools will go a long way to satisfying customer’s travel needs.
Langley, Surrey mayors push for light rail funding
Thanks to the South Fraser Blog for pointing out this article in the Langley Advance about the federal budget:
Langley Township Mayor Rick Green said he is not sure that all the money will go to “shovel ready” projects. Some of the projects may be a couple years away from starting construction, Green said. Green said he hopes that Surrey Mayor Diane Watts has brought regional issues to the forefront. She has been lobbying for money for projects that would affect much of the south Fraser area.
“We’re talking light rail,” Green said.
I’m very glad to see municipalities working together on this, and that it’s now a top priority at the local level. Now, I wonder when our provincial politicos will wake up to the new reality in the Fraser Valley…..
Rail for the Valley "the single most popular idea"
UPDATE: More coverage, see this editorial in the Surrey Leader: Keep the momentum
An article by Jeff Nagel, appearing in Black Press newspapers throughout the Valley
The Lower Mainland needs new rail transit lines and amenities ranging from better bike routes to theatres and teen centres.
And don’t forget about housing.
Those are among the suggestions Black Press readers have advanced as part of the newspaper group’s The Path Ahead project.
Launched earlier this month, the initiative aimed to bring local citizens together online to suggest ways to improve the economy and local communities A?ai??i??ai??? specifically through government-funded infrastructure projects A?ai??i??ai??? during the current downturn.
Dozens of responses have been posted on Black Press newspaper websites in advance of this weekA?ai??i??ai???s federal budget, which is expected to unleash billions of dollars in deficit spending to stimulate the economy.
The single most popular idea: establishment of a passenger light rail line to the Fraser Valley. Many readers argued it could be done efficiently and inexpensively using existing rail lines…. (click here for the rest of the article)
It seems the public continues to be way ahead of politicians on this. With $4 billion of federal infrastructure money being available for projects that are “shovel ready,” upgrading the Interurban track in the Fraser Valley for high-speed light rail is an absolute no-brainer that is not only a shovel-ready but a shovel-worthy project – in fact the most popular idea in the Fraser Valley.
We will see very soon if our municipal, and especially provincial politicians are listening, or if they have in fact completely forgotten about the public that they have been elected to serve.
Tram-Train trials in Sheffied UK, should our politicians have a look?
Tram-train, where light rail vehicles can operate on tram (streetcar) or regular railway tracks, is getting a lot of interest around the world. The reason? It’s cheap to install and operate.
Our politicians and transit bureaucrats should investigate tram-train operation, especially for the interurban before squandering billions of dollars on politically prestigious transit projects like the Evergreen line and SkyTrain extensions to UBC and Surrey. For the cost of 10 KM. of SkyTrain in Surrey we can build a deluxe Vancouver to Chilliwack tram-train service; the sad thing is, is anyone listening?
An innovative form of public transport called a ‘tram-train’ is to be trialled for the first time in the UK on a the ever-growing 37 mile stretch of the Penistone Line between Huddersfield-Barnsley-Sheffield.
Five new tram-trains, which can run on both railway tracks and tram lines, will replace conventional trains currently used on the Penistone Line; tram-trains are lighter and greener than conventional trains; they use less fuel and weigh less, which reduces wear and tear on tracks therefore decreasing the need for disruptive maintenance works. Tram-trains have faster acceleration and deceleration rates so they can also offer passengers better journey times.
The trial will commence in 2010 and will last for two years. It will look at the operating costs, environmental benefits and technical suitability of the tram-trains as well as gauging how popular the vehicles are with passengers on the route. A second phase could also be possible, which would test the vehicles on the Sheffield Supertram system to see what additional benefits the vehicles can deliver when extended onto city centre tram lines.
The manufacturer of the five new tram-trains has yet to be decided, with Northern Rail (owned by Serco-Ned Railways) planning to run a competition to decided which manufacturer to use. All five vehicles will be leased. Network Rail have signalled that they will spend around Ai??A?15k in track improvements and alteration to stations in readiness for the trial.
Transport Secretary, Ruth Kelly, is quoted as saying: “Tram-trains will bring quicker journeys and offer a greener travel option for passengers in Yorkshire. This trial, the first in Britain, could herald the start of a new era in public transport. Passenger feedback is a vital ingredient in determining the success of the trial and I look forward to hearing what the people of Yorkshire think about the comfort and reliability of tram-trains.”
The Penistone Line, one of the most successful Community Rail Partnerships, has been chosen for the trial because it offers the chance to test the tram-trains on a route that in part is for passenger trains only and in part for passenger and freight trains.
The project is a partnership between the DfT, Northern Rail and Network Rail and seeks to establish whether tram-trains similar to those operating successfully in Europe are suitable for Britain’s railway network.
Recent Comments