Transit study set up to fail? Editorial from the Province.
Editorial, the Province newspaper, Dec. 17
I f the B.C. government thinks it will score political points with voters south of the Fraser River for its $400,000 Fraser Valley transit report, it should think again. Not only will the study’s results not be ready until long after the May provincial election, but its terms of reference are woefully inadequate as well.
The study aims to examine how best to deploy new buses and, more importantly, to assess the viability of running light rail transit on the existing Inter-Urban rail line, which runs from the north end of Scott Road in Surrey through to Langley, Abbotsford and Chilliwack.
A strengthening public movement covering all communities south of the Fraser prefers the right-of-way be re-established for just that: Modern, high-tech light-rail transit to connect everyone in the region and to link them up with the SkyTrain service in Surrey.
Why then did the B.C. government omit Surrey and Langley from the study’s terms of reference?
Skeptics suggest it wasn’t an oversight.
They contend it’s an intentional move to guarantee that the study will conclude there is insufficient population, ridership or economic justification for the light rail concept in the less densely-populated centres such as Abbotsford and Chilliwack.
Factoring the higher-populated Lower Mainland cities such as Surrey, Langley Township and Langley City into this study would certainly yield a different result — one that might well better serve the needs of a travelling, commuting public.
But Victoria has never been gung-ho on the idea of reviving the Inter-Urban line, a bias that becomes increasingly evident when considering the study’s terms of reference and lack of input from all stakeholders.
It’s worth reminding the election-bound B.C. Liberals that every south-of-Fraser mayor who publicly supported a return of Inter-Urban light rail was elected or re-elected in B.C.’s recent civic elections.
Not that government has ever felt it necessary to heed the wishes of its citizens.
-The Province newspaper
Wally
This excellent post is taken from Nathan Pachal (South Fraser On Trax):
In Michigan state, all levels of government and the private sector are coming together to upgrade a 44km section of single track rail to serve as a commuter line between Ann Arbor, Michigan (POP: 341,000) and Howell, Michigan (POP: 9,232). These communities are near Detroit. This project was proposed by the government because they had the choice of spending $500 million to add an additional lane of highway between these communities, or spending $33 million to get a simple commuter rail system up and running. They will be upgrading the signaling, crossings, tracks, and adding some passing sidings. Capital funding for the rail upgrade are in process. The short line operator, Great Lakes Central Railroad, will be providing the train-sets and operating the line. It is expected that passenger revenue and a government subsidy will cover the operating cost. They plan on running eight trains a day to start.
I wanted to point this project out for three reasons. First, it shows that you donA?ai??i??ai???t need to spend lots of money to get a simple rail system going. Second, there are some parallels to our Interurban line. (short line operator, underutilized line, etc.) Third, you donA?ai??i??ai???t need a large population to get a rail system up and running.
I invite you to read the business plan for this project.
-Nathan Pachal, South Fraser Blog
Canada asks provinces to suggest stimulus projects
Canada asks provinces to suggest stimulus projects
As we’ve long pointed out, regular Interurban rail service could be up and running the whole distance between Chilliwack and Vancouver within 2 years, with political will. The Fraser Valley has been clamouring for this service for long enough. It is now time for our provincial politicians to act. This is our golden opportunity!
One ideal infrastructure project that is simple enough to undertake immediately is to upgrade the entire stretch of Interurban track to passenger grade rail, as is currently being done in Surrey for their Heritage Rail Project. Such an upgrade is quite inexpensive, simple to carry out, and necessary for any sort of regular passenger rail service to be implemented.
By performing the necessary upgrades in 2009 using federal economic stimulus money, a Valley-wide demonstration project in time for the Olympics becomes viable.
While the track upgrades are ongoing, an implementation task force could be established to plan the next phase of Interurban infrastructure development – type of service, station locations, areas that are in need of double tracking, etc. Implementation of regular service could then be fast-tracked with the help of federal funds.
Light rail cheaper than buses – study
UBC Prof. Patrick Condon and Kari Dow have come to the startling conclusion that when you add capital costs together with operating costs, light rail is actually cheaper, per passenger per km, than any type of bus, and that Skytrain is the most expensive by far.
This is very significant for the Fraser Valley, because of the government’s promise to implement rapid buses to Langley by 2020 and Abbotsford by 2030. Rapid buses are not the affordable option for the valley. Particularly when you consider this study assumes construction of new light rail track in their cost estimates, when in fact we already have a strategically located rail line (the Interurban) that is sitting mainly idle and is far cheaper (and takes far less time) to uprade and use for LRT than a new line.
Condon also points out that for the cost of the proposed $2.8 billion Skytrain subway to UBC, you could supply each new UBC student with a hybrid car, forever!
Or, for that money we could fund the construction of a comprehensive light rail and transit network extending from UBC through Vancouver and right through the whole Fraser Valley, including a new rail bridge. One question though: if we spend the $2.8 billion UBC subway money on a comprehensive Lower Mainland rail and transit network, how on Earth would we spend the extra $1.1 billion that’s now allocated for a Surrey Skytrain extension?
Karlsruhe Light/Heavy Rail Track-Sharing System
Here is a good article, from Railway-technology.com, that describes the Karlsruhe Model of track-sharing:
Karlsruhe Light/Heavy Rail Track-Sharing System, Germany
“Close to the French border in south-west Germany, Karlsruhe in Baden-WA?A?rttemberg was the first European city to implement track-sharing for light and heavy rail vehicles. The ‘Karlsruhe Model’ is considered the reference point for similar developments worldwide…..”
Langley left out
More coverage today, in the Langley Times:
Rail group pans TransLink plan
and this very blunt editorial by Frank Bucholtz: Langley left out.
Why we build with LRT
What is Light Rail Transit or more commonly known as LRT? According to the Light Rail Transit Association (www.lrta.org) Light rail is a mode that can deal economically with traffic flows of between 2,000 and 20,000 passengers per hour per direction, thus effectively bridging the gap between the maximum flow that can be dealt with using buses and the minimum that justifies a metro. But there is more, by track-sharing with existing railways on their rights-of-ways, means that LRT can effectively and affordably service less populated areas, with public transport. Streetcars are also light rail, but operate on-street, in mixed traffic, with little or no signal priority at intersections. The main difference between LRT and a streetcar is the quality of rights-of-way, where a streetcar operates on-street, LRT operates on a reserved rights-of-way or a route that is reserved for the sole purpose of the light rail vehicle. A reserved rights-of-way can be as simple as a HOV lane with rails, to a lawned park like route with trees, hedges and flowerbeds. LRT, in it’s various forms is used in over 600 cities around the world and is the first choice of transit planners for affordable, customer friendly public transport.
The German city of Karlsruhe (City population 275,285) has taken light rail to a new standard, by track sharing with mainline railways and operating, what is called tramtrains. In Karlsruhe, one can board a tram, on-street, on the pavement and alight, on-street in Ohringen some 210km (130 mile) later, with the tram acting as a streetcar, light rail vehicle and a passenger train! Karlsruhe’s light rail network now extends over 400 km. (250+ mile) of route, servicing scores of small towns and villages with high quality public transit at very little cost simply because the tram can use existing railway tracks.
In British Columbia, tramtrain can be a useful tool for implementing a high quality ‘rail’ transit service, not only in Vancouver and the Fraser Valley, but in Victoria (E & N Railway) and the Kelowna/Vernon rail corridor as well.
The question is: Why does TransLink and the BC government reject modern LRT out of hand and continue to build with dated SkyTrain light metro?
Langley not in rail study
Langley not in rail study (Langley Advance)
“Rail for the Valley says Langley is being railroaded when it comes to a study of local transit options…”
Jordan Bateman is also quoted. He seems to think the study will seriously look at the Interurban. If that were the case, wouldn’t Langley be included in the study announcement?
Brian Lewis: Transit boss’s credentials starting to show
Is Translink REALLY going to give honest consideration to light rail on the Interurban route? Brian Lewis seems to think so. He really likes their new CEO Tom Prendergast:
Brian Lewis’s Province column yesterday
Excerpt:
“…after listening to Prendergast yesterday, my gut feeling says: Don’t count this guy out.
He’s a consummate transit professional, as his more than 30 years in the business suggests. His previous posts include senior vice-president of New York City’s subway system and president of the Long Island Rail Road, which is the largest commuter railroad in the U.S.
Yes, the man knows his rails and, as he said yesterday, he’s not about to dismiss either light rail or the existing Interurban right-of-way options as TransLink plans its options for south of the Fraser.
Nor is he convinced that SkyTrain’s extension in Surrey has to be a continuation of the elevated system.
In fact, when TransLink announces today that it’s embarking on two new major studies — one covering a westward, rapid-transit extension to the University of B.C. and the other focusing on Surrey — the latter study will look at all options, Prendergast told me yesterday.”
LANGLEY COMPLETELY LEFT OUT OF TRANSIT STUDIES (press release)
The following press release was sent out today, in response to the provincial government’s announcement today of transit implementation studies:
Today, the province and Translink announced implementation studies for rapid transit lines to UBC and to Surrey (see link). According to the provincial Transit Plan, the estimated cost of these expansions is $2.8 billion (UBC) and $1.1 billion (Surrey), assuming elevated SkyTrain is chosen. This would work out to $180 million/km for the line in Surrey and more than $200 million/km for the UBC subway line.
Light rail transit, in contrast, costs $20-30 million/km to implement from scratch, or much less for any project using the existing Interurban line. (According to a 2006 UMA study commissioned by the City of Surrey, Interurban light rail would cost only $6 million/km, and experts agree that east of Langley this figure drops off considerably, due to a far lower density of stations.)
Rail For The Valley points out that neither this study, nor the recently announced FVRD study focusing on Abbotsford and Chilliwack, includes Langley. “It’s a travesty that Langley, a full member and funder of Translink, appears to be left out yet again,” said Rail For The Valley spokesman John Buker.
Rail For The Valley appeals to Translink to shift it’s expansions away from the extremely expensive Skytrain option towards light rail, for both UBC and Surrey lines, and to include Langley and the rest of the Fraser Valley. Buker said, “While it’s encouraging that Translink is now saying the Surrey line could be light rail, we’re disappointed that they’re still even considering Skytrain as an option, given that Surrey strongly prefers light rail, and given that light rail is by far the more cost-effective option.”
During November’s civic election campaign in Surrey, it was revealed that not a single mayoral or council candidate favoured Skytrain expansion to light rail. (see link).
Recent Comments