Zwei has been a member of the Light Rail Transit Association for over 35 years and with membership comes a subscription to the most excellent magazine Tramways & Urban Transit.
The following will be of most interest for those wanting an affordable rail connection from Vancouver to Chilliwack using the existing and former BC Electric passenger line connecting to Chilliwack or reinstating passenger service on the E&N Railway.
Today six years after the this article was published in T&UT much has happened with TramTrain. today there are over 30 TramTrain systems operating around the world, with a further 30 plus systems being planned.
TramTrain is evolving and with newer, Greener propulsion systems and cheaper and safer signalling systems, TramTrain is no longer a niche transit system, but a safe, affordable and user friendly transit mode, that can expand ones transit system into lower population areas, providing an efficient and cost effective public transport service.
There are several candidates for a TramTrain service in BC, yet the provincial government and civic politicians still want massively expensive and financially ruinous extensions to the current light metro system as they love to cut ribbons in front of mega-projects at election time.
The time has come to seriously consider TramTrain in BC, but I am afraid with Horgan and the NDP, the affordable transit train has long left the station.
From Tramways & Urban Transit
Tram-train / JUNE 2014
www.tramnews.net.www.lrta.org
TRAM-TRAIN:A PROMISE UNFULFILLED?
Micheal Taplin
Prologue
“On 25 September 1992 dual-voltage LRVs began running between Karlsruheand Bretten… within a year passenger numbers were up 400%, and today the model works over nearly 500km (310 miles) of track.”
TramTrain and regional passenger train at station.
During 125 years of electric tramways, the tram as we know it has generally been developed as a vehicle suited to alignments on, or based on, city streets. Of course there were interurban lines that ran across country, particularly in North America, where they reached their apogee in 1915, before being decimated by the inexorable rise in motor vehicles. Some of these originated as steam railroads, and others entered cities on the tracks of urban tramways or rapid transit lines. In Europe, particularly Switzerland, such interurbans were called light railways (to distinguish them from their mainline cousins), and again running on to city streets was, and is, quite common. The former NZH in the Netherlands is another example.Japan, with its plethora of private railway companies, followed the US interurban pattern, though the boom there coincided with the decline in North America, and Michael Taplin gives a brief overview of the tram-train concept and asks if political and institutional issues form a greater barrier to its further implementation than technical concerns.
During 125 years of electric tramways, the tram as we know it has generally been developed as a vehicle suited to alignments on, or based on, city streets. Of course there were interurban lines that ran across country, particularly in North America, where they reached their apogee in 1915, before being decimated by the inexorable rise in motor vehicles. Some of these originated as steam railroads, and others entered cities on the tracks of urban tramways or rapid transit lines. In Europe, particularly Switzerland, such interurbans were called light railways (to distinguish them from their mainline cousins), and again running on to city streets was, and is, quite common. The former NZH in the Netherlands is another example.
Japan, with its plethora of private railway companies, followed the US interurban pattern, though the boom there coincided with the decline in North America, and Michael Taplin gives a brief overview of the tram-train concept and asks if political and institutional issues form a greater barrier to its further implementation than technical concerns.most lines survive today as rapid transit operations, with some penetration of city streets or subways. None of the above models were referred to as tram-trains, though the principle is not dissimilar.
Germany The modern tram-train concept, which saw its inauguration at Karlsruhe in Germany, uses a tram-based vehicle capable of operation on both mainline railway tracks and city tram tracks. Track-sharing between trams and trains was not unknown before, but the railways involved could hardly be deemed mainline.Karlsruhe had its own interurban operation, the Albtalbahn, which had track-sharing with Deutsche Bahn (DB) on its northern arm.
The possibility of travelling to the city centre without a change of vehicle was very attractive to passengers. Thanks to the German concept of the Verkehrsverbund joint tariff area, the financial consequences could be uncoupled from the commercial interests of the operators (AVG and DB), and work concentrated on the legal and technical hurdles to be overcome to permit through operation.On 25 September 1992 dual-voltage (750V dc and 15kV ac) light rail vehicles began running between Karlsruhe and Bretten, switching between city tram tracks and DB tracks at Grötzingen.
Within a year passenger numbers were up by 400%, and today the Karlsruhe model works over nearly 500km (310 miles) of track. There are 151 dual-voltage cars, 121 from Siemens, and 30 just being delivered by Bombardier (with options for up to 45 more). The tram-train model was truly a success, and good business for the Karlsruhe-based consultants involved.
Other German examples followed, in Saarbrücken, Chemnitz, Zwickau, Kassel and Nordhausen, though not exact copies. Saarbrücken runs 28 Bombardier Flexity Linkdual-voltage cars through the streets and then on DB tracks south to Sarreguemines,
Despite the hype and hoopla of regional mayors, five very important facts about our SkyTrain light metro system are glossed over in Metro Vancouver, by metro mayors, bureaucrats and transportation planners:
The Expo and Millennium Lines operate a dated proprietary railway, now called Movia Automatic Light Metro.
Only seven of these proprietary railways were sold and in operation and when the Scarborough Rt closes down, there will be only six.
There has been no sales of the Linear Induction Motored MALM for the past 15 years.
In January, MALM will have a new owner, as Alstom absorbs, Bombardier’s rail division and has history discontinuing production of unsalable transit systems.
Several of the ART (the fourth name for the now called MALM) systems have embroiled Bombardier and SNC Lavalin in legal cases stemming from corruption charges.
The Expo Line is aging and needs billions of dollars in upgrades and rehab, with many spare parts scarce because there is no market for mass production as the system is very dated.
*
Another unpleasant truth is that with Covid-19, peoples travel habits have changed and the expensive rapid transit systems not satisfy peoples travel demands, thus will face a drought of ridership, further increasing subsidies. The inherent inflexibility of light-metro means longer commutes and more unpleasant journey times for transit customers, as the entire regional transit system is based on feeding the light metro system.
When travel habits change, unlike light rail the light-metro cannot.
A second ICTS/MALM system in Detroit is on its last legs and probably will not survive the next five years, again spare parts are hard to come by and are expensive to maintain a safe operation. When Detroit shuts down, then there will be five.
*
The Scarborough ICTS, will soon be a page in the history books and Vancouver a very strong political subway lobby is forcing the TTC to build a costly subway, to serve fewer customers at a billion dollar or more higher cost.
*
As always, Metro Vancouver politicians would rather spend three times more for a dated light metro system, purely for photo ops and happily raise taxes to cover their myopic vision for Metro Vancouver of towers and high rise condos.
Unfortunately, the clock is ticking with MALM and the years are aging the light-metro. The past flows, the future ebbs. As the proprietary MALM ages, costs climb expansion declines and then there were six.
Scarborough RT will shut down before subway is finished, mayor says
The beleaguered Scarborough RT will fail before the long-awaited Scarborough subway is built, leaving residents on the bus — possibly for years — Mayor John Tory confirmed Thursday.
Council, meanwhile, will once again be asked to consider the alternative — a cheaper, more robust plan to build LRTs across the eastern part of the city.
Speaking to reporters at city hall, Tory said he had been briefed on the lifespan of the SRT ahead of a delayed report to the TTC board.
“There are very active discussions going on now between the TTC and Metrolinx with respect to exactly how long we have to provide that alternate transit service for, because it will not be the case that we can keep the SRT going until the Scarborough subway is finished.”
That news — after a decade of promises to Scarborough residents about improved transit — undercuts one of the central arguments for building a subway instead of the cheaper light-rail transit option preferred by some on council.
When first pushed under former mayor Rob Ford’s administration, proponents of the subway said it was, in part, a superior option because the SRT could continue running while the subway was built and not cause any disruptions in regular service.
The TTC refused to answer questions on Thursday, saying its report to the board would now be tabled in February.
“The seven-stop Scarborough LRT that I advocated for, along with being approved, funded and able to serve more neighbourhoods, would’ve already been built and operating by now,” said Coun. Josh Matlow, who has long questioned the lack of evidence for a subway.
He plans to move a motion at council next week asking councillors to request the province stop work on the three-stop subway and instead build the originally planned seven-stop LRT, while using any cost savings to build a second LRT along Eglinton Avenue East.
“Today, the worst outcome has happened and Scarborough residents are being left on a very long bus ride. When we cautioned this would happen, subway proponents falsely promised it wouldn’t. Scarborough deserves so much better than this.”
A three-stop subway, loosely estimated to cost $3.56 billion with zero design work done was first confirmed by council under Ford in October 2013 — more than seven years ago.
Campaigning for the mayoral seat in 2014, Tory himself promised to build the three-stop version of the subway until ballooning cost estimates forced him to pivot to a revised one-stop option.
At the time, he and then-chief planner Jennifer Keesmaat promised that the cost savings from that switch would allow the city to also build an LRT along Eglinton Avenue East to the University of Toronto Scarborough campus.
However, emails uncovered by the Star showed that the cost had never been verified as claimed, and city staff believed it could actually be much higher but didn’t tell council that ahead of a crucial vote. Later, the cost of that subway option grew to overtake the available funds, pricing out any additional LRT.
When Doug Ford, the late mayor’s brother, became premier of Ontario, he resurrected the three-stop option approved years earlier, scrapping ongoing plans for the one-stop version. Construction of that estimated $5.5-billion subway — which has not been fully funded — has not yet started. The province estimates it could be completed in 2029 or 2030.
In TTC reports to the board to be discussed next week, staff note that the SRT is not currently fully functional, with only four of five cars in service and a plan to return to full service in October had been delayed. Though a future service plan assumes all five cars will be operational through 2025, the report notes that the SRT’s lifespan is “currently under review.”
In 2012, the city, TTC and Metrolinx signed an agreement to build a seven-stop LRT in the SRT corridor, replacing that service which at that time was said to be nearing the end of its life. Back then, Metrolinx was contractually obligated to pay the cost of the bus replacement service.
The TTC would not say Thursday who would cover the cost of any alternate transit now.
In a 2016 business case on the subway, city staff said “replacing the existing SRT vehicles with buses is not a desirable option.”
It outlined that bus replacement for the SRT during construction would require 63 additional buses and other infrastructure requirements such as a new bus facility to accommodate the additional fleet and expansion of the bus terminals at Scarborough Centre and Kennedy stations at a cost estimated at that time to be $171 million.
Give the gift of trusted news.
If you refuse to settle for second hand news and think that your loved ones shouldn’t either, give them the gift of the Star.
“The SRT shutdown would also result in slower and less reliable transit service,” the business case said, “which would be likely to deter users from using public transit.”
At executive committee Thursday, a report updated members that the cost of the Eglinton East LRT has nearly doubled, further pricing it out of the city’s transit expansion plan as it is not a provincial priority project.
Glenn de Baeremaeker, a former Scarborough councillor for the area and the mayor’s appointed “subway champion,” told the Star Thursday that closing the SRT before the subway is built is a “worst case scenario.”
“I would encourage the TTC and Scarborough councillors … to keep that SRT going if at all humanly possible,” he said, calling the SRT cars that have needed extensive repairs “literally Dinky toys.”
“I think the continuation of the SRT is essential, and if we can put people on the moon we should be able to figure out how to keep that dedicated line operating.”
One of my favourite railways, the Zilleralbahn, which I visited in 1983.
There is really nothing to compare this to in BC, though there could be some candidates, if our tourist authorities stop skiing at Whistler and actually craft a product other than winter skiing.
Running through a valley in a well to do rural area, the line is used by tourists and for commuter transport by local people. Railway enthusiasts from all over the world are attracted to it because of its use of steam engines on the narrow gauge railway.
Most of the passenger train services operate using modern diesel locomotives and railcars but the Zillertal Railway also has several steam locomotives which are used with heritage rolling stock for special trains targeting tourists. Goods traffic is carried; standard gauge wagons to and from the main line network are carried on transporter wagons.
In Jenbach the Zillertal Railway meets the ÖBB standard gauge line between Salzburg and Innsbruck and the metre gauge Achenseebahn. Jenbach is the only location in Austria where railways of three different track-gauges meet.
This is big news as Bombardier is the sole supplier of the proprietary, linear induction motor powered Movia Automatic Light Metro system used on the Expo and Millennium Lines. Alstom may or may not continue the production of the now stale dated Movia Light Metro and give notice to its customers that they will wind down production.
As Alstom will own the patents, the cost for MALM vehicles and spare parts may increase significantly.
The aged Movia family of light metro is now more expensive when compared to more modern transit mode, including light rail and only seven of the LIM powered light metros have been built since the late 70’s; with only three seriously used for urban transport.
So unpopular is MALM that its marketing name has been changed at least six times, over the past 40 or more years it has been on the market.
Vancouver is now the sole customer for MALM and if Alstom abandons production future planning for SkyTrain extensions will not be possible.
Does TransLink have a plan B? Do they really care?
2021 maybe the trigger that puts the carnival ride, called SkyTrain, into the history books.
Alstom-Bombardier deal to complete in January
INTERNATIONAL: Alstom and Bombardier announced on December 1 that they had received ‘all necessary regulatory approvals’ required to complete the sale of Bombardier Transportation to Alstom.
As a result the two companies expect the transaction to close on January 29 2021.
Alstom announced its intention to acquire 100% of Bombardier Transportation from Bombardier Inc and Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec on February 17.
After Alstom offered a number of product and factory divestments to ensure competition in key market segments, the deal was approved by the European Commission on July 31.
Signing of the formal sale and purchase agreement was announced on September 16, when Alstom said the terms had been ‘adapted to the current situation’, reducing the anticipated price range to between €5·5bn and €5·9bn.
Under the deal, the acquisition is to be funded through a mix of cash and new Alstom shares. Around €2bn is being raised on the market, with CDPQ contributing €2·6bn to €2·8bn through a reserved capital increase. The Canadian investor currently holds 32·5% of Bombardier Transportation, and would become the largest shareholder in the enlarged Alstom group with a stake of approximately 18%.
TransLink, the Mayor’s Council on Transit and the provincial government should take serious note of the following, but they won’t. Riding in their cars, subsidized by generous car allowances and more, politicians remain oblivious to current issues and pretend nothing has happened.
For politicians it is “Do as I say, not as I do.”
In the spring, Zwei wrote a letter to the Premier and Ministers for Transportation about how Covid is changing ridership habits of people and that there would be better uses to spend $4.6 billion than for 12.8 km of rapid transit.
Zwei got no answer.
$4.6 billion to build 12.8 km of light metro won’t take cars off the road, will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions and will not be “green” transit.
Vancouver’s public transit system is just average; there is nothing special about it and now with Covid, people are changing their commuting habits.
Remote working from home is now growing in popularity, as well as staggered work hours and, of course, driving is the safest way to commute in our Covid stricken world.
My big fear is that there will be little money for transit fro the next decade and when the current Broadway subway and Fleetwood extension are finished, there will be little appetite for further transit improvement, as the taxpayer just will not have the money to pay for it.
Sadly, political ennui and political prestige have become the raison d’être for transit planing and not customer satisfaction and with public transit, as with any other consumer protect, if the customer thinks he/she gets good value for money, he/she will use it, but if the customer thinks that the transit product is substandard, he/she will avoid it. Former customers are avoiding our regional transit system in droves.
The transit customer is voting with their feet and the politicians remain blind, deaf and dumb at the results.
From the BBC
Why our reliance on cars could start booming
Although many have been off the road during lockdown, research is showing that the desire to drive may surge in a post-pandemic world.
Until earlier this year, Alley Vandenbergwas a regular bus rider. She’d wake up each morning and take line 15 from her apartment in the City Park neighbourhood of Denver, Colorado, to her office at a financial institution in the bustling Civic Center Plaza. Because the commute was just 2.5 miles (4km), the investment supervisor left her car at home so she could avoid the hassle of driving through the heart of downtown at rush hour. It also saved her the $200 cost of monthly parking. Then, the pandemic threw a major wrench into her seamless commute.
“In May, when my office started asking people to return, my bus route had been cut to fewer runs, and capped at 15 riders per bus,” she says. Pre-Covid-19, the bus was always standing room only by the time it got to her, “so I knew I would just end up sitting at the bus stop for an hour or two, watching buses go by because they were already at capacity”.
This, coupled with news of riders not following guidelines for mask-wearing and social distancing, led her to swallow the additional costs and commute to work by car.
She’s hardly alone in making the change. Ridership on public transport has plummeted to historic lows both in the Americas and Europe, including on the London Underground and New York City Subway. Meanwhile, recent reports suggest that, despite our apparent embrace of biking and walking during the pandemic, many people can’t wait to get back into their vehicles. And they might even use them more after Covid-19 passes. Transport planners warn that this rapid shift back to the comfort of cars may be setting the stage for post-pandemic gridlock that could hamper economic recovery in cities across the globe.
A November report by automotive-services company RAC claims that the pandemic may have set the UK back decades in attitudes of driving versus taking public transport. Out of the 3,000 car owners surveyed, 68% considered their vehicles essential for daily errands, up from 54% last year.
The pandemic had the effect of making drivers who already had cars realise that they would depend on them more – Rod Dennis
Reluctance to use public transport was at its highest in 18 years. Some 54% of respondents said safety was a top consideration, but only 43% agreed that they would use their cars less if public transport was improved, which was the lowest figure since 2002. “The pandemic had the effect of making drivers who already had cars realise that they would depend on them more than ever,” says Rod Dennis, a data-insight spokesperson for RAC. “The million-dollar question is whether or not this is a deep-rooted change.”
The generation that has been historically least interested in car ownership, Gen Z, may offer some clues. Auto Trader, a digital marketplace for cars, says 15% of its website audience in the UK between June and September was aged 18 to 24, compared to just 6% during the same period in 2019. Rory Reid, Auto Trader UK’s YouTube director, noted that “the pandemic has shifted young people’s views of car ownership and gotten them to hit the road earlier than usual, as they look to rely less on public transport and try to minimize risk of spreading coronavirus”.
The technology is coming, whether we acknowledge it or not.
The “Green” challenge is not taxing people out of their cars or airplanes, rather it is providing a reliable and user friendly “Green” transportation alternative.
Our politicians have not done that, on the contrary they still opt for “rubber on asphalt” politics, including hugely polluting light metro (the pollution from cement manufacture) and ignore using existing railways.
Currently the provincial NDP, Liberals, and Green parties and their civic acolytes are not “Green” at all, using the “Green” moniker as an election gimmick and tax grab.
What political party or politician is up for the challenge to make truly BC Green?
As it stands all we have talking heads: all talk the talk, but none walk the walk.
The future is friendly, sadly in BC, our politicians and bureaucrats cannot see 20 minutes into the future.
Fuel cell Mireo Plus H to be trialled in Baden-Württemberg
26 November 2020
GERMANY: Deutsche Bahn and Siemens Mobility are to trial a fuel cell powered regional trainset in revenue service between Tübingen, Horb and Pforzheim in 2024, along with a green hydrogen fuelling plant.
Siemens and Deutsche Bahn plan trial of hydrogen-powered train in Germany
Published Thu, Nov 26 2020
Siemens Mobility and Deutsche Bahn have laid out plans to develop and trial a hydrogen fuel-cell train, in the latest example of major firms turning to a technology which could have a significant effect on the environmental footprint of transportation systems.
According to a joint announcement issued earlier this week, the trial is slated to commence in 2024 and will see a train travel between Tübingen, Horb and Pforzheim in the southwest German state of Baden-Württemberg.
The prototype train, known as Mireo Plus H, will use a fuel-cell and lithium ion battery. Made up of two carriages, its range will extend to as much as 600 kilometers, or a little under 373 miles. It will boast a top speed of 160 kilometers per hour.
When the year-long pilot gets underway, the hydrogen train will take the place of a diesel one. It’s hoped the trial will save approximately 330 tons of carbon dioxide.
The collaboration will also look to work on the associated infrastructure the train will need.
To this end, Deutsche Bahn is to partially refit one of its maintenance shops to service the train and will also develop a fueling station for the vehicle.
Using electrolysis, water will be split into oxygen and hydrogen, with the latter compressed then stored in a mobile unit. The electricity used in this process will come from renewable sources.
Support for the initiative is coming from the state government of Baden-Württemberg. Funding is due to come from Germany’s Federal Ministry for Transport and Digital Infrastructure.
At the moment, Deutsche Bahn has approximately 1,300 diesel-powered trains being used on regional routes. In addition, around 40% of its sprawling 33,000 kilometer network is not yet electrified.
“Especially on non-electrified routes, hydrogen fuel cell propulsion can become a climate-friendly alternative to diesel propulsion,” Winfried Hermann, who is Baden-Württemberg’s minister of transport, said in a statement Monday. “Whether powered by overhead line electricity or hydrogen – the decisive factor is that the energy comes from renewable sources,” he added.
One of many projects
The partnership between Siemens Mobility and Deutsche Bahn comes at a time when a number of projects focused on hydrogen-powered transport are taking shape.
In comments sent to CNBC via email a spokesperson for Transport & Environment, a campaign group focused on clean transport, emphasized the need to ensure hydrogen was used in a mixture of transport options.
“Rail in Europe is already largely electrified, so it is not where the big environmental gains are to be made,” they said.
“We need hydrogen in transport where batteries aren’t possible,” they added. “First and foremost, that means shipping and aviation. For long-haul trucks, the race is wide open.”
The spokesperson went on to state: “The biggest obstacle facing us is making sure that hydrogen is made from clean electricity. Producing hydrogen from fossil gas is not clean. We need to make sure it’s based on additional, renewable electricity.”
Interest in green hydrogen — a term used to refer to hydrogen that’s produced using renewable sources such as wind and solar — has started to increase in recent years.
A number of major players such as Orsted and BP are undertaking projects looking at the sector, while the European Union has laid out plans to install 40 gigawatts of renewable hydrogen electrolysers and produce as much as 10 million metric tons of renewable hydrogen by 2030.
To put the EU’s goals into context, the International Energy Agency says global hydrogen production currently amounts to roughly 70 million metric tons per year.
As the technology for hydrogen fueled trains continues to develop, the technology will become cheaper. Electric trains without the large cost of OHE.
Very Green, isn’t it.
Not in BC, where the government is OK building with prestigious light-metro and willing to spend $4.6 billion, to build a mere 12.8 km of line.
For $4.6 billion, we could rehab the E&N Railway, providing a modern regional rail service for Vancouver island. We could rehab the former Vancouver to Chilliwack interurban route and operate a modern regional rail service and we could rebuild the rail line from Salmon Arm to Kelowna, providing a modern regional rail service for the Okanagan.
Please tell me which would be more “Green”?
Hydrogen fuel cell train to be developed with EU funding
4 November 2020
EUROPE: The FCH2RAIL consortium’s €14m project to design, develop and test a prototype hydrogen fueled train has been awarded a €10m grant from the European Commission’s Fuel Cells & Hydrogen Joint Undertaking as part of the Horizon 2020 Program.
FCH2RAIL aims to produce a zero-emission train offering an operating performance which is competitive with existing diesel trains, using technology which could be applied to both new and refurbished vehicles. The overall budget is €14m, of which 70% would come from EU funds, and the remainder from the project partners.
The consortium is led by CAF, which has experience with fuel cell technology through its recently acquired Solaris bus subsidiary. The other members are German aerospace research centre DLR, Spanish national operator RENFE and infrastructure manager ADIF, car maker Toyota Motor Europe, Portuguese infrastructure manager IP, Spanish national hydrogen centre CNH2 and rolling stock component supplier Faiveley Stemmann Technik. Each consortium member will be allocated specific tasks by the end of the year, enabling work on the four-year project to begin in January 2021.
The prototype will be produced by modifying a CAF Civia Class 463 three-car EMU, a type which is found on many Spanish commuter networks. This will be equipped with a hydrogen fuel cell system and lithium-titanate batteries, giving the ability to operate through from electrified routes onto non-electrified lines.
Testing and authorisation is to take place in Spain, Portugal and a third country still to be determined.
The project will explore the use of waste heat from fuel cells to improve energy efficiency. The work programme also includes the drafting of new and updated European technical standards to ensure the interoperability of future hydrogen trains.
Light-metro, a 1970’s solution for a 1950’s transit problems and made obsolete by light rail by the early 90’s. Why oh why do politicians love gadgetbahnen.
The total cost of Honolulu’s 20-mile (32 km) rail line and 21 stations is $9.862 billion. If the add-ons approved by the board Friday are included in the final budget next year, the construction budget for rail will total $10.2 billion, not including about $1 billion in financing costs.
Remember, in Vancouver, we are spending $4.6 billion for 12.8 for light metro extensions to the Expo and Millennium Lines.
Then there is the issue of Private Public Partnerships or P-3’s, which were so designed to mitigate cost overruns. They don’t!
It is interesting to note that the Honolulu rapid transit project, was Bombardier’s last gasp to sell their proprietary Advanced Rapid Transit (ART) light metro (erroneously called SkyTrain in Vancouver), but the added cost for LIM operation, saw Bombardier pipped at the post by AnsaldoBreda and Ansaldo STS .
The desire for a mythical fast and driverless operation comes at a cost and politicians are finding that cost adds billions to the final price tag, P-3 or no.
‘How Do We Go Forward?’ Honolulu Rail Leaders Kill P3, Confront Unknown Costs
Officials will start a fourth attempt to find a way to finish the final four miles while adding hundreds of millions of dollars to the overall budget.
The quest to finish building Honolulu rail and run it for 30 years with a public-private partnership is officially over, two years after project leaders embarked on that path hoping to get the price and schedule under control.
Instead, the beleaguered multibillion-dollar transit project currently faces more runaway budget costs, a schedule delay of as much as 13 years compared to the original 2020 service date, and a future more uncertain than ever.
On Friday, Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation Executive Director Andrew Robbins announced his agency would take immediate steps to cancel the long-touted P3 effort after his last-ditch attempt earlier this week to convince city leaders to rejoin that procurement failed.
“This is not a moment to celebrate,” Kirk Caldwell, the city’s outgoing mayor, said Friday after a two-hour meeting with Robbins.
When the city withdrew from the P3 effort “it was a very sad and depressing moment for me,” Caldwell said. “Since then, it’s how do we go forward?”
HART rail guideway columns stand near the Keehi Lagoon Beach Park pedestrian walkway as rail snakes toward Middle Street. The city still hasn’t been able to award a contract to build the line past that area.Cory Lum/Civil Beat
HART will now start its fourth attempt since the rail project’s inception to award a contract to build the elevated rail line into town.
With the city once again short on funding, the next procurement may not include all of the transit line’s remaining four miles and eight stations to Ala Moana Center. Both Robbins and Caldwell have separately suggested a “phased” approach will be needed to eventually get that far.
Robbins said Friday it will probably take another couple of months for HART to issue the next request for proposals — and then it will take another year or so to award the construction contract that has proven so difficult.
Precisely what caused the P3 pursuit’s failure hasn’t been disclosed, although one of the companies competing for the contract shared in an earnings call this summer that its proposal was hundreds of millions of dollars more than what HART and the city had budgeted for the remaining construction.
One must have an affordable and user friendly public transit alternative.
Metro Vancouver doesn’t, nor is planning for one. Instead metro Vancouver is planning for politically prestigious mega transit projects and like all megaprojects, they cost a lot of money and government, whether it be civic, provincial or federal, has only one taxpayer to source income.
Metro Vancouver’s and the NDP’s addiction to the hugely expensive, yet extremely dated light metro, for the sheer rapture of cutting ribbons and laying plaques means the car must be singled out to pay for political largess.
Bent Flyvberg’s Iron Law of Megaprojects specifically addresses why politicians are obsessed with infrastructure at any cost.
…the “political sublime,” which here is understood as the rapture politicians get from building monuments to themselves and their causes. Megaprojects are manifest, garner attention, and lend an air of proactiveness to their promoters. Moreover, they are media magnets, which appeals to politicians who seem to enjoy few things better than the visibility they get from starting megaprojects. Except maybe cutting the ribbon of one in the company of royals or presidents, who are likely to be present lured by the unique monumentality and historical import of many megaprojects. This is the type of public exposure that helps get politicians re-elected. They therefore actively seek it out.
The die has been cast, with the NDP’s political promise to extend the obsolete SkyTrain light metro to Langley, Vancouver needs money to help pay for an extremely costly transit system woefully unsuited for the job it is supposed to do.
The sad fact, for almost $10 billion in investment to extend the dated SkyTrain light metro to Arbutus in Vancouver and to Langley, including much needed rehab and upgrades to the aging Expo Line, will probably not take a car off the road.
Vancouver’s mobility pricing debate dominates council’s approval of emergency climate plan
VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) — A debate over charging Vancouver drivers a fee in a bid to reduce congestion and emissions dominated city council ahead of its approval of the Climate Emergency Action Plan, on Tuesday.
Council voted 6-4 to adopt the plan, including an amendment to have staff report back in two years with a feasibility plan on road pricing for all of the downtown peninsula and part of the central Broadway corridor.
“The already insufficient and unstable gas-tax revenue will decrease further as we continue to encourage an uptake of electric vehicle use, whose drivers currently pay little toward the roadway network,” the report says in arguing the need for a new revenue source.
“The number one issue we’re hearing about from the public was the City of Vancouver advancing a transport pricing framework without any coordination regionally,” says Dominato, adding it’s critical to coordinate with other municipalities and TransLink to invest potential revenue back into public transportation.
“But it has to be a regional approach because we’re so interconnected in our economies across Metro Vancouver,” Dominato says.
Mayor Kennedy Stewart acknowledged last week that the city lacks the power necessary to tax roads and the law would require changes before the city can go-it-alone on charging drivers.
Councillor Rebecca Bligh says she’s happy her amendment to separate the road/mobility/congestion vote from the rest of the plan was accepted, adding she heard loud and clear that more stakeholder engagement is necessary.
“We’re in the middle of a pandemic and in two ears we’ll still be feeling the effects of a pandemic, financially, for sure, and so we need to take all that into account while we study mobility pricing,” she says.
Bligh says she believes in the long run a system can be designed that will reduce congestion and accomplish a fair and equitable tax while reducing city expenses overall.
New focus on climate initiatives
With the adoption of the Climate Emergency Action Plan comes a commitment to add electric vehicle charging stations and city-wide residential parking permits. It also includes a plan to grow walking, cycling and alternative transportation methods.
Another large focus will be on using more sustainable building materials and reducing the use of natural gas, which accounts for 54 per cent of the city’s emissions, according to staff.
In an op-ed in the Georgia Straight this week, Councillor Christine Boyle made her case for parking fees and surcharges on high-emission luxury vehicles.
“Transport pricing and parking permits need to have fairness and equity at their core. We need to incorporate discounts or exemptions for low-income people and people with disabilities, and to consider the needs of precarious and low-wage workers,” she wrote.
Dominato and others have criticized the inclusion of additional parking fees and permitting, saying the COVID-19 pandemic has put too much strain on people’s wallets and the economy already.
“I really didn’t see a strong business case for that in terms of affordability,” says Dominato
Haveacow is an avatar of a very knowledgeable chap from back east who works with public transport.
In the arcane world of transit in Canada, speaking one’s mind or even being truthful can send one to Coventry.
To send someone to Coventry is an English idiom meaning to deliberately ostracize someone. Typically, this is done by not talking to them, avoiding their company, and acting as if they no longer exist. Victims are treated as though they are completely invisible and inaudible.
Mr. Cow’s insights and vast experience makes him a person to be listened too and indeed, Zwei does.
When one reads the following, which is a comment he made on a previous post, the first thing that comes to mind is that Broadway is not the busiest transit corridor in Canada or the USA. Far from it, it is rather average.
Of course this manipulation of the facts, repeated over and over again so the public tended to believe it, was and is the basis for the justification to build the Broadway subway.
Even TransLink, grudgingly admitted to this in a letter, when they thought they were to be faced with a possible judicial inquiry.
TransLink is confident in its data collection and peer comparisons, noting that the 99 B-Line route on the Broadway
Corridor moves 60,000 customers per day on articulated buses running every three minutes at peak times.
This is our region’s most overcrowded bus route.
Please note, this includes all bus routes that use Broadway, including the number 9, 8, 14, 16, 17, and of course the 99B. It should be noted that the only bus route which the subway will replace is the 99 B-Line and only from Commercial Drive to Arbutus!
Not only has this sham planning been approved by regional mayors, it has been approved by the province!
For the common person, this would lead to investigation and criminal charges, but not our transit planning, where six figured salaries and bonuses are the order of the day.
Sadly inaccurate and manipulated data, repeated over and over again, swayed civic, provincial and federal politicians to fund a 5.8 km almost $3 billion subway under Broadway!
The frustrating thing about the way TransLink measured the capacity ranges for the various types of rapid transit technologies was because it was based on how they believed they would run the particular transit operating technology. It wasn’t based on how other more experienced regional transit properties ran their facilities or even close to the best-known Canadian or international operating practices of each type. This pretty much guarantees the results you want. The choice of SkyTrain on Broadway was highly manipulated by this kind artificially low operational capacity and standards and practices that were poor choices for any comparison. I used Bus Rapid Transit as an example here not because I thought it was the best option on Broadway but as an example to show how poorly TransLink’s BRT option really was compared to what could have been used in their report.
The Bus Rapid Transit norms used were inferior and far from the superior practices used by Ottawa and other cities.This absolutely shoddy choice of BRT infrastructure and operating practices shows the limited understanding TransLink officials had on the subject. Thus it’s not surprising that the capacity limits believed for their BRT comparison were more than a little artificially low, especially compared to where and how they planned to operate the SkyTrain.
How TransLink Defined and Would Operate Bus Rapid Transit
I remember reading what TransLink defined as Bus Rapid Transit in many of their past reports and giggling. Ottawa has operated real Bus Rapid Transit on our bus transitway Network since 1983. Ottawa still has the most extensive network of BRT lines in North America, even with 12.5 km of BRT lines already converted to LRT and about 25 km more being converted presently. Many of the operating details of what TransLink defined under BRT would be laughed at by longtime Ottawa Transitway passengers and not considered BRT but really, a glorified express bus with nice bus stops.
Professionally, many of the operating practices presently used or what TransLink planned to use as BRT operational practices in their reports, showed at best an inexperienced operator and a lack of understanding about what you can really do with BRT. If you are going to measure BRT against SkyTrain in a given corridor to determine the most useful operating technology, actually measure a real functioning line that is working within a real BRT operation. Not the joke TransLink used to compare against the SkyTrain. What was obvious from the start was that TransLink doesn’t either understand or wouldn’t acknowledge that there are 2 main types or extremes, of BRT operations, open or closed systems. Choosing to mainly concentrate on either one has real operating advantages depending and different issues that very much effect what gets put in reports. Unfortunately the same lack of understanding can be said for their LRT and just general standard bus operating comparisons as well.
The example of BRT system TransLink used was a mostly closed system which by their nature purposely limits operational capacity and bus numbers to preserve the infrastructure’s theoretical capacity. It greatly lowers cost as a result but TransLink’s own documents downplayed the cost reality. It mainly concentrated on the capacity argument. The examples below are mostly open BRT systems which greatly increase operational capacity.
Before the conversion to LRT, during the height of both the AM and PM peak period, Ottawa’s Transitway would have a passenger level of 10,700 passengers per hour per direction. This was done using 185 to 200 buses per hour per direction on 85 separate bus routes. During the day the Central Transitway would average between 4,000 to 6,000 pass/hr/direction using 60 to 80 buses/hr/direction.
Currently, during both peak periods Gatineau’s Rapi-Bus Transitway moves 4600 to 5000 pass/hr/direction using 90 to 100 buses/hr/direction.
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia “Brisbane Transport Agency known as “Translink” operates a successful BRT “The Busway Network” moves at peak 14,000 pass/hr/direction using 225 buses/hr/direction.
Pitsburgh’s Busway Network during both peaks sees 4500-4800 pass/hr/direction using 90-95 buses/hr/direction
Capacity and Cost is Important Here
The capacity of TransLink’s BRT example in the report shows a service level of only a marginal improvement over the current bus system. Each one of these BRT examples I used uses far greater levels of buses than was currently planned for the Broadway Corridor, but their capacity far exceeds stated capacity levels of Bus Rapid Transit in the reports. The truly laughable BRT capacity used by TransLink here can’t be realistically compared against a full Light Metro line operating in a tunnel. Especially if operating costs aren’t considered important. For example, data out of various projects in Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa all showed that a full scale BRT line is lower in cost per passenger and 30 year operating costs than a Light Metro line if that particular line is moving less than 134,000 people a day. Broadway has quite a while before it will consistently break that service level.
Compare Apples to Apples and Oranges to Oranges
The BRT example used in the Broadway report was mostly operating in a painted bus lane with some physical segregation. Painted bus lanes can be easily entered by other vehicles, they are almost impossible for any police service to regulate if it is more than a kilometre long, are highly effected by parking lanes, driveways and laneways, block lengths, the number, size, frequency of and types of intersections. Different types of intersection signaling and control and the sheer number of other lanes. Painted bus lanes have a very low numerical capacity 3000 to 5000 pass/hr/direction depending on many physical conditions. Lastly, the amount of external traffic is desperately important as well for the operating effectiveness of a painted bus lane. Unless the bus lane is a non painted, physically segregated from other traffic, the comparison of this bus lane to any train in a tunnel is meaningless.
To be fair, if you are going to measure a BRT lane against a SkyTrain operating in a tunnel, the BRT lane needs to be in a tunnel as well!
The type of BRT operations used needs to have the capacity maximized to compete fairly against any type of train. The position of the BRT lanes also needs to be considered as well given other surface road conditions.
A mostly closed BRT system operating along mainly painted bus lanes, operating in the open, along with other mixed traffic lanes and having to enter signalized intersections will never compare favourably against the SkyTrain operating below grade in a tunnel.
Stations become critical here because the report had fairly numerous bus stops that could only hold two articulated buses 18 to 20 metres long each. The SkyTrain station platforms were 80 metres long. There were also more BRT stops than SkyTrain Stations. That’s just not an equal comparison!
TramTrain and regional passenger train at station.
/https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/city_hall/2020/12/10/scarborough-rt-will-shut-down-before-subway-is-finished-mayor-says/scarborough_rt.jpg)
HART rail guideway columns stand near the Keehi Lagoon Beach Park pedestrian walkway as rail snakes toward Middle Street. The city still hasn’t been able to award a contract to build the line past that area.Cory Lum/Civil Beat
Recent Comments