Comments about TransLink’s recent push poll about expanding SkyTrain in Surrey.
The Truth about TRANSLINK’S SURVEY RESULTS EXPOSED….
southfrasercommunityrail@shaw.ca
May 26, 2019
South Fraser Community Rail
“Hydrogen iLink PassengerRail, Scott Rd. SkyTrain to Chilliwack” #connect the valley
Press Release May 26th, 2019
The Truth about TRANSLINK SURVEY RESULTS EXPOSED….
Look into the untold facts behind TransLink’s misrepresentation! It’s startling!
The TransLink Survey results just released by TransLink yesterday exposes this organization for what it does very well, they are irresponsible with your tax dollars, conduct one sided Open Houses with only ONE option, conduct in-house on-line surveys with only ONE option and conduct market research offering only ONE option with ONE Question – Add all of this up, you get a ONE sided result surprised!
IMPORTANT – Added to the above is the fact the area being surveyed is absolutely starved for Transportation of any kind. In Langley/Surrey you get the results that have been published, all manufactured by TransLink for your pleasure. Wasting tax dollars is something they do very well.
Real Market Research seeks out the public’s views on a selection of issues, providing a variety of options to select from. Conducting telephone market research and asking the question ‘would you be in favor of SkyTrain to Langley City down the Fraser Highway” with no other option – WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO BE THEIR ANSWER? Especially, as stated above, they are starved for a transit option of any kind! It is an insult to the intelligence of the region, all designed with a preset answer.
On telephone market research, let’s break down their numbers:
In Surrey a sample size of 595, a margin of error of +/-4%, 85% support and in numbers 505.
In Langley City a sample size of 67, a margin of error of +/-12%, 90% support and in numbers 60.
In Township Langley, sample size of 180, a margin of error of +/-8%, 92% support and in numbers 165.
IMPORTANT NOTE: This phone call research again asked one question with only one option and you get 90%-92 %? In a transportation starved community, how did they not get 100%?
On Open House, filled out survey forms?
Pouring an endless amount of taxpayer dollars towards and into promoting; the website, Digital ads (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google Search network, Google Display Network, G mail ads), Surrey Now Leader banner ads, advertorial, Facebook Posts, Langley Advance Times Banner ads, advertorial, Facebook Posts, SMS NextBus alert ads, eNewsletters, Social Media using Facebook and Twitter (Facebook events were created for each open house), Direct Outreach through corporate, business and community organizations, Mail out postcards to Surrey and Langley businesses and residents, Street teams (staff) distributing postcards at transit hubs, Community Events in Surrey, Information Boards at Surrey City Hall, Langley City Hall and the Township of Langley City Hall and finally transit ads! And you are Surprised at the result?
The level of awareness seems to have been the question of the day!
With the money poured into this one-sided Public Engagement Campaign the results are not at all surprising. Throughout the survey they talk about the plan for the South of Fraser – Surrey is NOT the South of Fraser region, it is a small part of it! Once again asking residents ONE question on ONE option in a region starved for any Transit Option does not constitute a survey of ANY value.
Seriously consider the following –
Doug McCallum got elected with only 13.50% of the eligible voters in Surrey!
Promised SkyTrain at a cost of $1.65 Billion, actual cost will be $3 + Billion!
Promised City Police Force @ 10% cost increase– Increase will be substantially greater!
The Safe Surrey Coalition has disbanded, Doug McCallum is the lone remaining voice and will cost the residents throughout the region increased TransLink taxation costs PLUS increased Surrey taxation for increased Policing costs. This financial irresponsibility has got to stop! Check out the Per Capita Costs below on all options:
Original LRT, Guildford, Surrey Center to Newton Pop. 312,340 @ $1.65 Billion = $5,122. Per capita
11 kms in length 104th Guildford to Surrey Center down King George Blvd to Newton
SkyTrain Surrey Center to Fleetwood Population 62,735 @ $1.65 Billion = $25,504. per capita.
7 kms in length down Fraser Highway to Fleetwood
SkyTrain Surrey Center to Langley City Population 157,618 @ $3.2 Billion = $20,302. per capita
16 kms in length down Fraser Highway (About $800 million thru a Dead Zone, 25% no population)
The solution for our region follows and the questions regarding this option were not asked? WHY?
Scott Rd SkyTrain to Chilliwack, Population 852,846 @ $1.250 Billion = $1,465. per capita
99 kms in length
The Interurban State-of-the-Art Hydrail Passenger Rail proposal makes sense for 1.2 million people! Why wasn’t this option offered in their survey? Cost would be pennies on the dollar and would serve 14 Post Secondary Institutions, 7 First Nations Communities and 16 Cities, towns and municipalities!
Let’s stop insulting the intelligence of the Public. Let’s start by conducting a balanced survey that will MEAN something, save Billions of dollars and provide far better service at a fraction of the cost while we are at it!
It would be laughable IF it wasn’t so serious! TransLink continues to waste an immense number of tax dollars while the regions (1.2 million residents) are losing out on a FREE for use corridor.
For more detail from the South Fraser Community Rail Group – Contact Rick Green – 604 866-5752
Good news everyone, the federal liberals are giving TransLink money to buy new cars and upgrade the Expo Line, yippee.
It’s not additional money of course, rather a renouncement of a renouncement.
Really, how much mileage can they get for $1.47 billion? A lot if today’s reannouncent is anything to go by.
Just to remind ourselves of the committed costs to date, I will restate the funded projects and the funding shortfalls.
Broadway subway: Funded to $2.8 billion. Real cost around $3 billion. Shortfall $200 to $300 million.
Surrey Expo line extension: Funded for $1.65 billion. Cost to go to Langley $3 billion. Shortfall $1.35 billion.
200 Mk.3 car order: $800 million plus. Funding included in the Federal financing. Shortfall $800 million plus from the two approved transit projects.
Expo & Millennium Line rehab: around $3 billion. Unfunded. Shortfall, around $3 billion.
Total funding shortfall: Over $5 billion!
As always, Translink’s numbers do not add up and the federal Liberals and the provincial NDP know this very well, but with such a dismal mainstream media in BC, renouncement of a reannouncement, of reannouncement makes big news!
New, reconditioned SkyTrain cars: Feds, province outline funding for Metro Vancouver transit
BURNABY (NEWS 1130) – The federal government is outlining how the $1.47 billion it previously announced to upgrade public transit infrastructure in Metro Vancouver will be spent.
The money will go toward buying hundreds of new SkyTrain cars, as well as toward reconditioning dozens of older ones.
“It’s money that was announced back in January that we were sharing the investment with the federal government,” B.C. Minister of Transportation Claire Trevena says.
Of Thursday’s announcement, Trevena says she’s happy to be able to announce the upgrades and expansion of the Expo and Millennium lines.
“The upgrades wouldn’t happen without the commitment from all levels of government. We’re working in partnership with the federal government, and obviously with TransLink to make sure this happens. But, we do need to ensure that we are replacing the rolling stock, that we do get those extra carriages on, that we have the facilities, the storage facilities, to make sure the power system is upgraded.
“We need to get people out of their cars, we need to get them into public transportation,” Trevena adds.
The money is part of the federal government’s broader infrastructure plan, which Minister of Defence Harjit Sajjan says has been able to fund thousands of projects across Canada.
“Our investments are encouraging more people to take public transit and helping to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution,” he says.
Continued investments in communities across B.C. will help grow the local economy, Sajjan adds, as well as build more inclusive communities, all while protecting the environment and health of those living in this country.
“Here in British Columbia, we have provided and invested over $3.6 billion through our infrastructure plan to date,” Sajjan says.
-With files from Martin MacMahon
Editor’s Note: A previous version of this story quoted Minister Sajjan as saying the federal government has invested over $3.6 million to date. The minister has corrected his statement to say $3.6 billion.
As the debate over trams/LRT and or proprietary light metro intensifies, let us look and modern trams in operation around the world.
Today, there is over 600 tram/light rail systems in operation or nearing completion, around the world.
Only seven of the proprietary ART Movia light-metros have been built in the past 40 years and there is good reason for this. With tram/LRT one can operate the in almost all locales, from small suburban lines to main transit arteries in major conurbations where peak hour customer flows exceed 20,000 pphpd.
With light metro, only somewhat short, yet very expensive trunk lines can be built, forcing many transit users to transfer from bus to mini-metro, which in turn deters ridership. This is but one, of the many reasons light metro has become somewhat obsolete in the 21st century.
This inherent flexibility of operation means that the modern tram can serve transit routes with low and high ridership; track share with mainline railways; and penetrate economically into dense city centres without beggaring the taxpayer.
Beggaring the taxpayer is a topic the SkyTrain lobby refuses to deal with.
Nottingham's (UK) new tram system services the city centre with the minimum of cost.
Another view of Nottingham's tram, using city streets to affordably reach customers.
Innsbruck's tram services mountain customers, giving direct access to the city centre.
A Basel tram operating safely, on-street in the city.
A modern tram operating in Nice, France. Note the simple reserved or dedicated R-o-W.
From the response from the previous post with about lawned rights-of-ways for trams, I offer more glimpses of what modern LRT should look like in Metro Vancouver and in any city considering modern light rail.
Think of tram routes as linear parks.
Think of Vancouver with many linear parks, providing fast and efficient public transport.
Think of a linear park reaching as far as UBC; Stanley Park; or even SFU.
This is real “Green” transit, supported by the “Green” movement internationally.
Modern light rail, would bring “Green” transit to Metro Vancouver.
Note: the centre is used for the APS method of power collection (no overhead wires).
A simple station or stop on a lawned tram route.
A simple pedestrian crossing at a station in Basel Switzerland.
But it is in France, where lawned tram track is de rigueur, making the tram a part of the cityscape and not an eyesore. The modern tram is “green” in more ways than one.
Reserved or dedicated, at-grade rights-of-way and easy pedestrian access across the line is the hallmark of LRT.
All the benefits of a metro at a fraction of the cost.
So, why does the provincial NDP, the City of Vancouver and the Mayor’s Council on Transit not support light rail?
Why instead, does the provincial NDP, the city of Vancouver and The mayor’s council on Transit keep supporting the now obsolete and extremely expensive light-metro system, with two lines using the equally obsolete, proprietary ART Movia Metro?
Maybe it has something to do about certain political contributions and donations?
Age is an expensive journey for older transit systems, especially older proprietary transit systems and the MK.1 cars operating on the SkyTrain network are indeed showing their age.
The majority of Mk.1 cars are now over 34 years old and are in dire need of major maintenance and/or refurbishment.
This is why TransLink is ordering 200 new Mk. 2/3 cars because they are going to replace the original fleet, which will have seen 40 years of service by the time the first replacements arrive.
Here is the problem, this order for 200 new cars includes the cars previously announced and not the extra cars needed for the Fleetwood/Langley extension.
Then there is the thorny issue that Bombardier may cease production of the ART Movia metro cars altogether, as Vancouver is the only city in the world, out of the seven cities that use ART Movia Metro or its predecessors, that is expanding its system. No other company offers an “off-the-shelf” vehicle for Expo and Millennium Lines.
Has TransLink reached it’s own “critical” vehicle shortage?
The answer maybe found on the Millennium Line where TransLink operates two car train-sets only!
In Toronto, Transit issues are reported, unlike metro Vancouver where the mainstream media report TransLink news releases as actual news and politely ignore the rest.
Presently, only 2 car train-sets are used on the Millennium Line. Has TransLink reached its critical vehicle shortage?
Scarborough RT fleet reached ‘critical’ vehicle shortage last month
The Scarborough RT’s aging vehicle fleet reached a “critical juncture” last month when so few cars were available for service that the line was operating without any spares, according to the TTC.
The shortage of cars meant the agency had no margin of error to operate planned service on the RT, which serves more than 35,000 riders every day. It’s a bad omen for Scarborough transit users who are supposed to rely on the line for at least another seven years.
The TTC expects the Scarborough RT to stay operational until 2026. The agency has “not yet evaluated how/if we can keep the line operational” beyond then, says a spokesperson, despite a provincial plan that may not see it replaced by a subway until about 2029. (Rene Johnston Toronto Star / Toronto Star)
The situation “is a prime example of the need to modernize and replace our assets before they reach their end of life expectancy,” TTC CEO Rick Leary wrote in his latest report to the agency’s board.
To operate full service on the RT, the TTC requires five trains. Each is made up of four cars, paired in two-car units, for a total of 20 vehicles.
The agency has 28 of the vehicles, which allow it to perform tasks such as preventative maintenance on some cars while still operating full service.
But in mid-April, workers discovered an electrical fault on a car as they were preparing it for morning service. At the same time, a car in another unit was found to have an axle-bearing defect.
Both of the two-car units had to be taken out of service. And because two more units were already undergoing overhauls as part of a life-extension program to keep the RT running, over five days the TTC had just 20 cars available.
That’s the bare minimum, meaning if any other car had experienced a problem during that period, the RT would have had to operate with fewer than five trains.
“Depending on the time of day, fewer than five trains would mean longer wait times and increased crowding,” said TTC spokesperson Stuart Green.
“Although not ideal, we can run four trains in peak periods. Fewer than that and we would supplement service with bus shuttles (in addition to the trains). We did this a few times over the winter when we faced challenges on the line.”
Green couldn’t rule out a repeat vehicle shortage.
“Unfortunately, given the age of the vehicles, it is possible we could see a similar situation in the future,” he said.
The RT fleet entered service in 1985, and was intended to last 30 years.
A 2016 analysis by Bombardier, which owns the RT vehicle technology, flagged numerous problems with the cars, including “heavily worn” brake discs and holes in car bodies that “could compromise the integrity of the vehicle structure.”
The document, which the Star obtained through a freedom of information request, said in some cases maintenance had been done using a “piecemeal” approach. “Duct-tape has been used as a sealant, electrical wiring is exposed,” it said.
The TTC was already facing a struggle to keep the RT in good enough condition to operate until 2026. That’s around the time the one-stop $3.9-billion Scarborough subway extension council approved as a replacement for the RT was expected to enter service.
However, the Ontario Progressive Conservative government has tabled legislation to take control of new transit builds in Toronto and plans to construct a longer, three-stop $5.5-billion subway extension instead. Its version may not open until about 2029, raising the prospect that Scarborough transit users will be served only by buses for years after the RT is forced to shut down.
Both subway plans supplanted a proposed LRT that was supposed to replace the RT. It was scheduled to open in 2019 when council voted in 2013 to build a subway instead.
Councillor and TTC board member Jennifer McKelvie (Ward 25, Scarborough-Rouge Park) said reliability issues with the RT fleet is “a problem we’re going to be dealing with for the foreseeable future.”
She said she would ask the TTC at the agency’s board meeting next week to ensure it has contingency plans in case it’s not able to operate full service on the line.
She supports the three-stop subway over the one-stop plan or LRT, and made no apologies for backing the project that could leave riders taking the bus for years.
“This is our one chance to build important infrastructure for the next generation, and we can’t take shortcuts, we need to do it right,” she said.
She said her message to Scarborough transit users is “to continue to be patient and positive as we work on this important issue together.”
Green said the TTC is confident its vehicle life extension project, which is expected to cost $68 million, will enable the RT to operate safely until 2026, but the agency has “not yet evaluated how/if we can keep the line operational” beyond then.
With files from Jennifer Pagliaro.
Ben Spurr is a Toronto-based reporter covering transportation. Reach him by email at bspurr@thestar.ca or follow him on Twitter: @BenSpur
The ongoing planning charade currently being played out by the cities of Vancouver & Surrey, and TransLink with the proposed Broadway SkyTrain subway, is being fueled by professional misconduct, by all professionals and most politicians involved.
A notable exception is Vancouver City Councillor Colleen Hardwick.
Today, the message being relayed around the world is that the city of Vancouver lacks any modicum of professionalism, which is both a dark message for companies wanting to locate here, but also it sends a welcoming call to money launders, flim-flam artists and alike.
The following is a 2014 email from a real transit engineer from Germany on the subject of tram headway’s and capacity (Capacity is a function of headway). He is answering questions that were put to me by several local politicians claiming that LRT cannot obtain the same headway’s as SkyTrain.
I relayed the email to said politicos and bureaucrats. As of yet, I have not heard a reply!
A coupled set of trams in Leipzig.
> = question.
> It is not possible to operate 36 trains per hour as traffic signals > will hold them back.
That’s the whole point of traffic light pre-emption. Which does not *increase* the green phase for streetcars, but *shift* it in time. So automobile traffic does not wait longer, it’s just different drivers who wait, statistically.
If there’s no significant automobile traffic parallel to the streetcar/light rail tracks (as typically the case in those “transit malls”), you can even dynamically reduce the green phase for the trains to the strict minimum required to clear the crossing (less than ten seconds, even for a four-car set), which will actually *increase* the green phase for crossing automobile traffic.
Right here next door, Leipzig is easily running 40 trains per hour on sections shared by several routes. And the infrastructure is not nearly at capacity, neither concerning trainset lenght (platform length would allow 60m instead of 42m), nor concerning frequency. Other operators do as well or even better. Karlsruhe’s 80 trains per hour are running through a pedestrian street. Calgary’s transit mall precisely seems to suffer from a lack of traffic light pre-emption, judging form the videos.
Another example, from Czechia, the streetcar at Prague. The section from Karlovo Namesti east to I.P.Pavolova carries the routes
4: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 6: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 10: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 16: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 22: 4 min 15 trains/h
That’s 45 trains per hour.
The tracks from Karlovo Namesti to the north carry the routes
3: 4 min 15 trains/h 6: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 14: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 18: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 22: 4 min 15 trains/h 24: 8 min 7.5 trains/h
That’s 60 trains per hour.
The tracks from Karlovo Namesti to the south carry the routes
3: 4 min 15 trains/h 4: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 10: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 14: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 16: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 18: 8 min 7.5 trains/h 24: 8 min 7.5 trains/h
That’s 45 trains per hour as well.
All figures given are for the morning peak. There are various other networks in Europe that have similarly dense operation on sections shared by several routes. 40 trains/h is not uncommon.
> In a subway, 31 trains are possible per hour with 14,640 passengers.
Boston’s green line is running 40 trains per hour, 90 second frequency. On sight in the tunnel, without ATC. Four branches, six minutes frequency each. They are running four-car trainsets for events so the platforms would be long enough.
First published in 2009. Updated 2014, 2016 and in 2019
A Wee Bit Of Local History
In early 1996, during BC Transit’s meaningless public consultation period for the Broadway Lougheed Rapid Transit Project which later morphed into the Millennium Line, Zwei received a phone call from an European Transit specialist, who worked for Asea Brown Boverai (later absorbed by Bombardier Inc.) regarding the project.
The European transit specialist, wanting to make contact with those planning for light-rail, had phoned BC Transit to arrange a meeting regarding the then proposed Broadway/Lougheed LRT project and was given Zwei’s phone number instead!
After his initial shock and displeasure being fobbed-off by BC Transit, the transit specialist entered into a long conversation with me on transit issues in the region and how modern light rail could help solve them. To make a long story short, he proposed a classic European style tramway for Broadway, with stops every 500m to 600m, going from BCIT to UBC, replacing all Broadway bus services and a second line via Main Street, Hastings St. to Stanley Park, that, he claimed would double present bus ridership on the two routes within two years, providing enough fare revenue for the tram to operate without any subsidy, with fares covering not only operating costs but most or all debt servicing costs as well. By doing so, a private company could build and operate the light rail line at no or little cost to the taxpayer.
The rest is history as they say and the SkyTrain Millennium Line was built instead and is subsidized by over $100 million annually!
The Light Rail Committee Proposes the BCIT to UBC and Stanley Park Light Rail Project.
In late 1996 the Light Rail Committee (now defunct) proposed a bold Broadway light rail plan: a tram/light rail line from BCIT to UBC via the Lougheed Hwy., Broadway, 10th Ave. and University Blvd. with a second line via Main street to Hastings Street to the Aquarium in Stanley Park. The plan consisted of lawned reserved rights-of-ways and on-street running; priority signaling on traffic calmed Broadway and Hastings Streets; tram/streetcar stops every 500 metres; a single track Vancouver General Hospital Loop via Fraser St., 10th Ave. and Cambie St., providing front door service to the hospital.
Commercial speed would be about 20 kph to 25 kph (depending on the number or tram-stops per km.) and the construction costs in the region of $25 million/km to $35 million/km; maximum hourly capacity of 20,000+ persons per hour per direction using modern low-floor trams.
Signaling would be line of sight with intersections and switches protected by local signaling. Headway’s could be as low as 60 seconds in peak hours.
What the LRCs plan would do is service many important transit destinations (UBC, BCIT, VGH, downtown Vancouver, Stanley Park, etc.), while providing economy of operation by replacing all bus services on Broadway and many in Vancouver, thus reducing operating costs by about half. Further economies are made by using existing masts and span wires along the proposed transit routes. The new LRT would be merely seen as the reinstatement of streetcar service by modern articulated trams, operating on 21st century rights-of-ways.
The concept of a private operator, by securing private financing to build the line at no or little cost to the taxpayer must be looked at by politicians. This type of P-3, not to be confused with the Canada Line scam, would see little or no subsides from government, unlike the Canada line which is heavily subsidized by TransLink by over $110 million annually.
The plan would reduce Broadway to one lane of traffic in each direction (passive traffic calming) except in areas of mixed operation, while keeping the all important on-street parking for local merchants. The plan would have offered a minimum of three transit routes: BCIT to UBC; BCIT to Stanley Park; UBC to Stanley Park.
The plan incorporates modern European light rail and tram practice; lawned reserved rights-of-ways, modular cars, high capacity, passenger comfort, and affordable cost. It was not to be, as the Glen Clark NDP government, for reasons that can only be speculated, dismissed LRT out-of-hand and went for a truncated SkyTrain light metro line, the only metro in the world that went nowhere to nowhere.
Now the City of Vancouver and TransLink are demanding a $3.5 billion dollar subway under Broadway.
It is time to again to consider again a BCIT to UBC and Stanley Park light-rail network, that could cost the taxpayer little or no money instead of a $3.5 billion subway to Arbutus or a $6 billion plus subway to UBC that ignores transit concerns East of commercial Drive.
/https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/gta/2019/05/04/scarborough-rt-fleet-reached-critical-vehicle-shortage-last-month/scarborough_rt.jpg)
Recent Comments