“We do not have to watch reruns of Monty Python for our amusement, we just have to tune in to Vancouver’s transit planning for our entertainment”

It is now 2017 and the transit year is off with a dull thud.

The title comes courtesy of an old transit acquaintance from the UK who was badly burned by his Canada Line experience.

With the planned Pattullo Bridge replacement bridge having only 4 traffic lanes; the Surrey Hawthorne Park road debacle (where a new road is needed due to LRT taking up two traffic lanes); the ongoing Broadway Subway silliness and TransLink’s oppressive ongoing public relations program, 2018 will be a make or break year for transit.

My money is on a complete transit fiasco, as the amateurs planning the Surrey LRT; TransLink’s/City of Vancouver’s denial with subway costs (TransLink fired its best planner because of his opposition to the subway) and Burnaby mayor, Derek Corrigan, now head of the mayor’s Council on Transit, it will be a most explosive mix.

The main stream media both in Vancouver and Toronto, who have never honestly reported on transit in the region and rely on a blather of News Releases and ‘Yellow Journalism’ for their transit articles are firmly on side with TransLink, as they rely on TransLink’s largess with advertising revenue. If the news fits, they will print!

Then we have Kevin Desmond, the new American born CEO of TransLink, repeating the old saw that “SkyTrain pays its operating costs”.

Really?

But Desmond never mentions the annual subsidies paid to SkyTrain and the Canada line.

Subsidies you say? But how can a transit system pay it operating costs, yet receive a subsidy?

Fancy book work, Mr. Desmond.

So much more including the bad habit of giving percentage increases, without giving the actual numbers.

It is like listening to a used car salesman, selling a lemon.

After the fiasco’s of 2015 and 2016, I hoped TransLink for once, would travel a more honest road. Well, I guess you cannot teach a bad old dog new tricks.

Memo to Mr. Horgan: Clean up this vile and expensive mess called TransLink.

 

A Question Of Capacity Reprinted from the Light Rail Transit Association

A QUESTION OF CAPACITY

THE CAPACITIES of different modes of transport are generally quoted as 0-10 000 passengers per hour for bus, 2000-20 000 for light rail, and 15 000 upwards for heavy rail.

 

 

* Maximum capacity is only likely to be required for a few hours during peak hours, and even here there are likely to be variations both day by day and within each hour. The capacity required originates from the route’s social characteristics.

* As for the vehicles, buses have a comfort capacity equal to the number of seats, and a maximum capacity equal to seats plus standing load.

* In the case of trams, it is more complicated. The nominal maximum capacity is calculated at four passengers per square metre of available floor space (a reasonably comfortable level), plus the number of seats.

* As trams are designed to carry a large standing load, the ratio of standees to seats is quite high. The standing area is also important for the carrying of wheelchairs, pushchairs, shopping and sometimes bicycles. Some manufacturers quote maximum capacity using 6p/m2 while a figure of 8p/m 2 is used as a measure of crush capacity. This last figure is also employed to determine the motor rating of the vehicle.

* A further complication is that even when there are seats available, some passengers prefer to stand. This may be because they are only traveling for a few stops, that they want to stretch their legs, or may just prefer to stand.

* A tram’s comfort capacity can therefore be considered as the number of seats, plus the voluntary standees who may amount to up to 10-15% of the nominal maximum number of standing passengers.

ELASTICITY

* It is the difference between the average passenger load for any particular time and the crush load which gives light rail its Elasticity Factor, allowing it to cope with variations in conditions such as sudden surges or emergency conditions.

* Standing is made more acceptable by the design of track and vehicle, reducing the forces acting on the passenger to a minimum. This makes for a smooth ride, as well as ensuring ease of access, good support and the ability to see out without having to stoop.

* Where a route is mainly urban with short journey times, the number of vehicles required should be calculated on the nominal maximum. On longer journeys outside the central area, a lower level may be more appropriate, dependent on the route’s characteristics. Even on rural sections, there are likely to be a a number of short distance riders, and the loading factor will increase nearer to the urban area.

COMPRESSIBILITY

* While it might be thought desirable to offer every passenger a seat, it is in fact the ability to carry high loadings in a confined area (the Compressibility Factor) which enables light rail to achieve many environmental benefits, allowing large numbers of people to be carried without harming, and often improving, the features of a city.

* It is city centres where several routes combine that the most capacity is required. A typical situation could be a pedestrian street with six routes operating at 10-minute headway giving 36 double coupled trams per hour each with a capacity of 225. This gives a nominal capacity of16 200 passengers per hour which can be increased to 25 200 pph in extremis without extra vehicles.

Light rail is unique in this ability to operate on the surface with its capacity without detracting from the amenities which it serves. A further factor in setting the resources required is the need to lure motorists out of cars. The more difficult the traffic conditions, the higher the loading’s will be acceptable. It is however important that crush loads are not allowed for more than the shortest of periods on an infrequent basis, both to maintain customer satisfaction and prevent elasticity of the system being compromised.

* It is vital that public transport can cope with sudden changes in demand, such as extreme inclement weather or air quality violations which can cause private traffic to be halted. This is where the elasticity inherent in light rail is so beneficial in enabling an instant response in an economical fashion. A tram may be crowded, but its infinitelybetter than having to wait in the snow of smog untilextra vehicles are brought into service.

* It is this unique combination of Capacity, Compressibility and Elasticity rather than capacity alone which makes light rail so successful as an urban transport mode.

* Note Statistics are based on Karlsruhe, using GT/8 cars

 

Christmas Eve in Trondheim

Christmas eve and the dependable tram is ready to take one to Christmas festivities.

 

Numbered Line 1, it is operated by Boreal Bane, a subsidiary of Boreal Norge and is often simply called the GrA?kallen Line (GrA?kallbanen). GrA?kallbanen operates five tram cars, out of a total rolling stock of nine articulated tram cars built by Linke-Hofmann-Busch in 1984. In addition heritage cars from the Trondheim Tramway Museum are available for chartered tours.

The tram operates at 15 minute headway in the daytime on weekdays, and partly on Saturdays, otherwise at 30 minutes headway. The line has 21 stations remaining in use. The tram service is integrated into the city bus system with free transfers. The overall responsibility for public transport in Trondheim is managed by SA?r-TrA?ndelag county municipality, who subsidize the operations.

Previously there were three lines in Trondheim, including Ladelinjen to Lade and Singsakerlinjen to Singsaker in addition to tracks to Ila, Elgeseter, Trondheim Central Station and Lademoen. The line to Singsaker was closed in 1968 while the rest of the network was closed in 1983 and 1988, though the line to Lian was reopened in 1990.

Since 2004, the tramway has been the most northern in the world, following the closure of the Arkhangelsk tram system on 21 July 2004.Trondheim is also unique in that it is one of two rail lines in Norway built to metre gauge 1,000 mm (3 ft 3 3a?i??8 in) (along with the heritage railway Thamshavnbanen) and in that the tramway is one of two in the world (along with the Cairo tramways) to use 2.6 m wide cars in combination with metre gauge.

The Return Of The Tram!

One of the recurring themes for the SkyTrain types is that big cities have subways and little cities have trams.

Well Berlin, the Capital of Germany with a population 3.7 million, is now investing in trams in the former “West” portion of the city as the old Communist “East” section retained the pre-war tramways.

This could be a lesson for Vancouver, in providing user-friendly transit, instead of politically prestigious and user unfriendly subways.

The subway isnai??i??t necessarily ideal for short trips………… Getting on a tram at street level is easier for people with limited mobility………

This is something TransLink and Vision Vancouver planners have failed to realize, transit that is easier to use is user-friendly and user friendliness is the prime reason people use public transport.

While East Berlin’s streetcars soldiered on under communist rule, West Berlin tore up the tracks. Now, the city is correcting its mistake.

While East Berlin’s streetcars soldiered on under communist rule, West Berlin tore up the tracks. Now, the city is correcting its mistake.

This spring, Berlin agreed to correct a 50-year-old mistake.Back in 1967, in a city divided between the powers of the Cold War, West Berlin canceled its last streetcar services, focusing its transit network on trains, subways, and buses. Meanwhile, East Berlinai??i??s streetcars soldiered on, resulting in a tram system that today is largely nonexistent in the cityai??i??s former western sector.But 28 years after reunification, the city has realized its error. Between now and 2026, the German capital is set to greatly expand its streetcar network, with the western region receivingmost (if not all) of the new connections. Starting in 2021, streetcars will roll back out along the western streets, with officials hopeful that they will streamline the local transit, and maybe even reduce crime in some areas.A quick visit to eastern Berlin makes clear why the western sectorai??i??s rejection of streetcars was a bad idea. European streetcars have never developed the bad reputation they often have in the U.S., and what survives of Berlinai??i??s longstanding pre-division network is still exemplary. Usually fully segregated from motor traffic, itai??i??s fast and clean, linking up well with the subway without duplicating its routes. Jump out of the subway at some key stations and youai??i??ll often find a carefully timed streetcar waiting there to whisk passengers away.

Recent modest enlargements to the network have also proved popular. When the streetcar was extendedto Berlinai??i??s Central Station in 2015, the city expected 20,000 passengers per day. The current number of passengers is actually twice that.The new lines will follow this model, extending from the existing network far into the west, to connect the Kreuzberg, NeukAi??lln, SchAi??neberg, Moabit and Charlottenburg districts to the cityai??i??s (formerly eastern) heart. None of these areas are poorly served for transit links, but the streetcars will certainly come in handy. Berlinai??i??s buses can get snarled in traffic at peak hours, while the sheer variety of routes mean that people tend to stick to the two or three lines they know well, or even avoid buses entirely.

The subway isnai??i??t necessarily ideal for short trips, even if Berlinai??i??s system is often considerably closer to ground level than in London or Paris, resulting in trains that are quicker to reach from the street. Getting on a tram at street level is easier for people with limited mobility, while it could also take some weight off an overburdened subway in a fast-growing city.Some drivers wonai??i??t be happy, however. Berlinai??i??s streetcars donai??i??t mingle with traffic, so they will take some space from existing car lanes along key routes. Still, the plan has some potential support from an unexpected source: users of a park that will likely get a new tram line through it.The current plan is to thread rails across Kreuzbergai??i??s GAi??rlitzer Park, a long sliver of parkland that covers the former platforms and sidings of a long-demolished railway station. Using parkland as a transit site might sound controversial, but in recent years the park has become a notorious sitefor drug dealing. Bringing the streetcar through the park might make it more difficult for dealers to use the park as shelter, meaning that so far, locals seem to be giving the plan cautious approval.The new trams should ultimately join up with other pending transit projects, including a new bike highway network. Berlinai??i??s drivers may be looking at less road space in some areas, but the cityai??i??s transit network could end up proving so effective that few will mourn the loss.

Their NDP May Do, What Our NDP Should Do!

The Scarborough subway soap opera continues.

What is interesting is that the NDP in Ontario may very well kill the now $3.45 billion, 5 km., one station subway for a much cheaper light rail line.

“There is a tipping point beyond which the unjustifiable becomes unsustainable.” and as TransLink and the Mayor’s Council on Transit are deeply afraid in releasing current cost estimates, one must be assured that the tipping point for the Broadway SkyTrain subway has already been past.

Memo to Premier Horgan; show some moral fortitude and kill the project, before the project kills TransLink.

Could the NDP stop the Scarborough subway in its tracks?

The Ontario Liberals and PCs are dug in deep on the transit plan but on the eve of an election what better way for the NDP to resonate with Toronto than by reverting to the original LRT plan, Martin Regg Cohn writes.

By Martin Regg CohnOntario Politics Columnist

Wed., Dec. 20, 2017

Itai??i??s not every day ai??i?? nor even every year ai??i?? that Toronto opens six new subway stations. More like every other decade.

Thatai??i??s a long wait for harried commuters. And an eternity for politicians in a hurry.

None of the politicians cutting the ribbons this month were in power all those years ago to cut the cheques. A timely reminder that they only ever benefit from the short-term election cycle, and rarely remain for the long-term investment horizon required to build subways.

Against that backdrop, the back and forth trajectory of transit construction in the GTA is easier to explain. Politicians come and go every few years, while their pet projects zigzag to their final destination:

Former finance minister Greg Sorbara drove the much-needed York University extension all the way to his own riding of Vaughan, a dubious terminus; ex-mayor Mel Lastman gave us the little-used Sheppard stub; the late Rob Ford begat the overbuilt Scarborough subway, with funding from his federal pal, then-finance minister Jim Flaherty; and Dalton McGuinty bankrolled much of it before bailing as premier.

A supporting role goes to Brad Duguid, the Scarborough cabinet minister who warned that any subway changes would be ai???over my dead body.ai??? Like other transit contortionists and extortionists, Duguid isnai??i??t running again, so he will be long gone by the time his legacy becomes our albatross. Two public servants who have danced around the Scarborough debate are also out of the picture ai??i?? chief planner Jennifer Keesmaat has quit, and the TTCai??i??s nimble CEO, Andy Byford, is New York-bound.

Who then will cut the next set of ribbons years from now?

A new cast of characters is driving the transit debate ai??i?? Premier Kathleen Wynne, Progressive Conservative Leader Patrick Brown, the NDPai??i??s Andrea Horwath and Mayor John Tory. Despite their disparate ideologies, they have a shared allegiance to the dubious Scarborough subway extension that defies logical transit planning and fiscal prudence.

For the rest of the story click here.

 

 

A VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL!

RAIL FOR THE VALLEY WISHES ALL A VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS

AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR

Fear of Subway Costs Grips Mayors Council

As our friend, Haveacow indicated some time ago, the Broadway subway is going to cost a lot more than many think.

Some years ago, Zwei entered into correspondence with a German transit Engineer, Wolfgang and he warned of subway construction and operating costs, which hobbled German transit authorities and also lead to the rebirth of the tram in Germany.

In Toronto, the TTC estimates that the cost to operate and maintain a one station 5 km subway is $40 million annually.

The last post now sees Vision Vancouver and the mayor, rushing ahead with subway plans, yet the very same council is afraid to release the estimated costs for the subway.

Memo to Premier Horgan: Enforce a moratorium on all subway planning until TransLink releases:

1. Total construction costs for a SkyTrain subway.
2. Ai??The annual maintenance costs for a SkyTrain subway.
3. Present passenger flows on the 99B buses on Broadway.

Planning by stealth never works and fear now grips the mayor’s Council on Transit as they are afraid of releasing the real costs of subway construction.

Thank you to Bob Mackin and the Breaker news!

 

Exclusive: Mayors got secret update last year on TransLink megaproject costs, but kept public in the dark

Bob Mackin

Internal TransLink documents obtained by theBreakerAi??strongly suggest the estimated costs for three Metro Vancouver transportation megaprojects have skyrocketed and the agency is grappling with how and when to break the news to the public.

Document obtained by theBreaker confirms TransLink and Metro Vancouver mayors are keeping secrets about megaproject costs.

The 2015-adjusted estimates were $2.53 billion for light rail transit in Surrey, $2.28 billion for a subway under Broadway and $1.1 billion to replace the 80-year-old Pattullo Bridge. Documents released to theBreaker on Dec. 11 under the freedom of information law confirm that the costs were further updated in 2016 and given secretly to the Mayorsai??i?? Council, ai???but not publicly released.ai??? Further estimates were crafted this year.

A March 9, 2017 communications plan said the cost pressures include rising real estate prices, inflationary pressures on contractors and a Canadian dollar that is lower in value than when the estimates were made for the regional mayorsai??i?? $8.08 billion, 10-year plan in 2014.

Specifically, the Broadway project is feeling increased pressure because of geotechnical assessment. The cost of an operations and maintenance facility is adding pressure to the Surrey-Newton-Guildford phase of Surrey LRT, along with utility relocation and the rising cost of land to accommodate corridor widths.

The communications document indicated that TransLink was planning to hold media briefings to provide in-depth information about the projects, business cases and updated costs. It contemplated holding a major media event in conjunction with the B.C. and federal governments. Development was underway on project websites and social media content, it said, was shared with mayors and the province.

Project cost estimates were censored from January updates to the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund steering board. The documents did show that more than $11.6 million had been spent on the Broadway project and $15.2 million on Surrey. Other documents warn that every year of delay adds $300 million to $500 million to capital costs.

An April 2 email from Sany Zein, TransLinkai??i??s infrastructure management and engineering vice-president, to TransLink CEO Kevin Desmond did not show dollar figures, but it said ai???the project inflation numbers are higher than recent GDP growth and higher than general recent inflationary growth; so some level of ai???hot marketai??i?? inflation is accounted for.

ai???The contingency percentages have been getting lower as the design definition improves.Ai??If interest during construction and internal labour charges are excluded from the gross total, the contingency value would represent a higher percentage.ai???

Inflation was estimated at 3.5% per annum for construction and 2.5% for systems prior to contract award, 2.5% for construction and systems during construction and 2.5% for management and professional services.

Donald Trapp, the ParternshipsBC project director, wrote April 7 to Zein that contingency estimates for construction costs ranged from 19% for Surrey-Newton-Guildford to 25% for Pattullo. Trapp also offered some optimism.

ai???Cost inflation for heavy civil does not follow residential/commercial domestic market trends,ai??? Trapp wrote. ai???Major projects attract contractors and consortia from around the world, and some areas (think Europe) the outlook is not secure; our projects will be very attractive.

ai???Cost control is achieved through proper management of the scope and schedule throughout the project from inception to substantial completion.ai???

TransLinkai??i??s Sany Zein

Final business cases were supposed to be completed and submitted for approval to the NDP government this fall. The documents estimated that, pending funding confirmation, construction work on all three projects could be underway by 2019. Pattullo and Surrey-Newton-Guildford could be completed in 2023 and Broadway in 2024.

An update on major capital projects is on the agenda for the Dec. 14 board of directors meeting at TransLink headquarters in Sapperton. It will be the swansong for Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson and Surrey Mayor Linda Hepner, who were replaced as the Mayorsai??i?? Council-appointed directors last week.

The regionai??i??s mayors chose Burnabyai??i??s Derek Corrigan to replace Robertson as chair and North Vancouver Districtai??i??s Richard Walton to replace Hepner as vice-chair.

Corrigan, a pragmatic, longtime NDP member, suggested that smaller municipalities are growing anxious.

ai???Both Gregor Robertson and Linda Hepner were very much focused on the big projects in their cities, so I think there was a feeling that maybe there would be a little more regional perspective if they got people in that were from more neutral ground,ai??? Corrigan told the Burnaby Now.

Vancouver’s Dirty Subway Politics Continue

A Vancouver reader to this blog received the following letter today from the City of Vancouver.

 

The gentleman received the letter one day past the RSVP Date and the city evidently got the bus route numbers mixed up, as well.

This continues the dirty subway politics practiced by Vision(less) Vancouver and with a former Vision(less) Councillor, now advising the Premier, more bad and expensive transit decisions may soon be coming from the Premier’s Office.

Why the hurry?

Could it be that the CoV and Vision Vancouver want to ramrod this $3 billion+ subway through before sticker shock becomes an issue in the region?

Dirty politics abound with transit issues and only the Premier and the Minister of Transportation can change this.

I am not holding my breathe.

The Big Shake Up

Good news everyone, there has been a shake up at TransLink and Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan is at the helm of the Mayor’s Council on Transit.

Mayor Corrigan is the only mayor who actually has knowledge of transit and transit operation as he was a former CEO of BC Transit. The rest of the metro mayors haven’t a clue and have supported building massively expensive transit projects that will not alleviate congestion in the region at the behest of special interests. Special interests I must say, that did not care about proving an affordable ans user-friendly transit system.

Under Vancouver Mayor, Gregor Robertson, transit planning was Vancouver centric with multi billion dollar vanity projects, with the proposed Broadway subway being at the top of the list!

The Broadway SkyTrain subway, with costs now rumoured in excess of $3 billion, will not take a car off the road, yet pile on massive debt onto TransLink.

The badly planned Surrey’s LRT is being designed as a poor man’s SkyTrain and again offering little or no advantage to transit customers and/or the taxpayer.

The so called experts still pining for the Broadway subway demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge on transit and still believe in the old adage that;

“the more money you spend on a transit project, the better it will be.”

Not experts they!

Simple math kills the Broadway subway as current traffic flows along Broadway are less than 4,000 pphpd in the peak hour and the bare minimum traffic flows recommended for a subway is at least 15,000 pphpd!

Toronto’s much debated Scarborough Line replacement subway is suffering from the same issues of not enough traffic flow to justify a now $3.6 billion $5 km. one station subway. The proposed Broadway subway will be 5.5 km long and have six stations.

As mentioned before, an European transit specialist once told me that Metro Vancouver’s mayors are not mature enough for LRT, well maybe some maturity is now being shown.

Some fear shakeup at mayor’s council could doom Broadway subway, Surrey light rail

Dan Fumano
More from Dan Fumano

Published on: December 8, 2017

Transit watchers are offering different takes on what this weekai??i??s regional transportation leadership shakeup means for major projects on Metro Vancouverai??i??s horizon.

On Thursday, Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan replaced Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson as the chair of the Mayorai??i??s Council on Regional Transportation after the council held an election, while District of North Vancouver Mayor Richard Walton replaced Surrey Mayor Linda Hepner as vice-chair.

The mayors of the regionai??i??s two largest cities were ousted at a time when those leaders are hoping to get major transportation projects built in their municipalities: Vancouverai??i??s Broadway subway and Surreyai??i??s light-rail line. Corrigan has been an outspoken critic of both projects, citing them as the reasons that,Ai??in 2014, he was the councilai??i??s only dissenting member to vote against the 10-year transportation plan.

Despite that, former Vancouver councillorAi??Gordon Price believes itai??i??s unlikely that the Burnaby mayor taking over as council chair will seriously jeopardize the Broadway subway or Surrey light-rail.

ai???That would really surprise me,ai??? said Price, who believes both projects as well as the Pattullo Bridge replacement are critical priorities for the sake of the region. ai???That would just raise a lot of antagonism, needlessly. ai??i??Ai??I donai??i??t think Corrigan is going to go there, I just canai??i??t see that kind of fight.ai???

ai???Here is Corriganai??i??s chance to establish his big-picture legacy, beyond Burnaby,ai??? Price said. ai???And I think he will go with it, I think heai??i??ll take it.ai???

ButAi??Patrick Condon, a professor in UBCai??i??s School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, disagrees.

Condon said Price ai???has been a strong advocate for the subway despite its costs, so itai??i??s no surprise he would put a hopeful spin on it.ai???

Following this weekai??i??s change in the mayorsai??i?? council leadership, Condon said, ai???The tea leaves suggest a reconsideration of what will get built and where the money will go and what comes first, second and third.ai???

Some have speculated, Condon said, that the ai???Broadway subway might end up going to the back of the line.ai???

And, he added: ai???With a mayorsai??i?? council which hasAi??shifted dramatically in its power base away from Surrey and Vancouver, you might see some big changes, or at least a delay for the big projects, and at the most, potentially, a reconsideration.ai???

Other municipal politicians reacted to Corriganai??i??s election with concern Thursday: Langley City Coun. described Corrigan as ai???anti-TransLink,ai??? while New Westminster Coun.Ai??Patrick Johnstone tweeted: ai???TransLink finally has a (provincial government) ready to work with them; mayors put the most transit-regressive mayor in charge.ai???

Thursdayai??i??s vote result also means a change in the composition of TransLinkai??i??s board of directors, as the mayorsai??i?? councilai??i??s chair and vice-chair sit on the board, said TransLink spokesman Chris Bryan. The next TransLink directors meeting is scheduled for next week, which Robertson and Hepner are expected to attend, Bryan said, and then Corrigan and Walton will replace them in those positions starting in January.

Corrigan and Robertson were not available for comment Friday.

But in an October interview about TransLink governance, Corrigan told Postmediaai??i??s Jennifer Saltman the regionai??i??s mayors want to know theyai??i??re represented by mayors who areAi??ai???looking at the broad interests of the whole of the region.ai???

Robertson and Hepner ai???like where they areai??? on the TransLink board, Corrigan said in October.

ai???Both of them have a vested interest in being on the board because both of them have major projects that theyai??i??re pushing forward,ai??? he said in October. ai???So they see the ability for them to get what they want as a high priority, while the rest of us are saying: ai???Sure, itai??i??s nice that you can advance your big projects, but the rest of us donai??i??t have any voice.ai??i??ai???

Commuter Rail Is Passe – It Is The Age Of TramTrain!

The anti-rail brigade is hard at it on Vancouver Island and there is a good reason why.

The author of the piece, consults with SNC Lavalin (a major red flag there)Ai?? and SNC Lavalin only wants high profit projects.

Example 1: The Canada line faux P-3 consortium, lead by SNC Lavalin,Ai?? receives about $110 million annually from TransLink for operating the mini-metro. Put another way, SNC Lavalin receives more on an annually than what is needed to get the E&N operational.

Example 2: The $100 million needed to renovate the E&N would buy you less than 250 metres of the proposed Broadway SkyTrain subway.

But is is the love affair with commuter rail that is worrisome. Despite the hype and hoopla, commuter rail, with long rakes of bi-level cars is a rather dated concept and indeed would be a failure on the E&N Railway.

The West Coast Express, is regarded as a success, but its extremely limited service, five trains in and five trains out, has not reduced congestion, rather it has exacerbated it by allowing an almost unchecked development of the North Shore of the Fraser as far as the City of Mission. Massive amounts of new housing has brought massive population increase, which has lead to massive congestion. All commuter rail has done is allow politicians to rezone lands for housing, making good profits for political friends.

For many, the WCE is not a transit option.

A regional rail servcie is a far better investment than commuter rail because it offers a daily scheduled service, which will offer a realistic transportation alternative for the car driver.

There is not much profit to be made by large corporations on regional railways because the tracks are in situ and all that is needed is an operating agreement, diesel multiple units, a maintenance facility, and a few employees.

Here is the issue, the simpler the transit the cheaper it is to operate.

All the the Times Colonist article states the obvious, that a commuter rail line on the E&N, will not work.

A regional passenger servcie, operating a regular timetabled service from downtown Victoria to downtown Nanaimo hasAi?? yet to be studied.

For SNC Lavalin and those who work for SNC Lavalin, there is no profit in a regional railway and they will make damn sure their consultants will see that none are built!

An Alstom diesel tramtrain operating on a railway portion of route.

Comment: Economics show E&N rail line is a lost cause

Times Colonist December 2, 2017

Noting that the E&N Rail corridor is again drawing media attention and our current provincial poohbahs are launching yet another study of the entire rail line, I was taken with the photograph in the Nov. 26 edition of the Times Colonist, which shows a gentleman walking his dog along the rail line.

It is beyond my imagination that some people believe that this 19th-century junk pile has any future as an operating railway. The E&N was built in the 1880s as a resource railway to haul coal and timber. The former is unlikely ever to be mined on Vancouver Island in any quantity again, and the lumber industry abandoned rail transport on both the E&N and the Canadian National by the early 1970s. No railway in a lightly populated area such as Vancouver Island is ever going to thrive on passenger traffic alone.

At best, there were only a few hundred carloads of freight over the entire line, most of it between Port Alberni and Nanaimo, when the Canadian Pacific Railway surrendered ownership of the E&N. The now-departed Via Rail passenger service carried no more than 40,000 passengers in any year, was massively subsidized and then abandoned more than six years ago because of the unsafe condition of the entire railway between Victoria and Courtenay.

The costs of rehabilitating the E&N were in excess of $100 million when I was engaged as a consultant to the CPR in Calgary in the late 1990s. That figure has more than doubled today, and the deficiencies to bring the line up to current railway standards are lengthy ai??i?? substrate, ballast, ties, rail, bridges, signals and the list goes on and on.

Donai??i??t forget rolling stock ai??i?? Via Rail had three Budd rail diesel cars on the Island that are long gone, not to mention that they were built between 1956 and 1958. Donai??i??t forget the 180-plus grade crossings on the system, which are major hazards in themselves.

It was definitely to the CPRai??i??s advantage to ai???give the railway back to the peopleai??? for a tax receipt rather than to attempt to rebuild it, given no meaningful freight revenue, the associated cost of upkeep and a once-a-day Via Rail passenger service that was a giveaway. Why our provincial government would spend money on yet another study raises the question ai???why?ai??? butAi??this is an NDP/Green government.

I can fully understand the merits of a high-speed commuter rail service in areas of large, dense populations. To be safe, systems need to completely separate rail from pedestrian and vehicle traffic, and the Skytrain system in Vancouver is an excellent case in point. Does anyone really want to contemplate running a commuter-rail transportation system at grade level through Admirals Way and Goldstream Avenue with the frequency necessary to maintain a viable system?

To operate safely and efficiently, a system needs to be dual track and connected to the heart of the urban centre it serves. If one really wants to consider seriously a commuter-rail system, envision an elevated line using the Galloping Goose Corridor, which would serve a population base as far west as Sooke and connecting it to the heart of downtown Victoria, noting that connection was cut at the time theAi??Via Rail service was discontinued.

Until the day comes that economics justify a commuter-rail system that can be operated safely and efficiently, the best use of the E&N corridor is exactly what was illustrated in the photograph, a place to walk your dog or perhaps ride your bicycle.

James P. Crowley has been a consultant to Canadian National Railways, B.C. Rail and the Canadian Pacific Railway, specializing in heritage rail projects and working extensively on commuter-rail development with SNC-Lavalin and its predecessor companies, including portions of the Vancouver Skytrain system. He is the outgoing board chairman of the Victoria Airport Authority.