The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
This post, first appeared in 2010, yet the very same problems exist withAi??Trans Link today.
In the Vancouver regional area, change happens at a glacial pace.
The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree ai??i?? TransLink’s Regional Transit Planning
Posted by zweisystem on Wednesday, October 13, 2010 – reprinted May 30, 2012
Fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal metaphor in the United States used to describe evidence that is obtained illegally.The logic of the terminology is that if the source of the evidence (the ai???treeai???) is tainted, then anything gained from it (the ai???fruitai???) is as well.
TransLinkai??i??s planning officials still maintain that modern light Rail has a limited capacity of about 10,000 persons per hour per direction and refuse to entertain the fact that they are wrong. All of TransLink planning, including the RAV/Canada Line, theAi?? Evergreen line, the Broadway/UBC rapid transit line, and Fraser Valley transportation have assumed LRTai??i??s seemingly inferior capacity and despite the fact that modern LRT can carry in excess of 20,000 pphpd, have portrayed LRT as a poormanai??i??s SkyTrain.
The assumption that light rail has only a capacity of 10,000 pphpd is wrong.
The Light Rail Transit Association [ www.lrta.org ], which can trace its history back 63 years, which has continually campaigned for affordable and efficient public transit, defines light rail transit as:
ai???a steel wheel on steel rail transit mode, that can deal economically with traffic flows of between 2,000 and 20,000 passengers per hour per direction, thus effectively bridging the gap between the maximum flow that can be dealt with using buses and the minimum that justifies a metro.ai???
The following study from the LRTA, shows that even in 1986, it was generally understood that modern LRT could carry 20,000 pphpd.
http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2010/05/20/the-1986-lrta-study-bus-lrt-metro-comparison/
More recently, (2006) Calgary Transit LRT Technical Data page claims that the maximum theoretical capacity of the C-Train is 30,700 pphpd!
Maximum THEORETICAL single direction capacity (pass./hr/dir) at 256 pass./car and 2 min. headway:
3-car train 23,040
4-car train 30,720http://www.calgarytransit.com/html/technical_information.html
If TransLinkai??i??s basic assumption about light rail (including streetcar) is wrong, then TransLinkai??i??s entire planning history, regarding bus, LRT, and SkyTrain is wrong and is not worth the paper it is printed on. Yet TransLink, without any public scrutiny and very little political oversight, continues to plan for hugely expensive SkyTrain light-metro projects, which supposed support for, has been heavily biased by questionable studies andAi?? even more questionable tactics ai??i?? all fruit from the poisonous tree!
Noted American transportation expert Gerald Fox, summed up his observations on the TransLink business case for the Evergreen line;
ai???It is interesting how TransLink has used this cunning method of manipulating analysis to justify SkyTrain in corridor after corridor, and has thus succeeded in keeping its proprietary rail system expanding.ai???
Has TransLinkai??i??s regional transit planning over the past ten years nothing more than ai???Fruit of the poisonous tree?ai???, based on the fact that TransLinkai??i??s bureaucrats desired that light rail (LRT) be seen inferior to SkyTrain, on paper, to ensure further planning and building of their cherished light metro system?
Rail for the Valley would welcome TransLinkai??i??s clarification on this issue!
I guess were in real trouble in Ottawa because our bus transitway already handles 10500 pphpd during the peak and because of this high volume and a daily line up of buses that is almost a kilometre long (185 + BUSES/HOUR/DIRECTION) we are switching to light rail transit. OC Transpo expects that we will be using 4 car trains running as little as 3 minutes and 15 seconds apart at peak periods. Most experts believe we will be using 30 metre long lrv’s however, the car maker has not yet been chosen. Bombardier is part of one of the 3 short listed development teams, each team is made up of a number of engineering, construction and management companies that, are currently bidding to build and manage the project. I wonder what will happen if Bombardier wins? You guys in Vancouver could ask some really interesting questions to Translink and their management. Even if they don’t win the numbers are already set.
Zweisystem replies: Bombardier will win. Let us not forget that Seimens won the initial contract a few years back only to have the LRT decision reversed. That cost local taxpayers almost $40 million in a court decision against the operating authority. Now Ottawa has a hybrid LRT/light metro complete with a subway, unfortunately the money spent on the subway means that the LRT plans have been truncated to the point where on wonders if transit planners have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Truncated? If the extension to Baseline Station occurs on time around 2023 (cost approximaely 33 – 50% of the current project, depending on the route) and the short extension to the O-Train to Leitrum Road we will have all the light rail we were supposed to have. This would actually complete phase 1 of the LRT plan ahead of 2031 schedule. The upgrades to the existing O-Train are already set to begin this year and must be complete by early 2014. Though the plan is not an ambitious one it is very much on track and on time. Electric LRT on the O-Train line has been pushed back till after 2031 and with the coming improvements I doudt it will ever be needed. There will be no LRT outside of the greenbelt here because of the sheer lack of population density as was originally proposed back in 2006. The Transitway (busway) in Kanata is set to start soon and the second Transitway to Orleans is being planned however, here they say they are having some difficulty. The Transitway to Barhaven was complete last year and the extension of the Transitway south of the new Baseline Station complex to the new station at the City Archives Building has already started construction. The plan remains the same here, LRT inside the Greenbelt and Transitways outside. The only real black spot is that the O-Train is not going to be extended to Gatineau, Qubec across the Prince of Wales Rail Bridge instead, Gatineau’s BRT line Rapibus, will convert the rail bridge to run buses to the end of the O-Train line and meet up at the new LRT/O-Train station at Bayview.
Why do we assume that Transit Signal Priority (TSP) is going to work here? Much of the reaserch on TSP demonstrates that the technology is flawed and benefits are most typically observed only in single-intersection simulations.In other words, benefits were viewed in a computer model, but not within the real world. One high profile study out of Portland showed that TSP actually had a negative impact on vehicles’ on-time performance. The authors of the study state emphatically that a considerable amount of work needs to be done with respect to signal priority programs before the expected benefits of TSP are fully realized. Maybe bullying the TTC into using a flawed technology isn’t the right solution?Steve: I agree that signal priority may be counterproductive, and you can see this in the design at some intersections on the TTC. The whole point is to understand how it works on a case by case basis, and ensure that the setup is optimal. As I have already shown for St. Clair, the initial setup did not provide the priority one would expect and actually interfered with the line. You imply that TSP, per se, is a bad idea based on one implementation.It is outrageous that a Commission request for a staff report on Spadina/Harbourfront has produced no response for over five years, not even a status report on updates, if any, and their effect. This whole issue began with a widely-quoted article in the Star about how the Bathurst car, running in mixed traffic, provided a faster service than the Spadina car running on its own right-of-way with priority .The TTC takes a lot of flak over the Transit City plans and their effects on traffic operations, and existing lines are often cited as examples of how things work (or not). It is in their interest to address the situation and demonstrate that what they have already built has been fine tuned and improved.
Zweisystem replies: Traffic lights are a form of signal priority and have worked for over 75 years. Would you have us take away all traffic lights at intersections? I think not!