The North Shore’s “Hobson’s Choice”
From: Rail for the Valley
For the past 17 years, Rail for the Valley has advocated for the “return of the interurban” on the former Vancouver to Chilliwack BC Electric interurban line that still connects Vancouver to Chilliwack, via Surrey/Cloverdale; Langley; Abbotsford and Vedder/Sardis. Rail for the Valley, due to the soundness of the plan, secured Leewood Projects (UK) to do a study on the viability of such a service, with the result, the Leewood Study done for Rail for the Valley, released in 2010.
The Leewood Study is unique, in that it is a fully independent study, free of political and bureaucratic meddling.
Rail for the Valley, through its blog, tries to present viable and affordable transportation options-and being advised by real transportation experts and engineers who have “hands on experience” with transit projects, not only in Canada, but the USA, the UK and Europe. Having professionals who live outside the Metro Vancouver bubble advising on transit issues, gives a more realistic look at Metro Vancouver’s transit and transportation issues.
In 2010, the Leewood Study concluded that a full build, 138 km electric rail service, using modern articulated rail-cars, from Vancouver to Chilliwack would cost $998,519,424.00 or $7,235,648.00 per km. Accounting for inflation and updated to 2024 dollars, this would amount to $1.37 billion or $10.5 million/km to install.
In comparison, the current cost of the proposed Expo Line extension to Langley is now over $300 million per km. and the Broadway Subway is now said to surpass $500 million/km. The cost of the combined Expo Line extension and the Broadway subway is now over $7 billion for a mere 21.8 km of light metro and does not include a further $5 billion to complete the Broadway Subway to UBC, nor the much needed multi billion dollar rehab of the Expo and Millennium Lines.
In 2022, TransLink and Thales signed a contract for $1.47 billion to resignal the Expo and Millennium Lines. This does not include the much needed electrical rehab of the E&M Lines, which is now estimated to exceed $2 billion!
Also not included is the complete fleet renewal for the soon to be retired MK.1, ALRT, stock.
VICTORIA, WE HAVE A PROBLEM
A short recap.
Metro Vancouver’s SkyTrain light-metro system operates two very different railways: the Canada Line which is a conventional railway, built as a light metro and the Expo and Millennium Lines which operate the proprietary and now called Movia Automatic Light Metro (MALM) system, the sixth rebranding of this obsolete mini-metro. Only seven MALM systems have been built in over 40 years, with Alstom now being the fourth owner of the proprietary railway. Previous owners were Bombardier, Lavalin and the Urban Transportation Development Corporation.
Canada Line operation is incompatible with the Expo and Millennium Lines and vice versa.
Only Vancouver continues to build with MALM.
Today, MALM is considered obsolete as it lacks capacity, costs more to operate and maintain than comparative light rail systems and lacks flexibility which is very important in the 21st century.
The $2.4 billion Canada line was the BC Liberals foray into transportation Private Public Partnership or P-3. The Canada Line a capacity-constrained heavy rail metro, built as a light-metro, costing much more to build than a modern tram, with less capacity. Internationally, the Canada line is considered a classic transit “White Elephant”.
The cost to have the Canada Line rehabbed to match the present maximum legal capacity of 15,000 persons per hour per direction (as stated in Transport Canada’s Operating Certificate) for the Expo and Millennium Lines, is now between $1.5 to $2 billion dollars.
This must be done before any extension to the Canada Line can be considered.
A big problem for TransLink is rumblings from Alstom indicating that production of MALM cars may cease when the last production orders have been filled in 2025. No sales for the past 15 years may speed up the decision to abandon the proprietary railway, which would both drive up the cost of new vehicles as no other company makes MALM compatible cars and the cost of replacement parts.
The cost for light metro, especially MALM extensions, is rapidly increasing, quickly making such extensions not cost effective.
There may be no further extension to the MALM Lines after the completed Broadway subway to Arbutus! Talk of extending rapid transit to the North Shore is nothing more than political posturing, for photo-ops and sound bytes at election time.
“The problem with TransLink is that you can never believe what it says; TransLink never produces a report based on the same set of assumptions.”
Former West Vancouver Clr. Victor Durman, Chair of the GVRD (now METRO) Finance Committee.
DARK CLOUDS
There has been a change in scope for the Expo Line Extension Project to Langley, from 2 stages into a single stage project due to escalating costs.
The cost to go 16km from Surrey Centre to Langley is now creeping close to $5 billion.
From the last news release regarding the Expo Line extension to Langley, the guideway was said to have a firm cost of $4.01 billion, but the signalling, the electrical overhead and stations were still under negotiations. Obviously the cost of the Langley extension will surpass $4.5 billion and if the needed Operations and Maintenance Centre #5 is built, the cost of the 16 km line will exceed $5 billion!
Translink may not be capable of being a full financial partner in this project or any other large capital project for some time, due to its current budget issues. This is not good news for the Surrey Extension and even worse news for the North Shore.
A dark financial cloud on the horizon is beginning to appear larger. TransLink had to begin serious final planning and engineering on the second stage of the Broadway Millennium Line extension from Arbutus to UBC by 2024, if construction is to begin in 2026.
They estimate this extension project to cost between $4.98 to $5.12 Billion for the planned 7.3 km long tunnel and above grade structure into UBC and those costs were estimated in 2021, Just accounting for inflation, the UBC extension project will cost between $5.7 to $5.9 Billion in 2024 dollars.
The question facing TransLink and the province is whether they pay $5 Billion for the Langley project or wait and fund the near $6 Billion for UBC extension, both will not be funded at the same time.
Unless something drastically changes soon, the current Langley Skytrain extension project in its present form is dying and may be put off, well into the next decade.
This bodes ill for any SkyTrain light metro connection to the North Shore.
RAIL FOR THE VALLEY’S SOLUTION
It is widely accepted that only a rail solution will attract the motorist from the car; buses have proven disappointing in operation, as they get stuck in traffic and true Bus Rapid Transit costs only a little less to build than LRT with none of the operating or capacity benefits. Only politicians think buses can be rapid transit, yet sadly for the transit customer, a bus is a bus, is a bus.
Rail for the Valley’s Leewood Study provides an affordable alternative, operating a regional passenger service using existing railways. As there is a railway connection from Vancouver to the North Shore, Squamish and beyond to Whistler, a passenger rail service must be considered.
Modern articulated rail cars can travel at higher speeds on curving track, giving realistic travel times and properly signalled with passing loops (double track), trains could operate up to three times an hour per direction.
This is not fanciful thinking, rather it’s what is currently happening in Europe where the huge cost of new metro and highway construction has forced planners to use existing railways for a regional rail service that people will use! In Europe and now even in the USA, disused railways are being refurbished and abandoned railways are being rebuilt as a much cheaper alternative than stand alone metro lines or new highways.
The modern articulated railcar, powered by clean diesel or electricity from by fuel cell or by overhead wires, can obtain commercial speeds acceptable by customers on even the most difficult routes. The modern articulated railcar can contain amenities such as a WC and or a ‘bistro’ offering light refreshments for the longer trips. The modern articulated railcar can also operate in multiple units, thus capacity can be increased when needed.
The modern articulated railcar can also increase vehicle capacity by adding additional modules at a much cheaper cost than buying a new vehicle.
Based on the Leewood Study and taking into consideration that the track is in excellent condition, the cost for the approximately 80km Vancouver to Squamish regional passenger railway, using the Canadian National Railway and the former BC Railway right-of-way, with a maximum of three trains per hour per direction would be in the neighbourhood of $1 billion.
The new regional railway would have stations at the Squamish, Britannia Beach, Lions Bay, Horseshoe Bay, Caulfield, West Bay, Ambleside, Capilano, Lonsdale, Lynn Creek, and Vancouver, Pacific Central Station.
The province and region are now in a climate emergency, combined with worsening regional traffic congestion. The current transit planning based on light metro and the hub and spoke philosophy of transit (where buses bring customers to transit hubs) is failing as pre covid, regional mode share for transit is dropping. Planning and building more SkyTrain light metro lines is akin to doing the same thing over and over again ever hoping for different results.
Metro Vancouver must plan cheaper, user-friendly transit options in order to attract the motorist from the car, as the present light metro system has failed to do so and despite an over $15 billion taxpayer investment.
For less than the cost of a now $3 billion, 5.8 km Broadway subway or just over half the cost of the over $5 billion, 16 km Expo Line extension to Langley, we could build two regional railways, connecting Vancouver to Chilliwack and Vancouver to Squamish, with a possibility of a 210 km regional rail service, with through service from Squamish to Chilliwack, via Vancouver.
There are many obstacles to overcome and all levels of government must be on board but….. the time has come to stop transit planning for politically prestigious projects and plan for the region’s future and the future is an affordable and user friendly transportation network, which the present transit system is definitely not.
The North Shore city government’s faces a Hobson’s Choice for transit planning, either advocate for what could be affordably built or advocate for ‘pie in the sky’ rapid transit solutions that will not be built.
Even LRT has become expensive (mainly because of the super costly design they choose) as our Stage 3 LRT plan in Ottawa is being reworked, due to post Covid 19 inflationary pressures. This has forced design changes and necessary changes to the project scope. We are still stuck paying for 40% of the Stage 2 LRT cost locally. Unfortunately no Provincial or Federal funding yet for Stage 3 LRT. Officially, we can’t even try anything until 2031 and we pay off our local portion of the Stage 2 LRT Project.
There is a group here locally that is pushing for an expansion of the Trillium Line (Line 2) into Barhaven (westerly then southerly) which is significantly cheaper, instead of the planned and ever more expensive southerly expansion of the Confederation Line 1 into Barhaven. The Confederation Line uses conventional electric LRV’s whereas the Trillium Line uses hybrid regional rail vehicles Alstom Lint 41DMU’s and 4 section long plus the power module, Stadler Flirt DMUs (the longest of the train graphics used in this article by Zwei)
Yes. A group fundraised to get a study bring back service on track. brook forth to mayor’s council, Then TransLink input with local engineering firm. Suggested in long-term operation separation would be necessary at Important crossovers no interfere with freight. Group did not follow-up recommendations put forth TransLink report. Since then there hasn’t been any more progress. AKA Rail for the valley is Dead.
North Coast Express.
Whistler to North Vancouver at Seabus Terminal.
Track is available.
Some sections need to be modified for speed services 90-100kmh.
Major reason why it hasn’t been pursued any further is the lack of equipment and Renting CN Track cost is ridiculous.
E & N
The only thing I currently know is the investigation of track was done in 2020.
Cost estimate for just repairing and replacing existing infrastructure at $172.7 Million in 2023.
To my knowledge, they’re working on. Maybe a business case to have passenger service with new stations?
Alstom North America is dedicated to its partners at BCRTC new train sets MK 5.
Contract is under custom rolling stock.
Delivery window has been adjusted do suggested modifications from BCRTC.
Innovia metro is dead.
Zwei replies:
1. There have been several studies done for a Vancouver to Whistler rail service, even BC Rail did one just before Campbell sold the railway. From what I saw (mid 90’s) that an 120 minute service was viable costing about $6 to $8 million annually. I have been told it was one of the reasons Campbell sold the railway as it would compete with the Rocky Mountaineer folks who were both politcal and personal friends of Campbell.
2. Whistler to North Vancouver would be less desirable as it would hard to use.
3. According to Mr. Cow the full service regional railway (2 to 3 trains per hour per direction) would be in the neighbourhood of $3 billion. I remind you business cases in BC are politcal documents posing as technical documents and generally not worth the paper they are printed on.
4. Alstom has a lingering bad taste dealing with BC and i would not be surprised they treat TransLink with disdain. Alstom inherited the contract when they bought Bombardier’s rail division and as Vancouver will be the only customers they will terminate production after the last paid for orders are completed.
The MK.5 cars are Innovia Metro, so according to you, it is dead.
The service difference between a Rail For The Valley-type line and a Skytrain-type line makes equation of these options silly.
The Business Case for the Langley Skytrain line projects 56,000 boardings in 2028, running 6 to 10 trains per hour and moving a rider from 203 Street Station in Langley to King George station in Surrey in 22 minutes and Waterfront station in Vancouver in 62 minutes. (https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-langley-skytrain-business-case-approved-new ).
A RFV-type line is in an entirely different ballpark – worthy of consideration on its own merits (lower build cost!), but not as an substitute for or equivalent to a Skytrain-type service.
Mr. Zwei’s projection of 22.5 minutes from Langley to Surrey and 50 minutes from Langley to Vancouver is just implausible. (https://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/tramtrain-its-time-to-have-another-look-at-the-leewood-project-2/ ) The 2023 Langley Township proposal pegged the time from Chilliwack to Surrey at 90 minutes. (https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/langley-township-backs-revival-of-passenger-railway-between-chilliwack-and-surrey )
And imagine the RFV-type line used the Ottawa O-type trains (2 Alstom Citadis Spirit cars), which can carry 600 people https://www.octranspo.com/en/our-services/bus-o-train-network/service-types/o-train-line-1#:~:text=The%20O%2DTrain%20Line%201,600%20people%20in%20quiet%20comfort). Skytrain’s 56,000 boardings would mean something like 93 O-type trains at full capacity. The RFV’s maximum 3 trains per hour each way for 16 hours a day is 96 trains.
But their actual ridership would be a fraction of full capacity given the normally far-below capcity ridership in off-peak hours and the challenge of attracting riders to a service that is less frequent than Skytrain, requires a longer ride and likely charges higher fares.
Apples and oranges.
Zwei replies:As usual you are very far off the mark.
First of all, the Daily Hive is nothing more than a scandal sheet used by TransLink to disseminate misleading information. The Hive does not fact check!
Secondly, business cases in BC are merely politcal documents masquerading as technical ones and are for pure politcal propaganda and nothing more.
The travel times you mentioned were merely estimates after track upgrades (you know the $1.6 billion isn’t to fly executives on “fam” trips around the world) and are achievable.
Now you mention 56,000 boarding by 2028, well first off, the Langley extension will not be completed by 2028 and it now seems it maybe mothballed after the election as costs are now approaching $5 billion for 16 km of line (the retirement from politics of the current Minister of Transportation and Surrey MLA Harry Bains, may indicate the decision to abandon the line has been taken).
56,000 boarding’s, equates roughly to 28,000 customers a day, which is much less than the 99B-Line bus and is around the number that RftV estimates will be using the line upon opening. Also RftV would rather use the Stadler product and capacity can be increased by either increasing the modules of each train or operate in multiple units, thus increasing capacity.
Also you have been caught up in the “Capacity” nonsense as ridership on the line to Langley will be weak for many reasons.
So to compare the two systems apples to apples:
Expo Line extension to Langley: Cost $5 billion; Length 16 km; daily ridership (on the 16 km extension) max 30,000 per day; destinations served 6.
RftV Leewood Plan: Cost $1.7 billion; Length 130 km; daily ridership max 40,000 per day; destinations served 14+.
The clincher is that most of the ridership with the RftV plan will be new, but for the Expo Line extension, it will be recycled bus customers.
“Based on the Leewood Study and taking into consideration that the track is in excellent condition, the cost for the approximately 80km Vancouver to Squamish regional passenger railway, using the Canadian National Railway and the former BC Railway right-of-way, with a maximum of three trains per hour per direction would be in the neighbourhood of $1 billion.
The new regional railway would have stations at the Squamish, Britannia Beach, Lions Bay, Horseshoe Bay, Caulfield, West Bay, Ambleside, Capilano, Lonsdale, Lynn Creek, and Vancouver, Pacific Central Station.”
This would be a great idea. Should be extended to Whistler or Pemberton as it is a popular destination. There should be additional 1–2 trains per day to Prince George.
BC still owns the right of way and is leased to CN rail. The lease is renewed every 60 years. Either side can cancel the lease. BC gov can cancel the lease at next renewal date and CN must return everything.
At the 90-year mark (2094), either party can break the lease unilaterally. BCRC must give CN five years notice that it intends to do so, while CN must give three years notice.
In either case, if the lease is ended at that point, the following applies.
CN must return all the track to the province in the same condition as when the lease began. In practical terms, that means the track must be safe, at the 2004 speed limits, for trains of loaded railcars weighing up to 143 tons each (the current mainline standard in North America), except for some branchlines and the northernmost part of the system, where 131.5 tons was the limit in 2004
But if the government does not want to renew in 2094 or at any of the later 60-year intervals, it has to purchase the “Operating Enterprise” from CN under the “Re-purchase Option”. Unfortunately, the definition of the latter is blacked-out in the contracts, so we have no idea of what this entails. The implication, though, is that CN could require the government to purchase the physical operating assets of the railway, such as a certain number of locomotives and freight cars, shop buildings and other structures, road vehicles and so on.
Apples to apples.
56,000 boardings (or lets say 28,000 people passengers/day, to and from) when the Langley Skytrain starts running is not the capacity, it is the anticipated actual ridership, i.e., the demand.
The Stadler Flirt trains are 266 ft long and can carry 420 passengers (https://otrain.railfans.ca/trains/stadler-flirt ). 40,000 passengers equates to 95 trains at full capacity. How do you squeeze this many trains into 3 trains/hr on a line shared with freight trains and its available station lengths?
But that is not even the main point, which is anticipated actual ridership, not the maximum capacity. Are there 40,000 people/day who have reported they will pay fares comparable to those charged by the West Coast Express – $26 return trip from Mission to Waterfront, and the large majority of whom will only have their ‘spot’ in off-peak hours?
Zwei replies: Your answer has many flaws. first off the Stadler flirt can carry more customers by adding on another module and they can be operated in multiple units, thus they can deal with traffic flows along the line. Thus your figure of 420 per train is not accurate. Say a two train train set has a capacity of1,000 persons and three trains per hour per direction has a capacity of 3,000 pphpd, which is slightly less than the present Millennium Line.
So, in theory over a 16 hour day, the maximum capacity is somewhere around 48,000 to 50,000 persons a day. Not bad.
You will never get close to that ridership on the 16 km extension, due to the different dynamics of the lines, but for a 140 km Marpole to Chilliwack rail line costing under $2 billion, serving 14 major transit destinations, you will get far more bang from your buck than a $5 billion, 16 km Expo Line extension to Langley.
I will add this: with Translink’s attempt to increase capacity, they have taken out seating and that alone will deter ridership. Thus Translink’s ridership estimates are based on “best case” scenario and may not reflect actual ridership.
You again evade the issue of actual ridership, which is my compaint about treating the RFV proposal as somehow equivalent to or a substitute for a Skytrain-type system (including the ‘lighter rail’ proposal that got dumped).
Yes, RFV offers far “more bang for the buck” in the sense of build cost/passenger, but the bang is just not big enough (in the sense of realistically-anticipated actual ridership rather than theoretical maximum capacity).
Zwei replies: I am afraid you have all the wrong way, you are evading the issue. The ridership expected on the $5 billion, 16km Langley extension, according to TransLink, will be less than the current Broadway B-Line bus. The majority of ridership will be former bus customers, therefore for a $5 billion investment we have a politically prestigious light metro line that will be grossly under used.
The RftV scheme will probably attract more ridership because of the very nature of the system and the 14 major destinations it serves. TransLink refuses to accept tourist ridership and the fact that the line serves 3 post secondary Institutions, a future major hospital, a 20 minute transfer to YVR and YXX and the Cultus lake summer crowd. to date TranmsLink’s main excuse is that they refuse to look at any rail system with frequencies more than 15 minutes (West Coast Express is politely not included), well the RftV valley plan can have 15 minute hideaways from Scott road Station to Chilliwack by adding more passing loops.
Translink always comes up with excuses for not building anything other than skyTrain, with all not being valid.
As BC is not mature enough for light rail, I offer light DMU’s as an alternative, where there are examples in operations in scores of cities around the world.
Continued planning for SkyTrain is like airlines only planning to use DC-8’s: dated and expensive to operate.
It’s very simple, the $4.5 Billion to 5$ Billion capital cost of the Langley Extension and its operating issues it will have means, it will never be a great Skytrain extension. I don’t know many cities that would extend a trunk line scale service (LRT lines, Light Metros and Metros) like Skytrain into a regional distance service (Commuter Rail, Regional Rail, short haul intercity rail services) serving an outer suburb like Langley. Skytrain like vehicles just don’t operationally or economically handle these longer distances well, they aren’t designed for it.
Plus, the Langley extension creates a 40 km long trunk service line. Yes, there are longer LRT, Light Metro and Heavy Metro lines in operation but their primary area passenger generator (downtown Vancouver) is stuck on the extreme western end of the line. That means, a major proportion of your passenger ridership, faces ever growing, longer and longer commutes.
The passengers you hope to get on the Langley extension will have to stop at no fewer than two dozen stations (up to 1 hour travel time) to get to the primary destination area, on trains with few seats, forcing you to stand for long periods on just one part of the commute. This is because in most major cities worldwide, a majority of your transit passengers deal with at the least, 1 or 2 transfers on their entire complete trip. Most people, would rather sit in there own vehicle than have to stand for up to an hour for just one portion of their rail transit trip.
On top of this commuters who already have seats because they start their daily journey at or near the current end of the line, most likely will loose their guaranteed seat. Having a seat on transit trips that exceed 35 to 40 minutes is the best way to guarantee choice transit riders will continue to be transit riders.
Lastly, this extremely expensive line extension will never generate more ridership than a much cheaper BRT line traveling over the same distance and would take roughly the same time, given the same number of stations.
A regional rail line (GO Trains, West Coast Express type of operation) with stations every 3 km to 5 km (which is standard) would be faster, cheaper to operate over the distance because they are simpler and the rail vehicles (EMU’s, DMU’s Push-Pull locomotive driven coaches) are actually designed to operate over that distance or greater. Higher frequency service is possible with this type of equipment using good signaling and clear design. That’s why Ottawa’s Trillium Line (Line 2 and 4) Can be cheaply extended over longer and longer distances giving a trunk like scale service (LRT, Light Metro & Heavy Metro) over greater distances, far cheaper than the Skytrain can.