Urgent need for light rail transit in Surrey

The following editorial by Frank Buchholz continues the myth that at-grade light rail is slow and causes accidents at intersections. I am not surprised as the SkyTrain Lobby’s mouthpiece, the SkyTrain for Surrey blog is given prominence in the piece.

From what I have read, SkyTrain for Surrey rehashes the same old myths about LRT, at the same time pretending that the proprietary SkyTrain light metro system is the great panacea for urban transit. What the SkyTrain chaps’ fail to mention is that SkyTrain is only seriously used as an urban transportation system in just two cities, Vancouver and Kuala Lumpor, with the other five SkyTrain type systems being demonstration lines and glorified airport people mover type systems. Even in Kuala Lumpor there is an extensive elevated light rail system, now call just light metro and a proprietary monorail system. Even in Vancouver, the Canada line is not a proprietary SkyTrain, but a conventional heavy rail metro built as a truncated light metro as SkyTrain was too expensive to build.

As mentioned in previous posts, not only modern light rail has proven to carry far more customers in revenue service than SkyTrain, it can travel at higher speed if it designed to.

If we cut through the fog of pseudoscienceAi??that surroundsAi??SkyTrain, we find that the proprietary railway cost far more to build than modern LRT, can carryAi??less transit customers than modern LRT, and that SkyTrain only appears to be faster than LRT because it has about one half the stations per route km. than modern light rail. Sadly, very few media types ever report that and the great SkyTrain myth continues on and on. “A lie repeated often enough becomes a fact in the public’s mind.”

Surrey needs a viable public transit plan, but not a plan that indentures modern LRT as a poorman’s SkyTrain, with LRT radiating outwards from SkyTrain stations in central Surrey, instead, the City of Surrey and TransLink must plan LRT to cater where customers needs and where transit customersAi??want to go, not whereAi??politicians want to cut ribbons. From what I have seen to date, I do not think TransLink and Surrey planners are up to the task.

Urgent need for rapid transit in Surrey

By Surrey Leader
Published: July 05, 2012

The City of Surrey sent out a provocative press release on Sunday, saying
that ai???LRT arrives in Surrey.ai???

The city arranged with Bombardier Transportation to exhibit
a 60-foot-long, full-scale model of a light rail vehicle at the popular
Canada Day event at the Millennium Amphitheatre in Cloverdale.

The model being exhibited was the Bombardier Flexity Freedom vehicle. The
city says it is designed with the latest technology, emits no emissions and
reduces visual and noise pollution.

Mayor Dianne Watts is on record as wanting LRT in Surrey, as opposed to
extensions of SkyTrain. She would like to see LRT lines on at least three busy
corridors ai??i?? 104 Avenue from Whalley to Guildford; King George Boulevard from
Whalley to Newton with a possible extension to South Surrey and from Whalley to
Langley on Fraser Highway, passing through Fleetwood and Clayton.

The cost of LRT extensions is considerably less than SkyTrain, which has been
very expensive to construct. However, SkyTrain is separated from road traffic
and as such can offer quicker trips and not get tied up by intersection crashes.
One only has to travel on SkyTrain from King George station to New Westminster
at a time when the Pattullo Bridge is backed up to understand that.

For more on the cityai??i??s perspective, see www.surrey.ca/RapidTransitNow.

However, not everyone agrees with Watts. Daryl Dela Cruz, chairman of the
SkyTrain for Surrey Initiative, says SkyTrain costs in other areas have been
inflated by specific conditions, and he says a study his organization is working
on will provide the true costs of SkyTrain versus LRT. His organizationai??i??s
position is detailed at http://skytrainforsurrey.org.

The real issue to consider in the debate is this: will any money be
forthcoming from the senior levels of government to pay for most if not all of
the capital costs of extending rapid transit in Surrey? Surrey canai??i??t come up
with the money itself, and TransLink has been reluctant to put money towards
adding transit service in Surrey.

TransLinkai??i??s own money woes seem to indicate that it will not be taking the
lead in bringing more rapid transit service in Surrey anytime soon.

Discussions between South of the Fraser mayors on transportation have been
going on for some time, and it may well make sense to set up a separate South
Fraser transit authority. It could still cooperate with TransLink and pay part
of the costs of buses that go from south to north of the Fraser, but chances are
it could provide better service here ai??i?? if it had enough taxing authority.

Thatai??i??s been TransLinkai??i??s problem from day one ai??i?? it has proven very difficult
to expand transit service with its limited taxing authority. While it keeps
saying a car tax would solve many of its problems, that is a non-starter in
areas like Surrey where bus service is so poor.

For now, the LRT model provides something to dream of ai??i?? frequent and fast
rapid transit in Surrey, service that could move a lot of people quickly. That
service could be a SkyTrain extension, or it could be at-grade LRT. No matter
what, it is needed now, because Surrey transit service is far from what it
should be in a city with this many residents.

http://www.surreyleader.com/opinion/161453305.html