UBC subway talk illustrates why rapid transit fails to advance south of the Fraser
The University of B.C. wants an extension of the SkyTrain Millennium
line to come all the way to its Point Grey campus, and is prepared to help pay
for it. The cost to extend the line from the current proposed end point of Arbutus Street in Vancouver could
top $3 billion.
While UBC’s concern for students is understandable, it is
this type of thinking that has punished Surrey and other South Fraser residents for decades. Residents
of the South Fraser area have endured substandard transit service, along with congested
roads and bridges, with no significant transit improvements for more than two
decades. Meanwhile, the population of the South Fraser region continues
to grow at a rate far higher than the Burrard Peninsula.
Residents need to let TransLink and local mayors know, in no
uncertain terms, that transit expansion in Surrey must be a far higher priority
than a subway running from the current VCC/Clark terminus to UBC.
Surrey will one day, not too far away, have more residents than
Vancouver. Proposed land use in Surrey calls for sufficient densities along major
transit routes to ensure that they are well-utilized. Meanwhile in Vancouver,
land uses along much of the SkyTrain Expo line haven’t changed in the more than
30 years the line has operated. It is highly unlikely that the City of
Vancouver and its residents will agree to much higher densities on the leafy west
side of Vancouver, should a subway to UBC be built.
Surrey has not seen any extensions of rapid transit since
1994, when the final three stations on the Expo line opened. Even though the SkyTrain guideway tantalizingly points east down Fraser Highway, King George station has remained the terminus. In fact, it's been the terminus for so long that the road it fronts on, King George Boulevard, was still called King George Highway back then. Of course, that was in the last millennium.
During the last municipal election campaign in 2014, Linda Hepner promised
that the first phase of an LRT line (between Newton and Guildford) would be up and
running by this year. She has worked toward that goal, and even served a term
as vice-chair of the Mayors’ Council, but construction of the line has yet to
begin. Funds have been allocated towards the project, and planning work has
taken place, but the only transit changes since 2014 have been improved bus
service on a number of corridors.
The region’s current 10-year transit plan does not call for
any type of rapid transit running to UBC. It does call for a second transit
line in Surrey, along Fraser Highway. The city wants that line to be a street-level
LRT system. Most residents feel it should be a SkyTrain line, mainly because of
improved travel times and no interaction with street traffic.
Residents have been told, over and over, that LRT makes more
sense because it is cheaper to build. The funds for rapid transit are limited, Surrey
politicians say. The prime reason that a road is being built through Hawthorne
Park is because of the necessity of moving some utilities off 104 Avenue to
accommodate LRT.
Planners and politicians also claim LRT it is a
better way
to build livable communities along the route. If that’s such a good idea
in
Surrey, why isn’t it being applied to any phase of the extension of the
Millennium Line? Funds are in place to build a subway along Broadway to
Arbutus. If a six-kilometre extension from Arbutus to UBC is such a good
idea, why is no
one suggesting LRT?
There is a limited amount of money available to build rapid
transit lines in Metro Vancouver. It took decades for the Evergreen Line extension
to Coquitlam and Port Moody to be built, and it only finally got the green
light when an additional tax on gasoline was agreed to by mayors.
The first phase Surrey LRT line may actually be up and running
three years from now. It is scheduled to be built simultaneously with the
subway extension of the Millennium line to Arbutus Street. Just when the second
rapid transit line in Surrey will finally be built remains to be seen, but it’s
a pretty safe bet that it won’t be in place for at least a decade.
Patrick Condon, a UBC urban design professor who has done
extensive planning work in Surrey, said last week that UBC could build enough housing
for all its students and faculty members on campus, and let them live in it rent-free,
for the cost of a subway extension to the campus. He said Surrey rapid transit
needs to be a higher priority.
Condon knows what he is saying. He was heavily involved in the design of East Clayton - turning a rural area into higher-density urban development. The design, done two decades ago, was based on transit service being extended to the area within a reasonable time frame. In a commentary published last year by the Surrey Now-Leader, Condon admitted that he had no idea it would take so long to get even basic transit service into that urbanized area.
One line from his commentary bears repeating: "It’s great to build a community that is good for transit. But what happens if there is no transit right away?"
East Clayton, until last fall, was serviced by the the 502 and 503 major bus routes along Fraser Highway (on its extreme southern edge) and an occasional, leisurely community shuttle bus route which serves a small eastern portion of the area, and connects to other transit routes in Langley.
Langley, by the way, is even more poorly-served by buses than Surrey is. Yet its population is expected to almost double in the next 20 years.
In East Clayton, another community shuttle bus route was added last fall. It serves (in a fashion) the western portion of East Clayton and the new secondary school on 184 Street which is set to open in September.
Meanwhile, a rapid transit line down Fraser Highway which would provide the kind of transit service Condon and other planners envisioned in 1998 remains a talking point. Little has been done to actually advance its construction.
If residents of the South Fraser area continue to let the rapid
transit discussion remain Vancouver-centric, this area will continue to become
more and more congested and rapid transit will be little more than a distant
dream.
anyone interested sign this petition
ReplyDeletehttp://skytrainforsurrey.org/saynotophase2
The fact is, SkyTrain cannot be built to Langley. As it stands, the Expo Line and the rest of the Innovia light-metro needs about $3 billion in upgrades before a $3 billion R/T line is built. As only $1 billion is earmarked for renovations, the major needs are not budgeted for and are a long way off.
DeleteThis means no SkyTrain extension in Surrey and with only 7 of these things built in the past 40 years and not one sold in the past decade, SkyTrain might not be around when he funding is in place 25 years from now.
The SkyTrain lobby must do better research because no one wants this Edsel, except the rubes at TransLink and Metro Vancouver.
I am still 'gob-smacked' by the Mayor's Council 10 year rapid transit plan as it is so dated and so expensive, that they will be financial millstones around TransLink's neck.
ReplyDeleteSurrey's LRT is really a "poor man's" SkyTrain and hugely expensive for what it will do. It will not take cars off the road, thus will not ease congestion. Surrey's LRT is bad planning, compounded by politcal involvement resulting is prestige project and nothing more.
Anyone who suggests SkyTrain to be built instead is talking through their hats as the proprietary SkyTrain operating certificate from Transport Canada limits capacity at 15,000 persons per hour per direction until an estimate $3 billion is spent on extending station platforms to accept longer trains, as well rebuilding stations to safely handle more customers; install a brand new electrical supply, which is very expensive; install a new automatic train control system and a host of other expensive upgrades.
The Broadway SkyTrain subway is nothing more than a political project, to allow land speculators to assemble land at potential stations, then flip to land developers who use SkyTrain rapid transit as an excuse to get council to up-zone the property to build high-rise condo, to off shore money launderers! SkyTrain is part of the money laundering scandal!
There is no other reason to build it.
In North America, the established customers flows needed to justify a subway is 15,000 pphpd and in Europe, because of the Success of 2nd generation light rail, subways are not considered unless customer flows exceed 20,000 pphpd.
If one looks a TransLink's schedule for Broadway and the 99B, peak hour service is 3 minute headway's or 20 trips an hour. The capacity of an articulated bus is 110 persons, thus the traffic flows of the 99B just do not justify a subway and just barely justify the most basic of tram service!
Now combine trolley bus and B-Line buses on the busiest section Broadway, traffic flows are under 4,000 pphpd, 11,000 less than the established passenger flow that would justify investing in a subway.
Beware of those who claim that Broadway is the busiest transit corridor in Canada. A transportation engineer had this to say about the claim; " That BS line that Broadway is the busiest bus corridor in North America. Whom ever started it sure didn’t research it too hard. How about simply improving the bus service by making the operations more efficient."
In Toronto, the proposed 5.5 km, one station subway, which will replace the Scarborough SRT in Toronto is now said to cost $3.3 billion and add $40 million to the TTC's operating costs. The 4 station Broadway subway will cost the same or more and to mitigate the cost, like the Cambie Street, Canada Line subway, cut and cover will most certainly be used!
The Scarborough SRT is Toronto's version of our Innovia SkyTrain and will be torn down because the guide way will soon become life expired.
Now a word about the Canada Line.
It is not an success, far from it, as internationally it is considered a "white elephant". Small stations and small train effectively limit capacity at 9,000 pphpd. Remember, in North America, traffic flows must exceed 15,000 pphpd before building a subway. The Canada Line costs TransLink about $110 million to operate annually.
By the way, SNC Lavalin own the engineering patents for the proprietary Innovia SkyTrain system and the chap providing oversight for the subway also happens to work for SNC Lavalin. How do you spell, conflict of interest?
Last reference: Since SkyTrain was first marketed in the late 70's, it has undergone at least 4 name changes and only seven such systems have been built and not one in the past decade.
During the same period, over 200 new build tram/LRT lines have been built and many of the 350 existing city tram line have been upgraded to light rail.
There is so much more.
Why do we still build with a yesterday's "Edsel" transit system?
I am an advocate for NASA skytran. News from cfo is encouraging for this hyperloop tech without the cost and redundant speed. They have now $11million invested to set up more labs and offices in US. See my video on top of tramwaypods.ca
ReplyDeleteGood and accurate article Frank. Thanks.
ReplyDelete