paulhillsdon.com

I was at the Surrey Archives today, and while going through a *ton* of documents, I came across an old timetable from the BC Electric Railway’s Interurban Line. Here’s a quick rundown of what I found from the 1924 timetable:

• Service ran three times a day in both directions, for a total of six runs both east and westbound, all the way from Chilliwack to New West and back again. There was additional runs leaving from Jardine (in Langley), and from Cloverdale (in Surrey).
• Times were spaced out throughout the day, rather than the rush hour commuter service the West Coast Express provides.
• Westbound from Chilliwack to New West: 8:05A, 1:40P, 6:20P
• Eastbound from New West to Chilliwack: 12:15P, 5:50P, 9:00P
• From New West, it took:
  • 24 mins to Newton
  • 40 mins to Cloverdale
  • 53 mins to Langley City
  • 1 hour and 40 mins to Abbotsford
  • 2 hours and 40 mins to Chilliwack

Nathan Pachal, former writer of the VALTAC blog, started up his own site today. I found some more recent timetable information on his Document Archive. This rundown covers Interurban service in 1950, just before it was shut down:

• Service ran three times a day in both directions, for a total of sux runs both east and westbound all the way from Chilliwack to Vancouver and back again. Service was express from Vancouver to New West - local service on this stretch was provided by the Central Park Line (the equivalent of the Expo Line SkyTrain).
• Westbound from Chilliwack to Vancouver: 8:00A, 1:30P, 6:10P
• Eastbound from Vancouver to Chilliwack: 8:25A, 1:20P, 5:30P
• There was special early runs on Fridays, and late night runs on Saturdays (i.e. leave Vancouver at 11:33P, leave Langley at 1:50A)
• From Vancouver, it took:
  • 45 mins to New West
  • 1 hour and 9 mins to Newton
  • 1 hour and 25 mins to Cloverdale
  • 1 hour and 38 mins to Langley City
  • 2 hours and 25 mins to Abbotsford
  • 3 hours and 25 mins to Chilliwack

I personally find it fascinating that we were able to run a regional rail service, throughout the day, back in the 20’s, compared to our terrible lack of service today. I suppose that’s what happens when your rip up a transportation network - it takes a while to rebuild.

I can hardly imagine how much of a boon restoring service on the Interurban would be, even just for my transportation needs. My main places of travel are Cloverdale, Newton, Whalley, Fleetwood, Langley, Burnaby, and Vancouver - and the Interurban would serve five, possibly six, of them! That’s nearly everywhere I go.

That said, it doesn’t really help the denser areas in North Surrey. However, it would be huge to communities east in the Valley! I can’t even imagine how convenient and enjoyable a rail ride would be, going from Cloverdale to Langley in 13 mins, Cloverdale to Newton in 16 mins. Having a direction connection from downtown Vancouver to Surrey, without all the stops that the SkyTrain necessitates, would be AMAZING!

Please. Bring back the Interurban. I’ll do anything. Just give me my rail service!

I was going through the South of Fraser Area Transit Plan today, and I was reminded that, given the choice of what rapid transit services they wanted, almost all residents South of the Fraser turned down SkyTrain.

According to the document, TransLink reps gave residents colour coded lengths of tapes to place over a regional map as part of a visioning process. The length of this tape was based on a reasonable estimate of the budget TransLink would have for expansion.

• 1 piece of SkyTrain = 5 pieces of BRT
• 1 piece of LRT = 3 pieces of BRT
• 1 piece of BRT = 1.5 pieces of Frequent Bus services

Now, let’s examine the outcome of this visioning process.

SkyTrain

There was very little agreement for this expenditure, primarily because of the cost and the limited penetration into the South of Fraser that results by spending all available capital on this type of rail. Most participants started out with SkyTrain but then began to understand the tradeoff between service single corridors versus creating a network of services.

LRT

There was more agreement on this investment with a number of corridors being highlighted. However, overall, the network remains thin because rail takes up the majority of the budget. Most participants picked out corridors shown in previous transit strategies such as King George highway and 104th Street in Surrey of Fraser Highway from Surrey to Langley. The Southern Rail (Interurban) corridor was highlighted in Workshop but it did not appear in the other 24 maps. Interestingly, there was limited support for the northern section of the line.

BRT

The network and the level of agreement for Bus Rapid Transit echoes the market research. It is interesting to note that as the budget is spread among les expensive alternatives, the network that can be created increases both in scale and popularity. Respondents seemed to understand the concept of the B-Line as Bus Rapid Transit and were interested in extending a similar network throughout the region, including to Abbotsford.

————————————————————————————-

Now, take the above into the context of almost a year or two ago, before the Provincial government decided to invest $4 billion into our transit system.

With this change, I think it’s safe to say that we have a slightly larger budget now. When taking this into account, I think choosing to develop at least one of the major transit corridors in the SoF region as LRT would be a smart move. There are numerous advantages to choosing rail over bus, despite what some would tell you.

Furthermore, TransLink has a terrible reputation for stalling upgrades or expansions years after they were necessary. Obviously, the B-Lines have been a success. However, if you don’t meet initial success with quick expansion, typically through providing more buses, the whole experience diminishes in quality and convenience quite rapidly. Just try riding either the 98 or 99 B-Line and you’ll quickly find out that they pale in comparison in terms of definition as “rapid transit” beside our SkyTrain system. The routes get stuck in traffic, the bus doesn’t have much of a premium interior, and you can never get over the simple fact of overcrowding.

I think the SoF area has a prime opportunity here to convince Mr. Falcon to redirect the money in place for SkyTrain expansion in Surrey to provide us with at least one LRT route - and heck, throw the rest of the millions into more buses for our future BRT routes - so we can avoid having to stand for 45 minutes on the Fraser Hwy.

During the Surrey Mayor’s State of the City address, while discussing transportation in BC’s second largest city, Dianne Watts said:

“I for one am a firm believer that instead of SkyTrain expansion in Surrey we should be looking at At Grade Rail. At Grade Rail is significantly cheaper, easier to build and much more aesthetically pleasing than Sky Train. Surrey cannot wait until 2020 for improved rail transit. At Grade Rail can be completed much faster. I have great confidence in the potential of At Grade Rail, and I am currently having City staff analyze this option so that we can move it forward.”

This is a terrific move on the part of the Mayor. It great to know that she understands the added qualities that LRT presents to Surrey over SkyTrain - not just cost efficiency per km, but also aspects like the streetscape asthetics.

While I understand the reasoning for SkyTrain to UBC and to Coquitlam, I am a vehement supporter of the development of a new rail transit network based on LRT. Surrey is in the perfect position to be the beginning spot for this new network and will set the city apart from the North of Fraser’s transportation planning of the past few decades. It’s saying “We will chart our own path, learn from your mistakes, and build the best rail transit we can”. And that rail transit will be based on LRT!

Hopefully Surrey City Council will take a nod from Vancouver, and continue to push forward on the Heritage Rail Project. It would be a fantastic business case for LRT South of the Fraser if we can have a demonstration up and running in the next few years!

Good job Dianne! You just got my vote for November!

There’s a story in The Province today about Surrey continuing it’s so-called “made in Surrey” approach to regional growth, although this time the city has a leg to stand on.

There’s a strong possibility that following the LRSP update, Metro Vancouver will gain stronger powers to enforce cities in the region to play along properly with the regional growth strategy - something Surrey has a reputation for “derailing” due to it’s sprawled development.

One of the current large problems in the region is a growing lack of industrial land. As most should be aware, Vancouver and Burnaby are actually making the situation worse by rezoning industrial land for high density condos. Just take a look downtown: False Creek North and South, Yaletown, Coal Harbour - all former industrial lands. Burnaby is playing a similar game, building condos along the SkyTrain lines, usually on land that is or was industrial.

Now, it’s perfectly debateable whether or not these rezonings were justified and are actually improving quality of life. Certainly, it’s a very complex debate, ranging from the Province building rapid transit along industrial corridors in the first place (in an attempt to avoid NIMBYs), to Vancouver pursuing a word renowed smart growth strategy for the Downtown Penninsula.

The fact remains though, that industrial land is disappearing quickly and cities north of the Fraser are doing nothing to replace the lost plots of industrial lands.

This leaves Surrey is a difficult situation. Jean Lamontagne, General Manager of the City of Surrey’s planning department:

“Many municipalities have converted large areas of industrial land to higher uses, such as residential,” Lamontagne said in a report to council.

“Surrey is now being expected to make up for the shortcomings of others.

“It is expected to provide storage, distribution and truck storage for the region. It is clearly not acceptable . . . as they do little for the tax base of the city,” he said.

In the article, Dianne Watts, Mayor of Surrey, outright dismisses the option that Metro Vancouver will be able to overrule the City’s land use authority:

“The pressure to convert industrial land to residential is very high in Surrey, but we’re saying no,” she said.

“The region is looking at other communities to pick up the slack. It wants to fix mistakes of the past, but one community can’t supply industrial land for the region.”

Then, Vancouver Councillor Suzanne Anton steps in and completely misreads the whole situation with this statement:

“Surrey wants to be able to upgrade industrial land to commercial land [and produce more tax revenue]. Surrey is saying more loudly than others that they don’t want to be told what to do,” said Anton, who sits on the Metro planning committee.

Surrey has never wanted to replace industrial with commercial. Frankly, industrial lands provide better jobs in the long term for residents. In fact, Surrey has pursued a very intense strategy of protecting or expanding industrial lands in the city.

But it gets better. Anton then goes in for the knockout:

She admitted Vancouver recently converted industrial land in Southeast False Creek for a future residential community of 15,000. But she said Surrey shouldn’t point fingers.

“Do we want to get into who shoots up on the Downtown Eastside and where they come from?” she asked.

BAM!

How dare Anton try and claim that all the homeless, mentally ill, and drug addicted in Vancouver are somehow Surrey’s problem?! How dare she reinforce a negative persona on both Surrey as a city and claim to define it’s type of residents?!

That type of verbal attack on a neighbouring community should not be occuring by any mayor or councillor in the region.

In fact, it’s quite debateable, but if it wasn’t for the SkyTrain, Whalley wouldn’t have even gotten half the problems it did in the 90’s. And where do you think those people were coming from - oh, right, VANCOUVER!

For a while I felt as though my blog was steering too far into posts on Surrey. I mean, obviously it’s something I feel is important to write about as it is my home city. However, I know not everyone is interested in such posts.

On that front, I’ve launched a Surrey specific blog: civicSurrey. It will cover important future developments and major news stories in the city. I may crosspost a few interesting articles, but generally from now on, most Surrey posts will be on civicSurrey. So, go check it out and I hope you stick around!

As one of Surrey’s initiatives under the Cultural Capital of Canada designation, the City has funded a digital art project named “Glocal: Your World in Motion“. Here’s the synopsis from the project’s site:

Glocal is an interactive screen and online artwork now in production by a team of local artists: Sylvia Grace Borda, M Simon Levin, and Jer Thorp. They have envisioned building a massive community media experience that will challenge perceptions about the city of Surrey, Canada’s fastest growing metropolis.

With the use of digital cameras and motion capture, audiences will witness how speed, size, density and diversity have enabled Surrey to exist in local and global (Glocal) consciousness.

All the content produced under the banner of the Glocal project will form a large relational artwork in which ‘moving’ images of Surrey will become a central point of exploration. This interaction will then be repeated internationally through community workshops and public exhibitions. When realized, audiences will be able to compare, contrast and examine the world from all points of the globe – and experience how we all share the same horizons … and how we have a lot in common with others, wherever you are!

So how can YOU become part of Glocal and Think again about what’s cool where you live.
The Glocal team of artists will be residing online and at the Surrey Art Gallery TechLab to guide you on your way. Surrey youth and residents can become partnering artists through a series of mentoring workshops developed by the team. The team will also be producing low-tech toolkits to help you record your world in lots of new and amazing ways….

The project already has a Facebook page and a Flickr pool.

It sounds interesting enough, but I fear “Glocal” will be just another waste of time and money. I found it quite surprising that, as of yet, I didn’t even know this project was even in progress. For such an interactive and multimedia project, it hasn’t seemed to reach out to the local web community at all. Is this just another case of artists sharing their art with no one else but other artists?

Furthermore, the pictures that are currently posted on Flickr are nothing more than a series of boring, webcam shots. It’s like this group of artists is being paid to sit at a computer, make faces, and take pictures of themselves. I want that job!

We’ll see where this goes, but as of yet, I am not at all impressed.

Schedule info has screwed me multiple times. I’ve ended up missing the last bus on a route, standing in the rainsnow for 30 minutes without an umbrella, and walking a good 20 minutes along the route just to have something to do. All because I tried to relied on sources other than TransLink’s official schedule system - through both Google Transit and MyBus.

Now, it’s understandable that MyBus’s info may be off - they have to scrape TransLink’s website to get the times, and depending on if that system is working at all - it can really be off. That problem has to do with TransLink not making the info available for free to private developers.

But Google Transit should be a whole different story. TransLink worked side by side with Google engineers (AFAIK) to get the product off the ground, and all schedule information that is provided through GTransit is updated manually by TransLink. So here, when something is off it’s all TransLink’s fault.

With GTransit, I’ve encountered some problems. My regular stop features two routes - sometimes the routes times would be the opposite - meaning that the 320 I was told to catch at 4:50 is actually the 341, and the 320 came at 4:41. Sometimes, the map won’t even show any information at all! (I’m talking here about clicking on individual bus stops on the map, not creating travel info).

Today, I was searching up schedule information at all three places, and once again, I’m faced with three different scenarios. How the hell am I, as a transit rider, supposed to figure out when to even catch the friggin bus with a situation like this?!

MyBus:

TransLink’s NextBus:

Google Transit:

Two maps I worked on recently to show you. First off, here’s the ALR in Surrey. Sure, it’s nature I suppose, despite the fact that none of it is public land (meaning the nature is inaccessible to most people), and that very few of these places actually make any edible food for our region. Still, it’s good for containing sprawl.

Secondly, here’s the other green spaces in the City - basically areas that were densely green on the aerial map (mostly forests and whatnot). Some of this greenery is parks (i.e. you can see Tynehead, Green Timbers, and Bear Creek), other areas are sections like the grass along the power line corridors.

Nature truly is the arteries of our cities. It’s too bad politicians and developers don’t understand this.

Not much of a “city in a sea of green”, is it?

Dave left a comment on my Transit Metropolis Vancouver post, challenging me to take it beyond a vision and to figure out if it is viable as a real plan, and how much it would cost. I didn’t quite fulfill that exact challenge, but combined it with the latest SkyTrain expansion plans in Surrey, and came out with this.

It’s a 14 paged document outlining what LRT is, why we shouldn’t build SkyTrain in the South Fraser area, and how much it would cost to build three LRT lines out here.

Surprisingly enough, the final estimate, based on a cost of $24 million per kilometre, three LRT lines totaling 100km in the South Fraser area could be built for $2.5 billion.

Considering that the SkyTrain extensions, tentatively set for completion between 2020-2030, will likely total nearly $5 billion by then, with only 22.7 kilometres of rail rapid transit.

I think the business case is clear. Check it out [PDF] and let me know what you think in the comments! :)

This is the third pillar in my civic platform.

Transportation, all things considered, isn’t actually a *huge* deal out here. Most Surrey residents own a car and deal with reasonable traffic loads. The minority that doesn’t rides the buses and have put up with poor service for a long time now. However, this cycle can’t continue forever. At some point, with too large an increase in population and not enough road expansion, the drivers will get angry. Everyone knows roads can’t be expanded forever.

From here, we need to start looking at ways other than the car for people to get around. One simple strategy is to improve transit to the point where you can sufficiently attract drivers out of their cars. Another one, somewhat pioneered in our region is the idea of building complete communities. With this strategy, the concept is that people will be able to work, live, and play, in the same area, and could simply walk or cycle anywhere they needed to go. Longer trips could be taken of my transit or even a car share type program.

At one point in time, Surrey grew up around the Interurban, sprouting communities like Newton, Sullivan, and Cloverdale. Unfortunately, we are no longer a rail city, and growth has been half hazardly occuring around roads. It’s quite rare to see anyone walk in the city - only from the car to the store. Don’t even think about cycling in the area unless you are ready to fight the drivers.

This is unsustainable and needs to change. Now.

Imagine living somewhere where you wanted to walk to the store because there was things to see along the way and you felt safe. Imagine being able to safely cycle on your own lane, physically separated from the auto traffic or down beautiful greenways along the creeks and rivers. Imagine being able to walk a short distance to a bus stop with a modern and sharp looking weather shelter, comfy bench, along with a transit map, a garbage and recycling bin, and daily newspapers. We can make this a reality. Here’s how.

1. A Transportation Hierarchy

Development in Surrey is based around the car. Simple as that. There have been attempts to make developments a bit more friendly to other forms of transport. For example, making sure sidewalks are built, or perhaps bike lanes. But, you’re still building for cars, not people.

No more.

Surrey needs to establish a transportation hierarchy that will apply to a whole methodology surrounding developments and the way people get around. Taken straight from SmartGrowth BC’s Transportation policy:

• Walking
• Cycling
• Public Transit
• Goods and Commercial Services
• High Occupancy Vehicles
• Single Occupant Vehicles

With this overarching philosophy in place, developments will be made once again for people, not cars.

2. Bus stop initiative

Surrey doesn’t have too much control over transit and is frankly very much held captive by TransLink and the provincial government on that matter. The one area they have jurisdiction over though is the bus stops and what amenities are located there. If Surrey is truly dedicated to transit and transportation alternatives, our bus stops need to be at least as good as Vancouver’s.

First off, Surrey and it’s citizens need to decide whether they are fine with adspace paying for a large portion of this program. We could define ourselves as the city without advertising. Bus stops could be adopted by the local community and feature job boards or school artwork. Or, they could have ads for car drivers. This decision needs to be made as it influences funding.

From there, the City needs to hold a design contest with local architects to design modular bus stop amenities that can give the City an overarching transit identity, but still flexible enough to change things like colours depending on which of the six town centres the stop is in.

Next, the City needs to define progressive guidelines for bus stop amenities and also take a good look at the data. For example, some stops may be places where everyone always exits - a stop which would unlikely need a shelter, at least compared to one where riders are waiting for the bus.

Taking these variations into consideration, I generally support the concept that all stops should feature at least a shelter. This is Metro Vancouver. It rains. Shelters are needed above anything else. Shelters can also comfortably be leaned upon. A shelter is of much more use than a seat. Also, all stops with shelters must incorporate a transit map into the design.

All stops should also feature a garbage/recycling bin, in various sizes depending on the usage of the stop. Busier stops should also have a comfortable seat (not metal!), as well as newspaper bins.

It may seem like a huge initiative, but could actually dramatically improve the transit experience for all riders for quite a low cost, especially if it is partially funded through adspace. Think about it. Standing in the rain could make someone want to never ride the bus again. Having a newspaper to read could dramatically reduce the stress one faces waiting for a late bus - similar to the effect the radio has on drivers stuck in traffic. Minor investments with huge benefits.

3. Cycling Network Initiative

This is another “best buy”, similar to the bus stop initiative. For very low capital investment, Surrey could make huge strides in terms of cycling usage.

Cycling could be Surrey’s defining feature. We could be the national capital of cycling. Why not? It’s fun, it’s healthy, it’s green.

In fact, a ton of the immigrants living in Surrey have known cycling for most of their lives. It’s sad seeing them attempt to ride safely on the sidewalk, away from the traffic.

Ask anyone why they don’t cycle and they’ll reply, somewhere near the top, that it’s not safe! Bike lanes don’t encourage cycling, at least not among the majority of the public. We need physical separation.

Of course, just like any form of transportation, there needs to be a network. That it why, under my originally proposed Surrey Cycling Initiative, the City would make major capital investments into the system to complete the network in the near future (i.e. a couple of years). And as I said, building a whole cycle network costs so little in comparison to road expansion.

The initiative revolves around creating two major networks.

• A greenway network would feature long distance routes running through the City’s expanded biotopes in coordination with the Nature Preservation Strategy in the Green Spaces pillar. These would run along the farms, the creeks, and through the park - connecting them all up for enjoyable recreational use. It would be Surrey’s equivalent of Vancouver’s extremely successful seawall route.

• The second network is a mainly commuter one. And as I said before, to make people feel comfortable to ever do so, there needs to be physical separation. The commuter network would feature physically separated cycling lanes, alongside sidewalks, down the major roads in Surrey (aka: King George, Fraser, Scott Road, 152 St., etc.). There are a number of way the separation could be achieved, but there needs to be something there (i.e. bollards, a mini median, trees and grass, a small concrete strip, etc.)

Futhermore, in coordination with the Traffic Calming Strategy further down, measures would be taken to make cycling safer in neighbourhoods and residential zones. This could be things like bike lanes, sharrows, and the like.

4. Traffic Calming Strategy

The current traffic calming strategy is failing in two main realms.

• It requires inception from the community. This means that unless people truly care about their neighbourhood and have enough support for traffic calming, it won’t be put in.
• The traffic calming features in use aren’t cycling friendly.

The solution is quite simple. Require a traffic calming strategy to be incorporated in all new developments. Also, update the strategy to include markers for calming features to be installed in certain areas. For example, you could set baeslines according to how many cars a road is designed for - if it surpasses this number, traffic calming is installed. Similar baselines could be set around the number of speeding tickets that have been written around certain location - or the number of accidents.

Also, update the acceptable measures to ensure that traffic calming that is friendly towards cyclists. For example, some cyclists have difficulty with roundabouts that feature a potted garden in the center. This could be adjusted be removing the garden, and allowing cyclists to proceed directly forward, while cars would have to do the roundabout. Or, you could just not have roundabouts in the first place, and do things like speed bumps or traffic diversion instead.

5. Municipal Green Fleet

As part of Surrey’s green efforts, the City should, sometime in the next few years, begin to purchase and replace it’s vehicles with “greener” ones. These could be anything from hybrids, to electrics, to diesels, to smart cars. Major capital shouldn’t be put into this, however a strategy should be in place to gradually upgrade the municipal fleet to greener vehicles.