paulhillsdon.com

If you didn’t know, Portland, Oregon, is *the* leader of sustainability in the US. A key part of their success has been in providing a variety of transportation options. Since the 80’s, they’ve built multiple LRT lines, expanded their bike boulevards and cycling network, built the Portland Streetcar, and built the Portland Aerial Tram. Portland’s public transportation agency, TriMet, is now set to add a new service to their long list of options: Commuter Rail. 

In 1996, a feasibility study for a commuter rail line was initiated by Washington County, the cities of Beaverton, Tigard, Tualatin, Wilsonville and Sherwood, TriMet, Metro, and the Oregon Department of Transportation.

The project to establish a new 14.7-mile passenger rail line between Beaverton and Wilsonville has received strong support from the public and business community. It is the first commuter rail line in Oregon and one of the few suburb-to-suburb commuter rail projects in the country.

Because the line uses existing freight tracks in a dedicated corridor, construction impacts are minimal.

Passengers will ride in self-propelled diesel train cars. TriMet is working with Colorado Railcar to design and build the vehicle.

Sound familiar? 

Maybe that’s because the former Interurban rail corridor in Surrey is also an existing freight line, it is also a suburb-to-suburb route, and it’s also about 14 miles (actually only 12.22 miles or 19.66 km) in distance from Scott Road Station to Cloverdale. 

Plus, WES’ corridor was formerly home to two passenger rail services. Oregon Electric Railway and Southern Pacific Railway used to run Interurban rail services quite similar to those that were ran in the past by British Columbia Electric Railway.

Portland’s WES commuter rail service is set to open this fall. What can we learn from their experience?

1. Get everyone on board

The first feasibility study for the line was bi-partisan, bringing together various agencies and levels of government.

This initial collaboration is something we have not had going in the South of Fraser, with TransLink, Surrey, Langley Township, and The Province all launching their own studies, for various reasons, all with different conclusions. 

2. Ensure there is political will

With WES, immediately after the first study, the project gained it’s first political ally in Tom Brian, at the time, a member of the Oregon Legislature. He secured funding for follow-up studies. For 10 years, various politicians, at various levels, worked hard to secure funding to build the project. This resulted in the cost of WES being paid for by the federal government, State of Oregon Lottery Bond Proceeds, TriMet and GARVEE Bonds, and contributions by local governments and Washington County.

While a number of organizations continue to call for “Rail for the Valley”, there is no consensus among citizens, let alone politicians about how or where expanded transit South of the Fraser should be. For this, among other reasons, bringing back rail on the Interurban route isn’t being unanimously championed.

3. It doesn’t take long to achieve 

The whole time span from the first study to the opening of the service is 12 years. Consider this though: 3 of those years was spent just doing the initial study! It took seven years for design, engineering, environmental assessments, and funding to be secured. Construction took a total of two years. 

Realistically, bringing back rail in the South of Fraser could be achieved even faster than WES’ experience. BC Hydro already owns the right-of-way to the route, something Portland didn’t have. Not to mention, Southern Railway has already stated it is keen on incorporating passenger rail service on the route. And considering how fast Kevin Falcon can push projects through, rail out here could be built quite quickly - in a matter of years. But we aren’t at this stage yet. 

We in Surrey are still at step 1 and until we set some of our initial problems straight, we will never be getting commuter, or community, rail service happening anytime soon. Always keep hope, and transform that hope into action - then maybe we can get this off the ground.

It’s been proven time and again in public transit that, if you build it, they will come. Just ask any of those Greater Vancouver commuters crammed like sardines in SkyTrain cars during the morning or evening rush hour.

This is happening now despite arguments made during the planning of the existing rapid-transit system that not enough folks would use such a service.

Now, we’re hearing similar criticisms from those who oppose using the old Inter-Urban route for light-rail service in the Fraser Valley. There’s not enough population density, they say.

The folks displaying this attitude clearly have a hard time seeing beyond their noses.

Transit must be planned in a long-term context. And all growth projections for south-of-Fraser communities, from Delta to Chilliwack, agree that this region alone will one day have a population larger than that of the whole of Metro Vancouver today.

Surrey already has the largest number of children enrolled in K-12 schools of any municipality in the province. And its population is expected to surpass that of Vancouver in the next 20 years.

Also, the 18-24 demographic in the Fraser Valley is growing at six times the provincial average.

The most efficient and “green” way to move large numbers of people is via light-rail transit.

Given the population growth in this region, this transit option should be a no-brainer.

So, build it and they will come. Just ask the sardines.

[The Province]

Once The Province hops on the bandwagon, you know something is going here.

It’s my understanding that there are two things holding back restored rail service on the Interurban route: TransLink and Kevin Falcon.

TransLink tends to operate in its own little bubble and isn’t nearly as progressive as one would hope. Not to mention they are continuously behind schedule in implementing their plans. You may attempt to blame that on lack of funding, but when they refuse to even try a cheap, innovative idea like rail for the valley, you know that the planners there are rather stuck up in their data analysis and can’t quite think outside the box. Not a personal attack here - just TransLink as a whole ;)

Their excuses include lack of density and population along the route. Of course, they don’t mention the big key that The Province’s editorial mentioned - build it and they will come. If you give us roads and highways, of course development will be car oriented. Open a railway and the shift won’t just immediately happen, it will happen over the course of years. But it will happen. Just look at the success the Millennium Line now is with all the new high rise developments around the stations - not that long ago it was called a major failure and waste of money. Which is exactly why we shouldn’t build an expensive fancy system that will take years to attract sufficient ridership. Restore Interurban service cheaply at the beginning and begin upgrading, adding new trains, and double tracking the route as ridership increases. Cheap, effective method to wean us off cars!

TransLink is giving the same crap to Vancouver with their Downtown Streetcar plan. Ironically enough, a new streetcar system in Vancouver and restored community rail in Surrey would both cost just over $100 million. Anyways, TransLink’s excuse is that the streetcar will take ridership away from bus routes and that they hadn’t incorporated a streetcar in their long term transit expansion plans for Vancouver. God, what a friggin’ stupid excuse. Buses can be diverted elsewhere in the region! And talk about a bureaucracy if they can’t even see what a smart idea it would be to have a sleek, modern streetcar linking many of the attractions in Downtown Vancouver.

The second reason rail for the Valley isn’t coming anytime soon is Kevin Falcon. Before Gateway came along, he gladly gave $75,000 provincial dollars to Fraser Valley Heritage Railway Society. Ever since though, there’s been no money, nor any provincial support for the restoration attempts. First, he decided highways are the best solution to traffic congestion for the Valley. Then, after some arm twisting by his boss, Mr. Campbell, he included a short SkyTrain extension into Surrey as part of the Provincial Transit Plan. Falcon has, however, also promised that the Province will launch a study into the possibility of restoring rail service on the Interurban route - although I haven’t heard of any progress on this initiative. So unless he suddenly changes his mind, I don’t see him supporting rail for the Valley. And expect the typical spin in the study.

Which is all quite unfortunate, because all we would need is one of these two to hop on the rail bandwagon and it would get done like *that*.

Time to enter politics, eh?

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!

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! :)

There has been more than a few questions about the odd conceptual routing of the extension of SkyTrain in Surrey. Based on the image provided by the province, SkyTrain was to run along 96th Ave, then cut through a neighbourhood, finally reaching 88th Ave and Fraser. It was a terrible alignment, attempting a half assed connection to Guildford, and then leaving the new terminus smack dab at one of the busiest intersections on Fraser in the Fleetwood community.

According to both an article in the Now, and Kevin’s recent speech to the Langley Chamber of Commerce, the alignment shown in the image is not the actual one being proposed by the government. How much of this is Kevin personal opinion versus actual an government decision is not at all known (although what is the difference these days?).

He says the 6km extension will leave King George Station north to 104th Ave, turn south down 152nd St, and then run east down Fraser Hwy to 168th St.

Furthermore, and again I have no idea if this is just his vision, but he said that by 2030, we would see two more SkyTrain extensions:

• From the new terminus in Fleetwood, the Expo Line would continue along Fraser Hwy to Willowbrook in Langley
• From King George Station, a new branch would run south along King George Hwy to 64th Ave.

Click the image below to view the interactive Google Map.

All things considered, despite SkyTrain’s expensive cost, if the government is willing to pay for it, I’m happy. And with the “conceptual alignment” controversy being ironed out, the new proposed route will actually serve Surrey quite well.

Connections between Downtown Surrey and Guildford are quite popular and the route along 104th is currently quite busy. Guildford is still one of the largest malls in the region, and considering stations at malls are one of the mainstays of SkyTrain, it’s a good thing the route is going to hit it.

152nd St, between 104th and Fraser, is also a very busy route and will benefit from the SkyTrain. Furthermore, 152nd St is the other main road (King George is #1) that residents from South Surrey and White Rock take to get to North Surrey. Having a major hub at 152nd and Fraser will be great for these transit users, giving them an option between hopping SkyTrain from here, or taking a RapidBus to the Canada Line (assuming their destination is Vancouver).

Then of course, having the new terminus at 168th St, just before a major hill and dropoff into agricultural land, is a way better plan. This will allow for very fast connections from my community of Cloverdale as well as a very short route to Langley (basically through the agricultural land, a small community, then you’re there).

The unfortunate side of these new details is the current wait time for SkyTrain down King George. It’s always been the busiest route in Surrey, and I would personally say a SkyTrain connection to Newton would probably be a better short term improvement, despite all the newfound connections the other extension will provide to eastern and southernly communities. Also, the King George route has far more potential for transit oriented development.

Actually, Kevin, why not do both? Then, I’ll embrace your autocracy as something profoundly wonderful and will praise the road you walk on!

Well, just as I recommended they do in a previous post (not that I’m saying they are reading, though if they are I’d love a shoutout :P), the Mayors of Surrey, Delta, White Rock, Langley City, and Langley Township, have unianimously rejected TransLink draft South of Fraser Transit Plan. They are simply calling it too little, too late:

Watts says the main issue is that 80 per cent of the trips taken south of the Fraser do not cross the Fraser. “We are very underserved and there has to be a recognition to that fact. We can’t wait until 2031 to catch up to where the rest of the region is today,” states Watts. She says what is needed now is an additional 300 buses south of the Fraser, especially as there is an international airport in Abbotsford with no cross-connective routes on transit.

Watts says while the plan calls for increases to bus service, it doesn’t meet the immediate or long term transit needs of the region, whose combine population is already 650,000.

[News1130]

I commend the Mayors for making this move. It’s typical of Watts’ style - a very democratic process. Unlike the Tri-Cities mayors, who, at one time, were clamouring heavily for the Evergreen Line, or the always raucus causing Sam Sullivan, the SoF Mayors simply wrote a strongly worded letter of rejection to TransLink. In addition, they notified the media of the unacceptablility of the draft plan, putting a bit of pressure on TransLink to improve it.

It has always been important that the communities SoF stand strongly united on this front. It is quite clear that TransLink doesn’t have enough funding to provide us with the system we need, at least not while they are putting down hundreds of millions for other capital investments at this point. However, that doesn’t mean that perhaps priorities can’t be shifted, or timelines moved to possibly see some improvements. In addition, this clear message that there’s not enough transit will notify the public of the situation, and provides a perfect chance for Mr. Falcon to jump in and provide funding to vastly expand the transit system in his own constituency’s area.

I found it interesting how, although all these Mayors are now on the new Mayors’ Council of TransLink, they still decided to get this point out to the public. It seems to me that the place to discuss these needs is at the Mayors’ Council and perhaps reflects their lack of control of transportation issues with the new TransLink.

This news release brought out another interesting point for me. I wonder, how much leeway or influence will Mayors have on TransLink staff. It’s my understanding that all along, the former Board relied very heavily on reports and plans put together by the professional staff. So, if the new Board is simply taking this executive look at this and just rubber stamping most projects, then I would assume that local politicians could go rub shoulders with staff to get improved service plans heading their way. In a sense, creating a loophole, whereby staff are doing specific municipalities biddings…

In any case, support and cheers go out to the five Mayors of the South of Fraser region. Let’s keep up the pressure to fix this major issue.

2008

• New route on 64 Avenue between Langley Centre and Scottsdale
• New route on 88 Avenue between Walnut Grove and 22nd Street Station
• Continuous service on Scott Road - 72 Avenue
• Frequent Bus Network service on King George Highway between Newton and White Rock Centre
• More frequent service along 152 Street and on other core routes in Surrey

2009

• New route across Golden Ears Bridge, connecting Langley and Maple Ridge
• New route between White Rock Centre and Langley
• Integration of several routes with Canada Line rapid transit at Bridgeport Station in Richmond, including significant increases in service levels and reliability
• Introduce all-day local service in South Surrey
• New Community Shuttles in West Whalley
• More frequent service and extended hours for Langley Community Shuttles, including introduction of higher capacity “midi-buses”
• Improved service on Fraser Highway between Aldergrove and Langey Centre

2010-2011

• Improvements throughout the South of Fraser aera to achieve baseline transit service levels (6:00 am - 11:00 pm, seven days a week on key routes)
• Development of new transit infrastructure, improvement of existing transit exchanges
• New Community Shuttles on 68 Avenue in Surrey

2012

• Introduction of limited-stop B-Line service on Fraser Highway
• Improve service between Scottsdale and Langey
• New Community Shuttle route between Langey City and Walnut Grove
• Improved Community Shuttle service in South Surrey/White Rock and South Delta

2013

• Introduction of bus rapid transit from White Rock Centre to Guildford via King George Highway and 104 Avenue
• New transit services on Highway 1 and Port Mann Bridge
• New Community Shuttle route in South Surrey/White Rock

———————-

A few more interesting facts I gathered:

• The B-Line is a very poorly defined service, as anyone who rides the three routes can tell. They are basically nothing more than limited stop, express routes. Well then why aren’t all limited stop, express routes B-Lines? TransLink doesn’t know! But apparently they are looking into this. The guy told me that most likely there will be B-Lines (limited stop services), and a new identity for real rapid bus lines (with ITS, etc. which is what the 98 B-Line has). I assume this identity update will also include a designation for these new “midi-buses” planned for Langley (as seen above).
• The Interurban route is not being looked at any deeper because that’s not where the population is, and because they can get more bang for their limited buck adding buses around the area than upgrading the rail route for passenger service.
• The introduction of the new east-west connector routes is being championed as a very important improvement to the area

———————
Quite frankly, I am rather disappointed. From what I had heard, and I’d have to clarify on this, these improvements are based on a budget of around $600 million. And what do we get? More buses, and three semi rapid bus lines by 2013. No real rapid transit that actually shapes communities. Again, no reuse of the Interurban line (though the corridor is to be “secured for future use”). Just the same old standard improvements.

And that’s great, and it’s realistic, but there’s a significant issue here that continues to be neglected. The South of Fraser area is growing exponentially faster than any other place in the region, and is far behind in it’s transit usage and transit infrastructure. If most of the people moving to Metro Vancouver are going to live there, and there’s no major funding in place to provide *real* rapid transit to these residents, we are simply going to get a continuous increase of cars on the roads. And that’s without even mentioning the effects of the Gateway Program.

I would be excited if there was a major investment. But there isn’t.

And I understand that TransLink faces funding deficiencies, and based on what they have in their forecasted budgets, this is what they can realistically provide. I just hope that either they will dip into their reservoir of $400 million, or the provincial government will step in and put some of that 2.2 billion from Harper into the South of Fraser area. We need real options. And rapid buses in six years isn’t going to cut it.

The thing that annoys me most is that the King George/104th route (currently the 321, and part of the 320), at least from Guildford, to Surrey Central, to Newton… it’s already got 10 minute service at it’s peak, and is consistently packed throughout the day. It’s more than ready for articulated buses, and designation as a B-Line. That’s today. Imagine what’ll be like in 2013, when rapid bus is supposed to finally arrive.

What’s weirder is the route now known as the 502 (Surrey Central to Langley Centre, and sometimes beyond) is to become a B-Line before the King George route! Just based on my experience, it’s not usually as busy, and I could understand TransLink waiting a year or two to turn it into a rapid bus route. But they are gung ho about upgrading a route that doesn’t quite need it yet (if we are prioritizing…).

I find it odd that all these rapid bus routes seem to be timed with the twinning of the Port Mann Bridge around 2013, and when that highway rapid bus service will begin.

B-Lines would not take long to implement. I was going to suggest they put the 98 B-Line buses on a route in Surrey, but, of course, those buses are being diverted to the 95 and 91 B-Lines in Vancouver.

What does it take to buy a handful of articulated buses and stick them in Surrey/Langley?