Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[red-paladin]

I just discovered a website that you all might be interested in:

https://www.translinklistens.bc.ca/

This is a site that collects opinions by Translink users.
Hopefully, the more people that go there and push for improvements,
the more likely we will get them.

[deasine]

Most of us are already part of it

[racc]

This is a great idea. This will ensure enough funding for the Evergreen Line, the UBC Line, the Surrey Extension and maybe even LRT in the Valley.

Please encourage candidates to support this.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Technology/M...rbon+millions+transit/1519951/story.html

Metro Vancouver mayors want carbon tax millions for transit


BY MIRO CERNETIG, VANCOUVER SUN COLUMNISTAPRIL 21, 2009 7:28 PM


Surrey’s Mayor Dianne Watts plans to unveil a motion at a meeting of Metro mayors Wednesday demanding the provincial carbon-tax revenue collected in Metro Vancouver be channeled back to TransLink.
Photograph by: Ward Perrin, Vancouver Sun files
METRO VANCOUVER — Metro Vancouver mayors are expected to ask the province Wednesday for up to $300 million in annual carbon tax revenue to help pay for regional transportation, The Vancouver Sun has learned.

The mayors’ council, which oversees TransLink, also wants senior governments to guarantee that $120 million in federal gas-tax transfers will be given annually to the regional transportation authority.

These demands are contained in a motion to be voted on today by the mayors council at a confidential meeting. Background notes with the motion warn that TransLink must be properly funded or “the future of the region is in peril.”

TransLink has estimated annual spending must increase to $1.45 billion from $1 billion to pay for regional road and transit improvements. The authority says $150 million more per year is required simply to maintain existing services.

In today’s motion, the mayors’ council says it will support the $450-million spending increase only if the carbon tax revenue and gas-tax transfers are provided.

The motion notes that the share of TransLink revenues generated from property taxes has risen to 28 per cent from 18 per cent since 1999, and that the region’s taxpayers now pay 65 per cent of the total costs, compared to 53 per cent a decade ago.

“The mayors’ council will not support any further increase in property tax and holds the view that a reformed governance model is required that restores the decision-making authority to those who are required to approve the funding model,” the motion says in part.

“The provincial government has over the last several years significantly reduced income taxes and sales taxes and is now forcing local governments to ‘claw’ these ‘lost’ public revenues back through the introduction of new or increased local fees and taxes in support of TransLink’s funding needs.”

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts chairs the mayors’ council and has support from Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson and other civic leaders. None of the mayors would discuss the motion Tuesday, but a news conference has been scheduled after today’s confidential meeting.

Robertson has sided with Premier Gordon Campbell on the overall wisdom of a carbon tax, which is intended to reduce the burning of gasoline and other fuels that contribute to global warming.

The premier has said the $1.8 billion collected from the carbon tax over three years will be plowed into personal and small-business tax reductions to ensure that it remains “revenue-neutral.”

However, the mayors’ council argues that using some of the money to improve transportation will do more to move Metro Vancouver residents from their cars than a policy of unrelated tax reductions.

TransLink now gets its funding from three primary sources: transit fares and advertising revenue (38 per cent), property taxes (28 per cent), and fuel taxes (27 per cent).

“Increases in some of the current sources of revenue may be used to assist in addressing the funding shortfall; however, in consideration of the magnitude of the shortfall, they cannot be expected to deliver all the necessary revenues,” according to a background paper accompanying the mayors’ motion.

“It is clear that the sources of revenue available to TransLink need to be further diversified and that other orders of government need to be involved in the solution.”

[email protected]

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

[metroXpress]

Mayors seek carbon-tax revenue to pay for transit upgrades


FRANCES BULA
Special to The Globe and Mail

April 22, 2009

Lower Mainland mayors, struggling with the dilemma of how to pay for the next decades half-billion in transit improvements, plan to make their problem a campaign issue by pushing the provincial parties to give them carbon-tax revenue to pay the bill.

They say that the revenue, estimated at $100- 200-million a year for the region, should be put into transit instead of being given back to taxpayers as a climate-action credit, which is the current strategy to make the tax revenue neutral. At an in-camera TransLink mayors council meeting today, the regions 22 mayors will finalize whether to approve a motion saying they will only support TransLink's plans for the next 10 years if the agency gets $450-million over that period from carbon-tax revenue. The motion, obtained by The Globe and Mail, also declares mayors won't agree to fund the system any more with increased property taxes, which has become the default source in the past decade as the local agency has tried and failed to find other forms of funding.

The motion, being spearheaded by Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts, Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson and a small circle of others, says in its background material that the province's climate-action credit "does nothing toward moving Metro Vancouver residents from their cars toward public transportation," but that applying carbon-tax revenue to transit "will directly benefit the public."

Ms. Watts acknowledged the existence of the motion yesterday but refused to talk about the specifics. However, she said "there's been an ongoing level of frustration within the mayors council about the funding options."

Mr. Robertson agreed. "We're looking for logical ways of funding because we can't put it on the backs of the taxpayers," he said.

He said it remains to be seen whether all mayors will agree with the motion as written, but he believes there's strong support and the timing is right.

"It should be an election issue. It's a huge issue for the whole province."

The NDP has made its opposition to the carbon tax part of its campaign platform, but Mr. Robertson said the party should be able to find another way to support local transit.

"The bottom line is we need the province to step up and fund transit for the region," he said.

Mayors in Delta and Langley agreed that the current way of funding transit services is broken.

"The reality is we need more sustainable funding," said Langley City Mayor Peter Fassbender. "What we're doing now is putting together position papers and resolutions to go to the parties seeking support."

The question of how to fund Lower Mainland has been a political hot potato since the province first created TransLink, a regional body intended to provide more local control over transit, in 1999. TransLink directors tried to introduce a vehicle levy, but the public outrage was so intense that the provincial government refused to allow it to go forward.

That has left the regional body, whose operating budget is currently $1-billion, relying mainly on transit-fare hikes and property-tax increases to fund the system. TransLink taxes increased by 8 per cent this year for everyone in the region.

Property-tax payers now cover 28 per cent of the total bill compared to the 18 per cent they paid 10 years ago, with transit fares, advertising, and the gas tax covering much of the rest, the background material notes.

Before TransLink was created, the province used to pay 47 per cent of the total bill. It now pays 35 per cent.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090422.BCCARBON22ART2224/TPStory/National

[WarrenC12]

I don't know if I'm in favour of carbon taxes going towards Translink, at least not until something is figured out with respect to cap and trade or whatever for bigger industry.

The bottom line is Translink will get the money one way or another, with a vehicle levy, more gas and/or property tax.

[ambaUp]

SkyTrain service disrupted due to incident on SkyBridge
News1130 Staff | Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009 10:52 am
SURREY (NEWS1130) - A police situation on SkyBridge, has cut SkyTrain service in Surrey. There is no service at all between New Westminster and Sapperton. Millennium Line is operating segregated service between VCC-Clark and Sapperton.

TransLink says Expo Line is currently moving sporadically between Waterfront and New Westminster Stations, but they expect full service to resume by 11:10 am.

TransLink also says some people stuck on the SkyBridge compounded the problem by breaking out of a train. This is a highly dangerous thing to do, and has extended the shutdown time on SkyTrain.

[DKaz]

If there was any doubt that Port Moody West Coast Express Station was being utilized enough (Excuse the black dot, my CCD sensor thingy in my camera's defective ):



Compared to Coquitlam Station which is one of the busier stations besides Waterfront.



Note, everyone's standing at the east end of the platform because there are more seats over there becaues of the two extra cars with three doors roped off, especially at Port Moody because all the other cars have their seats taken by that station.

[officedweller]

Presumably if you're allocating carbon tax revenue to transit - it would be applied within the geographic region in which it was raised?
i.e. taxes paid by industry up in northern BC would pay for transit in Fort St. John, etc.?

[racc]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Presumably if you're allocating carbon tax revenue to transit - it would be applied within the geographic region in which it was raised?
i.e. taxes paid by industry up in northern BC would pay for transit in Fort St. John, etc.?

This is what would be both fair and a way to build public support for this. For communities where transit does not make sense, the revenue could be used to fund other projects that reduce emissions in that community.

No one cares that the tax is revenue neutral. For most people it is not. For the ones paying more, they aren’t going to be that happy. For me, I would much rather have better transit than a 100 bucks a year from some poor shmuck in a pickup truck from Fort St. Bob.

[mellenger]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

I just discovered a website that you all might be interested in:

https://www.translinklistens.bc.ca/

This is a site that collects opinions by Translink users.
Hopefully, the more people that go there and push for improvements,
the more likely we will get them.

I'm not sure if you have seen the bus ads and skytrain wraps, but TransLink has another website where they are collecting feedback and facilitating discussion about transit issues in Metro Vancouver. http://bepartoftheplan.ca/

They also have some public consultations coming up and a transportation forum that should be pretty interesting on June 1st. They are bringing in planning experts to discuss issues and challenges both here and with transit in general: http://www.bepartoftheplan.ca/upcoming-consultations

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by racc

This is what would be both fair and a way to build public support for this. For communities where transit does not make sense, the revenue could be used to fund other projects that reduce emissions in that community.

No one cares that the tax is revenue neutral. For most people it is not. For the ones paying more, they aren’t going to be that happy. For me, I would much rather have better transit than a 100 bucks a year from some poor shmuck in a pickup truck from Fort St. Bob.

hey they have a good bus service there and many people use it and rely on it

[usog]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Nothing to do with anything but look what's on the front page <.<"

[SpongeG]

Rapid Transit: The light rail option


Published: April 20, 2009 4:00 PM
Updated: April 22, 2009 3:08 PM

5 Comments

by DAN KINVIG

and JOE MILLICAN

Abbotsford News

Many of the issues facing Fraser Valley commuters could be solved with the adoption of a light rail system.

That’s the contention of the local advocacy group Rail for the Valley, which is lobbying the provincial government to take advantage of existing rail infrastructure to upgrade the public transit system.

“The future is going to require rail transportation,” said John Vissers, a local Rail for the Valley spokesperson. “Urban areas around North America are slowly making transitions to rail-based infrastructure, and we have to do the same.”

Light rail is a form of rapid transit that operates largely on a dedicated rail track, and refers to the fact that the streetcar-type system accommodates lighter loads. Many light rail systems are powered by overhead electric wires, but some diesel models are also in service.

Rail for the Valley supports the revival of the old B.C. Electric interurban rail line to serve as the backbone of a light rail system linking Chilliwack, Abbotsford, Aldergrove, Langley and Surrey. The 50-kilometre interurban route transported passengers between Chilliwack and New Westminster until the 1960s, and is currently used by the freight transporter Southern Railway.

According to light rail advocate Malcolm Johnston, based on studies of light rail systems in other jurisdictions, a basic diesel system offering hourly trips from Vancouver to Chilliwack could be started for an estimated $500 million. A six-kilometre SkyTrain extension planned for Surrey carries a price tag of $1.1 billion.

“I know there are naysayers about light rail, but I think the movement will take hold,” said Abbotsford Coun. Lynne Harris, who chairs the traffic committee. “I think there’s feasibility to it. The infrastructure is already there, and in terms of economic affordability, it’s an idea that should be explored.”

Advocates also believe that light rail represents a more environmentally friendly solution to transit issues than expanding the road system. Road expansion just increases traffic, Vissers said.

The province is currently assessing the viability of using the interurban rail corridor as part of its Fraser Valley Transit Study. The $400,000 study, launched in late November, is expected to begin the public consultation phase later in the spring. A final report is expected in late 2009.

Speaking at a public forum last year, transportation minister Kevin Falcon noted that the business case conducted for the Evergreen Line linking Coquitlam, Port Moody and Burnaby concluded that SkyTrain technology would draw 2.5 times as many riders as light rail and would reach destinations in almost half the time.

That said, there has been little debate over whether a SkyTrain expansion could stretch to Abbotsford.

It prompted Harris to say last year that Abbotsford had been “shortchanged” when it comes to a B.C. government proposal to only extend SkyTrain’s lines from the existing limit in Surrey out to Langley.

Metro Vancouver’s SkyTrain service is operated by regional transportation authority TransLink.

Spokesman Ken Hardie acknowledged that a SkyTrain-type expansion – whether it be above ground or underground – would be the priciest way to connect Abbotsford to Metro Vancouver.

Light rail would be the next most expensive, he said, followed by rapid bus services.

These buses often have their own dedicated lanes. Their lower cost, when compared to light rail, allow for a larger network at the same price. Technology also means traffic lights can be held green for approaching buses, while bypass lanes can be created to allow the buses to speed past congestion at bridges or intersections.

“We need to look at how many people want to book it through [from Abbotsford] into Surrey, Coquitlam or Vancouver,” he said.

According to Hardie, the provincial study will likely examine whether there is high demand to connect Abbotsford to Metro through transit.

Last week, The News reported that 62 per cent of Abbotsford’s workers have jobs in their hometown. Most commuters travel to Langley and Surrey.

When it comes to reviving the old B.C. Electric interurban rail line, Hardie said a lot of “quite expensive” work would need to be completed before it could be opened. He also questioned whether it accommodates the sites that should be served by a rapid transit service. Another potential problem is that development tends to follow the establishment of any rapid transit network and could impact neighbourhoods that lie close to the track.

Any rapid transit service for Abbotsford is unlikely to come for free, Hardie continued.

TransLink operates the West Coast Express, a commuter train between Mission and Vancouver.

The operating cost for that service in 2008 was $16.7 million, of which TransLink recouped $15.4 million (92 per cent) through fares. That is better than the norm, according to Hardie, who said that on average for all TransLink services, only 53 per cent of operating costs are recaptured through fares. He doubts whether an Abbotsford rapid transit service would turn a profit, leaving taxpayers on the hook for the remainder

“You don’t necessarily have the population density, coupled with the demand for people trying to get from here to there,” he said.

5 Comments
Sort by Community Page Comments feed

Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.

Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.

*
starstruck60 1 day ago
I would like to know, how in these hard economic times, are we going to get 38 to 42 heavy frieght trains a day off the rail through Langley and onto a different track. That is twice as many trains then the CP tracks that the West Coast Express run on. I New Mexico, They have a heavy rail train like the West Coast Express running up the middle of there major highway. 60 miles of rail for less then 500 billion dollars and built in a year. Runs at up to 100 miles per hour, goes through 7 zones and cost 7 dollar oneway. You can also use your ticket for discounts at over 100 local companies along the way and at hotels.
o Like
o Report
o Reply
o More ▼
o Use Media ▼
Login (optional)

Please log in to Disqus to comment on Abbotsford News.
*
fluffy354 1 day ago
Since the first plans were drawn up in 1988 for the Evergreen line there has been no success. A local engineering plan failed to impress the old Rita Johnston Socreds that went down in 1989-90. Tom Irwin an engineer out of Toronto who has done the Toronto grid said its impossible. The Socreds said it was and through the report out. When the N.D.P. took power the politicians resigned and the group folded.
Two years later in 1992 The NDP formed a community group called the North East Transportation Committee.
The recomendations were widen the freeway HOV, The Millenium line both still in progress. Twinning the Port Mann with a light rail capacity using the middle of the freeway because there are no level crossings to Abbotsford. The Canada Line which was drawn up in 1990 and waited until the CPR and Translink could figure out Arbutus or Cambie. The province stepped in under the Terms of Union of B.C. and Ottawa and got the money for Cambie because the CPR refused to abandon the Arbutus corridor. This in turn trapped the train route to meet with Skytrain, West Coast express, Seabus and the Richmond Airport section.
In 1992 it was confirmed the Millenium line would go to UBC. All cars were ordered and there is no going back. A ten year lead time is required.
Yesterday the announcement of high speed on the Cascadia Corridoe will add stimulus for high speed rail up the valley to Abbotsford where the two intersect on the new Sumas route. The route now has a slow go through White Rock at 15 mph for 2 miles, at Cresent Beach the curve and crossing problems not to mention the tressle problem at 20 mph. None of the exsists between Bellingham and Abbotsford. So from Abbotsford a straight shot down the freeway to Vancouver. Time curently to finish 15 years. However it could be quicker if campbell shortens the length of time on Peter Kiewi the Contractor.
The group for High Speed should be awarded something as a recognized community group sitting on various Committees and holding public forums. railforthevalley.com has been noticed by The president of the U.S. for there work up here. He ordered money and funding last week. Many politicians on both sides of the border are watching this rail configuration. In the past I have worked with them all on the projects and still do as a community liason and volunteer planner and contributor.
One of the future commuter rail runs will be on the E&N railway on Vancouver Island. High speed rail is also been touted for Whistler. Now the highway is finished thre railway down below is a mess and CN with lots of money will want to straighen it all out. There mainline is the Fraser canyon, but a good secondary would be that route from Prince george thru Edmonton. There is an upgrade paragraph in the BCR sale to CN.

Bryan Vogler
o Like
o Report
o Reply
o More ▼
o Use Media ▼
Login (optional)

Please log in to Disqus to comment on Abbotsford News.
*
jameswatt 1 day ago
Not to mention that if CP wasn't charging ridiculous amounts for track fees to the West Coast Express it would be turning a profit!!
o Like
o Report
o Reply
o More ▼
o Use Media ▼
Login (optional)

Please log in to Disqus to comment on Abbotsford News.
*
ZweiSystem 1 day ago
Hardie is just not telling the truth!

Quote: "He doubts whether an Abbotsford rapid transit service would turn a profit, leaving taxpayers on the hook for the remainder "

Hardie certainly doesn't say that SkyTrain is currently subsidized by over $200 million annually!

Quote: "You don’t necessarily have the population density, coupled with the demand for people trying to get from here to there,” he said."

Neither does the $2.5 billion RAV/Canada line, but the government funnelled all sorts of tax money into that scheme.

Quote: "Any rapid transit service for Abbotsford is unlikely to come for free, Hardie continued."

A Vancouver to Abbotsford SkyTrain at over $100 million/km. to build, would cost well over $8 billion; Diesel LRT, track-sharing with the SRR of BC costing an average of $10 million/km. could cost as little as $800 million! A limited 90 minute service, about $500 million.

Quote: "Another potential problem is that development tends to follow the establishment of any rapid transit network and could impact neighbourhoods that lie close to the track."

Um no, unless zoning is changed. LRT preserves neighbourhoods, while SkyTrain destroys them.
o Like
o Report
o Reply
o More ▼
o Use Media ▼
Login (optional)

Please log in to Disqus to comment on Abbotsford News.
*
fluffy354 1 day ago
Skytrain is great and has saved the people millions if not billions in litigation and mourning of the dead and injured people and families. Fact undisputed, Skytrainhas no level crossings. It was built that way for the safety of everbody. ASk Via Rail what it costs for a simple car demoliished by a 2 3000 hp road engines with twenty cars behind it. Ask them what the people look like inside the train after the emergency stop if there was one.
It a 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 mess, you cut your way into cars and haul the dead out. The firemen look after the wrecked car with a nice family in it. if you want to comprimize safety at any price then level crossings is the place to go. They have been there since the railway started long before cars. So if the congestion gets worse the more crossings are needed and there is no solution for this suicide run except overtop or tunnelling or a seperate right of way. Both the Canada Line and Skytrain will save millions of lives over the long run and I would rather be safe than sorry.
By the way B.C. Southern has gone on the record as not building light rail for that reason. The leverage is on the 365 mph fast train down the middle of the freeway. Hardie knows his stuff, he has been there awhile.
Bryan Vogler

http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/abbynews/news/43315132.html

[mr.x]

Both the Canada Line and Skytrain will save millions of lives over the long run and I would rather be safe than sorry.

[mr.x]

According to light rail advocate Malcolm Johnston, based on studies of light rail systems in other jurisdictions, a basic diesel system offering hourly trips from Vancouver to Chilliwack could be started for an estimated $500 million.

If it's light-rail, that would probably make it the most infrequent and inefficient light rail system in the entire world with that horrendously low budget. A train ever hour? Really??? And who in the right mind would build an LRT system from Vancouver to Chilliwack?

Rather, for $500-million we could build ourselves a very decent, world-class commuter rail system from Vancouver to Chilliwack. That's where hourly trips fit in.

The guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.

[deasine]

Maintenance and Transportation Training Centre

TransLink is exploring a new maintenance facility that would enable necessary fleet expansion at the Burnaby Transit Centre to maintain service levels. The hope is that the facility would also serve as a training centre for future maintenance personnel.

Discussions are underway between TransLink, British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT), Coast Mountain Bus Company (CMBC) and the Canadian Auto Workers to investigate the development of a joint facility, which would have educational, employment and economic benefits to the community and the province.

Site Identified

The proposed site is located on the north side of the Fraser River in Maple Ridge. The site is bound by Wharf Street to the south, Katzie First Nations Reserve to the west, Hazelwood Street to the east and an existing Industrial Park to the north. The right of way for the future Golden Ears Bridge is within the footprint of the site.

In addition to the property investigations, a Memorandum of Understanding has been signed between BCIT, TransLink, CMBC and CAW.

Source: TransLink

Marine Drive Transit Bus Lane
TransLink is conducting community consultation about the implementation of a bus-only lane on Marine Drive in North Vancouver, between Glenaire Drive and Tatlow Avenue.

Recently, TransLink completed a transit priority study entitled, “Lions Gate Bridge / Marine Drive Transit Priority Study ”. The primary purpose was to identify opportunities of improving transit travel time in accessing the bridge.

Currently, to avoid the westbound traffic line ups on Marine Drive en-route to the Lions Gate Bridge, buses are being detoured to 15th Street between Pemberton and McGuire during AM peak periods. From McGuire, North bound buses turn left onto Marine Drive, weaving a short distance, crossing two West Vancouver off-ramp lanes as they approach the Lions Gate Bridge. Once on the Marine Drive overpass heading toward the bridge, buses are often caught in the slow moving southbound traffic.

Implementation of the bus-only lane will eliminate several of these deficiencies. Key objectives of these improvements include:

Allow buses on Marine Drive providing passenger pick-up and drop-off at all times of the day, thereby improving customer service along this corridor
Reduce transit delay in this corridor by improving line-up jumping capability accessing the bridgehead of Lions Gate Bridge from Marine Drive

Source: TransLink

Burnaby Mountain Transit Hub

Transit use continues to grow on Burnaby Mountain. The current transit hub can no longer keep up with demand. Working with the public, we aim to develop a long-term urban design plan for the central town square area at Simon Fraser University’s Burnaby campus.

Attractive, Safe Design

We hope to create an exceptional urban environment that supports sustainable planning and encourages commuters to choose transit as their preferred mode of travel. The hub will be an attractive, safe and functional facility, respecting the campus’ inherent character as well as the urban context of the area. Its design will meet the needs of the community now and well into the future.

Transit use in the area has increased significantly since 2002 and continues to rise. As a result, investment is required to improve the transit experience, including better bus arrivals and departures. Part of the new hub's design will consider requirements for end-of-route facilities including bus layover, on or off site, will also be considered.

Source: TransLink

[deasine]

• Video Link

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by mr.x

If it's light-rail, that would probably make it the most infrequent and inefficient light rail system in the entire world with that horrendously low budget. A train ever hour? Really??? And who in the right mind would build an LRT system from Vancouver to Chilliwack?

Rather, for $500-million we could build ourselves a very decent, world-class commuter rail system from Vancouver to Chilliwack. That's where hourly trips fit in.

The guy clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.

thats what they had years ago

i think we have to look at whatever happenning isn't meant to be rapid but a non-car option

[DKaz]

Originally Posted by mr.x

If it's light-rail, that would probably make it the most infrequent and inefficient light rail system in the entire world with that horrendously low budget. A train ever hour? Really??? And who in the right mind would build an LRT system from Vancouver to Chilliwack?

It would be a starter system that can be upgraded over time as demand warrants it. Remember once upon a time when the 410 only ran during rush hour? The 99 B-Line only ran 5am to 8pm Monday to Saturday? The Interurban can eventually be upgraded to run 15 minutes headways Scott Road to Langley and 30 minutes beyond.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

thats what they had years ago

i think we have to look at whatever happenning isn't meant to be rapid but a non-car option

Close, but If you talk to the old-timers, they'll tell ya that there was one train out to Chilliwack per DAY.

In addition, the InterProvincial Hwy was the only way to get out there, MUCH slower than the #1.

Also, fewer people owned cars, and those that did, didn't have one per family member.

As for calling it LRT, we don't need to get up in arrms about it. Diesel DMU LRTs and Commuter Rail is essentially the same thing. I think they're just using LRT as a buzzword as it's the IN thing to do these days.

I thought this was interesting:

The route now has a slow go through White Rock at 15 mph for 2 miles, at Cresent Beach the curve and crossing problems not to mention the tressle problem at 20 mph. None of these [problems] exist between Bellingham and Abbotsford. So from Abbotsford a straight shot down the freeway to Vancouver. Time curently to finish 15 years. However it could be quicker if campbell shortens the length of time on Peter Kiewi the Contractor.

The group for High Speed should be awarded something as a recognized community group sitting on various Committees and holding public forums. railforthevalley.com has been noticed by The president of the U.S. for there work up here. He ordered money and funding last week. Many politicians on both sides of the border are watching this rail configuration. In the past I have worked with them all on the projects and still do as a community liason and volunteer planner and contributor.

One of the future commuter rail runs will be on the E&N railway on Vancouver Island. High speed rail is also been touted for Whistler. Now the highway is finished the railway down below is a mess and CN with lots of money will want to straighen it all out. The mainline is the Fraser canyon, but a good secondary would be that route from Prince george thru Edmonton. There is an upgrade paragraph in the BCR sale to CN.

Interesting. I had never thought of shooting north-east from Bellingham and crossing at Sumas (on an existing ROW).