Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[Unregistered User]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Exactly (esp that last one - some people on here assume it'll be a shared ROW)

Is that an unreasonable assumption? California High Speed Rail will be using the Caltrain ROW between San Francisco and San Jose. Why not have a similar arrangement here?

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Unregistered User

Is that an unreasonable assumption? California High Speed Rail will be using the Caltrain ROW between San Francisco and San Jose. Why not have a similar arrangement here?

I don't know the details of the California HSR, but I wanted to point out that there's a difference between a shared right of way and shared trackage. You can have different sets of tracks in the same right of way.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

No plan survives contact with the finance department. Airports are critical infrastructure, yes, but YVR and many others are also self-funding; we don't even know if the HSR would break even during operations.

GO in Ontario is expanding at the ballpark cost of $90m/km, and it's over 90km from Tsawwassen to Chilliwack. That's a whole lot more than $1b.

Are municipal rail and regional rail an apples and oranges comparison? Yes. Are the provincial accountants likely to see it that way? No.
Is Victoria likely to spend $4.5 billion on 9,000 tourists/day ahead of 150,000 Canadian commuters/day? No.
Is Victoria likely to spend another $8+ billion on even less ridership out to the Valley? No.
a simple high-frequency bus network in the Valley would actually get more riders than a train. So they'll likely do that instead and revisit rail in another thirty years.

It's also important to remember that, as I stated before, Ontario decided to plan for the future which is why their GO system can expand at such a dizzying rate.

20 years ago, Metrolinx began buying up rail corridors knowing they will need them in the future and it has turned out to be a very good investment. GO now owns 340km of track covering all of it inner suburban routes within a 60km radius of downtown save the Milton line. This is going to allow GO, once electrified by 2026, to provide a whopping 8,000 trips per week and possibly 10,000 by 2030. This is Metro/subway style service at a fraction of the cost.

A basic bus service may suffice for now and that's fine but you don't plan for tomorrow, you plan for 30, 50, or 100 years from now. Translink/BC should start buying up any and all rail it can get it's hands on and keep buying it as well as "working" with CN/CP. As GO found out, you would be amazed how notoriously uncooperative CN/CP are willing to be to sell unneeded rail lines/corridors when you wave a fat cheque in front of their face.

Either Translink/BC plans now or we are going to have to build SkyTrain to Chilliwack at 10X the price with half the speed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Changing City

The reason that the California project must ensure ridership revenues are sufficient to cover the operations and maintenance costs of the program is to comply with Proposition 1A, which authorized the bonds that funded part of the state's contribution to the costs.

That doesn't apply (yet) to Cascadia because the sources of funding haven't been identified, and certainly not confirmed. (Neither have the costs - $24 to $42 billion at last estimate). The project may never have to be revenue neutral, but it may be a requirement of funding, just as it is in California - the latest report from WSDOT (linked above) indicates the intention of trying to operate the system at least at break-even. It certainly doesn't say anything about who might operate any future service.

The existing service is irrelevant - Amtrak Cascades runs on freight company tracks and was subsidized by Washington (and Oregon) by over a third of the $50m operating costs in 2018. Oregon and Washington also paid for most of the train sets (although it's temporarily running with old Amtrak trains while new ones are being built in California).

If it's ever built, the new service will run on its own tracks, have its own train sets, and its own corporation owning the operation. Amtrak could be the operator, but so could an entirely separate company and unlike on the East Coast, Amtrak don't seem to have been involved in the west coast high speed rail at all - it's all WSDOT led.

I have no idea why you're obsessed with suggesting Amtrak are the most likely to have a role, but up to now they haven't had one and there's absolutely no reason why state and federal funds (likely to be the main sources of funding at least for the initial construction) shouldn't support an independent operation.

I know why it is the case.

My issue is that private enterprise in Canada or USA are not in the business of passenger service. Rocky Mountaineer is a great example. I cannot ride the train from point to point. I must book the "adventure".

Show me a for profit company that runs passenger service in Canada or USA with no government money.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I don't know the details of the California HSR, but I wanted to point out that there's a difference between a shared right of way and shared trackage. You can have different sets of tracks in the same right of way.

The problem is when you need to cross tracks.The only way to ensure that it is not a problem is to have some sort of fly over or under for it.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

It's also important to remember that, as I stated before, Ontario decided to plan for the future which is why their GO system can expand at such a dizzying rate.

20 years ago, Metrolinx began buying up rail corridors knowing they will need them in the future and it has turned out to be a very good investment. GO now owns 340km of track covering all of it inner suburban routes within a 60km radius of downtown save the Milton line. This is going to allow GO, once electrified by 2026, to provide a whopping 8,000 trips per week and possibly 10,000 by 2030. This is Metro/subway style service at a fraction of the cost.

A basic bus service may suffice for now and that's fine but you don't plan for tomorrow, you plan for 30, 50, or 100 years from now. Translink/BC should start buying up any and all rail it can get it's hands on and keep buying it as well as "working" with CN/CP. As GO found out, you would be amazed how notoriously uncooperative CN/CP are willing to be to sell unneeded rail lines/corridors until you wave a fat cheque in front of their face.

Either Translink/BC plans now or we are going to have to build SkyTrain to Chilliwack at 10X the price with half the speed.

Also a fraction of the ridership. 10,000/week is about 1,500/day; the Canada Line, despite being "underbuilt," gets 150,000/day. You're also conveniently ignoring how GO's still paying ~$17 billion even though they own the corridor.

TransLink IS planning for the far future. It's not just the far future you want them to plan for. Like it or not, 1) the GVRD is just as snarled in traffic as the Valley, 2) politics and proportional representation means BC only has enough money to serve one at a time, and 3) there's more potential riders in the city.

Once again, it's $8 billion or more to get to Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Why pay for two SkyTrains to get 1k, when you can pay for one SkyTrain to get 150k? Abby and Chilliwack aren't even part of TransLink! And which corridor, assuming one is even for sale, would get you there in a reasonable time?
The interurban, even without all the freight trains, would take an hour just to reach Langley from Surrey. That's over three hours to Chilliwack.
Extending the WCE from Mission skips most of the Valley's ridership base, which wants to go to Surrey and Langley.
So your best option is the middle of the TCH, followed by a tunnel into King George/Scott Road/whatever works best, and that's pricey too.

Total ridership? 3,900. Total Langley extension ridership? 80,000. The Valley will have to wait.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I know why it is the case.

My issue is that private enterprise in Canada or USA are not in the business of passenger service. Rocky Mountaineer is a great example. I cannot ride the train from point to point. I must book the "adventure".

Show me a for profit company that runs passenger service in Canada or USA with no government money.

Why can't a private company receive government subsidy, at least for the construction part of a system? Effectvely, the Canada Line was built by, and is operated by a private company, but it was built with public funds, local, provincial and federal.

In Florida, Brightline operate a new high speed train system that was initially privately funded. They're now receiving some federal funds to work out how to add a Tampa to Orlando link.

Most of the French, German and Japanese high-speed rail lines apparently operate without a subsidy.

I'm not in any way advocating for a privately owned entity over a publicly owned corporation like Amtrak. So far WSDOT seem to be looking at a seperate entity, with public funding, but not necessarily any existing agency. It seems likely that we're many years and tens of billions of dollars away from seeing track being laid. I'd like it to be as soon as possible, and if private sector involvement is the way that the public transportation authorities favour, bring it on! They'll be building the track and the trains anyway.

[SpongeG]

Originally Posted by chowhou

I actually take it back, why bother transferring to the Canada Line in Richmond when you could transfer to the Expo Line in Surrey (other than avoiding Surrey )?

It either makes sense to do balls-to-the-walls Surrey + Vancouver or neither and terminate at YVR, not something in between.

have you ever tried to ride the expo line in from surrey? good luck getting a seat now add in people with luggage etc. yikes.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Once again, it's $8 billion or more to get to Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Why pay for two SkyTrains to get 1k, when you can pay for one SkyTrain to get 150k? Abby and Chilliwack aren't even part of TransLink! And which corridor, assuming one is even for sale, would get you there in a reasonable time?
The interurban, even without all the freight trains, would take an hour just to reach Langley from Surrey. That's over three hours to Chilliwack.
Extending the WCE from Mission skips most of the Valley's ridership base, which wants to go to Surrey and Langley.
So your best option is the middle of the TCH, followed by a tunnel into King George/Scott Road/whatever works best, and that's pricey too.

Aside from the 'what existing rail lines are for sale' (the answer being 'none'), TransLink is also planning on upgrading RapidBus and creating actual BRT - and not on-ground rail - to feed into the Skytrain lines.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Why can't a private company receive government subsidy, at least for the construction part of a system? Effectvely, the Canada Line was built by, and is operated by a private company, but it was built with public funds, local, provincial and federal.

In Florida, Brightline operate a new high speed train system that was initially privately funded. They're now receiving some federal funds to work out how to add a Tampa to Orlando link.

Most of the French, German and Japanese high-speed rail lines apparently operate without a subsidy.

I'm not in any way advocating for a privately owned entity over a publicly owned corporation like Amtrak. So far WSDOT seem to be looking at a seperate entity, with public funding, but not necessarily any existing agency. It seems likely that we're many years and tens of billions of dollars away from seeing track being laid. I'd like it to be as soon as possible, and if private sector involvement is the way that the public transportation authorities favour, bring it on! They'll be building the track and the trains anyway.

I am not against a private operator. I just feel that there are too many here that may think that this line will be privately funded and operated. That most likely will not be the case. There is a pretty good reason that it should fall under Amtrak/Via and that is for fare integration.

Originally Posted by SpongeG

have you ever tried to ride the expo line in from surrey? good luck getting a seat now add in people with luggage etc. yikes.

This is why a second station further towards downtown makes more sense. I can see a Surrey station, but I do not see it being the terminus.

[wabooba]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

have you ever tried to ride the expo line in from surrey? good luck getting a seat now add in people with luggage etc. yikes.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

This is why a second station further towards downtown makes more sense. I can see a Surrey station, but I do not see it being the terminus.

Precisely!

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I am not against a private operator. I just feel that there are too many here that may think that this line will be privately funded and operated. That most likely will not be the case. There is a pretty good reason that it should fall under Amtrak/Via and that is for fare integration.

Sorry, but it absolutely won't be VIA operating a mostly US route. It may, or may not be Amtrak, but fare integration really isn't a valid reason for why it should be. It's really not a big deal for anybody from Vancouver, or Portland to buy a ticket from one operator tto Seattle, and another from Seattle to Chicago, for example.

And on the public subsidy question, while the capital costs will be substantially coming from state and federal sources, at least initially, if the business case doesn't show the operation paying for itself pretty soon after service is introduced, it probably won't be funded at all. The Republicans are already after the $1.4bn that Amtrak receives in annual subsidy.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Sorry, but it absolutely won't be VIA operating a mostly US route. It may, or may not be Amtrak, but fare integration really isn't a valid reason for why it should be. It's really not a big deal for anybody from Vancouver, or Portland to buy a ticket from one operator to Seattle, and another from Seattle to Chicago, for example.

I feel it would be like all the other international routes that are in Canada.

Originally Posted by Changing City

And on the public subsidy question, while the capital costs will be substantially coming from state and federal sources, at least initially, if the business case doesn't show the operation paying for itself pretty soon after service is introduced, it probably won't be funded at all. The Republicans are already after the $1.4bn that Amtrak receives in annual subsidy.

This I have no doubt about. Amtrak has several other priorities before doing this. For Via, it is irrelevant to them. However, if there isn't a good business case for it, there is an even better chance it will not be a private company.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I feel it would be like all the other international routes that are in Canada.

This I have no doubt about. Amtrak has several other priorities before doing this. For Via, it is irrelevant to them. However, if there isn't a good business case for it, there is an even better chance it will not be a private company.

But this won't be in Canada, it will almost all be in the US. And it's being promoted by Washington State, BC are just tagging on. As already noted, the Maple Leaf has both Canadian and US crews for the operation in their respective countries, and they change over while Customs and Immigration are going through the train. Canadian crews don't operate the train in the US. That won't happen with this train as the terminus will be very close to the border.

If the business case shows that it'll operate at a profit, there's every reason why a private company (or consortium) might be interested in being involved. Again, Amtrak are not involved with this project yet in any way, and may never be.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Changing City

But this won't be in Canada, it will almost all be in the US. And it's being promoted by Washington State, BC are just tagging on. As already noted, the Maple Leaf has both Canadian and US crews for the operation in their respective countries, and they change over while Customs and Immigration are going through the train. Canadian crews don't operate the train in the US. That won't happen with this train as the terminus will be very close to the border.

If the business case shows that it'll operate at a profit, there's every reason why a private company (or consortium) might be interested in being involved. Again, Amtrak are not involved with this project yet in any way, and may never be.

The Maple Leaf has Via operators.
The Adirondack and Cascades are only Amtrak operators.

Whether they use Canadian personnel or not remains to be seen. Regardless, I still cannot see a private entity running it.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Also a fraction of the ridership. 10,000/week is about 1,500/day; the Canada Line, despite being "underbuilt," gets 150,000/day. You're also conveniently ignoring how GO's still paying ~$17 billion even though they own the corridor.

TransLink IS planning for the far future. It's not just the far future you want them to plan for. Like it or not, 1) the GVRD is just as snarled in traffic as the Valley, 2) politics and proportional representation means BC only has enough money to serve one at a time, and 3) there's more potential riders in the city.

Once again, it's $8 billion or more to get to Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Why pay for two SkyTrains to get 1k, when you can pay for one SkyTrain to get 150k? Abby and Chilliwack aren't even part of TransLink! And which corridor, assuming one is even for sale, would get you there in a reasonable time?
The interurban, even without all the freight trains, would take an hour just to reach Langley from Surrey. That's over three hours to Chilliwack.
Extending the WCE from Mission skips most of the Valley's ridership base, which wants to go to Surrey and Langley.
So your best option is the middle of the TCH, followed by a tunnel into King George/Scott Road/whatever works best, and that's pricey too.

Total ridership? 3,900. Total Langley extension ridership? 80,000. The Valley will have to wait.

You are missing my point.

I CLEARLY stated if all that is needed for The Valley right now is a commuter bus service then that's fine and yes, high ridership lines in the Metro area should take priority. That said, you can't keep building SkyTrain to serve suburban areas. No other city on the planet does it and with good reason........it's financially unsustainable and provides a worse service to boot. The length becomes too long due with rapid transit stop spacing, and, due to use rapid transit vehicles, having much slower speeds and being incredibly uncomfortable.

Translink/BC should start buying up corridors and lines and entice CN/CP to sell some of them. They may not need them now but there sure will in the future. Also, Niagara, KWC, Guelph, Barrie, Brantford, and Peterborough are NOT part of Metrolinx but that doesn't stop GO from providing service to them so the fact that Abb/Chill is not part of Translink doesn't fly.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

You are missing my point.

I CLEARLY stated if all that is needed for The Valley right now is a commuter bus service then that's fine and yes, high ridership lines in the Metro area should take priority. That said, you can't keep building SkyTrain to serve suburban areas. No other city on the planet does it and with good reason........it's financially unsustainable and provides a worse service to boot. The length becomes too long due with rapid transit stop spacing, and, due to use rapid transit vehicles, having much slower speeds and being incredibly uncomfortable.

Translink/BC should start buying up corridors and lines and entice CN/CP to sell some of them. They may not need them now but there sure will in the future. Also, Niagara, KWC, Guelph, Barrie, Brantford, and Peterborough are NOT part of Metrolinx but that doesn't stop GO from providing service to them so the fact that Abb/Chill is not part of Translink doesn't fly.

You’re missing my point: no major railway corridors in Lower Mainland are currently open for purchase. How do you buy something when nobody wants to sell? Even if the province expropriates them, they’re useless for transporting commuters (see above).

As demonstrated by the 99 B-Line on Broadway, a North American express bus can run up to every 3-4 minutes and move up to 56,000/day before reaching crush capacity. Before the lockdown, the entire FVX bus service between Lougheed and Chilliwack got a peak ridership of >700/day, so “Abby + Chill” would need about 80x more transit users before the buses max out. Maybe 2070 at the earliest?

Literally nobody on this forum has suggested a SkyTrain to Abbotsford. What I’ve been saying is that it gets priority because it serves more people. Incidentally, SkyTrain investment also serves the Valley better than a commuter train would, because it removes tens of thousands more cars from the road network and thereby makes driving in from Abbotsford easier.

Metrolinx actually serves the entire GTHA, which by most definitions includes Barrie, Kitchener, et al. Note that GO doesn’t cover London, ON, which is roughly as close as Niagara, but outside their jurisdiction.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

You’re missing my point: no major railway corridors in Lower Mainland are currently open for purchase. How do you buy something when nobody wants to sell? Even if the province expropriates them, they’re useless for transporting commuters (see above).

As demonstrated by the 99 B-Line on Broadway, a North American express bus can run up to every 3-4 minutes and move up to 56,000/day before reaching crush capacity. Before the lockdown, the entire FVX bus service between Lougheed and Chilliwack got a peak ridership of >700/day, so “Abby + Chill” would need about 80x more transit users before the buses max out. Maybe 2070 at the earliest?

Just because you can does not mean you should. We should aim that all future transit does not require crush load in normal operation.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Metrolinx actually serves the entire GTHA, which by most definitions includes Barrie, Kitchener, et al. Note that GO doesn’t cover London, ON, which is roughly as close as Niagara, but outside their jurisdiction.

Kitchener is served by Grand River Transit.
Barrie is served by Barrie Transit.

Neither are under the jurisdiction of Metrolinx.

Metrolinx has jurisdiction of GO Transit, UPX, the PRESTO card system. They also pay for projects like the various RT in the province.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Just because you can does not mean you should. We should aim that all future transit does not require crush load in normal operation.

Okay, so maybe 2065 at the earliest. Not exactly disproving my point; bus overcrowding in the Valley is a very long-term problem.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Kitchener is served by Grand River Transit.
Barrie is served by Barrie Transit.

Neither are under the jurisdiction of Metrolinx.

AFAIK, jurisdiction basically just means "legal authority/responsibility." Metrolinx covers Barrie and Kitchener with GO rail because they're within the designated service area; obviously, it doesn't mean they're in charge of all transit in those towns.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Okay, so maybe 2060 at the earliest. Not exactly disproving my point; bus overcrowding in the Valley is a very long-term problem.

If you pulled the various modes of transit out of the same agency, you might get more done.

The GTA/Southern ON is a great example.

The TTC concerns itself with transit within the city of Toronto.
GO literally stands for Government of Ontario

BC does things weird. When I think of BC Transit, I do not think of local service.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

AFAIK, jurisdiction basically just means "legal authority/responsibility." Metrolinx covers Barrie and Kitchener because they're within the designated GO service area; obviously, it doesn't mean they're responsible for all transit within those towns.

They are responsible for only the commuter rail and bus service. They can push RT that the province wants done.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

If you pulled the various modes of transit out of the same agency, you might get more done.

The GTA/Southern ON is a great example.

The TTC concerns itself with transit within the city of Toronto.
GO literally stands for Government of Ontario

BC does things weird. When I think of BC Transit, I do not think of local service.

TransLink handles the GVRD and a few adjacent towns, BC Transit handles the rest - pretty straightforward. The problem is that BC doesn't have enough spending power in general, so splitting the WCE and other future heavy rail lines into a separate authority without increasing the overall transit funding (from all three branches of government) only guarantees their neglect in perpetuity.