Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

The single track Fraser River Railway Bridge at New West is a Federal Bridge. It has been upgraded several times but the piers are original. I doubt it will be twin tracked anytime soon. Marine traffic has priority so the swing bridge dictates whether there is congestion or not. The tracks north of the bridge to the right and all the way into Vancouver are owned by BNSF with trackage rights to other users. Track speed is slow to moderate and can get congested at times. The route does not fit with commuter rail because it would be too unpredictable. Even Scott Road to the Valley wouldn't work because the line doesn't pass through many major centres when compared to WCE. IMO Skytrain to Langley would serve the most customers for the money.

We should just replace it along with Pautello. It would make the intra-Vancouver rail lines viable alternatives to the CP rail line for freight. How much would it cost?

Originally Posted by Kisai

Extending it past Langley doesn't make sense from a capital cost point of view, and the fact that all the area east is a different transit region. It creates a complexity that TTC/YRT does in the Toronto metro area. The WCE is similar in that regard, let's say that a separate WCE line went from Cloverdale (Surrey) to Langley so that there are no bridges to cross trying to get it to a rapid transit/airport terminus like Bridgeport, and then that line follows the previous Interurban "Central Line" to probably Chilliwack.

(Side note, the interurban used to connect with a logging railway that went all the way to Chilliwack lake http://forums.clubtread.com/11-hikin...tml#post136536 , if you look at the ALR map, not much of it is in the ALR http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/assets/alc/...ap_92h_001.pdf . )

Back on topic though, I think we're looking at least a century before major developments end up going that far. In 1891, Burnaby was all forest, and the Interurban central park line, literately connected through Central park which was in the middle of the forest.

So the question really should be, where do we want people to commute from, rather than "what would be a scenic ride", or vanity projects which seems to be the problem every time reviving the interurban comes up.

There are political consequences if Surrey is allowed to build a LRT, because they may seek to carve out their municipality from Metro Vancouver, and thus complicate all development in the Fraser Valley. Since Langley is to the east of it, without the Skytrain being extended first, Surrey may never allow anything but LRT's to be built, thus the only way Langley ends up with rapid transit is by extending the Skytrain over to Poco, through Pitt Meadows. That's a much less convenient trip if your destination is anywhere past Coquitlam.

Which goes back to the issue with Heavy Rail/Commuter rail. Let's say for the sake of not wanting to go around in circles again, that Surrey builds it's LRT, withdraws from Translink and then expands it into Langley, and Langley doesn't want anything to do with LRT, and instead wants to be the terminus of a Central Fraser Valley commuter line. We're still left with this gap between the Skytrain terminus and Langley.

Ideally, the Skytrain is extended to Langley, and Surrey can no longer dictate anything to the Fraser Valley. If a commuter rail is then proposed, it could go all the way to Scott Road station (I believe that is the closest) over the existing SRY. But that still requires Translink being able to acquire the SRY. Which since Translink doesn't really have anything to do with the Central Fraser Valley transit area, that may require expanding Translink's area to the entire Fraser Valley, or operating the SRY/Interurban as an independent operator.

Why does Translink need to aquire SRY? It's not used that much (unlike the CP rail that West Coast Express uses), and the only areas with much congestion in Metro Van are at Langley Bypass and Westminister Bridge, both which need upgrading regardless, and would benefit from expansion $$$.

Well, we already have development in Abbostford due to high land prices...

It would be nice to go to Chilliwack on Rail, but there's no demand to support it. To Abbosford...? I find it strange how WCE ends at Mission and not the Hwy 11 Abbosford Border Crossing. A spur from there could connect to the airport if that's ever something that's needed.

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

Winnipeg is also an argument against amalgamation. The disruption it causes outweighs any perceived minor benefits.

Sometimes I wish Mission and Abbotsford would join the Metro Van District instead of having a strange "semi-member relationship" is Metro Van.

[GlassCity]

^ I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen eventually. It's up to the Province though. Talks of TransLink expanding into Abbotsford and Chilliwack have been talked about forever too. Probably will one day.

[casper]

Originally Posted by fredinno

We should just replace it along with Pautello. It would make the intra-Vancouver rail lines viable alternatives to the CP rail line for freight. How much would it cost?


Why does Translink need to aquire SRY? It's not used that much (unlike the CP rail that West Coast Express uses), and the only areas with much congestion in Metro Van are at Langley Bypass and Westminister Bridge, both which need upgrading regardless, and would benefit from expansion $$$.

Well, we already have development in Abbostford due to high land prices...

It would be nice to go to Chilliwack on Rail, but there's no demand to support it. To Abbosford...? I find it strange how WCE ends at Mission and not the Hwy 11 Abbosford Border Crossing. A spur from there could connect to the airport if that's ever something that's needed.


Sometimes I wish Mission and Abbotsford would join the Metro Van District instead of having a strange "semi-member relationship" is Metro Van.

I could be wrong but my understanding is when SRY purchased their track from BC Hydro (who use to own all of it), the deal was BC Hydro (BC Government) retained the right to run passenger trains on the SRY track. Makes sense as much of that track was originally laid for the interurban street car system.

[Trainguy]

Here is an article that answers some of the info you presented. It is a bit confusing at first sorting out who owns what.
https://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Tra...PassengerRail/

Basically BC Hydro still owns the right of way all the way to Chilliwack. CPrail owns the tracks for part of it from Cloverdale to the CN Merge in Fort Langley and SRY owns the tracks for the rest. This is like the deal between CN and the BC government when BC Rail was sold. Getting trackage rights past Cloverdale is tricky because coal and intermodal going to Robert's Bank regularly use that stretch of mostly single track.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Here is an article that answers some of the info you presented. It is a bit confusing at first sorting out who owns what.
https://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Tra...PassengerRail/

Basically BC Hydro still owns the right of way all the way to Chilliwack. CPrail owns the tracks for part of it from Cloverdale to the CN Merge in Fort Langley and SRY owns the tracks for the rest. This is like the deal between CN and the BC government when BC Rail was sold. Getting trackage rights past Cloverdale is tricky because coal and intermodal going to Robert's Bank regularly use that stretch of mostly single track.

I think there are two deals.

BC Rail was "sold/leased" to CN in some strange way.

Most of SRY was originally build by BC Hydro for the inter-urban street car network that pre-dated skytrain. BC Hydro sold its track to SRY. This is a much older sale than the BC Rail sale.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Here is an article that answers some of the info you presented. It is a bit confusing at first sorting out who owns what.
https://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Tra...PassengerRail/

Basically BC Hydro still owns the right of way all the way to Chilliwack. CPrail owns the tracks for part of it from Cloverdale to the CN Merge in Fort Langley and SRY owns the tracks for the rest. This is like the deal between CN and the BC government when BC Rail was sold. Getting trackage rights past Cloverdale is tricky because coal and intermodal going to Robert's Bank regularly use that stretch of mostly single track.

Good, it can't be so difficult to transfer rights from BC to Translink?

And the congested segment from Cloverdale to Fort Langley is a segment that's seen a lot of upgrades around it over the years. Another track section could be added to that, with the potential to be used for future freight capacity if the other tracks are overloaded.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by casper

I think there are two deals.

BC Rail was "sold/leased" to CN in some strange way.

Most of SRY was originally build by BC Hydro for the inter-urban street car network that pre-dated skytrain. BC Hydro sold its track to SRY. This is a much older sale than the BC Rail sale.

True but BC Hydro still owns the land underneath the tracks whether it be CP or SRY. A second track could be added to make commuter rail work and BC Hydro could sell the land to Translink but there would be a lot of hurdles to get through before any trains would ride the rails.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

True but BC Hydro still owns the land underneath the tracks whether is be CP or SRY. A second track could be added to make commuter rail work and BC Hydro could sell the land to Translink but there would be a lot of hurdles to get through before any trains would ride the rails.

Te sooner they get on it, the sooner the hurdles can be dealt with.

[twoNeurons]

In other news:

Seattle to Vancouver in an hour: Is that our future?
john-stang
by John Stang


Credit: tokyoform

The dream is to send super-fast trains — the type capable of going 250 miles per hour — between Seattle and Vancouver, B.C.

Gov. Jay Inslee wants to see if that dream, which has drawn some heavyweight business-sector interest, is feasible. And he wants the Washington Legislature to spend $1 million to find out.

The idea of an ultra-high-speed commuter railroad between Seattle and Vancouver has been around for roughly 20 years, but has been dormant for a long time. The dream was revived last September at the Emerging Cascadia Innovation Corridor Conference in Vancouver that discussed the idea. Attendees included Inslee, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and British Columbia Premier Christy Clark.

A result is that Inslee put a $1 million allocation into his 2017-2019 operating budget proposal to study the feasibility of the concept with a report due Dec. 15.

“There’s a compelling case to move this forward, but it requires in-depth study,” said Charles Knutson, a senior policy adviser to the governor.

He also told a Senate Transportation Committee hearing last week, “What is unique about today is that you’re getting well-heeled technology executives willing to see this go forward.”

Michael Groesch, a lobbyist for Microsoft, said the company supports a study. “If we don’t ask the questions,” he told lawmakers, “we won’t get answers.”

Inslee’s budget request calls for analyzing the economic feasibility of the project, the demand for such a high-speed train, the best placement for a line, and the technology aspects. The study would also address specifications for speed, safety, how the line would be built and how it would be paid for.

The basic numbers are that Seattle and Vancouver are roughly 140 miles apart, which is a 2 1/2-hour to three-hour drive on Interstate 5. Theoretically, an ultra-high-speed train could cut that ride to less than one hour. Trains systems capable of going 250 miles per hour exist in China, Japan, Spain and France. A train capable of 350 miles per hour is being developed in Japan.

“A two-track high-speed guideway can reliably support 6-8 trains per hour in each direction,” according to a report presented to the 2016 conference by Montreal-based firm WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff Engineering Services. “This would mean a train connecting Seattle and Vancouver every 10-15 minutes, with some operating as non-stop express and others stopping at Everett and Bellingham.”

Inslee’s budget proposal would look at setting up stations at Vancouver, Bellingham, Everett and Seattle — with the possibility of a trail of stations headed south to Portland.

Read more below

Source: http://crosscut.com/2017/02/seattle-...at-our-future/

[LeftCoaster]

I see you didn't quote the part where they said it would cost 20-30 billion USD to build it.

I would love to see this happen but at that pricetag I just don't see it happening any time soon.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

I see you didn't quote the part where they said it would cost 20-30 billion USD to build it.

I would love to see this happen but at that pricetag I just don't see it happening any time soon.

It's unlikely without being part of a much larger HSR system (eg Mexico to Canada)

Just that small part that California is building right now, is meant to take cars off the highway between major cities. Flying between those cities often involves lots of delays and the airports are congested.

It's likely that California's HSR gets extended to Oregon and Washington, and at that point BC can consider being part of it. But that's decades away. As for Canada doing HSR, not likely. The cost of jet fuel would have to reach a point that flying is cost prohibitive.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Kisai

It's unlikely without being part of a much larger HSR system (eg Mexico to Canada)

Just that small part that California is building right now, is meant to take cars off the highway between major cities. Flying between those cities often involves lots of delays and the airports are congested.

It's likely that California's HSR gets extended to Oregon and Washington, and at that point BC can consider being part of it. But that's decades away. As for Canada doing HSR, not likely. The cost of jet fuel would have to reach a point that flying is cost prohibitive.

The Vancouver-Seattle HSR is right up there with the Edmonton-Calgary high speed rail dream. It has been talked about for decades but will never get built. Too expensive and not enough riders.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

The Vancouver-Seattle HSR is right up there with the Edmonton-Calgary high speed rail dream. It has been talked about for decades but will never get built. Too expensive and not enough riders.

At least the Vancouver - Seattle route has a train that they can use as a benchmark. If only they would put in a train for Calgary - Edmonton.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

The Vancouver-Seattle HSR is right up there with the Edmonton-Calgary high speed rail dream. It has been talked about for decades but will never get built. Too expensive and not enough riders.

I am not certain that is the case. It has progressively gained ridership and frequency over the past decade or two. It is a relatively new service. The driver for high-speed rail may well be Portland to Seattle, and Vancouver comes along for the ride.

It also benefits from a cost advantage over air travel. The US and Canadian government impose so many security and trans-boarder taxes on air travel. That helps rail.

[GlassCity]

.

[swimmer_spe]

It probably will be like Acella. Not true high speed, but higher than normal speeds.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

It probably will be like Acella. Not true high speed, but higher than normal speeds.

The article said they're aiming for 400 kilometres an hour. That definitely meets the HSR requirements. Still don't think this'll happen any time soon though. For now, I just want to see the Cascade continue to be improved, including on this side of the border.

[SpongeG]

1 hour from Vancouver to Seattle? Washington state budgets $1M for high-speed rail study
The Cascadia region — Vancouver to Seattle to Portland — fits the bill for a high speed line, says expert
CBC News Posted: Feb 14, 2017 9:00 AM PT Last Updated: Feb 14, 2017 9:00 AM PT

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...tudy-1.3981747

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

1 hour from Vancouver to Seattle? Washington state budgets $1M for high-speed rail study
The Cascadia region — Vancouver to Seattle to Portland — fits the bill for a high speed line, says expert
CBC News Posted: Feb 14, 2017 9:00 AM PT Last Updated: Feb 14, 2017 9:00 AM PT

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...tudy-1.3981747

hahahaha totally not happening. We lack the rail infrastructure to even support passenger rail, let alone high speed rail.

The extremely high cost is the least of the problems. You'll need to build a dedicated electrified track in order for it to be viable. Just think of all the land acquisitions required. You think this is SimCity where you can just bulldoze everything without politics and nimbys getting in the way??

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by casper

I am not certain that is the case. It has progressively gained ridership and frequency over the past decade or two. It is a relatively new service. The driver for high-speed rail may well be Portland to Seattle, and Vancouver comes along for the ride.

It also benefits from a cost advantage over air travel. The US and Canadian government impose so many security and trans-boarder taxes on air travel. That helps rail.

Part of the issue is that people either don't know about Amtrack/VIA rail, or don't care about their services because driving or flying tends to be more convenient and often cheaper.


I wonder how viable a low-pressure HSR system would be- like Hyperloop (running on Maglev technology, low pressure environment) but running at only a 1/2-1/4 atm instead of essentially vacuum, allowing for some of the benefits without all of the massive headaches regarding pressure on the Hyperloop.
How fast would that go?

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

hahahaha totally not happening. We lack the rail infrastructure to even support passenger rail, let alone high speed rail.

The extremely high cost is the least of the problems. You'll need to build a dedicated electrified track in order for it to be viable. Just think of all the land acquisitions required. You think this is SimCity where you can just bulldoze everything without politics and nimbys getting in the way??

Hey!

But seriously, they should use existing rail, pipeline, and power line (or even I-5) corridors to make the HSR rail line.

It's not like we need to connect to anywhere else other than the major stops (otherwise, it wouldn't be "high speed".)

The sections unable to run on land already owned by the government (usually in city centers) should build the HSR on top of normal freight rail lines. Though that's more a last-ditch solution. Hopefully we only need to do it once or twice.