Group wants interurban back on track

Rail for the Valley seeks municipal support for old-fashioned transit solution


David Hogben, Vancouver Sun
Published: Friday, October 31, 2008


An Abbotsford group is recommending a light-rail transportation service that would be running in time for the 2010 Olympics.

The Rail for the Valley committee, formed about 18 months ago, will ask Abbotsford council on Monday to support a light-rail demonstration project along the old interurban rail route that once connected New Westminster to Chilliwack.

"Ideally, it could run from Scott Road [SkyTrain station in Surrey] to Chilliwack," Rail for the Valley spokesman John Buker said in an interview Thursday.

Exactly how far the line would run would depend on whether other municipal governments decide to join in. If not, the line would be more modest, Buker said. "It could be a small project from Abbotsford to Chilliwack."

Buker said tracks are still in place on the old interurban electric line, which operated from 1910 to 1950.

Buker envisions the demonstration line as a method of gaining public support for a line which could eventually cross the Fraser River and extend to downtown Vancouver.

Two other projects aimed at showing off light-rail transit by 2010 are already in the works, one in Surrey and one in Vancouver.

Consultant Peter Holt, who has been working with Surrey city officials to restore a service on a section of track in that city, however, thinks the 2010 Winter Games deadline is too tight to complete a service between New Westminster and Chilliwack.

He said Surrey's Heritage Rail demonstration project between Newton and Cloverdale is expected to come into service in 2010, but probably not until after the Feb. 12-28 Olympics.

He said the 11-kilometre stretch could be a tourist attraction. After it is operational, Holt said, the most probable expansion would be from Cloverdale to Langley and from Newton to Scott Road.

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts is supporting light rail over the provincial government's preference, a SkyTrain extension.

"TransLink has estimated the cost of light rail at $27 million per kilometre versus $127 million per kilometre for the Evergreen Line [through northeast Metro Vancouver] and $233 million for the UBC/Broadway Line," states a policy paper on Watts's election website.

In Vancouver, the city has signed an agreement with transportation giant Bombardier to operate a 1.8-kilometre demonstration streetcar line linking the Olympic Village with Granville Island. The line, which will run from Jan. 21 to March 21, 2010, is expected to use borrowed streetcars from the Brussels Transport Co.

Holt said obtaining cars quickly for the lines might be problematic because there is a worldwide shortage of rail cars.

TransLink spokesman Ken Hardie said light-rail transit south of the Fraser River is an option for the future, but TransLink now is more interested in expanding the capacity of the West Coast Express north of the river. Eventually that line could cross the Fraser River and reach Chilliwack.

dhogben@vancouversun.com

I could see DMUs being used for the rail lines. Although with light rail, are they planning on having it at grade with street level traffic if they were to build it to UBC? It would be much better to have it cut and covered and used as an extension of the Millenium Line than at grade.

If they want to expand WCE, then they will need the province to screw CP's trackage rights since they will not allow more trackage rights for the weekends. If they want to use the same train for service for Abbotsford and Chilliwak, they are going to have to do alot of trackage upgrade to allow faster speeds. Perhaps some straighter trackage in order to maintain higher speeds. Either way, rail infrastructure is probably going to need a big upgrade in the next few years.

In Langley on 200th and 72nd there was a big sign
on the side of the road advertising it with a picture of
the route and stuff I'll take picture next time I pass

Please =)

That's Rail for the Valley's big truck, isn't it?

Anyway, please change the name of this thread. The Interurban doesn't have a hope as long as the Liberals are in office.

why is that?

Skytrain good, LRT bad.

Actually it doesn't matter who's in power. The M-Line was originally going to be LRT, then NDP decided it should be Skytrain as well as the planned Coquitlam extension. Then Translink decided LRT was better, then the Liberals came in and said nope, Skytrain. There seriously needs to be a greater public voice for our transit system.

So in the end they're going to decide that Skytrain is the best technology for the Valley Rail line, it'll be 50km @ $100m/km = $5 billion, they'll deem it too expensive and scrap the entire project altogether when all we need is the existing track, basic rail traffic controls, concrete slab stations, some track upgrades (6km stretch along the Mission-Abbotsford Highway for one), and 10-15 DMUs, all for maybe $500 million at the very most.

skytrain is LRT a form of it at the least

Share Research lags on valley rail vision

By Jeff Nagel

Published: November 12, 2008 5:00 PM
Updated: November 12, 2008 5:09 PM

Demands for light rail to the Fraser Valley should wait for the results of a provincial government-led study into long-range transit improvements there, says one key player.

Southern Railway of B.C. runs freight trains on the old Interurban rail corridor through Surrey that advocates see as a fast and cheap route that could once again provide rapid transit to Langley and points east.

Southern president Frank Butzelaar said he has an open mind toward a rail transit revival, but says it depends on Victoria's wishes.

"We are open to the concept," he said. "It really requires that the province comes to us and says 'Look, this is something we're interested in.'

"To date, that hasn't happened."

The province is expected to soon pick a consultant to carry out a five-part strategic review of transit in the valley.

Butzelaar hoped that will help the province decide what type of transit upgrades to pursue.

Light rail advocates fear Victoria's interest is only lukewarm.

Work was to have started by September on the new studies.

But critics say there's now little chance any findings will be ready before the provincial election next May, and the final document may not be ready until well after the original target date of December, 2009.

"That is dreamland now," said Surrey rail advocate Peter Holt. "They have no chance of meeting their timeline. I think they are in disarray."

He said the government needs to catch up to the rising tide of public support for light rail that has played out in civic election campaigns across the region.

Numerous candidates throughout the South of Fraser area have embraced light rail and pledged to fight for it.

"I think the ball is rolling," Holt said.

Abbotsford city council has backed a strategy to press for light rail that includes forming a committee of mayors and councillors from Abbotsford to Surrey.

Both Abbotsford and Surrey are also considering launching light rail demonstration projects, ideally to be on track by the 2010 Olympics.

Rail for the Valley spokesman John Buker said local politicians from Delta to Chilliwack have jumped aboard the light rail push.

"It's very positive," he said, adding advocates need to keep pushing as the provincial election gets closer to make inroads in Victoria.

"So far the provincial government has been dragging its feet," he said. "It needs to turn that around or there's going to be a very interesting election out in the valley."

Skytrain is not LRT. When it was first developed it was branded as ALRT (automated light rapid transit), but in fact it is Light Metro.

SkyTrain no slam dunk:Falcon

By Jeff Nagel

Published: November 13, 2008 2:00 PM
Updated: November 13, 2008 3:06 PM

Transportation minister Kevin Falcon is promising a detailed review of whether SkyTrain or light rail technology should be used to extend rapid transit through Surrey to Langley and in Vancouver to UBC.

TransLink is expected to issue a proposal call soon for consultants to carry out the work, which could take several months.

"Light rail could be the smartest, wisest thing to do," Falcon told Black Press.

"I wouldn't rule that in or out. But for goodness sakes, let's do our homework first and make sure we actually know what we're talking about before we make a decision on what the answer should be."

The $14-billion Provincial Transit Plan unveiled in January pledged a six-kilometre SkyTrain extension in Surrey – to Guildford and then southeast to the Fraser Highway.

Advocates in the Fraser Valley have since been pressing hard for street-level light rail, which is much cheaper to build than elevated or buried SkyTrain lines and might allow a much more extensive rapid transit network to be quickly built for the same amount of money.

Those critics fear a government preference for costlier SkyTrain will result in a truncated network that stops far short of Langley, Abbotsford and Chilliwack, leaving those areas underserved for many more decades.

Falcon denies the province has settled on SkyTrain.

"That's subject to further analysis," he said.

And he says light rail fans shouldn't blindly champion that technology either.

"I've just got to believe people aren't so woolly-headed about these kind of things that they think we should just plunge forward with a solution they've come up with before anyone's done any homework to determine whether or not that makes any sense for taxpayers and transit riders."

The cheaper per kilometre cost of light rail is just one part of the calculation, he said, adding capacity and expected ridership are also critical.

"There's no sense having a much longer system if you're not going to get the kind of ridership you need," he said.

He pointed to the northeast sector, where mayors ultimately rejected light rail in favour of faster SkyTrain for the Evergreen Line after TransLink's business case concluded SkyTrain would attract two and a half times as many riders.

Likewise, Falcon noted the Canada Line will carry passengers from Richmond to downtown Vancouver in just 23 minutes.

If TransLink had built the line using light rail instead, he said, the trip would take an hour.

"It takes me 45 minutes to drive, so guess what – you're not going to have virtually anyone using the transit."

In Surrey, he said, SkyTrain already works well.

"Naturally there will be some bias to look at the existing technology," he said. "Of course we'll look at other options and see if those make sense."

Rail for the Valley advocate John Buker called Falcon's pledge of a review "a positive step."

Not one of the civic election candidates in Surrey back SkyTrain over light rail, according to a survey conducted by the group.

New TransLink CEO Tom Prendergast recently spoke out in favour of more detailed analysis of alternatives to SkyTrain, such as light rail.

Spokesman Ken Hardie confirmed TransLink believes light rail "deserves a very good close look" and that it is not defaulting to SkyTrain on either the Surrey or Broadway extensions.

However, he said TransLink still doubts the old Interurban corridor is the best choice of route for a new line towards the valley.

That's one of the options that's to be weighed in a separate study of long-range transit upgrades for the Fraser Valley.

LRT down the old Interurban, King George, Fraser HWY, Coquitlam but SkyTrain ext to UBC. Not my first choice but seeing the rest of the MLineis SkyTrain its better to make it seemless.

It is important when reviewing all options that it be a FAIR comparion which Evergreen wasn't. To show that SkyTrain would be faster than LRT Translink placed nearly twice as many stops for the LRT and then did a time comparison. If they would have done the comparion with the same number of stations the time difference would have been very small.

B.C. funds commuter rail studies

By Tom Fletcher - BC Local News

Published: November 27, 2008 1:00 PM
Updated: November 27, 2008 1:42 PM

0 Comments The B.C. government is spending $900,000 to study the extension of rail transit options in the Fraser Valley and on southern Vancouver Island.

Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon says up to $500,000 will be provided to investigate the "business case" for upgrading the run-down E&N railway line on Vancouver Island to carry freight and commuter rail service. A call for proposals from consultants is to be made in the new year, with the study to be completed by the end of 2009.

Falcon, who has been skeptical about the potential on the E&N line, said operator Southern Rail estimates it would cost $100 million to upgrade the track for freight, and considerably more to accommodate faster trains that would be needed for commuter service.

Southern Rail also runs freight trains on the old Interurban track that once had passenger rail service through Surrey and Langley to Abbotsford and Chilliwack. The government has awarded a $400,000 contract to Urban Systems to assess transit options linking the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver, with a final report expected in late 2009.

Commuter rail advocates have accused Falcon of stalling on both proposals.

"Someone obviously dragged Mr. Falcon kicking and screaming to this position, but I'm delighted with that," said Malahat-Juan de Fuca NDP MLA John Horgan, who has been working with southern Island communities on the E&N proposal.

Horgan said Falcon is overstating the cost of upgrading the E&N line. He said the Island Corridor Foundation has done studies since acquiring the line in 2006, and has estimated that in a federal-provincial-municipal joint project, the province's contribution would be about $35 million.

Falcon said the key to commuter rail proposals is the potential ridership along the line. The Fraser Valley rail corridor runs through a wide swath of farmland with few residents who would be nearby, he said.

Falcon said the studies cost money and take time, but they are essential. He noted that TransLink, the Lower Mainland transit authority, was recommending surface light rail for the Evergreen line extension east along the north side of the Fraser River, but a study showed that it wouldn't attract enough riders and SkyTrain service is a better option despite its higher construction cost.

Everything is about the "business case" with this government. What about the social and environmental benefits that rail would bring? Do those not require consideration at all?

I so wish I lived in Falcon's riding. Going to the polls next year would be a sweet, sweet thing.

The advantage of doing a business case is to asses whether or not "undefinables" such as social/environmental concerns would be recovered through proceeding with the project.

Also, it sets out clear goals and objectives so that the public can track the progress of an initative.


Is there a clear alternative to the old interurban corridor? or would a new route need to be purchased?

Also, it would be very cool to have a rail system on the Island 'ala' WestCoast Express.:banana:

One of the intangibles which should be fleshed out is whether any improvement in air quality would occur with a frequent rail service on the Interurban between Cloverdale. Rail for the Valley and new Langley township mayor Rick Green have made noises about diverting freight trains (coal trains from Roberts Bank) off this direct route across the Valley to the more circuitous CN and CP lines which service the Burrard Peninsula. Longer freight routes mean poorer economics for the rail companies, and that was why the Langley City route was pushed rather than the Tillbury-Ladner route back southeast coal mines were developed.

Incidentally, the Tillbury-Ladner route is where the South Perimeter Road would be built, but no rail line is planned.

Rick Green says that the money saved by the federal government by not building overpasses along the former Interurban route could be used to build a New Westminster rail bridge replacement. Trains would no longer cross the Mission rail bridge, but the new bridge further east.

Hey, at least Falcon is now considering this. I really don't get why we didn't just include a commuter rail/trial project in the Provincial Transportation Plan in the first place. After all, this rail project does go through directly to his house... >__>"

A business case is imperative. You can't spent hundreds of millions on a route that won't get used or a route where the money could have gone to better use.

Surrey, Langley township and city should be shot for not protecting the corridor. Thru Newton, Cloverdale, and Langley they allowed strip malls to quite litterally go righ on top of the rail line making part of the route almost impossible to negotiate. Those cities bitch about the lack of transit vision on the part of the province but provided none of their own.

Surrey, Langley township and city should be shot for not protecting the corridor. Thru Newton, Cloverdale, and Langley they allowed strip malls to quite litterally go righ on top of the rail line making part of the route almost impossible to negotiate. Those cities bitch about the lack of transit vision on the part of the province but provided none of their own.

so just leave all the land around the railway empty? there isn't a lot of room in downtown langley basically surrounded by ALR and out of downtown the township has all of Willoughby slated for residential. It's not just the volume of trains that come through downtown but the noise! The trainline also cuts downtown in half.... & Langley has a huge transit vision downtown and something along the 200th street corridor. Don't say we don't have visions when there are:bash:

The rail line/interurban runs right along HWY10 from Cloverdale to Langley and instead of not allowing any development that would interfere with tyhe line they instead put strip plaza which are right in the rail line. The line runs right tru the parking lots.

BRT would be money far better spent.

Skytrain is not LRT. When it was first developed it was branded as ALRT (automated light rapid transit), but in fact it is Light Metro.

in my school there is HRT and LRT

and anything will fall into those two categories :bash:

Its not like "safe" was absent in the early days. The law wasn't as sophisticated then too. When the Interurban had its heyday, the Interurban was far more frequent than the cars it met at the intersections, so the occasional accident when it happened, died or was a lesson to the general driving public to be more aware.

That doesn't fly today, seeing we're into the legal blame game that has been all the rage south of the border for eons. We're just playing catch-up since implementation of the charter of rights.

Now, each intersection for the proposed interurban would either require a bridge/tunnel and only in the farthest extremities of the Sumas-Chilliwack could level crossings be considered with alarms and gates.