Obama’s high-speed rail suggests Gateway Program “rethink” needed: prof
An announcement from the White House could open up a new front in the debate on the Gateway Program.
Today (April 17), U.S. president Barack Obama called for the federal government to spend $13 billion on a “new era” of high-speed passenger rail transportation in America. As indicated on the map above, two Canadian cities are part of his vision. The proposal includes a high-speed rail link connecting Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver.
Lawrence Frank, chair in sustainable transportation at UBC, told the Straight that the announcement “could be a great thing” for Vancouver.
“I think it could affect projected increases in demand on the Highway 1 corridor coming into Vancouver from the U.S. border,” Frank said in a telephone interview. “I think it suggests a need to rethink [the Gateway Program].”
The Gateway Program largely consists of a series of infrastructure projects. Two of the largest will affect travel flow from the U.S. to downtown Vancouver. The program includes plans to replace the existing Port Mann Bridge with a new 10-lane structure, and to widen Highway 1 from McGill Street in Vancouver to 216 Street in Langley.
According to Frank, part of the provincial government’s argument for replacing the Port Mann Bridge and widening Highway 1 is a projected increase in congestion on account of more traffic from the U.S.
Frank said that if, in the same amount of time that it would take to complete these highway-focused projects, the province could instead enhance its rail infrastructure, the demand for these roadway projects could be reduced.
“It could save a whole lot of money,” Frank said. “Yes, of course it would be an expensive project. But relative to what?”
Frank said that when assessing transportation options, people should think of costs in terms of projects’ full impacts on society, and not just what the up-front, dollar figures are. For example, he continued, enlarging roadway capacity can carry additional costs such as air pollution.
“It’s clear that rail and nonmotorized [transportation] come at health and environmental benefits whereas roadway-focused investments come at health and environmental costs,” Frank said.
Currently, Amtrak Cascades operates a single passenger train between Vancouver and Seattle. The ride takes approximately four hours, according to Amtrak’s Web site.
A call to the B.C. Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure was not returned by the Straight’s deadline.
Other infrastructure projects that the B.C. government describes as part of the Gateway Program are the construction of the South Fraser Perimeter Road, a four-lane road from Deltaport Way to the proposed Golden Ears Bridge, and construction of the North Fraser Perimeter Road, which comprises improvements to existing roads, a stand-alone project to replace the Pitt River Bridge, and the building of an
You can follow Travis Lupick on Twitter at twitter.com/tlupick.
Follow us on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Google
Comments
If they decide to upgrade the Cascadia rail line to high speed, then we should pay whatever our share of it would be. It would be a no brainer, as most of the track and costs would be born by our US neighbors anyway. This is also a program that should qualify for Federal money (Bombardier could build the trains and get people to work in Quebec), although the current Neo-Cons in power don't seem to have the vision or business sense to make an investment in high speed rail.
I just hope whatever they build is true high speed rail, and not just a minor improvement of what we currently have. Imagine heading to Seattle in just over an hour or so without having to deal with the border, traffic, accidents, etc. You could go for lunch and be back for dinner.
Canada, as alway, underwhelms everyone.
Thanks, Stephen, I was hoping someone would say that. I really don't know where Larry Frank is getting all this stuff about Gateway being predicated on car traffic from Washington State. It's bizarre.
Gateway is predicated on more truck traffic within the Lower Mainland, from port to plant, and then on to other destinations. It's furthermore predicated on the expected increase in the region's population and the inevitable and quite autonomous impact that will have on vehicle traffic that competes with commercial traffic for roadspace. The Transport 2021 papers in the early 1990s foresaw that possibility, and their "solution" was NOT to increase capacity, but rather to ration access to the Hwy 1 corridor in all those municipalities which they labelled as "the valley towns", meaning Langley, Abottsford, Mission, and Ridge-Meadows. They very definitely did NOT propose that access to Hwy 1be rationed for the more mature, closer in municipalities such as Burnaby and Vancouver, and that attitude is still very prevalent and very vocal at Burnaby City Hall.
I don't know what the details of the US HSR proposal are, but I certainly think that the Lower Mainland needs several additional heavy rail systems like the West Coast Express serving the south side of the Fraser River and perhaps Bellingham and Whatcom county as well if there are enough daily work trips and weekend social trips into Canada. Another line to the Squamish-Whistler region is indicated at some point.
But in Vancouver there's a traditional bias against any kind of high speed travel, be it freeways or HSR because the established GVRD planning doctrine is not to facilitate longer distance commutes, and instead to "encourage" people to live close to their work, regardless of housing prices, and regardless of multiple earners in a household with possibly different work locations, and regardless of periodic changes in work locations for either wage earner. It's a plan for local government bureaucrats and politicians, not workers or consumers.
Rod Smelser
The short answer is a loud YES, and here’s a few good reasons why. Rail is much more fuel-efficient than cars, planes or trucks. Trains use 1/3 less fuel than trucks per ton-mile, ½ as much fuel per passenger mile over cars and planes, and pollute the atmosphere only half as much.
That may not impress many these days, but if you think oil and gas are past their peak in production, and prices will only climb in the decades ahead, this becomes a really big deal – even threatening our global position as an economic power. Trains are powered by relatively cheap and available diesel, just like trucks and planes, but trains can be converted to overhead electric wires, and powered by emerging alternate energy sources. That’s not an option for planes, or the vast majority of our current auto fleet.
Investments in our nations railroad networks that allow passenger trains to go 110+ mph, through the reduction of bottlenecks, also allow freight traffic to move more efficiently. Improvements to signal, safety, and grade crossings speed up both passenger trains, and freights.
As America moves towards more HSR service, dedicated tracks, with no grade crossings or conflicts with slower freights will emerge in certain corridors, allowing much higher speeds. But first we must walk, before we can run. This can be a huge first step.
Planes, cars, trucks and buses all have their place, each with their own strengths and weaknesses as modes of travel. The HSR initiative will gradually build upon our transportation network, offering alternatives for the future, and we as a nation will be better for it.
President Obama is wise beyond his years to make this investment, and America should thank him for his vision.
Mike Skehan, Member, All Aboard Washington
We need to force our government organizations to institute mandatory telecommuting plans then add corporate carrot/stick incentives later. To illustrate the effect on energy/traffic/. US GTA has marked 40% of US federal civilian employee jobs are telecommutable that includes us forest and postal services I would assume the BC government is more or less the same. A Carlton university survey found 60% of those surveyed would telecommute if they could. Stats Can has it that that institutions under the control/purview of the BC Government ie hydro ferries municipals control more than 350,000 employees. Gordo could end rush hour almost overnight.
The problem with transit approaches is the unwillingness of Transclunk to spend the money to build the structure first (ie buy buses) then putting huge penaltys on drivers to get their retentive butts out of their SUV's
A commuter from White Rock to downtown Vancouver can at present save at least a hour in time and $25 in automotive costs a day by taking the bus. Unfortunately, they love their SUV's,starbucks coffee, and makeup kits and think buses are for low class white trash so only 10% of commuter trips are on the bus. It is quite hilarious zooming along in the bus in the HOV lanes past these nitwits.
Kingston had a taxi system in the 70's where the cabs were dispatched in an orderly fashion east to west and north to south picking up and dropping off passengers as they went along. The fare was about double the bus fare With modern GPS and computer based control ,it would be easy to set up a similar system.
Not going to happen though. Taxi cab companies like it the way it is and spend millions in campaign donations to keep it that way. An outfit tried to set up a van based system $5 anywhere in the Surrey BC but were quickly shut down by the sleazy city council.
seth