Can a streetcar solve Vancouver’s Broadway corridor conundrum?
This post was featured earlier in Vancity Buzz. Image above sourced from Price Tags blog.
Now that the wraps have been taken off the design plans for Evergreen Line stations the reality is setting in – rapid transit is finally coming to Metro Vancouver's Tri-Cities area. However, questions continue to linger about Translink's capacity to handle the inevitable increased ridership at Skytrain's busiest choke point, the station at Broadway and Commercial.
It is estimated that this extension of Skytrain out to Coquitlam, Port Moody and Port Coquitlam will quickly generate a ridership of 70,000 strong. But there's an obvious question: where will passengers go when they arrive at Broadway station? Thousands of daily commuters will need to continue westward through the dense Broadway corridor, and all the way out to the UBC campus.
All political bickering aside regarding Translink's priorities and lack of funding mechanisms to expand rapid transit, the reality is that Vancouver's Broadway corridor currently has a ridership of over 100,000 passengers daily, half of those on the B-Line bus route alone. It is the busiest bus commuter route in North America, and recent reports say that there is no more capacity for additional buses.
Furthermore, twenty-five percent of Vancouver's economy is generated within the West Broadway corridor. Improving transit is therefore fundamental to our city's future success. The unrelenting growth of UBC as a new urban centre should also put Broadway atop the transit priorities for regional politicians.
Yet when it comes to Broadway rapid transit (also known as the UBC Line), Vancouver faces a stalemate. It begs the question – why?
It's About Leadership
The answer is clear: there is no leadership coming from Vancouver. For all its efforts to brand itself as a green Mecca, nothing drops greenhouse gas emissions faster than effective rapid transit. If you truly want green for Vancouver, then your top priority should be the UBC Line.
For real leadership on rapid transit, look no further than Surrey. Three years ago only a handful of proponents thought that light rail south of the Fraser was viable. Today, light rapid transit in Surrey is in a dead heat with Broadway as a regional transportation priority after Evergreen Line. Credit the fact that Mayor Dianne Watts herself tells anyone who will listen that she is going to get it built.
By contrast, Vancouver's government has been virtually silent on the subject of Broadway rapid transit over the past four years. It is possible that Mayor Robertson, who built his political reputation bashing the BC government over disruptions caused by Canada Line construction, fears a Broadway business backlash by even raising the subject. Notably, a key Vision Vancouver 2011 campaign promise was to champion better bus service on Broadway, though there has been scant news on that front since last year.
Where Vancouver needed to wield its influence the most was at Translink's Mayors Council meetings. Yet Robertson skipped half of them, sending Coun. Geoff Meggs in his place. Meggs, for his part, is now using delays on Broadway line development as a campaign issue for his Vancouver-Fairview NDP candidacy. After four years in office, Vancouver's failure to build support for Broadway rapid transit hardly ranks as an accomplishment for either Robertson or Meggs.
Prospects for rapid transit on the Broadway corridor got even gloomier after this recent opinion column by CBC Radio host Stephen Quinn. He quotes SFU's Gord Price, who says he thinks rapid transit on Broadway will "not be built in his lifetime".
How About a Streetcar?
So where can Vancouver go? Its hands are not only tied by Translink's financial struggles, but the surging success of Surrey's politicking is also setting Vancouver back even further. There is one solution to relieve the pressure on Broadway that Robertson's office seem to have slammed the door shut on: a streetcar along the south shore of False Creek.
During the 2011 civic election, re-energizing Vancouver's streetcar program was a key plank of the NPA campaign under Suzanne Anton. I sat in meetings with stakeholders where we discussed how Vancouver could "go it alone", building its own streetcar system with the help of a private partner. Though public-private partnerships are responsible for some of the most successful infrastructure developments across the globe, "P3s" are apparently not a part of the Vision-NDP vocabulary.
Integrated with the existing bus and rapid transit systems, a streetcar line could link the VCC-Clark Skytrain station (Millennium Line terminus) with a new rapid bus connection located at Arbutus and Broadway. A railway right-of-way exists for much that entire route. The section by southeast False Creek is currently under redevelopment and promises to bring thousands of new commuters. While it cannot match the ridership nor the speed of Skytrain, it could take many UBC-bound commuters off the overburdened 99 B-line west of Commercial.
A Political Twist
Don't just take my word for it though. Commentator Bob Ransford argued for the same scheme in a Vancouver Sun column back in 2010. The one-time NPA campaign worker cum Vision turncoat stated, "With a $3-billion price tag, you can do all the studies you want, but the project will never happen." Ransford continued…
The Olympic Line streetcar project can be built for one quarter the cost of any SkyTrain extension. The city owns most of the right-of-way that would allow a streetcar to run between the Clark Drive SkyTrain station, the Canada Line Olympic Village station and Granville Island. It wouldn't be that difficult to secure a right-of-way all the way to Arbutus Street. This routing would tie together all the SkyTrain lines and service the densest part of the Broadway corridor. A rapid bus line from Arbutus could adequately continue to service UBC.
…the project is a perfect one for a public-private partnership where a private company designs, builds, operates and maintains the streetcar line in return for the fare box revenue and perhaps a small operating subsidy. If the city was willing to entertain a corporate sponsor being granted naming rights for the streetcar line, it's likely that subsidy could be covered with annual advertising fees from naming rights. In effect, the streetcar line could be built and operated at little or no cost to taxpayers.
In an ironic twist Ransford's Vision pals tried to discredit the NPA's streetcar proposal, and still rules it out as an option today. Politics, as this example proves, makes for strange bedfellows.
As I stated earlier, what is missing here is the "L" word – leadership. Ransford reached the same conclusion, saying…
It takes leadership to put together a creative structure like this that could make the project possible. Without the city taking the lead, though, we might never see this project or any other streetcar line actually get off the ground. That means we may never see the full potential of sustainable urbanism and real livability in Vancouver's neighbourhoods.
For citizens stuck queuing up for buses at Commercial Drive every morning, the least Vancouver could do is indicate that they are keeping an open mind about a streetcar, and call for proposals.
Will it ever happen? Pigs will fly sooner.
voony
October 13, 2012 @ 2:02 pm
Finally blogging again!
Good post, bu (t is it necessary to paint the streetcar in so partisan term?). Nevertheless what your streetcar proposal could do more/better than what is already done by the bus 84 (VCC-UBC) following roughly the route you suggest for the streetcar?
As you point out, central Broadway is the second economic engine of the region, and the streecar proposal (like route 84) biggest flaw is that it avoids it…
It could be cheap to build, but not that cheap to operate, and for what gains?
Could not the money be better spent elsewhere? (like extending the trolley lines here and there, 41th west of Dunbar come in mind… )
Mike Klassen
October 14, 2012 @ 9:16 am
Voony, nice to hear from you. I recall that we were both at the blogger consultation I mentioned.
First, on partisanship. I admit to this being a political thrown down of sorts. The issue of streetcar infrastructure is one that separates the NPA and Vision. The former being for it, the latter not. If Mayor Gregor had simply stuck to the message on supporting Broadway buses during the campaign it would be less of a political bun toss. Instead they decided to discredit the idea altogether, fabricating numbers to suggest it was too expensive to build. I counter by saying prove it –- put out an RFP and let the private sector put their own numbers.
High capacity, high speed rapid transit is the ideal solution. But the expense and politics of doing it make it seem unrealistic for a long time. A streetcar (or more accurately, a light rail vehicle) like the one which ran on the so-called Olympic Line has the ability to spur new growth in a way that buses do not.
See the video I shot in January 2010 when a “first look” for media was provided. I was lucky to get Stephen Rees to make a number of observations about the rail line and the cars themselves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otlKxoDDL4A
Yes, a bus line runs approximately along the route I propose (see: http://www.transitdb.ca/route/084/). No doubt it helps to alleviate some of the street on the B-Line. I’d like to know if a rail-based system on a dedicated right of way might be able to move more passengers more quickly between VCC-Clark and Arbutus.
Where the streetcar system distinguishes itself is its power to mould urban development. The very image of the city itself is strengthened by adding these systems to the transportation mix.
Something I did not mention was that one of the most valuable assets along the south False Creek line is owned by the Federal government — Granville Island. Because of this and the value a streetcar to Granville Island would bring, the feds would be natural partners in this endeavour.
Now, the big problem with this scenario is Vision Vancouver and Gregor Robertson. City hall has consistently taken swipes at the feds (not surprising given they are genetically indistinguishable from the NDP). The governing Tories are unlikely to want to invest in a city that treats them with such hostility.
That may change, however, with the new Vancouver-Granville riding. It looks to be a lock for the Conservatives if the proposed boundaries stick. Would Ottawa want to throw Vancouver a bone like supporting the streetcar if it helps their MP? It’s possible.
Building a streetcar would benefit the Broadway corridor, but it would not be the reason you build it. Instead, you have to look at the long term benefits of growing the line into Yaletown, Chinatown, Gastown and Canada Place. Wouldn’t it be amazing if it went all the way to Stanley Park?
How would this help to shape the city’s core? Where would it go after that? Arbutus? Marine Drive? We’re putting 15,000 new residents into East Fraser Lands with no long term plans for transit. A rail line runs right through it.
Anyway, we can only dream about this stuff for now as there is little political will to make it happen. For now we streetcar keeners can keep discussing it.
Roger Kemble
October 14, 2012 @ 3:35 am
"<I>It is estimated that this extension of Sky train out to Coquitlam, Port Moody and Port Coquitlam will quickly generate a ridership of 70,000 strong. But there's an obvious question: where will passengers go when they arrive at Broadway station? </I>"
Good question!
Friday nite CTV news showed a continent wide survey placing Vancouver Metro second only to Los Angeles in traffic snarls. This is a damn disgraceful condemnation on all the mindless chatter that our various local, including our host, experts have been spouting for the last decade!
So far the glaring fact that the City and Metro accreted, (I hesitate to use the terms <I>designed</I> or <I>grew</I>), by spastic, grab-thu-money-and-run, convulsions into the automobile age has not yet sunk in. TX experts still talk of their gadgetry in terms of a more sophisticated road system.
We cannot afford this shit we call "<I>rapid transit</I>" and even if we could the exorbitant billions would be better spent re-booting the city . . .
http://www.theyorkshirelad.ca/1yorkshirelad/vancouver.re-boot/Vancouver.re-boot.html
. . . into an incrementalized configuration whereby our good citizens are not expected to spend all their precious leisure hours sitting in <I>phuccin'<I/> noisy, crowded shiny metal tube waiting to get there, where ever <I>the hell<I> there is!
Far less capital, we do not have, would be expended on closely relating origin to destination . . .
http://members.shaw.ca/theyorkshirelad72/working.mount.pleasant.html
. . . and a far less harassed polity would walk to work, walk home, walk to the gym, have time to play with the kids and smile when the tax bill comes due . . .
Ryan
October 15, 2012 @ 1:22 am
I don’t exactly understand what makes a line like this so much different that running the 99 B-line. I guess you would have to run this line concurrently with the B-line in order to really make a dent in the crowding problem. Wouldn’t there still be a huge choke point at VCC Clark and Broadway caused by the evergreen line? I hear your point about the political gridlock, but it’s just so hard to get excited about a project like this. Your point that twenty-five percent of Vancouver’s economy is generated within the West Broadway corridor and that map showing how many Metrotowns exist along the corridor seems to me to scream that an LRT won’t be enough.
The idea of boarding the train at Ioco Station on the evergreen line (5 minutes from my house) and getting off some 50 odd minutes later at the UBC campus without transfer is just so intuitively appealing and completely eliminates the problem of choke points all together.
It just seems like a pity locking ourselves in with an inferior system just because we don’t have the political will to get it right in the first place.
yvrlutyens
October 16, 2012 @ 1:05 am
I’m not against the idea of a streetcar from Arbutus to Stanley Park. It’s appealing and eventually, I think that it will be built. But this really doesn’t have anything to do with the Broadway-UBC Line. False Creek is not that close to Broadway, especially up that steep hill, so a False Creek Line would see next to no Broadway traffic. And through traffic from the Expo and Millennium Lines to UBC would not use this because it would convert a one transfer trip into a two transfer trip, something that can only be made up with a very fast mode. I don’t doubt that a False Creek Line would see some ridership, but it would be a small fraction of what a Millennium Line to UBC would achieve.
West Broadway has such a large transit ridership already that it fully justifies converting this to a metro system. The city should certainly campaign for this, but expanding the Expo Line in Surrey also has merit and if that were built first, I would not have a problem with that. Notwithstanding all the separate municipalities, this is all one city and improvements to the parts are improvements to the whole.
I also think that the rail shapes development argument is a bit of a canard in Vancouver. Certainly in some places in seems to, but in Vancouver, we don’t actually have a problem in encouraging development. We have as much development as we are willing to zone for. If we wanted more development along False Creek, we could just upzone.
So Bob Ransford and now Gordon Price say rapid transit won’t happen along Broadway. That don’t impress me much. These guys are just being curmudgeonly. Just about everything that ever was was something that someone said was never going to happen. Flying? Walking on two feet? Blogging?
Bob Ransford also makes several other questionable arguments:
1. It will be cheap because the city owns most of the ROW. However, you can’t just build transit where it is cheap to build. You need to build it where it is useful. This is a problem in Portland and LA where LRT lines have been built in railway and freeway rights of way, but out of the way for people that might want to use the line. (That said, I think the False Creek ROW would be a good streetcar line, but for a different market.)
2. Trying to serve the local and regional market with one system. If you are serving the local market, you don’t have rapid transit because there will be too many stops. Having two parallel systems, a metro and a bus, is a sign that you are doing it right. Trying to combine them is like the cost compromise above, a compromise too far.
3. The ridership numbers for the demonstration line are entirely artificial. This was a free “ride” during a huge pedestrian oriented festival. This was not normal. And even then, at 500,000 boardings over two months, that is less than 10,000 a day.
5. The 3 billion figure. The Canada Line was built for 115 million per km. That would be 1.4 billion to UBC. Only 60% of the Canada Line is buried, but there is still a bored section, a maintenance centre and a bridge built on mushy ground. With a cut and cover tunnel to UBC – the way it should be built – coupled with a compensation program to affected businesses, something like 170 per km ought to be realistic. That would be 2 billion to UBC.
Mike Klassen
October 16, 2012 @ 5:55 am
Fantastic response. Challenging opinions, useful stats. This is a good debate.
Neil W. Humphrey
October 25, 2012 @ 3:32 pm
Live in Kits on 4th Ave. Every weekday morning after rush hour I see B-line after B-line heading East on 4th empty. Because of that it’s pretty hard to justify a huge transit infrastructure expense down Broadway.
I’d be interested to know what volume numbers you have going back and forth from UBC in-between and after rush hours?