3104 replies to this topic

[Bingo]

How many people are really crying out for commuter rail? 

 

 

All of those stuck in the congestion from Leigh Road to the Shawnigan turnoff are already crying for a solution, and have hinted * that rail travel is it.

* they have booked a rail holiday in Europe.

Edited by Bingo, 30 July 2017 - 08:41 PM.

[malahatdrive]

Greater Victoria population is about 380,000 and Cowichan Valley is around 100,000 according to latest census. I don't know what the critical population level is to support rail but the south island is 500,000 and growing fast.

[AllseeingEye]

/\.....Calgary was ~ at 600K when they actually launched the C-Train 35-odd years ago (although the city began planning for an LRT at least fifteen years earlier in the 1960's), and it required heavy government subsidies for most of its existence; with a metro population now approaching 1.5 million I believe its only been in a last decade where OpEx expenditures have reached close to a break even point. Any new system here - considering our significantly smaller population, growing nowhere near as fast as Calgary did - would have to be similarly subsidized literally for several decades.

[VicHockeyFan]

I'll support commuter rail only after the following municipalities all agree to these housing units being built along the track:

Victoria: 5,000 units
Esquimalt: 10,000
View Royal: 10,000
Langford: 15,000

To be built within a 10-minute maximum walk to a station. That's only 40,000 units, or 80,000 people or so. But it's a tripling of View Royal's population and more than doubling Esquimalt's.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 30 July 2017 - 10:08 PM.

[57WestHills]

/\.....Calgary was ~ at 600K when they actually launched the C-Train 35-odd years ago (although the city began planning for an LRT at least fifteen years earlier in the 1960's), and it required heavy government subsidies for most of its existence; with a metro population now approaching 1.5 million I believe its only been in a last decade where OpEx expenditures have reached close to a break even point. Any new system here - considering our significantly smaller population, growing nowhere near as fast as Calgary did - would have to be similarly subsidized literally for several decades.

​Save one bizarre exception in Toronto no public rail line, light or heavy, is in anyway designed to break even. Obviously there is thought to ensuring that some operating costs are recuperated- but generally every ride is subsidized very substantially.  By memory - so perhaps flawed and dated, C Train had pretty decent recovery because light rail is "cheap" and it is a very heavily used system.

 

So your final statement is literally correct but misleading. Any transit system regardless of mode, which is publicly run, (even if privately administered) needs to be subsidized always. The trick is ensuring that the subsidy is realistic and sustainable.

[AllseeingEye]

​Save one bizarre exception in Toronto no public rail line, light or heavy, is in anyway designed to break even. Obviously there is thought to ensuring that some operating costs are recuperated- but generally every ride is subsidized very substantially.  By memory - so perhaps flawed and dated, C Train had pretty decent recovery because light rail is "cheap" and it is a very heavily used system.

 

So your final statement is literally correct but misleading. Any transit system regardless of mode, which is publicly run, (even if privately administered) needs to be subsidized always. The trick is ensuring that the subsidy is realistic and sustainable.

Which is the crux of my point: at 1.5 million population, and growing exponentially relative to our incremental population increase comparatively speaking, clearly subsidizing the Calgary system is much more palatable for government presumably than doing likewise for a system with barely one quarter the population.

 

Also another critical point: Calgary took the bold step (in 1981) of essentially thumbing its nose at "buying Canadian" and went with a tried and tested foreign (German) solution. It remains to be seen whether Victoria would have the cajones to do likewise. If so then 'cost' is significantly and meaningfully further curtailed. If not, well then the $ky potentially is the limit....

[tedward]

I'll support commuter rail only after the following municipalities all agree to these housing units being built along the track:

Victoria: 5,000 units
Esquimalt: 10,000
View Royal: 10,000
Langford: 15,000

To be built within a 10-minute maximum walk to a station. That's only 40,000 units, or 80,000 people or so. But it's a tripling of View Royal's population and more than doubling Esquimalt's.
 

 

Yep. That's the point. We build the service and then approve reasonably dense development along the line. If we build it they will come!

[VicHockeyFan]

No no no. We need to have the housing ****agreement before we start to build it.

Last time we had a frequent train through View Royal the Hallowell residents complained.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 31 July 2017 - 10:13 AM.

[Bingo]

No no no. We need to have the housing ****agreement before we start to build it.

Last time we had a frequent train through View Royal the Hallowell residents complained.

 

We need to have more affordable housing no matter where we build it, so it makes sense to have it along the right of way as many residents don't have cars.

I like your idea to combine housing with rail, it's brilliant!

 I can't believe I said that.

[johnk]

​Save one bizarre exception in Toronto no public rail line, light or heavy, is in anyway designed to break even. Obviously there is thought to ensuring that some operating costs are recuperated- but generally every ride is subsidized very substantially.  By memory - so perhaps flawed and dated, C Train had pretty decent recovery because light rail is "cheap" and it is a very heavily used system.
 
So your final statement is literally correct but misleading. Any
transit system regardless of mode, which is publicly run, (even if
privately administered) needs to be subsidized always. The trick is ensuring that the subsidy is realistic and sustainable.

The goal in the transit industry is to recoup 50% of operating through the farebox. Most systems in North America are high 40s, some are in the high 30s low 40s.
The Toronto Transit Commission was mandated to recoup 68% when I was doing media relations there and they managed to do it during the golden era from about 1954-90. Other systems marveled at it.

[kxl]

Great description of C-Train's introduction in Calgary, ASE, but it was actually Edmonton that was first to get an LRT with <1 M population, in 1978. If I'm not mistaken, Edmonton purchased their cars from Siemens too.

[VicHockeyFan]

Our people do not all go to one place. We have downtown, the dockyard, UVIC and Camosun.

And the largest potential growth is the schools that will never work for LRT.

[lanforod]

UVic has little desire to grow much larger than it is now.

[VicHockeyFan]

UVic has little desire to grow much larger than it is now.

 

The University of Victoria’s continuing-studies division, which already has more than 16,000 registrations a year, has undergone a major expansion to help meet the rising demand for courses that deal with topics ranging from professional development to general interest.

 

...

 

Close to 3,500 people sign up for English-language courses annually, she said. “Some of those are hoping to go on to UVic — they’re just hoping to get their English skills up a little better.”

 

...

 

Online courses are offered, and there are also partnerships with schools in Asia and South America that see students come for studies at UVic, MacDonald said. “Those are students that come and take anywhere from three to six weeks, up to a semester or a year, and then go back to their home institutions.”

 

http://www.timescolo...-uvic-1.2238220

[lanforod]

^ yeah, that division is an exception. It isn't the main school.

[VicHockeyFan]

Over this period domestic student enrolment has grown modestly and international enrolment growth has been very strong. While it would not be prudent to predict that such growth continues, it is expected that a higher than historical average of international students will continue to enroll.

 

https://www.uvic.ca/..._ 2017FINAL.pdf

 

And it would seem to me, that the international students are obviously not coming with cars.

[Mike K.]

International students typically purchase cars while they're here. That demographic overwhelmingly uses personal vehicles to travel to and from UVic.

[lanforod]

Oh yeah. They seem to buy all kinds too. Pink BMWs, orange Porsches. Luxury dealerships must love international students.

[VicHockeyFan]

International students typically purchase cars while they're here. That demographic overwhelmingly uses personal vehicles to travel to and from UVic.

 

I find that hard to believe.  You may see some that are very visible (pink, orange), but I bet it's the exception still.

[Danma]

Great description of C-Train's introduction in Calgary, ASE, but it was actually Edmonton that was first to get an LRT with <1 M population, in 1978. If I'm not mistaken, Edmonton purchased their cars from Siemens too.

Both Calgary, Edmonton and Salt Lake use the same Siemens car trains (although the SLC ones are in tram configuration). In general they have been reliable and performed well. Bombardier, Toshiba, and many others offer similar products.