[All] Fwd: LRT Investment is the Right Choice

[Robert Milligan]

Michael,

Well written as usual. However, even though the Region will be  
considering new IDEAS to possibly make the LRT system design more cost- 
effective, your group shows no signs of pitching in to help in this  
process.

Robert



Begin forwarded message:

> Date: September 16, 2010 10:01:56 PM GMT-04:00
> Subject: LRT Investment is the Right Choice
> Source: TriTAG » News
> Author: Michael Druker
>
>
> (Photo: William Murphy / Flickr)
>
> As most people have heard, two weeks ago Prime Minister Harper  
> announced Federal funding for Waterloo Region’s Rapid Transit  
> project. The amount is 1/3 of project costs, up to $265 million, for  
> the first phase of light rail (LRT) and express bus line. But the  
> conversation in local media and by many municipal candidates has  
> shifted to the so-called shortfall. That, horror of horrors, the  
> lower-tier municipality would have to contribute a portion (around  
> $235 million, or less than 1/3) of the capital costs of a long-term  
> transit and growth management project. This post addresses several  
> common themes in objections to funding light rail.
>
> From seeing some discussion of the LRT, you would think this is  
> something that would be built for today’s needs. Infrastructure,  
> however, can’t be built overnight, and can’t influence much until it  
> is built. But while the project would be a well-used part of a  
> transit system on opening day, the larger purpose is to manage  
> future growth of the Region. The area continues to grow rapidly, and  
> is to add 200,000 to its existing half-million population. LRT is  
> about building the transportation infrastructure that will attract  
> development to the urban core areas and that will be able to handle  
> the resulting travel demand. Failing to do this would result in  
> major development occurring on greenfield sites and pressure to push  
> out the urban boundary to accommodate more sprawl. The costs of the  
> road widening and other infrastructure needed to support that sprawl  
> are far higher than the costs of the LRT system. Avoiding building  
> any new transportation infrastructure will result in serious traffic  
> congestion and lost economic productivity in the Region.
>
> You may also have been led to believe that the full capital costs of  
> LRT have to be paid immediately. Dividing $235 million by 500,000  
> people in the Region, you do get the sum of $470 per average person.  
> Which is a fair chunk of change, sure. However it pales in  
> comparison with other large, common sums such as a home ($200K+) or  
> a car ($50K+ lifetime cost). It also pales in comparison to the cost  
> of building highways or widening roads to accommodate a similar  
> volume of people. The light rail would be a project that pays its  
> substantial benefits over decades. Dividing that $470 per person  
> over ten or twenty years should give a much more reasonable  
> perspective on the investment.
>
> Some suggest that since the Region has to pay something, it should  
> go with a cheaper option that was rejected earlier, Bus Rapid  
> Transit (BRT). In the context of the Rapid Transit project, this  
> would entail a similarly segregated right-of-way as the LRT, but  
> with diesel buses on pavement instead of electric trains on tracks.  
> Note that most of the costs come in the construction of stations and  
> the right-of-way, which is the most effective means of ensuring that  
> the system really is rapid. Going with buses isn’t cheap – the  
> figure was $585 million. Still, for the Region, the Provincial and  
> Federal contributions would make the local portion $90 million, so  
> this is certainly tempting.
>
> However, there are serious reasons why BRT was rejected in the  
> project assessment. Buses bring more noise and pollution, more  
> labour costs (due to smaller vehicles), and a less comfortable ride  
> for many. Bus infrastructure is also less likely to attract  
> development to station areas, and would attract fewer riders.  
> However, the much bigger reason is a technical one: it won’t be able  
> to handle the capacity in twenty years. Where light rail can just  
> run more trains or longer trains, BRT would need to be rebuilt as a  
> rail system at huge costs. In street-running operation with even the  
> most efficient station design, you can only really run about a bus  
> every 2 minutes. The kind of BRT that could handle the capacity is  
> basically a bus highway, with passing lanes and few or no grade  
> crossings; this is much more expensive to build than LRT and is not  
> feasible or desirable in our downtowns.
>
> Instead of ignoring the issues that we will have to face in the  
> coming decade or two, we should use the light rail project as an  
> appropriate investment in our Region’s infrastructure and economy.  
> And it certainly doesn’t hurt that for every dollar we invest in  
> ourselves, the Provincial and Federal Governments will be kicking in  
> another two.
>
> Read more…
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20100920/0460dbe9/attachment.html>