Skytrain Reliability, or How TransLink Made My Head Explode

Alright, this is going to be a long one, and a little mathy, so grab a cup of coffee or three. 

Fraser Coal Port - am I the only one?

Let’s just put it all on the table.  One – I’m probably not going to make too many friends with this post.  Two – I have worked at a coal mine.  I spent an eight-month co-op job at Fording River Operations near Elkford, BC, some 10 years ago while working on my degree.  I studied mechanical engineering, so I was working with the equipment as opposed to the process, but I got my hands dirty in the industry.  My first job after university was in the mining industry as a contractor, and among the many mines I worked with, a number were coal. 

As you probably already know, the Fraser Surrey Docks, under Port Metro Vancouver have proposed building a coal-terminal on the south shore of the Fraser.  This has led to much writing of letters, waving of signs, and rending of garments.  The objections have been manifold, but primarily can be distilled down to a few main points. 

• The health and nuisance effects of coal dust from the trains, transfer, and barges
• Diesel pollution from the coal trains
• Emergency access and traffic concerns from the coal trains 

Do these things need to be addressed?  Absolutely.  And according to the environmental assessment, they are being addressed through standard industry practices.  Is that enough?  Given Metro Vancouver’s position as a major coal port already, I think it is.

Why I think a mountain is being made out of this molehill is this: the Fraser coal terminal practically speaking is insignificant.  Westshore Terminals, the Roberts Bank terminal, shipped 27.3 million tonnes of coal in 2011.  Neptune in North Vancouver is looking to ship 18 million.  The  four-million proposed by Fraser-Surrey docks is minor in comparison – it won’t change significantly the amount of coal dust flying around Metro Vancouver, and we’re talking one additional daily train on top of 70 in Metro Vancouver – emergency access and locomotive pollution are weak arguments to make for this. 

And as much as everyone is demonizing coal dust and the lack of understanding how small amounts of it affects  health, coal towns have been around a long time and the review of their health have been inconclusive at best. 

The big gap in the Environmental Assessment, as New Westminster Citizen of the Year, Environmental Geoscientist, and all around entertaining blogger Patrick Johnstone adeptly pointed out, is greenhouse gas emissions.  The Port says it’s outside their scope – some say that’s not good enough; I say it’s not the Port’s call to make. 

As a country we have said burning coal is still acceptable.  B.C. doesn’t have any, but in six out of ten provinces we burn coal for power (Manitoba uses its single coal fired boiler for emergency use only).  We burn coal for steelmaking.   It is hypocritical for us to say we can burn coal, but you can’t.  If as a country we are unwilling to stop burning coal, it is unfair and unjust to deny that opportunity to others.  (On the other hand saying a product is too hazardous for us to use butokay to ship out to the rest of the world is pretty damn sketchy.  Additional disclaimer – as a teenager I had a pen-pal from Asbestos, Quebec.  What can I say – I love their accent). 

This is effectively trying to legislate another country by fiat.  If the US called Canada one day and said “We need to stop global warming, and you guys already withdrew from Kyoto so  we’re not going to send you any more oil,” while they continued to buy SUVs by the bucket and sell oil to Mexico, we’d be rightfully pissed.  Getting our own house in order, leading by example, not being hypocrites – let’s do things right. 

Secondly, if we are concerned with local pollution from trains (and we should be), the right approach isn’t to stop one more train containing stuff we happen to not like.  The approach should be to back out to a regional level and assess what maximum level of train, truck, ship, and automobile traffic can we support at our pollution limits, and how do we drive traffic down below that.  Lo and behold, Metro Vancouver has done part of this!  Metro Vancouver has an AirQuality Management plan that provides the targets. 

The Air Quality Management Plan’s vision is “Health, clean and clear air for current and future generations.”  (suitably fuzzy and vague) and its strategies include “Reduce emissions of and public exposure to diesel particulate matter,” “Reduce air contaminant emissions from industrial, commercial and agricultural sources…,” “residential sources,” and “cars, trucks and buses.” Other strategies include increasing public engagement, partner with other agencies, reducing carbon footprints. 

Surprisingly for a government plan, it has some actual performance metrics in there – exceedances of air quality objectives, hours with Air Quality Health index in the High/Low category, and some percentages to track the year over year change.  While it would be difficult work I’m sure, we should be able to model the regional emission sources and validate that against currently measured air pollution.  From there, we can assess what level of industry and transport the region can support (or how much we need to reduce) to be within our targets for air quality.  As technology improves and emission sources get smaller we can allow additional development, create more stringent targets, or some combination of the two. 

Then we can actually answer the question of can the region support one more train per day.  Or a waste incinerator.  It can also drive policy – we can model trade-offs on truck, train, heavy equipment and industry to see the best way to reduce diesel particulate matter.  At that means we can make informed decisions on the issues instead of leaping to a panic. 

Given all that, I am in favour of the proposed facility as it is currently given.  As a country, we are still burning coal – until we decide otherwise it’s not our place to condemn others for doing the same.   As a region, we are a coal port (among other things).  Singling out this one port and 4 million tonnes while ignoring the 27 million at Roberts Bank smacks of NIMBYism.  One train per day and a 10% increase in coal through the region is not going to significantly change the regional pollution situation.  Local effects need to be managed, yes, and the trains and port are using best practices as they stand.  As those practices improve, we should pressure them to keep up.

And none of this considers the benefits to the recipients.  All of North American stands as a witness to the benefits electrification brings.  To deny that benefit to another country is imperialism – we know better than you what’s good for you, so you can’t have it.  Is there a cost to coal powered electricity?  Does it need to be weighed against the benefits?  Yes, but it’s not our place to make that decision for another country.  

PATTULLO TRAFFIC

According to the October 7^th Committee of the Whole meeting, a raft of reports, and just plain common sense, tolls on the Port Mann Bridge have led to a significant increase in traffic on the Pattullo.

Much hand wringing ensued about what to do about it.  While there were a few suggestions that could be implemented by the city (banning trucks on Royal Avenue), most involved getting other people to do stuff (generally toll the Pattullo).

I’m in favour of doing things yourself rather than trying to pass the buck whenever possible.  Electronic tolling gives us the ability to take control of this issue at a municipal level.  Legal authority may or may not, I haven’t delved into that pit yet, but technically there is nothing stopping us from tolling commuters or truckers through New West .

TOLLS

Tolls can be done a few different ways.  The traditional Canadian way is to toll a specific asset.  You pay a toll to cross the Port Mann or Golden Ears bridge, to ride a ferry, and formerly to drive the Coquihalla.  The equivalent to doing that here would be to toll that Pattullo Bridge, which is what some people are calling for.

Another way is a congestion charge, basically charging vehicles to enter a specific zone in the city.  London is probably most famous for this, but Milan also does it, Singapore tested it, and a number of smaller European cities have implemented it. 

Both of these options have problems for us.  Before we get to those problems though, we need to define what is our goal.  If we don’t define that well, we may end up implementing solutions that only partially or weakly get us what we want, and may have side effects that are more problematic that the problem was before. 

GOALS

Based on council discussions, news articles, and general bitching and whining, there is one thing everyone says they want.   

Reduce traffic volumes.  Remember the glorious days when the Pattullo was shut down for three weeks after the fire?  We want our car-free utopia back. 

That’s the quick and easy answer.  But the real answer is more subtle.  What traffic do we want to reduce?  Through traffic commuting to Burnaby or Vancouver?  Heck yes, slam that gate shut.  Truck traffic on the way to various ports?  Don’t need it.  Truck traffic to heavy industry or warehouses in New West?  Ummm….that might have some consequences.  Commuters going to or from New West?  Well, we’d like to get them on transit but….  People coming in to utilize New West businesses or services?  Crap - we’re only five questions in and this is already getting hard. 

What we probably want to do is some combination of choking off through-town commuters, minimizing through truck traffic, directing in-town truck traffic in a way that minimizes its impact on everyone else, and allowing people and business to get in and out of New West easily.

BACK TO TOLLS

The problem with tolls is they are a sledgehammer.  Yes, you can tweak things based on time of day, vehicle size, vehicle pollution, HOVs, but generally speaking tolling comes down to cross this line and you have to pay. That has the general result of making fewer vehicles cross the line.  Instead the go around it (as the Port Mann bridge toll has shown us) or up to the edge of it. 

Sometimes that’s good.  In the case of congestion charges, your end goal is fewer vehicles on the road.  The toll-hammer works well for that – make it more expensive and fewer cars will come. 

In our case, we want to do something more subtle.  We want to direct some traffic away, while at the same time keeping it as easy or easier for other types of traffic to get in and out of town.  The miracle of electronic tolling offers us a potential solution. 

GIVE ‘ER THE OLD IN-AND-OUT

The main problem people seem to have is with the traffic that uses New West as a highway – vehicles that drive through our city, congest and wear out our roads, and pollute our air while not paying to support our infrastructure.  We don’t want to discourage those people coming to or from town, but if we can nudge them onto transit it would be a bonus. 

A bridge toll or congestion charge would hit everyone.  Sure, we’d discourage commuters, but we’d also hit on people living here and coming here for business.  So let’s try and tweak the system a little bit.

Let’s set up a toll system like you would for a congestion charge.  Track every time a vehicle enters and exits the city zone.  Only rather than charging every vehicle that enters the city, just charge the ones that come and go.  Pick a time, say an hour.  Any vehicle that enters town and leaves within one hour is an evil commuter whom we hate and gets charged with the toll.  Any vehicle that stays at least an hour is a friendly patron and supporter off all things New Westminster, so they don’t get charged. 

While it’s not perfect, and would likely miss some of the through traffic and hit some of the come to town traffic we want, in general it should toll those vehicles using New West as a thoroughfare while not hitting those coming to town.  It would be far more selective than a simple bridge toll or congestion charge and thus should manage traffic closer to how we want it instead of just slamming everyone.

PROBLEMS

It will discourage people coming to New West on short trips for business

Yes this will discourage short trips for business.  To an extent, it will support other goals by pushing some of those people onto transit rather than taking their car.  You could also mitigate this to an extent by making a “from whence ye came” exemption – if a vehicle exits the city by the same road it entered on it does not get tolled. 

Congestion from intentional delays

Make the time too short, and people will game the system by entering town, parking on the side of the road somewhere (maybe even *gasp* idling) until their time is up, then leaving.  This would also aggravate the parking situation.  Solution?  Extend the time you need to stay before the toll is removed.  However, there’s only so far you can go with this before it becomes a defacto congestion charge.  I’m willing to trust engineers and their traffic models to pick an ideal time. 

CONCLUSION

I’m just a simple engineer, so I’m sure this is an idea that has been thought of in traffic circles before.  My Google searching wasn’t able to come up with anything, but I may not know the right words to search for.  I would love to see if any studies, modelling or tests have been done for a system along these lines.  Even more so, I would love to see the city take control of traffic on its roads.  I believe the technology is there to do it. 

Rapid Transit - Time to Implement Continuous Growth

With a lot of jubilation, tremendous public interest, and a big final sigh of relief, the Canada Line of Metro Vancouver’s Skytrain system finally opened on August 17th. . Early reports were ridership was even higher than expected. While a lot of the media has focused on those people who have been inconvenienced by the new line, I think the numbers speak for themselves – the line appears to be meeting or beating expectations.

Supposedly next on the list of rapid transit projects is the Evergreen Line connecting Burnaby (Lougheed) to Port Moody and Coquitlam. The tale of this line is almost epic, started, stopped, and made the number one priority so many times it would make your head spin. For brevity, the last few things to happen were

New West - Centre of the Universe?

Or at least Metro Vancouver. New West is in a unique and somewhat odd position. Historically, it was one of the major urban centres and the first colonial capital of B.C. However, as development focused in on Vancouver, New West seems to have lost its way. Now, as part of Metro Vancouver, it is in the middle of the pack as far as population goes, but sandwiched between the big cities of Burnaby and Surrey.

The geographical benefits of New West
o 10 minute drive to Central Surrey,
o 15 minutes to Surrey Docks, Newton, Metrotown, Coquitlam Town Centre
o 20 minute drive to Central Richmond
o 25 minute drive to YVR, the US Border, Cloverdale and Langley
o 30 minute drive to Downtown Vancouver
o 35 minute drive to Deltaport.
o Two rapid transit lines connecting to Vancouver, Burnaby and Surrey
o Reasonable bus schedules (through Uptown/Downtown at least)
o Easily walkable neighbourhoods
o On the North/West side of the Fraser (Crossing the Fraser is a major psychological barrier the further you get away from it, and depending on traffic a major physical one as well)

The geographical challenges of New West
o Sandwiched between Burnaby and Surrey, attention is drawn away from New West to the bigger cities
o Hilly terrain, affects mobility, particularly in winter.
o No port facilities within the city

While it is mentioned in passing in places like the Official Community Plan (OCP), I don’t see how we are really leveraging our position. This is just a quick list of potential businesses types and agencies that could potentially benefit from locating in New West.

Businesses
- Distribution centres
- Couriers
- Shipping
- Sales
- In-home services (cleaning, cooking, nursing)
- News reporting
- Private investigators
- Trades (Plumbers, electricians, etc)
- Construction Management
- Consulting Firms
- Auto parts
- Pilot Car Operators
- Movie Servicing
- Construction Supplies and Equipment

Civic/Government
- Regional policing
- Taxis
- Postal Centre
- Corrections/Probations
- Hydro/Utilities
- Revenue Canada
- Children’s Ministry
- Metro Vancouver Parks

Essentially any kind of business or agency that needs to work throughout Metro Vancouver or needs decent connections to major transportation infrastructure (highways, docks, airports, border crossings) could potentially benefit from locating in New West.

In addition to location, New West has a number of other positives that make it attractive for business, including

Land Costs – Low office rates compared to region. Lower land costs than Vancouver, higher than south of Fraser
Taxes – comparable with the region.
Labour availability – local labour is available, however New West is a job neutral-job creating city, so immediately local labour may be lower than average. However, strong transit connections should mitigate this somewhat. Another issue identified in the background of the OCP is the average education of the local area is below the regional average. Along with being distant from the two major post-secondary institutes, this can make attracting high-tech business more difficult.
Image/Prestige of Area – Downtown is negative due to crime
Parking and accessibility – generally cheaper and more available than most of the region.

(http://www.newwestcity.ca//cityhall/dev_services/livable_city_strategy/pdf/state_of_econ_final_report.PDF)

Under the OCP, Uptown is meant to be the Professional/High Tech centre, Downtown is the historical tourist and retail (maintaining some office and professional), Sapperton/Braid the Manufacturing centre and Queensborough the heavy industrial site. However, it is not just enough to designate certain areas for certain types of development, and restrict that through the development process. How are we encouraging business in general and the specific types of businesses we want to start or move to New West?

Two of the items identified in the OCP:

Promote new office development – this puts the cart before the horse. Construction follows demand. We need to promote professional and office based businesses to locate within New West, as they require more office space construction will follow to meet the needs.

Vibrant streetscapes – badly needed downtown to improve the perception of the area
Industrial – just platitudes on supporting and promoting for more jobs, consolidated facilities, and specialized areas.

To their credit, the city is working on some of the foundational type work such improving transportation infrastructure. However, this is moving very slowly and there appears to be little support outside of this. Business services consist of Initial Building Consultation, which is only for construction. Very little is on city website about business development or support for business, just a hard to find reference to BIA and Chamber of Commerce. While I have not spoken to them, from all accounts city staff are very helpful when calling, but who will call if they can’t get the information they need beforehand?

Despite all our benefits, the city seems content to do some of the work identified in the plan, put out less information and let the business community find us. The biggest problem New West has is being found amongst the other bigger cities. The city needs to take on a strongly active role in promoting itself to business, lest we lose our position as a job creator and settle into being just another suburb.