Politicians need to consider light rail
Comments from Chilliwack
More transit pressure urged
We had light rail 100 years ago
Time to Stop Heavy Rail Intrusion
Light rail needed - now
Impressive Presentation
Other options should be considered

Politicians need to consider light rail

May 02, 2008
Letter to Editor Langley Times - Rick Green, Mayoral Candidate Langley Township.
Image by - Rob NEWELL/Langley Times

Transportation planner Stephen Rees was among a panel of transportation experts who spoke at VALTAC’s forum last Saturday.

Editor: The organizers of the VALTAC transportation forum on Saturday should be congratulated. Now we have to hope our mayor and other mayors south of the Fraser, along with provincial politicians, are listening.

All too often the obvious is overlooked in solving major problems. Costly, over-thought solutions are brought forward by bureaucracies intent on justifying their existence. Whatever happened to common sense?

Light rail transit is not new. It was thought of and implemented back in the early 1900s and, as one panel member said on Saturday, they designed, planned and constructed the interurban line in three years. We couldn’t design or plan that infrastructure today in three years — let alone build it.

This unique opportunity is available to us — all we need is to use our common sense and get on with it. The problem with that notion is that we assume our politicians, municipal, provincial and federal, are listening and interested in common sense.

The province, municipalities and unelected TransLink board are forcing two options for transit — buses or SkyTrain (at an estimated $120 million per kilometre). Gordon Campbell’s recently announced transportation plan has a $14 billion price tag, but it may as well be $30 billion, because the likelihood of that kind of money being spent on our regional transportation needs within the suggested time frame is pie in the sky.

It is just plain unrealistic politics, and make no doubt about it, it is just politics. When we have such a cost-effective option as light rail available to us, it would be completely irresponsible not to get on with a plan to move forward.

We are told we can’t institute light rail on a line carrying so much heavy rail traffic (which is growing considerably).

Some of the VALTAC directors have delved into, investigated and obtained copies of agreements that are still valid, regarding the interurban line’s history. There are rights that flow from the historic agreements dealing with passenger travel on this line.

While we seem to be willing to sit back once again and take what is thrown at us, it is now time, as part of the commuter initiative, to deal with the relocation of heavy rail.

If you look at the current number of unit trains that are running through the Township and the City daily, the powers that be are looking at doubling that number in the not too distant future.

If we keep turning our back on this problem and take on the population that is intended for Langley under the Livable Region Plan, our children and their children will be wondering what was wrong with the politicians and the electorate of the past. We will be known for our lack of foresight, the opposite of our ancestors, who had considerable foresight.

Mayor Kurt Alberts sat on the former TransLink board that approved of the implementation of a bus program for our region, giving no support to light rail. Like so many municipal leaders in the region, Mayor Alberts has lagged behind the wishes of the taxpayer.

They stand up and pump their chests at the building of rail overpasses (at considerable cost to Township taxpayers), when those dollars could be spent to build a new rail bridge over the Fraser at New Westminster to help solve the problem of unit trains going through the middle of the Township and City.

Politicians must start listening, using their common sense and take action. It was great to see Mayor Alberts attend the forum on Saturday. He should have stayed longer.

I notice that all sorts of options are cast about in the endeavour to get rail service to the valley. I for one would not settle for any trams or bus plus rail service or any of the stop-gap solutions chucked at us.

I think we should stick to having a proper train service with a staion and a regular trains coming at regular intervals to get people to Vancouver and stops inbetween. Chilliwack always had a train service. If ever we needed a return to decent rail service it is now with oil companies and producers having lost all sense of decency and gouging the public mercilessly.

It is nigh on thirty years since I came back to the Chilliwack area and all the benighted travellers to Vancouver still have is only a Greyhound bus service if they have no car.

They can find billions to keep the all-powerful GVRD off their backs for whatever reason but we up here in the valley hear of and see only densification but nothing of the concomitant services that densification demands.
I think the line from the Pied Piper is in order here, where the people said to the council of Hamelin:

" Rouse up sirs, give your brains a racking
To find the remedy we're lacking
Or sure as fate we'll send you packing!
Robert Browning

Getting a rail service for this town shouldn't even be our job. It should be the job of the Mayor and his council.

Tony
Concerned Chilliwack Citizen

The population densities mentioned in the article is on par with the regional densities of European cities that operate with LRT/streetcar. What the region doesn't have is the population densities that would require a metro like SkyTrain, even in Vancouver and Burnaby. Hence an annual subsidy of $200 for the SkyTrain metro system.

In 2006, the Spanish town of Velez-Malaga, population 52,150, opened their new light rail line. The total cost, including three modern low-floor cars, of the standard gauge, double track 4.6 km line was Euro (EUR) 18 million or CAD $27.1 million! ($5.9 million/km. to build, including cars!)

The new LRT line is designed to economically carry 1.2 million passengers per year which certainly fits the model for a reinstated valley interurban.

By comparison, for the same cost of the new Velez-Malaga tramway, one could only build only 200 metres of the new RAV/Canada line.

Malcolm Johnston
Light Rail Committee
Box 105, Delta, BC
V4K 3N5

We had light rail 100 years ago
Sep 21 2007
Editor:
It still shocks me to think that from 1910 until the 1950s, we had a complete light rail system that connected all areas of the Fraser Valley and Greater Vancouver. People back then (when the population was about one-quarter of what it is today) had access to a better system then we do today.
They tore that system up in the 1950s for buses, ridership plummeted, and the rest is history. In this day and age, we should be asking ourselves why we are building greenhouse gas-causing roads that don’t work, and not building light right.

They had light rail over 100 years ago, we can have it now.

The map was sent to me by Henry Ewert, who has written a book about the Interurban system.

Nathan Pachal,

Langley

Editor’s note — Mr. Ewert is a regular speaker on the B.C. Electric Railway, and always draws a sizable crowd when speaking in Langley.

Time to stop heavy rail intrusion
Sep 19 2007

Editor:
As a boy in Fort Langley, I can remember the thrill of the seeing the “Silk Train” as it raced through the village, with its eight or nine baggage cars behind a great steam engine, doing 70 or 80 miles an hour. Airplanes didn’t go much faster than that; what a thrill. Why the silk train? It was because the route from the Orient through Vancouver via the CNR was the fastest route to take raw silk to the looms of New York.

Did anyone note the article noting that Vancouver-based Seaspan Corp. is building eight super-sized container vessels, to be delivered in 2011. Each vessel will carry 13,100 TEU (20-foot equivalent unit) containers.

A current 120-car train can carry about 480 TEU, a ship load would require over 27 trains to unload. With the back haul of empties, about 55 trains through Langley would be needed to service each ship. It’s still a fast trip to New York.

There is already a container ship on the Pacific that can carry 15,000 TEU and cruises at 31 miles per hour. This is a forerunner of things to come.

The heavy rail corridor through Langley is a fact, and the upgrading and usage of this corridor is just beginning. If ever we are going to stop this intrusion of a railroad that is being built exclusively for the use of others, for shipments from Asia to the Eastern American seaboard, it has to be now.

I don’t think that the taxpayers of Langley realize the tax ramifications of the 204 Street overpass. Needed? Of course it was needed. Does it serve a purpose? Certainly, but why should we pay for something that is thrust upon us so that transportation companies can prosper?

Langley City’s share of the $36.9 million cost of this structure was $8.1 million. These figures are approximate. However with a population of about 26,000 and perhaps 8,000 taxpayers, my additional tax assessment, and yours, would be about $1,025. And more overpasses are to be built! I cannot understand why more people are not complaining.

From reading the editorial pages of the local papers it would seem that some people are getting the message but our elected representatives are not. Maybe we need an election.

William L. Marr,

Langley City

Light rail needed - now
Langley Advance
Published: Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Dear Editor,

We need a rail service in the Fraser Valley, and we need one now.

We need to have a transit option for many reasons, including quicker and cheaper access, pollution reduction, safety and efficiency, and reduction of dependency on gas.

Further consideration should be given to re-introducing the Inter-Urban Railway, an electric train system that stretched through the entirety of the Lower-mainland until it ceased operation in the 1950s.

Light rail systems exist in many areas of the world, and questions must be asked as to why B.C. is so reluctant to follow their lead.

The politicians try and tell us we are not a train culture, but anyone who uses the SkyTrain or the West Coast Express knows that we are as much of a train culture as any European nation, and if we are less so, it is only because our government won't give us trains.

Not only is a significant portion of the Lower Mainland's population utterly ignored by the bulk of taxes used for this province's transit, but our own elected leaders outright deceive us into thinking that there is no alternative but to go on like this indefinitely.

I don't hear anything from our government on the most sensible of decisions to secure a fast, affordable, efficient, and eco-friendly rail transit system for the residents and commuters in the ever-sprawling ,increasingly urban Fraser Valley.

The Fraser Valley needs rail now, not in 10 years, and not in 20. Light rail, passenger rail, expanding the Skytrain - all are options which should be considered in lieu of highway expansion.

To top it all off, trains are even profitable, and that is the thing the politicians don't like to talk about when they tell you how much money it will cost to put down tracks, because after all, highways don't make money.

We have a real responsibility here to fight for something that is long overdue, and also a real opportunity, with the upcoming 2010 Olympics, to put some of our money into something that will benefit everyone, and for which our children will be able to thank us.

Glynis Sylvester,

Murrayville

Editor;
4 July 2007

On Thurs 28 June at 3:30 pm there was a very impressive presentation at the Langley Township Municipal Hall. It was to present the Plan and sign the documents to start the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor rail system upgrade. All is part of the Canada Asia-Pacific Gateway and Rail Corridor to service the expanded Delta Port. The rail line runs through Delta, Surrey and Langley to connect with the main CN line just east of Ft. Langley. The project is to be funded by the Federal and Provincial governments, effected municipalities, the Vancouver Port Authority, TransLink, and the railways. The total cost is over $300 million.

Present and speaking in favour of the plan were Cabinet Ministers, MP's, MLA's, Mayors, and bureaucrats from Transport, TransLink, Ports, Railways and the GVRD. It was truly amazing that all these politicians, bureaucrats, professionals, experts and leaders had all been able to agree on what should be done to fix our traffic problems. All advised the plan was designed to correct traffic problems caused by the railway, result in improved air quality, add greatly to our economy and be of benefit to the people living in the area. The Plan is part of other projects such as Gateway and the Golden Ears Bridge.

However, none of the negatives were mentioned and having evaluated transportation issues for many years in BC, North America and the World it was very obvious they had spent a great deal of time and money to sell a plan that had some serious deficiencies, now and in the future. It was obvious that anyone blindly accepting what was said would pay a slick salesperson $100 for 100% ownership of the Golden Ears Bridge.

History tells us that the railways in Canada have tremendous power and they usually get their way and in this instance the railroads got what they told our leaders to do. Heavy rail traffic through Langley will grow to 38 trains a day by 2021 and continue to increase after that. It is very unlikely we will ever have rail overpasses built where needed at 56 Ave, Fraser Highway, 200 St., Bypass and Glover, and two on Glover Rd. I asked one bureaucrat why and his answer, "too expensive". I asked another about the problem in Ft. Langley and the answer, "the railways have their rights and they have no desire to make any change there".

The proposed two grade separations for Langley will not solve the existing traffic problems and the Mufford/Glover 64 Ave one is a disaster if the original design is used as it requires up to 100 acres of prime farm land. The
232 St one has been selected so the railway can have trains pass without blocking the road for up to 12 hours a day. There are cost effective, economically viable, environmentally friendly, common sense solutions to our transportation problems. Unfortunately all those that could do what was right took the easy way out. We had a chance to get light community rail running up the valley for very little relative cost. It will be required but to do it now will cost billions of dollars and us taxpayers will pay the bill. Long-term pain for short-term political gain.

Years from now people will look back on this massive short-term solution blunder and refer to us as "loony lower mainland morons". We allowed those in charge to ruin the future and now they will pay the price. Our leaders should represent Canadians not just the railroads.

Eric J Bysouth, VALTAC

Other options should be considered

Jul 01 2007

Editor: A study released to the public on June 11 identified and evaluated road/rail crossings that would require grade separation, to provide relief to communities affected by rail transport along the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor.

This study has not had the circulation nor the grasp of understanding by the community of what is involved. The Canadian economy and our quality of life is being impacted by the development of this heavy rail corridor through the Township, in support of Asia-Pacific trade and the expansion of the marine terminals at Roberts Bank. The following is a critique of this study.

Briefly, this study indicates that it is the intention to increase train velocity along the corridor and also to increase the maximum intermodal train lengths to 3.65 km (12,000 feet), which will require extensions to existing sidings plus a new siding in the Boundary Bay area. The frequency of trains along the 78 km corridor will increase to upwards of 38 trains a day by the year 2021, plus the current short local freight trains.

Consider what this entails — noise, waiting for trains to pass and the general closure of streets and passages that are no longer available to us because of train frequency and danger to those close by. Multiply the time these long trains take to clear an intersection, plus the time for the gates to open and traffic to resume, by 38 trains a day, and we find that the roads that we have already paid for are now closed in aggregate, about 4.5 hours out of 24.

Grade separation is certainly required and the benefits from the 204 Street bypass are most evident. But who pays for all of this?

There are at present 65 road crossings of this railroad, 11 are already grade separated and 38 are at-grade public roads. Nine more are being considered to be made grade separated crossings. The completion of the 204 Street overpass is the first grade separated crossing in Langley, and the next crossing being planned for grade separation is Mufford Crescent at Glover Road.

This plan entails not only a grade overpass but a rerouting of Mufford Crescent to the north to cross Glover and to connect with 64 Avenue at 216 Street. This study or plan must be rethought, as it seemingly will ruin 100 acres or so of prime agricultural farm land.

It appears that the next crossing to receive grade separation will be at 232 Street, and yet there appears to be no plan to create an overpass of the railway on the Bypass near Glover Road. This is an oversight.

The federal government is making a contribution of $75 million for building road/rail separation along the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor between Mission and Deltaport. We assume that there will be other contributions.

Let us look at the cost of this rail infrastructure. The 204 Street overpass has cost about $36 million; the estimated cost of these projects ranges from approximately $15 to $20 million for a ‘simple’ grade separation crossing in Delta, to $78 to $108 million for substantial improvements such as the combination of the 54 Avenue/192 Street/196 Street project in Surrey and Langley.

The estimated capital cost of these potential nine additional grade separated crossings is $189 to $251 million.

This is a considerable amount, yet the future impact of container activity at Roberts Bank, including the introduction of Terminal 2, as an economic generator is expected to contribute a total value to the GDP of $2.7 billion, an increase of $1.9 billion over the existing activity. These are buoyant forecasts for continued growth in this Asia-Pacific trade.

Canada must compete and we must strengthen our transportation corridors and marine terminals. We must also help facilitate the whole of the transportation infrastructure and be strong, otherwise the Canadian economy, and ultimately our quality of life, is endangered. But must we have this heavy rail corridor bisecting our community?

One of the objectives of VALTAC is “the development of an alternate and safer route for bulk and container traffic in the Langley area.” There is a better way.

In 1968, the Lower Mainland Regional Planning Board prepared a brief for Lower Mainland municipalities and the province. This was to draw attention to proposals for rail links to the port facility being built at Roberts Bank.

The conclusion and recommendation of this study was “for an industrial rail corridor along the Fraser River and not through the Boundary Bay and Fraser Valley communities, and the rail route to Roberts Bank should be located as part of this Fraser River corridor.”

The money to be spent on grade separated crossings would go a long way to rerouting rails back to the Fraser corridor, along the South Fraser Perimeter Road.

It is costly to reroute rail lines, and this whole project involves large expenditures. If we cannot make enough from our Asian sales to pay for the infrastructure, then what is the point? Other options should be considered. The CN railway could be ditched through Fort Langley, or it could be re-routed along McMillan Island. There are other solutions.

Our final observation on this study is that this again seems to be a patch-up of a plan that was wrong from the beginning. VALTAC’s objective is to encourage a 50-year Master Transportation Plan for the Lower Mainland. Please visit our Web Site, www.valtac.org, and join with us for a better community.

William L. Marr,

director, VALTAC

Dear Editor,

The organization of the recent Roberts Bank Rail Corridor "GRAND" announcement last week hosted by the Federal Government in "our" Langley Townhall was very poorly organised and showed no respect to the citizens of Langley. As I personally went to enter the room I was told by a young lady that only special invited guests could enter, and yet I had been informed by Mayor Albert's personal assistant and our local MP Mark Warawa's office that the event was open to the public. As President of VALTAC I would like to say that our committee has met weekly for no less than 2 hours a week to discuss rail/road transportation issues affecting the Langley's. Our committee members have worked tirelessly to bring to the attention of the public, our Mayors and their councillors, our MLA's and MP the tranportation crisis affecting the Langley's and the Valley. As I stood outside the door and looked back at our committee members and calculated the years of committee service dedicated to Langley by the indivuals who were left standing outside my heart sank. They did not deserve to be treated like this. This committee has worked very hard to be respectful of all levels of government. Our committee consists of a dedicated group of indivuals who have through their years of service built the Langley's we live in today and though many are retired they have personally chosen to attending meetings, attend transportation workshops from Vancouver to Langley, helped organize two transportation forums now and work tirelessly at display booths at Canada Day, two years in a row now and also other community events like the Cruise In. Why? Because they are genuinely concerned about the future of those who will live in the Langley's long after they are gone. But locked out they were.

I want to thank Mayor Alberts for standing up and speaking on our behalf and suggesting to the Federal organisers that they allow our committee members in.
Had you not done that we may well have sat outside for the entire meeting.

Here's the twist...was this the most disturbing moment of the day? No...the biggest and most shocking and "DEPRESSING" moment of the day was when we realized we had been "railroaded" by the Federal and Provincial Government. For over a year we have been asked to be patient...don't do anything to damage the announcement for funding for the Mufford Cresent overpass. To our surprise we heard that the funding was not just for one overpass, but for three...Mufford Crescent...one at the border of 192 and the other at 232 Street. Now we realize why we were asked to be quiet. How is it that a committee who meets regularly with Provincial and Federal representatives, our municipalities, our Chamber of Commerce would know nothing about this additional funding...if we as a committee were not aware..what does that say about the average citizen. If we didn't know about this funding for additional overpasseses and the community didn't know would that suggest to you that we "WERE NOT CONSULTED"?

Please be sure that if VALTAC knew that this additional funding was coming for more concrete infrastructure to move "MORE" trains through Langley, concrete that will change the apperance of our Langley forever we would have spoke out long ago. WE also are disturbed that their is no announcement for funding to provide alternative modes of transportation to move the people. Funding that would help our youth of today to more easily transport to colleges and universities by a community rail system, or transportation to help our seniors move about easier without having to take a car. Or thinking outside of the box and thinking towards the Olympics of 2010, light rail from Langley to Abbotsford airport, which would provide our guests an opportunity to fly into Abbotsford and stay in the Valley and attend Olympic events. Last but not least funding to develop a long term master transportation plan for Langley that would be part of a livable region strategy. Had we known what was coming would we have been silent all these months...the answer is no, no and no.

Please visit our website to learn about our organization and how you can get involved....get involved today or get involved in the future to paint mountains and sunflowers on the concrete overpasses...it is your choice. These overpasses are not built until they are built. Call you MP and MLA today...or go out and buy some new paint brushes...it's your choice.

Sonya Paterson
President
VALTAC

Lockout wasn’t the worst moment

Overpass announcement John GORDON/Langley Times

VALTAC members Sonya Paterson and Lee Lockwood gesture as they are kept outside the Langley Township council chambers during the announcement on overpasses June 28. They were eventually let in, at the insistence of Township Mayor Kurt Alberts.

Jul 08 2007

Editor: The recent Roberts Bank Rail Corridor announcement, hosted by the federal government in “our” Langley Township hall, was very poorly organized and showed no respect to citizens of Langley.

As members of Valley Tranportation Advisory Committee (VALTAC), including myself, were about to enter the council chambers, we were told by a young lady that only invited guests could enter. I had called earlier in the day, as had other members of VALTAC, to both Mayor Kurt Alberts’ and MP Mark Warawa’s offices. We were told by both offices that the event was open to the public.

As president of VALTAC, I would like to say that our committee has met weekly for no less than two hours a week to discuss rail/road transportation issues affecting the Langleys for more that two years. Our committee members have worked tirelessly to bring to the attention of the public, mayors, councillors, MLAs and our MP the tranportation crisis affecting the Langleys and the Fraser Valley.

As I stood outside the door after being refused entry and looked back over my shoulder at our committee members, and calculated the years of committee service dedicated to the Langleys by the individuals who were rudely left standing outside of this important meeting, my heart sank. They did not deserve to be treated like this.

This committee has worked very hard to be respectful of all levels of our local, provincial and federal government.

Our committee consists of a dedicated group of individuals who, through their years of service, built the Langleys. Although many are retired, they have personally chosen to regularly attend committee meetings, transportation workshops from Vancouver to Langley, helped organize two transportation forums, worked tirelessly at display booths at Canada Day two years in a row and at other community events like the Cruise-In.

Why? Because they are genuinely concerned about the future of those who will live in the Langleys, long after they are gone. But locked out they were.

I want to thank Mayor Alberts for standing up and speaking on our behalf and suggesting to the Federal organizers that they allow our committee members in.
Had Mayor Alberts not done that we may well have sat outside for the entire meeting.

Here’s the twist. Was this the most disturbing moment of the day? No — the biggest, most shocking and depressing moment of the day was when we realized we had been “railroaded” by the federal and provincial governments.

For over a year, we have been asked to be patient. Don’t do anything to damage the announcement for funding for the Mufford Cresent overpass. To our surprise, we heard that the funding was not just for one overpass, but for three — Mufford Crescent, one at the Surrey border and another at 232 Street.

Now we realize why we were asked to be quiet. How is it that a committee which meets regularly with provincial and federal representatives, municipalities and the chamber of commerce would know nothing about this additional funding?

If we as a committee were not made aware, what does that say about the average citizen? If VALTAC and the general public didn’t know about this funding for additional overpasseses, would that not suggest to you that we, the community, were not consulted?

Please be sure that if VALTAC knew this additional funding for more concrete infrastructure was coming, funding to allow the railways to move more trains through Langley, more concrete that will change the appearance of Langley forever, please be sure we would have spoken out long ago.

We are disappointed that there is no announcement for funding to provide alternative modes of transportation to move the people of Langley. This funding would help our youth of today to more easily transport themselves to colleges and universities by a community rail system, and provide additional transportation to help our seniors move about more easily, without having to take a car.

Politicians could have been thinking outside of the box and thinking towards the Olympics of 2010. There could be light rail from Langley to Abbotsford Airport, which would provide our guests an opportunity to fly into Abbotsford and stay in the Fraser Valley and attend Olympic events.

Last but not least, there could have been funding to develop a long-term master transportation plan for Langley that would be part of a livable region strategy. Had we known what was coming would we have been silent all these months? The answer is no, no and no.

Please visit our website, www.valtac.org to learn about our organization and how you can get involved. Get involved today or get involved in the future, to paint mountains and sunflowers on the concrete overpasses...it is your choice.

These overpasses are not built until they are built. Call your MP and MLA today — or go out and buy some new paint brushes. It’s your choice.

Sonya Paterson, President,

VALTAC

July 6th, 2007

Dear Editor,

I had the pleasure of attending the Valley Transportation Advisory Committee (VALTAC) display as a volunteer at the Canada Day celebrations in Langley. In the 20+ hours I spent manning the booth and conversing with average citizens on the transportation challenges, the following patterns emerged:

1) The seething unhappiness with the 200th Street Intersection at Highway 1 and how unsuitable it is for the current, let alone future needs of Langley. The Public are bright enough to know a 6 lane overpass with a proper interchange would have been superior and would have allowed it to service the approaches to the new Golden Ears Bridge without having to cobble together additional approaches from 192/216th Streets. I advised them this was “short term greed for long term pain decision by Langley Township Council” and their only recourse is to remember who voted in favour of same in November 2008.
2) Jaws dropped when people were advised population south of the Fraser would increase by 500,000 by 2031 and the long term view of TransLink in dealing with the Langleys was to put on a few more articulated buses on the Fraser Highway corridor. People haven’t noticed bus pullout accomodation was omitted on the recently revamped Fraser Highway thus causing additional traffic chaos. People were concerned over this population increase without fast alternate transit solutions. All we can recommend is to howl at the Municipal Government and TransLink
3) I spoke with 2 couples who had moved out from the Toronto area and due to the traffic issues in the Langleys were selling and moving to the Interior. The traffic and transit challenges were the primary impetus for moving.
4) A professional couple are currently selling their small acreage at 264th/16th Ave due to the lack of transit within a reasonable timeframe. Apparently their cost for commute fuel, let alone capital costs, depreciation and maintenance exceeds their mortgage payment and we will be losing these fine people to Delta.

On June 28th announcements were made for funding a couple of overpasses in the Langleys. I noticed the MLA’s for the constituencies didn’t bother to show up for the unveiling and indulge in the mutual gladhanding and backslapping antics. I too would have been embarrassed to attend an event whereby the heavy rail continues to roll through the Langleys despite campaign promises to the contrary while the legal tools and remedies under the Canadian Transportation Agency to bring them to a screeching halt remain unused in the Municipality’s quiver.
In closing I would like to extend a humble “Thank You” to Councilor Grant Ward who was not only kind enough to lend us a tent but assist in the erection/dismantle of same.

Yours very truly

E. Lee Lockwood

Coal – A Precious Natural Resource

Editor; March 12th.

Burning coal contributes greatly to the accumulation of greenhouse gas or CO2. Mankind has burned coal for thousands of years; so maybe it is time that we stopped, or at least thought about it.

Coal is mostly carbon. The coal shipped from B.C. is primarily metallurgical coal and is perhaps 90% pure carbon. By weight carbon dioxide is better than twice the weight of carbon alone so a ton of carbon therefore can produce upwards of two tons of “greenhouse gas”. The standard coal car on a coal trains can carry about 100 tons of coal, and some of these trains are one hundred and twenty cars long. Twenty four thousand tons of CO2 is the immense amount of gas and it can be produced by one train load of coal. This coal is shipped in four or so train loads a day that rumble through our fair city to be burned somewhere else in the world, however in a few months or so this greenhouse gas is distributed overhead and around the northern hemisphere contributing an increase in CO2 and Global warming.

Look at it another way; the nations of the world are attempting to stop the Afghanistan farmer from growing poppies and the Columbian peasant have been persecuted and abused for years for collecting coca leaves. We come down much harder on the pot grower than the smoker. Is the producer not as guilty as the user?

The Government and all of us are concerned. Premier Gordon Campbell has gone on record of stating that no greenhouse gas emissions will be permitted from any coal-fired electric projects in B.C. This will probably release more coal to be consumed in China or elsewhere where there are few emission standards. What to do is really a national problem and a world problem. Knowing that this problem that is going to cost us all, I would like to suggest that as a National Program we prohibit the production and sale of coal.

Michael Campbell writing in the Feb 9th ’07 Vancouver Sun, had this to say – “China is opening a new coal-driven power station every five days through to 2012”.

I do not believe that the coal industry is labor intensive or that the CPR is making a great profit on its sale and movement of coal. Canada must do its share in cutting back on emissions and this would appear to be at least cost to most of us. Our Prime Minster could lead the world in green house gas reduction and stand before the world as a leader in advancing the Kyoto Accord by encouraging all nations to prohibit coal use. We must not liquidate in a few short years what nature as taken millions of years to produce, and too coal is an irreplaceable natural resource that may be of inestimable value to future generations.

William L. Marr , #4 – 5051 203 Street, Langley, B.C. V3A 1V5

RBRC - Road/Rail Interface Study

A study was released to the public on June 11, 2007 that identified and evaluated road/rail crossings that would require grade separation, to provide relief to communities affected by rail transport along the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor. This study has not had the circulation nor the grasp of understanding by the community of what is involved. The Canadian economy and our quality-of-life is to a degree being impacted by the development of this heavy rail corridor through the Township in support of Asia-Pacific trade and the expansion of the marine terminals at Roberts Bank. The following is a critique of this study.

Briefly, this study indicates that it is the intention to increase train velocity along the corridor and also to increase the maximum intermodal train lengths to 3.65 km (12,000 ft), which will require extensions to existing sidings plus a new siding in the Boundary Bay area. The frequency of trains along the 78 km corridor will increase to upwards of 38 trains a day by the year 2021, plus the current short local freight trains.

Consider our quality-of-life that all this entails; noise, waiting for trains to pass and the general closure of streets and passages that are no longer available to us because of train frequency and danger to those close by. Multiply the time these long trains take to clear an intersection, plus the time for the gates to open and traffic to resume, by 38 trains a day, and we find that the roads that we have already paid for are now closed in aggregate, about 4½ hours in 24. Grade separation is certainly required and the benefits from the 204th Street bypass are most evident. But who pays for all of this?

There are at present 65 road crossings of this railroad, 11 are already grade separated and 38 are at-grade public roads, 9 more at present are being considered to be made grade separated crossings. The completion of the 204th Street overpass is the first grade separated crossing in Langley, and the next crossing being planned for grade separation is Mufford Crescent at Glover Road. This plan entails not only a grade overpass but a rerouting of Mufford Crescent to the north to cross Glover and to connect with 64th Avenue at 216th Street. This study or plan must be rethought, as it seemingly will ruin 100 acres or so of prime agricultural farm land. It appears that the next crossing to receive grade separation will be at 232nd Street, and yet there appears to be no plan to create an overpass of the railway on the Bypass near Glover Road. This could be an oversight.

The Federal Government has made an initial contribution of $50M for building road/rail separation along the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor between Mission and Deltaport. We assume that there will be other contributions. Let us look at the cost of this rail infrastructure. The 204th Street overpass has cost about $36M; the estimated cost of these projects ranges from approximately $15M to $20M for a ‘simple’ grade separation crossing in Delta, to $78M to $108M for substantial improvements such as the combination of the 54th Avenue/ 192nd Street/ 196nd Street project in Surrey and Langley. The estimated capital cost of these potential 9 additional grade separated crossings in the RBRC scenario, in 2006 dollars, is $189M to $251M.

This is a considerable amount, yet the future impact of container activity at Roberts Bank, including the introduction of Terminal 2, as an economic generator is expected to contribute a total value to the GDP of $2.7B, an increase of $1.9B over the existing activity. These are buoyant forecasts for continued growth in this Asia - Pacific trade. American ports on the Pacific coast are also looking at this bonanza, as is Prince Rupert and we also hear of the vast improvements to the Panama Canal. Then too, the Artic ice is melting and shipping is again looking to the northern passage to the Atlantic. Canada must compete and we must strengthen our transportation corridors and marine terminals. We must also help facilitate the whole of the transportation infrastructure and be strong, otherwise the Canadian economy, and ultimately our quality-of-life, is endangered. But, must we have this heavy rail corridor bi-secting our community?

One of the objectives of VALTAC is “the development of an alternate and safer route for bulk and container traffic in the Langley area”. There is a better way.

In 1968 the Executive Staff of the Lower Mainland Regional Planning Board prepared a Brief for the Lower Mainland Municipalities and the Province of British Columbia. This was to draw attention to proposals for rail links to the port facility being built at Roberts Bank. The conclusion and recommendation of this study was “for an industrial rail corridor along the Fraser River and not through the Boundary Bay – Fraser Valley communities, and the rail route to Roberts Bank should be located as part of this Fraser River Corridor”. The money that is to be spent on grade separated crossings would go a long way to rerouting rails back to the Fraser corridor and along the highway that is currently under construction.

There is money in the system. In 2005, the Government was reportedly forecasting $186M from coal revenue alone. It is costly to reroute rail lines, and this whole project involves large expenditures; this is a play of huge numbers. If we cannot make enough from our Asian sales to pay for the infrastructure, then what is the point? Langley City has no wish to off load its problems onto Fort Langley, but there are other ways that should be considered. The railway could be ditched through the old Village, or it could be re-routed along McMillan Island. There are other solutions.

Our final observation on this study is that this again seems to be a patch-up of a plan that was wrong from the beginning. VALTAC has one final objective and that is to encourage a 50 year Master Transportation Plan for the Lower Mainland. Please visit our Web Site, www.valtac.org , and join with us for a better community.

William L. Marr – Director VALTAC

Transportation Problems – as old as history.

Noah had been afloat for weeks, and now after the deluge the rains had stopped and his world was deep in water. There was no point in raising sail for there was no course to make good. There was no sense in trying to navigate for there was no destination to reach. There was no logic in planning, for without a future, one’s plans were meaningless. Today our world seems to be one of exasperation, transportation gridlocks and aggravation, our planning may be as much adrift as was old Noah.

What is needed is a proper 50 year Master Transportation Plan for the Lower Mainland which is workable, affordable and environmentally sensitive. Costs will be considerable to fix a problem of a rail line that crosses every East-West road between the river and the U.S. boundary, but this could be inconsequential when considering the potential future costs of overpasses and other crossings. Local citizens should not have to put up with rail traffic disruptions and inconvenience, and at the same time pay for the cost of overpasses, gates and signals, such costs should be a normal cost of the transportation infrastructure. The profits on the sale of coal and the transport of goods should not be at the expense of the local taxpayers.

No one has ever stated what the final cost in increase taxes will be to the citizens of Langley for the overpass now being constructed on 204th street. This overpass is estimated to cost up to 40 millions of dollars. We also do not know what the cost of future crossings will be, nor how many there may be, or when required. A current study has reported that there are now seven grade crossings in Langley that should be considered for “Grade Separation”, of which the 204th street crossing is but one. What share of these heavy costs will we in Langley be asked to cover?

The cart may be before the horse! Has there ever been a study to determine if the return on the sale of coal is paying for the cost of its production, transportation and the disruption of the normal traffic of commerce? It would appear that in the conflict between rail and other surface transport, or as in other conflicts, the one that creates the problem should be the one to put it right.

We have communities which seem to have so much, yet have no hand to reach out towards tomorrow. Langley is not the only township that that is impacted by this problem, yet everyone seems to be proceeding in their own way and in their own time. We must devise an overall long term plan and we must act with one accord. We must have railroads and they must come to the table with money and solutions.

Our quality of life is being compromised, by traffic that is approaching gridlock. With the increase in population that we see in every place, we must be excused if we show alarm. Our future is in the hands of those who are responsible for getting things done. We trust they will do what is right, think in the long term and assign costs fairly.

William L. Marr,