HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2007, 8:51 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,105
heres a seattle times article about it

Quote:
Toot, toot, the region goes to B.C., too

In sometimes small steps, the region is binding together, almost despite itself as the connections between north and south Puget Sound become insistent rather than optional.

Such may be the case with the new agreement announced in Canada for a second Amtrak train between Vancouver, B.C., and Seattle. The object, according to the provincial Ministry of Transportation, is to "reduce traffic congestion and ease vehicle emissions on our major transportation corridors and at our border crossings."

British Columbia will put up $4.5 million, about half the cost, and BNSF Railway will build a passing track by the summer of 2008, and about 50,000 more tourists will enter B.C. the first year.

It's a private-public partnership of the kind measured skeptically in Washington state, where public-privates are not always welcome.

In dozens of countries worldwide, adding a second daily passenger train between two major cities across an open border would be ridiculously easy. But this agreement had to deal with U.S. Customs, now part of the Department of Homeland Security, whose members wanted to remain armed instead of handing over security to the RCMP — and dozens of similar bureaucratic decisions.

U.S. Customs clearance for southbound trains would take place at Pacific Central Station in Vancouver, with a stop at the border for a short inspection — for immigration, agriculture and sniffing dogs — at Blaine.

This took six years of negotiations and the change of two or three provincial and federal governments, but the obvious need for cross-border traffic during the 2010 Vancouver-Whistler Winter Olympic Games and the paucity of train travel everywhere pushed a deal together, according to Bruce Agnew of the Discovery Institute's Cascadia Center.

"Look ahead, and maybe we will see the opportunity for Canadian trains to come to Seattle," Agnew said, "like the Whistler Mountaineer or the Canadian Rocky Mountain passenger train."

The advent of another train to Vancouver — with the potential of four trains a day in the future — is reinventing old routes. Daily train service was halted, and then restarted in 1994 when Rep. Al Swift represented Washington's 2nd Congressional District.

This time, Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Lake Stevens, and Sen. Patty Murray worked on getting Customs clearance in Vancouver.

Agnew said daily trains would help a joint Seattle-Vancouver bid for the World Cup, similar to the Japan-South Korea World Cup venue.

Ah, yes, more ideas than we can count. Direct train service from Seattle to Vancouver and then to Whistler is such a no-brainer, you would think it would take six days to figure out instead of six years.

But, the region needs fixing, and rail, while not the only solution, gives us the tangible freight and passenger links along a historically rail-friendly coast. Mike Long of B.C.'s Ministry of Transportation emphasized this is just one agreement for one side track. But it's easy to mentally add on some additional cars and think of trains to come.

Correction: I was wrong last week when this column identified Seattle City Councilman Peter Steinbrueck's position on the Alaskan Way Viaduct decision. Steinbrueck, as the week's news stories emphasized, is a passionate advocate for a surface solution to the viaduct issue.

James F. Vesely's column appears Sunday on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is: jvesely@seattletimes.com
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._vesely04.html
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2007, 9:00 PM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
Quote:
Agnew said daily trains would help a joint Seattle-Vancouver bid for the World Cup, similar to the Japan-South Korea World Cup venue.
Seattle and Vancouver are countries now?

Anyways, I wonder if this whole delay was BC's way of haggling and cheaping its way out of paying the entire cost of the rail improvement.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2007, 6:10 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by z95fm2000 View Post
Coming north the Amtrak does not stop at the 49 degree Boundary and you clear Canada Customs at the Vancouver station. So going north it could be high speed, not south.
Maximum speed of the current Talgo tilting-trains are 200kph. They are limited by signalling and track curvature and Us Federal Regulations to 125kph. 200kph would definitely be faster than a car... especially when you consider the border wait and Seattle traffic.

Infinitely less stressful too.

addendum: (from wikipedia)
Quote:
The WSDOT Rail Office plans for eventual service of 13 daily round trips between Seattle and Portland and 4-6 round trips between Seattle and Bellingham, with four of those extending to Vancouver, BC. Due to a vote by the Washington State Legislature in 2005, the fourth round trip between Seattle and Portland began operating on July 1, 2006.

These reductions in travel times are also planned:

* Seattle to Portland – 3:30 (2006); 2:30 (planned)
* Seattle to Vancouver BC – 3:55 (2006); 2:57 (planned)
* Vancouver BC to Portland – N/A (2006); 5:37 (planned)

In order to increase train speeds and frequency to meet these goals, a number of incremental track improvement projects must be completed. Gates and signals must be improved, some grade crossings must be separated, some track must be replaced or upgraded and station capacities must be increased. In order to extend the second daily Seattle to Bellingham round trip to Vancouver, BNSF must make track improvements north of the US-Canadian border, to which the government of British Columbia has been asked to contribute financially.

Last edited by twoNeurons; Mar 5, 2007 at 6:23 PM. Reason: addendum
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2007, 7:09 AM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
Word from Kirk at WSDOT is, the second train should start running sometime around summer of 2008.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2007, 9:50 AM
hollywoodnorth's Avatar
hollywoodnorth hollywoodnorth is offline
Blazed Member - Citygater
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Downtown Vancouver
Posts: 6,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutterbug View Post
Word from Kirk at WSDOT is, the second train should start running sometime around summer of 2008.
GO FALCON GO!
GO KIRK FROM WSDOT GO!
__________________
Quote of the Decade on SSP: "what happens would it be?" - argon007

"orange vested guy" - towerguy3
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 11:58 AM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
The expansion plan gains an unexpected adversary...

Quote:
Nudists and residents' group unhappy with plan to double Amtrak runs from Seattle

Tom Zytaruk
Surrey Now

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

SURREY - Surrey United Naturists Association is planning to register its dismay over the imposition of a second Amtrak train along the city's coastline by staging a mass mooning under the banner "B.N.S.F. Butt Out of the Beach."

The event would likely take place during the June solstice.

Don Pitcairn, association president, noted that at least four people have been hit since Amtrak began running passenger trains along the Burlington Northern-Sante Fe line. Of those, three were killed, including a 12-year-old boy who'd been playing on the beach with his family.

Last week, B.C.'s Ministry of Transportation announced it will contribute $4.5 million toward building a passing track in Delta, near Colebrook Road, to allow one train to move aside while another passes. This will allow Amtrak to double its Seattle-to-Vancouver service to two trains per day.

"What we're doing is doubling the number of tourists coming into our communities to be able to spend money," Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon said. "These are very small trains, they're 12 cars, they carry about 25 passengers [each].

"What it means now is we get two of those a day instead of just one and the doubling of the track will allow them to pull a train over so we can let the Amtrak train go through. It's really very positive."

Concerns about adding such a "small" train to the line, he finds, "is a little over the top."

A group called Semiahmoo Peninsula Citizens for Public Safety, representing a couple hundred residents, is watching carefully.

The idea of an extra train, says spokesman Paul LeMay, "is annoying the residents of the area.

"No Amtrak train is going to stop in White Rock to pick up and discharge passengers," he said.

"What does White Rock and south Surrey get out of the deal except more noise and more train traffic and greater risk of hitting more people? We get nothing out of the deal."
© The Vancouver Sun 2007
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 6:28 PM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,020
I have a solution.

Barbed wire fence along the entire White Rock Coastal line.

Nobody dies.

And nudists are concerned about their privacy on a public beach?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 9:47 PM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,446
^Ya, I don't understand the nudist reference. I assume it must be due to people who go to the more secluded area of coastline between White Rock and Crescent Beaches so that they can go nude, even though it isn't a designated nudist beach area, and don't like the idea of more trains passing and invading their privacy. The way I see it is that if you're regularly naked in a public area, why are you so self-conscious?

Having grown up in the area and only a block or so away from the rail lines on the peninsula, I don't see it as a big issue. It's already noisy enough with all the freight trains that one extra, relatively quiet Amtrak train isn't a big deal. I always kind of liked falling asleep to the sound of trains anyways. Just one of those things that made home home. They're distant enough and sound-buffered enough by the cliffs and all the trees anyways so it's not like they're all that intrusive. As for the people that literally live next to the lines at Crescent Beach, if you don't like noise and are stupid enough to move there then you're not allowed to complain about it. And as for the people that get hit... look both ways before crossing and don't play on railroad tracks! These are the kind of things you should learn when you're 5.

Last edited by raggedy13; Mar 7, 2007 at 10:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 10:06 PM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
I suppose there's some legitimacy in their complaint that the train does not stop there and serve them. Ideally, there would be a stop in White Rock, but US Homeland Security doesn't want that. Hence my suggestion for a stop at Blaine as a compromise, since it is close enough for a short drive or even a walk from WR.

Last edited by Nutterbug; Mar 7, 2007 at 10:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 10:14 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,105
the creme de la creme is whining the people who live close to the tracks not the nudists - those places affected by the noise live in million dollar homes - its not like they didn't know the trains went by when they bought
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 10:34 PM
raggedy13's Avatar
raggedy13 raggedy13 is offline
Dérive-r
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 4,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nutterbug View Post
I suppose there's some legitimacy in their complaint that the train does not stop there and serve them. Ideally, there would be a stop in White Rock, but US Homeland Security doesn't want that. Hence my suggestion for a stop at Blaine as a compromise, since it is close enough for a short drive or even a walk from WR.
I always thought it would be cool if the old White Rock station was revived for its original use instead of just being a museum and archives. It has such a great location and is an interesting heritage building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2007, 11:44 PM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,105
Quote:
Surrey eyes for Amtrak station


Amtrak passenger trains from Seattle could some day stop in Surrey instead of Vancouver, U.S. studies suggest.

Moving the terminal from downtown’s Pacific Central Station east to a “Greater Vancouver Terminal” beside Surrey’s Scott Road SkyTrain station is one option that has been studied to achieve a potential major increase in cross-border rail service.

The existing single daily Amtrak round trip to Vancouver is now planned to increase to two daily by 2008, thanks to an agreement unveiled last week between the province, Washington State and the BNSF Railway.

B.C. will contribute $4.5 million to help build a siding in Delta so trains can pass.

But longer-range hopes to expand further to three or four daily Amtrak trains depend on much costlier rail line upgrades – including an estimated $675 million to replace the century-old rail bridge across the Fraser River between Surrey and New Westminster.

Because the costs are so high to address congestion on the tracks into Vancouver, studies commissioned by the Washington State Department of Transportation conclude it may make sense to pull out of Vancouver and establish a new Amtrak station in Surrey instead.

“At first glance, the potential has various attractive features,” says an analysis of the Scott Road site in the 2003 Cascade Gateway Rail Study.

Foremost would be the lower price tag – about $86 million to build the station and carry out rail upgrades.

The Scott Road site would also offer easy access to SkyTrain, the study says, allowing travellers to transfer and take the transit line to downtown.

A map and aerial photo show the “possible station” just east of Scott Road Station, north of 110 Avenue along 126 A Street.

But the study cautions many U.S. passengers who want to go to downtown Vancouver won’t like having to transfer and take the 26-minute SkyTrain ride, and some business may be lost.

However, Washington State’s draft long range plan for the Amtrak line notes more Canadians may jump on board to visit the U.S. because the Scott Road station would be more convenient for much of Greater Vancouver “as the station would be more centrally located and more accessible for a greater number of people.”

The plan, tabled last year, estimates moving to the Surrey terminal would increase Amtrak’s ridership here by three to seven per cent.

It says the “surge in rail passengers converging on the area” could mesh well with Surrey’s plans to revitalize the neighbourhood.

The long-term U.S. wish list calls for a high-speed rail bypass around White Rock costing $370 million, along with another $110 million for high-speed tracks continuing to the Fraser River.

Matched with high-speed tracks planned in Washington, the upgrades would cut Amtrak’s Vancouver to Seattle travel time from nearly four hours now to just over two and a half by 2023.

Planners see Amtrak’s Vancouver ridership, which has nearly tripled in the past decade, ballooning from a current 164,000 per year to as much as 950,000 in the next 15 years.

But Kirk Frederickson, the state’s rail policy and planning co-ordinator, says U.S. planners aren’t holding their breath for major Canadian rail upgrades.

He said they’re focusing on getting the second train in place in 2008 and using it to gradually build ridership.

Fredrickson said the Scott Road station concept is being explored, but isn’t likely to be a priority anytime soon.

One sometimes-mooted scenario Frederickson all but rules out, is setting up an Amtrak stop in White Rock.

He said a secure metal “cage” would have to be built to enclose the train for border inspections and it’s hard to see how that could be done without wrecking White Rock’s picturesque promenade.

“Nobody can come up with a solution to that,” he said.
http://www.peacearchnews.com/portals...d=846704&more=
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2007, 1:26 AM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,020
I'm sure the ones complaining would rather have an extra train, than a secure metal cage.

Actually, since much of what people consider White Rock is practically a part of Surrey... and since Crescent Beach IS Surrey, a potential station at Scott Road would serve them better than Vancouverites.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2007, 2:46 AM
Lee_Haber8 Lee_Haber8 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 757
If they add a Scott Rd. station they shouldn't abandon Pacific Central. They should have trains going to both those going to central Vancouver and those visiting the periphery
__________________
www.winnipegrapidtransit.ca
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2007, 3:48 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam
Posts: 39,105
the river crossing is a problem

but most great cities have multiple train stations -pacific central still has VIA, rocky mountain etc etc
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2007, 5:25 AM
Nutterbug Nutterbug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee_Haber8 View Post
If they add a Scott Rd. station they shouldn't abandon Pacific Central. They should have trains going to both those going to central Vancouver and those visiting the periphery
But they want all the customs and immigration work done at one place (ie. Pacific Central), without the "seal" broken at any other stops until the border.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2007, 6:01 AM
twoNeurons twoNeurons is offline
loafing in lotusland
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lotusland
Posts: 6,020
Vancouver has two train stations now. Pacific Central and Waterfront.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2007, 4:05 PM
brown_supahero brown_supahero is offline
Constructor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boca de Floridablanca
Posts: 9
Ya! there going to fix the tracks ya!.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:21 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.