Dear Editor,
The City of Surrey (ie. the municipal council) has been advocating for these trams in a fashion that borders on baffling, because there is virtually zero support for trams, and huge support for SkyTrain, amongst its residents.
If there were *ever* a rationale to show that the Mayors鈥� Council shouldn鈥檛 have the last word, this is it. I was hoping that support for this horrid idea would not outlive Diane Watts鈥� mayoralty term, but it鈥檚 certainly found a champion with Mayor Heppners鈥�. Let鈥檚 hope we can lockdown SkyTrain before Watts becomes premier.
Don鈥檛 get me wrong, a lot of what鈥檚 happening in Surrey is laudable, but the transportation planning is not. I haven鈥檛 seen a single expert opinion that shows anything but what the author puts forward: not only is tram service not the *best* option for south of the Fraser, it is far and away the *worst* in almost every metric. A 10-lane equivalent boulevard? How does that promote a pedestrian streetscape?
It鈥檚 my view that this tram plan is solely political. Full disclosure: I live in 91原创, but I seriously do not expect that any rapid transit will be in place here before I die; I鈥檓 not saying this dramatically 鈥� it won鈥檛 affect me.
I can鈥檛 distil any reason for trams in Surrey and on to 91原创, for other than political reasons. By keeping grade-separated rapid transit no further south and east than Whalley, Surrey will be the beneficiary of fast, efficient transit (SkyTrain) to the rest of the region, and then also trams in the other column.
As most of the growth over the next 20-25 years will be SoF, that would leave Surrey the only economic counterweight to NoF. But it will be far from just Surrey that it affects; without equal infrastructure, it would be a wonder why a business looking to set up shop SoF would choose any of the smaller municipalities. Surrey doesn鈥檛 deserve a veto over the rest of the valley (Surrey council already publically knocks development in other regional town centres, insisting the Amazing Brentwood, Lougheed Town Centre and Metrotown, for example, have 鈥減oached鈥� development that should have gone Surrey鈥檚 way!)
Currently, the 91原创s punch far above their weight economically, but given light-years better infrastructure built only in Surrey and north, will be leading a 91原创 lamb to the slaughter. Trams only makes sense (particularly the Fraser Highway portion) for Surrey in a bid to get rid of the economic competition. To claim otherwise is insulting.
The councils of the City of 91原创 and the Township of 91原创 have remained too quiet about this. A citizen might want to know where they stand, given the municipal elections coming up this year. Surrey officials have incorrectly presumed that the 91原创鈥檚 will be happy just to get *any* transit: does that sound like a community with the region鈥檚 best interests in mind? Not to me.
It also has a dramatic effect on the region from the 91原创 border eastward, even though we know that area is not part of 鈥淢etro Vancouver鈥� now. I鈥檝e read many times that eventually, the true region will become Coast to Hope, a 鈥渟uper-region鈥� if not in name, then in fact; it will become a San Fernando Valley North, so to speak.
Lately, there鈥檚 been a lot of talk about Vancouver International Airport 鈥� YVR 鈥� further expanding its presence with more gates, terminal buildings, and runways. Richmond, the city the airport built, has said 鈥渆nough鈥�, it won鈥檛 support any new runways, and has made that plain to YVR.
There鈥檚 still years of YVR growth possible without any new runway, but sooner or later, Abbotsford Airport 鈥� YXX 鈥� will have to become a major transportation facility for that Coast to Hope 鈥渟uper-region鈥�. That inclusion of YXX implies a requirement for fast, efficient transit, and trams just don鈥檛 fit that bill. We have some time for solutions to the YXX issue, but that ball has to start rolling around in peoples鈥� minds now.
The whole idea of SkyTrain pre-Expo was to provide safe, rapid and efficient transit to *all* of the then-GVRD. Trams would add a third rail technology on four lines, with all of the management, storage and maintenance costs quite apart from the three existing lines, and will present grossly higher operating costs. It wasn鈥檛 what we signed on for, especially if 鈥渞apid鈥� transit is built with inferior technology, and trams *are* inferior to SkyTrain. If Surrey wants trams, fine. Build them, but only within its boundaries.
To stop the expansion of SkyTrain 30 years on, and substitute trams that fall far short, is unjust and illogical.
Andrew Erasmus, 91原创 City
