From Wiki

Submissions to Waterloo Regional Council About LRT

This page contains two submissions to regional council. The first was by T4ST and the second by John Shortreed.

The submissions were made on June 10, 2009, when the public was invited to present submissions about the proposed LRT to a meeting of Regional Council.

T4ST submission

Taxpayers for Sensible Transit (T4ST) is a group of residents from the Region of Waterloo concerned about the proposed light rail transit plan for the area. Our goal is to make sure local politicians understand the interests and concerns of voters when making their decision on rapid transit.

SUMMARY OF OUR MAIN POINTS

1. We support improvements to transit in Waterloo Region.
2. However, we believe that any new transit investment must be size-and cost-appropriate for the Region.
3. We are concerned about the projections used to justify the LRT. Compared to a conservative 2005 cost/benefit analysis, the current ridership projections appear to be extremely optimistic.
4. Given the above, we feel LRT will fail to meet its ridership numbers and will therefore become a burden on future taxpayers. We believe buses provide a better alternative for rapid transit in the Region.
5. We are further concerned that local politicians and planners have become entrenched advocates of an LRT system rather than servants of the public interest.
6. To settle this issue conclusively, we believe the Region should hold a referendum on the issue. If this is to be the largest public works project in the history of the Region, then the public should properly have the last word.

T4ST Contacts:

Peter Taylor: 519-884-7692
Carl Kaufman: 519-885-4938
Ruth Haworth 519-749-9265
Bill & Rhea Kauffeldt: 519-571-9399
Norm Knutson: 519-744-9695
Mona Vosberg: 519-888-7111 Ext: 2097

See also Facebook page: Taxpayers for Sensible Transit

Transit improvements

Taxpayers for Sensible Transit (T4ST) is not opposed to improvements to the transit system in Waterloo Region. We recognize the growth requirements that have been placed on the area under Ontario’s Places to Grow plan and acknowledge that a region with a large university component and a growing population will require a mix of transportation solutions. Transit is obviously one of those solutions.

Local suitability

Having accepted that it is appropriate to invest in transit in Waterloo Region, it is then necessary to look critically at the area and determine what form of transit investment makes the most sense.

It is obvious that the Region of Waterloo, with a total population of approximately 500,000, is not a big city by North American standards. And even with strong projected population growth to 729,000 by 2031, Waterloo Region will still be a relatively small metropolitan centre.

Waterloo Region is also notable for its lack of a single, central business district (CBD). While downtown Kitchener may function as the CBD for the region, its office space rents are among the lowest in Canada.

These factors will inevitably affect the ability of transit to provide services for regional commuters. As we lack a large commuter base, comparisons between Waterloo Region and many other cities with successful rapid transit systems will not be entirely useful or appropriate.

With respect to cost, we acknowledge that it appears the bulk of the costs will be picked up by senior levels of government. However, this does not mean the $790 million project will be “free.” There are an estimated $150 million in local expenditures to be considered. And it is a fallacy to consider that tax dollars provided by other levels of government are free. There is only one taxpayer. Therefore politicians should always treat tax dollars with respect and caution. All decisions should be made using conservative estimates.

Projection concerns

There have been two major reports on ridership and cost for the region’s proposed rapid transit options: the 2005 TransDec model and the 2009 Multiple Account Evaluation (MAE). There are significant differences between these two reports that bear close scrutiny.

TransDec assumed that opening-year daily ridership on an LRT would be 11,800. The MAE projects 26,850. Given that iXpress ridership is currently in the range of 8,000 to 10,000 daily riders, the MAE figure seems an extremely optimistic prediction, even considering changes to the transit plan between 2005 and now. Again, T4ST recommends that Council adopt a conservative basis for making ridership calculations to avoid future surprises for taxpayers.

There is also a significant difference between the TransDec and MAE models in the projected growth of riders. The 2005 work estimated the number of daily riders in 2041 to be 30,900. The MAE calls for 56,250 by 2031. The projected number of riders has thus been greatly increased while the time frame has been reduced by an entire decade.

Further T4ST would like to point out that the 2005 TransDec model concluded Bus Rapid Transit made the most financial sense. It produced a net benefit of $37 million whereas LRT only returned $7 million. Council has chosen to ignore the TransDec findings by commissioning an MAE that is far less transparent and appears to be based on optimistic projections for LRT use as explained above.

If these optimistic LRT ridership figures do not materialize, taxpayers in the region will be forced to subsidize the LRT to a much greater extent than the current projection of $10.5 million annually (in 2014). T4ST requests that the Council provide the public with a variety of subsidy scenarios explaining what would happen if ridership fails to meet projected targets.

For instance, what would be the annual taxpayer subsidy for the LRT if ridership was not 26,850 in the opening year but rather 11,800, as was predicted by the 2005 TransDec model?

We also note with concern the rapid growth in the cost of the project. With respect to the LRT proposal, what was a $306 million project in 2005 is now a $790 million project. What guarantees do we have that the cost will not continue to escalate? And what impact will this have on taxes?

Preference for Bus Rapid Transit over LRT

T4ST recommends that if Waterloo Region adopts a rapid transit system, then Bus Rapid Transit should be ranked above LRT.

We believe that the cost and scope of a rapid bus system is more consistent with the size and density of the region. It is also far more flexible and can be expanded or altered based on experience after launch.

We would discourage the construction of an expensive, excessively-sized LRT transit system that seems affordable just because other levels of government are paying most of the capital costs. There are still substantial costs for regional taxpayers. And the operating expenses will fall entirely on local taxpayers’ shoulders.

We are also concerned about the potential impact of a rapid transit system on King Street businesses in Waterloo and Kitchener. An LRT will reduce car traffic on King Street to one-lane each way and will also reduce parking. Bus Rapid Transit will have less of an impact in this regard.

Role of Council and staff in promoting the LRT option

T4ST is concerned that Council and staff have chosen to ignore the arguments in favour of Bus Rapid Transit – and in particular the results of the 2005 TransDec report – in preference for an LRT. It appears that staff and council have become entrenched advocates of the LRT option regardless of what the facts and figures say. Institutional blindness of this nature is not in the public interest.

Referendum

It appears to us that the Bus Rapid Transit option enjoys significant public support over the LRT. This observation includes input of T4ST members, letters to the editor of the Waterloo Region Record as well as callers to local talk radio. While these methods are clearly unscientific, it suggests at the very least that there may be a substantial dichotomy between the position of local government officials and the wishes of the voting public.

Settling this issue conclusively will require a more substantial investment in public opinion than has occurred to date. With this in mind, T4ST recommends that Council hold a referendum on the issue. T4ST would be pleased to provide input on the design of the referendum and the question.

John Shortreed's submission

10 minutes to convince you to vote against the recommended LRT plan developed over 4 years with 4 million dollars

A year ago I traveled at 342 kilometers per hour on really rapid transit, it was a real thrill. It was a thrill since I am a huge fan and promoter of public transit.

The recommendation before you promises an energy saving green future with less cars and more people on transit, I hope to show you that this is not probable and likely impossible.

Also there are better solutions – Boulder Colorado with no LRT and 1/5 the population has 3 times the Region’s public transit usage per capita, because of frequent bus service and 68% of the population with bus passes.

The LRT under reasonable assumptions would increase transit use in this region by 30% not 300% with other solutions, that can be done now and for less capital and less operating costs.

The basic problem is that LRT does not fit the Waterloo Region “small city” characteristics. Not now. Not in the next 50-100 years.

Why should you believe me?

I have taught many of your consultants courses in urban planning, transportation planning, transit planning and operations, economics, statistics, and land use models at the University of Waterloo.

In London England I worked on planning the docklands LRT to Canary Wharf, on the 1st bus lane, on after the fact review of the cost benefit analysis for Victoria line. Benefits were way overestimated since the traffic flow did not improve.

As a visiting professor in Texas I helped set up the statewide transit program and also developed a model of transit ridership, costs and optimization. Models that were later applied to all the bus routes in Waterloo Region and routes in Toronto, Europe, and elsewhere.

I helped the Canadian Urban Transit Association Canadian Transit Handbook including writing chapters on costs, demand and other topics.

So I may know what I am talking about – Please consider the possibility that LRT is not the solution for Waterloo Region and there are much better public transit solutions that are cheaper, have more ridership and will encourage intensification better, will use less energy usage, and lead to less car usage.

I ask you to have a close look at transit in Waterloo Region and in other cities of similar size – consider what happened in Buffalo which built a LRT – why is it such a white elephant?

I am encouraged by the letters to the editor – they are perceptive and generally accurate, including the letter this morning praising LRT with the hope that there will be less traffic to slow down the writer.

Consider the proposed LRT stations. For the prime prospects for LRT - between downtown Kitchener and UpTown Waterloo - the LRT has one station – between the stations at Victoria St. in Kitchener and UpTown Waterloo there is one station at the Hospital.

The existing King St. bus route has 10 stations not 1 – does this sound like a system to encourage transit ridership? – where there were 10 stations now we will have one – skip KCI, skip Sun Life, skip Central Fresh Market – let them all walk to the Hospital stop.

This area. between the two largest downtowns in the Region, is the best place for condos. The studies say that LRT will have 8,000 more condos built in the next 25 years than BRT. Does this make sense?

Do the Bauer Lofts, Kaufman Lofts, Lang Lofts,. depend on having a LRT nearby? or do condo sales depend on the number of empty nesters and young professionals who want an urban lifestyle with nearby attractive core areas with shops, restaurants, public squares, and other amenities.

Why will LRT fail where other public transit solutions will succeed?

LRT is a commuter transit system, replacing 10 stops with 1 increases transit speed. Typical commuter systems combined fewer stops with 1200 car suburban parking lots like those at Yorkdale or Islington to get commuters out of their cars and onto the transit.

There are two insurmountable problems for a successful LRT in Waterloo Region:

Problem One

There is no place to commute to – successful LRT systems serve downtowns with at least 50,000 employees, desirably 80,000. Kitchener, the largest core in the Region has 20,000 downtown employees.

For LRT success downtown Kitchener would have to double in size in the next 10-14 years then double again in the following 10-14 years.

Will this happen? No. How do I know? Look at the rents for office buildings in downtown Kitchener – they are the lowest in Canada, almost 1/3 of those in Calgary –These rents will not entice developers to build office towers.

Problem Two

No 1000 to 1500 space commuter parking lots are planned – successful systems like Calgary or Toronto would not dream of building a LRT commuter system without commuter parking lots

Conclusion

There are not enough commuters for LRT, not now, not in the future.

Why build a LRT commuter transit system? Why not build a system to serve the Waterloo Region as it can reasonably be expected to develop in the next 25 years? Forget the 30% LRT target go for 300%.

If a miracle happens and Kitchener core has a building boom, then build LRT. Like Ottawa and Calgary evolve transit technology to suit demand, avoid white elephants.

Please look at the facts on the ground, rental rates, development trends, transit ridership, condo development characteristics.

Please come and talk to me for a couple of hours to find out what you have not been told by your planners and consultants.

Please try to find a similar situation where LRT has worked.

Please ask me a question, thank you.