Plans for expanded train service between Seattle and Vancouver might be the first step toward extending the corridor north.
Relocating the current terminus from downtown Vancouver a few miles southeast to Surrey would be a start. The change would eliminate the need to rebuild a bridge, cut the total travel time to Seattle and save more people in the metropolitan area a trip downtown to board, according to a local newspaper report Tuesday. SkyTrain would still provide a link to downtown.
Most importantly, serving more people in the area would build public support for trains. That's critical since funding for improvements would come from Canada. The new station could spur transit-oriented development in the area and eventually boost ridership from the Vancouver-area by 7 percent, assuming five trains a day to Seattle, according to a report by the Washington transportation department (it's in Appendix E).
British Columbia has studied options to implement train service to Whistler that's competitive with driving. Though the cost would be high, it could become realistic as the financial and time cost of driving rises. The Washington study bases projections for future ridership between Seattle and Vancouver on a series of projected fares and similar calculations of return on investment could be made further north.
Imagine how much more pleasant would the weekend trip to Whistler be on a train where you could drink the whole way! As long as the journey is fairly close to the driving times, I think it would be quite popular. It takes about 6 hours to get to Whistler from Seattle in rush hour...
Posted by: vincent | March 07, 2007 at 16:18
Current plans call for eventually trimming the travel time to 2:30 between Seattle and Vancouver (quite a bit less if the end is Surrey) from 3:55 now. Even a reliable three hours would be competitive with driving.
Posted by: brad | March 08, 2007 at 10:34
A stop in Surrey would also gut ridership - WSDOT studied it for their 2003 update to the Amtrak Cascades 20-year plan. Because riders from the city core would have to drive a significant distance (or pay a two-zone SkyTrain fare) to even get to the train, many current riders would simply choose to drive the distance instead.
Posted by: Ben Schiendelman | March 09, 2007 at 19:21
Have you seen any research on this? You could argue that the faster trip and additional frequency (there's capacity on lines up to Surrey) would boost ridership, even if it ended short of downtown.
Posted by: brad | March 20, 2007 at 11:28
In Europe, many trains stop at multiple train stations in the major cities - traveling around 30-40 mph between stations, even though they may only be a kilometer or two apart. If they're going to do this, and I'm riding the train up from Portland or Seattle, I sure as heck don't want to have to transfer to the local transit line to get all the way downtown... all of Vancouver's emphasis is on Downtown; it would be a travesty to not actually be able to get there!
International trains need to hit the central city.
Posted by: Smithi | March 22, 2007 at 10:56