Surrey Langley Skytrain - Expo Line Extension | Proposed

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

This of course is just one crossing of many.

Yes, I randomly picked one.

What about 102nd and King George? One would need some pretty awkward crossing gates there.

That actually looks like one of the easier ones to gate to me. It does look terribly confusing for motorist though.

If you need to start continually taking on ever increasing convoluted measures to make a system work, maybe the base proposal itself needs to be redesigned...

I certainly do agree that this design looks very convoluted. I was just trying to point out that there are solutions, but something is amuck with this design. LRT works best with a dedicated corridor that is relatively straight. This isn't anything near that. At a minimum they should be grade separating all this dipsy doolally track.

And all these additions are just more aspects to fail. There are reasons why in recent years many of out major at grade crossings have been grade separated. Nothing creates a traffic jam better than a malfunctioning gate.

You can't really compare an freight rail crossing with an LRT crossing. It isn't just the gate failures that cause delays. Having a to wait for a long, slow, freight train to pass causes major problems. The LRT will block the road for less than 30 seconds, but you are right, we need to make is obvious a train is coming. I see the problems with LRT design similar to the problems with the design of many bike lanes and racetracks.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Envder

I don't understand why they wouldn't just go down along in front of the mall then down old yale/100th ave and then turn on to king george. They could even ad a nice stop right in front of the mall which could be great for the mall itself.

Because that's all private propery and I'll bet dollars to donuts the landowners don't want that (they'd probably scream about losing parking or some other such nonsense).

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I certainly do agree that this design looks very convoluted. I was just trying to point out that there are solutions, but something is amuck with this design. LRT works best with a dedicated corridor that is relatively straight. This isn't anything near that. At a minimum they should be grade separating all this dipsy doolally track.

That's the problem, isn't it? If Surrey Council was committed to making this LRT work, if they were willing to listen to feedback, if they were willing to spend a few more hundred million tunnelling or elevating the downtown-Guildford section? Well, it's not SkyTrain, but it'd work just fine - no problem here.

Instead, for fiscal/political/ideological reasons unknown, they've stubbornly insisted on at-grade all the way... even when it clearly doesn't work very well. Hence the backlash.

[Reecemartin]

I agree with the previous comments, often it seems for whatever reason that some people on this forum are more bent on being anti-LRT than actually making a good argument. Posting videos of random accidents is pointless, especially if you are suggesting the alternative is BRT.

In terms of this intersection, it clearly is complex however it’s a very difficult transition to make. If it is well signed and signalled (which no matter how much people on the forum want to act like it won’t be) then at least after a little getting used to the new arrangement drivers should be fine. If Surrey central is really to become a true downtown in the coming years and with the LRT the goal will be reducing private vehicle traffic anyways.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

As someone living in Toronto, just as many people think the streetcar is just as horrible as a bus.

It seems all neat and different but it's just as skinny and shitty as a bus, it just can't go around accidents.

All depends, comparing it to Toronto isn’t fair. Most of Toronto runs in mixed traffic which obviously this system isn’t (just look at the alignments). Torontonians are frighteningly car addicted and this is largely to blame for the poor measures taken to separate streetcars from traffic.

It’s noteworthy that lines like the 510 where there is total lane separation are actually fantastic with great frequency and quite good speeds.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

All depends, comparing it to Toronto isn’t fair. Most of Toronto runs in mixed traffic which obviously this system isn’t (just look at the alignments). Torontonians are frighteningly car addicted and this is largely to blame for the poor measures taken to separate streetcars from traffic.

It’s noteworthy that lines like the 510 where there is total lane separation are actually fantastic with great frequency and quite good speeds.

Actually comparing it to Toronto is fair. Up until quite recently Surrey has been using images that show their LRT running in mixed traffic. Even now they're showing it with what looks like a small curb on either side when what it needs to be successful at-grade rail is to be fenced off in some way.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

All depends, comparing it to Toronto isn’t fair. Most of Toronto runs in mixed traffic which obviously this system isn’t (just look at the alignments). Torontonians are frighteningly car addicted and this is largely to blame for the poor measures taken to separate streetcars from traffic.

It’s noteworthy that lines like the 510 where there is total lane separation are actually fantastic with great frequency and quite good speeds.

No. I took the 510 Spadina route and I have official TTC data that shows average speeds for 510 are about 10-14km/h. That's not "rapid" transit .

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I agree with the previous comments, often it seems for whatever reason that some people on this forum are more bent on being anti-LRT than actually making a good argument. Posting videos of random accidents is pointless, especially if you are suggesting the alternative is BRT.

In terms of this intersection, it clearly is complex however it’s a very difficult transition to make. If it is well signed and signalled (which no matter how much people on the forum want to act like it won’t be) then at least after a little getting used to the new arrangement drivers should be fine. If Surrey central is really to become a true downtown in the coming years and with the LRT the goal will be reducing private vehicle traffic anyways.

In the event of an accident, the line will shutdown or single track for a distance if they have crossovers on the line, which I doubt, while it's being cleared up and shit. You'd also more likely than not need a special crane, which who knows how long that could take or cost even, especially during rush hour.

With a bus, you can just detour around the accident like it never happened, as well as tow the bus out of the way.

It will definitely take considerably less time to get everything back to normal after an accident involving a bus than it would with LRT.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Colin4567

No. I took the 510 Spadina route and I have official TTC data that shows average speeds for 510 are about 10-14km/h. That's not "rapid" transit .

Not to defend LRT too much but the 510s issues are too many stops and no signal priority/preemption. I actually have not been following closely enough but I worry the Surrey LRT will end up having only limited signal priority which will make it function like a 'streetcar'. The trams I took in switerland tended to have exclusive lanes in the suburbs, limited car interactions dowtown and very strong signal priority. If you don't have the political will to do that it is not worth doing. I cannot see effective signal priority being possible on that loopy intersection. That needs to be fixed.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by Rico

Not to defend LRT too much but the 510s issues are too many stops and no signal priority/preemption. I actually have not been following closely enough but I worry the Surrey LRT will end up having only limited signal priority which will make it function like a 'streetcar'. The trams I took in switerland tended to have exclusive lanes in the suburbs, limited car interactions dowtown and very strong signal priority. If you don't have the political will to do that it is not worth doing. I cannot see effective signal priority being possible on that loopy intersection. That needs to be fixed.

Actually in my email to one of the top staffers in the TTC I was told there is intersection priority, but my guess is that it's only on select places. I do agree with your comments about too frequent stop spacing and ensuring a good system is in place through intersection priority. Also, once the 510 streetcar goes underground near the waterfront it really picks up speed - grade separation is IMPORTANT!

[Urbanmetro]

The LRT line in Surrey is a great idea to me. For a medium sized city, it really will help keep development dense, with all amenities near by, less capital costs to run. However, coming from Roma, I must say, everything is going to be dependent on how the route is developed. In Roma, the lines that are straight and have 0 turns function perfectly. Those with a turn create traffic havoc, accidents and are so slow.

Therefore, dear city of Surrey, please do not cut across intersections with your LRT idea. There is absolutely no benefit in doing so. For example, from Surrey central station to king George station, the track must be straight, vut across the mall and only turn at the park, with the LRT station opposite to king George. An overpass directly linking king George station to the LRT station makes sense and will allow for a third entrance to king George. Then the track continues on the west side of the road. The same can be said of 104 street. The LRT must stay on the south side of the street and not cut across it. This will require turning through the bank on the corner of 104 street.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Urbanmetro

The LRT line in Surrey is a great idea to me. For a medium sized city, it really will help keep development dense, with all amenities near by, less capital costs to run. However, coming from Roma, I must say, everything is going to be dependent on how the route is developed. In Roma, the lines that are straight and have 0 turns function perfectly. Those with a turn create traffic havoc, accidents and are so slow.

Therefore, dear city of Surrey, please do not cut across intersections with your LRT idea. There is absolutely no benefit in doing so. For example, from Surrey central station to king George station, the track must be straight, vut across the mall and only turn at the park, with the LRT station opposite to king George. An overpass directly linking king George station to the LRT station makes sense and will allow for a third entrance to king George. Then the track continues on the west side of the road. The same can be said of 104 street. The LRT must stay on the south side of the street and not cut across it. This will require turning through the bank on the corner of 104 street.

Well, the whole project is a dumb idea and is just a Hepner vanity project and nothing more. It will do more damage than good, especially if they run it down Fraser Hwy to Langley. 104th is not wide enough to add in 2 tracks.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Urbanmetro

Therefore, dear city of Surrey, please do not cut across intersections with your LRT idea. There is absolutely no benefit in doing so. For example, from Surrey central station to king George station, the track must be straight, vut across the mall and only turn at the park, with the LRT station opposite to king George.

The mall is private property and the landowner would never allow this to happen unless they got an extremely generous payout.

[Urbanmetro]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The mall is private property and the landowner would never allow this to happen unless they got an extremely generous payout.

The city needs to demonstrate the benefits gained for this route to their business model and also give an incentive to redevelop the mall parking lot. (Added density and less public amenity space for example)

[officedweller]

As far as I know, TransLink has expropriation powers, but that would still be at market rates, so still expensive.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Urbanmetro

The LRT line in Surrey is a great idea to me. For a medium sized city, it really will help keep development dense, with all amenities near by, less capital costs to run. However, coming from Roma, I must say, everything is going to be dependent on how the route is developed. In Roma, the lines that are straight and have 0 turns function perfectly. Those with a turn create traffic havoc, accidents and are so slow.

Therefore, dear city of Surrey, please do not cut across intersections with your LRT idea. There is absolutely no benefit in doing so. For example, from Surrey central station to king George station, the track must be straight, vut across the mall and only turn at the park, with the LRT station opposite to king George. An overpass directly linking king George station to the LRT station makes sense and will allow for a third entrance to king George. Then the track continues on the west side of the road. The same can be said of 104 street. The LRT must stay on the south side of the street and not cut across it. This will require turning through the bank on the corner of 104 street.

If Surrey was 100s of km away from a major centre, or if the route was not along the extension of an existing RT line, I would agree. However, that is not the case.

[Sheba]

The Buzzer Blog - Get involved in the environmental and socio-economic reviews for both rapid transit projects

Today, we are launching the Environmental and Socio-Economic Review process for both the Vancouver and Surrey rapid transit projects.

To get involved, please review the technical summaries for each project. Next, fill out the online surveys until November 6 for the Millennium Line Broadway Extension and Surrey–Newton–Guildford LRT projects.

[logicbomb]

Ok so the provincial government will make a decision whether or not to fund this project by early next month.

The MLAs in Whalley, Guildford, Fleetwood and Newton need to hear your concerns by the end of the month.

There is very little in the way of opposition in these ridings. I cannot be directly involved in what you write or do but will say that petitions do indeed work.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

Ok so the provincial government will make a decision whether or not to fund this project by early next month.

The MLAs in Whalley, Guildford, Fleetwood and Newton need to hear your concerns by the end of the month.

There is very little in the way of opposition in these ridings. I cannot be directly involved in what you write or do but will say that petitions do indeed work.

There is little opposition because people are not aware of the severe impacts of reducing 104th to a 2 lane road. The 105th ave road is still a hot potato not solved yet.

[Shift]

New site launched for Surrey LRT project:

https://surreylightrail.ca/Benefits

Provides a good overview of the comprehensive vision and benefits of the system for not just moving people, but transforming the corridors it will run along.