Surrey Langley Skytrain - Expo Line Extension | Proposed

[memememe76]

Originally Posted by Shift

Nobody wants to ride SkyTrain from downtown to Langley/Abbotsford. Downtown to Surrey is dreadfully long enough on such a small uncomfortable train. Build a proper regional rail system.

I would. Downtown to Surrey (or vice versa) is fine.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by scryer

See this is the common misconception that I was talking about.

http://public.tableau.com/views/Comm...showVizHome=no

http://vancouversun.com/news/staff-b...uting-patterns

Time to use the links!

For the record, if the expo line gets extended to Langley, I think that it should end at just that. But that's a personal opinion.

Yes, it would be crazy to push the SkyTrain out past Langley. It's already 29km from Downtown to Surrey, Langley alone adds another 15km. Going to Langley is like building HALF an Expo Line!

To put that into context, the longest single-ride line in New York is the A-Train and it's 51km long and that stretches both ways from 209th in Harlem ( north of Manhattan ) and south-east into Brooklyn:



If you take out statistical anomalies like shuttles and the A Train to Far Rockaway, you end up with an average line length of about 29km, but all the lines fit within a 19km radius from Midtown ( obviously mostly extending east ).

So in terms of distance from the core, the Expo Line is ALREADY further from Vancouver than almost every line in New York!!!

The Millennium Line extension to Coquitlam will be about the same as the Expo Line.

I've argued in the past that Vancouver's SkyTrain is different from Subways like Toronto and due to station spacing can operate more as a hybrid commuter/subway system... I still will argue that, but due to New York's 4-track Express system, the A train can operate in a somewhat similar manner. We need to start connecting INSIDE the circle. Vancouver will need another East-West Line after Broadway ( Hastings or 49th ) before Langley needs a High capacity connection to Vancouver.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that even Langley is a questionable priority for rapid transit. It would be good to connect Langley and Surrey together, but it's LESS important to connect Langley to Vancouver.

For further context, approximate radius of systems:
London, UK: 25km radius
New York City: 20km radius
Paris, France: 10km radius (Metro) ( the RER stretches out 60km )
Tokyo: ~16km radius ( Metro )
Moscow : ~16km
Berlin: ~16km ( U-Bahn )
Toronto: ~18km ( including SRT )

Vancouver: ~24km ( Downtown to Surrey )

Even if you argued the real center of our transit system is Commercial/Broadway, or the triangle between there, downtown and City Hall... it's still 20km.

I'm not saying Langley shouldn't be connected to the system... but a definitive cost analysis SHOULD be done as to whether we extend SkyTrain to Langley or not. And it's NOT about cost. Seattle's LRT was expensive because of all the tunnelling, but it's a great example of what a good LRT should be. It's mostly grade separated where it makes sense. I'm as big a fan of SkyTrain as the next guy, but partially at-grade separated systems that have some level crossings seem like a better model SoFR.

Remember, if they're grade-separated, they can be JUST as fast as SkyTrain and in many cases, they can be MORE comfortable than SkyTrain. Wider cars, larger windows, more friendly stations.

Seattle's LRT is more pleasant to ride than SkyTrain and it's not just that it's newer. Having a wider more spacious train makes a big difference. The stretch between 156th and 168th is EASILY run at-grade, as well as much of Fraser Highway.

This image says it better than I could. Check out where most of Langleyites commute to.


The vast majority stay SoF. More travel to Abby than Vancouver... ( though I guess you SHOULD include Burnaby, which is basically part of Vancouver )

[Shift]

Better idea for Downtown to Langley is to expand West Coast Express along the existing rail corridor. Would also service rapidly growing areas in South Newton.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Shift

Better idea for Downtown to Langley is to expand West Coast Express along the existing rail corridor. Would also service rapidly growing areas in South Newton.

To be honest, there is nothing express about going through Surrey on the old BC Hydro ROW. It is too steep with too many curves. Track speed through there now is at best 20 km/h in most sections. It would then have to wait for track time across the Fraser River before hitting double track at Braid. Trains can wait easily 30 mins to get across the Fraser if there is river traffic. KG to downtown Langley would be much faster on Skytrain.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by Sheba

The newspapers may be saying LRT but the official announcements only say rapid transit - not what technology it will be. "Design and planning for Rapid Transit South of Fraser and the Millennium Line Extension along Broadway."

https://news.gov.bc.ca/stories/prime...itish-columbia

Even at the press conference JT explicitly said that the federal government isn't in the business of drawing lines on the map and that all route decisions would be local ones. They don't care what's built, as long as the money goes to something useful (no white elephants please). All they want is to see projects that in some way grow the economy and benefit people.

While I want Skytrain to eventually reach Langley, I wonder how far they could actually build with $700 million.

They really should break the project into phases and build it a bit at a time with smaller amounts of money. Even extending Skytrain only as far as 156 St would make a huge difference. In the PM rush it takes more than 30 minutes to travel from King George to 160 St on the 502 bus. The schedule says 16 minutes, but it usually takes more than 30. 152 St is just a river of cars heading south, and the Bermuda triangle of traffic there with Fraser and 88 Ave make it one of the worst areas for traffic SoF. Getting Skytrain just past that would be huge difference in so many lives.

And I don't think it would be that expensive or take that long to build. If we were to wait for an LRT megaproject, it could take a decade before trains are running and things improve.

Investing a fraction of that to serve Fleetwood could see trains running in just a few years from today. How long did it take to actually build the guideway on North road? Less than a year? I'm pretty sure the entire Millennium Line guideway went up in less than 12 months.

Originally Posted by Shift

Nobody wants to ride SkyTrain from downtown to Langley/Abbotsford. Downtown to Surrey is dreadfully long enough on such a small uncomfortable train. Build a proper regional rail system.

That's not the only reason for Skytrain. Not everyone who gets on at all the stations on the network, exclusively ride to Downtown. There is a lot of intermediate travel. Not every passenger that boards at King George today rides all the way to one of the 5 downtown stations.

While I actually think there would be a lot of people in Langley who would ride to Downtown Vancouver, that's not the only reason to build to Langley. As Surrey grows the city center, the commute from Clayton/Cloverdale/Langley to Surrey Downtown will increase. A Skytrain station in Langley Center will also increase job growth there (which I believe is already higher than what exists at Surrey City Center), and Skytrain will encourage a reverse commute from Fleetwood and Clayton into Langley. And that's not covering different trips that might be from Fleetwood to Metrotown, or Edmonds to Clayton, or New West to Langley.......

That's not to say I wouldn't like to see some more regional rail. There are a lot of trips (commuter and other reasons) to downtown from distant suburbs, but investing in multiple projects at the same time is hard. Not all trips are downtown focused, so ignoring the Fraser Corridor and putting money into downtown focused commuter rail only covers a subset of travelers, while Skytrain covers all the bases in one project.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

To be honest, there is nothing express about going through Surrey on the old BC Hydro ROW. It is too steep with too many curves. Track speed through there now is at best 20 km/h in most sections. It would then have to wait for track time across the Fraser River before hitting double track at Braid. Trains can wait easily 30 mins to get across the Fraser if there is river traffic. KG to downtown Langley would be much faster on Skytrain.

It doesn't have to be express. It has to be feasible. It should be comfortable and reliable.

Obviously, something would have to be done about the bridge if you wanted to tick off the reliability box, but I don't ever see Amtrak cascades trains running 30 minutes late and I see them every day. So I suspect that with a fixed schedule, it wouldn't be as much of a problem.

Besides, as many have said, this is about connecting Langley to Surrey. A commuter train could simply terminus at Scott Road if the bridge were an issue.

Stops in Willowbrook, Cloverdale, Newton and Scott Road. That's currently a 1 hour journey via the 502 express bus and SkyTrain. And it would connect the downtowns of Newton and Cloverdale as well. There's no way a train making those few stops would take much longer than 30 minutes for a 1-seat ride.

And even if it is justified for Langley to get grade-separated, automated, mass transit then there is still no good reason to make it an extension of the Expo line. Why not use Innovia trains, or some other wider more comfortable RER-style trains. LRT like Seattle would also work.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Yes, it would be crazy to push the SkyTrain out past Langley. It's already 29km from Downtown to Surrey, Langley alone adds another 15km. Going to Langley is like building HALF an Expo Line!

You're looking at this wrong. You're using the faulty logic that every person in Abbotsford is going to Vancouver, and every person in Vancouver is going to Abbotsford. That is what the WCE assumes, hence why it's designed to operate the way it does (in one direction only.)

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I'm not saying Langley shouldn't be connected to the system... but a definitive cost analysis SHOULD be done as to whether we extend SkyTrain to Langley or not. And it's NOT about cost. Seattle's LRT was expensive because of all the tunnelling, but it's a great example of what a good LRT should be. It's mostly grade separated where it makes sense. I'm as big a fan of SkyTrain as the next guy, but partially at-grade separated systems that have some level crossings seem like a better model SoFR.

Remember, if they're grade-separated, they can be JUST as fast as SkyTrain and in many cases, they can be MORE comfortable than SkyTrain. Wider cars, larger windows, more friendly stations.

The Skytrain tech can, and should be used until there is a real reason not to. (I'd rather support a second WCE route, eg Scott Road to Chilliwack than any at-grade LRT, but the SRY would need to be upgraded to modern standards and possibly be re-electified before it it could be used.) When you add too many different technologies to your transit system, you end up with the same problem we have with the bridges in the area, all of them having to be replaced or refurbished at the same time. Since the rail systems all have different tech, you can't reuse or sell any of it. If you focus on just one technology, then you minimize all the waste inherent in having different technology.

There is no reason to not use the Skytrain tech. Period. It's simply a capital cost vs operational cost question, and when push comes to shove, at-grade LRT's have no place in Metro Vancouver. We have three technologies in use (Skytrain Bombardier Innovia EMU, Canada Line ROTEM EMU, and WCE Bombardier DMU.) Cities like NYC don't have 40 different kinds of subway cars. They have two loading gauges (10' (B division) and 8' 9" (A division)) and that's it (and those two different loading gauges are because it was originally two different overlapping subway systems.) That's also the difference between the Canada Line and the Expo/Millenium Line plus the induction strip.

But look at the arguments. The arguments about pooh-poohing the Skytrain are focused on things that are a stretch. People who want to live in Langley but work in Downtown Vancouver, don't even have the option to do that without a Skytrain extension. Building a LRT assumes that currently ZERO people work in New West/Burnaby/Vancouver and live in Langley. That is precisely what Surrey City Council wants, is to trap people in Surrey. Add into the parts about the LRT's only support comes from developers, who quite frankly would be happy with anything as long as they can use it as a selling point to sell condos.

Surrey's motives have been nothing but dishonest from the beginning.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by Shift

Better idea for Downtown to Langley is to expand West Coast Express along the existing rail corridor. Would also service rapidly growing areas in South Newton.

Originally Posted by Trainguy

To be honest, there is nothing express about going through Surrey on the old BC Hydro ROW. It is too steep with too many curves. Track speed through there now is at best 20 km/h in most sections. It would then have to wait for track time across the Fraser River before hitting double track at Braid. Trains can wait easily 30 mins to get across the Fraser if there is river traffic. KG to downtown Langley would be much faster on Skytrain.

I live near the line and the trains go quite a bit faster than 20km/h. It is surprisingly straight and flat once you are South of 88 Ave. It was built where it was built to make it as straight and flat as possible. The only thing limiting the speed are the multiple crossings through high traffic intersections.

Old video of the interurban on the line show it going pretty darn fast.

• Video Link

But even with the crossings in horrible locations that cut through intersections, you could maintain a top speed of 50km for a long distance, which would give you a better average speed than bus service through Surrey that gets stuck in traffic.

So speed isn't really the problem. It's the headways you would get.

It would take significant work to upgrade the tracks to handle multiple trains in both directions. So if you didn't significantly invest in double tracking parts through Surrey, you could maybe at best put in a passing section or two. But that would only facilitate a couple of trains an hour at best.

You would also have to upgrade the mainline from Cloverdale through Langley. That section of track is too busy for frequent passenger service as is. If all you wanted to do was have a train to/from Langley every hour or 2 hours, then yeah or only a few peak direction commuter trains, then the agreement between CP and BC Hydro leaves enough room. So it could be part of an intercity style passenger system or peak commuter rail.

But if you want a true transit system, you would need to invest in at least double tracking that section or even putting in dedicated passenger tracks. That would be a rather large investment, at which point Skytrain starts to have a much cheaper $$/passenger spend.

The population is high enough in Surrey, and so is demand, that something with more than just peak hour service with more than an hourly headway is needed.

If it were 15 years ago, and we were having this debate, it would have made sense to have a peak time WCE service from Langley while we wait for Skytrain. But the density has increased drastically along Fraser, and the corridor is primed for ToD.

The only reason for WCE on the BCER from Langley to Downtown going forward from today is if the Skytrain gets so busy that a relief line is needed during peak hours to free up space on the trains for riders from North of Fraser.

[nname]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Stops in Willowbrook, Cloverdale, Newton and Scott Road. That's currently a 1 hour journey via the 502 express bus and SkyTrain. And it would connect the downtowns of Newton and Cloverdale as well. There's no way a train making those few stops would take much longer than 30 minutes for a 1-seat ride.

The current WCE between Port Haney and Port Moody is about 30-35min, with straighter track allows for higher speed, and about 25% shorter distance.

With the route proposed for SoF and with current track alignment, I don't see it would be any faster than 40-50min - unless you're imagining a totally rebuilt, regraded and realigned tracks that partially grade separated and cut straight through some neighborhoods to achieve higher speed and higher ride quality.

Plus calculating the travel time to Scott Road is meaningless as it would not be the destination for most people. So people taking either route must take the same transfer somewhere in the trip. What about comparing trip time to New Westminster, Metrotown, or Downtown? Adding the transfer time at Scott Road, the time saving will be pretty much negligible.

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

And even if it is justified for Langley to get grade-separated, automated, mass transit then there is still no good reason to make it an extension of the Expo line. Why not use Innovia trains, or some other wider more comfortable RER-style trains. LRT like Seattle would also work.

Transfers. What is the point for forcing people to transfer for no reason in the middle of their trip? By the time people get off SkyTrain, walk to the other platform, wait and get onto their "comfortable" train, they would've already pretty close to Langley, or even their home if Langley is being built as an extension for Expo Line. Building a short stub line to Langley, you're basically proposing Vancouver's version of SRT. Look how well that goes in Toronto...

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Yes, it would be crazy to push the SkyTrain out past Langley. It's already 29km from Downtown to Surrey, Langley alone adds another 15km. Going to Langley is like building HALF an Expo Line!

I think I already posted twice on this forum, but a metro line of > 50km is pretty normal everywhere in the world. If the Expo line is extended to Langley today, it would only barely made it onto the top 50 longest metro line in the world. So many recently opened Subway lines in Asia are in the 40-60km range, and the same for even some of the LRT lines in the US. Keep in mind that most of these line have much slower average speed compare to SkyTrain. So a ride time of about 1hr on a metro line is pretty much normal.

EDIT: Found it. There are currently 46 metro lines that are longer than the Expo Line when extended to Langley.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Yes, it would be crazy to push the SkyTrain out past Langley. It's already 29km from Downtown to Surrey, Langley alone adds another 15km. Going to Langley is like building HALF an Expo Line!

To put that into context, the longest single-ride line in New York is the A-Train and it's 51km long and that stretches both ways from 209th in Harlem ( north of Manhattan ) and south-east into Brooklyn:



If you take out statistical anomalies like shuttles and the A Train to Far Rockaway, you end up with an average line length of about 29km, but all the lines fit within a 19km radius from Midtown ( obviously mostly extending east ).

So in terms of distance from the core, the Expo Line is ALREADY further from Vancouver than almost every line in New York!!!

The Millennium Line extension to Coquitlam will be about the same as the Expo Line.

I've argued in the past that Vancouver's SkyTrain is different from Subways like Toronto and due to station spacing can operate more as a hybrid commuter/subway system... I still will argue that, but due to New York's 4-track Express system, the A train can operate in a somewhat similar manner. We need to start connecting INSIDE the circle. Vancouver will need another East-West Line after Broadway ( Hastings or 49th ) before Langley needs a High capacity connection to Vancouver.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that even Langley is a questionable priority for rapid transit. It would be good to connect Langley and Surrey together, but it's LESS important to connect Langley to Vancouver.

For further context, approximate radius of systems:
London, UK: 25km radius
New York City: 20km radius
Paris, France: 10km radius (Metro) ( the RER stretches out 60km )
Tokyo: ~16km radius ( Metro )
Moscow : ~16km
Berlin: ~16km ( U-Bahn )
Toronto: ~18km ( including SRT )

Vancouver: ~24km ( Downtown to Surrey )

Even if you argued the real center of our transit system is Commercial/Broadway, or the triangle between there, downtown and City Hall... it's still 20km.

I'm not saying Langley shouldn't be connected to the system... but a definitive cost analysis SHOULD be done as to whether we extend SkyTrain to Langley or not. And it's NOT about cost. Seattle's LRT was expensive because of all the tunnelling, but it's a great example of what a good LRT should be. It's mostly grade separated where it makes sense. I'm as big a fan of SkyTrain as the next guy, but partially at-grade separated systems that have some level crossings seem like a better model SoFR.

Remember, if they're grade-separated, they can be JUST as fast as SkyTrain and in many cases, they can be MORE comfortable than SkyTrain. Wider cars, larger windows, more friendly stations.

Seattle's LRT is more pleasant to ride than SkyTrain and it's not just that it's newer. Having a wider more spacious train makes a big difference. The stretch between 156th and 168th is EASILY run at-grade, as well as much of Fraser Highway.

This image says it better than I could. Check out where most of Langleyites commute to.


The vast majority stay SoF. More travel to Abby than Vancouver... ( though I guess you SHOULD include Burnaby, which is basically part of Vancouver )

New York is a rather specific example.

You could as easily compare it to the Central or Metropolitan lines in the London Underground (74 & 66km; 5 of 11 lines are over 50km in length).

If you want to stay closer to home, the Pittsburg/Bay Point–SFO/Millbrae line on BART is 89km long, and it operates very similarly to Skytrain as it is more of a longer distance hybrid commuter service than local subway. A line all the way to Abbotsford would still be shorter.

So I don't think System length is a problem.

And to me it doesn't really matter where commuters from Langley go. Skytrain has been built more along a philosophy than practical data.

The philosophy is that Metro Vancouver is composed of many town centers. We have decided to encourage the growth of these town centers rather than have everyone be focused on downtown. The town centers encourage higher density development, discourage sprawl into the ALR, and provide less reliance on cars for sole mobility. To get these town centers functional, they have been connected to the rapid transit network. So you can ride into or between these town centers very easily and quickly. Most people will never achieve the dream of having a job in the town center they live near. So while they may be able to conduct their personal lives (eat, shop) near home without travelling, Skytrain provides them access to all the other town centers, where their job might be located (downtown or not). This has been our guiding philosophy.

So far, the plan has worked. Town centers connected to Skytrain have thrived. Langley is one of the last major town centers not connected. Once it is, then the regional strategic plan has pretty much come to fruition.

Switching tech at this point is only throwing the middle finger at East Surrey and Langley who have been paying taxes into the system expecting better.

To give them what they deserve with LRT, like you say, we would have to make LRT as grade separated as possible. That's Skytrain. Once you throw in elevated guideways or vehicle overpasses, you have Skytrain. That's pretty much what happened with the Evergreen line; to give them Skytrain levels of service with LRT, we had to build LRT at the same cost as Skytrain, so we might as well build Skytrain. And I don't see why Langley doesn't deserve the same treatment as Coquitlam.

I'm not saying LRT doesn't have a place. Once you get outside the major town centers and want to create high capacity modes to feed them on busy corridors, then surface LRT/Streetcar makes financial sense.

I think Langley Center has potential, and deserves the same treatment as Richmond and Coquitlam.

[nname]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

New York is a rather specific example.

You could as easily compare it to the Central or Metropolitan lines in the London Underground (74 & 66km; 5 of 11 lines are over 50km in length).

If you want to stay closer to home, the Pittsburg/Bay Point–SFO/Millbrae line on BART is 89km long, and it operates very similarly to Skytrain as it is more of a longer distance hybrid commuter service than local subway. A line all the way to Abbotsford would still be shorter.

So I don't think System length is a problem.

It would NOT even long enough to be the longest line using Bombardier ART technology!

The technology is already proven.

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

It's already 29km from Downtown to Surrey, Langley alone adds another 15km. Going to Langley is like building HALF an Expo Line!

You don't get it. Your only reasoning on how it would be "crazy to push SkyTrain out past Langley" is because it would be more than 45km long to reach downtown Vancouver. Once again that is assuming that everyone's trying to get downtown to begin with, which funnily enough you disproved later on in your post.

Distance from the main city core means nothing in a city and metro as complicated as ours. It's even funnier how you're quoting all of these other cities with pretty much no understanding of their regional commute mechanics.

I have particular reservations of your use of the Tokyo example. The Tokyo/Toei metro network within 16km of the city is probably less than 1/20 of the rapid transit extent, in km, across all JR and private train lines servicing the Kanto region. Your commute radius example is less than 1/3rd of the actual distance radius by which people can (and hundreds of thousands do) commute into Tokyo by a regular train (examples include Fujisawa, Hachioji, Saitama, Kasukabe, Chiba - all within 1 hour of Tokyo, Shibuya or Shinjuku stations by a JR or other rapid transit train), and less than 1/10th of the distance radius people commute into the city within 1 hour by Shinkansen (because they can - believe it or not many people do this from distant centres like Shizuoka, Nagano or north of Utsunomiya, and there are so many that peak hour trains are run specifically for commuters).

***

Anyway I digress, back to SkyTrain to Langley/Abbotsford talk. As I said a few pages ago, I don't think extending SkyTrain to Abbotsford in the future - if it happens - is ultimately going to be about giving people in Abbotsford the fastest route downtown Vancouver - because as pretty much everyone has demonstrated, if that's the sole purpose then there are other, better ways to spend the money. In terms of what would purely be the most comfortable, practical way to go between Abby & Vancouver, maybe we should invest in inter-regional rail. Maybe Abby should get an extension of the West Coast express, or a special DMU timed with WCE runs operates on track between Abby and Mission.

However, we don't know what the region is going to look like in around 40 years. To give some perspective, 40 years ago quality bus transit in built-up Surrey was just getting started, with the introduction of the 619, 620 and 621 FastBus routes (the precursors to the modern 319/320/321 & SkyTrain). In 40 years, Surrey Centre might be as big as downtown Vancouver is today. Langley might be as built up as Surrey is today, and the regional urban containment boundary might have then been changed to allow additional urban development east from Langley towards Aldergrove. Either you let all of these people drive and add congestion to roads, or give them (preferably high quality) transit service. This is a perfectly reasonable scenario in 40 years in which a SkyTrain extension from Langley Centre to Abbotsford, with a connection to the airport, would make sense. SkyTrain would be especially effective because it will serve a triple role - firstly, as a rapid transit line it is own right; secondly, by connecting seamlessly to the existing regional rapid transit network; and thirdly, by providing a still reasonable and cost-effective alternative to get from Abbotsford to Vancouver by transit, even if it is not necessarily the most ideal.

When it comes to a SkyTrain extension, you really have to think about it in all directions and also consider what currently isn't possible. Building SkyTrain isn't about trying to replicate a commuter rail service. You're right about that. It's about giving the people it can serve - whether directly as in they live nearby, or by a bus connection - a high quality transit system along a trunk corridor with regional reach. It's as simple as that. You could certainly attempt to fulfill this purpose with a street-level LRT but it would be less effective - for one you're already sacrificing the regional reach part by losing the seamless connection to existing rapid transit; and then, the numerous shortfalls compared to SkyTrain service.

Whether travelling to your nearby station (where the amenities have likely been enhanced thanks to the new SkyTrain line) or somewhere further, SkyTrain offers a way to tie it all together. You can trust that your transit commute will be: 1. reliable, and 2. within a travel time that is reasonable for the distance traveled. We've expanded SkyTrain based on that premise and it has been tremendously successful. We have North America's best ridership against non-heavy rail systems (including light rail systems). Because SkyTrain not only offers reliability but regional reach, transit-only lifestyles are not only possible - they're actually productive. People can choose to forego cars without any livelihood sacrifice - a huge help with housing as expensive as it is here. That is part of the massive ROI SkyTrain brings.

On expanding out to Abbotsford, we can't really say anything for sure right now - it's waay too early. 40 years is a long time. But I think everyone here realizes that if we made different decisions on how to build our current system 30-40 years ago, we would be living in a very different region today. One that may be perhaps less transit-friendly or successful in terms of transit ridership. So let's not close these doors today.

***

Anyway, I'd like to highlight one more thing.

People who want to live in Langley but work in Downtown Vancouver, don't even have the option to do that without a Skytrain extension. Building a LRT assumes that currently ZERO people work in New West/Burnaby/Vancouver and live in Langley. That is precisely what Surrey City Council wants, is to trap people in Surrey. Add into the parts about the LRT's only support comes from developers, who quite frankly would be happy with anything as long as they can use it as a selling point to sell condos.

The Tokyo example I laid out above is also a good reason why basing our expansion plans on the assumption people will only travel short distances for commuting is rather short-sighted - if Tokyo did that, the entire Kanto region would be economically unsustainable. If you conclude "people aren't go there, we shouldn't bother to do that", you dismiss the possibility you can carry them by transit and then they will 1. just drive if it's what's necessary to have a reasonable commute, or 2. just not have those opportunities. Do we not build rapid transit partially to unlock commute potential through the shortening of travel times?

Part of the reason why I've been very supportive of a SkyTrain to Langley is because it's not actually a bad idea. The previous Surrey Rapid Transit Study analysis completed by TransLink and partners showed that there is a very good case to have SkyTrain extended to Langley - it is certainly more cost-effective than investing in LRT. We're not supporting SkyTrain blindly - after all, this isn't the transit fantasies thread. You can read more here:

SkyTrain to Langley top rapid transit option for Surrey: TransLink

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

While I want Skytrain to eventually reach Langley, I wonder how far they could actually build with $700 million.

They really should break the project into phases and build it a bit at a time with smaller amounts of money. Even extending Skytrain only as far as 156 St would make a huge difference. In the PM rush it takes more than 30 minutes to travel from King George to 160 St on the 502 bus. The schedule says 16 minutes, but it usually takes more than 30. 152 St is just a river of cars heading south, and the Bermuda triangle of traffic there with Fraser and 88 Ave make it one of the worst areas for traffic SoF. Getting Skytrain just past that would be huge difference in so many lives.

I'm completely with you on this. Previously when they extended the Expo Line, Columbia Station and then a year later Scott Road Station was added. Years later the remaining Surrey stations were added. There's no reason they couldn't continue to build it in phases. I'd also like to see Skytrain extended to Fleetwood in phase one and then make it to Langley on the second or even third phase.

[cleowin]

The recent 66 Langley/Chiliwack bus route is basically the first major connector between SoF (Metro Van side) and the FVRD side, all things considered. It has baffled me that until basically 2015, there was limited options to commute by bus to the FVRD. In all honesty, I think TransLink should have full operating control over the entire FVRD (as they are governed to do so if necessary), but contract out the work to a private operator. This way you can create an additional 4th zone for Abbotsford and then a 5th zone in Chiliwack, and a skytrain system would work within one region. I think that is the most ideal in my opinion.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Preferably, we'd have enough money for both a Skytrain extension and a second WCE line. Given the choice between the two however, it'd be better to have basic LRT/RRT service first and a peak-hour express option later.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I'm completely with you on this. Previously when they extended the Expo Line, Columbia Station and then a year later Scott Road Station was added. Years later the remaining Surrey stations were added. There's no reason they couldn't continue to build it in phases. I'd also like to see Skytrain extended to Fleetwood in phase one and then make it to Langley on the second or even third phase.

Yeah, I think the biggest mistake you can make in Surrey is wait around for the money for a mega project. Even a simple LRT project on 104 and KGB would take a $1 billion due to the start up overhead of buying a starter fleet of LRV. Throw in utilities work and road construction (on the route and adding capacity on alternate routes for displaced vehicles) and throw in the economic impact of having the roads essentially closed for a few years, and the impact will be well over $1 billion.

Building Skytrain on Fraser Hwy to 160 St is just a little over 5km, so probably at most $500 million for above ground construction, with little road work necessary. And without the startup impacts of buying and testing LRVs, construction length would be minimal. It could be up and running in less than 2 years. And the impacts would be huge. All the bus routes that travel from far east to Central City could be curtailed to basically operate half their length, freeing up buses to provide improved frequency (or maintain frequency and decrease costs).

Once that is built, it increases density and thus taxes, which can be put towards extending the line to Langley. Once the line is extended, then there should be increase tax revenue, and time, to invest in new technology options for rapid transit down KGB to Newton or White Rock.

The other problem with waiting for money for an entire line, is people get impatient and feel like it won't happen. So land is developed without it being ToD, so you get less density. Then when transit does show up, it is too late to affect and encourage more density around stations.

But if you build a little bit at a time, then it shows people, it IS coming. So they can plan around Skytrain being there within a few years.

[logicbomb]

Taken from the Hub thread.

Originally Posted by xd_1771

This is the kind of thing that happens when you have a City that's too lazy/careless to do the necessary engineering/regulating work and then just leaves it all to the developers. No efforts were made to shorten the crosswalk distance - the second bus lane starts right at the intersection even though there is no reason to do so as there is no lane feeding it - it should've been started *after* the intersection to shorten the crossing distance on the north side. The new intersection reeks of pisspoor engineering and once traffic into/out of the complex gets added into the mix, things will be quite messy in the area for both drivers and transit users.

Possibly just another way the City is trying to add congestion now so that the business case-less LRT system being proposed looks like more of an improvement later. (About that, I am really annoyed at how the $4 million put down into the city's traffic control centre that's often in the media included nothing to hold green lights for the 96 B-Line and other buses. TransLink put in a whole such system for the 98 B-Line, from scratch (as in it included the GPS bus tracking system that was not then/is now available system-wide) for $6.2 million, at a time when computers were running Windows 2000. For $4 million and with 2016 technology, it should've been a simple matter to add optimizations to that control centre to help move transit.)

I do not disagree one bit. I would say that the City has waged war on the automobile and is going out of their way to make it a living hell for commuters to get around the place.

What's been done lately that reinforces this notion?
-They will soon permit new condo developments outside of "the core" to limit the number of parking spaces to 0.5 per unit.
-New parking restrictions within the core
-Currently installing parking meters in Whalley and Guildford. They are planning to install new meters in Fleetwood and Newton.
-Withdrew plans to widen 100th between Whalley Blvd to 160th St.

This is to push their LRT agenda. Even people I know that are Skytrain proponents are beginning to side with LRT because it's better than the status quo.

[Kisai]

While not particuarly new, this is a news item

http://www.news1130.com/2016/07/26/s...ey-light-rail/

by JOHN ACKERMANN
Posted Jul 26, 2016
SURREY (NEWS 1130) – There is another push for separated bike lanes, but this one has nothing to do with cars.

New research recommends keeping cyclists away from streetcars.

A joint UBC/Ryerson University study found a third of bike crashes in Downtown Toronto involved cyclists getting their tires caught in streetcar tracks.

“Eighty-five per cent of the crashes were tires getting caught in those flangeways and then the person falling and being injured,” says UBC Professor Kay Teschke.

She tells us light rail planners in Surrey may want to consider putting streetcars in their own dedicated right of way.

...

Link to the study itself.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Kisai

While not particuarly new, this is a news item

http://www.news1130.com/2016/07/26/s...ey-light-rail/


Link to the study itself.

Yep, definitely an issue. It happened to me and I fell into the opposing lane of traffic. Absolutely terrifying.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Yep, definitely an issue. It happened to me and I fell into the opposing lane of traffic. Absolutely terrifying.

Not just that, but strollers, walkers, wheelchairs, roll-able luggage. Not only that, but the flangeways along major intersections will see incredible wear-and-tear and maintenance costs will go through the roof.

Grade rail transportation has its place, but it doesn't within the confines of the City.