Surrey Langley Skytrain - Expo Line Extension | Proposed

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surre...t-cancellation

That would be perfect.

Can't believe this crazy pro development former mayor is making sense. But like all politicians how much of this is just lies to get votes.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by flipper316

Can't believe this crazy pro development former mayor is making sense. But like all politicians how much of this is just lies to get votes.

This would be too blatant of a lie. And it looks to be the best chance we have so far to a sensible transit plan in Surrey and Langley.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by flipper316

Can't believe this crazy pro development former mayor is making sense. But like all politicians how much of this is just lies to get votes.

Why would you lie about this though? It's not like he's promising to give everyone free money and then doesn't. This is an issue that doesn't have a clear vote-buying side.

Doug is the hero we've been waiting for.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by d_jeffrey

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surre...t-cancellation

That would be perfect.

Good news. I like his logic. Sure, I think LRT is great for connecting communities within Surrey and would help add low rise density along the corridors, but it is not worth the cost and disruptions within the current budget and amateur hour implementation. RRT, like Skytrain, to Langley is a necessity when connecting cities and commuters to the whole region. That would take people off Hwy 1 while densifying the Fraser Highway corridor with high rises along the nodes. LRT should never be considered for Langley.

[Waders]

As Surrey Councillor Bruce Hayne said,

“It’s not that I’m against LRT specifically as a technology along the Guildford-104 line, because a lot of those decisions have already been made and they were made a long time ago,” Hayne said, “but we also have phase two that’s going to go down Fraser Highway to Langley and I think there’s an opportunity to really hit the reset button and say, ‘Wait a minute, let’s look at this, let’s talk to the public, let’s engage the community as to what they want.’

“Here we are about to spend $1.6 billion and there’s a large percentage of residents who are in opposition,” he added. “And so, we’ve got to ask ourselves, did we not tell the story properly? Did we not engage the people properly? It really is a massive infrastructure project and we simply don’t have a large percentage of the population on side with it.”

I wonder whether he will join Doug McCallum's new party.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Doug is the hero we've been waiting for.

I’m a little skeptical about him. When he was mayor, he didn’t allow any form of large-scale development in Surrey until Watts became mayor. My memory is faded but in the last election he said he didn’t want SkyTrain (because of NIMBY reasons). Or was it someone else?

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Good news. I like his logic. Sure, I think LRT is great for connecting communities within Surrey and would help add low rise density along the corridors, but it is not worth the cost and disruptions within the current budget and amateur hour implementation. RRT, like Skytrain, to Langley is a necessity when connecting cities and commuters to the whole region. That would take people off Hwy 1 while densifying the Fraser Highway corridor with high rises along the nodes. LRT should never be considered for Langley.

Nathan Pachal has been fighting for LRT to Langley tooth and nail because “budget cuts”. There are staunch LRT nuts who thought LRT on Fraser Hwy is a great idea because they bring communities together, more businesses and livability without actually backing them up. (Anecdotes do not count, and pointing European cities as example of “transformative community” is Red Herring.)

[Trainguy]

"Canada Line's Congested City Centre Station Needs a Second Entrance

Vancouver British Columbia - With over 140,000 weekday boardings as of 2017, just eight years after its opening, calling the Canada Line a success would be an understatement.

For comparison, the entire Portland Max light rail system recorded 116,800 weekday boardings in 2015.

While the Canada Line has been criticized for its single-track rail sections in Richmond and YVR, and its notably short platform lengths (40 metres, expandable to just 50), its current ridership is a clear testimonial to the aspects that were built correctly, in particular grade separation and automation."

Yes, there is more population along the Canada Line, but the choice of technology was bang on. LRT in Surrey is a huge mistake. The train won't get you to where you need to go quickly. If you are not in a hurry, come on board and enjoy the ride. Ignore the fact that your ride is screwing up everyone else's commute along 104th. Surrey will get its vanity project but everyone will pay for it.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

"Canada Line's Congested City Centre Station Needs a Second Entrance

Vancouver British Columbia - With over 140,000 weekday boardings as of 2017, just eight years after its opening, calling the Canada Line a success would be an understatement.

For comparison, the entire Portland Max light rail system recorded 116,800 weekday boardings in 2015.

While the Canada Line has been criticized for its single-track rail sections in Richmond and YVR, and its notably short platform lengths (40 metres, expandable to just 50), its current ridership is a clear testimonial to the aspects that were built correctly, in particular grade separation and automation."

Yes, there is more population along the Canada Line, but the choice of technology was bang on. LRT in Surrey is a huge mistake. The train won't get you to where you need to go quickly. If you are not in a hurry, come on board and enjoy the ride. Ignore the fact that your ride is screwing up everyone else's commute along 104th. Surrey will get its vanity project but everyone will pay for it.

Surrey is backstabbing Langley with its vanity project too. Don’t forget that.

[xd_1771]

A new TransLink FOI release has revealed the expected capital costs for the Surrey-Langley line built as an at-grade LRT or as an extension of SkyTrain (Expo Line: Langley Extension).

Exclusive: TransLink finally fesses-up to the ballooning costs of the delayed Surrey-Langley line

...

TransLink changed its tune this week and released a report to theBreaker under the freedom of information law that includes separate estimates for an LRT line and SkyTrain line to connect Surrey and Langley.

...

[MORE on: thebreaker.news]

So some summaries since you are all interested:

The LRT option is now estimated to cost $1.95 billion in 2022 dollars, plus several additional unlisted costs. This will include 13km of grade-running track and 3 km of elevated track, including full elevation through the Serpentine Valley, which was determined necessary due to poor soil conditions. The LRT option assumes the use of 19 40-metre long light rail vehicles. The station platforms will be 40m long; as well, the LRT estimate only includes canopy covering for half (20m) of the platform, and there is no indication of whether platforms can be expanded beyond 40m. Numerous additional costs are not listed, including: physical barriers at LRT street crossings; park and ride facilities; bus loops (other than basic street facilities); work to the existing Serpentine River Bridge; operating costs; and GST. With these costs included, LRT on the Surrey-Langley Line will tally in at over $2 billion.

The SkyTrain option is also expected to be delivered at an increased cost, which totals $2.9 billion in 2022 dollars, plus some unlisted costs. The increased cost seems reflective of the much higher ridership that a SkyTrain extension will see. This amount buys almost 16km of fully-elevated track built to the same standard as the existing Expo Line, and includes costs to enable seamless integration with existing SkyTrain (such as updating of next-train displays on all existing Expo Line stations). The stations will have 82.5m long platforms, fully canopied, mostly located on the side of Fraser Highway, and with an allowance of 12 bike lockers per station. The cost estimate includes the acquisition of 11 5-car Mark III trains (55 cars in total), and an allowance is included for a small vehicle storage facility. The cost also incorporates all Fraser Highway roadwork (widening, replacing of median, replacement of 644 street lights), which is usually borne by the municipality, i.e. during previous SkyTrain expansion projects.

Both alternatives adopt the same 8 station locations (the LRT alternative includes a 9th station at King George Blvd beside the SkyTrain station) and include a generous 25% contingency allowance on all items, on top of a 20% contingency on property. It should also be noted that the estimates are in year of expenditure (2022 dollars) which accounts for why they seem absurdly high. In more recent dollars (2016 dollars), the report estimates Expo: Langley at $2.45 billion.

If we compare to the 2012 SRTAA estimate ($1.8 billion in 2010 dollars) and discount the generous 25% contingency which was not in the 2012 estimate, the cost for Expo: Langley has actually been reduced by about 8%.

These are cost numbers only and there are NO numbers on expected travel times, ridership, fare revenue and fare recovery.

However, a strong hint on the operating speed difference is the amount of trains deemed necessary for each option. The LRT option specifies a need for 19 light rail vehicles; the SkyTrain option requires 11 5-car trains. Increasing the operating speed reduces the amount of vehicles necessary to operate along the same distance; lower operating speed requires more vehicles, so this would suggest that the proposed SkyTrain alternative is nearly twice as fast as light rail.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

A new TransLink FOI release has revealed the expected capital costs for the Surrey-Langley line built as an at-grade LRT or as an extension of SkyTrain (Expo Line: Langley Extension).



So some summaries since you are all interested:

The LRT option is now estimated to cost $1.95 billion in 2022 dollars, plus several additional unlisted costs. This will include 13km of grade-running track and 3 km of elevated track, including full elevation through the Serpentine Valley, which was determined necessary due to poor soil conditions. The LRT option assumes the use of 19 40-metre long light rail vehicles. The station platforms will be 40m long; as well, the LRT estimate only includes canopy covering for half (20m) of the platform, and there is no indication of whether platforms can be expanded beyond 40m. Numerous additional costs are not listed, including: physical barriers at LRT street crossings; park and ride facilities; bus loops (other than basic street facilities); work to the existing Serpentine River Bridge; operating costs; and GST. With these costs included, LRT on the Surrey-Langley Line will tally in at over $2 billion.

The SkyTrain option is also expected to be delivered at an increased cost, which totals $2.9 billion in 2022 dollars, plus some unlisted costs. The increased cost seems reflective of the much higher ridership that a SkyTrain extension will see. This amount buys almost 16km of fully-elevated track built to the same standard as the existing Expo Line, and includes costs to enable seamless integration with existing SkyTrain (such as updating of next-train displays on all existing Expo Line stations). The stations will have 82.5m long platforms, fully canopied, mostly located on the side of Fraser Highway, and with an allowance of 12 bike lockers per station. The cost estimate includes the acquisition of 11 5-car Mark III trains (55 cars in total), and an allowance is included for a small vehicle storage facility. The cost also incorporates all Fraser Highway roadwork (widening, replacing of median, replacement of 644 street lights), which is usually borne by the municipality, i.e. during previous SkyTrain expansion projects.

Both alternatives adopt the same 8 station locations (the LRT alternative includes a 9th station at King George Blvd beside the SkyTrain station) and include a generous 25% contingency allowance on all items, on top of a 20% contingency on property. It should also be noted that the estimates are in year of expenditure (2022 dollars) which accounts for why they seem absurdly high. In more recent dollars (2016 dollars), the report estimates Expo: Langley at $2.45 billion.

If we compare to the 2012 SRTAA estimate ($1.8 billion in 2010 dollars) and discount the generous 25% contingency which was not in the 2012 estimate, the cost for Expo: Langley has actually been reduced by about 8%.

These are cost numbers only and there are NO numbers on expected travel times, ridership, fare revenue and fare recovery.

However, a strong hint on the operating speed difference is the amount of trains deemed necessary for each option. The LRT option specifies a need for 19 light rail vehicles; the SkyTrain option requires 11 5-car trains. Increasing the operating speed reduces the amount of vehicles necessary to operate along the same distance; lower operating speed requires more vehicles, so this would suggest that the proposed SkyTrain alternative is nearly twice as fast as light rail.

This report is a no-brainer!! Fraser HWY is already pretty congested from KG. I can't imagine trying to put 2 tracks down the middle of it.

[Shift]

A report on Surrey's Long Range Rapid Transit vision is being presented to Council Monday. All you LRT haters are gonna love it.

Surrey is envisioning a future 'grid' LRT network along major arterial corridors spanning the city totaling approximately 140-150km of track. This is comparable in size to rapid transit networks in other cities studied throughout Europe, North America, and Australia, with a similar size and population density to Surrey's future population.

Further it is noted in the report that the City of Vancouver is planning to replace Trolly routes in the future with street-level LRT just like Surrey's. Both cities will eventually have a grid network of LRT along select major arterials complimenting SkyTrain - like is standard in hundreds of major cities around the world.

https://www.surrey.ca/bylawsandcounc..._2018-R161.pdf

Medium-range LRT vision:


Long-range LRT vision:

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Shift

Further it is noted in the report that the City of Vancouver is planning to replace Trolly routes in the future with street-level LRT just like Surrey's. Both cities will eventually have a grid LRT network complimenting SkyTrain - like is standard in hundreds of major cities around the world.

Fake news.

The City of Vancouver plans to expand rapid transit along the arterial street grid by converting its grid-based network of high frequency, high productivity bus services to rapid transit. When all the projects in the Transportation 2040 Plan are delivered, Vancouver will have approximately 140-150km of rapid transit.

"Rapid transit" can be anything from blimps to gondolas to monorails; extrapolating "trolleys to LRT on every route" is a whole new kind of baseless assumption.

The current SkyTrain network is 77km; plus the Broadway extension and LRT lines (if built, since it looks like Doug McCallum is leading in the polls), that's less than 110km. Apparently, the B-Lines are included as rapid transit too.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Shift

A report on Surrey's Long Range Rapid Transit vision is being presented to Council Monday. All you LRT haters are gonna love it.

Surrey is envisioning a future 'grid' LRT network along major arterial corridors spanning the city totaling approximately 140-150km of track. This is comparable in size to rapid transit networks in other cities studied throughout Europe, North America, and Australia, with a similar size and population density to Surrey's future population.

I was asked for my opinion on an earlier draft that was about corridors only - no talk of what technology might be used. The idea was for 4 traffic lanes (with possibly 2 additional transit-only lanes), separated bike paths and wide sidewalks. There were a lot more corridors under consideration at that point.

[Firebrand]

Apparently someone in the CPTDB Surrey LRT thread preferred a Fraser Hwy LRT instead of SkyTrain, believing that the SkyTrain is better suited NoF, and Langley should get express trains instead. I took a screenshot of it on my phone.



Edit: For some reason, the image keeps on disabling every time I upload it to this forum, so I decided to link it to the website.

https://cptdb.ca/topic/15812-surrey-...comment-814981

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Firebrand

Apparently someone in the CPTDB Surrey LRT thread preferred a Fraser Hwy LRT instead of SkyTrain, believing that the SkyTrain is better suited NoF, and Langley should get express trains instead. I took a screenshot of it on my phone.

"Provide faster service to North of Fraser than Skytrain, while servicing additional areas of Surrey"

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Shift

A report on Surrey's Long Range Rapid Transit vision is being presented to Council Monday. All you LRT haters are gonna love it.

Surrey is envisioning a future 'grid' LRT network along major arterial corridors spanning the city totaling approximately 140-150km of track. This is comparable in size to rapid transit networks in other cities studied throughout Europe, North America, and Australia, with a similar size and population density to Surrey's future population.

Further it is noted in the report that the City of Vancouver is planning to replace Trolly routes in the future with street-level LRT just like Surrey's. Both cities will eventually have a grid network of LRT along select major arterials complimenting SkyTrain - like is standard in hundreds of major cities around the world.

https://www.surrey.ca/bylawsandcounc..._2018-R161.pdf

Medium-range LRT vision:


Long-range LRT vision:

So, not only does Langley not deserve Skytrain, but now neither does White Rock? When will this madness stop?

[xd_1771]

The above maps are hilarious.

I feel like it's lines drawn on a map meant as a last ditch effort to convince whoever has left to educate themselves to side with light rail instead of the growing for-SkyTrain community.

If you just look at the costs... if we go with the current costs per km to build the Surrey-Newton-Guildford Line of $157 million per kilometre, it would cost in excess of $24 billion in today's dollars to build out this network - never mind the inflation costs from now until year of expenditure. This is around 3-4 times what's been spent to build out our existing, 80km SkyTrain network. I don't recall there being any other Canadian city - in history - trying to single-handedly ask for this much money for "rapid transit" projects.

Is there real motivation to actually build out this network in the future? I don't think so. It doesn't really help that the timing of the release of this map seems to coincide with a very prominent Mayoral candidate announcing his preference for a SkyTrain extension and not the light rail plan.

Never mind the fact that all of these lines will run at terrible average operating speeds of between 20 and 30 km/h, by design, doing essentially nothing to meaningfully improve access in the city.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Shift

A report on Surrey's Long Range Rapid Transit vision is being presented to Council Monday. All you LRT haters are gonna love it.

Surrey is envisioning a future 'grid' LRT network along major arterial corridors spanning the city totaling approximately 140-150km of track. This is comparable in size to rapid transit networks in other cities studied throughout Europe, North America, and Australia, with a similar size and population density to Surrey's future population.

Further it is noted in the report that the City of Vancouver is planning to replace Trolly routes in the future with street-level LRT just like Surrey's. Both cities will eventually have a grid network of LRT along select major arterials complimenting SkyTrain - like is standard in hundreds of major cities around the world.

https://www.surrey.ca/bylawsandcounc..._2018-R161.pdf

Medium-range LRT vision:


Long-range LRT vision:

just change the route descriptions in the key, and it becomes a map of b-line routes with the skytrain extension to langley as the backbone

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Fake news.


"Rapid transit" can be anything from blimps to gondolas to monorails; extrapolating "trolleys to LRT on every route" is a whole new kind of baseless assumption.

The current SkyTrain network is 77km; plus the Broadway extension and LRT lines (if built, since it looks like Doug McCallum is leading in the polls), that's less than 110km. Apparently, the B-Lines are included as rapid transit too.

I just read the document (it's only 7 pages) and nowhere does it say that Vancouver is going to build LRT lines all over the place, as Migrant_Coconut already posted.

Aside from a love affair with LRT as their rail choice, it's a pretty sensible plan (RTS = Regional Transportation Strategy).

The RTS update will look at global and regional trends, opportunities and challenges, and the development of a long-term strategy to meet growing transportation demands. City of Surrey will provide important input into TransLink’s update of the RTS, in particular, pertaining to its vision for the future of rapid transit in the City.

Key Principles

Key principles to consider when developing the City of Surrey’s long-range rapid transit network include:

• Provide connections to all communities in the City of Surrey and the rest of the Metro Vancouver region;
• Serve existing development and shape future development;
• Encourage continuous development along key corridors and at connection points;
• Accommodate existing transit users and encourage long-term transit ridership growth;
• Provide access to transit service for the majority of the City of Surrey’s residents and jobs;
• Enable freedom of movement for a diverse range of people and trips; and
• Ensure the system is simple to use, easy to understand, safe and accessible for all people.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I just read the document (it's only 7 pages) and nowhere does it say that Vancouver is going to build LRT lines all over the place, as Migrant_Coconut already posted.

Aside from a love affair with LRT as their rail choice, it's a pretty sensible plan (RTS = Regional Transportation Strategy).

Key Principles

Did Surrey went full retard by shoehorning LRT all over the place in the above images? It makes Edmonton’s LRT look fantastic in comparison.

I was completely bummed out by the costs of that system that xd_1771 explained. I can't imagine the cost overruns of actually building them to get them in operation.

Originally Posted by Sheba

"Provide faster service to North of Fraser than Skytrain, while servicing additional areas of Surrey"

That statement didn’t make any sort of sense. How does a train bound to traffic lights—thus reducing speed, even with signal prioritiy—is faster than a train that is completely off the ground? That’s like saying Lougheed Hwy is faster than the #1 while covering more areas in Burnaby.