[Surrey] GEC Education Centre | 165m | 49 fl | Proposed

[CoryHolmes]

That alignment along King George frightens me. All I can see is the number of accidents caused by cars trying to race the train along those crossings, all day long.

"I can make it! I can make it! I can-" *CRASH!* "Oh, <censored>." Same thing along 88th, which is a major east-west corridor.

[Shift]

^ I doubt it. There are traffic lights to obey just like any other intersection.

[CoryHolmes]

Originally Posted by Shift

^ I doubt it. There are traffic lights to obey just like any other intersection.

And I see enough red-light runners, yellow-light chasers, and just downright impatient drivers every single day to have any faith.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by CoryHolmes

That alignment along King George frightens me. All I can see is the number of accidents caused by cars trying to race the train along those crossings, all day long.

"I can make it! I can make it! I can-" *CRASH!* "Oh, <censored>." Same thing along 88th, which is a major east-west corridor.

Erkkkk, shades of Houston TX.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwcYcedLxZc

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Erkkkk, shades of Houston TX.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwcYcedLxZc

Ah yes, the video I send to Surrey city staff explaining why I'm against this LRT line. They could improve it by putting it in it's own separate lanes - but that would remove left hand turns at all but the major intersections, which would piss off drivers. Still at least it would limit where crashes happen (unlike that video).

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by Shift

^ I doubt it. There are traffic lights to obey just like any other intersection.

I find it unusual that no consideration is given to LRT disrupting both pedestrian traffic (including GEC education Centre students) and vehicular traffic in the city core. It's a one way show with LRT in that everyone else, especially students, who have important business to tend to, has to stop in their wake so LRT can bring a select few to their coffee shop...

[Equinox71]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

I find it unusual that no consideration is given to LRT disrupting both pedestrian traffic (including GEC education Centre students) and vehicular traffic in the city core. It's a one way show with LRT in that everyone else, especially students, who have important business to tend to, has to stop in their wake so LRT can bring a select few to their coffee shop...

While I am under no illusion that Surrey's Central City will ever rival Amsterdam Centraal in regards to transportation efficiency, I do think that it will be a well-used system with more than a select few riders. I also think that pedestrian and vehicle traffic will adapt without too much drama. Downtown Portland (OR) seems to work quite well with light rail and having recently navigated the streets of Toronto with all its light rail, I am less skeptical of Surrey's light rail as I might have initially been. Of course having an elevated skytrain would be ideal traffic-wise but that doesn't mean that light rail can't serve its purpose reasonably well including around high student traffic (think Ryerson in TO).

On another note, it appears as though the White Spot at KGH and 102 might have to disappear for the plan to be executed as per image. That's fine by me as it seems inevitable that the outliers on the mall parking lot (i.e. White Spot, BMO, and the former Best Buy) will eventually be replaced by residential / mixed-use high-rises. Or, in keeping with expansion of the education theme by SFU, KPU and GEC, something to serve that end.

[Hooknose]

Originally Posted by Equinox71

While I am under no illusion that Surrey's Central City will ever rival Amsterdam Centraal in regards to transportation efficiency, I do think that it will be a well-used system with more than a select few riders. I also think that pedestrian and vehicle traffic will adapt without too much drama. Downtown Portland (OR) seems to work quite well with light rail and having recently navigated the streets of Toronto with all its light rail, I am less skeptical of Surrey's light rail as I might have initially been. Of course having an elevated skytrain would be ideal traffic-wise but that doesn't mean that light rail can't serve its purpose reasonably well including around high student traffic (think Ryerson in TO).

On another note, it appears as though the White Spot at KGH and 102 might have to disappear for the plan to be executed as per image. That's fine by me as it seems inevitable that the outliers on the mall parking lot (i.e. White Spot, BMO, and the former Best Buy) will eventually be replaced by residential / mixed-use high-rises. Or, in keeping with expansion of the education theme by SFU, KPU and GEC, something to serve that end.

In reading this post, I came upon a fact. Surrey central is going to mix 6 types of transport ... rapid rail, light rail, bus, car, pedestrian and bikes.

And it is going to do it in just a few acres.

And it is going to mix in some really high density buildings as well. The first two high rises in the area are going to be almost 200 meters each. And more are coming.

I hope that "they" get it right.

[Shift]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

In reading this post, I came upon a fact. Surrey central is going to mix 6 types of transport ... rapid rail, light rail, bus, car, pedestrian and bikes.

And it is going to do it in just a few acres.

And it is going to mix in some really high density buildings as well. The first two high rises in the area are going to be almost 200 meters each. And more are coming.

I hope that "they" get it right.

^The first 2? There are already 7 completed in the area immediately surrounding Surrey Central Station, and 2 under construction. GEC will be the 10th, and the 44-Storey West Village rental tower starting around the same time will be the 11th.


Wouldn't really call the mixing of 6-types of transportation in a small urban area revolutionary. Seems to work in many places around the world with good synergy. Will be a first for the Vancouver area at least.

[EhJay]

If it works half as well as it does in Amsterdam then it should do fine.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Hooknose

In reading this post, I came upon a fact. Surrey central is going to mix 6 types of transport ... rapid rail, light rail, bus, car, pedestrian and bikes.

And it is going to do it in just a few acres.

And it is going to mix in some really high density buildings as well. The first two high rises in the area are going to be almost 200 meters each. And more are coming.

I hope that "they" get it right.

I wouldn't count on the LRT chicken hatching just yet...

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by scryer

I wouldn't count on the LRT chicken hatching just yet...

Exactly. I am a professional (6 years of post education) who has purposefully moved into the Central City so as to be within walking distance to work. This might sound unusual to people life "Shift". I have no need for LRT and reasonably nor do the prospective students of GEC as I walk to work (while occasionally dealing with panhandlers who threaten my safety in return for buying them coffee). I am a successful case in the sense that I live and work within reasonable distance that no LRT or BRT would be required. I already emailed City Hall about my concerns of LRT and GEC students and was met with typical Liberal Smurf Village ideals that LRT will make sure people who do not walk to work will still get their coffee in the morning. This coming from City Hall folk who are still driving their cars into work from outside Central City. Basically LRT is meant to tie in communities within Surrey while pushing political agendas that transit is wonderful, but in practice they are designing a transit system that does not work for a lot of people in the actual community and for commuters outside Surrey.

[EhJay]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Exactly. I am a professional (6 years of post education) who has purposefully moved into the Central City so as to be within walking distance to work. This might sound unusual to people life "Shift". I have no need for LRT and reasonably nor do the prospective students of GEC as I walk to work (while occasionally dealing with panhandlers who threaten my safety in return for buying them coffee). I am a successful case in the sense that I live and work within reasonable distance that no LRT or BRT would be required. I already emailed City Hall about my concerns of LRT and GEC students and was met with typical Liberal Smurf Village ideals that LRT will make sure people who do not walk to work will still get their coffee in the morning. This coming from City Hall folk who are still driving their cars into work from outside Central City. Basically LRT is meant to tie in communities within Surrey while pushing political agendas that transit is wonderful, but in practice they are designing a transit system that does not work for a lot of people in the actual community and for commuters outside Surrey.

I'm curious, how does LRT not work? If the goal is to tie in more communities in Surrey, bring about more development around LRT stations, and give people a better alternative to get around than driving then it's off to a great start.

You live close to work, which is commendable (I do too), but I would gladly use LRT to get around more often, in teh same way that I use SkyTrain to get downtown. The pull of LRT and SkyTrain with buses was the reason that I moved into the area.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by EhJay

I'm curious, how does LRT not work? If the goal is to tie in more communities in Surrey, bring about more development around LRT stations, and give people a better alternative to get around than driving then it's off to a great start.

You live close to work, which is commendable (I do too), but I would gladly use LRT to get around more often, in teh same way that I use SkyTrain to get downtown. The pull of LRT and SkyTrain with buses was the reason that I moved into the area.

Read the Surrey LRT thread, but for a quick summary:

The LRT proposed is more akin to a street car than a C-Train style LRT.
It will remove road capacity in the area without adding speed and frequencies any superior than a bus.
It's current proposed meandering layout has numerous unnecessary points of traffic and pedestrian conflicts (making it super susceptible to accidents and delays, something a bus can drive around or a grade separated rail system can avoid completely).
It will cost more than the Evergreen Line despite its inferior technology.

[jollyburger]

Way to stay on topic.

[Metro-One]

We have to educate whenever the misinformed arrive.

[Blease]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Read the Surrey LRT thread, but for a quick summary:

The LRT proposed is more akin to a street car than a C-Train style LRT.
It will remove road capacity in the area without adding speed and frequencies any superior than a bus.
It's current proposed meandering layout has numerous unnecessary points of traffic and pedestrian conflicts (making it super susceptible to accidents and delays, something a bus can drive around or a grade separated rail system can avoid completely).
It will cost more than the Evergreen Line despite its inferior technology.

Just a couple of points:

-Street car style LRTs run perfectly well all over Europe.
-The Surrey LRT will be less susceptible to accidents because it will reduce the number of cars on the road to begin with.
-Dollar per dollar the Surrey LRT will provide more coverage than the Evergreen line.

[scryer]

Ignore.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Blease

Just a couple of points:

-Street car style LRTs run perfectly well all over Europe.
-The Surrey LRT will be less susceptible to accidents because it will reduce the number of cars on the road to begin with.
-Dollar per dollar the Surrey LRT will provide more coverage than the Evergreen line.

Yeah, tram systems in European cities are decades, if not a century, old. Generation after generation of drivers got used to the fact that there was a massive and unpredictable beast, which is a tram, coursing through their streets and to be careful with it.

[SurreyonTheMap]

So about that GEC huh? They currently renewed the lease of the roller hockey arena for six more months, is that because of the funds for GEC are still not where they need to be? Also will they allow people to invest as well like what is going on with the innovation building.

And for the LRT discussion, I live 2 minutes where one of the stops is going to be and someone whose used the 321 and 96Bline for over 15 years and i believe 5 years for the bline. From all your points and from the discussion that i seen in this thread and the LRT thread. I have to agree, its not going to work for me.

But lets discussed that in the LRT thread not here.