Surrey Langley Skytrain - Expo Line Extension | Proposed

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

what a surprisingly hostile thing for them to draw attention to

If you want more "in-your-face" facts, go to skytrainforsurrey.org . This I felt, was more gentle; the video flirts with the idea of streetcars and then shuts it down .

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by scryer

If you want more "in-your-face" facts, go to skytrainforsurrey.org . This I felt, was more gentle; the video flirts with the idea of streetcars and then shuts it down .

Ah but this was from TransLink. Those of us who pay attention to this stuff know that they don't like the LRT plan, while the general public for the most part don't know what's being planned.

There were also links to articles about walkability, congestion pricing, HS rail, cycling, gondolas and reducing parking (along with some other stuff). It really seems like someone there is trying to force some issues.

[swimmer_spe]

In large cities, having 4 orders of transit makes sense.

Commuter rail is great for traveling large distances. It bring people in and out of the suburbs to the city centre.

Subways/Metros/Skytrain is good for moving lots of people throughout the city.

Streetcars/LRT are for moving more people over smaller distances.

Buses go where there is small demand, but still needed.

If the Surrey LRT ever gets built ad they show, in 10-20 years, a new Skytrain will get built through Surrey.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

In large cities, having 4 orders of transit makes sense.

Commuter rail is great for traveling large distances. It bring people in and out of the suburbs to the city centre.

Subways/Metros/Skytrain is good for moving lots of people throughout the city.

Streetcars/LRT are for moving more people over smaller distances.

Buses go where there is small demand, but still needed.

If the Surrey LRT ever gets built ad they show, in 10-20 years, a new Skytrain will get built through Surrey.

It's all about capacity, distance, and common direction.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

It's all about capacity, distance, and common direction.

And the LRT will not have the capacity.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

In large cities, having 4 orders of transit makes sense.

Commuter rail is great for traveling large distances. It bring people in and out of the suburbs to the city centre.

Subways/Metros/Skytrain is good for moving lots of people throughout the city.

Streetcars/LRT are for moving more people over smaller distances.

Buses go where there is small demand, but still needed.

If the Surrey LRT ever gets built ad they show, in 10-20 years, a new Skytrain will get built through Surrey.

The problem with this utopian vision is that it implies that streetcar/LRT corridors will never see demand growth, which they will. Buses are more than adequate for local, lower-to-mid range demand transport. LRT in Surrey is not a stepping stone to rapid transit, but a half-baked finale that constrains the true transit potential of the area.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

The problem with this utopian vision is that it implies that streetcar/LRT corridors will never see demand growth, which they will. Buses are more than adequate for local, lower-to-mid range demand transport. LRT in Surrey is not a stepping stone to rapid transit, but a half-baked finale that constrains the true transit potential of the area.

Right. You save light rail for suburban or demi-urban areas that will/should densify soon, but not by much - for example, Arbutus or the interurban route through Whalley and West Newton. Putting it straight through your future downtown (median or not) is never going to end well.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Right. You save light rail for suburban or demi-urban areas that will/should densify soon, but not by much - for example, Arbutus or the interurban route through Whalley and West Newton. Putting it straight through your future downtown (median or not) is never going to end well.

Arbutus is also a bad plan, for he complete opposite reason - lack of demand.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Ah but this was from TransLink. Those of us who pay attention to this stuff know that they don't like the LRT plan, while the general public for the most part don't know what's being planned.

There were also links to articles about walkability, congestion pricing, HS rail, cycling, gondolas and reducing parking (along with some other stuff). It really seems like someone there is trying to force some issues.

If you were reading my post properly, you would know that I never said that it wasn't from Translink or that they had any feelings different from what you describe . Again I felt that this video demonstrates a clear approach but in a passive aggressive tone. Now don't go getting that twisted .

Right. You save light rail for suburban or demi-urban areas that will/should densify soon, but not by much - for example, Arbutus or the interurban route through Whalley and West Newton. Putting it straight through your future downtown (median or not) is never going to end well.

Just coming from a personal feeling here but I find it very hard to justify street-integrated LRT under any circumstance. What are the thoughts on Toronto's streetcar system? Is it a good LRT system or not? And why?

However grade-separated LRT is a different story for me.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Arbutus is also a bad plan, for he complete opposite reason - lack of demand.

A bad plan for now; Arbutus isn't growing as fast as Cambie, but it's definitely growing.

But I digress. Good on TransLink - this is the smart way to mutiny.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

my guess is TransLink has looked at the same feasibility studies we have; looked at the building costs; looked at the operational costs; looked at the ridership forecasts. then they went. wtf, why would we do this? for a broke agency, they cant afford this terrible idea. not to build, and not to run. it would cost 10s of millions to operate compered to BRT. any smart person can look at the studies and say; BRT for the L-line and RRT for Langley for less then LRT L-line.

[social_polymerase]

Hi everyone! I've been following the Vancouver SSP forum for a while, but this is my first time posting.

Originally Posted by scryer

Just coming from a personal feeling here but I find it very hard to justify street-integrated LRT under any circumstance. What are the thoughts on Toronto's streetcar system? Is it a good LRT system or not? And why?

I lived in Vancouver for ~20 years and I now live in Toronto. Frankly, I don't understand why Toronto loves its streetcar system so much. IMO, it offers very limited benefits (development incentives, aesthetics, minor capacity improvements) to justify its cost and has significant downsides (blocks two lanes of traffic when stopped, slower than buses, cannot pass obstructions on the track ahead, inaccessible).

On top of all that, the streetcar system is dangerous to cyclists:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ists-1.3696234

Worst of all, the streetcar system offers no improvements to mobility over a bus system. IMO, the best way to improve public transit in Toronto is to expand the subway system, and the same thing is true in Surrey (with skytrain). While Surrey LRT may offer minor improvements to mobility, it is not enough to justify its enormous cost. Skytrain and BRT is definitely the way to go (just in case anyone still needed convincing ).

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by scryer

If you were reading my post properly, you would know that I never said that it wasn't from Translink or that they had any feelings different from what you describe . Again I felt that this video demonstrates a clear approach but in a passive aggressive tone. Now don't go getting that twisted .

Just coming from a personal feeling here but I find it very hard to justify street-integrated LRT under any circumstance. What are the thoughts on Toronto's streetcar system? Is it a good LRT system or not? And why?

However grade-separated LRT is a different story for me.

As someone who has ridden the Streetcars in Toronto a few times, I can say, overall, it is a good system. The CLRVs can carry more than a standard bus. The new trains can carry more than the ALRVs or the bendy buses.

The problem is if there is an accident on route. They cannot easily divert.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

A bad plan for now; Arbutus isn't growing as fast as Cambie, but it's definitely growing.

But I digress. Good on TransLink - this is the smart way to mutiny.

In 20 years, I doubt it would be worth building there. There are still lots of places to build rail transit to.

Originally Posted by social_polymerase

Hi everyone! I've been following the Vancouver SSP forum for a while, but this is my first time posting.

I lived in Vancouver for ~20 years and I now live in Toronto. Frankly, I don't understand why Toronto loves its streetcar system so much. IMO, it offers very limited benefits (development incentives, aesthetics, minor capacity improvements) to justify its cost and has significant downsides (blocks two lanes of traffic when stopped, slower than buses, cannot pass obstructions on the track ahead, inaccessible).

On top of all that, the streetcar system is dangerous to cyclists:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...ists-1.3696234

Worst of all, the streetcar system offers no improvements to mobility over a bus system. IMO, the best way to improve public transit in Toronto is to expand the subway system, and the same thing is true in Surrey (with skytrain). While Surrey LRT may offer minor improvements to mobility, it is not enough to justify its enormous cost. Skytrain and BRT is definitely the way to go (just in case anyone still needed convincing ).

Toronto is one of the very few North American cities that was able to keep it's streetcars from the time when every other city was ripping them up (Even Vancouver area.)

The streetcars can hold more than a standard bus.

[bardak]

Streetcars make sense when there is a legitimate need for the capacity and in Toronto they do have a need for it. I would also argue that if you have the capacity need for a streetcar that you would also be able to give it a dedicated lane but Toronto hasn't yet.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by bardak

Streetcars make sense when there is a legitimate need for the capacity and in Toronto they do have a need for it. I would also argue that if you have the capacity need for a streetcar that you would also be able to give it a dedicated lane but Toronto hasn't yet.

Bloor and Yonge used to have streetcars Now they don't. They are planning a Queen subway as part of the DRL.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Ah but this was from TransLink. Those of us who pay attention to this stuff know that they don't like the LRT plan, while the general public for the most part don't know what's being planned.

To be clear, Translink did not produce this video - it's by Vox. Translink merely linked to it in their weekly post that summarizes Internet buzz about transit issues.

[ssiguy]

That video finally adds some objectivity to the streetcar debate. In most US cities where they have recently built streetcars, they have been a stellar failure. They uniformly come in over budget and not on time. Worse they serve little purpose.

The politicians {who wouldn't be caught dead riding on one after the ribbon cutting cremony} are the one's behind these little but expensive endevours to make themselves look good in time for the next election or get kick backs from their developer friends. They are also built for vanity reasons ......."look mom, now I have a streetcar too!"

The average transit rider is ussually far worse off as precious dollars are spent on building these stupid lines while needed new buses are ignored as they don't have the panache politicians want. They also can play havoc on operational budgets as their ridership levels are so low that they bleed red ink taking much needed operational funding out of the bus service.

None of this is true for Toronto. First the physical infrastructure and maintenance/garage facilities are lready existing. Toronto also has the most populated inner city of any city in NA second only to NYC. The Toronto system also runs very frequently and all night so it is vital part of the transit system and not just a ride for kids on the weekend like so many US systems are.

It was noted that Toronto doesn't have ROW but that is not entirely true. Both Spadina and St.Clair have complete ROW and the busiest route, King Street, has just begun a pilot ROW project. Considering the size of the streetcar system and the frequency there are relatively few accidents because Torontonian drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists are use to streetcars. They are a part of the urban fabric.

[ssiguy]

As far as Surrey is concerned I do not support the SkyTrain extension or the new LRT. I think B-Line type service with higher frequency and more bus lanes would more than do the trick.

What Vancouver has to start looking at is what Toronto is and many world cities already have.......suburban rail. I know Vancouverites maynot want to hear this but Vancouver is a sprawling city and that will only continue further east as even high income earners leave the city to buy a house and the restraints of the ALR. Anyone who thinks Vancouver is a densely populated area has never left the West End.

Vancouver is a cone shaped urban area arriving at the Vancouver and widening out the further it goes. This makes LRT or SkyTrain a very long trip for anyone going to Vancouver. Vancouver has rail corridors that it doesn't use and these should be turned into a Toronto type GO suburban rail...........all day each way electric train service fro the suburbs to the city. The most obvious first route would be Aldergrove/Langley/Clover/Newton to interchange with SkyTrain at Scott Road and then head downtown with a stop at Broadway and then finish at Waterfront. This would not only give the people SoF a viable way to get downtown but also releive the overcrowded Expo Line.

Toronto is doing this by buying the current GO rail lines from CN/CP and adding more trains. By 2025 the entire 250km system will be fully electrfied run a MINIMUM of every 15 minutes each way all day and probably 140 meter trains. The suburban system will run over 6,000 train trips per week.

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

To be clear, Translink did not produce this video - it's by Vox. Translink merely linked to it in their weekly post that summarizes Internet buzz about transit issues.

I think everyone is reading in to this video too much. It's literally just one link in a weekly list of transit-related links compiled by the Buzzer editors. I don't think the degree of curation that goes into those weekly lists amounts to an organization-wide conspiracy against the Surrey LRT (although, sure, we all wish it did )

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

That video finally adds some objectivity to the streetcar debate. In most US cities where they have recently built streetcars, they have been a stellar failure. They uniformly come in over budget and not on time. Worse they serve little purpose.

The politicians {who wouldn't be caught dead riding on one after the ribbon cutting cremony} are the one's behind these little but expensive endevours to make themselves look good in time for the next election or get kick backs from their developer friends. They are also built for vanity reasons ......."look mom, now I have a streetcar too!"

The average transit rider is ussually far worse off as precious dollars are spent on building these stupid lines while needed new buses are ignored as they don't have the panache politicians want. They also can play havoc on operational budgets as their ridership levels are so low that they bleed red ink taking much needed operational funding out of the bus service.

None of this is true for Toronto. First the physical infrastructure and maintenance/garage facilities are lready existing. Toronto also has the the populated inner city of any city in NA second only to NYC. The Toronto system also runs very frequently and all night so it is vital part of the transit system and not just a ride fr kids on the weekend like so many US systems are.

It was noted that Toronto doesn't have ROW but that is not entirely true. Both Spadina and St.Clair have complete ROW and the busiest route, King Street, has just begun a pilot ROW project. Considering the size of the streetcar system and the frequency there are relatively few accidents because Torontonian drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists are use to streetcars. They are a part of the urban fabric.

Queensway also has their own ROW.