Surrey Langley Skytrain - Expo Line Extension | Proposed

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by Echowinds

http://www.surrey.ca/for-business/1418.aspx

This seems to be conclusive evidence that Newton should get the next Expo Line extension. It's the largest town centre by population and has the fastest growth (faster than Cloverdale, apparently), and as a bonus, it is the cheapest town centre to expand to.

[Millennium2002]

Can I say wow... this debate has gone full circle and is getting worse by the day.

Anyway. I guess there's a reason why they're "equal priorities". One is needed to fix an actual transportation problem involving a cityload of commuters, another one or two is needed to fix a perception problem involving a region of taxpayers. Okay. Perhaps I'll take both... somehow... even though we know we can't because it'll be a budget drain.

Now if only the provincial government could de-politicize the process as well and allow projects to be built in incremental stages rather than the usual mega-projects that cause too much disruption above and/or below for residents and businesses alike.

I dunno. I doubt any of the above will happen sanely, if at all. I still strongly feel like the equal priority clause in the regional transit strategy is a mere attempt at delaying the problem given the inflexible budget that TransLink is given to work with.

Some here have also advocated for a more radical solution in the past... two new transit agencies, dealing with the same individual problems. Only this time there'll likely be less funds for either without provincial government help, and everyone knows where those tax dollars come from... everyone in BC, to be exact. In fact the only benefit (more like drawback) is an extra layer of bureaucracy due to two agencies having to negotiate between the cities and each other.

In the end, no one sees what is really needed: working together, towards a common goal. That's what cities are for, that's what the region is for, and that's what the regional transit agency should be there for.

In any case, I'm feeling rather pessimistic that in a few years we'll probably be in the same place... waiting for a solution while the region gets more polarized at who deserves which and why.

----

Now, for my opinion on what should happen:

- Evergreen Line is a sure go this time, and will happen until 2014.

- Surrey should have B-Lines first, and they will get it this year (2012). Everyone started off with that before SkyTrain, no one should jump the queue.

- In 2013, local service to certain areas of Surrey and Langley, particularly Clayton Heights, Morgan Heights, and Rosemary Heights should be started/expanded/improved with more straight and frequent routings.

- In 2014-2015, there should be work on building LRT to Guildford. A lot of routes duplicate themselves on 104th, and removing that short duplication allows more frequent connecting services.

- In 2015-2016, the first of six phases of Evergreen Line to UBC should start work, heading towards Cambie first. These phases as listed below will slowly bridge the gap among the corridors intersecting Broadway.

- In 2016, the North Shore should have more frequent Seabus service and get three B-Lines / frequent Express buses on the Phibbs-Lonsdale-Park Royal-Dundarave, Lynn Valley-Phibbs-Vancouver, and Horseshoe Bay-21st-Park Royal-Vancouver routings. Local services should also no longer run to Downtown from this point. Such separation of local vs regional service does mean more transfers but also means that local services can proceed independently in case of bridge disruptions.

- In 2016-2017, the Expo Line will be extended on King George towards 96th.
- In 2017-2018, Evergreen Line to UBC will proceed to Granville.
- In 2018, Delta services should be split into express-local groupings.
- In 2018-2019, LRT will be built elevated to Fleetwood.
- In 2019-2020, Evergreen Line to UBC will proceed to MacDonald.
- In 2020-2021, LRT will be extended at-grade from Fleetwood to 168th.
- In 2021-2022, Evergreen Line to UBC will proceed to Alma and/or Sasamat.
- In 2022-2025, Expo Line will be extended towards Newton.
- In 2025-2028, Evergreen Line to UBC will proceed to UBC.
- In 2028-2031, LRT will be extended towards Langley.

Now, am I forgetting something? In any case other priorities/proposals may also be squeezed onto this list, provided that no two rapid transit projects happen at the same time. (It might work, but it might just break the budget too!)

[red-paladin]

I think the best is a modest skytrain expansion of the existing Expo line in Surrey.
Then there is no 'Surrey Line' and the Expo line as a whole will make a profit still. It's economies of scale. The trains will still have the same amount of people, as they are already taking the buses and more people will start to take it because it's a Skytrain. I think when the Evergreen Line opens people will be surprised that it only takes a short time to have substantial ridership.

Regardless what happens, the next line should start construction right after the Evergreen Line, wherever it's going to be.
There is no doubt that based on ridership and potential ridership the UBC project is the most deserving, but I do agree with the political consideration of building an extension in Surrey before Vancouver, as they've just had the Canada Line. I still feel LRT is second rate and if it wasn't good enough for anywhere else it's not good enough for Surrey.

[nname]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Expo & Millenium Line Expenses = $94,984,000
Canada Line Expenses = $100,555,000
Bus Expenses = $614,000,000

Total Transit Revenues = $421,015,000

Seeing as it all goes into 1 pot, stating that Canada Line earns a Profit would mean either or Expo/Millenium Lines see HUGE losses or busses also see huge losses.

Unfortunately I have yet to find a Translink financial report that actually states what the revenues are from Sky Train different from busses. They lump it all together.

At the end of the day though:

Transit fairs paid = $421 million
Transit expenses = $809 million

Something wrong with that picture. A broadway line even making 500% profit would still not bring Translink into the black if you just focus on transit paying for transit. So I doubt profitability of a skytrain line will determin which line would go first. It would just slow the bleed ever so slightly. Not to mention as has been said above, a large bulk of people on a new Broadway line would be U-pass holders so you have even less revenue.

Unfortunately I don't know the answer. *shrug*

Canada Line is at a loss, since that 100 millions of operating cost does include the payback for private sector contribution in construction. The "break even" actually means it is cheaper to run Canada Line now compared to before with the B-Line and all commuter routes going to downtown. This just shows how much it cost to run all those bus routes...

And no, they don't tell you the revenue for each mode, but its pretty easy to estimate them. I'll just use the 2010 data:

Revenue: $437.9M, minus approx $10M for airport add-fare gives $427.9M.
Boardings: 347.2M

Now, we have to make this assumption that all fare are the same. Of course this is not the case and it would actually go in the favor of bus as most bus trips are one zone, but this is the best we can do. At least we can get a rough estimate...

Average fare paid per boarding: $1.261

Now for calculate the cost for each line

Expo Millennium Line:
Operating Cost: $88.7M
Boardings: 79.2M
Cost per Boarding: $1.12
Cost Recovery: 112.6%

Canada Line:
Operating Cost: $83.6M - $10M (add-fare)
Boardings: 38.4M
Cost per Boarding: $1.92
Cost Recovery: 65.8%

Bus and SeaBus:
Operating Cost: $587.2M
Boardings: 226.8M
Cost per Boarding: $2.59
Cost Recovery: 48.7%

Again, the vast majority of multi-zone fares are taken by SkyTrain. So in reality, the recovery for SkyTrain would be even higher and the bus would be lower.

[nname]

Originally Posted by jhausner

Same tax payer lawl oh wait I just used the same argument you used against me earlier. But wait, why do the Expo and Millenium line expenses and revenues show up on Translink's financial statements? (Btw if you want the answer take a look at their 2011 capital budget... but I'll save you the trouble... it's because Translink = BC Transit)

Like I said, your opinion and my opinion is clear and quite frankly there is no point debating you. I can throw numbers left right and center and make this an endless pointless debate. The truth is the numbers are quite meaningless my ultimate argument is that people SoF just want to feel like we don't have to hold the region at gun point to get any increased service which we still do.

Is the tide shifting? Sure it is. But it has to shift quite a bit before people will perceive it as fair.

Its the operating and minor capital project (ie. station improvement) cost. The debt payment and depreciation cost are actually on BC Transit and RapidTransit2000's financial statement (RapidTransit2000's statement can be found on BC MoT's site). Whoever own the line, is whoever who pays the debt and depreciation. It stated explicitly on BC Transit's statement that paying for the Expo Line and WCE is now their only contribution toward the transit system in Metro Vancouver.

[nname]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

If I'm not mistaken, the Canada Line profits won't show there. It's a P3. I don't know the details, but I'd assume that profits would go to the private party until the end of the contract.

The Expo Line, as I understand it, turns a profit. Not sure about the M-Line. It looks like, from those numbers, buses are the biggest drain when it comes to expenses. This makes sense. There's less room for optimization, better efficiency, etc. Passengers to operator ratios are much higher.

HOWEVER, rail projects have a large capital cost.

Canada Line may never see as "profitable" on the financial statement over the next 32 years as it would also have to pay back the ~750M capital contribution from the private sector, as operating cost.

Rail projects have large capital cost, but senoir government would also help pay for it so local government only need to contribute about 1/3, whereas they have to contribute almost 100% of the operating cost. For a more greedy point of view, building something that generates operating profit would be better than building/using something cheap and require subsidy to operate, right?

For instance, having federal and provincial government contribute 2/3 of the capital cost of Burnaby Mountain gondola that generates operating revenue would be much better on TransLink's finance than operating those buses at huge subsidy, even if the total cost of the gondola is higher.

[trofirhen]

Excuse me, but IMO, the next thing to do right after the Evergreen Line is the UBC extension. In the interim, B-lines, and high-density feeder bus lines could be used SoF until final infrastructure is installed there.

[Rico]

As someone who lived a long time in North Delta it seems obvious the only possible reason to build a Surrey extension before a Broadway extension is politics (although as a transit fan I would love to see both). I am pretty sure there are plenty of demand models that will show this. A point I don't think has been covered here is a significant portion of people SoF are closer to existing rapid transit than any proposed Surrey extensions (people in most of Delta, Whalley), these people probably get more improved mobility with the Broadway line than a Surrey expansion (assuming there are destinations they will visit on Broadway and none on the Surrey expansion (Sorry but a fair assumption I think)). That does not even consider the mobility improvements for other people in the region. Does anyone doubt a Broadway line would be more useful for people in the Tri-cities, Richmond, New West, Burnaby? I didn't think so.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by Zassk

This seems to be conclusive evidence that Newton should get the next Expo Line extension. It's the largest town centre by population and has the fastest growth (faster than Cloverdale, apparently), and as a bonus, it is the cheapest town centre to expand to.

Explain why that automatically is the best course.

You might see it as the largest, but it is still just 1 out of 6 Surrey "boroughs". What about everyone else?

Extending to Newton sure does help the biggest part of surrey, but completely ignores the others (well, it does marginally help South Surrey). It's spending money to help Newton, at the expense of the rest of the city.

The other thing to keep in mind is that Newton is HUGE! Newton isn't just the area around King George and 72nd. It stretches from Scott Road to 152 St at it's widest, and around 90 Ave to Highway 10 at it's tallest. It's about triple the land area as Fleetwood.

A line straight down King George isn't going to benefit most of the population on the West Side along Scott Road, and the further north you go the more pointless it gets. From most points it would take just as long to get to King George Blvd as it does to get to Scott Road Station today on a bus. And I'm talking from experience. I live in "Newton" and from my place by bus, it would be faster to go to Scott Road Station than any point on King George Blvd.

The population base on the East side of Newton might also find the line useless. Between 88 and 72nd, there is no road access from East Newton to King George Blvd, meaning, by bus, for most people the closest, fastest and easiest station to get to will STILL BE KING GEORGE STATION!!!!!!!!!

And that doesn't mention the fact that transit has improved ZERO PERCENT for residents of Guildford, Fleetwood, and Cloverdale (and Langley and beyond). They are completely left out of any improvement. That's 177,020 people (in Surrey alone) today which is more than the entire population of Newton, which, many of whom won't even benefit substantially from Skytrain on King George.

If the line were to go straight down Fraser Highway, even only as far as 168 St, then it brings it substantially closer to residents in South East Guildford, ALL OF FLEETWOOD, and most of Eastern Newton. That is a much larger population that is directly affected by Skytrain expansion. Not to mention the bus travel times from Cloverdale and Langley are basically cut in half (and that is only if the Skytrain goes as far as 168 St) and the line bisects almost every bus route in Eastern Surrey, facilitating easy grid like travel. That is a much larger impact for a line that is about the same length.

Then further future expansion has more impact too. From Newton the only reasonable place to go is South Surrey. Again, this ignores and does nothing for everyone in Guildford, Fleetwood, Cloverdale, and Langley, and only serves a smaller percentage of SOF residents than other corridors.

From Fleetwood, expansion can proceed into Langley. The bisects almost the entire population SOF. Almost everyone SOF becomes a whole lot closer to Rapid Transit. There is fast growing density in Clayton and Cloverdale, which would be just a few minute bus ride from Fraser Highway. Not to mention the Willowbrook area which has some lofty density plans in the works. And have you not been into Langley city? It's almost entirely apartments, condos and townhomes. Terminating in Langley also brings residents further out in the Valley that much closer to Skytrain. Aldergrove would be only a short rapid bus ride away, and there is a lot of growth potential in the area.

While sending Skytrain down King George to Newton might really benefit some people, going down Fraser highway will benefit a much larger number of people, shorten ( and simplify and cheapen) many bus routes, and leave Skytrain open to further, more impactful expansion in the future. And politically, it will involve more communities and residents of the Valley, making it an easier line to get through the Translink board and/or provincial assembly.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Explain why that automatically is the best course.

You might see it as the largest, but it is still just 1 out of 6 Surrey "boroughs". What about everyone else?

Extending to Newton sure does help the biggest part of surrey, but completely ignores the others (well, it does marginally help South Surrey). It's spending money to help Newton, at the expense of the rest of the city.

The other thing to keep in mind is that Newton is HUGE! Newton isn't just the area around King George and 72nd. It stretches from Scott Road to 152 St at it's widest, and around 90 Ave to Highway 10 at it's tallest. It's about triple the land area as Fleetwood.

A line straight down King George isn't going to benefit most of the population on the West Side along Scott Road, and the further north you go the more pointless it gets. From most points it would take just as long to get to King George Blvd as it does to get to Scott Road Station today on a bus. And I'm talking from experience. I live in "Newton" and from my place by bus, it would be faster to go to Scott Road Station than any point on King George Blvd.

The population base on the East side of Newton might also find the line useless. Between 88 and 72nd, there is no road access from East Newton to King George Blvd, meaning, by bus, for most people the closest, fastest and easiest station to get to will STILL BE KING GEORGE STATION!!!!!!!!!

And that doesn't mention the fact that transit has improved ZERO PERCENT for residents of Guildford, Fleetwood, and Cloverdale (and Langley and beyond). They are completely left out of any improvement. That's 177,020 people (in Surrey alone) today which is more than the entire population of Newton, which, many of whom won't even benefit substantially from Skytrain on King George.

If the line were to go straight down Fraser Highway, even only as far as 168 St, then it brings it substantially closer to residents in South East Guildford, ALL OF FLEETWOOD, and most of Eastern Newton. That is a much larger population that is directly affected by Skytrain expansion. Not to mention the bus travel times from Cloverdale and Langley are basically cut in half (and that is only if the Skytrain goes as far as 168 St) and the line bisects almost every bus route in Eastern Surrey, facilitating easy grid like travel. That is a much larger impact for a line that is about the same length.

Then further future expansion has more impact too. From Newton the only reasonable place to go is South Surrey. Again, this ignores and does nothing for everyone in Guildford, Fleetwood, Cloverdale, and Langley, and only serves a smaller percentage of SOF residents than other corridors.

From Fleetwood, expansion can proceed into Langley. The bisects almost the entire population SOF. Almost everyone SOF becomes a whole lot closer to Rapid Transit. There is fast growing density in Clayton and Cloverdale, which would be just a few minute bus ride from Fraser Highway. Not to mention the Willowbrook area which has some lofty density plans in the works. And have you not been into Langley city? It's almost entirely apartments, condos and townhomes. Terminating in Langley also brings residents further out in the Valley that much closer to Skytrain. Aldergrove would be only a short rapid bus ride away, and there is a lot of growth potential in the area.

While sending Skytrain down King George to Newton might really benefit some people, going down Fraser highway will benefit a much larger number of people, shorten ( and simplify and cheapen) many bus routes, and leave Skytrain open to further, more impactful expansion in the future. And politically, it will involve more communities and residents of the Valley, making it an easier line to get through the Translink board and/or provincial assembly.

Thats not a good argument point there cause if you go down fraser your making people in newton and south surrey miss out which alone(going by the numbers on the cities site) is 201320. Thats not including people in north delta and white rock.

Plus if you look at the cities plans there aren't really any plans to really grow the fleetwood area. But newton and south surrey are huge growing areas and only set to expand rapidly for a while. If you look at the future numbers the city is projecting the top three in order for population are newton first, whalley second, south surrey third. Skytrain would better suit this route going to newton while LRT would suit going out to langley

[invisibleairwaves]

You know, I used to feel pretty strongly about the Fraser Highway vs. King George debate, but honestly at this point I've given up on RRT expansion in Surrey being a worthwhile issue at all. Until the city smartens up and stops allowing or building idiotic, anti-pedestrian, transit-unfriendly projects along its major corridors, neither route should even be considered for rapid transit. And judging by the sheer number of brand-new strip malls and subdivisions along both corridors, it's fairly obvious that this change isn't going to happen any time soon.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Whalleyboy

Thats not a good argument point there cause if you go down fraser your making people in newton and south surrey miss out which alone(going by the numbers on the cities site) is 201320. Thats not including people in north delta and white rock.

Plus if you look at the cities plans there aren't really any plans to really grow the fleetwood area. But newton and south surrey are huge growing areas and only set to expand rapidly for a while. If you look at the future numbers the city is projecting the top three in order for population are newton first, whalley second, south surrey third. Skytrain would better suit this route going to newton while LRT would suit going out to langley

I am not a good person to talk about Fraser hwy as i rarely get there, but you shouldn't count N.Delta in a Newton line as travel time to existing stations will be similar or less to at least 80th but probably 72nd (assuming destinations North). I think White Rock travel times to Richmond/Downtown would also still be faster via Canada line. As for Lrt vs rrt a larger number of lines will reduce lrt infrastucture costs for the whole network as they could share facilities. My recollection is both King George and Fraser hwy should work fine for lrt...or for now King George for Brt.

[Chikinlittle]

Originally Posted by invisibleairwaves

You know, I used to feel pretty strongly about the Fraser Highway vs. King George debate, but honestly at this point I've given up on RRT expansion in Surrey being a worthwhile issue at all. Until the city smartens up and stops allowing or building idiotic, anti-pedestrian, transit-unfriendly projects along its major corridors, neither route should even be considered for rapid transit. And judging by the sheer number of brand-new strip malls and subdivisions along both corridors, it's fairly obvious that this change isn't going to happen any time soon.

Thank you! Now, on to Broadway please.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by Rico

I am not a good person to talk about Fraser hwy as i rarely get there, but you shouldn't count N.Delta in a Newton line as travel time to existing stations will be similar or less to at least 80th but probably 72nd (assuming destinations North). I think White Rock travel times to Richmond/Downtown would also still be faster via Canada line. As for Lrt vs rrt a larger number of lines will reduce lrt infrastucture costs for the whole network as they could share facilities. My recollection is both King George and Fraser hwy should work fine for lrt...or for now King George for Brt.

I'd would actually bet on it being fast for much of N.Delta to travel to skytrain from 96 onwards since they would just have to take a bus down to king george and not all the way to scott road like what current buses do.

Also why do you only think about people from white rock going to Downtown. What if people want to go to new west or metrotown or even maybe broadway? After all we don't live in place where dt is the only destination.

[twoNeurons]

Something to be considered.

RRT down Fraser Highway is essentially Surrey's Expo Line. The SkyTrain Expo line is successful because it was built through largely industrial areas and TOD was built around it. The less successful areas were already established. Fraser Hwy has a lot of space for TOD. More space than Newtown and Guildford.

In addition, Newton is close the to the highway into Richmond (Alex Fraser) and Guildford is close the the #1 highway. A Fraser Highway extension would have less competition with cars.

Although I like the idea of traversing along 104th, I'm warming up to a straight shot down Fraser Highway. Excellent post, BCPhil.

[TransitJack]

The biggest issue I have with putting RRT further into Surrey is that Surrey is currently not built to take advantage of RRT. Let's face it, Surrey is sprawl-central, a city that will surpass the population of Vancouver simply because it is massive, and they seem bent on taking over most of the land available with large subdivisions and cul-de-sacs.

The city is spread far and wide, and though there are nodes of increasing densification, most of Surrey's transit problems stem from the fact that you can't serve the increasing population to much satisfaction because of the spread of the population across all this space.

Last time I was in "downtown" Surrey I was so surprised that after having Skytrain since 1994 how little density there actually was around the stations. A few newer highrise towers, but nothing compared to New West, Burnaby, or even Richmond.

I understand the economics behind Surrey's sprawl and by no means do I suggest it is the city or its residents fault that housing prices push people to outlying areas where land is cheap. That said, you can't 'reward' a city for its sprawl by spending billions on rapid transit. This is especially true in Metro Vancouver where population growth is a constant. I also realize that Surrey is trying to change this sprawl mentality, but for now the area's low density dynamic hinder its case for RRT investment.

I know, I know, Surrey needs something and I totally agree. This could come in the form of BRT or B-lines (for now) to serve areas that show the need. But Surrey needs to develop its town core and demonstrate a constrained effort to reduce sprawl and encourage much greater densification around its existing Skytrain stations. From this, build feeder bus lines and build ridership with Blines and better bus service (perhaps frequent transit network) and establish the ridership that warrants the capital costs of RRT.

In the mean time, focus RRT investment in areas of the region that are dense, that have outgrown their available bus service, that continue to promote walking and transit as alternatives, in areas that have demonstrated an acceptance to density and an acceptance to further grow around dense, compact communities.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Whalleyboy

I'd would actually bet on it being fast for much of N.Delta to travel to skytrain from 96 onwards since they would just have to take a bus down to king george and not all the way to scott road like what current buses do.

Also why do you only think about people from white rock going to Downtown. What if people want to go to new west or metrotown or even maybe broadway? After all we don't live in place where dt is the only destination.

Don't forget for N.Delta 22nd street station is an option, and rember that for any destination it will be the total travel time, not just the time to the rapid transit. So by the time our intrpid traveller goes up 72nd to your new Newton line then takes it north of the Fraser it is almost a wash.
As for White Rock I am aware dt is not the only destination, thats why I specifically said Richmond/dt.....although I should point out your Broadway example would be faster via Canada line from White Rock.

[tybuilding]

You only need to look at new developments to see that suburban spawl is not in favor anymore. I agree it was 15 years ago but not anymore.

Clayton

South East Newton

Though I agree that we need more infill than high density housing on the fringes.

[twoNeurons]

I agree with you... to a point. However, the recent build of super-narrow lots in Cloverdale, flanked by townhouses and some apartment buildings is more a product of the recent real estate overvaluation, and less about what's in trend. It may be a temporary trend.

The real estate market has been overpriced for a few years and so for families who want to get into a SFH, the only chance they have is these "new urbanism" townhomes.

The lots in Cloverdale are ~8m wide.

Compared with typical Surrey/Langley homes in the area, that's tiny.

Along 56th Ave, several years earlier, the same amount of money would get you a double car garage and 14m wide lot.

An older house lot is 18m.

A typical [what was suburban] East Vancouver lot is 10m wide.

I'm sure if you look into the 25' lots that some place in Toronto have, you'll see the same factor at play... affordability. That was back when you needed a whole lot more than 5% down to buy a place.

Vancouver dealt with higher prices not by rezoning, but rather by lowering the standard of living. They turned a blind eye to illegal suites, thus allowing buyers to afford more than they should be buying because of the "mortgage helpers". Thus, the only really affordable places to live in Vancouver are rental suites... because rental apartments simply weren't built.

Almost every house built in East Vancouver in the past 15 years has had one legal and a 2nd illegal suite in the basement.

If the city had zones density areas back in the 90s when the SkyTrain was building steam, we would've had a whole lot more affordable apartments and condos as developers bought up land and consolidated packages. Instead we have everybody being a landlord and this general tension.

When you live in someone else's basement, it's hard to feel like it's your home (not your house, but your home).

ANYWAY, enough of this rant... what I'm trying to say is that the density in Cloverdale is temporary, should the real estate market correct itself like it did 22 years go.

[Whalleyboy]

Originally Posted by Rico

Don't forget for N.Delta 22nd street station is an option, and rember that for any destination it will be the total travel time, not just the time to the rapid transit. So by the time our intrpid traveller goes up 72nd to your new Newton line then takes it north of the Fraser it is almost a wash.
As for White Rock I am aware dt is not the only destination, thats why I specifically said Richmond/dt.....although I should point out your Broadway example would be faster via Canada line from White Rock.

Well if then the same argument could be done about most people in Guildford since the line wont hit them along Fraser. Going to a station in central will be much more faster then them riding out to Fraser hwy to ride back to central.

I just think the newton line is way better as the population is there future plans to build up newton are in place. Plus the line could in the future still branch out along 64 ave and hit Cloverdale and Langley in the future.

Fleetwood isnt going to expand much more then it is in the cities mind so they aren't planning on much build up for there just look at the maps and population numbers the city is planning
Land use planning
http://www.surrey.ca/files/cos-maste...MAP-letter.pdf
Population projects

from the cities of surreys site http://www.surrey.ca/for-business/1418.aspx