Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771
For anyone interested:
SNG LRT socio-economic report FULL DOWNLOAD (PDF, 250MB)
The Surrey LRT website splits up every single chapter into its own PDF, which I found difficult to properly review (the TL/SNG team are clearly trying to make it difficult for us...). To aid in this process I have merged all of the files into a single large PDF and it is available for download at the link above. It is 906 pages long.
Kinda interesting how they've given the public just under 3 weeks to review a 900+ page long document and made the whole thing relatively difficult to access... |
Don't really have time to look through the entire document now.. but just looking at project description... this image says it all:
If you say Canada Line currently does not have enough capacity... well, this line is planned to have
2,040 pphpd initally, which is about 1/3 of current capacity on Canada Line.
Minimum headway is 5min, I guess that have to do with the planned Fraser Hwy line. So in a few years, every SkyTrain Line will have
off-peak frequency that's better than the
ultimate peak frequency of this line...
Maximum speed of 50km/h due to traffic speed limit... well, this isn't new to us.
Ultimate capacity of
6,000 pphpd with 60m train... Now where are the people that were saying the Canada Line's 15,000 pphpd is under built? And I remembered correctly, isn't Surrey said it will surpass Vancouver in population by something like 2041? And yet they're satisified with a capacity that's only 40% of the "underbuilt" line? Oh, and even Canada doesn't go as low as "increase" train capacity by cramming more people per car and user a different formula for calculation...
And for the people who claim LRT can carry same amount of people as SkyTrain when they build super long station.... Well, I guess that's not even an option now (even though I already mentioned a few hundreds post back that, at least the design of Surrey Central station prevent platform that fits more than a couple of cars, due to road, curves, and SkyTrain pillar blocking the way)
And then the next page...
AM peak ridership of
930 pphpd...
They either seriously low-ball the ridership, or that just shows this corridor doesn't even need a rapid transit at all. Even by 2045, the projected ridership is far lower than the 99 B-Line, and may even be lower than some local bus routes like the 20. Again, does this corridor need LRT at all?
And I love how they justify the line by saying.. "although the LRT is only 2min faster now, it will be much faster than the B-Line in about a decade time, as the B-Line's will somehow 40% slower due to traffic congestion"
On the side note, I'm glad they didn't try to glorify the
stops by calling them
stations...
I'm sure I won't be here complaining if this is a 165 million project... or even 365 million.... But this thing cost 1.65 billion, and that's the best they can come up with for that much money???
Threaded Mode