Expo Line - Surrey Langley Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Double track will fit fine, they are just concerned with taking space away from cars (Toronto syndrome in full effect, a large job for transit is to get people out of their cars).

That's what those planners and engineers in City of Surrey continue to think, however they usually do not commute or see the sorry state the neighborhoods around 104th are in. Many local streets feeding to 104th Ave between Whalley Blvd and 148th Ave do not have any sidewalks and it is borderline suicidal when you are walking along these streets.
They are essentially going to place down LRT first before doing ANY infrastructure improvements along supporting arterial (108th Ave and 100th Ave).

I think it's time to get real. First off, I am not overly cynical when it comes to public transportation but I can confidently say that the average Surrey Joe will not be enticed to get out of their car and hop on a glorified bus to connect to either the Skytrain or another bus. THAT IS...unless the price of driving skyrockets (insurance increases, gas prices go sky high or road pricing is introduced). We have seen people tack on as much as 30 minutes to their rush-hour commute avoiding the PMB and people will put up with whatever BS traffic disruptions this project causes. Personally, I would rather drive 40min (and pay 100-150 dollars more) to commute to my destination and put up with whatever traffic rather than walk 10min to a bus, wait X amount of time for a packed bus and board a packed Skytrain only to have to wait X minutes for another packed bus in Vancouver.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

That's what those planners and engineers in City of Surrey continue to think, however they usually do not commute or see the sorry state the neighborhoods around 104th are in. Many local streets feeding to 104th Ave between Whalley Blvd and 148th Ave do not have any sidewalks and it is borderline suicidal when you are walking along these streets.
They are essentially going to place down LRT first before doing ANY infrastructure improvements along supporting arterial (108th Ave and 100th Ave).

I think it's time to get real. First off, I am not overly cynical when it comes to public transportation but I can confidently say that the average Surrey Joe will not be enticed to get out of their car and hop on a glorified bus to connect to either the Skytrain or another bus. THAT IS...unless the price of driving skyrockets (insurance increases, gas prices go sky high or road pricing is introduced). We have seen people tack on as much as 30 minutes to their rush-hour commute avoiding the PMB and people will put up with whatever BS traffic disruptions this project causes. Personally, I would rather drive 40min (and pay 100-150 dollars more) to commute to my destination and put up with whatever traffic rather than walk 10min to a bus, wait X amount of time for a packed bus and board a packed Skytrain only to have to wait X minutes for another packed bus in Vancouver.

It's not just what they think, that's a huge part of transit. Decongests crowded areas and reduces emissions.

[logan5]

That's a good point. A major part of what makes transit in the City of Vancouver successful are the many interesting streets and neighbourhoods that transit customers navigate on their way to and from their bus stop. Walking to a bus stop in Vancouver is a pleasant experience. Surrey on the other hand...

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

It's not just what they think, that's a huge part of transit. Decongests crowded areas and reduces emissions.

In theory, and I will not digress with that as we've seen this put into practice with the Skytrain network. It's tried, tested and true when it has been built right. The thing I will continue to argue is that the City of Surrey has done absolutely nothing to address the state of the road/pedestrian network along the corridor...This will continue to be hinder mass transit ridership unless they address this.

The L line offers little to add capacity and reliability over what we have in place. If what I am hearing is correct, there are discussions whether or not it is feasible to single track portions of the line along 104th. This to me tells me the City either thinks; a) the line will not be achieving 8 min or greater frequencies or b) they think reducing 104th Ave to 1 lane each way is a significant issue going forward.

The alternative is upgrading the 96 B-Line to a full BRT system with enclosed shelters, GPS tracking at bus stops, priority queued lights with increased frequencies (5-7 min).

LRT down 104th Ave is completely unnecessary though. You have several express buses including the 96 that can offer a 5-10min commute between Guildford and Surrey Central.

[Reecemartin]

The problem is it's unlikely to draw significantly development as live mentioned a bunch of times this is a development project.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

The L line offers little to add capacity and reliability over what we have in place. If what I am hearing is correct, there are discussions whether or not it is feasible to single track portions of the line along 104th. This to me tells me the City either thinks; a) the line will not be achieving 8 min or greater frequencies or b) they think reducing 104th Ave to 1 lane each way is a significant issue going forward.

The alternative is upgrading the 96 B-Line to a full BRT system with enclosed shelters, GPS tracking at bus stops, priority queued lights with increased frequencies (5-7 min).

LRT down 104th Ave is completely unnecessary though. You have several express buses including the 96 that can offer a 5-10min commute between Guildford and Surrey Central.

[ilikeredheads]

not only unnecessary, but an extreme waste of money as well. Money that will be needlessly spent for decades to come.

[Reecemartin]

\_(ツ)_/¯

I am pretty sure that Surrey council isn't going to reverse course on this, while you might think it's unnecessary, they certainly do not. I believe the line is already going through P3 Canada?

[paradigm4]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

That's what those planners and engineers in City of Surrey continue to think, however they usually do not commute or see the sorry state the neighborhoods around 104th are in. Many local streets feeding to 104th Ave between Whalley Blvd and 148th Ave do not have any sidewalks and it is borderline suicidal when you are walking along these streets.
They are essentially going to place down LRT first before doing ANY infrastructure improvements along supporting arterial (108th Ave and 100th Ave).

The City is actually upgrading and expanding 100 Ave from 140 to 148 St right now, four lanes with a multi-use pathway and separated bike lanes, in preparation for the impacts on 104th (providing east-west alternative routes out of City Centre).

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by paradigm4

The City is actually upgrading and expanding 100 Ave from 140 to 148 St right now, four lanes with a multi-use pathway and separated bike lanes, in preparation for the impacts on 104th (providing east-west alternative routes out of City Centre).

Any images or renders?

[Aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

The problem is it's unlikely to draw significantly development as live mentioned a bunch of times this is a development project.

The argument that technology plays a bigger factor in attracting development is a bit of a red herring. Studies have shown that the biggest factor in getting TOD is a government that is willing to rezone near stations. There are examples where both BRT and LRT have stimulated or failed to stimulate development.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

The argument that technology plays a bigger factor in attracting development is a bit of a red herring. Studies have shown that the biggest factor in getting TOD is a government that is willing to rezone near stations. There are examples where both BRT and LRT have stimulated or failed to stimulate development.

Of course policy is a big factor too, both can create good development. But I would argue that all other things the same that LRT will draw more than BRT (unless we are talking transmillenio level BRT). Rather LRT vs, BRT on a similar scale.

[bardak]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

The problem is it's unlikely to draw significantly development as live mentioned a bunch of times this is a development project.

That is the issue. There are many of us who are not happy that surrey is using limited provincial, federal, and local transit funds on a development scheme. I am more than happy for Surrey to use their own municipal fund to promote development but the fact that they are trying to sell a development scheme as a transit project is what gets people upset.

Look I am not going to protest in the streets over this. The LRT is the compromise that needed to be made so that Surrey would support the Broadway subway and as long as Broadway goes ahead I will live with it. That being said I will not stop criticizing the idiocy of the LRT plan when it is brought up.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Any images or renders?

http://www.surrey.ca/city-services/21331.aspx

of course you'll see as usual for Surrey to half ass it. They won't even upgrade west of 140th to like 137th.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

In theory, and I will not digress with that as we've seen this put into practice with the Skytrain network. It's tried, tested and true when it has been built right. The thing I will continue to argue is that the City of Surrey has done absolutely nothing to address the state of the road/pedestrian network along the corridor...This will continue to be hinder mass transit ridership unless they address this.

The L line offers little to add capacity and reliability over what we have in place. If what I am hearing is correct, there are discussions whether or not it is feasible to single track portions of the line along 104th. This to me tells me the City either thinks; a) the line will not be achieving 8 min or greater frequencies or b) they think reducing 104th Ave to 1 lane each way is a significant issue going forward.

The alternative is upgrading the 96 B-Line to a full BRT system with enclosed shelters, GPS tracking at bus stops, priority queued lights with increased frequencies (5-7 min).

LRT down 104th Ave is completely unnecessary though. You have several express buses including the 96 that can offer a 5-10min commute between Guildford and Surrey Central.

I demonstrated earlier that even Skytrain will barely fit at 104th near Surrey Central if they merge the sidewalk and cycling paths.

Meaning it's pretty much essential to single track it at this point if they want to still have a sidewalk at the end of this.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I demonstrated earlier that even Skytrain will barely fit at 104th near Surrey Central if they merge the sidewalk and cycling paths.

Meaning it's pretty much essential to single track it at this point if they want to still have a sidewalk at the end of this.

I'd imagine with all the significant redevelopment plans, the road network around Surrey Central will be worked. IMO I'm not particularly worried that we will be losing sidewalk space, much more likely to simply cut down on road space which is something that I would support, especially in the core.

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by bardak

That is the issue. There are many of us who are not happy that surrey is using limited provincial, federal, and local transit funds on a development scheme. I am more than happy for Surrey to use their own municipal fund to promote development but the fact that they are trying to sell a development scheme as a transit project is what gets people upset.

Has anyone even seen some of the newest LRT renders by the City?



The actual LRT project is the small station, tram and track in the middle of the picture. The rest isn't actually going to be funded by the L-Line's billion+ dollar budget.

It certainly looks pretty to see an envisioned LRT terminus in Newton surrounded with people and development like that, but the suggestion I'm getting is that the LRT project money will absolutely build the rest of the picture, and that's going more than a little too far. Making the rest of the picture come to life is going to require an incredible amount of private developer participation, none of which is actually guaranteed. Even if this were to become reality, for all we know it might not be until another 10 to 20 years - by which time, it will be too late to make a real impact on increasing transit use/reducing auto use and suburban sprawl. I don't recall that transit projects in Vancouver have ever been promoted like this. I've been thinking of calling it out; it's absolutely misleading.

Public spending on transit should be about moving people, and not about subsidizing private development.

[Genauso]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

I don't recall that transit projects in Vancouver have ever been promoted like this. I've been thinking of calling it out; it's absolutely misleading.

Public spending on transit should be about moving people, and not about subsidizing private development.

Staff aren't supposed to show bias or advocate, but it happens.

> LRT will solve all of Surrey's problems!
< Why not build 100 LRT lines instead of 3
> I always hated math, that question isn't fair. This is about a big picture
< Ok, where else is the city spending to achieve these goals and the observed return on investment
> Precedents aren't fair, think about the artistic merit

Dropping all rules and constraints is fun, it's called daydreaming and it's what happens when the political/image side of City Hall bleeds over into the Planning departments.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Has anyone even seen some of the newest LRT renders by the City?

I love how these visualizations show a few cars here and there. In real live those streets would be chock-a-block full of cars.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Has anyone even seen some of the newest LRT renders by the City?



The actual LRT project is the small station, tram and track in the middle of the picture. The rest isn't actually going to be funded by the L-Line's billion+ dollar budget.

It certainly looks pretty to see an envisioned LRT terminus in Newton surrounded with people and development like that, but the suggestion I'm getting is that the LRT project money will absolutely build the rest of the picture, and that's going more than a little too far. Making the rest of the picture come to life is going to require an incredible amount of private developer participation, none of which is actually guaranteed. Even if this were to become reality, for all we know it might not be until another 10 to 20 years - by which time, it will be too late to make a real impact on increasing transit use/reducing auto use and suburban sprawl. I don't recall that transit projects in Vancouver have ever been promoted like this. I've been thinking of calling it out; it's absolutely misleading.

Public spending on transit should be about moving people, and not about subsidizing private development.

Of course not, however I don't think it's unlikely at all. Surrey seems ready to approve pretty much any density on the corridor, and developers will inevitably want to build projects. If the city is smart they will try to get developers to fund public realm enhancements as well.