Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[usog]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

A Surrey resident served by a bus route that's new or has increased frequency isn't going to avail themselves of the service if they're continually passed up by the Broadway bus that they need to get to their destination.

God forbid anyone wants to go to/from Downtown, Burnaby, Richmond, tri-cities, or anywhere outside of the Broadway Corridor I personally think skytrain to Surrey is way premature as well but the new frequent transit network concept does needs attention. It's this tunnel vision towards the Broadway corridor that's tweaking the noses of everyone else really.

[GMasterAres]

This is a ridiculous debate that has been hashed out before hundreds of pages back. People for a surrey line first live in surrey. People for Broadway line first live or work along the Broadway line. You are both selfish and biased so just keep your pointless opinion to yourself.

The truth is both are needed for different reasons. Vancouver has 100 years on Surrey for densification. So if we just do everything on density we should have skytrain down every second street in Vancouver before anywhere else. That is just silly.

On the flip side it has to make sense to build expensive rrt in Surrey and they do need to be showing initiative to densify and not just be handed transit expansion because it is "our turn".

At the end though it is pretty clear both are needed. Anyone that actually travels through the entire region and not just their to and from work/school everyday like half the people on these forums, know Broadway is at capacity and rrt expansion makes sense. The jobs are there the people are there and you have the largest provincial university at the end.

Those people also know Surrey has over 10 years increased density 10 fold and in many parts has higher per square meter densities than much of the Broadway corridors. If you don't believe me I challenge you to get in a car and drive around. Or better yet, try and travel around surrey on transit. That will get you true appreciation for those that don't live on 5 main roads in surrey thus have little to no transit service.

We talk constantly on these forums about how Surrey has to earn skytrain by densifying first. But I ask how is that fair? Metrotown consisted of 5 high rises when it got expo. New west was. bunch of low rises when it got skytrain. Brentwood wasn't anywhere what it is today before millenium line was announced. And heck Joyce didn't densify until 15 years after skytrain was stopping there.

Surrey central in 10 years will have 40-50 highrises and a population of 50,000 or more. It has been designated the next downtown and downtown of the Fraser valley. Downtowns have business and I believe the demand is there for skytrain if not only for the argument Coquitlam is getting skytrain and has less than 1/4 the population of Surrey. And the Surrey should have a b line first argument doesn't fly either because we were supposed to get a b line before even Canada line was planned. You can't penalize the city for being lied to for decades. Where is that rapid bus? Where are our b lines? Why did it take 2 years more to make a bus lane on highway 99 than the entire gateway project took and it still doesn't go all the way?

It goes on and on.

I think it has been proven we need a line out here just like it is proven Broadway needs one. We just have to all stop the me first me first childishness and get our government to figure out a way of paying for both. They can pay for ads on the radio. They can figure out one of the single pressing matters in metro van, transit.

Oh but they don't want to and and don't have to because we are too busy in the surrey vs Vancouver debate to pay attention to reality and that is the actual problem.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by andasen

Your arguement isn't quite correct. A Surrey resident wont be able to get on the broadway bus coming from their destination. Go to is no issue as they'd be boarding at Commercial Broadway transfering from the Expo Line.

There are pass-ups for buses leaving Broadway westbound, too...

[xd_1771]

Well, in the case of SkyTrain rapid transit... aside from low operating costs, SkyTrain really generates ridership, which really generates revenue.... so it could help to an extent.

[Jack Guevara]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Could you maybe be more precise about which Surrey pax corridors merit RRT?

Yes, from King George Skytrain, down Fraser Highway to Langley. I believe that it would help those that take long bus rides to Surrey Central, and encourage new users to use transit.

[Jack Guevara]

Originally Posted by Meraki

It's clear for someone who doesn't understand population density. But we don't listen to them because they don't understand population density.

In terms of density, if one removes the ALR(agriculture land reserves) from the equation then Surrey has just as much density as the rest of the area. For that many people there needs to be more rapid transit(skytrain or LRT), and not a mere 4 skytrain stations. Most of Surrey can and will still be served by buses, but RRT is needed down certain corridors if we want to make the city less car dependent.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Jack Guevara

In terms of density, if one removes the ALR(agriculture land reserves) from the equation then Surrey has just as much density as the rest of the area. For that many people there needs to be more rapid transit(skytrain or LRT), and not a mere 4 skytrain stations. Most of Surrey can and will still be served by buses, but RRT is needed down certain corridors if we want to make the city less car dependent.

If only you could avoid having to route the RRT through long stretches of the ALR. Connecting Guildford and Newton make sense, but anything beyond that is a little ridiculous.

Without the ALR Surrey's density is ~2000/km².
Richmond's is ~2400 km².
The Tri-Cities range from 1000/km² to 1900/km².

Without subtracting any parkland (which there is lots...) Burnaby is at 2430/km².
New West without any subtraction is at 4000/km².
Vancouver without any subtraction is at 5250/km².

I don't think anyone will be suggesting Coquitlam, or Richmond deserve much more RRT other than their connections the central region. A good connection is important, but buses can handle a lot more traffic in these cities.

I think Surrey is the same. A few couple more stations to act as bus hubs feeding into the main parts of the region yes, as a replacement for infrequent buses? Heck no.

Should RRT eventually cross large swaths of ALR to reach South Surrey and Langley? Again, heck no.

Give it a decade or two of B-Line.

[xd_1771]

^ Then for the same reason, building the SkyTrain over the Fraser River (a gap similar to the ALR, except a full bridge is far more expensive) was not justified.

As for Surrey.... when you discount the ALR, there are still many non-ALR "NCP" zones such as Port Kells/Anniedale, much of Grandview Heights, and some parts of Clayton that are still not developed whatsoever - and will be developed at fairly good densities when it happens. Try the calculation again after subtracting those.

[BCPhil]

I really don't see why it seems so impossible to build to UBC and into Surrey at the same time.

First, multiple big dollar projects happening concurrently isn't new to BC. We built the Canada Line while we built a convention center, upgraded BC Place, built the Oval and Vancouver Olympic Center, and upgraded the Sea to Sky highway; not to mention the dozens of highway projects in the interior like the new Okanagan lake Bridge. Today, we are starting work on Evergreen while finishing work on the Gateway and NFPR projects. The NDP worked on the island highway, fastcats and other projects at the same time as the Millennium line. And the Socreds built the Expo line while building one of the most amazingly engineered mountain highways in the world.

Even translink worked on the Canada Line and the Golden Ears bridge simultaneously.

If it was our will to NOT work on a major highway project (kick the 99 project down the road) and prioritize on public transit for a decade, 2 major projects isn't outside the realm of financial feasibility.

Second, Skytrain to UBC is going to be a very long project. It will probably take 10 years to build the line all the way to UBC. So even though the project might be expensive, its yearly budget probably won't be more than something like Evergreen line.

Contrarily, Skytrain to Langley would be a very simple build. It is a pretty straight line, all above ground, and for the most part down the Fraser Highway. Plenty of space is reserved down the side of the road for transit. All that needs to be done is put up some pilings, lay the guideway, and clear a bit of land for stations. Not much extensive roadwork needs to be done (which is why I think RRT to Langley would actually be cheaper than LRT to Langley which would need a lot of roadwork to be redone). It's probably a 3 year project at the most.

It's only 16km to Langley, it can't cost more than $2 billion. I bet if a detailed engineering assessment were done it would come in at less. That said, on an annual basis, it would probably be the same, if not a bit more than per year than Skytrain to UBC.

I think building both lines is well withing the purview of the people of the lower mainland.

[Zassk]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

^ Then for the same reason, building the SkyTrain over the Fraser River (a gap similar to the ALR, except a full bridge is far more expensive) was not justified.

Not the same, and you know it. The river was a major obstacle for buses with the state of the bridges in the early 80's. The ALR was not.

A city core of 50,000 does not impress me for a city of Surrey's size and for having had SkyTrain for more than 20 years. Do you realize that Coquitlam and Richmond will have far denser and more populous city centers than Surrey for the next several decades, despite having gotten their rapid transit decades later than Surrey?

IMO Surrey wasted the opportunities presented by their SkyTrain stations for years, and therefore we should be skeptical that they will leverage any future transit line in a timely fashion. New West has set a good example of what Surrey should have been doing for the past 25 years. It is beyond me as to why the region should want to prioritize transit spending on a city that ignored its transit for so long.

Surrey has had their transit service hours doubled in the past five or six years, despite Watts' cries of transit inequity. IMO it is time for Surrey to focus its development enough to make B-lines pay for themselves. Nevermind prioritizing rail lines for Surrey until that happens. Vancouver buses get 5x the usage of Surrey buses. It is time to stop making excuses for that, and for Surrey to start shaping development to fix that.

Every new development in far-flung places like South Surrey is a slap in the face of the region's transit planning, and another reason not to prioritize Surrey rapid transit.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Jack Guevara

In terms of density, if one removes the ALR(agriculture land reserves) from the equation then Surrey has just as much density as the rest of the area. For that many people there needs to be more rapid transit(skytrain or LRT), and not a mere 4 skytrain stations. Most of Surrey can and will still be served by buses, but RRT is needed down certain corridors if we want to make the city less car dependent.

And Vancouver's density is 5250/sq km, or 5437/sq km if you remove the 4 sq km of Stanley Park.

This is about 2.5x that of Surrey if you subtract the ALR.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

I really don't see why it seems so impossible to build to UBC and into Surrey at the same time.

$$$$

You try and come up with an extra $5 billion in provincial and TransLink funds.

[Steveston]

Is there any reason why these projects need to built all at once? There are valid arguments for both the Surrey extensions and the UBC line. But why does everything need to be built in a single phase?

Why not start with a 5km (or so) extension of the M line from VCC Station to Burrard? West of there, the traffic starts to lighten up (somewhat) on Broadway, and buses can make better time (and operate at higher frequencies) from Burrard to UBC. As funds become available, the line can be extended westward to Dunbar/Alma, then finally all the way to Campus Centre.

Similarly, why can't there be a leg of the E line running from Surrey Central Stn to Guildford (about 4km), as a first phase? Let's see how that works with buses feeding two terminus stations, thus lightening road traffic along 104 between Central & Guildford? Future decisions on B-lines, LRT or SkyTrain can be made based on those results.

Sounds like a way to somewhat address both issues, without breaking the bank.

[Joat]

If only someone could persuade Jimmy Pattison to help out with the funding. Then we could honour him by naming the line after him!

[Millennium2002]

Good question.

I cannot say this is for sure, but it seems like for transit projects at least, we tend to prefer the base components to be built as one gigantic phase. This goes for the Canada Line and the Evergreen Line.

I think if the region could agree on splitting things up into phases vs one gigantic project, it'd make more budgetary and political sense to do both at the same time. However, as we all know, political and economic sense can be lacking in this region... and perhaps the politicians have concluded that it might win more points politically if everything were done at once. (shrug)

@Joat Haha. I think Surrey wouldn't mind doing another deal with the group, given that there are already naming rights on the Surrey Outpatient Hospital to that effect. (even though the hospital is the responsibility of Fraser Health)

[jlousa]

Breaking the UBC Line into 3 phases would elevate the price from $2.8B (today $$$s) to at least ~$3.6B(today $$$s). The price would jump at a min. 20-30% higher in constant dollars then doing it all at once. With interest at all time lows it doesn't make sense to phase the project if you are doing to end up building the whole thing anyways.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

If only you could avoid having to route the RRT through long stretches of the ALR. Connecting Guildford and Newton make sense, but anything beyond that is a little ridiculous.

Without the ALR Surrey's density is ~2000/km².
Richmond's is ~2400 km².
The Tri-Cities range from 1000/km² to 1900/km².

Without subtracting any parkland (which there is lots...) Burnaby is at 2430/km².
New West without any subtraction is at 4000/km².
Vancouver without any subtraction is at 5250/km².

I don't think anyone will be suggesting Coquitlam, or Richmond deserve much more RRT other than their connections the central region. A good connection is important, but buses can handle a lot more traffic in these cities.

I think Surrey is the same. A few couple more stations to act as bus hubs feeding into the main parts of the region yes, as a replacement for infrequent buses? Heck no.

Should RRT eventually cross large swaths of ALR to reach South Surrey and Langley? Again, heck no.

Give it a decade or two of B-Line.

You are actually missing the point entirely. Stop thinking of Surrey as just another suburb that directs people to Vancouver. Surrey has been designated downtown of the Fraser valley and second downtown of metro Vancouver.

That makes Surrey a second transit hub in the future and place where people in Langley, surrey, delta, and even burnaby/new west will commute to eventually. But as it can take a decade to get things constructed, the purpose of skytrain extension in Surrey is to build that backbone to encourage further business's and smart density.

So try and remove the notion that you have to lump Surrey in as just another suburb of Vancouver. It is mainly today for business but for industry it already leads with delta as a hub. Over time you will see business increase and increase. Not to mention in 10 years SFU Surrey will challenge Burnaby for size and make it further a destination rather than a source.

Also re crossing alr that is just blown over proportion. Drive down Fraser highway. You have 2km of alr to cross. You cross more distance from Columbia street to Scott Road. So crossing 2km of alr to connect regions with medium to high density is no big deal in my books. It is more dense in Fleetwood and Clayton than most of the Cambie corridors so just because there is a 2km wide "River" called the alr you need to cross, there should be no rrt at all ever?

Let's get real here that is just a tad sily. We aren't talking 20 km of empty devoid farmland here. Like I said go drive Fraser highway from Surrey central to Langley. You may be surprised as to how much actually is along that stretch and how busy it actually is.

This all still does not discount the fact that I think Broadway has to happen and quite frankly should have happened when Millenium line was built. And this coming from a born and raised Surrey citizen.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Breaking the UBC Line into 3 phases would elevate the price from $2.8B (today $$$s) to at least ~$3.6B(today $$$s). The price would jump at a min. 20-30% higher in constant dollars then doing it all at once. With interest at all time lows it doesn't make sense to phase the project if you are doing to end up building the whole thing anyways.

I agree. Much like sfpr intersections I would rather see infrastructure built in 1 shot. It is always cheaper in the long run. If you could have shut down all of highway 1 for 3 years, gateway would have been far cheaper than it was. Just like when they do upgrade sfpr to interchanges it will cost much more than if they just did it now.

Same here. When they are going to build the ubc line just bit the bullet and do the entire thing.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by jhausner

You are actually missing the point entirely. Stop thinking of Surrey as just another suburb that directs people to Vancouver. Surrey has been designated downtown of the Fraser valley and second downtown of metro Vancouver.

I said lines to Newton and Guildford make sense. Does a fledgling downtown really need more than 3 rail rapid transit routes entering and exiting it?

Hell, Downtown doesn't even have that. Vancouver proper just got it's 3rd line in 2008. Anything more than a Newton / Guildford route would be wasteful for decades into the future.

I'd venture to say that Poco evergreen extension should be higher up on the pecking order than a Fleetwood / Langley line.

We're not Dubai. Money can be better spent.

[Alon]

Originally Posted by Steveston

Is there any reason why these projects need to built all at once? There are valid arguments for both the Surrey extensions and the UBC line. But why does everything need to be built in a single phase?

Why not start with a 5km (or so) extension of the M line from VCC Station to Burrard? West of there, the traffic starts to lighten up (somewhat) on Broadway, and buses can make better time (and operate at higher frequencies) from Burrard to UBC. As funds become available, the line can be extended westward to Dunbar/Alma, then finally all the way to Campus Centre.

Because a partial extension does nothing for UBC-bound commuters, who are the biggest peak on the buses, and if anything makes things worse by ending the 99/84 split.

http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/skytrain-and-ubc/