Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

That's a very vague statement though, it doesn't even say rails. That statement could easily be interpreted as "bus lane". Didn't the new PMB replacement promise another deck for rails up until shortly before construction?

There was never anything really "official" about PMB LRT (and with that bridge design, it's hard to see where it could be placed).

WRT GMT - it's probably vague because South Surrey White Rock would be served by rapid transit extending down King George Blvd, so GMT would just be serving Ladner, Tsawwassen and the ferries (not exactly huge population bases).

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by jacobparry

The bus route north along suburban King George Boulevard is already as busy at rush hour as the congested B-line in Vancouver.

http://www.bcbusiness.ca/manufacturing-t...k-light-rail-station-stops-by-early-2016

I assume he's talking about the 96 B-Line that runs on King George Boulevard. Luckily TransLink released the ridership stats for 2014, so we can actually compare the 96 B-Line with the 99 B-Line.

Looking at the 06:00-09:00 and 15:00-18:00 blocks (I'd call that "rush hour"), the 96 B-Line had average peak ridership of 25-40 passengers, and was 88% full in the afternoon rush hour. Compare this to the 99 B-Line, which had average peak passenger load of about 80, and capacity at about 170%.

Yeah, saying the King George corridor is "just as busy" as the Broadway one is crazy. The B-Line carries three times as many people per bus and runs about twice as many buses. It sounds like this guy has never seen the 99 B-Line during a morning or evening rush, or has never looked at the numbers.

[nname]

Even the 97 was more well-used than the 96 in 2014.

On a side note, I'm so curious to see the stat for 97 this year, after they pulled almost all the 60ft buses from the route during daytime and put them on the 160...

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by officedweller

There was never anything really "official" about PMB LRT (and with that bridge design, it's hard to see where it could be placed).

WRT GMT - it's probably vague because South Surrey White Rock would be served by rapid transit extending down King George Blvd, so GMT would just be serving Ladner, Tsawwassen and the ferries (not exactly huge population bases).

I agree, but the GMT is just as vague about rail transit, if not more so. Fool me once, and all that.

I don't think there will be any rail over the GMT bridge, at least with this government at the helm.

I'd love to see Skytrian extended down KGH to South Surrey, but that would take away serious justification for such a large bridge, as a bunch of that Hwy 99 traffic would be taken off the road, in theory.

Long term, having the Skybridge as our only transit rail bridge over the Fraser is short sighted. With the Canada Line extending to YVR and Western Richmond, it makes sense to extend that further south, at some point in the future. Whether or not it's worth including in the GMT bridge design at this stage, I don't know.

[jacobparry]

Originally Posted by Rico

I really hope that is poor reporting and not that the transportation planner in Surrey has such a poor grasp of his job. Wow, just wow. Reading the linked article has a few other what planet is this coming from statements too.

Curious to hear reasoning per how transportation planner has a poor grasp of his job

[WarrenC12]

New Federal Liberal Infrastructure Cabinet Minister is a "light rail" fan.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/11/04/new-infra...rail-advocate-with-incredible-backstory/

He comes from Edmonton. Hopefully he's a big supporter of light rail that happens to be grade separated and driverless.

[Reecemartin]

Do we know what the station locations for the Surrey lrt will be yet? Do we have a good general idea?

It seems counterintuitive to build the L line before the line to Langley.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

New Federal Liberal Infrastructure Cabinet Minister is a "light rail" fan.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/11/04/new-infra...rail-advocate-with-incredible-backstory/

He comes from Edmonton. Hopefully he's a big supporter of light rail that happens to be grade separated and driverless.

Let's hope that lrt is not what he pushes on Millenium-Broadway !

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I don't think there will be any rail over the GMT bridge, at least with this government at the helm.

I'd love to see Skytrian extended down KGH to South Surrey, but that would take away serious justification for such a large bridge, as a bunch of that Hwy 99 traffic would be taken off the road, in theory.

Long term, having the Skybridge as our only transit rail bridge over the Fraser is short sighted. With the Canada Line extending to YVR and Western Richmond, it makes sense to extend that further south, at some point in the future. Whether or not it's worth including in the GMT bridge design at this stage, I don't know.

Yeah, given the population distribution, location of GMT and the KGH route, highly unlikely rail would be built over a GMT bridge.

Re: KGH, using the Translink Surrey LRT/BRT map as a guide, I see the BRT route marked as the precursor for rail to White Rock, and if it's LRT, capital costs may be more "affordable" than SkyTrain (i.e. side of road gravel railbed along remote parts of KGH?).


http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Rapid-Transit-Projects/Surrey-Light-Rail-Transit.aspx


https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Surrey,...!1s0x5485dc034d3fa75b:0xd28b4898abd598e0

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Do we know what the station locations for the Surrey lrt will be yet? Do we have a good general idea?

It seems counterintuitive to build the L line before the line to Langley.

It may be counter-intuitive to build LRT before Skytrain, but when it is discovered that LRT on the street doesn't do what people were expecting, the Skytrain extension to Langley can be phase II (instead of LRT to Langley).

It will, however be an expensive lesson to learn.

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Let's hope that lrt is not what he pushes on Millenium-Broadway !

Google to find the horror stories of the new NAIT LRT line in Edmonton.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Yeah, given the population distribution, location of GMT and the KGH route, highly unlikely rail would be built over a GMT bridge.

Re: KGH, using the Translink Surrey LRT/BRT map as a guide, I see the BRT route marked as the precursor for rail to White Rock, and if it's LRT, capital costs may be more "affordable" than SkyTrain (i.e. side of road gravel railbed along remote parts of KGH?).

Well, I think Skytrain to Langley is the best idea.

I'm not a fan of having multiple branches, so maybe an LRT line that runs from Guildford then south down KGH isn't the end of the world? Apart from the dense area of KGH, it makes sense and would be a cheap extension down to White Rock.

My concern is for the western half of Metro. Are we going to leave it as agricultural land, or build stupid giant malls like Tsawassen? If we are going to let people live there en masse, we should think about rail transit. LRT might do well to the ferry to handle surge loads, through Steveston, and areas like that.... just a thought.

[GlassCity]

LRT over the Massey Bridge is completely not needed, it was just brought up to make the bridge seem like it wasn't just about drivers. 40,000 people live in South Delta, and I am firmly again "rapid" transit through extensive farm areas if White Rock is the destination. White Rock would be much better connected to rapid transit going north through Surrey, and as far as South Delta goes, express buses with their own lanes and increased frequency will be more than enough for the foreseeable future. There are many more pressing areas for transit investment before rapid transit over the Massey Bridge.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Well, I think Skytrain to Langley is the best idea.

I'm not a fan of having multiple branches, so maybe an LRT line that runs from Guildford then south down KGH isn't the end of the world? Apart from the dense area of KGH, it makes sense and would be a cheap extension down to White Rock.

My concern is for the western half of Metro. Are we going to leave it as agricultural land, or build stupid giant malls like Tsawassen? If we are going to let people live there en masse, we should think about rail transit. LRT might do well to the ferry to handle surge loads, through Steveston, and areas like that.... just a thought.

I think that SkyTrain / LRT transfers in municipal town centres seems reasonable as you get farther from the core and population densities drop.
i.e. line haul / SkyTrain connecting municipal town centres to each other and lower capacity services feeding each municipal town centre.

i.e.
Streetcar / LRT system in Richmond (Railway Ave., etc.) linking to/feeding into Canada Line.
Likewise, Surrey's LRT feeding into SkyTrain (though I'd like to see SkyTrain down Fraser Hwy to Langley).

When Evergreen was to be LRT that could have been an LRT network in the northeast, as well, but now, with the spur at Coquitlam Central, it suggests that any rail transit to Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge will be SkyTrain. So... if you are treating north of Fraser and South of Fraser equally, that also suggests that SkyTrain should go as far as Langley.

I really don't think there's anything wrong with low density areas (farmland) continuing to be served by bus service and private vehicles.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Let's hope that lrt is not what he pushes on Millenium-Broadway !

Originally Posted by jsbertram

Google to find the horror stories of the new NAIT LRT line in Edmonton.

I just had a look at a couple !!!!!!!!! Yeesh, frequencies of 15 minutes, top speed of 25/h, and often 16+ minute dealys. Not on Broadway, no, no, please !!!

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

LRT over the Massey Bridge is completely not needed, it was just brought up to make the bridge seem like it wasn't just about drivers. 40,000 people live in South Delta, and I am firmly again "rapid" transit through extensive farm areas if White Rock is the destination. White Rock would be much better connected to rapid transit going north through Surrey, and as far as South Delta goes, express buses with their own lanes and increased frequency will be more than enough for the foreseeable future. There are many more pressing areas for transit investment before rapid transit over the Massey Bridge.

Originally Posted by officedweller

I think that SkyTrain / LRT transfers in municipal town centres seems reasonable as you get farther from the core and population densities drop.
i.e. line haul / SkyTrain connecting municipal town centres to each other and lower capacity services feeding each municipal town centre.

i.e.
Streetcar / LRT system in Richmond (Railway Ave., etc.) linking to/feeding into Canada Line.
Likewise, Surrey's LRT feeding into SkyTrain (though I'd like to see SkyTrain down Fraser Hwy to Langley).

When Evergreen was to be LRT that could have been an LRT network in the northeast, as well, but now, with the spur at Coquitlam Central, it suggests that any rail transit to Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge will be SkyTrain. So... if you are treating north of Fraser and South of Fraser equally, that also suggests that SkyTrain should go as far as Langley.

I really don't think there's anything wrong with low density areas (farmland) continuing to be served by bus service and private vehicles.

I know it's been said on here before, but I don't know why Surrey has such a hard on for LRT everywhere when they could achieve as good, if not better, with buses and bus / HOV lanes - and for a lot less money. Running LRT down the middle of the road with no barricades (what they have planned) is a disaster waiting to happen. Fraser Hwy needs Skytrain.

[Metro-One]

I really REALLY hope that the new Transportation Minister is not blinded by the current North American "one size fits all" surface LRT fad...

Seriously, Broadway must be skytrain.

In Surrey, it should be Expo Line out to Langley.

If Surrey wants their own separate LRT system to Guildford and Newton, have at it (although BRT is the better choice), but dont screw over Langley (which has stated before that they want an Expo Line skytrain extension).

In regards to the GMT, sorry, but rail is not needed in that project for several reasons.

Yes, extending the Canada Line a little further south through Richmond as that community grows would be nice, but there will never be a need to extend a metro / LRT line south of LuLu Island via the 99 route.

Simply because south of the GMT the population is too small and too isolated to justify the cost of rapid rail transit. Even in the future this will not change. Look at any map and the majority of that land is ALR (farm reserve), which should never change. Even when the pocket population centres of White Rock and west Delta grow, the distances between these nodes due to the ALR and Burn`s Bog is still too far to justify skytrain or LRT.

Rapid Bus along the 99 corridor south of Richmond is the only true decent rapid transit choice for many decades to come. This includes the ferries.

In a perfect world these areas should eventually be serviced with heavy rail commuter trains akin to a Japanese JR rail system, but that requires a completely different style of infrastructure than what the new GMT bridge replacement can provide. (and such a project would better coincide with the replacement of our old heavy rail CP / CN bridge corridors).

[Rico]

Originally Posted by jacobparry

Curious to hear reasoning per how transportation planner has a poor grasp of his job

I would normally assume that a transportation planner would know something about transit, and unless it was seriously poor reporting it appears Surreys transportation planner does not. For starters he talked about the top speed of LRT as 70km when going through farm land sections, if he had any knowledge he would know this is false. There are plenty of LRT vehicles capable of travelling much faster than that when they have their own right of way without uncontrolled crossings (like say going through farmland) and wide stop spacing. Conversely talking about the King George corridor as if it has equivalent to Broadway can only be explained as total ignorance or glue sniffing. I am pretty sure the various buses on the Central Broadway corridor carry about 4,000 people per hour per direction today. King George LRT is forcast to carry 2,000 people per hour per direction in 2031. There were a couple of other things in the article that also showed a general lack of transit knowledge but I would need to reread to refresh my memory. My guess from the statements is he is a landscape architect with zero transit background.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Rico

I would normally assume that a transportation planner would know something about transit, and unless it was seriously poor reporting it appears Surreys transportation planner does not. For starters he talked about the top speed of LRT as 70km when going through farm land sections, if he had any knowledge he would know this is false. There are plenty of LRT vehicles capable of travelling much faster than that when they have their own right of way without uncontrolled crossings (like say going through farmland) and wide stop spacing. Conversely talking about the King George corridor as if it has equivalent to Broadway can only be explained as total ignorance or glue sniffing. I am pretty sure the various buses on the Central Broadway corridor carry about 4,000 people per hour per direction today. King George LRT is forcast to carry 2,000 people per hour per direction in 2031. There were a couple of other things in the article that also showed a general lack of transit knowledge but I would need to reread to refresh my memory. My guess from the statements is he is a landscape architect with zero transit background.

Or alternately he knows exactly what his job is - to keep his bosses happy by spreading FUD so they get what they want, even if it isn't in the best interest of the people they're supposedly serving. If he doesn't do it they'll fire him and find someone else who will.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Or alternately he knows exactly what his job is - to keep his bosses happy by spreading FUD so they get what they want, even if it isn't in the best interest of the people they're supposedly serving. If he doesn't do it they'll fire him and find someone else who will.

We expect politicians to spew manure, but civil servants should be responsible to the city, not the politicians. A case can be made for the Surrey LRT without resorting to statements that make knowledgeable people think he is high. Some of his views on a future network are 'interesting'. I really do think it is lack of knowledge, for whatever reason Surrey seems to have hired a transportation planner with no knowledge of transit.