Quote:
Originally Posted by lightrail
While I agree with you that the LRT sucks as a regional connector, there are benefits that people are missing. The big one, is for better or worse, people just like rail over buses. It likely won't carry more people than the current buses in the early years, but the permanence of the LRT, along with the sexy smooth ride, will foster development around the stations - driving up density and creating a livable city. The low-floor stops integrated into the urban fabric will support walking and cycling too. It will likely attract high tech jobs - like amazon or Microsoft or Apple or any number of jobs that appeal to younger people. But it depends on the city allowing the zoning to change and to have guidelines in place to support that density. From that point of view, I understand what Surrey is trying to do and I think they are correct.
BUT - the LRT will do nothing for moving around the region - such as White Rock to Vancouver. Nobody is going to get off a bus at Newton to get the LRT to Surrey Central to then get on Skytrain - instead, they'll stay on the bus to Surrey Central or take the 351 to Bridgeport. This and the fact that the LRT will be manually driven, will lead to expensive operations.
A Skytrain extension could have done the same thing - though not as elegantly or as sexy looking as the European renders show. So we'll see down the road when somebody going home steps off Skytrain at Surrey Central then has to wait 15 minutes for an LRT to finish their journey, whether LRT was such a good idea afterall. Skytrain can run frequently at night simply because there is no cost overhead in doing so, other than wear and electricity. Skytrain can run frequent shorter trains at the same cost as less frequent longer trains. For example, a 2-car train running every 3 minutes is the same cost as a 4-car train running every 6 minutes. The LRT will require a driver, so to cut costs you have to cut frequency. Therefore it is cheaper to run a 4 car train every 10 minutes, than it is to run two 2-car trains every 5 minutes. So service during quiet times will suffer on the LRT in relation to Skytrain.
|
"Sexiness" is neither worth the extra billion dollars it costs to build LRT over BRT, nor is it a good argument for one technology over an other. Transit is about moving people, not filming promotional videos with LRT riding down past high-rises.
As far as encouraging development, Surrey still has more than enough room around its existing Expo Line stations to spur development for many years to come. Land that has only recently really began to be taken advantage of like this, and land that is incredibly more attractive than around King George Boulevard towards Newton.
If Amazon or Microsoft really wanted to set up shop in Surrey, I don't think LRT instead of BRT would be the deciding factor for them. Again, there's plenty of much more attractive land in Surrey's city centre for this office space, with existing rapid transit. Where are they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One
Hahaha, told you guys!
Like many on here I as well am not really against the L-line LRT, just the cost draining funds from other transportation projects.
But again, time for everyone to focus and ensure that the Langley extension is done as Skytrain. For that REGIONAL connection LRT makes NO sense. It so naturally needs to be an extension of the Expo Line.
|
There's no harm in continuing to complain about this decision. It's not over until it's over. Just because Surrey's politicians have an economic and transportation death wish, doesn't mean the rest of us have to stop talking about it. I'm gonna do the survey and tell them how much I oppose this decision. You're right—they'll probably do it anyway. But staying silent is not the way citizen-participant urban planning is supposed to work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicbomb
She doesn't have to provide a good reason. This isn't a project for the people and what I found out on the "inside" truly confirmed this. It is and has always been about being the first municipality to do something different. Also, there's a lot of dirty money in BC Politics right now and this is bleeding into municipal politics. Sadly, this move was solely made to provide contracts to "friends" and to try and cement a Surrey First legacy.
My worry is the sickening level of congestion the City will see. You people cannot comprehend how short-sighted this government is when forecasting traffic projections and it was really concerning hearing the Chief City engineer claim "those people will be frustrated enough to make the switch from car to transit." Guildford-Whalley is screwed with 104th Ave going down to single lanes with no left-turns. The roads cannot handle the traffic with the current grid configuration and there's barely improvements coming before 2020 to remedy the clusterfuck that will ensue after construction
|
Absolutely. This has never been about encouraging development, improving transportation or transitioning to an urban form. This is all about distinguishing Surrey from Vancouver. If LRT gets built, it sets it apart. Vancouver and its suburbs have SkyTrain; Surrey and (what it wants you to believe are ITS suburbs, like Langley) will have light rail. They have been fairly transparent about this. Surrey said they partially favour light rail along Fraser Highway because it forces a transfer at City Centre, creating a downtown-ish terminus feeling and preventing a smooth commute into the city. It forces people to interact with their city centre.
This is Surrey's Oakland Coliseum moment. This is their plan to develop their own identity separate from being a Vancouver suburb, but their own city. Problem is they're not one.
Prev
Linear Mode
