HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2861  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 4:48 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by logicbomb View Post
What don't you get? All decisions are made based on:

Personal gain- Those pushing for this project are getting kickbacks
Politics- maintain political power or cement a legacy
Money- handing out lucrative contracts to friends and donors (ties in with personal gain)

There is no such thing as rational planning. The City could have invested in better bus shelters or upgraded transit hubs. They could have created new roads or built more bus queue jumpers on all major FTN routes...etc..

This is a project that will solely do well for the politicians and stakeholders involved. If it was otherwise, they would have held a referendum or staged multiple open houses and community engagement events.
Sorry, I completely forgot about all those reasons.
     
     
  #2862  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 5:25 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
Why build the line first?
Why not leave that line and build other more needed lines.
You accidentally left out a word before "line." Are you asking why the L line before the Langley line?

If so, I have no idea. Maybe it's cheaper to build so it's easier to get done first, or maybe because it's entirely in Surrey and functions more as an "internal" line rather than a commuter line. The second reason would support my belief that Surrey only wants light rail to legitimize itself as a real city, as it would serve Surrey exclusively, whereas a Langley Line would be perceived as just passing through Surrey on the way to Vancouver. I'm just speculating though, I'm sure there are lots of varied reasons. The Langley Line is definitely more needed as of now though.
     
     
  #2863  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 5:36 AM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
You accidentally left out a word before "line." Are you asking why the L line before the Langley line?

If so, I have no idea. Maybe it's cheaper to build so it's easier to get done first, or maybe because it's entirely in Surrey and functions more as an "internal" line rather than a commuter line. The second reason would support my belief that Surrey only wants light rail to legitimize itself as a real city, as it would serve Surrey exclusively, whereas a Langley Line would be perceived as just passing through Surrey on the way to Vancouver. I'm just speculating though, I'm sure there are lots of varied reasons. The Langley Line is definitely more needed as of now though.
I was referring to the L line.
That is just it, if they were to build the Skytrain to UBC, then extend it to Langley. By then, the L line will become more important to go south to White rock and north to Pitt Meadows. Then, building the L line as a Skytrain line would make sense.
     
     
  #2864  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 5:55 AM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by swimmer_spe View Post
I was referring to the L line.
That is just it, if they were to build the Skytrain to UBC, then extend it to Langley. By then, the L line will become more important to go south to White rock and north to Pitt Meadows. Then, building the L line as a Skytrain line would make sense.
Yeah unfortunately these projects don't get built in terms of need. If they were, Broadway would've been built a looong time ago. But considering the large variety of voices, politics and interests in our region, I think we've done tremendously well in developing our transit system.
     
     
  #2865  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 10:03 PM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
Are you asking why the L line before the Langley line?
I think Surrey is the one spearheading the LRT - so it would focus within its boundaries first.
.. and Surrey, with a population in excess of 500,000, contributes a lot in terms of regional taxes for transit,
so projects need to be spread out, otherwise Vancouver would always get priority.

The Langley line may also have less ridership and is a longer line through less dense areas than the L line.

Personally, I think it good that it's the 2nd phase, since that could allow a switch to SkyTrain.
     
     
  #2866  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2017, 11:06 PM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,916
Evergreen Line = 10.9 km = 1.4 billion = about 120 mill per km (with a long tunnel and all grade seperated and driverless)

Surrey LRT L Line = 9.7km = over 1 billion = min 100 mill per km (all at grade with drivers mixed with traffic and removing some 20 km of traffic lanes etc) * costs will likely be significantly higher once planing starts.

I makes no sense on the routes to go LRT. Crazy stuff.
...
     
     
  #2867  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 1:15 AM
bardak bardak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
You accidentally left out a word before "line." Are you asking why the L line before the Langley line?

If so, I have no idea. Maybe it's cheaper to build so it's easier to get done first, or maybe because it's entirely in Surrey and functions more as an "internal" line rather than a commuter line. The second reason would support my belief that Surrey only wants light rail to legitimize itself as a real city, as it would serve Surrey exclusively, whereas a Langley Line would be perceived as just passing through Surrey on the way to Vancouver. I'm just speculating though, I'm sure there are lots of varied reasons. The Langley Line is definitely more needed as of now though.
I have a feeling that they were given both option but the province told then that the Fraser highway was going to have to be Skytrain. Surrey is only really cares about building a fancy LRT system and not coming up with measurable benefits to work towards they went with the LRT line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
Evergreen Line = 10.9 km = 1.4 billion = about 120 mill per km (with a long tunnel and all grade seperated and driverless)

Surrey LRT L Line = 9.7km = over 1 billion = min 100 mill per km (all at grade with drivers mixed with traffic and removing some 20 km of traffic lanes etc) * costs will likely be significantly higher once planing starts.

I makes no sense on the routes to go LRT. Crazy stuff.
...
It costs a lot build a whole new system and basically rebuild an entire road. If the bidding process for the Canada line allowed for cost savings from integration of existing Skytrain system we probably would have save a large amount of money too.


When it come down to it Vancouver wants to get the Broadway subway done ASAP and if they have to pay for Surrey to build a giant boondoggle to do so they will.
     
     
  #2868  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 2:24 AM
Aroundtheworld Aroundtheworld is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by officedweller View Post
The Langley line may also have less ridership and is a longer line through less dense areas than the L line.

Personally, I think it good that it's the 2nd phase, since that could allow a switch to SkyTrain.
In Translink's study I thought they indicated it was the opposite, that the land use around the Fraser Highway corridor was more conducive to higher ridership than the L-line. I remember when I first saw that that the results surprised me.
     
     
  #2869  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 3:30 AM
cornholio cornholio is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld View Post
In Translink's study I thought they indicated it was the opposite, that the land use around the Fraser Highway corridor was more conducive to higher ridership than the L-line. I remember when I first saw that that the results surprised me.
It is diagonal and cuts through the middle of Surrey and terminates in Langley. There would be lots of bus routes that would terminate at its stations. I assume most ridership transfers into the system instead walks to the system. Even if there is little development along Fraser Highway it does seem like the route would catch a significant number more bus routes. Its better positioned.
     
     
  #2870  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 5:01 AM
casper's Avatar
casper casper is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 12,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
Evergreen Line = 10.9 km = 1.4 billion = about 120 mill per km (with a long tunnel and all grade seperated and driverless)

Surrey LRT L Line = 9.7km = over 1 billion = min 100 mill per km (all at grade with drivers mixed with traffic and removing some 20 km of traffic lanes etc) * costs will likely be significantly higher once planing starts.

I makes no sense on the routes to go LRT. Crazy stuff.
...
In principle, I think the Lower Mainland eventually needs LRT (lets call it street cars since that is what it is). Well suited to locations that require a lower capacity, lower frequency service that can not justify the cost of skytrain.

What is odd about this is, this is not a route that requires lower capacity or frequency. How can this possible be this expensive.
     
     
  #2871  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 7:09 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,722
Makes sense about bus route catchment.
     
     
  #2872  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 8:14 AM
Kisai Kisai is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Burnaby
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper View Post
In principle, I think the Lower Mainland eventually needs LRT (lets call it street cars since that is what it is). Well suited to locations that require a lower capacity, lower frequency service that can not justify the cost of skytrain.

What is odd about this is, this is not a route that requires lower capacity or frequency. How can this possible be this expensive.
Skytrain + TrolleyBuses are the only acceptable transit for Metro Vancouver, here's the reasoning:

a) The Skytrain is fast, frequent, cheap to run (no drivers, hence it can run even when Skytrain staff on are on strike,) and the grade separation makes it safe for pedestrians, cars and transit riders.
b) LRT is slow, infrequent, expensive to run (it will not be running when bus driver unions strike) and the level crossings will result in gridlock, pedestrians and bike riders being injured in locations where there is no overpass.
c) Street-car mode LRT takes all the inefficiencies of LRT and adds car-train collisions at any point in the track.
d) Trolleybuses have more capacity and are more flexible than LRT/Streetcars that run on a fixed track.

It is a naive thing to think that just because the rails exist that they will always have street cars on them, just look at Arbutus and the old interurban.
All the trolleybus routes we have used to be streetcars at one point in time. That was back when the city population was sparse and not many people owned private automobiles. Every time people suggest going back to street cars, they are ignoring the part where you would have to make the ROW exclusive to the street car, otherwise it will be excessively dangerous due to car/train and pedestrian/car interactions of having to go to the middle of the road to board the train.

Every time someone proposes bringing back streetcars they don't provide a reason why building expensive-to-maintain rails in the street is supposed to be better than just running trolleybuses. The fact is the only advantage "streetcar" LRT has over a Trolleybus only comes when you make the LRV train long like the Skytrain, which LRV's never are, they max out at 35.7m. Any potential LRT will have capacity less than the Canada Line even if it was run at Canada Line frequency and speed.

The City of Surrey is lying through it's teeth about any benefits the "L Line" will bring over the Skytrain, and at this point the only people who even want it are those who don't know that the Skytrain+BRT was the preferred option by Translink in the first place.
     
     
  #2873  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 11:21 AM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by cornholio View Post
It is diagonal and cuts through the middle of Surrey and terminates in Langley. There would be lots of bus routes that would terminate at its stations. I assume most ridership transfers into the system instead walks to the system. Even if there is little development along Fraser Highway it does seem like the route would catch a significant number more bus routes. Its better positioned.
Honestly I do not see lot of buses terminating at skytrain stations on fraser hwy. Lot of people in Surrey and Langley use buses to get across town. I know some people need to transfer between 2 buses just to get around some times in Surrey. Having them terminate at the skytrain stops on fraser could force people to have to go bus skytrain bus. Which could actually cut down the number of people using transit.
     
     
  #2874  
Old Posted Jan 21, 2017, 8:38 PM
Express691 Express691 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 650
Small announcement:

SkytrainForSurrey has made a Facebook event to get people to voice their opposition against the proposed plans

https://www.facebook.com/events/202745816858382/202753106857653/
     
     
  #2875  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 12:35 AM
officedweller officedweller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 41,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whalleyboy View Post
Honestly I do not see lot of buses terminating at skytrain stations on fraser hwy. Lot of people in Surrey and Langley use buses to get across town. I know some people need to transfer between 2 buses just to get around some times in Surrey. Having them terminate at the skytrain stops on fraser could force people to have to go bus skytrain bus. Which could actually cut down the number of people using transit.
Cross-town bus routes would just be transfer points.
Like bus routes that cross the Canada Line.
     
     
  #2876  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2017, 12:41 AM
trofirhen trofirhen is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,052
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whalleyboy View Post
Honestly I do not see lot of buses terminating at skytrain stations on fraser hwy. Lot of people in Surrey and Langley use buses to get across town. I know some people need to transfer between 2 buses just to get around some times in Surrey. Having them terminate at the skytrain stops on fraser could force people to have to go bus skytrain bus. Which could actually cut down the number of people using transit.
However, if the current roster of major bus routes can be maintained and integrated into the rail system, what then? Diluting the rail colume? Diluting the bus volume? Or working well?
     
     
  #2877  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 6:38 PM
Express691 Express691 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 650
LRT survey is now up

http://www.translink.ca/surreylrt
     
     
  #2878  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 6:50 PM
SleepyCommuter SleepyCommuter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 2
Mayors' Council Meeting
Meetings Meetings
Jan 26, 2017 9 a.m. - 11 a.m.

Quote:
Details
The Mayors' Council contains representatives from each of the 21 municipalities, as well as the Tsawwassen First Nation, from within the transportation service region and collectively represent the viewpoints and interests of the citizens of the region. The Mayors' Council has allotted the first hour of each public meeting to receiving public delegations.
http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Even...ouncil-Meeting-Jan-26-2017.aspx?filter=1

Maybe another avenue to express opinion on the project
     
     
  #2879  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 7:14 PM
SFUVancouver's Avatar
SFUVancouver SFUVancouver is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 6,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Express691 View Post
Thanks for the head's up. I completed the survey and shared my views.

The Phase 2 study has a couple of major flaws in it to my eyes:

-There was no direct comparison of the "L Line" LRT option on King George Blvd/Hwy & 104 Ave ("LRT Alternative 4") with equivalent scenarios for BRT or RRT, independent of what could occur on Fraser Highway to Langley. How do we know whether the LRT "L Line" option is the best way forward if it was not compared to anything?!
-There was also no direct comparison of RRT on Fraser Highway and BRT on the "L Line" to Newton with an option with RRT again on Fraser Highway but with LRT on the "L Line" to Newton.

For the direction comparison of LRT vs RRT on Fraser Highway with BRT on the "L Line" to White Rock, the RRT option (RRT 1a) was superior in almost every way to the LRT option (LRT 5a).

(Page 7 http://www.translink.ca/-/media/Document...natives_Evaluation_Executive_Summary.pdf)
__________________
VANCOUVER | Beautiful, Multicultural | Canada's Pacific Metropolis

Last edited by SFUVancouver; Jan 23, 2017 at 7:34 PM.
     
     
  #2880  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2017, 7:26 PM
xd_1771's Avatar
xd_1771 xd_1771 is offline
(daka_x)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,740
TransLink's online survey for the LRT project is now open: http://fluidsurveys.com/surveys/translink-Z/surrey-lrt/

If you're with me in opposing the Surrey-Newton-Guildford project then you can state that you are "NOT IN SUPPORT" at question one, and you have an opportunity to type in any reasoning a couple of questions later. As an example below is roughly what I wrote.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SleepyCommuter View Post
Mayors' Council Meeting
Meetings Meetings
Jan 26, 2017 9 a.m. - 11 a.m.

http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Even...ouncil-Meeting-Jan-26-2017.aspx?filter=1

Maybe another avenue to express opinion on the project
Hey, thanks for the notice on the meeting. Because of the short notice of this meeting, anyone looking to speak at this meeting has until 8AM TOMORROW MORNING to fill in the application form here http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Governance-and-Board/Mayors-Council/Council-Meetings.aspx
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Vancouver > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:13 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.