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

[officedweller]

If you want a SkyTrain only solution, then revert back to the "kinked" Fraser Hwy extension announced back in 2008 which would put a station at the south end of the Guildford district (not necessarily at the mall, but close to it). Or just forget about Guildford and go down Fraser Hwy for a faster route.

To serve Newton, construct a branch east of King George Station that heads south past the back of Surrey Memorial Hospital, then veer back to King George Blvd. on the hydro RoW.

You'd end up with a branched line that would probably work for the service demands of each branch.


Image: Government of B.C. Released in 2008.
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/03/14-billion-transit-plan-b-c-liberals-conveniently-forgot/

[Express691]

One of the things I think we need to discuss here is any updates with other LRT projects.

Just this morning, one of Hamilton Street Railway's proposed LRT is being downgraded to BRT.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/hamilton/hamilton-go-announcement-live-1.3963159

[xd_1771]

^ Actually that's a pretty big deal. It's not a downgrade at all when the new line is a whooping 14km longer than the previous LRT proposal and services an entirely new part of the city. This is the kind of announcement I think most of us would like to see with the L-Line, and now there's another Canadian city doing it. They're also noting that by going with BRT, service is up and running sooner. It's almost like it jumped the priority list, because it will be done and running even before the LRT "B-Line" is done and running.

Surrey should follow this decision for the Surrey-Newton-Guildford LRT line and instead it can be the White Rock-Newton-Guildford-Coquitlam BRT line with through service.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

I have thought that Willingdon would make a good candidate for a future B-Line. If the Willingdon B-Line were to have its northern terminus at Hastings, a future Hastings Line from downtown Vancouver could terminate there, versus Kootaney Loop, and capture a good chunk of the Burnaby Heights neighbourhood. A southern terminus for the Willingdon B-Line would be Metrotown.

Makes sense. If there's demand, TransLink could even extend it south to the River District or north up the Ironworkers' Memorial to Lonsdale.

[swimmer_spe]

As I understand it, both parts of the LRT are or will have B line routes. That is a good start. This will help transit planners see the need and the ridership.

This may show that the demand isn't there yet, or it may show that the demand is higher than thought, and may spark Skytrain discussions.

Frankly, if this is built before extending to UBC, I will be shocked.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

^ Actually that's a pretty big deal. It's not a downgrade at all when the new line is a whooping 14km longer than the previous LRT proposal and services an entirely new part of the city. This is the kind of announcement I think most of us would like to see with the L-Line, and now there's another Canadian city doing it. They're also noting that by going with BRT, service is up and running sooner. It's almost like it jumped the priority list, because it will be done and running even before the LRT "B-Line" is done and running.

Surrey should follow this decision for the Surrey-Newton-Guildford LRT line and instead it can be the White Rock-Newton-Guildford-Coquitlam BRT line with through service.

I wouldn't be surprised if the business case for Surrey LRT is rapidly falling apart due to land acquisition costs and just to "get something done" they are forced to go with the BRT option and a Skytrain line gets built later, AFTER the Langley Skytrain.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Kisai

I wouldn't be surprised if the business case for Surrey LRT is rapidly falling apart due to land acquisition costs and just to "get something done" they are forced to go with the BRT option and a Skytrain line gets built later, AFTER the Langley Skytrain.

This would be a dream come true, but if it's happening, they're certainly hiding it very well...

[Kisai]

I thought this was relevant:

http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/should-driverless-trains-be-in-our-future/490426182

Transit expert Jarrett Walker said driverless systems are expensive to build, but transit agencies can save on labor expenses.

“Most of the cost of running transit service is the cost of labor so if you carry more people per driver you have more abundant service," Walker said.

...

In August 2016, KIRO 7 asked Sound Transit's Rogoff about driverless trains in ST3.

He said it isn't something the agency would look at right away.

But he also said: "Let's remember that we're talking about a 25-year plan and this is something we can and probably will look at in the future."

In a new interview this week, Rogoff told KIRO 7 the agency's thinking has evolved.

"The more we looked into this it's very hard to imagine that we'll ever have driverless trains on the Sound Transit network," Rogoff said.

Rogoff said Sound Transit has money to expand service but not to retrofit with expensive automation.

And he doesn't want driverless trains on only one part of the system.

"We want our trains to be interoperable, we want every train to be able to run on every segment of the rail network," Rogoff said.

Note the importance of the bolded. Seattle likely will not run any automated trains because they need them to be able to run on all the network. Now consider the fact that you can use the automated technology and still run them manually if needed. Seattle doesn't need to run our vehicles, and they don't need to retrofit their existing trains with it, they would just buy new new trains that support the automated control, and run the rest of the network in ATP or STO (GoA 2) mode, and just don't run the old trains on the automated section. (San Francisco's MuniMetro runs automated in the grade-separated segments as an example of using both modes simultaneously.)

In regards to Surrey, it's the same thing, by Surrey running yet another incompatible rail system, it increases the costs of the entire Translink rail system.

[xd_1771]

"It's very hard to imagine that we'll ever have driverless trains on the Sound Transit network"

Wow, ST's new CEO comes off as quite a skeptic it's all the more ironic that the CEO we have here who works with and seems to really like our system used to be the head-person at ST. They're gonna want our CEO back at this rate!

No doubt what with Seattle Subway (who have over 16k likes on Facebook, they are huge) throwing their voice behind it and at least one petition actually calling for the grade-separation of Link on MLK Blvd, this discussion that was started over a pedestrian-train collision will continue for a long time - and perhaps it will produce a driverless train line proposal in Seattle sometime in the next few years!

[WarrenC12]

If we can have self-driving cars, we can certainly have self-driving metro, LRT, and buses. Not sure what the issue is here, thinking medium-term.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

If we can have self-driving cars, we can certainly have self-driving metro, LRT, and buses. Not sure what the issue is here, thinking medium-term.

In Toronto there has been significant opposition to going from two to one person subway operation on line 4, Unions are staunchly against automation of line which very well could be automated.

[Express691]

Switching gears for a bit, the Surrey LRT survey closes tonight.

Share and complete accordingly, opposition against LRT is heavily appreciated

http://fluidsurveys.com/surveys/translink-Z/surrey-lrt/

[Metro-One]

It should be noted that encouragingly the vast majority of comments on all of Translink's Facebook posts about the Surrey LRT were people demanding that the Langley extension be built as Expo Line Skytrain. Looks like we may have some sane momentum going on in the public.

[GlassCity]

Daryl's SkyTrain for Surrey page is doing great work. A lot of my friends know I'm a nerd, and have been messaging me asking about it because they saw other people share it around Facebook. Given Hepner's comments on "it will be LRT!" it sure seems like a lot of other people agree.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Daryl's SkyTrain for Surrey page is doing great work. A lot of my friends know I'm a nerd, and have been messaging me asking about it because they saw other people share it around Facebook. Given Hepner's comments on "it will be LRT!" it sure seems like a lot of other people agree.

IIRC she said that the line to Langley is still being "studied" with LRT vs RRT I would not be surprised at all to see the province push for Skytrain as with the Evergreen line.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

IIRC she said that the line to Langley is still being "studied" with LRT vs RRT I would not be surprised at all to see the province push for Skytrain as with the Evergreen line.

Can Surrey afford to build the LRT with no other government support?

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Can Surrey afford to build the LRT with no other government support?

I'd say that's pretty unlikely, I'd imagine that upon further study that they would actually choose to grade separate some of the busiest intersections (something a lot of the Toronto LRT's have added) which would drive costs up even further. Pushing things in the direction of Skytrain.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I'd say that's pretty unlikely, I'd imagine that upon further study that they would actually choose to grade separate some of the busiest intersections (something a lot of the Toronto LRT's have added) which would drive costs up even further. Pushing things in the direction of Skytrain.

So, arguing the technology is pointless then. The province will say Skytrain, and after the Broadway extension to UBC is done, the Skytrain will be built to Langley.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, arguing the technology is pointless then. The province will say Skytrain, and after the Broadway extension to UBC is done, the Skytrain will be built to Langley.

I'd hope theywould get on building it sooner, considering how long those two projects will take back to back. It would certainly be cool to have multiple extensions opening at the same time.

[logicbomb]

My main immediate concern continues to be the potential traffic disruption and hazards construction will pose in Guildford and Whalley. 104th being narrowed to 1 lane in each direction will lead to more congestion on 108th and 100th Ave...

I think they replaced the water mains in 2010 or 2011 which led to mass delays. Transit was forced to detour and many vehicles were pulling dangerous maneuvers in the side streets.

There's been near 0 movement to build the 105th Ave connector or widen 100th in the past 2 years and now there's a push to put shovels in the ground.


Idiots.