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

[officedweller]

Kuala Lumpur has 4-car trainsets (and ordered them before Vancouver), so maybe we piggy-backed on their past work.
I don't know if new engineering would be needed for 5-car trainsets (propulsion for added loads, etc.), or maybe added electrical loads requiring upgraded traction power substations?
(i.e. since each car is powered, a 5th car would be an additional 25% power load per train, and if train frequency stays the same (although not all would be 5-car trainsets), you'd have a proportional increase in power requirements?

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Kuala Lumpur has 4-car trainsets (and ordered them before Vancouver), so maybe we piggy-backed on their past work.
I don't know if new engineering would be needed for 5-car trainsets (propulsion for added loads, etc.), or maybe added electrical loads requiring upgraded traction power substations?
(i.e. since each car is powered, a 5th car would be an additional 25% power load per train, and if train frequency stays the same (although not all would be 5-car trainsets), you'd have a proportional increase in power requirements?

True, though I doubt it would be a huge increase as I'd assume they've found some sort improved efficiencies since they designed the Mark 2's. I'd be curious to see what the maximum passenger capacity possible in a 5-car train would be if they went with full bench seats etc should be quite large.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

True, though I doubt it would be a huge increase as I'd assume they've found some sort improved efficiencies since they designed the Mark 2's. I'd be curious to see what the maximum passenger capacity possible in a 5-car train would be if they went with full bench seats etc should be quite large.

According to Bombardier's spec sheet, the maximum capacity (assuming it's bench seating packed in Asian style) for 4-car train at 75s headway is 35,520pphpd and 6-car train is 53,280pphpd...

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by nname

According to Bombardier's spec sheet, the maximum capacity (assuming it's bench seating packed in Asian style) for 4-car train at 75s headway is 35,520pphpd and 6-car train is 53,280pphpd...

Actually very impressive numbers.

To pivot, as it sounds like LRT on the so called "L" line is a done deal, does anyone have any detailed designs on the project? It should be interesting to see if the go with the Flexity Freedom which has become to go to with all the Metrolinx LRT projects, in particular it would be nice to see platforms long enough to hold two 7 segment cars such as the ones Edmonton has ordered.

In addition is there any consensus on where the OMC will be placed?

Finally, any idea on how they plan to integrate stations with King George and Surrey central?

[Reecemartin]

With all the new development around Surrey Central, such as the SFU expansion, a number of decent towers and several major offices (ie Coast Capital) and the lrt it's looking certain the Surrey central is going to be an increasingly important transportation hub for our region going forward. It's the cities stated ambition to have a "second downtown", curious on people opinions obviously this isn't going to happen overnight however this will be very interesting for transit.

Will we see significant counter peak flow on the Expo Line? Significantly more bus service? Bike sharing?

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

With all the new development around Surrey Central, such as the SFU expansion, a number of decent towers and several major offices (ie Coast Capital) and the lrt it's looking certain the Surrey central is going to be an increasingly important transportation hub for our region going forward. It's the cities stated ambition to have a "second downtown", curious on people opinions obviously this isn't going to happen overnight however this will be very interesting for transit.

Will we see significant counter peak flow on the Expo Line? Significantly more bus service? Bike sharing?

Surrey.... It's our own little Mississauga...

[Shift]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Surrey.... It's our own little Mississauga...

Surrey is much different than Mississauga.

Mississauga feels much more disconnected from Toronto. It's not connected to Downtown Toronto by rapid transit like Surrey City Centre is to Vancouver.

The built form of Mississauga is also very different. It has much more of an 80's suburban centre feeling with very large blocks, very wide road dedications with large setbacks from the street, large suburban office park type towers, and very large residential towers not oriented to the street. It's also isolated by expressways and non-grid pattern single family subdivisions. Many of the towers are clustered in 'Towers in the Park' like communities.

Surrey City Centre by comparison is much more human-scaled with a finer-grained street pattern, is surrounded by more traditional grid-pattern streets, ties in better to the surrounding region, and has more human-scaled buildings.

Do a streetview around each City Centre to see the differences.


Mississauga



Surrey

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Surrey.... It's our own little Mississauga...

I just returned from Downtown Missasauga and I agree with the other comments, while it's definetly a convenient analogy Surrey is very different from Mississauga. One big thing being that Missasauga is less than half Toronto's size while Surrey is rapidly approaching Vancouver. While GO expansion and new LRTs are great seeing Surrey become Missasuaga would be my worst nightmare. Despite having more than a million people, Missasuaga's downtown still isn't particularly great.

Surrey has aspirations to actually compete with Vancouver and I can see it actually happening (albeit it far down the road- maybe sooner than many think), Missasauga on the other hand still feels like a bedroom community to Toronto (Surrey may actually see it's LRT built before Missasuaga's). Essentially I don't ever think Missasauga will be able to be considered a city which competes with or exists on the scale of Toronto, that's not something I can say about Surrey and Vancouver.

If there's anything we can learn (there certainly are some things) I think Surrey should keep trying to build up a solid skyline. The absolute towers in Missasauga are fantastic and Id love to see high rises like that in Surrey. When sitting in Pearson you can see Missasuaga's skyline in the distance, and with Surrey centres location we could certainly build a skyline which can be seen from a great distance.

[Trainguy]

I can see things like this happening if Surrey builds their LRT line. Trains and people do not mix. Build Skytrain and keep it elevated.

21 February 2017
Man Struck and Killed by C-Train

Calgary Alberta - Calgary Police now say a 30-year-old man killed by a C-train Monday night in Whitehorn appears to have been distracted by his cellphone.

At about 20:30 last night police say the man stepped out in front of a northbound train at the Whitehorn station while the warning signals were in operation.

He died at the scene.

Police say it appears he was wearing earphones at the time.

It's not known if alcohol or drugs were factors in the collision.

Police are reviewing CCTV footage as they continue their investigation.

Brenda Neufeld.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

I can see things like this happening if Surrey builds their LRT line. Trains and people do not mix. Build Skytrain and keep it elevated.

21 February 2017
Man Struck and Killed by C-Train

Calgary Alberta - Calgary Police now say a 30-year-old man killed by a C-train Monday night in Whitehorn appears to have been distracted by his cellphone.

Trains and cars do not mix either, which is why I posted that Houston rail video (it's here for anyone who hasn't seen it yet). If they separate it from traffic in some way, then there'll be less issues with both people walking and people driving. I'd prefer elevated too but I suspect we'll be stuck with ground rail for the L line - just as long as we don't get stuck with it for the extension to Langley too...

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Trains and cars do not mix either, which is why I posted that Houston rail video (it's here for anyone who hasn't seen it yet). If they separate it from traffic in some way, then there'll be less issues with both people walking and people driving. I'd prefer elevated too but I suspect we'll be stuck with ground rail for the L line - just as long as we don't get stuck with it for the extension to Langley too...

Honestly, people getting hit by trains because they are at grade isn't really a train problem, if you aren't paying attention you could just as easily be hit by a car or a bus as well.

I general Im just highly excited about Surrey Centres development, I'm not sure if there is height restrictions but perhaps this will mean we can get some taller towers.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

I can see things like this happening if Surrey builds their LRT line. Trains and people do not mix. Build Skytrain and keep it elevated.

21 February 2017
Man Struck and Killed by C-Train

Calgary Alberta - Calgary Police now say a 30-year-old man killed by a C-train Monday night in Whitehorn appears to have been distracted by his cellphone.

At about 20:30 last night police say the man stepped out in front of a northbound train at the Whitehorn station while the warning signals were in operation.

He died at the scene.

Police say it appears he was wearing earphones at the time.

It's not known if alcohol or drugs were factors in the collision.

Police are reviewing CCTV footage as they continue their investigation.

Brenda Neufeld.

Grade separating the lines doesn't stop this from happening. How many times does the SkyTrain get shut down because someone jumps in front of it?

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Grade separating the lines doesn't stop this from happening. How many times does the SkyTrain get shut down because someone jumps in front of it?

I wonder when we will see our first screen doors or gates.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

With all the new development around Surrey Central, such as the SFU expansion, a number of decent towers and several major offices (ie Coast Capital) and the lrt it's looking certain the Surrey central is going to be an increasingly important transportation hub for our region going forward. It's the cities stated ambition to have a "second downtown", curious on people opinions obviously this isn't going to happen overnight however this will be very interesting for transit.

Will we see significant counter peak flow on the Expo Line? Significantly more bus service? Bike sharing?

It's not just Surrey's desire - it's enshrined in the previous Livable Region Strategic Plan and in the current Regional Growth Strategy.
The Regional Growth Strategy was approved in 2011 by all 21 municipalities within Greater Vancouver Regional District (dba Metro Vancouver).

From the Regional Growth Strategy:

Types of Urban Centres

The Urban Centres that make up the regional network are of various scales and functions. While all Urban Centres share the common elements of transportation accessibility and planned residential and employment growth, they differ in other characteristics. There are three broad types of Urban Centres that help structure growth in the region, all of which will continue to be monitored and explored.

Metro Centres

Metro Centres are large Regional City Centres that anchor the Urban Centre Network. They serve the regional population by providing major activity hubs for transportation, employment, and housing.
•Vancouver Metro Core: The Region's Downtown
•Surrey City Centre: The Centre of Activity South of the Fraser

Learn more about the characteristics and growth trends of the Metro Centres in the Regional City Centre Profiles.

​Regional City Centres

There are seven other Regional City Centres found across Metro Vancouver that also serve as important activity hubs for transportation, employment and housing. These Centres provide good locations to distribute growth across the region while connecting to the larger Metro Centres.

Learn more about the characteristics and growth trends of the Regional City Centres in the Regional City Centre Profiles.

Municipal Town Centres

There are 17 designated Municipal Town Centres that are more local and serve as activity hubs for municipal populations. Some Municipal Town Centres are important transportation hubs for subregional and municipal populations and are all linked to the Frequent Transit Network.

Frequent Transit Development Areas

Frequent Transit Development Areas (FTDAs) are additional priority locations for accommodating concentrated growth in higher density forms of development. Urban design for these areas will also promote transit-oriented development where transit, cycling and walking are the preferred modes of transportation.

Learn more about how FTDAs are identified to complement the Urban Centres Network in Metro 2040 Implementation Guideline #4: Identifying Frequent Transit Development Areas.

http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...ypes-of-urban-centres/Pages/default.aspx


http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...lanning-maps/rgs-maps/Pages/default.aspx


http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...lanning-maps/rgs-maps/Pages/default.aspx


http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...lanning-maps/rgs-maps/Pages/default.aspx


The job projections for Surrey Metro Core aren't all that great though (but that was back in 2011):


http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...rban_Centres-Final_Report_March_2015.pdf


http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/r...rban_Centres-Final_Report_March_2015.pdf

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I wonder when we will see our first screen doors or gates.

Interesting. I've been asking myself fthe same thing about
stations here in Paris. Some lines (like 14) have them, most others do not. Re: Vancouver, I understood Main St Station esp. has a had a high### of suicides.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I just returned from Downtown Missasauga and I agree with the other comments, while it's definetly a convenient analogy Surrey is very different from Mississauga.......
.....................
Surrey has aspirations to actually compete with Vancouver and I can see it actually happening (albeit it far down the road- maybe sooner than many think), Missasauga on the other hand still feels like a bedroom community to Toronto ........
.................
If there's anything we can learn (there certainly are some things) I think Surrey should keep trying to build up a solid skyline. The absolute towers in Missasauga are fantastic and Id love to see high rises like that in Surrey. When sitting in Pearson you can see Missasuaga's skyline in the distance, and with Surrey centres location we could certainly build a skyline which can be seen from a great distance.

I could go for some 50, 60+ towers in Surrey, but please, not those contorted tubes in Mississauga. I admit that they're really impressive. But they're not elegant, more like grotesque.

[ilikeredheads]

I don't understand the obsession with streetcars/trams, which is what Surrey is proposing here. They are slow, expensive, and inefficient mode of transit that doesn't benefit anyone, both the passengers and vehicles on the road. It's a lose/lose situation. I would rather have BRT over a streetcar.

You don't just plop it down in the middle of a major corridor and expect it to be as safe and fast as Skytrain. Building it with no grade separation will only increase the risk of accidents due to human error. Jaywalkers. Stupid drivers. Accidents in the middle of intersection that's blocking the tracks. Broken traffic lights. All of these things can and will cause disruptions. However, nothing's worse than risk of derailment, which can be easily caused by just having debris in the tracks.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

With all the new development around Surrey Central, such as the SFU expansion, a number of decent towers and several major offices (ie Coast Capital) and the lrt it's looking certain the Surrey central is going to be an increasingly important transportation hub for our region going forward. It's the cities stated ambition to have a "second downtown", curious on people opinions obviously this isn't going to happen overnight however this will be very interesting for transit.

Will we see significant counter peak flow on the Expo Line? Significantly more bus service? Bike sharing?

Well, Surrey has a lot of catching up to do if it wants to be Downtown 2.0. No.3 Rd looks a lot more like a 2nd downtown right now.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Ah indeed, I was referring to expo line trains, so they are still half a metre narrower.

Curious to know why Translink didn't order 5 car mark 3 trainsets?

Can't we just make a Mark 4 with a wider train body? We're upgrading the Expo Line, might as well...

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Grade separating the lines doesn't stop this from happening. How many times does the SkyTrain get shut down because someone jumps in front of it?

A lot less than if it wasn't grade separated...

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

I don't understand the obsession with streetcars/trams, which is what Surrey is proposing here. They are slow, expensive, and inefficient mode of transit that doesn't benefit anyone, both the passengers and vehicles on the road. It's a lose/lose situation. I would rather have BRT over a streetcar.

You don't just plop it down in the middle of a major corridor and expect it to be as safe and fast as Skytrain. Building it with no grade separation will only increase the risk of accidents due to human error. Jaywalkers. Stupid drivers. Accidents in the middle of intersection that's blocking the tracks. Broken traffic lights. All of these things can and will cause disruptions. However, nothing's worse than risk of derailment, which can be easily caused by just having debris in the tracks.

People want the old streetcar systems of North America back.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

I don't understand the obsession with streetcars/trams, which is what Surrey is proposing here. They are slow, expensive, and inefficient mode of transit that doesn't benefit anyone, both the passengers and vehicles on the road. It's a lose/lose situation. I would rather have BRT over a streetcar.

You don't just plop it down in the middle of a major corridor and expect it to be as safe and fast as Skytrain. Building it with no grade separation will only increase the risk of accidents due to human error. Jaywalkers. Stupid drivers. Accidents in the middle of intersection that's blocking the tracks. Broken traffic lights. All of these things can and will cause disruptions. However, nothing's worse than risk of derailment, which can be easily caused by just having debris in the tracks.{text added: take a look at Houston for that. Ha!}..

The ultimate bottom line reason is simply this $. End of post

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by fredinno

People want the old streetcar systems of North America back.

Maybe we should give people what they want, but modernized. The old lines might not now be where streetcars should be, but, maybe it is time to have 3 levels of local transit - bus, streetcar, and RT.

It works well in Toronto.