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

[Shift]

^Well it's a good thing 108 Ave and 100 Ave are there to become the primary routes for east-west car traffic, while 104 Ave can become more of a transit-oriented corridor.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Ottawa's and Toronto's are grade separated, and neither Hamilton nor Waterloo have enough road traffic to make LRT a problem. And funny you should mention Edmonton...

LRT done wrong, or for political purposes, is worse than doing nothing. Surrey wants skyscrapers, fine, but King George is Surrey's Broadway, and light rail tracks down either street would be a nightmare - especially when a proper B-Line (every three minutes, not every seven) gets you the exact same kind of speed for a fraction of the money. The developers will come with or without light rail, so Surrey might as well wait another decade or two and build a SkyTrain line.

King George but is at minimum, 65% more usable width!!! Most of Kingsway isn't a pleasant place to walk but adding LRT to that street gives you an opportunity to remake it. Surely, Broadway is a busier corridor than Kingsway in terms of people, and maybe even in terms of vehicular traffic. I really like the example of Berlin and layering of systems. We have to get over the Toronto mentality... that's exactly what is causing them to scrap the SRT which is a 4-stop mini-metro and put in a single stop subway. They COULD refurbish the existing line to run new trains on it for MUCH less money than building a subway, but there's this inferiority complex that only the Subway is good.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

King George but is at minimum, 65% more usable width!!! Most of Kingsway isn't a pleasant place to walk but adding LRT to that street gives you an opportunity to remake it. Surely, Broadway is a busier corridor than Kingsway in terms of people, and maybe even in terms of vehicular traffic. I really like the example of Berlin and layering of systems. We have to get over the Toronto mentality... that's exactly what is causing them to scrap the SRT which is a 4-stop mini-metro and put in a single stop subway. They COULD refurbish the existing line to run new trains on it for MUCH less money than building a subway, but there's this inferiority complex that only the Subway is good.

You mean King George, right? Kingsway's in Burnaby and already has the Expo Line.

A) Berlin's layering is based on, again, saving RRT for primary routes and LRT for secondary routes. Guildford-Newton is shaping up to be a primary route.

B) Toronto has the choice between four SRT stops and one RRT stop; the Surrey LRT is now almost as expensive as the RRT option!

IMO, save up a couple more years, build the SkyTrain, and save light rail for the interurban route and/or several less busy roads. As a bus rider always stuck in traffic, I think it's a good idea to err on the side of non-gridlock.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Again, I support LRT too, but not for Guildford-Newton. It makes sense for Arbutus and the old interurban routes, because there's a separate ROW. It does not make sense to put it down busy roads in the heart of Surrey (especially if/when the high rises come in) when you could save up and build RRT instead.

SkyTrain on the primary routes, light rail on the secondary routes. It's that simple.

The idea of single tracking is stupid as well. If ANY FUTURE RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT HAS ANY SINGLE TRACKED SECTION ANYWHERE OR IS NOT BUILT FOR THE FUTURE, then I wish/pray/will be making a pagan sacrifice to the gods that it collapses on the first day. I am completely constipated if NIMBY's don't want it extended or if they think it looks ugly because they're gonna be dead when it comes time to extend it.

[Sheba]

Here we go again with the comparisons to Berlin - and it still doesn't make much sense...

Originally Posted by Sheba

I can see the point of on-ground rail (not going to get into which variety / technology) - but it has to be somewhere that's separate from car traffic and doesn't have frequent cross streets to deal with. The Surrey LRT plan fails that criteria.

IF they barricaded the King George run and made the smaller cross streets right in / out, then it would pass enough to be plausible. But that would remove ability to do a left turn on King George except for at major cross streets, which would not go over well with drivers.

Honestly the best scenario in this situation is for more B-Line buses. Surrey is pretty under-served by transit, which is why so many people there drive. FYI "With 377 cars per 1000 residents in 2013 (570/1000 in Germany), Berlin as a Western world city has one of the lowest numbers of cars per capita." - that hardly makes Berlin a good comparison to what would happen anywhere in the region.

[Shift]

^Low car ownership per capita because of how good their transit system is. You can get anywhere on a rail line. We should be moving in the same direction with ours, with a tiered system as a model to follow.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Shift

^Low car ownership per capita because of how good their transit system is. You can get anywhere on a rail line. We should be moving in the same direction with ours, with a tiered system as a model to follow.

Low car ownership because everybody's already riding, and because the city is designed around transit.

LRT doesn't work if everybody already owns a car in a car-oriented city: nobody rides the tram since it's slow, it's slow since traffic is high, traffic is high since nobody rides the tram.

Hence the argument behind RRT for Surrey. The SkyTrain runs fast and free of traffic, so drivers ride it, so traffic drops and THEN you can build LRT on the secondary corridors.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Low car ownership because everybody's already riding, and because the city is designed around transit.

LRT doesn't work if everybody already owns a car in a car-oriented city: nobody rides the tram since it's slow, it's slow since traffic is high, traffic is high since nobody rides the tram.

Hence the argument behind RRT for Surrey. The SkyTrain runs fast and free of traffic, so drivers ride it, so traffic drops and THEN you can build LRT on the secondary corridors.

Someone gets it - thank you.

A lot of European cities were built before cars and designed for other forms of transportation vs most of North America was built for cars and other forms of transportation are secondary.

(Note: I'm talking about people moving around, not freight trains)

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Ottawa's and Toronto's are grade separated, and neither Hamilton nor Waterloo have enough road traffic to make LRT a problem. And funny you should mention Edmonton...

LRT done wrong, or for political purposes, is worse than doing nothing. Surrey wants skyscrapers, fine, but King George is Surrey's Broadway, and light rail tracks down either street would be a nightmare - especially when a proper B-Line (every three minutes, not every seven) gets you the exact same kind of speed for a fraction of the money. The developers will come with or without light rail, so Surrey might as well wait another decade or two and build a SkyTrain line.

Wasn't referring to Ottawa because as has been discussed at length that it is grade separated.

Ok so again you need to read up on these projects, the Eglinton Crosstown is about half at grade street running and Finch West will be entirely at grade street running. And saying Hamilton has less traffic than Surrey is silly considering that it has a larger population, is still fairly close to Toronto, and has some major highways running through it....

The point about creating multi tiered transit is a great one, and yes while many European cities were not built around cars this is Metro Vancouver definitely not a very pro-automobile region already.

In terms of using RRT for main transport arteries that is sensible. However, Fraser Highway has significantly larger future growth potential (the corridor extends deep into the valley) than Surrey's L LRT route, which can be nicely served by LRT for a long time.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Ok so again you need to read up on these projects, the Eglinton Crosstown is about half at grade street running and Finch West will be entirely at grade street running.

That's actually my point. To clarify, yes, it's at-grade in the suburbs, but the downtown part is tunnelled. Whalley should be too.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

And saying Hamilton has less traffic than Surrey is silly considering that it has a larger population, is still fairly close to Toronto, and has some major highways running through it....

Same population but a third of the density and an actual grid, so the traffic spreads out. It's when everybody bunches up down one main arterial that surface LRT runs into problems, which AFAIK isn't the case in Hamilton.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

The point about creating multi tiered transit is a great one, and yes while many European cities were not built around cars this is Metro Vancouver definitely not a very pro-automobile region already.

Yes and no. Making it harder to drive =/= reducing demand; without better alternatives, people will literally just sit there and wait in traffic.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

In terms of using RRT for main transport arteries that is sensible. However, Fraser Highway has significantly larger future growth potential (the corridor extends deep into the valley) than Surrey's L LRT route, which can be nicely served by LRT for a long time.

And KGB extends to White Rock. Not saying it has equal growth potential, but a SkyTrain would service it and the future downtown core for an ever longer time; LRT has to go slower and in small trainsets in order to negotiate traffic, and it's going to hit capacity as soon as the planned skyscraper forest is built up.

[officedweller]

Problems with Toronto's Bombardier Flexity streetcars:

http://projects.thestar.com/bombardier-ttc/index.html

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Problems with Toronto's Bombardier Flexity streetcars...

Wow, what a horror story. It sounds like a completely different Bombardier than the one Translink deals with.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Problems with Toronto's Bombardier Flexity streetcars:

http://projects.thestar.com/bombardier-ttc/index.html

damn, a long read but worth it. This is a pretty obvious warning sign:

When the bids were submitted by Siemens and Bombardier, Bombardier came in at a shocking two-thirds the price of the competition.

[Bdawe]

One hopes that the "🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 dwarf's forge" does not characterize the Mark III order as well

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

One hopes that the "🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 dwarf's forge" does not characterize the Mark III order as well

The TTC kept changing what they wanted, hence ordering parts that had to be fixed by any means.

This doesn't happen when you have standard gauge. It also doesn't happen when the rolling stock is essentially something you engineered, so all the additional work that goes into it is the computer system. (The Mark II, Mark III, and Canada Line all use SelTRAC, which is different from Bombardier's CityFlo tech.)

The dwarfs forge comment likely comes from having to build vehicles to operate on Toronto Gauge. This is the TTC's problem, not Bombardier. Hell had Siemens won the contract you'd be seeing the exact same story except with Siemens. What did you think was going to happen when you refuse to switch to standard gauge in order to save costs? If you wanted cheaper vehicles you'd have to make that investment, otherwise you can not have off-the-shelf vehicles.

This is part of the problem I bring up every time DMJ writes a letter to a local paper shilling for LRT. ALL Rail systems are build-to-order. There is no train store to just pick up a completely built train to plop down on your rail system of choosing. Every city has engineering issues, and the older the city and more car-dependant the city, the more engineering has to go into designing vehicles that will work.

If the TTC had expected Bombardier to go grab it's European LRV's and just put them down on the existing street car system, that was not going to happen.

And the same will happen with Surrey. The city has not, and never been planning for surface Light Rail, the only plans were for the Skytrain down Fraser Highway. The city thinks it's going get a good deal by spending as little as possible, and it's going to be reflected in LRV's that will likely not be weather-appropriate, and the first time it snows, they can't operate, or will be derailed by snow plows.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Kisai

This doesn't happen when you have standard gauge.

I strongly doubt the gauge was the major issue - that's essentially just a matter of the bogie specifications. More relevant was Toronto's special need for tight turning circles and steeper grades - those kinds of requirements can affect the body and propulsion system designs, which have a far greater impact.

And other unrelated requirements such as Toronto's request for a wheelchair ramp that could accommodate different platform heights also seemed to cause a lot of problems.

None of those is going to affect the Mark III Skytrain order, especially since it's just an extension of the same production process that Bombardier has already successfully used. That means that the plans, all the tooling and probably most of the workforce will just continue to be used to produce the additional cars.

[Xrayal]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

None of those is going to affect the Mark III Skytrain order, especially since it's just an extension of the same production process that Bombardier has already successfully used. That means that the plans, all the tooling and probably most of the workforce will just continue to be used to produce the additional cars.

I know this is off topic for this thread but just a quick question because I can't find the answer anywhere. Where were the first 28 Mark III's cars made? From my memory the majority were made in Plattsburgh NY. And only the first 4 were made in Kingston ON. Correct? Dose anyone know where the next order of 28 will be made?

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I strongly doubt the gauge was the major issue - that's essentially just a matter of the bogie specifications. More relevant was Toronto's special need for tight turning circles and steeper grades - those kinds of requirements can affect the body and propulsion system designs, which have a far greater impact.

And other unrelated requirements such as Toronto's request for a wheelchair ramp that could accommodate different platform heights also seemed to cause a lot of problems.

There's been news bits here and there about the TTC constantly changing requirements. If you've already ordered parts and your client changes it's demands after they have been ordered, what do you expect is going to happen? You're going to have those original parts delivered, and any modifications to adjust to the clients demands are on you.

The rail gauge was the most obvious reason why an off-the-shelf design can't be used. So the logic follows that the parts ordered may not fit, particularly when we're talking about articulated cars, which would not be engineered for Toronto's gauge.

Originally Posted by Xrayal

I know this is off topic for this thread but just a quick question because I can't find the answer anywhere. Where were the first 28 Mark III's cars made? From my memory the majority were made in Plattsburgh NY. And only the first 4 were made in Kingston ON. Correct? Dose anyone know where the next order of 28 will be made?

We probably won't know until Bombardier shows a picture.

AFAIK, it's unlikely that they will move production to another facility that doesn't have the tooling in place, so it's likely they're all Plattsburgh NY. The ones in Kingston were probably the engineering model (the first one that arrived here) so they could test it on the test track. Incidentally, in trying to look this up, I found this page
http://www.advantadesign.com/en/bombardier-portfolio.html

"I want a company that is good, but has never designed a train, someone who will think differently", thought Ziad Rizk, site manager for Bombardier's Kingston engineering group. When we found out that the Advanta proposal to create new train concepts was accepted – by such an iconic and large Canadian company – we were ecstatic!

The project was to create a new styling concept for the Innovia ART 300 commuter train "end-cap". The end-cap is the front part of the train, the face of the train, if you will. The Innovia ART is the same train design platform as the Vancouver Skytrain and the JFK Airport passenger train.

We got busy and poured our hearts into doing a good job for them. After delivery of the concepts (and a lesson on the power of a rendering over a sketch), the project morphed into providing the completed detail design of all components for the end-cap and delivering two full-size prototypes – ready to put on a train – to Bombardier's Kingston yard. The project was both very challenging and very enjoyable. We were able to provide some significant innovations to Bombardier, learn a lot about the field of commuter rail transportation, and meet some great people. Our completed design is slated to see service on three continents, starting with new trains for Vancouver in 2016.

If you go to http://www.advantadesign.com/en/bombardi...icle/112-innovia-300-for-bombardier.html itself, you can see all the concepts.

[Reecemartin]

@migrantcoconut

Thats not exactly how the Crosstown was designed, the entire Western portions grade separated from the depot, while East of Laird I believe it's mostly at grade besides at some stations. Central Eglinton is not really "Downtown" at all but, I see what you re getting at that is a pretty major growth and high density area.

In terms of limited trainsets due to navigating traffic again this is LRT not a streetcar, segregated lanes mean we could have 90m trains like are going to be used on ECLRT (3 flexities back to back).

On the topic of what created the delays the unusual specs (as was mentioned the tighter turning radius as well as steeper grades) as well as trolley pole power delivery until the overhead is all changed out (they will then switch to pantos). A big issue was the plant Bombardier was using in Mexico as well, supposedly they had a lot of manufacturing issues.

[Bdawe]

If Toronto Gauge was such an engineering problem, it would not have been economical for the TTC to have scooped up hundreds of PCC Streetcars after WWII from other city's ruberizing transit systems