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

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Bmpruner

Interesting...more ammo on why this is ill conceived
http://trib.al/v4rXtWJ

you'd think with all this information from financial to societal that someone in power would use an once of their brain to say "maybe we shouldn't do this because its bad in every possible way."

but i guess that is asking too much from politicians to actually make a right choice on something.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Bmpruner

Interesting...more ammo on why this is ill conceived
http://trib.al/v4rXtWJ

You could swap in Surrey without changing any other words...

Research shows streetcars aren’t great transit options, either. They’re slow, subject to the whims of traffic in the way that a train or bus with a dedicated lane wouldn’t be. Worse, many cities aren’t running them frequently. Transportation researcher Yonah Freemark studied 15 modern streetcar systems in 2014 and found that two-thirds of them ran no more than three trains every hour. Miss your streetcar in New Orleans, and you might wait 25 minutes for the next one. Anyone riding the QLine in Detroit can expect a train every 20 to 25 minutes to start. That makes the projections by M-1 officials that the line will attract 5,000 to 8,000 riders daily seem optimistic. It’s hard to convince riders to hop on board when it comes so infrequently.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by Sheba

You could swap in Surrey without changing any other words...

Not really. Translink isn't going to run three streetcars per hour because they're not running a mixed traffic toy. They're not stupid, and they have have statistically significant numbers of customers to serve

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Bmpruner

Interesting...more ammo on why this is ill conceived
http://trib.al/v4rXtWJ

I'm amused that they point to the Portland streetcar as a success story. It's certainly no success story compared to Vancouver. For example their entire streetcar system serves fewer passengers than just the #25 Victoria trolleybus route alone, and the trolleybuses are cheaper to operate. And there are 6 other bus and trolleybus routes in Vancouver that are even busier.

So if Portland is being held up as a template for LRT I really can't see why we'd want to emulate it.

[Metro-One]

Wasn't it also free to ride for the longest time as well?

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm amused that they point to the Portland streetcar as a success story. It's certainly no success story compared to Vancouver. For example their entire streetcar system serves fewer passengers than just the #25 Victoria trolleybus route alone, and the trolleybuses are cheaper to operate. And there are 6 other bus and trolleybus routes in Vancouver that are even busier.

So if Portland is being held up as a template for LRT I really can't see why we'd want to emulate it.

That's just their streetcar system, which does not include the TriMet MAX. The MAX did 780k weekly boardings in April 2017, or about 110k per day, which is roughly double the 99 B-Line.

Edit: And yes, I realize the article you linked talks about Streetcar and not MAX, but it's important to remember that they're two separate systems in Portland and to not confuse them. Streetcar probably doesn't have high ridership numbers because of MAX; if MAX wasn't there Streetcar's ridership would be higher.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

That's just their streetcar system, which does not include the TriMet MAX. The MAX did 780k weekly boardings in April 2017, or about 110k per day, which is roughly double the 99 B-Line.

Edit: And yes, I realize the article you linked talks about Streetcar and not MAX, but it's important to remember that they're two separate systems in Portland and to not confuse them. Streetcar probably doesn't have high ridership numbers because of MAX; if MAX wasn't there Streetcar's ridership would be higher.

The streetcar is a downtown local. Presumably the regional rapid transit sytem is feeding it passengers more than it's competing with it

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

Not really. Translink isn't going to run three streetcars per hour because they're not running a mixed traffic toy. They're not stupid, and they have have statistically significant numbers of customers to serve

Ahh, but you just think they're not going to bring down service levels that far. Then, the first ridership figures come in and the operating cost bill comes in. I guarantee you, they will try to cut corners at any possible opportunity. It's happened with many of the street-level LRT systems built on the continent (including in Portland) and I don't see why it wouldn't happen here.

Remember, since the formation of the Mayors' Plan there's been practically ZERO talk of what the LRT system's total operating deficit will be, exactly how it's going to be paid for, and how it could affect SoF bus services, from any party involved. Right now it seems that everyone's mandate is to push LRT at all costs - they wouldn't dare risk bringing any attention to the question of how much it will cost to operate, and whether this might have an impact somewhere down the road.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Ahh, but you just think they're not going to bring down service levels that far. Then, the first ridership figures come in and the operating cost bill comes in. I guarantee you, they will try to cut corners at any possible opportunity. It's happened with many of the street-level LRT systems built on the continent (including in Portland) and I don't see why it wouldn't happen here.

Remember, since the formation of the Mayors' Plan there's been practically ZERO talk of what the LRT system's total operating deficit will be, exactly how it's going to be paid for, and how it could affect SoF bus services, from any party involved. Right now it seems that everyone's mandate is to push LRT at all costs - they wouldn't dare risk bringing any attention to the question of how much it will cost to operate, and whether this might have an impact somewhere down the road.

The Surrey Rapid Transit Study would seem to strongly indicate that the problem with the L-line is mostly disproportionate capital costs, rather than operations. Which makes sense, given the operational characteristics of electric rail systems.

Remember that Surrey already has a level of transit mode share comparable to all of Portland on buses and the Expo spur. As such, LRT will probably look much more like MAX (rather than the Portland Streetcar), but fuller.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an LRT-pessimist, but not an LRT-Catastrophist

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

The Surrey Rapid Transit Study would seem to strongly indicate that the problem with the L-line is mostly disproportionate capital costs, rather than operations. Which makes sense, given the operational characteristics of electric rail systems.

Remember that Surrey already has a level of transit mode share comparable to all of Portland on buses and the Expo spur. As such, LRT will probably look much more like MAX (rather than the Portland Streetcar), but fuller.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an LRT-pessimist, but not an LRT-Catastrophist

LRT done right never has to stop for lights or other traffic. It always has the right of way. Edmonton's LRT only stops at stations. Surrey's LRT will only work if it controls all the lights and intersections like normal trains do. Otherwise it will just be a bus on rails... at 2 Billion..

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

LRT done right never has to stop for lights or other traffic. It always has the right of way. Edmonton's LRT only stops at stations. Surrey's LRT will only work if it controls all the lights and intersections like normal trains do. Otherwise it will just be a bus on rails... at 2 Billion..

It IS a bus on rails, just like a street car because it's being designed to stop in the middle of the dang highway, and require pedestrians to navigate the crosswalk like a bus.

Surrey's proposed light rail system is a streetcar system with "potentially having traffic priority" that is all we know. If it was actually "light rail" they would not be proposing running it at grade through Newton, Whalley or Guildford, only at the stops between them.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

LRT done right never has to stop for lights or other traffic. It always has the right of way. Edmonton's LRT only stops at stations. Surrey's LRT will only work if it controls all the lights and intersections like normal trains do. Otherwise it will just be a bus on rails... at 2 Billion..

By the time you reach that level of ROW / grade separation the cost is usually similar to just building the superior system of skytrain.

The Evergreen Line was the perfect example of this, I believe that building it as skytrain ended up only being about 100 million or so more than the LT proposals.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

By the time you reach that level of ROW / grade separation the cost is usually similar to just building the superior system of skytrain.

The Evergreen Line was the perfect example of this, I believe that building it as skytrain ended up only being about 100 million or so more than the LT proposals.

The Evergreen Line ended up that way mostly because of the Burquitlam-Port Moody Tunnel, no?

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

The Evergreen Line ended up that way mostly because of the Burquitlam-Port Moody Tunnel, no?

Building Evergreen as an LRT would have been a stupid choice. Everyone would have to switch trains going east and west at Lougheed.

I think once the true cost of building Surrey's bus on rails comes to light, the people fronting the costs are going to think twice about it. Promising funding is one thing, actually paying up is another.

[ilikeredheads]

I have been saying that this project is basically a glorified streetcar that benefits no one. LRT is too broad of a term and Surrey is using that label to make it sound more modern than it is. Surrey wants their fancy tram because it looks like "nice" but it will be terrible, inefficient transit system that will cause even more congestion.

[swimmer_spe]

I wonder if this is a ploy to get Skytrain built sooner in Surrey.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I wonder if this is a ploy to get Skytrain built sooner in Surrey.

Never assume malice or cunning when you can assume incompetence. Doubly so with politicians.

[Shift]

Nice rendering of the future LRT along the to-be-pedestrianized City Parkway, showing the Surrey Central Station north house expansion, completed Civic Plaza, and new Central Avenue.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Shift

Nice rendering of the future LRT along the to-be-pedestrianized City Parkway, showing the Surrey Central Station north house expansion, completed Civic Plaza, and new Central Avenue.

Where are the wires that the LRT will get it's power from?

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Shift

Nice rendering of the future LRT along the to-be-pedestrianized City Parkway, showing the Surrey Central Station north house expansion, completed Civic Plaza, and new Central Avenue.

I sure hope that's just some college kid's render and not one from a professional transportation agency because putting the vehicle stop lights on the other side of the LRT tracks like that is an awesome way to have vehicles stopped across the tracks.