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

[dharper]

Why do they want to put LRT in the middle of the road instead of one side? I can envision a car(automobile) that will have mechanical problem, thus imprisoning everyone behind them, because they can't sneak by in the oncoming automobile lane. You also couldn't pass on the track because for some reason the want it a different elevation.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by dharper

Why do they want to put LRT in the middle of the road instead of one side? I can envision a car(automobile) that will have mechanical problem, thus imprisoning everyone behind them, because they can't sneak by in the oncoming automobile lane. You also couldn't pass on the track because for some reason the want it a different elevation.

It doesn't matter when you put it. 104th isn't wide enough anyways but they are brute-forcing it in because they want their photo-op. 1 lane in each direction is a joke for major artery. Any car that needs to turn right or left will cause backups. Heck, even a bus would cause traffic to stop and go whenever it pulls over at a stop.

We all know this streetcar is expensive and inefficient, but what's worse is that other mayors aren't outright opposing this because if this thing gets built, then every other municipality will have excuse to demand their own pet project. Tbh, if Surrey is 100% responsible for all expenses, I wouldn't care that much. Since Translink has been dragged into this, when this thing blows up, it'll once again become the scapegoat.

[POCO]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

It doesn't matter when you put it. 104th isn't wide enough anyways but they are brute-forcing it in because they want their photo-op. 1 lane in each direction is a joke for major artery. Any car that needs to turn right or left will cause backups. Heck, even a bus would cause traffic to stop and go whenever it pulls over at a stop.

We all know this streetcar is expensive and inefficient, but what's worse is that other mayors aren't outright opposing this because if this thing gets built, then every other municipality will have excuse to demand their own pet project. Tbh, if Surrey is 100% responsible for all expenses, I wouldn't care that much. Since Translink has been dragged into this, when this thing blows up, it'll once again become the scapegoat.

Totally. Translink is gonna be thrown under the train as soon as this thing starts killing people and grid locking the city.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

It doesn't matter when you put it. 104th isn't wide enough anyways but they are brute-forcing it in because they want their photo-op. 1 lane in each direction is a joke for major artery. Any car that needs to turn right or left will cause backups. Heck, even a bus would cause traffic to stop and go whenever it pulls over at a stop.

We all know this streetcar is expensive and inefficient, but what's worse is that other mayors aren't outright opposing this because if this thing gets built, then every other municipality will have excuse to demand their own pet project. Tbh, if Surrey is 100% responsible for all expenses, I wouldn't care that much. Since Translink has been dragged into this, when this thing blows up, it'll once again become the scapegoat.

As much as this project is a total waste of money it might not be all doom and gloom for 104th. It's why 105th is going to be extended through Hawthorne Park and 100th is being expanded from 137th to 148th to alleviate the reductions in 104th lanes. Also i'll bet they won't be that dumb to not put in left turn lanes at key intersections at 104th. This is not Vancouver where major roads are missing left turn lanes at key intersections. Not sure if they plan on running buses down 104th but i'm sure in the planning they can have bus pullouts incorporated in to the design.

[Stingray2004]

Just continue Skytrain from its current terminus to Guildford. A good start.

As for running LRT down King George Blvd. ... KGB already has too much traffic. Requires several signalized light cycles just to make it through an intersection at 72nd Ave. northward at peak. BTW, that area is notorious for accidents, esp. at intersections.

Moreover, traffic is growing so much that KGB should eventually be expanded to 6-lanes.

And they want to throw in a "glorified streetcar" i.e. LRT in the middle of KGB? That's just asking for further major accidents between both vehicles as well as LRT. Calgary's LRT shows numerous examples of just LRT road crossings with numerous vehicular incidents.

Agree with most here. Proposed KGB LRT would result in a gong-show. Can't easily move a smashed/derailed LRT vehicle unlike a bus. Would result in even further major traffic/transit tie-ups as a result.

PS. KGB also has considerable cross-traffic aside from intersections. Just would exacerbate the matter.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by flipper316

Also i'll bet they won't be that dumb to not put in left turn lanes at key intersections at 104th. This is not Vancouver where major roads are missing left turn lanes at key intersections. Not sure if they plan on running buses down 104th but i'm sure in the planning they can have bus pullouts incorporated in to the design.

Don't be so sure - both Vancouver and Surrey have a major case of the stupids. Also 104th is *the* route Surrey Central and Guildford (and beyond) with multiple bus routes, which won't all be replaced with their planned LRT.

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

PS. KGB also has considerable cross-traffic aside from intersections. Just would exacerbate the matter.

I've been harping on at them about that. They want a LRT down the middle of the street without taking out the center left hand turn lane and not making most of the side streets 'right in, right out'. Somehow I can't see drivers voting for that.

[Aroundtheworld]

If they are running LRT down the middle, it would also make sense to have matching bus stops also stop at the LRT stations. It's a good way to save space and it worked quite effectively in Zurich.

[Kisai]

If I actually lived in Surrey, I'd make sure to move to the West side of King George, or north of 104 if this goes through. If you end up on the East side of King George and south of 104, it will be perpetual gridlock from dawn to dusk.

Municipal elections are October 20 2018, make this an election issue.

[Bdawe]

Guys, that's not how traffic works.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by flipper316

As much as this project is a total waste of money it might not be all doom and gloom for 104th. It's why 105th is going to be extended through Hawthorne Park and 100th is being expanded from 137th to 148th to alleviate the reductions in 104th lanes. Also i'll bet they won't be that dumb to not put in left turn lanes at key intersections at 104th. This is not Vancouver where major roads are missing left turn lanes at key intersections. Not sure if they plan on running buses down 104th but i'm sure in the planning they can have bus pullouts incorporated in to the design.

Sorry meant to say 100th is being expanded from 140th to 148th. From 137th to 140th is still being kept at 2 lanes for some reason. Although I am not surprised. This is BC. Why not expand the whole road at once instead of doing the next short section 5-15 years down the road.

[elevtechlift]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Just continue Skytrain from its current terminus to Guildford. A good start.

As for running LRT down King George Blvd. ... KGB already has too much traffic. Requires several signalized light cycles just to make it through an intersection at 72nd Ave. northward at peak. BTW, that area is notorious for accidents, esp. at intersections.

Moreover, traffic is growing so much that KGB should eventually be expanded to 6-lanes.

And they want to throw in a "glorified streetcar" i.e. LRT in the middle of KGB? That's just asking for further major accidents between both vehicles as well as LRT. Calgary's LRT shows numerous examples of just LRT road crossings with numerous vehicular incidents.

Agree with most here. Proposed KGB LRT would result in a gong-show. Can't easily move a smashed/derailed LRT vehicle unlike a bus. Would result in even further major traffic/transit tie-ups as a result.

PS. KGB also has considerable cross-traffic aside from intersections. Just would exacerbate the matter.

Also with the LRT, there would still no direct bus link between Coquitlam Central and Surrey Central via Port Mann. SFU Surrey students would still have to cram on the SkyTrain in the Tri-Cities and then change at Lougheed and Columbia to head to Surrey Central. A single bus ride on an extended 96 B Line from Coquitlam Central to Surrey Central, Newton, and White Rock via Port Mann, Guildford, 104th, KGB, and SMH would be cheaper and faster to implement yet has more long term benefits over LRT.

[Shift]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

Absolutely atrocious that a main arterial road which connects the city to highway 1 would be down to one lane in each direction for goods movers and commuter cars.

You don't get it.

104th is to become a transit prioritized / oriented corridor. That is the point.

100th and 108th will become the car prioritized / oriented corridors. You can add cycling to 100th as well since it will have the separated bike lanes.

In the future, 104th Avenue will not be a busy arterial with the sole purpose of moving heavy volumes of car traffic across the city. It will be a calmed pedestrian / transit-oriented corridor connecting City Centre to Guildford, with a better streetscape and community built along it.

You also can't build such communities with a Skytrain running down the street disconnected from street level.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Shift

You don't get it.

104th is to become a transit prioritized / oriented corridor. That is the point.

100th and 108th will become the car prioritized / oriented corridors. You can add cycling to 100th as well since it will have the separated bike lanes.

In the future, 104th Avenue will not be a busy arterial with the sole purpose of moving heavy volumes of car traffic across the city. It will be a calmed pedestrian / transit-oriented corridor connecting City Centre to Guildford, with a better streetscape and community built along it.

You also can't build such communities with a Skytrain running down the street disconnected from street level.

I agree with the first part of your post, but you can build a traffic calmed / pedestrian oriented corridor along a Skytrain route...it is just unlikely to happen because they won't HAVE to take away car lanes, nothing to say they CAN'T.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Shift

In the future, 104th Avenue will not be a busy arterial with the sole purpose of moving heavy volumes of car traffic across the city. It will be a calmed pedestrian / transit-oriented corridor connecting City Centre to Guildford, with a better streetscape and community built along it.

You also can't build such communities with a Skytrain running down the street disconnected from street level.

And you can build such communities with an uncrossable LRT median splitting the street in two?

There are corridors in Surrey where LRT makes sense. This is not one of them.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Shift

You also can't build such communities with a Skytrain running down the street disconnected from street level.

Have you seen the current proposed LRT design?! This whole LRT thing just doesn't make sense. I would have different feelings if it had a good design. This is not the case and I would rather pay less to have a BRT that would travel at the same speed for the same distance. I ain't no NIMBY, and I am absolutely pro-Skytrain.

The purpose of rapid transit is to move larger amounts of people conveniently across a certain areas of interest. The communities that get built and the TOD is just a side-effect IMO and I would rather focus on a solution to move the Lower Mainland's second largest population without hemorrhaging a ridiculous amount of money on a vanity project.

[that guy101]

everyone in surrey should be demanding skytrain as opposed to the lrt/ tram that's being proposed. i live in edmonton, and street level lrt has really messed up the area, and the politicians have their heads buried, as they continue to spend billions more for the same thing.
the new line under construction won't be any faster than a bus. so, what's the point.
the skytrain is a fantastic system. you should be proud it's there. it's fast, convenient, a tourist draw.
the surrey lrt will be a travesty from day one.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Shift

102 Ave to Surrey Central Station:

I know that bike lanes aren't on this map and that King George isn't really meant for bikes, but bicycles are probably going to be going down King George every now and then. The low "angle of attack" between the direction bikes will be going and the rail lines will lead to numerous single-rider crashes as described in this article. Watch the video of people bailing and imagine how bad King George & 101 Ave is going to be. 102 Ave is going to be bonkers for cyclists too.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

I know that bike lanes aren't on this map and that King George isn't really meant for bikes, but bicycles are probably going to be going down King George every now and then. The low "angle of attack" between the direction bikes will be going and the rail lines will lead to numerous single-rider crashes as described in this article. Watch the video of people bailing and imagine how bad King George & 101 Ave is going to be. 102 Ave is going to be bonkers for cyclists too.

What cyclists? It's Surrey. The car is king. The only regular people you see riding bikes are the street people and the elderly east Indians.

[jsbertram]

seems the yankees haven't figured out to run successful trams/ trollies/ streetcars after spending billions in the last few years


http://reason.com/blog/2017/08/04/americas-cities-double-down-on-trolley-f

will surrey learn anything before spending the big bucks?

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

seems the yankees haven't figured out to run successful trams/ trollies/ streetcars after spending billions in the last few years

http://reason.com/blog/2017/08/04/americas-cities-double-down-on-trolley-f

will surrey learn anything before spending the big bucks?

Streetcar funds also come at the expense of more effective transit solutions. "Many cities are spending money on streetcars at the expense of their bus system," notes Feigenbaum, even though buses are cheaper, faster, and more flexible. To Feigenbaum, this underlines the fact that these projects are "really not about transportation—they're about economic development. But even the economic development is not really there, so what's the point?

Surrey won't learn anything because this streetcar is a vanity project anyways.