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

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Let's be honest, the "Phase II" separated ROW along Fraser Highway is more about connecting Langley than Surrey. Langley is the only major municipality in Metro without rail transit (Maple Ridge has the WCE, Steveston/Tsawassen are not major).

Yes, the Langleys are the only major municipalities in Metro Vancouver without rail transit, other than Delta, both North Vancouvers, West Vancouver, and White Rock (don't know if you count White Rock as a "major" municipality or if you lump it in with Anmore and Belcarra...).

[rickvug]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Yes, the Langleys are the only major municipalities in Metro Vancouver without rail transit, other than Delta, both North Vancouvers, West Vancouver, and White Rock (don't know if you count White Rock as a "major" municipality or if you lump it in with Anmore and Belcarra...).

A better way to look at it is to view all of the designated Regional City Centres in Metro Vancouver. Langley Centre is the only RCC to not have rail based rapid transit. Maple Ridge has WCE and North Vancouver is a unique situation with Sea Bus. Every other RCC has Skytrain now. IMO the hierarchy of transit investments the focus should be on connecting all of the hubs (ie Regional Centres) with the Skytrain. After that focus on upgrading the B-Line feeder routes to Light Rail. Reality isn't this black and white but you get the idea. Translink has actually been doing well in this regard. Up until leapfrogging Surrey LRT ahead of Skytrain to Langley, that is.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by rickvug

Every other RCC has Skytrain now.

Lonsdale doesn't have SkyTrain either (SeaBus doesn't really count). Good points regardless.

[bardak]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

The Surrey LRT is all about connecting Surrey to Surrey. It's about Surrey growing up into the 2nd largest city in the region, separating itself from Vancouver. It's about creating a system for Surrey, BY Surrey... and maybe it's not the BEST solution for super speed, but it's a permanent ROW for transit. Sure, a B-Line would be cheaper... but it won't spur development along 104th like a fixed link will.

Metro Vancouver has done extremely well by investing in regional transit. I would be happy for Surrey to invest it's own municiple money on the L line but at the end of the day investing regional transit dollars that gives marginal improvent in transit related benchmarks is bad policy. We currently have many other transit improvents that could be funded and provide a better transit business case.

Surrey is part of Metro Vancouver whether it wants to be or not and trying to balkanise our rapid transit hurts the entire region and in the long run Surrey. While most posters here are against the L line I think we would bergugenly accept it if they were not try to push Langley line as LRT.

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

I don't think the LRT will be a failure. It will attract WAY more people to transit than a B-Line EVER could. Portland residents LOVE their LRT despite it being comparatively slow.

The success of Portland is very overstated. The 96 b-line has the same ridership per km as the LRT as Portland.

[rickvug]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Lonsdale doesn't have SkyTrain either (SeaBus doesn't really count). Good points regardless.

When I said "every other" I was caveating Lonsdale and Maple Ridge. The North Shore is a unique situation due to the existing presence of sea bus and the challenging geography. Maple Ridge technically has WCE but that's nowhere near equivalent to Skytrain. Looking at these three centres in my mind Langley is the clear winner in terms of an investment case (not to mention the politics). Given the population of Surrey and Langley, there's also an excellent opportunity for Skytrain to become the backbone that stitches together various feeder bus routes.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by rickvug

When I said "every other" I was caveating Lonsdale and Maple Ridge. The North Shore is a unique situation due to the existing presence of sea bus and the challenging geography. Maple Ridge technically has WCE but that's nowhere near equivalent to Skytrain. Looking at these three centres in my mind Langley is the clear winner in terms of an investment case (not to mention the politics). Given the population of Surrey and Langley, there's also an excellent opportunity for Skytrain to become the backbone that stitches together various feeder bus routes.

Agreed. Daryl's said it many times on here but the LRT would be one of the slowest routes in the entire TransLink network so there seems to be no benefit to their plan to direct buses to LRT stations (the may even overload the LRT considering that I suspect many routes would truncate at its termini

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Lonsdale doesn't have SkyTrain either (SeaBus doesn't really count).

Seabus gets people from central North Vancouver to downtown faster than any Skytrain that would traverse one of the existing bridges, and it's considerably more reliable. It's only wanting for more frequency, which could be provided remarkably cheaply just by building a few more vessels.

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

I still find it funny how the only idea they can provide that this will "reduce congestion" is that "More people using public transit means fewer vehicles on the road."

THANK YOU!

Just look at our transit numbers right now. Transit ridership across the region again in 2017 has reached peaks and set records. Over 300 million. It is up up up, more people are using transit.

But guess what... car use has increased even higher! Why? Population gain. It's that simple. So Surrey can dream all it wants but unless Surrey stops growing, transit does not and will NEVER replace cars. I'm absolutely sure of the NEVER too. Vancouver has 100 years on Surrey and it hasn't gotten rid of cars in the city and traffic has only grown. Not in Surrey, not in ANY city on the planet anywhere period. And when automated electric cars are more mainstream in the next 20 years, you're going to see transit get challenged due to the convenience cars bring in many situations.

I don't get why mayors and planners in Metro-Vancouver seem to think we're different than all the other cities on the planet. It is ridiculous. Oh wait, I know the answer. It's that politicians don't seem to think beyond the next election.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Colin4567

Agreed. Daryl's said it many times on here but the LRT would be one of the slowest routes in the entire TransLink network so there seems to be no benefit to their plan to direct buses to LRT stations (the may even overload the LRT considering that I suspect many routes would truncate at its termini

I had a possibly fantasy transit thought - if Surrey wants to do something 'new' (LRT instead of Skytrain) why don't they consider having the L Line as a gondola instead? Sure there would be the inevitable complaints that go with an elevated system but beyond that? From my cursory search it's a pretty safe system and urban gondolas are the hot new thang now.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I had a possibly fantasy transit thought - if Surrey wants to do something 'new' (LRT instead of Skytrain) why don't they consider having the L Line as a gondola instead? Sure there would be the inevitable complaints that go with an elevated system but beyond that? From my cursory search it's a pretty safe system and urban gondolas are the hot new thang now.

For everything its place, unlike the SFU gondola there is no advantage here and plenty of disadvantages.

[cganuelas1995]

http://theprovince.com/opinion/letters/l...-stand-up-for-skytrain-not-lrt-in-surrey

[cganuelas1995]

Do the world a favour and sign

https://www.change.org/p/extend-skytrain-and-not-street-level-light-rail-to-langley

[trofirhen]

More criticism of the proposed Surrey LRT. Well researched IMO. Plus videos of an LRT "demolition derby." Enlightening. Please take a look!

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-light-rail-skytrain-mistakes-underbuilt

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

More criticism of the proposed Surrey LRT. Well researched IMO. Plus videos of an LRT "demolition derby." Enlightening. Please take a look!

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-light-rail-skytrain-mistakes-underbuilt

oh good that should put a dent in that Malcolm JOhnston character.......keeps pooping up in my facebook feeds about this Surrey LRT nonsense

[ilikeredheads]

It's like seeing into the future, one that hopefully won't happen.

• Video Link

Tram in Romania btw.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

It's like seeing into the future, one that hopefully won't happen.

• Video Link

Tram in Romania btw.

Good to know that we expect a modern LRT to be built to the same standards as this clearly poorly designed tramway.

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I had a possibly fantasy transit thought - if Surrey wants to do something 'new' (LRT instead of Skytrain) why don't they consider having the L Line as a gondola instead? Sure there would be the inevitable complaints that go with an elevated system but beyond that? From my cursory search it's a pretty safe system and urban gondolas are the hot new thang now.

This idea has 0 legs...

-too little capacity
-very long
-slow
-very nimby prone with its appearance
I could go on...

[Reecemartin]

Originally Posted by Colin4567

Agreed. Daryl's said it many times on here but the LRT would be one of the slowest routes in the entire TransLink network so there seems to be no benefit to their plan to direct buses to LRT stations (the may even overload the LRT considering that I suspect many routes would truncate at its termini

I mean this should be obviously false? Even if it's only 1 minute faster than the 96 that still would make it faster than a bus that runs express? Have you guys ridden any suburban services?

Not to mention the 96 doesn't have the best lane priority and as far as I know has zero signal priority. I hate how all the anti-lrt people almost resort to Surrey City level hyperbolic rhetoric about why LRT is so bad when in reality it certainly would be faster.

With regards to Portlands LRT it actually is fairly fast as the lights are timed in tune with the train movements, the system also has some significant dedicated ROW. And in terms on success from a development standpoint I think it has been a massive one.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I mean this should be obviously false? Even if it's only 1 minute faster than the 96 that still would make it faster than a bus that runs express? Have you guys ridden any suburban services?

Not to mention the 96 doesn't have the best lane priority and as far as I know has zero signal priority. I hate how all the anti-lrt people almost resort to Surrey City level hyperbolic rhetoric about why LRT is so bad when in reality it certainly would be faster.

With regards to Portlands LRT it actually is fairly fast as the lights are timed in tune with the train movements, the system also has some significant dedicated ROW. And in terms on success from a development standpoint I think it has been a massive one.

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Good to know that we expect a modern LRT to be built to the same standards as this clearly poorly designed tramway.

I grew up with SoF suburban service. The problem with this LRT plan is that it won't be any faster (and quite possibly slower) than the 96B and it's going to cost boatloads of money. Plus I can't remember comments about giving the LRT signal priority, and Surrey has been saying 'shared road space'. This recent image from TransLink shows more traffic separation than previous images.


TransLink reveals new images of Surrey LRT

So yeah, that "poorly designed tramway" is pretty accurate for what Surrey was planning - while believing that the inevitable problems wouldn't happen here.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I mean this should be obviously false? Even if it's only 1 minute faster than the 96 that still would make it faster than a bus that runs express? Have you guys ridden any suburban services?

Not to mention the 96 doesn't have the best lane priority and as far as I know has zero signal priority. I hate how all the anti-lrt people almost resort to Surrey City level hyperbolic rhetoric about why LRT is so bad when in reality it certainly would be faster.

With regards to Portlands LRT it actually is fairly fast as the lights are timed in tune with the train movements, the system also has some significant dedicated ROW. And in terms on success from a development standpoint I think it has been a massive one.

you make it sound like 1 minute faster is worth 2 billion dollars. in what world is that a good use of dollars? 1 minute faster. lol lol lol. not even worth mentioning. that is the difference between stopping at a red light, or hitting the light green. also, what happens when there is an accident on the road? bus drive around it. what happens when there is an accident on train tracks? trains stop until it is cleared. in BC any accident that is deemed to cost more then $10,000 must have a full investigation so vehicles CANT be moved until that is done; many and many hours.

guess what??!?! 10% of the cost of this LRT, you can build dedicated, signal priority bus-lanes akin to what was down No. 3 Road in Richmond before Canada-Line.

you get a dedicated ROW, less money spent, flexibility around accidents, signal priority.

development? yes, because TRANSPORTATION PLANNING isnt needed. who cares about if commuting is actually good, lets just build all these condos and offices with a crappy 🞵🞵🞵 LRT system no one will want to use, and anyone who has to use will hate it.

and on top of all this, its operating costs are high as well. oh wonderful, so you get to spend all this money up front for 🞵🞵🞵🞵, and you get to spend more in the long run. wow, great plan. *clap...clap...clap...* /sarcastic clap