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

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by nname

Expo Line ends at King George with a tail track pointing southwest, toward the direction of Langley. The tail track lined up exactly at the center of Fraser Highway.

Originally Posted by nname

That's what people against SkyTrain said, which I disagree to. People claim SkyTrain is too expensive because they have to elevate through the farm land. But go Port Moody to check out how at-grade SkyTrain works. The only thing extra is to close or elevate the roadways that crosses the track, and then the cost of SkyTrain or LRT is pretty much the same.

Exactly. Laying the tracks is pretty much the same price - grade separating it costs more. Elevating is costs some more but not $$$ more. A lot of the section between approx 170th to 180th (about 2.5km) could be low or on-ground.

Originally Posted by SgtNeonPanda

The only reason costs between LRT and Skytrain on the Evergreen line were so similar was due to the tunnel no? Otherwise, I think LRT wins cost wise, especially since it's unlikely to need very high capacity in the future that far south. At least the end of the Evergreen extension still has a significant population past its terminus.

The Evergreen tunnel was the most expensive section to build (tunnels cost $$$). Really the only reason Surrey LRT will be cheaper to build is due to no grade separation and very little traffic separation.

Meanwhile it's been shown that LRT operational costs will be waaaaay higher than Skytrain operational costs. Do we really want to spend less up front and end up paying a lot more to run it?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by SgtNeonPanda

I'd love for this thing to be Skytrain as well, but I'm trying to stay optimistic since we can't go back in time now, unfortunately.

Sheba and nname covered all the major points. Obviously no commuter ever wants to see a train line fail, but there really aren't any redeeming features so far.

Oh, and welcome to the forum.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

i wouldn't hate this so much if Surrey paid for this political 🞵🞵🞵🞵 themselves. but nope, they need to waste my tax dollars on their stupid vanity project from a transit agency that is perpetually broke being tossed around like a hot potato. it should be illegal for politicians to pick what to do when it comes to anything that requires a brain.

[Metro-One]

Yeah, that is the sticking point it the cost and that Translink will get all the blame once any problem occurs on this line (despite its design being fully dictated by Surrey City government ).

Then there is the fact that they are also trying to sabotage the extension to Langley with their idealism (and sadly so far the provincial government seems to not have the backbone to counter them... wish they took properly building mass transit as seriously as their stance against KM... )

[flipper316]

Well if Translink doesn't want to be 🞵🞵🞵🞵 on once this white elephant finally gets built and within the first month you might have the first ped fatality. Then maybe Translink should tell Surrey to piss off and pay for it and operate it themselves. Instead Translink is playing along.

[Metro-One]

Unlike the provincial government Translink doesn’t have such authority. They work for the elected governments, not above. They can only recommend, that’s it.

[s211]

I would have to think that if there were grade-separated tracks at major intersection, much of the LRT/Skytrain debate would diminish.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by s211

I would have to think that if there were grade-separated tracks at major intersection, much of the LRT/Skytrain debate would diminish.

If you go back in the forum you'll see this debated time and time again,so everyone let's not have another 10 page discussion on grade separation

[Firebrand]

^This. Instead of what you said, how about we do the ”let’s make the Surrey-Langley Line in to a SkyTrain extension instead of a botched LRT” thing?

[s211]

Originally Posted by Colin4567

If you go back in the forum you'll see this debated time and time again,so everyone let's not have another 10 page discussion on grade separation

Sorry, that wasn't my intent. I'm not following this thread in detail because it has shades of the mess Edmonton's going through on two of its existing lines (and about to get messier with its line currently under construction), and it gets too hard to read sometimes.

Will step back.

[Trainguy]

Went to the open house at 104th and 144th today to voice my concerns about the project. They told me it would be too expensive to make 104th ave all 4 lanes so they are only doing it in sections. They are making 100th ave 4 lanes from KG to 156th st. I asked about signal priority. The LRT won't have total signal priority but something call intelligent signalling. In other words, there will be times when it has to stop at lights just like the rest of us.

They said they changed some things about the project because of feedback. This means we need to make our voices heard so that the Langley section does not go LRT. Nothing has been decided about that section officially.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Went to the open house at 104th and 144th today to voice my concerns about the project. They told me it would be too expensive to make 104th ave all 4 lanes so they are only doing it in sections. They are making 100th ave 4 lanes from KG to 156th st. I asked about signal priority. The LRT won't have total signal priority but something call intelligent signalling. In other words, there will be times when it has to stop at lights just like the rest of us.

They said they changed some things about the project because of feedback. This means we need to make our voices heard so that the Langley section does not go LRT. Nothing has been decided about that section officially.

104th isn't even wide enough to accommodate 4 lanes plus a pair of streetcar tracks, so it'll require land acquisition along the entire stretch of the road, driving up cost even more. And that's assuming there's even space for expansion. Well, at least they are expanding 100th to 4 lanes all the way.

Sounds like "intelligent signalling" is basically the light staying green a bit longer if a tram is approaching the intersection.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

They said they changed some things about the project because of feedback. This means we need to make our voices heard so that the Langley section does not go LRT. Nothing has been decided about that section officially.

Technically the fight isn't over until the shovels are in the ground...

And if this LRT 🞵🞵🞵🞵 gets built, you can bet your tax dollars that Translink will not be building ANYTHING for any municipality south of the Fraser river for a while.

This project is going to piss off the entire Lower Mainland, the Feds, and the Provincial Government.

[ClaytonA]

1) Mods need to change the thread by taking out the "rapid"

2) We all need to stop calling this LRT; it's a streetcar/tram given the capacity and design. Calling it LRT is a misnomer muddying the waters. Besides Surrey streetcar has a nice ring to it anyways.

3) The biggest improvement would be two grade separations where the streetcar enters/exits City Blvd. Those are the highest risk of collision/largest creator of traffic congestion with longer crossing times. If there is any change you can motivate, this is the one.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by nname

Expo Line ends at King George with a tail track pointing southwest, toward the direction of Langley. The tail track lined up exactly at the center of Fraser Highway.

Don't you mean southeast?

[jsbertram]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

104th isn't even wide enough to accommodate 4 lanes plus a pair of streetcar tracks, so it'll require land acquisition along the entire stretch of the road, driving up cost even more. And that's assuming there's even space for expansion. Well, at least they are expanding 100th to 4 lanes all the way.

Sounds like "intelligent signalling" is basically the light staying green a bit longer if a tram is approaching the intersection.

city report has admitted that by the 2040's, 104th will need to be widened back to 4 lanes plus lh and rh turn lanes because the train as built won't have the capacity or ability to change driving habits at that time. even with 100th and 108th widened to 4 lanes today, they will run out of vehicle capacity in 20-30 years.

that's a problem and cost for a future council to deal with

[SpongeG]

• Video Link

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

• Video Link

Typical slick propaganda that doesn't tell the whole story. I hope the protests ramp up even more and make people more aware of the mess this street car will create.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Typical slick propaganda that doesn't tell the whole story. I hope the protests ramp up even more and make people more aware of the mess this street car will create.

What kind of stories they don’t tell, other than the huge costs with low returns?

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Firebrand

What kind of stories they don’t tell, other than the huge costs with low returns?

For starters that video smooths out most of the corners in the route - the only one it clearly shows is 104th to City Parkway.