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

[Firebrand]

https://biv.com/article/2018/11/surrey-needs-lrt-not-skytrain-technology

The new Surrey is in danger of finding itself on a return trip to the old Surrey when it comes to intermunicipal transportation.


And that’s bad for business prospects in B.C.’s fastest-growing urban area. It’s not much help in other areas of Metro Vancouver either.
One of Surrey mayor-elect Doug McCallum’s first initiatives has been to follow through on his promise to shunt already approved light-rail transit (LRT) to a siding in favour of pursuing SkyTrain technology. Up-front costs for the McCallum transportation move: an additional $1.3 billion.
Reasons: proponents argue that SkyTrain would provide more efficient people movement than its LRT counterpart, and its automated operation would eliminate the need for human drivers and their wages and replace that with the artificial intelligence that drives the Canada Line and other SkyTrain links. So: no drivers, no humans, no problems.
But the McCallum SkyTrain option’s infrastructure price tag will not sit well with other Metro Vancouver municipalities, especially considering LRT’s decade-long journey from proposal to endorsement from the region’s 23-member Mayors’ Council. Stalling that momentum is a rug yanked from under commuters in Surrey now and any considering moving there.
More important, however, is the impact rapid transit will have on Surrey’s development.
LRT would help cultivate commercial and community development all along its right-of-way. But SkyTrain promotes concentrated development around commuter station locations, and that is not a community cultivation proposition. It is a developer’s opportunity.
The LRT option offers a chance to build more than a transit line out of the Fraser Valley to connect with the rest of the region. It provides a rapid transit avenue to develop closer community and business connections within Surrey. In short, it is a generational opportunity to expand and develop a vital urban centre in the southwest region that is distinct from Vancouver.

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Firebrand

https://biv.com/article/2018/11/surrey-needs-lrt-not-skytrain-technology

Another article full of personal bias while leaving out the facts. Yes, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even me, but that does not mean it has to be accepted as facts.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Sheba

If people want to go all Nimby then stop it at the South Surrey Park & Ride and let them bus / drive from there.

Question: Are P&Rs really that useful? On paper it makes a lot of sense, but if you're already driving, wouldn't it be better for you to just keep driving?

[flipper316]

One of the comments in that article said that the LRT was going to be diesel powered instead of electric to save money. Damn, if that's true then quite literally it would've been a bus on rails as most of our buses are diesel or a diesel hybrid.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by flipper316

One of the comments in that article said that the LRT was going to be diesel powered instead of electric to save money. Damn, if that's true then quite literally it would've been a bus on rails as most of our buses are diesel or a diesel hybrid.

Now we can see that Surrey First proposed all this just for their vain glory. At least that’s how I see it.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by flipper316

One of the comments in that article said that the LRT was going to be diesel powered instead of electric to save money. Damn, if that's true then quite literally it would've been a bus on rails as most of our buses are diesel or a diesel hybrid.

So that's why none of the promotionals show overhead wires...

[Trainguy]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So that's why none of the promotionals show overhead wires...

Hold it a sec... So the proposed LRT was not going to be this "clean, environmentally friendly electric LRT" like other cities use? People would be shocked to see a diesel LRT running up and down Surrey streets. That's a bus on rails!!! I can't believe Translink would approve that nonesense. The price would have to be higher if they had to install over head cantenary. I can't believe this fact was hidden if it is indeed true!! Yikes

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

I can't believe Translink would approve that nonesense.

Remember that TransLink is like the maid. The powers that be want something, TL plans it, TPTB says "cool, now make it happen," TL builds it, and whenever we get upset, TPTB can just back off and say "not my fault, TL was in charge."

[Bombaman]

Please stop spreading this non-sense even if you don't like the LRT. It runs on electricity.

Originally Posted by flipper316

One of the comments in that article said that the LRT was going to be diesel powered instead of electric to save money. Damn, if that's true then quite literally it would've been a bus on rails as most of our buses are diesel or a diesel hybrid.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Question: Are P&Rs really that useful? On paper it makes a lot of sense, but if you're already driving, wouldn't it be better for you to just keep driving?

For people who live further out and have crap local bus service - yes. The South Surrey Park & Ride has buses (some of them rush hour only express routes) that travel to the Expo and Canada lines. Depending on where people are going, the cost of gas and parking isn't worth driving all the way.

[BirchTrain]

I highly doubt the LRT would’ve been using DMUs. As Bombaman posted, the website states that the line would’ve been electric powered.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by BirchTrain

I highly doubt the LRT would’ve been using DMUs. As Bombaman posted, the website states that the line would’ve been electric powered.

I find that claim from that comment a bit farfetched. The reason you didn't see overhead in the pictures was because the sales pitchers knew that the wires would make the train look ugly.

[tybuilding]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So that's why none of the promotionals show overhead wires...

Like this one?
https://youtu.be/xfTDT8UMBIA

[flipper316]

Guarantee you this would've happened within the first month of LRT opening.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=55&v=QaztuSQqbbs

[cornholio]

For BRT what they need is dedicated right turn lanes and where they cant have them then right turn restrictions (these restrictions could be only during peak times).

The second thing they need is dedicated bus lanes during peak times. As mentioned other buses, taxis hov vehicles with x passengers etc can also use these lanes. As long as the lanes are not congested at any point or no one is blocking them turning right they will work better then any LRT.

Third stations for BRT buses should be all door bording. Then can use modular stations with turnstiles possibly as they do elsewhere in the world.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by cornholio

For BRT what they need is dedicated right turn lanes and where they cant have them then right turn restrictions (these restrictions could be only during peak times).

The second thing they need is dedicated bus lanes during peak times. As mentioned other buses, taxis hov vehicles with x passengers etc can also use these lanes. As long as the lanes are not congested at any point or no one is blocking them turning right they will work better then any LRT.

Third stations for BRT buses should be all door bording. Then can use modular stations with turnstiles possibly as they do elsewhere in the world.

Rome and Istanbul are some cities that come to mind that actually does BRT fairly well. In the outskirts of Rome, the dedicated lanes are reserved for buses and taxis which makes sense to me. In fact, are there actual Canadian BRT systems that can be followed as an example? Winnipeg doesn't count btw...

However whether we are adding lanes for BRT or LRT, we will still require KGB to be widened to accommodate the lanes and that was a major gripe for us that were against LRT. My biggest concern is developing a legitimate BRT system like they do in other international cities in Europe and in South America; being that the buses have their own lanes and that people pay before boarding.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by scryer

Rome and Istanbul are some cities that come to mind that actually does BRT fairly well. In the outskirts of Rome, the dedicated lanes are reserved for buses and taxis which makes sense to me. In fact, are there actual Canadian BRT systems that can be followed as an example? Winnipeg doesn't count btw...

Ottawa's Transitway is the first one that comes to mind.

[Dengler Avenue]

In that case, count MiWay (Mississauga) Transitways too.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by nname

Maybe instead of going with regular elevated structure, perhaps they could use a lower structure, similar to what had done in Evergreen Extension?

https://goo.gl/maps/nX4nTCGWaTB2

It must've saved some cost compared to the elevated structure that was regularly used... otherwise they wouldn't do it this way, right?

Maybe through the ALR part. Not through Green Timbers; both because of the tree-cutting, and because of the fact there's too many roads, too close together, there.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Translink capitulated on the L-Line in order to get Surrey backing in the mayor's plan for the Broadway line. That was all fallout from the transit referendum, which stemmed from the provincial government's bad-faith "negotiations" (which they promised but never followed through on) about funding sources. There's a long history of botched transit policy since the Olympics, it's basically a lost decade during which the province was spending a ton of money on road projects.

It's so refreshing to see a new provincial government that actually seems to want to work with the cities to get the job done.

Hey, we needed the road projects; Port Mann was one of the most congested corridors in Canada...

Originally Posted by Sheba

Surrey isn't viewed internationally the same way it is locally. Tourists may well go to Surrey just as much as anywhere else in the region.

Internationally, Surrey is a footnote.

Fort Langley alone probably has more tourists visiting it than the entirety of North Surrey. There's nothing particularly impressive or noteworthy to justify the tourist demand.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Hey, we needed the road projects; Port Mann was one of the most congested corridors in Canada...

Yep, but we needed the transit too.