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

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by red-paladin

Some interesting renderings of stations on there.
Reproduced in https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-langley-skytrain-update-february-2019

This design for the 152nd St. station is awful.
Reminds me of some of the Honolulu station designs.
If you are on the south side of the street and want to go westbound, how do you get there?
If the station entrances were closer to the intersection, people could use the crosswalk to get to the other side.

That's why side of road stations (like along No. 3 Rd.) are preferable.
Smaller footprint, cheaper to build, easily navigable.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-langley-skytrain-update-february-2019

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by officedweller

This design for the 152nd St. station is awful.
Reminds me of some of the Honolulu station designs.
If you are on the south side of the street and want to go westbound, how do you get there?
If the station entrances were closer to the intersection, people could use the crosswalk to get to the other side.

That's why side of road stations (like along No. 3 Rd.) are preferable.
Smaller footprint, cheaper to build, easily navigable.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-langley-skytrain-update-february-2019

I'm just as concerned about the lack of expansion room. No one thought they should leave the possibility for Spanish Solution on one of the busiest stations of the extension?

[ilikeredheads]

One simple solution is to make the guideway higher and borrow the design of Brentwood Centre Station.

[nname]

Originally Posted by officedweller

This design for the 152nd St. station is awful.
Reminds me of some of the Honolulu station designs.
If you are on the south side of the street and want to go westbound, how do you get there?
If the station entrances were closer to the intersection, people could use the crosswalk to get to the other side.

That's why side of road stations (like along No. 3 Rd.) are preferable.
Smaller footprint, cheaper to build, easily navigable.

Seen lots of busy Asian elevated systems use this design though. Even Oakridge and Langara is somewhat similar to that.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

One simple solution is to make the guideway higher and borrow the design of Brentwood Centre Station.

Yup. That would be the best option if the guideway is in the median.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by nname

Seen lots of busy Asian elevated systems use this design though. Even Oakridge and Langara is somewhat similar to that.

Pretty sure that those stations are less to do with ergonomics or functionality and more to do with cost-cutting. Oakridge and Langara, for example, because it was cheaper to dig the mezzanine deeper than the guideway.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I'm just as concerned about the lack of expansion room. No one thought they should leave the possibility for Spanish Solution on one of the busiest stations of the extension?

Are there projected numbers for the stations?

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by fredinno

I'm just as concerned about the lack of expansion room. No one thought they should leave the possibility for Spanish Solution on one of the busiest stations of the extension?

Not everything needs a spanish solution. And to have it there means the station must have island style or double stacked platform in the first place, which means splitting the guideway. This presents a new set of challenges because the station is on top of the median, thus driving up building costs. The main thing is that the second set of platforms won't be built right away, so you are essentially going for more expensive complicated design just to have the option of expansion, which makes zero economical sense. And there's no data to suggest that it'll even need such an expansion.

[Jasoncw]

I have to admit I don't understand why this station design is so bad.

If this had a mezzanine level like Brentwood Centre, the layout would be simpler and the stairs would be more pleasant, but you'd still go up/down 4 levels on a round trip (2+2 for mezzanine, 1+3 for this). But for a mezzanine you'd need a higher guideway and a giant hulking station, so there's a tradeoff.

As far as I can tell, this is the same as the typical side alignment stations except it's spread across the street, so there are two entrances/fare zones instead of one. And for round trips on average you'll be crossing the street once with any type of station, except this station has a bonus pedestrian overpass.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Pretty sure that those stations are less to do with ergonomics or functionality and more to do with cost-cutting. Oakridge and Langara, for example, because it was cheaper to dig the mezzanine deeper than the guideway.

Cost-cutting and Asian system? That might not belong to the same sentence

But the fact that it's being used and still used in new systems even for high volume station means the design is perfectly fine.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Jasoncw

If this had a mezzanine level like Brentwood Centre, the layout would be simpler and the stairs would be more pleasant, but you'd still go up/down 4 levels on a round trip (2+2 for mezzanine, 1+3 for this). But for a mezzanine you'd need a higher guideway and a giant hulking station, so there's a tradeoff.

My friend always question how the design for Brentwood station was passed. Isn't the building code requires 2 independent exits? Both exits for Brendwood converges at the mezzanine, so in case of something happens there, everyone above is basically trapped...

At least for the mock up design, the nearest exit is always 1 stair away

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Jasoncw

If this had a mezzanine level like Brentwood Centre, the layout would be simpler and the stairs would be more pleasant, but you'd still go up/down 4 levels on a round trip (2+2 for mezzanine, 1+3 for this). But for a mezzanine you'd need a higher guideway and a giant hulking station, so there's a tradeoff.

As far as I can tell, this is the same as the typical side alignment stations except it's spread across the street, so there are two entrances/fare zones instead of one. And for round trips on average you'll be crossing the street once with any type of station, except this station has a bonus pedestrian overpass.

It wouldn't be so bad if the overpass used the main elevators or stairs - as it is, this is going to add to crowding and is just bad design overall.

Originally Posted by nname

Cost-cutting and Asian system? That might not belong to the same sentence

But the fact that it's being used and still used in new systems even for high volume station means the design is perfectly fine.

You know that "Asia" isn't a monolith, right? Which stations in what countries are we talking about here?

I'll happily concede the point if it's - let's say - Singapore or Hong Kong or Japan, but the only such stations I can see are in Malaysia, and their government has a long record of being corrupt cheapskates (unless it's for themselves or a pet project); seriously, Christy Clark and the Libs have nothing on Mahathir or Najib.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Jasoncw

I have to admit I don't understand why this station design is so bad.

If this had a mezzanine level like Brentwood Centre, the layout would be simpler and the stairs would be more pleasant, but you'd still go up/down 4 levels on a round trip (2+2 for mezzanine, 1+3 for this). But for a mezzanine you'd need a higher guideway and a giant hulking station, so there's a tradeoff.

As far as I can tell, this is the same as the typical side alignment stations except it's spread across the street, so there are two entrances/fare zones instead of one. And for round trips on average you'll be crossing the street once with any type of station, except this station has a bonus pedestrian overpass.

If you are on the opposite side of the street it's too circuitous to get to the other platform.
A mezzanine provides a more direct route to your platform, especially for large volumes of people.
The overpass design could be improved with escalators to the overpass (instead of just the elevator and (emergency?) stairs).
The best solution for simple station design is a "side-of-road" station.

The underpasses at Oakridge and Langara stations are likely due to cost-cutting.
They should have had mezzanines like Broadway-City Hall.
When Oakridge volumes increase, the underpass will get clogged (think former Metrotown exit overpass).

[nname]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I'll happily concede the point if it's - let's say - Singapore or Hong Kong or Japan.

Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Japan are the ones in my mind.

Hong Kong - Many stations on East Rail... and maybe a few others
Taiwan - Most stations on Muzha and Neihu (brown) line, and some stations in Danshui (red) and Taoyuan Airport (purple) line.
Japan - Been into a few stations, but can't remember the names.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by nname

Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Japan are the ones in my mind.

Hong Kong - Many stations on East Rail... and maybe a few others
Taiwan - Most stations on Muzha and Neihu (brown) line, and some stations in Danshui (red) and Taoyuan Airport (purple) line.
Japan - Been into a few stations, but can't remember the names.

Thanks, conceded. Though I do note that Taiwan mostly placed the overpass staircase behind the entrance staircase, so there's no bottleneck at the faregates.

[nname]

Originally Posted by officedweller

The underpasses at Oakridge and Langara stations are likely due to cost-cutting.
They should have had mezzanines like Broadway-City Hall.
When Oakridge volumes increase, the underpass will get clogged (think former Metrotown exit overpass).

I don't think clogging of the underpass/overpass would be an issue if they use proper stair and escalator than just an elevator.

I mean, check out the design of these three major transfer stations in Taipei Metro:

Daily boarding excluding transfers: 76,273
https://web.metro.taipei/img/ALL/INFOPDF/009.pdf

Daily boarding excluding transfers: 96,356
https://web.metro.taipei/img/ALL/INFOPDF/010.pdf

Daily boarding excluding transfers: 50,591
https://web.metro.taipei/img/ALL/INFOPDF/011.pdf

The elevated portion for the brown line is on page 2 (3F), and there is only a single entry at the platform level of one platform. Passenger must use the overpass to access the other platform.

Of course there are many issues those stations, but crowding of the overpass is not one of them...

[officedweller]

Those stations seem to have 2 underpasses/overpasses.
My biggest complaint is the extra time to access the trains versus a mezzanine.

[MIPS]

Why not just ring up Architekten-Gruppe and see what they can propose to us? They've done a good job of being both economical and high quality in the past.

[CanSpice]

Can someone point me to the projected ridership stats for the Surrey SkyTrain stations?

[Waders]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Can someone point me to the projected ridership stats for the Surrey SkyTrain stations?

Page 89 of the Mayors Council briefing report figure 3.3 has the Fraser Highway extension WB ridership number for year 2045. The number is probably out of date.