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

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Green Timbers group worried about Surrey-Langley SkyTrain
https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/05/16/green-timbers-group-worried-about-surrey-langley-skytrain/

The Green Timbers Heritage Society has been worried for years - from 2015, when there were LRT plans:

A report that went to council this week outlines the city's plan to widen Fraser Highway between King George Boulevard and 148 Street.

The project will make room for two additional lanes of traffic, an LRT line, a bike path, a sidewalk and drainage ditches.

"Right now there is no shoulder to walk on and cycle, there is no sidewalk in the area and we have no light rail," said Surrey's parks manager Owen Croy.

"When this goes ahead, there will be environmental and health benefits from the actual transportation improvements and we will see no net impact on the actual forest."

In the 1980s, Surrey voters decided in a referendum to declare Green Timbers a protected urban forest.

However, the city made sure planners would eventually be allowed to widen Fraser Highway.

"They left some very wide road allowances, so even though they may have some trees on them, they're not part of the dedicated urban forest," Croy said.

...

"Green Timbers is unique," said Jim Foulkes with the Green Timbers Heritage Society.

"I compare it to Stanley Park in Vancouver, Central Park in New York and Central Park in Burnaby. You couldn't convince any of these large cities to give up their parks, so why should we give up our park?"

Foulkes said he isn't opposed to an LRT line on Fraser Highway, but he doesn't understand why the city needs to add an additional two lanes of traffic.

"If you create rapid transit, people can park their cars and use it," Foulkes said. "You don't need four lanes anymore."

[Migrant_Coconut]

Yeah it sucks, but just how do you get rapid transit without widening Fraser Highway? The SkyTrain plan's already less space-intensive then the previous one.

[officedweller]

Another story suggested that it may be at grade through the park to same costs, but that seems stupid to me because of a couple of cross-streets.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

I always wonder just how many junctions you can sustain on the skytrain network while maintaining adequate branch service and overall reliability and frequency levels

Given the choke point is the Skybridge, if they design the switching system so that either King George/Surrey Central and Scott road each switch to different lines through Surrey, that allows the lines to run independently if there is a switch failure, but ends up putting the switch failures all on those stations.

They could just run the skytrain to Langley on the existing line, build the "L" line as Skytrain and just put a pair of Wyes right after the before Surrey Central to allow the trains to switch between lines. It would also allow the Skytrain to operate in a twin-L mode, where the Surrey Central-Newton and Surrey Central - Guildford lines operate with Surrey Central or Gateway as terminus.

Like ideally, you just don't want the train paths to cross each other, they either have to switch to each other, or run under/over. The switch at Columbia is kinda a good example of a bad switch on the Skytrain. The issue is that the switch gets stuck in one position and thus all trains have to terminate at the previous station. If there was actually another place for the train to park for people to get off (eg a third platform) then the switch becomes less of an impediment.

Who knows what the engineers may decide on to cut costs however.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Yeah it sucks, but just how do you get rapid transit without widening Fraser Highway? The SkyTrain plan's already less space-intensive then the previous one.

Well they could tear up the highway, build the skytrain beneath it, and build a highway of the same size, but that's... expensive and will probably rile up everyone who commutes through it. If the Skytrain is simply elevated and encroaches into the highway, it likely doesn't take up any more space than the center median anyway. That said, it doesn't have a center median and really should.

What is really stupid about the forest, is they built the RCMP E division HQ and the School District/school buildings in it for whatever reason, with massive parking lots.

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Another story suggested that it may be at grade through the park to same costs, but that seems stupid to me because of a couple of cross-streets.

Between 96 and 148 streets, if the tracks were on the North side of Fraser highway, there are no intersections for 1.2km.

The at grade track was proposed by Mayor Doug to save some cost on construction. But I'm not convinced that at grade construction is significantly cheaper than elevated. At least not enough cheaper to justify cutting into the Urban Forest.

The only time constructing a segregated rail line is truly cheaper at grade is when the ROW already exists and is prepped for the load. As soon as you add ROW widening and ground preparation and tons of concrete into the mix, your savings vanish.

[flipper316]

Originally Posted by Kisai

Given the choke point is the Skybridge, if they design the switching system so that either King George/Surrey Central and Scott road each switch to different lines through Surrey, that allows the lines to run independently if there is a switch failure, but ends up putting the switch failures all on those stations.

They could just run the skytrain to Langley on the existing line, build the "L" line as Skytrain and just put a pair of Wyes right after the before Surrey Central to allow the trains to switch between lines. It would also allow the Skytrain to operate in a twin-L mode, where the Surrey Central-Newton and Surrey Central - Guildford lines operate with Surrey Central or Gateway as terminus.

Like ideally, you just don't want the train paths to cross each other, they either have to switch to each other, or run under/over. The switch at Columbia is kinda a good example of a bad switch on the Skytrain. The issue is that the switch gets stuck in one position and thus all trains have to terminate at the previous station. If there was actually another place for the train to park for people to get off (eg a third platform) then the switch becomes less of an impediment.

Who knows what the engineers may decide on to cut costs however.



Well they could tear up the highway, build the skytrain beneath it, and build a highway of the same size, but that's... expensive and will probably rile up everyone who commutes through it. If the Skytrain is simply elevated and encroaches into the highway, it likely doesn't take up any more space than the center median anyway. That said, it doesn't have a center median and really should.

What is really stupid about the forest, is they built the RCMP E division HQ and the School District/school buildings in it for whatever reason, with massive parking lots.

Dont forget there's going to be more development along 140th on the park side between the Jim Pattison building and 100th ave. There's barely a park there anymore with all the roads going through it and buildings and parking lots. Might as well just destroy it more as they did with Hawthorne Park with a useless road that goes nowhere.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Between 96 and 148 streets, if the tracks were on the North side of Fraser highway, there are no intersections for 1.2km.

The at grade track was proposed by Mayor Doug to save some cost on construction. But I'm not convinced that at grade construction is significantly cheaper than elevated. At least not enough cheaper to justify cutting into the Urban Forest.

Yeah Surrey's current mayor suggested it - he thinks they could have Skytrain on-ground through the ALR too.

Originally Posted by Kisai

Given the choke point is the Skybridge, if they design the switching system so that either King George/Surrey Central and Scott road each switch to different lines through Surrey, that allows the lines to run independently if there is a switch failure, but ends up putting the switch failures all on those stations.

They could just run the skytrain to Langley on the existing line, build the "L" line as Skytrain and just put a pair of Wyes right after the before Surrey Central to allow the trains to switch between lines. It would also allow the Skytrain to operate in a twin-L mode, where the Surrey Central-Newton and Surrey Central - Guildford lines operate with Surrey Central or Gateway as terminus.

Or even better - have the Fraser Hwy line and the L line independent of each other and have a 'connecting' station like Commercial - Broadway (it connects the Expo and Millennium lines in CoV).

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by BCPhil

Between 96 and 148 streets, if the tracks were on the North side of Fraser highway, there are no intersections for 1.2km.

Thanks that's farther than I thought.
I hope they don't have the guideway switch sides like the M-Line
- or hope they don't use bents like the M-Line.

[officedweller]

Overwhelming support for new SkyTrain in Surrey and Langley: TransLink survey
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-surrey-langley-fraser-highway-skytrain-support-may-2019

[Migrant_Coconut]

Just going to point out that a poll several years before it suggested that the majority of Surrey "preferred" LRT. So either somebody's numbers are off, or SoF residents don't care what it is so long as they get a train.

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Just going to point out that a poll several years before it suggested that the majority of Surrey "preferred" LRT. So either somebody's numbers are off, or SoF residents don't care what it is so long as they get a train.

a survey with only a sample size of 600 is hardly accurate.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

a survey with only a sample size of 600 is hardly accurate.

The article indicates 21,300 respondents to the survey....

[ilikeredheads]

Originally Posted by Cypherus

The article indicates 21,300 respondents to the survey....

I was referring to the article on the sun coconut linked

The telephone survey of 600 adults, conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs between January 25-29, found that 80 per cent supported LRT.

[xd_1771]

This time they are drawing from the 21000 who participated AND an additional market research survey with 1200 participants so I would say we have a far better picture of what the people want SOF

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Sheba

Or even better - have the Fraser Hwy line and the L line independent of each other and have a 'connecting' station like Commercial - Broadway (it connects the Expo and Millennium lines in CoV).

Ideally you want at least one switch point, even if the switch is not used during revenue service, because otherwise you create a balkanized system which is what the LRT would have done. Balkanized transit systems mean you have to sink further costs into redundant systems that otherwise already exist like the OMC.

That is the problem with Toronto's RT, it was made incredibly more expensive because the TTC wouldn't do simple things like operate in automated mode, have an OMC (RT vehicles are trucked off for maintenance) or have any way of moving the RT vehicles on the subway to their maintenance facilities. And they want to replace it with even worse LRT. So far the Subway expansion keeps winning and that's the more desirable outcome.

At any rate, what I view as the correct "ultimate" end design of the Surrey side of the Skytrain is to have the Langley terminus also be the terminus for a reverse L-line, where you effectively end up with what looks like a "square" transit line (two L-lines) , and therefor you can start your trip from either side (eg Surrey Central or Langley) and take it in any of the three directions if your goal is Columbia or beyond. If you need to get from point A to point B in Surrey, that L line went nowhere to nowhere unless your destination was Surrey Central.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by Kisai

At any rate, what I view as the correct "ultimate" end design of the Surrey side of the Skytrain is to have the Langley terminus also be the terminus for a reverse L-line, where you effectively end up with what looks like a "square" transit line (two L-lines) , and therefor you can start your trip from either side (eg Surrey Central or Langley) and take it in any of the three directions if your goal is Columbia or beyond. If you need to get from point A to point B in Surrey, that L line went nowhere to nowhere unless your destination was Surrey Central.

Do you mean a Y line branch like the Airport/Richmond. Not following you on the square line. Surely you don't mean a big square loop between Surrey and Langley, do you?

[WestCoastEcho]

There's an article in the Globe and Mail (for subscribers only) written by Frances Bula about a campaign being headed by former Langley Township mayor Rick Green against the Surrey Skytrain project:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/b...testing-surrey-langley-skytrain-line-as/

A Fraser Valley group headed by a former local mayor is mounting a public campaign to oppose plans for a Surrey-Langley SkyTrain line, saying it would cost far too much money and there aren’t enough people along the route to justify it.

“It is one of the biggest wastes of money,” former Langley township mayor Rick Green said. “The per-capita cost, it’s just nonsense.”

I would have to agree that the concept of light rail for the Fraser Valley isn't a smart one because of issues with the layout of the rail network and congestion, unless one spends a lot of money re-configuring the rail network.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

There's an article in the Globe and Mail (for subscribers only) written by Frances Bula about a campaign being headed by former Langley Township mayor Rick Green against the Surrey Skytrain project:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/b...testing-surrey-langley-skytrain-line-as/



I would have to agree that the concept of light rail for the Fraser Valley isn't a smart one because of issues with the layout of the rail network and congestion, unless one spends a lot of money re-configuring the rail network.

Light or heavy rail indeed do not make much sense for Langley and beyond at this point. SkyTrain, OTOH, is well worth it.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Light or heavy rail indeed do not make much sense for Langley and beyond at this point. SkyTrain, OTOH, is well worth it.

Skytrain = Jesus in these lands..

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by scryer

Skytrain = Jesus in these lands..

In this case, it might as well be. The last study or two showed that SkyTrain had the best cost-benefit ratio (1.55) and light rail the worst (0.69); given the route, catchment and frequency, Vander Zalm's brainchild ain't going to fare much better.