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

[Bdawe]

A King George Branch would be a good long term idea, IMO, but I suspect that you'd want to reconfigure the Sapperton branch as a Millennium Line spur terminating at Columbia (New platform?), so that you could send all your expo line trains to Surrey. This would also help with the likely future where wildly asymmetric Millennium line demand for Broadway causes there to be far more frequency than has any business going to Coquitlam

[Dengler Avenue]

You will have to reconfigure Columbia Station too then. Right now, going from Surrey to Coquitlam requires walking up and down the stairs of Columbia Station, IIRC...

So in the long term: 5 branches?
Expo: Waterfront -> Columbia -> King George -> Langley (with "spur" to White Rock)
Millenium: UBC -> Lougheed -> Columbia
Evergreen (which will be its own thing): Lougheed -> Coquitlam Central -> Haney Place (with spur to Douglas College)

[logicbomb]

I get the sense this project will be shelved until 2040.

Maybe best to look at heavy rail from Langley to Vancouver via a new rail crossing near Marpole.

[Kisai]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

A King George Branch would be a good long term idea, IMO, but I suspect that you'd want to reconfigure the Sapperton branch as a Millennium Line spur terminating at Columbia (New platform?), so that you could send all your expo line trains to Surrey. This would also help with the likely future where wildly asymmetric Millennium line demand for Broadway causes there to be far more frequency than has any business going to Coquitlam

I reasonably suspect that it would be desirable for Columbia and the Skybridge would be reconfigured at some point to allow trains to switch between Surrey, Sapperton and New West without having to transfer. eg a train goes from columbia to scott road, a train comes from scott road to sapperton, a train comes from sapperton to columbia. However there is no space to do this at all, let alone add another platform.

The existing configuration, the millennium line was more or less "tacked on" right before the Skybridge, so the existing station infrastructure would only really support the existing switches because it's too close to the Skybridge itself.

A more desirable option would likely be to change the switching/transfer points so that the Sapperton station is part of the Millennium Line again, when the Patullo bridge is replaced and build an additional skytrain crossing under the new Patullo at Scott Road. This would spread the switching/transfer points around so that trains can come from Scott Road to Columbia or Sapperton, and add some redundancy for when the switch at Columbia breaks (like it does every so often.)

At some point the Millennium Line capacity might be exceeded for switching at Production Way, so a third platform (in conjunction with building the SFU Gondola) would be justified so the trains can turn back at Production Way instead of having to go half way to Lake City Way.

But that's all transit fantasy stuff. If one thing is consistent, "cutting costs during design/construction results in inconvenient compromises years later."

[Aroundtheworld]

WRT the King George branch, the sensible thing to do is put in a switch after King George station so you leave the possibility of an extension in the future. It may or may not make sense to split the traffic here but at least you have the option in the future.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

I get the sense this project will be shelved until 2040.

Maybe best to look at heavy rail from Langley to Vancouver via a new rail crossing near Marpole.

That concept interests me. Is it within your capacity to make a map of the rail route you describe? That'd be great. Thank you for your consideration.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Aroundtheworld

WRT the King George branch, the sensible thing to do is put in a switch after King George station so you leave the possibility of an extension in the future. It may or may not make sense to split the traffic here but at least you have the option in the future.

That wouldn't work as the line is already off King George and pointed at Fraser Hwy - the switch would have to be over by Surrey Central Station.

[ssiguy]

Well now with Translink new report that the Langley SkyTrain extension is going to cost $3.2 billion änd only if they get it built by 2025} the case for the Valley Rail makes more sense than ever. Surrey's Mayor McCallum beleived it would only cost $1.6 billion so that target has already been doubled. That is also the amount Translink has to put towards the project so now it seems it will only go to 168th Street.

Just going to 168th is beyond useless. There is not a single employment centre or post-secondary along the entire Fraser Highway between KG & 168th. A good chunk of the route even goes thru a park. The only employment centre is Surrey General which would actually take people from Clover/Clayton/Langley longer to get to because it won't have a station so people will have to transfer from those areas at 168th and then go to KG and then walk back to SG.

Even if you don't agree with the Valley Rail, spending $1.6 billion on a completely useless extension would be far better spent building a huge network of bus-only lanes and/or bus transitway.

[WestCoastEcho]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Well now with Translink new report that the Langley SkyTrain extension is going to cost $3.2 billion änd only if they get it built by 2025} the case for the Valley Rail makes more sense than ever. Surrey's Mayor McCallum beleived it would only cost $1.6 billion so that target has already been doubled. That is also the amount Translink has to put towards the project so now it seems it will only go to 168th Street.

Just going to 168th is beyond useless. There is not a single employment centre or post-secondary along the entire Fraser Highway between KG & 168th. A good chunk of the route even goes thru a park. The only employment centre is Surrey General which would actually take people from Clover/Clayton/Langley longer to get to because it won't have a station so people will have to transfer from those areas at 168th and then go to KG and then walk back to SG.

Even if you don't agree with the Valley Rail, spending $1.6 billion on a completely useless extension would be far better spent building a huge network of bus-only lanes and/or bus transitway.

As I said before, the problem is that the rail proposal is a even worst option to move people around in the region. It's literally a rail to nowhere, and even the most optimistic projections of ridership indicates that potential ridership on the old interurban line would be a fraction of the ridership potential of a Langley Skytrain.

As this BC MOT strategic review notes:

The projected 2031 annual ridership for the entire inter-urban line of 1 million passengers (most of which is between Langley and Surrey) would be comparable to the projected ridership for an all day, frequent express bus service operating in a priority lane Highway 1 between Abbotsford and North Langley-Surrey. In this regard, the ridership for the inter-urban line would be less than 5% of the entire projected transit ridership for the Fraser Valley.

Also, a passenger rail service along the old inter-urban line would be more costly to operate than any other option, as noted by the BC MOT document:

Significant investment is required in the Fraser Valley just to get a desirable level of local, regional and inter-regional transit to move from a $10 million per year system to almost $90 million in 2031. The 2031 annual operating and debt service cost for a commuter rail service along the inter-urban line between Abbotsford and Surrey of approximately $68.9 million would almost equal that of the entire investment required to achieve the Vision.

The projected 2031 cost per ride ($70 - $110 / ride) and cost per service hour ($19,750 - $21,500) for a commuter rail service on the inter-urban line are significantly higher than most alternatives considered such as a premium bus service in a dedicated lane on the Highway 1 corridor ($5.75/ride)

So why the hell would Translink invest in a line that would cost anywhere from 2x to 4x the cost of a limited SkyTrain extension on an annual basis?

In fact, the BC MOT believes that an all-day premium bus service in a dedicated lane on Highway 1 would easily match the ridership of the interurban line, while being cheaper to build and operate. That's pretty damning of the economics of the interurban line. Otherwise, the interurban line would be one hell of a white elephant.

[Bobert]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

I get the sense this project will be shelved until 2040.

Maybe best to look at heavy rail from Langley to Vancouver via a new rail crossing near Marpole.

There is no way this project gets shelved.

It's too important politically for the NDP to drop it.

The soil conditions and elevations changes in the Fraser Highway ALR must be more challenging than they had previously thought. That's a huge cost difference for one station between fleetwood and clayton

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Well now with Translink new report that the Langley SkyTrain extension is going to cost $3.2 billion änd only if they get it built by 2025} the case for the Valley Rail makes more sense than ever. Surrey's Mayor McCallum beleived it would only cost $1.6 billion so that target has already been doubled. That is also the amount Translink has to put towards the project so now it seems it will only go to 168th Street.

Just going to 168th is beyond useless. There is not a single employment centre or post-secondary along the entire Fraser Highway between KG & 168th. A good chunk of the route even goes thru a park. The only employment centre is Surrey General which would actually take people from Clover/Clayton/Langley longer to get to because it won't have a station so people will have to transfer from those areas at 168th and then go to KG and then walk back to SG.

Even if you don't agree with the Valley Rail, spending $1.6 billion on a completely useless extension would be far better spent building a huge network of bus-only lanes and/or bus transitway.

I repeat, the $1.65 billion is just step 1 - step 2, guaranteed by the feds and province, is $1.95 billion that funds the rest of the Expo to Langley and BRT for Newton and Guildford (originally, the funds were for light rail on both routes, but they've been transferred). Blowing the step 1 funding for the sake of "doing something" would be, at best, moronic.

And you forget that rapid transit doesn't exist in a void. There's more ridership than just what exists on Fraser right now, and not just from development. Consider the many bus routes that can be reconfigured into a more efficient grid-like network instead of all being funneled to Surrey Central or King George. Consider the routes from Langley which can disembark at Fleetwood or Clayton instead of Whalley. Consider the pressure that all of the above will take off the arterial street grid and improve commutes for everybody.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I repeat, the $1.65 billion is just step 1 - step 2, guaranteed by the feds and province, is $1.95 billion that funds the rest of the Expo to Langley and BRT for Newton and Guildford (originally, the funds were for light rail on both routes, but they've been transferred). Blowing the step 1 funding for the sake of "doing something" would be, at best, moronic.

And you forget that rapid transit doesn't exist in a void. There's more ridership than just what exists on Fraser right now, and not just from development. Consider the many bus routes that can be reconfigured into a more efficient grid-like network instead of all being funneled to Surrey Central or King George. Consider the routes from Langley which can disembark at Fleetwood or Clayton instead of Whalley. Consider the pressure that all of the above will take off the arterial street grid and improve commutes for everybody.

I am pro Skytrain but are you sure phase 2 is funded? It is in the mayors plan but I don't think the Feds/Prov have committed. I am very sure I remember Horgan warning McCallum the funding was 1.6billion and after that Surrey needed to get back in line. I may have missed some a announcements after that.

[Rico]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Well now with Translink new report that the Langley SkyTrain extension is going to cost $3.2 billion änd only if they get it built by 2025} the case for the Valley Rail makes more sense than ever. Surrey's Mayor McCallum beleived it would only cost $1.6 billion so that target has already been doubled. That is also the amount Translink has to put towards the project so now it seems it will only go to 168th Street.

Just going to 168th is beyond useless. There is not a single employment centre or post-secondary along the entire Fraser Highway between KG & 168th. A good chunk of the route even goes thru a park. The only employment centre is Surrey General which would actually take people from Clover/Clayton/Langley longer to get to because it won't have a station so people will have to transfer from those areas at 168th and then go to KG and then walk back to SG.

Even if you don't agree with the Valley Rail, spending $1.6 billion on a completely useless extension would be far better spent building a huge network of bus-only lanes and/or bus transitway.

Bus lanes and bus priority measures are an area metro Vancouver does very poorly (it is in municipal control not translink). Bus lanes/priority measures on busy routes are clearly the best bang for our buck. At least the latest B lines are a start.
The Interurban proposal has been looked at and is a very low priority. I would liken it to a coverage route versus a ridership route. Rail for the Valley likes it because for relatively low cost they could get a couple of trains a day...which is fine if you are retired or just want a line on the map. To get good frequency so it is useful they need to spend a lot of money. Which brings us to Zwei's comprehension problem, he likes to talk about cost per km which is important but he never talks about cost per boarding or rider. I think most people would agree an expensive option that serves a lot of people is better than a cheap option that only serves a few. In this case to get more than a train every hour or so the Interurban choice will not be that cheap and that is reflected in very high cost per rider, much higher than the Skytrain to Langley cost per rider or the L line LRT cost per rider. That puts the Interurban further back in the priority list.

[ssiguy]

I think you guys are missing a few valid issues.

First, the Valley Line could become a truly regional connector and not just SoF. It could be easily extended over the Fraser to stop at , for example Sapperton, and then run express to Broadway and then terminate at Waterfront. This would give the people SoF far superior access to the city than a SkyTrain would. SkyTrain to Langley will be a lot of things but to those going to Vancouver, fast is not one of them. It will take at LEAST 50 minutes to get from LC to downtown. It would also help relieve {or at least halt} further capacity issues on the current Expo Line.

Second, if the SkyTrain is better for people going downtown/inner city to Langley and Metro wants to encourage it then that will mean a massive upgrade to all Expo stations to 110 meters to allow for longer trains to meed demand. That is an inevitable expense that SkyTrain proponents are ignoring.

Third, a SkyTrain does absolutely, positively nothing to relieve the congestion on HWY#1 nor serve any post-secondaries or major employment centres outside downtown Langley. That leaves 2 Kwantlen campuses, Trinity Western, 2 UCFV campuses unserved as well as absolutely no service to the massive employment area of Glouster Industrial Park which currently doesn't have a single bus.

Fourth, SkyTrain will completely bleed dry and further monies for other needed projects SoF. The $2 billion difference between a 16km SkyTrain and an 80 km Surburban rail means that extra $2 billion won't be available for any improved services to Guilford, South Delta, Newton, White Rock, Gloucester, to say nothing of Abby/Chill. No B-Lines, no Transitways, no LRTs, no express buses, no new transit centres.

Fifth, SkyTrain/Metro cost more per-rider the further out to the suburbs they go...……...diminishing returns. This is why very few cities extend Metros/subways into suburban area, they simply don't have the density {population, academic, and employment} to support it. Cities hence provide more suburban rail type systems to serve those areas such as Toronto's GO/RER. They make far superior use of existing infrastructure and can cover far greater areas and populations than a single Metro...…….far more bang for the buck.

[Galaxy]

Just a friendly reminder that Langley is the last municipality within Metro Vancouver and where Translink service area ends. The rail for the Valley and the transportation needs of people East of Langley are important but to get people that live in Metro Vancouver proper to really care about paying to improve beyond Metro Vancouver the people in Abbotsford and beyond will need to want to join or become part of Metro Vancouver proper. I don't think the people in Abbotsford want to join though as the benefits of lower taxation and lower property values etc.. out in Abbotsford are some of the very reasons those that live out there do that.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Rico

I am pro Skytrain but are you sure phase 2 is funded? It is in the mayors plan but I don't think the Feds/Prov have committed. I am very sure I remember Horgan warning McCallum the funding was 1.6billion and after that Surrey needed to get back in line. I may have missed some a announcements after that.

Phase 3, technically - and it's technically not funded yet, but I don't see why it wouldn't be. There was never a serious controversy about having no $1.95 billion for light rail to Langley, nor political obstacles to getting it when the time came.

That said, $1.65B is all we have right now and that only gets us to Fleetwood, so McCallum does need to stop hallucinating out loud.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I think you guys are missing a few valid issues.

First, the Valley Line could become a truly regional connector and not just SoF. It could be easily extended over the Fraser to stop at , for example Sapperton, and then run express to Broadway and then terminate at Waterfront. This would give the people SoF far superior access to the city than a SkyTrain would. SkyTrain to Langley will be a lot of things but to those going to Vancouver, fast is not one of them. It will take at LEAST 50 minutes to get from LC to downtown. It would also help relieve {or at least halt} further capacity issues on the current Expo Line.

Second, if the SkyTrain is better for people going downtown/inner city to Langley and Metro wants to encourage it then that will mean a massive upgrade to all Expo stations to 110 meters to allow for longer trains to meed demand. That is an inevitable expense that SkyTrain proponents are ignoring.

Third, a SkyTrain does absolutely, positively nothing to relieve the congestion on HWY#1 nor serve any post-secondaries or major employment centres outside downtown Langley. That leaves 2 Kwantlen campuses, Trinity Western, 2 UCFV campuses unserved as well as absolutely no service to the massive employment area of Glouster Industrial Park which currently doesn't have a single bus.

Fourth, SkyTrain will completely bleed dry and further monies for other needed projects SoF. The $2 billion difference between a 16km SkyTrain and an 80 km Surburban rail means that extra $2 billion won't be available for any improved services to Guilford, South Delta, Newton, White Rock, Gloucester, to say nothing of Abby/Chill. No B-Lines, no Transitways, no LRTs, no express buses, no new transit centres.

Fifth, SkyTrain/Metro cost more per-rider the further out to the suburbs they go...……...diminishing returns. This is why very few cities extend Metros/subways into suburban area, they simply don't have the density {population, academic, and employment} to support it. Cities hence provide more suburban rail type systems to serve those areas such as Toronto's GO/RER. They make far superior use of existing infrastructure and can cover far greater areas and populations than a single Metro...…….far more bang for the buck.

Okay, let's do this point by point.

First, the most realistic schedule for Rail for the Valley is twice or thrice a day, and even just the SoF segment takes almost three hours to get to Chilliwack. It'll have to slow down considerably for the downtown segment while it crosses the street grid, and/or stop entirely for a considerable amount of time while a freight train passes like the WCE does. Hardly competitive with SkyTrain.
You want more? Gotta spend at least a SkyTrain's worth of funding on a tunnel downtown and a twinned track SoF. Might as well build a SkyTrain instead.

Second, most Langley riders get out at Surrey; that's where the jobs are. There's hardly going to be a sudden surge of riders going all the way downtown, there's going to be a trickle as SoF gets bigger and bigger. That's what the platform upgrades and additional trains are for. 110m platforms is a problem for 2049's TransLink, not 2019's.

Third, exactly what difference will the Valley's three trains a day make to Valley congestion? Even twice the FVX service is a smarter investment.
OTOH SkyTrain every two minutes provides connectivity and capacity for increased transit in the region, and takes traffic away. Drivers from Guildford, Fraser Heights, Fort Langley and Aldergrove can opt to take improved bus service to the SkyTrain. The FVX can stop at Langley and head back, improving frequency and thereby attracting more riders. Every driver switching to transit is one less on Highway 1, so the goal should be a system that attracts as many drivers as possible. TransLink's run the numbers, and it turns out, hey whaddya know, that's SkyTrain.

Fourth, additional bus service is already funded in the Ten Year Plan; the rail projects are just the big ticket items. SkyTrain can relieve the bus system, and can break even and help fund additional bus service. Valley rail will have no passengers, will not integrate with or complement existing transit, and will be a money sink for its entire lifespan.

Fifth..... again, I believe the same was said about Burnaby and New West. Look at them now. Surrey and Langley will grow into city centres in their own right with or without rapid transit, and the last thing we need is to intentionally underbuild their network like we did the Canada Line. Won't make that mistake again, that's for damn sure.

[nname]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

First, the Valley Line could become a truly regional connector and not just SoF. It could be easily extended over the Fraser to stop at , for example Sapperton, and then run express to Broadway and then terminate at Waterfront.

For the line to cross over Fraser, it WILL need a new bridge. There is no way to run any meaningful regional or commuter rail with the existing single lane draw bridge that often cause delay of 1 hour or more.

For the "express" portion from Broadway to Sapperton... as someone who cross the rail line everyday, I can say there's no way they will be able to run commuter service on that line without grade separation at major intersections. Otherwise it will just induce gridlock all over Burnaby and Vancouver as there are trains crossing constantly. Add in these cost, your regional rail can easily be 3 billions or more.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

This would give the people SoF far superior access to the city than a SkyTrain would. SkyTrain to Langley will be a lot of things but to those going to Vancouver, fast is not one of them. It will take at LEAST 50 minutes to get from LC to downtown. It would also help relieve {or at least halt} further capacity issues on the current Expo Line.

Without the upgrades I mentioned above, SkyTrain line from Langley into Vancouver is by far the fastest and most reliable option. Who would want to take a commuter line when you know most likely it will need to wait anywhere from 30min to 2 hours trying to cross the bridge? If you don't believe me, try taking Amtrak Cascade a few times.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Second, if the SkyTrain is better for people going downtown/inner city to Langley and Metro wants to encourage it then that will mean a massive upgrade to all Expo stations to 110 meters to allow for longer trains to meed demand. That is an inevitable expense that SkyTrain proponents are ignoring.

There are still a lot of capacity left in Expo Line by simply running more train more often. Currently it is only using 16000pphpd of the 25000pphpd originally designed for 6-cars MkI trains. This does NOT include the ~30% capacity gain from 6-car MkI to 5-cars MkII. There maybe minor upgrade at few selected stations eventually, but massive upgrade like platform lengthening is NOT needed until very very far in the future. I believe the current projection is somewhere between 2061 and 2081?

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Third, a SkyTrain does absolutely, positively nothing to relieve the congestion on HWY#1 nor serve any post-secondaries or major employment centres outside downtown Langley. That leaves 2 Kwantlen campuses, Trinity Western, 2 UCFV campuses unserved as well as absolutely no service to the massive employment area of Glouster Industrial Park which currently doesn't have a single bus.

I'm sure there will be one once the SkyTrain built to Langley. The reason why transit is so unattractive to these places is because the freeway is much faster. Building a commuter line that goes all the way to Cloverdale and back will not help in this case.

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Fourth, SkyTrain will completely bleed dry and further monies for other needed projects SoF. The $2 billion difference between a 16km SkyTrain and an 80 km Surburban rail means that extra $2 billion won't be available for any improved services to Guilford, South Delta, Newton, White Rock, Gloucester, to say nothing of Abby/Chill. No B-Lines, no Transitways, no LRTs, no express buses, no new transit centres.

See the point above. Without any upgrade, your suburban rail will take 4 hours end to end, and it will do nothing but bleed money that could be otherwise invested in improving bus or express bus service.

And the final point. Abby/Chilliwack is not part of TransLink's service area, and they already expressed years ago that they are not willing to join. So why does TransLink need to spend any money that were collected within the Metro Vancouver in improving the transit service for them?

[ilikeredheads]

As already illustrated by Translink own study, Valley rail has a poor business case due to its indirect routing and major conflicts with freight trains. This would require double tracking the line, which would be unfeasible due to the narrowness of the route (aka require land acquisition), numerous at-grade crossings, as well as poor soil conditions.

The most important thing people who need to realize is that this...
The Valley is NOT part of Translink's jurisdiction!! Translink is not responsible for the Valley's transit needs. That's BC Transit's job!!! If you want your own failing "monorail", then you have to pay for it!! or go complain to BC Transit! Do you know why WCE goes to Mission? Because Mission is subsidizing it!!

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Okay, let's do this point by point.

...

Originally Posted by ilikeredheads

As already illustrated by Translink own study, Valley rail has a poor business case due to its indirect routing and major conflicts with freight trains. This would require double tracking the line, which would be unfeasible due to the narrowness of the route (aka require land acquisition), numerous at-grade crossings, as well as poor soil conditions.

The most important thing people who need to realize is that this...
The Valley is NOT part of Translink's jurisdiction!! Translink is not responsible for the Valley's transit needs. That's BC Transit's job!!! If you want your own failing "monorail", then you have to pay for it!! or go complain to BC Transit! Do you know why WCE goes to Mission? Because Mission is subsidizing it!!

We've already been through this multiple times with ssiguy - by this point I've think he's purposely trolling us.

The Interurban rail line is