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

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by bardak

I really hate when people try to puff up the importance of Newton town centre by focusing on total population of Newton. Yeah Newton has the largest population out of all Surrey's neighbourhoods. It also has the largest built up area out of all Surrey's neighbourhoods. They never mention the population is pretty well evenly distributed throughout all of Newton and rapid transit down King George will only serve a small portion of it.

BRT lanes along King George, Scott road, and 72nd would provide much better service to all of newton and probably cost less then LRT or Skytrain to Newton town centre. Add frequent service along 64th and 152nd and Newton would have great service.

YES thank you! I've been saying that for years! Newton has a massive foot print and people are MANY KM away from each other. That said, King George Boulevard is definitely building up in recent years, many 6 storey + condos going up with townhouses behind. But Newton Town Center itself hasn't changed much since I was a teenager going to high-school and living in Newton. Like virtually unchanged (for those counting... that's like 20 years ago).

I think development needs to really kick up before it justifies rapid transit beyond dedicated BRT.

[GMasterAres]

And the issue for King George Boulevard from a traffic perspective is not enough east/west and very few 2-lane north-south alternatives.

The only 2 lane north south roads are 152nd, King George, and 128.

144th should have been made 2 lanes about 10 years ago, 140th is 2 then 1 then 2 then 1 then 2 then 1 the entire stretch causing issues. 132 is ridiculously built. List goes on.

Then east-west you get 88th then..... err 72nd basically to cross most of North Surrey east-west. 84th should have been pushed through Bear Creek a decade ago too and they're trying today but protesters and NIMBY as usual. 80th hits a creek. 76th curls and barely connects to 140th in a convoluted way.

So that chokes a lot of people up King George between basically 96th and 76th. Before and traffic is AOK, after and traffic is AOK. But through that stress everyone is funneled without much alternatives.

BRT and transit could help by maybe getting people out of cars but I seriously doubt it could out pace just shear population growth. For every car you take off the road by putting someone on a bus, another 2 cars are added with development. The road infrastructure needs to expand it's that simple.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I think you are a bit overselling King George Boulevard being "8 lanes" for like a block and those extra lanes are bus bays. Most of it south of 96 Avenue is a confusing mix of lane configurations, but it is mostly 2+2 with a constant left-turn lane in the middle. Sure, you could redesign it and have a narrow 3+3 configuration, but then you would have Vancouver Syndrome with no left-turn lanes.

A road doesn't get much more central than King George Boulevard, cutting through the geographical center of a city of 500,000 people. It shoul have 3+3 general purpose lanes, left-turn bays and than then some. It even has fookin empty bike lanes along it, fighting for the space. Definitely a significant widening to a true boulevard would be needed, but I think development along it limits the opportunity for that. We are stuck with another small arterial road, the trademark of Metro Vancouver.

Let's be real, 5-7 lanes is only a "small" arterial by Houston standards.

It's also still more than Broadway, which drops from 6 to 4 west of Macdonald (with two lanes often full of cars violating the deadline)... yet comfortably handles much more vehicle traffic than King George. Unless the R1 has a sudden loss of ridership, then unlike the bike lanes, bus lanes can only increase mobility.

Originally Posted by jhausner

BRT and transit could help by maybe getting people out of cars but I seriously doubt it could out pace just shear population growth. For every car you take off the road by putting someone on a bus, another 2 cars are added with development. The road infrastructure needs to expand it's that simple.

True, but that's more of an argument for widening 128th/132nd/140th/148th, not halting bus expansion on KGB.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Getting back to rapid transit, the long-term solution is obviously a SkyTrain line. But a Newton branch of the Expo competes for track space with the Langley branch, and TransLink is evidently not interested in a brand new line from Newton to Guildford.

[Express691]

The recent September 23 Board Meeting Minutes has the projection for Expo/Millennium Line trains.

https://www.translink.ca/-/media/transli...21_09_23_public_board_meeting_agenda.pdf

Page 88:

The Surrey Langley SkyTrain Project, when implemented, will increase the size of the Expo and Millennium Line network by 24% as measured by track-km (from 66 to 82 kms) and increase the number of cars by 8%. The length of the extension makes it challenging to stabling vehicles and maintenance equipment from existing OMCs. The Skytrain network currently does not have an OMC south of the Fraser River and the nearest facility to the Langley terminus is approximately 30 minutes away (and longer by maintenance vehicles that travel at slower speeds than revenue service vehicles). There are currently 205 train cars on order to address planned peak capacity expansion, to service the Broadway Subway Project (BSP) extension, and to replace the retiring MKI trains. An additional 30 train cars will be needed to be ordered by SLS opening day (2028) to service the extended network. By late 2028 there will be a combined 235 trains on the Expo Line peak, and 192 cars on the Millennium Line. In 2028 the total combine Expo/Millennium Line fleet size will be 427 cars, which is more than the total number of available spaces (380 spaces) in the existing and planned OMCs:
• OMC1/2: 185 spaces
• OMC3: 50 spaces
• OMC4: 145 spaces

Off the bat, it does not include numbers inside pocket track/sidings.

Off the top of my head, counting each "space" as 17/18m long for each car.
Waterfront Tail Track: 8 Spaces across 2 tracks
Nanaimo Pocket: 4 Spaces
Metrotown Pocket: 4 Spaces
Scott Road Pocket: 4 Spaces
Holdom pocket: 6 spaces
VCC-Clark: For now, let's say 6 spaces. (Not sure how the junction west of the station will be configured post-Broadway Extension but I'm sure there will be at least 2.)
Coquitlam Station Spur: 2 spaces.
Moody Centre: 6 Spaces

Unsure if Braid Pocket is counted in OMC4 estimates.

42 spaces inside pocket tracks not including Fraser Extension. There will be a few spaces along the Fraser Extension in the Green Timbers area from what I recall, which should take care of all the space needed to store all the trains.

[madog222]

OMC3 can be expanded but it would need to double in capacity and that doesn't solve the proximity to Langley issue. Sounds like they'll need to build one in Surrey or Langley.

[Express691]

Originally Posted by madog222

OMC3 can be expanded but it would need to double in capacity and that doesn't solve the proximity to Langley issue. Sounds like they'll need to build one in Surrey or Langley.

Also seems like a logistical nightmare in terms of sending trains out to the different lines despite pocket tracks being there for supplemental storage.

Even post-Broadway I think there will be lineups of trains trying to get into OMC4 for the night

[Metro-One]

SLS opening day?

[madog222]

For the Broadway Subway there will be a pocket track West of VCC near Fraser St, I think also one East of Arbutus Station.

Originally Posted by Metro-One

SLS opening day?

2028 unless I'm reading that incorrectly. It will probably be before SLS sends crew to the moon!

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by Express691

Off the bat, it does not include numbers inside pocket track/sidings.

Generally speaking, they can't store trains in pocket tracks overnight because they power down the guideway for maintenance work, and the trains can't run on battery that long.

Currently there are a few areas that are left energized overnight to allow for train storage, but this means maintenance work (and travel by maintenance vehicles) has to be scheduled to avoid those areas.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by madog222

OMC3 can be expanded but it would need to double in capacity and that doesn't solve the proximity to Langley issue. Sounds like they'll need to build one in Surrey or Langley.

I thought the plan was to build a new OMC somewhere along Fraser Hwy - they've done it for the other lines / extensions.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by dpogue

Generally speaking, they can't store trains in pocket tracks overnight because they power down the guideway for maintenance work, and the trains can't run on battery that long.

Currently there are a few areas that are left energized overnight to allow for train storage, but this means maintenance work (and travel by maintenance vehicles) has to be scheduled to avoid those areas.

That does not make sense to me because if they're just storing them overnight and not using them, why do they need to be running? Just turn them off if you're not using them.

[Firebrand]

Since when did they decided that it’ll be in operation in 2028 instead of earlier? It shouldn’t take 7 years to build the whole 16 km stretch. I thought they mentioned that it’ll open earlier in other sources. No wonder why things take forever to get built in this region.

Hopefully, a change in government won’t cancel the project like many others have done in the past few years.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by Express691

There will be a few spaces along the Fraser Extension in the Green Timbers area from what I recall, which should take care of all the space needed to store all the trains.

There's also a 2nd pocket track along the SLS extension.

Originally Posted by Sheba

I thought the plan was to build a new OMC somewhere along Fraser Hwy - they've done it for the other lines / extensions.

That's what I recall too, but just storage tracks like OMC3.

[dpogue]

Originally Posted by cganuelas1995

That does not make sense to me because if they're just storing them overnight and not using them, why do they need to be running? Just turn them off if you're not using them.

If the onboard computer shuts down, the train stops communicating with the vehicle control computers and times out. That would require staff to manually drive those trains every morning to get them picked up by the computer, before any automated trains could be run (because the computer doesn't know where the timed out trains are, so it won't let any automated trains into the area to prevent a collision).

[TransitJack]

Originally Posted by dpogue

If the onboard computer shuts down, the train stops communicating with the vehicle control computers and times out. That would require staff to manually drive those trains every morning to get them picked up by the computer, before any automated trains could be run (because the computer doesn't know where the timed out trains are, so it won't let any automated trains into the area to prevent a collision).

They have a battery that allows the VOBCs to maintain communication with the VCC, so the trains do not immediately time out. The batteries don't last long so powering down for the night isn't a workable solution.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by dpogue

If the onboard computer shuts down, the train stops communicating with the vehicle control computers and times out. That would require staff to manually drive those trains every morning to get them picked up by the computer, before any automated trains could be run (because the computer doesn't know where the timed out trains are, so it won't let any automated trains into the area to prevent a collision).

They can't just boot up and reconnect to the system upon power restoration yet?

This seems like a feature that is absolutely necessary for a system of this nature and function.

[rpvan]

Originally Posted by madog222

2028 unless I'm reading that incorrectly. It will probably be before SLS sends crew to the moon!

Wasn't expected completion originally supposed late 2025/early 2026?

[madog222]

Originally Posted by rpvan

Wasn't expected completion originally supposed late 2025/early 2026?

For phase one back when this was a two phase project, yes. Perhaps we will see it open in phases but that is purely speculation at this point.

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by madog222

For phase one back when this was a two phase project, yes. Perhaps we will see it open in phases but that is purely speculation at this point.

i doubt it would open in phases. that is logistically challenging and not worth the money when there is bus service that can handle the current demand.