Surrey Langley Skytrain - Expo Line Extension | Proposed

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Trainguy

Wild comments being made on this site. Check it out.

Articulate, logical arguments about light rail's drawbacks and a lack of consultation... against "SkyTrain's not going past my house, so it sucks," "LRT looks prettier" and "voters r not smart enuf (sic)." Dunning-Kruger is a bit scary sometimes.

[xd_1771]

Then the already committed $1.65-billion could be used to build part of the line.

After that, Mr. McCallum would need to ensure that other mayors agreed that the $1.9-billion that was tentatively budgeted for the second light-rail line to Langley is then approved to build the remainder of the line, Mr. Coté said.

Glad to see that they've finally figured this out!

The total amount of money that was laid down for both of the LRT projects was $3.55 billion. Expo: Langley's current estimate of $2.9 billion is not only within this funding envelope, there is a surplus of $650 million which can then be developed into the enhanced BRT/B-Line route on King Geeorge Blvd/104 Ave.

Originally Posted by flipper316

https://urbansurrey.com/2018/10/24/l...simple-switch/

So this is a great example of the "panicking" I was talking about earlier. I think we can all expect that those who were in favour of LRT are going to put up some sort of defense for it.

And as expected, the blog post is pretty much spewing misinformation. It's trying to point fingers at the "low density" nature of the Fraser Highway corridor, which is honestly no different than many parts of King George Blvd and 104 Ave. Plus, I'm pretty sure it's been pointed out in this thread many times before just how dense the Clayton area is relative to even some of the densest residential neighbourhoods in the City of Vancouver. And, there are greenfield sites between 188th and 192nd which look like they've been set aside for the dense development you can expect adjacent to a station.

The writer puts down the extension on the basis "the lowest densities of any SkyTrain corridor in the region", but that relies on the argument that existing density justifies transit and I'm pretty sure that it's supposed to be the other way around, with transit being utilized to add density. Heck, SNG LRT was being touted as a way to add density where it doesn't exist now on that corridor, which is why Surrey had designated the areas for increased urban densities (as the author has been keen to point out). The same was going to happen on Fraser eventually since an LRT was planned to go there (now converted to SkyTrain). I'm pretty sure Fleetwood around Fraser/160th was one of the development areas, and Willowbrook would be one too.

This would require changes to the Official Community Plan (OCP) – ironically Doug McCallum campaigned against OCP amendments.

I'm also pretty sure that the author misinterpreted whatever Doug said about OCP amendments. What Doug likely meant was any amendments (such as those being pursued by the previous Council) to add new development areas in greenfield and undeveloped sites (think Grandview Heights, Anniedale/Port Kells).

What Doug and SSC have been campaigning for quite a lot in the election was to pause this in favour of "smart development" - and this includes (as far as from what I read in today's Surrey Now-Leader) "densifying along transit corridor". The message I'm ggetting is that Doug and the new Council are going to be very supportive of adding new density on the SkyTrain line.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by jlousa

My understanding is it's not just the Newton business association that wants LRT but other Surrey business associations as well. They see the plan as building up Surrey as opposed to getting people into Vancouver. If the plan is to build Surrey as a secondary metrocore and to make it easier for people to move around between the Surrey neighborhoods then I can see the point of LRT. Skytrain would certainly make it easier for those in Langley to get to thru Surrey but I don't believe that was the goal.

I think the business associations like LRT because it would have closer stop spacing, at-grade would allow stores to be more visible and would slow down car traffic that would otherwise pass through.
i.e. business self-interest rather than efficiency in moving people.

*************

Standard chicken and egg argument - build transit to shape growth or to serve existing growth.
If shaping growth, the zoning follows after or inconjunction with the line.

[Metro-One]

I think most on here understand the business associations reasons for preferring LRT.

That doesn’t make it any less wrong and misguided though when it comes to transit planning and all the drawbacks it would cause.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I think most on here understand the business associations reasons for preferring LRT.

That doesn’t make it any less wrong and misguided though when it comes to transit planning and all the drawbacks it would cause.

Totally agree. LRT would be great if we had no skytrain and the region used LRT as its primary form of rapid transit between cities. However, skytrain as RRT is preferred by the region because it's a proven form of transit, and has galvanized the development of hi-rises and town centres, including 60 story towers at the nodes. It's also persuaded people in this region to use transit. LRT on the other hand has no influence on anyone because it's unproven and unclear. To conclude, one cannot fathom how much RRT has shaped our region, and it is reasonable LRT is too forgone for it to have an impact.

LRT, on the other hand as well, tends to influence 4 story apartments along its corridors with small business podiums. The region has preferred hi rise density around nodes due to RRT being rapid and moving lots of people, rather than 4 story apartments served by a smaller capacity LRT. The former is more interesting and economical than the latter, which for this mature region, has proven itself.

LRT is not bad technology. It's just too late for this region where RRT has taken form and convinced people that rapid transit to go to work (not coffee shops) is better and preferred over cars.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I'm seeing two problems with the business association's argument. One, that LRT would have closer stops and therefore more foot traffic for everybody. Nope, same stop spacing as RRT - and since RRT draws more riders due to speed and frequency, less foot traffic.

Two, that we can't get low-rise density or walkability with RRT, but we can with LRT. SkyTrain stations run the entire gamut of redevelopment from "second downtown" to "retail village" to "in limbo since the 70s." It's all about what Surrey Council wants to create in the area; if they want retail villages, they should plan retail villages. Rapid transit simply dictates how many people said village can handle.

[nname]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Two, that we can't get low-rise density or walkability with RRT, but we can with LRT. SkyTrain stations run the entire gamut of redevelopment from "second downtown" to "retail village" to "in limbo since the 70s." It's all about what Surrey Council wants to create in the area; if they want retail villages, they should plan retail villages. Rapid transit simply dictates how many people said village can handle.

The entire strip from Lougheed to Burquitlam is going to be so much more walkable once the plan and all the buildings are completed, and there aren't even a stop for a length of almost 2km... So yes, it's all dependent on what the council wants.

[BirchTrain]

You can have all the businesses you want in a town centre near a SkyTrain station. Have all the people getting off, wandering around the area, and they will see all the businesses and stuff the area has to offer. Walkability will increase business more than any person in a moving vehicle will.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by xd_1771

Glad to see that they've finally figured this out!

The total amount of money that was laid down for both of the LRT projects was $3.55 billion. Expo: Langley's current estimate of $2.9 billion is not only within this funding envelope, there is a surplus of $650 million which can then be developed into the enhanced BRT/B-Line route on King Geeorge Blvd/104 Ave.

The thing is, that extra ~1.5 Billion was not yet allocated to the project; it was left 'for later', like the final extension of the Millennium to UBC.


BUT, if we had another $650 Million to spare on top of the Expo to Langley, I'd rather see a Guildford-Surrey Central Spur. That area is pretty prime for redevelopment in general, with large number of either old buildings, or empty lots, and it could connect directly to buses from HWY 1- thus being a springboard for buses from Carvloth, and thus transit to North Langley.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The thing is, that extra ~1.5 Billion was not yet allocated to the project; it was left 'for later', like the final extension of the Millennium to UBC.


BUT, if we had another $650 Million to spare on top of the Expo to Langley, I'd rather see a Guildford-Surrey Central Spur. That area is pretty prime for redevelopment in general, with large number of either old buildings, or empty lots, and it could connect directly to buses from HWY 1- thus being a springboard for buses from Carvloth, and thus transit to North Langley.

A Guildford spur - which would more realistically split off from Gateway Station - is a nice idea but they didn't build the station with it in mind. Plus there's not a lot of room to work with at Gateway. That makes it fall under 'fantasy'.

Anything they come up with will be a separate line from Expo. For the time being it will stay as the 96B. I've suggested a subway replace the 96B but that's way beyond the current 10 year vision.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Sheba

A Guildford spur - which would more realistically split off from Gateway Station - is a nice idea but they didn't build the station with it in mind. Plus there's not a lot of room to work with at Gateway. That makes it fall under 'fantasy'.

Anything they come up with will be a separate line from Expo. For the time being it will stay as the 96B. I've suggested a subway replace the 96B but that's way beyond the current 10 year vision.

The idea was that it would be the first part of an L-line Skytrain- Surrey Central Station needs to be expanded to handle extra traffic anyways eventually, which is why I proposed Surrey Central rather than Gateway.

It's not THAT fantasy, Translink (https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Doc...2B015E3FDE57CF) seriously considered (though dropped) RRT 3, which basically has the same 'no existing spur to connect to Surrey Central' problem.

I mean, you're replacing two pre-fab sections of Skytrain El-rail and expanding Surrey Central.

Also, a spur from Surrey Central would go over the Safeway parking lot (minor disruptions to the area) , while a Gateway transfer would result in the demolition of at least one big box store to fit it.

Admittedly, it's probably not going to happen; there's probably no money for it, (as I said, it wasn't allocated) but it's going to be done eventually; it's the next logical line in SOF after Skytrain to Langley. If you have the money, better do it now, while there's still space, and Surrey Central isn't as busy.

[BirchTrain]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The thing is, that extra ~1.5 Billion was not yet allocated to the project; it was left 'for later', like the final extension of the Millennium to UBC.


BUT, if we had another $650 Million to spare on top of the Expo to Langley, I'd rather see a Guildford-Surrey Central Spur. That area is pretty prime for redevelopment in general, with large number of either old buildings, or empty lots, and it could connect directly to buses from HWY 1- thus being a springboard for buses from Carvloth, and thus transit to North Langley.

I don't know if I should be worrying about capacity, but when Fleetwood, Clayton, Cloverdale, and Langley City develop into higher density neighbourhoods, capacity may be an issue on the Expo Line. A spur line to Guildford will only increase that. I would like to see a completely separate line, perhaps connecting Surrey to Richmond?

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by BirchTrain

I don't know if I should be worrying about capacity, but when Fleetwood, Clayton, Cloverdale, and Langley City develop into higher density neighbourhoods, capacity may be an issue on the Expo Line. A spur line to Guildford will only increase that. I would like to see a completely separate line, perhaps connecting Surrey to Richmond?

Though several Km of ALR?

But really, we already have an alternate Expo Line route- the Millennium Line.


Expo still has plenty of expansion headway left too, and expansion in SOF would probably make it more viable, since currently, there's not enough demand to justify full Skytrain service to Langley. I wouldn't worry about it.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by BirchTrain

perhaps connecting Surrey to Richmond?

Through Ladner and Nordel or through Richmond East (Kings Landing) and Nordel?

Whenever I take the 301 during midday, there aren't that many people on the bus. Perhaps bus lanes on Highway 91 from Richmond to 64 Avenue will be a good first step (to encourage ridership with more reliable service)?

(Speaking of that, Translink needs to restore the midday and weekend frequency of 340 from every 30 minutes back to every 20 minutes. From what I remember, a lot of people take that bus.)

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The idea was that it would be the first part of an L-line Skytrain- Surrey Central Station needs to be expanded to handle extra traffic anyways eventually, which is why I proposed Surrey Central rather than Gateway.

It's not THAT fantasy, Translink (https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Doc...2B015E3FDE57CF) seriously considered (though dropped) RRT 3, which basically has the same 'no existing spur to connect to Surrey Central' problem.

I mean, you're replacing two pre-fab sections of Skytrain El-rail and expanding Surrey Central.

Also, a spur from Surrey Central would go over the Safeway parking lot (minor disruptions to the area) , while a Gateway transfer would result in the demolition of at least one big box store to fit it.

Admittedly, it's probably not going to happen; there's probably no money for it, (as I said, it wasn't allocated) but it's going to be done eventually; it's the next logical line in SOF after Skytrain to Langley. If you have the money, better do it now, while there's still space, and Surrey Central isn't as busy.

What I thought you meant was a spur off of the existing Expo Line after crossing the Fraser River from New West into Surrey. That wouldn't work (other than cascading spurs) as the train would have to back up from Surrey Central to get to Guildford - hence Gateway instead. Upgrading the L Line as a separate line makes more sense.

I looked over the images and not one of them suggests Skytrain to Guildford - it's either bus or LRT. Two of them (RRT 2 and RRT 3) suggest Skytrain down to Newton. For the time being the 96B is more than enough. Some variety of BRT with dedicated (or shared HOV) lanes is the most likely upgrade.

Aside from Skytrain down Fraser Hwy, what Surrey really needs are more frequent buses and more limited stop B Line type routes. It's possible to have a more grid-like system for a lot of Surrey instead of the hub and spoke system that's there now.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by BirchTrain

I don't know if I should be worrying about capacity, but when Fleetwood, Clayton, Cloverdale, and Langley City develop into higher density neighbourhoods, capacity may be an issue on the Expo Line. A spur line to Guildford will only increase that. I would like to see a completely separate line, perhaps connecting Surrey to Richmond?

Station capacity would be less of an issue at Surrey Central with an Expo extension down Fraser Hwy, even if it only went as far as Fleetwood (which is a likely Phase 1 end point) as not all buses would need to travel to either Surrey Central or Guildford (and then funnel everyone to Surrey Central from there).

Originally Posted by fredinno

Though several Km of ALR?

Exactly. It's unlikely that'll ever be more than a bus.

[Firebrand]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

(Speaking of that, Translink needs to restore the midday and weekend frequency of 340 from every 30 minutes back to every 20 minutes. From what I remember, a lot of people take that bus.)

If you want to put bus lanes on the 91, you'll need to take some of the lanes on the Alex Fraser bridge AND replace the Queensborough with a newer bridge for the 340. Since New West doesn't want to build ANY bridge within it's borders, replacement is a non-starter, so you'll forced to be left with only two lanes for car traffic.

Originally Posted by Sheba

What I thought you meant was a spur off of the existing Expo Line after crossing the Fraser River from New West into Surrey. That wouldn't work (other than cascading spurs) as the train would have to back up from Surrey Central to get to Guildford - hence Gateway instead. Upgrading the L Line as a separate line makes more sense.

I looked over the images and not one of them suggests Skytrain to Guildford - it's either bus or LRT. Two of them (RRT 2 and RRT 3) suggest Skytrain down to Newton. For the time being the 96B is more than enough. Some variety of BRT with dedicated (or shared HOV) lanes is the most likely upgrade.

Aside from Skytrain down Fraser Hwy, what Surrey really needs are more frequent buses and more limited stop B Line type routes. It's possible to have a more grid-like system for a lot of Surrey instead of the hub and spoke system that's there now.

Since we're talking about having a separate line for the L-Line, it should have an OMC SOF that integrates into the SkyTrain system. But that's a few decades away, so an upgraded 96 is good enough for now.

[fredinno]

Is $500 Million enough excess Cash to get the Expo to Clayton rather than ending in Fleetwood? It seems kind of a waste to leave $500 Million on the table like this...

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Firebrand

If you want to put bus lanes on the 91, you'll need to take some of the lanes on the Alex Fraser bridge AND replace the Queensborough with a newer bridge for the 340. Since New West doesn't want to build ANY bridge within it's borders, replacement is a non-starter, so you'll forced to be left with only two lanes for car traffic.



Since we're talking about having a separate line for the L-Line, it should have an OMC SOF that integrates into the SkyTrain system. But that's a few decades away, so an upgraded 96 is good enough for now.

Queensborough Bridge is such a bottleneck though... Why’s the city so opposed to a “new” bridge?

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by fredinno

Is $500 Million enough excess Cash to get the Expo to Clayton rather than ending in Fleetwood? It seems kind of a waste to leave $500 Million on the table like this...

The money isn't even on the table yet. First Surrey needs to get enough mayors to vote yes for it to pass, and then have the province and feds agree. After that they need to do prep work ahead of building the line, make a final decision of how many / where the stations will be, and then budget for the whole thing. By that point there might not be $500M left.

Plus this:

Originally Posted by ronthecivil

However, I can tell you that building in the Serperentine River Valley is not fun. The soil has a consistantcy like peanut butter and it gets even weaker when distrurbed. Even to build a road your looking at doing a close mowing of the grass and then extensive preloading, with close controls of the final grading. So if you are relocating roads for this part, that's what you have to do.

To build a skytrain, it can be at grade, but it's still going to be on piles the whole way. No way the tolerences of the skytrain can deal with settlement, so even preloading or light weight fill aren't going to cut the mustard. That whole stretch will be piles. Might as well elevate it the whole way. And if you don't, you have to figure out how to elevate highway 15 instead, which isn't exactly much cheaper.

In short, the structures through the muck in the ALR are going to be geotechnical masterpeices......