Vibrant communities,productive citizens.Surrey Rapid Transit Vision

skytrainforsurrey.org Better Surrey Rapid TransitCrafted by Daryl Dela Cruz – lead campaigner

City of Surrey’s Rapid Transit Vision

“Rapid Transit Now”: City of Surrey is in support of city-wide Light Rail Transit (LRT) network and is opposed to any SkyTrain alternative

Basis of supporting LRT is largely based around “shaping and managing growth”

ProblemLight rail won’t help us solve certain problems

• More work needed to achieve regional modal shift goals – impossible if LRT is built, even with demand-management strategies (top)

• Urgency of auto use growth in Surrey and Langley (bottom right) is largely ignored

• Even the urgency of the regional situation (bottom left) may be underestimated

• Focus has been on “shaping communities” at the exclusion of actually improving transportation and targeting automobile use growth

• Also see previous report:Rapid Transit and Surrey’s Needs

Light Rail Transit (LRT) Advocates Reality“Light Rail can be as fast as SkyTrain” This is limited in Surrey’s case by on-street right-of-way to 50km/h operation

“Light Rail is completed faster and more easily whereas SkyTrain takes decades from planning to delivery”

• Experience in Metro Vancouver has shown the real deciding factor on large projects is ability to agree on a funding commitment (example: 96 B-Line).

• The Canada Line, constrained by an Olympic deadline, was designed, built and put into service in less than 5 years after the final decision to build.

• Elevated SkyTrain is very quick to construct with no tunnel segments.

“Light Rail Transit attracts the most transit-oriented development investment whereas bus rapid transit cannot”

• Strong government support and real estate market conditions are the #1 predictors in in transit-oriented development (TOD) outcomes; per dollar of transit investment, BRT actually leverages more TOD investment than LRT(ITDP study, referenced on humantransit.org)

• Bus services – particularly along frequent services within 15 mins. ride from SkyTrain - have phenomenal ability to attract TOD investment here in Metro Van. Great examples include: South Commercial Dr. (Vancouver), Edmonds-Southlands (Burnaby), 108 Ave (Surrey), Cambie Rd (Richmond)

“LRT is far less expensive in terms of capital cost” Advocates often did not include utility removal, street-scaping and additional property acquisition costs in their estimates & claims.

“SkyTrain is ugly, community-splitting” SkyTrain is largely responsible for the new vibrancy of Surrey City Centre.

Reality of Light Rail

2008: “Rail for the Valley”

• Advocates for the purpose of improving transit, but has not influenced any due to sole interest in interurban rail over anything else.

• Started the advocacy mentality of the refusal of all alternatives except at-grade rail

• Notorious in discussion communities for spreading misinformation on SkyTrain, LRT, transit planning and other political issues.

2008: Paul Hillsdon

• Gained popularity when he ran a City Council Campaign in 2008 at a young age, focusing on a vision for city-wide LRT network to replace a SkyTrain extension.

• Exaggerated the LRT cost advantage; Hillsdon’s cost estimates were based on construction cots on a disused railway R.O.W. and did not account for utility removal, street-scaping and property acquisition costs at all.

2013: “Light Rail Links”

• Surrey Board of Trade (SBoT)-backed coalition has grown to 16 members

• Light Rail Links has put on a show of solidarity but has added nothing new to the discussion, reusing the same and sometimes misleading reason for support.

• Little activity since inception; questionable whether it is a serious advocacy effort

Light Rail advocacy history in Surrey

It’s now 2014. Thanks to these efforts, we have near-unanimous support for Light Rail…and near-unanimous disregard for its serious downsides.

2011: Mayor Watts

• Told stakeholders that “SkyTrain destroys communities”, disregarding actual community-building results in Richmond, Brentwood, Oakridge

• Has dismissed stakeholders questioning the current LRT proposal

• Empty vision: claimed LRT construction could begin in 2012 (2 years ago)

Absolutely no benefitsfrom light rail transit

Present transit arrangement

• Express riders save just 1 minute on the proposed LRT vs. 96 B-Line

• Travel times increase for transit riders from Fraser Heights (337), Walnut Grove (509) due to permanent loss of nonstop express service + added transfer

• Negative impact in corridor capacity for vehicles, goods, local buses (104 Ave permanently reduced from 4 to 2 lanes)

• Huge negative impacts during construction

• Major permanent travel time/reliability impacts to parallel local services (320, 501)

Travel time(Guildford-City Centre, peak)

Nonstop337509/590

7 mins.Express96 B-Line 10 mins.Local320/501 14 mins.

Future arrangement w/finished LRTTravel time

(Guildford-City Centre, peak)

ProposedLRT 9 mins.Local320/501 20 mins.

Travel time(Guildford-City Centre, peak)

All routes 20-30 mins.

Arrangement during LRT construction

104 AVE

* Proposed 104 Ave reduction to 2 lanes w/LRT prevents ability to continue running nonstop express services 337, 509, 590

Service disruption risks

Accident-prone intersections along proposed LRT # of crashes in 2013 (ICBC)

King George Blvd & 88 Ave 180King George Blvd & 72 Ave 160King George Blvd & 96 Ave 104104 Ave & King George Blvd 93104 Ave & 152 St 88

• Service disruption threat poses severe risk to LRT project benefits, business case, ridership

• King George Blvd is a very high-traffic, high-accident corridor. King George & 88th, King George & 72nd have highest accident rates in S-of-Fraser and are in the top 10 in Metro Vancouver crash-rates

• At just King George & 88th, accident-related LRT service disruptions could occur on average of once every 2 days!

• Accidents involving trains can involve high costs of stock write-up and replacement.

King George BLVDBus services can easily detour around accident areas or even get through them with traffic control personnel assistance

LRT services are tied to the track: ANY disruptions can require lengthy line closures, shuttle buses and severe inconvenience

Map of potential service disruptions at KGB/88th with proposed LRT

R.O.W. with previous SkyTrain proposal

R.O.W. with proposed LRT

Property acquisitions and regional disconnection

• Wider right-of-way (R.O.W.) on LRT means more community disruption, property acquisitions

• Disconnection from existing SkyTrain system misses key opportunity to include Langley as an integrated part of Metro Vancouver, making a significant contribution to the region-wide economy by creating more flexible employment opportunities North and South-of-Fraser.

• Shared lane section through Green Timbers has a major implication for service reliability.

Fraser HWYProperty acquisitions required

(partial + full takes)

LRT 210 (190 + 20)

RRT 120 (101 + 19)SkyTrain’s flexibility can allow for less disruption of existing

properties. This example is on the Evergreen Line.

Langley is the most distant town centre without convenient access to rail rapid transit

Surrey Rapid Transit Study – PDF page 358

LRT: Worth the risk?In the midst of fostering a marketing tool for attracting development and shaping growth in Surrey, are we still trying to benefit our stakeholders in the most practical way possible?

How about a better vision?

Vision Map104 AVEBUS PRIORITY UPGRADES

King George BLVDMEDIAN BUSWAY/BRT

Fraser HWYEXTEND SKYTRAIN TO LANGLEY

Vision: King George BLVDDedicated median bus-way from Surrey Central to 56 Ave, for enhanced/BRT operation of 96 B-Line. Has full signal priority and accessible, sheltered stations.

• Fosters continued provision of a high-quality B-Line bus service throughout significant traffic growth on KGB

• Focus on permanent lit, sheltered and accessible station facilities to improve the ride experience.

• Transfer-less continuous service to South Surrey/White Rock, and better integration with bus services to 104 Ave and beyond ensure seamless ride (unlike LRT)

• Surrey Rapid Transit Study indicated that a bus-type service will be close to capacity in 25 years, but is adequate until 2051 (30+ years out)

• Leaves room for service detours in the event of emergencies/right-of-way blockages, unlike LRT

• Compatible with phasing: potential to convert busway to LRT and potential is open for future SkyTrain expansion

• Gradual approach to improving transit without negative construction & permanent impacts. Investment focus is on maintaining the travel time and reliability of existing services (96, 337, etc) as community & traffic levels grow.

• Benefits exceed BRT and LRT due to the much lower intensity of any construction impacts + retention of faster non-stop express services

• Opportunity to provide through service onto Hwy 1 to Coquitlam and Langley/Abbotsford (unlike LRT)

• Surrey Rapid Transit Study indicated that a bus-type service will meet demand on 104 Ave for over 25 years.

• Aim is to eventually complete a full-length curb-side bus lane through redevelopment of corridor – which is also a better environment for a future upgrade to median LRT or SkyTrain service.

Vision: 104 AVECorridor enhancements for 96 B-Line: Increased service, signal priority system, introduce all-door boarding, new queue jump lanes and congestion management.

Vision: Fraser HWY Extend the Expo Line SkyTrain from King George Station to Langley Centre on a mostly elevated right-of-way down Fraser Highway. Combine with adjustments to bus service to better connect communities.

• Regional importance – Langley is the most distant population centre without convenient access to a rail rapid transit line• Generates huge travel time and flexibility benefits for Surrey and Langley citizens (Cuts travel time in half versus the 502)• Creates a high-quality, fast alternative to the automobile and attracts the most ridership of any rapid transit proposal• Highest annual vehicle-kms travelled (VKT) reduction potential• Cost-effective – SkyTrain has the lowest cost per added rider and per person-hour saved• Best result in generation of fare-revenue – which allows for faster repayment of capital debt or expansions of bus system• Supports and can attract higher-density growth in areas that would otherwise see (or have already seen) more sprawl growth

Pictured: Conceptual Mk III SkyTrain vehicle

It will take decades to generate the transportation benefits to offset the cost of LRT

Reality of Light Rail

Surrey Rapid Transit Study – PDF page 358

This vision has

2xthe transportation and monetary benefits.Surrey LRT vision - CAPITAL COST (2015$)

$2.44 billionThis vision - CAPITAL COST (2015$)

$2.3 billionCity of Surrey VisionLight Rail Transit

This VisionSkyTrain to Langley + enhanced 96B

Travel Time from Langley:

To Surrey Centreto Vancouver

29 minutes68 minutes

22 minutes56 minutes

System Daily ridership 166,000 riders 202,000 riders

New regional daily transit trips 12,000 new riders 24,500+ new riders

Annual VKT reduction to 2041 (millions) -1,300 -2,400

Average cost per added rider (annualized) $35 $18

Average cost per person-hour saved $33 $11

Life-cycle cost return (NPV + fare revenue) $1.25 bllion benefits $2.6 billion benefits

Benefit-Cost Ratio 0.56:1 1.13:1

Including:• Over 2x the travel time savings benefits• Over 2x as many new transit trips• Close to 2x reduction in driving• Lower cost per added rider• Faster, more frequent service• Superior on-time reliability• More capacity for future growth

Based on latest estimate in Mayors’ Council Vision: see appendices

A practical rapid transit vision to empower more productive Surrey residents and more vibrant Surrey communities

skytrainforsurrey.org Better Surrey Rapid Transit