Rapid Transit and Surrey's Needs Presentation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

7/30/2019 Rapid Transit and Surrey's Needs Presentation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1/32

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Rapid transit and Surreys needsExamining the modal shift in TransLinksSurrey Rapid Transit Study alternatives


2/32

What is:Mode shareModal shift

Mode share descr

number of trips or ptravelers using a partransportation. Oftepercentage of walkipublic transit, and a

Modal shift can dbetween transporta

a shift from driving tbe influenced by sevi.e. cost of driving, nlines, personal choic


3/32

Current modal split+ 2040 targetsSurrey and area

Poor transit optdiscouraging tra

Current transit mSurrey and area

84% of trips ma

2041 modal shifreduces car trip

Source: Surrey Rapid Tran


4/32

Increasing car use is aproblem for SurreyandMetro Vancouver

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Vehicle registrations growth 1999-2013

Surrey + White Rock Vancouver

Burnaby + New West Tri-Cities

Richmond Langley

North + West Van Maple Ridge + Pitt Meadows

Fa20

Sur

49

Lan

38

M.R

37

Reg

24

Tri-

23

Bur

18

Van

15Data source: Metro Vancouver, ICBC


5/32

Increasing car use is aproblem for SurreyandMetro Vancouver

Vehicle reg. growpopulation increa

Population increaamong fastest in

70% of [upcominMetro Vancouverin the South of Fr

Both outpace roaincrease each yea

Impacts to congeeconomy, health,

Modal shift to traand cycling are a

3%

4.30%

0.65%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

Growth rate in %

Surrey growth rates

Avg. annual population increase (2001-11)

Avg. annual vehicle reg. increase (2001-11)

Avg. annual lane-km increase (2007-10)


6/32

Problems ofincreased car useand car ownership

Graphic c


7/32

Surrey RapidTransit StudyFinal 4

Alternatives


8/32

Study admits thatno option will meetmodal-shift targets

All alternatives will attract few newtransit trips

Most alternatives will shift bus trips rather than a

This includes SkyTrain to Langley and full LRT ne

Source: Final Analysis PDF page 17


9/32

2040 mode sharepredictions for finalalternativesvs. regional goal

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

BRT

network

LRT to

Langley +BRT

Full LRT

network

RRT to

Langley +BRT

Regional

goal

2041 mode-shares

(AM peak hour)

Transit + walking + cycling % (region)

Transit + walking + cycling % (study area) All alternatithan 20% sh

goal for trancycling

Remaining t(over 70%) i

Metro Vancaverage mohit 50% goa

(Surrey, etc)be lower thVancouver

Source: Final Analysi


10/32

Demand-sidemeasures vs.regional goal

TDM (transpmanagemen28% increasshare compa

Alternatives

despite demor TDM if waequivalent mtransit.

Walking + cyextremely ufor regional

TDM scenargrowth (aborelated costshorten on aincreasing dwalking & cy

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

BRT network LRT to Langley

+ BRT

RRT to Langley

+ BRT

Regional goal

2041 study area mode-shares with TDM

(AM peak hour, to/from/within)

Transit % Transit + walking + cycling %

Source: Final Anal


11/32

ComparisonProposed Surrey bus networkvs. 2006 Vancouver network(bus networks after 20 years ofrapid transit)

All rapid transit alternatives to be complemented with BAU trSource: Final Analysis PDF page 242-245


12/32

ComparisonProposed Surrey bus networkvs. 2006 Vancouver network(bus networks after 20 years ofrapid transit)

Surrey 2041 bus nbe far more estabVancouvers 2006routes to maintaservice within 15Surrey/SOF after transit.

Busy Vancouver bof frequent transi2006 (i.e. 20 yearsincluded: 17, 25, 4

Vancouver bus ronot existbefore 2

Many Vancouver years after rapid tprovide service wpeak hour (26, 27,

Mode share goalsVancouver for intin 2006 are not myears of rapid tranmore established Source: Final Analysis PDF page 242-245,

TransLink 2008 press releaseCPTDB Wiki on CMBC bus routes

Full tables on final analysis PDF page 242-245


13/32

The Reality ofthe currentSurrey rapidtransit proposals

Modal shift rate on all proposed Surrey Rapid Transit optfall short of targets, in spite of transportation demand

Because of this, all Surrey Rapid Transit options do not fstudy objectives despite that TransLink has misleadingobjectives are met with the final 4 options

Study area anticipated mode-share to be lower than reaverage; additional sustainable mode share in South of for modal shift goal to be met across the Metro Vancouv

City of Surrey will require millions of dollars to deal with

+ its implications on community safety, health, etc. as a not enough investment in rapid transit

New options need to be created that make a bigger imcreate more modal shift to transit in order to fully addre


14/32

City of Surrey:Rapid Transit Now

City of Surrey is in support of city-wide LRT network (LRT

and opposed to any SkyTrain alternative Basis of supporting LRT is largely based around shaping

growth as opposed to addressing transportation issues

All rail rapid transit types effective at growth-shaping; mby Council and staff ignore growth attraction potential o


15/32

City of SurreyLRT proposalLRT1

Surrey Mayorsee Light Railcorridors fromto Guildford, and Newton.


16/32

Study areamode-sharewith LRT1 alt.

Evident that mogoals will not be

with full LRT net

550.00%

Regional

Transit, walking and

73.09%

15.01%

11.90%

26.91%

2041 study area mode shares

with LRT1

(AM peak hour,

to/from/within)

Auto Transit Walking/Cycling Source: Final Analysis P


17/32

LRT benefits vscosts

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

MILLIONS

LRT1 Benefits-Costs

Benefits Net Costs Final Net Present Value

LRT1 estimatednot exceed cost

Taxpayers to pain costs for $1.1 benefits. Net lo

Sources: Final Analysis PDF pages 349-369


18/32

The Reality ofthe Surrey LRTproposal

City vision for LRT will bring and shape smart growth;completely fails to address transportation issues, incauto use growth rate in Metro Van

City of Surrey must change its rapid transit vision to transportation issues

City of Surrey will require millions of dollars to deal wi

use + its implications on community safety, health, etcoff for not enough investment in rapid transit


19/32

The Solution isbigger than LRT

Much bigger solution is needed for Surrey

SkyTrain expansion is needed on all 3 proposed corrconsistent area-wide modal shift to meet goals

Above: two proposals being worked on by Better Surr


20/32

The Solution isbigger than LRT

Much bigger solution is needed for Surrey

SkyTrain expansion will require more infrastructure & affvisual concerns must be put aside in favour of addressin

Above: conceptual image of median SkyTrain station fro


21/32

SkyTrain isbetter transit

SkyTrain(grade-separated

Full grade segrebetter reliabilit

Current SkyTrathan 96% on-t

Higher speed (

Higher capacit

potential to debeyond 2041

Better off-peafrequencies du

Light Rail Transit(at-grade rail transit)

At-grade running meansinterfacing with other vehicles,pedestrians; risky environmentmay compromise reliability

All at-grade transit governed byspeed of road (50-60km/h)

Accidents blocking track cause

full disruption (i.e. accident atKGB & 88th will cause an LRTclosure until cleared)

Higher cost may lead to lower off-peak operating frequencies


22/32

SkyTrain attractsmore riders ontotransit

New transit trips with LRT5a(LRT on Fraser Highway + BRT)

Alternative has total dailyridership of178,000 in 2041

4250 passengers peak load onFraser Highway

Just 12,500 new daily transittrips across region

Just 1.4 billion vehicle kmtravelled reduction to 2041

New transit trips w(RRT on Fraser Hig

Alternative has toridership of202,0

6600 passengersFraser Highway

24,500 new dailyacross region

2.4 billion vehicletravelled reducti

SkyTrain attracts 2x as many new tra

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171


23/32

SkyTrain attractsmore riders ontotransit

Canada Line SkyTrOpened in August 2009

Original projectiodaily ridership of 1and 141,000 by 20

Summer 2011 ride136,000 daily (weboardings)

Averaged growth68000 riders year

Portland MAX LRT 85kmOpened 1986, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2009

MAX LRT lines have often notgenerated ridership meetingprojections

Total MAX system ridership in2011 was recorded at 132,500daily (weekday boardings)

Averaged growth rate: approx.5100 riders yearly

Sources: TransLink media releases

TriMet ridership data (Portland)

Canada Line has more riders in 3 yeaentire MAX LRT system has in 26 y


24/32

SkyTrain riderscare abouttravel times

2011 Canada Linfound trip speemost liked aspe

Trip speed garnlikes than next-(system cleanlinalmost 3x

Survey found mfrequency ridersvalued frequenc

Survey found ovwas least liked aCanada Line (i.eimportant to rid

Source: Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses survey by TransLink & NRG Research Group


25/32

LRT vs SkyTrainridership projections

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

King George Blvd to

Newton

Fraser Highway

2041 forecast peak load(passengers per hour per direction)

Bus Rapid Transit Light Rail Transit SkyTrain

Average ridershSkyTrain over L53% on both co

Indicates commridership estimaused, can be ext

other corridors

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171


26/32

LRT vs SkyTrainbenefits

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

BRT network LRT to Langley+ BRT

Full LRTnetwork

SkyTrain toLangley + BRT

Millions

Life-cycle cost returns of alternatives

Travel Time Savings Other Travel Benefits

Auto Operating Cost Savinsg Collission Cost Savings

Fare revenue GHG emissions

Travel time

for SkyTraiBRT exceeother BRT

SkyTrain togenerates the cost reLangley + B

SkyTrain gtravel timeas LRT

Sources: Final Analysis PDF pages 349-369


27/32

SkyTrain canshape growth

More than $8

developmentRichmond witthrough Canad

Strict coordinato control groSkyTrain line

Innovative an

coordinated ldirects develoseveral chara


28/32

Slow transit doesnt make peoplelive slower lives. Instead, it makes

people use their cars because thosebecome the only way to access thecity quickly

Jarrett WalkerPublic Transit Planning Consultant, author of Human Transit


29/32

How to makeSkyTrain amore feasibleoption

Discussing this can help address concerns about cost

Potential ways to address cost issue could include: separate liinfrastructure but shorter (3-car?) trains and stations (Better

side-running (to avoid median utility relocation), alternate aliCentral-Guildford), over-street stations without mezzanines, parking lots (i.e. at Willowbrook), funding participation from d

Potential ways to address visual issue could include: shorter tover-street stations without mezzanines, build stations over pWillowbrook), guideway profile/construction method (i.e. ExpLine), integration tactics as with Canada Line in Richmond


30/32

This is whatSurrey reallyneeds.

SkyTrain (grade-separated rapid transit) presents bet

opportunity for modal shift goals to be met

City of Surrey must change its rapid transit vision to transportation issues. New rapid transit vision will reqincorporation ofgrade-separated rapid transit to me

City-wide SkyTrain expansion introduces potential to more billions of dollars in benefits than city-wide LR

City of Surrey should explore how SkyTrain can be mafeasible option (addressing cost + visual concerns)


31/32

Better SurreyRapid Transit

Daryl Dela Cruz Campaign Director and Exec of StatBenedic Dasalla Exec of Marketing & Communicatio

Neo Caines Exec of Infrastructure Analysis

This presentation was brought to you by advocates foRapid Transit.

Better Surrey Rapid Transit will continue to advocate f

meeting mode-share goals and addressing transportaif the City of Surrey does not correspond with these co

Website: skytrainforsurrey.org

Email us: [email protected]
http://skytrainforsurrey.org/mailto:infoskytrainforsurrey.orgmailto:infoskytrainforsurrey.orghttp://skytrainforsurrey.org/


32/32

Thank youWe look forward to an improved outlook for Surreysforthcoming transportation issues and thank you for listening.

Rapid Transit and Surrey's Needs Presentation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Documents

Transcript of Rapid Transit and Surrey's Needs Presentation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY