Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Scroll down to find out why more SkyTrain is the best and only option for Surrey
Accidents blocking track cause full disruption (i.e. accident at KGB & 88th will cause an LRT closure until cleared) Higher cost may lead to lower offpeak operating frequencies
Evergreen Line as SkyTrain (grade-separated rail transit) Driver-less $10 million annual operating cost For faster grade-separated service with 3 minutes peak frequency, 5 minutes offpeak frequency
For at-grade service with 6 minutes peak frequency, 15 minutes off-peak frequency
SkyTrain can cost less to operate for the same service SkyTrain can offer more off-peak service than LRT Off-peak service is provided at no premium More off-peak service encourages riders to use SkyTrain all-day and for all purposes, incl. other than commute-to-work
SkyTrain Traits
High Reliability: SkyTrain service is 96% on time, all the time Faster transit: SkyTrain runs at between 80-90km/h, whereas atgrade transit is governed by the road speed limit of 50-60km/h. More development: SkyTrain promotes higher density around transit, and has attracted tens of billions of dollars in development such as Metropolis at Metrotown, Plaza 88 in New Westminster, and the upcoming Canada Line Marine Gateway. Because of high frequency potential, SkyTrain can offer a higher theoretical capacity and so will be ready for Surreys ridership needs beyond 2041. SkyTrain helps the environment by putting diesel bus riders and drivers onto emissions-free transit. The Canada Line helps replace 14,000 tonnes in annual greenhouse gas emissions.
Alternative has total daily ridership of 178,000 in 2041 4250 passengers peak load on Fraser Highway Just 12,500 new daily transit trips across region Just 1.4 billion vehicle km travelled reduction to 2041
MAX LRT lines have often not generated ridership meeting projections
Total MAX system ridership in 2011 was recorded at 132,500 daily (weekday boardings) Averaged growth rate: approx. 5100 riders yearly
Original projections involved daily ridership of 100,000 by 2013 and 141,000 by 2021
Summer 2011 ridership was over 136,000 daily (weekday boardings) Averaged growth rate: approx. 68000 riders yearly
Canada Line has more riders in 3 years than entire MAX LRT system has in 26 years
140000
120000
136259
39500 34000
100000
80000
100000
60000
40000
20000
0
Average weekday boardings Projected ridership by 1990 (4 years of operation) Actual ridership by 1990 (4 years of operation) Actual ridership by 1998 (12 years of operation)
Actual ridership by 2005 (19 years of operation) Sources: TransLink media releases TriMet ridership data (Portland) Report by Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Portland State University <http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~monserec/courses/urbantrans/projects/ce454f05_MAX20.doc>
2011 Canada Line rider survey found trip speed was the most liked aspect by riders
Trip speed garnered more likes than next-best trait (system cleanliness) by almost 3x Survey found mid and high frequency riders most likely valued frequency, reliability Survey found overcrowding was least liked aspect of Canada Line (i.e. capacity is important to riders)
Source: Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses survey by TransLink & NRG Research Group
<https://www.translinklistens.ca/MediaServer/documents/Satisfaction%20with%20Canada%20Line%20and%20Connecting%20Buses%20Wave%202%20March%202011.pdf>
2,500
2,000
Travel time benefits alone for SkyTrain to Langley + BRT exceed benefits of other BRT & LRT options SkyTrain to Langley + BRT generates more than twice the cost returns of LRT to Langley + BRT SkyTrain generates 3x travel time savings benefits as LRT
BRT network LRT to Langley + BRT Full LRT network SkyTrain to Langley + BRT Other Travel Benefits Collission Cost Savings
1,500
1,000
500
Fare revenue
GHG emissions
2,500
2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Full LRT network SkyTrain to Langley SkyTrain on all + BRT corridors (estimate) Travel Time Savings Auto Operating Cost Savinsg Other Travel Benefits Collission Cost Savings
SkyTrain on all corridors could generate $3.75 billion in benefits and cost return Benefits with SkyTrain on all corridors could be more than 3x a full LRT network 1.46x the cost return of SkyTrain to Langley only + BRT
Fare revenue
Reduction in amount of vehicles entering Vancouver between 1996-2006 coincides with additional SkyTrain expansion during this period 2011 Canada Line rider survey found 45% of respondents formerly commuted via SOV (single-occupancy vehicle)
Sources: Vancouver Transportation Plan Update Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses survey by TransLink & NRG Research Group
<https://www.translinklistens.ca/MediaServer/documents/Satisfaction%20with%20Canada%20Line%20and%20Connecting%20Buses%20Wave%202%20March%202011.pdf>
4000
3000 2000 1000 0 King George Blvd to Newton Bus Rapid Transit Fraser Highway SkyTrain
Average ridership gain of SkyTrain over LRT is approx. 53% on both corridors Indicates commonality in ridership estimation formula used, can be extrapolated to other corridors
8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Passengers per hour per direction during peak Bus Rapid Transit on all corridors (BRT1) LRT to Langley only + BRT SkyTrain to Langley only + BRT Light Rail Transit on all corridors (LRT1)
Peak hour load significantly higher with SkyTrain on all corridors versus LRT on all corridors or any other partial arrangement More passengers attracted to transit = more transit modeshare = less people in cars = closer to modal shift objectives
More than $8 billion in development attracted in Richmond within 5 years through Canada Line SkyTrain
Strict coordination by Richmond to control growth around new SkyTrain line Innovative and well coordinated land-use plan directs development into several character zones
Left top: Newest Canada Line development proposal, near Bridgeport Station Left bottom: Richmond character zone development plan
Discussing this can help address concerns about cost or visual impact
Potential ways to address cost issue could include: separate line with shared infrastructure but shorter (3-car?) trains and stations (Better Option B), more side-running (to avoid median utility relocation), alternate alignments (Surrey Central-Guildford), over-street stations without mezzanines, build stations over parking lots (i.e. at Willowbrook), funding participation from developers. Potential ways to address visual issue could include: shorter trains and stations, over-street stations without mezzanines, build stations over parking lots (i.e. at Willowbrook), guideway profile/construction method (i.e. Expo vs. Millennium Line), integration tactics as with Canada Line in Richmond