Why LRT is not the answer

7/29/2019 Why LRT is not the answer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/why-lrt-is-not-the-answer 1/16

Five reasons tooppose Light RailTransit in Surrey

• At-grade Light Rail provides slower transit comparedand potentially less reliable transit compared to evenprovides less options for citizens (esp. young citizenstime of economic recession, desperately need more o

• At-grade Light Rail has a smaller impact on pressing auto use growth because it attracts less modal shift

• At-grade Light Rail causes traffic mayhem and

disrupcommunities by taking away road capacity on major such as 104th Ave and creating less auto to transit mo

• At-grade Light Rail will generate less benefits than it

• No Surrey Rapid Transit options involving Light Rail w

transportation modal shift goals

Oppose LRT

Scroll down tofind out why LRTis not the bestsolution forSurrey’s issues



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



At-grade LRT isinferior transit

SkyTrain(grade-separated rail transit)

Full grade segregation meansbetter reliability

Current SkyTrain service morethan 96% on-time

Higher speed (80-90 km/h)

Higher capacity expansion

potential to deal with growthbeyond 2041

Better off-peak operatingfrequencies due to lower cost

Light Rail Transit(at-grade rail trans

At-grade runninginterfacing with opedestrians; riskymay compromis

All at-grade transspeed of road (50

Accidents blockinfull disruption (i.KGB & 88th will caclosure until clear

Higher cost may peak operating fr



At-grade LRT isinferior transit

In the top-left pLight Rail Line hfor 3 hours whil

was cleared.

When the LRT libecause an accitrack, it can takeuntil service ca

At-grade and onservice is more to accidents, vebreakdowns, petc. and typicalreliability than fseparated altern



At-grade LRTattracts less ridersonto transit

New transit trips

(LRT on Fraser Hi

Alternative has toridership of 178,0

4250 passengersFraser Highway

Just 12,500 new d

trips across regioJust 1.4 billion vetravelled reducti

New transit trips with RRT1a

(RRT on Fraser Highway + BRT)Alternative has total dailyridership of 202,000 in 2041

6600 passengers peak load onFraser Highway

24,500 new daily transit trips

across region2.4 billion vehicle kmtravelled reduction to 2041

LRT makes half the impact compared to

Source: Surrey Rapid Transit Study

Final Analysis PDF page 171



At-grade LRTattracts less ridersonto transit

Canada Line SkyTrain – 19kmOpened in August 2009

Original projections involveddaily ridership of 100,000 by 2013and 141,000 by 2021

Summer 2011 ridership was over136,000 daily (weekdayboardings)

Averaged growth rate: approx.68000 riders yearly

Portland MAX LRTOpened 1986, 1998, 2

MAX LRT lines hagenerated ridersprojections

Total MAX system2011 was recordedaily (weekday b

Averaged growth5100 riders yearly

Sources: TransLink media releases

TriMet ridership data (Portland)

Canada Line has more riders in 3 yea

entire MAX LRT system has in 26 y



Modal shift inVancouver vsPortland

Vancouver, British ColumbiaServiced by 69km (then 50km) SkyTrain system

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1996 2006

Journey-to-work trips by

transit, walking or cycling

Trips from outside the city

Trips within the city

Combined

Portland, OregoServiced by 85km MAX LR

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1997

Journey-to-wo

by transit, walk

cycling

Combined

At-grade LRT in Portland did not create anchoice-ridership modal shift until the 200

Three LRT lines were opened between 19Sources: City of Vancouver Transportation Plan Update

City of Portland mode-share surveys



LRT vs SkyTrainService and ridership

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

SkyTrain proj

more peak hthan LRT on

Average rideSkyTrain ove53% on both

This additionincludes morriders, not juswitching frolike 321/502.

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171



City of SurreyLRT proposal“LRT1”

• Surrey Mayorsee Light Rail

corridors fromto Guildford, and Newton.



LRT benefits vscosts

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

M I L L I O N S

LRT1 Benefits-Costs

Benefits Net Costs Final Net Present Value

LRT1 net presen

-$510 mi LRT1 estimated

not exceed cost

Taxpayers to pa

in costs for $1.1 benefits. Net lo

Sources: Surrey Rapid Transit Study

Final Analysis PDF pages 349-369



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




0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

With full LRT network

2041 mode-shares

(AM peak hour)

Transit + walking + cycling % (region)

Transit + walking + cycling % (study area)

Metro Vancaverage mohit 50% goa

(Surrey, etcwith LRT1 wMetro Vancaverage

Source: Final Analysi

50.00%

Regi

Transit, walki




Evident that mogoals will not be

with full LRT ne

550.00%

Regiona

Transit, walking and

66.78%

12.50%

20.72%

33.22%

2041 study area mode shares

with LRT1

(AM peak hour, within only)

Auto Transit Walking/Cycling Source: Final Analysis P



Surrey 2021-2041 vsVancouver 1996-2006with LRT1 alternative

0.3

0.1605

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

Vancouver 1996-2006 Surrey 2021-2041, LRT1

Average yearly modal shift

Average yearly additional mode-share captured in %

Previous Vanccapture rate isexpected annucapture rate wnetwork in sur

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 342-344,

Vancouver Transportation Plan Update

TDM adjustments are not included in this comparison as such measures had not been implemented

of Vancouver. See report: Assessing the potential for road and parking charges to reduce demand focommuting in the Greater Vancouver region, page 9 - http://research.rem.sfu.ca/theses/Washbroo

http://research.rem.sfu.ca/theses/WashbrookKevin_2002_MRM298.pdf




Surrey 2021-2041 vsVancouver 1996-2006with LRT1 alternative

1.73%

1.36%

0.00%

0.20%

0.40%

0.60%

0.80%

1.00%

1.20%

1.40%

1.60%

1.80%

2.00%

Vancouver 1996-2006 Surrey 2021-2041, LRT1

Average yearly modal shift

Average yearly mode share growth

Surrey to see slomodal shift withthan Vancouver previously beforebuilt

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 342-344,

Vancouver Transportation Plan Update

TDM adjustments are not included in this comparison as such measures had not been implemented

of Vancouver. See report: Assessing the potential for road and parking charges to reduce demand focommuting in the Greater Vancouver region, page 9 - http://research.rem.sfu.ca/theses/Washbroo





“Slow transit doesn’t 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

Documents

Why LRT is not the answer