7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
1/16
Five reasons tosupport buildingSkyTrain for Surreyinstead of LRT
SkyTrain is faster transit that opens up citizens to m
within a reasonable commute time SkyTrain offers the capacity to handle future growt
transportation demand beyond 2041
SkyTrain has worked in Vancouver to increase transshare and reduce motor vehicle us
e, the most pressbeing faced by the City of Surrey today.
SkyTrain generates more benefits
, and has a recordattracted billions in economic transit-oriented deve
SkyTrain has lower operating costs for more servicein the off-peak), and generates more revenue by atmore riders and more new transit trips. This helps Tpursue further expansions in the regional bus netwo
SkyTrain for Surrey
Scroll down tofind out whymore SkyTrain isthe best and onlyoption for Surrey
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
2/16
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
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
3/16
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 causefull disruption (i.e. accident atKGB & 88th will cause an LRTclosure until cleared)
Higher cost may lead to lower off-peak operating frequencies
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
4/16
SkyTrain isbetter transit
Evergreen Line as LRT(at-grade rail transit)
Driver-manned $15 million annual
operating cost
For at-grade service with 6minutes peak frequency, 15minutes off-peak frequency
Evergreen Line a(grade-separated
Driver-less $10 million ann
operating cost
For faster gradeservice with 3 mfrequency, 5 mipeak 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 purposes, incl. other than commute-to-work
Source: Evergreen Line business case and
analyses
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
5/16
SkyTrain Traits
High Reliability: SkyTrain service is 96% on time, all
Faster transit: SkyTrain runs at between 80-90km/hgrade transit is governed by the road speed limit of
More development: SkyTrain promotes higher denstransit, and has attracted tens of billions of dollars idevelopment such as Metropolis at Metrotown, PlaWestminster, and the upcoming Canada Line Marin
Because of high frequency potential, SkyTrain can otheoretical capacity and so will be ready for Surreyneeds beyond 2041.
SkyTrain helps the environment by putting diesel bdrivers onto emissions-free transit. The Canada Linereplace 14,000 tonnes in annual greenhouse gas em
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
6/16
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 HigAlternative has toridership of202,0
6600 passengersFraser Highway
24,500 new daily
across region2.4 billion vehicletravelled reducti
SkyTrain attracts 2x as many new tra
Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
7/16
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 yea
entire MAX LRT system has in 26 y
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
8/16
SkyTrain attractsmore riders ontotransit
Canada Lineridership vs. projections
42500
22200
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
Average week
Projected ridership by 1990
Actual ridership by 1990 (4
Actual ridership by 1998 (1
Actual ridership by 2005 (19
Portland MAX LRridership vs. p
100000
141000 136259
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
Average weekday boardings
Projected ridership by 2013 (4 years of operation)
Projected ridership by 2021 (12 years of operation)
Actual ridership by 2011 (2 years of operation)
Sources: TransLink media releases
TriMet ridership data (Portland)Report by Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Portland State University
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
9/16
SkyTrain riderscare abouttravel times
2011 Canada Linfound trip speemost liked aspe
Trip speed garnlikes than next-(system cleanlinalmost 3x
Survey found mfrequency riders
valued frequenc Survey found ov
was least liked aCanada Line (i.eimportant to rid
Source: Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses survey by TransLink & NRG Research Group
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
10/16
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
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
11/16
LRT vs SkyTrainbenefits
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
Full LRT network SkyTrain to Langley+ BRT
SkyTrain on allcorridors (estimate)
Millions
Life-cycle cost returns of alternatives
Travel Time Savings Other Travel Benefits
Auto Operating Cost Savinsg Collission Cost Savings
Fare revenue GHG Emission reductions
SkyTrain ocould genein benefits
Benefits wall corridorthan 3x a fu
1.46x the c
SkyTrain toBRT
Sources: Final Analysis PDF pages 349-369
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
12/16
SkyTrain willget morepeople out of
their cars
Reduction in amvehicles enterinbetween 1996-2coincides with aSkyTrain expanthis period
2011 Canada Linfound 45% of reformerly comm(single-occupan
Sources: Vancouver Transportation Plan Update
Satisfaction with Canada Line and Connecting Buses survey by TransLink & NRG Research Group
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
13/16
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
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
14/16
LRT vs SkyTrainridership projections
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
Passengers per hour per direction during peak
2041 forecast peak load(passengers per hour per direction)
Bus Rapid Transit on all corridors (BRT1)
LRT to Langley only + BRT
SkyTrain to Langley only + BRT
Light Rail Transit on all corridors (LRT1)
SkyTrain on all corridors (estimate)
Peak hour load shigher with SkyTcorridors versuscorridors or anyarrangement
More passengertransit = more tr
share = less peocloser to modal
Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
15/16
SkyTrain canshape growth
More than $8
developmentRichmond witthrough Canad
Strict coordinato control groSkyTrain line
Innovative an
coordinated ldirects develoseveral chara
Left top: Newest Canada Line development proposal, nearBridgeport Station
Left bottom: Richmond character zone development plan
Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 342-344,
7/29/2019 Why SkyTrain
16/16
How to makeSkyTrain amore feasible
option
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