SkyTrain for Surrey

Five reasons to support building SkyTrain for Surrey instead of LRT

SkyTrain is faster transit that opens up citizens to more jobs within a reasonable commute time SkyTrain offers the capacity to handle future growth in transportation demand beyond 2041 SkyTrain has worked in Vancouver to increase transit modeshare and reduce motor vehicle use, the most pressing issue being faced by the City of Surrey today. SkyTrain generates more benefits, and has a record of having attracted billions in economic transit-oriented development SkyTrain has lower operating costs for more service (especially in the off-peak), and generates more revenue by attracting more riders and more new transit trips. This helps TransLink pursue further expansions in the regional bus network.

Scroll down to find out why more SkyTrain is the best and only option for Surrey

The Solution is bigger than LRT

Much bigger solution is needed for Surrey SkyTrain expansion is needed on all 3 proposed corridors, for more consistent area-wide modal shift to meet goals Above: two proposals being worked on by Better Surrey Rapid Transit

Light Rail Transit (at-grade rail transit)

At-grade running means interfacing with other vehicles, pedestrians; risky environment may compromise reliability All at-grade transit governed by speed of road (50-60km/h)

SkyTrain (grade-separated rail transit)

Full grade segregation means better reliability Current SkyTrain service more than 96% on-time Higher speed (80-90 km/h) Higher capacity expansion potential to deal with growth beyond 2041

SkyTrain is better transit

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

Better off-peak operating frequencies due to lower cost

Evergreen Line as LRT (at-grade rail transit)

Driver-manned $15 million annual operating cost

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

SkyTrain is better transit

Source: Evergreen Line business case and analyses

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.

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

New transit trips with RRT1a (RRT on Fraser Highway + BRT)

SkyTrain attracts more riders onto transit

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

Alternative has total daily ridership of 202,000 in 2041

6600 passengers peak load on Fraser Highway 24,500 new daily transit trips across region 2.4 billion vehicle km travelled reduction to 2041

SkyTrain attracts 2x as many new transit trips

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171

Portland MAX LRT 85km

Opened 1986, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2009

Canada Line SkyTrain 19km

Opened in August 2009

SkyTrain attracts more riders onto transit

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

Sources: TransLink media releases TriMet ridership data (Portland)

Canada Line has more riders in 3 years than entire MAX LRT system has in 26 years

Canada Line ridership vs. projections

160000 141000

Portland MAX LRT (east-side) ridership vs. projections

45000 42500 40000 35000

140000
120000

136259

39500 34000

SkyTrain attracts more riders onto transit

100000
80000

100000

30000 25000 20000 22200

60000
40000

15000 10000 5000 0

20000
0

Average weekday boardings

Projected ridership by 2013 (4 years of operation) Projected ridership by 2021 (12 years of operation)

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 2011 (2 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

SkyTrain riders care about travel times

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>

Life-cycle cost returns of alternatives

Millions
3,000

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

LRT vs SkyTrain benefits

1,500

1,000

500

Travel Time Savings Auto Operating Cost Savinsg

Sources: Final Analysis PDF pages 349-369

Fare revenue

GHG emissions

Life-cycle cost returns of alternatives

Millions
4,000 3,500 3,000

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

LRT vs SkyTrain benefits

Sources: Final Analysis PDF pages 349-369

Fare revenue

GHG Emission reductions

SkyTrain will get more people out of their cars

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>

2041 forecast peak load

(passengers per hour per direction)
7000
6000 5000

LRT vs SkyTrain ridership projections

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

Light Rail Transit

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171

2041 forecast peak load

(passengers per hour per direction)
18000
16000 14000 12000 10000

LRT vs SkyTrain ridership projections

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

SkyTrain on all corridors (estimate)

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 171

 More than $8 billion in development attracted in Richmond within 5 years through Canada Line SkyTrain

SkyTrain can shape growth

Strict coordination by Richmond to control growth around new SkyTrain line Innovative and well coordinated land-use plan directs development into several character zones

Sources: Final Analysis PDF page 342-344,

Left top: Newest Canada Line development proposal, near Bridgeport Station Left bottom: Richmond character zone development plan

How to make SkyTrain a more feasible option

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