Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SURFACE TRANSIT
The case for trackless train technology in Metro Vancouver
By Daryl Dela Cruz blog.daryldelacruz.com
How do we improve our surface corridors?
We have one of the most heavily used public transit networks in North
America, both on rapid transit and on surface bus routes.
Typically, surface route improvements involve introducing B-Line bus
services & transit priority, but this can only go so far (see: 99 B-Line)
Recently, light rail has been considered as a solution. However, LRT is very
costly, and there can be many practical limitations to its implementation.
We need a versatile, low-cost solution that can supersede both traditional
B-Line buses and light rail lines, achieving the goal of offering a higher
quality transit service on our surface corridors but avoiding disadvantages.
TRACKLESS TRAINS
TRAINS THAT CAN RUN ON EXCLUSIVE,
DEDICATED LANES BUT DONT REQUIRE TRACKS
TRACKLESS TRAIN TECHNOLOGY
Zhuzhou, China Brisbane, Australia
Autonomous rail rapid transit Brisbane Metro
Demonstration project by CRRC Corp, the largest rail Two-line metro using trackless train tech, integrated
rolling stock manufacturer in the world. w/extensive BRT network. Now under construction.
Components of trackless train technology
BI-ARTICULATED BUSES
Typically 33% longer than standard 60 ft articulated buses, can be even longer
Increase capacity to between 250-300 passengers per vehicle
Typically utilizes clean propulsion tech (i.e. CNG, battery-electric)
Used in cities in Europe, S America, China. Potential use in Canada on York Region VIVA.
Components of trackless train technology
The most advanced trackless train systems generally feature level boarding just
like their tracked counterparts. No ramps, roll onto the vehicle.
Conventional buses can have it. Kelownas 97X rapid bus route has level boarding!
Screen doors can allow for totally enclosed platform areas, protected by gates.
ADVANTAGES OF TRACKLESS TRAIN TECH
Higher capacity than conventional BRT
Lower infrastructure costs compared to LRT (no tracks, no utility relocation)
Possibility of phasing in supporting infrastructure (i.e. dedicated transitways)
High quality ride experience (smooth, spacious vehicles)
Lower costs to build out, faster to set up
Avoids reliability shortfalls of LRT/streetcar (no blocked tracks, etc)
No connection to Hwy 1
routes at 156th St
APPLICATION II
104 Ave reduced to 2 lanes
SURREY-NEWTON-GUILDFORD
At-grade through busy city centre
Current LRT plan has limited extent, limited
travel time savings against existing transit
routes (incl. 96 B-Line).
Passes through accident-prone intersections
Poor business case in SRTAA (BCR 0.69:1)
Covers existing B-Line route only Extensive construction impact & disruption of
community (Hawthorne Park)
High cost to subsidize operations
No opportunity for trams to detour around
No direct connection to South
Surrey/White Rock blockages in track, could pose reliability issue
No direct connection to areas in South
Surrey, White Rock
Low contribution to transit modal shift Poor business case BCR (0.69:1)
APPLICATION II
SURREY-NEWTON-GUILDFORD
Suggestion: convert to BRT
project with future upgrade to
Integration w/ Fraser
Valley commuter services
trackless train system
Infrastructure is built gradually: King George
busway first, then 104 Ave as redevelopment
allows. Less community impacts (i.e. road
closures during constr., Hawthorne Park)
Buses can connect more places: example
Longer routes routes could connect Surrey City Ctr to White
More possibilities
Rock Beach, Coquitlam Ctr, Fraser Valley
Lower costs to build, cost savings can be
reinvested into Surrey-Langley SkyTrain
NUMEROUS POSSIBILITIES IN OUR REGION
Where could we build
To Capilano Uni trackless trains
Willingdon
Surrey to Maple Ridge
41st / Pitt Meadows
Surrey to
Coquitlam
Arbutus
Marpole
to 22nd St
Surrey-Newton-
Guildford corridor