Surrey City Centre Redevelopment Plans

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by idunno

This is huge for Surrey City Centre connectivity! This is like the entire length of W Georgia St downtown getting a street rebuild. Great job on the part of Surrey for getting that federal funding.

Burnaby should do the same with Lougheed and Kingsway!

[Klazu]

If they will reduce KGB through Surrey Central to 2+2 driving lanes, that is madness. I work in Guildford and I have yet to see a single cyclist on the dedicated bike routes through the area. Independent bicycle entrepreneurs are the only people I have seen cycling in Surrey and even they don't use bikeways, but sidewalks and roadway.

I think Brenda would be better off to save the millions for her circus with SPD.

[EhJay]

Downtown Surrey is being designed and built for the future, not for today. Not sure how many lanes are planned or how it will be built out, but adding in separated bike lanes and larger sidewalks will definitely increase the use of biking. I avoid the area when biking as it's not a place I feel safe using. With separated bike lanes, I would be biking in the area a lot more often. Nevermind as they add in dozens of new condos over the next 20 years.

[SpongeG]

they added bike lanes to Whalley Blvd recently, some of the infrastructure looks like it can and probably has damaged cars, there is like an asphalt divider bump thing and some signs where one of them has already been taken out and if you take a corner too tight coming of 104th north onto Whalley you can really hit the bump and the damaged sign holder sticking out.

I've never seen anyone using it to cycle on. I often see people on King George on scooters, electric wheelchair type things riding down the curb lane instead of on the sidewalk so they may benefit.

[Lexus]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

they added bike lanes to Whalley Blvd recently, some of the infrastructure looks like it can and probably has damaged cars, there is like an asphalt divider bump thing and some signs where one of them has already been taken out and if you take a corner too tight coming of 104th north onto Whalley you can really hit the bump and the damaged sign holder sticking out.

I've never seen anyone using it to cycle on. I often see people on King George on scooters, electric wheelchair type things riding down the curb lane instead of on the sidewalk so they may benefit.

I rode a bike there about a month ago. It’s really nice. I actually didn’t know about those new bike lanes and only discovered because I was there taking photos. I also like green paint near intersections. That is a passive method to I indicate to drivers that cyclists are expected.

[dferch]

There have been quite a few studies on reducing lanes, and it usually has positive effects on traffic in the long term. Especially with Whalley bvd going further south soon, having kgbvd 4 lanes all the way would probably be fine?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

This sounds like a good project.

Small pet peeve of mine is double-counting that sometimes occurs when describing a project like this. A 1km stretch of cycle tracks is often described as 2km (because it is effectively 2 lanes - one per side of the street). 1km of sidewalk construction is often described as 2km for the same reason. Yet 1km of SkyTrain is rarely if ever described as 2km, even when twin tunnels or parallel single guideways are required. Likewise, 1km of road is almost never described as 2km, 4km, 6km, 8km, etc., depending on the number of lanes in the right of way.

People would quite rightly call out and ridicule a politician boasting that their administration would fund 600 km of highway upgrades when it's actually funding the resurfacing 100km of 6-lane highway.

Forward thinking, that's all I can say.

[GMasterAres]

<Somehow double posted>

[GMasterAres]

Reducing lanes is fine if they keep same net lanes. As long as they combine with widening Walley Boulevard and 140th to 2 lanes the whole Surrey Central stretch along with expanding roads like City Parkway it should be ok. More people need to use University Drive, I often would zip down that road and bypass so much traffic on King George because nobody seems to every thing about taking it. They are pre-programed to stick to KGB or go over to Whalley Boulevard which is only 1 lane for 75% of the length. Heck they should also expand 132 ST to 2 lanes while they're at it. You do that for all of those, and reducing 1 lane in KGB will not be noticed.

The ONLY thing I think they need to make sure they maintain are right turn lanes for 102 and 104 avenues. The third lane often backs up for right turners at 104th Avenue or 102 which is super narrow. So traffic flows AOK with 2 lanes because there is the 3rd right turning lane. It does look like they have the option as the cross section has a 3.0 meter buffer with trees. At the intersections they could definitely have those terminate just before the intersection and add a right queue lane then continue the buffer beyond.

If they take away 1 lane of traffic but also take away right turn lanes at those intersections, then I agree it will make traffic really bad as you'll only have a single lane going through while people are queued waiting for pedestrians/bikes to cross. Unless they change the light patterns to prohibit pedestrian/bike crossing at the same time as cars which is another option (right turn arrows for example).

Either way I think it is a great project if executed correctly. Everyone harps on bike lanes but the sidewalks are to me the most important factor. King George is the absolute worst road to walk down as a pedestrian. The sidewalk is super narrow, if you are pushing a buggy for example two people can't walk side by side and when passing someone they have to walk on the grass or off the sidewalk. It is also noisy and smelly. And for cycling, nobody cycles on KGB because it is a death trap. When I still lived in Surrey Central, plenty of people cycled down Fraser Highway and 100th Ave or up Whalley Boulevard. Like anything it was primarily during morning and afternoon commute, but people used them for sure, enough to me to warrant the bike lanes being there. Do KGB the whole stretch and you'd then have full connection to the other above + 105a and other roads already built for cycling. Will likely encourage more people to grab their bikes. So if they can build them they should for sure for the future and just to provide all potential modes of transport. The 2 major though are still going to be vehicles + pedestrians. A LOT of people walk.

[Lexus]

2023, Mar 19

Melrose https://mlemporio.ca

Untitled by Lexus LX600, on Flickr

[Equinox71]

Vancouver Sun article on City Centre 4:

https://vancouversun.com/sponsored/r...boratory-space

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by EhJay

Downtown Surrey is being designed and built for the future, not for today. Not sure how many lanes are planned or how it will be built out, but adding in separated bike lanes and larger sidewalks will definitely increase the use of biking.

Increasing cycling by 500% would still make cyclists an extremely rare sight in Surrey. People need to accept that cycling is never ever going to be anything more than a curiosity in Metro Vancouver and it will never account for more than 1% of overall transportation, AT BEST. We shouldn't sacrifice vital thoroughfares like KGB, which we have very few of and even they are paltry 3+3 lanes, to such obscure things as cycling.

One just has to look at map to see how extremely important thoroughfare KGB is in Surrey, being the only connector for Pattullo Bridge. It is always going to see loads of traffic, as cars will always be the main transportation mode in a spread out city like Surrey. No Skytrain extension is going to change that. And this is not even taking into account the 10,000 new cars that 50+ new towers in Surrey Central is going to bring to the area. Traffic is only going to get more.

If people truly want to "get rid of KGB" in Surrey Central, the only way is to tunnel it and make above ground into a boulevard. This would work so well also in places like Brentwood, but our cities are way too regressive to even consider such.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Increasing cycling by 500% would still make cyclists an extremely rare sight in Surrey. People need to accept that cycling is never ever going to be anything more than a curiosity in Metro Vancouver and it will never account for more than 1% of overall transportation, AT BEST. We shouldn't sacrifice vital thoroughfares like KGB, which we have very few of and even they are paltry 3+3 lanes, to such obscure things as cycling.

One just has to look at map to see how extremely important thoroughfare KGB is in Surrey, being the only connector for Pattullo Bridge. It is always going to see loads of traffic, as cars will always be the main transportation mode in a spread out city like Surrey. No Skytrain extension is going to change that. And this is not even taking into account the 10,000 new cars that 50+ new towers in Surrey Central is going to bring to the area. Traffic is only going to get more.

If people truly want to "get rid of KGB" in Surrey Central, the only way is to tunnel it and make above ground into a boulevard. This would work so well also in places like Brentwood, but our cities are way too regressive to even consider such.

E scooters and other personal transportation devices are becoming a very popular way to get around. Building infarstructure for them is a good idea.

[SpongeG]

yea, maybe cause I spend 90% of my free time in Surrey these days I see people on e-scooters, e0nikes and those wheel things all the time, many of them don't wear helmets which is worrisome, I saw one in Coquitlam a few weeks ago, a guy laying on the side of the road with an escooter, people were attending to him but he wasn't moving at all, no helmet, he must have hit his head or something really bad, he was from what I could see unconscious. And then in Whalley part of surrey you see the street people on bikes lugging around carts or huge bags of bottles on their way to the depots. Quite a lot of use and need for safe bike paths in the hinterlands.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Increasing cycling by 500% would still make cyclists an extremely rare sight in Surrey. People need to accept that cycling is never ever going to be anything more than a curiosity in Metro Vancouver and it will never account for more than 1% of overall transportation, AT BEST. We shouldn't sacrifice vital thoroughfares like KGB, which we have very few of and even they are paltry 3+3 lanes, to such obscure things as cycling.

One just has to look at map to see how extremely important thoroughfare KGB is in Surrey, being the only connector for Pattullo Bridge. It is always going to see loads of traffic, as cars will always be the main transportation mode in a spread out city like Surrey. No Skytrain extension is going to change that. And this is not even taking into account the 10,000 new cars that 50+ new towers in Surrey Central is going to bring to the area. Traffic is only going to get more.

If people truly want to "get rid of KGB" in Surrey Central, the only way is to tunnel it and make above ground into a boulevard. This would work so well also in places like Brentwood, but our cities are way too regressive to even consider such.

In 2017 biking accounted for 1.6% of trips across the metro. The pandemic definitely increased the number of people on bikes and micro mobility has also become more prevalent in the past few years so I would guess we're somewhere around 2% now?

Now, Surrey's biking figure is lower at 0.6% but it's not just Vancouver dragging up the stats for the rest of the metro. Burnaby, which is far from a cycling haven, was at 1.5% and North Van, which has some murderous terrain challenges, was also at 1.5%. And in Vancouver the neighbourhoods surrounding downtown have a much higher cycling mode share. Most of the trips originating Downtown or Broadway or Kits where between those core neighbourhoods and something like 10% of those core trips were made by bike. There is a future where Newton of Fleetwood maintain a mode share around 1% but where Surrey Central is closer to 5 - 10%.

If Surrey truly establishes a downtown, I see no reason why KGB shouldn't adapt to that new reality. As currently constructed, KGB exists to get cars from the north side of Surrey to somewhere else in the city but it will need to serve a lot more local needs if thousands of new residents are living and working in Surrey Central in the coming decades.

[vanman]

Surrey Loop

located at 133A Street & Central Avenue
43-storey, mixed-use tower
418 condos, 8 townhomes, 94 rental apartments
3,692 sq ft of retail space
350m from Surrey Central Station
near Central City Shopping Centre
close to Holland Park
10-minute walk to Whalley Athletic Park & Chuck Bailey Recreation Centre
40 minutes to downtown Vancouver via SkyTrain

https://www.mikestewart.ca/presale/s...io-properties/

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

In 2017 biking accounted for 1.6% of trips across the metro. The pandemic definitely increased the number of people on bikes and micro mobility has also become more prevalent in the past few years so I would guess we're somewhere around 2% now?

Now, Surrey's biking figure is lower at 0.6% but it's not just Vancouver dragging up the stats for the rest of the metro. Burnaby, which is far from a cycling haven, was at 1.5% and North Van, which has some murderous terrain challenges, was also at 1.5%. And in Vancouver the neighbourhoods surrounding downtown have a much higher cycling mode share. Most of the trips originating Downtown or Broadway or Kits where between those core neighbourhoods and something like 10% of those core trips were made by bike. There is a future where Newton of Fleetwood maintain a mode share around 1% but where Surrey Central is closer to 5 - 10%.

If Surrey truly establishes a downtown, I see no reason why KGB shouldn't adapt to that new reality. As currently constructed, KGB exists to get cars from the north side of Surrey to somewhere else in the city but it will need to serve a lot more local needs if thousands of new residents are living and working in Surrey Central in the coming decades.

Surrey has the potential to be a great place for bike riding. My friend ended up moving from the Joyce station area to Newton last year, and he finds he can ride farther than he used to due to a lot of the city being pretty flat. He's also reported the simple painted curb bike lane has been safe to ride in as cars have been keeping out of it.

Now obviously that's not an all ages bike lane but it's pretty effective for a lot of commuter cyclists. If Surrey were to add more of them and paint them green with some kind of rumble strip along the edge, it would make cycling more plausible for a lot of people. Add to this more separated lanes not only in Surrey Central but also in the town centres and more short trips would be attractive to do by bike.

Originally Posted by logan5

E scooters and other personal transportation devices are becoming a very popular way to get around. Building infarstructure for them is a good idea.

Pre-pandemic I used to see bikes but not a lot of other micro mobility - now I see them all over the place. Even my elderly neighbours who drive everywhere have seen the change and think they need a lane separate from cars and pedestrians.

[officedweller]

From Rize twitter March 30th:

Comma King George

Comma is Rize's rental division.

Video update link:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1641572467725443072

It's the one with the modern heritage retention.


https://rize.ca/project/commercial/parks-yards/

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

If Surrey truly establishes a downtown, I see no reason why KGB shouldn't adapt to that new reality. As currently constructed, KGB exists to get cars from the north side of Surrey to somewhere else in the city but it will need to serve a lot more local needs if thousands of new residents are living and working in Surrey Central in the coming decades.

1%, 2%, even 5% is still completely meaningless and most cyclists in Metro Vancouver are also Fairweather Cyclists. Since COVID and remote work, BC Parkway through Metrotown has been devoid of cyclists. It is really noticeable, as the trail is now almost entirely pedestrians, which is much better and civilized use of the space.

Since they won't put KGB into a tunnel like in a modern European cities, they should build any possible bikelanes as space crawled back from new development going up. Keep the same road space and expand the arterial with new bikelane to the side. Why does all cycling development have to be away from roadway? Why can't we develop something actually new and better for every mode? Oh right, it's none of this is actually about making cycling easier, but driving harder.

[GMasterAres]

I still think reducing KGB through that stretch to 2 lanes is not an issue IF they build appropriate right turn queue lanes at key intersections or turning points. The cross section proposed in that article has a tree separation from the bike lanes which is wide enough for 1 lane and from a safety perspective, you'd likely want that to stop near intersections to allow right turners to SEE cyclists.

If that is done, I don't think there will be as big an impact on traffic as thought. I lived on Surrey Central for almost a decade and drove/walked KGB a lot. Heading Northbound, the right lane is typically avoided because of people turning right at 100th, 102, and 104th along with London Drugs and formerly Saveon. The right turners queue up many many cars so it effectively is only a right turn lane already.

Heading Southbound, it isn't 3 lanes the whole way as they have street parking at several spots until you pass 104th. Then it again turns into basically a right lane for 102, Central City mall, and 100th. The only place you can usually zip through on the far right is 98th but then it ends @ 96th anyway.

So if you look at use today, the third lane is effectively a right turn queue lane for like 90% of the entire distance. Thus why I said if they get rid of that lane, they would NEED to have right turn queues at the major intersections or else they'd effectively then be reducing KGB to 1 lane through and that definitely would be a complete nightmare. But 2 through lanes with right turn queues where the grass/trees are @ intersections wouldn't substantively change anything imho.

And I still think they'd get more bang for their buck vehicle traffic wise by widening 140th (100th to 108th), Whalley Boulevard (100th > 108th), 132 (96 > 108), and pushing through City Parkway at 104th (which is coming). Those terribly built out N/S routes are what drive quite a bit of traffic to KGB today. I mean if we want to really get technical, the ONLY N/S route other than KGB between 96th and 108th Avenue is 152nd street, a whole 16 blocks away and in Guildford so with no affect on Surrey Central. That would be like Granville being the only N/Sish 2 or more lane road through all of Downtown Vancouver.

I think I'll hold out too much criticism until the City actually has a plan beyond a simple cross section artist impression.

If they 1) reduce lanes, 2) don't expand the other N/S routes at the same time, and 3) don't put in right turn queues at major intersections, then I'm with Klazu that it will be terrible, but I'd say it is terrible execution by the City not bad simply because of bike lanes and widened sidewalks. I do think they can do it right and make all modes AOK.