The Great Canadian Transit Thread - Page 251

Beedok · #**5001** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 1:15 PM**

Impressive, especially for a suburb.

miketoronto · #**5002** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 1:18 PM**

Edmonton residents won't have to feel like they are traveling too fast on any future LRT lines (not extensions of the current system).

Edmonton is promoting that all new LRT lines will never travel any faster than 70 km/h between stations, even on fully grade separated sections.

In addition, new LRT lines will not have full priority at intersections like the current system. This is to ensure LRT trains never go faster than car traffic, and in fact usually will be slower than car traffic.
This is to ensure the LRT is a community fixture.

The result is that future LRT lines in Edmonton will be half as fast as the current network, and not much faster than local bus service.

Great way Edmonton to mess up an outstanding a highly utilized light rail system.

I would not expect these new lines to be as popular as the existing line.

Nouvellecosse · #**5003** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 3:16 PM**

People were complaining the LRT was going to be too fast?

miketoronto · #**5004** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 3:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

People were complaining the LRT was going to be too fast?

No. Edmonton residents don't seem to interested in slower LRT either.

It is the planning fad right now that "rapid transit" is bad, and building slow transit will force people to live in compact communities.

itom 987 · #**5005** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 5:04 PM**

Mike, the new line will be just as fast as Calgary's LRT through downtown.

miketoronto · #**5006** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 6:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by itom 987

Mike, the new line will be just as fast as Calgary's LRT through downtown.

You are joking right????? Do you know how slow Calgary's LRT is in the downtown core? It is basically a streetcar at that point.

Chadillaccc · #**5007** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 6:58 PM**

And you do know that Calgary's average rail transit speed is still faster than that of Toronto and Montreal, even with the downtown portion, right? Also that the downtown portion of the future 203 line will be underground? How about that one of the two existing lines on the downtown portion will be put underground around the same time that the next new line is built? You don't seem to know much about the C-train at all, so why bother making claims about it?

miketoronto · #**5008** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 7:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

And you do know that Calgary's average rail transit speed is still faster than that of Toronto and Montreal, even with the downtown portion, right? Also that the downtown portion of the future 203 line will be underground? How about that one of the two existing lines on the downtown portion will be put underground around the same time that the next new line is built? You don't seem to know much about the C-train at all, so why bother making claims about it?

The new Edmonton LRT lines will be half the speed of the current lines which are like Calgary's C-Train. So I think that is a problem. The new lines will not be as fast as the C-Train. And the downtown portion of the C-Train is well known in transit circles as a big issue that Calgary must address. The system cannot operate more frequently because the trains go so slow through the downtown portion.

niwell · #**5009** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 7:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

And you do know that Calgary's average rail transit speed is still faster than that of Toronto and Montreal, even with the downtown portion, right? Also that the downtown portion of the future 203 line will be underground? How about that one of the two existing lines on the downtown portion will be put underground around the same time that the next new line is built? You don't seem to know much about the C-train at all, so why bother making claims about it?

I'm not sure how any of that is relevant? Mike said that the speed of Calgary's LRT is slow through downtown. Which it is, frustratingly so. When I had to commute from the NW to the south it seemed like half the trip time was simply getting through the core.

caltrane74 · #**5010** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 9:53 PM**

Its also not fair to use the speed, because that just means the stops are spaced further out and deeper into the suburbs. Toronto and Montreal have more stops in the core, which limits the speed of travel because its getting up to speed and stopping again. Many subway stops on the Montreal and Toronto lines are less than a kilometre apart, especially in the core. Where the trains go fastest, in the suburbs the station spacing is almost like a commuter train some stops over 2 km apart, but there are fewer of those so they can't really impact the overall speed of these subway networks.

Chadillaccc · #**5011** Posted **Sep 21, 2014, 11:51 PM**

The average spacing of Calgary's stations is 1.3 kilometers, not much more than Toronto and Montreal's 1 kilometer, and less than Vancouver's 1.5 kilometers.

GreaterMontréal · #**5012** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 12:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

The average spacing of Calgary's stations is 1.3 kilometers, not much more than Toronto and Montreal's 1 kilometer, and less than Vancouver's 1.5 kilometers.

Montréal Métro accelerates and brakes quickly
Maximum speed of 78 km/h
Acceleration : 5.2 km/h/s or 3.2 mph/s

Allan83 · #**5013** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 12:26 AM**

There has been a lot of debate about those downtown stops in Calgary. There are only 4 or 5 of them, however, depending on the direction, and personally I would rather cut down on the walking distance and take the slight time penalty from an extra stop or two. This probably saves most people time overall, and most people aren’t riding right through downtown anyway. Maybe if I was a student coming from the NE or S and going to the UofC those downtown stops might get annoying, but I think for most people this is the better option. I understand that it does slow down the system, but moving one line to 8th should take care of that.

Metro-One · #**5014** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 1:22 AM**

Wow, it feels like many people missed the point of the original comment.

The issue is that the entire line will be as fast as the C-Train through downtown Calgary, which is pretty slow for an entire line!

ssiguy · #**5015** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 2:10 AM**

That's just like Toronto's new LRT.

Eglinton will be underground most of the way but when it comes to grade it will be maxed out at 60km/hr like the rest of the traffic with more frequent stops and lights to boot.

The TransitCity LRT like Sheppard and Finch are even worse as they can go no faster than 60km/hr and yet have stops about every 2 to 3 blocks and have to contend with all traffic lights. Having their own ROW certainly will make the service more predictable but still slow.

The problem with this "great city building" crap that results in these new slow lines is that the people who imagine them are urban utopians and green freaks who all live in some trendy area downtown. In other words they wouldn't know a commute if they saw it. They are only slightly cheaper than true LRT are usually a bit quicker to build and can be opened in smaller segments..........in other words, the politicians get to do some ribbon cutting during their tenure and milk it for all it's worth in the next election.

Rapid transit is suppose to be precisely that, rapid. These people that think they everyone just wants to meander all the roads for an hour because they have nothing better to do is fallacy but then again the urban policy wonks who come up with this stuff usually can walk to work and god knows the politicians will never use the lines but will preach how everyone else should.

Cities are already served with local service by these new technology vehicles that are now on the market, they're called buses. If the goal is to simply better serve local areas then a BRT-lite system is fine with ROW. Same speed and capacity as these slow moving "LRT" lines but cost a fraction as much and can be up and running in 3 months with some basic shelters and a can of paint.

caltrane74 · #**5016** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 2:38 AM**

Well Express buses basically cover what you are looking for, almost zero start up cost, especially when travelling on existing bus only lane/car pool lane/ or highway shoulder.

Mikemike · #**5017** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 3:10 AM**

Edmonton's new line won't actually be that bad. It will have a significant elevated section that will represent real times savings for people from the farther south west going downtown. It has one minor "detour" from what I would consider the ideal route, and stop spacing really isn't that bad, especially considering that this end of the line is unlikely to ever be significantly extended. The slightly slower speed isn't a huge deal when the trip isn't too long.

There are one or two level crossings that really should be grade separations, but while the LRT will share lights with traffic it is supposed to have 100% priority, and since most of the streets it will use will be reduced to one lane each way with no turn bays they will not travel fast: LRT will still be competitive.

Downtown won't be perfect either, but isn't bad/slow enough to be called a streetcar.

The planned west extension will be much worse.

Chadillaccc · #**5018** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 4:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Wow, it feels like many people missed the point of the original comment.

The issue is that the entire line will be as fast as the C-Train through downtown Calgary, which is pretty slow for an entire line!

Yes, I missed that point and started that tangent. I apologize.

milomilo · #**5019** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 4:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

That's just like Toronto's new LRT.

Eglinton will be underground most of the way but when it comes to grade it will be maxed out at 60km/hr like the rest of the traffic with more frequent stops and lights to boot.

The TransitCity LRT like Sheppard and Finch are even worse as they can go no faster than 60km/hr and yet have stops about every 2 to 3 blocks and have to contend with all traffic lights. Having their own ROW certainly will make the service more predictable but still slow.

The problem with this "great city building" crap that results in these new slow lines is that the people who imagine them are urban utopians and green freaks who all live in some trendy area downtown. In other words they wouldn't know a commute if they saw it. They are only slightly cheaper than true LRT are usually a bit quicker to build and can be opened in smaller segments..........in other words, the politicians get to do some ribbon cutting during their tenure and milk it for all it's worth in the next election.

Rapid transit is suppose to be precisely that, rapid. These people that think they everyone just wants to meander all the roads for an hour because they have nothing better to do is fallacy but then again the urban policy wonks who come up with this stuff usually can walk to work and god knows the politicians will never use the lines but will preach how everyone else should.

Cities are already served with local service by these new technology vehicles that are now on the market, they're called buses. If the goal is to simply better serve local areas then a BRT-lite system is fine with ROW. Same speed and capacity as these slow moving "LRT" lines but cost a fraction as much and can be up and running in 3 months with some basic shelters and a can of paint.

Nice rant! I half agree, but think trams can be good in some contexts - inner city Melbourne uses them fantastically. I also don't think the reasons stated by proponents of LRT are the actual reasons it is built - it is purely because it is cheaper, as it is objectively worse at its primary purpose compared to heavy rail.

In regards to Calgary's downtown section, that is definitely not something to hold up as an example. It is awful - there are definitely too many stations and the flat crossings at each end really screw it up. It needs fixing.

milomilo · #**5020** Posted **Sep 22, 2014, 4:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

Laval Tramway

http://robertfrankmedia.blogspot.ca/2013/07/bordeleau-slams-bureau-blouins-metro.html

See, a tram network as extensive as this would be fantastic if fully built out. Trams should be seen as replacement for buses - I would far rather take a tram than a bus, mainly because they are so much easier to figure out where they will go.