The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

It might not matter to you the squarefootage of space of which usage has been spurred or not by your particular way of getting to work, but have you ever wondered why your office is where it is? Or why your grocery store is here and not there? Or why you're getting/not getting enough exercise?

There are lots of things I don't think about on a daily basis ― the mechanics of global food distribution, the workings of our sewage systems, the variable nature of the electron...― but that doesn't make them unimportant or not there. Your getting to work is inexorably tied to development patterns, even if you don't think about it.


Now on the subject of speed and nobility.

Mobility is pointless without proximity. In Anytown, USA, you'll probably be able to maintain an average speed of 70, but it will still take you longer to get to the grocery store than if you lived in the Mile-End where you'd be lucky to move faster than 15km/h. For transit, you can move faster on the GO line to Barrie than on the Bloor-Danforth, but I'll bet you my shiniest nickel that you'll get to where you need to go much quicker in Danforth. If my transit system hits 60 but moves me from nowhere to no place, it's wasted money. Hence the importance of development as an absolutely essential component of transit.

And I know this is a newfangled concept in post-war North American (though Toronto and to a lesser extent Ottawa did realise this until the 90's), but I don't think we should be looking to post-war North America for guidance on how to do transit. Remember, you can't solve a problem with the same mindset that created it.

I generally agree with you, but it is interesting that when Ottawa's O-Train was being originally planned, the comment was made about it being the nowhere to nowhere train. To a degree, it is still true today and not much new development has occurred on the line although this will change eventually. What people originally failed to understand was that it provided a useful transit link in the overall network and this transit link was much faster than existed before. So, it is possible for a nowhere to nowhere transit line to be highly useful if it saves enough people enough time. Of course, in the case of the O-Train, the nowheres were actually rapid transit stations on different lines, and central point was a university and those were the keys to success.

[Chadillaccc]

Made a future map of the Ctrain based on current plans.





Based on the current one...

[Large Cat]

Are there any plans for a C-train to Calgary airport anytime soon?

[rbt]

Originally Posted by Large Cat

Are there any plans for a C-train to Calgary airport anytime soon?

While that would be nice the current bus service is pretty good and far from crowded.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Large Cat

Are there any plans for a C-train to Calgary airport anytime soon?

Blue Line extension off Saddletowne on the Future Map goes right into the airport

[1overcosc]

Wonder who's next to the finish line in the airport service game.

Vancouver was first, Toronto's about to be second. Montreal, Calgary, and Ottawa are all planning for ones in the near future. Ottawa's is tentatively coming in 2021-ish if the Airport Authority money comes through.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Blue Line extension off Saddletowne on the Future Map goes right into the airport

Nope, that is way further north the jog back west. A spur might be built, or an automated people mover between the green line, the airport, and the blue line. The spur line would cause the perennial spur line problem of limiting frequencies beyond the spur.

Most likely there will just be the bus service, augmented by a much better bus service once airport trail is upgraded and the lights are taken off the spaghetti access to the terminal.

[caltrane74]

Hey, does the Airport line in Toronto count as a rapid transit extension for Toronto? If it does it might mean we have caught and passed Vancouver in Montreal in total trackage (km) once the line opens in the Spring. The Spadina Line extention, 3KM I believe has been delayed until late 2016 or early 2017, so when Vancouver finishes its new line it will / or may have taken the overall lead again.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Wonder who's next to the finish line in the airport service game.

Vancouver was first, Toronto's about to be second. Montreal, Calgary, and Ottawa are all planning for ones in the near future. Ottawa's is tentatively coming in 2021-ish if the Airport Authority money comes through.

I don't think Calgary's is near-term at all. The terminal is really on the wrong side of the airport; right now its a lot of track for not much marginal benefit.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Hey, does the Airport line in Toronto count as a rapid transit extension for Toronto? If it does it might mean we have caught and passed Vancouver in Montreal in total trackage (km) once the line opens in the Spring. The Spadina Line extention, 3KM I believe has been delayed until late 2016 or early 2017, so when Vancouver finishes its new line it will / or may have taken the overall lead again.

Good question. I'd say because of its high cost, it's more of a shuttle service than a rapid transit system, but that's my non-expert opinion.

My non-expert opinion as well is that GO RER lines will count as rapid transit once done, assuming they are indeed 15 minute electrified service.

[Aylmer]

Why not just a single-tracked DMU line beside/on the railway which runs beside Deerfoot Trail? Even with two or three stops on the way, you could probably build it on the cheap and provide 15-20 minute headways and a 20-minute trip from downtown Calgary to the Airport.

If Edmonton goes ahead with a new central railway station (as was planned with HSR, no?), they could do the same with Leduc airport.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Why not just a single-tracked DMU line beside/on the railway which runs beside Deerfoot Trail? Even with two or three stops on the way, you could probably build it on the cheap and provide 15-20 minute headways and a 20-minute trip from downtown Calgary to the Airport.

If Edmonton goes ahead with a new central railway station (as was planned with HSR, no?), they could do the same with Leduc airport.

It is a better plan in Calgary. The freight rail is both on the side of Deerfoot and on the main line is very well used and would require more tracks to make it work.

If high speed is done you would just share that track.

Right now the province/Edmonton has a big decision to make about maintaining the rail approach to the southside of downtown (CP is moving some of its yards out of the city). Otherwise, the approach would be a roundabout from the northeast following the LRT.

Edmonton is convinced that LRT to the airport would be better. Though it would be super slow compared to taxi or a business express. The issue hasn't really been studied in either city, and transit administration in Calgary has been slowly weaning planning away from an airport link.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Good question. I'd say because of its high cost, it's more of a shuttle service than a rapid transit system, but that's my non-expert opinion.

My non-expert opinion as well is that GO RER lines will count as rapid transit once done, assuming they are indeed 15 minute electrified service.

What does the RER stand for in GO RER?

When I think of RER I think of "Réseau express régional" in the Paris region. Is it the same idea in Toronto?

[Aylmer]

Regional Express Rail, yeah. It's a nice bilingual-able term, so we could use it if it catches on in other cities (I'm lookin' at you, Montreal)

[MalcolmTucker]

^ RER refers to the service model of all day two way, frequently enough that you don't have to plan in advance since there isn't better terminology for it.

Studies underway on whether Toronto will end up with a new tunnel or secondary stations to accommodate the extra trains - Toronto could end up with a true RER/Crossrail with its own underground stations. Or maybe someone will find a solution that solves the Union Station track crunch without major new infrastructure (but I doubt it).

[ciudad_del_norte]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It is a better plan in Calgary. The freight rail is both on the side of Deerfoot and on the main line is very well used and would require more tracks to make it work.

If high speed is done you would just share that track.

Right now the province/Edmonton has a big decision to make about maintaining the rail approach to the southside of downtown (CP is moving some of its yards out of the city). Otherwise, the approach would be a roundabout from the northeast following the LRT.

Edmonton is convinced that LRT to the airport would be better. Though it would be super slow compared to taxi or a business express. The issue hasn't really been studied in either city, and transit administration in Calgary has been slowly weaning planning away from an airport link.

Really? My understanding was that from an LRT network planning perspective there isn't really any intention, desire, or interest to have LRT to the airport in any planning horizon. The distance to cover and volumes just aren't there. Maybe if the annexation goes ahead it would eventually make into the plans...

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by Acajack

What does the RER stand for in GO RER?

When I think of RER I think of "Réseau express régional" in the Paris region. Is it the same idea in Toronto?

The RER thing is something Glen Murray came up with. I think it start off with him just comparing it to the Paris RER network, but the name sort of stuck. Hes a bit of a character, and often releases unannounced policy on twitter.. but he gets stuff done. He got switched onto the environment folder after the election and now Ontario is set to announce its new carbon tax in the spring budget.

He was the one who pushed through on HSR as well.

Edmonton's airport is way too far out of town for an LRT connection.. you either need some sort of dedicated heavy rail connection like Toronto is getting or just run express buses on the highway.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

It is a better plan in Calgary. The freight rail is both on the side of Deerfoot and on the main line is very well used and would require more tracks to make it work.

If high speed is done you would just share that track.

Right now the province/Edmonton has a big decision to make about maintaining the rail approach to the southside of downtown (CP is moving some of its yards out of the city). Otherwise, the approach would be a roundabout from the northeast following the LRT.

Edmonton is convinced that LRT to the airport would be better. Though it would be super slow compared to taxi or a business express. The issue hasn't really been studied in either city, and transit administration in Calgary has been slowly weaning planning away from an airport link.

Do you know if there's a time of day when the 300 is busy? Its my go-to airport transport, but its usually pretty empty (which is why they can't justify better than half-hour frequencies).

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by VIce

I don't think Calgary's is near-term at all. The terminal is really on the wrong side of the airport; right now its a lot of track for not much marginal benefit.

The spur line/people mover from the Blue line would end up being about 5km of track from the terminal to the connection to the Blue line.

I'd argue that at least one intermediate station should be allowed for if the money was going to be spent.

The only way I see it making financial sense, is to connect the NE (blue) line, through the terminal, continuing past Deerfoot to the future HSR station, and across to the future North Central (Green) line. This would be about 9km of track, and I would put in 4 stations between the transfer stations at the NE and NC lines (Counting the airport terminal as one, and the HSR station as one).

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The RER thing is something Glen Murray came up with. I think it start off with him just comparing it to the Paris RER network, but the name sort of stuck. Hes a bit of a character, and often releases unannounced policy on twitter.. but he gets stuff done. He got switched onto the environment folder after the election and now Ontario is set to announce its new carbon tax in the spring budget.

He was the one who pushed through on HSR as well.

Glen Murray was/is a loose cannon. He made promises everyone knows can't be kept, like promising 320 km/h HSR in 10 years (now 9 years). I remember that another Liberal MPP in Guelph had to calm down her constituents who feared that their neighbourhoods would have to be sliced in half to accommodate the rather wide ROW that a HSR demands.

Thanks to his big mouth, it was inevitable that he would get sacked from the Ministry of Infrastructure and land a job in the far less important MOECC. I would not call him a man who "gets stuff done".