The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by FrAnKs

I have no idea!...but we have to start somewhere. We practically start from scratch here. I mean, rather than buses, we don't really have a serious & solid transit system network and I see this as the Phase 1 of larger project.

There are pros and cons for going to D'Estimeauville rather than Charlesbourg.

They are actually building in D'Estimeauville a rather dense ''Eco-Neighbourhood'' (French : Écoquartier) and between Pôle St-Roch, there is also l'Enfant-Jésus, Québec City's Mega-Hospital. The eastern part of Limoilou just east of Pôle St-Roch is also a densely populated area made of Pre-war buildings which also has an important College which is Cégep Limoilou.

Thanks for the context. In that case, I'd say D'Estimauville sounds like it's well suited for higher order transit. I was confused because I remember the CAQ pushing QC back to the drawing board over a lack of service to the suburbs in the original plan, which this change doesn't seem to address. Seems to actually be doing the opposite.

Like you said, QC just needs to get shovels in the ground at this point before they're forced back to square one again.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Well, the Estimauville area is represented by Sol Zanetti of Québec solidaire, and he only beat the CAQ by a hair...

Ahh that makes more sense now. I'm not all that familiar with the Quebec political situation, but I figured it had to be related to a seat flip.

[FrAnKs]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Thanks for the context. In that case, I'd say D'Estimauville sounds like it's well suited for higher order transit. I was confused because I remember the CAQ pushing QC back to the drawing board over a lack of service to the suburbs in the original plan, which this change doesn't seem to address. Seems to actually be doing the opposite.

Like you said, QC just needs to get shovels in the ground at this point before they're forced back to square one again.

Yes, because Politics you know...to more you wait, to more it's dangerous for any major project. The problem is, there are so much need in the city, but we have a limited budget, so we have to make choices for Phase I and obviously, some people will be happy and others will be dissapointed. I'm still looking forward for Phase II!

Where you from?

[Hybrid247]

Ya, can't expect everyone to be happy with the first phase. As long as phase I is planned and designed to facilitate future extensions, that's what's most important.

I'm from Ottawa.

[FrAnKs]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Ya, can't expect everyone to be happy with the first phase. As long as phase I is planned and designed to facilitate future extensions, that's what's most important.

I'm from Ottawa.

Ottawa is awesome. When I moved away from my hometown Montréal in 2011, Ottawa-Gatineau was my second choice. A decade later, I can say that I am still happy with my choice

[Reecemartin]

I think this piece might be appreciated by some here since we often talk about trolleybus nostalgia!

• Video Link

[foolworm]

Onwards and forwards.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/...ment-francois-legault-labeaume-1.5954776

[FrAnKs]

Originally Posted by foolworm

Onwards and forwards.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/...ment-francois-legault-labeaume-1.5954776

Quebec City tramway is one step closer to becoming a reality

Mayor reaches verbal agreement with Premier to move ahead with $3.3B project
Julia Page · CBC News · Posted: Mar 18, 2021 12:59 PM ET | Last Updated: 44 minutes ago

Mayor Régis Labeaume says many elements already included in Quebec City's tramway project won't need to be revised, including plans for de la Couronne street, pictured here. (Ville de Québec)

Citizen and environmental groups in Quebec City are applauding a new deal that will finally allow a tramway project to move ahead.

Premier François Legault met with Mayor Régis Labeaume on Wednesday to discuss whether both levels of government could agree on the route the tramway will take, as well as how the new mass transit network could better serve citizens in the northern suburbs.

Labeaume, who has spent much of his career campaigning for the $3.3-billion project, left the meeting saying the Premier had given him his word.

"And he has mine," Labeaume said.

A compromise between both men seemed unlikely just a few weeks ago. In January, several CAQ MNAs started publicly questioning whether the tramway would meet the needs of residents in the suburbs.

Last month, Premier Legault said Labeaume was being unco-operative about suggestions for changes to the tramway's layout — a comment the mayor didn't take well.

New design for Quebec City tramway makes way for larger sidewalks, more parks
Province's environmental review board rejects Quebec City's proposed tramway
But both governments seemed to have found a middle ground.

"We now agree on the outline of the new tramway route and the services needed for the suburbs — we hope to make an announcement soon," Legault tweeted after the meeting.

New layout
The tramway will no longer go north to Charlesbourg. Instead it will go further east to D'Estimauville, a neighbourhood the city has been trying to breathe new life into in recent years.

To make up for the service lost in Charlesbourg, the province is expected to add reserved bus lanes on highways running north to reach the suburbs of the Haute-Saint-Charles.

That's still a gamble, according to Quebec Solidaire MNA Sol Zanetti, because the CAQ has often voted against reserved bus lanes.

"I'm worried the government will be the one managing service to the suburbs," Zanetti said. "It makes me fear the CAQ's political intervention, and that is meddling."

Nonetheless, after years of back-and-forth, many are satisfied to finally see concrete steps being taken.

City opposition councillor Jean Rousseau said the changes Labeaume agreed to were necessary.


"Places further north deserve to have better service, and that was part of the complaints from many MNAs," said Rousseau.

"This is a win-win situation for the government and citizens — it's great news."

First step toward larger investment
Accès Transport Viables, that promotes active and public transportation in Quebec City, views the Labeaume-Legault agreement as a first step in a much larger revamp of the city's public transit network.

"The fact that we'll be able to launch construction of the backbone of what will become a much larger sustainable transit network is excellent news," said director Étienne Grandmont.

The organization J'ai Ma Passe was created to show citizens' support for the tramway, amidst ongoing criticism from groups opposed to the project.

With 20,000 members, J'ai Ma Passe organized a rally on Wednesday to celebrate the governments' agreement.

Director Angèle Pineau-Lemieux said the last-minute changes that nearly jeopardized the project "proved that a single investment is not enough to answer all the mobility needs in the city."

"There are going to be necessary other phases, other routes added later on so we can offer more mobility alternatives."

The provincial government will still have to adopt a decree before being able to call for tenders and begin construction.

Quebec has so far promised an $1.8-billion investment. Ottawa is also pitching in $1.2 billion, and Quebec City another $300 million.

[J.OT13]

Interview on West Gatineau Tram proposal.

Originally Posted by sseguin

• Video Link

West-End Gatineau Tram - Interview with Myriam Nadeau, President of the STO - March 2021

In this March 2021 interview with Myriam Nadeau, City Councillor for Pointe Gatineau and President of the STO, we discuss the West-End tram for Gatineau and answer the following questions:

-How a decision was made to pursue building a Tram/LRT in Gatineau.
-The advantages that the Tram/LRT will bring to commuters and citizens of Gatineau and in particular to those residing in the Plateau and Aylmer.
-The currently proposed routing options.
-The options for entry into Ottawa via the Portage Bridge: Surface on Wellington / Underground beneath Sparks.
-The timelines: work that has been completed, the next steps, and when might we see the first passengers ride this new transit service.
-How citizens can get involved during consultations, as well as providing feedback and support.

[Doady]

I've always preferred "tramway" (a la "busway") instead "light rail transit" (trams/streetcars are a form of light rail and a form of transit). It's funny that Quebec City uses more sensible English terms than the rest of the continent.

I mean, I can understand cities that got rid of their old streetcar systems using "LRT", but Toronto? Toronto not only still has a streetcar system, now with modern LRVs that have a very similar design to other modern LRVs, some of those streetcar lines operating in their own ROWs just like modern LRT. The lines are already blurred to separate "streetcar" and "LRT" here just doesn't make sense to me. The LRVs in Toronto are known as "streetcars", that is the brand for light rail here, so the newer light rail lines should be "streetcar subway" or "streetcar rapid transit" (a la "bus rapid transit") or something like that.

[Andy6]

Originally Posted by Doady

I've always preferred "tramway" (a la "busway") instead "light rail transit" (trams/streetcars are a form of light rail and a form of transit). It's funny that Quebec City uses more sensible English terms than the rest of the continent.

I mean, I can understand cities that got rid of their old streetcar systems using "LRT", but Toronto? Toronto not only still has a streetcar system, now with modern LRVs that have a very similar design to other modern LRVs, some of those streetcar lines operating in their own ROWs just like modern LRT. The lines are already blurred to separate "streetcar" and "LRT" here just doesn't make sense to me. The LRVs in Toronto are known as "streetcars", that is the brand for light rail here, so the newer light rail lines should be "streetcar subway" or "streetcar rapid transit" (a la "bus rapid transit") or something like that.

I thought that "le tramway" is the usual French term. Many people don't really associate streetcars in Toronto with speed. "Streetcar subway" would make me think of a streetcar lurching and creaking through a subway tunnel at 15 mph. It's also kind of contradictory as it would not in that case be on the "street" (although I suppose a lot of our "subway" isn't "sub" anything other than the sky).

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I think this piece might be appreciated by some here since we often talk about trolleybus nostalgia!

• Video Link

Trolleybuses certainly had their place but are now yesterday's technology.

Vancouver has many and with good reason. The routes that use trolleybuses are overwhelmingly ones that have very steep grades. Trolleybuses are necessary as diesel buses would have been far too slow and belch out even more pollution. Streetcars, besides the huge initial infrastructure costs, would also not be able to negotiate Vancouver hills. Trolleys also offer a much quieter ride than diesels for the passengers and less noise pollution for the community in general.

The drawbacks is that they are painfully slow around corners, often become disconnected to the wires when turning corners, and can cause a back-up if there is a problem or bunching much like streetcars. The wires also require a lot of maintenance and there are few manufacturers.

Today with zero emissions electric and hydrogen buses you will definitely see a slow phase out of trolleybuses as their raison d'etre erodes.

[Reecemartin]

A video on how Translink can keep it's position as the best regional transit system in Canada: https://youtu.be/xjuCENuIKYs

Lots of ideas here that other cities should "steal" - reliable high quality highway bus services, great farecard integration, increased bus electrification etc.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

A video on how Translink can keep it's position as the best regional transit system in Canada: https://youtu.be/xjuCENuIKYs

Lots of ideas here that other cities should "steal" - reliable high quality highway bus services, great farecard integration, increased bus electrification etc.

No WCE expansion off the existing line?
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1RuRfK5O50ayec5Zp5nF1k-5MSUo&usp=sharing

If you want to releive the Expo line, doing so with a WCE expanded system would be the way to go. Toronto and Montreal have shown proof of that.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

A video on how Translink can keep it's position as the best regional transit system in Canada: https://youtu.be/xjuCENuIKYs

Lots of ideas here that other cities should "steal" - reliable high quality highway bus services, great farecard integration, increased bus electrification etc.

Vancouver has done an excellent job of expanding it's rapid transit network, highway buses, and a logical fare-zone system that enhances cross boundary transit and one that Toronto should emulate.

I think the biggest problem Vancouver will face is the lack of truly regional and suburban rail. Vancouver sprawls endlessly into the valley and Abbotsford is becoming a defacto outer suburb as people try to escape Vancouver's outrageous real estate prices.

The WCE should be an all day service but it does have some drawbacks. Negotiating with CP will be no easy task, the route is very slow and curvy, and it can have no stops between Port Moddy and downtown although one at Commercial is both needed and doable to take it away from being just a downtown express.

The one route that I would put much higher priority on than WCE is a a Fraser Valley suburban line. The rail line could go from Waterfront to Surrey with stops at Broadway, Sapperton to connect with the Mill line, Scott Road for Surrey connections and then follow it's route to Newton to Cloverdale and Langley.

Expanding the SkyTrain forever into the Valley is a an expensive option for diminishing returns as the population begins to greatly sprawl and the commutes, even with SkyTrain simply become too long.

[hipster duck]

I don't think Vancouver is well-suited for regional or even commuter rail. There really are only a handful of rail lines, and all of them are circuitous and almost comically miss any and all important trip generators. Most of them are hidden in valleys or along the coast but behind a mountain in places where nobody lives or works.

[ssiguy]

Connections to the Valley are imperative and at this point, quite poor.

There is a way to do it which would actually be 'relatively' cheap, more convenient for many people, would serve many more people, could be used for far out commuters like Abbot/Chill, and get rid of many transfers.................a Vancouver BRT highway-type commuter route.

One of the reasons why Vancouver City does not true BRT or commuter bus services into the City is the city's crushing traffic and no highways for HOV. There is however a corridor that can be used for such a route.............the one that runs under the current Mill line thru Vancouver.

Using the excellent HWY 1 HOV and bus entry/exit system, different commuter bus routes to Surrey/Langley/Abbotsford/Chilliwack could serve their communities to connections to the HOV lanes and then all head towards the City. At bus only/exit entry at Braid would allow a stop for transfer to NW,COQ,SFU, and Metrotown.

Once leaving Braid they would get back onto the HOV and head to Lougheed/12th and the follow the a Bus-only route along the rail corridor to Commerical/Broadway and then again using the rail corridor head north to Waterfront station using a combo of rail corridor, some small elevated portions where the corridor is too thin, and low-traffic port access roads taking them downtown and with connections to Seabus.

This slim corridor along the railway tracks that could be used for BRT highway and, if done right, it's one that could greatly improve connectivity to the City from the suburbs and relieve traffic on the Expo line. By having 7 or 8 all-day {and many more in rush hour} routes serving the corridor the would bring very fast transit to downtown Vancouver from the Valley. Such routes would be Guilford/Surrey, HWY 15/Cloverdale, 200th/Langley, HWY 13/Aldergrove, and routes coming in from Abbotsford and Chilliwack as well.

[casper]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't think Vancouver is well-suited for regional or even commuter rail. There really are only a handful of rail lines, and all of them are circuitous and almost comically miss any and all important trip generators. Most of them are hidden in valleys or along the coast but behind a mountain in places where nobody lives or works.

When the provincial government entered into the deal with CN to talk over BC Rail they retained the right to run passenger service on the interurban lines BC Rail had owned. Translink should make full use of this for less frequent service. This can be done at fairly low cost.

First thing to do it get rid of the premium charges for the Westcoast Express potentially replacing with additional zone boundaries that is goes through.

Here is the old inter-urban (owned by BC Rail or others): http://maps.nicholsonroad.com/bcer/

A number of these lines make a lot of sense. Run commuter rail up to Whistler from the Seabus terminal in North Vancouver. That hits Squamish etc. The back-haul traffic on empty trains during the day would be of interest to those playing tourist.

The streetcar along arbutus should be continued along the Fraser River and interest with one of the Expo Line stations such as Edmonds. Again it is using existing corridors.

The old Surrey-Fraser Valley line could become a low frequency half hour service.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

I don't think Vancouver is well-suited for regional or even commuter rail. There really are only a handful of rail lines, and all of them are circuitous and almost comically miss any and all important trip generators. Most of them are hidden in valleys or along the coast but behind a mountain in places where nobody lives or works.

Not well suited at all - the upgrades necessary to provide good service would be very expensive for little benefit. There's no point using rail lines if they, as you say, don't follow a logical route. In some places they do, because they were where the settlements followed, but that isn't a major pattern around Vancouver.

But conversely it is well suited for purpose built, high quality rapid transit lines, exactly the sort which they have methodically built over the years and continue to do so. Hopefully by the time (ideally before) the Broadway line is built they have something else lined up.

[Nouvellecosse]

Well "very expensive" is a relative term. The necessary upgrades to the rail corridors may be expensive compared to cities who have corridors just sitting there waiting for a few basic stops to be built to allow passenger trains to be run on them, but may be very cheap compared to rapid transit routes. There's need for a careful comparison of the service quality and additional passenger kms of service provided relative to the extra cost.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Andy6

I thought that "le tramway" is the usual French term. Many people don't really associate streetcars in Toronto with speed. "Streetcar subway" would make me think of a streetcar lurching and creaking through a subway tunnel at 15 mph. It's also kind of contradictory as it would not in that case be on the "street" (although I suppose a lot of our "subway" isn't "sub" anything other than the sky).

Yes "tramway" is the term that we use in French.

While technically "tram" (British and Commonwealth) and "streetcar" (American) mean the same thing in English, in French the word doesn't evoke the situation you describe in Toronto.

I think that's because most tram(way)s in France are modern as opposed to legacy systems and therefore they operate in their own guideways ("en site propre" as they say) so they're not as mixed in with traffic.

That's what people in Quebec City have in mind.