The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[biguc]

Originally Posted by casper

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.

Thanks for sharing that. This honestly looks like a better transit system than Vancouver currently has. And it should soundly refute the idea that regional rail wouldn't work in the Lower Mainland. It wouldn't have to be expensive, either: a few used diesel trains, some platforms, and an agreement with CP/CN and you're running trains to Langley/Abbotsford for a fraction of the cost of the Skytrain to nowhere.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by biguc

Thanks for sharing that. This honestly looks like a better transit system than Vancouver currently has. And it should soundly refute the idea that regional rail wouldn't work in the Lower Mainland.

That system is categorically worse than what Vancouver has now.

Most of the main interurban lines are duplicated by far superior skytrain service. Nobody was being whisked from downtown to New West in 20 minutes every 2 minutes like they are now.

Also, interurban trains are not the same as regional rail. The grades, curvature, grade crossings and stops (shelters, really) would not be able to be upgraded to a heavy rail standard without spending significant amounts of money - pretty much building a new line from scratch.

I guess you could buy special small vehicles and run them at low speeds, but that's still a big investment and at that point you're not getting any value over the existing system of frequent buses and express buses, especially when you consider that a lot of the non-skytrain-duplicated interurban lines don't run anywhere near any trip generators.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by 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.

You don't have to do too much work to look at the railways in Vancouver to see they don't actually go anywhere very useful in a convenient way, as hipster duck says they almost go out of their way to avoid destinations. And if WCE is already capacity constrained, that means there is no room to expand without adding track, downtown, in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

Vancouver shouldn't build Skytrains to nowhere, but there are plenty of somewheres which would be well served by new build transit, and where demand doesn't justify rail can get frequent buses. I think it's hard to credibly say that Translink is making a mistake when they have little interest in expanding heavy rail.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

That system is categorically worse than what Vancouver has now.

Most of the main interurban lines are duplicated by far superior skytrain service. Nobody was being whisked from downtown to New West in 20 minutes every 2 minutes like they are now.

And nobody can take a tram down Main street now, or a train to Langley or Abbotsford. This system clearly has far better coverage than the current system. Sure, it probably wasn't as fast, but speed isn't nearly as important as coverage in a transit system.

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Also, interurban trains are not the same as regional rail. The grades, curvature, grade crossings and stops (shelters, really) would not be able to be upgraded to a heavy rail standard without spending significant amounts of money - pretty much building a new line from scratch.

I guess you could buy special small vehicles and run them at low speeds, but that's still a big investment and at that point you're not getting any value over the existing system of frequent buses and express buses, especially when you consider that a lot of the non-skytrain-duplicated interurban lines don't run anywhere near any trip generators.

I feel like you're in an alternate dimension where the interurban lines don't run through central Abbottsford and Langley, through Surrey, and the exact same places the Skytrain goes. If Vancouver's rail lines don't go anywhere, neither does the Skytrain.

What "trip generators" was GO built to serve? By and large the service just runs to sprawly, generic suburbia--the service was created to relieve highway capacity. It's succeeded and grown, to the point where it's a catalyst for development.

Outside Canada it's normal for metro and regional rail lines to share corridors. Skytrain is light-metro; pressing it into intercity service is a costly mistake when a diesel train following the same ROW, on tracks that already exist, (and even stopping at, say, Braid and Sperling for transfers to Skytrain) would provide the level of service actually called for at a far lower price.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by biguc

And nobody can take a tram down Main street now, or a train to Langley or Abbotsford. This system clearly has far better coverage than the current system. Sure, it probably wasn't as fast, but speed isn't nearly as important as coverage in a transit system.

There's an articulated trolleybus that runs up and down Main St. every 5 minutes that serves its transit purposes perfectly fine. I'm willing to bet it transports more passengers faster and more frequently than the streetcar line it replaced 70 years ago. If that's not good enough, the Canada Line is 800 meters away.

I would disagree with coverage being worse, or coverage being more important than speed. The coverage nowadays is better, it's just done with buses. The speed is better too, but nowadays you have to compete with cars so an interurban lumbering along at 30 km/h is not going to cut it.

I think a system where you blanket the region with frequent, low cost bus coverage connecting to a rapid transit network that delivers high capacity and high speed is the best system to have in a major metropolitan region. In that case, you want the rail rapid transit system to move with some speed. Vancouver isn't quite there yet, but it's doing a pretty good job in that regard. Better than almost any North American region, and better than a lot of European ones if I can be frank.

I feel like you're in an alternate dimension where the interurban lines don't run through central Abbottsford and Langley, through Surrey, and the exact same places the Skytrain goes. If Vancouver's rail lines don't go anywhere, neither does the Skytrain.

What's in downtown Langley or Abbotsford? Those places are hardly trip generators within their own communities. That might be another problem, but it's not something we should solve with regional rail.

Also, skytrain does hit the trip generators, mostly because the trip generators have moved near the Skytrain stations. Again, I don't think that this would naturally happen if we just resurrected the interurban network, because Skytrain offers capacity, speed and frequency improvements that a tram line running 60 km at 30 km/h wouldn't.

What "trip generators" was GO built to serve? By and large the service just runs to sprawly, generic suburbia--the service was created to relieve highway capacity. It's succeeded and grown, to the point where it's a catalyst for development.

I never brought up GO transit.

FTR, I don't think GO-RER will be the smashing success that it is in, say, Paris, because I think that in North America, historically, heavy rail lines were used to carrry freight and therefore run mostly in industrial corridors that not many people want to live in, nor do they want to site offices, hospitals and schools there. However, I think that Toronto has much more opportunity to use regional rail than Vancouver, since the rail lines are, for the most part, straight, built to mainline standards, and there's already quite a bit of work already done in terms of grade separation, double-tracking, signalization and station infrastructure. The fruit doesn't hang low, but it's much lower hanging than in Vancouver.

Outside Canada it's normal for metro and regional rail lines to share corridors. Skytrain is light-metro; pressing it into intercity service is a costly mistake when a diesel train following the same ROW, on tracks that already exist, (and even stopping at, say, Braid and Sperling for transfers to Skytrain) would provide the level of service actually called for at a far lower price.

Again, Skytrain technology allows it to navigate the deficiencies of the old Interurban ROWs - like steep gradients, narrow ROW and track curvatures - while also being able to be completely grade separated and to veer off the old Interurban paths to serve places people actually want to travel to. Beyond the routes that the existing Skytrain serves, most rail lines in Vancouver don't go where people want to go, and don't have much development potential either.

[biguc]

I brought up GO because a lot of what you say about Vancouver also applies in Toronto. So, is your larger point that Canadian cities shouldn't bother with regional rail? That the Lower Mainland doesn't have terrible transit?

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by milomilo

You don't have to do too much work to look at the railways in Vancouver to see they don't actually go anywhere very useful in a convenient way, as hipster duck says they almost go out of their way to avoid destinations. And if WCE is already capacity constrained, that means there is no room to expand without adding track, downtown, in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

Vancouver shouldn't build Skytrains to nowhere, but there are plenty of somewheres which would be well served by new build transit, and where demand doesn't justify rail can get frequent buses. I think it's hard to credibly say that Translink is making a mistake when they have little interest in expanding heavy rail.

To be clear, in the video Reece posted he just argues for a DMU service between Coquitlam or Moody Centre to points further east (perhaps to the current terminus at Mission) arguing that while track capacity is restrained going into downtown, there is excess capacity in the eastern part of the corridor. I assume passengers would transfer to Skytrain if heading further west. He draws a comparison to Trillium line in Ottawa, though a better one might be Portland WES.

But really, I try to be careful when talking about mainline regional rail in terms of judging how much we should invest. These routes often provide a lot of service by transporting smaller numbers of people long distances rather than having a large total number of passengers as with more urban/local service. Therefore, stops don't need to be in locations that are as useful or convenient to the majority of people (compared to rapid transit) to justify expanded service. The longer the distance a rider is traveling, the more important speed becomes and the less important convenience of access (station location and frequency) become. People are more willing to go out of their way or wait longer for a long distance express service because it still may significantly reduce total travel time compared to more conventional transit.

Thinking about the amount of service provided, the current (pre-pandemic) WCE service has ridership of over 10k per weekday (similar to Halifax's busiest bus route #1 which runs every 10 min all day) despite only making 5 trips per direction. With a route 69km long, even if the average rider is only going 1/2 that distance it is still providing over 6x more transportation in terms of passenger km than the #1 bus if every bus trip averaged half its 10km length. And if you added all day, 7 day/week service the WCE ridership could easily double or even triple. That's definitely worth some investment. How much is the only question.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by biguc

So, is your larger point that Canadian cities shouldn't bother with regional rail?

Yes, I honestly think that only Toronto should bother building regional rail right now. That's not because Montreal and Vancouver, let alone the smaller cities, don't have the demand for regional rail, but because existing rail lines don't really go where people want to go or need to go, and the rail lines themselves are very primitive and would need a substantial amount of work just to be made into functional transit.

Montreal is doing the right thing with REM. I think getting the Exo lines up to S-bahn standard would be such a Herculean endeavour that they might as well build a parallel automated system from scratch that diverts from the rail rights of way to actually serve destinations.

Even in Toronto where the rail lines kind of follow natural commuting corridors, the amount of work Metrolinx has had to do to turn GO into an RER has taken over a decade and will take another decade still. They've had to grade separate intersections, build new stations, build new track, add switches, completely reconfigure the entrance into Union Station, rebuild Union Station, add a new signal system, add layover facilities, build entirely new maintenance facilities...and that's all before even contemplating electrification and buying an entirely new fleet of trains.

I think too many people look at our single track, jointed freight rail lines and think that all we need to do is buy some new trains and we can have S-bahns running around our cities. That's not the case.

That the Lower Mainland doesn't have terrible transit?

The Lower Mainland has decent transit, especially given the fact that it has to serve an area that was built for the car. I wouldn't characterize it as "terrible" at all.

It's not world-beating like Singapore or Zurich, but those cities made conscious choices over most of their modern history to orient all of their urban growth and major trip generators around transit. Nor is it one of those cities where they are resting on the laurels of past generations like New York. Vancouver didn't even think about transit or transit-oriented development until about 1983 when it had over 1.5 million people, mostly in car-oriented suburbia.

I am critical about Greater Vancouver's transportation system as a whole, but I don't place too much of that blame on Translink.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

That system is categorically worse than what Vancouver has now.

Most of the main interurban lines are duplicated by far superior skytrain service. Nobody was being whisked from downtown to New West in 20 minutes every 2 minutes like they are now.

Also, interurban trains are not the same as regional rail. The grades, curvature, grade crossings and stops (shelters, really) would not be able to be upgraded to a heavy rail standard without spending significant amounts of money - pretty much building a new line from scratch.

I guess you could buy special small vehicles and run them at low speeds, but that's still a big investment and at that point you're not getting any value over the existing system of frequent buses and express buses, especially when you consider that a lot of the non-skytrain-duplicated interurban lines don't run anywhere near any trip generators.

Then lets get rid of all express style buses. What is needed for the Expo line is an express route. The old Interurban routes as well as existing rail lines that intersect with some of the stations is perfect for it. The WCE is a sad state that really hasn't expanded beyond it's original implementation. Add midday trips between Waterfront and Moody Centre. All of a sudden, traffic would be down slightly on the Skytrain as people may ride to Moody Centre to get downtown faster. Using the Pacific Central station as another hub might work well as well so that other lines could be better for the Skytrain. Upgrading the ROW and infrastructure along the route makes perfect sense if it is to be implemented.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by biguc

And nobody can take a tram down Main street now, or a train to Langley or Abbotsford. This system clearly has far better coverage than the current system. Sure, it probably wasn't as fast, but speed isn't nearly as important as coverage in a transit system.

True. I agree that the coverage was better. It was predated (as opposed to outdated) and I honestly don't blame the city developers way back when for not prioritizing transit during the golden age of the cars. Canada is actually quite lucky that the TTC streetcar system is still operating.

And you may just want to hold your breath on Langley. Skytrain is-a-coming to Langley in the nearish future .

Originally Posted by biguc

Skytrain is light-metro; pressing it into intercity service is a costly mistake when a diesel train following the same ROW, on tracks that already exist, (and even stopping at, say, Braid and Sperling for transfers to Skytrain) would provide the level of service actually called for at a far lower price.

That diesel train requires a driver which now drives up the operating costs though.

I think that Metro Vancouver will freak out over any rapid transit system that uses diesel. And I actually think that they have a point since electrified versions of Ottawa's O-train could certainly be implemented as a technological choice for interurban rail.

But yeah, you are right in that the demands for interurban rail in the Lower Mainland are low at the moment. And I don't imagine that we will see any demands for an improved WCE until the Lower Mainland starts spreading (properly) deep into Langley, Abbotsford and beyond.

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Yes, I honestly think that only Toronto should bother building regional rail right now. That's not because Montreal and Vancouver, let alone the smaller cities, don't have the demand for regional rail, but because existing rail lines don't really go where people want to go or need to go, and the rail lines themselves are very primitive and would need a substantial amount of work just to be made into functional transit.

I think that the big point to walk away with here is that just because it works for one city, doesn't mean that the exact same model should be cloned in the Lower Mainland.

The Go train system, IMO, actually works well for Toronto because it's a very widespread city geographically (and even more so if you include the entire Golden horseshoe). The lower mainland and the Fraser valley are geopolitically much denser so long distance regional rail isn't something that the region desperately needs right now. Especially considering that most commute trips made South of the Fraser river have a final destination in Surrey.

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Montreal is doing the right thing with REM. I think getting the Exo lines up to S-bahn standard would be such a Herculean endeavour that they might as well build a parallel automated system from scratch that diverts from the rail rights of way to actually serve destinations.

Maybe I just don't know much about the S-bahn but I'm not sure where you are heading with this comparison, tbh. I will say that the Expo line has a lot of room to grow and optimize before it is deemed to be at capacity. I just can't find the link .

I do agree that more long term relief strategies for the Expo line should be in place though with the land set aside. Montreal's REM, when fully built out, will be the envy of Canada.

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Even in Toronto where the rail lines kind of follow natural commuting corridors, the amount of work Metrolinx has had to do to turn GO into an RER has taken over a decade and will take another decade still. They've had to grade separate intersections, build new stations, build new track, add switches, completely reconfigure the entrance into Union Station, rebuild Union Station, add a new signal system, add layover facilities, build entirely new maintenance facilities...and that's all before even contemplating electrification and buying an entirely new fleet of trains.

I agree that Vancouver shouldn't copy + paste the exact same technology that Toronto used/uses for its Go Train and RER system. When metro Vancouver is ready to invest in a long distance commuter train system, it should seek to implement an updated next-gen technology solution; whether that comes in the form of more automated heavier trains or just electrified heavier trains. The GO RER transition is good to watch to learn how converting, later on, is actually a big pain in the ass. Better off to get it right the first time.

For Metro Vancouver, there is no low hanging fruit for an interurban rail system. And there is no demand for it. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't reserve space for it and work towards a system little-by-little but it's a hard sell to the people of the region and to the politicians that want to cut the tape.

For the record: yes, I do believe that when Skytrain gets to Langley, or even after the Skytrain hopefully gets extended to PoCo sometime after; that we need to create a stronger regional rail spine to support the growth of the region. There comes a point where the distance gets so long that it actually makes driving a private vehicle more appealing than taking transit; which I feel is why Toronto's Go-Train system is successful in the region.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

The Lower Mainland has decent transit, especially given the fact that it has to serve an area that was built for the car. I wouldn't characterize it as "terrible" at all.

One problem in metro Vancouver is that a lot of the prime transit spots have not been allowed to grow organically. Commercial Drive is the best example of this but there are probably a dozen stations like it. Even the brand new stuff near King Edward station is in the 4-6 floor range (and looks like real estate bubble investor class construction rather than construction for people who rely on transit). Renfrew and Rupert are houses and strip malls and those stations are around 20 years old now. Nanaimo is I believe an original Expo 86 station which is about a 10 minute ride from downtown, and it is still detached houses plus some small older apartments. If Vancouver had reasonable land use rules, it would have had better transit coverage even with the current system.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

Yes, I honestly think that only Toronto should bother building regional rail right now. That's not because Montreal and Vancouver, let alone the smaller cities, don't have the demand for regional rail, but because existing rail lines don't really go where people want to go or need to go, and the rail lines themselves are very primitive and would need a substantial amount of work just to be made into functional transit.

Montreal is doing the right thing with REM. I think getting the Exo lines up to S-bahn standard would be such a Herculean endeavour that they might as well build a parallel automated system from scratch that diverts from the rail rights of way to actually serve destinations.

Even in Toronto where the rail lines kind of follow natural commuting corridors, the amount of work Metrolinx has had to do to turn GO into an RER has taken over a decade and will take another decade still. They've had to grade separate intersections, build new stations, build new track, add switches, completely reconfigure the entrance into Union Station, rebuild Union Station, add a new signal system, add layover facilities, build entirely new maintenance facilities...and that's all before even contemplating electrification and buying an entirely new fleet of trains.

I think too many people look at our single track, jointed freight rail lines and think that all we need to do is buy some new trains and we can have S-bahns running around our cities. That's not the case.



The Lower Mainland has decent transit, especially given the fact that it has to serve an area that was built for the car. I wouldn't characterize it as "terrible" at all.

It's not world-beating like Singapore or Zurich, but those cities made conscious choices over most of their modern history to orient all of their urban growth and major trip generators around transit. Nor is it one of those cities where they are resting on the laurels of past generations like New York. Vancouver didn't even think about transit or transit-oriented development until about 1983 when it had over 1.5 million people, mostly in car-oriented suburbia.

I am critical about Greater Vancouver's transportation system as a whole, but I don't place too much of that blame on Translink.

Fair enough, but I do disagree. We have to start somewhere--rail is a long-term investment. If we want to have s-bahns in our cities--and we should--I agree that it's not something we can conjure into being overnight, but that's why we should start now. That's why I propose simple DMUs, to build ridership, guide development towards transit, provide a dignified and affordable way to get around the lower mainland, and build a rail culture. It's cheap, and based on the existence of the old intercity trains, it would work. It doesn't need to be high speed rail, or super frequent. It just needs to exist.

Then, over many decades, it can turn into what they have in Germany. It took so long here as well. And even now, many smaller communities surrounding the cities are served by exactly the kind of DMU service I'm proposing--a lot of it's even privately operated, leasing track time from Deutsche Bahn, as Translink would do with CP/CN.

And, yeah, Toronto's RER is a massive project. But Toronto wouldn't be in the position it's in to build RER without launching the Lakeshore GO line back in the '60s.


There's been some conversation on this board about how to get better rail service around Canada, and a lot of us agree that regional systems should form the backbone of better intercity rail. There's some talk, too, about the Seattle HSR line--it's pie in the sky, I agree, but in 20 years, with an established rail connection between Abottsford and PCS, and some modest improvements to that stretch of track in the intervening years, it won't look so daunting.


For the record, bus service between Vancouver and Abbottsford/Chilliwack is terrible and expensive*. And I'm embarrassed every time I take the bus to Tsawwassen (which is also overpriced, given how shitty it is) and the tourists from abroad are confused because they thought they came to a developed country.

*Does it even exist, post Greyhound?

[biguc]

Originally Posted by scryer

That diesel train requires a driver which now drives up the operating costs though.

I think that Metro Vancouver will freak out over any rapid transit system that uses diesel. And I actually think that they have a point since electrified versions of Ottawa's O-train could certainly be implemented as a technological choice for interurban rail.

This is fair. DMUs aren't really big polluters, and they're really common in Europe, but diesel is a dirty word. They do remain the cheapest way to get rail service running. The key is to avoid running catenary electrical power. These days that's looking more and more possible without resorting to diesel, and instead using batteries.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by scryer

That diesel train requires a driver which now drives up the operating costs though.

I think that Metro Vancouver will freak out over any rapid transit system that uses diesel. And I actually think that they have a point since electrified versions of Ottawa's O-train could certainly be implemented as a technological choice for interurban rail.

But yeah, you are right in that the demands for interurban rail in the Lower Mainland are low at the moment. And I don't imagine that we will see any demands for an improved WCE until the Lower Mainland starts spreading (properly) deep into Langley, Abbotsford and beyond.

I think that the big point to walk away with here is that just because it works for one city, doesn't mean that the exact same model should be cloned in the Lower Mainland.

The Go train system, IMO, actually works well for Toronto because it's a very widespread city geographically (and even more so if you include the entire Golden horseshoe). The lower mainland and the Fraser valley are geopolitically much denser so long distance regional rail isn't something that the region desperately needs right now. Especially considering that most commute trips made South of the Fraser river have a final destination in Surrey.


I agree that Vancouver shouldn't copy + paste the exact same technology that Toronto used/uses for its Go Train and RER system. When metro Vancouver is ready to invest in a long distance commuter train system, it should seek to implement an updated next-gen technology solution; whether that comes in the form of more automated heavier trains or just electrified heavier trains. The GO RER transition is good to watch to learn how converting, later on, is actually a big pain in the ass. Better off to get it right the first time.

For Metro Vancouver, there is no low hanging fruit for an interurban rail system. And there is no demand for it. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't reserve space for it and work towards a system little-by-little but it's a hard sell to the people of the region and to the politicians that want to cut the tape.

For the record: yes, I do believe that when Skytrain gets to Langley, or even after the Skytrain hopefully gets extended to PoCo sometime after; that we need to create a stronger regional rail spine to support the growth of the region. There comes a point where the distance gets so long that it actually makes driving a private vehicle more appealing than taking transit; which I feel is why Toronto's Go-Train system is successful in the region.

The problem you run into is a commuter style system starting from scratch using new rail lines will be prohibitively expensive. Using existing ROW will make it more of a reality.

The other issue is that the idea of using any automated train on shared ROW won't happen.

What makes GO and the EXO so successful for their busiest routes is they expanded it. It goes further, and it goes more often.

[ssiguy]

I also don't think Vancouver will use DMUs in the future but that will be true of all commuter/suburban rail lines in the future across the country.

I think any city that starts services with diesel will have a VERY hard time getting any money out of Ottawa and especially since Ottawa announced $2.7 billion over the next 10 years for transit agencies to convert their fleets over to zero emissions.

In today's rapidly developing transportation technologies, there really is no reason why any rail system in the country should be building a diesel based one. Besides the standard catenary, there are 2 main options that are becoming increasingly popular throughout the world and their growth will be exponential over the few decades............battery and hydrogen.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I also don't think Vancouver will use DMUs in the future but that will be true of all commuter/suburban rail lines in the future across the country.

I think any city that starts services with diesel will have a VERY hard time getting any money out of Ottawa and especially since Ottawa announced $2.7 billion over the next 10 years for transit agencies to convert their fleets over to zero emissions.

In today's rapidly developing transportation technologies, there really is no reason why any rail system in the country should be building a rail based one. Besides the standard catenary, there are 2 main options that are becoming increasingly popular throughout the world and their growth will be exponential over the few decades............battery and hydrogen.

That depends on whether the ROW exists or not. If, for example it is owned by CP/CN, it will not be required to be electrified.

[nname]

Originally Posted by biguc

Thanks for sharing that. This honestly looks like a better transit system than Vancouver currently has. And it should soundly refute the idea that regional rail wouldn't work in the Lower Mainland. It wouldn't have to be expensive, either: a few used diesel trains, some platforms, and an agreement with CP/CN and you're running trains to Langley/Abbotsford for a fraction of the cost of the Skytrain to nowhere.

It "look" better on a map, but in reality such system would be next to useless today. Especially for the Chilliwack line, because:
- it only have 3 round-trip per day
- It takes 3.5 hours to get from Chilliwack to Vancouver, or 45min to go from New West to Commercial Drive non-stop

The tracks and alignment was never designed for high-speed operation. If it is going to put in any use today, it would need a complete realign and rebuilt, and it could probably cost billions.

Rail service back then and now are completely different animals. Don't mix them up.

Originally Posted by biguc

And nobody can take a tram down Main street now, or a train to Langley or Abbotsford. This system clearly has far better coverage than the current system. Sure, it probably wasn't as fast, but speed isn't nearly as important as coverage in a transit system.

There is now a considerably better service to Abbotsford or beyond, that's called "express bus". It is 3 times as fast, run 3 times more frequent, and much cheaper to operate. Just because it doesn't run on rail doesn't mean it's bad. In reality, do the far suburbs need high capacity and frequent rail service into and out of Vancouver right now? After all, WCE only carries 450-500 passengers a day to/from Mission (before the pandemic), and a portion of that comes from Abbotsford. There won't be that much more demand to warrant an all-day rail service that far into the suburbs.

[giallo]

Originally Posted by someone123

One problem in metro Vancouver is that a lot of the prime transit spots have not been allowed to grow organically. Commercial Drive is the best example of this but there are probably a dozen stations like it. Even the brand new stuff near King Edward station is in the 4-6 floor range (and looks like real estate bubble investor class construction rather than construction for people who rely on transit). Renfrew and Rupert are houses and strip malls and those stations are around 20 years old now. Nanaimo is I believe an original Expo 86 station which is about a 10 minute ride from downtown, and it is still detached houses plus some small older apartments. If Vancouver had reasonable land use rules, it would have had better transit coverage even with the current system.

Amen.

To say that Vancouver hasn't pulled its weight with housing while getting the loin's share of the metro's infrastructure and office space is an understatement.

Vancouver's zoning laws have been a constant disappointment that are just now (somewhat) being addressed, but there's still so far to go.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by nname

It "look" better on a map, but in reality such system would be next to useless today. Especially for the Chilliwack line, because:
- it only have 3 round-trip per day
- It takes 3.5 hours to get from Chilliwack to Vancouver, or 45min to go from New West to Commercial Drive non-stop

The tracks and alignment was never designed for high-speed operation. If it is going to put in any use today, it would need a complete realign and rebuilt, and it could probably cost billions.

Why would it only have 3 round trips?

Building the HFR in Ontario won't even take billions. Not sure why this one would.

Originally Posted by nname

Rail service back then and now are completely different animals. Don't mix them up.

There is now a considerably better service to Abbotsford or beyond, that's called "express bus". It is 3 times as fast, run 3 times more frequent, and much cheaper to operate. Just because it doesn't run on rail doesn't mean it's bad. In reality, do the far suburbs need high capacity and frequent rail service into and out of Vancouver right now? After all, WCE only carries 450-500 passengers a day to/from Mission (before the pandemic), and a portion of that comes from Abbotsford. There won't be that much more demand to warrant an all-day rail service that far into the suburbs.

Does anywhere need better service?
The WCE should get extended out to Hope. Doing this can help stabilize the high cost of housing in the Lower Mainland. Adding other lines to other places, like down to White Rock along the same one that the Cascades uses would open that area up as well. This isn't about just serving the GVA, just like GO does not just serve the GTA. Barrie and Kitchener are not part of the GTA. Neither is Hamilton or Niagara Falls. It is about serving the areas where people already commute from to reduce the need for them to drive.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

To be clear, in the video Reece posted he just argues for a DMU service between Coquitlam or Moody Centre to points further east (perhaps to the current terminus at Mission) arguing that while track capacity is restrained going into downtown, there is excess capacity in the eastern part of the corridor. I assume passengers would transfer to Skytrain if heading further west. He draws a comparison to Trillium line in Ottawa, though a better one might be Portland WES.

But really, I try to be careful when talking about mainline regional rail in terms of judging how much we should invest. These routes often provide a lot of service by transporting smaller numbers of people long distances rather than having a large total number of passengers as with more urban/local service. Therefore, stops don't need to be in locations that are as useful or convenient to the majority of people (compared to rapid transit) to justify expanded service. The longer the distance a rider is traveling, the more important speed becomes and the less important convenience of access (station location and frequency) become. People are more willing to go out of their way or wait longer for a long distance express service because it still may significantly reduce total travel time compared to more conventional transit.

Thinking about the amount of service provided, the current (pre-pandemic) WCE service has ridership of over 10k per weekday (similar to Halifax's busiest bus route #1 which runs every 10 min all day) despite only making 5 trips per direction. With a route 69km long, even if the average rider is only going 1/2 that distance it is still providing over 6x more transportation in terms of passenger km than the #1 bus if every bus trip averaged half its 10km length. And if you added all day, 7 day/week service the WCE ridership could easily double or even triple. That's definitely worth some investment. How much is the only question.

OK - I've watched the video now, hadn't before.

I agree that expanding WCE is a tempting idea. But if you can't upgrade capacity into downtown, this can do very little. It's sad, because it looks like the demand could easily justify more trains. But that approach along the harbour looks scarily expensive to upgrade. A few DMUs serving the east and connecting with the Skytrain might be OK, but I would be suspicious that the demand is such that the money wouldn't be better spent on buses.

In regards to other potential rail lines, running Skytrain to Langley does seem like the wrong choice of technology at first glance. In broad strokes, it looks like a heavy rail line up either side of the Fraser, meeting up in Abbotsford or Chiliwack would make sense. But when you actually follow the railways, the idea looks less good. I don't know the exact route it could take from Langley to downtown, but whichever way it has to go over that swing bridge and follow an absurdly windy route. It's hard to see how that could ever provide better service than a Skytrain to Langley, or even just getting a bus to connect in Surrey.

What could change things would be HSR to the south. Because that would demand a new ROW. The investment cost of HSR would have to stand on its own merits, but then other rail lines could make use of the infrastructure and leverage network effects.