Canadian LRT/RT projects U/C

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by scryer

What is going on here?

Some people have a hard time understanding that trams are not supposed to run like a metro and that's partially why they have a million problems with it. That's why no other city or country does this, not even third world countries.

I found one other example of a metro system with one of it's lines using low floor trains but they did so for technical reasons. The other lines on this particular system all run normal metro trains.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Luisito

Some people have a hard time understanding that trams are not supposed to run like a metro and that's partially why they have a million problems with it. That's why no other city or country does this, not even third world countries.

I found one other example of a metro system with one of it's lines using low floor trains but they did so for technical reasons. The other lines on this particular system all run normal metro trains.

It’s why transit projects here have ridiculous cost/km that would be unfathomable anywhere outside of North America. It clearly doesn’t work and we got to stop defending it.

Simply put, Canada sucks at building rail transit and we should be getting consultation from the Japanese and Chinese on how to build effective rail service. Especially since some places in Japan that the Shinkansen runs through such as Aomori and Sapporo get more snow then anywhere in Canada.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nite

This is why Transit in Canada is so expensive to build because everything is design from scratch with multi years to design these novel systems. we would have save billions of dollars if Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa had the exact same designs down to the same rolling stock, same stations, same lights, gauge, same everything. everything should be built to the exact same specs that without the knowing the names of the stations you wouldn't even know what city you were in. instead everything has to be unique which just waste money and time and prevents the systems from being expanded because of said cost and time.

Once we have a design we know that works well it should be copied relentailly across the country. This is how Spain and China are able to build massive systems so cheaply and fast.

I feel that the iON and the TTC LRTs as well as the HLRT are basically the same.

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I feel that the iON and the TTC LRTs as well as the HLRT are basically the same.

They are. I would throw the new Edmonton line in there also.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Luisito

They are. I would throw the new Edmonton line in there also.

The new line in Edmonton should be the same as the old lines in Edmonton.

[Coldrsx]

Dear Ward Ipiihkoohkanipiaohtsi residents, I hope you have had a restful holiday season and some quality time to spend with family, friends, and neighbours.

Following a number of my community engagement events including two public town halls in May and September of 2022, where the LRT extension project was discussed, I have been working with the city’s executive leadership and LRT project team to address a variety of concerns I heard from our ward residents.

As promised, I am providing a number of updates related to the Capital Line LRT South Extension project after having spent some time working through the issues. Some of these updates have been provided in person to select property owners along the LRT corridor in October 2022, also at the October 2022 Twin Brooks Community League AGM, and at a few other in-person community meetings in November. These updates have the latest information and cover the following topics:

1. Fence materials adjacent to the LRT corridor
2. Updated noise study
3. Emergency access for Twin Brooks
4. Twin Brooks station (and follow-up survey)
5. LRT petition (community entrance features, fence materials, and multi-use trail)
6. Street Parking within Twin Brooks
7. Traffic flow in and out of Twin Brooks
8. Access to Anthony Henday Drive
9. Indigenous engagement
10. Bus service adjustment
11. Transit safety

Please see the attachment for full details.

As a follow-up to recent community engagements, an additional Capital Line South (Twin Brooks Station) LRT Survey is open until January 22, 2023. Visit http://bit.ly/3FpGLK5 to complete the survey. Alternatively, can access the survey from the LRT project website at edmonton.ca/CapitalSW.

Sincerely,
Jennifer

----

Early construction for Phase 1 began in 2022 and will continue into 2023 to start preparing the corridor, with major construction anticipated to begin in 2024 and to be completed by 2028 (subject to change).

• Future phases of the project, which are not yet funded, aim to extend Capital Line South LRT Line to the future Edmonton New Hospital in Heritage Valley (scheduled to open in approximately 2030), provide LRT access to additional neighbourhoods in Ward Ipiihkoohkanipiaohtsi, and for the line to continue south to the Edmonton International Airport (EIA).

[Greetingsfromcanada]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The new line in Edmonton should be the same as the old lines in Edmonton.

The capital and metro line use high floor trains. The valley line uses low floor trains

[Doady]

Eglinton Crosstown not being "novel" enough is part of the problem in the first place. Eglinton is too narrow for conventional modern light rail, so light rail should never have been a consideration. Now they building it mostly underground and even considering some elevated sections now. Elevated LRT. Yikes.

In a city like Winnipeg with those wide corridors, BRT can be built easily. Build the ROWs, build the BRT stations, implement an all-door boarding scheme, invest in articulated buses, and that will be a strong foundation for a future LRT system. If you can build BRT, then eventually you can convert it to LRT easily. BRT was never possible along Eglinton, so they should have thought about subway instead of LRT.

Ottawa is different because it was mostly a grade-separated BRT system. It is hard to understand what is the point of converting a grade separated BRT to light rail unless they plan to have branching on-street service in the outer suburbs. They probably could have used regular metro trains with third rail instead of light rail vehicles with overhead wires.

Thinking of light rail as being more attractive than buses and a cheaper alternative to subway/metro doesn't lead to good results. We can see that with all the failed systems in the USA and we are starting to see now it in Canada as well. Attractiveness of the transit system has nothing to do with the amount of light rail, and the costs could end up being much higher.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Greetingsfromcanada

The capital and metro line use high floor trains. The valley line uses low floor trains

Isn't the new line the one that had structural issues?
That is what happens when you decide to break the mold.

Originally Posted by Doady

Eglinton Crosstown not being "novel" enough is part of the problem in the first place. Eglinton is too narrow for conventional modern light rail, so light rail should never have been a consideration. Now they building it mostly underground and even considering some elevated sections now. Elevated LRT. Yikes.

In a city like Winnipeg with those wide corridors, BRT can be built easily. Build the ROWs, build the BRT stations, implement an all-door boarding scheme, invest in articulated buses, and that will be a strong foundation for a future LRT system. If you can build BRT, then eventually you can convert it to LRT easily. BRT was never possible along Eglinton, so they should have thought about subway instead of LRT.

Ottawa is different because it was mostly a grade-separated BRT system. It is hard to understand what is the point of converting a grade separated BRT to light rail unless they plan to have branching on-street service in the outer suburbs. They probably could have used regular metro trains with third rail instead of light rail vehicles with overhead wires.

Thinking of light rail as being more attractive than buses and a cheaper alternative to subway/metro doesn't lead to good results. We can see that with all the failed systems in the USA and we are starting to see now it in Canada as well. Attractiveness of the transit system has nothing to do with the amount of light rail, and the costs could end up being much higher.

Crosstown should have been a subway, like it had been started in the 1990s. However, politicians decided to be stupid and ta da.

[yaletown_fella]

Just finished work at Sentinel and Finch

Finch West seems to be progressing much faster than Eglinton. Some stops have been installed;

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Just finished work at Sentinel and Finch

Finch West seems to be progressing much faster than Eglinton. Some stops have been installed;

Does Finch have many underground sections?

[DirectionNorth]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Does Finch have many underground sections?

Not many. There's a tunneled section to connect to the subway and a trench at Humber College, but the vast majority of the route runs at-grade.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Does Finch have many underground sections?

at most the Finch LRT might have 100m being fully underground at both ends

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by Doady

Thinking of light rail as being more attractive than buses and a cheaper alternative to subway/metro doesn't lead to good results. We can see that with all the failed systems in the USA and we are starting to see now it in Canada as well. Attractiveness of the transit system has nothing to do with the amount of light rail, and the costs could end up being much higher.

Very true. I agree with this 100%.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nite

at most the Finch LRT might have 100m being fully underground at both ends

VS 100 times that (10km)

I'd bet that has more to do with construction speed.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

Dear Ward Ipiihkoohkanipiaohtsi residents, I hope you have had a restful holiday season and some quality time to spend with family, friends, and neighbours.

Following a number of my community engagement events including two public town halls in May and September of 2022, where the LRT extension project was discussed, I have been working with the city’s executive leadership and LRT project team to address a variety of concerns I heard from our ward residents.

As promised, I am providing a number of updates related to the Capital Line LRT South Extension project after having spent some time working through the issues. Some of these updates have been provided in person to select property owners along the LRT corridor in October 2022, also at the October 2022 Twin Brooks Community League AGM, and at a few other in-person community meetings in November. These updates have the latest information and cover the following topics:

1. Fence materials adjacent to the LRT corridor
2. Updated noise study
3. Emergency access for Twin Brooks
4. Twin Brooks station (and follow-up survey)
5. LRT petition (community entrance features, fence materials, and multi-use trail)
6. Street Parking within Twin Brooks
7. Traffic flow in and out of Twin Brooks
8. Access to Anthony Henday Drive
9. Indigenous engagement
10. Bus service adjustment
11. Transit safety

Please see the attachment for full details.

As a follow-up to recent community engagements, an additional Capital Line South (Twin Brooks Station) LRT Survey is open until January 22, 2023. Visit http://bit.ly/3FpGLK5 to complete the survey. Alternatively, can access the survey from the LRT project website at edmonton.ca/CapitalSW.

Sincerely,
Jennifer

----

Early construction for Phase 1 began in 2022 and will continue into 2023 to start preparing the corridor, with major construction anticipated to begin in 2024 and to be completed by 2028 (subject to change).

• Future phases of the project, which are not yet funded, aim to extend Capital Line South LRT Line to the future Edmonton New Hospital in Heritage Valley (scheduled to open in approximately 2030), provide LRT access to additional neighbourhoods in Ward Ipiihkoohkanipiaohtsi, and for the line to continue south to the Edmonton International Airport (EIA).

Maybe I’m wrong about this but wouldn’t it make more sense of setting up rail on 23 Ave and go to South Edmonton Common? Compared to Twin Brooks which is primarily single-family cul-de-sacs, SEC has infinite more TOD potential. 23rd Ave itself also has far more apartment blocks.

I guess speedrunning to create the airport connection is a bigger priority.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Doady

Eglinton Crosstown not being "novel" enough is part of the problem in the first place. Eglinton is too narrow for conventional modern light rail, so light rail should never have been a consideration. Now they building it mostly underground and even considering some elevated sections now. Elevated LRT. Yikes.

In a city like Winnipeg with those wide corridors, BRT can be built easily. Build the ROWs, build the BRT stations, implement an all-door boarding scheme, invest in articulated buses, and that will be a strong foundation for a future LRT system. If you can build BRT, then eventually you can convert it to LRT easily. BRT was never possible along Eglinton, so they should have thought about subway instead of LRT.

Ottawa is different because it was mostly a grade-separated BRT system. It is hard to understand what is the point of converting a grade separated BRT to light rail unless they plan to have branching on-street service in the outer suburbs. They probably could have used regular metro trains with third rail instead of light rail vehicles with overhead wires.

Thinking of light rail as being more attractive than buses and a cheaper alternative to subway/metro doesn't lead to good results. We can see that with all the failed systems in the USA and we are starting to see now it in Canada as well. Attractiveness of the transit system has nothing to do with the amount of light rail, and the costs could end up being much higher.

As an Ottawa resident, the city greatly underestimated the cost of BRT to LRT conversion and greatly overestimated the benefit of such conversion.

When choosing rapid transit modes, don't plan for a conversion later.

It has been disgusting how Ottawa's Trillium Line has been totally closed for 3 years for a very dubious improvement and no upgrade path that doesn't involve another substantial closure.

No city should ever follow the Ottawa example. The outcome will be a loss of ridership.

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Luisito

Some people have a hard time understanding that trams are not supposed to run like a metro and that's partially why they have a million problems with it. That's why no other city or country does this, not even third world countries.

I found one other example of a metro system with one of it's lines using low floor trains but they did so for technical reasons. The other lines on this particular system all run normal metro trains.

What does metro have to do with how the tram performs? Metro means that you are giving it grade separation, stations and fare gates. How does that affect how low floor teams perform?

[ciudad_del_norte]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Maybe I’m wrong about this but wouldn’t it make more sense of setting up rail on 23 Ave and go to South Edmonton Common? Compared to Twin Brooks which is primarily single-family cul-de-sacs, SEC has infinite more TOD potential. 23rd Ave itself also has far more apartment blocks.

I guess speedrunning to create the airport connection is a bigger priority.

Twin Brooks is more a stop that is being included because it is along the line, not the line being extended with the purpose of servicing twin brooks. The capital line extension main ridership drivers are the Ellerslie Road Park and Ride just past the ring road, the future hospital to the south and higher density residential and commercial planned around Heritage Valley "Town Centre" development to the south of that. Basically, all of the developing land south of Anthony Henday drive has been planned around having LRT, Twin Brooks predates that planning and just happens to be along the way of the alignment.

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by logan5

What does metro have to do with how the tram performs? Metro means that you are giving it grade separation, stations and fare gates. How does that affect how low floor teams perform?

It also means solid better trains that were desgined to move at higher capacity, higher speed with more people. Trams were not designed for that.

This had to be the biggest f**k up in transit history I have ever seen anywhere. They had the opportunity to build a grade seperated system and they chose to put street cars on it. They have had a million problems from the begining and will continue to have them.

From two days ago.
• Video Link

From a year ago.
• Video Link