Canadian LRT/RT projects U/C

[Luisito]

Awesome map. Thanks for sharing this.

Originally Posted by ericmacm

Hoping a revived LRT discussion in Winnipeg leads to something of substance. The original plan for the Winnipeg subway system from the 1950s that never emerged would have changed everything. It is tragic it was never realized, but I am hoping that the opportunity for LRT is taken.

[GreaterMontréal]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Surface construction is always the cheapest option.

It can easily be argued that Ottawa chose the wrong type of train, but making most of the route elevated would have been more expensive and would have received more NIMBY resistance.

I would wait until Montreal's REM has been in operation for a while and fully debugged before embarking on a similar project in Winnepeg and using it as a model. Vancouver's skytrain has not been proven reliable for a harsh climate.

The Skytrain and the REM don't use the same tehcnology. Skytrain uses third rail, the REM uses catenary. The use of catenary has been proven for decades as the Deux-Montagnes Line commuter rail was using the same technology. For harsh climate cities like Montreal between November and April with chances of snow or freezing rain, the third rail technology will not work.

https://rem.info/en/news/rem-and-winter

But no system is 99% weather proof unless it's underground, and even summer severe thunderstorm can flood the underground network. Doesn't happen often but it can happen.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

The Skytrain and the REM don't use the same tehcnology. Skytrain uses third rail, the REM uses catenary. The use of catenary has been proven for decades as the Deux-Montagnes Line commuter rail was using the same technology. For harsh climate cities like Montreal between November and April with chances of snow or freezing rain, the third rail technology will not work.

https://rem.info/en/news/rem-and-winter

But no system is 99% weather proof unless it's underground, and even summer severe thunderstorm can flood the underground network. Doesn't happen often but it can happen.

And that is exactly why Winnipeg should pay more attention to what is happening in Montreal instead of Vancouver, but wait until REM is fully proven. Naturally, no system is totally weatherproof.

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And that is exactly why Winnipeg should pay more attention to what is happening in Montreal instead of Vancouver, but wait until REM is fully proven. Naturally, no system is totally weatherproof.

Yeah as much as I like the skytrain, I am not a huge fan of the type of cars they use. REM trains are much better IMO. Those Alstom trains are used all over the world. They will be tested thoroughly this winter. Should be no problems.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nite

Like most cities in Canada, Winnipeg and Ottawa should have gone with a skytrain like system which is mostly elevated (cheaper and faster to build) with tunnel or elevated portion downtown with high frequencies and that is full automatic saving operation cost.

Two 15 km skytrain routes would serve Winnipeg well, a north-south one and east west one, both elevated the entire route.

If i was in the city government I would contact translink in Vancouver or the CDPQ in Montreal (REM Builders) and ask them to design, build and maybe operate the system to the same standard and rolling stock as vancouver or the REM and save much needed expense and time coming up with a novel system since they would know how to build and run it already.

With a city that is roughly 20km x 30km the city would need more than 15km of lines, or even 30km of lines. I would suggest a network of about 50km of total lines would be sufficient. for the long term. That would put it on par with Calgary. I am not suggesting they build it all in one project, They could do it in phases, much like Ottawa did.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Surface construction is always the cheapest option.

It can easily be argued that Ottawa chose the wrong type of train, but making most of the route elevated would have been more expensive and would have received more NIMBY resistance.

I would wait until Montreal's REM has been in operation for a while and fully debugged before embarking on a similar project in Winnepeg and using it as a model. Vancouver's skytrain has not been proven reliable for a harsh climate.

We have 7+ different urban rail systems. No 2 are the same. Winnipeg's should not be identical to any other system.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And that is exactly why Winnipeg should pay more attention to what is happening in Montreal instead of Vancouver, but wait until REM is fully proven. Naturally, no system is totally weatherproof.

They should also be watching KW too.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Anyway, if Mississauga can run an LRT up and down Hurontario, and if Kitchener can snake one through its core, then there's no reason Winnipeg can't or shouldn't.

I wonder how much of this just comes down to the fact that Ontario has already implemented similar projects. They have some institutional knowledge, a political sense of scale and value, and once one city gets these things other nearby cities start to think of them as realistic options. That will happen more with Kitchener vs. Hamilton than Kitchener vs. Winnipeg.

Manitoba is basically similar in scale to NS and I believe the province of NS has done 0 major transit projects ever. The last really major transit project in NS was arguably in 1949 when the trolleybus system was built in Halifax and back then it was owned and operated by the descendant of the private company that first built the trolleys in the 1860's. The province was involved in building heavy railways but not urban transit. In the 1970's and later they basically chipped in money incrementally buying buses and bus infrastructure. I guess the ferries might be considered an exception but the biggest ferry project was probably a single terminal at a time, or the municipality ordering some new boats.

[thebasketballgeek]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Ottawa could probably have done light metro since they mostly just added rails to the existing BRT corridors but for Winnipeg, a metro - light or otherwise - would be far costlier than LRT. Well, unless it has suitable existing ROWs I'm not aware of.

Just curious but what would be a suitable amount of space for existing ROW. Would it have to be so that the ROW has an existing rail line + enough space to add another set of tracks parallel or am I missing something?

Because Winnipeg has about 8 different rail lines cutting through either the City Centre or terminate at the existing CP Rail Yards in the North End. What’s interesting is that 3 of the lines already are double track and go through residential areas (although primarily SFH). One of the double tracks would even make a near perfect connection between our 2 most popular shopping centres (Polo Park and Outlet Collection)

The only problem of course is that these rail lines are each owned by different companies so expropriation and rail relocation would be quite the effort. I think it would take a superstar provincial premier to get the ball rolling on that.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by someone123

I wonder how much of this just comes down to the fact that Ontario has already implemented similar projects. They have some institutional knowledge, a political sense of scale and value, and once one city gets these things other nearby cities start to think of them as realistic options. That will happen more with Kitchener vs. Hamilton than Kitchener vs. Winnipeg.

A lot of it is a mental hurdle for sure. Obviously people in Mississauga and Kitchener are aware of taking TTC and are aware of what the scope, scale, and requirements are for a project. That means accepting and supporting something like Hurontario LRT is inherently easier because residents know what it will be and look like. Can't say with any certainty that Winnipeg or Halifax have this institutional knowledge. At some point these locations either push forward on urban transit options for their growing centres or stifle their own growth and development by shunning them or doing nothing.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by JHikka

A lot of it is a mental hurdle for sure. Obviously people in Mississauga and Kitchener are aware of taking TTC and are aware of what the scope, scale, and requirements are for a project. That means accepting and supporting something like Hurontario LRT is inherently easier because residents know what it will be and look like. Can't say with any certainty that Winnipeg or Halifax have this institutional knowledge. At some point these locations either push forward on urban transit options for their growing centres or stifle their own growth and development by shunning them or doing nothing.

Ottawa has a demonstrated a lack of knowledge in building and operating modern rail transit and this has been a source of the ongoing problems. Hopefully, this will resolve itself in time.

Also, the situation in Ontario provincially no longer easily allows for the cancellation rail transit projects following a change in government. Look at the Hamilton line that was cancelled and quickly brought back. The voters in several Ontario cities are now demanding transit improvements. A substantial change since the 1990s when Mike Harris filled in a subway line. Manitoba may still experience this kind of nonsense without a history of urban voters demanding otherwise.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by Nite

The Finch west bus was the busiest bus route in the city with the most overcrowding, which should be the only reason any route should be turned into a higher order transit route than how your feelings about the street.

When did I say anything about my feelings? I was talking about the Avenues Plan, which the City of Toronto identifies the corridors with most redevelopment potential, corridors that will have most intensification By the City of Toronto's own definition, Wilson is one of the Avenues, and Finch West is not, simple as that. That is Toronto's definition, not mine, and it is clear why Toronto would include Wilson and not Finch based on the examples I showed.

And also:

36 Finch West 43,100 boardings per weekday in 2016
199 Finch Rocket 32,969 (runs mostly on Finch East)

vs.

96 Wilson 19,325
118 Thistletown 3,230
119 Torbarrie 1,563
165 Weston Road 26,071
186 Wilson Rocket 10,571

Both Wilson and Finch West get around 60,000 boardings per weekday.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, does that mean you can see how LRT can make sense regardless of actual population?

When did I ever argue that LRT funding should be on population? Tell me. I am waiting. I argued that LRT should be prioritized in Quebec City and Hamilton over Winnipeg, I argued that LRT in Winnipeg should be prioritized over LRT in Durham, I argued for LRT in Halifax and London, and somehow you are suggesting that I have been arguing LRT that should be based on population.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Doady

When did I ever argue that LRT funding should be on population? Tell me. I am waiting. I argued that LRT should be prioritized in Quebec City and Hamilton over Winnipeg, I argued that LRT in Winnipeg should be prioritized over LRT in Durham, I argued for LRT in Halifax and London, and somehow you are suggesting that I have been arguing LRT that should be based on population.

Once a city reaches 500K, rail transit becomes a reasonable possibility and planning towards it should begin.

Once a city reaches 1M, the city has already fallen behind if rail transit has not been built.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Once a city reaches 500K, rail transit becomes a reasonable possibility and planning towards it should begin.

Once a city reaches 1M, the city has already fallen behind if rail transit has not been built.

What does have to do with what I said? When did I argue that LRT should based on population only? I am confused.

[Luisito]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Ottawa has a demonstrated a lack of knowledge in building and operating modern rail transit and this has been a source of the ongoing problems. Hopefully, this will resolve itself in time.
.

I hope ottawa gets entirely new trains for the confederation line. Is that even possible at this point? The nations capital deserves better.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Once a city reaches 500K, rail transit becomes a reasonable possibility and planning towards it should begin.

Once a city reaches 1M, the city has already fallen behind if rail transit has not been built.

Metro or actual city? Remember, places like BC have small cities, for instance, Vancouver only has less than 700,000 people.

CMAs, I would say that within the next few years, Winnipeg, QC, and Hamilton need to get on with building something. I would also add Brampton to the list too.

Originally Posted by Doady

When did I ever argue that LRT funding should be on population? Tell me. I am waiting. I argued that LRT should be prioritized in Quebec City and Hamilton over Winnipeg, I argued that LRT in Winnipeg should be prioritized over LRT in Durham, I argued for LRT in Halifax and London, and somehow you are suggesting that I have been arguing LRT that should be based on population.

The one below, I think I misunderstood you.

Originally Posted by Doady

Does Winnipeg include undeveloped land within its borders? Because the developed area seems very similar in size to Mississauga.

I can get behind LRT to help transform Portage and Main and shape the future growth of Winnipeg. Such an LRT system would be much better than those idiotic LRTs under construction in Toronto, that's for sure. But is it as urgent as LRT for Quebec City and Hamilton? That's the real question.

Toronto has the "Avenues Plan" to highlight corridors with high redevelopment potential and Portage and Main in Winnipeg would definitely be considered Avenues by Toronto's standard. Finch West? Not so much. A Wilson LRT would have been made a lot more sense than the Finch LRT by Toronto's own standards. But that's what happens when you let short term politicians like Adam Giambrone decide where to build new transit. Winnipeg, continue taking your time, think long term, don't make the same mistake Toronto did. No urgency is a good thing.

Finch Ave at Bathurst St:
https://goo.gl/maps/dWHkw2qknYtWm9c69

Wilson Ave at Bathurst St:
https://goo.gl/maps/RnqCy6d1WwkzR6aP9

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Luisito

I hope ottawa gets entirely new trains for the confederation line. Is that even possible at this point? The nations capital deserves better.

The problem is, is it actually the trains themselves, or the people and quality of the work of those people?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by JHikka

A lot of it is a mental hurdle for sure. Obviously people in Mississauga and Kitchener are aware of taking TTC and are aware of what the scope, scale, and requirements are for a project. That means accepting and supporting something like Hurontario LRT is inherently easier because residents know what it will be and look like. Can't say with any certainty that Winnipeg or Halifax have this institutional knowledge. At some point these locations either push forward on urban transit options for their growing centres or stifle their own growth and development by shunning them or doing nothing.

The Kitchener-Waterloo project really shifted the narrative around how only major cities should get LRT. But it was never true; it's not true in Europe and it wasn't true when Calgary and Edmonton were building their systems. Winnipeg is already larger than Calgary and Edmonton were when service began.

I don't know much about Winnipeg and Manitoba but I think it's essentially inevitable that the situation will shift in NS in the coming years. It is quite painful today though, with the province dragging its heels on transit and the municipality fighting against highways and road building while the city is growing by 2% per year or more. The reality is that a lot more transit and some more highway development is needed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by someone123

The Kitchener-Waterloo project really shifted the narrative around how only major cities should get LRT. But it was never true; it's not true in Europe and it wasn't true when Calgary and Edmonton were building their systems. Winnipeg is already larger than Calgary and Edmonton were when service began.

I don't know much about Winnipeg and Manitoba but I think it's essentially inevitable that the situation will shift in NS in the coming years. It is quite painful today though, with the province dragging its heels on transit and the municipality fighting against highways and road building while the city is growing by 2% per year or more. The reality is that a lot more transit and some more highway development is needed.

This highlights that most cities likely could support some sort of LRT if the funds to build it are there. for a silly example, here in Sudbury, the Mainline bus route, which also has other buses follow parts of it likely could support an LRT. Those bus routes make it almost a 5 minute frequency.

For Canada, I feel we are entering an LRT renaissance. 100 years ago, we had the massive push for streetcars. Now it seems there is a push for LRT.

So, after Quebec City, Hamilton, Winnipeg, London and Halifax, what other cities should seriously be considered for LRT? (Sudbury isn't serious, but it is an interesting though experiment)

[Doady]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The one below, I think I misunderstood you.

Yeah, I was just saying LRT in Winnipeg would be worth it because of the redevelopment potential of the Portage and Main corridors, not because it has a similar population as Mississauga. Maybe my post was not clear enough, sorry for any confusion.

I just want to clarify that I think Quebec City, Winnipeg, Brampton, London, and Halifax are all good places for LRT, but the order that they are built shouldn't be based too much on population or overall transit ridership. Like when I read the posts on SSP about the situation in Halifax and I glance at their transit map, I find it disconcerting, even as an outsider. Brampton is a big system in its own right, and Main and Queen LRT lines in Brampton would benefit me more, but somehow I am more worried about Quebec City and Halifax.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Doady

Yeah, I was just saying LRT in Winnipeg would be worth it because of the redevelopment potential of the Portage and Main corridors, not because it has a similar population as Mississauga. Maybe my post was not clear enough, sorry for any confusion.

I just want to clarify that I think Quebec City, Winnipeg, Brampton, London, and Halifax are all good places for LRT, but the order that they are built shouldn't be based too much on population or overall transit ridership. Like when I read the posts on SSP about the situation in Halifax and I glance at their transit map, I find it disconcerting, even as an outsider. Brampton is a big system in its own right, and Main and Queen LRT lines in Brampton would benefit me more, but somehow I am more worried about Quebec City and Halifax.

Ideally they all can get built at the same time.