The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[GreaterMontréal]

That is interesting about those Quebec suburbs, I didn't know Gat or Long were even considering it. Good to know!

maybe suburbs north of the fleuve Saint-Laurent. A new LRT would not cross the river.

[MolsonExport]

KW, we in London are very jealous of your future light rail.

[GernB]

How are some of these cities (Regina, Victoria and Saskatoon come to mind) going to pay for LRT systems? Edmonton and Calgary were both well over half a million residents when they started their systems in the late 70s, though both had talked about it for a decade or so. Vancouver didn't start their skytrain until the early 80s when there were about a million and half in the area. As much as I like and support the idea of mass transit I just can't see some of these going ahead in the foreseeable future.

[begratto]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

With the Longueuil/Brossard situation, I'm hoping they decide to go with Canada Line style automated light metro instead of LRT. From the highway, it can branch north and south down Taschereau Blvd in an elevated guideway in the median. With the two branches it would total about 17km, and would be entirely elevated or surface, and should carry about as many riders as the Canada Line and be less expensive so it would be a great value.

The trains would be 4 car articulated consists with each car 17m long and 3m wide with the peak hedway on the north branch 12tph and south branch 8tph. Total capacity of the line as a whole: 10,000 pphpd, expected rush hour ridership: 7200 pphpd. Off peak headway would drop to 14tph (8tph north branch, 6tph south branch).

70m platforms should be adequate for foreseeable future. Capacity can be increased by adding frequency with up to 30tphpd with the automated services and sufficient rolling stock.

I'm sure the AMT will pay exorbitant consultant fees to come up with a plan very similar to what you just proposed. And it will take them 5 years. And then the study will have to be udpated.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by GernB

How are some of these cities (Regina, Victoria and Saskatoon come to mind) going to pay for LRT systems? Edmonton and Calgary were both well over half a million residents when they started their systems in the late 70s, though both had talked about it for a decade or so. Vancouver didn't start their skytrain until the early 80s when there were about a million and half in the area. As much as I like and support the idea of mass transit I just can't see some of these going ahead in the foreseeable future.

Neither Calgary or Edmonton was over half a million when they started construction on their systems. Edmonton wasn't even over 500 000 when they opened theirs, they only hit that population a year later. When Calgary's opened, they had a massive population surge the previous 5 years, pushing them from 469 917 in 1976, to 592 000 in 1981. So when theirs opened, they were over half a million, but again, only just past 400 000 when they started construction on it.

As I said, Saskatoon is already setting aside corridors for future LRT routes, and is already implementing BRT. The other two cities you mentioned are not(I believe Victoria is preparing for a tram-style streetcar system). Also, of those 3 cities, Saskatoon will almost definitely be the first to reach 500 000. They are planning to hit that population around 2030, and as such, are planning to have a LRT online by that time. A long way away, so there is no use in wondering how they will fund it.

[GreaterMontréal]

Taschereau Blvd

'' Un tramway au centre du boulevard Taschereau?

« On veut un beau transport en commun en plein milieu, genre tramway ou Système rapide par bus », explique le maire de Brossard. Le document remis au comité exécutif de Longueuil affiche l'image d'un tramway parisien pour illustrer cette volonté.

L'Agence métropolitaine de transport (AMT) participe aux réflexions sur l'avenir du boulevard Taschereau, route sous juridiction provinciale. L'AMT a mis en place début 2013 le « Comité d'axe Taschereau », chargé d'évaluer et planifier les besoins en transport dans le secteur. À l'hiver 2014, ce comité commencera à déterminer des outils de réalisation et de financement. En attendant, la Ville de Brossard organisera une soirée de consultation publique au mois de décembre. Le maire Paul Leduc, âgé de 76 ans, ne pense pas qu'il circulera sur le « nouveau Taschereau » avant 2030. ''

http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/Montreal/2013/10/09/004-taschereau-champs-elysees-rive-sud.shtml

[Nouvellecosse]

Right now the street is an incredibly ugly, suburban strip-malled mess. It would be great to see it improved, and the fact that it's so bad now gives a great advantage in that they can basically design it from scratch and have transit elevated and fully grade-separated without making the street too dark. The street is so wide and all the buildings are so far from the curb now that they can control how close to the street they decide to make then during redevelopment. I'd really want them to seize this opportunity and have much faster, fully grade-separated rail rather than a tramway.

However, the whole idea is rather pie in the sky and I doubt that we'll see a drastic redevelopment until after rail transit is already present and can fuel new TODs.

[GernB]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Neither Calgary or Edmonton was over half a million when they started construction on their systems. Edmonton wasn't even over 500 000 when they opened theirs, they only hit that population a year later. When Calgary's opened, they had a massive population surge the previous 5 years, pushing them from 469 917 in 1976, to 592 000 in 1981. So when theirs opened, they were over half a million, but again, only just past 400 000 when they started construction on it.

As I said, Saskatoon is already setting aside corridors for future LRT routes, and is already implementing BRT. The other two cities you mentioned are not(I believe Victoria is preparing for a tram-style streetcar system). Also, of those 3 cities, Saskatoon will almost definitely be the first to reach 500 000. They are planning to hit that population around 2030, and as such, are planning to have a LRT online by that time. A long way away, so there is no use in wondering how they will fund it.

Huh. I was sure they were both around 600,000 in the late 70s but after checking I see you're right. Maybe I was thinking of the metro areas? Anyway thanks.

[miketoronto]

There is no minimum population needed to build LRT or rapid transit. Smaller cities in Europe have rail, so why can't a Canadian city?

If anything, cities like Victoria should have had rapid transit a decade or more ago.

[Chadillaccc]

Totally. It just doesn't happen, unfortunately. Calgary and Edmonton are, to this day, this smallest North American cities to have built modern LRT networks I think. Others have built trams though, but not ROW reserved rapid transit LRTs.

[milomilo]

Rail networks take decades, centuries even, to achieve their full potential as development goes up around it, usage patterns adjust and networks are added. Best to get rail in as soon as possible, but make sure it's the right system, and future proofed.

Good on Ottawa for grade separating it's system. I believe Calgary made a big mistake on not grade separating the LRT, especially across some major roads and especially especially downtown, which is painful to ride across.

I think there have been fairly some nonsensical arguments between 'LRT' and 'subway', mainly due to the fact that there is no single definition of either. LRT can mean pretty much anything, but generally just means lighter vehicles. The Docklands Light Railway is classed as light rail, but has no at grade crossings, has deep level underground stations, long vehicles and carries 300,000 people a day. It was built partly on old heavy rail infrastructure but has the advantage of being able to make much tighter curves and handle steeper gradients. Vancouver's Skytrain, too, is light rail.

[Chadillaccc]

I know what you're saying Milo, but remember, Calgary built its system when the city was only half a million people. Ottawa is building its system from scratch when it is nearing a population of 1.3 million. That is the issue here, and now that we're stuck with it here, it is a lot harder to fix something that was built for a city of half a million, when the city(metro) is coming up on 1.5 million in a couple years. I'm just glad that the city has already approved the 8th Avenue subway, it just needs the funding now.

Also, I really wouldn't call getting across the downtown on the LRT "painful"... I do it every single day, and there is maybe 2 delays per year. It's a very reliable system at least in my experience, except for the week full of bomb threats last summer.

[GreaterMontréal]

$/km in Calgary ? underground. should not be that bad. 2km total ?

[SkahHigh]

Construction progress on Ahuntsic Station for AMT's future Mascouche Line.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

$/km in Calgary ? underground. should not be that bad. 2km total ?

In 2011, their estimation was $800 million... so that is at the very least what it would cost. However, by the time they do it around 2020, it will be a billion or more. That is not including the 2nd street subway of the 203 Line which will also have 3 subway stations downtown, and likely several more outside of the core under Centre Street.

[GreaterMontréal]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

In 2011, their estimation was $800 million... so that is at the very least what it would cost. However, by the time they do it around 2020, it will be a billion or more. That is not including the 2nd street subway of the 203 Line which will also have 3 subway stations downtown, and likely several more outside of the core under Centre Street.

ok, all I know, is the more you wait, the more it will cost. In Montréal, it's around $300 million per km in 2013. The Laval metro extension was $143 million per km.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Rail networks take decades, centuries even, to achieve their full potential as development goes up around it, usage patterns adjust and networks are added. Best to get rail in as soon as possible, but make sure it's the right system, and future proofed.

Good on Ottawa for grade separating it's system. I believe Calgary made a big mistake on not grade separating the LRT, especially across some major roads and especially especially downtown, which is painful to ride across.

I think there have been fairly some nonsensical arguments between 'LRT' and 'subway', mainly due to the fact that there is no single definition of either. LRT can mean pretty much anything, but generally just means lighter vehicles. The Docklands Light Railway is classed as light rail, but has no at grade crossings, has deep level underground stations, long vehicles and carries 300,000 people a day. It was built partly on old heavy rail infrastructure but has the advantage of being able to make much tighter curves and handle steeper gradients. Vancouver's Skytrain, too, is light rail.

The Docklands light rail is a light metro system, not LRT. It says so right in the link you posted. A light metro system is the same as metro/rapid transit except that the trains are shorter than typical metro systems. Neither Skytrain nor DLR is light rail.

[Innsertnamehere]

DRL in Toronto is pegged at around $450 million / km.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

ok, all I know, is the more you wait, the more it will cost. In Montréal, it's around $300 million per km in 2013. The Laval metro extension was $143 million per km.

Yup.

We already have part of it built. the section in use is about 3 blocks long, the part not in use is about 2 blocks long, under City Hall and Olympic Plaza. Bankers Hall also has a knockdown wall in place, for the future station that will be located under the towers.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Also, I really wouldn't call getting across the downtown on the LRT "painful"... I do it every single day, and there is maybe 2 delays per year. It's a very reliable system at least in my experience, except for the week full of bomb threats last summer.

I've heard this said before, and I just cannot agree. For most of last year I commuted between Sunnyside and Chinook/39th so had to go all the way through downtown. The train regularly sat for long periods waiting for cars at 4th St, then again to join 7th Ave, and the same on the East side. Then you have 7th Ave itself, which for starters is very low speed, but it's operation is ruined by so many crossing streets. As soon as someone holds open a door or the train is held up for some other reason and a train misses a signal, all the preceding trains are held up. There are also too many stations, they don't need to be so close.

In the short term, they could help this by making the door closures much more aggressive, efficiency wins against holding up a train/entire line for one person but the 8th Avenue subway cannot come soon enough.

I understand that it is easy to criticize in hindsight, but we need to begin correcting those mistakes rather than encouraging more sprawl and making the problem worse with extensions to Tuscany etc.