The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[MalcolmTucker]

And Toronto could lower the cost per KM by stop building huge transfer stations, even if the new extension is going to be a looker. I prefer the nice heated glass transfers compared to Islington for example.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

Yeah, Option D doesn't seem obviously better to me at all. It actually seems more vulnerable to flooding than the other options (the elevated one actually appears to win on that front) and the extreme depth of some of the stations is definitely not beneficial.

I did hear that they are considering removing Crescent Heights Station (the 50 meter deep one) from the plan if Option D goes to the short list. Why do you think Option D is more vulnerable to flooding though? It only has the one portal in the flood zone which hopefully would be built with adequate protections.

Option B looks good enough, but I just absolutely hate the idea of Eau Claire Station being at grade. Just feels like the city has learned nothing at all from our experience with 7th Avenue and at-grade crossings in the core if that option is chosen. I know it sounds crazy, but I'd actually rather them do the elevated option, as at least it would mean that all stations from Highfield to 16th Avenue will be grade separated, creating a 12 km uninterruptable "express" zone of sorts. Though I do recognize the adverse impact that an elevated line would likely have on the pedestrian realm on 2nd Street SW in the core.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

And Toronto could lower the cost per KM by stop building huge transfer stations, even if the new extension is going to be a looker. I prefer the nice heated glass transfers compared to Islington for example.

Nice idea, but I wouldn't count on it.

The new Eglinton LRT-Crossrown will have only a few transfer stations though, where the LRT intersects with the subway and terminal stations. There I would expect large and complicated transfers.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

And Toronto could lower the cost per KM by stop building huge transfer stations, even if the new extension is going to be a looker. I prefer the nice heated glass transfers compared to Islington for example.

Islington station design hasn't been used in 30 to 40 years. In fact, those stations are seeing complete rebuilts due to poor accessibility. Victoria Park was first. I agree many east/west or north/south routes would be better served with the subway as a layover rather than a terminus but, many stations would still need 5 to 6 bus bays.

[caltrane74]

Victoria Park is still a massive station.

Maybe because its above ground, although, Keele and High Park do not feel nearly as large.

York Mills was rebuilt about 20 years ago, and that station went from minimal to a super-huge gargantuan subway station. 10 underground Bus bays for TTC another 10 underground bus bays for GO Transit. Underground connections galore and internal entrance to the plaza/office tower built above the station.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I did hear that they are considering removing Crescent Heights Station (the 50 meter deep one) from the plan if Option D goes to the short list. Why do you think Option D is more vulnerable to flooding though? It only has the one portal in the flood zone which hopefully would be built with adequate protections.

I'm sure engineers could create viable protections; however, the fact that almost the entire tunnel lies below the river level seems to make more of it vulnerable to flooding. There would likely have to be at least one ventilation shaft somewhere in the vicinity of the river as well, and there are several stations in the flood zone. None of that is hugely problematic in my view, but I don't see how it is *less* vulnerable than the other options.

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Option B looks good enough, but I just absolutely hate the idea of Eau Claire Station being at grade. Just feels like the city has learned nothing at all from our experience with 7th Avenue and at-grade crossings in the core if that option is chosen. I know it sounds crazy, but I'd actually rather them do the elevated option, as at least it would mean that all stations from Highfield to 16th Avenue will be grade separated, creating a 12 km uninterruptable "express" zone of sorts. Though I do recognize the adverse impact that an elevated line would likely have on the pedestrian realm on 2nd Street SW in the core.

I don't really know Calgary all that well. Would it be possible to simply make the part of the line that runs at grade transit-exclusive with no level crossings? It doesn't seem like that part of 2nd St is a major arterial and none of the cross-streets seem particularly important, but I may be mistaken. If that's not feasible, why couldn't they simply move the portal further north closer to the river?

Avoiding deep tunnelling is likely significantly cheaper due to cheaper underground station construction and it makes transit quite a bit more accessible as well.

[1overcosc]

The ease of bus<->subway transfers in Toronto with things like fare-paid terminals and bus loops within station grounds is one of the best things about Toronto's system. Ottawa is copying that model for its Confederation Line because it works so well.

That said, designs like that of Islington or the old Victoria Park are over the top.

[Innsertnamehere]

Eglinton Crosstown will have two new bus terminals, one at Mount Dennis and one at Don Mills.

The Spadina Extension has 4 new bus terminals, Finch West, Pioneer Village, Highway 407, and Vaughan Metropolitan Centre.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

Why should the private sector have to operate commuter rail in Ottawa-Gatineau when the GTA gets GO Transit which receives government funding from all Ontarians, including the 900,000+ people of Ottawa?

Due to the transprovincial nature of this plan, this should be a federal venture, perhaps through VIA Rail, or at least jointly run between GO Transit and the Quebec government. Private transportation solutions end up being way too expensive (see Highway 407).

It's a Pie in the sky plan that will never happen, that is why.

[Beedok]

OC Transpo basically filling the role of GO Transit with the buses that head 30+ km from downtown.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Beedok

OC Transpo basically filling the role of GO Transit with the buses that head 30+ km from downtown.

How much does it cost to go that far?

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

How much does it cost to go that far?

Well if you take the 96 out to Stittsville I believe it's just the standard fair. I think the rural express routes are like $5 cash. (I have a U-pass, so I don't know the fairs very well.)

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by GreaterMontréal

and you can't compare a subway-métro, which is only covering the downtown-inner-city to a system that covers the entire metropolitan area.

even within the same city

In China at least subways play the role of both inner city and commuter transport, instead of having separate commuter rail systems. So while the separate systems are common in the West, it's not necessarily always the case.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Well if you take the 96 out to Stittsville I believe it's just the standard fair. I think the rural express routes are like $5 cash. (I have a U-pass, so I don't know the fairs very well.)

Yep, Ottawa's main single fare zone extends all the way out to the suburban fringes like Stittsville, Barrhaven, Orleans, Kanata, etc. As long as you're in that zone a regular (non-express) ride from one end of the zone to the other costs the exact same fare as a ride that's a few blocks across downtown.

The furthest point is in southwest Stittsville which is about 40 km from Parliament Hill. From there you can ride to downtown, and all the way to the eastern fringes of Orleans (another 30 km or more) on a single basic fare.

Ottawa/OC Transpo have pretty much always automatically extended its urban transit area (covered by the basic fare, with all-day local routes in all neighbourhoods that feed into major cross-Ottawa routes going downtown) as the suburban footprint has expanded.

So basically as soon as a new subdivision is built (generally townhomes or singles on 35 to 50 foot lots), transit service on the city-wide system goes in.

It consists of that basic all-day basic fare system I described above, plus AM-to-downtown and PM-to-the-burbs transfer-free express services. For these guys you do have to pay a premium though.

You have to get pretty far out and into low-density (think one-acre lots) and rural areas for the rural service fares to kick in.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by The Chemist

In China at least subways play the role of both inner city and commuter transport, instead of having separate commuter rail systems. So while the separate systems are common in the West, it's not necessarily always the case.

Sounds kind of like the Washington DC approach. They do have a few conventional commuter rail lines, but compared to peer cities like Philadelphia and Boston, very little.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Well if you take the 96 out to Stittsville I believe it's just the standard fair. I think the rural express routes are like $5 cash. (I have a U-pass, so I don't know the fairs very well.)

That's pretty similar to us except our top fare is $3.50. I think the furthest routes we have are about 40km drive from downtown although closer as the crow flies which is 25-30km

[SignalHillHiker]

We are so, so far behind.

We're only just now putting a bus out to the suburbs for the first time. A ground-breaking pilot project! Public transit to a suburb within our uninterrupted urban area. What will we think of next.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/paradise-metrobus-dan-bobbett-1.3369263

All jokes aside its a good thing. But holy fuck so, so late.

[Aylmer]

St. John's should do it right the first time 'round and take the plunge for a full subway

[ssiguy]

The really cool thing about upcoming transit expansion is that London will be the smallest city in NA to have a subway station.......................that's right Canada will have it's own London Underground.

[lrt's friend]

Ottawa is having problem funding transit because the city continues to get more spread out yet they have failed to consider zone fares. In fact, express fares continue to be curtailed. In the long run, this is not sustainable and it results in ongoing pressure to cut service and to provide very substandard service in new suburbs.

The funny thing about it all is that Ottawa has three clearly delimited satellite cities, which make it clear where potential zone boundaries could be.