The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[MalcolmTucker]

A big part of the ROW REM will run on already runs just fine with caternary power. I'm sure it will be fine. https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5170931,...itch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

We already have a line into Vaughan. Why not Pickering?

Because Vaughan (which is also significantly more populated than Pickering), has a downtown bordering on several high ridership areas of Toronto. Given that they also paid for the subway extension north of Steeles, it made sense to continue the line a few kilometres further.

To extend Line 2 into Pickering would require tunneling through about 15km of low-density suburbia. As mentioned already, this is precisely what commuter rail is most adept at serving, and subways the least effective.

[corynv]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't care if Montreal claims that they are using a different type of train, something closer to Vancouver's skytrain. I wouldn't be so confident. The skytrain has also experienced problems during Vancouver's rare snowfalls.

Isn't part of the issue for vancouver, because they use pressure plates for track intrusion detection, and the snow triggers that after a certain point?

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Because Vaughan (which is also significantly more populated than Pickering), has a downtown bordering on several high ridership areas of Toronto. Given that they also paid for the subway extension north of Steeles, it made sense to continue the line a few kilometres further.

To extend Line 2 into Pickering would require tunneling through about 15km of low-density suburbia. As mentioned already, this is precisely what commuter rail is most adept at serving, and subways the least effective.

What should we do with 905 East <-> North York (or in general, suburb <-> midtown/northtown) commuters then?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Acajack

It's a tramway going mostly down Taschereau between Longueuil and Laprairie.

So running very roughly parallel to the river shore but some distance inland.

It will link up the major hospitals, CEGEPs, the Longueuil Métro, the Panama terminus near Mail Champlain in Brossard (integrated with REM), etc.

I am hearing reports that the tramway line might be extended northwards as far as Boucherville.

Subject to confirmation.

[Acajack]

The news report has some interesting video imagery.

https://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2020/02/27/tramway-sur-la-rive-sud-la-mairesse-de-longueuil-voit-grand

[begratto]

Longueuil's Léeo LRT project details are here : https://leeo.longueuil.quebec/

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Because Vaughan (which is also significantly more populated than Pickering), has a downtown bordering on several high ridership areas of Toronto. Given that they also paid for the subway extension north of Steeles, it made sense to continue the line a few kilometres further.

To extend Line 2 into Pickering would require tunneling through about 15km of low-density suburbia. As mentioned already, this is precisely what commuter rail is most adept at serving, and subways the least effective.

Are you assuming it would be done in one go?

If I were to suggest how it is done, first build east to Downsview. Then build west. Start with an extension to the STC. Then add an extension to the Zoo. Then go to Pickering. That would take likely 50 years before we see it opening.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, you want the mess of the SRT? Why? You would need to close the existing line down to convert it. Keep it as a subway as it is. Keep it underground as it can. Extend it as necessary. I could see this line go to the Airport and to Durham.

I'm not talking about the SRT; I'm talking about the Shepperd subway. Obviously the 5.5km part that's already underground would remain so since that investment has already been done. It's just that further extensions would not generate the ridership to justify the cost of construction underground when there is sufficient space to to have it's own median in a wide suburban arterial. There wasn't sufficient justification to build the current underground section to begin with. It was done for political reasons.

[Dengler Avenue]

Fair point about the terribly low ridership. I’d wanna see how Eglinton Crosstown turns out first safety-wise though.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'm not talking about the SRT; I'm talking about the Shepperd subway. Obviously the 5.5km part that's already underground would remain so since that investment has already been done. It's just that further extensions would not generate the ridership to justify the cost of construction underground when there is sufficient space to to have it's own median in a wide suburban arterial. There wasn't sufficient justification to build the current underground section to begin with. It was done for political reasons.

So, you want the eastern section to be a different technology? So, yup, exactly what SRT represents.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'm not talking about the SRT; I'm talking about the Shepperd subway. Obviously the 5.5km part that's already underground would remain so since that investment has already been done. It's just that further extensions would not generate the ridership to justify the cost of construction underground when there is sufficient space to to have it's own median in a wide suburban arterial. There wasn't sufficient justification to build the current underground section to begin with. It was done for political reasons.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, you want the eastern section to be a different technology? So, yup, exactly what SRT represents.

I think in that case, we may as well extend Finch LRT to serve Seneca College, then come down to Fairview Mall via Don Mills Road, then continue east...

TTC more like Toronto Trouble Commission...

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

So, you want the eastern section to be a different technology? So, yup, exactly what SRT represents.

The whole line would be the same technology. The underground section would simply use LRT trains rather than the current rolling stock and emerge from the tunnel at either end of and continue on the surface. That isn't any different than the Eglinton LRT now u/c. The only conversion that would be needed is for the platforms to be extended to meet the train which would not require extensive or lengthy closures. There are examples of rail vehicles that are dual mode and can draw power from either overhead or 3rd rail (such as Boston blue line) so the power in the tunnel wouldn't even need to be altered.

[Nouvellecosse]

Actually, the platforms wouldn't necessarily even need to be extended. The difference would only be about 24cm on each side. The LRT trains could just have retractable platform extenders.

[osmo]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The whole line would be the same technology. The underground section would simply use LRT trains rather than the current rolling stock and emerge from the tunnel at either end of and continue on the surface. That isn't any different than the Eglinton LRT now u/c. The only conversion that would be needed is for the platforms to be extended to meet the train which would not require extensive or lengthy closures. There are examples of rail vehicles that are dual mode and can draw power from either overhead or 3rd rail (such as Boston blue line) so the power in the tunnel wouldn't even need to be altered.

This idea has been mused in the past but it is a bit more complicated. Platform heights would need to be modified and adjusted to conform to a LRT type rolling stock for the Sheppard Line. The platform modification would be expensive and thus it's cheaper to just have two seperate systems and then just figure out the transfer point. The only need would be to extend the subway to Victoria Park as there is no way to pass the DVP unless you tunnel under it, this also provides the ability to build a sutible transfer point for both technologies. No point to tunnel the LRT under the DVP to only then have to build a complicated transfer point at Don Mills; It's cheaper to just extended the current line under and mold a proper station from scratch. All of this, no matter the option, would be incredibly expensive.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

The whole line would be the same technology. The underground section would simply use LRT trains rather than the current rolling stock and emerge from the tunnel at either end of and continue on the surface. That isn't any different than the Eglinton LRT now u/c. The only conversion that would be needed is for the platforms to be extended to meet the train which would not require extensive or lengthy closures. There are examples of rail vehicles that are dual mode and can draw power from either overhead or 3rd rail (such as Boston blue line) so the power in the tunnel wouldn't even need to be altered.

Originally Posted by osmo

This idea has been mused in the past but it is a bit more complicated. Platform heights would need to be modified and adjusted to conform to a LRT type rolling stock for the Sheppard Line. The platform modification would be expensive and thus it's cheaper to just have two seperate systems and then just figure out the transfer point. The only need would be to extend the subway to Victoria Park as there is no way to pass the DVP unless you tunnel under it, this also provides the ability to build a sutible transfer point for both technologies. No point to tunnel the LRT under the DVP to only then have to build a complicated transfer point at Don Mills; It's cheaper to just extended the current line under and mold a proper station from scratch. All of this, no matter the option, would be incredibly expensive.

Or.... We keep the technology and just extend it. That would keep the existing line open while construction happens and one day it just goes further.

Lets give the Line 5 a few years before it becomes overcrowded. Then we can see how LRT may not be the best solution.

[MisterMillionz]

Originally Posted by begratto

Longueuil's Léeo LRT project details are here : https://leeo.longueuil.quebec/

Awesome video, very informative! Interesting to see Montreal's suburbs all focusing on their own "downtowns" recently... If Longeuil starts building that tramway soon, that means there will be 3 systems under construction or expanding in the Montreal area alone (REM, Leeo & the blue line to Anjou)

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Because Vaughan (which is also significantly more populated than Pickering), has a downtown bordering on several high ridership areas of Toronto. Given that they also paid for the subway extension north of Steeles, it made sense to continue the line a few kilometres further.

To extend Line 2 into Pickering would require tunneling through about 15km of low-density suburbia. As mentioned already, this is precisely what commuter rail is most adept at serving, and subways the least effective.

Vaughan was built because powerful voices wanted it. There is no rationale to have built the line extension and, in particular, up to sprawling Vaughan. Both Pickering and Vaughan are served by GO on Metrolinx owned lines.

Pickering and Ajax obviously do not support the population of York Region. They also don't have any sort of employment concentration. They are about as bedroom as Toronto's large suburbs get. I'd be surprised if the commutes to Toronto and Markham weren't huge and one directional.

[Darkoshvilli]

Originally Posted by MisterMillionz

Awesome video, very informative! Interesting to see Montreal's suburbs all focusing on their own "downtowns" recently... If Longeuil starts building that tramway soon, that means there will be 3 systems under construction or expanding in the Montreal area alone (REM, Leeo & the blue line to Anjou)

There's also talk of extending the orange line north to Bois-Francs.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]