The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[someone123]

In Halifax there is nothing close to a one-to-one mapping between major arteries and transit corridors, and there's no notion of heading in cardinal directions.

I never really thought of this but I've visited Halifax with people from Toronto and Edmonton and they tend to approach navigation there in terms of figuring out which cardinal direction to head in or what an address tells you about where something is. For example, they might ask what direction a road or highway is headed. The answer to that is something like "this is kind of a sideways W shape, and we were going southwest, but now we're headed northeast...", which is completely unhelpful. It made me realize that in Halifax I thought only in terms of sequences of roads/streets and what turns to make (which will frequently involve intersections or roundabouts with 5 roads going into them if you're going onto the mainland Halifax side; Dartmouth's roads are a mess too, and if you're driving there are a lot of irregularities in how lanes work that make it much worse than it seems on a map).

[Hali87]

Cardinal directions work ok on the Peninsula itself (there's an offset where the street grid bends but people typically continue "north along Robie" rather than "northwest".

The freeway network requires a bit more abstraction, but generally people think of the 101, 102, and 118 as going "North" (although the 101 and 102 don't go in the same direction!), 103 goes vaguely "West", 107 goes "South" and then "East", the 111 goes "towards Woodside" or "towards the MacKay Bridge". "Outbound" and "Inbound" are directions that are used for many other routes.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by someone123

I like this map to give people a sense of perspective if they've never used Halifax's transit system before:



If I were a tourist looking at this I would just give up.

As someone who lived there and took transit, it really is no worse than most other major cities. However, what they really could do is ... a BRT....

See, there are common roads most buses use and if the BRT ran along it, and ran at a high frequency, it would help alleviate the traffic and the mess of the map.

But, Halifax won't do it right and it will be a mess. Which is why I suggest buried LRT on the peninsula. You would still have the local buses covering the surface streets, but you would have a relatively fast way off the peninsula.

[Chadillaccc]

So here’s the skinny on the fuckery that’s been going on with the Green Line in Calgary. It looks like they’re finally coming to a conclusion and may actually be able to begin hard construction on time (Summer 2021). I don’t personally support their conclusions (mostly just butthurt about losing the tunnel under the river), but I do understand the financial and geological limitations of a city our size and geography in the economically austere climate we are in.

- The tunnel under the river is out the window for good due to the extreme depth of Eau Claire and 7 Avenue SW Stations and extremely poor soil conditions making it cost prohibitive even when not considering the depth
- 4 Street SE Station is now underground and 1 block south of previous alignment, to be better connected with new Flames Arena and Stampede Park
- Eau Claire Station will now be at grade; the city is in consultations with Harvard Developments to integrate the station into the Eau Claire Market redevelopment
- The downtown tunnel will begin between 2 and 3 Avenue SW (a block south of Eau Claire Station)
- There will be a new bridge built between Eau Claire and north of the Centre Street Bridge.
- The downtown subway (including 4 Street SE, Centre Street South, and 7 Avenue SW stations) will connect to Eau Claire Station at grade, then progress on to the bridge
- Ninth Avenue North (Crescent Heights) Station is back in play as a grade level station, though not a certainty
- A decision on whether 16 Avenue North Station will be underground won’t be released for a couple months
- The southeastern portion of the line will remain as was already planned and designed.



Some new concept renders of the revisions…

Crescent Heights Station

Side traffic version


Centre traffic version




Eau Claire Station






Tunnel Portal Concept – Options being considered are a staircase up to the +15, or a performance space with plaza.






Centre Street North – between Crescent Heights and 16 Avenue Stations





Bridge options being considered





Overall, it’s not the worst compromise given the constraints. Here is the layout of the changes; green is new alignment, yellow is 2017 proposed alignment. It is unclear if the bridge and Centre Street portions will be built in Stage 1, but we will know by April, around the time of the decision on the 16 Avenue Station being underground or not. I’m really just glad that most of the decisions are finally made and we can move the f*ck on with detailed design and construction.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

As someone who lived there and took transit, it really is no worse than most other major cities.

I think it's much worse than it could be and much worse than the setup in cities like Toronto, although it's important to separate out what can be done with the network in Halifax and what can't be because it's a smaller city that will have lower service levels. As Nouvellecosse pointed out there's a big problem with useful frequency of service along the major routes and connections.

If you're looking at service downtown you'll see 15-20 routes overlapping but they don't offer many useful alternatives for travelers in terms of similar destinations or connections. The bus timings are unreliable and they don't all stop in the same spots so you are often running around or guessing at which option is best.

You might effectively get 15 or 20 minute service frequencies along a corridor that gets a bus every 2 minutes at peak times, and you will often need to make connections despite the complicated mix of routes. Likewise you'll see some packed buses running along a major corridor and some empty buses that don't go to useful destinations. That is a bad use of resources.

If there were more of a corridor approach like with the BRT plan a lot of trips would have decent service from start to finish and the connections would work better.

In general as a city grows you need to develop corridors and centralize service somewhat because otherwise if you have X destinations you need ~X^2 routes in the most decentralized case while you need ~X if you funnel all traffic through a central location (the bus for the people going from Lacewood to Burnside, etc. rather than the generic Lacewood to downtown bus and generic downtown Burnside bus).

Another issue Halifax is going to hit is that the urban core is getting too big to easily walk around in. Back in the 50's it was pretty much Gottingen-Barrington-Spring Garden which wasn't too bad. Increasingly people will want to get along Robie/Quinpool and up to the Young Street area from downtown, and those trips are not easy walking distance. There will be more and more demand for short trips around the peninsula.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

So here’s the skinny on the fuckery that’s been going on with the Green Line in Calgary. It looks like they’re finally coming to a conclusion and may actually be able to begin hard construction on time (Summer 2021). I don’t personally support their conclusions (mostly just butthurt about losing the tunnel under the river), but I do understand the financial and geological limitations of a city our size and geography in the economically austere climate we are in.

- The tunnel under the river is out the window for good due to the extreme depth of Eau Claire and 7 Avenue SW Stations and extremely poor soil conditions making it cost prohibitive even when not considering the depth
- 4 Street SE Station is now underground and 1 block south of previous alignment, to be better connected with new Flames Arena and Stampede Park
- Eau Claire Station will now be at grade; the city is in consultations with Harvard Developments to integrate the station into the Eau Claire Market redevelopment
- The downtown tunnel will begin between 2 and 3 Avenue SW (a block south of Eau Claire Station)
- There will be a new bridge built between Eau Claire and north of the Centre Street Bridge.
- The downtown subway (including 4 Street SE, Centre Street South, and 7 Avenue SW stations) will connect to Eau Claire Station at grade, then progress on to the bridge
- Ninth Avenue North (Crescent Heights) Station is back in play as a grade level station, though not a certainty
- A decision on whether 16 Avenue North Station will be underground won’t be released for a couple months
- The southeastern portion of the line will remain as was already planned and designed.

Overall, it’s not the worst compromise given the constraints. Here is the layout of the changes; green is new alignment, yellow is 2017 proposed alignment. It is unclear if the bridge and Centre Street portions will be built in Stage 1, but we will know by April, around the time of the decision on the 16 Avenue Station being underground or not. I’m really just glad that most of the decisions are finally made and we can move the f*ck on with detailed design and construction.

I'm not worried too much about the bridge designs (though I actually like them), I doubt any them will be built this decade. If the Green Line is built at all!

[Chadillaccc]

The Green Line will most certainly be built, it's just a question of if Eau Claire or 16 Avenue North will be the terminus. I am hopeful that the bridge and 9th/16th Ave stations will be built in phase one. But even if they're not, an 18 kilometer line with 13 stations (3 subway and 2 elevated) is a good win. I would hope with the cost savings from not building the bridge and Centre street portions that they would at least extend the southeast section down to Mahogany Station to get it to significant population clusters.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

The Green Line will most certainly be built, it's just a question of if Eau Claire or 16 Avenue North will be the terminus. I am hopeful that the bridge and 9th/16th Ave stations will be built in phase one. But even if they're not, an 18 kilometer line with 13 stations (3 subway and 2 elevated) is a good win.

How can you be so sure? The province has given themselves the right to can the project, can given how the city has bungled it, I can't say I'd blame them if they do. What we end up left with once all the salami slicing is done is a pretty pointless rail line.

[Chadillaccc]

Yes, and now that the city is finally getting their ducks in a row, the line won't be can'd. Obviously it would have made sense 6 months ago when the boondoggle happened, but not now that sensible decisions have been made. Hence the entire 500 word essay I basically wrote 5 posts up. Lmao

[milomilo]

If ducks were in a row, they would have requests for contracts. We still haven't decided if this final plan really is the final plan, we've been at this point before.

[MalcolmTucker]

Best option is to examine surface centre street north, and have it rejected for community impact reasons, and stop at eau claire. When the north is revived, then we have the opportunity of building a bridge to a tunnel portal under crescent heights, and going north from there.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by milomilo

How can you be so sure? The province has given themselves the right to can the project, can given how the city has bungled it, I can't say I'd blame them if they do. What we end up left with once all the salami slicing is done is a pretty pointless rail line.

unbeknownst to seemingly almost everyone, the province includes this clause in almost every funding agreement.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Best option is to examine surface centre street north, and have it rejected for community impact reasons, and stop at eau claire. When the north is revived, then we have the opportunity of building a bridge to a tunnel portal under crescent heights, and going north from there.

I agree that's the "best" option. It still ends up with pretty trash rail line that runs mostly through industrial wasteland.

Then, does the city build proper BRT to the north with dedicated lanes, or do they continue to pretend that the Green Line is heading up there soon and just let them muddle along with maybe some heated shelters?

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by milomilo

or do they continue to pretend that the Green Line is heading up there soon and just let them muddle along with maybe some heated shelters?

I'd assume that's why Gondek has now asked to cancel the bridge and use the money for something closer to a real BRT for the NC; she's tired of the pretending and expect's that it'll be many years before rail can progress northward and getting something now is better than nothing (and probably worse than nothing with the loss of two lanes up to 16th).

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Doady]

The problem with Viva is not frequency. It has always delivered good frequency, at least 15 minutes on all routes, it was a massive increase in service, but ridership never came. The real problems are twofold: the routes not serving established corridors and the lack of fare integration with TTC.

What is York Region's busiest east-west transit corridor? Steeles Ave. As long as York Region Transit continues to ignore Steeles, their ridership will never grow. That's a major gap in the network right now.

I think York Region is a good example of how the "build it and they will come" mentality does not work. You can see it all over the US as well. No matter how much you build BRT and LRT and subway, if you still don't have complete network serving every corridor, serving the entire region, the ridership will always be low.

Brampton and Mississauga have 3-4 times the ridership of York not because of the frequency of Zum or MiExpress, but because they have a much more complete network, no huge gaps like Steeles in York Region. There are some smaller gaps in Brampton like Rutherford Dr. Brampton also should have built an east-west arterial between Steeles and Queen. Mississauga lacks a continuous east-west arterial between Dundas and Lakeshore.

Over the years, I have seen over and over again how unimportant frequency is in attracting riders. In Mississauga, high frequency has always followed high ridership, never the other way around. Recently, Mississauga finally, FINALLY gave Matheson Blvd two-way service by extending 39 Britannia, east from Kennedy to Renforth and the Toronto border. And the ridership skyrocketed, to the point that the buses were too full and leaving people stranded at the bus stops and they were forced to put articulated buses on the route. Articulated buses on a route with 25 minute rush hour frequency. Think about that.

That's why I think YRT really needs a new VIVA route along Steeles. It's not about frequency but giving people the option in the first place. YRT needs to complete the grid. In Vaughan, YRT already has a gap at Langstaff, because Langstaff Rd is broken up by that rail yard. That is already bad enough, but to have gap at Steeles as well is just way, way too much. In Vaughan, Highway 7 is the only east-west transit corridor south of Rutherford right now. They need a second corridor. From Steeles to Rutherford is 6km. To have only one east-west transit corridor is not enough.

Just look at the way the population of York Region is distributed: concentrated along the Toronto border, along Steeles. They need these east-west corridors. They also need more integration with TTC.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

So here’s the skinny on the fuckery that’s been going on with the Green Line in Calgary. It looks like they’re finally coming to a conclusion and may actually be able to begin hard construction on time (Summer 2021). I don’t personally support their conclusions (mostly just butthurt about losing the tunnel under the river), but I do understand the financial and geological limitations of a city our size and geography in the economically austere climate we are in.

- The tunnel under the river is out the window for good due to the extreme depth of Eau Claire and 7 Avenue SW Stations and extremely poor soil conditions making it cost prohibitive even when not considering the depth
- 4 Street SE Station is now underground and 1 block south of previous alignment, to be better connected with new Flames Arena and Stampede Park
- Eau Claire Station will now be at grade; the city is in consultations with Harvard Developments to integrate the station into the Eau Claire Market redevelopment
- The downtown tunnel will begin between 2 and 3 Avenue SW (a block south of Eau Claire Station)
- There will be a new bridge built between Eau Claire and north of the Centre Street Bridge.
- The downtown subway (including 4 Street SE, Centre Street South, and 7 Avenue SW stations) will connect to Eau Claire Station at grade, then progress on to the bridge
- Ninth Avenue North (Crescent Heights) Station is back in play as a grade level station, though not a certainty
- A decision on whether 16 Avenue North Station will be underground won’t be released for a couple months
- The southeastern portion of the line will remain as was already planned and designed.



Some new concept renders of the revisions…

Crescent Heights Station

Side traffic version


Centre traffic version




Eau Claire Station






Tunnel Portal Concept – Options being considered are a staircase up to the +15, or a performance space with plaza.






Centre Street North – between Crescent Heights and 16 Avenue Stations





Bridge options being considered

Overall, it’s not the worst compromise given the constraints. Here is the layout of the changes; green is new alignment, yellow is 2017 proposed alignment. It is unclear if the bridge and Centre Street portions will be built in Stage 1, but we will know by April, around the time of the decision on the 16 Avenue Station being underground or not. I’m really just glad that most of the decisions are finally made and we can move the f*ck on with detailed design and construction.

Great to see the City of Calgary considering solutions to continue with the Green Line project.

For Crescent Heights Station, I would prefer the Centre Traffic option to minimize street crossings and to make the sidewalks wider (even if it's an illusion, it could still make people feel safer).

The treatment of the tunnel portal is quite nice. Ottawa went with the most basic approach there is, which makes them very unappealing and down-right oppressive. It's not a huge deal at the moment because they are far from walkable areas, but one is adjacent to the future central library, complete with an ugly grey power substation shed next to it.

Bridge options are also nice, but the cable-stayed seems a little over the top.

My only complaint would be the bare-bones stations. Hopefully, these are just preliminary and more coverage will be provided.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Doady

The problem with Viva is not frequency. It has always delivered good frequency, at least 15 minutes on all routes, it was a massive increase in service, but ridership never came. The real problems are twofold: the routes not serving established corridors and the lack of fare integration with TTC.

What is York Region's busiest east-west transit corridor? Steeles Ave. As long as York Region Transit continues to ignore Steeles, their ridership will never grow. That's a major gap in the network right now.

I think York Region is a good example of how the "build it and they will come" mentality does not work. You can see it all over the US as well. No matter how much you build BRT and LRT and subway, if you still don't have complete network serving every corridor, serving the entire region, the ridership will always be low.

Brampton and Mississauga have 3-4 times the ridership of York not because of the frequency of Zum or MiExpress, but because they have a much more complete network, no huge gaps like Steeles in York Region. There are some smaller gaps in Brampton like Rutherford Dr. Brampton also should have built an east-west arterial between Steeles and Queen. Mississauga lacks a continuous east-west arterial between Dundas and Lakeshore.

Over the years, I have seen over and over again how unimportant frequency is in attracting riders. In Mississauga, high frequency has always followed high ridership, never the other way around. Recently, Mississauga finally, FINALLY gave Matheson Blvd two-way service by extending 39 Britannia, east from Kennedy to Renforth and the Toronto border. And the ridership skyrocketed, to the point that the buses were too full and leaving people stranded at the bus stops and they were forced to put articulated buses on the route. Articulated buses on a route with 25 minute rush hour frequency. Think about that.

That's why I think YRT really needs a new VIVA route along Steeles. It's not about frequency but giving people the option in the first place. YRT needs to complete the grid. In Vaughan, YRT already has a gap at Langstaff, because Langstaff Rd is broken up by that rail yard. That is already bad enough, but to have gap at Steeles as well is just way, way too much. In Vaughan, Highway 7 is the only east-west transit corridor south of Rutherford right now. They need a second corridor. From Steeles to Rutherford is 6km. To have only one east-west transit corridor is not enough.

Just look at the way the population of York Region is distributed: concentrated along the Toronto border, along Steeles. They need these east-west corridors. They also need more integration with TTC.

Steeles Avenue is TTC jurisdiction, in which case better fare integration, even just a deal cut only between YRT and TTC, is the way to go.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Doady

The problem with Viva is not frequency. It has always delivered good frequency, at least 15 minutes on all routes, it was a massive increase in service, but ridership never came. The real problems are twofold: the routes not serving established corridors and the lack of fare integration with TTC.

What is York Region's busiest east-west transit corridor? Steeles Ave. As long as York Region Transit continues to ignore Steeles, their ridership will never grow. That's a major gap in the network right now.

I think York Region is a good example of how the "build it and they will come" mentality does not work. You can see it all over the US as well. No matter how much you build BRT and LRT and subway, if you still don't have complete network serving every corridor, serving the entire region, the ridership will always be low.

Brampton and Mississauga have 3-4 times the ridership of York not because of the frequency of Zum or MiExpress, but because they have a much more complete network, no huge gaps like Steeles in York Region. There are some smaller gaps in Brampton like Rutherford Dr. Brampton also should have built an east-west arterial between Steeles and Queen. Mississauga lacks a continuous east-west arterial between Dundas and Lakeshore.

Over the years, I have seen over and over again how unimportant frequency is in attracting riders. In Mississauga, high frequency has always followed high ridership, never the other way around. Recently, Mississauga finally, FINALLY gave Matheson Blvd two-way service by extending 39 Britannia, east from Kennedy to Renforth and the Toronto border. And the ridership skyrocketed, to the point that the buses were too full and leaving people stranded at the bus stops and they were forced to put articulated buses on the route. Articulated buses on a route with 25 minute rush hour frequency. Think about that.

That's why I think YRT really needs a new VIVA route along Steeles. It's not about frequency but giving people the option in the first place. YRT needs to complete the grid. In Vaughan, YRT already has a gap at Langstaff, because Langstaff Rd is broken up by that rail yard. That is already bad enough, but to have gap at Steeles as well is just way, way too much. In Vaughan, Highway 7 is the only east-west transit corridor south of Rutherford right now. They need a second corridor. From Steeles to Rutherford is 6km. To have only one east-west transit corridor is not enough.

Just look at the way the population of York Region is distributed: concentrated along the Toronto border, along Steeles. They need these east-west corridors. They also need more integration with TTC.

I'd plead YMMV on that.

In Gatineau when they opened the Rapibus BRT corridor they gambled on much higher frequencies than anyone had ever seen here (especially in rush hour) and ridership has increased by about 15% (exclusive of population growth) since it was put into service 7-8 years ago.

In my opinion they're still in a situation of "over-capacity" during rush hour, but they keep on adding service instead of cutting it back.

Obviously this is a corporate decision in order to build ridership and create a culture of taking transit.

In terms of the system being "complete", it isn't really if I am being totally honest, though yes it does take people where most of them want to go.