The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Nouvellecosse]

So depressing that until a few years ago a Canada-based company was a world leader in rolling stock.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Quickly becoming the Canadian mainstay for LRVs - Ottawa, Toronto, Mississauga, now Quebec City.. Hamilton will more than likely follow as well.

So, basically replacing Bombardier?

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

So depressing that until a few years ago a Canada-based company was a world leader in rolling stock.

So depressing they hired people at the top that could not do anything good to keep it going.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

So depressing that until a few years ago a Canada-based company was a world leader in rolling stock.

Their train division was based in Europe and their north american operations were a joke. It's not as impressive as you think.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Their train division was based in Europe and their north american operations were a joke. It's not as impressive as you think.

It was based in Europe mainly because they bought an existing German OEM. Not sure why you weren't impressed but I thought it was nice. Certainly nicer than having only fully foreign brands.

[Acajack]

In a pretty shocking turn of events, the Quebec government has announced that the "third link" (le troisième lien) between Quebec City and its suburbs to the south across the St Lawrence River (cities like Lévis) will not involve the highway option and will be devoted to "collective transportation". So I suppose some type of transit option.

This will reduce the cost of the tunnel project quite a bit and score political points for the CAQ almost everywhere in Quebec except for a handful of ridings in those specific south shore suburbs.

There is also a good chance they'll be able to get help from the feds now as Ottawa was not keen on funding a project that was predominantly a highway expansion.

Right now there are two road bridges between the two sides of the river, and it's even a stretch to say that there are two as the old Quebec Bridge is extremely decrepit.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

In a pretty shocking turn of events, the Quebec government has announced that the "third link" (le troisième lien) between Quebec City and its suburbs to the south across the St Lawrence River (cities like Lévis) will not involve the highway option and will be devoted to "collective transportation". So I suppose some type of transit option.

Well thank goodness. That's really the only sane option considering how outrageously expensive underwater road tunnels are. Infrastructure of that scale would be a huge undertaking for even a metro several times the size.

Although I wonder how much cheaper such a tunnel would be if it didn't need the massive ventilation for ICE engines.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

....Although I wonder how much cheaper such a tunnel would be if it didn't need the massive ventilation for ICE engines.

I would guess that it wouldn't be a significant difference as the largest expense by far is probably the tunnel itself, plus emergency access, power, and other considerations. Also, they would still need to have sufficient air replacement to keep the air breathable in the event of stalls, accidents, fires and the like.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Acajack

In a pretty shocking turn of events, the Quebec government has announced that the "third link" (le troisième lien) between Quebec City and its suburbs to the south across the St Lawrence River (cities like Lévis) will not involve the highway option and will be devoted to "collective transportation". So I suppose some type of transit option.

This will reduce the cost of the tunnel project quite a bit and score political points for the CAQ almost everywhere in Quebec except for a handful of ridings in those specific south shore suburbs.

There is also a good chance they'll be able to get help from the feds now as Ottawa was not keen on funding a project that was predominantly a highway expansion.

Right now there are two road bridges between the two sides of the river, and it's even a stretch to say that there are two as the old Quebec Bridge is extremely decrepit.

Do you have a link to the project (preferably in English)?

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Do you have a link to the project (preferably in English)?

I'm sure Reece will be releasing a video with all the details in the coming days. Assuming you can bring yourself to watch it given your disdain for his video titles and thumbnails.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'm sure Reece will be releasing a video with all the details in the coming days. Assuming you can bring yourself to watch it given your disdain for his video titles and thumbnails.

I more meant the government one. I prefer to read the source materials.

[Reecemartin]

Here is my new video on Toronto's Sheppard Line & its extension possibilities! I actually feel really strongly that this is an important project and the best solution for the Sheppard Line, and I've addressed most of the expected criticisms. Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/Wv0oWk_OVok

[Doady]

Ridership in Mississauga seems to be getting out of control lately, especially in the north industrial parts of the city, along Derry, Mavis, McLaughlin, and Britannia. I wouldn't be surprised if Derry is the busiest route in Mississauga now, which is just crazy. How does such a shitty corridor like Derry Road get so many riders without any connections to the TTC, I don't know. Is it time to start thinking about a Derry LRT?

Worst part is they were in the midst of realigning routes and adding new routes for a complete grid when the pandemic happened. Some grid-based routes were cancelled, and now they seem are focused on boosting frequencies and realigning routes to deal with the overcrowding, sometimes to even further detriment of the grid. And this is with the ongoing disruptions due to the LRT construction and the TTC ridership still not fully recovered, so the overcrowding is only going to get worse while the grid remains incomplete.

[Doady]

According to the APTA statistics, Brampton Transit got 49,200,800 million boardings (unlinked trips). Brampton Transit had been incorrectly reporting revenue riders or linked trips, the Canadian method of counting ridership, to APTA for years. They say the 2021 ridership was 19,462,800 which I assume are linked trips, so probably around 28 million unlinked trips, or 75% growth in 2022 compared to 2021. Ridership in 2019 was 31.9 million linked trips, so approximately 46 million unlinked trips, so Brampton Transit ridership not only recovered from COVID in 2022 but even exceeded the pre-COVID ridership.

Compare this to TTC, where ridership in 2022 was still only 55% compared to 2019. GO is even worse, recovering only 44.4% in 2022. YRT recovered around 71%. I don't have 2022 numbers for Mississauga, but the ridership in 2023 so far is 110% compared to the same months in 2019, so I'm guessing the 2022 numbers probably were probably 90 to 100%.

I think you can see the trend away from downtown commuting. The systems serving downtown lost the most ridership and they are also the slowest to recover. Even York Region Transit is slow to recover being much more reliant on transfers to the TTC compared to Brampton and Mississauga which are more independent systems mostly serving factory and warehouse workers instead of office workers.

It might also be that the overall total yearly ridership hasn't recovered only because of lower weekday ridership. Maybe the weekend ridership is actually higher than before. Or maybe the weekday ridership down only during the peak hours, but higher in the off-peak hours. Hard to find the data, especially with the TTC website offline right now. Yeah, it's not going be easy to get all those riders back when you can't even keep your fucking website online.

Based on the APTA numbers, although the overall TTC ridership recovered to 55.3% in 2022 compared to 2019, the weekday ridership only recovered to 50.5%. You can also break TTC numbers down by mode, where bus ridership in 2022 was 69.9% of pre-COVID levels compared to subway ridership which was only 50.1%.

https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/2020-Q4-Ridership-APTA.pdf
https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/2022-Q4-Ridership-APTA.pdf

[SFUVancouver]

It's always wild to check Canadian transit system numbers against US cities.

The Vancouver SkyTrain, for example, with 385,700 average weekday unlinked trips (boardings), has higher ridership than every heavy rail system in the US except New York. The closest competitors were:

- Washington Metro Area Metro (326,300)
- Chicago Transit Authority (334,200)
- Boston Transit Authority (273,000)
- Philadelphia (146,300)
- San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (140,700)

Against US Light Rail Transit systems, because SkyTrain technology is generally considered to be somewhere in between Metro (heavy rail) and LRT (light rail), the differences are even more stark. SkyTrain was more than three times higher than the highest US LRT system (San Diego, at 109,600).

Portland Oregon and Metro Vancouver have the unique trait of being very similar cities in many respects with comparable regional populations and geographic area, and similar timing for construction of their rapid transit systems (Portland's first MAX LRT line opened in mid-1986 and Vancouver first SkyTrain Line at the end of 1985). MAX LRT and SkyTrain are also generally comparable in terms of system length (96km for Portland to 79.9km for Vancouver), function (both serve a region area with a focus on feeding into the central city), and general order of magnitude number of stations (MAX has 94 stations, including many closely-spaced downtown stations, SkyTrain has 53). Yet Portland only achieves 64,100 average daily boardings, barely 1/6th of SkyTrain!

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

It's always wild to check Canadian transit system numbers against US cities.

The Vancouver SkyTrain, for example, with 385,700 average weekday unlinked trips (boardings), has higher ridership than every heavy rail system in the US except New York. The closest competitors were:

- Washington Metro Area Metro (326,300)
- Chicago Transit Authority (334,200)
- Boston Transit Authority (273,000)
- Philadelphia (146,300)
- San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (140,700)

Against US Light Rail Transit systems, because SkyTrain technology is generally considered to be somewhere in between Metro (heavy rail) and LRT (light rail), the differences are even more stark. SkyTrain was more than three times higher than the highest US LRT system (San Diego, at 109,600).

Portland Oregon and Metro Vancouver have the unique trait of being very similar cities in many respects with comparable regional populations and geographic area, and similar timing for construction of their rapid transit systems (Portland's first MAX LRT line opened in mid-1986 and Vancouver first SkyTrain Line at the end of 1985). MAX LRT and SkyTrain are also generally comparable in terms of system length (96km for Portland to 79.9km for Vancouver), function (both serve a region area with a focus on feeding into the central city), and general order of magnitude number of stations (MAX has 94 stations, including many closely-spaced downtown stations, SkyTrain has 53). Yet Portland only achieves 64,100 average daily boardings, barely 1/6th of SkyTrain!

I was in Houston a week ago for the Blue Jays games against the Astros, and after both games I used that city's LRT.

I've been to Jays and Raptors games in Toronto, Canucks and Lions games in Vancouver, and Mariners and Kraken games in Seattle; in all three cities, the subway or LRT is jam-packed with riders leaving the game. Not so in Houston; the LRT red line heading south from downtown was almost empty - and one of the other few passengers, like me was a Jays fan, presumably visiting from Canada. Most people I saw leaving the stadium were walking towards parking lots.

It's quite a jarring cultural difference from what I'm used to. But it also helps in Houston that parking near the stadium is only $25, versus $40 in downtown Seattle, not to mention the difference in gas prices between those cities. I have no idea what parking costs these days in either Vancouver or Toronto.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Portland Oregon and Metro Vancouver have the unique trait of being very similar cities in many respects with comparable regional populations and geographic area, and similar timing for construction of their rapid transit systems (Portland's first MAX LRT line opened in mid-1986 and Vancouver first SkyTrain Line at the end of 1985). MAX LRT and SkyTrain are also generally comparable in terms of system length (96km for Portland to 79.9km for Vancouver), function (both serve a region area with a focus on feeding into the central city), and general order of magnitude number of stations (MAX has 94 stations, including many closely-spaced downtown stations, SkyTrain has 53). Yet Portland only achieves 64,100 average daily boardings, barely 1/6th of SkyTrain!

They have similar stats in some ways but they're really obviously different systems in person. Vancouver has underground stations in the urban core while Portland's got transit malls and some streetcar-style portions. Then out in the suburb it's a mix of old railway ROWs and surface-level boulevards running through low-density areas.

I wonder how total capital expenditure on the two systems compares.

Canadian systems definitely have higher ridership, all else being equal, but you can flip that around and point out that partly this may be due to a relative lack of funding in Canada.

[Doady]

Portland's transit ridership is actually a big achievement because they started from basically nothing. The ridership in 1968 was only 16 million and it increased to 97 million by 2019, kinda like Brampton quadrupling ridership from 2004 to 2019. Portland's growth is the reverse of the trend in the rest of the USA as well.

COVID really killed the ridership of the Washington Metro. The Metro used to be almost twice of Skytrain, and it used to be more than twice their bus ridership, but now their bus ridership is the same as their metro ridership, again suggesting a trend away from downtown commuting. Skytrain is not so focused on serving the downtown compared to Washington Metro.

I think the problem with the US systems is they are very basic, more focused on serving downtown with rail and they ignore buses, especially in the suburbs. The systems are designed as hub-and-spoke networks instead of as grid networks, so they cannot keep up with the current trend away from downtown commuting. In Canada, we have much more comprehensive transit networks with a mix of hub-and-spoke and grid routes. Look the TTC subway, even that is hybrid grid network. It's GO that is the pure hub-and-spoke network. The local buses operate on almost a pure grid and they fully cover the suburbs.

If you want to see the real difference between Canada and the USA, don't look at the rail ridership downtown, look at the suburban bus ridership. Brampton Transit vs Pace Suburban Bus: 189,700 vs. 65,200 average weekday boardings in 2022.

[ssiguy]

In the US transit is viewed as a social service while in Canada {like the rest of the world} it is viewed as an essential service. To most Americans transit is something only poor people use. This is especially true when it comes to buses where most Americans would rather be seen walking into a porn shop than boarding a bus.

[Nouvellecosse]

The US does generally to have comparatively lower ridership outside NYC, but in Portland's case, there's also important differences between a metro system (light or otherwise) and most LRT systems. Metro systems almost always have full grade separation and therefore aren't slowed by congestion or having to wait at intersections, crosswalks, etc. In the few cases when they don't have full grade separation they still have full priority, usually with boom gates. And because they're fully separate they can have higher speeds than routes with street running or incursion points. And when a service can get you places faster it tends to attract more ridership since it's seen as a better service, especially for longer trips.

Some LRT systems such as Edmonton, Seattle and Calgary are more metro-like so they don't suffer from these issues as much. But Portland's system, while some having fast sections, is generally less metro-like. And Portland's fast sections are mostly in freeway corridors which don't tend to be great for ridership. I looked at the Trimet Blue line schedule and compared the speed from the eastern terminus at Cleveland Ave to Pioneer Sq. downtown. The Google measure feature shows it as 23.85km and the schedule says it takes 51 min during morning peak. That's 28km/h. Not terrible, but also not great for such long distances. By comparison, a trip of similar length on the Skytrain such as the 27km from King George to Granville only takes 37 minutes despite being several km longer. That works out to about 44 km/h. Much more suitable for covering distances of 20+ km.

[Doady]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

In the US transit is viewed as a social service while in Canada {like the rest of the world} it is viewed as an essential service. To most Americans transit is something only poor people use. This is especially true when it comes to buses where most Americans would rather be seen walking into a porn shop than boarding a bus.

Transit being viewed as nothing more than a service for poor people is as much an effect as it is a cause. US transit systems have lower fares, and so these systems get less revenue from fares, and of course less revenue cutting service, which will not attract many choice riders. And of course, fewer choice riders means even less fare revenue, just a downward spiral. US systems actually get similar amount of taxpayer subsidy as Canadian systems do, just the fare revenue is much lower, so the overall service is lower.

Columbus (2019)
Fare $2.00
Fare revenue $19 million
Total operating budget $185 million (USD)

Edmonton (2019)
Fare $3.50
Fare revenue $140.9 million
Total operating budget $340.0 million (CAD)