Rail-based Transit Discussion

[OldDartmouthMark]

Quite possible! Though back then people appeared to be slimmer in general...

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I wonder if a really fat guy got on when it was empty if the front would hit the ground and the back would stick up, then when he walked to the back, the back would hit the ground and the front would stick up? Maybe that's why the doors were so narrow to prevent that from happening.

You win the internet for the day....

[ns_kid]

I thought it worth noting that Quebec City this week signed a $1.3 billion contract with Alstom Canada to buy and maintain 34 electric light rail vehicles (LRVs) to serve its new rail transit system. Construction of the 19.3 km long "Tramway" is set to begin by the end of this year or early next and be complete by 2029.

The Quebec project was first proposed in 2000 and it has gone through several iterations since then (including a short-lived proposal to convert it to a bus rapid transit system). The line will include a 1.8 km underground section and will have 29 stations.



Earlier plans for extensions to the suburbs of Charlesbourg and (across the St. Lawrence) to Charny and Levis were dropped, at least for now. The projected construction cost, somewhere around $4 billion, will be shared by the city, the province and the feds.

The LRVs are Alstom's Citadis Spirit model, built at its (former Bombardier) plant in La Pocatiere QC. OC Transpo in Ottawa and Metrolinx in Toronto have bought the same model. One LRV will carry up to 260 passengers, and the system is designed to deliver 3900-passenger miles per hour.


Alstom Citadis Spirit LRV in Ottawa. Source: Youngjin, Wikimedia Commons


The city says the LRV will "alleviate road congestion, reduce the impact of mobility on the environment and air quality, improve the quality of life for residents and further enhance the attractiveness of Quebec City." They're projecting an additional 10 million transit trips a year, a 30% increase over current ridership.

Quebec will become the eighth metropolitan area in Canada with rail transit; Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Kitchener-Waterloo, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal are the others. Systems are also at some level of planning or development in Gatineau, Hamilton, and Peel/Brampton.

The population of the Quebec CMA is 840,000. compared to Halifax's 481,000; planning for the system began in 2000, when the population was at 680,000.

[MonctonRad]

Halifax should be planning LRT and/or heavy commuter rail too. They should be doing this now and not in 25 years time.

Planning and implementation of such a system will take decades.

[LikesBikes]

Good luck to Quebec. From my understanding those cars have been somewhat of a disaster in Ottawa to the point I'd be disappointed and worried with receiving the same vehicles.

If Halifax is to pursue rail, I'd hope it'd be with a more proven system such as something like the Vancouver SkyTrain or a typical metro. All these low-floor LRT systems popping up seem like glorified trams/streetcars that don't really provide as much benefit as higher-order transit but cost almost the same.

[ns_kid]

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

Good luck to Quebec. From my understanding those cars have been somewhat of a disaster in Ottawa to the point I'd be disappointed and worried with receiving the same vehicles.

If Halifax is to pursue rail, I'd hope it'd be with a more proven system such as something like the Vancouver SkyTrain or a typical metro. All these low-floor LRT systems popping up seem like glorified trams/streetcars that don't really provide as much benefit as higher-order transit but cost almost the same.

You are right that the Ottawa LRT has been plagued with problems since it began in 2019. I am no expert on the subject (I lived in Ottawa for several years but had left before the original diesel-powered O-Train launched in 2001) but I believe it is true to say that many of the issues (a couple of sinkholes, sewage-smelling stations, misaligned track) were unrelated to the design of the LRV. Many of those that were -- according to Alstom's testimony last year before a public inquiry -- were the results of demands by Ottawa that the trains be larger and more heavily powered than they were designed for.

An Alstom official testified that "The City of Ottawa wanted to move 24,000 passengers an hour in each direction, which was 'exceptional' and more in line with subways as opposed to light rail." In fact, Alstom replaced the standard engine with one used in subway trains. They also pointed out that Ottawa insisted that some LRV assembly and maintenance of the vehicles be done in Ottawa, where the workforce was inexperienced and poorly trained. The public inquiry report, released in November, seems to focus most of the blame on Ottawa's mayor and senior managers and on the private-public construction consortium that built the system.

The prototypes proposed for Quebec have apparently undergone extensive testing and should be more reliable, and Alstom's track record (unintended pun) is pretty strong elsewhere. To your point, the Quebec system is designed more like a tram system (it's to be called "the Tramway") and the promotional narrative links to the city's original street railway. [Historic fact: Halifax's street railway opened in 1866, just a few months after Quebec's, and was retired in 1949, just a year after Quebec's.]

All that said, the Ottawa case should serve as a cautionary tale for any big public-private sector partnership. For more, see the article from The Walrus, tellingly entitled, "Ottawa's Transit Gong Show."

[someone123]

I think the metro populations are important but you could look at it a bit differently. Halifax grew by 20k last year while Quebec grew by 12k. What transport infrastructure is being built to support the additional population and ensuing trip demand?

There has also been a shift toward urban infill projects and away from greenfield development. And there isn't much capacity or desire for road building, so transit projects have become more desirable than they were in the 1950-2000 period.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by ns_kid

All that said, the Ottawa case should serve as a cautionary tale for any big public-private sector partnership.

Inept management, especially by the public sector part of the management group, combined with complex issues relating to construction and design, rigid and uncooperative public sector unions, and lack of accountability by both public sector management and labor, means that all such large projects are risky. If you go down this road, you are sure to have problems.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Halifax should be planning LRT and/or heavy commuter rail too. They should be doing this now and not in 25 years time.

Planning and implementation of such a system will take decades.

Halifax does not really want to look to the future. If they did that, the people would need to also admit that Halifax is a real city.

Originally Posted by LikesBikes

Good luck to Quebec. From my understanding those cars have been somewhat of a disaster in Ottawa to the point I'd be disappointed and worried with receiving the same vehicles.

If Halifax is to pursue rail, I'd hope it'd be with a more proven system such as something like the Vancouver SkyTrain or a typical metro. All these low-floor LRT systems popping up seem like glorified trams/streetcars that don't really provide as much benefit as higher-order transit but cost almost the same.

Canada does poorly at picking the right modes for transportation. Pick something and it is not what should be used. For example, the Ontario Line is not going to have cars that are as big as the existing subways. Using artics in a city where snow is a problem and those buses cannot work in snow.... So, while Halifax should use something good, they won't. Ottawa didn't, so why expect Halifax to do any better?

Originally Posted by someone123

I think the metro populations are important but you could look at it a bit differently. Halifax grew by 20k last year while Quebec grew by 12k. What transport infrastructure is being built to support the additional population and ensuing trip demand?

There has also been a shift toward urban infill projects and away from greenfield development. And there isn't much capacity or desire for road building, so transit projects have become more desirable than they were in the 1950-2000 period.

Basing the system around the need and the future needs would be good, but unfortunately, we don't do that.

[someone123]

It's probably been discussed to death but I wonder if anybody is thinking about the possibility of putting a passenger rail line on the bridge that replaces the MacKay. This could run downtown, above or below ground, and connect up with the rail line that goes to Windsor Junction on the Dartmouth side or split off to a new rail line running through the woods to the airport and eventually on to Truro or Moncton.

It may sound ambitious but I am not sure it is on a 10-20 year timeline.

It also would have been good to consider how a rail line could run into downtown around the Cogswell interchange area. That ship has probably sailed but it is a lot cheaper to do cut-and-cover infrastructure before an area is developed.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by someone123

It's probably been discussed to death but I wonder if anybody is thinking about the possibility of putting a passenger rail line on the bridge that replaces the MacKay. This could run downtown, above or below ground, and connect up with the rail line that goes to Windsor Junction on the Dartmouth side or split off to a new rail line running through the woods to the airport and eventually on to Truro or Moncton.

It may sound ambitious but I am not sure it is on a 10-20 year timeline.

It also would have been good to consider how a rail line could run into downtown around the Cogswell interchange area. That ship has probably sailed but it is a lot cheaper to do cut-and-cover infrastructure before an area is developed.

A better spot would be the third harbour crossing" tunnel plans. It lines up bettwe with the existing Via station and the rail infrastructure on both sides.,

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

I saw the mayor being interviewed on CTV about a month ago following his annual address to the Halifax Chamber of Commerce. He said something to the effect that the city is sitting on solid rock and there is no likelyhood of underground rail and that the city is focusing on ferries and not rail. So, I guess that if we're ever to see mass tranist service to the airport we're going to have to widen the Shubie Canal system?? Joking aside, i and quite literally everyone I speak with have no faith in the our city council to properly address the current transit issues let alone how to grow transit into the future. And the premier's wish to grow the province by one million is becoming more of a threat than a boon. Without question, the Mckay bridge replacement, the Windsor St. exchange upgrade and the Cogswell project should consider mass transit in their plans.

[Nouvellecosse]

That's weird. Having rock as a tunneling substrate isn't rare and isn't particularly undesirable. While it requires either blasting or extra hard teeth on a TBM, these things can both be done easily enough and having a hard material actually can be beneficial in that there's less risk of collapse and fewer water issues. Sounds more like a hunt for excuses than a genuine impediment.

[MonctonRad]

Agreed, but costs would be a lot higher drilling through solid granitic rock. This is what Savage was probably getting at.

If a subway is too expensive, then go for LRT and heavy commuter rail.

- LRT for on the peninsula, sharing the roadways.
- heavy passenger rail for the far flung suburbs, using the rail cut to get downtown.
- ferries are OK for getting back and forth to downtown from Dartmouth.

A multipronged approach is necessary.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Agreed, but costs would be a lot higher drilling through solid granitic rock. This is what Savage was probably getting at.

The geology varies across the metro area. The peninsula is mostly slate (the dark "ironstone" you see used in some buildings, which was just the local stone) and parts (e.g. Citadel Hill) are glacial till made up of a clay-like mix with stones embedded inside.

The rail cut was built through this geology in the early 1900's.

I get the impression NS/Halifax are lagging in culturally "internalizing" the growth happening there and would be better off planning with a more open mind and longer time horizon and suppressing the reflex to come up with reasons why things can't be done. Whether or not a tunnel is worthwhile will come down to specifics of the plan; it shouldn't be taken off the table a priori.

When I think about cities with good transport systems in Europe they have a great mix of different modes. Amsterdam has highways, tunnels, a metro, ferries, streetcars, and great bike infrastructure. There is no one project that was ever built there that solved regional transportation problems. Given the geography I think Halifax would be similar, and will need a lot of different projects. For example maybe more ferries, commuter rail, and streetcars.

[Keith P.]

Perhaps Mayor Mike thinks he is Mr. Zucca:

• Video Link

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by someone123

The geology varies across the metro area. The peninsula is mostly slate (the dark "ironstone" you see used in some buildings, which was just the local stone) and parts (e.g. Citadel Hill) are glacial till made up of a clay-like mix with stones embedded inside.

The rail cut was built through this geology in the early 1900's.

I get the impression NS/Halifax are lagging in culturally "internalizing" the growth happening there and would be better off planning with a more open mind and longer time horizon and suppressing the reflex to come up with reasons why things can't be done. Whether or not a tunnel is worthwhile will come down to specifics of the plan; it shouldn't be taken off the table a priori.

When I think about cities with good transport systems in Europe they have a great mix of different modes. Amsterdam has highways, tunnels, a metro, ferries, streetcars, and great bike infrastructure. There is no one project that was ever built there that solved regional transportation problems. Given the geography I think Halifax would be similar, and will need a lot of different projects. For example maybe more ferries, commuter rail, and streetcars.

The problem is they are unwilling to future plan a grand metropolis. You can see it in all of the infrastructure plans and how they do not really represent the future. They represent the past and present needs. Until enough of the citizens of the city look to the future, there will be slow movement on anything.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

That's weird. Having rock as a tunneling substrate isn't rare and isn't particularly undesirable. While it requires either blasting or extra hard teeth on a TBM, these things can both be done easily enough and having a hard material actually can be beneficial in that there's less risk of collapse and fewer water issues. Sounds more like a hunt for excuses than a genuine impediment.

Having rock as a substrate is, in fact, highly desirable.

[Dengler Avenue]

Another issue to consider is the fractures (discontinuities) in the rock mass.
Hardness is one factor, but the system of fractures is a main determining factor of the stability of hard rock mass (especially when it comes to cutting and tunneling). Also, if the rocks turn out highly weathered, well, good luck to you…
MTQ can teach us how to cut and Norway can teach us how to tunnel.

[Empire]

Good for Quebec City!

https://railway-news.com/alstom-to-s...-city-tramway/