[planarchy]

It still annoys me that everything is discussed in the context of serving Bedford and then ideas like LRT are dismissed. Bedford doesn't have the population to support its own light rail line but there are definitely areas in the HRM which do have the densities - namely the peninsula and Clayton Park, which could have been much better if it were more sensibly designed.

I was just on the SkyTrain 20 minutes ago and it passes through many areas that are no more densely built up than parts of Halifax. It has about 70 km of track, some underground. I find it really hard to believe that Vancouver can support that, streetcars, electric trolleys, and a vastly superior bus service while Halifax can't even handle one small LRT line. Vancouver's larger for sure, but the other part of the puzzle is that it has more direction and better priorities. Vancouver's transit is far more expensive per capita and TransLink is in far worse financial shape than Metro Transit but they are nevertheless focused on expansion and providing high-level service. In Halifax the focus is on what can't be done and the system is so poor that the only ones who use it are the ones who have no other choice.

Well said. Public Transit Agencies are not there to turn a profit, but to make a city more desirable, accessible and efficient.

[Dmajackson]

Lmao.

I'm not going to post what he said since it is in a private email but apparently Outhit saw Someone123's post and disagrees greatly on the use of LRT.

[Wishblade]

Lmao.

I'm not going to post what he said since it is in a private email but apparently Outhit saw Someone123's post and disagrees greatly on the use of LRT.

Well then I don't think theres any changing his mind. But the dayliners their looking into are better than nothing, and is a step in the right direction I suppose.

[Dmajackson]

I was in contact with Councillor Outhit again and he has asked me to post his reasoning behind supporting dayliners and not LRT at the moment. The following is his wording;

"LRT requires separate tracks from the CN rails and a buffer between the two separate lines of tracks. So, you could say that CN doesn't allow Smart Cars on their equivalent of an 18 wheelers only highway.

LRT tracks cost tens of millions of dollars per km. Dayliners can use the existing CN rails and have some of the stop and go functionality of LRT, and much more flexibility than the heavy rail GO Train approach.

Plus, the existing tracks go further than we could reasonably hope to be able to afford to build for separate LRT. Thus, this extending out much further to a larger population base and more potential riders. Remember, NS's entire population is less than 50% of greater Vancouver's."

[fenwick16]

I have to admit my ignorance with regards to dayliners. I Google'd it and came up with the image below. If this is the system that is being talked about it then it seems like a reasonable approach. It is somewhere in between LRT and the heavy rail GO system.

http://www.railtravelcenter.com/images/Malahat%20Dayliner%20at%20Niagara%20Canyon%20by%20Jack%20Weeks.jpg

[haligonia]

One idea that I have is to combine two of the ideas that seem to be floating around.
You could completley eliminate the seaport in the south end (Yes, grain elevators and all:rolleyes:) and move operations to somwhere else, which would free up that land for a large mixed-use development, which could include a commuter rail station. The elimination of the seaport would also give a lot more flexibility in when these trains could operate, only sharing the rail cut with VIA Rail rather than VIA aswell as CN.

I know it will probably never happen, but you have to have something to hope for.:rolleyes:

[hfx_chris]

I'm not going to post what he said since it is in a private email but apparently Outhit saw Someone123's post and disagrees greatly on the use of LRT.
Then he's an idiot and spends too much time listening to the anti-LRT transit planning department.

"LRT requires separate tracks from the CN rails and a buffer between the two separate lines of tracks. So, you could say that CN doesn't allow Smart Cars on their equivalent of an 18 wheelers only highway.
No, it doesn't. LRT vehicles can be built to the same track gauge as heavy rail, and it can operate just fine on the same tracks as long as the required time separation is maintained. All it would require here is coordination with freight and VIA passenger services, and probably updated signaling.

[sdm]

move hal term in the south end, and fairview to magazine hill.

Therefore Halterm can be the south station location, and fairview the north.

Distrubtion from fairview or the South station could be by bus.

oh wait, that type of idea would only happen in a city with a leader with vision.............

[spaustin]

A few thoughts. The real problem with the argument that "we have the tracks lets use them" is we don't actually, the tracks are CNs and CN is a tough as nails corporation. They are not interested in taking on any liability whatsoever. Just look at the lengths they're going to minimize risk at train crossings. I did some work as part of my planning degree that involved the rail cut and the reality is CN is just not going to play ball with anything that adds singificant risk. That means you can either run trains that fit their standards or negotiate to use whatever space they have leftover in their right of way. It's unfortunate, but that's the reality.

As for moving the port, great idea in the long-term. It's sitting on very valuable land and getting in and out of it is logistically difficult for traffic. The problem is where do you move it? You can't move it up the basin since half the ports potential competitiveness compared to places like New York is the harbour is unobstructed so it can take the biggest ships. New York is seriously considering raising the Bayonne Bridge because it's too low for big ships to get under and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge poses potential future limits as well. If we moved the port up to Magazine Hill we would lose that edge because the two bridges would be in the way! Maybe we could find room on the Dartmouth side near the refineries/Shearwater. They already have decent rail and highway access over there. Would be a heck of a better spot from a transportation point of view and would free up valuable land on the Peninsula. Too bad it would cost a fortune.

[haligonia]

Jonathan Norwood wrote in today's Herald about redeveloping Halterm. Unfortunaly I couldn't find the story online, but it's good to see that we're not the only visionary people in this city. :rolleyes:

[Wishblade]

Commuter rail for Bedford back in consideration

By JASON TEAKLE
Fri. Feb 12 - 4:54 AM

The commuter rail transit option has been put back on the table for Bedford residents.

The strategic transportation planning branch of Halifax Regional Municipality is looking at three public transit options for the area: commuter rail, a fast ferry and MetroLink bus routes.

The study is separate from Metro Transit’s five-year transit plan passed in principle earlier this week by regional council’s committee of the whole.

"Commuter rail was not part of the regional (five-year plan)," said David McCusker, manager of strategic transportation planning with HRM.

"We had a request from council to include (rail service) in the consideration (for Bedford) so it was added as a later thing, making some additional work."

The addition of the commuter rail option will delay the release of the study’s findings.

The results were to be released sometime in March, but McCusker said it will likely be May or June before the study is complete.

A 1996 commuter rail study commissioned by the Halifax Metropolitan Authority in response to a proposal made by CN and Via to the town of Bedford, and then-mayor Peter Kelly, was thrown out because the fee CN wanted to charge for using their line and the amount Via wanted to charge to operate commuter trains were too expensive.

McCusker said while there is nothing major for Bedford in the five-year plan produced by Metro Transit, the area is a priority for better transit service after 2015 because more growth will occur in the south and west parts of the community and increased transit capacity will be needed.

[Halifax Hillbilly]

The Dayliner idea is interesting, and I've never been a huge fan of using the existing rail cut. At the least it deserves study, it's a new idea and could provide a unique service to an underserviced area.

Everyone assumes there is only one option to serve Bedford - is it necessarily ferry vs. rail vs. Link vs. conventional bus? Why couldn't a number of these ideas work and provide more options for commuters in Bedford? Is it good service people are concerned about or what mode of transportation gets implemented. Rail is not inherently superior to bus rapid transit or ferry and vice versa.

[halifaxboyns]

I'm loving this discussion and I think that its great that one of the councillors from HRM is reading this. So I really want to kick this discussion up a notch and get a discussion going.

First, I hate to kybosh someone's thoughts, but someone123 - LRT doesn't work in rail. I have friends with Calgary Transit and they couldn't use the CP rail because the trains are usually powered with a 3rd rail (on the side) for power, or in the case of Calgary Transit, overheard power lines. Plus the gauge of track is different. But, I'm going to post something seperately about LRT - because i don't think it should be discounted - just not with regular rail. :)

So when I was doing my degree, I did had to do a regional planning exercise and I was the transportation guy - the issues I figured out with rail were mainly that it didn't get you into the downtown. So in order for rail to work, three things had to be achieved (IMO):
1) Commuting time had to be more competative than auto (so 40 minutes or less);
2) The cost had to reasonable in terms of other forms of transit and the cost to park downtown (so slightly higher than say a regular bus, but not astronomical);
3) Provide a seemless connection into downtown (either through a direct route or by no more than 1 connection) that allowed quick changes - so off the train, to a bus and to your destination without waiting; and
4) Didn't incomber CN's trains (since they owned the line).

So then you have to look at what are the major employers on the Peninsula: Downtown office towers, the universities and the hospitals. So your focus should be mainly on getting people from the train to these three places. The first step of that plan is happening now - with the free downtown bus route proposed. That can be one piece of the puzzle, so the train comes in but instead of just one bus being there, there are several - incase one gets full. But there is a seemless connection. Then have another route going from the train station to the universities and hospitals. So say up south street, left @ South Park, Right onto Inglis, then right onto Robie, and end just behind the QE on summer street by the Museum. The return route would be similar during the PM rush. So, if you get on in Bedford - you'd get off at the Train Station, jump on the Hospital University Bus, get off and go to work.

As to the route; that's where I get really 'pie in the sky'. Yes a route to Bedford is important, but what would be the stopping points? Well obviously the Via station (lets call it Waterfront or Central Station - something interesting), Mumford (could be another connection point to the hospitals/university), but the big one for me is Bayers Road. Bayers Road is where the Chester Spur is and has huge potential. This is where I get (probably) controversial - I think you'd need to expropriate the Superstore and here is why: I don't think you limit rail to Bedford. The burbs are growing, so use the chester spur too. So Bayers Road could be the point where both lines come together and then go downtown - so you'd have double service from the Waterfront to Bayers Road, but then each line would go in it's seperate ways from there. Plus, if you build a huge station there - you could sell back the remaining land to Superstore under the catch that they build higher density there - so they can have their store, but towers have to be above it. That could then spur more office growth at the Village and some of the small apts on Desmond could grow up (say 5 stories).

So from there, you have a stop at Rockingham (for the Mount); then Chinatown (since there is talk of high density there), Mill Cove and then Downsview.

I look at an expropriation behind the mall - so that you could build a terminal off the mainline there. Then you could add more offices there, plus Downsview could be a spur point for another line (I'll mention in a minute). Then the last station could be at Windsor Junction (near Cobequid Road) with potential expansion out to the airport.

But why limit service to Bedford? The chester spur is a great example of treating rail at the bottom of the barrel for priority; but that could still be used. More political will would be needed in order to widen the rail right of way for a double line, but could be done - you'd need to expropriate. But setup a double line that goes from Bayers Road, up under the NW Arm drive (maybe put a station there?), then into Bayer's Lake (put a station there), Timberlea and out to Tantallon. As part of taking land to make the ROW wider, you could make it wide enough for the rail beds and then still keep the walking trail, but keep it well fenced off and seperated? This could capture people out that way better than the bus would and wouldn't have the same delays due to traffic.

And what about Dartmouth? Well - use the spur line to Dartmouth - so you catch it at Downsview, then it spurs off into the business park - maybe put it near the ferry terminal i've suggested for Burnside, at the Yacht Club and then take land and eventually connect it to the line that runs along the harbour edge into DT Dartmouth? So you could have a stop at Shannon Park and then at the Ferry Terminals for DT Dartmouth and then Woodside?

Why limit the route to just one place? The problem with my thoughts is that you'll have to negotiate or take land - which is never easy or fun. So there would have to be a lot of political will - but the benefits could be great; because you could build higher density, transit oriented development all around each station - allowing older neighbourhoods to grow again.

The other issue would be the trains - the 24 cars in Moncton is a good start, but no where near enough. Now you could buy BUDD built rail cars that weren't powered and connect them to these self powered trains to get more capacity - that would work. But you'd ultimately need more modern cars to expand.

The other catch will be car traffic for bus connections. A seemless connection at the train station is great; but if you are always going to miss the train coming home in the PM - not so good. Not sure how to resolve that one, but it would be an obsticle - but could also be a great asset. You could run the trains for the typical AM/PM commutes and then during festivals and big concerts/events. Plus, at certain locations (Mill Cove, Chinatown, Burnside) it could be an intermodal system - Rail, Bus and Ferry perhaps?

I'd love to hear people's thoughts on my concept - it's what got me an A for my regional planning project eheh.

[halifaxboyns]

...and now for my thought on LRT (I promised someone123 I'd say something). First though; the pic of the dayliner posted in this thread is the VIA train on Vancouver Island (from Victoria to Duncan - very fun!).

Someone123 has a good thought about LRT; but my thought on it is a little different. I've been to many cities that use trollies and they give that city a really interesting feel (Toronto being a great example).

Halifax used to have them - so why not think about adding them back into the system?

Maybe try it out on a line on both sides of the harbour (I doubt you could send them across the bridges, I think the weights wouldn't work) - but you could due a trolly like what was done for Vancouver through the streets of Halifax and Dartmouth along some main corridors?

Could spur some redevelopment. Say for example Gottingen Street or Agricola? Those are probably the next two spots where you'll see development pressure, because they are so close to downtown - so why not spur that with a trolly line into downtown?

Just not sure of a route and how it would work - I don't think a skytrain would work in Halifax because of the huge changes in grade, but who knows?

[someone123]

LRT implies a different sort of system that can't run along the standard gauge heavy rail lines, but this is consistent with what I said: I think that the city should give up on the idea of using the CN rail lines and make their own new ROWs.

It doesn't seem like weights should be an issue on the bridges. They regularly carry very heavy vehicles. Running freight trains is probably a bad idea but modern electric trolleys are probably way lighter than old buses. The Macdonald Bridge is from the 1950s and it's possible that it's very overbuilt, although they did widen it.

My issue with trolleys is that they'd be expensive without being faster than cars. I think the best option is some kind of hybrid system where it's possible to have mixed stretches along with parts that are dedicated ROW (at-grade, elevated, or short tunnels). This is the kind of thing the city can invest in over time to gradually improve service.

[hfx_chris]

First, I hate to kybosh someone's thoughts, but someone123 - LRT doesn't work in rail. I have friends with Calgary Transit and they couldn't use the CP rail because the trains are usually powered with a 3rd rail (on the side) for power, or in the case of Calgary Transit, overheard power lines. Plus the gauge of track is different.
First off, they can be diesel powered, and although I'm not aware of any system at the moment, I don't see why some sort of hybrid technology couldn't be implimented. Second, they can be manufactured to the standard north american track gauge (check out the O Train in Ottawa). Third, it can be done as long as proper spacing and separation is maintained between the LRT vehicle and freight/heavy rail, which would necessitate upgrades to CN's signalling equipment, and the vehicles meet the appropriate Transport Canada requirements.

Everything else you said though I agree with. And, I've been coming more onboard with the idea of an electrified trolleycoach system downtown. My suggestion would be for it to take the place of the now cancelled downtown shuttle route, although I would like to see a loop created from the Via station to Inglis, Robie, South, Oxford, Quinpool, Bell, Summer, Spring Garden, Barrington (north), then back via Hollis (or Upper Water in the opposite direction). And, just to clarify there would be no problem running them over the Macdonald Bridge. I mean after all, the former trolleycoach route 11 ran to Dartmouth via that bridge.

[fenwick16]

One problem with electric trolley buses are the overhead power lines which look very unattractive in a city. Also they are confined to a specific path whereas buses aren't. Halifax has introduced new hybrid buses which are far more economical and cleaner than the old diesel buses. I don't see any advantage to any system that shares the road with cars such as streetcars. Living in the Toronto area, I have to navigate the streetcar tracks whenever I go downtown and it is a nightmare for people in cars. Also, sharing the road with a streetcar is like sharing the road with a heavy train (it is intimidating when driving a car). Again, I really think that buses are superior, especially the new hybrid buses.

Living in the Toronto area, I am somewhat spoiled as far as transit goes. In my opinion, other than a subway or GO-like rail transit system, which have their own right of way, the new Halifax hybrid buses seem superior to both trolley cars and streetcars.

PS: If Halifax had of kept its streetcar system from the early 1900's then it would be a great tourist attraction like the San Francisco system is. However, the modern Toronto system doesn't even have that going for it. I honestly don't know why Toronto continues to operate them.

[musicman]

I seem to remember a picture somewhere.... Maybe at the macpass offices that has a troller car on one of the bridges... It must have been the mcdonald due to the timing that both existed...

[Jstaleness]

I seem to remember a picture somewhere.... Maybe at the macpass offices that has a troller car on one of the bridges... It must have been the mcdonald due to the timing that both existed...

It is at the offices and was also the front cover of the 50th Anniversary Calendar.

[terrynorthend]

One problem with electric trolley buses are the overhead power lines which look very unattractive in a city. Also they are confined to a specific path whereas buses aren't. Halifax has introduced new hybrid buses which are far more economical and cleaner than the old diesel buses. I don't see any advantage to any system that shares the road with cars such as streetcars. Living in the Toronto area, I have to navigate the streetcar tracks whenever I go downtown and it is a nightmare for people in cars. Also, sharing the road with a streetcar is like sharing the road with a heavy train (it is intimidating when driving a car). Again, I really think that buses are superior, especially the new hybrid buses.

Living in the Toronto area, I am somewhat spoiled as far as transit goes. In my opinion, other than a subway or GO-like rail transit system, which have their own right of way, the new Halifax hybrid buses seem superior to both trolley cars and streetcars.

PS: If Halifax had of kept its streetcar system from the early 1900's then it would be a great tourist attraction like the San Francisco system is. However, the modern Toronto system doesn't even have that going for it. I honestly don't know why Toronto continues to operate them.

Your comments are right on the money, Fenwick. Urban trolleys sound romantic, but not very practical. The caveat is an historical line that doubles as a tourist attraction/ city ambiance, or perhaps a funicular line on a mountainous route. Hybrid or hydrogen buses and a BRT system make much more sense for a city the size and density of Halifax.

[DigitalNinja]

I to agree with Fenwick. It is already hard enough to navigate narrow streets without a big train in the middle.
I really don't think much time would be saved from buses and trains.
The only way it would be practical would be something like Shanghai's maglev system which travels at 400kph in some points. Otherwise buses are just fine here.
Also just a curiosity, but would a subway be viable in a city like halifax?

[Phalanx]

I'm guessing the terrain is too difficult (too much rock, too many hills), and our population not nearly dense enough to make a subway practical. Not to mention that none of the established infrastructure was built with subways in mind.

[hfx_chris]

Good lord folks, you're aware that modern trolley coaches are the same physical size, and in many cases look identical to a diesel bus, the only difference being the power poles at the back? I don't know why we're talking about tracks in the pavement when the bloody things use rubber tires. It's no more "intimidating" than a diesel bus - in fact I would say less intimidating, because it doesn't have the noisy diesel engine.

I think you guys are mistaking trolley coaches with trams or street cars.

[fenwick16]

Good lord folks, you're aware that modern trolley coaches are the same physical size, and in many cases look identical to a diesel bus, the only difference being the power poles at the back? I don't know why we're talking about tracks in the pavement when the bloody things use rubber tires. It's no more "intimidating" than a diesel bus - in fact I would say less intimidating, because it doesn't have the noisy diesel engine.

I think you guys are mistaking trolley coaches with trams or street cars.

We were talking about both. The main advantage of trolley buses is that they are electric and therefore better for the environment. Streetcars run on tracks, as we know. I don't see the advantage of either over hybrid buses, especially with technological advantages such as hybrid buses. In fact buses aren't confined to a steet-based track which is an advantage for buses.

If it is LRT, heavy rail or subway on a right of way track free of traffic lights and cars then there is a definite advantage. My point is that buses are better than streetcars (on tracks) and trolley buses (i.e. the ones with power poles but on tires). Halifax has had both in the past and phased them out in favour of buses. On the other hand, if Halifax could construct a subway or rail system with a right of way track then it would be better than buses (although much more expensive).

I don't like the idea of a LRT running on a street-based rail track together with cars and traffic lights. If that is what we are talking about, then this system doesn't have any great advantage over buses (unless it is mainly operated on a completely separate track and then operates for only a few city blocks on a street based track it would be an advantage). There are many different LRT systems that can be considered.

[halifaxboyns]

I think the difficulty with LRT (in my mind) is that with the densest part of the city fully built out - in order to get a ROW for an LRT - you have to expropriate property. I've suggested it in my initial post; but it's not a happy process.

An LRT would be easier for out in some of the burbs into new greenfield areas; but getting it into the city is going to be tough.

As for trollycars, streetcars, etc - it was merely a suggestion. I've driven in toronto and I do feel affraid driving with them on their streets. But it was merely a thought.

I'm sad to hear that the downtown shuttle has been cancelled though - when was that cancelled? Why? What happened to it?

[fenwick16]

If it were possible (just forget about the cost) to use the rail cut and then have the LRT on the downtown streets for just a few city blocks then it might be a good solution. Even better, if it were possible to use the rail cut and have a short subway through downtown Halifax (a few kilometers in length) with it being just below street level to minimize the construction cost. This would service the suburbs and drop people off right downtown.

The only system that I can see happening in the near future would be a rail system with a drop off location at the VIA station near the Westin Hotel and then have transfers to city buses. (Even this depends on CN allowing the system to use the rail lines).

[hfx_chris]

We were talking about both.
I was talking about trolley coaches. And your point that they are confined to a particular route is also moot, because they can be ordered with batteries onboard to allow travelling for significant distances off the grid, in order to say detour around construction or accidents.

Anyway, getting back to the LRT discussion...

If it were possible (just forget about the cost) to use the rail cut and then have the LRT on the downtown streets for just a few city blocks then it might be a good solution.
I've been suggesting the exact same thing right from the start. My suggestion includes making Lower Water one-way northbound for its' entire length, then having the tracks along both L.W. and Hollis, running to the Cogswell area where a new terminal could be included in whatever future redevelopment happens there.

[fenwick16]

I was talking about trolley coaches. And your point that they are confined to a particular route is also moot, because they can be ordered with batteries onboard to allow travelling for significant distances off the grid, in order to say detour around construction or accidents.

That is interesting, that they can operate for significant distances off the grid. However, you would still have overhead lines which don't look very appealing. I remember when Halifax had trolleys (I was very young at the time). I remember them down near the Spring Garden Road and Barrington intersection (at least that is what I faintly remember). I just don't see why they would be preferable to buses (especially hybrid buses which can also operate for significant distances on battery power).

I would really like to see a LRT system in Halifax similar to what you have described. Hopefully Halifax will continue to grow and will be able to afford such a system in the future. It would also be great to see a line operating under the harbour (although it might make the ferries redundant if in the same geographical area).

[worldlyhaligonian]

How much does 1 km of two lane ashphalt cost?

The rail cut would be great as an express bus in the mean time. There could be stations Downtown, at Smu, Dal, Quinpool area, Chebucto and all the way out to bedford.

[MalcolmTucker]

I don't know when everyone seemed to start to believe that LRT isn't standard gauge - it is everywhere but Toronto (at least in Canada, all of Western Europe, and the USA). Even the new lines in Toronto will be built to standard gauge.

The biggest difficulty for co-mingling trains is the railways safety standard in North America called 'FRA'. Basically, to operate on a shared track, there either has to be very generous time separation (which is what the O-Train in Ottawa uses, freight trains run sometimes on the line at night) or the cars have to be FRA compliant like the BUDD Via Rail car someone posted last page, or the locomotive & bi-level car setup that is used all across the continent to solve this problem.

As for normal street operation and buses vs. trolleys vs. streetcars, streetcars are definitely superior if you put in place the policies to support them. The main advantage is in the focusing of higher density real-estate development along the route. (other advantage is in lower lifecycle costs, and operating costs). The are expensive to start with however and provide no advantage to average commuters over buses beyond 'rail bias' (legibility and ride quality).

For a first phase I have to say I would avoid service on the peninsula, and run a feeder system for the harbour ferry terminals/ downtown in Dartmouth. I assume that it would be much easier to gain access to the ROW there, and it would be pretty cheap to implement a service level close to the O-Train in Ottawa.

Getting rail transit on the peninsula that is actually an improvement over buses in anything other than aesthetics is going to be really expensive.

[someone123]

For a first phase I have to say I would avoid service on the peninsula, and run a feeder system for the harbour ferry terminals/ downtown in Dartmouth.

This would be almost worthless. You could put in a dedicated right of way and great rail service but it wouldn't do anything particularly wonderful for anybody. Dartmouth is very suburban, so the few people who lived near stations would still own cars, and getting downtown would involve a transfer to a slow ferry, ultimately destroying whatever advantage was gained by adding rail service. This is why the existing MetroLink BRT service runs over the bridge to Scotia Square terminal.

The best way by far to start a system would be to go from the downtown to a convenient transfer point for suburban express buses - either the bridge terminal or Lacewood (preferably Lacewood first). This would cost actual money but no more in proportional terms than what's been done in half a dozen other cities across Canada.

It's probably even worth starting out a system with a fully dedicated right of way just so that it can be automated. An elevated system with small trains and relatively high frequencies would provide vastly better service than what exists and wouldn't have the labour costs.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ The amount of passengers needed to justify automated rail are far far out of Halifax's league, plus I am pretty sure there would be huge opposition to the trains downtown. You need a system that for metro's population is affordable - building the Canada Line Halifax edition is definitely not.

[halifaxboyns]

Sir.humphry makes a good point (although I'm sorry to say this, but when I saw you nick name, all I could think was Mr. Humprey's are you free? Sorry I was watching Are you being Served at the time I read your post - no insult intended).

Anyway...building any transit infrastructure like LRT or rail in Halifax will be mega expensive and unfortunately the density anywhere in the city isn't high enough - yet.

I think if it were to go forward - there would have to be a huge risk taken on the part of the city to get the infrastructure in place first and then build the density up second; which is never a happy idea because it takes a long time to recover the costs and you may never get the density levels you want.

Plus considering the level of money the city has - it would be a huge effort (we're talking the total cost of their capital/operating budgets for 2010 times by at least 2 or 3 - so in the 1Billion mark). I estimate it that high because of the geology that would have to be dealt with and the difficulty of setting up a new right of way through heavily developed areas.

I still believe that if you want to do transportation like this - the rail line is the cheapest way to go for initial setup and operation since the cut is already there. But I'd be supportive of anything frankly; that would improve Halifax.

I like the idea that someone mentioned about Hollis Street and Lower Water - I've always believed those streets should be one way in opposite directions and that the on street parking should be removed. That way; you'd have better traffic flow and you could do a trolly down one side.

As to the trolly discussion - if you could do a trolly that wouldn't require an overhead line; I'm all for it - I don't really like those overhead lines.

[Keith P.]

I think the one area that really has been overlooked in all this is BRT. Consider: there is a rail ROW from Mill Cove (beyond there actually, but let's keep that out of it for now) that has space because one of the lines has been removed. You could make that into a dedicated bus roadbed and run them as far as the Cogswell interchange or beyond. It is far more flexible and uses technology that the city already is comfortable with. You could do the same with the aforementioned Chester spur. I wonder why this has not gotten more interest.

[fenwick16]

I think the one area that really has been overlooked in all this is BRT. Consider: there is a rail ROW from Mill Cove (beyond there actually, but let's keep that out of it for now) that has space because one of the lines has been removed. You could make that into a dedicated bus roadbed and run them as far as the Cogswell interchange or beyond. It is far more flexible and uses technology that the city already is comfortable with. You could do the same with the aforementioned Chester spur. I wonder why this has not gotten more interest.

This sounds great to me. After all the Montreal subway runs on rubber wheels, why not dispense with the track all together. I was thinking about this on the weekend, i.e. running buses on ROW paths throughout the city. This is something that could possibly be implemented economically. Does anyone know of such a system elsewhere (is this usually the case with BRT, i.e. ROW routes)?

[halifaxboyns]

This sounds great to me. After all the Montreal subway runs on rubber wheels, why not dispense with the track all together. I was thinking about this on the weekend, i.e. running buses on ROW paths throughout the city. This is something that could possibly be implemented economically. Does anyone know of such a system elsewhere (is this usually the case with BRT, i.e. ROW routes)?

Well for me; I like to think of the city's transportation in a multi-model perspective. I've posted before my thoughts on the high speed ferry and what research I came up with in university.

So I see the key to solving the transportation problems in HRM like this:
1) Have multiple modes of transit (bus, BRT, rail, ferry);
2) While still keeping the major focus on the class 1 office space in downtown HRM (including downtown Dartmouth), dispurse office/commercial growth (class 2 space) throughout HRM (Burnside, Bedford, Bayer's Lake, Dartmouth Crossing);
3) Focus higher density around existing and potential transit nodes for multi-model; and
4) Potentially take a risk - they might come? :)

BRT is a great way to see what potential there could be for LRT or rail in areas; most larger cities do that (Ottawa and Calgary for example). Calgary just added a 3rd BRT called Route 302 which mimics the proposed SE LRT line, which is on the books, but not slated for construction for 20 years.

Ultimately; no matter what you build and how you build it (route, etc) people will choose the mode of transportation that best works for them. The key here for city transportation is to make rail, brt, bus or ferry the better option both in the time it takes and the ease. With the cancellation of the free downtown bus route - that would make rail more difficult because there wouldn't be a bus to connect too (as an example).

I think for the sake of ease, ferry might be right up there with rail for the sake of getting things off the ground quickly and expense wise.

The other thing to remember though about any new LRT line or going outside the current rail cut is how do you get the rail there? If it's already a developed area - then you need to take land from something (either people's homes, road widening etc).

[MalcolmTucker]

The O-Bahn Busway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O-Bahn_Busway) in Adelaide, basically a guided bus that outside the corridor runs just like normal.

If ROW can be secured in the cut, it might be the best option to provide extra capacity into downtown, while not having disadvantages of the buses like needing wide ROW.

[fenwick16]

How about the Ottawa Transitway BRT system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Transitway . A BRT system with ROW so that it can maintain schedules during rush-hour and reach speeds similar to LRT.

[halifaxboyns]

I don't see CN allowing buses in the cut; I just can't see how their safety rules for rail traffic would allow it?

A transit way would be interesting - but yet again if you can't use the cut, then how do you build it? You'd be talking about taking land from businesses and homes along the route for the creation of transit only lanes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to make tough decisions like this - just it will be a political nightmare!

[MalcolmTucker]

^ How wide is the cut right now in most places? Enough for 3 tracks?

[halifaxboyns]

^ How wide is the cut right now in most places? Enough for 3 tracks?

I don't believe so - I think it was made wide enough for 2 tracks only. The ROW for the cut though would be widder; at least it seems that way on the HRM GIS, suggesting that should it have been needed; it could be widdened.

If that's the case, you could widen it but it might cause some issues for properties right up against the edge of the right of way. Not to mention potential disruption to the rail service with the equipment necessary to dig it out.

But if you could widen it; then potentially you could seperate the rail and then have a 2 lane wide bus lane - but only up to the point where the track is 1 track - once it was back to 2 tracks; then you'd have to setup a system to stop inbound buses to allow outbound out in the portion that would be one lane.

The other issue is once you get the bus lane in there - where does it come out? Would you take it all the way down to the train station or have it come out sooner?

[worldlyhaligonian]

I don't believe so - I think it was made wide enough for 2 tracks only. The ROW for the cut though would be widder; at least it seems that way on the HRM GIS, suggesting that should it have been needed; it could be widdened.

If that's the case, you could widen it but it might cause some issues for properties right up against the edge of the right of way. Not to mention potential disruption to the rail service with the equipment necessary to dig it out.

But if you could widen it; then potentially you could seperate the rail and then have a 2 lane wide bus lane - but only up to the point where the track is 1 track - once it was back to 2 tracks; then you'd have to setup a system to stop inbound buses to allow outbound out in the portion that would be one lane.

The other issue is once you get the bus lane in there - where does it come out? Would you take it all the way down to the train station or have it come out sooner?

You wouldn't have to widen it... the second track has been completely taken up and there is still room between the rockwall and the other track regardless.

I think this could be effective if a test was put in place between Mumford and downtown with simple open pad stations with stairways up to street level. Total investment could be put out to tender and I doubt would be all that more expensive than laying a new street in a subdivision.

[halifaxboyns]

You wouldn't have to widen it... the second track has been completely taken up and there is still room between the rockwall and the other track regardless.

I think this could be effective if a test was put in place between Mumford and downtown with simple open pad stations with stairways up to street level. Total investment could be put out to tender and I doubt would be all that more expensive than laying a new street in a subdivision.

Sorry I may not have been clear in my thought - in the areas where there was only 1 rail track; you could potentially have 2 lanes for bus travel in and outbound. The issue will be where the second track comes into play - you'll be reduced to one bus lane. So you'll have to find a way to ensure the buses can come in and outbound; without running into each other. Now if the ROW for the rail cut is wider than it's current width - then it could be expanded in the areas containing 2 tracks; thus allowing 2 tracks and 2 lanes for buses.

(that's what I was originally thinking).

[someone123]

^ The amount of passengers needed to justify automated rail are far far out of Halifax's league, plus I am pretty sure there would be huge opposition to the trains downtown. You need a system that for metro's population is affordable - building the Canada Line Halifax edition is definitely not.

Not really. The Canada Line was dramatically more expensive than would be necessary in Halifax because of the tunnels (about half underground, mostly bored), wider trains, water crossings, and so on. It's also worth pointing out that Vancouver doesn't just have the Canada Line - the SkyTrain system is just under 70 kilometres long in total. A very useful transit backbone could be built with 5-10 kilometres of track in Halifax.

Having an automated system is a cost advantage and makes it easier to have higher frequencies, night service, etc. The drawback presently is that this requires a dedicated right of way (I doubt this will be necessary for much longer given computer vision technology, but who knows about legal limitations?) but Halifax can totally afford building a few kilometres of concrete pylons with track on top. Tunnels would quickly become very expensive but are unnecessary. Of course, it would also be possible to use such a route as a busway (something similar was done in Seattle with a tunnel, but long term it doesn't seem like the greatest scheme, and the train from the airport now is just sad).

At the end of the day the biggest thing is that I wish people in Halifax would appreciate the scale of the city and cost of transportation projects a little more. It's great to buy new buses and build $10M terminals but major cities are investing billions - in Halifax terms this would imply allocating perhaps $300-400M for a transit project, and that has never even remotely been on the table.

[hfx_chris]

As for normal street operation and buses vs. trolleys vs. streetcars, streetcars are definitely superior if you put in place the policies to support them.
I dunno.. I've seen the streetcar vs trolley coach debate many times before, and honestly I've always preferred trolleys. I mean sure the streetcar is a simpler beast from a purely mechanical point of view, but you've got to content with not only the cost of stringing overhead, but also tracks, track maintenance, annoyance to pedestrians/cyclists/drivers... I mean it really says something to a city's commitment when they embark on a piece of public infrastructure that is so permanent, but what if someday you wanted to change a route remove service from an area? A lot simpler if all you have to move/add is the overhead. And again, stuff like detours is nearly impossible unless you have a fairly large system with multiple options.

although I'm sorry to say this, but when I saw you nick name, all I could think was Mr. Humprey's are you free?
...
As to the trolly discussion - if you could do a trolly that wouldn't require an overhead line; I'm all for it - I don't really like those overhead lines.
Yes, I'm free Captain Peacock! :cool:

Anyway. A trolley without overhead power. So basically a hybrid vehicle, of which transit is currently operating two :)
Y'know, the thing about the overhead... yeah it may add a bit of visual clutter, but it does have a psychological affect. It almost adds a sense of permanency to the system. It's there. It isn't going anywhere, it'll always be there, it's a serious thing. Plus there's the whole fact that deep down people do have certain biases against certain modes of transportation. Would you rather take a bus to Moncton or the train, if you could have the choice? Would you rather take a smelly old diesel bus, or a hybrid? How about a trolley? (by the way, it pains me to write the words "smelly old diesel bus" since I love diesel buses...but I recognize not everyone does)
Not to mention the fact it would be 100% clean at street level. A hybrid bus still has a diesel engine that runs from time to time.

I think this could be effective if a test was put in place between Mumford and downtown with simple open pad stations with stairways up to street level. Total investment could be put out to tender and I doubt would be all that more expensive than laying a new street in a subdivision.
I could definitely see a stop at Mumford, but I wouldn't want the next one until you're in downtown. Have you ever seen some of those areas in the rail cut? It's nothing but homeless people and abandoned garbage. I wouldn't want to be standing on a concrete pad waiting for a bus down there... not to mention the accessibility problem, you'd need elevators, and now you're getting into a more permanent solution. However if LRT went through there, I could see proper stations installed, specifically one at South for the Dal students, and one at Tower for the SMU students.


I attended a talk a few years ago about the possibility of a LRT system running along the Dartmouth subdivision, from Windsor Juction to the Woodside ferry terminal, with a stop at Alderney Gate - and a few others, I can't recall. As somebody here said, yes you're adding the extra ferry ride from either Alderney or Woodside, but that's only a 10 minute ride, and it would get you closer to downtown than say a Budd RDC car to the Via station. Either way you'll need to some second form of transportation to get you into the core area, whether it's a shuttle bus or a ferry.
Maybe I'll see if he still has his presentation... it was quite interesting.

[halifaxboyns]

It seems to me the more we discuss this issue, the more we see how complex it is.

There seems to be rough agreement that no matter what is built (either heavy rail in existing rail cut or LRT in a new ROW); it's going to probably be quite expensive.

I'd easily guess way more expensive than the Canada line if a lot of tunnels are needed - plus add to that the impact of having an elevated train - how would people react?

It would be really interesting if the population growth of Halifax started going up over the 2.5 to 3% a year. Especially if it got up into around the 5% range for a good period of time say; 5 to 10 years. Then you'd be looking at somewhere around 15 to 20k people moving in - would inspire the need for a review of the transportation plan.

[halifaxboyns]

Looks like the new MAster Plan for the old China Town site has proposed some higher density - which may lend itself to a high speed ferry or rail station.

[fenwick16]

This is my idea for a LRT rail system. The Old Ashburn Golf Coarse would have to be acquired and converted to parking/development so commuters would be able to park and then take the LRT train downtown (light rail system). This location is close to highways, the bridge to Dartmouth, and rail lines to West Halifax (Timberlea line) and Bedford.

This is routed from the Old Ashburn Golf Course along the harbour (since there is an existing track) through the DND dockyards parking and then finally through a short 2 - 3 kilometer single track system through downtown Halifax (subway). I think that this would be one of the least expensive options and it would promote grow in the Halifax North End along the waterfront. A 2 -3 kilometer elevated track through the downtown section might be cheaper than subway, but over time this would become an eyesore (example the Chicago elevated train system) - thus my preference for a short single track subway through downtown Halifax. I think that the single track could be bored/tunneled (as opposed to tearing up roads and building it directly under the streets). During the Harbour Solutions construction, a 1 kilometer tunnel was built under the downtown, so this idea isn't as far fetched and expensive as it might appear). Having it single track would decrease the tunnel size requirement. It would then have a short loop through the downtown core which allows turning of the light train.

I think this would cost a few hundred million to build, including the trains and stations. However, I think it would be far cheaper than building a third harbour crossing. If a third harbour crossing did become necessary in the future then twinning the MacKay bridge would be a favourable option since it would be close to the LRT and a LRT track could then be built across the second MacKay Bridge crossing. This system would tend to promote growth to the west of the Halifax Peninsula (Bayers Lake/Timberlea areas).

If the Halifax metro area is allowed to grow to a million people over the next 50 years (this would be about 1.8% annual growth) then I think something like this will be required. In fact by the time Halifax gets to 500,000 - 600,000 then I think that this will be required (the next 10 - 20 years). PS: I should re-state that; some Rapid Transit system will be required not necessarily the one that I have indicated.

PS: As the North End Waterfront starts to develop then part of the above ground system could be buried (become subway).

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/571/lrtsystemhalifax.jpg

PS: This document ( http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/documents/CommuterRail.pdf ) states that: The lands across which the north end line traveled have now been redeveloped and can no longer realistically be re-assembled into a rail corridor. Not even if money is committed to do it? I will look at it in a bit more detail with Bing Maps.

[reddog794]

I might see a problem with the idea of a train going through the Navy Yards, unless they build an above ground tunnel, entering, the yards and leading to the sub-level track. Hiding the train from the base, and the base from the train.

Even have a stop there, make it secured, and only those with military id can "swipe" through. Shoot have them "swipe on" at the stations, so that way the train would know to stop there, if no military personnel swipe on, then the train goes by.

Even at the ship yards you could have the same system. Save on the number of stops on the entrance to DT.

[Wishblade]

I might see a problem with the idea of a train going through the Navy Yards, unless they build an above ground tunnel, entering, the yards and leading to the sub-level track. Hiding the train from the base, and the base from the train.

Even have a stop there, make it secured, and only those with military id can "swipe" through. Shoot have them "swipe on" at the stations, so that way the train would know to stop there, if no military personnel swipe on, then the train goes by.

Even at the ship yards you could have the same system. Save on the number of stops on the entrance to DT.

You wouldn't need to run the train behind the gates of the dockyard. The large parking lot and adjacent roadway you see is not owned by DND, but by the city. There is already bus service that goes down this roadway so theres no reason why a train couldn't either.

[worldlyhaligonian]

You wouldn't need to run the train behind the gates of the dockyard. The large parking lot and adjacent roadway you see is not owned by DND, but by the city. There is already bus service that goes down this roadway so theres no reason why a train couldn't either.

Really? That land must be worth a fortune... you could put a whole north skyline on those lots.

[Wishblade]

Really? That land must be worth a fortune... you could put a whole north skyline on those lots.

It's hard to give up the land because so many work in the dockyard. I work down there and it would probably be pretty devestating without the parking unfortunately.

[fenwick16]

You wouldn't need to run the train behind the gates of the dockyard. The large parking lot and adjacent roadway you see is not owned by DND, but by the city. There is already bus service that goes down this roadway so theres no reason why a train couldn't either.


That opens up a lot of possibilities for LRT and development. A parking garage could be built for the DND dockyard employees to free up land for development.

[-Harlington-]

the map is a good idea but id like to see the south end serviced as well making Mumford more of a commuter terminal with rail and bus, also the tracks from Joe Howe some of which they have ripped up go all the way through the armdale area to bayers lake and beachville lakeside timberlea and would be a good place to.
and if all that is feasible there is a good bit of tracks through dartmouth and maybe if the city makes the 3rd bridge at any point it could include a rail line.

[fenwick16]

This is another possibility for a very short single track system (red line - above ground, green line - subway or elevated track). Since it is only one track going through the downtown (in one direction) in order to get from the Maritime Centre to Scotia Square, one would have to go west to the transfer station and then transfer to a east bound train at the transfer station.

To make this even cheaper, or to start with, it could be just one track downtown to the Scotia Square area. It could have two trains with double track at the halfway point to allow trains to pass. (or since it is so short, it could just be one train on one track). The first stage would be just 4 kilometers of single track, partly above ground and partly below ground.

The Old Ashburn Golf Course would have to be bought and converted to parking and commercial/residential development. The main advantage of this system is that it gets people off the peninsula to the Old Ashburn Golf course location where they can park their cars or, in the future, get connecting LRT trains going to Timberlea and Bedford. PS: A less expensive option would be to have it terminate at the West End Mall. From this location there are CN tracks to Bedford and Timberlea and good highway connections.

Having a very modern LRT would encourage people to park their cars and travel by the LRT downtown. This would have to run on a regular fast cycle so that people would be able to get on at any time of the day without much wait. This system is not much longer than the inter-connecting terminal trains at some large airports like Seattle which is 2.7 km long (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_Transit_System) and Atlanta which is 4.7 km long (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartsfield-Jackson_Atlanta_International_Airport_Automated_People_Mover). I think of this as a horizontal elevator. The distance from the Old Ashburn Golf Course to downtown would be about 4 kilometers. The Seattle airport system uses Bombardier CX-100 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardier_CX-100). This system is being used in a downtown Miami route which is 7.1 km long and is called the metromover (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metromover). This system sounds like it would work well in a medium size city that can't support a full subway system. These systems are unmanned and referred to as automated people movers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_mover). Other examples are: Link Train at the Person Airport which is 1.5 km long and cost $55 million in 2002 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LINK_Train). Here is a list of people movers at airports: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airport_people_mover_systems.

Another example is the Detroit People Mover which is 4.7 km long: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_People_Mover. Based on the price of a planned expansion for this Detroit system and the short Toronto Airport Link Train, the Halifax system would likely cost $200 - 300 million. These systems are similar to the Vancouver Skytrain but the Skytrain is a much longer system.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/6661/lrtsystemhalifaxshorttr.jpg

[haligonia]

Why not have a loop starting and ending at the old Ashburn;

You could have a single track running around the whole peninsula, some spots above ground ( i.e. the railcut ) some spots below ground. ( i.e. downtown/navy dockyards) In the railcut you could possibly install a stop along beaufort ave (access to dal/smu, maybe an express bus to the hospitals) with a simple elevator and staircase down to the tracks and the main station at street level. This could be followed by stops at the via station after which it could dip underground, downtown (spring garden, scotia square?) and possibly one more at the dockyards before looping back to the old ashburn which could be a hub for access by bus/rail to Bedford/sackville and maybe out to timberlea. With this configuration you would only need one track for the whole peninsula.

[fenwick16]

Why not have a loop starting and ending at the old Ashburn;

You could have a single track running around the whole peninsula, some spots above ground ( i.e. the railcut ) some spots below ground. ( i.e. downtown/navy dockyards) In the railcut you could possibly install a stop along beaufort ave (access to dal/smu, maybe an express bus to the hospitals) with a simple elevator and staircase down to the tracks and the main station at street level. This could be followed by stops at the via station after which it could dip underground, downtown (spring garden, scotia square?) and possibly one more at the dockyards before looping back to the old ashburn which could be a hub for access by bus/rail to Bedford/sackville and maybe out to timberlea. With this configuration you would only need one track for the whole peninsula.

I would certainly like to see a loop around the peninsula. However, CN would have to allow it. With a single track - either trains must only go in one direction (which can work with short loops and then have double track in some areas) or there has to be areas of double track where trains can pass and have them go in both directions (which might be possible).

If there is a single track around the entire peninsula, then I don't think that having trains go in one direction would be practical (for going in short distances in the opposite direction). I haven't given this a lot of thought, so there might be practical ways of doing it.

Another idea for the dockyards route is to have BRT going around the peninsula in the North End direction. Then track isn't required, just a Right of Way which might not be too expensive to set up, since some of the right of way already exist.

The West Mall could be used instead of the Old Ashburn Golf site to keep the cost down (I haven't had time to redraw it).

As the city grows, it might make sense to have a couple of separate (but connected) routes - one for the North End of the peninsula and one for the most densely populated areas of downtown (with a transfer point). The North End route would take the development strain off the current downtown area. The downtown route could be close enough to the universities to handle this sector. Then when a third harbour crossing is required it could be the cheaper option of twinning (with a second bridge) the MacKay bridge, versus the longer and more expensive south end route.

[fenwick16]

I did a quick sketch of a light rapid transit system with all single track (about 6 - 7 km in total).

The main loop is up Spring Garden Road to Dalhousie University and then back down University Avenue to Barrington Street. I like this route since it goes past both Universities, hospitals and Spring Garden Road shopping areas. This main loop would be about 3 km. I think a people mover system would work on this route similar to what is used in many large airports (ex: Toronto Link Train) and also the Miami Metromover system and Detroit People Mover system. However, for this to be effective, I think it would have to be a tunnel (which is best during the winter and will not be an eyesore). Making it single track would keep the cost down. The spur lines to downtown Halifax and the West Mall could be added as a later stage. In fact to keep the cost down, it could initially be just one train, on one track going up and down Spring Garden Road (no loop). Then if the capacity was sufficient, the loop could be completed.

This would benefit all of Halifax, however, it would especially benefit Dalhousie University since it provides a quick connection to all three campuses (Sexton, Studley and Carleton). I wonder if Dalhousie U., HRM, Nova Scotia, and Federal government could all contribute to this?

http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/8536/lrtsingletrackloop.jpg

[someone123]

Interesting post.

I think it would be useful to consider some of the trains around major airports. These are built on a scale similar to what would be useful for getting people around core parts of the peninsula. They're typically separate lines with unique vehicles, so the costs would also be comparable to setting up a new system in Halifax (higher than just expanding a line).

The Pearson LINK cost $55M for 1.5 km. The JFK train was $1.9B but is 13 km and much more elaborate. This station is very cool though (despite the 10 minutes waiting for an elevator):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b5/Jam6.jpg/800px-Jam6.jpg

I think it would be totally worth it for Halifax to spend $100-200M on something like this for the core that basically replaces buses along the major routes.

[someone123]

Here's a route I made up:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4060/4495218203_6496be7b60_o.png

I could imagine there being lots of room for improving the specific stations but this captures the idea of what I mean when I talk about rail to serve the downtown/peninsula.

[fenwick16]

Are you thinking double track or single track? With such a wide loop, I assume that the train would travel in both directions (either with passing areas or double track)? From the West Mall there could eventually be train service (or BRT) to Timberlea and Bedford.

The West Mall terminal will really help transit bottlenecks if people can completely avoid the Armdale Rotary. There would need to be sufficient parking so that people will just park their car and take the LRT downtown.

I like the idea of using the CN Right of Way (if there is room for a separate track).

[Halifax Hillbilly]

At the end of the day the biggest thing is that I wish people in Halifax would appreciate the scale of the city and cost of transportation projects a little more. It's great to buy new buses and build $10M terminals but major cities are investing billions - in Halifax terms this would imply allocating perhaps $300-400M for a transit project, and that has never even remotely been on the table.

It's hard to have this kind of conversation until we know what that kind of money can buy. I think we should take Someone123's suggestion from another thread and start compiling info on the costs and layouts of other transit projects to get an idea of what the per kilometer and station cost of some of these options are. Should we do that in here, or start another thread?

[halifaxboyns]

I like that some people are thinking - but I do agree with the comment that it's hard to nail down something like this until the costs are explored. I can imagine that the underground component of route would be the most expensive part, because if I remember back to when the tunnel was put under Duke Street - it was hugely expensive, just for that one tunnel!

Granted, that was then and this is now and technology has advanced to the point that we should be able do something like that for cheaper. The other comment I'd make is to go back to the previous discussion about seperating the LRT from the existing rail tracks; there are safety standards that would have to be observed (where as using heavy rail on the existing and putting back the 2nd track wouldn't be so much of a problem).

Plus I don't think there would be enough room for more than 1 track for an LRT (when tied with the existing track) depending on the routing, so for it to be one continuous direction would be horrible if you were trying to get from say Dal to the Metro Centre (if it was travelling in a different direction). Plus I don't believe the rail cut's ROW is wide enough to expand, but I may be wrong (if someone know's for sure, please correct me).

It's a good start though. Oh, one last thing I forgot - I don't think the dockyard would be an option anymore since I think the parcel ownership has changed in some cases or there may be obstructions. I havent' walked the area in a long time, but the whole reason for the bridge over into the Irving dry docks was because of the rail - if someone is down that way, have a look. But I think it was only wide enough for single rail though, so any rail coming inbound from say Bedford, would have to have a siding to pull off too while an outbound train went by (to reduce conflict).

[MalcolmTucker]

No matter what system is built, a huge initial fixed cost is the operation and maintenance centre, which includes storage tracks, light maintenance bays, and overhaul bays. Unfortunately they don't scale down very well, I would doubt including land costs even for a small system you could get costs down to less than $100 million.

Tracks can really range in price. In Toronto where they had to do very little utility relocation, with no signal system, no powered switches they built 7.5 km of dual track for ~$100 million, not including rolling stock. For street running utility relocation is usually the highest cost which makes it hard to predict costs without an underground services map.

[alps]

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l217/halps00/eaef05a4.jpg

Just brainstorming...

-Clayton Park line runs down the "Linear Park" until Ashburn
-Bedford line runs on CN trackage, then down the no man's land alongside the Robie St extension (Massachusetts Ave), then does something Curitiba-style (dedicated busway) along Robie

I really hope to see true Rapid Transit in Halifax sometime soon and I think dedicated BRT transitways like Ottawa has may be most realistic for us.

[fenwick16]

I would like to see Halifax invest $500 million dollars in rail-based rapid transit starting on the (peninsula) and then twin the MacKay bridge when required, instead of $1 billion on a South End Harbour crossing. I would think that twinning the MacKay bridge would be a fraction of the cost of the South End route.

Is interesting to note that between 1958 - 1970, that the Halifax area completed two major suspension bridges. So a significant LRT system and twinning the MacKay Bridge is not that far fetched. It would certainly get people in the HRM talking.

[-Harlington-]

there wont be any transit down that path in Clayton park at all it is way to heavily used and loved there, same with ashburn sorry to say.
id like to see something started with this at least small like the dayliner or heavy rail from bedford or truro and have have the obvious stops like mumford and mill cove ect ect.
but once that is deemed feasible i think maybe a bayers lake line to timberlea or even a Dartmouth line across one of the bridges wouldn't be to bad either.

[halifaxboyns]

It still annoys me that everything is discussed in the context of serving Bedford and then ideas like LRT are dismissed. Bedford doesn't have the population to support its own light rail line but there are definitely areas in the HRM which do have the densities - namely the peninsula and Clayton Park, which could have been much better if it were more sensibly designed.

I was just on the SkyTrain 20 minutes ago and it passes through many areas that are no more densely built up than parts of Halifax. It has about 70 km of track, some underground. I find it really hard to believe that Vancouver can support that, streetcars, electric trolleys, and a vastly superior bus service while Halifax can't even handle one small LRT line. Vancouver's larger for sure, but the other part of the puzzle is that it has more direction and better priorities. Vancouver's transit is far more expensive per capita and TransLink is in far worse financial shape than Metro Transit but they are nevertheless focused on expansion and providing high-level service. In Halifax the focus is on what can't be done and the system is so poor that the only ones who use it are the ones who have no other choice.

I agree with you in terms of not just focusing on Bedford - but no matter what is proposed (LRT or heavy rail), there is going to be a cost that I don't believe HRM can handle at this point.

Heavy rail may be a more appetizing option simply because with existing rail lines, the right of ways still exist in some form or another. Where as with an LRT, you have to get a ROW through already built up land - which more than likely requires expropriating property (not a terribly fun process and can be quite expensive).

Once I figure out how to use flickr, I want to upload a map I created to illustrate the idea of a heavy rail network (with some creative 'fiction' on my part about expansion). But I don't discount that there may be room for LRT in the process, I don't believe it should simply be counted out. Sometimes the best projects are the ones which are the most difficult.

[someone123]

Heavy rail may be a more appetizing option simply because with existing rail lines, the right of ways still exist in some form or another. Where as with an LRT, you have to get a ROW through already built up land - which more than likely requires expropriating property (not a terribly fun process and can be quite expensive).

Not really.. there are plenty of streets and public properties that can serve as a rail ROW.

This does not have cost figures but has interesting details on ways to save costs by running rail along existing streets: http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/track-facts-modern-light-rail-track/

[halifaxboyns]

Not really.. there are plenty of streets and public properties that can serve as a rail ROW.

This does not have cost figures but has interesting details on ways to save costs by running rail along existing streets: http://railforthevalley.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/track-facts-modern-light-rail-track/

This is true - if I look at the example we have here in Calgary of 7th Avenue being a transit only street in downtown. Although there is a huge push on to eventually put the LRT lines underground (which is a real waste since they are re-doing all the stations for 4 car trains)!

The problem for me would be the streets in the suburbs and I'm not talking just Bedford. Bayers Road is mostly a provincial ROW - so you might have problems getting to use it for an LRT. Plus Dutch Village Road isn't that wide through Fairview and up into Clayton Park. The only road I can think of that might work would be Dunbrack (you could do like Calgary and put the rails in the Centre perhaps?). Willet from Dunbrack might work too, but getting the trail up the hill - probably would work better on Lacewood (grades aren't so bad).

[MalcolmTucker]

Calgary will have trains on 7th Ave for at least another three decades - just only 1 line will use it once the second one moves into a subway.

Outside of the core Calgary has 100% exclusive right of way which is the real key however to making it fast - no stopping for cars, ever.

[someone123]

The problem for me would be the streets in the suburbs and I'm not talking just Bedford. Bayers Road is mostly a provincial ROW - so you might have problems getting to use it for an LRT. Plus Dutch Village Road isn't that wide through Fairview and up into Clayton Park. The only road I can think of that might work would be Dunbrack (you could do like Calgary and put the rails in the Centre perhaps?). Willet from Dunbrack might work too, but getting the trail up the hill - probably would work better on Lacewood (grades aren't so bad).

There's actually a plan to turn part of Bayers Road into a busway.. I am not sure if this is in the 5-year transit plan or not. I also don't remember if there's a plan for a MetroLink (BRT) route to Clayton Park yet, although this is obviously needed. I think part of the bottleneck there was that the transit garage is full and located in Burnside - they are building a new one in suburban Halifax soon.

[halifaxboyns]

I`ve been taking some of the discussion from this forum and came up with my own idea of a heavy rail based system, using the existing rail right-of-ways. I`ve taken some creative license in some of the routing and I`ve also added what I think the high speed ferry network would be.

Hope this works - would be interested to get some comments.http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3628/4551174791_0ecbd8cf3e_o.jpg.

From my flickr account.
Also, I haven`t noted areas which could be re-developed around each station - but it can be assumed that Bayers Road, Mumford could be more higher density - the Akerley station would be more of an office centred TOD station and the Bedford stops (mill cove, Kearney Lake and Bedford) would see a combo of higher density residential and commercial - I was thinking the mall and adjacent areas could have more apartments and commercial towers.

Bayers Lake would be a feeder station to the park - which could also have more Class B offices (still focusing Class A in the core).

[MonctonRad]

:previous:

Very good halifaxboyns :tup:

I agree, the only way to achieve a commuter rail system in Halifax is to use existing ROW's; anything else would be too disruptive to existing traffic patterns.

- It would be interesting if there were some way to extend your "green line" out towards Cole Harbour.
- Also, could a spur be created from your "red line" to service Sackville and down towards Windsor. There is an existing ROW there too.

On a side note, here's a link to a little article on the transit history of greater Moncton.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~wyatt/alltime/moncton-nb.html

The stats are a little dated, and in particular Codiac Transit is now a lot larger than what they state (we now have about 50 busses). but there is still some interesting stuff here.

In particular, I was intrigued to find out that in the 1950's (at least), that CNR operated a commuter rail service between Moncton and Pointe-de-Chene (no doubt for the cottage crowd).

So, commuter rail does have a history in the Maritimes.........perhaps it will rise again! :tup:

[halifaxboyns]

It`s interesting that you ask that question about Cole Harbour, I was just looking at Bing Maps and there was an old spur line off the CN rail line to the Autoport (it appears to be a pathway now), but you could easily convert it back and it you expropriate some land along Caldwell Road, and then on the edge of Morris Lake, it looks like there is a narrow sliver of land that would run all the way up to the Portland Hills Bus station - you may have the ability to do a double track most of the way but it looks narrow so you`d need 1 track up to the station. But it looks possible.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3533/4551483155_657220a1e7_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3516/4552120326_d2f3922c14_o.jpg

From my flickr account.

[fenwick16]

I think it is important for people to be thinking of LRT.

Just as a note: There was a proposal to tear up the Joseph Howe track to widen Joseph Howe - I am not sure if it went ahead. Also the Timberlea (Chester spur) track is being torn up and replaced with a paved trail (it could be dug up and a subway line created in the future - then the trail could be replaced on top of the subway line).

Personally I would like to see the peninsula served with short subway lines to take the place of most bus lines on the peninsula. With a good subway system, parking could be minimized on the peninsula. It would also be good to have a subway under the harbour instead of a third harbour bridge crossing.

[halifaxboyns]

Has there been a report done to look into the idea of a subway system for HRM? I can only imagine how much it would cost given the amount of rock you'd have to go through - but I wonder if it's been looked at?

The chester spur is mostly a path and the rails have been removed from Joe Howe Drive, but they remain on either side of the street. Joe howe hasn't been widened.

My thought on the chester spur was to keep the line one track for most of the way to Tantallon with side spurs so that cars could pass each other. I don't think it's wide enough for two lines, but if HRM were willing to spend the money to expropriate a wider ROW to include a trail system (well fenced off) then I think that might be worth while.

[MonctonRad]

I think a subway would be prohibitively expensive, especially given the hard granite that Halifax is built on. A line under the harbour would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

I can't think of any city with a population less than a million people with a subway system..........

[MalcolmTucker]

I think a subway would be prohibitively expensive, especially given the hard granite that Halifax is built on. A line under the harbour would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

I can't think of any city with a population less than a million people with a subway system..........

Halifax wouldn't get a subway in the traditional sense, but a tram-train system concentrating into one tunnel in the core would be workable - and is done in many mid sized European cities.

[someone123]

Halifax wouldn't get a subway in the traditional sense, but a tram-train system concentrating into one tunnel in the core would be workable - and is done in many mid sized European cities.

A single underground tunnel running 1-2 km under part of the downtown would be really useful. It would be expensive but not impossible, though maybe it wouldn't be such a good idea to worry about funding something like that initially.

[fenwick16]

I think a subway would be prohibitively expensive, especially given the hard granite that Halifax is built on. A line under the harbour would cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

I can't think of any city with a population less than a million people with a subway system..........

The Bridge Commission is talking about building a billion dollar third harbour crossing. I think a subway under the harbour would actually be cheaper and it would encourage people to leave their cars in Dartmouth. I think that Halifax could build 10 - 15 Km of subway for 1 billion dollars including a line under the harbour (especially if it is just a single track). So for a billion dollars have a subway servicing the downtown area, Spring Garden Road and Dartmouth (some single track and some double).

[halifaxboyns]

The Bridge Commission is talking about building a billion dollar third harbour crossing. I think a subway under the harbour would actually be cheaper and it would encourage people to leave their cars in Dartmouth. I think that Halifax could build 10 - 15 Km of subway for 1 billion dollars including a line under the harbour (especially if it is just a single track). So for a billion dollars have a subway servicing the downtown area, Spring Garden Road and Dartmouth (some single track and some double).

I have to agree that Fenwick has a point - there isn't really a spot on the Halifax side that a bridge or a tunnel could really connect with easily. That being said, an underground subway can be by heavy rail - I've never seen it done that way but I'm sure it could be (so long as it's well ventilated).

I think from my perspective - I just don't see an LRT working well in Halifax because of the difficulty of securing land. For me; it might work if Bayers was widened, but then where do you go from there? There may be some streets you could put it on in the median, but that requires removal of mature trees - which would probably upset people. That or you'd have to expropriate property; which is never a happy process.

For me, by using the existing ROWs for heavy rail; you already have an existing path - yes; with my suggestions you'd still have to expropriate some land, but I don't think anywhere near as much as an LRT might require. Or as a friend pointed out to me; the rail would allow getting close to the airport - so you could also setup some sort of connection bus perhaps?

[MalcolmTucker]

Airports are bad trip generators. Focus on commuters.

[fenwick16]

I have to agree that Fenwick has a point - there isn't really a spot on the Halifax side that a bridge or a tunnel could really connect with easily. That being said, an underground subway can be by heavy rail - I've never seen it done that way but I'm sure it could be (so long as it's well ventilated).

I think from my perspective - I just don't see an LRT working well in Halifax because of the difficulty of securing land. For me; it might work if Bayers was widened, but then where do you go from there? There may be some streets you could put it on in the median, but that requires removal of mature trees - which would probably upset people. That or you'd have to expropriate property; which is never a happy process.

For me, by using the existing ROWs for heavy rail; you already have an existing path - yes; with my suggestions you'd still have to expropriate some land, but I don't think anywhere near as much as an LRT might require. Or as a friend pointed out to me; the rail would allow getting close to the airport - so you could also setup some sort of connection bus perhaps?

I think heavy rail and LRT/subway have different purposes. For example, in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) the heavy rail system is the GO system which is heavy rail that shares track with one of the freight lines (CN maybe - I am not sure which) and operates during rush hour. In Halifax the heavy rail would be the Bedford line if Halifax implements a heavy rail system. An LRT/subway operates in the Toronto downtown area, Etobicoke, and Scarborough and is a frequent service (during the rush hour it is every few minutes). So a subway system takes the place of a bus system on these routes (you wouldn't want heavy rail operating on such a route). Subway would only be feasible in Halifax on the most densely populated areas of downtown/Spring Garden Road/Dalhousie University/Dartmouth-under the harbour. Most likely this would be a relatively short system of about 10 km (then in the future have a route stretching to the North End).

Most likely an LRT/subway line won't happen anytime soon, however I think it would be better than a third harbour crossing. A third harbour crossing will encourage more car use and traffic downtown whereas a short subway system will allow more people downtown with the existing infrastructure (plus a subway).

[halifaxboyns]

I think heavy rail and LRT/subway have different purposes. For example, in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) the heavy rail system is the GO system which is heavy rail that shares track with one of the freight lines (CN maybe - I am not sure which) and operates during rush hour. In Halifax the heavy rail would be the Bedford line if Halifax implements a heavy rail system. An LRT/subway operates in the Toronto downtown area, Etobicoke, and Scarborough and is a frequent service (during the rush hour it is every few minutes). So a subway system takes the place of a bus system on these routes (you wouldn't want heavy rail operating on such a route). Subway would only be feasible in Halifax on the most densely populated areas of downtown/Spring Garden Road/Dalhousie University/Dartmouth-under the harbour. Most likely this would be a relatively short system of about 10 km (then in the future have a route stretching to the North End).

That may be true; I think both systems have value - but you are probably right that the heavy rail would only be during the rush hour component. But it could operate a regular schedule if there was sufficient density and demand (at least on a run from say Enfield to downtown) or for Special events.

I came up with a rough subway plan based on your thoughts and my concept. Let me know what you think.
Subway Proposal (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3082/4553805444_5b1194e60f_o.jpg)

[fenwick16]

That may be true; I think both systems have value - but you are probably right that the heavy rail would only be during the rush hour component. But it could operate a regular schedule if there was sufficient density and demand (at least on a run from say Enfield to downtown) or for Special events.

I came up with a rough subway plan based on your thoughts and my concept. Let me know what you think.
Subway Proposal (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3082/4553805444_5b1194e60f_o.jpg)

I was thinking of a route very similar to what you have drawn, except I was thinking of a sub-harbour crossing closer to downtown Dartmouth. (I hadn't thought much about the Dartmouth route, except that it should connect to an area where people have good highway access and can park their cars). Also, I wasn't thinking of extending it so far into Dartmouth (However, maybe your route is a good one).

Your Halifax route has what I consider to be important - Downtown, Spring Garden Road, Dahousie University and the West Mall. On the Halifax side, I also think that a route to the West Mall is important so that people can park and then get the subway downtown.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ from Oxford there is no reason not to save money and join the rail corridor. Also, the southern jog for the university is not really needed. You could also stand to consolidate some stations since they are the major cost with subway.

[halifaxboyns]

^ from Oxford there is no reason not to save money and join the rail corridor. Also, the southern jog for the university is not really needed. You could also stand to consolidate some stations since they are the major cost with subway.

Well certainly you'd want to go to some of the major employment centres within the Peninsula: The Hospitals, Universities (say mid-point between Dal and SMU) and then of course Spring Garden and downtown.

But then (IMO), you'd have to capture some of major points where people come in from off the peninsula from residential areas. West End Mall being a major focus (for Fairview/Clayton Park) and I'd even say a future extension to Bayer's Road and up to Lacewood), but also from the Dartmouth side hitting the Dartmouth Terminal.

What I didn't include was a realization of where would the trains be stored - I excluded that; so I'd suggest maybe routing through Highfield, into Burnside at the Transit Centre (which could be the location of the storage yard) and then onto Dartmouth Crossing and finally Mic Mall. The portion of track from Highfield to Mic Mac could then be above grade.

[hfx_chris]

What I didn't include was a realization of where would the trains be stored - I excluded that; so I'd suggest maybe routing through Highfield, into Burnside at the Transit Centre (which could be the location of the storage yard) and then onto Dartmouth Crossing and finally Mic Mall. The portion of track from Highfield to Mic Mac could then be above grade.

Would make much more sense to use the Ragged Lake site, and build a new car barn next to it. The Ilsley transit centre is at capacity.

[halifaxboyns]

Would make much more sense to use the Ragged Lake site, and build a new car barn next to it. The Ilsley transit centre is at capacity.

To be honest, I thought that was pretty far away considering that if a proposed line went over to Dartmouth, Ilsley could be expanded through purchasing an adjacent parcel (if need be).

But it's a thought, I can come up with some concepts.

[Keith P.]

The only way anything like this would work would be if Metro Transit and their militant union have nothing to do with it. Otherwise it is just our current mismanaged, customer-unfriendly and ineffective bus system on rails.

[fenwick16]

The only way anything like this would work would be if Metro Transit and their militant union have nothing to do with it. Otherwise it is just our current mismanaged, customer-unfriendly and ineffective bus system on rails.
A totally automated system might be the way to go.

[halifaxboyns]

A totally automated system might be the way to go.

That's how I had conceived it. I'm currently pondering my thoughts on routes and craving a tim's coffee. So i'm probably going to go for a walk down 7th Avenue here in Calgary, get a coffee and then do up a map. Since we're supposed to be getting rain for the next few days (which we really need), I want to get in some walks before it's too wet!

[MalcolmTucker]

Bonus points if you put on the map distance between stations, just to help us all conceive of it.

[someone123]

That route seems very circuitous to me. It also seems strange to follow the Macdonald Bridge instead of going downtown to downtown, although a harbour crossing either way would be very costly. A cheaper alternative would simply be to connect to the downtown ferry terminal.

Digging a tunnel for a subway would cost on the order of $150M per kilometre, which is probably unrealistic outside of specific short stretches.

I agree that an automated system would be ideal. I'm still looking for good cost numbers for different rapid transit technologies - these seem to be absent from most reports I read, which is very odd.

[MalcolmTucker]

The costs really don't change much depending on control technology, only the requirements of the corridor change costs (like automated systems require full grade separation).

Halifax could probably get away with very very small stations, like 30 meters or so to really save money since underground stations cost an arm and a leg. With an automated system could like still manage 10,000 ppdph out of it.

With LRT you would be able to save big time in out of downtown operations of a tram train variety, but you would need much larger stations to accommodate the much less frequent trains.

[someone123]

The statement about automation and the one about cost appeared a little more connected than they were actually meant to be, although I'd expect lower operating costs and fewer issues in general with an automated system, particularly when looking at a system with high frequencies, late night service, and so on.

Outside of the downtown it would be relatively easy to find a mixed at-grade and elevated right of way for a train if there really were hundreds of millions of dollars available for such a project. This isn't such a tall order downtown either. It's been done in other cities.

[halifaxboyns]

So I was pondering the system during my walk and my delicious coffee. So here is my proposal - i've also tied into the map high speed ferry and a commuter rail network, to create a comprehensive transportation network.

Now while everyone is saying the tunnel under the harbour would be expensive, i've kept that concept, but I also wouldn't rule out an bridge for the trains either.

I've created 2 lines, which in my concept would be an automated system. Both lines follow Downtown Halifax quite a bit, but one line splits off to service the train station and St. Mary's. My thought is that the universities are huge trip generators, especially with the U passes. So giving Dal and SMU stations made sense to me. I've tried to service some other key areas which I think in the future could be key employment centres (such as Dartmouth Crossing and Burnside - where I think office Development would eventually go (once the core is built out).

There is an alternate Dartmouth route to service the major suburbs, but I've tried to concentrate stations around in spots where existing high density is, or could be (or office development could occur). So for Highfield, there is potential for even higher density towers there (with careful redevelopment).

I'm affraid I didn't put a distance in stations, but I would think it would be in suburbs, probably 2-4km apart, where as in major locations it would be less than 1km apart (downtown Halifax).
Thoughts?


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4019/4556293361_00cae42463_o.jpg

[fenwick16]

Your route might be a little bit ambitious for now (it might be feasible in another 30 years though). Perhaps the best chance that Halifax has of a subway (ROW) LRT system would be a very short loop that includes downtown, Spring Garden Road, Coburg and the West Mall. To get people from Dartmouth maybe the ferries can be beefed up and eventually faster ferries could be used (however this will likely result in higher fuel consumption per person which in today's society is a no-go). So forget the third crossing and encourage people to use the ferries. (We need money for our subway).

I think a short route of about 7 KM would include most of the Halifax locations. To keep the cost down, it might have to be elevated (although I would prefer subway). The people mover systems can handle about 20,000 trips per day - the Detroit People Mover system has handled up to 50,000 per day during the Super Bowl. A Halifax system would likely have to have annual ridership of 5 -10 million per year to be feasible (even with government subsidies). However, it could save money elsewhere - by eliminating some buses and by reducing parking requirements in the downtown. It would mostly likely qualify for a federal grant since they seem to like to fund such projects (it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions).

[hfx_chris]

I might as well show my map while we're at it!

I did this up a couple of years ago. It basically starts with a small loop around the peninsula (rail cut, Barrington and Quinpool), continuing on through Southwestern Junction to the Chester sub, terminating at a park and ride lot near the Hwy 103/NW Arm Drive interchange. There's of course always the possibility some sections downtown could be buried (cut and cover).
Future expansion options would be to Beaverbank, via the CN main line to Windsor Junction, then taking the former DAR (now Windsor and Hantsport Railway) to Beaverbank, shown in light blue on the map.
And some day if some sort of third crossing or bridge was constructed, there's the possibility to expand into Dartmouth via the bridge/tunnel and hwy 111. I terminated that route for some reason at Burnside Drive and Akerley, and I don't really remember why; it would make a lot more sense for it to re-join the Dartmouth sub and continue on to Windsor Junction, forming one giant loop.

http://local.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=108164844284702764252.00045df329de70452d470&ll=44.646552,-63.598309&spn=0.091597,0.222988&t=h&z=13