[fenwick16]

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

Interesting route, especially the idea of having rail follow the highway where possible. One thing that I would change is to forget about the rail cut and have it go up Spring Garden Road and Coburg pass Dalhouse University.

The length of the downtown Halifax/Dalhousie University/West Mall route would be similar to the Buffalo, NY LRT which is 10.3 KM long (80% subway) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_Metro_Rail . I think that the Halifax system might have similar ridership numbers if it is a short route through the highest population density neighbourhoods.

[hfx_chris]

One thing that I would change is to forget about the rail cut and have it go up Spring Garden Road and Coburg pass Dalhouse University.
The whole point of using the cut is to reduce cost for that initial peninsular loop. It's there, after all.

[fenwick16]

It just seems like there aren't many businesses close to the rail cut although there is St. Mary's University. In my opinion, in order for a rail route to be feasible it should be located in areas where it will serve the most people - such as Spring Garden Road, Dalhousie University and the Hospitals. Although I can understand the temptation to use the rail cut because it is there, I don't think that there is a good reason otherwise.

[halifaxboyns]

I like your plan Chris, but I have to agree with Fenwick on the rail cut - although it's good that you are thinking about ways to reduce costs.

When I did my transportation planning courses, once of the key concepts that got drilled into my head by the prof was when constructing mass transit, make sure you hit key employment sectors - which are often some of the major trip generators (since they employ the most people). Universities are also good trip generation sources as well, as are key shopping districts. And of course, grab spots where park and ride can work for major residential areas.

But one other thing that he said was to also look for possibility sites that at the outset, didn't look like they had a major impact on the system at the initial time the system goes online, but over time could grow and evolve to be areas of trip generation from people living or coming to work there.

So on the Peninsula, here are the major employment centres:
QE 2/VG Hospitals;
IWK Hospital
Dalhousie and St. Mary's Universities (both as employment and education)
Downtown Office Core (mainly around Scotia Square)
Limitied office at Maritime Centre and surrounding area
DND Dockyard.

Then of course Spring Garden is a major shopping area, for the most part (and is continuing to be so).

So when I looked at the route that I conceived, I looked at areas that I thought could grow, not just on the Halifax side, but the Dartmouth side too. Although some may not agree, I see potential for Quinpool to become bigger and more prominant with residential above mainly ground floor commercial. The Quinpool Shopping Centre has great redevelopment potential - especially the multi residential behind it. The same is true (IMO) for Highfield Park - let things go bigger, say 10 stories, maybe even 15. With Burnside, more class B offices - taller offices (to take the pressure off downtown and have more cross trips). Mumford and Bayers Road I saw the same potential, either more intensive commercial for offices or mall expansion or additional residential towers.

The only exception to concept was probably the station I suggested at Connaught and Quinpool - not really much potential there, but it was a go between station, so that you didn't have such a long distance to west end mall.

If I look at my concept, yes it has a tunnel under the harbour to the Bridge Terminal - this is all about pie in the sky, why not? Or it could be a train only bridge too. Bridge Terminal also has some potential with the Dartmouth Shopping Centre and the other strip mall for redevelopment. The last Dartmouth stations is Brightwood - which I think has the potential to be a great high density neighbourhood.

Now in real life, it could probably work, but it would be a much shorter route that would expand over time - but a second line out to Penhorn and Cole Harbour would also capture those areas of growth - while providing additional frequency in downtown (with the dual service in the Core and Dock yard).

One thing that someone said earlier was maybe to have the systems end at the Ferry and then Ferry Across the harbour - I don't think that would work. One of the things I learned in my TP class was that human beings like things simple - so make your system as easy as possible, few connections, as direct routing as possible. When you add in connections to something like a ferry, there is too much room for error or missed connections (although the same can be said for multi-route subways too - which is why systems which have overlapping areas of service tend to work better).

[hfx_chris]

It just seems like there aren't many businesses close to the rail cut although there is St. Mary's University. In my opinion, in order for a rail route to be feasible it should be located in areas where it will serve the most people - such as Spring Garden Road, Dalhousie University and the Hospitals. Although I can understand the temptation to use the rail cut because it is there, I don't think that there is a good reason otherwise.

LRT on Spring Garden Road? Yeah, I'd love to see that happen...I just think burying it the entire way is much too cost prohibitive.

[someone123]

The problem is not the cost so much as the opportunity cost. Instead of building one kilometre of subway tunnel the city could build a whole LRT line above ground. The difference between digging and simply laying down a bit of concrete and steel on the surface is huge. Another important point is that in the worst case rail along the street that has to cross intersections would be slightly faster than buses and way more comfortable. If this is combined with some dedicated ROW components a little farther out then you end up with a nice system that is relatively inexpensive.

The harbour crossing is similar. Nobody would deny that a subway across the harbour would be useful, but the question is whether or not that money could be better invested in another way. Given the fact that ferries already operate it's better to start with a light rail system that extends out to suburbs on the Halifax side - those areas are also more densely inhabited and have higher transit use to begin with.

[halifaxboyns]

From the cost perspective - someone is probably right that using a portion of or all of the railcut would save money. Especially if you could work it to include the train station.

No matter what; it won't be a cheap project because of the constraints around the city. An underground system would be one that would be the least impact overall in terms of the finished product, cars could still drive the streets as normally without interaction with the trains and the trains wouldn't be impeded by traffic lights (whether its an underground LRT or automated system like Vancouver).

An LRT above ground - either at grade or elevated would have impacts mainly due to construction of the system and potential impacts like noise or expropriation of land to construct the line itself (I'm thinking long term and I'm sure any NIMBY would say the noise, the noise!).

From my perspective, I think setting up a system similar to the Go train using the rail cut is a good start - probably the least expensive in terms of infrastructure spending, but anything more will be costly.

A good way to determine the viability of a route is BRT - that's what they've done in Calgary and it really showed the need for the West LRT (when the 301 started running).

I think we already know that the universities and downtown need it, since typically the 10 and 1 are standing room only - but it would be interesting to see how a BRT would run along the same route as the 1, but expanded out into Clayton Park and then extening on the Dartmouth side maybe to Mic Mac Mall? Or out to Highfield.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ have to remember that all of Calgary's LRT corridors were basically sketched out in the 60s (like from where to where) and the routes were mostly defined in the 70s. Land use was then planned to support the routes.

So it is pretty easy to run a bus like the 301 and 'prove' the need for lrt, since the route was planned for a generation.

[halifaxboyns]

^ have to remember that all of Calgary's LRT corridors were basically sketched out in the 60s (like from where to where) and the routes were mostly defined in the 70s. Land use was then planned to support the routes.

So it is pretty easy to run a bus like the 301 and 'prove' the need for lrt, since the route was planned for a generation.

Oh yes, I know there was a lot of pre-planning. But I think to a certain extent, the route for some sort of mass transit system (either a subway or LRT) could easily be established based on the high capacity routes. So from the higher density residential neighbourhoods around Clayton Park and Bayers Road (also Ashburn - if and when it redevelops), then of course Mumford.

Quinpool would be a bonus street in an effort to encourge redevelopment but then you'd have all the major employment centres from there: QE 2 Hospital, Dalhousie, Spring Garden Road, Downtown and the dockyards. If crossing the harbour was a big cost - then end it at the dockyard?

[someone123]

From my perspective, I think setting up a system similar to the Go train using the rail cut is a good start - probably the least expensive in terms of infrastructure spending, but anything more will be costly.

It would be great but the project has been dead in the water for over a decade. The current mayor, Peter Kelly, won an election partly on the basis of commuter rail and it hasn't happened. As far as I know CN simply isn't interested and they own the right of way.

[halifaxboyns]

It would be great but the project has been dead in the water for over a decade. The current mayor, Peter Kelly, won an election partly on the basis of commuter rail and it hasn't happened. As far as I know CN simply isn't interested and they own the right of way.

I suspect it may be better to start off with the high speed ferry system and then work up from there - far less hassle (although an application to increase speed limits for these ferry's would be necessary for the harbour).

My belief is that CN would get on board with the right stimulus - meaning money. So if HRM were to contract out the maintenance of the train cars to CN, lease track time and pay to maintenance the platforms they build - I suspect they would be on board. Let's face it; as a private company they are all about getting more money and looking good for shareholders.

[beyeas]

Light-rail solution touted for HRM
Siemens Canada boss on nationwide tour to promote sustainable urban transit plans
By JUDY MYRDEN Business Reporter
Fri. Jun 25 - 4:54 AM

HALIFAX NEEDS to build a mass transit system to get commuters off the road, says the head of Siemens Canada.

While Halifax has no immediate plans for any light-rail network, some believe politicians must start thinking long term about transportation issues, as the rest of North America drives toward more sustainable cities.

"There are improvements to be done in the transportation area," Roland Aurich said in an interview Thursday in Halifax.

That would make the city cleaner and more attractive and help keep university graduates in the city, he said.

The president and CEO of the Canadian operations of the German-based transportation and engineering conglomerate is on a cross-country tour promoting a $100,000 study it sponsored with the David Suzuki Foundation.

The study found transportation and waste water management are the two biggest challenges facing cities in the future.

"We believe a good mass transit solution, based on rail traffic, and having an intelligent and efficient connection around city centres, and also connecting airports and other close-by cities, is really essential for giving that level of quality that people expect to have," said Aurich.

The study, conducted by GlobeScan in 12 of Canada’s largest cities, could be construed as being self-serving, since Siemens does this type of transportation construction, Aurich said the research was conducted as part of the company’s corporate responsibility.

He said about 70 per cent of the workforce travelling to Halifax commutes in their own cars, and about 80 per cent of power consumption takes place in cities.

"There is a need for cities to engage in creating more sustainable solutions going forward," Aurich said, before he met with Halifax Mayor Peter Kelly.

He said Siemens is interested in helping Halifax and other cities rebuild old infrastructure to pave the way for the future.

The environment and sustainability are two key drivers that will attract people to the area and keep graduates from local universities here, Aurich said. They will also help to develop the city’s economy

[halifaxboyns]

Well fenwick - looks like your LRT concept has gotten a boost without anyone saying a word!? :)

I like that they admit the report is pretty self serving; since they are looking to provide the vehicles. I got a kick out of that, but still - great way to get people thinking.

[Canadian_Bacon]

I'd like to see a light rail system from the airport to Halifax. It could just follow along the 102 etc. It would be great for the 'green' aspect of the HRM.

[fenwick16]

Well fenwick - looks like your LRT concept has gotten a boost without anyone saying a word!? :)

I like that they admit the report is pretty self serving; since they are looking to provide the vehicles. I got a kick out of that, but still - great way to get people thinking.

But will anyone at city hall listen? When I think of LRT though, I am thinking in terms of frequent service to the most densely populated areas. More of a subway/surface/elevated LRT as opposed to commuter rail. More like the Toronto subway but with a much shorter track (7 kilometers would be a good start, serving the downtown, Spring Garden Road, universities and possibly the West Mall). Although this would be costly, the federal government will usually contribute to such projects since it is seen as being environmentally friendly.

[Canadian_Bacon]

I don't think they would ever go for a subway system of any kind in the near or distant future. I don't think Halifax is large enough to justify such a huge expense that it would cost. Subways are only for large cities of like a million +. I think a light, surface rail system is about all Halifax could ask for at this time. Something that connects major points of the city... Like the airport, downtown Dartmouth, downtown Halifax etc.

I don't see many Haligonians using a subway system anyway. Those that would use it most would be students who don't have a car etc. But once University is out for the summer, the ridership would drop significantly. Plus most of the densest parts of the city are close to each other anyway that most would just walk. When you live in the city core, you most likely have a job within walking distance if you don't have a car. So a subway would be useless for that part of the city. Those that do have a job outside of the city core, have a car, and would just keep driving it even if a transit system was available.

To me a subway in the core would not work due to...

1. The densest part of the city where people live where the subway would be proposed... Those that live there probably live close to their jobs in the core. So they would be within walking distance.
2. Those that live in the city core but have a job outside the core. A subway would not be available to take them to their job, so they would drive.

So either way, I don't see many using such a system.

It would be cool to happen, but I just don't see it ever happening.

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Pointless to serve out to the airport really, would be more of a vanity project than anything at this stage. Better to build effective links for commuters that take the same route everyday than for a handful of individuals that take a trip a couple times a year and have a catchment area of the entire region.

[alps]

Airport could easily be served by a bus I'm sure

[MonctonRad]

A subway would never work in Halifax.
- Halifax is too small. The smallest city in Canada with a subway is Edmonton at about 1.1M people.
- Halifax is not dense enough and the downtown core is far too compact to generate the needed ridership.
- The city is built directly on bedrock. You'd damn near need a nuclear device to dig the tunnels. The costs to build a subway would be prohibitive.

An LRT system for Halifax would be problematic.
- An elevated LRT track system would drive the NIMBY's into a frenzy.
- A surface LRT would have to share the right of way with existing street traffic which would be aggravating for car drivers in the downtown.
- Without a dedicated right of way, LRT would not be a realistic option in getting commuters to the downtown from the suburbs.

This is the rub.......the problem is not so much in getting people around downtown, it's in getting the commuters to the downtown in the first place!!

LRT's and subways are not feasible or practical in getting those people from Cole Harbour, Bedford, Sackville or Hammond's Plains into the core. You need a high capacity system that can transport people (relatively) long distances in order to reduce commuter traffic congestion.

Busses in some ways are not the answer. Since they use existing roadways, they are subject to unpredictable scheduling due to traffic congestion problems. This could be solved by HOV lanes, but these are not really an option in Halifax as there are no freeways into the downtown and the existing roadways are too narrow to dedicate entire lanes to high occupancy vehicles.

This leaves only two options:
- high speed ferries
- commuter rail

To me, high speed ferries would be expensive and suffer from capacity issues. The term "high speed" is a relative one for any form of water transportation and a round trip from Bedford would likely be about one hour. I'm not against high speed ferries, but I don't think that it is the entire answer.

This leaves commuter rail as the most viable alternative. Advantages include:
- There is already a dedicated rail corridor into downtown Halifax. This formerly was completely double tracked. It would not be very costly to double track it again.
- The rail corridor follows the bulk of the metro areas population out through the west end, Clayton Park, along the basin and to Bedford and beyond.
- Commuter rail could be added to existing rail connections to Dartmouth, Enfield, Waverly and to Windsor.
- A relatively small number of suburban commuter stations could be built and could include park 'n ride lots. This could take a large number of vehicles off the road, freeing up the downtown streets for legitimate commercial vehicle traffic. Less congestion would also make the downtown more attractive for tourists and for casual shoppers.

Commuter rail is the way to go. It is really the only economically viable and effective option for Halifax. The city should begin negotiating with CNR immediately. :tup:

[fenwick16]

OK, so you make a lot of good points but a rapid transit system within the city gets cars off city roads and reduces the requirement for parking within the city. So make it a surface system whereby it has dedicated roadways within the city and ROW wherever possible. Sounds like BRT is the way to start.

Commuter rail to the suburbs would be good also. I think that the HRM should consider both. Although a ferry from Bedford would be great, it won't have any stops between Bedford and the downtown so I think that commuter rail will have higher ridership numbers. It might be that the commuter train would only operate during rush hour and then during the day it might be an Express bus.

[hfx_chris]

I might as well just re-state my personal thoughts on this.

I think for any sort of rail system to be worth while, it needs to serve the central downtown area, that would be the area between Citadel Hill and the waterfront. Large commuter rail trains (such as GO in Toronto, or AMT in Montreal) are just too large and akward to navigate Halifax's tight, busy streets, without being buried or elevated. And I think most people would agree, burying or elevating the tracks for any significant length is just either way too costly, or would encounter far too much opposition.
LRT uses smaller vehicles, often electrified although not always. They can operate both within and outside of downtown.

My ideal system would be to utilize the existing rail cut to the Via station, then to the Cogswell Interchange site which, when eventually torn down, I forsee as being a major downtown transit hub. It could either at that point reverse back to the rail cut, or continue along by the dockyard/Barrington area, up to Richmond and re-join the existing CN tracks.
Now to do this, Lower Water and Hollis Streets need to be made one-way streets for their entire length. I know this is something we've discussed before, and honestly this needs to happen regardless of rail service through downtown. On-street parking needs to be seriously restricted in some parts as well. Then you have two, 2-lane roads through downtown that could both accomidate vehicles and LRT traffic. It's all pretty much straight roads too, so you're not going to have large rail vehicles making tight turns onto Spring Garden or Quinpool/Cogswell, you get your service from areas like Clayton Park/Fairview, Bedford, Windsor Junction and Beaver Bank direct to the downtown central business district, and no transferring at the Via station.

If the Cogswell area redevelopments could include some sort of downtown transit terminal/hub, you could also run a couple of electric trolley coache (not rail) routes along areas like Barrington, Inglis, Spring Garden, Oxford, Quinpool, maybe Gottingen and Agricola as well, with frequent trips departing the downtown terminal.

http://local.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=108164844284702764252.00045df329de70452d470&ll=44.713318,-63.573074&spn=0.175664,0.445976&t=h&z=12
Keep in mind this also shows a possible Dartmouth expansion, assuming a 3rd bridge or tunnel were to be built.


Also, my downtown trolley coach map:
http://local.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=108164844284702764252.00047a1535e6013c38b39&t=h&z=14
Featuring both a north-end and south-end route. I think the south-end route does a pretty good job hitting most of the major points of interest.

[halifaxboyns]

I agree with Sir Humphrey on serving the airport. Vancouver was in a bit of a unique situation, since their airport happened to be along the route of what became the 99 b-line and then the Canada line. But if translink hadn't setup the 99 B-line; it probably would've skipped over the airport. Granted, I'm sure everything got skewed because of the olympics.

[halifaxboyns]

Moncton makes some very good points - which I think many of us have brought up.

I think what is changing here is everyone seems to be jumping on board with the idea that no matter what system is used, Halifax has to grow more before it can come. So this is a long term solution - not put the shovel in the ground today.

Also, I'm seeing the people are starting to realize that transportation needs to be looked at in a multi-model approach. I see people talking about ferries, rail and bus - together (maybe not always said that way, but I can see that we seem to be agreeing with it; in some fashion).

High speed ferries are an interesting option because of the fact they can apply for an exemption to speed limits in the harbour - and the boat they used was low wake. Apparently the speed made the trip from Mill Cove to downtown in 15 minutes; which would make a 30 minute round trip.

I'm also pleased to see that people are seeing what has been said about commuter rail's difficulty - the fact that it doesn't go all the way into downtown. Personally, I'd like to see the service go to the train station - I see it as a huge value and a great spot to setup a terminal and spur new development around the area. But I'm open to the loop chris has proposed on the old rail line from Ceres into the dockyard, parts of which still exist.

Personally - I think the region's transportation systems will improved as the whole system improves. So if you add combinations of things like high speed ferry, rail and BRT - things will get better. Added to that, increased density in both the Halifax and Dartmouth cores; you will see the modal shift occur. Halifax has a wonderful walking/biking quality and believe me; the day I move home is the day I move into a place downtown. I'm prepared to keep my car in a garage and use it only for grocerry trips and pay the extra price if it will help in the long run (sorry guys, I won't sell her - she's just too much fun!).

Another way that commuter rail may work out of the train station is to setup timely connections along the line to the main work locations on the peninsula (hospitals/schools/downtown). So if a station were setup at Mumford, this could be one connection point; the second being the end of the line at the Train station. The catch will be ensuring timely connections (if you've missed the bus; then it won't work well). Human nature in transportations typically works that if it's long and difficult - it won't work. But if I can get on a train at mill cove, get to the train station and walk onto a bus that's waiting and get to downtown and then do the reverse with little hastle - it might work. Granted, the downtown loop via the dockyard may eliminate that need.

Btw - totally in support of the idea of Ashburn as a park/ride type style TOD development. Oh and two small criticism on Moncton's post about Edmonton/at grade rail: Their actual population is somewhere in the 782,439 (as of 2009 - according to wiki), but the region (St. Albert, Strathcona County, Sturgeon County and Fort Sask is about 1.2 million). The second - about at grade - Edmonton is having a really hard time about the LRT south extension (apparently some of the at grade crossing are not working properly and causing more problems than solving). I know for Calgary; the LRT crossing at 6 Ave SE near the East village development has a new signal (similar to a couple crossings in Edmonton). Here in Calgary; the lights are timed to prefer the LRT; so drivers would have probs with at grade crossings.

[Keith P.]

One suspects Bulldog Sue Uteck wrote this letter to the editor of the Herald (Sunday June 27) after having a few drinks on the patio at the Shoe:

Unaffordable option

As a Halifax regional councillor, I read with interest that Mayor Peter Kelly met with Roland Aurich, president and CEO of Siemens Canada, to discuss sustainable transportation issues (June 25 article).

Mr. Aurich, you are wasting your time. Not only will this meeting (and hundreds of others) not be shared with council, but you should know that our mayor is head of the commuter rail committee which has not met for eight years.

In the interim, rail lines have been disposed of, making this choice unaffordable for the taxpayer.

Sue Uteck, Councillor, District 13,

North West Arm-South End


Nice "can't do" attitude demonstrated there. Disappointing.

[fenwick16]

What a nightmare it would be for the HRM if Sue Uteck became the Mayor (she is reportedly planning to run). Does the HRM need any more narrow-minded politicians? Has Sue Uteck ever heard of democracy? Or is it just that she has much better things to do than waste time listening to talk about commuter rail? Is it true that no councillors were planning to attend?

[beyeas]

One suspects Bulldog Sue Uteck wrote this letter to the editor of the Herald (Sunday June 27) after having a few drinks on the patio at the Shoe:




Nice "can't do" attitude demonstrated there. Disappointing.

Ok I am reading this totally different that others here obviously. My read of what she said was she was planting the blame on the Mayor for chairing the committee but never having it meet, and the comment about tearing up the rail lines was that this was a short sited decision because it makes it more expensive down the road to bring in rail.

Am I way off here or what? My read was that she is blaming the Mayor, not that she is saying rail shouldn't happen.

[fenwick16]

Ok I am reading this totally different that others here obviously. My read of what she said was she was planting the blame on the Mayor for chairing the committee but never having it meet, and the comment about tearing up the rail lines was that this was a short sited decision because it makes it more expensive down the road to bring in rail.

Am I way off here or what? My read was that she is blaming the Mayor, not that she is saying rail shouldn't happen.

You could be right. Maybe she is stating that the details will not be shared with council, as opposed to my interpretation that she and council are not interested. However, she was the one who wanted a motion to prevent debate on the southern bridge (although I somewhat agree with her regarding a southern bridge, discussion and debate should proceed, since it is not up to one person to stop it).

What has Sue Uteck stated in the past regarding commuter rail?

[Keith P.]

What has Sue Uteck stated in the past regarding commuter rail?

Indirectly she has opposed it by her support for turning rail ROWs into useless trails instead of preserving them for transitways.

[fenwick16]

Indirectly she has opposed it by her support for turning rail ROWs into useless trails instead of preserving them for transitways.

I have done a quick search on the internet, regarding commuter rail and couldn't find anything about Councillor Sue Uteck supporting commuter rail, whereas she opposes a third harbour crossing and paving the rail cut.

On the other hand Mayor Kelly supported commuter rail in 2000 during his election bid. So I have to give the Mayor the upper hand with regards to this issue. Maybe it is very tough for the Mayor to deal with all the back stabbing going on. By the way, here is an interesting article - does anyone recognize the person on the front page? This is where I found the reference to the commuter rail and Mayor Kelly. http://journalism.ukings.ca/files/commoner_001023.pdf

[halifaxboyns]

I have done a quick search on the internet, regarding commuter rail and couldn't find anything about Councillor Sue Uteck supporting commuter rail, whereas she opposes a third harbour crossing and paving the rail cut.

On the other hand Mayor Kelly supported commuter rail in 2000 during his election bid. So I have to give the Mayor the upper hand with regards to this issue. Maybe it is very tough for the Mayor to deal with all the back stabbing going on. By the way, here is an interesting article - does anyone recognize the person on the front page? This is where I found the reference to the commuter rail and Mayor Kelly. http://journalism.ukings.ca/files/commoner_001023.pdf

Interesting article - I think most of the residents in Ms. Uteck's riding would be against rail because when rail was in it's peak - they hated all the noise through the rail cut. Since Via service has diminished and CN has limited runs; not so much noise anymore.

My only response to that is - you knew the cut was there; deal with it. But I will go back to what I've said and look at transportation as a regional context; so don't just look at rail - look at ferries and enhanced bus service.

With ferries; you can build hubs at the terminals and then feeder services from them to the communities; but don't remove connections to downtown via bus. So for example; if you build the Mill Cove ferry; you could have feeder service out to the neighbourhoods of Bedford and Sackville. But, don't eliminate the 80 to downtown just because you have the ferry, because people may want to use the 80 to get somewhere else - but enhance it. Make sure the 80 connects with the ferry; in both directions (into and out of downtown), same with the feeders. The feeder services could operate 7 days a wekk, but use buses like these (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3125/2846900439_f3fff38e1e.jpg?v=0).

[FuzzyWuz]

There's a 25 year plan for growth right? And the LINK system is unfolding along some of the corridors identified in that plan. I assume a LRT or subway would run on the same path(s) since that's where the people have to travel to get where they're going. I guess there are multiple considerations for planning mass transit. Where are the people NOW? Where do we expect/plan for them to be in the future? So I'd like to see a map with plans for moving people right away, as well as the plan for how the system will look 20/30+ years in the future.

[Wishblade]

Sue Uteck wrote into the chronicle herald with a letter showing her disapproval with LRT, and attack in particular the CEO of Siemens, who stated LRT will be needed in HRM:


Unaffordable option

As a Halifax regional councillor, I read with interest that Mayor Peter Kelly met with Roland Aurich, president and CEO of Siemens Canada, to discuss sustainable transportation issues (June 25 article).

Mr. Aurich, you are wasting your time. Not only will this meeting (and hundreds of others) not be shared with council, but you should know that our mayor is head of the commuter rail committee which has not met for eight years.

In the interim, rail lines have been disposed of, making this choice unaffordable for the taxpayer.

Sue Uteck, Councillor, District 13,

North West Arm-South End


I dont think were ready for LRT yet, but we should definately be planning ahead for it. I think we are ready however for heavy commuter rail, atleast as a start for getting people into the city from further outlying areas, perhaps starting in Truro or the valley.

[MonctonRad]

I dont think were ready for LRT yet, but we should definately be planning ahead for it. I think we are ready however for heavy commuter rail, atleast as a start for getting people into the city from further outlying areas, perhaps starting in Truro or the valley.

Precisely. The answer to Halifax's traffic woes will have to be multi-pronged. The city is still too small for many of the possible options. Heavy commuter rail however would be relatively easy to implement and should be considered in the short term as the basis for a more comprehensive strategy down the road.

[Keith P.]

Sue Uteck wrote into the chronicle herald with a letter showing her disapproval with LRT, and attack in particular the CEO of Siemens, who stated LRT will be needed in HRM

You're over a day late. I posted that yesterday.

[Wishblade]

You're over a day late. I posted that yesterday.

ah, so you did. Sorry about that lol

[hfx_chris]

Sue Uteck wrote into the chronicle herald with a letter showing her disapproval with LRT, and attack in particular the CEO of Siemens, who stated LRT will be needed in HRM

How do you read that as an attack on LRT, and the CEO of Siemens?

[fenwick16]

How do you read that as an attack on LRT, and the CEO of Siemens?

Mayor Kelly has been on record as supporting commuter rail. Can you provide a link where Sue Uteck shows support for commuter rail? (I looked and I couldn't find any). In any case, isn't there enough backstabbing in the HRM council? She should leave such critical remarks for the people on this forum (LOL). Although I know that our critical remarks aren't as newsworthy.

[someone123]

Something to keep in mind is that this is not just about suburban commuters getting into one central location. Transit around the core is extremely important for supporting future infill and for making transit practical - not everybody works on Barrington. Commuter rail to the train station is worthless without good service to nearby areas.

Buses already don't cut it in the core. The city is going to suffer more and more if it doesn't look at better transit infrastructure, and this includes rail.

[worldlyhaligonian]

This is almost scary to me... why would you write somebody a letter like that for any reason other than to be a shit disturber. Seriously, the effort required to do that could have been better served working on solutions to the transportation problems that are seemingly ignored while buses are shoved down our throats. Buses are terrible long term solutions, but we should at least have a BRT system with links to the airport right now if this is the priority method of transportation!

The Mayor can meet with whoever he wants and the only people wasting their time are the naysayers in this city.

Siemens is a legit company and could do good things in the Halifax area (i.e. jobs, investment in public projects).

But I guess Sue "saw" to the "disposal" of those stupid rail lines. I loved Keith P's comment about turning infractructure into useless trails... because that is what is going on.

What is this anti-rail propaganda, seriously. I guess we should spend more money on alot of shitty buses instead of a phased transportation strategy that takes into account other types of transport.

[MonctonRad]

Something to keep in mind is that this is not just about suburban commuters getting into one central location. Transit around the core is extremely important for supporting future infill and for making transit practical - not everybody works on Barrington. Commuter rail to the train station is worthless without good service to nearby areas.

It is (almost) all about getting suburban commuters into the core. Halifax downtown is just too small and not compact enough to justify grandiose plans for subways etc.

Having said that, the rail station is a little removed from the main downtown core. It would make sense to supplement a heavy rail commuter system with a trolley loop extending from the railway station to the Cogswell area using Water Street and Barrington as a right of way. Trolleys and cars can learn to co-exist on a few low speed downtown streets.

[fenwick16]

It is (almost) all about getting suburban commuters into the core. Halifax downtown is just too small and not compact enough to justify grandiose plans for subways etc.

Having said that, the rail station is a little removed from the main downtown core. It would make sense to supplement a heavy rail commuter system with a trolley loop extending from the railway station to the Cogswell area using Water Street and Barrington as a right of way. Trolleys and cars can learn to co-exist on a few low speed downtown streets.

I think you are missing the point - Rapid Transit in the downtown core encourages the use of transit and thus fewer cars in the city. If Halifax continues to grow then this is something to consider. This would likely have higher ridership numbers than the suburban commuter rail. You are only right if the city population will stagnate.

[MonctonRad]

:previous:

While I am confident that HRM will see a population of 500,000 (and possibly 600,000), I don't foresee a population greater than that in the near to medium term. Also, that population will be distributed throughout the metropolitan area and a considerable portion of the people in the HRM will likely only rarely venture downtown. I still don't think you need to spend tens of millions of dollars on a sophisticated downtown transit system.

Heavy commuter rail supplemented by downtown trolleys is both feasible and relatively affordable. This is where you should start.

Over time, the trolley routes could be expanded, for example a second loop up Morris and Spring Garden to service the commercial district here as well as the universities and the hospitals.

[someone123]

Well, employment downtown (CBD) is about 20,000. On the peninsula it is about 100,000 or so.

[fenwick16]

:previous:

Heavy commuter rail supplemented by downtown trolleys is both feasible and relatively affordable. This is where you should start.

Over time, the trolley routes could be expanded, for example a second loop up Morris and Spring Garden to service the commercial district here as well as the universities and the hospitals.

I can see the advantage of having commuter rail from Bedford and then have it connect to a bus terminal. However, commuter rail plus rapid transit within the city would be far better.

When you say trolley, are you talking about electric buses? The operative word in rapid transit is "rapid". Trolleys and streetcars don't provide rapid transit unless they have a Right of Way (and even then, I don't think streetcars would be very fast). However, I don't see the advantage of trolleys and streetcars over buses. The reason that subways are preferred over buses is that they quickly get from point A to point B.

[MonctonRad]

When you say trolley, are you talking about electric buses? The operative word in rapid transit is "rapid". Trolleys and streetcars don't provide rapid transit unless they have a Right of Way (and even then, I don't think streetcars would be very fast). However, I don't see the advantage of trolleys and streetcars over buses. The reason that subways are preferred over buses is that they quickly get from point A to point B.

By LRT, I mean a rail based transit system which shares the roadway with regular vehicular traffic - essentially what most North Americans consider to be a streetcar or trolley system

http://www.lrta.info/photos/images/pg59a.jpg

It might not be "rapid" in the same way as you are thinking, but it will move with regular traffic flow and is capable of moving a lot of people comfortably and quietly in a short period of time.

These sort of systems are becoming quite popular in urban Europe.

[halifaxboyns]

By LRT, I mean a rail based transit system which shares the roadway with regular vehicular traffic - essentially what most North Americans consider to be a streetcar or trolley system

http://www.lrta.info/photos/images/pg59a.jpg

It might not be "rapid" in the same way as you are thinking, but it will move with regular traffic flow and is capable of moving a lot of people comfortably and quietly in a short period of time.

These sort of systems are becoming quite popular in urban Europe.

The problem with commuter rail becomes getting people from the train station or say mumford (which could be used as a key stop in and outbound) to the major employment centres such as universities, hospitals and the dockyard (not to mention downtown).

Now if you had a rail system like this from the station to just downtown, doing a loop, or maybe 2 (one to downtown and SGR and the other to the universities) then you might have a chance. The problem will be ease of service. Commuters typically will not use a system that requires more than 1 connection and if the travel time is more than what a car would do; forget it.

The only way it might work well is if you had a sizeable supply of buses (or trolleys) standing by at Mumford or the train station to take people on the two routes I mentioned. That way; as they got off the train - they'd exit to the bus/trolley station which could either by streetside by the park or behind of the terminal road - then hop on the bus/trolley and then go. The same would be true in reverse; you'd have to have trolley's waiting and have good frequency and then get them to the train stations quickly. That might work for the downtown train station because you may flow against the traffic; but for Mumford - you'd probably be in traffic most of the time. On top of which, you also have to factor in the possibility that when people get to Bedford, they'd have to transfer again - this is why commuter rail isn't really easy to do, because now you are talking 2 connections:

Get on bus at home in say Sackville, get to Mill cove (CONNECTION);
Take train to Mumford Station (CONNECTION TO BUS SERVING SMU);
Arrive at SMU.

So 2 connections - unless it works well; people will find that more complicated. This process holds true even for the fast ferry; unless the park and ride lot is huge - but even then people going to the hospitals or universities will still have to connection at the Ferry Terminal or walk up to Scotia Square.

[Canadian_Bacon]

By LRT, I mean a rail based transit system which shares the roadway with regular vehicular traffic - essentially what most North Americans consider to be a streetcar or trolley system

http://www.lrta.info/photos/images/pg59a.jpg

It might not be "rapid" in the same way as you are thinking, but it will move with regular traffic flow and is capable of moving a lot of people comfortably and quietly in a short period of time.

These sort of systems are becoming quite popular in urban Europe.

Then it's only a matter of time before they become popular here in Canada. We seem to be adopting more of a European life then anything. European car styles, and now roundabouts etc. Are everywhere here. Whatever Europe does, we have to follow it seems. :rolleyes:

[MalcolmTucker]

Commuters typically will not use a system that requires more than 1 connection and if the travel time is more than what a car would do; forget it.

Answer? The tram train (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train)! Would be difficult to implement without a FRA waiver, and you would likely need custom equipment. But it is certainly possible. You can run on mainlines and on the tram loop without transfers.

[fenwick16]

Answer? The tram train (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train)! Would be difficult to implement without a FRA waiver, and you would likely need custom equipment. But it is certainly possible. You can run on mainlines and on the tram loop without transfers.

This is an interesting option, especially if it could be built to maximize ROW to increase the speed. Underground sections could be built where it would be inexpensive (examples - passing through areas such as the Commons, dockyards and even some boulevards could be underground without a major cost). If this could be built as a true rapid transit option then it might be successful.

[halifaxboyns]

I posted this in the Bedford Study string; but I wanted to put it in here as well to get people thinking about what LRT can do (if designed well).

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mkR0LO1kG6g&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mkR0LO1kG6g&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[MonctonRad]

:previous:

Now that's what I'm talking about.

Have a handful of suburban commuter rail stations with park 'n ride lots, a heavy commuter train route to the VIA station using the rail cut and then a couple of surface LRT's with frequent trains (say every five minutes) connecting the VIA station to a downtown loop and a second loop serving SGR, the hospitals and the universities. There would only be one transfer involved (at the VIA station), it would service the entire downtown core and the university district, and is entirely doable........there is nothing grandiose about this vision at all. It's eminently practical in fact.

Once people get used to LRT's, additional routes could be added on in the future, like up Quinpool Road and down Robie Street. The future possibilities are endless!! :tup:

Let's git 'er done Halifax!!

[hfx_chris]

OR, just run the LRT system out to the suburban areas, requiring 0 transfers and negating any need to purchase and maintain two different fleets of rail vehicles.

[MonctonRad]

:previous:

That would be OK, but I don't think CN would like the idea of heavy freight sharing the same ROW as LRT.

Of course, if HalTerm were relocated, this would obviate the problem :D

[pnightingale]

I like the idea of using the North End instead for a commuter/LRT route. I know much of the ROW is taken up by parking lots right now, but with the Cogswell Interchange (hopefully) coming down soon, you could take that opportunity to build a tunnel from Scotia Square to the dockyards where you could either continue running in a tunnel under the parking lots, or simply build a few parking structures for the dockyard employees and reclaim the ROW and run the line at grade. This would remove the need for a transfer for many people who would take the train into downtown. If you were feeling ambitious (which I am) you could dig the cut and cover tunnel where the interchange was and then take advantage of that opportunity and launch a TBM that could tunnel even further through the downtown, to the Maritime Centre, or even the VIA Station. Hybrid diesel/electric trains would remove the necessity of electrifying the whole line while still allowing then to run safely in a long tunnel. I would think that there is also less congestion on the North End line, but I could be wrong...

[fenwick16]

I like the idea of using the North End instead for a commuter/LRT route. I know much of the ROW is taken up by parking lots right now, but with the Cogswell Interchange (hopefully) coming down soon, you could take that opportunity to build a tunnel from Scotia Square to the dockyards where you could either continue running in a tunnel under the parking lots, or simply build a few parking structures for the dockyard employees and reclaim the ROW and run the line at grade. This would remove the need for a transfer for many people who would take the train into downtown. If you were feeling ambitious (which I am) you could dig the cut and cover tunnel where the interchange was and then take advantage of that opportunity and launch a TBM that could tunnel even further through the downtown, to the Maritime Centre, or even the VIA Station. Hybrid diesel/electric trains would remove the necessity of electrifying the whole line while still allowing then to run safely in a long tunnel. I would think that there is also less congestion on the North End line, but I could be wrong...

This is an idea that I like. Let's think big. Many areas could even be single track to keep the cost down (just some scheduling would be required). I also like the dockyard route for commuter rail to places like Bedford and in between. Especially if there could also be short route, high frequency LRT on the same route.

Let's start boring to create an exciting LRT route.

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_boring_machine )
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Tunnel_Boring_Machine_%28Yucca_Mt%29.jpg/300px-Tunnel_Boring_Machine_%28Yucca_Mt%29.jpg

[hfx_chris]

That would be OK, but I don't think CN would like the idea of heavy freight sharing the same ROW as LRT.

If it was constructed to the same safety standards as heavy rail, and with proper upgrades to signaling systems, and if proper separation was kept, it would not be an issue. It is possible.
However I agree with you, CN is not always as willing to play ball as we would like.

[fenwick16]

I found this quote in the HRM's Metro Transit's 5 year plan (from October 2009 - http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/documents/5yearStrategicOperationsPlan.pdf ):

Although beyond the scope of this plan, the consulting team envisions that, in the longer term, within 10 to 15 years, Metro Transit’s network of bus routes and ferries will need to be augmented by a network of higher order transit services, specifically, Light Rail Transit, in order to provide the needed capacity to handle higher ridership levels.

They actually show a picture of a Portland, Oregon LRT/Streetcar. I hope that instead they will consider the Portland, Oregon MAX system which sounds like it would be suited to Halifax (since both have small city blocks). This is a quote from Wikipedia (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAX_Light_Rail ):

In parts of the MAX system, particularly in central Portland and Hillsboro, MAX trains run on surface streets. Except for on the Portland Transit Mall, trains run in reserved lanes closed to other motorized vehicles. On the Transit Mall, trains operate on the same lanes as TriMet buses (although MAX trains have traffic priority). Elsewhere, MAX runs within its own exclusive right-of-way, in street medians, along side freeways, and on former freight railroad lines.

Where the tracks run along a street, intersections are generally controlled by traffic signals which give trains preemption. Where the tracks occupy a completely separate right-of-way, level crossings are protected by automatic crossing gates giving trains the right-of-way. A three-mile (4.8 km) section consists of two tunnels below Washington Park. While this section has only one station, it is 260 feet (79 m) below ground level, making it the deepest train station in North America and the second-deepest train station in the world.[11]

Because of Portland's relatively small 200-foot (61 m) downtown blocks, trains operate with only one or two cars. The MAX cars are about 90 feet (27.4 m) long, so a stopped train consisting of more than two cars would block intersections. All operating trains typically operate with two-car trains, except for certain lines during off-peak hours and other instances where only one-car trains can operate.

Here is an interesting plot of commuter patterns. Not surprisingly, New York City with its extensive subway and commuter rail system has the highest percentage of transit users (x-axis) and lowest percentage of car users (y-axis). In Oklahoma City almost everyone drives and almost no one uses public transit. Based on this CityThink survey, http://www.metronews.ca/halifax/local/article/527754--less-than-a-quarter-of-hrm-residents-weekly-transit-users-new-survey-finds, it seems as though Halifax would be in the 10% - 15% range on this graph.

(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_Portland,_Oregon )
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/USCommutePatterns2006.png/800px-USCommutePatterns2006.png

[beyeas]

I posted this in the Bedford Study string; but I wanted to put it in here as well to get people thinking about what LRT can do (if designed well).

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mkR0LO1kG6g&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mkR0LO1kG6g&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

While there is certainly a bit of polyanna in that, it is a great video that makes a number of points much better than I could ever make them.

[halifaxboyns]

I was surfing around you tube and found this video - it's two part, but links to this website for a group called Crest.
It's late so I will look at it tomorrow; but it sounds interesting.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DKUmNjLLNsM&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DKUmNjLLNsM&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Crest website. (http://www.cresthalifax.org/)

[beyeas]

I was surfing around you tube and found this video - it's two part, but links to this website for a group called Crest.
It's late so I will look at it tomorrow; but it sounds interesting.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DKUmNjLLNsM&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DKUmNjLLNsM&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Crest website. (http://www.cresthalifax.org/)

Interesting. I will definitely have to read that report.

Keith P. need not even respond because I can simply fill in his predictable response for him:
"CREST is just a bunch of pinko commie namby pamby eco-twits peddling their using crap". :haha:

[Jonovision]

I went to school with Patrick. I remember seeing his report and it looked very interesting. It was a well thought out proposal for the downtown street car.

[Keith P.]

Keith P. need not even respond because I can simply fill in his predictable response for him:
"CREST is just a bunch of pinko commie namby pamby eco-twits peddling their using crap". :haha:

When you're right, you're right.

Actually it's not a bad site except for the excessive and foolish emphasis on bicycling as a rational form of commuting.

[someone123]

I've read that report. I don't remember the exact alignments but I could see streetcars working well as transit between core areas. Suburban commuter rail or light rail would complement such a system very well.

I think cycling infrastructure is important but it will always be a niche transportation mode with maybe 5-10% share during nicer months, unless people have no other options. I commuted to university by bike when I had no car and found it to be much more pleasant than the bus and roughly the same speed for a 15-20 km trip (since the bike is door to door and there is no wait). It is vastly superior to the bus when you have to make multiple stops when running errands. It's also worth noting that the bike was better even when I was living on the 99 B-Line corridor in Vancouver, which is an express bus with 2 minute rush hour frequencies. On top of this, it was also great physical activity.

Something else to bear in mind is that bike infrastructure does not need to be expensive - very simple things like street-facing light triggers before intersections and bike racks are helpful. These cost tens of thousands of dollars compared to millions for significant roadway projects. They're totally worth it even if you are looking at adding 1-2% more to cycling as a mode of transportation.

[halifaxboyns]

I've read that report. I don't remember the exact alignments but I could see streetcars working well as transit between core areas. Suburban commuter rail or light rail would complement such a system very well.

I think cycling infrastructure is important but it will always be a niche transportation mode with maybe 5-10% share during nicer months, unless people have no other options. I commuted to university by bike when I had no car and found it to be much more pleasant than the bus and roughly the same speed for a 15-20 km trip (since the bike is door to door and there is no wait). It is vastly superior to the bus when you have to make multiple stops when running errands. It's also worth noting that the bike was better even when I was living on the 99 B-Line corridor in Vancouver, which is an express bus with 2 minute rush hour frequencies. On top of this, it was also great physical activity.

Something else to bear in mind is that bike infrastructure does not need to be expensive - very simple things like street-facing light triggers before intersections and bike racks are helpful. These cost tens of thousands of dollars compared to millions for significant roadway projects. They're totally worth it even if you are looking at adding 1-2% more to cycling as a mode of transportation.

I agree that biking will only be a niche - but I think it would grow as you densify the inner city core. It seems to me that Vancouver's biking trips is around 10 to 15% - so if HRM were able to densify the inner city to a great extent; I think 10 to 15% would be reasonable and there will always be people from the burbs that will want to bike as well.

As the city grows; better transit options will become a necessity; not a dream. What that form of mass transit will be (LRT; heavy rail or combo there of) will take time to study. I think I've mentioned it before - there seems to be a pattern of areas around the peninsula that are growing on their own and they seem to be in linear patterns. That will be a good thing for when a new rapid transit system is developed, because it creates places with high density that support a rapid transit system. The difficulty will be ensuring major destinations are served like the hospitals, universities, downtown and DND.

[fenwick16]

:previous: I hope that it will be more like Portland, Oregon's LRT Max system ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAX_Light_Rail ) instead of strictly streetcars. The idea of transit based on streetcars seems to be taking a step backward to where Halifax was 70 years ago (even if the streetcars look modern).

[halifaxboyns]

:previous: I hope that it will be more like Portland, Oregon's LRT Max system ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAX_Light_Rail ) instead of strictly streetcars. The idea of transit based on streetcars seems to be taking a step backward to where Halifax was 70 years ago (even if the streetcars look modern).

I would actually suggest that if you were to look at LRT for an underground system component - look at the Seattle LRT system. In certain segments - the buses and trains share the tunnels and it's like an underground street.

The LRT is low floor - so its like a bus - a very small step up into the train or into the bus. I'm not sure how the signal system works; but obviously the two work harmoniously. This could be done on a street like Quinpool or Robie where the right of way and building foundations are far apart on each side - versus Spring Garden which would be quite narrow (I'm sure it could be done; but it might be crowded).

Here is a video example:
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ShJcMOuH7RQ&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ShJcMOuH7RQ&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

But please...don't let us use a system like this (or I should say - don't operate it this way; we'd have to protect the vehicles).
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OwcYcedLxZc&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OwcYcedLxZc&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[fenwick16]

Regarding the second video clip of the Houston system, this could be a promotional video for why people should leave their cars at home and take public transit.

Having driven in downtown Toronto and having experienced sharing the streets with the TTC streetcars , I can relate to all the accidents related to the Houston system. For such a system to be successful, maximizing ROW is a must.

[beyeas]

When you're right, you're right.



LMAO Well played. :cheers:

[someone123]

I've been on the Seattle train and it's really sad. It's much, much slower than the SkyTrain in Vancouver (in fact, I have heard that it's not much faster than the bus it replaced, though I can't confirm this) yet still very expensive. An engineer involved in the project was complaining bitterly about the train last time I was on it.

Seattle sadly is a fairly sprawly city somewhat like LA that isn't a great place to take transit pointers from. Part of the issue there is that they have public votes on many major projects like transit and so they end up making terrible decisions that make no sense. Frequently people propose something new and then there's another seven year study then the voters change their mind and do something else, etc. etc.

I've heard some hilarious related stories about plebiscites. In Berkeley, for example, they had to do earthquake retrofits on buildings. They decided to introduce a ballot measure for the refit of an old library that was unsafe. Because the refit required that the library be somewhat disassembled, they decided to add a separate item asking if the library should be restored while the earthquake retrofitting was taking place.

The earthquake improvements failed to pass but the restoration DID pass so they ended up doing costly renovations on a building that might not make it past the next major earthquake...

...and this is why public consultations or plebiscites should be taken with a grain of salt.

[halifaxboyns]

It wasn't my intention to suggest that Seattle or Houston are great ideas - but merely to suggest that a tunnel system could work - if done well and safety is maintained.

I've not been to Seattle; but I've read the stories about the system - so I can understand why people would be upset that the system seems to fail.

But from a Halifax perspective; if a tunnel went down Robie from say young street all the way to Dalhousie; you could probably take a lot of buses off the road. The problem would be how to get the buses back up on the street if the tunnel ends. What I mean is; if the 80 turns left at SGR to head into the downtown to end its route, but the tunnel keeps going down Robie - how would you get that bus out of the tunnel?

[halifaxboyns]

One thing that just dawned on me about this discussion is - the in case of breakdown or maintenance scenario. HRM would need a lot more buses if a regional rail or LRT system were to be shut down for maintenance or an accident - which is something I don't think any of us have thought about?

It came to mind as I was bbq'ing last night - because currently the Ctrain here in Calgary is shut down for the long weekend, so trains for the NE are stopping at Bridgeland, the NW at Sunnyside and from the south at Erlton Stampede Station. You then have to bus it between the stations on shuttle buses Calgary transit is supplying - Calgary Transit is using the long weekend (as they typically do) to install new switch tracks by city hall and do upgrades on the 7th Avenue corridor.

So if HRM had a similar situation; I would hope that there would be excess articulated buses (which is what Calgary transit is using) to take up the slack for reduced or shut down service.

[Jstaleness]

I have seen on a few occasions in the last few weeks that they have been testing the new articulated buses. I am not sure how many new ones they have ordered though. I don't see an issue supplying the buses in the event of maintenance as long as they keep the current articulated buses that are in service already. We are years away from rail transit here so who knows if the current ones will even be drivable when it happens.

[halifaxboyns]

I have seen on a few occasions in the last few weeks that they have been testing the new articulated buses. I am not sure how many new ones they have ordered though. I don't see an issue supplying the buses in the event of maintenance as long as they keep the current articulated buses that are in service already. We are years away from rail transit here so who knows if the current ones will even be drivable when it happens.

A friend of mine (who is a transit planner with Calgary Transit) said that when they ordered the current new flyer articulated buses for the BRT routes; they ordered about 10 extra for emergencies with the LRT.

So i'm thinking if a system as big as Calgary only needed 10 extra for weekend frequency; about the same or less would be needed for Halifax.

[Jstaleness]

Do any of the users on here ride Halifax's BRT's? Are they usually full or half full? It would be neat to see Articulated buses needed here for BRT's too so that's why I'm asking.

[halifaxboyns]

Do any of the users on here ride Halifax's BRT's? Are they usually full or half full? It would be neat to see Articulated buses needed here for BRT's too so that's why I'm asking.

Although I don't live in Halifax; I've ridden the BRT here in Calgary when I was dating my most recent ex (wow, that sounds bad). Anyway, I'd sometimes take the BRT because I knew we'd be drinking that night.

The BRT's here in Calgary tend to be busiest during the rush hours; where as they take some of the articulated buses off the routes during the day when the demand isn't there. That's also true on some weekends as well.

When I was home; I took the BRT to stay I took it and the bus (for a mid-weekday trip) was quite busy and it was only 2:30.

[Dmajackson]

Do any of the users on here ride Halifax's BRT's? Are they usually full or half full? It would be neat to see Articulated buses needed here for BRT's too so that's why I'm asking.

I've only ever ridden a Halifax BRT once and it was very full but it was also during rush hour.

I'll behave myself this time and not go into a massive rant about how I don't ride the BRT's because Metro Transit thinks it would be a sin to provide adequate transit to Bedford.

[Jstaleness]

Oh Rant on my friend. I agree.

I watched the movie Crash the other night. There is a scene when Ludacris is talking about the big windows on the bus and how they are there to embarrass the people ridding inside. Halifax is very much like this. It's been said many times before on this forum that people only take the bus because they have to and not because they "Choose" to. While I don't disagree and its true to a certain extent, how can we change this? How do you make a city as a whole feel more comfortable about riding? Let's paint all the buses Blue and Yellow with Link written on the side. They seem way more accepted by the business crowds.

[halifaxboyns]

The usual point to BRT is to establish corridors where high speed, low stop service can be established - eventually leading to the introduction of service of a high speed rail system (that's typical).

Calgary's LRT system has a similar history; with the Blue Arrow buses and then the ctrain (that is a very shortened history).

The idea of establishing an LRT along these routes in the future is a great idea -because these system establish the most travelled routes.

[hfx_chris]

It's been said many times before on this forum that people only take the bus because they have to and not because they "Choose" to.
I think a very large number of passengers taking the bus during rush hour would disagree with that.
As for the BRT, as I recall the route to Dartmouth, you usually couldn't find a seat.

[someone123]

I've never been on the BRT buses but apparently ridership was much higher than anticipated.

Bedford unfortunately has been short-changed because of the ferry proposal that has dragged on forever. That is a common theme in the HRM - often, it's worse to have council propose something like that because they'll debate it for 20 years while everything is on hold.

I'm also not sure why there aren't more immediate plans for Clayton Park and possibly Spryfield routes. Maybe they were waiting for the transit garage. There were also plans for bus lanes on Bayers Road that would complement BRT service.

[halifaxboyns]

I've never been on the BRT buses but apparently ridership was much higher than anticipated.

Bedford unfortunately has been short-changed because of the ferry proposal that has dragged on forever. That is a common theme in the HRM - often, it's worse to have council propose something like that because they'll debate it for 20 years while everything is on hold.

I'm also not sure why there aren't more immediate plans for Clayton Park and possibly Spryfield routes. Maybe they were waiting for the transit garage. There were also plans for bus lanes on Bayers Road that would complement BRT service.

Clayton Park was delayed because of the bus garage and the fact that the Lacewood Terminal can't accommodate any more bus routes at it's current location (I believe its actually over capacity).

So until Lacewood is redone; no BRT.

[someone123]

Right.. I forgot about the terminal as well. That area was never even really designed to be a terminal.

[halifaxboyns]

So with the help of hfx_chris and a lot of patience (my computer at home doesn't like google maps and runs really slow); I've managed to take my original transportation plan that I posted months ago and do it up on google map for the groups consideration and consumption.

Before you go into it, a few comments:

This is a REGIONAL plan for transportation - so it would occur over a period of 30 years;
The blue line would be the first one done and is just less than 17km that would be combined below grade (cut/cover) and elevated;
The green lines are proposed extensions to the main blue line - there are 2 options from Mumford. One to Lacewood terminal (where I assume it will be) and one to Mill Cove. I'm more preferential to Lacewood, because with a regional rail and high speed ferry, Bedford could be well served to major employment centres;
Because this is a regional context; I felt that Halifax would have 2 lines and then Dartmouth would have 2; so there is one line that goes to both Halifax and Dartmouth and then a crosstown link on both sides;
In light of some research, I'm inclined to believe that the rail system i'm proposing for Above/below grade should be similar to Vancouver Skytrain - the reduction in operating staff to run the trains would help offset capital costs;
Where possible, I've noted for each station TOD opportunities;
The Regional Rail line concept utilizes existing rail ROW and would be similar to the dayliners via runs for initial start up and then could expand to something bigger for increase capacity and frequency;
High speed ferry service freequencies are noted.


The other thing I forgot to mention is that the Blue/pink and red lines could also operate with an LRT system similar to Edmonton/Calgary - where there are operators running the train and could have at grade interactions. However, considering the traffic nightmare that 32nd Street is with the NE LRT - I'm partial to below and above grade where possible.

My concept also supports concerns DMjackson has said that Bedford and Sackville is underserviced for transportation. This takes into account some localized density increases (with the Mill cove project) and although not expressed in the concept - assumes that infilling opportunities near transit could occur (provided they are serviced lots).

Based on the research I've found; I'm estimating that the initial blue line construction would be in the range of 10 to 15B $ (that includes tunnels, trains, guideways and additional buses for servicing stations with feeder). That's conservative.

Would love to hear people's thoughts:
My Regional Transportation Map (http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&t=h&hl=en&msa=0&msid=117610886341492740324.00048e3756c494b2b4514&ll=44.672559,-63.626976&spn=0.146001,0.394135&z=12)

[fenwick16]

Based on the research I've found; I'm estimating that the initial blue line construction would be in the range of 10 to 15B $ (that includes tunnels, trains, guideways and additional buses for servicing stations with feeder). That's conservative.

Would love to hear people's thoughts:
My Regional Transportation Map (http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&t=h&hl=en&msa=0&msid=117610886341492740324.00048e3756c494b2b4514&ll=44.672559,-63.626976&spn=0.146001,0.394135&z=12)

I like your ideas and plan, except at $1 billion dollars per mile, it will never be more than a fantasy.

[halifaxboyns]

I like your ideas and plan, except at $1 billion dollars per mile, it will never be more than a fantasy.

Well like I said; that was an estimate. I'm ball parking and I'm sure as the technology for tunneling in such intense rock becomes better and cheaper; that cost would come down. Plus, I'm never great with the cost estimates, so I could be way off.

[halifaxboyns]

Actually I can almost guarentee that my price was wrong; now that I had a better look.

I found a note that in 2006, Translink bought 38 trails and if you did the math it worked out at 3.2 million a train set (2 cars with the articulated centre). From what I could find, the cost today is about 3.4 - I priced them at 6.5; which is way more. I ended up doing the same because the Nova Bus artic's are about 350K, I somehow ended up pricing them at about 750. Whoops! I also suspect that my math doesn't take into account that the guideway would be cheaper than a tunnel.

I should really be more careful - so I'd say if I highballed things that much - the probably cost range would be more than likely in the 7 to 13 billion range. It's a good thing I'm not an accountant...that would be quite unfortunate. Yet another reason not to enter politics.

[hfx_chris]

I ended up doing the same because the Nova Bus artic's are about 350K, I somehow ended up pricing them at about 750.
~700-750k is the correct value

[worldlyhaligonian]

Would it be possible to pave the rail cut around the tracks and retrofit a system where a wheeled vehicle could drive? (while kept in place by the tracks)

Could a company like Bombardier or Siemens do something like this for good value?

[halifaxboyns]

~700-750k is the correct value

Oh well there you go :) I guess I was partially correct after all.

[halifaxboyns]

Would it be possible to pave the rail cut around the tracks and retrofit a system where a wheeled vehicle could drive? (while kept in place by the tracks)

Could a company like Bombardier or Siemens do something like this for good value?

I think the issue here would be the safety/interaction combination. Generally they don't want vehicles in the rail cut because if something happens that there is an accident with a train moving an any great speed with a truck; the truck will be torn to bits. That's why when an LRT is done near a train; they want some distance between them because the LRT isn't always built of the same materials as the train (usually more composits, which are lighter but not as sturdy). This is my understanding - if I'm wrong, someone please correct me.

[MalcolmTucker]

Well, in Calgary you can see this: http://members.shaw.ca/LRT1/S/CAN4.jpg

http://members.shaw.ca/LRT1/S/CAN9.jpg
The right most track is the freight track. (source (http://www.members.shaw.ca/lrtincalgary/CanyonMeadows.html))

You could probably run guided buses in the railcut like the o-bahn in Adelaide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O-Bahn_Busway
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Obahn_pano_entering_klemzig.jpg

[worldlyhaligonian]

I think the issue here would be the safety/interaction combination. Generally they don't want vehicles in the rail cut because if something happens that there is an accident with a train moving an any great speed with a truck; the truck will be torn to bits. That's why when an LRT is done near a train; they want some distance between them because the LRT isn't always built of the same materials as the train (usually more composits, which are lighter but not as sturdy). This is my understanding - if I'm wrong, someone please correct me.

I think they can move the port and thus avoid trucks downtown and make the railcut the city's transport corridor.

The Australian case looks interesting... Too bad Sue Utek is protecting her own personal interests.

[musicman]

Has any of you heard about a straddling bus? It's a new concept that is going to be put into use in Beijing. Basically the bus is a raised platform that goes over the traffic below... They could be built to handle anywhere from 400 to 1400 people and the costs associated with building the system is 1/10th the price of a subway line... They can ride on embed rails or a painted line with sensors and best of all they run on electricity they get charged at every stop and use huge capacitors to store power and charge quickly...
It is a very neat concept.

[halifaxboyns]

Has any of you heard about a straddling bus? It's a new concept that is going to be put into use in Beijing. Basically the bus is a raised platform that goes over the traffic below... They could be built to handle anywhere from 400 to 1400 people and the costs associated with building the system is 1/10th the price of a subway line... They can ride on embed rails or a painted line with sensors and best of all they run on electricity they get charged at every stop and use huge capacitors to store power and charge quickly...
It is a very neat concept.

I saw the mockups - very interesting indeed and might be a workable solution for Halifax given the geology. My only concern would be how well it would perform on hills (given the steep hills in HRM). But if it works well; why not?

[Jstaleness]

I was going to post the pictures and embed the video somehow but it's quicker to post a link of one of these options.
http://www.chinahush.com/2010/07/31/straddling-bus-a-cheaper-greener-and-faster-alternative-to-commute/

[Jstaleness]

Let's get some of these before Toronto and Vancouver do. Let's be first at something new instead of always being first to decline change!

[MalcolmTucker]

Until they are proven in China, which I doubt, it would be really stupid to think of this as a viable solution. Right now it is in the realm of gadgetbahn.

[Jstaleness]

I was just being sarcastic. Halifax could never use that type of system to its full potential. However! What would people say if something similar (on a smaller scale) were used on a few a streets. Sort of like a horizontal elevator. Say Barrington or Hollis st? A quick way from north to south for pedestrian traffic.

[hfx_chris]

I think it's one of the most retarded ideas to come out of Asia in a while ;)

[musicman]

I was thinking the same thing. North, South or East, West.... no turns or stuff like that... It would take some major education for it to work... Let's face it there are still people who go the wrong way around the rotary... could you imagine these people stuck under one of these things.....lol It would be the best bang for your buck entertainment wise...lol