Rail-based Transit Discussion - Page 56

MonctonRad · #**1101** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 4:11 PM**

Why not double track the whole way?????

q12 · #**1102** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 4:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Why not double track the whole way?????

There was double track the whole length and someone had the bright idea to rip it up a decade or so ago. It would expensive to add it all back even though the space and rail bed are already there.

Nouvellecosse · #**1103** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 4:28 PM**

The big advantage of commuter rail tends to be that it can move a fairly high number of people at peak periods with low initial investment since it uses existing infrastructure rather than requiring new. It's limited in terms of trip frequency and service scope since it shares with other rail and sometimes has single track sections but... it's cheap. A way to help with the peak-period traffic bulge in an inexpensive way. But because of these limitations, it really only helps peak-period commuters and isn't that useful as general transit service, which is why it's call commuter rail. You can increase capacity by lengthening the trains so you often don't need more frequent service If you start thinking about building new infrastructure, you immediately have to question if a rail corridor is the best place to spend it as opposed to something like bus lanes on street.

MonctonRad · #**1104** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 4:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by q12

There was double track the whole length and someone had the bright idea to rip it up a decade or so ago. It would expensive to add it all back even though the space and rail bed it already there.

Indeed - there was a lot of double track in the Moncton area too, and a good portion of that was ripped up as well.

If they are serious about commuter rail in Halifax though, the track absolutely be double tracked to increase capacity and prevent the risk of collisions.

Keith P. · #**1105** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 5:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Indeed - there was a lot of double track in the Moncton area too, and a good portion of that was ripped up as well.

If they are serious about commuter rail in Halifax though, the track absolutely be double tracked to increase capacity and prevent the risk of collisions.

I think the bigger issue is that it goesn't go to where commuters need to go, the middle of downtown. Terminating it at the train station still leaves a ways to go for most commuters.

MonctonRad · #**1106** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 5:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I think the bigger issue is that it goesn't go to where commuters need to go, the middle of downtown. Terminating it at the train station still leaves a ways to go for most commuters.

That is an issue, yes, but rectifiable by putting in a streetcar/LRT loop on Barrington and Lower Water Street.

someone123 · #**1107** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 6:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Indeed - there was a lot of double track in the Moncton area too, and a good portion of that was ripped up as well.

If they are serious about commuter rail in Halifax though, the track absolutely be double tracked to increase capacity and prevent the risk of collisions.

I am not sure if this is true but I heard this happened because of taxes that are charged per kilometer of track, rather than maintenance costs. If so it's an impressive example of how governments are able to destroy infrastructure with bad tax policy.

someone123 · #**1108** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 6:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

That is an issue, yes, but rectifiable by putting in a streetcar/LRT loop on Barrington and Lower Water Street.

There was also a proposal to extend the track along Hollis Street. The problem with this is that only lighter trains are allowed to run along surface streets, and only heavy rail is allowed to be intermixed with freight trains in Canada. This isn't true in every country.

For the commuter rail extension to happen the city would need to either have some kind of grade-separated or protected track along Hollis that satisfies Transport Canada, or the rules need to be changed, or lighter rolling stock needs to be used and the VIA trains can't be.

swimmer_spe · #**1109** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 6:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I think the bigger issue is that it goesn't go to where commuters need to go, the middle of downtown. Terminating it at the train station still leaves a ways to go for most commuters.

Think of someone already sitting on a bus from Bedford. Do you think they would care if once they get downtown they need to take a 10 minute bus ride? The ones that will whine the most are those who drive and don't want to give up their car.

Nouvellecosse · #**1110** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 6:35 PM**

And the traffic along L. Water or Hollis St. would be counter the flow of rush hour traffic as well so it would be a pretty quick shuttle. If the shuttle went on a loop up Lower Water St. to where L. Water, Hollis, and Barrington meet, then reversed back down Hollis St. with 2-3 stops in each direction, each way might actually be less than 10 min. Google maps suggests that by car it would only be 6 min, and 2-3 stops shouldn't add more than 60-120 sec or 30 seconds each.

swimmer_spe · #**1111** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

And the traffic along L. Water or Hollis St. would be counter the flow of rush hour traffic as well so it would be a pretty quick shuttle. If the shuttle went on a loop up Lower Water St. to where L. Water, Hollis, and Barrington meet, then reversed back down Hollis St. with 2-3 stops in each direction, each way might actually be less than 10 min. Google maps suggests that by car it would only be 6 min, and 2-3 stops shouldn't add more than 60-120 sec or 30 seconds each.

I am thinking of those working at the Dockyard or the Shipyard.

Nouvellecosse · #**1112** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 7:10 PM**

Oh I actually didn't think of them. I was mainly thinking of downtown office workers. For people working at the Dockyard or Shipyard, I wonder if a better idea would actually be to get off the train right before it comes onto the peninsula, and take a shuttle heading toward the MacKay then up Barrington St. I guess it would depend of how the overall trip times compare.

q12 · #**1113** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 8:56 PM**

There is track to the shipyard:

Nouvellecosse · #**1114** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 9:03 PM**

But what difference does that make? Are you suggesting that there would be great enough service frequency that there would be trips terminating both downtown and the north end?

q12 · #**1115** Posted **Dec 3, 2017, 9:56 PM**

What if you wanted to take rail from the North end to the South End or vice versa.

OldDartmouthMark · #**1116** Posted **Dec 4, 2017, 3:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

But what difference does that make? Are you suggesting that there would be great enough service frequency that there would be trips terminating both downtown and the north end?

q12's suggestion above could simply be added as another stop on the route. Yes, it would add extra time to retrace its pathway to/from the dockyard, and there would have to be another siding or duplicate track added, but it's a possibility if the need is that great.

We have to start somewhere, and I think this proposal is a good start. The possibility of adding dedicated bus routes to cover the remainder of downtown that start and end at the rail station could be added very easily, with the long term goal of perhaps covering it with a light rail route.

It's kind of funny that Halifax already had such coverage years ago with the dayliner rail and trolley service, so what was once old is now suddenly new again. I'm very interested to see where this all goes.

Keith P. · #**1117** Posted **Dec 4, 2017, 11:49 PM**

It is such a tragedy that the rail ROW that used to extend along the waterfront approximately as far as the Cogswell Interchange was allowed to be taken over for other uses. Same sort of short-sighted thinking allowed the one that roughly paralleled the 103 to be used as a trail.

IanWatson · #**1118** Posted **Dec 5, 2017, 1:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

That is an issue, yes, but rectifiable by putting in a streetcar/LRT loop on Barrington and Lower Water Street.

Well clearly Murphy's was being forward-thinking with the Road Train! Sell it as a tourism project, but make the big bucks on the commuters

alps · #**1119** Posted **Dec 7, 2017, 4:53 AM**

Would be preferable to use LRVs that could travel through downtown and continue up the former ROW past the dockyards.

http://www.lightrailalliance.com/our-proposal/

OldDartmouthMark · #**1120** Posted **Dec 7, 2017, 7:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by alps

Would be preferable to use LRVs that could travel through downtown and continue up the former ROW past the dockyards.

http://www.lightrailalliance.com/our-proposal/

I'm not sure there is even much left of the ROW anymore, as some of it has been used for bridge ramps, Irving shipyards, etc.

The remainder of downtown would have to use existing roadways, and the rail cut would cover the rest.

Again, I see no problem in starting with the existing CN proposal to get it going, and then build on it in time.

I'm thinking if they don't get moving on the existing proposal the federal funds will dry up before it can be done. Then, we would be back to square one.