(03-12-2022, 06:35 PM)ac3r Wrote: You're looking at it the wrong way. Passenger numbers was only half the reason why we built the LRT. The other half was because it's a great catalyst for transit oriented development.

(03-12-2022, 06:35 PM)ac3r Wrote: You can't just look at raw data of the present and form opinions or draw conclusions as that's flawed, especially when it comes to planning. Half the bus routes in the city wouldn't exist if we were just talking ridership numbers to justify them.

(03-12-2022, 06:35 PM)ac3r Wrote: In planning, you have to consider the future, not just the present.

(03-12-2022, 05:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(03-12-2022, 01:14 PM)the_conestoga_guy Wrote: I personally think that Victoria North/Highland would be better served by installing BRT corridors with proper traffic signal priority measures than by adding LRT. I'm no traffic planner, but I think the benefits that could be achieved by moving our buses more efficiently along these corridors would be more meaningful than losing right-of-way space to an LRT and squishing the local bus routes into the remaining single lane with personal vehicles. Then maybe after 50-75 years or so, we could revisit the corridor and install a raised platform for an LRT or equivalent if necessitated.

Of course, this is (probably) moot until the new highway 7 is installed. I can't see the Region giving up road space in this corridor to transit projects until that happens. In the short term, I think the priority should be to efficiently move buses through the congested stretch of Victoria, in and out of the transit terminal once it's built.

Contrary to the beliefs of regional engineers there is no reason that a bus cannot use an LRT right of way. Many many cities do this.

(03-13-2022, 07:06 PM)Bytor Wrote:

(03-12-2022, 05:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Contrary to the beliefs of regional engineers there is no reason that a bus cannot use an LRT right of way. Many many cities do this.

An example of where it could help is if the 204 had no stops downtown and just used the tracks to do it's zig-zag from Victoria St N over to Queen to get to Highland. However, as anybody who has ever been on am iXpress bus knows, if there is a car crash along it's route, or if it has snowed more than a little bit, even if it's *scheduled* to use the track 1 minute after the tram went past, it's highly likely that it's going to get in the way of next tram 9 minutes later. And given that those tracks are not plowed they'd probably make the bus even slower than if it used the road instead.

(03-13-2022, 07:48 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:

(03-13-2022, 07:06 PM)Bytor Wrote: An example of where it could help is if the 204 had no stops downtown and just used the tracks to do it's zig-zag from Victoria St N over to Queen to get to Highland. However, as anybody who has ever been on am iXpress bus knows, if there is a car crash along it's route, or if it has snowed more than a little bit, even if it's *scheduled* to use the track 1 minute after the tram went past, it's highly likely that it's going to get in the way of next tram 9 minutes later. And given that those tracks are not plowed they'd probably make the bus even slower than if it used the road instead.

I don’t know how many places do this, but at 2:09 in this video there is an enclosed LRT station I understand has embedded track so that buses can also use the space:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZaRfNjTPx8

Although I can’t actually find the evidence (cite) that the reason for the embedded track is so buses can use it. Hard to see why else however — it seems like it should always be cheaper to use non-embedded track than embedded.

(03-13-2022, 08:15 PM)Bytor Wrote:

(03-13-2022, 07:48 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I don’t know how many places do this, but at 2:09 in this video there is an enclosed LRT station I understand has embedded track so that buses can also use the space:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZaRfNjTPx8

Although I can’t actually find the evidence (cite) that the reason for the embedded track is so buses can use it. Hard to see why else however — it seems like it should always be cheaper to use non-embedded track than embedded.

That's Westlake Station on Seattle SoundLink's Line 1. It was part of bus tunnel that was completed in 1990. It was closed from 2005-2009 to be renovated for light rail. Busses continued to use it until 2019, though at progressively reduced amounts as LRT services increased.

(03-13-2022, 08:15 PM)Bytor Wrote: That's Westlake Station on Seattle SoundLink's Line 1. It was part of bus tunnel that was completed in 1990. It was closed from 2005-2009 to be renovated for light rail. Busses continued to use it until 2019, though at progressively reduced amounts as LRT services increased.

(03-14-2022, 09:11 AM)jamincan Wrote: What do people think of some sort of LRT or BRT along Highland vs. along Victoria vs. on the CN/GO rail corridor? On the one hand, the CN/GO rail corridor is mostly grade separated (exceptions are Strange/Park/Duke/Lancaster/Lackner) and from King St. east, it is also double-tracked until just before Lackner. On the other hand, it's further away from the commercial strips which seem to be centred on Highland.

(03-14-2022, 08:27 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: I could also have mentioned Calgary’s downtown transit mall. That one is interesting because the rail vehicles are actually high-floor with high platforms; except for the location of the power pickup (overhead rather than 3rd rail), it’s not really that different from having a section of the Toronto subway sharing space with buses.

(03-13-2022, 08:47 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:

(03-13-2022, 08:15 PM)Bytor Wrote: That's Westlake Station on Seattle SoundLink's Line 1. It was part of bus tunnel that was completed in 1990. It was closed from 2005-2009 to be renovated for light rail. Busses continued to use it until 2019, though at progressively reduced amounts as LRT services increased.

Yes, that was one example I would have given, I believe Boston also had a similar situation at one point.

Plus there are many European cities which have transit plazas which include both buses and LRT.

I'm not suggesting that there isn't a cost to this, and transit vehicles can bunch. Stopping can be managed however, by having space for passing at any given stop, all actual BRT systems I'm aware of do this.

And yes, if we're talking about a short segment (say for example Duke St. from Frederick to Francis....just a random example) it's entirely feasible.

(03-15-2022, 06:19 PM)plam Wrote:

(03-13-2022, 08:47 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Yes, that was one example I would have given, I believe Boston also had a similar situation at one point.

Plus there are many European cities which have transit plazas which include both buses and LRT.

I'm not suggesting that there isn't a cost to this, and transit vehicles can bunch. Stopping can be managed however, by having space for passing at any given stop, all actual BRT systems I'm aware of do this.

And yes, if we're talking about a short segment (say for example Duke St. from Frederick to Francis....just a random example) it's entirely feasible.

Yeah, Seattle definitely has that. Pretty weird to see a train and then a bus. I do not think Boston did this. The Silver Line looks like it should be rail but is actually bus, and it's super slow, and there's switching time from electric to diesel along the line. Not my favourite.

(03-23-2022, 01:07 PM)Bob_McBob Wrote:

The entire ION system was down for hours this morning due to freezing rain. Someone on Reddit reported seeing a train stuck attempting to climb the grade on Northfield.