Waterloo Region Connected
ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - Printable Version

+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit (/showthread.php?tid=14)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ac3r - 07-19-2022

(07-19-2022, 02:23 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Somebody mentioned cheaping out on ION, but I’m not sure if everybody understands that going underground is almost certainly not feasible.

IDK why everyone keeps saying this. I have a PhD in architecture so I know a lot about engineering. It would have been entirely feasible to do cut and cover underground sections where necessary and without spending a too much money. It would have cost more than what we paid, but it would have paid for itself very quickly. There are no engineering challenges that could not have been overcome. I know everyone points to the water table but there are cities next to oceans that can build underground or run train tunnels under rivers and lakes. It's not hard.

The region was simply adamant to get it built ASAP, meaning that was not in the budget they decided to allocate though we could have easily reallocated money to it in order to tunnel or elevate it where needed. But we didn't, so as a result we have a "rapid" transit system that in many places travels slower than one can walk, that vehicles often drive into - with a cement truck derailing the entire thing, having to stop at red lights, to a wee bit of ice shutting the entire system down.

So really...what would have made more sense? An LRT that perhaps would have cost more but could have run underground or elevated downtown, moving much faster and wouldn't have to worry about driving into cars or people? Or one that plays bumper cars with traffic and falls apart due to a little bit of ice?

It's stuff like this that makes people, in the long run, not want to invest in transit. When you build a system that is very slow, gets into accidents, has the entire system shut down due to the weather - then people wonder why we spend the money in the first place. But if you invest a little more and be a little more bold and daring, you can end up with a proper transit system that can actually get more people out of their cars.

Of course it's too late to do anything, but that won't stop me from ranting on about how the region handicapped itself by designing the LRT the way they did... :'P And indeed, it was the cement truck at fault here. But it wouldn't have crashed into it if the LRT ran underground here. Ideally, I would have began tunneling it at perhaps Borden Station...then have back above ground at Grand River Hospital Station (just to save money - and because cut and cover makes that easy) then tunnel it again before Allen and bring it back up after Waterloo Public Square where it runs along the Laurel Trail. And then bam, you've got a light-metro that doesn't have to worry about traffic or signals or pedestrians and which can run much faster. And sure, it would have cost an extra couple hundred millions of dollars but that efficiency would have paid for itself.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - jamincan - 07-19-2022

Obviously it's possible to go underground from an engineering perspective. To think that it was politically possible is incredibly naive.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - bravado - 07-19-2022

It's just frustrating to hear the exact same people who forced this compromise on Ion are also the ones bitching that it is ugly, slow, and easy to drive into.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - neonjoe - 07-19-2022

I know they built the first phase of iON on the cheap as the province and the feds only committed around 550m to us. Anything more would not have been digestible for the property tax base. If not elevated or underground why could they have not added crossing arms on the urban stretches of the system where it made sense. The side running ballasted portion on Courtland and Hayward have them. This could haven been done fairly cheaply. Although it’s probably not allowed by the MTO or Transport Canada.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - taylortbb - 07-19-2022

(07-19-2022, 06:21 PM)ac3r Wrote: And sure, it would have cost an extra couple hundred millions of dollars but that efficiency would have paid for itself.

It's nothing to do with engineering, it's all about that "extra couple hundred million" . I think what you describe would be closer to $500M, but that's not really the point. As someone deeply involved with the LRT approval process, who ran an "LRT war room" tracking the stances of every member of regional council (and why), I give you my absolute guarantee that if the project had cost $100M more we'd have no LRT.

I'd love tunneling through DTK too, I think the extra few hundred million would be money well spent, but I feel the same way I do about getting to travel through space with Captain Kirk. It's simply not connected to the reality we occupy. No amount of wishing for it will change that.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-20-2022

“Why aren’t there crossing arms”. Why have crossing arms there and not on every other traffic signal in the city.

And we have rehashed the underground issue for years now lol.

There are all trade offs. When cars hit the LRV in downtown segments I question the design when they do so at fully signalized intersections I blame the bad drivers.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ijmorlan - 07-20-2022

(07-19-2022, 06:21 PM)ac3r Wrote:
(07-19-2022, 02:23 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: Somebody mentioned cheaping out on ION, but I’m not sure if everybody understands that going underground is almost certainly not feasible.

IDK why everyone keeps saying this. I have a PhD in architecture so I know a lot about engineering. It would have been entirely feasible to do cut and cover underground sections where necessary and without spending a too much money. It would have cost more than what we paid, but it would have paid for itself very quickly. There are no engineering challenges that could not have been overcome. I know everyone points to the water table but there are cities next to oceans that can build underground or run train tunnels under rivers and lakes. It's not hard.

Right, it’s not hard, just expensive (in particular, dealing with water).

Even building the Gotthard Base Tunnel wasn’t really hard per se, just a stupendous amount of work.

Quote:The region was simply adamant to get it built ASAP, meaning that was not in the budget they decided to allocate though we could have easily reallocated money to it in order to tunnel or elevate it where needed. But we didn't, so as a result we have a "rapid" transit system that in many places travels slower than one can walk, that vehicles often drive into - with a cement truck derailing the entire thing, having to stop at red lights, to a wee bit of ice shutting the entire system down.

The slow travel is due to safety paranoia, not due to cost cutting. It could run faster if we would just decide to do so.

To be fair, I don’t know if it’s local safety paranoia that could be fixed by changing personnel at Grandlinq, or if it’s imposed by regulators. But I find it unbelievable that, for example, the slow speeds southbound approaching Erb St. or when running parallel to Courtland are really justified by any realistic safety concerns.

If anybody actually knows anything about the slowdowns, I’m all ears — but I will be asking probing questions about the information and won’t quietly accept any bafflegab.

Quote:[…]

Of course it's too late to do anything, but that won't stop me from ranting on about how the region handicapped itself by designing the LRT the way they did... :'P And indeed, it was the cement truck at fault here. But it wouldn't have crashed into it if the LRT ran underground here. Ideally, I would have began tunneling it at perhaps Borden Station...then have back above ground at Grand River Hospital Station (just to save money - and because cut and cover makes that easy) then tunnel it again before Allen and bring it back up after Waterloo Public Square where it runs along the Laurel Trail. And then bam, you've got a light-metro that doesn't have to worry about traffic or signals or pedestrians and which can run much faster. And sure, it would have cost an extra couple hundred millions of dollars but that efficiency would have paid for itself.

You do know where Laurel Creek runs through Uptown? You might actually be able to convince me that a grade separation at Agnes St. is not totally unrealistic (my biggest concern would be where the sewer line is), but threading a rail tunnel around the creek definitely moves it into the expensive megaproject category (relative to the size of our city).

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-20-2022

(07-20-2022, 09:14 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(07-19-2022, 06:21 PM)ac3r Wrote: IDK why everyone keeps saying this. I have a PhD in architecture so I know a lot about engineering. It would have been entirely feasible to do cut and cover underground sections where necessary and without spending a too much money. It would have cost more than what we paid, but it would have paid for itself very quickly. There are no engineering challenges that could not have been overcome. I know everyone points to the water table but there are cities next to oceans that can build underground or run train tunnels under rivers and lakes. It's not hard.

Right, it’s not hard, just expensive (in particular, dealing with water).

Even building the Gotthard Base Tunnel wasn’t really hard per se, just a stupendous amount of work.

Quote:The region was simply adamant to get it built ASAP, meaning that was not in the budget they decided to allocate though we could have easily reallocated money to it in order to tunnel or elevate it where needed. But we didn't, so as a result we have a "rapid" transit system that in many places travels slower than one can walk, that vehicles often drive into - with a cement truck derailing the entire thing, having to stop at red lights, to a wee bit of ice shutting the entire system down.

The slow travel is due to safety paranoia, not due to cost cutting. It could run faster if we would just decide to do so.

To be fair, I don’t know if it’s local safety paranoia that could be fixed by changing personnel at Grandlinq, or if it’s imposed by regulators. But I find it unbelievable that, for example, the slow speeds southbound approaching Erb St. or when running parallel to Courtland are really justified by any realistic safety concerns.

If anybody actually knows anything about the slowdowns, I’m all ears — but I will be asking probing questions about the information and won’t quietly accept any bafflegab.

Quote:[…]

Of course it's too late to do anything, but that won't stop me from ranting on about how the region handicapped itself by designing the LRT the way they did... :'P And indeed, it was the cement truck at fault here. But it wouldn't have crashed into it if the LRT ran underground here. Ideally, I would have began tunneling it at perhaps Borden Station...then have back above ground at Grand River Hospital Station (just to save money - and because cut and cover makes that easy) then tunnel it again before Allen and bring it back up after Waterloo Public Square where it runs along the Laurel Trail. And then bam, you've got a light-metro that doesn't have to worry about traffic or signals or pedestrians and which can run much faster. And sure, it would have cost an extra couple hundred millions of dollars but that efficiency would have paid for itself.

You do know where Laurel Creek runs through Uptown? You might actually be able to convince me that a grade separation at Agnes St. is not totally unrealistic (my biggest concern would , but threading a rail tunnel around the creek definitely moves it into the expensive megaproject category (relative to the size of our city).

I think the thing that this has really revealed to me is just how invalid the "cyclists run red lights" rhetoric really is.

I knew drivers ran red lights sometimes, but given how wide the tolerances for the LRT are, it's clear to me that drivers run red lights CONSTANTLY...and not like...just red...LONG red.

As for speed...good luck finding answers...I've been asking for a while and got nothing. But there is no justification for this, for the LRV to be surrounded by cars doing 20 over the limit while it's forced to do 10, 20, 30 under the limit in some places.

Everyone here is on board with slow = safer, but I guarantee you, STOPPED LRVs would get crashed into. At a certain point, the problem is cars.

And I'm so tired of tunnels being painted as the magical solution...Toronto has a streetcar tunnel...it is not car free..

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - ac3r - 07-20-2022

Photos of some repair teams repositioning the train onto the tracks and one of an LRV towing the damaged to the service depot. A very costly procedure to do some very costly repairs. They'll also have to do some very costly track, electrical line and pantograph inspection. Then do a very costly repair on the train. And then a very costly investigation at all levels: GRT, RoW, Keolis, WRPS and so on. Eventually, the added up cost of all these collisions over the years will have cost the same as tunnels or elevated sections.

We can blame the cars all we want - and indeed they're at fault - but guess what? The LRT is basically a very expensive, very slow car because it is forced to share the same infrastructure they do. Wouldn't have had this issue if there was more investment or even just better planning. I.e. don't build it so long at first if the budget was the issue. Scrap the fantasy Cambridge line for now. Build the rest in phases. And start small.

Let's take the Edmonton LRT for example. The Capital Line started off in 1978 with 5 stations in the downtown area: 2 underground, 3 on the surface. In 1981 they expanded it with an additional surface station. In 1983 they expanded again with 3 more underground stations. 1982 and 1992 saw more underground expansion. By the 2000s they could warrant further expansion of the Capital Line. The slow but steady evolution of their rapid transit system meant they could build a much better system in increments, expanding as needed as well as capitalizing on the various economic and political changes that time brought (allowing them to get more funding from the governments). It also allowed them to prove to the public that it was worth the investment. Now they're at the point where they're expanding the Capital and Metro lines, building the new Valley Line and proposing 2 additional lines for the future and have a pretty great rapid transit system now.

Why couldn't we have done that here? Obviously, I understand they wanted to use this to spark off transit-oriented development and it did do a good job at it, but the system itself is still pretty weak. It's not like we absolutely needed to have Block Line Station or Northfield Station and similar low traffic stations right away. We could have built it to go from Borden to UW or something and then expand it as the years go by and likely not have spend more than we need...maybe an extra 250 million to build some easily constructed tunnels or elevated sections. We give the cops nearly that much each year so they can overpay officers and buy fancy toys...so we can't be that worried about how we spend money.

[Image: w2ab1j7.png]

[Image: EP6sJJ5.png]

[Image: XrJdSdF.png]

Photo credit goes to platonacci23 and wanTron_Soup.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - plam - 07-20-2022

(07-20-2022, 03:18 PM)ac3r Wrote: Photos of some repair teams repositioning the train onto the tracks and one of an LRV towing the damaged to the service depot. A very costly procedure to do some very costly repairs. They'll also have to do some very costly track, electrical line and pantograph inspection. Then do a very costly repair on the train. And then a very costly investigation at all levels: GRT, RoW, Keolis, WRPS and so on. Eventually, the added up cost of all these collisions over the years will have cost the same as tunnels or elevated sections.

I mean, everyone else here agrees that if it was a choice between tunnels or nothing, we would have gotten the nothing. Of course tunnels are technically possible, but the political will wasn't there.

Also, spending money later is less expensive than spending money earlier. So the costs over the years may still be less.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - neonjoe - 07-20-2022

I believe that in most cases the third-party liability insurance of the party at fault will pay for damages to infrastructure/property. If not this, the municipality's insurance will cover it. The costs are of the damage is not directly passed down to the taxpayer.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-20-2022

(07-20-2022, 04:07 PM)neonjoe Wrote: I believe that in most cases the third-party liability insurance of the party at fault will pay for damages to infrastructure/property. If not this, the municipality's insurance will cover it. The costs are of the damage is not directly passed down to the taxpayer.

I mean...if the insurance company pays for it...we still pay...if not directly...than indirectly.

At least if their liability insurance pays...only drivers (or commercial operators) pay.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - KevinL - 07-20-2022

In this case, as the offending vehicle (cement truck) surely belongs to a private enterprise, I imagine the bill will go to their insurance.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - clasher - 07-21-2022

I'd trade the money we spend on cops for a subway.

RE: ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit - danbrotherston - 07-21-2022

(07-21-2022, 06:29 AM)clasher Wrote: I'd trade the money we spend on cops for a subway.

I wouldn't. I'm all for defunding the police, but there are far better uses of the money than a subway.

And if we're making magical choices that aren't realistic that would make the city better, I'd defund the police, dump that money into social services. Then I'd have built the LRT mostly at grade as it is now, but I'd have closed King to cars end to end and run the LRT all the way up it, and given it automatic priority at every intersection.

Now I have almost all the advantages of a subway at a lower cost than we spent on the LRT. Yes, it's still possible for someone to hit the train.

For a city of our density, building a fully grade separated system is just a subsidy for cars.