ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[Canard]

\But you're replying to my observations by pointing at a piece of paper, saying that it's not written down.  I'm pointing at concrete and saying it's there.  

To be fair, that's not really accurate - your argument is using the lack of concrete as a basis.    I think we both agree that some significant rework would have to happen in order to accommodate platforms long enough to couple 3 LRV's together, and a lot can change in 30 years.

(I'll let it go, of course.  Just ribbing you.)

The weather has just been awful for photos. I can't motivate myself to get out and walk any portion of the line when it's like this...

[Markster]

To be fair, that's not really accurate - your argument is using the lack of concrete as a basis.    I think we both agree that some significant rework would have to happen in order to accommodate platforms long enough to couple 3 LRV's together, and a lot can change in 30 years.

(I'll let it go, of course.  Just ribbing you.)

The weather has just been awful for photos.  I can't motivate myself to get out and walk any portion of the line when it's like this...

Some amount of mutual agreement; I think that's a good place to leave the debate!

Yeah photos are not terribly interesting in this weather.  I posted a bunch to the Light Rail facebook group, and they're... okay.

Here, have an in-focus version of the pic KevinL posted earlier:
   


Oh, here are some notable things.
New power poles in midtown:
   

And the foundation for the (infamous) "dome".
There's a lot of concrete to rip back out when they're done.
   

[tomh009]

But all other heavy metros and subways I've ridden do something closer to 5 minutes in rush and 10+ minutes non-rush.  Growing up with Toronto as our nearest subway we kind of hold others up to a higher standard.  So when I got older and started going off and exploring the world I was shocked that so many systems have such dismal headways between trains in off-peak.  DC drops to something like 20 minutes off-peak!  It's a beautiful system but the service frequency can be brutal.

Yamanote line 2:30 peak, 4 minutes off-peak.  11-car trains, 3.7M passengers per day!   And while Marunouchi Line doesn't carry as many passengers, it runs at 1:50 intervals during peak times.

Now, this is in super-train-oriented Tokyo, so not exactly a valid comparison to Kitchener.  I think 5-minute peak intervals would be good for ION, hopefully we can get to that sooner rather than later.

[MidTowner]

I think 5-minute peak intervals would be good for ION, hopefully we can get to that sooner rather than later.

Hopefully before 2050, or whenever exactly the plan calls for as of now...

10 minutes is not particularly good, and a worse frequency than transit riders were being offered on King. I really hope we don't stay at that frequency with Ion for long.

[jamincan]

It would have been nice if hydro lines could have been buried at the same time as digging up the street, but I suppose adjusting the services to all the properties along King would have been expensive and even more disruptive. I wonder if any of the conduit they installed (they did, didn't they?) is designed to accommodate hydro down the road.

Isn't 10 minutes the accepted frequency below which users stop consulting a schedule for arrival times? I would think that below 5 minute headways the return on investment for greater frequency would be much lower; people aren't going to notice a huge change waiting 2.5 minutes average to waiting 1 minute average, for example.

FWIW, Copenhagen's metro runs at 2 minute headways during rush hour too.

[Canard]

Oh yeah, I loved the Minimetro. Fully automated though, falls into the "light" metro category like VAL and ICTS.  Very small trains running at high frequency to get the capacity up.

Re the hydro lines - I was hoping they'd integrate the OCS poles with the hydro poles so everything is supported together. If that's not what they're doing, then that's a real shame. More visual intrusion. But that's how light rail works, unless you go for contactless power (like Primove).

I'd also be very surprised if the concrete shown at King/Victoria was only for the dome. That's got to be for other future structures... there's no way they'd lay that much for a temporary, 2-month structure.

[Pheidippides]

From the articles I have read am I to understand that this temporary dome will take a month to build and will be used for just two months?

If they knew that this aspect of the project was behind schedule why didn't the dome get built before winter (probably easier and faster to do) to take full advantage of it for the entire winter instead of building it part way through winter.

When did the month long construction begin? Will it be finishing in a week (mid-January) or a month (mid-February)?

Will they really make up that much time in two months by adding the complication of building the dome compared what they would have accomplished just slugging it out in the elements at a slower pace without the additional expense? Perhaps the progress penalties are far greater than the cost of building the dome?

Is there a possibility the dome might remain after the winter if only to conceal progress from the watchful eyes of WRC? :-)
(e.g. out of sight out of mind)

[Markster]

Once it's up, I imagine they would keep it for as long as possible. It would provide good rain protection in the spring.

[Canard]

But most of the articles are saying it'll be up for just 2 months. Assuming it's a rented structure, the longer they keep it, the more it will cost...

I agree though, if I were a worker there, I'd want it up as long as possible!

[Smore]

Re VicPark Stn....Am I the only one that could see Gaukel as a pedestrian street, thus negating all concerns about platform extension pinches?

Surely sometime in the next 30 yrs the terminal will be redeveloped?!

[KevinL]

Re VicPark Stn....Am I the only one that could see Gaukel as a pedestrian street, thus negating all concerns about platform extension pinches?

Even if it's pedestrianized, the platform sits about 20cm above track level and will require that ledge. Thus those pedestrians would have to go around.

I suppose the entire platform could be moved to the other side of Gaukel, if need be.

[Smore]

Re VicPark Stn....Am I the only one that could see Gaukel as a pedestrian street, thus negating all concerns about platform extension pinches?

Even if it's pedestrianized, the platform sits about 20cm above track level and will require that ledge. Thus those pedestrians would have to go around.

I suppose the entire platform could be moved to the other side of Gaukel, if need be.

Ya I thought of that too...but I'm sure Canard can point to half a dozen examples of trails crossing platforms...

...besides monorails...

[Canard]

Trails crossing a platform? Errrr... You're on your own there.

If you like I can give examples of countless monorail systems with multi-use paths and gardens directly beneath the beamway.

[tomh009]

Re VicPark Stn....Am I the only one that could see Gaukel as a pedestrian street, thus negating all concerns about platform extension pinches?

Mmmm ... it could be nice, but there is the issue of the Manulife parking garage entrance.

[clasher]

Re VicPark Stn....Am I the only one that could see Gaukel as a pedestrian street, thus negating all concerns about platform extension pinches?

Mmmm ... it could be nice, but there is the issue of the Manulife parking garage entrance.

That's on Charles or Joseph so closing Gaukel wouldn't impact that very much. There are a few businesses between Charles and King though so they might not be so keen on closing the street... we've talked about that idea on here somewhere before, I was in favour of it, especially if/when they close the current bus terminal.