ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[ac3r]

Thanks for the video. First time I've seen a GP40-2LW locomotive in the GEXR roster.

[ijmorlan]

Thanks for the video. First time I've seen a GP40-2LW locomotive in the GEXR roster.

It’s not GEXR any more (if you’re referring to recent video); it’s CN. When CN took back the lines through town from GEXR all the locomotives switched over.

[Bytor]

I compiled a video collection of my videos of the Ion LRV deliveries (including the one last night).

I wonder why 515 came without the "fenders" hiding the wheel bogeys?

[KevinL]

My guess is that it had a longer journey off the freight car after unload - apparently that happened way up in St Jacobs - and so had to travel a good couple kilometres of the spur tracks on its own wheels. In case of debris or other unexpected obstacles, I imagine they wanted easy access to the wheels.

[danbrotherston]

Sorry, but I'm going to plug my petition again.

The Frederick and Queen St. ION stops are some of the most central stations we have, but have completely inadequate pedestrian access. It's unbelievable that it was built that way, but here's a way to retrofit Frederick St. to fix it.

Basically I suggest tighter turn radii, converting to two lanes to make room for a two-way cycle track. This way the ION station can have a direct access at both ends, all we need to do is retrofit some curbs in.

I have a Youtube video describing the idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rygMdouz...rotherston (gosh I wish we could embed like twitter).

If you think we can improve Benton and Frederick Sts. please sign the petition here: https://www.change.org/betterbenton

[ijmorlan]

I have a Youtube video describing the idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rygMdouz...rotherston (gosh I wish we could embed like twitter).

Brilliant video. If there is anybody who is not fundamentally convinced by this then I have absolutely no understanding of their thought processes. I’m sure there are lots of minor items that could reasonably be discussed or debated but the overall thrust of the proposal is indisputably a huge improvement on what we have.

[danbrotherston]

I have a Youtube video describing the idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rygMdouz...rotherston (gosh I wish we could embed like twitter).

Brilliant video. If there is anybody who is not fundamentally convinced by this then I have absolutely no understanding of their thought processes. I’m sure there are lots of minor items that could reasonably be discussed or debated but the overall thrust of the proposal is indisputably a huge improvement on what we have.

Thanks! You're certainly right there are details that could be reasonably discussed (I'm not sure which side of Frederick it should run on Between Duke and Lancaster).

But the general idea is fairly solid. Those who oppose it will be the ones who are offended by ANY infringement on where they can drive their car.

[kalis0490]

map of ridership - you can see university has the highest ridership - should ion branch there

[ac3r]

map of ridership - you can see university has the highest ridership - should ion branch there

Branch as in add a 3rd LRT line? There will of course be a Line 3 built at some point, though there is no exact plan as to where it might go yet. I've had many talks with colleagues in architecture and planning about where it might go and there are some potential options, but there is a hell of a lot to consider and a huge obstacle is finding the land to build tracks on. The current Intensification Strategy Plan does have some proposed intensification areas currently being studied. Below, the areas highlighted in yellow/with pink dotted lines are intensification areas:

Below includes potential routes that I've had in discussions with some colleagues. Breslau to Boardwalk makes good sense. Have it start in Breslau at the future GO Train station, follow Victoria and completely revamp that awful street until it hits the new train station downtown, have it make its way around Victoria Park using that small CN spur, then run it down Highland which is a very dense area, then run it up Ira Needles to The Boardwalk.

In addition to that, the red dashed lines include optional extensions that could service the intensification areas. If it were to go northbound after The Boardwalk, it could go up Ira Needles, down Erb and terminate at the University. If it went south, it could follow Ira Needles south, make its way down Ottawa Street, connect to Mill Station, then branch off so it could go down Manitou and Homer Watson terminating at Conestoga College/Highway 401. Both of these ideas follow the intensification plan the Region of Waterloo has set out and IMO the latter makes more sense because the potential for future development along the proposed intensification routes would be a lot greater than what can be developed along Ira Needles/Erb to the University. Another benefit is that this would allow a 3rd line to have an interchange at both Central Station and Mill Station for people who need to travel north/south on Line 1.

[kalis0490]

my proposal

king/university/erb line to board walk with Kitchener west go.


boardwalk - highland/Victoria line

spur Kitchener south to cambridge

[Bytor]

Given those two maps, I'm sure people would be interested in the 2019 per-route numbers that I finally managed to obtain from GRT.

Code:

route | yearly_boardings
-------+------------------
301   |         2,958,276 * only last half of year
7     |         2,840,589
12    |         1,794,285
201   |         1,676,775
8     |         1,610,404
200   |         1,384,869 * only first half of year
202   |         1,187,834
10    |           832,302
1     |           820,151
9     |           812,667
204   |           788,453
51    |           786,885
13    |           721,324
302   |           700,880 * only last half of year
20    |           694,646
29    |           651,129
16    |           608,070
52    |           589,497
19    |           588,689
6     |           492,864
61    |           406,302
110   |           396,793
205   |           349,583
206   |           318,912
5     |           313,599
22    |           311,228
31    |           298,304
3     |           295,709
203   |           255,078
23    |           252,087
4     |           221,605
33    |           186,142
55    |           158,299
11    |           152,354
75    |           152,235
59    |           150,918
60    |           150,440
53    |           141,908
2     |           141,202
63    |           140,728
21    |           138,317
56    |           134,800
27    |           100,581
54    |            99,970
58    |            96,184
64    |            89,361
67    |            81,607
57    |            76,104
28    |            70,494
116   |            56,811
92    |            55,704
62    |            51,359
14    |            49,740
99    |            43,361
26    |            36,915
36    |            35,591
34    |            33,355
50    |            21,086
72    |            15,459
98    |            13,370
76    |            10,403
77    |             9,723
73    |             8,270
111   |             7,621
91    |             3,889
901   |             1,579

[danbrotherston]

I think space for tracks is not a big issue, so long as we're willing to make real changes in our city. The singular feature of most of our regional roads being 4-5 lanes is that we could fit an LRT down the middle of any road, so long as we were willing to make it a priority. No touching any property, or heritage buildings, or anything.

That being said, I'd be curious to see us try and innovate in the transportation space a little bit, fixed guideways help, but the most important feature of a transit system in my mind, is frequency.

We have very significant density nodes near the LRT but just outside of walking distance, we should have very high frequency, but low speed connectors between those nodes and the adjacent LRT stations. That would significantly improve the service provided, without a huge investment.

That being said, if we're talking traditional LRT, I suspect one of the top bang for buck options is to make the north end of the LRT a loop...continue south from Conestoga Mall, split when Regina St. starts and make King and Regina one lane one way for cars, one lane, one way for LRT, and continue south and link up with the existing tracks in Uptown. In addition to linking Laurier up directly, and also linking up a HUGE popuplation node, there is actually an enormous amount of empty land for development and plenty of area for intensification. And the distance isn't very far, it would be a relatively low cost for that return.

(Of course, this is after we fix the mistakes in the original Phase 1, like fixing ped connections at all the stations, and rerouting it under the Block Line Bridge. I mean, we are dreaming after all.)

[jwilliamson]

That being said, if we're talking traditional LRT, I suspect one of the top bang for buck options is to make the north end of the LRT a loop...continue south from Conestoga Mall, split when Regina St. starts and make King and Regina one lane one way for cars, one lane, one way for LRT, and continue south and link up with the existing tracks in Uptown.  In addition to linking Laurier up directly, and also linking up a HUGE popuplation node, there is actually an enormous amount of empty land for development and plenty of area for intensification.  And the distance isn't very far, it would be a relatively low cost for that return.

How would you run service on such a loop? If you split the service so half the trains go north through Waterloo Park and half go north along King, then you only have half the frequency on either branch. You could add some trains that just run along the loop, but then there are more transfers.

(I'm not saying this is a bad idea, I'm just curious.)

[dunkalunk]

While on the topic of things far in the future:



I tend to agree that an extension of the LRT from Conestoga Mall down King, West on University and Erb to The Boardwalk makes good sense both from a ridership and development standpoint.

I envision that the outer 2 lanes of Univsersity Ave would be converted into a transit mall with shared stations for all buses and LRT (similar layout to Willis Way in Uptown)

Also, given rail ownership, I could see an O-Train type of service from The Boardwalk to a new terminal at Region of Waterloo airport to connect the airport to both the GO station at Breslau and Downtown Kitchener.

[dunkalunk]

my proposal

king/university/erb line to board walk with Kitchener west go.


boardwalk - highland/Victoria line

spur Kitchener south to cambridge

Given that it's a former rail alignment, Homer Watson Blvd South is screaming out to have an LRT run down the middle of it. Plenty of development opportunities along the mostly abandoned rail corridor as well. The trick though is what you'd need to do to people's houses is Preston though. It would definitely be cheaper than the current proposed elevated structures crossing the Grand and Speed rivers though.