ION - Waterloo Region's Light Rail Transit

[ac3r]

Transit oriented development is a good thing, but it has to be balanced and planned right. So far, this region is not doing that. From what I've seen, I've mostly witnessed this as "let's build a fancy LRT and hope big condos and boutiques open up along the route so the city looks good". It's gentrifying the areas along the LRT but the region is not providing low income housing and adequate transportation to blue collar jobs that are not exactly near the LRT. We're pushing low income people further and further away from the core of the city (there are literally homeless people living in the forests of Hidden Valley next to multi-million dollar homes because we keep kicking them to the curb). Poor people are not necessarily benefitting from this form of development and that should be a serious concern of every citizen.

https://www.objectifliberte.fr/2010/03/d...emain.html [in French]
https://www.frbsf.org/community-developm...mmunities/
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/eas...f/-char/en
https://community-wealth.org/sites/clone...nk-TOD.pdf

[ijmorlan]

I don’t like the framing that LRT is “not built to carry people”.

It is true that it is not built to carry existing demand, which is still well within the range that can be handled by buses.

But the way it promotes intensification is by providing the ability to move people efficiently.

If that is social engineering, then so is building huge wide roads and expressways all over the place. The difference is that a public transit system can actually move everybody affordably, whereas a road system will have more trouble doing that.

[ac3r]

It is true that it is not built to carry existing demand, which is still well within the range that can be handled by buses.

It is definitely able to handle the demand. The thing is empty half of the time, even before SARS-CoV-2 disrupted everything. According to Keolis the LRT only carries 25'000 people per day on average. In terms of a rapid transit system (and specifically one that is serving a region of over 600'000+ people! - Nürnberg, Germany for example, is roughly the same size as us even even denser yet it has 3 subway lines, 5 streetcar/LRT lines, 4 S-bahn lines and a million bus routes) it's so far an absolute failure in terms of ridership. Even that number is quite ambiguous since they only announced that in a recent press release in regards to the ION winning a national award. Will ridership go up? I have no doubt, but it's reaching veeeeeeerrryyy far to paint the ION as an astounding success.

[danbrotherston]

It is true that it is not built to carry existing demand, which is still well within the range that can be handled by buses.

It is definitely able to handle the demand. The thing is empty half of the time, even before SARS-CoV-2 disrupted everything. According to Keolis the LRT only carries 25'000 people per day on average. In terms of a rapid transit system (and specifically one that is serving a region of over 600'000+ people! - Nürnberg, Germany for example, is roughly the same size as us even even denser yet it has 3 subway lines, 5 streetcar/LRT lines, 4 S-bahn lines and a million bus routes) it's so far an absolute failure in terms of ridership. Even that number is quite ambiguous since they only announced that in a recent press release in regards to the ION winning a national award. Will ridership go up? I have no doubt, but it's reaching veeeeeeerrryyy far to paint the ION as an astounding success.

The LRT has been an unambiguous success in terms of ridership--before COVID--it was exceeding all ridership targets.

It not being full, does not make it a failure. Nurnberg Germany is a completely different city, it is entirely unfair to compare a city like that to our city which has just built it's first rapid transit line, that was operating only a year.

Saying it's a failure because 100,000 people didn't sell their cars the moment it was built is absurd, change takes time, but that change was happening far more rapidly as a result of the LRT than it was before, and more, it was happening faster than it was expected to as a result of the LRT.

If that is social engineering, then so is building huge wide roads and expressways all over the place. The difference is that a public transit system can actually move everybody affordably, whereas a road system will have more trouble doing that.

This is incredibly on point. Anyone who thinks that building transit is a social experiment is missing the petri dish for the cars...mass motorization has been an enormous and incredibly harmful social experiement. Yet so many people see car dependency as the natural order of things and not an bizarre 70 year old abberation from a 7,000 year old normal.

[ac3r]

It is definitely able to handle the demand. The thing is empty half of the time, even before SARS-CoV-2 disrupted everything. According to Keolis the LRT only carries 25'000 people per day on average. In terms of a rapid transit system (and specifically one that is serving a region of over 600'000+ people! - Nürnberg, Germany for example, is roughly the same size as us even even denser yet it has 3 subway lines, 5 streetcar/LRT lines, 4 S-bahn lines and a million bus routes) it's so far an absolute failure in terms of ridership. Even that number is quite ambiguous since they only announced that in a recent press release in regards to the ION winning a national award. Will ridership go up? I have no doubt, but it's reaching veeeeeeerrryyy far to paint the ION as an astounding success.

The LRT has been an unambiguous success in terms of ridership--before COVID--it was exceeding all ridership targets.

It not being full, does not make it a failure. Nurnberg Germany is a completely different city, it is entirely unfair to compare a city like that to our city which has just built it's first rapid transit line, that was operating only a year.

Saying it's a failure because 100,000 people didn't sell their cars the moment it was built is absurd, change takes time, but that change was happening far more rapidly as a result of the LRT than it was before, and more, it was happening faster than it was expected to as a result of the LRT.

Targets set by who, though? Targets don't mean much when they're made by the same business owners and politicians hoping to sell you a product. I could care less if the region and GranLinq set a random target and keep moving the goal post to make it sound like it was a resounding success. Now, I'm not hating on the ION in any way, I am very glad it was built - I hate cars and I wish we could get most places in the city without having to rely on one. I've worked for the Region of Waterloo on architectural and urban planning projects so I love the fact we finally did this because in many ways it has benefitted people. But it was under construction for years and yet the ridership isn't all that much more significant than it was when we only had the 7 and various iXpress routes doing more or less the exact same route. It's as slow as a worm trying to crawl across a sidewalk on a sunny day in July and it only covers a very very specific corridor of the city and is ultimately not that much faster than the bus routes it replaced - for me, it takes me less time to take the 8 downtown as it does the LRT and the route is almost virtually the same in terms of distance.

Most importantly, it has yet to do anything meaningful in regards to developing affordable housing and access to employers. Yeah it's easy to say "well don't worry, it's still new, the poor will love it one day" but people who live pay cheque to pay cheque don't give a shit how easy it might be to get to work in 5-10 years.

[ZEBuilder]

It is true that it is not built to carry existing demand, which is still well within the range that can be handled by buses.

It is definitely able to handle the demand. The thing is empty half of the time, even before SARS-CoV-2 disrupted everything. According to Keolis the LRT only carries 25'000 people per day on average. In terms of a rapid transit system (and specifically one that is serving a region of over 600'000+ people! - Nürnberg, Germany for example, is roughly the same size as us even even denser yet it has 3 subway lines, 5 streetcar/LRT lines, 4 S-bahn lines and a million bus routes) it's so far an absolute failure in terms of ridership. Even that number is quite ambiguous since they only announced that in a recent press release in regards to the ION winning a national award. Will ridership go up? I have no doubt, but it's reaching veeeeeeerrryyy far to paint the ION as an astounding success.

With that statment I doubt you've ridden it in the morning then. I know last year before covid happened the train was packed once you got to Block Line station going towards downtown and that was at 7:30 yes it starts to trail off in the middle of the day but at lunch theres a fair amount of people on it whenever I see it. You can't expect it to have astronomical ridership values in its first year and a year where Covid complicated everything, and you also can't compare it to Nurnberg since it has a bunch more lines. Would you really expect them to have the ridership they have now when they only had there first line no because it takes time for people to see it as a viable option. The ION spurred lots of development which means there are going to be more people in the region and resultingly more people who will see it as a viable option which means ridership will increase it's just a basic cause and effect cycle. It just takes time for people to see it as a option but the ridership values you're evidently looking for will come it just takes time.

[tomh009]

Transit oriented development is a good thing, but it has to be balanced and planned right. So far, this region is not doing that. From what I've seen, I've mostly witnessed this as "let's build a fancy LRT and hope big condos and boutiques open up along the route so the city looks good". It's gentrifying the areas along the LRT but the region is not providing low income housing and adequate transportation to blue collar jobs that are not exactly near the LRT.

There is no doubt that we have a shortage of affordable housing. But I think that blaming that on the LRT is disingenuous. We had a housing shortage and we have one now. And having more mid-market rental housing (Drewlo, Market Flats, Ophelia, The Scott, 66 Civic) will tend to ease the pressure on rents, even if the units themselves are mostly not in the affordable range. Even investor condos help relieve the rental housing shortage.

And the region (and at least Kitchener) are making real efforts to create more affordable housing. Much work remains, but the problem is not being ignored.

But that's really nothing to do with LRT.

[danbrotherston]

The LRT has been an unambiguous success in terms of ridership--before COVID--it was exceeding all ridership targets.

It not being full, does not make it a failure. Nurnberg Germany is a completely different city, it is entirely unfair to compare a city like that to our city which has just built it's first rapid transit line, that was operating only a year.

Saying it's a failure because 100,000 people didn't sell their cars the moment it was built is absurd, change takes time, but that change was happening far more rapidly as a result of the LRT than it was before, and more, it was happening faster than it was expected to as a result of the LRT.

Targets set by who, though? Targets don't mean much when they're made by the same business owners and politicians hoping to sell you a product. I could care less if the region and GranLinq set a random target and keep moving the goal post to make it sound like it was a resounding success. Now, I'm not hating on the ION in any way, I am very glad it was built - I hate cars and I wish we could get most places in the city without having to rely on one. I've worked for the Region of Waterloo on architectural and urban planning projects so I love the fact we finally did this because in many ways it has benefitted people. But it was under construction for years and yet the ridership isn't all that much more significant than it was when we only had the 7 and various iXpress routes doing more or less the exact same route. It's as slow as a worm trying to crawl across a sidewalk on a sunny day in July and it only covers a very very specific corridor of the city and is ultimately not that much faster than the bus routes it replaced - for me, it takes me less time to take the 8 downtown as it does the LRT and the route is almost virtually the same in terms of distance.

Most importantly, it has yet to do anything meaningful in regards to developing affordable housing and access to employers. Yeah it's easy to say "well don't worry, it's still new, the poor will love it one day" but people who live pay cheque to pay cheque don't give a shit how easy it might be to get to work in 5-10 years.

This is a very bizarre argument. The targets weren't set by business owners, nor were they set by politicians. They were set by staff and consultants based on growth models. As for targets, you'll find I'm the first to call bullshit on a lot of the well bullshit that I hear from planners, but generally people try to over promise to justify building something, not under promise as has happened here.

I am also not one to shy away from pointing out the faults in our system here, but the ridership complaints are frankly, not at all justified. When the ridership numbers were released they were comfortably beyond my expectations.

[danbrotherston]

Transit oriented development is a good thing, but it has to be balanced and planned right. So far, this region is not doing that. From what I've seen, I've mostly witnessed this as "let's build a fancy LRT and hope big condos and boutiques open up along the route so the city looks good". It's gentrifying the areas along the LRT but the region is not providing low income housing and adequate transportation to blue collar jobs that are not exactly near the LRT.

There is no doubt that we have a shortage of affordable housing. But I think that blaming that on the LRT is disingenuous. We had a housing shortage and we have one now. And having more mid-market rental housing (Drewlo, Market Flats, Ophelia, The Scott, 66 Civic) will tend to ease the pressure on rents, even if the units themselves are mostly not in the affordable range. Even investor condos help relieve the rental housing shortage.

And the region (and at least Kitchener) are making real efforts to create more housing. Much work remains, but the problem is not being ignored.

But that's really nothing to do with LRT.

This is entirely on point, if we hadn't built the LRT the only difference would be the unaffordable housing would have been built in Breslau instead of in the core. Here it just makes it more on display.  It's also the case that there are sections of the LRT that do have access to lower income housing, Block Line station being a key example of this.

The other thing that's always missed about this is that transportation is almost always the second biggest expense. The last thing someone who is unable to find affordable housing needs to be told is that they would need to buy a car in order to live somewhere.  The LRT is not the only transit investment we've made, the entire network has been expanded as well (or at least that was the pre-COVID plan....which seems now to be out the window).

[trainspotter139]

It is true that it is not built to carry existing demand, which is still well within the range that can be handled by buses.

It is definitely able to handle the demand. The thing is empty half of the time, even before SARS-CoV-2 disrupted everything. According to Keolis the LRT only carries 25'000 people per day on average. In terms of a rapid transit system (and specifically one that is serving a region of over 600'000+ people! - Nürnberg, Germany for example, is roughly the same size as us even even denser yet it has 3 subway lines, 5 streetcar/LRT lines, 4 S-bahn lines and a million bus routes) it's so far an absolute failure in terms of ridership. Even that number is quite ambiguous since they only announced that in a recent press release in regards to the ION winning a national award. Will ridership go up? I have no doubt, but it's reaching veeeeeeerrryyy far to paint the ION as an astounding success.

I have posted this in here before but since we're talking about Pre-COVID numbers then perhaps this graph from the 2020 Budget discussions would be appropriate. If your claim were at all true, these orange bars would be much, much smaller than they are. It's important to understand the size of the vehicle can be deceptive at times. Especially if one is only observing a vehicle between Northfield and Conestoga Stations.
   

[ijmorlan]

It not being full, does not make it a failure. Nurnberg Germany is a completely different city, it is entirely unfair to compare a city like that to our city which has just built it's first rapid transit line, that was operating only a year.

Saying it's a failure because 100,000 people didn't sell their cars the moment it was built is absurd, change takes time, but that change was happening far more rapidly as a result of the LRT than it was before, and more, it was happening faster than it was expected to as a result of the LRT.

Indeed, a transit system which is, on average, half full is doing very well at using its capacity efficiently. Compare that to the road network, which probably has an overall utilization of maybe — I’m guessing — 5%. Consider all those wide neighbourhood streets which are essentially deserted overnight and which even during rush hour only have a few dozen vehicles go through as residents arrive or leave; and even major roads are nearly empty much of the day.

Based on the graph somebody else posted, the LRT is doing very well at being used efficiently — it tops out at near capacity, and is over half usage for many hours of the day, only tailing off near the beginning and end of service. Some commuter services top out at around 50% usage because they basically just take people into the city in the morning and out in the afternoon; GO used to be mostly like this, although it’s getting better. What we’re seeing with the LRT is almost as far from a commuter service as is possible.

This discussion reminds me of a poorly informed proposal I saw around the time of the LRT debate from somebody who just wanted to buy a bunch of buses. They were proposing — no kidding! — 5 different sizes of vehicles, essentially to ensure that no transit vehicle ever drove across the city at less than full capacity. Of course, they were completely ignoring the 0% capacity on any vehicle that is parked in the garage, not to mention numerous other problems associated with such a diverse fleet.

… It's as slow as a worm trying to crawl across a sidewalk on a sunny day in July ….

This part is true. I and others have already complained about this. I’m not sure if we need to wait for less paranoid system managers to fix this or if there are external rules the transit system operator is forced to follow which enforce the paranoia.

[jamincan]

For people who don't live in KW, or who have only come here recently, it's tempting to look at ION in isolation - that is commonly how transit is planned elsewhere, after all. The thing with ION, though, is that it was a ground up comprehensive urban planning process. In brief, the justification grew out of transportation models that predicted unsustainable levels of investment in road construction in order to support projected growth. The plan was the creation of the so-called central transit corridor and the development of a comprehensive strategy involving economic development, zoning changes, and transit changes that all worked together to support more growth in that core area. ION is the most visible result in that process, but it is only one part of it. Looking solely at ION without understanding any of that broader context is like looking only at the engine of a car and pronouncing it a failure or success solely on its power without considering its purpose.

[Bytor]

It is true that it is not built to carry existing demand, which is still well within the range that can be handled by buses.

No it wasn't. A thousand times no. Between the 200 and 7 there were busses an average of every 3 minutes in rush hour before ION took over, and they were still overcrowded and frequently late. That is not "well within the range that can be handled by busses".

[Bytor]

It is definitely able to handle the demand. The thing is empty half of the time, even before SARS-CoV-2 disrupted everything. According to Keolis the LRT only carries 25'000 people per day on average. 

Except it wasn't "empty half the time". It couldn't have been carrying 25,000 riders a day—20% more than what the 7+200 carried together before—if it were empty.

Did you think that ION was going to jump to 100% capacity right away? That's just ridiculous, because if it did that means we waited far too long to put it in place. Of course it's going to start off on the lower end and grow from there, like if you had promoted a busPlus route to a full route and switched the short bus of 20 passengers to a regular bus of 80 passengers.

Even with only 30 people aboard, 1/8th capacity, ION is probably still going to be cheaper to operate per ride than a bus route carrying 20,000 people a day. In fact, I bet you that an analysis of IONs operational cost carrying 25,000 per day on average will show that it costs less per ride to operate than the old iXpress 200 cost at 7,000 riders per day.

In terms of a rapid transit system (and specifically one that is serving a region of over 600'000+ people! - Nürnberg, Germany for example, is roughly the same size as us even even denser yet it has 3 subway lines, 5 streetcar/LRT lines, 4 S-bahn lines and a million bus routes) it's so far an absolute failure in terms of ridership. Even that number is quite ambiguous since they only announced that in a recent press release in regards to the ION winning a national award. Will ridership go up? I have no doubt, but it's reaching veeeeeeerrryyy far to paint the ION as an astounding success.

It is an astounding success. GRT boardings all across the system were up 17%. Central Transit Corridor boardings were up 40%. The IO, if it has 25,000/day, carries more than three times as many people per day, on average, as the iXpress 200 did.

[KevinL]

Indeed, on labour cost alone the savings are dramatic - far fewer operators and maintenance staff are needed for the LRVs compared to equivalent capacity in the bus fleet. Then you get into savings on fuel cost, vehicle depreciation, and tons of other factors.