urbandreamer
recession proof
What a waste of money.
|
|
|
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
Coltaine79
Active Member
Are you serious?
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Get informed!
Informative site from a citizen's group:
http://www.tritag.ca/light-rail/
Official regional rapid transit initiative:
http://rapidtransit.region.waterloo.on.ca/
Informative site from a citizen's group:
http://www.tritag.ca/light-rail/
Official regional rapid transit initiative:
http://rapidtransit.region.waterloo.on.ca/
Mapleson
Active Member
The political manoeuvring wins out over sound planning. The jump ridership levels anticipated is beyond common sense. I wish building one LRT line down the main North/South corridor that already sees Express Bus service could triple system ridership and double cost recovery. The stop locations are ridiculous compared to the existing 6-8 differing bus routes that ply the general corridor now. There are separate stops for UW and WLU? Why not move the two together and create a real transit node? Why run LRT on two streets in one direction each in downtown Kitchener? Why run the LRT down King Street in South Kitchener rather than across Queen and down the existing Railway Corridor? Why run LRT from Charles Street to Fairview Mall instead of just BRT like service to Cambridge? KW LRT will be two minutes slower than the existing bus service.So jealous...
I live in London which has a population similar to K/W... we're denser yet they get rapid transit money?Either way congrats K/W, hope it all goes well!
Although I wouldn't be celebrating just yet. McGuinty has a way of pledging a lot of money for transit and then taking it way just before projects get started. Let's just hope it doesn't happen this time.
The biggest flaw in the KW LRT that I see is that the LRT does not conveniently serve any residential areas that do not already have the best service in the Region. Maybe the student ghettos will spread south to the cheaper property in Kitchener/Cambridge, but the system doesn't provide a significant incentive to people that don't already live near King Street.
Last edited:
SlickFranky
Active Member
Does London even have a rapid transit plan?
Not really. They've been mentioning BRT for a few years, but nothing has really come of it. Transit improvement isn't really a priority for most Londoners, even though they complain about traffic non-stop.
kEiThZ
Superstar
LAz,
There's isn't Transit City style LRT. It's more in line with what Ottawa's building. That certainly makes it rapid transit.
There's isn't Transit City style LRT. It's more in line with what Ottawa's building. That certainly makes it rapid transit.
Mapleson
Active Member
Unfortunately, I'm with LAz on this one. If the LRT is slower than the current bus route, how is it rapid?
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
This is great news. Considering that almost all the major trip generators: 2 universities, 2 downtowns, 2 malls, RIM, Manulife, the major hospital, and a research and tech park, are all along the corridor only minor trip generators like high schools, secondary malls and some employment clusters are left out. The stop spacing and the walking distance is hardly an issue, since Waterloo and Kitchener are fairly compact and walkable in the areas where the stop placement might be the most contentious (ie. around Laurier)
Mapleson
Active Member
The only thing missing on that trip generator list is the matching destination/origin.
The stop spacing and walking distance are huge issues because they are both inferior to the current service. Less stops, longer walks, and a slower trip is not a system I endorse. This project decreases the transit service level and takes up roadspace. For the same price, you could give everyone in Waterloo Region a free bus pass for a decade.
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
The stop spacing is identical to that of the current iXpress, plus it avoids the rather large dogleg that needs to be taken by swinging the buses around University and King near Laurier. I found the iXpress to have pretty much an ideal stop spacing, especially because I remember relying on the horrendously slow and meandering 7 bus as an undergrad at UW.
The walking distance to the stops is hardly torturous. The longest a Laurier student would have to walk is 12 minutes from Seagram to King street; the longest a UW student would have to walk is 15 minutes to Ron Eydt Village.
The reduction in traffic lanes is offset by the presence of nearby arterial roads, namely Weber and Park/Courtland which are practically next door.
Finally, I support this project in a way that I didn't support Transit City because LRT is effective in the kind of environment - and I say this as someone who is by no means a light rail fanatic. The fact that this goes through two established pre-war downtowns lends itself more to LRT than BRT which, effective as it is at transporting people in suburban environments very quickly and effectively, is not the greatest in a downtown setting; the use of the rail corridor in Waterloo also lends itself to the construction of a light rail line more than a busway - in some places a busway has to be unusually wide, and there is not that much room along this ROW. Finally, I support LRT because I know that this is the only rapid transit project this city will ever get - no other route in KW justifies anything beyond some improved off-peak bus frequencies - so it's not like we are losing opportunities anywhere else by funding one expensive project here.
The walking distance to the stops is hardly torturous. The longest a Laurier student would have to walk is 12 minutes from Seagram to King street; the longest a UW student would have to walk is 15 minutes to Ron Eydt Village.
The reduction in traffic lanes is offset by the presence of nearby arterial roads, namely Weber and Park/Courtland which are practically next door.
Finally, I support this project in a way that I didn't support Transit City because LRT is effective in the kind of environment - and I say this as someone who is by no means a light rail fanatic. The fact that this goes through two established pre-war downtowns lends itself more to LRT than BRT which, effective as it is at transporting people in suburban environments very quickly and effectively, is not the greatest in a downtown setting; the use of the rail corridor in Waterloo also lends itself to the construction of a light rail line more than a busway - in some places a busway has to be unusually wide, and there is not that much room along this ROW. Finally, I support LRT because I know that this is the only rapid transit project this city will ever get - no other route in KW justifies anything beyond some improved off-peak bus frequencies - so it's not like we are losing opportunities anywhere else by funding one expensive project here.
dunkalunk
Senior Member
The LRT includes 3 more stops than the existing iXpress route, and is a bit longer. Also keep in mind that the LRT will have signal priority while the iXpress does not. This means, that a trip from the top to the bottom of the line will take roughly the same amount of time 5 years from now as it will 25 years from now. The iXpress also shares its roadway with general traffic, which causes other delays that will only get worse with time.
With stop spacings at least twice as far apart as Transit Ciity, the system as designed is rapid transit.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Is it actually slower? Segregated ROW for the most part and wider stop spacing would seem faster to me.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
+1
LRT is absolutely ideal for these kinds of situations. And I really hope developments like these spur an LRT boom in secondary urban centres in Canada. Places like Kingston or Halifax or Saskatoon could really use LRT.
dunkalunk
Senior Member
What system map are you looking at? I'm looking at this one: http://rapidtransit.region.waterloo.on.ca/maps.html
Your statement is false.
First you claim that the system is not rapid transit, and then gripe about how the stops aren't close enough together. Make up your mind please.