News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 318     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
News Roundup for April 26, 2024
 297     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
How It's Going
 485     0 

Waterloo Region Transit Developments (ION LRT, new terminal, GRT buses)

I just hope David Jeanes stays the hell away from Waterloo Region. The last thing I want is for the same to happen there as what happened in Ottawa.
 
W. K. Lis said:
Region of Waterloo video showing a 3D model of how rapid transit might work in the future.

http://news.therecord.com/videogallery/371545
Click to expand...

I wondering if it is the same firm that doing Detroit LRT?

It would be nice to use what there now as how the LRT would appear today, not some 50 years down the road with all that new development shown there.

The Detroit firm LRT 3D show what exist along the route today and it not nice.
 
It looks like they took Hespeler road, one of the ugliest 'carterials' in Ontario, and turned it into something approximating Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington. The region certainly has the right kind of ambition and I wish them the best of luck.
 
Sinclair Project?

280px-ZX80.jpg


My apologies, I couldn't resist.
 
drum118 said:
It would be nice to use what there now as how the LRT would appear today, not some 50 years down the road with all that new development shown there.
Click to expand...
The section in uptown Waterloo looked exactly like it does today, with the exception of the new park to replace a parking lot in the NW corner of King Street and Willis Way.
 
Preferred Route (LRT recommended as preferred technology, interim BRT to Cambridge, north Waterloo route TBD)



Click to enlarge or view the PDF

staff report:
http://rapidtransit.region.waterloo.on.ca/pdfs/E-09-056_PREFERRED_RAPID_TRANSIT_SYSTEM2.pdf

Website

Region rolls out $790m rapid transit plan
May 08, 2009
JEFF OUTHIT, RECORD STAFF
WEB EDITION
http://news.therecord.com/News/BreakingNews/article/534035

WATERLOO REGION — Regional council has unveiled a rapid transit system that would cost $790 million to launch and could open by 2014 across all three cities.

The proposal calls for:
• Electric trains on dedicated tracks, displacing traffic between Conestoga Mall in Waterloo and Fairview Park Mall in Kitchener. The estimated construction cost for this portion is $710 million.
• Fast buses driving in mixed traffic between the Fairview Park Mall and the Ainslie Street transit terminal in the Galt core of Cambridge. The estimated construction cost for this portion is $80 million.

The system would have 18 stations and would draw up to 22,500 daily boardings upon launch, planners contend. That’s more than double the current boardings for express buses on a similar route.

Operating the system would require a public subsidy of $11 million a year at launch. This compares to a current public subsidy of $47 million for Grand River Transit.

Impacts on property tax impacts are to be released next month.
Council first proposed rapid transit as a tool to draw homes and jobs to the underused urban spine.

It’s meant to intensify neighbourhoods, ease pollution and help keep cities from spilling into the country, heading towards a population of 729,000 people by 2031.

Chair Ken Seiling favours the latest proposal, three years in the making.
“I think it’s wonderful,” said Seiling, comparing it to construction of the local expressway in the 1960s. “I think it’s a great scheme.”

Seiling said the proposal makes sense because it brings Cambridge into the first phase.

He contends it’s smart to put rapid transit in today rather than wait until it costs more and is more difficult to install. “It’s the way of the future,” he said.

But Cambridge Mayor Doug Craig opposes the proposal, saying the region is not ready for costly trains. He would prefer cheaper rapid buses and is irked that Cambridge would get an inferior system.

“I think what we have to do is go through an evolutionary process,” Craig said. “I think it’s too far advanced. I think it’s not the right time for this region. I think it’s too costly.”

Highlights of the proposal:

• Planners say a cost-benefit analysis shows the best option is electric trains, called light rapid transit, across all three cities. However, this would cost $1.3 billion and the potential for ridership and intensification is much stronger in Kitchener-Waterloo than in Cambridge. So they have proposed a first stage at $790 million with trains in the north and buses in the south.

• Rapid buses on dedicated lanes would cost up to $585 million across all three cities. That’s less than half the cost of trains. However, planners contend trains deliver much higher benefits and do a better job meeting planning goals. They also claim rapid buses would reach capacity by 2030 in the north of the region.

• Grand River Transit will be realigned and expanded to connect with rapid transit.

• Buses proposed between Kitchener and Cambridge would not get dedicated lanes but would operate better than today’s express buses. This could be achieved with bus lanes, bypass shoulders, queue-jumping at intersections, priority over traffic signals and other features.

• Rapid transit can’t proceed without federal and provincial funding, to pay most construction costs. Talks are under way and both governments have expressed strong interest. Council has already pledged $25 million to buy land and hire people. Councillors have been told local costs could reach $150 million.

• Planners contend passenger boardings would more than double to 47,000 a day by 2031. The annual operating subsidy would shrink by more than half to $4 million.

• Planners have yet to decide between two potential routes for trains in north Waterloo. More public input will be sought.

• Public feedback will be sought at a series of meetings this month. Council may endorse the proposal June 24, with final provincial approval by December. Construction could launch in 2012 and conclude in 2014.

• Planners convened a panel of outside experts who have endorsed the proposal. They include urban planners, scholars and planning consultants from around Ontario.

jouthit@therecord.com
Click to expand...


The North Waterloo part is still to be decided in the next month...

Although the MAE results demonstrate that the LRT option using the routing variation on the
rail spurline in Waterloo is the best performing system, there are other significant
considerations associated with the two route variations in this portion of the system. These
include:
The Spurline option includes a station at University of Waterloo (UW) only, while the
King Street option has stations at both UW and Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU)
Expected development potential is slightly greater along King Street
Ridership potential is greater for the Spurline option
Due to the fundamental nature of the trade-offs between the two options, a final selection
will be deferred to allow for the consideration of public and stakeholder input on the choice
between the two route variations.


then...


Next Steps
On June 10, 2009, a public meeting will be held to allow interested parties to provide their
comments on the Rapid Transit EA directly to Council. The meeting will be held in the Region’s
Council Chambers at 150 Frederick Street, Kitchener starting at 6 p.m. No decision will be made at
this meeting.

On June 24, 2009, a report incorporating any changes resulting from the most recent public
consultation and recommendations for the preferred technology, route and staging option will be
presented to Regional Council for consideration. The report will include a recommendation for
transition to the Accelerated Transit Environmental Process. If the recommendations are approved
by Council it is staff’s intention to start the accelerated EA process in July 2009. Details of the
accelerated EA process are summarized in Report E-08-070.

Following the immediate next steps the project schedule is as follows:
• Complete Building Canadian Fund Application Fall 2009
• Completion of Accelerated Transit EA & MOE Approval December 2009
• Design 2010
• Procurement 2010-2011
• Contract Award late 2011
• Construction 2012-2014
• Opening 2014
 
Last edited:
Good. The only part that makes any sense as LRT is Conestoga-Fairview Park via U of W and Uptown Waterloo/Downtown Kitchener, ideally serving Laurier as best as possible. I know there's regional politics of including Cambridge, but that also opens up the internal Cambridge politics of having to serve all three former town components - Galt, Preston, and Hespeler. Better to have a series of frequent, quality bus routes serve the various areas from Fairview Park or even Sportsworld if need be, because the LRT would be ridiculous if having to meet the demands of the three-headed beast that is Cambridge.
 
I don't know why they're still flip flopping on the North Waterloo alignment. To me, it always seemed like a no-brainer: use the rail corridor, and put a WLU station at Seagram drive (beside the sports field which should be where any future WLU expansion is directed) and then put the UW station across from the Davis Centre.

The walk from Seagram Dr. and the rail line to the WLU library is about 500 metres, or less than the distance an average U of T student would walk from St. George, Spadina Museum or Queen's Park subway stations to class. In fact, I would imagine that most U of W stations would have a further walk - particularly those who have classes in PAS or who live in V1/V2.
 
I think the problem lies with Northfield Drive, where service reliability could be adversely effected due to the number of left turning vehicles to/from those on ramps. Why hydro one wouldn't allow the line to be built in their ROW is beyond me, the official explanation was that it was unsafe to run rapid transit vehicles so close to one of their higher power lines.

There is more redevelopment potential along King Street, although the dedicated ROW would provide a quicker service (Until Northfield of course, where traffic congestion could potentially cripple it.)

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but capital costs for the rail corridor are higher than the King/University alignment due to the need to purchase the rail corridor and its longer overall length.
 
dunkalunk said:
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but capital costs for the rail corridor are higher than the King/University alignment due to the need to purchase the rail corridor and its longer overall length.
Click to expand...

The Region owns the corridor.

I see an interesting parallel to the Square One "should it divert" debate here...:rolleyes:
 
I have no (seriously, none) knowledge of Waterloo region, but it always seemed like it was relatively progressive, as smaller ONT city-regions go. If that's true (is it?) it might explain its eagerness to get on board, so to speak.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top