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

[drum118]

LRT project nearing completion after a challenging year

 

[muller877]

Norfolk VA has a population of 246,139 and has an LRT line. Milwaukee has 600,000 and getting a line. Durham NC has 245,475 and has a line. Tucson has an line for 526,116.

El Paso Texas has 681,124 and getting a PCC line. Kenosha has 99,900 and has a PCC line. Oklahoma City has 1.3 million and getting a line. Kansas City has 2,037,357 that open a starter line in May and planing extension now. Cincinnati has 2,172,191 that saw a line open in September.

Size means nothing if a town or city wants one.

Look at the CMA of these cities...not just the small central area for better comparisons. See the City of London UK post above.

Norfolk VA has 1.7M in its CMA
Milwaukee is 2.0M
Durham is 2.0M
Tuscon is 1.0M

Size is an indication of whether there is enough people to support a line. A secondary test is the urban form.

KW is one of the smaller regions that I can think of to build. It's urban form is also very linear which helped (linear in the sense of KW which turns out streets with both a N, S, E and W directions)

 

[innsertnamehere]

What does the size of the city have to do with the type or level of transit service that it provides?

If the ridership is there to support an LRT line, build an LRT line. Or hell, build 2.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

true of course. Its just that it is rare for a city of half a million to have a line with the required demand. Really, it is questionable whether ION is needed - IIRC its projected initial ridership is somewhere around 20,000 a day, very low by Canadian standards. The one line is a great feature for a small city like KW - two is just not likely in the near future given the size of the city. there is simply little potential as a large portion of the population will be well served by the one opening this year.

 

[Platform 27]

KW's shape, far more than its size, determines how many rapid transit lines are justifiable.

And definitely for the next 10 years, and probably for the next 25 years, and quite possibly for the next 50 years, the right number of rapid transit lines for KW is 1. Not 0. Not 2.

 

[Markster]

And definitely for the next 10 years, and probably for the next 25 years, and quite possibly for the next 50 years, the right number of rapid transit lines for KW is 1. Not 0. Not 2.

Indeed.

When looking at what cross-corridor should ideally get a Line 2, there are no standout options:
Ridership is heaviest on University Ave, but it's only for a 3 km section where many routes converge, so it might be better served with some localized BRT style improvements.
Kitchener's cross-town service is the 204 bus, but it's a far cry from a heavy trunk route that needs upgrading to LRT any time soon.

 

[Megaton327]

Indeed.

When looking at what cross-corridor should ideally get a Line 2, there are no standout options:
Ridership is heaviest on University Ave, but it's only for a 3 km section where many routes converge, so it might be better served with some localized BRT style improvements.
Kitchener's cross-town service is the 204 bus, but it's a far cry from a heavy trunk route that needs upgrading to LRT any time soon.

For that 3km section of University, bus-only lanes would be a good start, then eventually a Viva-style rapidway. I agree that an LRT wouldn't make much sense for such a short stretch, unless they made it branch off the King line, but I don't think that would be great either.

 

[Fritter]

I agree that an LRT wouldn't make much sense for such a short stretch

Kitchener's own Sheppard stubway?

 

[dowlingm]

If Kitchener-Waterloo was a French city it might have 2-3 tramways already... look at Rouen, Grenoble, Nantes, Le Mans, Angers, Montpellier, Valenciennes...

 

[kEiThZ]

If Kitchener-Waterloo was a French city it might have 2-3 tramways already... look at Rouen, Grenoble, Nantes, Le Mans, Angers, Montpellier, Valenciennes...

Exactly. They might at least have regular trams if they don't have actual LRT (with segregated ROWs).

 

[robmausser]

If Kitchener-Waterloo was a French city it might have 2-3 tramways already... look at Rouen, Grenoble, Nantes, Le Mans, Angers, Montpellier, Valenciennes...

Yep and if gas was even close to being as expensive as it is in Europe we would have many more tramways everywhere in Canada.

Thankfully it is not.

 

[dowlingm]

Yep and if gas was even close to being as expensive as it is in Europe we would have many more tramways everywhere in Canada.

Thankfully it is not.

We get 87 and 89 octane crappy gas, pump it full of ethanol and clap ourselves on the back for how cheap it is. In Europe, the lowest I've seen in years is equivalent to US 91.

In France, they have Alstom who are one of the major tram players and a significant nuclear industry to supply the power, so there is an industrial policy advantage for them to push tramways over diesel power even if EU tendering rules mean that occasionally CAF and Bombardier win an order here and there.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From this link:

US and Europe calculate it in different ways which makes US fuel look like it has a lower rating but in reality they've got the same rating. US shows the average of the Research Octane Number (RON) and Motor Octane Number (MON) rating, which is the Anti-Knock Index (AKI) while Europe just shows the RON rating which gives a higher number than the MON rating.

 

[vz64]

We get 87 and 89 octane crappy gas, pump it full of ethanol and clap ourselves on the back for how cheap it is. In Europe, the lowest I've seen in years is equivalent to US 91.
....

It is not due to crappy gas, you are mixing octane ratings in North America and Europe: here we calculate it differently (average of RON and MON) than in Europe (RON). So, Our 87 octane corrresponds to 91 in Europe.

oops, was a bit slow to reply..

 

[W. K. Lis]

It is not due to crappy gas, you are mixing octane ratings in North America and Europe: here we calculate it differently (average of RON and MON) than in Europe (RON). So, Our 87 octane corrresponds to 91 in Europe.

oops, was a bit slow to reply..

You're too slow.

You're terminated...

 

[robmausser]

We get 87 and 89 octane crappy gas, pump it full of ethanol and clap ourselves on the back for how cheap it is. In Europe, the lowest I've seen in years is equivalent to US 91.

In France, they have Alstom who are one of the major tram players and a significant nuclear industry to supply the power, so there is an industrial policy advantage for them to push tramways over diesel power even if EU tendering rules mean that occasionally CAF and Bombardier win an order here and there.

Octane has no bearing on gas quality. If your cars engine requires 87 octane, using anything above 87 octane will have 0 effect on your engine and car. My father worked for one of the biggest Oil Refining companies in Canada for 15 years as a top manager; and those are his words not mine.