kettal
Banned
If you were smart, you'd park in a bike lane. Nobody enforces that.
|
|
|
401 Rapid Transit?
- Thread starter Tcmetro
- Start date
If you were smart, you'd park in a bike lane. Nobody enforces that.
golodhendil
Active Member
Sure.
For moderately successful examples there are Transperth's Joondalup and Mandurah lines.
For examples in Europe, there is the corridor for intercity, local and metro trains along Ringweg-Zuid in Amsterdam, and several sections of the S-bahn around Berlin, among others.
Many highly used and profitable lines in the Osaka-Kyoto-Kobe area, including lines of the Osaka Subway, Osaka Monorail, Kobe Electric Railway, Sanyo Electric Railway, Senboku Rapid Railway and JR are along freeways. Some of these even have multiple companies running trains along the same highway corridor competing with each other.
Shanghai Metro Line 1, and Guangzhou Metro Lines 3 and 4 all have substantial sections along expressways, and are all among the busiest lines in their respective systems.
Some of the most successful examples of railway-along-highway are in Hong Kong. Almost the entire urban section of the Tung Chung line runs between/under an expressway, and has led directly to the establishment of multiple mixed-use nodes with offices, malls, hotels and residential developments that house tens of thousands of people. Ma On Shan line is a suburban line with half of it along the median of an expressway (which turns into a dual carriage with limited traffic lights when it enters the town centre), and spurred developments that added tens of thousands of people to what was already in the new town. Kwun Tong line runs along a similar semi-expressway in the eastside of the urban core, and while its original purpose several decades ago was to serve the residential areas, the line has directly facilitated the district's recent transformation into HK's second CBD.
Granted, I am not defending the idea of a 401 RT - I am still rather neutral about it, though I agree with Keithz that it's hard to think it will not be successful if north-south feeders are done well enough. I am simply countering the assertion that building railways along highways is always bad.
dunkalunk
Senior Member
Good luck getting the MTO to go along with it.
The Region of Waterloo has repeatedly approached the MTO about combining the proposed 4 lane road bridge south of the existing structure with an LRT crossing of the Grand River and placing the LRT in the highway corridor. In both cases, MTO has refused.
They say that it's a safety issue, having vehicles on a fixed track beside ones with drivers; That overhead wires would be a distraction; That if an accident ever did occur on the LRT line, it would require lane closures, That if an accident were to occur on Highway 8, the LRT ROW would get in the way, once even citing that an LRT corridor through this area would interfere with the placement of their high mast lighting.
And so, the LRT corridor was pushed northward into an existing rail corridor which serves Toyota and would need to be relocated. This would also require the further relocation of endangered mussels further upstream for the reconstruction of the existing bridge or the construction of a parallel structure.
All of the challenges presented by the MTO are easily technically overcome; higher barriers between traffic and LRT, moved lighting fixtures, Moitoring of traffic on highway 8, and quick signalling in case of accidents, ect. The environmental impact, temporal, and cost benefits of placing the LRT and Highway 8 on the same structure outweigh the technical challenges and cost of property acquisition and contruction associated with relocating a rail corridor.
We must remember, the MTO's job is building roads. It takes a lot of arm twisting to get the MTO to do anything that could possibly reduce their need to design and build roads. While a 401 rapid transit corridor is definitely technically feasible and could be beneficial, I don't expect the MTO to go along with it, unless its BRT, in which case, they'd probably be all for it as all you would really need to get started is some paint, some bus shelters, and some stairs.
For the uninitiated, here's the map of the area. Highway is is planned to be widened from 4 lanes to 8 lanes featuring a new bridge over the Grand River south of the existing structure. The parallel rail corridor is located immediately north sandwiched between King Street and low density residential.
The Region of Waterloo has repeatedly approached the MTO about combining the proposed 4 lane road bridge south of the existing structure with an LRT crossing of the Grand River and placing the LRT in the highway corridor. In both cases, MTO has refused.
They say that it's a safety issue, having vehicles on a fixed track beside ones with drivers; That overhead wires would be a distraction; That if an accident ever did occur on the LRT line, it would require lane closures, That if an accident were to occur on Highway 8, the LRT ROW would get in the way, once even citing that an LRT corridor through this area would interfere with the placement of their high mast lighting.
And so, the LRT corridor was pushed northward into an existing rail corridor which serves Toyota and would need to be relocated. This would also require the further relocation of endangered mussels further upstream for the reconstruction of the existing bridge or the construction of a parallel structure.
All of the challenges presented by the MTO are easily technically overcome; higher barriers between traffic and LRT, moved lighting fixtures, Moitoring of traffic on highway 8, and quick signalling in case of accidents, ect. The environmental impact, temporal, and cost benefits of placing the LRT and Highway 8 on the same structure outweigh the technical challenges and cost of property acquisition and contruction associated with relocating a rail corridor.
We must remember, the MTO's job is building roads. It takes a lot of arm twisting to get the MTO to do anything that could possibly reduce their need to design and build roads. While a 401 rapid transit corridor is definitely technically feasible and could be beneficial, I don't expect the MTO to go along with it, unless its BRT, in which case, they'd probably be all for it as all you would really need to get started is some paint, some bus shelters, and some stairs.
For the uninitiated, here's the map of the area. Highway is is planned to be widened from 4 lanes to 8 lanes featuring a new bridge over the Grand River south of the existing structure. The parallel rail corridor is located immediately north sandwiched between King Street and low density residential.
Last edited:
CodeMonkey
Active Member
I had a idea. Instead of having the ALRT run along at grade with the traffic. Why not have it elevated?
It's the JFK AirTrain, but the idea of having a ALRT run along it can still work. The support columns don't take up alot of space so we don't have to reduce lanes. Platform access can be predestination bridge over or figure out a way to use existing bridges along the 401 as places to put stations.
It's the JFK AirTrain, but the idea of having a ALRT run along it can still work. The support columns don't take up alot of space so we don't have to reduce lanes. Platform access can be predestination bridge over or figure out a way to use existing bridges along the 401 as places to put stations.
TOareaFan
Superstar
On a longer run than an airport train, though, would you not run into a whole mess of issues when that elevated train met a road that overpassed the highway? Would you build up over the overpass or duck under it? Blast through it?
EDIT...I take it back...on further review I see that it is built high/tall enough that it goes over the road that is overpassing the main road there.......so I guess that is the answer. Up up and away
nfitz
Superstar
What's length got to do with it? The JFK AirTrain has 13 km of track - much of it outside of the airport. That's longer than the Sheppard subway and SRT combined!
TOareaFan
Superstar
I originally thought that this pic was from a fairly short run of track within an airport that did not have to cross over other roads.....I later re-looked at the pic and noted that regardless of length it did actually cross other roads (irrispective of how long it is or isn't) and the solution to the problem I perceived was right there in the pic.
Last edited:
salmonz
New Member
I've been thinking about this for the longest time and the high amount of traffic on the 401 does suggest "something" needs to be built to accomidate cross regional transporation east-west non-downtown Toronto.
My opinion is to have a high speed rail line going from Kitchener to Bowmanville running along the 401 area. You will then need secondary lines going north/south to feed the line.
People want fast, reliable, and affordable transit. They don't want to use transit only to cost them 2x the price of owning and operating a car. We have to realize not everyone lives in Toronto, and doesn't travel into downtown Toronto. If people can do 100km/hr on the highway, and the fastest mode of public transportation only goes on average 60km/hr to 80km/hr, most won't go for public transit.
I wish for the day where I can drive to a parking lot beside the 401 high speed transitway, hop on a clean and comfortable high speed train for free, travel at 150-200km/hr near the highway. I would be watching the poor automobile suckers sitting in traffic or at best doing 120km/hr. Meanwhile, my trip cost me barely nothing, got to work in 20 minutes rather than 50, traveling 50 km one way, and feel healthier and safer knowing I don't have to battle the highway and Toronto traffic each day.
Now you must be wondering - free? Yes! If you consider the health care costs and road maintenance required to maintain our highways and roads, would there be savings of approx $4000/yr/person to the government? I would think yes.
But ofcourse, this day will never come and I'm daydreaming about a utopian society. Oh well, back to reality.
My opinion is to have a high speed rail line going from Kitchener to Bowmanville running along the 401 area. You will then need secondary lines going north/south to feed the line.
People want fast, reliable, and affordable transit. They don't want to use transit only to cost them 2x the price of owning and operating a car. We have to realize not everyone lives in Toronto, and doesn't travel into downtown Toronto. If people can do 100km/hr on the highway, and the fastest mode of public transportation only goes on average 60km/hr to 80km/hr, most won't go for public transit.
I wish for the day where I can drive to a parking lot beside the 401 high speed transitway, hop on a clean and comfortable high speed train for free, travel at 150-200km/hr near the highway. I would be watching the poor automobile suckers sitting in traffic or at best doing 120km/hr. Meanwhile, my trip cost me barely nothing, got to work in 20 minutes rather than 50, traveling 50 km one way, and feel healthier and safer knowing I don't have to battle the highway and Toronto traffic each day.
Now you must be wondering - free? Yes! If you consider the health care costs and road maintenance required to maintain our highways and roads, would there be savings of approx $4000/yr/person to the government? I would think yes.
But ofcourse, this day will never come and I'm daydreaming about a utopian society. Oh well, back to reality.