Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Bad enough to close roads and schools and wash out highways - ON's absolutely not ready for 250mm of rain. We've already mentioned blizzards above.

If Toronto gets atmospheric rivers, as we do, particularly in some years more than others, do they get as much as / more/ less than we do? I lived there for a year, and encountered wind, freezing rain, intense cold, and snow, of course) strangely mild days like the January thaw, and the atmospheric rivers, but not often did I seldom see the cool/mild, deep grey, continuously rainy days that Vancouver gets for sequences of several days or more> In August there were afternoons with short but intense downpours of a continental or humid temperate climate. I'm not so sure it has the continuous heavy rains Vancouver gets, especially in the late fall, but they do get wild, sudden swings of weather that we, mercifully, do not.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

And if BC'd only gotten 100mm instead of 300, neither would ours. That's 0-1 for ON in a real flood.

So, 100mm would have been fine in BC?

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If Toronto gets atmospheric rivers, as we do, particularly in some years more than others, do they get as much as / more/ less than we do? I lived there for a year, and encountered wind, freezing rain, intense cold, and snow, of course) strangely mild days like the January thaw, and the atmospheric rivers, but not often did I seldom see the cool/mild, deep grey, continuously rainy days that Vancouver gets for sequences of several days or more> In August there were afternoons with short but intense downpours of a continental or humid temperate climate. I'm not so sure it has the continuous heavy rains Vancouver gets, especially in the late fall, but they do get wild, sudden swings of weather that we, mercifully, do not.

Fun fact, did you know another term for Atmospheric River is.... Temperate Hurricane. They are actually quite identical.

So, yes Toronto does get them.

[Migrant_Coconut]

We just got 100+ mm this October without any major incident, so no, not usually a problem.

Originally Posted by trofirhen

If Toronto gets atmospheric rivers, as we do, particularly in some years more than others, do they get as much as / more/ less than we do? I lived there for a year, and encountered wind, freezing rain, intense cold, and snow, of course) strangely mild days like the January thaw, and the atmospheric rivers, but not often did I seldom see the cool/mild, deep grey, continuously rainy days that Vancouver gets for sequences of several days or more> In August there were afternoons with short but intense downpours of a continental or humid temperate climate. I'm not so sure it has the continuous heavy rains Vancouver gets, especially in the late fall, but they do get wild, sudden swings of weather that we, mercifully, do not.

Lower Mainland: 1457-1667 mm/year of precipitation.
Greater Toronto: 831 mm/year of precipitation. Not even close.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

We just got 100+ mm this October without any major incident, so no, not usually a problem.

Lower Mainland: 1457-1667 mm/year of precipitation.
Greater Toronto: 831 mm/year of precipitation. Not even close.

I see this has now turned into the Vancouver weather thread. I wonder who could have hi-jacked the thread (again)? (If there are any mods around, can we change the thread to 'Heavy Rain, Commuter Rain, & Intercity Precipitation'?

Abbotsford has the most average annual rainfall of any Canadian city (1,538mm) so it's not surprising that when it gets even more than an average year's rain, there are floods in the area (which mostly come over the border from the US). The land is already saturated from the 'usual' rainfall.

Vancouver has 1,457mm on average, over 168 days with some sort of precipitation. The wettest city in Ontario is London, that sees precipitation on the same number of days (168), but only 1,012mm on average. This isn't called the Wet Coast for no reason.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Fun fact, did you know another term for Atmospheric River is.... Temperate Hurricane. They are actually quite identical.

So, yes Toronto does get them.

Fun fact, they're different, and almost nobody uses the term "temperate hurricane". Apart from quoting yourself in a different thread, link me to one reference that includes "Temperate Hurricane" and "Toronto". Because Google says I can give you 72,500 links to "Atmospheric River" and "Vancouver".

[GenWhy?]

Also, I keep forgetting that this is real:
"Immediately advance the required planning, engagement, and design work to confirm the best alignment, technology, grade separation, terminus locations and phasing for a rapid transit connection between Metrotown and Park Royal via the Second Narrows corridor to be implemented in the latter half of the plan"

Says implemented by 2027-2032. Wonder if they'll try to take a lane away on the Second Narrows during rush hour for buses. Don't think they've gone into much detail yet on a early roll-out strat.

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

...Wonder if they'll try to take a lane away on the Second Narrows during rush hour for buses. Don't think they've gone into much detail yet on a early roll-out strat.

There's a number of potential complications, but I wonder if a transit counterflow lane might be considered. I would think that it is technically possible, since the centre median could be replaced with a moveable barrier similar to that used on the Alex Fraser Bridge.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Tvisforme

There's a number of potential complications, but I wonder if a transit counterflow lane might be considered. I would think that it is technically possible, since the centre median could be replaced with a moveable barrier similar to that used on the Alex Fraser Bridge.

The lanes are quite a bit smaller on Second Narrows. It might be possible, but probably not nearly as feasible as on the AFB.

They also haven't accommodated it the recent rebuild of the interchange. There would have to be a lot of work for it to be of any use.

Lastly, the Second Narrows jams up in both directions during rush hour. It's not uncommon for traffic headed into the city to back up to Westview starting around 3pm. There's not much spare capacity in either direction to reallocate.

[GenWhy?]

The que-jump light at Phibbs going over Main I think sets the stage for an outside lane peak bus priority lane heading south... way less sure how they'd do northbound

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

The que-jump light at Phibbs going over Main I think sets the stage for an outside lane peak bus priority lane heading south... way less sure how they'd do northbound

For the northern end, bus traffic would be going to Phibbs via the Main Street off-ramp, so transit priority would probably end shortly before the Deep Cove exit when other vehicles merge to exit. As for the south end, transit vehicle priority from downtown Vancouver could probably start farther back along the McGill on-ramp while bus traffic from Burnaby could have a priority lane from the First Street on-ramp to the Hastings off-ramp, up and over towards the bridge (thus avoiding losing a lane in the tunnel).

[GenWhy?]

Makes sense

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Changing City

I see this has now turned into the Vancouver weather thread. I wonder who could have hi-jacked the thread (again)? (If there are any mods around, can we change the thread to 'Heavy Rain, Commuter Rain, & Intercity Precipitation'?


Vancouver has 1,457mm on average, over 168 days with some sort of precipitation. The wettest city in Ontario is London, that sees precipitation on the same number of days (168), but only 1,012mm on average. This isn't called the Wet Coast for no reason.

I'm not attempting to hi-jack

Perhaps now would be the time to convince TransLink and any other pertinent companies that rail stations need more than a small basic roof. It's ok for a bus stop but why does the WCE and most of the Expo line think that's all that's needed at a station? Some basic walls (including glass ones) as a windbreak makes a world of difference while waiting for the next train.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

Wonder if they'll try to take a lane away on the Second Narrows during rush hour for buses. Don't think they've gone into much detail yet on a early roll-out strat.

The queues aren't on the bridge, they're on the approaches. All they really need is a queue-jumper that merges immediately before the bridge. They've essentially got that on the north side already, they just need to create one on the south side - shouldn't be all that hard to do.

[chowhou]

This thread is a train wreck now (so to speak). What are we even talking about?

In an attempt to bring back some semblence of "Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation", I noticed the federal HFR announcement a month ago went unnoticed in this thread.

LINK

The federal government at least still has appetite for investment in passenger rail out east however the more I look into the economics of passenger transportation in our province the more and more rail doesn't make any sense to me beyond HSR southwards.

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

The queues aren't on the bridge, they're on the approaches. All they really need is a queue-jumper that merges immediately before the bridge. They've essentially got that on the north side already, they just need to create one on the south side - shouldn't be all that hard to do.

Exactly what I mean for back-ups when adding a bus lane. the ramps and merging are going to be interesting what TransLink tries. Just curious how much infrastructure they'll build

[chowhou]

Why don't we move this over to the Transit Fantasies thread and practice what we preach?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by chowhou

This thread is a train wreck now (so to speak). What are we even talking about?

In an attempt to bring back some semblence of "Heavy Rail, Commuter Rail, & Intercity Transportation", I noticed the federal HFR announcement a month ago went unnoticed in this thread.

LINK

The federal government at least still has appetite for investment in passenger rail out east however the more I look into the economics of passenger transportation in our province the more and more rail doesn't make any sense to me beyond HSR southwards.

"High Frequency Rail will transform passenger rail service in Canada through the creation of a faster, more frequent, accessible, and sustainable rail service among the major centres of Québec City, Trois-Rivières, Montréal, Ottawa, Peterborough, and Toronto."

No mention of anything in BC.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

"High Frequency Rail will transform passenger rail service in Canada through the creation of a faster, more frequent, accessible, and sustainable rail service among the major centres of Québec City, Trois-Rivières, Montréal, Ottawa, Peterborough, and Toronto."

No mention of anything in BC.

All the cities mentioned in the government of Canada report are part of the Saint Lawrence - Great Lakes' agglomeration of cities. Half of the population of Canada, maybe more, lives there.
Vancouver is out west, cut off from the country by mountain ranges and canyons, and other than Victoria, has only Calgary, and maybe Edmonton as its big city neighbours, with perhaps Kamloops as a midpoint.
There is not only the lack the population density to support a HSR network, but the geography renders such a network virtually impossible unless you want to spend billions on tunnels in a colossal megaproject.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

All the cities mentioned in the government of Canada report are part of the Saint Lawrence - Great Lakes' agglomeration of cities. Half of the population of Canada, maybe more, lives there.
Vancouver is out west, cut off from the country by mountain ranges and canyons, and other than Victoria, has only Calgary, and maybe Edmonton as its big city neighbours, with perhaps Kamloops as a midpoint.
There is not only the lack the population density to support a HSR network, but the geography renders such a network virtually impossible unless you want to spend billions on tunnels in a colossal megaproject.

It is for HFR, not HSR

I know where it meant. I merely point out that the reason it was not mentioned is likely due to it not happening anywhere in BC.

[ssiguy]

The only place in Canada outside The Corridor that could possibly justify HFR little alone HSR is the Edmonton/Calgary Corridor. Anything else is a complete waste of money.