You are on page 1of 26

Transport Concepts –

Puzzling over Pieces…

The choices we make today will shape

our communities of tomorrow
Hybrid Cars
Car Sharing
Examples of Bicycle
 Bicycle parking
 Shared streets
 Shared lanes
 Dedicated lanes
 Shared trails
 Bicycle paths
 Public bicycles
“Smart Growth”
•Provide good public transport
•Design for feet, bikes & transit
•Manage congestion
•Cluster settlement
•Integrate land uses
•Control design & form
Third Harbour Toll Road
Crossing (Bridge Commission)
 Link Circumf. Hwy. with  $1.1 billion bridge
rail cut & Robie  $1.4 billion tunnel
 Major new road capacity
 Orbital not radial
 Balance traffic on
Halifax Peninsula  Competes with Woodside
 Take trucks off
downtown streets  Encourages driving &
 Toll pricing signal car-oriented dev’t
 Bridge bus lanes  Based on past 20 years’
traffic growth
Peninsula Railcut
(Province, 2008)
 Divert virtually all
container trucks from
 Grade separated  $220+ million
 New roadway might  Impact on greenway
allow buses  Neighbourhood impact
 Enable double-trailer  May limit rail services
trucks to/from Halterm  Encourage shift from rail
 Toll pricing signal to truck
Halifax Urban
(HUGA–HRM 2008)
 Multi-use Active
Transportation trail
 Plus nature trail
 Link Dal with SMU
 Use top of rail cut
 Not dependent on
truck way proposal
Burnside Expressway
Province; HRM Regional Plan 2006
 Opportunity for rural express routes
 Opportunity for MetroLink
 Could enable truck transloading with a
Burnside-Halifax rail container shuttle
 Actual route to be determined
Atlantic Gateway DistriPark
(Marinova & HRM, 2008)
 Remove 40-49% of  $15 million
container trucks
 Rural commutershed
 Use existing rails
construction impact
 New Distripark
 No rail at existing
 Less truck mileage
transload centre
 Rail can expand
 Can accommodate
double trailers
Rail Container Shuttle
(Marinova – HRM, 2008)
Downtown Hybrid Shuttle Bus
 HRM initiative
 Public helped plan the
 Flexible technology
 Low emissions
 Low noise
 Large buses
 Attractive image
Downtown Employment
Double Decker Buses
(Victoria, Toronto, etc.)
 Efficient use of street  Perceived competition
space  Limited routes
 No articulation  Clearances and trees
 High seat capacity  Stairs
 Good views
 Highly visible
Modern Streetcars for Halifax
(Dalhousie research paper, 2008)
 Fit characteristics of  $20 million+/km capital
Halifax  Inflexible routes
 Positive image  Disruptive construction
 Tourism potential  Boarding locations
 Stimulate downtown  Vulnerable to blockage
 Energy efficient
 Low emissions
 Low noise
Ultra-Light Rail (England)
 No wires  New to North America
 Shallow track  Lower capacity than
 Low emissions LRT or streetcar
 Low noise  Cannot mix with
 Hi-tech or historic conventional trains
 Tourism potential
 Visibly permanent
 Can fit very narrow
rights of way
Funicular Railway
 Proven technology  Not flexible
 For steep hills  Short routes
 Low operating costs  High capital cost
 Tourism potential
 Winter reliability
 Low emissions
 Low noise
 Low energy
Research Paper,
Dingle-Dal Ferry
 Low capital cost  Pilot projects in 2001
 2-minute crossing & 2002 averaged 30
 Congestion free to 60 passengers/day
 Scenic and relaxing  Low density around
 Attractive to cyclists
 Steep hills either side
 Back-haul traffic of Arm
 Recreation potential  Docks and boats must
 Near Dal, SMU & resist high winds
some hospitals  Isolated Dingle dock
 Near Halifax Urban  No major parking
Greenway & rail cut nearby
Windsor Jct.-Halifax Rail Shuttle
 6 Growth Centres  $25 million +/- cap. cost
 4 campuses  Track fee & negotiation
 6 retail centres  Vulnerable to sea level rise
 Energy efficient  Vulnerable to blockage
 Resilient to weather  South End terminus
 Congestion free  Trespassing risk
 Grade separated
 Encourage walkability
 Remanufactured cars
available in Maritimes
to Burnside
Rail Shuttle
(2004 Dal
Woodside – Burnside Rail Shuttle
 3 RP Centres  $15 million cap. cost
 2 ferry terminals  Track fee & negotiation
 2 major brownfields  Sea level rise
 Large business park  Vulnerable to blockage
 Trespassing risk
 Tourism potential
 Population issue
Diesel Light Rail (Ottawa)
 Lower operating cost  Higher capital cost than
 Serves more centres conventional rail
without time penalty  Must be time-separated
 Ultramodern image from conventional trains
 Ottawa success  Needs platform
 Low floor extenders
 Shorter stopping
 Can operate in a
street lane

Lwr. Left: Light Rail Atlas

Electric Light Rail
(Calgary, Edmonton)
 Frequent service  Very high capital cost
 Low operating cost  Disruptive construction
 No local emissions  Overhead wires
 Energy efficient  Must be spatially or
 Progressive image temporally separated
 Low floor from regular trains
 Compatible with
 Can operate in streets
“Railtown” but No Trains
(Wolfville, NS – 2008 photo)
Choosing the Best Fit
 Toolbox approach – no single solution
 Consider potential to shape development
 Balance trunk & local needs
 Offer an experience, not just a utility
 Consider image and street visibility