Transit City Plan

[sixrings]

How does it even cost 10M? Just don;t have the LRT make that one stop. Bypassing a stop costs 10M. Can you imagine all the stops that buses bypass when they short-turn or are too full?

I would think they would need to get rid of the actual median. Its not as simple as just removing a TTC pole. If it appears like a stop is there people will wait. Sure the locals will know its out of service but others wont. I couldnt imagine a sloppy poster at stations closed saying "out of service"

 

[Electrify]

Well in the west I consider Keele, Caledonia, Dufferin. Oakwood, Bathurst, Chaplin, (don;t remember the next one), Yonge to be major stops. There are bus routes on those roads going south or north

Avenue is the one you are thinking of...

In the eastern surface portion, it was to stop at such major arteries and trip generators like Ferrand, Lebovic, and Ionview...

EDIT: Could have put Pharmacy in there as well, as it is very close to Victoria Park, but left it out because it is perceived as a relatively major road. Best bet would be to out the VP stop on the east side to maximize its proximity to that road.

 

[unimaginative2]

Here's an article in the Star:

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/1126658--is-a-subway-twice-as-fast-light-rail

Okay, wait a minute.
The total trip is 35 minutes. If you take a short section at the east end and put it above ground, it will take 15 minutes longer? I'd say that means it's more than 50% slower above ground!

Stintz is obviously right about subway cars.

I love it...the TTC is now claiming you need 30,000 per hour for subway! And yet, according to them, that's close to level of service F with extreme overcrowding! The absolute theoretical maximum capacity of the subway is 34,000 per hour and they never managed to achieve it even in the late 80s on the Yonge Line.

 

[FinchConnection]

Are we convinced that Transit City will be saved?

 

[Palma]

Avenue is the one you are thinking of...

In the eastern surface portion, it was to stop at such major arteries and trip generators like Ferrand, Lebovic, and Ionview...

What country are we talking about with those names?

 

[sixrings]

Well in the west I consider Keele, Caledonia, Dufferin. Oakwood, Bathurst, Chaplin, (don;t remember the next one), Yonge to be major stops. There are bus routes on those roads going south or north

First of all those are the underground stops. Above ground stops should be
1. Martin Grove
2. Kipling
3. Isslington
4. Royal York
5. Scarlet
6. Jane.

Im just using the west as an example because I cant find the original TC stops for the east...

Now compare that to this map http://www3.ttc.ca/PDF/About_the_TTC/Transit_City/Eglinton_LRT_route_diagram1.pdf

There is an additional 4 stops in such a small area. That adds up. Loydd manor, wincott, russel, mulham ARE NOT major stops.

BTW BLACK CREEK NEVER DESERVED A STOP!!!!! If the only reason you are putting a stop in is to service a recreation centre MOVE the recreation centre especially when it hasnt even been built yet.

 

[sixrings]

Here's an article in the Star:

http://www.thestar.com/news/transportation/article/1126658--is-a-subway-twice-as-fast-light-rail

Okay, wait a minute.
The total trip is 35 minutes. If you take a short section at the east end and put it above ground, it will take 15 minutes longer? I'd say that means it's more than 50% slower above ground!

Stintz is obviously right about subway cars.

I love it...the TTC is now claiming you need 30,000 per hour for subway! And yet, according to them, that's close to level of service F with extreme overcrowding! The absolute theoretical maximum capacity of the subway is 34,000 per hour and they never managed to achieve it even in the late 80s on the Yonge Line.

I agree 15 minutes is ALOT. it should be under 10 minutes if they kept the same spacing. There is no way that lights make a 15 minute difference. The problem will be if they revert back to the old spacing. Then you are talking about added stations plus the light issues. Then I would agree 15 mins makes sense. Keep the underground spacing but put it above ground.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I love it...the TTC is now claiming you need 30,000 per hour for subway! And yet, according to them, that's close to level of service F with extreme overcrowding! The absolute theoretical maximum capacity of the subway is 34,000 per hour and they never managed to achieve it even in the late 80s on the Yonge Line.

Think Kalinowski read the TTC's charts wrong. Their standard chart indicates that subway maxes out at 30,000 while ROW LRT maxes at 12,000. She reported the maximums as minimums.

 

[Palma]

I did not realize those minor streets were in there. Well I agree they should not be. If someone lives midway between Scarlet and Royal York, people located west of that midway point walk to Royal York and if located east of that midway point walk to Scarlett. I use to live near Yorkdale Mall and woudl walk to the subway there and would take 18-20min. Half way was walking outside to the mall and the other half inside (which was kinda nice). I did not realize how that walk every morning and evening kept me in shape

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

And yet they hold more seats in Parliament current than centrists.

And yet you posted "Is it just me or do people on the right generally seem less intelligent then their more liberal counterparts.".

Who Cares?

 

[sixrings]

As always!

Will be there

 

[nfitz]

This time Wednesday Transit City will once again become Toronto's transit strategy for the future.

I wouldn't count one's chickens. It would only take 2 councillors to lose their nerve ... and I'm sure they are probably tied to a chair somewhere right now, getting the hard-sell about the Chong plan to save the universe.

And who knows what procedural mechanism might be tried to avoid the vote. The speaker is quite biased, so anything is possible. Perhaps she'll throw a couple of councillors out of the chamber just before the vote for passing notes or chewing gum ...

 

[BurlOak]

I'd argue that the SRT could have "sold" people on elevated LRT, if the project wasn't so mangled. Because of this, people think elevated LRT ALWAYS includes ugly stations, poor track design with surroundings, awkward transfers, uncomfortable trains, and unreliable service in the winter time.

The complaints about the SRT were mainly the connection, second probably the service. I think aesthetics were were down the list - especially for the portion away from stations. We need to remember what this stretch of Eglinton looks like - and elevated rail would have fit in reasonably well.

 

[andrewpmk]

Think Kalinowski read the TTC's charts wrong. Their standard chart indicates that subway maxes out at 30,000 while ROW LRT maxes at 12,000. She reported the maximums as minimums.

Also I think that 12,000 is very difficult for LRT to achieve with the Transit City design. To achieve this you need crossing arms, gates, long trains that are similar in length to subway trains, and grade separated pedestrian crossings for pedestrians to cross the street (similar to Calgary and Edmonton). Also remove all the minor stops. Until TC is redesigned so that it is similar in design to the Calgary and Edmonton systems, I refuse to support it because they will struggle to carry 6,000 passengers/hour if it is designed like St. Clair or Spadina. Even so, I think that the need for a transfer at Eglinton & Kennedy is a problem (because the Eglinton LRT can only run every 4-5 minutes, the SRT needs to run every 2 minutes because it is packed, the Eglinton tunnel west of Laird runs every 2 minutes because it will be packed, the unreliability caused by having a surface section will force the lines to be separated for service reliability reasons).

My opinion is that the line should be elevated from Don Mills to Kennedy and that the airport extension (also elevated/trenched) needs to be done now. All proposals for light rail should be scrapped. The TTC's belief that subways need to be massively overcrowded to be successful is ridiculous, e.g. the Spadina line is less heavily used north of St. Clair West but building light rail would have been very short sighted and the light rail has 1/4-1/2 the capacity and would have become severely overcrowded. Light rail supporters in this city seem to be extremely rabid - e.g. Hume's absurd proposal to build a surface streetcar along the central part of Eglinton. Face it: Toronto is a huge city; no light rail line in existence is capable of carrying as many people as the number of cars who currently use Highway 401 (around 14000-18000 an hour per direction assuming 2000/lane, well into subway territory).

 

[vz64]

vz64:

While I have issues with how LRTs are being used, the consensus among planning experts is that capacity isn't the issue for the lines envisioned. If it was a decision undertaken from a business perspective, I have a feeling you won't even see any improvements on Sheppard at all.

AoD

My point was not about when and how we hit a capacity limits on those planned LRT routs; I was more concerned with one dominant mean of public transportation proposed as a comprehensive long-term solution... A comprehensive plan would include DRL, some BRTs, and definitely, many LRTs. The Sheppard Line was a mistake, I agree, but was SELRT a priority or was it just a way to kill any possibility of extending this artificially handicapped line? Who was a planning expert behind SELRT?