Transit City Plan

[gweed123]

I have also decided to put into graphic form what I was describing with respect to the Finch XPress BRT a few pages back. There was a pretty lengthy (and fun) debate on it, so I figured I would put what I'm proposing into graphic form.

There are 4 overlapping services along the corridor:

1) The local bus service that currently operates. Naturally frequencies will be reduced, but it will still be there to service the stops in between the XPress stops.

2) The All-Day XPress BRT route. Runs from Malton Station to Sheppard-McCowan Station.

3) The Central Section XPress route, which runs from Jane & Finch to Seneca, during peak only. The purpose of this route is to give people boarding in the central section a relatively empty bus to board if the XPress buses coming from further out are already full. This type of service is heavily implemented in Ottawa, where routes like the 95X run an abbreviated version of the full 95 route (usually from Baseline to Hurdman as opposed to Barrhaven to Orleans). It's a God-send for people boarding further up the line.

4) The Outer Section XPress route, with Central Section bypass. Basically the exact reverse of the Central Section route. Runs from the end of the line to where the Central route starts, and then runs express to Finch & Finch West stations (and between the two). Very useful for people who get on way down the line, but don't want to sit through every stop on their way to the subway).

Both the Central and Outer section routes run only during peak hours, when demand is highest.

IMO, this type of system offers far more flexibility and service for all of Finch compared to an LRT that would be on 1/2 of Finch West.

 

[nfitz]

To further what I described above, I'll post a couple quick graphics that I did earlier that illustrate the downtown section, and more specifically the Union section, because from the system map it can be a bit confusing.

An interesting idea.

I'd proposed something similar once, but on the west side, by extending the University line down York, putting the new platform under York and the station. I wonder if that would give you shorter walking distances.

The trick is how to do it and minimizing impact to the existing lines. Hopefully the new crossing structure is away from the existing track, so it could all be built without any impact to the existing lines. And then you would need minimal shut-downs for where the track is joined, similar to how there are few shutdowns occurring to join in that new track segment just south of Downsview station.

 

[gweed123]

An interesting idea.

I'd proposed something similar once, but on the west side, by extending the University line down York, putting the new platform under York and the station. I wonder if that would give you shorter walking distances.

The trick is how to do it and minimizing impact to the existing lines. Hopefully the new crossing structure is away from the existing track, so it could all be built without any impact to the existing lines. And then you would need minimal shut-downs for where the track is joined, similar to how there are few shutdowns occurring to join in that new track segment just south of Downsview station.

Hmm, very interesting idea, I hadn't really considered having the Yonge line being the one to use Union. I was always working with the assumption that it would be the University-Don Mills line using the existing Union.

The good thing with all of these DRL options is that there aren't really very many bad options (unless it's something really wacky). It's all varying degrees of good options.

I'm assuming you would be running the University line down and then having it run along either Lakeshore or the Waterfront and then curve back up to Pape? With the Yonge line running west under Front?

Both of those options would serve the Rogers Centre well, but I guess you have to ask whether or not there is more ridership potential on Front St or on Bremner. Again, both very good options.

In terms of the tracks, what I envision with my proposal is the existing Yonge line dipping under the SDM (Spadina-Don Mills) line that would continue eastbound under Front. That would be at the same level as the existing tracks, while the new Yonge tracks would dip underneath. For the arrangement at King, I would think it would be a lot like the upper platform of St. George. Right after leaving the station, there would be the option to have trains turn right (west, or in the case of St. George, north), or continue straight and go down a level.

I just hope that the slope wouldn't be too steep to actually allow tracks to duck underneath the existing ones, or whether it would be like climbing the side of a mountain. I know it would be a decent climb, I just don't know if it would be too much for subway cars to handle. If under your plan you wanted to keep the existing track connection between St. Andrew and Union, I would imagine a similar type of arrangement would need to be built.

 

[nfitz]

I'm assuming you would be running the University line down and then having it run along either Lakeshore or the Waterfront and then curve back up to Pape? With the Yonge line running west under Front?

Something like that. Though ultimately, I think you do this AND build under Queen. So what goes up to Pape? And at some point, something has to go up Spadina as well between King/Queen and Bloor.

 

[gweed123]

Something like that. Though ultimately, I think you do this AND build under Queen. So what goes up to Pape? And at some point, something has to go up Spadina as well between King/Queen and Bloor.

I definitely agree. Although like I've said, I think Queen is more suited to an Eglinton-like underground LRT, especially when you consider the at-grade extension opportunities (Lake Shore and the Queensway), which would work perfectly with LRT.

And I meant that the University line would go east and then north again to connect to B-D at Pape-Danforth.

You're suggesting that the Yonge line loop back up Spadina to Bloor? I'm much more partial to pushing it further west to Dufferin, or at the very least to Bathurst. Eventually, I can see the downtown density pushing itself further west to nearly Bathurst (it's almost to Spadina now).

If you're thinking really long term, maybe something that goes down Spadina, across Wellington or King or Adelaide, then up Parliament. Something that kind of wraps itself around the near edges of the downtown density cluster.

 

[nfitz]

I definitely agree. Although like I've said, I think Queen is more suited to an Eglinton-like underground LRT, especially when you consider the at-grade extension opportunities (Lake Shore and the Queensway), which would work perfectly with LRT.

Possibly, if you don't run it up to Danforth. If you run it to Danforth, it would have to be heavy subway to handle the load.

You're suggesting that the Yonge line loop back up Spadina to Bloor?

No, not in particular. I'm just saying something is going to have to be built under Spadina sooner or later. I really think the demand is going to push the current line to the limit, even after the new LRV is running. I'm not judging what it should be. Heck, perhaps you run the existing Spadina subway down Spadina ...and do something else with University north of Bloor. I'm just thinking big picture here ... what segments do we think will need subway one day, rather than how to link them together.

 

[gweed123]

Possibly, if you don't run it up to Danforth. If you run it to Danforth, it would have to be heavy subway to handle the load.

What I was thinking is that the DRL and the Queen line would be two different projects. The DRL would run from Union (assuming the Union X proposal) along either Front or the Esplanade, and then up the rail corridor to Pape-Danforth. For the Queen line, it would start in the west as both the Queensway and Lakeshore LRTs, and then merge and run under Queen, through downtown, until it meets the DRL at Queen in Riverdale. From there, it would dip south and emerge in-median on Lake Shore out to Woodbine Beach, with a branch possibly running into the redeveloped Portlands. The Queen LRT would be pretty much exclusively for the 'South of Bloor' crowd, thus wouldn't be at subway-level demand.

No, not in particular. I'm just saying something is going to have to be built under Spadina sooner or later. I really think the demand is going to push the current line to the limit, even after the new LRV is running. I'm not judging what it should be. Heck, perhaps you run the existing Spadina subway down Spadina ...and do something else with University north of Bloor. I'm just thinking big picture here ... what segments do we think will need subway one day, rather than how to link them together.

Totally agree, especially if the current densification of the area between Spadina, Bloor, the lake, and the Don continues. Both Spadina and Parliament are going to need something more than a streetcar. Whether that's underground LRT or a subway remains to be seen, but something will be needed.

 

[innsertnamehere]

If this version Of the DRL were to infect be built, I feel that an underground streetcar route would need to be built on queen from king/queen In then west to king/queen in the east. This would allow for a local rapid transit network to run along queen with short stop spacing (5-600m) to serve pent up demand on that corridor. Would be the perfect place to run the WWLRT as well. King street streetcars could probably be rerouted into this, and would allow for reduced vehicular traffic congestion as both king and queen would become streetcar free in the core.

 

[ssiguy2]

The Finch BRT line has far, far too many stops. The thing that makes the BLine so successful is that it knew the kind of service it was to provide. The stations should, on average, be approx 1km apart and nothing more. If they are too frequent it becomes, and will be seen as just another bus. Vancouver view the BLine routes are true rapid transit which this bus [nor the Finch or Sheppard LRT lines} will not be.

 

[nfitz]

Both Spadina and Parliament are going to need something more than a streetcar.

I wouldn't go to far on Parliament. I do take the Parliament bus currently during rush-hour to get to work (when the 504 fails me). It only runs every 16 minutes, and based on the ridership I see, they don't need to run it that frequently!

Sherbourne is much busier. Broadview is much busier. Heck, Coxwell is much busier.

 

[gweed123]

The Finch BRT line has far, far too many stops. The thing that makes the BLine so successful is that it knew the kind of service it was to provide. The stations should, on average, be approx 1km apart and nothing more. If they are too frequent it becomes, and will be seen as just another bus. Vancouver view the BLine routes are true rapid transit which this bus [nor the Finch or Sheppard LRT lines} will not be.

I see your point. I was trying to strike a balance between speed an accessibility, and I figured that with the different types of services running along the corridor (especially during rush hour), that a few more stops wouldn't make a big difference if riders were able to bypass half the route.

I do suppose I can change it so that there's maybe 1 mid-block stop between the two concession roads. 2 mid-block stops for denser areas.

I wouldn't go to far on Parliament. I do take the Parliament bus currently during rush-hour to get to work (when the 504 fails me). It only runs every 16 minutes, and based on the ridership I see, they don't need to run it that frequently!

Sherbourne is much busier. Broadview is much busier. Heck, Coxwell is much busier.

I would argue that the situation with Parliament is very much a chicken and egg scenario. The service isn't that frequent, and is slow as molasses. As a result, people walk to the nearest streetcar line or walk to the nearest subway station. I used to live just north of Wellesley and Sherbourne, and I have a friend now who lives along Parliament midway between Carlton and Wellesley. For an area that is so central in Toronto, the transit connections there are pretty crappy, especially when you consider what the equivalent west end area has (being the Spadina and Bathurst streetcars). At least I was fortunate enough to be a decent walk away from Sherbourne Station. But from my friend's place along Parliament, to get downtown you're either looking at a 10 min walk up to Castle Frank, a 15 min walk to Wellesley or College stations, or a 5 min streetcar ride to College (assuming you time the streetcar right). Plenty of options, but none of them are really that great.

Put some kind of underground rapid transit under Parliament, and not only would you see a huge shift in the travel patterns (including a drop in pressure on the streetcar network in the area), it would give a lot more focus to the development that is happening in the area.

I can see rapid transit under Parliament as being incredibly useful for the residents there now, for people looking for an alternative route downtown, and for development in the area.

 

[drum118]

The Finch BRT line has far, far too many stops. The thing that makes the BLine so successful is that it knew the kind of service it was to provide. The stations should, on average, be approx 1km apart and nothing more. If they are too frequent it becomes, and will be seen as just another bus. Vancouver view the BLine routes are true rapid transit which this bus [nor the Finch or Sheppard LRT lines} will not be.

I guess you will love pushing your walker 1.5km or using your cane to get to these 1km stops if you don't live on Finch 100%????

If you draw a circle of 500m around these stops, you will see areas that will be not cover by good walking distance. Since most roads are not grid on either side of Finch, walking becomes a lot of back tracking to get to a stop to the point people will stay in the car or go out and get one.

With the aging population coming on line, walking will become a major issues for them, as well younger ones.

People are so fix on speed of transit that they fail to understand getting to/from stops out weight the speed of transit. What good is it if you save 5 minutes of travel time if it takes you an extra 10 minutes to get you to the stop and where you are going?? With today bean counter, they will see a need to increase headway to cover the cost ratio to the point riders will see longer travel time caused by waiting for a bus at stops.

It is great to say Vancouver stops are the way to go for Toronto, but Vancouver does not get the snow and coldness as Toronto.

In Europe you will find stop spaces for LRT/Trams all over the place from 300m to 2km and that has to do with both density and how people can get to/from stops. Even normal bus stops are the same way.

With BRT, you can do overlapping of services from local to express all day long and this will encourage more people to take the bus to the point they can transfer from a local to an express or vise verse to shorten their travel time.

If one look at the 103 on Hurontario St, you can see this today with the lower headway for the 103 and 19. I even have done it both ways where I will take the 19 to an 103 stop and get on the 103. Doing this will save me 10 minutes travel time, even waiting for the 103 to arrive. Using an 103 to a 19 stop and using the 19 for a few stop is faster than using the 19 for the full trip or having to walk to where I want to go from a 103 stop.

 

[Electrify]

Hudak’s agenda revives Toronto subway debate

ELIZABETH CHURCH

The Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Oct. 17 2012, 3:00 AM EDT
Last updated Wednesday, Oct. 17 2012, 3:09 AM EDT

Click Here

As Ontario’s governing Liberals started searching for a new leader, Progressive Conservative chief Tim Hudak arrived at City Hall with a campaign-style transit-funding agenda that could reopen the debate over building a Scarborough subway.

“Where funds are available, a PC government will build underground,” Mr. Hudak said, making it clear that would include redirecting some of the $8.4-billion now earmarked for a network of light-rail lines, the former Transit City plan.

It’s a pledge with the potential to ignite an issue most considered settled earlier this year when Mayor Rob Ford lost his case for subways during a dramatic council vote. But just as the city is about to sign a final agreement with the province on its light-rail plan, signs are growing that the debate is far from over.

Toronto is embarking on public consultations about new ways to finance transit, and with local politicians asking residents to consider paying new tolls or taxes, many expect subways to be at the centre of those discussions.

“A Scarborough subway has to be back on the table,” said Scarborough councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker, the TTC vice-chair and a long-time supporter of the light rail plan. Mr. De Baeremaeker dismissed Mr. Hudak’s promise to redirect the $8.4-billion in transit funding to subways, but said any new funds should go to replacing the aging Scarborough rapid transit line with a subway rather than light rail as planned.

That option was part of the One City plan Mr. De Baeremaeker and TTC chair Karen Stintz put forward this summer. While council rejected that plan, Mr. De Baeremaeker wants to put his Scarborough subway option back on the table next summer when council considers the staff report on transit funding. The cost of moving from light rail to subways, he estimates, is about $500-million.

“I don’t think it is over,” he predicted. “There is the opportunity to open up that debate if you can bring money to the table.”

Councillor Michelle Berardinetti, who also represents a Scarborough ward, said it would be hard to ask her residents to pay extra to fund transit, but not direct any of that money to subways in Scarborough. “It’s not going to fly,” she said. “I think that we have to have another look at it. I do.”

Ms. Stintz said on Tuesday that the city is still in negotiations with the province’s transit agency, Metrolinx, on the agreement for the light-rail lines. The final deal is expected to go to the mayor’s executive committee on Nov. 5, then the Toronto Transit Commission and council later in the month.

The $8.4-billion light rail plan was approved by council earlier this year over the objections of Mr. Ford and was passed by the provincial Treasury Board this summer.

“As far as I am concerned, those deals have been done, those lines have been confirmed. That is the expressed will of city council,” said Ms. Stintz, who met with Mr. Hudak on Monday, but did not attend his Tuesday news conference.

“We need to build transit in this city. We can’t spend more time debating the decisions that have already been made,” she said.

Provincial Transportation Minister Bob Chiarelli also said he considers the transit issue closed. “The train has left the station,” he said in a statement. “Toronto city council has voted overwhelmingly to support the Metrolinx plan and we already have shovels in the ground.”

The Eglinton portion of that plan is under construction, but work on the Sheppard Avenue line will not begin until 2014. A replacement for the Scarborough Rapid Transit line is scheduled to start after the Pan American Games in 2015, Mr. De Baeremaeker said. Work on Finch Avenue is set for 2015.

Asked whether he would halt work on Sheppard and Finch Avenues, Mr. Hudak said that would depend on the timing of the next election. “I’m clear-eyed and practical about this,” he said. “I’m going to leave the door open if there are dollars on the table and it is feasible to put money underground.”

But Councillor Doug Ford said Mr. Hudak’s promise means Scarborough residents can once again start thinking about subways. He also held out hope that the debate could be reopened at City Hall, saying some councillors who supported light rail are now “born-again subway believers.”

“It’s time to build subways, not antiquated streetcars,” Mr. Ford said. “It’s time for the people of Scarborough to be heard.”

When asked about funding options, Mr. Hudak said on Tuesday he does not favour imposing tolls on existing highways.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...revives-toronto-subway-debate/article4617529/

You know, I might give Hudak an ear IF he apologized for voting to cancel the Eglinton subway 20 years ago. If he did this, I might actually hear him out and assume that there was a chance that he did care about Toronto getting the best transit possible, rather than simply using this as cover to cancel a completed transit plan because public transit is for losers and socialists.

Maybe.

 

[nfitz]

You know, I might give Hudak an ear IF he apologized for voting to cancel the Eglinton subway 20 years ago.

Why would he apologize? He's just promised to cancel the Eglinton line again, and then at some future date when the province no longer has a deficit (very far in the future, given he's also promised to reduce taxes) to build subway.

Like Harris, he'd cancel big projects like Eglinton first, before building subway later on (even Harris paid for a portion of the Sheppard subway - eventually).

 

[rbt]

You know, I might give Hudak an ear IF he apologized for voting to cancel the Eglinton subway 20 years ago. If he did this, I might actually hear him out and assume that there was a chance that he did care about Toronto getting the best transit possible, rather than simply using this as cover to cancel a completed transit plan because public transit is for losers and socialists.

I read it as Hudak wanting to cancel Eglinton again.

He very clearly stated that all projects should be cancelled and funds reclaimed until the deficit is eliminated; at which point subways would be considered. It's entirely possible to have a tunnel for a decade without trains or stations if he wants to defer those funds.


Toss in the promise for tax cuts, health-care improvements, etc. and you get a situation where the deficit will not be eliminated until the end of his first term at best. So, a short subway extension (~5km) might be available after election date + 4 years (Hudak 1st term) + 8 years (design/construction).

I might even be retired before the next subway segment opens (aside from Spadina).