2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Transit Plans

[ehlow]

At the moment I could not support extending Eglinton.

If you read the ECLRT's Travel Demand Forecasting Report, a westward extension of the ECLRT of approximately 12 KM west to YYZ would have an AM peak hour ridership of only 2,900 at the peak point (Jane).

This compares to a maximum loading point of 5,300 persons for the 13.5 KM SELRT and 3,400 for the 11 km FWLRT.

2,900 doesn't seem terrible to me, but I agree with you that it's not urgently needed.

What do you think of an express bus between the airport and Mt Dennis ECLRT station? Could be a good stopgap solution to build ridership for later.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

What do you think of an express bus between the airport and Mt Dennis ECLRT station? Could be a good stopgap solution to build ridership for later.

An HOV lane with express busses on Eglinton West sounds good to me.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Hypothetical situation...

What are people's thoughts if a Mayor Tory announced that Sheppard East won't be continued due to hopes that the subway will eventually be extended instead. In return, the Finch LRT will be fully-built from Finch (on the Yonge line) all the way to Humber College?

Tory would be better off abandoning his support for the Scarborough Subway, using the money for the Scarb Subway to bury the entire ECLRT and joining SRT and ECLRT into one line. This provides the most value for money for Eglinton/Scarborough transit (see Option 1 on page 7)

 

[CDL.TO]

If Sheppard East ends up with three "intervening opportunity" points where someone can transfer from surface transit LRT to a faster rapid transit service (those being Don Mills, Agincourt, and McCowan), it's really going to fundamentally change travel patterns along Sheppard.

Right now as designed, the Sheppard LRT will serve both local trips as well as serving as a feeder to the Sheppard Subway. We expect that the "peak point" for utilization will be at Don Mills station. But with people getting off the LRT at McCowan and Agincourt as well, unless there are absolutely massive levels of intensification, that "peak" is going to be seriously flattened out. In addition, bus services are likely to be reorganized to serve Agincourt and McCowan/Sheppard stations directly, making the attractiveness of transferring from a bus to the LRT even less desirable than today.

I don't have the means to crunch the numbers myself, but I would wager that as long as we're using that transit capacities chart as the basis of our choice of mode, RER/SmartTrack and/or the Danforth extension will actually weaken the case for the SELRT, not bolster it.

 

[sixrings]

At the moment I could not support extending Eglinton.

If you read the ECLRT's Travel Demand Forecasting Report, a westward extension of the ECLRT of approximately 12 KM west to YYZ would have an AM peak hour ridership of only 2,900 at the peak point (Jane).

This compares to a maximum loading point of 5,300 persons for the 13.5 KM SELRT and 3,400 for the 11 km FWLRT.

I don't like the idea of finch and Eglinton extensions being delayed indefinitely. If lrt Is suppose to be so inexpensive above ground to build why are they being delayed at all. I can understand second guessing the Sheppard subway because extending it is a fortune but the lrt should at least gave an extension start date

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I don't like the idea of finch and Eglinton extensions being delayed indefinitely. If lrt Is suppose to be so inexpensive above ground to build why are they being delayed at all. I can understand second guessing the Sheppard subway because extending it is a fortune but the lrt should at least gave an extension start date

Yes LRTs are cheap, but we don't have infinate amounts of money. We still need to prioritize what we're building. Extending Finch and Eglinton isn't very high on the list.

 

[sixrings]

Yes LRTs are cheap, but we don't have infinate amounts of money. We still need to prioritize what we're building. Extending Finch and Eglinton isn't very high on the list.

1 I miss transit city
2 I want a network not stubwork
3 raise my taxes, toll my car

 

[nfitz]

2,900 doesn't seem terrible to me, but I agree with you that it's not urgently needed.

To Jane perhaps. But look at what happens west of there. By the time you get to the end, you've got an AM peak westward of 0. Now obviously there's some reverse peak going on ... but even the ridership in the opposite direction is in the hundreds, rather than the thousands.

 

[sixrings]

To Jane perhaps. But look at what happens west of there. By the time you get to the end, you've got an AM peak westward of 0. Now obviously there's some reverse peak going on ... but even the ridership in the opposite direction is in the hundreds, rather than the thousands.

I just don't think it is wise for lines to arbitrarily end if we want to encourage transit use. The more stubs will mean the more transfers. It would just seem logical that all the lines should be starting or ending at yonge subway since that is technically the middle of the city.

 

[BurlOak]

Tory would be better off abandoning his support for the Scarborough Subway, using the money for the Scarb Subway to bury the entire ECLRT and joining SRT and ECLRT into one line. This provides the most value for money for Eglinton/Scarborough transit (see Option 1 on page 7)

Are you saying that Council abruptly cancelled the Ford=-McGuinty compromise without having adequate information. Then a few months after Council makes their decision, this report shows that the Ford-McGuinty compromise was actually the best option.
No wonder this report has not been publicized. It sheds light on how wrong Council was. Why was this report not referred to in 2013 when Stintz, DeBaermaker, and the Liberals resurrected the Scarborough Subway?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Are you saying that Council abruptly cancelled the Ford=-McGuinty compromise without having adequate information. Then a few months after Council makes their decision, this report shows that the Ford-McGuinty compromise was actually the best option.
No wonder this report has not been publicized. It sheds light on how wrong Council was. Why was this report not referred to in 2013 when Stintz, DeBaermaker, and the Liberals resurrected the Scarborough Subway?

This isn't a new report. It's been around for years.

And no, Council did not make the wrong decision. Their choices were:

A) Cancel SELRT & FWLRT and redirect funds to an underground ECLRT with continuous SRT
B) Build ECLRT, FWLRT & SELRT

Option B was the correct choice. Building ECLRT, FWLRT & SELRT will move more people for less money.

Today, we have a very different decision to make. The options are:

A) Cancel eastward extension of Line 2, redirect the funds to refurbishing the SRT and making it a continuous line with an underground ECLRT
B) Build the eastward extension of Line 2 and the ECLRT (surfacing @ Don Mills)

In this case option A is the best choice. It would be cheaper, would eliminate the Kennedy transfer and moves about the same number of people.

 

[WislaHD]

If Sheppard East ends up with three "intervening opportunity" points where someone can transfer from surface transit LRT to a faster rapid transit service (those being Don Mills, Agincourt, and McCowan), it's really going to fundamentally change travel patterns along Sheppard.

Right now as designed, the Sheppard LRT will serve both local trips as well as serving as a feeder to the Sheppard Subway. We expect that the "peak point" for utilization will be at Don Mills station. But with people getting off the LRT at McCowan and Agincourt as well, unless there are absolutely massive levels of intensification, that "peak" is going to be seriously flattened out. In addition, bus services are likely to be reorganized to serve Agincourt and McCowan/Sheppard stations directly, making the attractiveness of transferring from a bus to the LRT even less desirable than today.

I don't have the means to crunch the numbers myself, but I would wager that as long as we're using that transit capacities chart as the basis of our choice of mode, RER/SmartTrack and/or the Danforth extension will actually weaken the case for the SELRT, not bolster it.

This is essentially my position as well. Sheppard East can easily do with a BRT line instead of LRT.

 

[sixrings]

This isn't a new report. It's been around for years.

And no, Council did not make the wrong decision. Their choices were:

A) Cancel SELRT & FWLRT and redirect funds to an underground ECLRT with continuous SRT
B) Build ECLRT, FWLRT & SELRT

Option B was the correct choice. Building ECLRT, FWLRT & SELRT will move more people for less money.

Today, we have a very different decision to make. The options are:

A) Cancel eastward extension of Line 2, redirect the funds to refurbishing the SRT and making it a continuous line with an underground ECLRT
B) Build the eastward extension of Line 2 and the ECLRT (surfacing @ Don Mills)

In this case option A is the best choice. It would be cheaper, would eliminate the Kennedy transfer and moves about the same number of people.

I do not know how you can assume that if you chose A that it would not possibly result in a cancelled Finch LRT.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

This is essentially my position as well. Sheppard East can easily do with a BRT line instead of LRT.

Umm... no, Sheppard East can't "easily" do with BRT.

The Sheppard-Finch LRT Benefits Case has the maximum loading point of the Sheppard LRT at 5,300 passengers per hour per direction. To help you better visualize that, it would require an LRV train of approximately 62 metres in length (two thirds the length of the trains on the Sheppard Subway; double the length of our new streetcars) arriving once every 3 minutes (same frequency as Line 1 & Line 2 during rush hour) to accommodate that ridership.

To move that same amount of people on a BRT, you'd need to have one of the TTC's new articulated busses arriving once every 50 seconds in both directions. The size of the bus fleet would have to be 3.3 times greater than the LRT. The operational and maintenance costs of that would be enormous, and would be a logistical nightmare to have transit signal priority working reliably (causing travel delays) with one bus passing through an intersection every 25 seconds. The thing would need to be replaced with a light rail solution on day one.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

This isn't a new report. It's been around for years.

And no, Council did not make the wrong decision. Their choices were:

A) Cancel SELRT & FWLRT and redirect funds to an underground ECLRT with continuous SRT
B) Build ECLRT, FWLRT & SELRT

Option B was the correct choice. Building ECLRT, FWLRT & SELRT will move more people for less money.

Today, we have a very different decision to make. The options are:

A) Cancel eastward extension of Line 2, redirect the funds to refurbishing the SRT and making it a continuous line with an underground ECLRT
B) Build the eastward extension of Line 2 and the ECLRT (surfacing @ Don Mills)

In this case option A is the best choice. It would be cheaper, would eliminate the Kennedy transfer and moves about the same number of people.

I do not know how you can assume that if you chose A that it would not possibly result in a cancelled Finch LRT.

Which Option A are you talking about?