News   Apr 19, 2024
 4.9K     1 
News   Apr 19, 2024
 1.3K     4 
News   Apr 19, 2024
 2.1K     4 

407 Transitway

When people speak LRT,I am trying to understand what is meant. Would the REM in Montreal be considered LRT? Could this line be part of GO's RER?
There is definetely some confusion in the discussion here- my latest post was describing the initial LRT provision design for the transitway, which effectively was calling for typical LRVs as seen today on Finch etc. The new “interregional LRT” is more of a bad name for what is being envisioned as a rail service (coinciding with the OL, so presumably light metro, not LRT) that is regional in scope.

The initial “real” LRT option would’ve been forced to act like a trunk line for feeding LRT routes which isn’t awful, but not realistic or much of an improvement as it shifts away from regional travel.
 
Given the demand difference, it might be like every 4th or 5th continues on, with most turning back. It might make sense to go with shorter stations and trains, and run higher frequency, to keep costs down. It is going to be a very long line, though maybe not that many stations.
I think this was the point of distinguishing the OL loop from the entire 407 line. The loop section (roughly from the 427 to the 404) would see more service and likely more stops, while everything else (the 403 and eastern/western 407 segments) would be part of the distinct regional service. Imo this is a tad redundant today with VIVA unless we accept that this will take 30 years to build and VIVA will need replacing, which arguably is more true for the Mississauga section to Markham, not just RHC-Pearson.
 
Imo this is a tad redundant today with VIVA unless we accept that this will take 30 years to build and VIVA will need replacing, which arguably is more true for the Mississauga section to Markham, not just RHC-Pearson.
Replacing Highway 7 Viva with something that runs in the 407 corridor would be like replacing the Sheppard subway with something that runs in the 401 corridor. They are not walking distance from each other

On the other hand, if you run a hypothetical Ontario line extension along Highway 7, you wouldn't need any of the reserved 407 transitway land for that, except maybe for another trainyard
 
This should be a GO line, not a TTC line considering the interregional importance it would have. I agree that OL capacity isn't really needed north of Sheppard, and we could get away with shorter trains. Basically GO ALRT 2.0 at this point
 
This should be a GO line, not a TTC line considering the interregional importance it would have. I agree that OL capacity isn't really needed north of Sheppard, and we could get away with shorter trains. Basically GO ALRT 2.0 at this point
I think you're catching on to the ethos of this scheme... it simultaneously allows the province to justify taking full ownership/control of the OL, achieves long-held goals of a 905 orbital line, and allows the government to capitalize on current investments until full buildout- which will be a long time. Even as a scribble on a map, this says a lot. It's an actionable version of GO ALRT.

Replacing Highway 7 Viva with something that runs in the 407 corridor would be like replacing the Sheppard subway with something that runs in the 401 corridor. They are not walking distance from each other

On the other hand, if you run a hypothetical Ontario line extension along Highway 7, you wouldn't need any of the reserved 407 transitway land for that, except maybe for another trainyard
Maybe replacement wasn't the right word. It's more of a supplement to offset the need to directly upgrade VIVA. Building the OL along/above Hwy 7 makes this way more expensive, turns VIVA redundant and pushes things well out of the realm of feasibility imo. The whole concept for both the OL and now the Interregional LRT (Im just gonna call it the '407 IRT' from now on) is to seemingly build a lot of transit on the cheap by going elevated to get out/through Toronto and following highway ROWs at-grade for the rest, all while using small automated trains.

In any case, I do think in Mississauga the Transitway will be fully replaced, however. Too valuable of an asset to leverage seeing as it is grade-separated.
 
I think this was the point of distinguishing the OL loop from the entire 407 line. The loop section (roughly from the 427 to the 404) would see more service and likely more stops, while everything else (the 403 and eastern/western 407 segments) would be part of the distinct regional service. Imo this is a tad redundant today with VIVA unless we accept that this will take 30 years to build and VIVA will need replacing, which arguably is more true for the Mississauga section to Markham, not just RHC-Pearson.
Viva isn't a particularly fast service, and moreso exists as a local service to serve developments and more specific areas. To make an analogy, its like how the Ontario Line isn't replacing or being redundant with the service offered by the Queen Streetcar, they exist to serve different needs and purposes.

To compare/contrast, Viva Orange RHC <--> VMC is ~29m, the 407 go bus services RHC <--> H407 are half that at ~14m.
 
Ok, now I am confused. keeping Viva the same stop frequency, if it were LRT, how could the 407 LRT/whatever it is going to be, be of any use?
 
Ok, now I am confused. keeping Viva the same stop frequency, if it were LRT, how could the 407 LRT/whatever it is going to be, be of any use?
For one, I'd have to assume that stops would be minimum 2-3km apart, preferably more. For example, between VMC and RHC, I could really only see a stop at the future Concord station and maybe Bathurst. There will never be enough demand for LRT on the VIVA orange, especially if we build this anyway.
 
For one, I'd have to assume that stops would be minimum 2-3km apart, preferably more. For example, between VMC and RHC, I could really only see a stop at the future Concord station and maybe Bathurst. There will never be enough demand for LRT on the VIVA orange, especially if we build this anyway.
Where the Viva follows highway 7, doesn't it have stations about 2km apart?
 
Ok, now I am confused. keeping Viva the same stop frequency, if it were LRT, how could the 407 LRT/whatever it is going to be, be of any use?
First, even if we assume they have similar stop spacings, Viva even as an LRT would be a median tramway, where even with the strongest TSP would be subject to speed restrictions due to the on street format. Second, Viva Orange isn't exactly an alignment built for speed. Instead of Following Highway 7, it diverts south onto Bathurst before serving the developing area of Promenade, then following Centre. The goal is less to provide a super fast regional connection, but rather to spur development (it is a development tool first and foremost), and feed people in these developments to the subway (VMC). Whilst I'm not going to call Viva necessarily a purely "local" route, its still for the most part an intra-regional artery.

The 407 Line meanwhile should best be looked at as a circumferential GO line, serving large scale regional trips, going from RHC to MCC or the Airport.

To offer a point of comparison, even after GO Expansion is built, nobody would look at the Barrie Line and wonder why that's necessary when Viva Blue exists, that would be absurd.
 
First, even if we assume they have similar stop spacings, Viva even as an LRT would be a median tramway, where even with the strongest TSP would be subject to speed restrictions due to the on street format. Second, Viva Orange isn't exactly an alignment built for speed. Instead of Following Highway 7, it diverts south onto Bathurst before serving the developing area of Promenade, then following Centre. The goal is less to provide a super fast regional connection, but rather to spur development (it is a development tool first and foremost), and feed people in these developments to the subway (VMC). Whilst I'm not going to call Viva necessarily a purely "local" route, its still for the most part an intra-regional artery.

The 407 Line meanwhile should best be looked at as a circumferential GO line, serving large scale regional trips, going from RHC to MCC or the Airport.

To offer a point of comparison, even after GO Expansion is built, nobody would look at the Barrie Line and wonder why that's necessary when Viva Blue exists, that would be absurd.

The 407 is in the middle of nowhere, and very wide, so it is not very walkable. Whereas, most of Highway 7 is walkable. The more I hear of this, the more pointless it sounds.
 
The 407 is in the middle of nowhere, and very wide, so it is not very walkable. Whereas, most of Highway 7 is walkable. The more I hear of this, the more pointless it sounds.
You're not wrong... however what I would ask is how necessary this really is.

I'm a very vocal on the idea that things like TOD, Urban Fabric, and walkability are extremely overrated when it comes to Transit discussions. While they are very important aspects, especially if we want more efficient infrastructure, thus leading to a more efficient economy, too many people these days seem to fall back to this idea that the only way for a transit line to make sense is if you can plop down Canary Wharf on top of it, which isn't true at all.

In General, one can describe 2 ways in which you can make a transit line/station successful:
1) Urban Fabric and Densification, where you create a neighbourhood/center that feeds off the existence of a transit connection, and build a core that makes doing your day to day tasks convenient.
2) You create a high quality service off the back of strong connections that lead you to those major urban neighbourhoods - and this is the important part.

Let's take a look at York Mills Station. If you weren't familiar with Toronto, you'd think that this station is completely pointless. While it does intersect a major street, the land use is horrible. Its in the middle of a flood plain, surrounded by a golf course, a gas station, some distant apartment buildings, and a small commerical complex at the intersection. Beyond it, its just swaths of detached single family housing. Despite that, back in 2019 it had a larger ridership than ANY STATION ON WASHINGTON DC'S METRO SYSTEM, INCLUDING TRANSFER STATIONS. It even had larger passenger counts than many Subway stations that are in dense urban areas that are fairly walkable and accessible such as Wellesley, and only slightly less riders than the very urban North York Centre. Now why is that? Why is this station in the middle of nowhere this used? Its because it has amazing bus connections that run every 5 minutes, making the station very convenient to access to by bus.

The same principle could easily apply to the 407 Line. Sure, its location means that for the most part its not going to be sitting next to dense walkable areas (although it will definitely serve major destinations such as RHC, Pearson, and MCC), but if it does its job at providing a very fast circumferential throughout the GTHA, then this won't matter. The way it will be used is:
1) You take the transit (either the bus, the subway, or go) to the line.
2) You take the line close to where your final destination is.
3) You then take local services again to reach your final destination.

In fact, we don't even need to theorize, the existing 407 GO Bus services are on their own some of the most used GO bus services on the network, because they do such a great job of providing a circumferential service in the region, especially since it travels on a lightly used highway thus meaning that travel times are relatively fast.

Now, would the line be better if instead of straddling the 407, it was instead tunneled under major arterials like Highway 7 in order to more directly serve more developments? Yes, it would. However, doing so would mean ballooning the costs of the project to levels that would simply be too expensive to justify - especially with current day construction prices. Remember, the line is meant to serve regional interests, not local. As such the need for people to take a feeder service to reach the line isn't that crucial. I don't see the reason to hike the price up tenfold, just to more directly serve some developments.
 
^Exactly this. Any highway-aligned transit line is kind of inherently going to have to be a trunk line for connecting bus and other transit lines. It would be very difficult to change the land use to make walk-up ridership justify the existence of the line. Perhaps bikes could extend the reach of the stations enough.

I think the vision should be to kind of enable trips like this...
 
Replacing Highway 7 Viva with something that runs in the 407 corridor would be like replacing the Sheppard subway with something that runs in the 401 corridor.

That's the perception you get when "highway" is a street's name and/or historical identity...
 

Back
Top