Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[W. K. Lis]

Maybe we should have a look at the Green Line in Boston, Massachusetts for comparison purposes. Keeping in mind that it is the oldest "subway" line in North America, opening in 1897. See link.

The Green Line is a light rail system run by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) in the Boston, Massachusetts, metropolitan area. It is the oldest Boston subway line, and with tunnel sections dating from 1897, the oldest in America. It runs underground through downtown Boston, and on the surface on several radial boulevards and into inner suburbs. With an average daily weekday ridership of over 204,000 in 2017, it is the second most heavily used light rail system in the country.

The four branches are the remnants of a large streetcar system, which began in 1856 with the Cambridge Horse Railroad and was consolidated into the Boston Elevated Railway several decades later. The Tremont Street Subway – the oldest subway tunnel in North America – opened its first section on September 1, 1897, to take streetcars off overcrowded downtown streets; it was extended five times over the next five decades. The streetcar system peaked in size around 1930 and was gradually replaced with trackless trolleys and buses, with cuts as late as 1985. A new branch opened on a converted commuter rail line in 1959; the Green Line Extension project will add two new branches into Somerville and Medford in 2021.

It includes underground subway stations.

and surface stops.

The big difference is that it includes branches that go in different directions. We transfer.

 

[BurlOak]

Maybe we should have a look at the Green Line in Boston, Massachusetts for comparison purposes. Keeping in mind that it is the oldest "subway" line in North America, opening in 1897. See link.





It includes underground subway stations.

and surface stops.

The big difference is that it includes branches that go in different directions. We transfer.

I assume its the branches that have the on-street portion.
If Eglinton would have had branches, people could have understood a central underground portion with at-grade branches.
For the Eglinton design, there was no talk of branches, and no way to really implement them in the future.

 

[BurlOak]

Should have had an option for underground lrt in center section with less surface lrt stops. As a lrt supporter I don't even like the surface sections.

I voted "Light tunneled subway or metro", although good parts of it would have been elevated.

 

[hw621]

Maybe we should have a look at the Green Line in Boston, Massachusetts for comparison purposes. Keeping in mind that it is the oldest "subway" line in North America, opening in 1897. See link.





It includes underground subway stations.

and surface stops.

The big difference is that it includes branches that go in different directions. We transfer.

Does it have to wait at traffic lights?

 

[BurlOak]

Does it have to wait at traffic lights?

Looking at that map - it has four branches. Assuming 2 minute frequency at the centre, that means 8 minutes on the branches. At 8 minute frequency, it can likely run on-street like a streetcar.

 

[Streety McCarface]

I created a poll here to get a (biased) idea of what people feel the Eglinton Line should have been.

I'd say it should have been a full-fledged subway based on ridership estimates for 2031...It will have daily ridership comparable to the BD line (300K PPD on the 19 km line vs 500K on the 30 km line). It may not have the same levels of peak traffic, but you can guarantee that 3 car LRV trains are going to be packed all day every day. This is not how transit should be built; the problem isn't solved.

 

[hw621]

Looking at that map - it has four branches. Assuming 2 minute frequency at the centre, that means 8 minutes on the branches. At 8 minute frequency, it can likely run on-street like a streetcar.

See the problem is I don't consider trains that have to wait for traffic light rapid transit, or is that just me....

 

[Voltz]

I'd say it should have been a full-fledged subway based on ridership estimates for 2031...It will have daily ridership comparable to the BD line (300K PPD on the 19 km line vs 500K on the 30 km line). It may not have the same levels of peak traffic, but you can guarantee that 3 car LRV trains are going to be packed all day every day. This is not how transit should be built; the problem isn't solved.

How can you guarantee that the LRV's are going to be packed all day? As I recall the peak point ridership is only expected to be something like 5000 per hour per direction. That's not even half way to being full.

 

[Streety McCarface]

How can you guarantee that the LRV's are going to be packed all day? As I recall the peak point ridership is only expected to be something like 5000 per hour per direction. That's not even half way to being full.

For an opening year ridership, that's huge. Also, they heavily overstate the capacity of the LRT system they're building. A LFLRV can only carry about 120 passengers, 3 can carry 360 passengers. Assume 20, 3 car trains per hour, that's a capacity of 7,200 PPDPH. Again, they're building a system that will be almost 70% full by the time it's running at its maximum. Do you see the problem with this type of mindset? They built more expensive tunnels (yet admittedly cheaper stations) for a system that might be at capacity within 10 years.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Here's a view out the front of a MBTA Green Line C branch "train". Views of the underground stations and the surface stops. Make note of the transit signals and the lack of English signs explaining that they are "TRANSIT SIGNALS", because they look different.

 

[Voltz]

For an opening year ridership, that's huge. Also, they heavily overstate the capacity of the LRT system they're building. A LFLRV can only carry about 120 passengers, 3 can carry 360 passengers. Assume 20, 3 car trains per hour, that's a capacity of 7,200 PPDPH. Again, they're building a system that will be almost 70% full by the time it's running at its maximum. Do you see the problem with this type of mindset? They built more expensive tunnels (yet admittedly cheaper stations) for a system that might be at capacity within 10 years.

No, that number is for 2031, and I went and double checked, it is 5500 per hour per direction.

Do you really think that no one involved in the past 10 years of planning and design that this line has been going through has noticed that this line would be full from day one but has said nothing?

 

[sixrings]

Well I would have been happy with a dixon lrt that ran into the central eglinton underground corridor and then reemerge out at lawrence east and Victoria Park. But apparently the city doesn't like to run branches.

 

[JSF-1]

Well I would have been happy with a dixon lrt that ran into the central eglinton underground corridor and then reemerge out at lawrence east and Victoria Park. But apparently the city doesn't like to run branches.

I don't blame them since running branches does complicate service and requires pretty good scheduling and if the TTC's bus routes are anything to go by, LRT lines with branches would be equally as bad. As well lets face there's a sizable portion of transit users that are a few bricks shy of a full load. Apparently having a automated voice telling you where the bus is going is not enough, and reading the front sign is to hard; you still end up with people getting on the wrong bus.

 

[BurlOak]

I don't blame them since running branches does complicate service and requires pretty good scheduling and if the TTC's bus routes are anything to go by, LRT lines with branches would be equally as bad. As well lets face there's a sizable portion of transit users that are a few bricks shy of a full load. Apparently having a automated voice telling you where the bus is going is not enough, and reading the front sign is to hard; you still end up with people getting on the wrong bus.

Each branch gets a different colour. Eglinton is Orange, Dixon-Eglinton-Lawrence is something else. I'm not sure we will have so many rapid transit lines that we will run out of colours.

 

[micheal_can]

I assume its the branches that have the on-street portion.
If Eglinton would have had branches, people could have understood a central underground portion with at-grade branches.
For the Eglinton design, there was no talk of branches, and no way to really implement them in the future.

There is no talk of branches for any of the rail transit, be it LRT. Streetcar, Subway or GO. All lines are separate. At this point, there is no line of any of those services that could take a branch on it without severely harming service on the branches.