Eglinton East LRT | Metrolinx

[nfitz]

The stop spacing is actually pretty good, nothing like St Clair,

It's not in the slightest bit comparable to St. Clair. Looking at Sheppard, there's only 5 stops between McCowan and Morningside. That's about 825 metres between stops. St. Clair is about 285 metres.

Danforth from Kipling to Victoria Park is closer together - about 745 metres. And it's even tighter closer to downtown, and on much of Line 1 south of St. Clair.

I'm not sure what @Amare is looking at to make this conclusion.

 

[Amare]

It's not in the slightest bit comparable to St. Clair. Looking at Sheppard, there's only 5 stops between McCowan and Morningside. That's about 825 metres between stops. St. Clair is about 285 metres.

Danforth from Kipling to Victoria Park is closer together - about 745 metres. And it's even tighter closer to downtown, and on much of Line 1 south of St. Clair.

I'm not sure what @Amare is looking at to make this conclusion.

Based on what the city tried to pull with the Eglinton West extension when it was under its control, that's all the conclusion I need to assert that the city will make sure that this operates as slowly as possible including through the addition of new stops.

 

[CapitalSeven]

Hmm. IIRC Olivia Chow was personally responsible for keeping some of the extra stops towards the south end of Spadina in the 90s, so who knows. But I suspect the plan is to keep buses running from Sheppard/McCowan to the Zoo and Rouge Hill that the house dwellers along Sheppard could ride to the intermediate stops. There's not a ton of redevelopment potential there, unless at some point they start bulldozing whole SFH neighborhoods for towers.

 

[T3G]

The south end of the Spadina line isn't really the problem for the most part. King, Front, Bremner, Queens Quay are all locations it's worth having stops at.

The bigger problem, IMO, is the top end - Sussex and Harbord are so close to each other it's almost offensive (if really necessary, they could've split the difference and had one Sussex/Harbord stop midway between the two), and Harbord - Wilcocks is scarcely better. South of Spadina Circle, Nassau, Sullivan, and Richmond need to go, as does the pointless traffic light by Clarence Square, and also the one protecting the entrance into Queen's Quay loop. This would be a start, but the inane safety rules also need to go.

The other day, I had the misfortune of taking the 510 up and I noticed that at EVERY SINGLE track intersection that was also protected by traffic lights (i.e. King, Adelaide, Queen), after stopping at the traffic light, my driver would speed up to about 2 km/h after the lights cleared, then stopped for the switch, then proceeded again. I'm not sure if this guy was just an excessively paranoid nut, or if "respecting the traffic lights" cannot be combined with "stop/check/go" under TTC policy, but whatever it is, it's garbage.

 

[felix123]

whatever it is, it's garbage.

Yep, everything about TTC streetcar operations is garbage. It's Kafkaesque.

Still, I'm cautiously optimistic that with the new, not-awful mayor and the recently-released data on the King St trip times, plus the impending ouster of Rick Leary, that some sanity will be restored to the network in the next year or two.

 

[T3G]

I would like to share your optimism. Cynically, I would rather expect that once instituted, a safety rule would be exceedingly difficult to abolish. But I'd like to be wrong.

 

[felix123]

I would like to share your optimism. Cynically, I would rather expect that once instituted, a safety rule would be exceedingly difficult to abolish. But I'd like to be wrong.

You're absolutely right, a so-called safety rule would be hard to abolish because no one wants to be held responsible for a derailment, etc. But riders, both residents and visitors do notice how unnecessarily slowly our streetcars run.

My personal fave is a behind-schedule streetcar driver braking on a straight section of Bathurst st, with no cars ahead, no traffic lights and no bunching. It usually happens when the streetcar exceeds the dangerous speed of about 15 km/h. Truly insane behaviour.

I foresee that especially given the King St report, questions will be asked and eventually rules will be reviewed and changed. I just wish Toronto had a little more dynamism so that these changes would happen faster.

 

[adys123]

The south end of the Spadina line isn't really the problem for the most part. King, Front, Bremner, Queens Quay are all locations it's worth having stops at.

The bigger problem, IMO, is the top end - Sussex and Harbord are so close to each other it's almost offensive (if really necessary, they could've split the difference and had one Sussex/Harbord stop midway between the two), and Harbord - Wilcocks is scarcely better. South of Spadina Circle, Nassau, Sullivan, and Richmond need to go, as does the pointless traffic light by Clarence Square, and also the one protecting the entrance into Queen's Quay loop. This would be a start, but the inane safety rules also need to go.

The other day, I had the misfortune of taking the 510 up and I noticed that at EVERY SINGLE track intersection that was also protected by traffic lights (i.e. King, Adelaide, Queen), after stopping at the traffic light, my driver would speed up to about 2 km/h after the lights cleared, then stopped for the switch, then proceeded again. I'm not sure if this guy was just an excessively paranoid nut, or if "respecting the traffic lights" cannot be combined with "stop/check/go" under TTC policy, but whatever it is, it's garbage.

Agree mostly, except for the light at Clarence square that is an important component of the Wellington Street Cycle Track and a midblock crossing. Though, that light could be better timed to stop drivers when the following segment is not clear though. I would also say that Nassau is not the worst either.

You're absolutely right, a so-called safety rule would be hard to abolish because no one wants to be held responsible for a derailment, etc. But riders, both residents and visitors do notice how unnecessarily slowly our streetcars run.

My personal fave is a behind-schedule streetcar driver braking on a straight section of Bathurst st, with no cars ahead, no traffic lights and no bunching. It usually happens when the streetcar exceeds the dangerous speed of about 15 km/h. Truly insane behaviour.

I foresee that especially given the King St report, questions will be asked and eventually rules will be reviewed and changed. I just wish Toronto had a little more dynamism so that these changes would happen faster.

Yeah that must be for the midblock crossings, those also have a similar intersection speed restriction.

 

[felix123]

Yeah that must be for the midblock crossings, those also have a similar intersection speed restriction

Good point, I'll watch next time I'm on the 511 and see if this is the reason. Do buses do this?

 

[adys123]

Good point, I'll watch next time I'm on the 511 and see if this is the reason. Do buses do this?

They do not. There are additional safety protocols that exist for rail vehicles (that you will see on the LRT lines (when they open)) in Toronto just due to physics, which don't exist in bus operations. However, this is not to say that the TTC's streetcar safety protocols are not disappointing.

 

[felix123]

They do not. There are additional safety protocols that exist for rail vehicles (that you will see on the LRT lines (when they open)) in Toronto just due to physics, which don't exist in bus operations. However, this is not to say that the TTC's streetcar safety protocols are not disappointing.

Those physics being faster deceleration for buses? In the event of a sudden stop, passengers will get to experience flight for a short time in either vehicle.

In any case, I just want streetcars to run at or close to the road speed limit. If the driver anticipates a pedestrian getting ready to cross, then sure, slow down.

 

[Northern Light]

The south end of the Spadina line isn't really the problem for the most part. King, Front, Bremner, Queens Quay are all locations it's worth having stops at.

Agreed.

The bigger problem, IMO, is the top end - Sussex and Harbord are so close to each other it's almost offensive (if really necessary, they could've split the difference and had one Sussex/Harbord stop midway between the two), and Harbord - Wilcocks is scarcely better.

Agreed.

South of Spadina Circle, Nassau, Sullivan, and Richmond need to go

Yes to removing Sullivan and Richmond, disagree on Nassau. That's there to promote Kensington Market and make it easy for tourists to find, it does reasonable volumes yes, on the SB side its a bit close to College, but on the NB side the stops are ~300m apart; and if you removed Nassau you would push the distance between stops to well over 500M from College to Dundas.

By contrast Queen to King is under 400M, Queen to Dundas is just shy of 500M which is getting a bit high, but I think reasonable in the circumstances.

, as does the pointless traffic light by Clarence Square,

Disagree. That light is not pointless, it serves to connect the Wellington Bikeway to the Wellington Bikeway. Cyclists would have no practical way to cross without it.

and also the one protecting the entrance into Queen's Quay loop.

I'm inclined to get rid of this one too. I see its purpose, which is preclude cars blocking streetcar access to the loop. I think this would be better achieved by having the light only on the road (not the tracks); and properly sync'ing it with the light at Spadina. It could also be turned off during low traffic volume times.

 

[T3G]

Agreed.



Agreed.



Yes to removing Sullivan and Richmond, disagree on Nassau. That's there to promote Kensington Market and make it easy for tourists to find, it does reasonable volumes yes, on the SB side its a bit close to College, but on the NB side the stops are ~300m apart; and if you removed Nassau you would push the distance between stops to well over 500M from College to Dundas.

By contrast Queen to King is under 400M, Queen to Dundas is just shy of 500M which is getting a bit high, but I think reasonable in the circumstances.



Disagree. That light is not pointless, it serves to connect the Wellington Bikeway to the Wellington Bikeway. Cyclists would have no practical way to cross without it.



I'm inclined to get rid of this one too. I see its purpose, which is preclude cars blocking streetcar access to the loop. I think this would be better achieved by having the light only on the road (not the tracks); and properly sync'ing it with the light at Spadina. It could also be turned off during low traffic volume times.

Concerning these two lights - could they be activated by transponders or motion sensors of some kind? The amount of times I've found myself stuck on a car hitting a red despite no one being there is too high.

 

[Northern Light]

Concerning these two lights - could they be activated by transponders or motion sensors of some kind? The amount of times I've found myself stuck on a car hitting a red despite no one being there is too high.

On the Queen's Quay loop light, its such a mess..........

Lets look at it:

What does it do?

1) It protects streetcar access to the loop by blocking cars

2) Its protects left-hand turn access from the west to a residential parking garage

3) It protects a second private road/drive access on the north side

4) Its protects access to the underground parking and drive circle for the Spadina Quay residence on the south side.

What an unholy configuration!

Very hard to fix this whole thing, it was very poorly thought out.

 

[Johnny Au]

Even an occasional cyclist like myself can bike faster than the 510 Spadina streetcar and the streetcar driver admits that it is the case.