News   Jun 12, 2024
 62     0 
News   Jun 12, 2024
 150     0 
News   Jun 12, 2024
 301     0 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

Thanks. What your both basically saying and confirming is that is the critics of these projects have a point. Average speeds of 22-23, thats really slow. And, when you add stops at traffic lights, you have a very slow commute with many torcherous stops. Anyone who has every used a city bus, will tell you the most frustrating thing about buses is how slow they are at getting from point A to point B and that the frequent stops have an adverse psychological impact on you. That, and overcrowding is what sets you in bad frame of mind. Other than the overcrowing factor, this Finch line project will ultimately deliver the same kind of service as busses did.

This is why i have never believed that, at grade LRT or streetcar service will ever do anything to improve property values. Property values are higher near the subways lines because you can get downtown faster and get you to work or school faster.

Finch West is the busiest bus corrior in the City. Demand for transit on the corrior outstrips the capacity that busses can provide. The LRT was needed unless we want to be forcing people off transit.

The Finch LRT isn't the fastest line in the city, but it will be substantially speedier than what is offered today. For reference, total trip times from Higway 27 to Finch West Stationby mode:
Subway: 20 minutes
Light rail: 27 minutes
Bus: 35 minutes
 
Thanks. What your both basically saying and confirming is that is the critics of these projects have a point. Average speeds of 22-23, thats really slow. And, when you add stops at traffic lights, you have a very slow commute with many torcherous stops. Anyone who has every used a city bus, will tell you the most frustrating thing about buses is how slow they are at getting from point A to point B and that the frequent stops have an adverse psychological impact on you. That, and overcrowding is what sets you in bad frame of mind. Other than the overcrowing factor, this Finch line project will ultimately deliver the same kind of service as busses did.

This is why i have never believed that, at grade LRT or streetcar service will ever do anything to improve property values. Property values are higher near the subways lines because you can get downtown faster and get you to work or school faster.

You don't build transit to improve property values, you build transit to move people and spur development/
The Finch West LRT will be a vast improvement over the Finch Bus. My main complaint is that the LRT should be going all the way to Yonge, but I guess riders can travel to Finch West Station to board.
 
You don't build transit to improve property values, you build transit to move people and spur development/
.
Exactly, you are supposed to build transit to move people. But if its slow because it has too many stops thats means its not moving people effectively and efficiently. For strictly comparative purposes, at 20-23 kms per hour, thats about the speed that decent marathoners run or good joggers/ runner who do 10km runs attain. Thats too slow for moving people via any kind of form transit or transportation.

Development is determined and occurs where there is an expectation of increased property values. In the absence of that, there is no development. Developers are business people. As such, they can and will only respond to market demand.

Its the proponents on these projects that are saying that its will increase property values, not me.
 
Last edited:
You don't build transit to improve property values, you build transit to move people and spur development/

You really think that there is not a correlation between improving property value and spurring development? You don't think there is a correlation to spurring development and moving people?
 
The Finch LRT isn't the fastest line in the city, but it will be substantially speedier than what is offered today. For reference, total trip times from Higway 27 to Finch West Stationby mode:
Subway: 20 minutes
Light rail: 27 minutes
Bus: 35 minutes
All those numbers, which by the way i have read in the metrolinx reports, are really contingent on the number of stops. But they dont really highlight that. They tilt the discussion by comparing their numbers to the downtown subway, where there are more stops. But overall, if you take for example, yonge and sheppard to King and yonge by subway. Thats 30 mins by subway and that's roughly 20-25 Kms. So the coverage really means 40-50 kms per hour. But you dont see that mentioned in any reports.
 
Last edited:
You really think that there is not a correlation between improving property value and spurring development? You don't think there is a correlation to spurring development and moving people?
Hmm.. Can i just ask kindly that you re read my posts.
 
They tilt the discussion by comparing their numbers to the downtown subway, where there are more stops.

The average speed of all of Line 2, with the sole exception of Victoria Park to Kennedy, is approximately 29 to 31 km/h. It's not a downtown thing.

All those numbers, which by the way i have read in the metrolinx reports, are really contingent on the number of stops. But they dont really highlight that

Of course it's contingent on the number of stops. What many people don't understand is that transit trips do not start and end when the customers boards and alights the vehicle. "The last mile" (aka, walking/bussing time to your destination) also has to be factored in.

For the Finch West LRT, cutting stops down to once every 800 meters to 1000 metres would make the 10 km Highway 27 to Keele journey a negligible 3 minutes faster. But you'd be adding 3 to 5 minutes onto the walking time for tens of thousands of commuters. So the train would be faster, but you've made overall journey times longer.

And remember, the vast majority of riders will not be making the full 10 km trip. Somebody making a 5 km trip will only save 1.5 minutes of time on the train for their trip. But they'll still have several minutes of additional walking time due to the wider stop spacing. So for these more typical trips, you've added on significantly to the total journey time by having wider stop spacing.
 
The average speed of all of Line 2, with the sole exception of Victoria Park to Kennedy, is approximately 29 to 31 km/h. It's not a downtown thing.



Of course it's contingent on the number of stops. What many people don't understand is that transit trips do not start and end when the customers boards and alights the vehicle. "The last mile" (aka, walking/bussing time to your destination) also has to be factored in.

For the Finch West LRT, cutting stops down to once every 800 meters to 1000 metres would make the 10 km Highway 27 to Keele journey a negligible 3 minutes faster. But you'd be adding 3 to 5 minutes onto the walking time for tens of thousands of commuters. So the train would be faster, but you've made overall journey times longer.

And remember, the vast majority of riders will not be making the full 10 km trip. Somebody making a 5 km trip will only save 1.5 minutes of time on the train for their trip. But they'll still have several minutes of additional walking time due to the wider stop spacing. So for these more typical trips, you've added on significantly to the total journey time by having wider stop spacing.
I think we safely say that we can both go on in endless circles on this debate. I dont know if there is a right or wrong answer. For example, your looking hwy 27 to Keele. I could cite as example a student or teacher going home from Humber college to somewhere in the city whereby they will connect to a subway line. Are that many stops with the potential time spent of half a hour or 45 mins on that line going to encourage someone to give up driving or not long to get a car?. Hmmm. I suppose we will have to see. But i dont think so.

Personally, i have no objection to walking 5-7 minutes to get to my transit station or stop. In that time i could cover 1/2 a kilometer. I believe very confidently that adding just two stops and factoring in reduced speeds due to decelation arriving at stops on my route will match that 5-7 mins. If you add more than two stops than that, then my overall commute times increases. Obviously i have not gone out there and measured this :) .

PS.: in regards to those models or studies. One needs to remember one importnt thing about studies and models. That is that the input values/factors/ assumptions will affect the output values.. And that the principle that "The one who pays the piper gets to call the tune" applies. In other words i can make a study or model say anything or come up with anything you want me to if you pay me for it. I see this in every place of work that i have been at. You could apply this to the decsions in regards to how many stops you should have on a transit line. Behind the scenes, you can be sure there were politicians ultimately deciding this.
 
Last edited:
Of course it's contingent on the number of stops. What many people don't understand is that transit trips do not start and end when the customers boards and alights the vehicle. "The last mile" (aka, walking/bussing time to your destination) also has to be factored in.

Maybe we shouldnt be making the assumption that people are not factoring in "The last mile" when asking for less stops. Perhaps they would rather walk a bit further than have so many stops when on transit. For myself I find many stops on a commute much more frustrating then how I get to the actual station.
 
Maybe we shouldnt be making the assumption that people are not factoring in "The last mile" when asking for less stops. Perhaps they would rather walk a bit further than have so many stops when on transit. For myself I find many stops on a commute much more frustrating then how I get to the actual station.
Yup. Me too. And i know that many feel the same. I would rather walk ten minutes and save 10 minutes on the commuting line as opposed to having a stop at my doorstep but spending an extra ten minutes on the commuting line.
 
Last edited:
PS.: in regards to those models or studies. One needs to remember one importnt thing about studies and models. That is that the input values/factors/ assumptions will affect the output values.. And that the principle that "The one who pays the piper gets to call the tune" applies. In other words i can make a study or model say anything or come up with anything you want me to if you pay me for it. I see this in every place of work that i have been at. You could apply this to the decsions in regards to how many stops you should have on a transit line. Behind the scenes, you can be sure there were politicians ultimately deciding this.

This is 100% true.

Once it was decided to not grade separate a transit line, it became too tempting for politicians, and the transit experts that they influence, to add extra stops and prove that there would be only benefits in doing so.
 
Yep,

I preferred the old ICTS route in the hydro corridor. From Weston Road, westward, I would have probably gone elevated above Finch to Humber, instead of going directly to YYZ as originally planned. In the East, it would go all the way to Malvern (Finch and Morningside), where it meets the end of the Eglinton-Scarborough line.

Now with the LRT station already roughed in at Finch West Station, I have not firmly committed to a route, although I haven't thrown out the idea of elevating entirely along Finch. By the time we get a change in government and a chance to look at this with a clear mind, I imagine it will likely be too late and we would be locked into the on-street LRT route.
With this route, I actually agree with the mid-block stops. Without the speed and reliability of grade-separation, this will be more of a local line and you may as well have additional stops on a local line. Distance travel will have to be accommodated with SmartTrack or RER.
 
You want Finch to be grade separated?
Its my view that at grade transit like LRT/streetcar has no place as a transit option in the inner burbs. For a whole host reasons and since i have to head off to the TFC game, i dont have time elaborate now. But that doesnt mean that you cant make this line work by making the best out of bad idea. They did that with eglinton crosstown by eventaully burying part of it in the more dense areas. Overall It makes sence and seems accepable now and will add value by improving transit overall in my opinion.

You can make this line (Finch) more viable by at least reducing the number of stops. I dont know exactly what that number is but like i said earlier, an average of one stop for every kilometer seems to make sense to me. My argument is centred around commute times.
 
Definitely think both sides in this argument are valid, and both have their pros and cons. Grade-separating the entire route provides higher speeds, higher capacity, more reliability; but costs significantly more and offers less local service. Tram-style offers more local service and costs considerably less; but has slower speeds, less reliability, and lower capacity. As for development, both have their benefits (one being higher-density but more nodal around stations, the other being more low/midrise stretched along the arterial)...both great, with the latter being a bit more realistic IMO.

This is why I think an Eglinton Crosstown-style premetro/stadtbahn solution can work in this instance. We get tram-style in the outer ends, but grade-separate the central portion. I also think over the decades we should do the same with our legacy streetcar system (501, 504, 505, 506), and attempt the same for waterfront transit. Nothing as exorbitantly costly like the Crosstown (with a whopping 10km of deep bore tunnel, and some very costly stations that no doubt will remain underused for centuries). Rather a few km of tunnel, cut/cover, or trenched.

Already posted this map in this thread, but since BurlOak brought up the Hydro Corridor I thought it'd be fitting to post again. I think it's a fantasy map that's worth pursuing. We get the best of both types of transit, grade-separation can be done affordably, and we fix the Sheppard Stub once and for all (by converting it for LRVs). The only change to the SELRT and FWLRT would be to use high-floor LRVs (and stops) in place of the low-floor Flexity Freedom.

rect3908-png.66716

rect3898-png.66717
 

Back
Top