News   Dec 23, 2024
Happy Holidays From All of Us at UrbanToronto!
 1.3K     0 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 4.1K     11 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1.4K     4 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

alexanderglista said:
Here's the "old" map. Same station numbers but you're right, this line will really be rapid.

Finch_West_LRT_Map_EN-850x550.jpg
Click to expand...

Given that these trains will be stuck waiting in traffic for the lights to turn green, I feel this has as much chance of being "really rapid" as the Spadina streetcar. With such frequent spacing it'll likely spend more time stopping than actually moving.

I think projects like this really undermine the credibility of LRTs with the public.
 
Avenue said:
Given that these trains will be stuck waiting in traffic for the lights to turn green, I feel this has as much chance of being "really rapid" as the Spadina streetcar. With such frequent spacing it'll likely spend more time stopping than actually moving.

I think projects like this really undermine the credibility of LRTs with the public.
Click to expand...

Both the Finch West and Eglinton LRTs will have signal priority, so hopefully this won't be a big problem.
 
signal priority of some form.

I expect you will see them rarely have to stop at minor intersections, but they won't be flying through the major ones like Jane, Weston, Albion, etc. The effect of 100% signal priority on those intersections would be too great.
 
Avenue said:
Given that these trains will be stuck waiting in traffic for the lights to turn green, I feel this has as much chance of being "really rapid" as the Spadina streetcar. With such frequent spacing it'll likely spend more time stopping than actually moving.

I think projects like this really undermine the credibility of LRTs with the public.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't characterize waiting 80s (or less) at a major intersection as being "stuck".

Spadina streetcar has much closer stop spacing, something like 250m, vs 670 m for Finch LRT. Traffic lights for cross streets are much more frequent there as well. Spadina streetcar is slow because of those factors, while for Finch West we can expect medium speed, about 25 - 27 kph with the current stop spacing. Slower than a subway, but comparable to an express bus in mixed traffic.

Perhaps they can give the LRT near-absolute priority at the intersections with minor streets having just some local traffic. Few cars that use those streets may have to wait 2 or 3 min more, but there would be no traffic backups.
 
Can they please just leave the names as the cross streets? Anything other than that on an LRT is just ridiculous. It was bad enough on Eglinton.
 
Can someone point me to LRT examples in North America (in operation) that is similar to the future Finch West LRT?

Thanks
 
Rainforest said:
I wouldn't characterize waiting 80s (or less) at a major intersection as being "stuck".
Click to expand...

Objectively this is quite valid, but subjectively the cadence of LRT is part of the customer sell. People relate well to subway because it has a zoom, stop, get moving again cadence. When a subway train creeps, or dwells in stations, you can see peoples' impatience factor grows rapidly, even if the creep only adds a few sconds to the trip time.

My fear with our new LRT lines is that the stops, whether platform stops or traffic related, will set the tone of a liesurely plod that is closer to current streetcar than 'rapid' transit. If so, people will not see LRT as good value. Even worse, if this style of operation gets into the operating culture, you will see schedules padded and timekeeping neglected. The 'need for speed' needs to be cemented in LRT from the design onwards. Objectively, we may be quibbling over 3 or 4 minutes in trip time, but subjectively those minutes matter a great deal.

- Paul
 
crs1026 said:
The 'need for speed' needs to be cemented in LRT from the design onwards. Objectively, we may be quibbling over 3 or 4 minutes in trip time, but subjectively those minutes matter a great deal.

- Paul
Click to expand...
Objectively, three minutes on a 30 minute ride is 10% longer journey time. There and back. Five days a week for someone who works full time. 30 extra minutes a week. Twenty six hours in a year. A whole extra day of someone's life.

This is not quibbling.
 
Last edited:
Rainforest said:
I wouldn't characterize waiting 80s (or less) at a major intersection as being "stuck".
Click to expand...

crs1026 said:
Objectively this is quite valid, but subjectively the cadence of LRT is part of the customer sell. People relate well to subway because it has a zoom, stop, get moving again cadence. When a subway train creeps, or dwells in stations, you can see peoples' impatience factor grows rapidly, even if the creep only adds a few sconds to the trip time.

My fear with our new LRT lines is that the stops, whether platform stops or traffic related, will set the tone of a liesurely plod that is closer to current streetcar than 'rapid' transit. If so, people will not see LRT as good value. Even worse, if this style of operation gets into the operating culture, you will see schedules padded and timekeeping neglected. The 'need for speed' needs to be cemented in LRT from the design onwards. Objectively, we may be quibbling over 3 or 4 minutes in trip time, but subjectively those minutes matter a great deal.

- Paul
Click to expand...

TransitBart said:
Objectively, three minutes on a 30 minute ride is 10% longer journey time. There and back. Fives days a week for someone who works full time. 30 extra minutes a week. Twenty six hours in a year. A whole extra day of someone's life.

This is not quibbling.
Click to expand...

I've said before that seconds matter when building transit.

So many transit projects are built on the premise that it'll save commuters 10 minutes or so. But when you consider that [insert random transit proposal] will require commuters to walk another 3 minutes to the station, then spend 2x 90 seconds descending/ascending from platform level, and that headways are 2 min less frequent than whatever is being replaced, suddenly the 10 minutes saved becomes a meagre 2 minutes saved.

Indeed, there are cases where the introduction of rapid transit can lead to increased trip times, such as with certain trips on the Eglinton Crosstown, or the one-stop Scarborough Subway.
 
crs1026 said:
...
My fear with our new LRT lines is that the stops, whether platform stops or traffic related, will set the tone of a liesurely plod that is closer to current streetcar than 'rapid' transit. If so, people will not see LRT as good value. Even worse, if this style of operation gets into the operating culture, you will see schedules padded and timekeeping neglected. The 'need for speed' needs to be cemented in LRT from the design onwards. Objectively, we may be quibbling over 3 or 4 minutes in trip time, but subjectively those minutes matter a great deal.

- Paul
Click to expand...

This fast?

Or like this fast?
When there is less motor vehicles to get in the way of streetcars.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top