Hurontario LRT | Metrolinx

drum118

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,092
Reaction score
10,317
Location
Mississauga, where cars rule city growth
How much extra lanes improve traffic basically operates on a log graph. Reducing a 4 lane road to a 2 lane road is a MASSIVE deal. Meanwhile reducing a 6 lane road to a 4 lane road, eh, doesn't do nearly as much, especially on a regular major street (this is different than for instance on a highway), so its not a fair comparison.

Also, digging a tunnel under Yonge? Neat. To bad it will never happen 😟
So you want transit underground so you can zoom along streets with no care in the world that transit riders must be rats as they will see no daylight or see what taking place on the street in the first place doing so.

Transit is slow in mix traffic and a ROW takes up more space to offer a faster trip. Both Brampton and RH need to remove on street parking and learn to live with the standard 1 lane road they use today. All you are doing is removing the on street parking and turning it into a traffic lane that will run next to the LRT/BRT ROW, so what is the different??

Where do you plan to put the 1.8 to 2.2 million more cars on the road by 2040 when today roads can't deal with what we have today???
 

rbt

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
6,717
Reaction score
2,401
Surprised at how accommodating the 407 has been. Are they allowing this construction purely as good PR? Doesn't the 407's contract with the province forbid the construction of mass transit projects near or on 407 property?

No. The 407 agreement has a non-compete with regard to future highway construction but that's about it.
 

ARG1

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
608
Reaction score
1,571
So you want transit underground so you can zoom along streets with no care in the world that transit riders must be rats as they will see no daylight or see what taking place on the street in the first place doing so.

Transit is slow in mix traffic and a ROW takes up more space to offer a faster trip. Both Brampton and RH need to remove on street parking and learn to live with the standard 1 lane road they use today. All you are doing is removing the on street parking and turning it into a traffic lane that will run next to the LRT/BRT ROW, so what is the different??

Where do you plan to put the 1.8 to 2.2 million more cars on the road by 2040 when today roads can't deal with what we have today???
Now you're quite literally making the "Bramptonians will forever live in darkness". argument. Rapid Transit underground is almost always faster than Rapid Transit on the street in its own ROW. Ignoring the fact there are less stops, underground/grade separated transit is less likely to have interference from outside sources such as cars stuck turning left, or poorly timed streetlights (don't respond with Signal Priority, since I've never seen that work perfectly, EVER), and the speed of LRTs travelling in a ROW in the middle of the street is always slower than underground or on an elevated guideway. When I travel on RT, I would much rather be underground than in a street median. Period.
 

Wm Perkins Bull

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
124
Reaction score
164
Location
Brampton, ON
Now you're quite literally making the "Bramptonians will forever live in darkness". argument. Rapid Transit underground is almost always faster than Rapid Transit on the street in its own ROW. Ignoring the fact there are less stops, underground/grade separated transit is less likely to have interference from outside sources such as cars stuck turning left, or poorly timed streetlights (don't respond with Signal Priority, since I've never seen that work perfectly, EVER), and the speed of LRTs travelling in a ROW in the middle of the street is always slower than underground or on an elevated guideway. When I travel on RT, I would much rather be underground than in a street median. Period.
The underground section is under 3 km, any speed difference is going to be marginal, but the cost is $1.7 billion instead of $0.4 billion ($400 million).
 

jys

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
165
Reaction score
137
Location
Mississauga
How much extra lanes improve traffic basically operates on a log graph. Reducing a 4 lane road to a 2 lane road is a MASSIVE deal. Meanwhile reducing a 6 lane road to a 4 lane road, eh, doesn't do nearly as much, especially on a regular major street (this is different than for instance on a highway), so its not a fair comparison.
Hey there, your facts are probably correct and your thinking is great ... for a highway. I ask you to kindly take into consideration that we are talking about main (literally Main) street here. Instead of focusing on level of service (traffic throughput), let's also think about safety and walkability. Sure, removing a lane might significantly reduce the level of service, but it just so happens that the best urban streets all have terrible level of service. Traffic moves slowly, and people feel safe to walk along the street.
With this reduction in lanes, downtown Brampton will become more pedestrian-friendly and more urban.. and wait! Isn't this exactly what they're trying to achieve? A more vibrant downtown?
:)
p.s. I hesitate to use the world 'disaster'. Time and time again, local and global examples have proven that when you take lanes away (or road becomes more 'congested'), people driving will simply change their habits, be it taking an alternative route or switching to another mode of transportation.
 

Transportfan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
467
I don't think people are afraid of walking along a street just because its four lanes. Also, if an area is undesirable, narrowing a street is not likely to gentrify it.
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,844
Reaction score
2,779
Hey there, your facts are probably correct and your thinking is great ... for a highway. I ask you to kindly take into consideration that we are talking about main (literally Main) street here. Instead of focusing on level of service (traffic throughput), let's also think about safety and walkability. Sure, removing a lane might significantly reduce the level of service, but it just so happens that the best urban streets all have terrible level of service. Traffic moves slowly, and people feel safe to walk along the street.
With this reduction in lanes, downtown Brampton will become more pedestrian-friendly and more urban.. and wait! Isn't this exactly what they're trying to achieve? A more vibrant downtown?
:)
p.s. I hesitate to use the world 'disaster'. Time and time again, local and global examples have proven that when you take lanes away (or road becomes more 'congested'), people driving will simply change their habits, be it taking an alternative route or switching to another mode of transportation.

That's exactly why surface LRTs can be so valuable. They're at odds with a suburban lifestyle, but can really help 'urbanize' a strip. That's why I haven't had a problem with the surface portions of the Eglinton LRT in Scarborough - it should really enhance the area from that perspective.
 

drum118

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,092
Reaction score
10,317
Location
Mississauga, where cars rule city growth
Thinking back to various places I been in Europe, Praha stands out as a city with 3 types of Tram service from mix traffic to pure ROW. The one things with Praha mix traffic, it had curb parking and very little traffic on the tracks to slow the Trams down compare to here.

Some cities had one lane of traffic next to an ROW while others have one or 2 lanes with no on street parking.

We been so fix since the 50s on the car that they must be the king of the road and transit needs to get out of their way, that we fail to see what it does to the city as a whole.

When we looked at the QQW from day one, the thought was the new street going to be 2 or 4 lanes and after many debates, it was to become 2 lanes. When it went to the public the first time during the EA, the plan was about 49-51 for the plan. We went back and had a second look to the point various counting measure were use to determined real numbers for everything at various point including checking vehicles plates to see where they were coming from in the first place. Based on vehicles counts, 65% of traffic where using QQ to bypass traffic on the Gardiner and Lake Shore. Based on the data we could go back to the public to say there was enough road space for a single lane of traffic to service the local area as well visitors to the area.

Regardless if the road is 2-6 lanes, it what exist along the road to say it a safe area to walk or not. Been in a number of cities where it wasn't safe to walk the street.

It boils down do we waste tons of money building tunnels to allow a small percentage of people to drive on the surface compare to taking that same amount and building more KM of RT or beefing up service or expanding the system?? The pols only look at what will it take to get elected or stay in office with no experience using transit nor real understand it.
 

Wm Perkins Bull

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 4, 2020
Messages
124
Reaction score
164
Location
Brampton, ON
$1.3billion to keep a few hundred parking spaces on street? Ridiculous. Build an underground garage or two if needs be.
There are five city owned parking facilities, downtown, and when I asked them if the parking garages have ever reached 95% full, they couldn't say. And the parking facilities are already heavily subsidized at only $308 a year, with most of it being used by employees who receive a further 50% off.

High speeds mean high traffic noise, which makes it really unpleasant to walk or be on the street.
Now what would it be like if we turned the section into a transit mall, closed to cars, but allowing buses to go through, and the side lanes are used to widen the sidewalk, and add bike lanes?
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
4,844
Reaction score
2,779
Thinking back to various places I been in Europe, Praha stands out as a city with 3 types of Tram service from mix traffic to pure ROW. The one things with Praha mix traffic, it had curb parking and very little traffic on the tracks to slow the Trams down compare to here.

Some cities had one lane of traffic next to an ROW while others have one or 2 lanes with no on street parking.

We been so fix since the 50s on the car that they must be the king of the road and transit needs to get out of their way, that we fail to see what it does to the city as a whole.

When we looked at the QQW from day one, the thought was the new street going to be 2 or 4 lanes and after many debates, it was to become 2 lanes. When it went to the public the first time during the EA, the plan was about 49-51 for the plan. We went back and had a second look to the point various counting measure were use to determined real numbers for everything at various point including checking vehicles plates to see where they were coming from in the first place. Based on vehicles counts, 65% of traffic where using QQ to bypass traffic on the Gardiner and Lake Shore. Based on the data we could go back to the public to say there was enough road space for a single lane of traffic to service the local area as well visitors to the area.

Regardless if the road is 2-6 lanes, it what exist along the road to say it a safe area to walk or not. Been in a number of cities where it wasn't safe to walk the street.

It boils down do we waste tons of money building tunnels to allow a small percentage of people to drive on the surface compare to taking that same amount and building more KM of RT or beefing up service or expanding the system?? The pols only look at what will it take to get elected or stay in office with no experience using transit nor real understand it.

That paragraph perfectly sums up everything wrong with transit planning in the GTA today.
 

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
18,619
Reaction score
7,499
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
You don't need tunnels, just run it in mixed traffic in that short section.

Unfortunately, there are people who say having light rail vehicles will spoil the "historical" vista of Brampton's downtown. (Not really, in my opinion.) Some people think the LRT will ruin Brampton. Maybe they expect to see that barbarians from Mississauga will be invading them.


From link.
 

Top