King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

[TheTigerMaster]

I think Torontonians overestimate how far behind we are. The Relief Line, GO RER, ECLRT, SELRT and FWLRT will put Toronto transit in an excellent position. After those are completed in a few years our most significant challenge should be ensuring that we have enough funding for operations. Any other capital expenditures will just be the icing on the cake.

 

[ehlow]

I think Torontonians overestimate how far behind we are. The Relief Line, GO RER, ECLRT, SELRT and FWLRT will put Toronto transit in an excellent position. After those are completed in a few years our most significant challenge should be ensuring that we have enough funding for operations. Any other capital expenditures will just be the icing on the cake.

Agreed. What I don't like is how often people point to Shanghai, Paris, London and NYC. We aren't even in the same ballpark as those cities in terms of population or density. We are a MUCH smaller city than those, we should not expect to have the same transit system.

The worst is when they use the phrase "world class" and show the subway maps to compare.

 

[ksun]

You compare Shanghai with London, but London has twice as many km of subway per rider than Shanghai.

Your number seems a bit off. May I ask what population did you use for London? Shanghai municipality is 6340 km sq, ten times as large as Toronto, and that's the land those 24 million people live on. You can't compare it with Greater London region (1572 sq km, 8.4M pop) or urban (2738 sq km, 10M pop) because those cover a much restricted area. It is more comparable to London metro, which is 8382 km sq, pop 15M (Great London Authority put it at 21M but let's not go there). Using 538km of subway for Shanghai and 402km for London, it is 22.4km/million for Shanghai, and 26.8km/million for London, a 20% difference. But Shanghai had its first subway in 1993, and London in 1863, a difference of 130 years.

Did you say "instead of investing in public transit infrastruture"? I am puzzled. You do know during the past 10 years Shanghai built 12 subway lines? It also built more than half a dozen under water tunnels as well as a few bridges linking Pudong and Puxi. The subway is still under rapid expansion. By 2020, total length is planned to 877 km, consisting of 22 lines (yes, another 8 lines in 6 years). That will be more than double what London has. And you know that when China says it is "planned" or "proposed", it will be completed 95% of the time. Other cities are doing the same to the extent local experts are worrying about subway overbuilding. And there is nothing wrong with building massive highways. According to the Economist, better highway system is a crucial advantage for China compared with India, which still doesn't have decent roads in many parts of the country. My hometown is 300 km from Shanghai. Used to take 9-10 hours, now it takes 4 hours door to door, and 1.6 million urban residents live there. How is better highway a bad thing?

I am not gonna fight with you over Toronto's transit results is "substantially superior to those in Shanghai". I am just one person against many who have never been to Shanghai. I can't win this battle.

I apologize for talking so much about China again. It was in responding to RC8's comments. When it comes to Transit City, I maintain my position that it was the right decision to be cancelled (despite not being a Ford fan). Toronto deserves something better and faster than a few 512 style LRTs here and there which will have to wait for traffic lights and have a stop every 500 meters. Most part is, none of these lines go directly to downtown, they all feed to the already crowded Yonge line. How does that make sense? Why can't they come up with something that goes from the suburbs to downtown directly?It will look good on paper (look we have xx km of rail transit) but in reality they simply can't move people efficiently and riders will be as dissappointed as when they take the slow moving 512. Additionally, the plan has nothing proposed between Front and Bloor, the entire booming downtown, which is a No-no for me. This kind of relates to this very thread, transitcity should have done something about the overacapacity issue of Queen/King yet it choose to just focus on the suburbs.

 

[ksun]

Agreed. What I don't like is how often people point to Shanghai, Paris, London and NYC. We aren't even in the same ballpark as those cities in terms of population or density. We are a MUCH smaller city than those, we should not expect to have the same transit system.

The worst is when they use the phrase "world class" and show the subway maps to compare.

True. Comparing with NYC and all those 20M level cities is silly.
Then Chicago and Madrid come into mind (both alpha city with similar population, instead of alpha+ or alpha ++, and in developed countries), and we are still behind.

 

[ehlow]

I apologize for talking so much about China again. It was in responding to RC8's comments. When it comes to Transit City, I maintain my position that it was the right decision to be cancelled (despite not being a Ford fan). Toronto deserves something better and faster than a few 512 style LRTs here and there which will have to wait for traffic lights and have a stop every 500 meters. Most part is, none of these lines go directly to downtown, they all feed to the already crowded Yonge line. How does that make sense? Why can't they come up with something that goes from the suburbs to downtown directly?It will look good on paper (look we have xx km of rail transit) but in reality they simply can't move people efficiently and riders will be as dissappointed as when they take the slow moving 512. Additionally, the plan has nothing proposed between Front and Bloor, the entire booming downtown, which is a No-no for me. This kind of relates to this very thread, transitcity should have done something about the overacapacity issue of Queen/King yet it choose to just focus on the suburbs.

Dude, 512 isn't the same thing as the transit city lines. St Clair/512 has both stops & traffic lights every 200 meters. Those traffic lights very often show red towards the streetcar.

Sheppard stop spacing is double that, and traffic lights are much further spaced too.

On Eglinton it's even more wider stop spacing and traffic light spacing. The average speed is double the St Clair streetcar, and the surface part will be significantly faster.

The wider stops & traffic lights are the faster the vehicle can go. This isn't even counting things like traffic signal syncing and downstream left turns (if that's still part of the plan).

 

[ehlow]

True. Comparing with NYC and all those 20M level cities is silly.
Then Chicago and Madrid come into mind (both alpha city with similar population, instead of alpha+ or alpha ++, and in developed countries), and we are still behind.

I don't necessarily know if I agree we're behind Chicago. Granted, I haven't spent a huge amount of time riding their system, but I've heard very bad things about their system. Also, Chicago by metro area is still like 50% bigger than Toronto (9 million vs 6 million).

I don't really see the point of this trend of constantly comparing us vs cities with huge transit systems and constantly worrying if we're "world class" or "alpha+" or not. We all know we need to expand our system.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I think Torontonians overestimate how far behind we are. The Relief Line, GO RER, ECLRT, SELRT and FWLRT will put Toronto transit in an excellent position. After those are completed in a few years our most significant challenge should be ensuring that we have enough funding for operations. Any other capital expenditures will just be the icing on the cake.

I would include Transit City Bus Plan (see link) and the other parts of Transit City as well. In addition, we need improvements to the Highway Traffic Act to allow for better laws to benefit public transit.

 

[ksun]

I don't necessarily know if I agree we're behind Chicago. Granted, I haven't spent a huge amount of time riding their system, but I've heard very bad things about their system. Also, Chicago by metro area is still like 50% bigger than Toronto (9 million vs 6 million).

I don't really see the point of this trend of constantly comparing us vs cities with huge transit systems and constantly worrying if we're "world class" or "alpha+" or not. We all know we need to expand our system.

I think it has been debated many times that you can't compare GTA (6M) with Chicagoland (9.8M) and say the latter is a 50% bigger. GTA is 2750 sq mi, Chicagoland is over 11,000 sq mi. The golden Horseshoe (12,000 sq mi) is more like Chicagoland, with 8.8M in 2011, probably over 9M now.

Chicago is bigger than Toronto probably by 10%.

You have heard very bad things about the system? Let's not do that to belittle other cities. Don't we always hear about bad things about the TTC too? All transits have many bad stories. Talk to anyone on the street and let's see how many nice things they have about TTC. The truth is, Chicago has a much more extensive rapid transit system with more affordable price Toronto would be lucky to possess in 20 years. Will our city have 8 lines (complete lines, not our Line 3 or line 4) totalling 165 km and 145 stations by 2035? Not likely.

I am sure people will say Chicago has much lower ridership. Chicago has lower ridership due to two reasons 1) the city is a lot less safe and many people will avoid take the subway, especially during certain time and in certain areas. For example, I will not take the red line south if I go there because it could be dangerous not because the transit is bad. and 2) it is a lot cheaper to drive in Chicago, so between suburbs people in Chicago would probably just drive while in Toronto, it makes more financial sense to take the bus. Again, has nothing to do with good or bad.

In transit, I am afraid we have to constantly compare ourselves to other cities. Why not? If not see the world, how do you know if we are behind and if there are things we can learn from? Every city constantly compares itself to a peer, even London and NYC compete all the time. It is in competition that a city improves. We don't need to desperately try to be alpha or alpha+ or world class, but it is a good thing we look at other cities' successful stories and find what we lack. If you have a kid, don't you want to know how she is doing among all the students, instead of just knowing the score she brings home?

 

[ehlow]

I think it has been debated many times that you can't compare GTA (6M) with Chicagoland (9.8M) and say the latter is a 50% bigger. GTA is 2750 sq mi, Chicagoland is over 11,000 sq mi. The golden Horseshoe (12,000 sq mi) is more like Chicagoland, with 8.8M in 2011, probably over 9M now.

Chicago is bigger than Toronto probably by 10%.

You have heard very bad things about the system? Let's not do that to belittle other cities. Don't we always hear about bad things about the TTC too? All transits have many bad stories. Talk to anyone on the street and let's see how many nice things they have about TTC. The truth is, Chicago has a much more extensive rapid transit system with more affordable price Toronto would be lucky to possess in 20 years. Will our city have 8 lines (complete lines, not our Line 3 or line 4) totalling 165 km and 145 stations by 2035? Not likely.

I am sure people will say Chicago has much lower ridership. Chicago has lower ridership due to two reasons 1) the city is a lot less safe and many people will avoid take the subway, especially during certain time and in certain areas. For example, I will not take the red line south if I go there because it could be dangerous not because the transit is bad. and 2) it is a lot cheaper to drive in Chicago, so between suburbs people in Chicago would probably just drive while in Toronto, it makes more financial sense to take the bus. Again, has nothing to do with good or bad.

In transit, I am afraid we have to constantly compare ourselves to other cities. Why not? If not see the world, how do you know if we are behind and if there are things we can learn from? Every city constantly compares itself to a peer, even London and NYC compete all the time. It is in competition that a city improves. We don't need to desperately try to be alpha or alpha+ or world class, but it is a good thing we look at other cities' successful stories and find what we lack. If you have a kid, don't you want to know how she is doing among all the students, instead of just knowing the score she brings home?

OK let me just say this about the constant comparing of Toronto to other cities and the insecurity of whether we're "world class".

Yes, many cities are better and we need to get better.

Having said that:
A: We are NOT the worst in the world, and there are many things we do well. There are things we do better than some other cities, believe it or not. I use our transit system all the time for years and I don't really have huge issues with it personally. Some people have terrible experiences using it, some people who live & work in different places actually have OK or good experiences.
B. We ARE getting better, but it takes time and money.

To me, I don't constantly compare and feel bad because our system isn't better. I think of ways I'd like to see things improved, but when you're constantly obsessed with comparing subway maps with cities that are 5x our size, which I think some people in Toronto are, I feel it's not the most interesting conversation to have.

Yes, we all know our system needs expansion, but what's the point of constantly comparing the TTC map with NYCs? OK, it's smaller, we all know and accept this. Let's move on and improve ours. Let's not constantly obsess over that comparison.

This may be a cultural thing, but I personal don't worry about Toronto's rankings among world cities, or really care if other cities have more subways. If I really really cared about living in an "alpha +" or whatever ranking city, I would move to one of them. I really enjoy living here, I'm choosing to stay here because I like it.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I think Torontonians overestimate how far behind we are. The Relief Line, GO RER, ECLRT, SELRT and FWLRT will put Toronto transit in an excellent position. After those are completed in a few years our most significant challenge should be ensuring that we have enough funding for operations. Any other capital expenditures will just be the icing on the cake.

Agreed. What I don't like is how often people point to Shanghai, Paris, London and NYC. We aren't even in the same ballpark as those cities in terms of population or density. We are a MUCH smaller city than those, we should not expect to have the same transit system.

The worst is when they use the phrase "world class" and show the subway maps to compare.

The problem is we have little highways and little transit. And the cars fill up the few highways we have, hence the current congestion. I hope all of those get built, I don't care wether it's LRT or Subway our map is empty and needed to be filled. The Eglinton Crosstown is a great start.

 

[ehlow]

The problem is we have little highways and little transit. And the cars fill up the few highways we have, hence the current congestion. I hope all of those get built, I don't care wether it's LRT or Subway our map is empty and needed to be filled. The Eglinton Crosstown is a great start.

Yeah, I'd like to add this: if you're interested in watching transit expansion & construction, as well as general city construction & growth, this is a great city for that. With regards to highway congestion, I think GO RER would have the biggest impact soonest in terms of giving people a viable option of bypassing that congestion.

 

[RC8]

When it comes to Transit City, I maintain my position that it was the right decision to be cancelled (despite not being a Ford fan). Toronto deserves something better and faster than a few 512 style LRTs here and there which will have to wait for traffic lights and have a stop every 500 meters.

Beyond your incorrect characterisation of what Transit City lines would be like, it's important to point out that this time next year we would already have 2 or 3 new LRT lines running, and we could be planning the DRL already.

I would happily take this for 2020-2025 and work towards the DRL as a parallel project:

P.S. I used ridership numbers for the London comparison, not population.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Sigh... The TC LRTs are unlike the 512

 

[ksun]

Sigh... The TC LRTs are unlike the 512

it is not exactly the same but similar enough to put together.
Besides being spacing a bit farther apart, I don't see any major difference. Signal syncing -- I don't hold my breath for that.

The star actually compared the new streetcar, Eglinton LRT and subway

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...a_streetcar_not_a_streetcar_when_its_lrt.html

speed: 15, 22, 32km/h
capacity: 250, 280, 1100
traffic lights: yes, yes, no
ROW: yes for some, yes, yes
need to wait in the cold: yes, yes, no

There are other technical difference but they are not relevant to rider experience.

Seems a lot like streetcars to me. Can't you see that if the ROW streetcars remove half of the existing stops (from 200m to 400m), they are basically the same as the LRTs? I could be wrong, delighted to know more.

I am not against LRTs, I actually like them. I am against TC because of three main reasons

1) the new lines almost all feed to Yonge, instead of going directly downtown, which is stupid - lines don't have to follow street grid however we are stuck with the idea
2) no new lines between Front and Bloor. Doesn't Queen/King deserves something much better than Finch/Sheppard? I am speechless.
3) The Don mills line should go further, not stopping at Danforth

 

[ehlow]

it is not exactly the same but similar enough to put together.
Besides being spacing a bit farther apart, I don't see any major difference. Signal syncing -- I don't hold my breath for that.

The star actually compared the new streetcar, Eglinton LRT and subway

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...a_streetcar_not_a_streetcar_when_its_lrt.html

speed: 15, 22, 32km/h
capacity: 250, 280, 1100
traffic lights: yes, yes, no
ROW: yes for some, yes, yes
need to wait in the cold: yes, yes, no

There are other technical difference but they are not relevant to rider experience.

Seems a lot like streetcars to me. Can't you see that if the ROW streetcars remove half of the existing stops (from 200m to 400m), they are basically the same as the LRTs? I could be wrong, delighted to know more.

I am not against LRTs, I actually like them. I am against TC because of three main reasons

1) the new lines almost all feed to Yonge, instead of going directly downtown, which is stupid - lines don't have to follow street grid however we are stuck with the idea
2) no new lines between Front and Bloor. Doesn't Queen/King deserves something much better than Finch/Sheppard? I am speechless.
3) The Don mills line should go further, not stopping at Danforth

How many times do we have to go through this? You can call it a streetcar if you'd like, call it whatever you'd like, it doesn't matter. A subway is basically a big streetcar underground anyways.

It's not about the name or definition, what's important are things like:
1. Speed
2. Frequency of vehicles
3. Reliability
4. Capacity
5. Can be stuck in traffic or no?
6. Experience of riding & stations

The TC lines are:
A. Faster because of stop spacing and traffic signal spacing. Much faster in the case of Eglinton. Even if there is no signal sync, the signals are further apart and give the main street green more often.
B. Longer trains because of multi unit operation. The capacity you stated is per car. Trains can and will be multi-car, meaning two-three cars attached together and driven as one. Meaning Eglinton trains will have capacity 500 with option of adding a 3rd car for 750.

Need to wait in the cold is bullshit. Firstly there are subway stations where you clearly need to wait in the cold (Rosedale, Davisville, High Park, etc). Secondly, as you can see on the Viva Highway 7 stations and in other places like Ottawa, you can have heated stations on the surface as well.

And yes, when St Clair or Spadina had the new vehicles it would become closer to the TC LRTs. If they removed half the stops, and the traffic lights were synced or removed, it would make it even closer to the TC LRTs. If they then ran 2-car trains such that each train's capacity was doubled, it would be even closer to the LRT lines. If more of the routes were underground then it becomes even more like the Eglinton LRT. If the full thing was underground, you now have a subway