Transit City Plan

[M II A II R II K]

Here's a long @$$ article dissecting the pros and cons of LRT instead of rapid transit.


http://www.humantransit.org/2010/04/is-speed-obsolete-.html

 

[Dan416]

Here's a long @$$ article dissecting the pros and cons of LRT instead of rapid transit.


http://www.humantransit.org/2010/04/is-speed-obsolete-.html

Any article that questions the "need for speed" I'm not even going to bother reading. I don't see the sense in trying to argue against nature. No one is going to take a slower form of transit by choice. That's madness and definitely a case of transit advocates getting lost in their own dream world where everyone would love to go slower to take in the views rather than, you know, getting to their destinations, which is what transit is FOR.

 

[Fresh Start]

If it's no faster than a bus with dedicated bus lanes, it's a complete joke and is a complete waste of money.

And anyone who tells you that ambiance is worth more than time is full of s*it... or unemployed. I work a lot and my free time is really valuable to me. I dont want to spend it sitting on a streetcar admitring the same view that I admire every day as I go to and from work or school, I'd rather be doing what I want, where I want.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Yea he gets picked apart over that one.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If it's no faster than a bus with dedicated bus lanes, it's a complete joke and is a complete waste of money.

And anyone who tells you that ambiance is worth more than time is full of s*it... or unemployed. I work a lot and my free time is really valuable to me. I dont want to spend it sitting on a streetcar admitring the same view that I admire every day as I go to and from work or school, I'd rather be doing what I want, where I want.

Streetcars run in mixed traffic with stops every couple of blocks or less. Light rail run in their own right-of-way with fewer stops or stations. Which do you mean?

And why is Ottawa considering replacing their bus rapid transit with light rail? See this link from the TransportPolitic for more information at this link.

 

[Justin10000]

Here's a long @$$ article dissecting the pros and cons of LRT instead of rapid transit.


http://www.humantransit.org/2010/04/is-speed-obsolete-.html

And Professor Condon responded:

http://www.humantransit.org/2010/05/is-speed-obsolete-professor-condon-responds.html#comments

 

[leopetr]

If it's no faster than a bus with dedicated bus lanes, it's a complete joke and is a complete waste of money.

1. Let's make sure we are defining "dedicated bus lanes" the same way. The diamond lanes that any car can just pop into and that police don't enforce are not dedicated bus lanes. A barrier-separated lane like the Viva rapidway under construction along Enterprise Dr or the Spadina median is a dedicated bus lane.

LRT may be similar in speed to BRT in dedicated bus lanes, but it's obviously faster than pre-BRT in shared diamond lanes.

2. Capacity matters. LRT beats BRT on capacity. (The study you are about to cite at me assumes a 4-lane BRT corridor. A 4-track LRT corridor will beat it on capacity just like a 2-track LRT corridor will beat a 2-lane BRT corridor on capacity.)

3. Pollution matters. LRT beats BRT on lack of local pollution.

4. Noise matters. Electric motors beat internal combustion on noise.

5. Frankly, the only thing one needs to do to dispel any illusions about the smoothness of buses is to ride Viva Blue, Viva Pink, or any TTC bus down Yonge from Centre to Steeles to Finch. It's pothole hell, and it's pothole hell precisely because buses destroy pavement.

I work a lot and my free time is really valuable to me.

Where do you work, if you don't mind me asking?

Edit: I work at IBM (my post is in no way representative of the views of my employer and should not be taken as such) at Warden & Highway 7. I commute there by subway and bus from Bloor & Christie.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^^ Smart man, but when you say bus, you DO mean Go bus, right? I've taken the Kennedy bus in York Region to the subway before. Not a very fun ride to make.

Fresh Start, your defense of BRT is admirable, but the truth is that the type of huge Curitiba-like BRT network that you champion for Toronto wouldn't work, mainly for the same reasons that the same would not work with LRT. Diamond lanes are dirt cheap to make and have a huge benefit. Transitways and Highway Busways would be great as regional services (for now at least,) as both regional lines themselves and quick routes for Go busses to reach their destinations. But replacing LRT with BRT accomplishes little. With just an adequate subway network, the advantages of flexibility in BRT become very minimal, and the pros of LRT almost unarguably beat busses in that context.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Metrolinx's CEO Rob Prichard addressed the Toronto Board of Trade today with an overview of plans for Transit City projects. The presentation is available in PDF form at this link.

One point from the presentation:

Common refrain – Why Aren’t You Building Subways?

• Fast and grade-separated
• We Are. Eglinton
• –12 km tunnel
• –Hybrid – tunnel in middle and at-grade in East and West
• –3 car consists every 3 minutes
• –Same speed as subway in tunnel
• –Seamless service
• –Meets needs of riders and communities best[/INDENT][/INDENT]

 

[fanoftoronto]

W K Lis they've contradicted themselves right after that point that you've mentioned:

Scarborough RT is not a subway but is grade separated

–Completely elevated and/or grade-separated
–3 car consists
–Common technology and LRT vehicles
–Meets all projected capacity well

If the upgraded SRT isn't a subway then the Eglinton underground isn't a subway. I would accept it as a subway only if the LRT runs seperate for the underground and above ground sections.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Interesting attempt at obfuscating the technology choices.

 

[Fresh Start]

^^ Smart man, but when you say bus, you DO mean Go bus, right? I've taken the Kennedy bus in York Region to the subway before. Not a very fun ride to make.

Fresh Start, your defense of BRT is admirable, but the truth is that the type of huge Curitiba-like BRT network that you champion for Toronto wouldn't work, mainly for the same reasons that the same would not work with LRT. Diamond lanes are dirt cheap to make and have a huge benefit. Transitways and Highway Busways would be great as regional services (for now at least,) as both regional lines themselves and quick routes for Go busses to reach their destinations. But replacing LRT with BRT accomplishes little. With just an adequate subway network, the advantages of flexibility in BRT become very minimal, and the pros of LRT almost unarguably beat busses in that context.

In many areas BRT is the best application though. Even within that Metrolinx report released today, they claim that Finch East is a low priority for LRT prescription; yet it is the highest used bus route in the city and second highest used surface route period behind the 504/508 car. GO Transit, YRT and the TTC have all eyed the Cherrywood Hydro Corridor in the past as a potential BRT route. It keeps appearing on official plannning websites and is a project in MO2020. I don't see why a busway couldn't be applied here and why it couldn't be a shared corridor for both local and regional buses alike.

I'm not calling for replacing existing LRT lines with BRT and I even support their expansion through the new Waterfront developments, but I'm skeptical of what benefit they pose to several of the corridors outlined in the Transit City plans. By the year 2031 Finch West LRT (the pre-truncated version) would have only a maximum usage of 2800pphpd at its busiest point during peak hour. Today the route moves closer to 1313pphpd. The TTC's own documents state that BRT is the suitable technology for routes with a capacity not exceeding 5000pphpd. And that's one of the highest used bus routes. What does that say about Jane, Morningside and far east Sheppard?

Why then are we pushing for light-rail in this area, particularly when within 300-500 metres north of the street there's an available guideway (one which interfaces with GO Stations, college campuses, malls, high-rise clusters, office buildings, and is a short walk away from major hospitals)? I think a long-haul BRT line across the city north of the 401 is critically needed and as always Busways can be converted to LRT more readily as demand grows. The 407's too far north to be applicable to inner-416 needs. And every penny saved building BRTs for now can go towards investing in ongoing subway expansion. I am willing to see BRT as a temporary solution only, one that wouldn't result in years of delay while the City's scrambling to find the money to pay for RT expansion. Citizens can't afford to wait another decade for most of Transit City to be completed, we need improved service now.

 

[Fresh Start]

Streetcars run in mixed traffic with stops every couple of blocks or less. Light rail run in their own right-of-way with fewer stops or stations. Which do you mean?

And why is Ottawa considering replacing their bus rapid transit with light rail? See this link from the TransportPolitic for more information at this link.

Considering that trains can only travel as fast as the vehicle in fromt of them and will likely enforce transfers for many suburbanites whom previously enjoyed one-seat access to the downtown core, one might consider Ottawa's move as a step down.

 

[Justin10000]

Considering that trains can only travel as fast as the vehicle in fromt of them and will likely enforce transfers for many suburbanites whom previously enjoyed one-seat access to the downtown core, one might consider Ottawa's move as a step down.

The starter line will be totally grade-seperated, and will shave a considerable amount of time from a commuters total trip. You're not going to have too many riders complaining about a transfer, especially if it means a smoother ride, and no more long lines at the central transitway stops.

 

[kEiThZ]

And why is Ottawa considering replacing their bus rapid transit with light rail? See this link from the TransportPolitic for more information at this link.

Capacity through the downtown core. Speed isn't an issue. If they could, they would stick with the current system they have.

Aside from that, have a look at how they are deploying light rail. It's more akin to heavy rail than what you're seeing with Transit City. It's in a fully segregated, grade separated ROW, the entire way. In their planning, they even considered deploying light metros. They only settled on LRT because they were considering running LRT lines on some avenues (well into the future) and wanted to retain the option to inter-line. Otherwise, this could very easily have been a Metro project.