Transit City Plan

[Electrify]

I'm focusing on city bound commutes from the Bay Mills and Sheppard stop. The reason is that it is currently slated to get an LRT stop despite being about 200m from Warden and 600m from Birchmount. Having an LRT stop here arguably puts it into the streetcar range in terms of performance. Also, the Scarborough Rocket bus skips this stop further making it a good case study for research.

 

[drum118]

If you talk to planners in Europe, they will tell you the goal is to get people to use transit and stop spacing is more important than speed. Anything over 500m goes against the grain depending on the location.

Stops are to service the local areas along the line, not people going from point to point on the long haul trip.

Quality of service is a must to meet the goal.

 

[Electrify]

If you talk to planners in Europe, they will tell you the goal is to get people to use transit and stop spacing is more important than speed. Anything over 500m goes against the grain depending on the location.

Stops are to service the local areas along the line, not people going from point to point on the long haul trip.

Quality of service is a must to meet the goal.

In Europe, local bus and tram routes have stops about every 300-400m. Very rarely are they every 200m or less as they tend to be here, despite the dense nature of its cities. Metro and light rail lines end up being about every 800m, more or less.

 

[diminutive]

If you talk to planners in Europe, they will tell you the goal is to get people to use transit and stop spacing is more important than speed. Anything over 500m goes against the grain depending on the location.

That's not true in my experience. European planners seem comfortable with wide stop spacing than NA, usually around 700-800m. Most of Paris LRT lines are >700m, as is London's Tramlink.

 

[Electrify]

I'm sorry, but isn't the surbuban density argument the exact same for Scar as for Oakv (or anywhere else in the universe?) That the density is much lower than a subway would demand, given the cost? Did the density of Scarborough change dramatically while I've been away? With friends in West Hill and on Whites Rd in Pickering, and a daughter who practiced at Agincourt, I've driven Lawrence, Eg, St. Clair, Danforth, Kingston Rd, and the N/S routes all over Scar. It's a suburban density, man! Roads are wider, lots are bigger, strip plazas have more parking lot than shop area.

More importantly, there is (seriously) nothing wrong with surface LRTs! They're a great form of transit that will be appreciated by millions of Torontonians in the inner suburbs if they just open their minds and take the chip off their shoulders.

Just wondering, what do you consider "urban?" It's it density? Because right now I am surrounded by more condos and apartment buildings near Sheppard and Kennedy than there are in all of Richmond Hill. Is it mixed uses? Because between here and Warden there are numerous plazas, shops, and professional offices alongside the high rises I mentioned.

As I said, the 416 suburbs are a completely different creature than the 905 suburbs, both in terms of built form and social makeup. And I feel this gets lost in the debate.

And I agree that there is nothing wrong with surface rail, as my questionnaire is about stop spacing, not whether it is underground or not. I'm just saying that despite what people think, the density along Sheppard may not be that much lower than it is along Danforth Ave.

 

[CDL.TO]

In Europe, local bus and tram routes have stops about every 300-400m. Very rarely are they every 200m or less as they tend to be here, despite the dense nature of its cities. Metro and light rail lines end up being about every 800m, more or less.

That is the same as my experience in many European cities.

 

[Jaye101]

As I said, the 416 suburbs are a completely different creature than the 905 suburbs, both in terms of built form and social makeup. And I feel this gets lost in the debate.

This is very true. Scarborough, North York are significantly denser than Mississauga (the densest 905 city), more than many believe. And this is reflected in transit ridership. The 116 Morningside, 96 Wilson, 95 York Mills, and 54 Lawrence East all have about the same or more riders than the 19 Huontario (the busiest route in the 905).

 

[datamouse]

I'm focusing on city bound commutes from the Bay Mills and Sheppard stop. The reason is that it is currently slated to get an LRT stop despite being about 200m from Warden and 600m from Birchmount. Having an LRT stop here arguably puts it into the streetcar range in terms of performance. Also, the Scarborough Rocket bus skips this stop further making it a good case study for research.

Don't forget Palmdale which is just 280m to the west of Warden.

 

[ssiguy2]

Tram lines in Europe are also overwhelmingly for more local travel as all major European cities have large Metro systems which Toronto lacks.

 

[Dan416]

Tram lines in Europe are also overwhelmingly for more local travel as all major European cities have large Metro systems which Toronto lacks.

Not all major European cities have large Metro systems.

Warsaw has a tiny subway system, Krakow has none. They both use trams. I always loved riding the trams there. Although I can't really say what the stop spacing is like, I feel like it was wider than the TTC uses.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Just wondering, what do you consider "urban?" It's it density? Because right now I am surrounded by more condos and apartment buildings near Sheppard and Kennedy than there are in all of Richmond Hill. Is it mixed uses? Because between here and Warden there are numerous plazas, shops, and professional offices alongside the high rises I mentioned.

Between your first and second post, you redefined your debate from 'Scarborough versus Oakville, subway vs. LRT' to 'Sheppard & Kennedy stop spacing, should it be closer or farther apart.' That's a pretty radical change, don't you think? The 'dense enough for subway' portion of your first post also seems to have gone a bit by the wayside, and it was that part I was addressing.

I don't consider Richmond Hill any more 'urban' than Agincourt Mall. And, yes, I define any place where you shop by going to a mall surrounded by parking spaces, and go to the dentist by driving in your car and parking in a strip plaza, as suburban, irregardless of density. (Having said that, I'd be VERY surprised if Sheppard east of the 404 is as dense as the least dense part of Bloor-Danforth, which would be east of the DVP as well, I suppose.)

As I said, the 416 suburbs are a completely different creature than the 905 suburbs, both in terms of built form and social makeup. And I feel this gets lost in the debate.

And I agree that there is nothing wrong with surface rail, as my questionnaire is about stop spacing, not whether it is underground or not. I'm just saying that despite what people think, the density along Sheppard may not be that much lower than it is along Danforth Ave.

The 416 and 905 suburbs may be different, but they're both still suburbs. And, even density on Sheppard is extremely punctual once you cross the 404. You're sitting in one of the nodes, marvelling at the density. Go back to Vic Park, or farther east, and the density drops significantly until the next node (Markham Rd., e.g.)

 

[JayBeeGooner]

That's not true in my experience. European planners seem comfortable with wide stop spacing than NA, usually around 700-800m. Most of Paris LRT lines are >700m, as is London's Tramlink.

Paris's T3 tramway stop spacing is around 450m according to Railway Technolgy. I expect T1, and T2 follow the same rationale. I rode all the trams a few years ago, and they did not seem to be 700m, with maybe the exception of the Tram-Train line T4.

 

[nfitz]

Paris's T3 tramway stop spacing is around 450m according to Railway Technolgy..

London's tram has a lot of stations closer than 700 metres too. Sure, there's some longer stretches where there's nothing around, but it's significantly less than 700 metres when it's in an urban area. Diminutive's claim seems to have no basis.

 

[JayBeeGooner]

I found this interesting article on stop spacing for Melbourne's tram system that argue it's lack of proper signal priority, not the number of stops that slow trams down.

http://www.ptua.org.au/myths/nonstop.shtml

 

[Electrify]

Between your first and second post, you redefined your debate from 'Scarborough versus Oakville, subway vs. LRT' to 'Sheppard & Kennedy stop spacing, should it be closer or farther apart.' That's a pretty radical change, don't you think? The 'dense enough for subway' portion of your first post also seems to have gone a bit by the wayside, and it was that part I was addressing.

I don't consider Richmond Hill any more 'urban' than Agincourt Mall. And, yes, I define any place where you shop by going to a mall surrounded by parking spaces, and go to the dentist by driving in your car and parking in a strip plaza, as suburban, irregardless of density. (Having said that, I'd be VERY surprised if Sheppard east of the 404 is as dense as the least dense part of Bloor-Danforth, which would be east of the DVP as well, I suppose.)



The 416 and 905 suburbs may be different, but they're both still suburbs. And, even density on Sheppard is extremely punctual once you cross the 404. You're sitting in one of the nodes, marvelling at the density. Go back to Vic Park, or farther east, and the density drops signficantly until the next node (Markham Rd., e.g.)

So Dufferin and Bloor (Dufferin Mall) is suburbia I suppose? You mention how density focuses at nodes, how is this different than much of the Yonge line where density drops off away from the stations?
And those condos weren't there before the subway was there either...I'm not saying that Sheppard should get a subway because it is dense. I'm saying that if density was the only factor in regards to building a subway, then there is precedent to suggest that Sheppard is dense enough to support one.