Videos of Light Rail RAPID Transit

[sixrings]

Electrify,

We all know what LRT looks like. Nobody here is confused. Many of us are decently well travelled to have ridden several of those systems. Some of us just disagree with LRT being suitable for every transit corridor in Toronto. Though there are corridors where LRT is clearly applicable: the waterfront, Finch West, north Don Mills, STC-Malvern, etc. And then are corridors where I don't think LRT is desirable: Eglinton (because of its implications as a regional transport corridor), Kennedy-STC (becuase of STC desgination as an urban growth centre and regional transport Hub), Sheppard Don Mills to Agincourt (because it would hamper finishing Sheppard as the originally intended northern cross-town route).

If you are pro Eglinton and BD expansion would you be OK if those two became subway lines but Sheppard remand the same? Eglinton Subway from the airport to Kennedy. And kenney to STC Subway. Or would you protest saying that Sheppard needs to be completed as well. Obviously there is only so much money to go arround.

 

[kEiThZ]

If you are pro Eglinton and BD expansion would you be OK if those two became subway lines but Sheppard remand the same? Eglinton Subway from the airport to Kennedy. And kenney to STC Subway. Or would you protest saying that Sheppard needs to be completed as well. Obviously there is only so much money to go arround.

I don't think Sheppard is a priority. And I spent half my life within a 5 min walk of the corridor. What I don't want on Sheppard is a solution that hobbles and rules out subway expansion, effectively betraying the original goal of the line: to be the northern crosstown connection between SCC and NYCC and beyond.

I am somewhat ambivalent on Eglinton. I think it would be great as a subway. But if it's unaffordable, let it run as LRT. It'll simply not be the regional corridor that city needs. I'd also suggest that if Sheppard is developed as originally envisioned (Downsview to STC) than the need for a full length subway on Eglinton might be somewhat ameliorated. All that said, I can't understand why the planners, at the very minimum, aren't making maximum use of bits like the Richview Corridor to speed things up. Or why they are imposing an unecessary transfer at Kennedy. Run the line through right till Kingston Road.

Coming back to Sheppard, all I think that's really needed is a short subway extension for now. Say to VP. Ideally for Sheppard, I'd say it should go till Agincourt (so that it can meet the GO line). But till VP ain't bad if we are selfish enough to ignore the regional context. Curbside bus lanes the rest of the way are fine. Over time (even if that's 30 years from now....there's no urgency here...anybody who's driven down Sheppard in Malvern knows this), we can finish the subway as originally intended to STC, and if it's really wanted run LRT from Agincourt to the zoo. But to suggest that all of Sheppard needs LRT right off the bat is a gross exaggeration of the demand on Sheppard (particularly from Malvern). They are using demand from the Agincourt to Don Mills portion (and particularly Pharmacy to Don Mills) to boost their numbers. Start taking some of those stretches out and you might not even have a case for BRT. Or is somebody really going to suggest that there's 5000 riders per hour coming from the Home Depot at Morningside/Sheppard?

There's great spots for LRT in this city (Finch West for example). I just think Sheppard East, as it stands today, is not one of them. Don't believe me? Just drive/bus the route yourself or use Google Streetview. Check out what's there east of Brimley. Look at all the backyards on Sheppard, and ask yourself how much appetite there is to uproot stable middle class neighbourhoods to turn Sheppard East into some kind of urbanist paradise. The city would have to go to war with residents over half the length of the proposed LRT to actually get some urban development benefits out of the line. Yet the dollars are going here and not to STC which is booming and finally becoming a decent town centre in its own right. Hell, they didn't even build a SELRT branch to STC to replace the 190 Rocket. And that's one of the highest demand routes on Sheppard.

 

[junctionist]

Sheppard could be completed in time. Is there any money to go around for transit expansion? Judging by what has been built in the past 20 years, there is not.

If you want transit expansion here, you need a dedicated source of money like a tax or tolls. It has to be very difficult to cut the funding, so you build in cheaper, smaller increments, continuously. Had that approach been applied to Sheppard, we'd be riding from Yonge to STC today, and the machines and crews would be moved to start working on the DRL.

 

[sixrings]

Why not build Eglinton Subway to the airport starting at yonge. And finish the Sheppard Subway. And make the BD connect to STC. This yould serve both east and west with a subway. And the rest could be built with Lrt.

 

[hkric88]

A system like we see in the video of Phoenix's would be great, but I think we all know damn well that its a far cry from what we will get: A glorified streetcar with operators who like to coast at 10 kph all the time,catching every red light in a way that seems intentional, and finally wait at loops and stations for 30 minutes while they **** around.

That's what we're going to get.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Here's an old interurban video:
[video=youtube;1Hd4qqWZM4s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Hd4qqWZM4s[/video]

 

[ssiguy2]

Some of these videos are more what I thought TC would be when first announced................stations every 1 to 2 km, total train priorities with overpasses bridges, small tunnels etc representing subway + speeds. What a disapointment. Now instead of rapid transit Toronto will a network of streetcars that are the same speed of a bus and MUCH slower than a BLine type bus.

 

[Fresh Start]

^ So true. I'm in shock that there's people on this forum whom beleive that Transit City as proposed is anything near as sophisticated as some of the YouTube videos presented here. If we were getting Skytrain or C-Train style LRT in 100% exclusive ROW and with far apart spacing I could understand the merriment; but TC is far more like YRT VIVA, a glorified express bus route being masqueraded as true Bus Rapid Transit.

 

[Electrify]

^^I would consider the Spadina, and St. Clair lines to be "rapid streetcar" lines. That is, smaller, vehicles running in their own ROW, allowing for greater speeds while maintaining stop spacing suitable for local, and short distance trips.

The way I see it is that light rail and streetcars are technically the exact same thing. Kind of like a metro and heavy rail. Yes different cities have different ways of operating them, but if we define them based on every single minor modification, we'll have a trillion different names all referring to the same thing.

With that said, obviously there is a difference between the Dundas streetcar and LA's Blue line, which is where the term light rail rapid transit comes in. These systems feature a mix traffic signal priority, exclusive right of ways, well placed stops, rapid boarding, etc. Spadina and St. Clair may have their own right of ways, but that's about it. They do not have their own signal priority, rapid boarding, and stops are placed far closer compared to the subway.

 

[Electrify]

A system like we see in the video of Phoenix's would be great, but I think we all know damn well that its a far cry from what we will get: A glorified streetcar with operators who like to coast at 10 kph all the time,catching every red light in a way that seems intentional, and finally wait at loops and stations for 30 minutes while they **** around.

That's what we're going to get.

Unfortunately we won't be getting what they have in Pheonix, but we will be getting much more than you think. Stops are to be placed about 400m apart - too close considering the suburban environment, but also more than twice the distance of current bus stop locations. Watch some of the videos that take place in downtown settings, and that is the aproximate performance to expect from the SELRT.

Also, it might not be LRRT, but feel it should be posted

Toronto-Etobicoke (median right of way, no signal priority)

[video=youtube;BwA9AkYyUcs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwA9AkYyUcs&feature=related[/video]

 

[LAz]

Oh boy, you guys are just asking to see trams and how the surrounding environment is not something for a metro.

[video=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGw_Dikug_M[/video]

 

[kettal]

Unfortunately we won't be getting what they have in Pheonix, but we will be getting much more than you think. Stops are to be placed about 400m apart - too close considering the suburban environment, but also more than twice the distance of current bus stop locations. Watch some of the videos that take place in downtown settings, and that is the aproximate performance to expect from the SELRT.

Also, it might not be LRRT, but feel it should be posted

Toronto-Etobicoke (median right of way, no signal priority)

[video=youtube;BwA9AkYyUcs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwA9AkYyUcs&feature=related[/video]

Good call, electrify. The streetcar on Queensway is proof that the ttc can run a fast streetcar. I'd say that section is almost identical to the TC street layout, too...

 

[W. K. Lis]

Good call, electrify. The streetcar on Queensway is proof that the ttc can run a fast streetcar. I'd say that section is almost identical to the TC street layout, too...

Except that the roads department can't or won't give the streetcars real and true transit priority with the traffic signals. On the Queensway, even the left turners go first. The streetcars should get the green as they approach the intersections, instead of waiting for the crossroad to finish and the left turners.

 

[Justin10000]

The way I see it is that light rail and streetcars are technically the exact same thing. Kind of like a metro and heavy rail. Yes different cities have different ways of operating them, but if we define them based on every single minor modification, we'll have a trillion different names all referring to the same thing.

Makes me wonder why you are using the term LRRT. It seems to be just another sub-definition. I have not heard this term defined as how you define it, and your definition seems to be subjective. I heard LRRT being applied to automated light rail systems that have characteristics of a mini-metro. TheDocklands light railway is a good example of LRRT. I did not really want to jump into the terminology debate, but the examples you posted for LRRT seem to fit what you percieve "rapid transit" to be. Which is fine. It's your opinion, but those systems are Light Rail systems and should not be lumpd into a sub-definition. If anything, the St. Louis Metrolink, and Edomonton's systems are the best examples of your definition.
They are the exact technology. Everyone knows that. What makes them different(in terminology) is operating environment, and types of vehicles used. In North America a streetcar is usually a smaller, single vehicle operating in mixed-traffic with little or no signal priority, and closed spaced stops. LRT is usually in a reserved ROW(surface, grade seperated), and utilizes signal priority, has larger vehicles, and is capable of high operating speeds, with stop spacing that can vary but it is usually 500m or or greater.

With that said, obviously there is a difference between the Dundas streetcar and LA's Blue line, which is where the term light rail rapid transit comes in. These systems feature a mix traffic signal priority, exclusive right of ways, well placed stops, rapid boarding, etc. Spadina and St. Clair may have their own right of ways, but that's about it. They do not have their own signal priority, rapid boarding, and stops are placed far closer compared to the subway.

They are the exact technology. Everyone knows that. What makes them different(in terminology) is operating environment, and types of vehicles used. In North America a streetcar is usually a smaller, single vehicle operating in mixed-traffic with little or no signal priority, and closed spaced stops. LRT is usually in a reserved ROW(surface, grade seperated), and utilizes signal priority, has larger vehicles, and is capable of high operating speeds, with stop spacing that can vary but it is usually 500m or or greater.
Again, your opinion, but it seems to me you are trying to frame the definition to suit your opinion.

 

[gweed123]

They are the exact technology. Everyone knows that. What makes them different(in terminology) is operating environment, and types of vehicles used. In North America a streetcar is usually a smaller, single vehicle operating in mixed-traffic with little or no signal priority, and closed spaced stops. LRT is usually in a reserved ROW(surface, grade seperated), and utilizes signal priority, has larger vehicles, and is capable of high operating speeds, with stop spacing that can vary but it is usually 500m or or greater.
Again, your opinion, but it seems to me you are trying to frame the definition to suit your opinion.

Debating over the definition of LRT doesn't change the fact that nearly every single one of those videos shows a more 'extensive' (for lack of a better word) form of LRT than what is being proposed in Transit City. No grade separation (aside from less than 1/3 of Eglinton), no separate dedicated surface ROW, and likely a very poorly implemented signal priority system. In short, some slightly larger than normal streetcars, twinned together, going down the middle of an avenue.

I'm not against LRT as it is implemented in the majority of those videos. It works well. Why? Because they have grade-separation in parts, they have separate dedicated ROWs in parts, and they have true signal priority. There's a spectrum that LRT covers, from slightly above streetcar, to slightly below HRT subway. The combination of those factors that I just mentioned determines where on that spectrum the particular LRT line is. Transit City is much more towards the streetcar end. Ottawa's new proposed LRT system (which I am strongly in favour of btw, and of which I was very strongly opposed to the first draft that had it running at-grade through downtown), is much more towards the subway end of the spectrum. Through downtown, and even outside of downtown, it's running in it's own grade-separated ROW. The only real difference between it and an HRT line is the platform length and the passenger capacity.