Whose vision of transit in Toronto do you support?

[nfitz]

Since when is Scott St suburban Ottawa?

Hey, last time I lived in Ottawa, anything past Tunney's Pasture was suburban Ottawa - much further out than that, your out of the old city into Nepean.

That's the whole point though ... your not going to leave the patch of grass. You'll develop with buildings, as part of an avenue. The same way we've seen development along the empty lands along Sheppard (including the stretch from the 404 to Victoria Park which will only be LRT).

 

[Rainforest]

Presumably the turn-back spot in the east, will be in the tunnel at the Don Mills station. With only a single traffic light between that location the portal east of Laird, it shouldn't impact operations.

Unless they want to introduce ATO. To my understanding, even a shortest stretch of partial ROW, even without any traffic lights, is an obstacle for ATO - just because it is not fenced and anything / anybody can suddenly get in the train's way.

Or, maybe the control systems will become so sophisticated in 20 years that they can handle emergencies just as well as human drivers ...

 

[Rainforest]

http://www.humantransit.org/2010/07/strasbourg-perfection-is-hard-to-copy.html

Very interesting post on the success of trams / LRT in Strasbourg ... and why it may be hard to replicate in other cities.

 

[rbt]

Unless they want to introduce ATO. To my understanding, even a shortest stretch of partial ROW, even without any traffic lights, is an obstacle for ATO - just because it is not fenced and anything / anybody can suddenly get in the train's way.

Or, maybe the control systems will become so sophisticated in 20 years that they can handle emergencies just as well as human drivers ...

You don't need to pick ATO or human drivers. Most systems use ATO for additional efficiencies when things are going well and still rely on human drivers for emergencies.

 

[gweed123]

Hey, last time I lived in Ottawa, anything past Tunney's Pasture was suburban Ottawa - much further out than that, your out of the old city into Nepean.

That's the whole point though ... your not going to leave the patch of grass. You'll develop with buildings, as part of an avenue. The same way we've seen development along the empty lands along Sheppard (including the stretch from the 404 to Victoria Park which will only be LRT).

The fact that you completely ignored the 2nd half of my post shows how weak the case for in-median LRT through the Richview portion of Eglinton is, you can't even really defend it.

 

[kEiThZ]

Hey, last time I lived in Ottawa, anything past Tunney's Pasture was suburban Ottawa - much further out than that, your out of the old city into Nepean.

That's changing. As is Tunney's itself in the years to come.

That's the whole point though ... your not going to leave the patch of grass. You'll develop with buildings, as part of an avenue. The same way we've seen development along the empty lands along Sheppard (including the stretch from the 404 to Victoria Park which will only be LRT).

That stretch didn't need LRT to develop. So why are you giving the credit to the LRT? I'd like to know what new development is occurring along Sheppard that can be attributed to the LRT at all. Pretty much everything I see now along Sheppard has been planned without any consideration to the LRT in the future. It's basically there as a selling point for the developer's brochure.

Once the thing is built though, we'll have some direct evidence on the difference between the impact of HRT subways and on-surface LRT. Nothing could provide a more instructive experience than having both deployed on the same corridor.

 

[Tewder]

None seemed to indicate passenger levels that couldn't be dealt with, with LRT.

For the central underground section of the LRT, the cost for LRT or subway is about the same. If all one is going to build is that section, one might as well simply build subway rather than something new.

It's only when we start looking at the segments east of Don Mills Road and west of Jane, where there is a more than adequate right-of-way to construct at-grade LRT, where LRT can be built for a lot less money than subway, and which the ultimate peak loads are barely in LRT territory, let alone subway that LRT makes sense.

And then it comes down to a simple question of which makes more sense. A central subway with 2 connecting LRT lines. Or a single line with through operation. And this is where the LRT wins.

I'll preface this by admitting I'm not an expert...

Shouldn't they be considering a mode of transit for Eglinton based on usage 100 years from now, rather than current usage? This wont even be operational until 2020 (is that right?) Then, at the very least, the investment in LRT would have to make sense for at least 50 year's usage to justify any potentially needed upgrade to subway later when it could be done now at a fraction of the total cost (the total cost being the cost of a current LRT and an eventually needed upgrade to subway).

Wouldn't another consideration be that of urban planning? Wouldn't the building of a crosstown subway line (as well as a DRL, depending on routing) be a powerful tool to promote urban growth based on density and transit, as an antidote to rampant sprawl that is rippling out from Toronto due to ineffective transit? Not that LRT is necessarily ineffective (I'll leave that for others to debate) but that it is not the most effective mode:

Problems with LRT as I see them:

- Snarling up traffic by taking away lanes. The effect of less cars on the road due to LRT could be offset by less space in the road due to LRT.

- Compromising the potential speed/efficiency of transit through surface gridlock, traffic lights, weather conditions etc.

- Negative public perception. Wouldn't surface LRT - with the issues outlined above - still be perceived as 'traffic' in a 'guilty by association' kind of way? The perception of subways however is that of speed and convenience with subways trains zipping around unimpeded in their own separate efficient network, taking travellors out of traffic and out of the elements.


None of this is to bash LRT. Every mode has its appropriate context, obviously. When talking about thebasic skeletal framework of a mass transit system for a city (and surrounds) the size of Toronto and the GTA we are surely not talking about a context for LRT!

 

[EnviroTO]

The cost of switching from the tunnel being built to subway in the future is not very significant. There are a number of cities which have migrated tunnels from LRT (pre-metro) to subway (metro) with little down time. So the expensive infrastructure which will be here in 100 years is upgradable. The surface section which is cheaper to build and has a shorter lifespan can easily handle the volumes expected on it until the day it is replaced. Creating an urban environment involves taking away traffic lanes even if there wasn't an LRT built, so the question is whether or not these routes make sense to become urban environments. If the goal is an urban environment you don't put 3 lanes of traffic each direction and left and right turning lanes in. Even if a subway was built it would make sense to take lanes of traffic away to put in a treed median, urban sidewalks, bike lanes, on street parking, and buildings flush with the sidewalks.

 

[kEiThZ]

The cost of switching from the tunnel being built to subway in the future is not very significant. There are a number of cities which have migrated tunnels from LRT (pre-metro) to subway (metro) with little down time.

Agreed. They could actually keep using the same rolling stock and up the service. They can just extend the tunnel and you'll get more "subway" so to speak.

The problem that I have with Eglinton being LRT is the fact that it's really the only real alternative to the Bloor-Danforth as a cross-town route. So I find it a little hard to believe that it'll only be 5000 riders especially once the DRL reaches up there (are there any studies that include the DRL in their calculations)? What I worry about though is the fragility of service. It's all going to be dictated by the at-grade portions. Sure, there's crossover tracks. But that does not mean car stalls, accidents, etc. won't impact service at all, or that reliability on the line will be the same as the Bloor-Danforth. Can anybody imagine if we were building the Bloor-Danforth today and people had argued that a tunnel in the core would be sufficient?

Personally, I'd like to see a subway in the core and BRT at the ends. But if that's not going to happen, I guess the current plan is second best for me. I really hope my pessimissm doesn't pan out and that the line proves reliable.

 

[ssiguy2]

LRT also has higher operational costs as it, unlike subways, cannot be automated and the tracks last twice as long.

 

[W. K. Lis]

LRT also has higher operational costs as it, unlike subways, cannot be automated and the tracks last twice as long.

Wrong about the automation. The underground sections like Eglinton and fully segregated right-of-ways like Scarborough Rapid Transit can be automated for light rail. See this link.

 

[Justin10000]

LRT also has higher operational costs as it, unlike subways, cannot be automated and the tracks last twice as long.

Bullshit. LRT can be easily automated. San Francisco Muni's LRT lines are fully automated in the Twin Peaks tunnels from West Portal to Embracadero stations. LACMTA's Green line was fully automated until the agency switched tod drivers.

General Electric perfromed automatic operations on a PCC streetcar in 1961 in Erie Pennsylvania! The PCC started, stopped, and even open doors on it's own!

Why do you lie so?

 

[Juan_Lennon416]

What is the procedure when an LRT stops running? Do the passengers come off the LRT and wait on the island? Do they stay inside the LRT and wait for buses to come? Just curious

 

[ssiguy2]

I know LRT can be automated but only if the thing is completely grade separated so it is no good for TC. The primary benefit of automation is savings in wages but that is not applicable to TC.

 

[gweed123]

What is the procedure when an LRT stops running? Do the passengers come off the LRT and wait on the island? Do they stay inside the LRT and wait for buses to come? Just curious

They walk to the Starbucks on the nearest corner, because everything along the route is a utopian urban avenue...