News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 3.2K     11 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1.2K     3 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 2K     0 

YRT/Viva Construction Thread (Rapidways, Terminals)

rbt said:
Ottawa actually has buses and passengers though. If you only have 4 buses an hour, half of which don't need to stop because nobody is waiting, then a pad matters a lot less.
Click to expand...

3.75 buses per hour, actually.

And don't Viva buses stop at every stop no matter what? This is supposed to be "rapid transit" after all. I don't see how it could be "rapid transit" if it requires passengers to make stop requests.
 
rbt said:
Ottawa actually has buses and passengers though. If you only have 4 buses an hour, half of which don't need to stop because nobody is waiting, then a pad matters a lot less.
Click to expand...

True, haha. Just seems like for a station like that, doing a concrete pad is a pretty minimal extra cost. And even if the ridership is lower, the concrete will last much longer and be a lot smoother to drive on.
 
doady said:
And don't Viva buses stop at every stop no matter what? This is supposed to be "rapid transit" after all. I don't see how it could be "rapid transit" if it requires passengers to make stop requests.
Click to expand...

I ride VIVA regularly and passengers are supposed to make stop requests. VIVA (as it stands now) is definitely NOT worthy of the "rapid transit" title; it's more akin to TTC Express or Rocket - type routes. Sometimes it's actually slower than YRT because of various detours (Purple via Enterprise vs. Route 1 along Highway 7 for instance).
 
Thanks for the photos, reaper.

It's definitely overbuilt for 4 buses an hour, but I guess it'll be easy to convert when (or if) LRTs come around. That said, the transition to LRT will still not be that straightforward at places like the Bayview station. The LRV would have to cross over traffic lanes to make it to the stop on the side of the road.
 
I think by the time LRT is reqd the bayview area would probably be redeveloped to run out of the middle...im pretty sure that their whole rationale for not building on the median to begin with is to maintain the 3 lane road width for cars. it wouldve been much more better to have stairs that branch off to the 2 stations in the middle than to have 2 separate towers but i guess that wouldve reqd the bridge to be rebuilt to accept 8 lanes
 
MafaldaBoy said:
I ride VIVA regularly and passengers are supposed to make stop requests. VIVA (as it stands now) is definitely NOT worthy of the "rapid transit" title; it's more akin to TTC Express or Rocket - type routes. Sometimes it's actually slower than YRT because of various detours (Purple via Enterprise vs. Route 1 along Highway 7 for instance).
Click to expand...

The planners and designers behind Viva Purple really should have seen that presentation by Jarrett Walker earlier this week. They totally spit on the concept of the grid in favour of detouring to hit high density nodes away from the corridor - ultimately creating a service which is less appealing regardless of density!

I was thinking of a South Park episode which parodied the Terri Schiavo (Florida vegetable woman) a few years back. In it, Kenny gets hit by a car and is put into a vegetative state. While Kyle and Stan want to keep him on the feeding tube so he doesn't die, Cartman wants to have him pass on - so he can inherit his PSP. At the end of the episode, Kyle or Stan says, "We're wrong, but for the right reasons. While Cartman's right, for the wrong reasons."

I think this best sums up the situation along Centre St. You have the planners who want to keep the detour going because it hits high density developments and the Promenade Mall, as good traditional planning logic dictates. This despite the fact that about 75% of the ridership is heading to Richmond Hill Centre and beyond. Meanwhile you have the NIMBYs who want to keep the route on Highway 7 because they fear it will destroy business, wreck havoc on drivers, and other mythological reasons.

YRT might be wrong, but at least they have good intentions and textbook academia to back up their rational. Unfortunately they are putting these books above examining how people actually want to commute in the real world (50 years ago, these same textbooks said that segregated land use and urban highways were the best ways to build cities). Meanwhile the NIMBYs might be correct in keeping the line on Highway 7, but their reasons are not only wrong, but self-defeating as this line could do wonders for their community.

As I've said in the other thread and elsewhere, run two branches of the Purple line or keep it on Highway 7 but strengthen the local grid so that those headed to the mall can take a bus along Centre or Bathurst.

EDIT: I'm copying and pasting this for my Facebook page/group in support of BRT https://www.facebook.com/YRTBN.
 
Last edited:
Electrify said:
The planners and designers behind Viva Purple really should have seen that presentation by Jarrett Walker earlier this week. They totally spit on the concept of the grid in favour of detouring to hit high density nodes away from the corridor - ultimately creating a service which is less appealing regardless of density!
Click to expand...

I was at Walker's talk too, I disagree with you using what he says to justify rerouting Viva Purple away from Centre/Bathurst. The routing via Centre and Bathurst doesn't deviate from the grid (Centre is the same corridor as Highway 7 west). It's not indirect. It serves trip generators. The only thing to change is removing the loop from the route and stop on-street. If you're talking about Enterprise Drive deviation, I'll agree with you there.
 
ShonTron said:
I was at Walker's talk too, I disagree with you using what he says to justify rerouting Viva Purple away from Centre/Bathurst. The routing via Centre and Bathurst doesn't deviate from the grid (Centre is the same corridor as Highway 7 west). It's not indirect. It serves trip generators. The only thing to change is removing the loop from the route and stop on-street. If you're talking about Enterprise Drive deviation, I'll agree with you there.
Click to expand...

How can you say that one deviates from the grid but not the other? They both serve the same purpose: Deviate off the main road to a parallel but more urban and populated area to pick up more people.

I do agree that the Centre street alignment has always been an annoyance for me when riding the Purple and I would much rather see viva stick to highway 7 so that it makes more sense to more people. Why can I get on the viva from some parts of 7 but not others? It's confusing to newcomers.

Create a secondary fork route to serve Centre, fine. But all you're going to get is teenagers from Atkinson who just want a free ride to the mall.
 
smallspy said:
It's not 4 buses an hour now - what makes you think that they're going to run fewer once the transitway opens?

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
Click to expand...

Purple operates on a 15 minute schedule (16 minutes during rush hours after June 30). That's four buses an hour per direction. With the addition of Viva Pink during peak periods, that number will improve to every 7.5 buses an hour.

As Route 1 will still continue to service stops not served by Viva (local stops like Pond Drive or Saddlecreek Drive), it can't use the Rapidways. Hipster Duck is correct in the sense that outside AM and PM peaks, it will be four buses an hour.
 
Last edited:
xtremesniper said:
How can you say that one deviates from the grid but not the other? They both serve the same purpose: Deviate off the main road to a parallel but more urban and populated area to pick up more people.
Click to expand...

I kind of agree but the fact is that Centre and Hwy. 7 are the same alignment, and the roads just got rerouted over the years. Highway 7 is "the main road" in a way, but in an other it's not. It's the fastest, most direct route but there is virtually nothing on it (ie it's a highway!) from Bathurst over to Dufferin. So, it's the "main road" if your'e trying to get to the end but because of the quirk of the alignments, Bathurst/Centre is "the main road" where stuff actually is and where people actually are.

I like the idea of having an express route, in the future, that stays on the highway. But to skip the transit terminal at Promenade and to avoid the potential redevelopment that will come along Centre Street seems antithetical to the entire point of the system. As I've said on the Yonge Subway thread, this isn't just a transit exercise, it's a land-use exercise.

The NIMBYs on Centre seem content with how a large strip of crappy plazas and abandoned bungalows insulates their McMansions from reality but the fact is that street is a prime location perfectly suited to transit-oriented intensification. Keeping the buses on Highway 7 effectively sterilizes development in a area that already has a revised secondary plan.

And, quickly, someone above said that Viva isn't a true RT system but that was never the intention of the first phase. It's an express-lite kind of service, designed to function as BRT in the rapidways. Soon we'll be able to assess how those are working. They look nice and the thought is a good one. The proof will be in the pudding.
 
xtremesniper said:
How can you say that one deviates from the grid but not the other? They both serve the same purpose: Deviate off the main road to a parallel but more urban and populated area to pick up more people.
Click to expand...

Then Purple should go straight across Highway 7 from Martin Grove to Ninth Line if you want to see Viva stick to Highway 7. You can then transfer to get to York University.
 
Does anyone know or want to hypothesize why VIVA purple doesnt turn south on Yonge so it can serve all of Centre St. If this was the alignment, it could also create an alternate branch route to replace VIVA orange which would go straight down Highway 7 to Martin Grove (and eventually Highway 50). This would be route that would serve a much bigger passenger base (the 77's) then the one the orange serves. From the looks of 2014 service plan, even after the subway comes and all viva diversions to YorkU can end, they are not planning on having a full east-west York Region link.
 
Evening said:
Does anyone know or want to hypothesize why VIVA purple doesnt turn south on Yonge so it can serve all of Centre St.
Click to expand...

a) Yonge is slower than Bathurst and certainly has enough bus traffic already. Taking a Viva bus off the highway, down a busy street and across a 40 km/h street with multiple stop signs kind of negates the whole "express" idea.

b) The main reason the Bathurst diversion makes sense is because of how Highway 7 does that huge arc around Bathurst to Dufferin. There's almost nothing along that stretch and it effectively acts like a highway. That helps with the "express" thing but not so much with the "riders" thing. Viva is trading one for the other there (and promoting development along a moribund street that's ripe for it).

c) Not only is Centre Street dead slow, it's also lined by low density housing, heritage homes and mega-mansions (and a picturesque pond!). It doesn't serve a lot of riders and has zero potential for redevelopment. It's also the "centre," in that it is easy travel distance to 2 major transit hubs (yonge/7, promenade) so I don't think you gain anything by running Viva there.

Obviously Viva's strategy is not purely about SPEED or they wouldn't leave Highway 7 to hit the Promenade or York U. Obviously they are trying to balance "express" service while hitting, serving and promoting development in key ridership nodes. It may be a tricky balance (a bit like stop spacing) but that's the strategy.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top