I totally agree with what you're saying. And I've advocated for building transit before densification. E.g. North York Centre. I also used densification in the east as an argument that Line 5 would reach overcapacity earlier than predicted.
My point of emphasis, is it's "Not at all like Line 1 downtown..."
It's not like Line 1, nor is it like downtown.
Downtown has way more jobs. In the future, I don't see Eglinton east getting close to even Scarborough Centre job numbers. Even if there is housing densification. Setting aside visiting neighbours and shopping, Brentcliffe and Golden Mile won't be destinations the way all of Downtown is. That means rail transit serves to bring people elsewhere.
So the benefits of tighter stop spacing are low. And
@nfitz is right, getting rid of Hakimi, Ionview, and Aga Khan would solve the problem. Without those 3, stop spacing would be ~935 metres, even wider than the tunnelled western side (~850 metres).
Almost had this discussion about an Ontario Line North extension. Even if you stuff the Don Mills Rd West/East peanut full of high-rises, it would still be surrounded by a sea of low density housing and few jobs.
Stop spacing in the relative suburbs should be wide. Just because you line Eglinton Ave with high density does not automatically make the
wider area dense enough to support <=600 metre spacing, as if it's downtown. 4 stops from Seneca to Fairview Mall would be ridiculous.
The assumption is this is supposed to be rapid transit, not local transit.
Deliberately short-sighted? The argument for making shopping more convenient doesn't make sense within a wider context.
View attachment 726571
View attachment 726548
-------------------------------------
A 6-car Line 1 train has nearly double the effective capacity of a 3-car Line 5 train (especially if minus the space wasted for couplers and ends of cars facing each other).
Line 1 runs more frequently. ATC theoretically allows 1'55", but it currently runs slightly better than 2'30" with gap trains.
View attachment 726566
It appears difficult, if not impossible to run Line 5 at such short headways (2.5 minutes or less), unless there is absolute signal priority/preemption.
From 2022: "According to a TTC staff report that went to the agency’s board on April 14, the TTC has been preparing to open the LRT at what the P3 agreement calls Service Level 1, which would see trains run as often as every 5 minutes at the busiest times. But the TTC is now in discussion with Metrolinx about starting at Level 6, under which trains would run as often as every
3 minutes and 10 seconds. Metrolinx proposed the higher service levels, which would be a major change —
the LRT wasn’t expected to reach Level 6 for another 15 years. [2037]"
Difference over LRT service levels proves an early test of province and city’s ability to get along.
web.archive.org
So if 3'10" was the original plan for 2037, how much lower could the headways get?
Again, why is it ok for Line 6 to replace buses over 10.3 km, at ~600 m stop spacing, but not okay for Line 5 to replace buses over 6.3 km with 620 m stop spacing? If they're not replacing buses, then make some stops request only.
