News   Nov 26, 2024
UrbanToronto at The Buildings Show: The Challenges of Supertalls
 386     0 
News   Nov 26, 2024
Three Towers Up to 44 Storeys Proposed Near Bloor and Hwy 427
 801     0 
News   Nov 26, 2024
News Roundup for November 26, 2024
 440     0 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

Steve X said:
It could be possibly for riders from North/South routes like 25/925 Don Mills, 24/924 Victoria Park and 68/968 Warden to transfer to Eglinton instead of Line 2 to get a seat if usage is lower. However being squash like sardines on Line 1 for a longer period of time might reduce at. This all depends on how post pandemic plays out as recovery seems to be a long term now. It's like the 96-03 recovery era again.
Click to expand...

With the OL in place, 25/925 Don Mills shouldn't be a problem, they will mostly feed into the OL. I think the whole eastern section will be fine capacity-wise, because it is intercepted by the downtown-bound routes at 3 points. Yonge, then the OL at Don Mills, and then both Line 2 and Stouffville GO at Kennedy. The total LRT boarding count will be high, but it will not translate into overloaded trains because the various groups of riders will not overlap. 50 people out, another 50 people in.

The western section may be of a greater concern. The predicted loads for the Etobicoke section are lower than in the east, but that prediction assumes business-as-usual for the Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington, Royal York bus riders. In reality, quite a few of those bus riders will decide that transferring to the LRT at Eglinton and then to Line 1 subway at Cedarvale (Eglinton West) station is a better deal than staying on the bus till Bloor and then transferring at St George. The extent of such a shift is hard to predict, maybe the loads will be fine as is. But adding more alternative transit options (frequent Brampton/Georgetown trains with fare integration, LRTs/BRTs on Kipling and Islington, a new north-western light metro line etc) would certainly help.
 
Rainforest said:
With the OL in place, 25/925 Don Mills shouldn't be a problem, they will mostly feed into the OL. I think the whole eastern section will be fine capacity-wise, because it is intercepted by the downtown-bound routes at 3 points. Yonge, then the OL at Don Mills, and then both Line 2 and Stouffville GO at Kennedy. The total LRT boarding count will be high, but it will not translate into overloaded trains because the various groups of riders will not overlap. 50 people out, another 50 people in.

The western section may be of a greater concern. The predicted loads for the Etobicoke section are lower than in the east, but that prediction assumes business-as-usual for the Martin Grove, Kipling, Islington, Royal York bus riders. In reality, quite a few of those bus riders will decide that transferring to the LRT at Eglinton and then to Line 1 subway at Cedarvale (Eglinton West) station is a better deal than staying on the bus till Bloor and then transferring at St George. The extent of such a shift is hard to predict, maybe the loads will be fine as is. But adding more alternative transit options (frequent Brampton/Georgetown trains with fare integration, LRTs/BRTs on Kipling and Islington, a new north-western light metro line etc) would certainly help.
Click to expand...
I think taking Line 5 from the west side would be better for riders coming from the north. It'll be a better ride with being outdoors and a less congested train. Doing a transfer onto Line 1 from Eg West is better than St George. Wins all around.
 
Rainforest said:
With the OL in place, 25/925 Don Mills shouldn't be a problem, they will mostly feed into the OL. I think the whole eastern section will be fine capacity-wise, because it is intercepted by the downtown-bound routes at 3 points. Yonge, then the OL at Don Mills, and then both Line 2 and Stouffville GO at Kennedy. The total LRT boarding count will be high, but it will not translate into overloaded trains because the various groups of riders will not overlap. 50 people out, another 50 people in.
Click to expand...
I don't think the concern is so much capacity, but rather speed. Even with signal priority (which is something the TTC doesn't exact have a stellar record with), the at-grade section will be slower than the tunnelled section.

IMO, the Golden Mile section of the ECLRT was a missed "golden" opportunity to showcase elevated transit in Toronto. A super wide ROW with low-density commercial on both sides. The impact to traffic and pedestrian flows at street level could have been minimized, and transit trip times would have been faster. There would have also been the opportunity to connect it to the revamped SLRT.
 
syn said:
Yeah that never happens. Why would they even consider building bad LRT's?!

Ever?
Click to expand...

Read the message - *rapid transit* - these trams are far from rapid. . . . . we are building a trunk line with trams

denfromoakvillemilton said:
This is objectively false. London has the Overground - a high speed LRT - and it's popular, as an example.

LRT was bad in the political context it was used for in Toronto, but the technology itself is fine.

Again, if Crosstown was HRT, there would have been no debate and both Scarborough LRTs would have been in operation for 5 plus years now.

And it's not as if HRT doesn't have it's issues as well.
Click to expand...

Calling the Overground an LRT is shockingly incorrect but in Toronto I am somehow not surprised

syn said:
The Golden Mile developments will not make it as dense as the urban core.

This line is more than able to handle density increases along this corridor well past our lifetimes - especially with other upcoming lines and expansions. I think people are drastically underestimating how much capacity an LRT can handle, while overestimating just how dense these areas actually are or will be.
Click to expand...

It will be over capacity from Day 1 unless we have another pandemic - *this LRT* cannot handle more than 15,000 ppdph - which is not much, especially since half of it is a subway through a major city where transit lines typically do very well . . .
 
superelevation said:
t will be over capacity from Day 1 unless we have another pandemic - *this LRT* cannot handle more than 15,000 ppdph - which is not much, especially since half of it is a subway through a major city where transit lines typically do very well .
Click to expand...
How is that even possible? The ridership is going to jump overnight from what buses can carry now to what an underground transit line can carry? And where are all those riders going to go? The Yonge line is full, no room for a substantial increase from that many riders. As well the Ontario Line will drain passengers off before they reach the busiest sections.
 
superelevation said:
Read the message - *rapid transit* - these trams are far from rapid. . . . . we are building a trunk line with trams



Calling the Overground an LRT is shockingly incorrect but in Toronto I am somehow not surprised



It will be over capacity from Day 1 unless we have another pandemic - *this LRT* cannot handle more than 15,000 ppdph - which is not much, especially since half of it is a subway through a major city where transit lines typically do very well . . .
Click to expand...
As the LRT can easily handle the prepandemic bus ridership, what is the basis for stating that Line 5 will be over capacity from day 1?
 
superelevation said:
Read the message - *rapid transit* - these trams are far from rapid. . . . . we are building a trunk line with trams



Calling the Overground an LRT is shockingly incorrect but in Toronto I am somehow not surprised



It will be over capacity from Day 1 unless we have another pandemic - *this LRT* cannot handle more than 15,000 ppdph - which is not much, especially since half of it is a subway through a major city where transit lines typically do very well . . .
Click to expand...
TRONto said:
As the LRT can easily handle the prepandemic bus ridership, what is the basis for stating that Line 5 will be over capacity from day 1?
Click to expand...

I am also curious to see the reasoning behind this.

Since when is 15,000 pphpd "not that much"??
 
Last edited:
Not a slightest chance for ECLRT to be over capacity on day 1. The ridership will be higher than at the time of Eglinton buses: some choice riders switching to transit, plus some people transfer to the LRT from the connecting bus routes. But the day 1 capacity, 20 trains per hour x 300 riders per train = 6,000 pphpd total is 3 times the normal bus line capacity (2,000 pphpd). The demand will not increase 3-fold on the opening day.

As the demand grows, the practical capacity limit is ~ 30 trains per hour x 450 riders per train = 13,500 pphpd total. That will require 3-car trains and some upgrades for the surface stops, but the underground stations are built for 3-car trains (just remove the false walls).

So, it will take decades before this line might approach its capacity limit.
 
gweed123 said:
I don't think the concern is so much capacity, but rather speed. Even with signal priority (which is something the TTC doesn't exact have a stellar record with), the at-grade section will be slower than the tunnelled section.

IMO, the Golden Mile section of the ECLRT was a missed "golden" opportunity to showcase elevated transit in Toronto. A super wide ROW with low-density commercial on both sides. The impact to traffic and pedestrian flows at street level could have been minimized, and transit trip times would have been faster. There would have also been the opportunity to connect it to the revamped SLRT.
Click to expand...

It would be a good idea to have this line designed consistently, with elevated sections both in the west and in the east. Especially, if it was known in advance that Doug will grade-separate the western section anyway. Then we could have the same in the east, plus larger stations and high-floor rolling stock.

That said, the difference in speed in the eastern section will not translate into a large difference in the travel time; and travel time is what ultimately matters for the riders. The distance between the Don Mills station eastern portal and the Kennedy station western portal is about 5 km. At 23 kph (street median), that's 13 min. At 35 kph (subway with medium stop distances), that's 8.5 min. The diff is about 5 min. Plus, we need to add a couple of minutes for the possible delay at the Leslie intersection traffic light. Thus, about 7 min diff between the current design and the optimal design; that's noticeable, but not crucial.

What we are getting isn't optimal, but is still very functional.
 
Rainforest said:
Not a slightest chance for ECLRT to be over capacity on day 1. The ridership will be higher than at the time of Eglinton buses: some choice riders switching to transit, plus some people transfer to the LRT from the connecting bus routes. But the day 1 capacity, 20 trains per hour x 300 riders per train = 6,000 pphpd total is 3 times the normal bus line capacity (2,000 pphpd). The demand will not increase 3-fold on the opening day.

As the demand grows, the practical capacity limit is ~ 30 trains per hour x 450 riders per train = 13,500 pphpd total. That will require 3-car trains and some upgrades for the surface stops, but the underground stations are built for 3-car trains (just remove the false walls).

So, it will take decades before this line might approach its capacity limit.
Click to expand...
From link.

The typical station box accommodates a 90 metres platform with a 40 metres service area at one end and a 20 metre service area at the opposite end resulting in a total station box length of 150 metres. Initially the LRT operation will consist of a 2-car trainset requiring a 60 metres platform. To protect for the ultimate 3-car train set the 90 metres platform would be constructed, but then temporary walls would be installed to create the initial 60 metres long platform. A 2.5 metres wide corridor would bisect the remaining 30 metres reserved portion of the platform leading to an additional secondary entrance.
Click to expand...
1637861894980.png

That makes them almost the same station box length of Toronto's legacy subway platforms. While 90m is about 3 Flexity Freedom light rail vehicles in length, that could be extended to 5 Flexity Freeom light rail vehicles, if they make use of the entire station box.
 
W. K. Lis said:
From link.


View attachment 365440
That makes them almost the same station box length of Toronto's legacy subway platforms. While 90m is about 3 Flexity Freedom light rail vehicles in length, that could be extended to 5 Flexity Freeom light rail vehicles, if they make use of the entire station box.
Click to expand...

I doubt they can occupy the whole station box with platforms; the "services" areas are probably essential for the operation, and if they repurposed them to make more platform space, then new "services" sections would have to be dug. Plus, 5-car trains could have problems fitting both the surface sections/stops and the elevated sections.

3-car trains is probably the limit for this line, but that's quite a bit of capacity.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top