Tulse
Senior Member
Actually, that's me checking my email and texting -- I too hate loud phone conversations in public.
|
|
|
Finch West Line 6 LRT
- Thread starter W. K. Lis
- Start date
Palma
Senior Member
I'm all for that
UD2
Active Member
^^ And run it in the middle of Jane Street; That's fine. Only problem is that they'd have to build an entirely new service yard for a two major intersection length LRT.
The entire extension North of Downsview should've been LRT that ran north along the center/side of the Allen road, then cut across though the hydro belt, north again along Keele turning slightly west into the greenbelt to access York University, then west again along steeles, and lastly up Jane St. If they did this, the Vaughan Centre LRT can even share service yards with the Finch West LRT, which would be significant savings.
On the matter of the Finch BIA. If they don't want anything built near them, I'm sure the rest of Toronto will be happy to divert their fund to something else. Maybe a Don Mills LRT, it can kinda be like a cute mini DRL.
The entire extension North of Downsview should've been LRT that ran north along the center/side of the Allen road, then cut across though the hydro belt, north again along Keele turning slightly west into the greenbelt to access York University, then west again along steeles, and lastly up Jane St. If they did this, the Vaughan Centre LRT can even share service yards with the Finch West LRT, which would be significant savings.
On the matter of the Finch BIA. If they don't want anything built near them, I'm sure the rest of Toronto will be happy to divert their fund to something else. Maybe a Don Mills LRT, it can kinda be like a cute mini DRL.
Last edited:
Vaucluse
New Member
I know it's late but I would like to propose an amendment to the route of the FW lrt. My concern is the route around William Osler Hospital (Etobicoke General). Currently the route is to run the line from finch to hwy 27 south then west at Humber College Blvd., this places the nearest station to the hospital at the intersection of Humber College and 27. I would prefer to see the line turn south at the Hydro lines (east of 27) and west at Humber College Blvd, then dog leg south onto the hospital property and then west to Humber College.
I've tried to attach a simple map showing what I'm thinking, with any luck it should be here:
I reason that it would be better to get the station closer to the hospital and heath buildings considering that it may be older, less fit, ill or people of reduced mobility going there and that having a station at 27 might be to much for them. As well if the route crosses 27 about 50m south of Humber College Blvd then a bridge could be built over 27 so that the lrt does not interfere with the already busy 27/Humber College intersection. For those who may not be familiar with the area, the 27 road drops into the Humber Valley south of Humber College there so the roadbed is already about 3m lower than the surrounding ground so a bridge wouldn't be to difficult with regards to grades and road clearances.
My friends, what do you think?
I've tried to attach a simple map showing what I'm thinking, with any luck it should be here:
I reason that it would be better to get the station closer to the hospital and heath buildings considering that it may be older, less fit, ill or people of reduced mobility going there and that having a station at 27 might be to much for them. As well if the route crosses 27 about 50m south of Humber College Blvd then a bridge could be built over 27 so that the lrt does not interfere with the already busy 27/Humber College intersection. For those who may not be familiar with the area, the 27 road drops into the Humber Valley south of Humber College there so the roadbed is already about 3m lower than the surrounding ground so a bridge wouldn't be to difficult with regards to grades and road clearances.
My friends, what do you think?
Attachments
Neil
Active Member
+1
works for me
works for me
BurlOak
Senior Member
I also think it helps to not have LRT turning at the already busy Highway 27/Albion intersection.
Last edited:
W. K. Lis
Superstar
I would rather have the LRT follow the hydro line down from Finch to Humber College Blvd and William Osler Hospital, and then have a bridge over highway 27, since it is in a cut at that point already. The problem I only see is the loss of a park and playground in the hydro right-of-way.
So here is my alternative vision for the Finch Corridor. Based on my preliminary numbers ($30 million/km for dedicated ROW, $20 million/km for curb side, plus $5 million/km for expropriation, and a $50 million fixed cost for a bridge over the Ross Lord Reservoir), this entire plan can be built for less than the cost of the FWLRT. The estimate comes in at $1.138 billion, compared to $1.2 billion for the FWLRT.
http://www2.andrew.thejohnsonclan.ca/FinchBRT.jpg
The basic principle is that 4 separate routes would operate on the Finch Corridor:
1) The milk run between Humber College and Malvern via Finch proper, using the curb side bus lanes.
2) An Express route running between Humber College and Malvern, but using the Finch Transitway for the central stretch (from the 400 to the 404, or more specifically from Norfinch to Seneca). The rationale for this is that the people from the outer reaches of Finch still want access to the subway, but don't necessarily want to sit through every single stop in order to get there. This route offers them an express alternative.
3) A Local route running between Norfinch and Seneca. This would be good for people who want to have local access to the centre part of Finch, without all of the long range commuters crowding the bus.
4) An Express route running only between Norfinch and Seneca. This is to handle the extra ridership that will be generated by the Transitway, in case the buses from Scenario #2 are full by the time they reach the Transitway.
There are two main problems with the FWLRT:
1) It's a compromise between a local and a long haul commuter route. As a result, it does neither particularly well. With this BRT proposal, each of the 4 routes is tailored to a specific demand and travel pattern. No compromises necessary, you pick the route that's best for you.
2) It only serves the western half of Finch West. Not of much use for the other 3/4s of Finch that are still stuck with mixed traffic buses. With this proposal, ALL of Finch gets enhanced service, and for the same cost as the FWLRT.
Most importantly though, the travel demand that would be on a single LRT is instead split onto two separate BRT corridors. Because the demand is split, BRT is capable of handling the projected ridership.
http://www2.andrew.thejohnsonclan.ca/FinchBRT.jpg
The basic principle is that 4 separate routes would operate on the Finch Corridor:
1) The milk run between Humber College and Malvern via Finch proper, using the curb side bus lanes.
2) An Express route running between Humber College and Malvern, but using the Finch Transitway for the central stretch (from the 400 to the 404, or more specifically from Norfinch to Seneca). The rationale for this is that the people from the outer reaches of Finch still want access to the subway, but don't necessarily want to sit through every single stop in order to get there. This route offers them an express alternative.
3) A Local route running between Norfinch and Seneca. This would be good for people who want to have local access to the centre part of Finch, without all of the long range commuters crowding the bus.
4) An Express route running only between Norfinch and Seneca. This is to handle the extra ridership that will be generated by the Transitway, in case the buses from Scenario #2 are full by the time they reach the Transitway.
There are two main problems with the FWLRT:
1) It's a compromise between a local and a long haul commuter route. As a result, it does neither particularly well. With this BRT proposal, each of the 4 routes is tailored to a specific demand and travel pattern. No compromises necessary, you pick the route that's best for you.
2) It only serves the western half of Finch West. Not of much use for the other 3/4s of Finch that are still stuck with mixed traffic buses. With this proposal, ALL of Finch gets enhanced service, and for the same cost as the FWLRT.
Most importantly though, the travel demand that would be on a single LRT is instead split onto two separate BRT corridors. Because the demand is split, BRT is capable of handling the projected ridership.
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
How about vehicle costs? The cost of the additional garage to pay for those additional buses? Both of those are factored into that $1.2bil.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
rbt
Senior Member
Unless he is buying artics there really wouldn't be any additional buses.
The current number of buses would be available and would be able to provide improved service (over today) in the dedicated lanes.
Unlike LRT we would not have excess buses available for gorwth on other routes (LRT has provincial money to buy rolling stock, buses do not have a provincial subsidy anymore) and we would eventually require an additional garage.
Not certain how this would work out on a 30 year network wide plan for capital moneys.
This is exactly what I was thinking RBT. Although I wouldn't mind purchasing a few artics, especially to run during the peak periods. But these can be bought as part of the normal vehicle replacement cycle, they don't have to be bought at the same time as the BRT is being built. They can also be bought as a system-wide initiative to bring more artics into the fleet.
My other line of thinking is that shortly after this is put into operation, the majority of the buses that are currently being used on Eglinton are going to become redundant when the LRT opens, and can be spread to other routes. Huge increase in the number of buses available without having to purchase any new ones.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Interesting idea gweed123.
Though, I see a couple of issues:
1) It will be difficult to sell to the public (to justify the need to build 2 parallel BRTs, curbside in the Finch proper and busway in the HC, when other corridors are not getting any improvements yet).
2) Capacity west of Norfinch, where both branches merge and all buses must use the Finch proper, might become an issue. If the system is fast enough to attract many more rides from North Etobicoke towards the subway, it could hit the BRT's capacity limit.
Though, I see a couple of issues:
1) It will be difficult to sell to the public (to justify the need to build 2 parallel BRTs, curbside in the Finch proper and busway in the HC, when other corridors are not getting any improvements yet).
2) Capacity west of Norfinch, where both branches merge and all buses must use the Finch proper, might become an issue. If the system is fast enough to attract many more rides from North Etobicoke towards the subway, it could hit the BRT's capacity limit.
This may be the case. However, I don't think it will be that hard to sell to the people of Finch East, who under the current plan are getting squat. And also, mention the words "express" and "less expensive", and I'm sure you'd get a few people jumping on too.
I agree that this may become an issue. However, that stretch of Finch is a wide suburban arterial with stoplights spaced wide apart. Having a higher frequency on that part of the route won't be as big of an issue as the central stretch.
There is also the option of taking the Express route and keeping it as an Express route, but on Finch proper. What I mean by this is only making major stops, in order to keep the service quick. Buses play leapfrog all the time, so this shouldn't be that big of an issue (even the buses on crowded Dufferin do it).
Good, and certainly valid concerns though.
voxpopulicosmicum
Senior Member
Good idea. I wonder, however, if it would be possible to better serve the hospital at the same time as providing service to the employment lands north of Finch? What about running WB through Hwy 27 to HCB, then south/southeast/east along HCB and through Hwy 27, and finally north through the hydro corridor back to Finch?
Edit: Having thought about it, I am not in favour of any changes that would require a new EA or would otherwise delay construction.
Last edited:
Vaucluse
New Member
I agree that he line should serve employment areas as well as residential areas but I don't like the loop. I imagine that sometime in the future the FWLRT and EglintonLRT will meet up at the airport (via Rexdale/Derry road and s along Airport road serving my town...oh please) and a loop would prevent that.
The biggest problem in transit planning here in the GTA, as I see it, is the way that we have planned our cities with large commercial and residential areas. Most of my LRT/tram experiences have been in the french cities Lyon, Bordeaux and Grenoble. These cities have smaller commercial and residential areas and many mixed use areas so that every route crosses them.
BTW, last year Lyon inaugurated their newest LRT line, a route from one their city centre train stations (Part-Dieu) to Lyon-St.Exupery airport). It's 23km long with only two stops between the airport and the rail station. The fare is $18-$20, depending on the exchange rate. Sound familiar anyone?
The biggest problem in transit planning here in the GTA, as I see it, is the way that we have planned our cities with large commercial and residential areas. Most of my LRT/tram experiences have been in the french cities Lyon, Bordeaux and Grenoble. These cities have smaller commercial and residential areas and many mixed use areas so that every route crosses them.
BTW, last year Lyon inaugurated their newest LRT line, a route from one their city centre train stations (Part-Dieu) to Lyon-St.Exupery airport). It's 23km long with only two stops between the airport and the rail station. The fare is $18-$20, depending on the exchange rate. Sound familiar anyone?