Finch West Line 6 LRT

[ARG1]

So, I haven't drawn any conclusions as I type this first line; but I will look at the map, to see if I can discern why the stops you note above were inserted, and what impact, if any, is obvious.

Stevenson:

Chosen likely for 3 factors, the mall to the south, but this, as noted prior is served by 2 other stops.

But the stop also directly serves these 2 residential towers:

View attachment 541302

It also serves a Junior High just up the street that is ~290M from Finch.

So the impact of removing the stop is taking the distance for the residential ~ 25M and the Junior High and considering the distance w/o that stop.

Distance to Kipling : ~710M (school); 430M for apartments.

Distance to Albion: ~560M (school); 332M for apartments.

***

I think there's a reasonable case for removal here, the primary impact is on the middle school which is material, but likely represents a fairly low portion of any potential ridership.


****************

Now lets' look at Driftwood:

Serves the east end of the Jane Finch Mall.

The only significant density currently is San Romanoiway which is under 300M to the Jane-Finch intersection.

There is the vast proposed densification of the Jane-Finch Mall site to consider here; where I would note, I have proposed moving Driftwood closer to Jane, which definitively remove any justification for a stop.

The only knocks on removal here are:

Removes a connecting bus route and stop, creating a walking transfer.

Also, with future density, I don't believe the current platform design at Jane would carry sufficient capacity. (there is, however, room, for now, to widen those platforms, albeit with some expensive changes to curbs/roads/streetscape etc.

*******

I think I'll leave it there for now.

My general thought process comes down to a few major ideas.

1) Is there a connection to a major/important bus route? This is why I'm fine with having the Kipling, Albion, and Martin Grove Stations despite being in relatively close proximity because all 3 of those streets are connections to major bus routes.
2) If there isn't a connection to a major bus route, is there a connection to a high demand commercial destination? This is why stations like Milvan-Rumike work.
3) If the station would only serve residential areas, how far would they have to walk to reach the next station if it didn't exist, and what are those walking conditions (walking under a highway, etc.). The reason I'm fine with having either Pearldale or Duncanwoods is because they both act as a sort of center for the surrounding subdivisions outside of Islington itself, and you could have community bus routes joining to it.

The one question I have to you is what is the transit modeshare for that junior high? Do grade 7s and 8s really take public transit that often because I typically I associate transit use with full on high school students.

If we had unlimited money there could have been a better way to design the Finch West LRT which would have improved speed but still serve the local community.

1. LRT should have resurfaced after passing Romfield Lane. It would allow the LRT to bypass traffic lights and avoid unnecessary delays. From here the LRT would run surface level to serve the local community,
View attachment 541423

2. The next big and expensive change would be to remove the Driftwood Ave stop and bury the Finch West LRT between Jane and Weston. The LRT could have entered a trench before driftwood to avoid that traffic light. My logic here is Finch West during rush hour is packed with cars and having the train run surface level here increases the chances of delays due to traffic and accidents. If the LRT ran unground in this section the trains could travel fast. The stops would remain the same with stops at Jane, Norfinch/ Oakdale, Signet/ Arrow, and Weston. The LRT could have resurfaced after passing Jayzel Dr, avoiding another traffic light, and run surface level to serve the local community.

View attachment 541427

3. Now for a smaller change I would have removed the stop at Duncunwoods Dr.

4. After passing through Pearldale Ave. the LRT could have gone through an above-ground section with an above-ground station at Islington. Between Islington and Kipling the lrt would run along the surface
View attachment 541428

4. lastly the LRT would go below grade between Kipling and Albion to avoid those busy intersections. It could have been built similarly to the Mississauga Transitway to keep costs down. Also, Stevenson station would be removed. After Albion, the LRT would resurface and run above ground.

View attachment 541429

*************************
My logic overall is the LRT would run separately at busy intersections, but serve more local trips between the major intersections. You would get both speed and convenience. hopefully satisfying both parties in this debate.

This is a bit extreme. Honestly if we were to up the budget to allow ourselves 1 more tunneled segment/station, the one change I'd make is to actually tunnel the line underneath Albion Mall. This would allow for a direct weather protected connection to the mall, and allow direct transfers to 2 major bus routes (with a possible bus terminal), whilst also cutting down 3 separate stops into 1, and finally reducing the overall line length. This could have huge end to end time saving ramifications for everyone other than the students at that junior high.

 

[nfitz]

I don't understand the propensity in this thread to discuss a different project that wasn't proposed, planned, or constructed.

If you really want to increase ridership on the Finch West LRT, then there are better options than anything proposed here. Move it to Queen Street downtown.

Otherwise, perhaps take this to a fantasy thread, for those reading about this project, and not some fan alternative history.

 

[drum118]

I don't understand the propensity in this thread to discuss a different project that wasn't proposed, planned, or constructed.

If you really want to increase ridership on the Finch West LRT, then there are better options than anything proposed here. Move it to Queen Street downtown.

Otherwise, perhaps take this to a fantasy thread, for those reading about this project, and not some fan alternative history.

Development along the whole route will generate ridership considering most of it is low density in the first place with a number of empty sites. Even in other parts of that corner of the city.

Look at the huge empty land on the north side between Kipling and Islington that had something there at one time.

 

[dowlingm]

Honestly just mandate partial WFH to be the default unless a company can prove they need people in. I know this doesn't apply to every single job but it would really help.

There is a reason - beyond his known corporate ties - that John Tory not only did not create a long term policy for this at the City but encouraged a return to downtown in the private sector, even though that would have mitigated transit operator shortages when COVID was still really hammering people. The major commercial buildings downtown needed their tenants to believe they weren’t wasting $send on their leases, especially ones coming due/new space coming on line. Those buildings’ taxes pay for a lot of things that voters don’t then have to - like SmartTrack stations with unbelievable construction costs

 

[chrisw]

@Northern Light @ARG1

So, Highfield Junior School is a K to 5 school with just under 600 students. Considering the proximity of other junior schools (elementary), the catchement area must be small.

Highfield Junior School

 

[Northern Light]

Personally, I find the streetcar suburbs too dense. They're not intended to host the numbers of cars they do today. I find the street parking and lack of garages really make those areas feel cramped as people are forced to store their cars curbside.

Overall, I don't think this to be the case; I find much to like about 'The Beach' or 'High Park/Roncy' or 'Leslieville' or Parkdale.

Many properties have decently deep lots and either large front or good sized backyards; many have laneway garages, but people either prefer parking out front, or that's where the 'second car' goes.

I accept that the on-street parking is both excessive, and problematic, if you actually need a space as a visitor to the area (or resident). I don't think this requires less density. It requires vastly more carsharing, which can be achieved simply by increasing the number of 'floating' permits; as well as reducing the cost for an on-street, reserved carshare space to the same as any other permit holder (instead of more than 15x the price).

It also requires that parking permits be more expensive. The entry level permit is $21.32 per month; even though, tenants in multi-res buildings routinely pay $70 or more for a space.

While the max permit (for residents with enough spaces for 2 or more vehicles on their property is still only $86.29 a month, when a market priced, reserved space would cost no less than $100, and possibly double that.

If we set the entry level permit at $70, and the permit where you have space on your property to park at $105 per month, there would be far less street parking demand. On major streets, this could be taken up as a boulevard separating a cycling track from a road. On side streets, it could allow for reserved spaces for movers and deliveries, and some additional streetscaping that could bookend those spaces; all the while providing more parking for those who need (and are willing to pay) for it.

We can also create more walkable grocery shopping simply by capping store sizes at 30,000ft2. In the east end of the old City (Danforth to the Lake, The Don to VP) this would force Loblaws and Metro to essentially divide 3 large stores into 2 smaller ones, which would bring grocery much closer to home.

Some modest transit improvements would do wonders to; The Ontario Line will accomplish much, but right now, frequent N-S bus services don't exist from Pape/Carlaw to Coxwell. That's a large gap; the moment the Greenwood and Jones based buses go to 10M service or better from 6am-10:30pm; M-Sat; and 8am-10:30 Sundays, you'd see lower interest in 2-car houses in particular.

*****

The 'streetcar suburb' for the purpose of talking about better suburban typology isn't some huge idea, its just narrower lots, rear laneway garages, and planning for mostly 1-car households, closer shopping, more mature trees, and better transit.

 

[Northern Light]

@Northern Light @ARG1

So, Highfield Junior School is a K to 5 school with just under 600 students. Considering the proximity of other junior schools (elementary), the catchement area must be small.

Highfield Junior School

View attachment 541573

Agreed. I don't know the draw effect from transit along Finch, but I would presume it to be relatively small; I think the case for removing Stevenson is there.

 

[Undead]

NL, I'm not making some objective statement. I'm just saying I wouldn't want to live in those areas because of the way they subjectively occur to me.

 

[ARG1]

@Northern Light @ARG1

So, Highfield Junior School is a K to 5 school with just under 600 students. Considering the proximity of other junior schools (elementary), the catchement area must be small.

Highfield Junior School

View attachment 541573

Ok so the case for Stevenson's case is effectively non-existent in regards to this school then

 

[afransen]

Honestly just mandate partial WFH to be the default unless a company can prove they need people in. I know this doesn't apply to every single job but it would really help.

Everyone here sees suburbs/sprawl as bad but nobody seems to care why someone is willing to drive from Barrie or Oshawa every day. Some people don't want dense housing. Personally I only have bad experiences in shared housing and if I had kids I would want them to have a backyard!

I'm not sure the backyard is a problem, it's the 5 cars in the driveway.

There are places that manage to have mostly low-rise housing, pretty high density, transit-oriented development where active transport is a huge part of the way people get around the community.

Houten · Netherlands

Netherlands

www.google.com

By the way, your suggestion about WFH wouldn't help. Those who still need to drive to work would leverage the reduced highway congestion to live even further out of the city (more house for your $). You're back to the same level of congestion with people driving longer distances.

 

[smallspy]

So, I haven't drawn any conclusions as I type this first line; but I will look at the map, to see if I can discern why the stops you note above were inserted, and what impact, if any, is obvious.

Stevenson:

Chosen likely for 3 factors, the mall to the south, but this, as noted prior is served by 2 other stops.

But the stop also directly serves these 2 residential towers:

View attachment 541302

It also serves a Junior High just up the street that is ~290M from Finch.

So the impact of removing the stop is taking the distance for the residential ~ 25M and the Junior High and considering the distance w/o that stop.

Distance to Kipling : ~710M (school); 430M for apartments.

Distance to Albion: ~560M (school); 332M for apartments.

Something to consider when looking at stops....

Transit planners will try to actively service as many schools as possible along a corridor. And they will go out of their way to put a stop as close to a school as they can.

The reason is not because schools are great trip generators - they are not.

The reason is that the planners know that if you get kids into using transit at an early age, that they are more likely to continue to use the system as they get older, or at least consider the option.

Food for thought.....

Dan

 

[Northern Light]

Something to consider when looking at stops....

Transit planners will try to actively service as many schools as possible along a corridor. And they will go out of their way to put a stop as close to a school as they can.

The reason is not because schools are great trip generators - they are not.

The reason is that the planners know that if you get kids into using transit at an early age, that they are more likely to continue to use the system as they get older, or at least consider the option.

Food for thought.....

Dan

I agree w/the principle you've put forward above; but I also do give some weight to those concerned about an overly slow commute using a given route, and whether that discourages more ridership than the extra stop encourages.

The answers here are more nuanced, than definitive in most cases; in this particular case, having looked at the resulting distances to the school, if the stop is removed, and considering the liklihood that relatively few students in a K-5 school, are coming from a great distance.........

If one were to edit stops on this route, certainly this one seems more plausible than most.

 

[Rainforest]

Cutting one or two stops improves the travel time by 1 or 2 minutes, and will be hardly noticed by the riders.

On the other hand, regarding the Stevenson stop and the school, I can say the following from my personal experience. Two kids, now in high school and taking a bus for about half of the trips, during the primary school were close enough to just walk. The determining factors to tell the kids to use transit are:
- Are they mature enough to travel alone.
- Are they mature enough to cross the road alone, not just once, but every day. They would need to cross the Finch westbound lanes both ways, and on the way to/from the eastbound stop, cross both the rail tracks too.
- The other end of the trip; do they live close to another stop on Finch, or need a really long walk to get to Finch, or need to take another bus route and transfer to Finch.

If the answer to the above three questions is "OK", then the need to walk to Kipling or Albion instead of using the stop at Stevenson is not a big deal.

 

[T3G]

Are the stops on the surface LRTs supposed to be served at all times, as on the subway?

Because if not, it seems to me that this whole kerfuffle about superfluous stops wasting time would be irrelevant, no? Stop when there are people waiting, sail on if not.

 

[afransen]

Are the stops on the surface LRTs supposed to be served at all times, as on the subway?

Because if not, it seems to me that this whole kerfuffle about superfluous stops wasting time would be irrelevant, no? Stop when there are people waiting, sail on if not.

My understanding is that all the LRT lines will make all stops.