Johnny Au
Senior Member
Too early to tell for me
|
|
|
Is LRT's repuation damaged permanently?
- Thread starter denfromoakvillemilton
- Start date
DKsan
Active Member
There are two big LRT projects in Ontario that will be built (hopefully) before any of the Toronto LRT projects: Kitchener-Waterloo and Ottawa. How those two procede may even cloud perceptions in favour or against before Eglinton even opens. Then again, it might not be a fair comparison, considering Ottawa is building entirely grade-separated (surface, trench, underground) and KW is doing a mixture of separated and in-street.
junctionist
Senior Member
I wouldn't move my rooster in a damn LRT, let alone my family.
doady
Senior Member
LRTs are streetcars, the same way BRT are buses. Modern light rail vs. traditional light rail, that's all it is. The name for our current streetcar is Canadian Light Rail Vehicle. I think if its proponents stopped trying to pretend they are completely different things, modern LRT would have more widespread acceptance.
The City of Toronto does not hate light rail. The City of Toronto has the largest light rail system in North America by ridership, and also the largest according to track length. It is a major part of the City's identity. I don't understand why not take advantage of that.
ehlow
Senior Member
Subways are streetcars too then right? They're just bigger streetcars which receive power from the bottom of the vehicle instead of the top.
I'm not saying you're wrong, all these terms have have multiple definitions & connotations and often have grey areas. For example many of these words imply not only a certain vehicle, but also the environment the vehicle runs in. It's no surprise people are confused. Explaining the difference between the St. Clair streetcar and the Finch West LRT, or the difference between an underground LRT and subway is not easy.
Then you have terms like BRT which could mean anything.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
What about old Toronto subway trains being used in Lagos, Nigeria for light rail?
W. K. Lis
Superstar
ehlow
Senior Member
Perfect example of ambiguity:
When Ford & Metrolinx had a plan to have the Eglinton LRT run underground and be connected to the Scarborough LRT on the Scarborough RT track, it was considered a "subway", even though it would have ran LRVs.
This year, when debating whether to extend the Bloor line to STC or to have LRVs running on the Scarborough RT track, LRVs running on the RT track was considered LRT.
Same vehicles, same track was considered a subway in 2010, then an LRT 3 years later.
When Ford & Metrolinx had a plan to have the Eglinton LRT run underground and be connected to the Scarborough LRT on the Scarborough RT track, it was considered a "subway", even though it would have ran LRVs.
This year, when debating whether to extend the Bloor line to STC or to have LRVs running on the Scarborough RT track, LRVs running on the RT track was considered LRT.
Same vehicles, same track was considered a subway in 2010, then an LRT 3 years later.
BurlOak
Senior Member
That is correct.
LRT and BRT have their own dedicated lanes while streetcars and buses never do.
LRT and BRT have all door loading while streetcars and buses never do.
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
My short answer opinion is nothing is permanent.
My long answer opinion is that Transit City damaged the reputation of LRT for the reasons outlined by others here: failure to demonstrate how well it will work here by building one line first (it doesn't matter how well it works elsewhere, that is not psychologically relevant), focusing on making it like streetcars by emphasizing alignments along main streets that displace active lanes of traffic (addition by subtraction is harder to sell than addition by addition).
My long answer opinion is that Transit City damaged the reputation of LRT for the reasons outlined by others here: failure to demonstrate how well it will work here by building one line first (it doesn't matter how well it works elsewhere, that is not psychologically relevant), focusing on making it like streetcars by emphasizing alignments along main streets that displace active lanes of traffic (addition by subtraction is harder to sell than addition by addition).
salsa
Senior Member
I think Ford was simply satisfied that the LRVs would have off the road and out of the way of drivers, even if it wasn't a real subway.
doady
Senior Member
Buses have dedicated lanes when it is BRT (Highway 7, Mississauga Transitway).
Streetcar/tram/trolley have dedicated lanes when it is a modernized LRT (Spadina, Queens Quay).
Subways are heavy rail. Fully grade-separated, all-door boardings, fare-paid zones, huge capacity. Eglinton does not fit that description. With its regional importances, connection grade-separate Mississauga Transitway, the availibility of Richview corridor, the huge underground section, I think running any part of Eglinton Crosstown down the middle of the street at grade is folly, but that's another discussion.
I think from a marketing standpoint, Toronto should highlight the improvement of modern light rail vs the current legacy streetcar system. Streetcar are important to Toronto so I don't understand why act like they are completely difference. Why not leverage and build upon the past? Why not unite suburbs and inner city with a common identity?
The Mississauga Transitway, fully grade-separated, with full stations - should Mississauga and GO act like it's not a bus service? Doesn't make sense to me. I think that seems like insecurity about buses, or maybe about BRT. Same with the streetcar vs LRT thing.
The new LRVs downtown will be very similar to the Transit City LRV, they're both Flexity. They will both operate with all-door boarding with honour fare. How do you separate the two the public's mind? Is it possible? It is it really beneficial to? I don't think so but I guess that's just me.
Last edited:
ehlow
Senior Member
I understand the difference between what Eglinton LRT is and Toronto's subway system. I'm just saying the terms can be vague and there aren't strict definitions.
Many systems called "LRT" can have the 4 characteristics you mentioned that define subway: "Fully grade-separated, all-door boardings, fare-paid zones, huge capacity". Many systems that are considered LRTs are fully grade separated, like the proposed Scarborough LRT.
BRT can have first three characteristics well.
The last characteristic isn't always a differentiator. Many systems that are considered subways have the width of streetcars/LRVs. Both Paris and Montreal have very narrow subways for example.
In terms of length, you can multiple-unit trains in both cases, so it depends. A 3 car LRV train would be about the same length as the 4 car Sheppard subway train, for example.
My point was just that the terms aren't well defined. Since the Montreal & Paris metros are on rubber tires, maybe they should be considered "trolley-bus-rapid-transit"
ehlow
Senior Member
Oh yeah, and regarding the difference between the new streetcars and the LRVs, I think the biggest difference in the public mind will be that the LRVs will be 2-3 car trains. So they will be 2-3x longer than the new streetcars.
kEiThZ
Superstar
LRT isn't damaged at all. The hardest fights have been in Scarborough. Why? Because the LRTs were being substituted for half-finished subway lines and making permanent the very transfers that annoy people day in and day out.
Eglinton as a brand new line faces no such challenge. Ditto Finch West. They are replacing buses. Nobody is going to complain....well save the Fords.
Eglinton as a brand new line faces no such challenge. Ditto Finch West. They are replacing buses. Nobody is going to complain....well save the Fords.