Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[TheTigerMaster]

who doesnt hate linear transfers.. I get that they need to end somewhere but weston is random and considering the size of the line they are so close to finishing it.

It's not random. Ridership dramatically drops at Jane Street, which is pretty close to Mt. Dennis. I might support extending a few hundred meters to Jane, but west of there (based on EA results) doesn't make any sense. Especially with a price approaching, and likely exceeding, $1.2 Billion.

Build the rest as BRT and save taxpayers a billion dollars. Sure the linear transfer won't look as pretty on a map, but it should improve commutes just as well as LRT.

 

[sixrings]

It is random as it is not a destination. it seems you want to save money which I understand. But the suburbs should be getting decent transit too. BRT just creates a transfer. It isnt about having a pretty map its about eliminating as many linear transfers as possible. This is why the Sheppard LRT doesnt get traction and this is why many people want the RT to be subway the whole way. I get your numbers argument both ridership and costs but at some point we are cheaping out on something that will probably eventually need an extension, which is practically shovel ready to save money for a DRL which doesnt have a route. Anyways what is the purpose of using LRT technology if we cant extend it in sections. The whole purpose is to use technology that is relatively cheap to build and fast which is what a city in gridlock should be about.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

It is random as it is not a destination. it seems you want to save money which I understand. But the suburbs should be getting decent transit too. BRT just creates a transfer. It isnt about having a pretty map its about eliminating as many linear transfers as possible. This is why the Sheppard LRT doesnt get traction and this is why many people want the RT to be subway the whole way

The BRT doesn't create a transfer, it just moves the transfer point.

The vast majority of people using the Eglinton West corridor will be transferring from bus routes operating north/south in Etobickoe. For these people, with the BRT, their transfers are:
1. Bus from home to Mt. Dennis Station via traditional streets and BRT.
2. Mt. Dennis to Eglinton West via LRT
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

With the LRT extension, their transfers would be:
1. Bus from home to LRT stop
2. LRT stop to Eglinton West
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

So for these people, whether or not an LRT or BRT is built, they have the same number of transfers. Heck, the BRT might even have a better user experience, since the transfer point will be in a station, rather than a cold, dark, windy transit shelter on some random spot on Eglinton. Transferring on Eglinton West at night is actually my least favourite place to wait for transit since it's so secluded.

And for people who live on Eglinton, the BRT will get them to their destinations even faster than the LRT. The reason is:
1. BRT is travel speed is as fast as LRT, as long as they're built to the same specifications
2. Frequencies on BRT will be higher. The ECLRT would likely have every second westbound train terminate at Mt. Dennis, due to low usage west of that point. That means that the Eglinton West corridor would see peak hour headways of 6 min, and approaching 10 mins at night! Because the BRT has lower capacity vehicles, necessitating higher headways, and has multiple routes running along Eglinton West, the BRT would see headways likely approaching or exceeding twice as frequent as an LRT. That's shaving 3 to 5 minutes off commutes.

Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail.

Anyways what is the purpose of using LRT technology if we cant extend it in sections. The whole purpose is to use technology that is relatively cheap to build and fast which is what a city in gridlock should be about.

The BRT doesn't preclude future extensions of the ECLRT. Decades from now, if the area warrants an LRT extension, it will be a simple upgrade as all the right of ways are in place. Lay the track, run the electrical and that's it. Simple and cheap(er).

In the mean time, the Billion dollar saved can go to beinging the DRL to Eglinton or beyond, something that is a much higher priority and will conservatively impact 10x the commuters an Eglinton LRT extension would.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Well, if we wanted to be really creative - this BRT could give Miway the franchise for all passengers all the way from Renforth to Mount Dennis. Call it the first step to fare integration. That way the BRT is seamless, and there aren't duplicate bus lines on the same street. TTC could run a 192 style Rocket frm Mount Dennis to the Airport.

It all depends on the ridership numbers.

- Paul

That is a really good idea. Eliminates a transfer for people coming from Mississauga to Toronto. The TTC could continue to operate the rest of the north/south routes that would use the BRT to get to Mt. Dennis.

 

[sixrings]

The BRT doesn't create a transfer, it just moves the transfer point.

The vast majority of people using the Eglinton West corridor will be transferring from bus routes operating north/south in Etobickoe. For these people, with the BRT, their transfers are:
1. Bus from home to Mt. Dennis Station via traditional streets and BRT.
2. Mt. Dennis to Eglinton West via LRT
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

With the LRT extension, their transfers would be:
1. Bus from home to LRT stop
2. LRT stop to Eglinton West
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

So for these people, whether or not an LRT or BRT is built, they have the same number of transfers. Heck, the BRT might even have a better user experience, since the transfer point will be in a station, rather than a cold, dark, windy transit shelter on some random spot on Eglinton. Transferring on Eglinton West at night is actually my least favourite place to wait for transit since it's so secluded.

And for people who live on Eglinton, the BRT will get them to their destinations even faster than the LRT. The reason is:
1. BRT is travel speed is as fast as LRT, as long as they're built to the same specifications
2. Frequencies on BRT will be higher. The ECLRT would likely have every second westbound train terminate at Mt. Dennis, due to low usage west of that point. That means that the Eglinton West corridor would see peak hour headways of 6 min, and approaching 10 mins at night! Because the BRT has lower capacity vehicles, necessitating higher headways, and has multiple routes running along Eglinton West, the BRT would see headways likely approaching or exceeding twice as frequent as an LRT. That's shaving 3 to 5 minutes off commutes.

Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail.



The BRT doesn't preclude future extensions of the ECLRT. Decades from now, if the area warrants an LRT extension, it will be a simple upgrade as all the right of ways are in place. Lay the track, run the electrical and that's it. Simple and cheap(er).

In the mean time, the Billion dollar saved can go to beinging the DRL to Eglinton or beyond, something that is a much higher priority and will conservatively impact 10x the commuters an Eglinton LRT extension would.

Lets pretend you are somewhere on Kipling or Isslington. Typically in 2016 you take the bus to the bloor subway, which gets you to st george and then another transfer to downtown. Thats 1 Bus 2 Subway rides. If you made the LRT get to the airport the person could choose to take 1 Bus 1 LRT 1 Subway ride to get to the same location. Your set up would mean 1 Bus to Eglinton 1 Bus BRT to Weston, 1 LRT to Eglinton west, 1 Subway downtown. So in fact you have created one extra transfer. You could argue that the people could simply stay on their original route to the bloor line but shouldnt we be trying to divert some people off the bloor west line. And what happens if the person is trying to get to yonge and eglinton which is about to boom big time, again an additional transfer.

Also "Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail." this is really a problem. Many people for whatever reason are adverse to taking buses. Some find it uncomfortable how it weaves in and out of traffic for stops. Some outright think buses are for poor people. I would not agree with the latter but buses are simply not as comfortable as LRT. In a city which is grid locked we need people to take transit who can choose and afford other means of transportation , a car, but choose transit because it works for them. A big part of this is comfort. I cant see how one can argue that we should have elaborate stations to encourage ridership but at the same time not be in favour of transit which is more "comfortable." I guess the buck has to stop somewhere.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Lets pretend you are somewhere on Kipling or Isslington. Typically in 2016 you take the bus to the bloor subway, which gets you to st george and then another transfer to downtown. Thats 1 Bus 2 Subway rides. If you made the LRT get to the airport the person could choose to take 1 Bus 1 LRT 1 Subway ride to get to the same location. Your set up would mean 1 Bus to Eglinton 1 Bus BRT to Weston, 1 LRT to Eglinton west, 1 Subway downtown. So in fact you have created one extra transfer. You could argue that the people could simply stay on their original route to the bloor line but shouldnt we be trying to divert some people off the bloor west line.

The problem with your assessment is that you treat BRT as if it operates exactly the same as rail, and act as if bus routes can't be reconfigured. The wonderful thing about BRT is that their busses don't have to stay on the BRT. The busses can leave the BRT and travel on other streets. This isn't possible with LRT.

With a typical downtown-bound trip from Kipling, this is what your trip would look like on the BRT: Board the Kipling bus at a stop near your home. The bus continues down Kipling until it reaches Eglinton, where it turns left (east) onto the new Eglinton BRT. The bus the continues on the BRT, protected from traffic and not having to weave in and out of traffic, until it reaches Mt. Dennis Station. You transfer at Mt. Dennis Station to the Eglinton LRT, and finally transfer at Eglinton West Station to downtown.
Total transfers: 2

With the LRT: Board the Kipling bus at a stop near your home. The bus continues down Kipling until it reaches Eglinton. Transfer from the bus to the ECLRT stop at Kipling and Eglinton. Continue to Eglinton West Station and transfer to Line 1.
Total transfers: 2

The BRT simply moves the transfer point to Mt. Dennis; it does not add a new transfer point.

What the Eglinton BRT means is that everyone it Etobicoke should have a single seat ride to Mt. Dennis Station.

And what happens if the person is trying to get to yonge and eglinton which is about to boom big time, again an additional transfer.

There will be an additional transfer here. But that should be offset by the higher frequencies (lower waiting tim) of the BRT. With the LRT, you'd see peak hour headways of 6 minutes, while the BRT will be much more frequent for reasons I described in my previous post.

Also "Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail." this is really a problem. Many people for whatever reason are adverse to taking buses. Some find it uncomfortable how it weaves in and out of traffic for stops.

Busses in a BRT do not weave in and out of traffic. They stay on a straight path, like a streetcar.

And like I mentioned before, the BRT would permit more comfortable transfer than the LRT especially in winter and at night. This is because the EBRT transfer point is a subway station, while the ECLRT transfer points are on street, exposed to the elements and with poor nighttime lighting.

 

[LNahid2000]

With a typical downtown-bound trip from Kipling, this is what your trip would look like on the BRT: Board the Kipling bus at a stop near your home. The bus continues down Kipling until it reaches Eglinton, where it turns left (east) onto the new Eglinton BRT. The bus the continues on the EBRT until it reaches Mt. Dennis Station. You transfer at Mt. Dennis Station to the Eglinton LRT, and finally transfer at Eglinton West Station to downtown.
Total transfers: 3

If your destination is near Union, with SmartTrack, you may be able to get downtown with only 1 transfer (your example actually only has 2 transfers). The Kipling bus would go to Mount Dennis, and then SmartTrack would take you to Union.

 

[sixrings]

The Jane bus I can believe maybe redirected to Weston. Perhaps the Scarlette but. Not so optimistic about Kipling and Islington. Redirecting bus routes just further complicated things but that is my opinion. I suppose you are anti Sheppard LRT as well since that is in the BRT number range as well. Continuous lines on a grid seams easy to navigate and not frustrating to use but I guess were back to stopping the gravy despite electing a federal government which did have a huge transit infrastructure component and a conservative mayor who agreed Eglinton should have a line and a former former mayor who thought it was a priority so planned it, as well as people who filled in a giant hole 20 years ago.

 

[BurlOak]

Transit will never be as comfortable as car. The key is speed, reliabilty and hassle.
Add too many stops and speed suffers.
Add traffic collision and tie-ups affecting anything not grade-separated and you don't have consistent reliability. Add too many transfers and it's a hassle.

If we want to get people out of their cars, it's one bus to a grade-separated transit line and one transfer to get to your destination (maybe a bus or streetcar on the final leg is acceptable).

 

[sixrings]

Transit will never be as comfortable as car. The key is speed, reliabilty and hassle.
Add too many stops and speed suffers.
Add traffic collision and tie-ups affecting anything not grade-separated and you don't have consistent reliability. Add too many transfers and it's a hassle.

If we want to get people out of their cars, it's one bus to a grade-separated transit line and one transfer to get to your destination (maybe a bus or streetcar on the final leg is acceptable).

I agree it will never be as comfortable but the proof is at the Kiss and Rides. People seem to have no problem taking rail but once they get close to home and the bus is the second part of the journey many people call their loved ones to pick them up. This isnt just a TTC problem as it is seen also at GO stops in Mississauga, which I hope the Hurontario LRT helps with a bit. It doesn't matter what the reasons are but plenty of people physiologically do not like and will not ride the bus. Beggars cant be choosers can be transit planners attitude or just accepting this truth and working with it is the other option.

 

[crs1026]

The street to consider in this is Dixon, rather than Eglinton.

Etobicoke close to Eglinton is not likely to lead to much new east-west ridership. It makes sense that EA ridership numbers were the low side, although it will be interesting to see if they have changed when the latest studies come out.

Dixon has density. The Dixon bus connects to employment areas around the Airport, including the airport hotels. Malton-Dixon-Scarlet-Mount Dennis has potential to be a heavily used bus route. Even Malton-Dixon-Weston RER/ST will likely be well used.

If Dixon had superior connectivity to Mount Dennis, many people would transfer there rather than carrying on down to Eglinton - the north-south routes in Etobicoke are long hauls.

I do hope that the new look at ST will extend ECLRT to Jane. The ridership is there. Otherwise, north-south travel on Jane will be made more difficult as the TTC intends to run both the north and south legs of the Jane bus over to the Mount Dennis Hub.

I'm secretly hoping that the ridership projections have gone up and the viability of LRT west from Mount Dennis isn't open to challenge. Otherwise, we haven't made any progress towards getting a transit line to the airport. This is a valid objective even if light on ridership - but we can't waste a billion dollars if the ridership isn't there.

- Paul

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I agree it will never be as comfortable but the proof is at the Kiss and Rides. People seem to have no problem taking rail but once they get close to home and the bus is the second part of the journey many people call their loved ones to pick them up. This isnt just a TTC problem as it is seen also at GO stops in Mississauga, which I hope the Hurontario LRT helps with a bit. It doesn't matter what the reasons are but plenty of people physiologically do not like and will not ride the bus. Beggars cant be choosers can be transit planners attitude or just accepting this truth and working with it is the other option.

Well those people need to find other way of getting around. Spending $1.5 Billion to make 2,000 people feel marginally better about themselves is ridiculous. Plus, if getting people out of busses is the goal of transit expansion, then there are far more worthy projects to invest in. The Relief Line to Sheppard will get 10x more people out of busses than the ECLRT extension would.

I do hope that the new look at ST will extend ECLRT to Jane. The ridership is there. Otherwise, north-south travel on Jane will be made more difficult as the TTC intends to run both the north and south legs of the Jane bus over to the Mount Dennis Hub.

That won't happen. Extending to Jane means that people on Jane bus needing to get to RER will have to transfer to LRT, travel 1 stop and then transfer to RER. It's better to split the Jane route in two, and perhaps have one branch travelling straight up Jane without going to Mt. Dennis.

I'm secretly hoping that the ridership projections have gone up and the viability of LRT west from Mount Dennis isn't open to challenge. Otherwise, we haven't made any progress towards getting a transit line to the airport. This is a valid objective even if light on ridership - but we can't waste a billion dollars if the ridership isn't there.

The ECLRT had 500 peak hour riders at Pearson Airport in the EA. The UPX probably lowered this number further. Spending $1.5 Billion to connect a few hundred people to the airport is ridiculous.

I know why people want a TTC rail connection to the airport, but it needs to be understood that the kind of travel that happens at airports are not congruent with mass transit systems. A subway/LRT connection to Pearson is more symbolism than it is sound planning.

 

[nfitz]

The ECLRT had 500 peak hour riders at Pearson Airport in the EA.

Though that was westbound (away from downtown). Generally towards downtown is what's important.

The peak AM demand in the EA was 0.

 

[sixrings]

I am not advocating spending the money here and not the DRL. All numbers are going to pale in comparison to the DRL. That doesnt mean that places like Eglinton west shouldnt get LRT. There is no reason why we cant afford both projects through new user fees, tolls, taxes. It should not be the either or situation some are making it out to be.

 

[LNahid2000]

I am not advocating spending the money here and not the DRL. All numbers are going to pale in comparison to the DRL. That doesnt mean that places like Eglinton west shouldnt get LRT. There is no reason why we cant afford both projects through new user fees, tolls, taxes. It should not be the either or situation some are making it out to be.

There is always an opportunity cost of spending $1.5 billion on Eglinton west of Mount Dennis, and there are other projects after the DRL that would provide greater benefit than this line.