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

[TheTigerMaster]

I thought the time savings estimations already factored in the extra time to get to/from these grade separation stations because the savings can't possibly be that small otherwise. I mean the difference between grade separated and not separated at an intersection as low as 15 seconds? Sounds very unrealistic by itself.

Time savings estimations created by whom? If you’re talking about the ones I wrote last night, those came from the ECLRT EA by reading the average delay due to red lights expected at each individual intersection, and assuming this delay would vanish with grade separation (because there would be no traffic lights).

The 2-3 minute in time savings is only in-vehicle time savings. It does not include the extra time to get to/from the grade separated stations.

 

[crs1026]

Can you elaborate on this? I took a look at Martin Grove, and they calculated a 31 second walk time for north-south pedestrian crossings. This seems exceedingly reasonable to me, even for elderly pedestrians.

My concern was - somewhere in the report (and I have tried to find the exact reference, but can't put my finger on it) the modelling was altered to use a number other than what the City actually uses. That 31 second number may be reasonable in theory, but if the City reverts to its "real" number in actual practice, and that number is longer, then the actual experience will be different than the model.

To be clear - personally I'm not advocating for grade separation at *every* intersection, hence not arguing for a $1B added spend. But I do believe it is prudent at some. Martin Grove and Kipling are known and notorious traffic choke points today. If you look at the Graphic Summary of Traffic Conditions (Appendix II of the Traffic Report in the EA) this is clearly identified. The more granular data shows this also. The 'future' picture clearly shows this worsening.

If we back off the proposal to a couple of intersections, we reduce the spend but we also reduce the seconds of delay saved. I don't know if that makes the business case better or worse. Perhaps it's no different. However - we do know that Martin Grove especially is already a very big problem zone, and the data shows LRT exacerbating that. Kipling is similar. Some avoidance of risk just seems wise.

- Paul

 

[sixrings]

Time savings estimations created by whom? If you’re talking about the ones I wrote last night, those came from the ECLRT EA by reading the average delay due to red lights expected at each individual intersection, and assuming this delay would vanish with grade separation (because there would be no traffic lights).

The 2-3 minute in time savings is only in-vehicle time savings. It does not include the extra time to get to/from the grade separated stations.

Tiger I am sure you can tell I agree with you but I do think the general public only thinks about the time actually on the transit system. in other words they are less frustrated by stairs or elevators as long as when they are on the system it appears to be moving faster. Perhaps part of that is because once you are squished into a tight spot you want that experience to be as short as possible. versus being on platforms or walking up and down stairs isnt as claustrophobic. It is a huge expense for such a luxury. I also think part of this is motivated by people which i know whom will take go trains, or subways but will not take buses. We all know these people exist because kiss and ride areas are always full. Perhaps people don't care so much about the transfer times and everything else if they expect to use the service in this way. I am going to be in the minority but I would much prefer the extra billion dollars which it will take to grade separate this to go to finch lrt expansion or eglinton east which looks like it might not have much funding left.

 

[crs1026]

This is the main debate.

Those in Scarborough and Etobicoke want to reduce the travel time for long distances.

• A 70 minute long distance trip reduced to 50 minutes (and a 99% reliable travel time due to complete grade-separation) is huge and will positively affect ridership. A 70 minute long distance trip reduced to 60 minutes (with 75% reliable travel time due to at-grade operation) will not affect ridership.
• A 10 minute local trip reducing to 8 or increasing to 12 is not that big of a deal. Buses have higher frequency than LRT, so maybe they are best for local. Grade-separated may mean a longer walk since all mid-block stations are eliminated, so maybe takes a bit longer. Less frequent local buses along with grade-separated is likely the best, as elderly may have trouble even getting to LRT in-median stations.

A case in point: Yesterday I had to go to Square One. I walked to Islington/Bloor and caught the #3 bus along Bloor. (On that trip, one has a choice of routes, the 3 was the first one that came along) It felt like a typical slow, lazy bus ride. With minimal traffic congestion at mid-day, the driver had to dawdle at one point to avoid getting ahead of schedule. Coming home, I took the #109 to check out the Renforth transitway. The bus flew along the transitway and down the 427. It was a very different experience. Objectively, the 109 route is much less direct. I don't know if the 109 actually saved me any time over the #3. But the 109 was full, and 95% of riders made the full trip from MCC to Subway. It sure felt like higher order transit. I'm not sure one can analyse the transitway on dollars per second alone. But getting that busload off of the arterial roads across Mississauga and into Etobicoke makes a lot of sense.

PS - To abuse the Duke, It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that zoom.

- Paul

 

[raptor]

 

[drum118]

A case in point: Yesterday I had to go to Square One. I walked to Islington/Bloor and caught the #3 bus along Bloor. (On that trip, one has a choice of routes, the 3 was the first one that came along) It felt like a typical slow, lazy bus ride. With minimal traffic congestion at mid-day, the driver had to dawdle at one point to avoid getting ahead of schedule. Coming home, I took the #109 to check out the Renforth transitway. The bus flew along the transitway and down the 427. It was a very different experience. Objectively, the 109 route is much less direct. I don't know if the 109 actually saved me any time over the #3. But the 109 was full, and 95% of riders made the full trip from MCC to Subway. It sure felt like higher order transit. I'm not sure one can analyse the transitway on dollars per second alone. But getting that busload off of the arterial roads across Mississauga and into Etobicoke makes a lot of sense.

PS - To abuse the Duke, It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that zoom.

- Paul

Based on my experience, depending how fast the 109 can get you to/from Sq One to/from Islington depends on the 427 at all hours of the day. If traffic is moving, you can save about 6 minutes over the 3 route. If it crawling, the 3 is the faster route. At the same time, 3 goes into the terminal while 109 stops west of the terminal and you have to walk back to the lights and wait for them coming from Islington. You add that extra time to the fast trip time, its almost the same time as the 3. Going east is a different story, as you can catch the 109 at the terminal.

With construction taking place on Bloor for the new Six Point Interchange, all routes will loose time for the next 2 years. There are a few spots were the 3 can have traffic issues, but overall, don't loose much time. One thing, the 3 drivers like to make time is on Mississauga Valley Blvd thats a 40 km zone, yet been on far too many buses where drivers are doing 10-30 km over the limit even in the 2 schools zone. Ridership is a rollercoaster for the route at all hours to the point you make a few stops to the point its every stop, which slow service down including riders themselves.

Where the 109 does save rider time are the ones going to/from the Meadowville area either to/from Sq One or Islington.

Starting next year, 109 will be running on 10 minute headway which is far better than 3 that runs 10 at peak, 16-18 off peak as well 18 on Sat. Sunday its the pits with 22-23 headway and 30 on special holidays.

 

[drum118]

Relocation of the Bus Loop and Passenger Platform at TTC Kennedy Station
Starting as early as December 13, the existing Kennedy Station Bus Loop will temporarily be moved to facilitate construction of the new bus loop and passenger platform. TTC passengers can continue to access Kennedy Station via all existing entrances but will be required to board buses from a new temporary platform on the south side of the terminal. For more information, please read the notice on the website.

 

[aquateam]

Here is the ridership at each station, from the Transit City EA:

Lets weight the cost of grade separation, with the ridership at each stop and potential time savings: This is cost per minute saved per passenger.

The cost effectiveness of grade separation of intersections gets progressively worse as we travel west on on LRT. Jane Street grade separation performs best, at a cost of $618 per second per passenger to $929 per second per passenger. Martin Grove performs worst at $3,225 per second per passenger to $4,829 per second per passenger.

City Council is going to have to decide if they're willing to spend so much money, for a relatively small impact on travel times. Personally, I don't believe I'm willing to continue supporting any of these grade separations. $106 Million to save 30 seconds is a very steep price - and that's for the best performing of all the grade separations.

100% grade separation, whether that be elevated or tunnelled, would also provide terrible value for money, considering that would save only 2.5 minutes on the trip time.

U-turn phase lengths aren’t specified, however it seems reasonable to me that with a cycle length of 120 seconds, we could get 8 cars to make a u-turn with a 15-20 second u-turn phase.

Consider that a train would be coming once every 3 to 4 minutes. With a 20 second u-turn phase every 120 seconds, the probability of the train having coming up against a red light at any individual u-turning intersection is just 11% (I hope I’m remembering my probability correctly). And this is the worse case scenario, where there is no transit signal priority, where all u-turning intersections have traffic volume to justify 20 second u-turn phases, and where it is assumed a u-turn phase will be actuated 100% of the time. And even when the train does come up to a red light, it’s stopped for at most 20 seconds - not a huge delay.

I'm not sure how you got 11%, it would be 20/120 = 16.7%. How often the train comes doesn't impact the probability of the light being red when it arrives if the light is on a cycle.

But this is all a moot point: we are not going to try to back-calculate the travel time savings of grade separations across the line on the back of a napkin when there are already travel time simulations done by actual professionals.

Here is Metrolinx's report:

This is for at-grade LRT:

These are the stops assumed:

This is for grade separated:

Notice the stop spacing, which is a thousand times saner than anything produced by the city planning department:

So the difference is 14 minutes vs 22 minutes across the western section for full vs none grade separation (i.e. 8 minutes time savings total, not 2.5 minutes.) But if the ridership is as bad as the TC report suggests then this would still not be good value for money.

 

[BurlOak]

So the difference is 14 minutes vs 22 minutes across the western section for full vs none grade separation (i.e. 8 minutes time savings total, not 2.5 minutes.) But if the ridership is as bad as the TC report suggests then this would still not be good value for money.

Although if you look at the Business Case and Benefit-Cost ratio, the grade-separated is the best, and the only option with B/C greater than 1.0.

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-94621.pdf

 

[Hopkins123]

The trip from Martin Grove to Jane will take just 15 minutes. There is very little opportunity for significant time savings in absolute terms with the Crosstown West. This project has far more in common with your second bullet point than your first.

And of course, only a small minoritiy of riders will be making the trip from Martin Grove to all the way to Jane in the first place.

What the *bleep*?

Just 15 minutes? Way to trivialize the plight of long-distance commuters. By comparison, the trip from Jane Stn to Kipling Stn on the Bloor-Danforth is just 7 a mere minutes. Even the existing 32 bus service clocks in faster than 15 minutes. We're not spending billions of dollars to make the situation of getting across the Eglinton corridor even worse.

Better to push for full grade separation, which at $1.3 billion isn't a bad overcome for all parties involved.

 

[Avenue]

Exactly. Also, why would anyone travel here locally? Who on the earth would travel from Widdicombe to Royal York, let alone these riders being the majority. Eglinton West along this stretch is mainly blank (with low density residential to the north or south). People either want to get to their schools or employment areas, which are for the most part either in Mississauga or along Yonge street...

 

[BurlOak]

Exactly. Also, why would anyone travel here locally? Who on the earth would travel from Widdicombe to Royal York, let alone these riders being the majority. Eglinton West along this stretch is mainly blank (with low density residential to the north or south). People either want to get to their schools or employment areas, which are for the most part either in Mississauga or along Yonge street...

But isn't City Planning saying that this stretch is within 5 years of looking just like Queen Street?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The trip from Martin Grove to Jane will take just 15 minutes. There is very little opportunity for significant time savings in absolute terms with the Crosstown West. This project has far more in common with your second bullet point than your first.

And of course, only a small minoritiy of riders will be making the trip from Martin Grove to all the way to Jane in the first place.

What the *bleep*?

Just 15 minutes? Way to trivialize the plight of long-distance commuters. By comparison, the trip from Jane Stn to Kipling Stn on the Bloor-Danforth is just 7 a mere minutes. Even the existing 32 bus service clocks in faster than 15 minutes. We're not spending billions of dollars to make the situation of getting across the Eglinton corridor even worse.

Better to push for full grade separation, which at $1.3 billion isn't a bad overcome for all parties involved.

My bad, I had a typo. I meant to say Renforth in my original comment, but mentioned Martin Grove by accident. The travel time between Jane and Martin Grove on Eglinton Line is 10.5 minutes. The travel time between Jane and Renforth is 15 minutes.

But isn't City Planning saying that this stretch is within 5 years of looking just like Queen Street?

No. Nobody at City Planning has claimed that.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I'm not sure how you got 11%, it would be 20/120 = 17.8%. How often the train comes doesn't impact the probability of the light being red when it arrives if the light is on a cycle.

But this is all a moot point: we are not going to try to back-calculate the travel time savings of grade separations across the line on the back of a napkin when there are already travel time simulations done by actual professionals.

Here is Metrolinx's report:

This is for at-grade LRT:
View attachment 129669
These are the stops assumed:
View attachment 129670

This is for grade separated:
View attachment 129667

Notice the stop spacing, which is a thousand times saner than anything produced by the city planning department:
View attachment 129668

So the difference is 14 minutes vs 22 minutes across the western section for full vs none grade separation (i.e. 8 minutes time savings total, not 2.5 minutes.) But if the ridership is as bad as the TC report suggests then this would still not be good value for money.

When reading the Business Case Analysis carefully, you'd see that they assume the speeds of the trains. Metrolinx didn't do any kind of quantitative study to determine how quickly the trains would be moving; that was undertaken in the Environmental Assessment. If what I recall from the Metrolinx BCA's is correct, they assumed all the Transit City LRTs would have 22 km/h running speeds, regardless of their location.

I'm not sure how you got 11%, it would be 20/120 = 17.8%. How often the train comes doesn't impact the probability of the light being red when it arrives if the light is on a cycle.

Yes, I believe you're right about that. But regardless, 17% still isn't a huge probability, especially when you consider that's the probability the tram of hitting a red at the worst-perfoming modified left turn proposed for the line.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

But this is all a moot point: we are not going to try to back-calculate the travel time savings of grade separations across the line on the back of a napkin when there are already travel time simulations done by actual professionals.

Here is Metrolinx's report:

This is for at-grade LRT:
View attachment 129669
These are the stops assumed:
View attachment 129670

This is for grade separated:
View attachment 129667

Notice the stop spacing, which is a thousand times saner than anything produced by the city planning department:
View attachment 129668

So the difference is 14 minutes vs 22 minutes across the western section for full vs none grade separation (i.e. 8 minutes time savings total, not 2.5 minutes.) But if the ridership is as bad as the TC report suggests then this would still not be good value for money.

When reading the Business Case Analysis carefully, you'd see that they assume the speeds of the trains. Metrolinx didn't do any kind of quantitative study to determine how quickly the trains would be moving; that was undertaken in the Environmental Assessment. If what I recall from the Metrolinx BCA's is correct, they assumed all the Transit City LRTs would have 22 km/h running speeds, regardless of their location.

Again, I emphasize the the data in the BCA aren't travel time simulations, they're travel time assumptions. The simulations are in the EA

Here's where they explicitly mention that the speeds of the trains are assumed. If I recall correctly, in a lot of analysis the TC LRT lines were assumed to be running at 22 km/h, because TTC and Metrolinx extrapolated the Sheppard East LRT running speed to the entire network, which is obviously imprecise. The details in the Environmental Assessment are more accurate, as the performance is extensively modelled, and not merely assumed. Don't read too much into the BCA for technical details on the operations of a particular proposal. The BCA is intended to provide a general overview of the potential benefits of a proposal, and not to define technical details on how the project is to be implemented.