Mississauga Hurontario-Main Line 10 LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

[doady]

The platforms will be design to hold 3 cars, but built for 2 at first. 3 cars were always in the plan.

In fact, you only need 1 car every 10 minutes for the next 5 years before moving to a 5 minute headway for off peak. After that, you will have to move to 2 cars trains.

If you go to 5 minute headway from day one, you don't need to change your schedule for the next 15 years, as you only need to start adding the 2nd and 3rd car. Once you decide to move to the 3rd car, it will take a few months to add the rest of the platform for it, at as well having the funds to do it.

One 100 foot long LRT car every 10 minutes is barely more capacity, if at all, than the current bus service now with a 40 foot bus every 3 to 4 minutes. They'd have to do a lot better than that or otherwise they should just scrap the LRT.

Searching through the master plan again, they do mention the possibility of 3-car trains, but also that some of the stations will be too small to accomodate such long trains.

The report says that a light rail line will need a headway of 2.5 minutes to satisfy the peak point demand, but since that headway is too low, they will have to couple the LRVs into 2-car trains for a 5-minute headway. (it also says that a BRT line would require a 95 second headway to satisfy demand, which was why LRT was recommended instead of BRT).

It makes no sense having Hurontario and Eglinton have the same capacity when Eglinton is obviously much busier. 3 car light rail trains are fine for Hurontario, but the much busier Eglinton should have been a subway.

I don't think there is actually a huge difference in ridership between Hurontario and Eglinton. But based on the ridership projections, even Hurontario will push the limits of LRT capacity, let alone Eglinton. I think the fact that Eglinton is a narrow, inner city corridor should have automatically disqualified LRT from being an option right there. But of course, as far as I know no alternative was actually compared to LRT for Eglinton as it was for Hurontario, so "option" is kind of a misnomer.

 

[TOareaFan]

I don't think there is actually a huge difference in ridership between Hurontario and Eglinton. But based on the ridership projections, even Hurontario will push the limits of LRT capacity, let alone Eglinton. I think the fact that Eglinton is a narrow, inner city corridor should have automatically disqualified LRT from being an option right there. But of course, as far as I know no alternative was actually compared to LRT for Eglinton as it was for Hurontario, so "option" is kind of a misnomer.

There was a discussion about this in the "Tim Hudak's plans" thread and I had asked a question but not sure it was answered....was trying to understand the ridership projections in this document.

http://lrt-mississauga.brampton.ca/.../Master-Plan/hurontario_MP_Part1_Chapter3.pdf

On page 98 (pg 28 of pdf) this chart appears which (if I read it correctly) shows the peak demand can be comfortably met by LRT (and can actually be met by BRT).

What I wondered in the other discussion was if that peak demand was driven, in part, by the assumptions in this chart:

I find some of those assumptions a bit hard to swallow (if I am reading it correctly). For example, Brampton GO - Steeles (southbound) currently sees transit getting 8.4% of the traffic but that leaps (in the base LRT case) to 71.1%? Similarly, Burnhamthorpe to Dundas goes from 11.8% to 64.8%?

Again, I am not sure if I am reading these right (and don't mind being shown how I am not) but if the ridership projections at that peak level are served by, either, BRT or LRT and that those projections themselves are based on such massive jumps in transit utilization....I have a hard time believing them.

 

[rbt]

I find some of those assumptions a bit hard to swallow (if I am reading it correctly). For example, Brampton GO - Steeles (southbound) currently sees transit getting 8.4% of the traffic but that leaps (in the base LRT case) to 71.1%? Similarly, Burnhamthorpe to Dundas goes from 11.8% to 64.8%?

Again, I am not sure if I am reading these right (and don't mind being shown how I am not) but if the ridership projections at that peak level are served by, either, BRT or LRT and that those projections themselves are based on such massive jumps in transit utilization....I have a hard time believing them.

I buy it. The line will be operated as a backbone with numerous feeder buses intersecting it. Adjacent and slower north/south routes will see a bit of ridership drop as people migrate to taking this new backbone route.

This is similar to Yonge subway carrying 99.99% of the mode-share for Yonge but only about 40% of the trips for people who live near Yonge are carried by transit. The answer is that a very large chunk of Yonge subway ridership does not originate on Yonge.

 

[andrewpmk]

I don't think there is actually a huge difference in ridership between Hurontario and Eglinton. But based on the ridership projections, even Hurontario will push the limits of LRT capacity, let alone Eglinton. I think the fact that Eglinton is a narrow, inner city corridor should have automatically disqualified LRT from being an option right there. But of course, as far as I know no alternative was actually compared to LRT for Eglinton as it was for Hurontario, so "option" is kind of a misnomer.

Really? Hurontario is basically a substitute for the 410 and Eglinton is a substitute for the 401. The 401 is much busier than the 410 (though both have terrible traffic) and Eglinton is much longer than Hurontario (particularly if extended west to meet Hurontario). So I would expect Hurontario to be within the LRT capacity range but Eglinton could easily exceed it.

 

[TOareaFan]

I buy it. The line will be operated as a backbone with numerous feeder buses intersecting it. Adjacent and slower north/south routes will see a bit of ridership drop as people migrate to taking this new backbone route.

This is similar to Yonge subway carrying 99.99% of the mode-share for Yonge but only about 40% of the trips for people who live near Yonge are carried by transit. The answer is that a very large chunk of Yonge subway ridership does not originate on Yonge.

Maybe I am asking the wrong question the wrong way. ...I dunno.

Focusing on that Brampton GO to Steeles. What that chart says to me is that right now, with an upgraded bus line, of the people making that journey 8.4% choose to do so via transit. Replace that bus with a LRT and the number changes to 71.1%?

That just does not ring true to me at all.

EDIT: to accept that number we would have to accept that for every 1 person on one of those Zum buses now there are 8 - 9 saying, "hell no, but if it were a LRT I would".

 

[doady]

There was a discussion about this in the "Tim Hudak's plans" thread and I had asked a question but not sure it was answered....was trying to understand the ridership projections in this document.

http://lrt-mississauga.brampton.ca/.../Master-Plan/hurontario_MP_Part1_Chapter3.pdf

On page 98 (pg 28 of pdf) this chart appears which (if I read it correctly) shows the peak demand can be comfortably met by LRT (and can actually be met by BRT).

View attachment 20571

Well according to that, Hurontario is theoretically well within in the limit of BRT capacity as well. But there are many different implementation of BRT, including full grade separation like the Mississauga Transitway. BRT as it could be implemented on Hurontario can not handle the projected ridership without causing major interference to other traffic.

Likewise the projected ridership for Hurontario-Main LRT, approaches the practical limit for LRT as LRT could be implemented along Hurontario. They could add a third LRV to the trains (and based on the ridership projections, the report says Hurontario will need 3-car trains by 2031), but the report states that parts of Hurontario have no room even for stations that can handle 3-car trains, let alone 4-car or more trains.

Really? Hurontario is basically a substitute for the 410 and Eglinton is a substitute for the 401. The 401 is much busier than the 410 (though both have terrible traffic) and Eglinton is much longer than Hurontario (particularly if extended west to meet Hurontario). So I would expect Hurontario to be within the LRT capacity range but Eglinton could easily exceed it.

Are you saying Britannia would have been a better choice for LRT than Hurontario because it's close to 401??

Hurontario-Main has a projected annual ridership of 29 million, Eglinton Crosstown 53 million. Peak point demand of 3400 vs 5000. It's not a world of difference.

 

[TOareaFan]

Likewise the projected ridership for Hurontario-Main LRT, approaches the practical limit for LRT as LRT could be implemented along Hurontario. They could add a third LRV to the trains (and based on the ridership projections, the report says Hurontario will need 3-car trains by 2031), but the report states that parts of Hurontario have no room even for stations that can handle 3-car trains, let alone 4-car or more trains.



Hurontario-Main has a projected annual ridership of 29 million, Eglinton Crosstown 53 million. Peak point demand of 3400 vs 5000. It's not a world of difference.

I guess that brings us back to those ridership projections that I am really struggling with.

 

[andrewpmk]

I guess that brings us back to those ridership projections that I am really struggling with.

These projections are extremely inaccurate. The issue is, what happens if Eglinton has 2x or more riders than projected?

 

[rbt]

Maybe I am asking the wrong question the wrong way. ...I dunno.

Focusing on that Brampton GO to Steeles. What that chart says to me is that right now, with an upgraded bus line, of the people making that journey 8.4% choose to do so via transit. Replace that bus with a LRT and the number changes to 71.1%?

That just does not ring true to me at all.

EDIT: to accept that number we would have to accept that for every 1 person on one of those Zum buses now there are 8 - 9 saying, "hell no, but if it were a LRT I would".

You just need to accept that the LRT is more attractive than a competing bus route on a different street and given the choice people will transfer to the LRT with empty seats instead of the bus route with standing room only. Zum is not, in it's current form, more attractive than alternative bus routes. If it was 2 minute frequencies rather than 20 minute frequencies then you might have something.

2 minute frequencies of Zum is about equal to the LRT at 8 minute frequencies capacity wise. I'm hoping the LRT will run at 5 minute frequencies most of the day.

What the number really says is the carrying capacity of the street increased by about 300%; and people will change their travel to fill the empty seats. It's really similar to a highway and induced demand; over time people will change to use it just because it's more comfortable (more frequent, more seats, ...).

It's not about local demand, it's about re-routing people through the network to the high-capacity backbone. Zum doesn't run with the quality of service necessary to do that.

Finch, as currently implemented in Toronto, probably does (45 second frequencies). It attracts far higher ridership than routes one block north/south. People are using it as a major artery for east/west travel.

 

[rbt]

These projections are extremely inaccurate. The issue is, what happens if Eglinton has 2x or more riders than projected?

It won't. Eglinton is a feeder route at best; very different situation. Transferring onto Eglinton does not get you to your destination any faster than the current alternatives. It's not worth going out of your way for. People will go North to Bloor and South later on to avoid east/west alternatives. I don't see very many people going south from York Mills then across Eglinton, then North later on.

Eglinton will attract riders due to comfort (get a seat on Eglinton, not Bloor). As soon as the seats are full it's growth rate will stall until B/D uncomfortably packed; then Eglinton will take the excess.

Of course, Eglinton & Yonge is going to be a complete mess until the DRL shows up; and the DRL will relieve Eglinton just as much as Bloor giving the line plenty of capacity again.

The only way Eglinton gets overpacked within 50 years is if we run the DRL up Bay/Avenue streets instead of somewhere far East of Yonge; or private vehicles become unaffordable to the majority of the population although in that case every street immediately becomes a multi-lane BRT due to eliminated congestion.

 

[andrewpmk]

It won't. Eglinton is a feeder route at best; very different situation. Transferring onto Eglinton does not get you to your destination any faster than the current alternatives.

Eglinton will attract riders due to comfort (get a seat on Eglinton, not Bloor). As soon as the seats are full it's growth rate will stall.

The thing is many people's destinations are somewhere in Mississauga. This is why we see massive traffic jams on the Gardiner and 401 going west in the morning and east in the afternoon. So once the line is extended to the airport, I think it will be extremely busy.

 

[CapitalSeven]

Eglinton will be more reliable and a bit faster in the at-grade section. It will be much faster in the underground section. Whether riders switch to it from the existing subway will depend on individual circumstances.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Even if eglinton has twice the projected ridership (12k) it will still be within the maximum of the underground section where it will occur, which has a capacity of 20k. The surface portion of Eglinton has a very similar ridership figure as Hurontario. Eglinton has been designed with plenty of extra capacity on top of opening day. 12k is unlikely anyway, that was the number they were predicting when the SRT through routed with it under Fords plan. I have a feeling opening day will see more than the predicted 5,900 PPHD, probably closer to 6,500 or 7,000. Even then there would still be room for ridership to triple though. Surface portions of LRTs can handle around 10k with 3 minute frequencies and 3 car trains, which should be more than enough for Sheppard, Finch, and Hurontario.

 

[rbt]

The thing is many people's destinations are somewhere in Mississauga. This is why we see massive traffic jams on the Gardiner and 401 going west in the morning and east in the afternoon. So once the line is extended to the airport, I think it will be extremely busy.

Eglinton has great counter-flow opportunities which will really help it's operating budget.

That doesn't impact the peak point/direction carrying capacity though. Much as the thousands who head north from Union every morning are just noise to the TTC. Great to have but no special planning is required. The waste (empty trains) from peak-point peak-direction is more than sufficient to provide service to them.


I don't know if Mississauga's numbers are correct but I can see how they got them for that route and why Eglinton would be completely different.

 

[doady]

I guess that brings us back to those ridership projections that I am really struggling with.

I don't know what you are talking about.