Toronto's and Province's New 12.4B Eglinton/SRT/Sheppard Plan

[sixrings]

What I dont understand is people who HATED the SELRT plan who are happy now for the Sheppard Subway plan... But are happy because essentially it will never happen... SO some people hate LRT so much that they would rather nothing happen (even for 30 years if they want the DRL built first) VErsus building LRT????? This doesnt seem to make any sense to me.......... How is nothing (essentially FOREVER) better then Something (NOW)??????????

 

[gweed123]

What I dont understand is people who HATED the SELRT plan who are happy now for the Sheppard Subway plan... But are happy because essentially it will never happen... SO some people hate LRT so much that they would rather nothing happen (even for 30 years if they want the DRL built first) VErsus building LRT????? This doesnt seem to make any sense to me.......... How is nothing (essentially FOREVER) better then Something (NOW)??????????

Wow, way to boil down a complex opinion into a "you hate LRT" statement.

1) I don't think anyone on this board has openly said that Ford's Sheppard proposal is a good proposal (if you do, please state so for the record, because I can't remember anyone explicitly saying that they like it). People may agree with the general intent of the Sheppard Subway proposal, but the situation as envisioned by Ford I don't think has a lot of support, even amongst the pro-subway crowd.

2) Those of us who did hate the SELRT proposal didn't hate it because it was LRT, we hated it because it was the wrong technology choice for the corridor. It created a permanent linear transfer point between two different technologies at the midpoint of a corridor. It was also a near billion dollar proposal for an LRT that for over half its route travelled along a section that barely even justifies BRT, let alone LRT. It also bypassed a Provincially-designated development and transit hub that was supposed to be the anchor for nearly all municipal transit in the eastern GTA. I didn't hate the SELRT because it was LRT, I hated the SELRT because it was a dumb proposal.

Saying that because people hated the SELRT, that means they hate LRT in general is like saying "because you hate Dr. Pepper, you hate all soft drinks". There are many other LRT projects that I'm in favour of (the Ottawa LRT, the WWLRT, the Hurontario LRT, the ECRLT, just to name a few).

3) I'm happy that we didn't piss away nearly a billion dollars on a shitty project that would have been a waste of money. Is that a concise enough answer for you?

 

[Hipster Duck]

Sheppard won't happen, and Finch certainly won't happen. My guess is that by the time the next election rolls around, Ford's Sheppard proposal will be just as far along as it is now (ie nowhere), and the City will make a swing back towards the political left. At this point, we just have to hope that the main candidate on the left has a DRL in their platform. .

Sadly, I don't think the DRL will ever be built. Politicians don't tend to frame rapid transit expansion as a way to improve capacity and travel speeds but as a) a real estate development tool, b) a way to improve mobility for a socially vulnerable population (eg. Transit City), c) a tool to reduce congestion on highways.

In all 3 respects, the DRL is considered "unnecessary": it doesn't need to catalyze development because that development is already happening regardless of whether something gets built; the area already has surface transit - regardless of how slow, crowded or unreliable it might be - so vulnerable people already have a choice, and, c) intra-downtown travel patterns don't cause highway congestion, and if there's congestion coming into downtown that would be from suburbanites who would be more of a candidate for improved GO service.

I'm not saying that the DRL shouldn't be built - I think it's one of the most important expansions we can take - but in order for it to happen there has to be a complete 180 in the way decision makers legitimize rapid transit expansion, and that's not an easy thing to change.

 

[sixrings]

Well I just would like to See more then one line worked on... Eglintons great (I will benefit from it since I live on it) BUT other areas need transit as well... I would have liked to see the Finch LRT get built because it was justifiable by ridership and again it would have been a great witness to the rest of the city which is SUBWAY only that there are other ways to move people arround... Now we have to hope that HUrontario can be an example to the city... And even by then we will have wasted so much time... I understand your desire for BRT which I can somewhat get but LRT would be a welcomed improvement in many areas. BRT and Articualted busses just doesnt make me feel like transit is a REAL priority to the city...

ALL im saying is I wish ROB FORD was still getting pressure to do something then just being content with well at least we get Eglinton and were not wasting money on SHeppard..

 

[Brandon716]

Many heavily used bus routes in Ottawa used articulated buses (I'm thinking specifically of the 118). It wouldn't be a long term solution, but as a stop-gap way to increase capacity without making any infrastructure changes, I think it would be worth it.

I really don't understand the TTC's aversion to artics.

Ottawa is even better of an example. They basically service routes with articulated buses on such a frequent basis that it effectively services as an LRT would. I agree the TTC shouldn't be averse to trying a busway style, articulated bus system along Finch West to relieve congestion now instead of waiting years. It was already needed years ago...

 

[gweed123]

Ottawa is even better of an example. They basically service routes with articulated buses on such a frequent basis that it effectively services as an LRT would. I agree the TTC shouldn't be averse to trying a busway style, articulated bus system along Finch West to relieve congestion now instead of waiting years. It was already needed years ago...

I think BRT has 3 optimal purposes:

1) On suburban arterial roads where ridership and congestion are high enough to warrant a form of enhanced bus service, but not high enough to warrant a full LRT (Sheppard is a prime example of this). Curbside bus lanes increase the frequency and reliability of the existing transit, without the need for substantial amounts of new equipment, and only relatively modest investments in infrastructure (compared to LRT to subway).

2) On routes where overlapping bus service is key. Ottawa implements this extensively with express buses running overtop of local and rapid transit bus routes. All 3 types of services use the same corridor. This scenario is pretty much unique to BRT, as building this type of thing for LRT or subway would cost a fortune. Look at the Southwest Transitway in Ottawa as an example of this. The local routes (174, etc), the Transitway route (95), and the Express routes (75, etc) all run along the same curbside lanes.

3) As a pre-cursor to LRT, where either funds or ridership levels do not warrant immediate investment in LRT. Nearly all of Ottawa's grade-separated Transitway has been built with this in mind. When trying to boost transit ridership in suburban areas, a larger amount of moderate improvement is often better than a limited amount of significant improvement.

 

[Brandon716]

BTW, in regards to DRL comments, there wasn't any funding left over for a DRL either if TC would have been completed. It takes an entirely new political push to go back to the DRL. DRL funding is independent of the cancelled TC project or this new plan.

Here is my dream mock-up for a DRL after the current plan is completed. This DRL wouldn't be a subway with TTC style heavy rail cars, it would be a heavy grade LRT network with multiple, high grade LRV's per stop (articulated LRV's that could be around 100m in length, high capacity) with it mostly underground downtown and along Don Mills, above ground where possible to reduce costs (but never in the street/going through traffic lights). It'd go from Airport to Weston/Dixon connecting at the ends of St Clair and Eglinton LRT and down to downtown, hop the Don Valley and hug the new line of condos on the east side, then hop back over the Don Valley and up Don Mills to past Finch.

In the distant future, the Sheppard Subway could be completed out to meet this DRL to the airport, and maybe Finch could eventually get something. But that's just conceptual. I think LRT technology is useful, when implemented properly. I think a DRL could be successful as LRT technology as long as it is underground mostly and truly rapid transit.

 

[Filip]

I think BRT has 3 optimal purposes:

1) On suburban arterial roads where ridership and congestion are high enough to warrant a form of enhanced bus service, but not high enough to warrant a full LRT (Sheppard is a prime example of this). Curbside bus lanes increase the frequency and reliability of the existing transit, without the need for substantial amounts of new equipment, and only relatively modest investments in infrastructure (compared to LRT to subway).

2) On routes where overlapping bus service is key. Ottawa implements this extensively with express buses running overtop of local and rapid transit bus routes. All 3 types of services use the same corridor. This scenario is pretty much unique to BRT, as building this type of thing for LRT or subway would cost a fortune. Look at the Southwest Transitway in Ottawa as an example of this. The local routes (174, etc), the Transitway route (95), and the Express routes (75, etc) all run along the same curbside lanes.

3) As a pre-cursor to LRT, where either funds or ridership levels do not warrant immediate investment in LRT. Nearly all of Ottawa's grade-separated Transitway has been built with this in mind. When trying to boost transit ridership in suburban areas, a larger amount of moderate improvement is often better than a limited amount of significant improvement.

Ottawa's bus system is an incredible, coordinated ballet of buses. I never thought bus transit could be so civil until I moved here!

I take the 114 to get to Hurdman and then switch to the 4 to get to Carleton. Both are considered 'local' buses, as they are not Transitway routes (the 90s series are). The 114 rolls up St Laurent and then connects to the Transitway until Hurdman, saving maybe 10 mins over regular roads. Then the 4 from Hurdman flies down that same Transitway until Heron where it goes back into regular roads to reach Carleton. This commute takes me 20-30mins tops; without the Transitway it would be close to an hour, knowing how horrid the traffic in Ottawa can get.

 

[gweed123]

Ottawa's bus system is an incredible, coordinated ballet of buses. I never thought bus transit could be so civil until I moved here!

I take the 114 to get to Hurdman and then switch to the 4 to get to Carleton. Both are considered 'local' buses, as they are not Transitway routes (the 90s series are). The 114 rolls up St Laurent and then connects to the Transitway until Hurdman, saving maybe 10 mins over regular roads. Then the 4 from Hurdman flies down that same Transitway until Heron where it goes back into regular roads to reach Carleton. This commute takes me 20-30mins tops; without the Transitway it would be close to an hour, knowing how horrid the traffic in Ottawa can get.

I agree completely. It's really hard to explain to somebody who's never rode it how well it actually works. People tend to think of rapid transit and regular bus routes as completely separate entities, that you need to transfer from one to get onto the other. In Ottawa this isn't the case. Some regular bus routes use the Transitway for over a third of their route length, before they exit and then serve a specific community as a local bus. With BRT, you can run multiple routes (in some cases upwards of 10 routes run on the same stretch of Transitway) along the same corridor. I see the future bus lanes on Sheppard and Finch acting very much like this. Buses from all over Scarborough run local in their own neighbourhoods, and then once they hit Sheppard or McCowan, run express (or semi-express, with only a couple stops) to Don Mills or STC. A bus can provide local service in Malvern, but once it crosses Sheppard, it goes straight to STC via Sheppard and McCowan. It's an infinitely more flexible system than LRT, especially when you're dealing with only moderate passenger volumes.

 

[Rainforest]

Here is my dream mock-up for a DRL after the current plan is completed. This DRL wouldn't be a subway with TTC style heavy rail cars, it would be a heavy grade LRT network with multiple, high grade LRV's per stop (articulated LRV's that could be around 100m in length, high capacity) with it mostly underground downtown and along Don Mills, above ground where possible to reduce costs (but never in the street/going through traffic lights). It'd go from Airport to Weston/Dixon connecting at the ends of St Clair and Eglinton LRT and down to downtown, hop the Don Valley and hug the new line of condos on the east side, then hop back over the Don Valley and up Don Mills to past Finch.

Given the massive ridership in the downtown section (up to 17,000 pphpd according to Metrolinx's modeling), HRT technology will actually be more economical than LRT.

If the line never runs on street, then there is no much saving from using LRT over HRT. But the light rail cars cost more than subway cars of the same capacity.

 

[Rainforest]

Sadly, I don't think the DRL will ever be built. Politicians don't tend to frame rapid transit expansion as a way to improve capacity and travel speeds but as a) a real estate development tool, b) a way to improve mobility for a socially vulnerable population (eg. Transit City), c) a tool to reduce congestion on highways.

In all 3 respects, the DRL is considered "unnecessary": it doesn't need to catalyze development because that development is already happening regardless of whether something gets built; the area already has surface transit - regardless of how slow, crowded or unreliable it might be - so vulnerable people already have a choice, and, c) intra-downtown travel patterns don't cause highway congestion, and if there's congestion coming into downtown that would be from suburbanites who would be more of a candidate for improved GO service.

I'm not saying that the DRL shouldn't be built - I think it's one of the most important expansions we can take - but in order for it to happen there has to be a complete 180 in the way decision makers legitimize rapid transit expansion, and that's not an easy thing to change.

I'd think that DRL can be marketed on (b) and (c), and to a lesser extent, even on (a).

b) Improves mobility for the relatively poor residents living west and east of downtown (note that all Transit City streets have bus service, and that did not prevent their inclusion in the LRT plan).

c) Taps into the latent transit demand: people who would take subway to downtown, but drive instead because YUS is so crowded.

a) Won't trigger massive new construction except in some pockets, but will help revitalize areas west and especially east of downtown.

 

[gweed123]

BTW, in regards to DRL comments, there wasn't any funding left over for a DRL either if TC would have been completed. It takes an entirely new political push to go back to the DRL. DRL funding is independent of the cancelled TC project or this new plan.

Here is my dream mock-up for a DRL after the current plan is completed. This DRL wouldn't be a subway with TTC style heavy rail cars, it would be a heavy grade LRT network with multiple, high grade LRV's per stop (articulated LRV's that could be around 100m in length, high capacity) with it mostly underground downtown and along Don Mills, above ground where possible to reduce costs (but never in the street/going through traffic lights). It'd go from Airport to Weston/Dixon connecting at the ends of St Clair and Eglinton LRT and down to downtown, hop the Don Valley and hug the new line of condos on the east side, then hop back over the Don Valley and up Don Mills to past Finch.

In the distant future, the Sheppard Subway could be completed out to meet this DRL to the airport, and maybe Finch could eventually get something. But that's just conceptual. I think LRT technology is useful, when implemented properly. I think a DRL could be successful as LRT technology as long as it is underground mostly and truly rapid transit.

If you're going to do it as LRT, might as well interline it with the Eglinton LRT out to the airport, instead of doing it along what looks like Lawrence. Use the Richview corridor to its full potential and 4 track that section if you need to, because building 4 tracks in 1 ROW would still be cheaper than building two 2 tracks in 2 separate ROWs.

 

[gweed123]

c) Taps into the latent transit demand: people who would take subway to downtown, but drive instead because YUS is so crowded.

"You're on the Yonge subway heading south from Bloor. Look to your left. Look to your right. If the DRL were built, 1 of you 3 would be on that line instead. Think of how much more pleasant your commute would be."

There's your marketing pitch right there. My God, that sounds kinda like an Old Spice ad, hahaha.

 

[valvenis]

"...Anything is possible when you build the DRL. I’m on a horse.â€

 

[Jaye101]

Wow, way to boil down a complex opinion into a "you hate LRT" statement.

1) I don't think anyone on this board has openly said that Ford's Sheppard proposal is a good proposal (if you do, please state so for the record, because I can't remember anyone explicitly saying that they like it). People may agree with the general intent of the Sheppard Subway proposal, but the situation as envisioned by Ford I don't think has a lot of support, even amongst the pro-subway crowd.

2) Those of us who did hate the SELRT proposal didn't hate it because it was LRT, we hated it because it was the wrong technology choice for the corridor. It created a permanent linear transfer point between two different technologies at the midpoint of a corridor. It was also a near billion dollar proposal for an LRT that for over half its route travelled along a section that barely even justifies BRT, let alone LRT. It also bypassed a Provincially-designated development and transit hub that was supposed to be the anchor for nearly all municipal transit in the eastern GTA. I didn't hate the SELRT because it was LRT, I hated the SELRT because it was a dumb proposal.

Saying that because people hated the SELRT, that means they hate LRT in general is like saying "because you hate Dr. Pepper, you hate all soft drinks". There are many other LRT projects that I'm in favour of (the Ottawa LRT, the WWLRT, the Hurontario LRT, the ECRLT, just to name a few).

3) I'm happy that we didn't piss away nearly a billion dollars on a shitty project that would have been a waste of money. Is that a concise enough answer for you?

Have you ever tried riding the 85 or 39 before? Scarborough's no Mississauga.