Transit City Plan

[Rainforest]

For what it's worth, Ottawa is considering implementing the same setup on Bank St from Billings Bridge to downtown, as well as on Holland from Tunney's Pasture to Carling, so it looks like the planners seem to like it.

It makes a lot of sense, because that extra freedom of movement for buses matters most during peak. Outside of peak, that lane can be used for parking or general traffic. I can see this being used on a lot of pre-WWII arterials where there is demand for increased transit service, but nothing near warranting a tunnel or elevated structure. It's much easier to implement this with buses than with streetcars, because operations can switch between general lanes and dedicated lanes depending on the time of day.

As far as Toronto goes, I can see this being implemented on Dufferin during peak periods, because it's never going to get a tunnel, and the street is never going to be widened, but demand on the Dufferin bus only seems to be going up.

And I think it's partly political, partly technical. It's political in the sense that store owners don't want to see the parking in front of their stores disappear (just look at St. Clair West). The parking is already taken away during rush hours on most streets like that anyway, so it's no loss to the businesses if it's buses or cars, because people can't stop there anyway. It's technical in the sense that having only 1 general traffic lane can be bad news on a lot of streets. During rush hours they usually ban left turns, so the one lane moves pretty well, but I don't think that would fly outside of rush hours when left turns are allowed. 1 car turning left and the whole street stops dead. It CAN be done, but there are a lot of technical and political maneuvers that need to be done in order to make sure it isn't a complete disaster, and I think a lot of cities just shy away from it for that reason.

It sound like a plan for Dufferin. Though, it would require more aggressive removal of left turns. Presently, left turns are prohibited at most (not all) major intersections, but allowed at minor side streets. Given that Dufferin south of Eglinton has no dedicated left-turn lanes, even one car trying to make a left can block the traffic flow for a long time. (In fact, sometimes it happens even with two general traffic lanes: the right lane is blocked by a car trying to make a right and waiting for pedestrians, or a bus at the nearside stop.)

 

[gweed123]

So I decided to put what I was talking about a few days ago into map form, so that it looks pretty clear what I'm talking about with respect to the BRT.

Note: Solid lines for BRT denote full shoulder lane BRT, while dashed lines denote enhanced bus service with limited stops, queue jump lanes (where possible), and signal priority.

The Finch XPress BRT runs from Malton Station (Brampton-Markham GO REX) to Sheppard-McCowan Station (B-D Subway extension). Major points include: Humber College, Jane XPress, Spadina-Don Mills Subway, Yonge Subway, Seneca College/Don Mills XPress, Brampton-Markham GO REX, and the B-D Subway.

The Sheppard West XPress BRT is a slightly improved run between Sheppard West and Sheppard-Yonge Stations.

The Sheppard East XPress BRT runs from Don Mills Station out to Malvern as well as Sheppard-Meadowvale. West of McCowan, it's a full shoulder lane BRT, while east of there it's an enhanced bus service with limited stops, queue jump lanes, and signal priority.

The Don Mills XPress would be the simplest one to build, because the lanes are already there. They just need to be converted into full BRT lanes. Runs from Science Centre Station to Seneca College.

The Jane XPress would run from Steeles West Station on the Spadina-Don Mills Subway to Jane Station on the Bloor-Danforth Subway, with a major interchange at Black Creek Station. This interchange would comprise the terminus of the Eglinton LRT & the Mississauga-Eglinton XPress, as well as the Brampton-Markham GO REX and the Jane XPress.

The Mississauga-Eglinton XPress BRT acts partially as an extension of the Mississauga Transitway, partly as a BRT for Toronto. It can run as either shoulder lanes along Eglinton, or in it's own roadway through the Richview corridor, depending on design preferences. It would terminate at Black Creek Station. One branch becomes the Mississauga Transitway, while the other runs up to Pearson.

The Scarborough-Durham BRT is the Toronto extension of the Durham Highway 2 BRT. It will use shoulder BRT lanes along Ellesmere, and terminate at Scarborough Centre Station.

As for the subways, I contain 3 subway extensions. The first is the decoupling of the Yonge and University-Spadina Subways, and the addition of the Don Mills Subway (aka the DRL). I've gone through the rationale for this many times. The second is two extensions to the Yonge Subway: one further south to the CN Tower/Rogers Centre, and one north to Richmond Hill Centre. The third is a Bloor-Danforth extension to Sheppard-McCowan.

 

[gweed123]

It sound like a plan for Dufferin. Though, it would require more aggressive removal of left turns. Presently, left turns are prohibited at most (not all) major intersections, but allowed at minor side streets. Given that Dufferin south of Eglinton has no dedicated left-turn lanes, even one car trying to make a left can block the traffic flow for a long time. (In fact, sometimes it happens even with two general traffic lanes: the right lane is blocked by a car trying to make a right and waiting for pedestrians, or a bus at the nearside stop.)

Yup, it's definitely a delicate traffic planning situation, which I think is why a lot of municipalities tend to shy away from doing it. If it's done right though, it could make a huge difference for the effectiveness (and the capacity) of the Dufferin bus. With that many buses on the route at any given time, even shaving 5-10 minutes off the travel time of each bus would be a pretty sizeable increase in capacity without adding a single new bus.

 

[gweed123]

One thing that I think needs to be noted as well is that by increasing the amount of perpendicular routes that cross a given BRT line, it has the potential to increase the amount of counter-flow usage, as well as the amount of turnover on that line.

For example, the current plan for the FWLRT is to have it run from the Spadina Subway extension to Humber College. By only having a perpendicular rapid transit route at one end of the line, it virtually guarantees that the vast majority of the AM peak hour ridership will be going eastbound. However, if it is a BRT, and extended to the Malton GO REX Station, some of the ridership will flow westbound instead, especially west of Highway 400. Suddenly, the peak point peak hour ridership number drops into a range that can be handled by BRT well into the future.

Same thing goes for Sheppard East. The current setup for the SELRT is to basically funnel all of the riders onto the Sheppard Subway, with only a few making the PITA transfers at Sheppard-Markham and Kennedy in order to take B-D downtown. However, if you move the intersection point further west and extend B-D up to meet it, you increase the number of people transferring off the line sooner, and therefore lower the peak point ridership further down the line. You'd also probably generate some counter-flow, because people at say Kennedy & Sheppard would just assume backtrack for a couple minutes and get on B-D, instead of going westbound for 10+ minutes, transferring, and then transferring again at Yonge.

By increasing the number of transfer options, it makes these BRT routes more what they should be: feeder routes. This is a pretty big contrast to what Transit City wants them to be: long haul routes. Same corridor, two entirely different ways of looking at how to service them.

 

[DKsan]

I'm not that sure about the FWLRT only being useful in one direction. Brampton Transit's Zum 511 will be linking from Humber College to (eventually) Lisgar GO in the west. I can easily see FWLRT being utilized well in both directions, especially once the westward Zum link between Shopper's World and Lisgar GO opens up.

 

[gweed123]

I'm not that sure about the FWLRT only being useful in one direction. Brampton Transit's Zum 511 will be linking from Humber College to (eventually) Lisgar GO in the west. I can easily see FWLRT being utilized well in both directions, especially once the westward Zum link between Shopper's World and Lisgar GO opens up.

Are many people going to be going to Shopper's World in the AM peak?

I have no doubts that there will be some counter-flow, but I don't think that too many people are going to spend over an hour on local rapid transit just to get to Shopper's World or Lisgar GO station. Shopper's World is mainly an off-peak trip generator, and Lisgar GO in the AM is pretty much unidirectionally inbound.

My point with connecting to Malton Station was that a) it's not that far from Humber College, and a decently short ride away for most people west of Highway 400, and b) it's going to have GO REX (or whatever it ends up being called), which is going to provide a very quick connection to downtown. In fact, doing that route for a lot of people may actually be faster than FWLRT + Spadina Subway to reach downtown.

 

[Jaye101]

You know, Gweed123, I really like where you're coming from after looking over your Move Toronto plan. It does make sense.

I'm curious, however, on why you propose to change all of the proposed LRT routes to BRT? Is it to save money by cutting capacity? Is it because you think it's a more efficient model? Why do you feel (an assumption, of course) that a LRT network and a BRT cannot function in unison.

The thing about North York, Etobicoke and Scarborough.. Is they're losing a lot of their potential growth to other areas in the GTA. The real reason why Transit City came before the Downtown Relief line is because North York, Etobicoke and Scarborough is where most of the city's residents live. Not only that, but they are suffering because they're losing potential office space to areas in the 905 and outside of the city. And that's not all, these areas are stuck in a transitional space between suburb and city, and they do not have the infrastructure to support attracting business in a significant way.

A network of LRT would offer a level of connectivity that would be able to encourage increased development - especially in Scarborough. A BRT would be unable to create the perceptions and realities of connectivity that drives businesses and developers to identify an area as desirable. While a subway would cost too much to build and operate.

The true fact is that Downtown Toronto, the Former City of Toronto, has already seen a transformation due to the effects of Light Rail over multiple generations. While extra transit capacity is still desperately needed Downtown, the market has responded by condo construction, which I believe is partly fuelled by a chronically underbuilt transportation network.

This fact has not been so kind to North York, Etobicoke, and Scarborough. The truth is that the significance of their future actually depends on a strong transit network, one that BRT can be a part of, but cannot do alone.

 

[gweed123]

You know, Gweed123, I really like where you're coming from after looking over your Move Toronto plan. It does make sense.

Thank you, haha. I was hoping that by showing it on a map, it would be clearer than just typing it out. Seeing the lines and how they connect vs just visualizing them, sometimes something can get lost in translation.

I'm curious, however, on why you propose to change all of the proposed LRT routes to BRT? Is it to save money by cutting capacity? Is it because you think it's a more efficient model? Why do you feel (an assumption, of course) that a LRT network and a BRT cannot function in unison.

It's a combination of all 3. I feel that for a lot of these suburban routes, BRT is less expensive to build, can be built in stages as opposed to 1 shot (further reducing the capital expenditures), and is more tailored to the capacity that is actually needed. A lot of the proposed suburban LRT lines will be built with a pretty substantial excess of capacity, something that won't be needed for a long time. And that's even assuming the setup of the network stays the same.

One of the things that I tried to really do with MoTo is reduce peak hour riderships by creating multiple perpendicular transfer points along each of the lines. The idea is that 1 seat that turns over 3 times is more effective than 3 seats that turn over once. When you look at the Sheppard East LRT, the way it was designed is basically as a long-haul feeder line for the Sheppard Subway. Someone who got on at Morningside was likely to stay on all the way to Sheppard. But with the Sheppard East BRT proposal, they're just as likely to get off at McCowan and transfer onto the B-D subway. This means that person's seat is now open for someone to get on at Kennedy. Increase in net capacity by increasing turnover.

And I do still do favour having an LRT along Eglinton, and while not shown (because it's long term) the WWLRT, with a branch of it going down the Queensway as well, and the Hurontario LRT. I think those are places where the design of the neighbourhood, coupled with the predicted ridership, truly warrants LRT.

The thing about North York, Etobicoke and Scarborough.. Is they're losing a lot of their potential growth to other areas in the GTA. The real reason why Transit City came before the Downtown Relief line is because North York, Etobicoke and Scarborough is where most of the city's residents live. Not only that, but they are suffering because they're losing potential office space to areas in the 905 and outside of the city. And that's not all, these areas are stuck in a transitional space between suburb and city, and they do not have the infrastructure to support attracting business in a significant way.

A network of LRT would offer a level of connectivity that would be able to encourage increased development - especially in Scarborough. A BRT would be unable to create the perceptions and realities of connectivity that drives businesses and developers to identify an area as desirable. While a subway would cost too much to build and operate.

The true fact is that Downtown Toronto, the Former City of Toronto, has already seen a transformation due to the effects of Light Rail over multiple generations. While extra transit capacity is still desperately needed Downtown, the market has responded by condo construction, which I believe is partly fuelled by a chronically underbuilt transportation network.

This fact has not been so kind to North York, Etobicoke, and Scarborough. The truth is that the significance of their future actually depends on a strong transit network, one that BRT can be a part of, but cannot do alone.

I do agree that there is a problem when it comes to attracting growth to the outer 416, but I don't think that LRT is necessarily the solution. I think the solution is any type of rapid transit that gets people in and out quickly. This can be BRT, LRT, Subway, or GO REX. Like I've said before, people value speed and reliability most. If the service is quick and reliable, they'll take it.

What our network really needs though is layers. GO REX for high capacity, medium frequency, long haul trips. Subways for high capacity, high frequency, medium haul trips. LRTs for medium capacity, high frequency, medium-short haul trips. BRTs for medium-low capacity, high frequency, short haul trips to the nearest GO REX or subway station.

The BRT lines as I'm proposing them are not meant as long haul commuting options, but rather has high frequency, medium-low capacity feeder routes to quickly and reliably bring people to the closest higher order transit station (by that I mean GO REX or Subway). They may seem like really long lines on the map, but the reality is, for most trips, they're really a string of shorter lines leading from local areas to the nearest station.

And I think that BRT will attract development. Why? Because that development is already happening to a certain extent in the outer 416, it's just happening in really random places. By putting in these BRT lines, it will give focus points for the development.

One of the advantages to doing BRT in the suburbs as well is the ability to create multiple bus routes that use BRT lanes for a portion of their trip. This allows the bus routes to be more accurately tailored to trip patterns, because it's so much more flexible. With LRT, the corridor and the routes are basically the same thing. But with BRT, the corridor and the routes can be completely independent from one another.

For example: there can be a bus route that runs along Warden north that hits the employment cluster in Markham, several density nodes along Warden, and then use the Sheppard East BRT lanes to either feed into Don Mills Station or Sheppard-McCowan Station. If there was an LRT on Sheppard, there would be an added transfer in there, but with BRT, that bus route can share the BRT lanes and travel just as quickly as the actual Sheppard BRT route for that portion of the trip, or even run express once it hits Sheppard. The net difference in bus + LRT vs bus + bus in BRT lanes is potentially hugely in favour of the latter, if the route is designed properly.

 

[Jaye101]

Ah, I see what you're saying.

We share a common grievance, and that is the fact that when LRT is built in the outer 416, frequencies are going to be so low that it may have the opposite effect on ridership along the corridor (a la 501 Queen post-articulation).

I have to admit I do like your plan, and I also am a fan of BRT when used along the right corridors. What's interesting to me is that you've chosen to keep both the Hurontario LRT and the WWLRT when both corridors have lower riderships than the majority of those you've converted to BRT within the 416.

I also understand your concerns about connectivity. Now, if LRT routes were being constructed to also handle BRT routes that are running through to stations, that can also offer the same connectivity you're looking for.

It's interesting to look at the case of Scarborough versus Mississauga, not in terms of shallow aesthetics.. But rather why Scarborough hasn't developed, and isn't growing as rapidly as the latter. I feel the true reason is because Scarborough lacks a high capacity road network. While Mississauga has the 401, 427, 403, QEW all within a few minutes drive of it's city centre, Scarborough only has the 401. Compile that with the fact that business taxes are significantly higher in the 416 and Mississauga becomes a much more desirable place to do business. Although Scarborough does have much better public transportation than Mississauga, it's operating at capacity where it matters most with the majority of it's residents live far away from higher orders of transit.

Hurontario (27,000) has a lower ridership than Finch East (45,200), Jane (39,300), Sheppard East (27,100), Dufferin (39,700), Finch West (38,100), Lawrence East (33,800), Steeles West (29,800), and even less than the 116 Morningside (21,300) and 86 Scarborough (16,400) combined corridor as proposed in transit city as the Scarborough-Malvern LRT.

Scarborough has the ridership. I think they deserve the investment, especially considering the lack of highways for a suburban entity, they require a strong investment in transit to remain competitive. Markham and Sheppard is the future home of an LRT transfer station while a potential spur on Neilson Road will be able to connect it to Malvern Town Centre. This will strengthen Scaborough, North York and Etobicoke and the 416's competitiveness for business as a whole.

I think you're ideas for BRT are great, but I just feel the corridors you've chosen are a little off - just my opinion though.

PS. I'm not sure what you're saying about the turn overs of seats? Are you saying that because BRT is slower and has less capacity people are more likely to transfer? Doesn't that mean the whole route would be less effective? I think the reason why they chose LRT is for exactly that reason, so that people feel it's more practical to travel on Sheppard rather than transfer to other routes. So then you'll see more people who are traveling southbound using Sheppard as opposed to the dreadful ride south to the Bloor line.

 

[DKsan]

The difference may be that whereas Toronto has grade-separated heavy rail lines as their trunk, with soon criss-crossing LRTs, the current legacy streetcar network, and some frequent bus routes, the Hurontario LRT would work as Peel's trunk transit line, with criss-crossing aBRTs.

 

[gweed123]

Ah, I see what you're saying.

We share a common grievance, and that is the fact that when LRT is built in the outer 416, frequencies are going to be so low that it may have the opposite effect on ridership along the corridor (a la 501 Queen post-articulation).

This is true, especially in off-peak hours. The trains will either be run at frequencies so far apart that it won't really be "rapid" unless you time it right, or they'll be run at a proper frequency but the ridership will be so low they'll be 90% empty and will be a drain on resources.

I have to admit I do like your plan, and I also am a fan of BRT when used along the right corridors. What's interesting to me is that you've chosen to keep both the Hurontario LRT and the WWLRT when both corridors have lower riderships than the majority of those you've converted to BRT within the 416.

Why thank you, haha. And the reason I chose to keep both the Hurontario LRT and the WWLRT is because:

Hurontario: It's going to be the transit spine of Peel Region. Ridership, especially between Cooksville and Eglinton is going to be well within the range of LRT, and maybe even too high for BRT.

WWLRT: What I actually favour for the WWLRT isn't precisely what's in Transit City, but a plan under which the Yonge Subway is extended west to Dufferin, and then up Dufferin to Bloor (you can see the tail end of the Yonge line starts to curve westward in my map above. Future extension westward to be determined). The WWLRT would run from Port Credit to Dufferin & Queen, connecting with the subway. A branch would also run along the Queensway out to Sherway. I see the Queensway as the next big spot for intensification (just look at all of the warehouses and big box stores), and with an LRT that feeds directly into the subway, it could be a huge catalyst. BRT would work for the Queensway too, but the problem is that the line would need to be tunnelled from Roncesvalles to Dufferin under Queen, and BRT tunnels are much more expensive than LRT. Also long term opportunity for that to be extended as the Queen LRT.

Kind of complicated, but believe me it wasn't arbitrary, haha.

I also understand your concerns about connectivity. Now, if LRT routes were being constructed to also handle BRT routes that are running through to stations, that can also offer the same connectivity you're looking for.

That is true, but to a lesser extent. If buses were to use the LRT ROW down the middle of the street, they couldn't pass other buses or LRT vehicles once they entered the ROW. With shoulder BRT lanes they can, just by pulling out into general traffic lanes. Now admittedly that's a minor detail, and I do see your point. It certainly is possible.

Although again, the thing with LRT is that you need to build it all in 1 shot, or at least in connected segments. With a BRT line, for Phase 1 they could widen all of the intersections along the route in order to put in queue jump lanes. Phase 2 would target certain mid-block sections of roadway where congestion occurs, and widen to include shoulder BRT lanes. Phase 3 would fill in non-congested areas if necessary. The construction can be staggered, with disruptions minimized. With an LRT, you pretty much have to rip up the entire street in one foul swoop in order to build it, which causes traffic chaos. Some roadwork here and there may create pinch point delays, but the street won't look like a war zone for years at a time.

Hurontario (27,000) has a lower ridership than Finch East (45,200), Jane (39,300), Sheppard East (27,100), Dufferin (39,700), Finch West (38,100), Lawrence East (33,800), Steeles West (29,800), and even less than the 116 Morningside (21,300) and 86 Scarborough (16,400) combined corridor as proposed in transit city as the Scarborough-Malvern LRT.

But in order to determine the ridership potential of a corridor, you need to look at more than just what the bus there is doing now. Hurontario is the main axis of Peel Region. The same can't really be said about Finch or Morningside. Hurontario is a destination corridor, where as those suburban Toronto streets that you mention are where most trips along them begin, not end. The majority of the riders on those routes are transferring off at the closest subway station to go someplace else.

The significance of Hurontario in terms of both the number of residents and the number of jobs along the corridor is going to significantly increase in the next decade or so, and transit needs to be in place in order to handle that growth. And by the way, MiWay is already operating a semi-BRT-like service along Hurontario, so the case could be made that the BRT stepping stone to LRT is already kind of there.

Hurontario may not be a top priority when compared to some streets in Toronto, but for Peel Region, I think it's Priority #1.

Scarborough has the ridership. I think they deserve the investment, especially considering the lack of highways for a suburban entity, they require a strong investment in transit to remain competitive. Markham and Sheppard is the future home of an LRT transfer station while a potential spur on Neilson Road will be able to connect it to Malvern Town Centre. This will strengthen Scaborough, North York and Etobicoke and the 416's competitiveness for business as a whole.

Oh they definitely do, which is why I'm a strong advocate for the extension of the Bloor-Danforth Subway. I think that's Scarborough's #1 transit need right now. Extend the subway, and then have better bus service (BRT or BRT-Light) feeding it from all corners of Scarborough. 10 minute quick and reliable bus ride to an extended B-D subway is the way to go for Scarborough as far as I'm concerned. Upgrade the feeder lines later if you need to, but get the backbone and some decent feeder service in now.

I think you're ideas for BRT are great, but I just feel the corridors you've chosen are a little off - just my opinion though.

Totally valid point of view. I'm just looking at it from the perspective of "how can Toronto get the greatest increase in transit service to the most amount of people at the least amount of cost". Sure, BRT may not be as good as LRT when it comes to aesthetics or initial public perception, but I'd much rather have hundreds of thousands of riders a day getting to where they need to get quicker using BRT, than only have a hundred thousand getting around quicker using LRT, while the people not fortunate enough to live near one of those few select corridors sees no time benefit at all, because they're still riding a regular bus.

 

[Dan416]

So I decided to put what I was talking about a few days ago into map form, so that it looks pretty clear what I'm talking about with respect to the BRT.

View attachment 9302

I like what I see of your map (no surprise there) but I find it a bit hard to read. Can you make it bigger?

 

[gweed123]

I like what I see of your map (no surprise there) but I find it a bit hard to read. Can you make it bigger?

No problem. Unfortunately the UT image thing shrinks it down quite a bit. Here's a direct website link:

http://www2.andrew.thejohnsonclan.ca/MoveToronto_v5.jpg

 

[gweed123]

I made a minor update to include the WWLRT, the Queensway LRT, and the Dufferin extension of the Yonge Subway. I just had to figure out how to show the Phase 2 lines without making it too confusing or too cluttered.

http://www2.andrew.thejohnsonclan.ca/MoveToronto_v5.jpg

 

[Dan416]

So it'd be the Yonge-(Front? Lakeshore?)-Dufferin line? Interesting. I know 29 Dufferin is a very busy route.