News   Jul 05, 2024
 2.9K     0 
News   Jul 05, 2024
 1.9K     13 
News   Jul 05, 2024
 676     0 

Transit City Plan

Which transit plan do you prefer?

  • Transit City

    Votes: 95 79.2%
  • Ford City

    Votes: 25 20.8%

  • Total voters
    120
A GO or overground line up the DVP/404 might successfully reach a lot of office and residential developments.

A modified Richmond Hill line? I've been in favour of re-routing the Richmond Hill line around the west side of the Don Mills neighbourhood instead of the east side. This would involve running along the CPR mainline for a short stretch, but it would make for a much better interchange with the Eglinton LRT (at Leslie).
 
A modified Richmond Hill line? I've been in favour of re-routing the Richmond Hill line around the west side of the Don Mills neighbourhood instead of the east side. This would involve running along the CPR mainline for a short stretch, but it would make for a much better interchange with the Eglinton LRT (at Leslie).

Metrolinx has such proposal on their books. That would bypass multiple bends that exist on the Bala sub, and allow higher speeds.

Of course, the question is when (and whether) it gets funded, given multiple competing priorities.
 
andrewpmk:



Yes, but most people in Toronto does not work at the nodes along the proposed transit lines either, and downtown is the largest employment node in the GTA - and it is concentrated in a way that is servicable by transit in an efficient manner. Besides, if you look at the figures, most of the riders use these EW lines as transfer to Yonge. What figures do you have to a) back up the assertion that somehow the line will reach saturation within 20 years; b) that DRL would be ineffective at diverting riders and c) that when it reaches saturation, that ripping it up can't be done (when we have had a history of ripping up streetcar lines for subway)



So you are proposing that we ignore all ridership projections, and somehow decide to plonk umpteen billions (which is nowhere to be found) into subway and other very high order transit lines everywhere hoping it will solve congestion issues - and in the meantime, major suburban employment areas keep on moving outward (to say, Meadowvale) where servicing them will be even more difficult and uneconomical? Sorry, even ignoring capital expenditure - the increase in operating cost alone will bankrupt the transit agencies in the region. The only way to "fix" traffic congestion is to move the suburbs in a direction of increasing density such that higher order transit becomes feasible.

AoD

I'd give the Crosstown Eglinton LRT 30 years or so, if transit amalgamation happens on the metro level..which it won't. So 25-30 years after it is built, whenever that is, and with the Sheppard line built out into LRT or subway, it'll max out, or close to it, at least in rush hours. Don't underestimate how comprehensive TC is. A lot more trips will happen. But realistically, if this is all built before 2020, then we should be good until 2050 or even 2060, with the DRL.
 
I'd give the Crosstown Eglinton LRT 30 years or so, if transit amalgamation happens on the metro level..which it won't. So 25-30 years after it is built, whenever that is, and with the Sheppard line built out into LRT or subway, it'll max out, or close to it, at least in rush hours. Don't underestimate how comprehensive TC is. A lot more trips will happen. But realistically, if this is all built before 2020, then we should be good until 2050 or even 2060, with the DRL.

I do not believe this at all. Transit lines have a habit of rapidly exceeding capacity. Therefore I predict: any LRT line will be overcrowded immediately after opening, and traffic on the 401 will still suck since most people will drive. Don't forget how much of a drop in the bucket the increase in capacity LRT provides is. A LRT line's capacity minus the capacity removed by taking away 2 car lanes is small compared to the car carrying capacity of the 401 plus all the parallel east west arterials like Lawrence, Eglinton, York Mills etc.
 
Stouffville line from a Cherry St Station out to Markham Station?



For suburban areas, a 10 minute frequency would be sufficient. The thing is, when the lines get closer to downtown, they begin to overlap on the same track, so the frequency effectively doubles or even triples, approaching subway-like frequencies.
That's exactly what interlining is in the NYC subway. The trains do not have to stop on the trunk lines (i.e. express) like how Stouffville trains do not stop along Lakeshore East line stations. And it's a lot easier to add extra tracks above ground than digging tunnels, as well with the lower frequency using bypass and not dedicated extra tracks (like what is being done north of Steeles to accommodate all day two way service).
Here's a map which includes the recent census data vs new lrt lines, not sure if its been posted.
http://www.globalnews.ca/pages/topicNew.aspx?id=6442578395
Even then, I'm skeptical about the dark blue they are talking about around Kennedy Station. Anyone who's been there knows it's not a high density downtown-like area. Even the dark blue around McCowan and Finch/Steeles (Alton Towers I assume) has more density, last I recall. The map seems to make anything with more than single family housing dark blue!
 
2km walk is not a problem if its the entire commute. but to suggest many residents will walk 2km to start their commute is asking a bit much.

electrify palma keeps suggesting that we need larger spacing and referencing her walk from home to yorkdale mall station. im happy she was able and wanted to do that but it is asking a bit much. i too believe the walk would be good for everyones health but 20mins is abit unrealistic. tc lrt lines should incorporate wide spacing 750+m otherwise they risk being mistaken for simply a larger streetcar.
 
I do not believe this at all. Transit lines have a habit of rapidly exceeding capacity. Therefore I predict: any LRT line will be overcrowded immediately after opening, and traffic on the 401 will still suck since most people will drive. Don't forget how much of a drop in the bucket the increase in capacity LRT provides is. A LRT line's capacity minus the capacity removed by taking away 2 car lanes is small compared to the car carrying capacity of the 401 plus all the parallel east west arterials like Lawrence, Eglinton, York Mills etc.

Traffic on the 401 will always suck. There is no magical transit system we can build that will make the 401 empty at rush hour. This is not a realistic goal.
 
I do not believe this at all. Transit lines have a habit of rapidly exceeding capacity. Therefore I predict: any LRT line will be overcrowded immediately after opening, and traffic on the 401 will still suck since most people will drive. Don't forget how much of a drop in the bucket the increase in capacity LRT provides is. A LRT line's capacity minus the capacity removed by taking away 2 car lanes is small compared to the car carrying capacity of the 401 plus all the parallel east west arterials like Lawrence, Eglinton, York Mills etc.

Well fortunately the planners involved have done a more in depth analysis than just looking at the 401, the LRT lines will be just fine and The TTC CGM stated that they will have sufficient capacity to beyond 2050. All planning, projections and reports do not agree with your predictions.
 
the only way to eliminate significant portion of the traffic from the 401 is to get the feds and province to put tolls on it that are at least twice as high as the 407.
 
Does anybody know what the above ground stations on the crosstown will look like? I'm a little concerned that the underground stops will be full stations while the street level stops will just be like a streetcar stop.
 
Does anybody know what the above ground stations on the crosstown will look like? I'm a little concerned that the underground stops will be full stations while the street level stops will just be like a streetcar stop.

That's kind of a selling feature, honestly. It costs a hell of a lot to operate an underground station.
 

Back
Top