|
|
|
Transit City: Sheppard East Debate
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
LAz
Active Member
I do not oppose LRT on some places. I do oppose it on certain places.
I strongly distrust any claims that LRT west of eglinton's tunnel will be one km slower than in the tunnel. That is just ridiculous. Above ground LRT is always significantly slower than underground LRT - unless if it is completely separate. Just think about it - how can it make sense that it is only 1 km/h slower? How? That's ridiculous.
We have seen reports earlier that the speed will be 22km/h. I will accept that number.
We also see that the TTC and Toronto do not want to talk about the speed. I posted the report/information thing from november or december of 2009... they go into just about every detail they can think of - but they do not talk about speed. That's on purpose.
GraphicMatt
Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
The TTC talked about the speeds on the Eglinton line in the panels (the "powerpoint") from the open houses held a couple of months back.
They don't generally talk about the speeds on TC as a whole because it will vary greatly from line-to-line. Sheppard is slower (too slow, in my opinion) than Eglinton. Finch is in the middle. The others will depend largely on stop spacing. (The community members who attend TC open houses tend to push for closer stop spacing, even at the expense of average operating speed. If you disagree with that, show up at a meeting.)
Have you been on Eglinton west of where the tunnel will start? It's a wide thoroughfare with few traffic lights. The stops are almost as far apart as subway stops would be. People will board from all the doors having already paid their fares (or they'll swipe Presto cards on the way in). What exactly is slowing this line down? The vehicles are absolutely capable of speed.
LAz
Active Member
The stoplights and intersections, in my opinion would slow it down. Plus, if it's winter-time, who knows how much slower it would be.
I actually doubt the difference in speed between the lines. But we'll see what happens.
The powerpoint, in my opinion, had that information in order to pump up support. We have other sources that say that it will be far slower. More sources suggest that it would be slower than in the powerpoint. Further, we do not know if the powerpoint thing was about "maximum speed".
Tell me, what would you do when the line gets to over-capacity?
As for sheppard snail line - it really is a big shame, in my opinion. I mean, maybe we should not extend it all the way to stc.. but I would extend it by at least two-three, maybe four km, underground.
I actually doubt the difference in speed between the lines. But we'll see what happens.
The powerpoint, in my opinion, had that information in order to pump up support. We have other sources that say that it will be far slower. More sources suggest that it would be slower than in the powerpoint. Further, we do not know if the powerpoint thing was about "maximum speed".
Tell me, what would you do when the line gets to over-capacity?
As for sheppard snail line - it really is a big shame, in my opinion. I mean, maybe we should not extend it all the way to stc.. but I would extend it by at least two-three, maybe four km, underground.
kettal
Banned
Your PowerPoint conspiracy theory is hilarious. If they were going to blatantly lie about the western section, why would they hAve left the eastern section speeds so much lower?
There is no reason why service would be slower in winter. Rail based vehicles handle winter much better than their rubber tired counterparts. If there was a major blizzard which reduced visibility it would probably slow down service, but that happens at most two days a year. Calgary has colder longer winters than us, and their lrt continues as normal through the season, so I don't know where your winter concern comes from.
And if you can't see why west eglinton would be significantly different to sheppard, then you've probably never been there.
There is no reason why service would be slower in winter. Rail based vehicles handle winter much better than their rubber tired counterparts. If there was a major blizzard which reduced visibility it would probably slow down service, but that happens at most two days a year. Calgary has colder longer winters than us, and their lrt continues as normal through the season, so I don't know where your winter concern comes from.
And if you can't see why west eglinton would be significantly different to sheppard, then you've probably never been there.
Fresh Start
Banned
It has every bit of relevancy because both the downtown streetcar lines and these new suburban Transit City lines will be owned and operated by the same transit agency. If route mismanagement is commonplace for one mode, it can be for them all. If transit signal priority is lacking on key routes through busy intersections in one part of the city, the same mistakes can be replicated the whole city over. The theoretical operational speeds placed in a self-serving Powerpoint presentation to manipulate the public; and the preexisting track record of subpar service the TTC is notorious for in regards to its light rail fleet are two entirely different things.
MisterF
Senior Member
The Toronto subway's importance to the city's daily operations are exactly why more subway lines are needed. Toronto has enough demand for the length of the subway system to be doubled, at least.
With proper station spacing, all-door boarding, and complete traffic priority, trams can be just as fast as subway. They don't even have to be totally grade separated, as the Edmonton and Calgary systems show. The Transit City lines might not be designed that way, but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
Fresh Start
Banned
It's $69 million/km actually. And think of two things here, a subway continuing on Sheppard East would only go as far as Midland and thereafter the trek southeasterly to Scarborough Centre would be along an elevated guide-way. The above-grade portion substantially lowers the overall construction costs. And for those few in number riders of the 85 bus destined for points east of Midland their commute to/from the subway has been dramatically shaved down by upwards of 20 minutes. And Sheppard-Progress will have a higher-order transit service in its vicinity soon, so passengers of the 85 bus would have yet another rapid alternative at their disposal.
In light of such implementation, is the SELRT really that warranted? And remember, Route 85 carries only 28,300ppd, which will further decline once the SRT's extended into Malvern.
If the "train" has to stop at lighted intersections once back up on the surface, it is not a true metro. ROW exclusivity: be it for bus, light-rail or heavy rail is a higher order of transit than mixed traffic operations.
True that it is, but it's being targeted at business and tourist class travellers whom would not mind paying the high expense for this premium service. Should everyone else have to drag their luggage onto a bus or streetcar in order to enjoy the same connectivity, albeit at significantly slower speeds?
Of course all these cities have already very expansive metro subway and/or bus rapid transit networks and is only now turning to light-rail as a last resort to in order to fill in the gaps. In several, if not most of these cities you've listed light-rail estimates have always incurred budget overruns, and will cause years upon years of social disruption, and will need to be heavily subsidized by governments because light-rail can never recoup its operational and maintenance costs unlike many bus and heavy rail systems are capable of doing. The TTC currently faces this problem with streetcars' cost per day being more than double that of a bus route's that is carrying the same levels of daily ridership.
I'd gladly take Lionel-Groulx or Berri-UQAM or Metrotown or 22nd St or Surrey Central or Bridgeport or Lougheed any day over some of the more poorly planned out transfer stations here. But you've missed the entire point of that label. It is a "transfer city" because it requires multiple transfers to make a one-way commute right clear across the city. Or where they do hypothesize a one-seat ride from Humber College to the Zoo, they do it in the most time-consuming meandering manner, such that one is almost compelled to give up on transit altogether and just carpool across the 401 everyday.
And therein lies the problem. I don't care how comfortable or spacious the waiting areas are, the point is that there should not be as many transfer points across the city. And how many minutes per day are spent lay waiting connecting bus or streetcar services when routes are not synchronized with eachother and some run at lesser frequencies than others? A lot of bus routes instead of turning back at some random point could just continue in the directional flow of demand. That the TTC thinks it's kosher to have four major transit lines running north, south, east and west all terminate at the same point just to enforce a transfer (of course I'm talking about Kennedy Stn), when obviously there is through-service demand, is just one failing of Transit City.
Why yes, with the craftsmanship and level of detail being put into designing $140 million concrete bunkers underneath toll highways lying adjacent to cemeteries and apple orchards, it's miraculous that anything's getting built at all. Perhaps if the TTC took a less fluff, more substance approach to its duty and actually found ways to improve the quality of service, the public could have nice things.
Fresh Start
Banned
If only 17% of airport users originate from the downtown, that is still over 20,000 trips per weekday. And even if and when air travel goes bust (I'd like to see what invention will ever replace transatlantic or transpacific air travel) that won't be for another century or two from now and planning for existing demand in the now is where we should be focused. The beauty of an Eglinton Line opposed to Union Pearson AirLink is that you not only net in downtown travellers, but also those from Midtown, Scarborough, North York, Etobicoke and especially Greater Mississauga via the ACC stn. Larger market share. There are other legitimate reasons to bring mass transit into the airport vicinity. It is the largest employment centre in the GTA with over 80,000 jobs. It is very proximal to Malton and Brampton which presently both are far removed from having rapid non-GO connections to/from Toronto. And the concentration of density around key intersections along Eglinton West (and Dixon Road) en route all but guarantee a high local walk-in and feeder traffic demand for the service. As such, functionally it'll be a transit gateway line for the western suburbs' residential and employment zones, with direct service to Pearson as an added bonus. So I really hope that the TTC doesn't mess this project up.
MisterF
Senior Member
It's a false dichotomy. Both will likely be built. Unfortunately the best option, a publicly run regional rail line along the Weston sub with several stations on the way downtown, isn't even being talked about. That line would have all the benefits of the Eglinton LRT plus a one-seat ride downtown, the single biggest destination for airport travellers.
kettal
Banned
Wrong. The LRT lines and vehicles will be owned by Metrolinx, not TTC. Metrolinx will have a stronger influence on city departments such as traffic, than TTC currently does.
DavidH
Senior Member
While it's true that the LRT lines will be owned by Metrolinx, it's not clear how much of a day-to-day role Metrolinx will play. I certainly hope that they play a positive role, but there is no certainty of that.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
RedRocket191
Senior Member
Does that mean we will see a different logo on these trams.
Does it really matter? It will all be part of the same fare system.
GenerationW
Senior Member
Sorry, but if the TTC is not calling it a subway (and they're not), neither am I.
Also, it's actually not a subway.