Disparishun
Active Member
Off-topic, possibly, but a benefit of extending Sheppard west to connect to the Spadina line would be to reduce this point of failure by allowing passengers to route around Yonge street.
|
|
|
Transit City: Sheppard East Debate
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
Off-topic, possibly, but a benefit of extending Sheppard west to connect to the Spadina line would be to reduce this point of failure by allowing passengers to route around Yonge street.
LAz
Active Member
I do not think that we have to have 10,000 to get a metro. Even less than 10,000 is fine. They are looking for the cheap way out.
In the meantime Moscow opened three new metro stations recently... they add a station or two every year.
There was a reason why we started building an eglinton metro in the 1990s.
edit:
Well we can't build them at once no matter how much we want to or not want to... it would be gradual, adding a few km of tunnel a year... by no means would this be too difficult.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
And that reason was politics. North York traded support of the Sheppard Line with York who wanted the Eglinton West line. I don't know where Scarborough, East York, Etobicoke and Toronto were when all this horse trading was going on ... this is the kind of garbage that used to go on, pre-amalgamation.
The claim made above was that Eglinton West would have a ridership similiar to Bloor. However, according to the 2002 RTES study the ridership for Eglinton West was projected to be only 4,100 people per hour per direction.
I'm still not sure what this has to do with the Sheppard East LRT though ...
rbt
Senior Member
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Note that the length of the subway when they talk about Eglinton would be about 4 km, and a lot of riders would find it easier to switch to the Spadina line when there's that little length on the Eglinton line to transfer to. That's even lower than the Sheppard subway, and both RT lines were planned to be extended (to Pearson and STC,) being at the top of the TTC's priority until Miller blazed in for LRT everywhere!
And if you find it hard to believe that the Eglinton line could soak up over half of the B-D's N-S ridership, please explain your reasoning instead of just covering up. Here's a perfectly logical argument, but there's just redundant and misplaced evidence as an "argument" against it.
Rainforest
Senior Member
For the 5-station stubway, that low projection is not surprising.
The idea to build two stubways, one on Sheppard and another on Eglinton, was not particularly bright in the first place. A subway line needs to be reasonably long to be successful.
A Crosstown line is likely to attract considerably more riders than a 5-station stubway.
Whereas a short subway would see low usage and way too much excess capacity, a long LRT line might attract solid demand but end up not having enough capacity.
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
Anyone know how many 'new' riders the Sheppard East LRT is going to attract?
nfitz
Superstar
I'm not covering up anything, I'm referencing real studies. Here's another one ... the 2031 estimate for demand on the current design is 5,400 passengers per direction per hour. Perhaps you could provide some references for your claims.
Even on a common sense level, it doesn't make sense that Eglinton would take half of the traffic from Bloor ... surely at least half of the demand on Bloor comes from the south (probably more based on density). At best, Eglinton would only take 1/2 of the demand from the north side of Bloor. And even then, most people I see on the Bloor subway are not travelling north as far as Eglinton.
My prediction is that most of the ridership that Eglinton will capture, is currently taking the bus to the YUS.
Over 30% more ... 5,400 versus 4,100. But still not enough to justify a subway. I suppose one could argue that they should simply build subway from Keele to Don Mills Road, and then connect an LRT on each side, given the cost of the tunnel ... and I could support that ... though it would create extra transfers.
I still don't see what this has to do with the Sheppard East LRT.
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
SHEPPARD not Eglinton...STAY ON TOPIC!
nfitz
Superstar
Agreed ... I keep hoping that someone will move the posts to a correct thread.
Rainforest
Senior Member
You can check that using this tool: map.toronto.ca
That section of Lawrence (Bathurst to Yonge) is narrow: 22 - 25 m between the property lines and 29 - 32 m between houses on the opposite sides. A far cry from 36 m they need for a typical LRT street.
Finch West is much wider. The only problematic section is the 100 m or so adjacent to Yonge, but they will build an underground station there, anyway.
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
Does anyone know how many new riders this Sheppard East LRT will attract?
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Arguments on all sides of this 'debate' have become increasingly silly. No one even bothers to use numbers that make any sense...why not spend 5 seconds and use some actual facts or make any sense? It'd take 10 pages of posts to correct all the crap in this thread.
That powerpoint slide uses some wrong and some misleading numbers, intentionally, probably, because they are trying to sell an outrageously expensive line. Here's the latest scheduled data: http://www3.ttc.ca/PDF/Transit_Planning/Service_Summary_2010_Jan03-Mar27.pdf - note the speeds at different times of the day, along different segments of lines, and how much terminal time is or isn't tacked on. For instance, Bloor is faster than 30 km/hr, while Spadina in the pm rush is scheduled to move a cripplingly slow 10.5 km/hr as far as King (which is what counts, since no one takes it from Spadina to Union). Bloor would likely be over 32km/hr all day if the DRL was built.
No, Eglinton will never be as busy as Bloor, and everyone knows this. A small percentage of Bloor users come from north of Eglinton and only some of them would even switch. There's absolutely nothing along Eglinton that won't also be served by other transit lines, anyway...no schools, no malls, no jobs.
No, Eglinton will not be a subway, and everyone knows this. Unless they force people to transfer when they get to the end of the tunnelled segment, the tunnel won't even be isolated from the predictably unpredictable street sections.
There is no broad public support for the Sheppard LRT, and that's because there is no broad public support for *any* transit projects beyond "better transit," which means "a line of my choosing from my house to wherever I go, built instantaneously, and for no money, unless I drive, in which case I don't care so I don't want to pay for anything." Most people still have absolutely no idea what's getting built. Seriously, virtually no one in the city has a solid grasp of the plans and what the technical differences actually mean. Maybe 10,000 people, most of them working for the city or in the transportation sector, or those who read Spacing, or something like that. If they have heard of the projects, their entire knowledge of them is rumours and anecdotes with incorrect data. A few old ladies turned up to the public meetings and were told that it'll be awesome but it's not like they have a real understanding of what the real outcomes will be. People will believe whatever they're told because they don't know the difference and most of them don't care. A few internet transit geeks turned up to the meetings as well, saw 20 old ladies, and think this constitutes firm public support.
Every dollar spent on the Sheppard LRT is an incredible waste of money and everyone knows this. There will be no benefits and no improved travel times - perhaps a minute or two during rush hour, assuming the service doesn't decline to Spadina-level craziness, but if anyone thinks that's enough to lure people from other routes or out of their cars, they are, frankly, stupid. 22-23km/hr is an optimistic model that assumes things like all-door boarding and transit priority, though it isn't clear if this figure includes the 10% of "variability" seen in the Finch-Sheppard BCA, which would eat up whatever few minutes might be gained. This 10% would also mean the LRT would be slower than improved bus service.
The Sheppard bus already travels over 21km/hr during the midday and evening and over 19km/hr in the am rush, and that's without POP, without queue-jumps, without signal priority, without a limited-stop express route east of Kennedy, and so on. Actually, the am rush is only 19 and not 22 because there's 5 more minutes of terminal time then than during the midday, a reminder to take all speed figures with a grain of salt...they're not real travel times and they are endlessly tweakable. People need to can the "all buses go 17km/hr!!!!" nonsense. Some buses go faster, including the buses on Sheppard, and that's without any kind of improvements.
For less than $100M, queue jumps where needed and an access ramp from the Don Mills terminal to eastbound Sheppard could be built, slashing minutes from the trip and getting the bus speeds up to or well over what is projected for the LRT all day long. This would save over a billion dollars. No capacity improvements are needed out in Malvern, where the bus only moves a few hundred people per hour and where the population is set to fall in the coming decades, and simply getting buses to run faster in the west would improve capacity a fair bit without the need to hire more drivers. The subway can wait...the 190 is an amazingly effective band-aid solution and the Rocket model should be expanded. The subway can be extended in the future. The DRL, Danforth to STC, Yonge north of Finch, etc., are all far more pressing subway projects - not that the city cares in the slightest about pressing transit needs.
As long as few doltish politicians think that LRT = mid-rise Parisian avenues = a better society, we'll continue throwing transit dollars down the drain. They're in charge, so they get to waste the money however they want to. Unfortunately, they think that streetcar ROWs down the middle of the street = the best way to build LRT lines. That's simply not how most light rail lines are operated. One way streets, running on the side of the street, dipping under intersections, etc....that's how almost every other LRT line is operated, especially suburban lines that are 15+ km long. Running only in the middle of the road is idiotic and doomed to operational mishaps and everyone knows this. LRT apologists are free to post pictures of 2km tram lines in Germany that run in the middle of the street, or that one LRT line in Paris that supposedly heralds the end of global subway construction.
And, yes, some city planners and officials were very surprised by the unveiling of Transit City. Some of them moped around public meetings muttering under their breath. Transit City was anything but a long-fought city-wide effort, just the dream of a tiny few influential people. Conspiracy theories aside, the fact is that existing plans were rewritten immediately before a many-billion dollar funding gift was announced, the lines did not build upon the just-completed new official plan, the line choices were not based on which routes are the busiest or the most congested, the price-tag was deliberately low-balled by the billions, and the plan was an explicit declaration that no more subway projects would be undertaken by Toronto unless forced down its throat by other governments. Opposition has been useless and pointless for 2 and a half years, though the terrible plan and its completely unaffordable cost have meant parts like Jane and Don Mills have already caved in on themselves. Ballooning costs and other planning mistakes could cause additional parts to implode, threatening the future implementation of LRT in places where it's suited or needed – which is not Sheppard.
Hardly any...maybe none, maybe a decline if there's no link to STC and if travel times rise. Ridership will fall greatly during construction, but population growth in spots may mean it rebounds a bit higher. Improvements to parallel/intersecting transit routes will eat up potential ridership. No one will get out of their car, so the modal increase is minimal and depends on unappealing demographic changes, like people not being able to afford a car. Sorry, but this is the billion-dollar reality.
That powerpoint slide uses some wrong and some misleading numbers, intentionally, probably, because they are trying to sell an outrageously expensive line. Here's the latest scheduled data: http://www3.ttc.ca/PDF/Transit_Planning/Service_Summary_2010_Jan03-Mar27.pdf - note the speeds at different times of the day, along different segments of lines, and how much terminal time is or isn't tacked on. For instance, Bloor is faster than 30 km/hr, while Spadina in the pm rush is scheduled to move a cripplingly slow 10.5 km/hr as far as King (which is what counts, since no one takes it from Spadina to Union). Bloor would likely be over 32km/hr all day if the DRL was built.
No, Eglinton will never be as busy as Bloor, and everyone knows this. A small percentage of Bloor users come from north of Eglinton and only some of them would even switch. There's absolutely nothing along Eglinton that won't also be served by other transit lines, anyway...no schools, no malls, no jobs.
No, Eglinton will not be a subway, and everyone knows this. Unless they force people to transfer when they get to the end of the tunnelled segment, the tunnel won't even be isolated from the predictably unpredictable street sections.
There is no broad public support for the Sheppard LRT, and that's because there is no broad public support for *any* transit projects beyond "better transit," which means "a line of my choosing from my house to wherever I go, built instantaneously, and for no money, unless I drive, in which case I don't care so I don't want to pay for anything." Most people still have absolutely no idea what's getting built. Seriously, virtually no one in the city has a solid grasp of the plans and what the technical differences actually mean. Maybe 10,000 people, most of them working for the city or in the transportation sector, or those who read Spacing, or something like that. If they have heard of the projects, their entire knowledge of them is rumours and anecdotes with incorrect data. A few old ladies turned up to the public meetings and were told that it'll be awesome but it's not like they have a real understanding of what the real outcomes will be. People will believe whatever they're told because they don't know the difference and most of them don't care. A few internet transit geeks turned up to the meetings as well, saw 20 old ladies, and think this constitutes firm public support.
Every dollar spent on the Sheppard LRT is an incredible waste of money and everyone knows this. There will be no benefits and no improved travel times - perhaps a minute or two during rush hour, assuming the service doesn't decline to Spadina-level craziness, but if anyone thinks that's enough to lure people from other routes or out of their cars, they are, frankly, stupid. 22-23km/hr is an optimistic model that assumes things like all-door boarding and transit priority, though it isn't clear if this figure includes the 10% of "variability" seen in the Finch-Sheppard BCA, which would eat up whatever few minutes might be gained. This 10% would also mean the LRT would be slower than improved bus service.
The Sheppard bus already travels over 21km/hr during the midday and evening and over 19km/hr in the am rush, and that's without POP, without queue-jumps, without signal priority, without a limited-stop express route east of Kennedy, and so on. Actually, the am rush is only 19 and not 22 because there's 5 more minutes of terminal time then than during the midday, a reminder to take all speed figures with a grain of salt...they're not real travel times and they are endlessly tweakable. People need to can the "all buses go 17km/hr!!!!" nonsense. Some buses go faster, including the buses on Sheppard, and that's without any kind of improvements.
For less than $100M, queue jumps where needed and an access ramp from the Don Mills terminal to eastbound Sheppard could be built, slashing minutes from the trip and getting the bus speeds up to or well over what is projected for the LRT all day long. This would save over a billion dollars. No capacity improvements are needed out in Malvern, where the bus only moves a few hundred people per hour and where the population is set to fall in the coming decades, and simply getting buses to run faster in the west would improve capacity a fair bit without the need to hire more drivers. The subway can wait...the 190 is an amazingly effective band-aid solution and the Rocket model should be expanded. The subway can be extended in the future. The DRL, Danforth to STC, Yonge north of Finch, etc., are all far more pressing subway projects - not that the city cares in the slightest about pressing transit needs.
As long as few doltish politicians think that LRT = mid-rise Parisian avenues = a better society, we'll continue throwing transit dollars down the drain. They're in charge, so they get to waste the money however they want to. Unfortunately, they think that streetcar ROWs down the middle of the street = the best way to build LRT lines. That's simply not how most light rail lines are operated. One way streets, running on the side of the street, dipping under intersections, etc....that's how almost every other LRT line is operated, especially suburban lines that are 15+ km long. Running only in the middle of the road is idiotic and doomed to operational mishaps and everyone knows this. LRT apologists are free to post pictures of 2km tram lines in Germany that run in the middle of the street, or that one LRT line in Paris that supposedly heralds the end of global subway construction.
And, yes, some city planners and officials were very surprised by the unveiling of Transit City. Some of them moped around public meetings muttering under their breath. Transit City was anything but a long-fought city-wide effort, just the dream of a tiny few influential people. Conspiracy theories aside, the fact is that existing plans were rewritten immediately before a many-billion dollar funding gift was announced, the lines did not build upon the just-completed new official plan, the line choices were not based on which routes are the busiest or the most congested, the price-tag was deliberately low-balled by the billions, and the plan was an explicit declaration that no more subway projects would be undertaken by Toronto unless forced down its throat by other governments. Opposition has been useless and pointless for 2 and a half years, though the terrible plan and its completely unaffordable cost have meant parts like Jane and Don Mills have already caved in on themselves. Ballooning costs and other planning mistakes could cause additional parts to implode, threatening the future implementation of LRT in places where it's suited or needed – which is not Sheppard.
Hardly any...maybe none, maybe a decline if there's no link to STC and if travel times rise. Ridership will fall greatly during construction, but population growth in spots may mean it rebounds a bit higher. Improvements to parallel/intersecting transit routes will eat up potential ridership. No one will get out of their car, so the modal increase is minimal and depends on unappealing demographic changes, like people not being able to afford a car. Sorry, but this is the billion-dollar reality.
Dan416
Senior Member
Great post Scarberian.
The Sheppard East LRT will not attract more riders than a Sheppard East subway extension, and this is common sense. I agree that some queue jumping janes would have been a better investment on this corridor if we're not going to get a subway anytime soon. Wasting on money on the SELRT is just a waste of money.
I'd rather they built a full-length Finch LRT than all these splits between East and West.
They made the mistake of trying to build an Eglinton West Subway and Sheppard East Subway concurrently and look what happened. And now they're trying to build a Sheppard East LRT and a Finch West LRT at the same time. Just makes no sense.
Extend the Sheppard Subway in both directions. Build a Finch LRT along the east and west stretches. Problem solved. Eglinton, as much as I don't like the on-street portions, at least will work in the tunnel. I won't call it a subway, because that's misleading, but it should have subway speeds due to subway-spacing. Of course as I've said before, I'd prefer they chop the line at the tunnel endpoints and just upgrade the middle to subway and leave buses on the extremities. But I'll settle for what we're getting (although I acknowledge that it is settling).
You know, Transit City is really a form of The Cheapening™ wrought large over the entire TTC.
The Sheppard East LRT will not attract more riders than a Sheppard East subway extension, and this is common sense. I agree that some queue jumping janes would have been a better investment on this corridor if we're not going to get a subway anytime soon. Wasting on money on the SELRT is just a waste of money.
I'd rather they built a full-length Finch LRT than all these splits between East and West.
They made the mistake of trying to build an Eglinton West Subway and Sheppard East Subway concurrently and look what happened. And now they're trying to build a Sheppard East LRT and a Finch West LRT at the same time. Just makes no sense.
Extend the Sheppard Subway in both directions. Build a Finch LRT along the east and west stretches. Problem solved. Eglinton, as much as I don't like the on-street portions, at least will work in the tunnel. I won't call it a subway, because that's misleading, but it should have subway speeds due to subway-spacing. Of course as I've said before, I'd prefer they chop the line at the tunnel endpoints and just upgrade the middle to subway and leave buses on the extremities. But I'll settle for what we're getting (although I acknowledge that it is settling).
You know, Transit City is really a form of The Cheapening™ wrought large over the entire TTC.
kettal
Banned
compared to the porkbarrel-lobbyist method that preceeded it?