A 6264
Active Member
Congratulations on your new job!
Out of curiosity, how are the stops better, assuming you mean the platform stations and shelters, which I presume would be similar since they were built around the same time?
|
|
|
- Thread starter Monarch Butterfly
- Start date
Out of curiosity, how are the stops better, assuming you mean the platform stations and shelters, which I presume would be similar since they were built around the same time?
FW36
Active Member
I don't remember where I heard it but apparently having an aggressive TSP and increased frequency could negatively impact traffic/bus routes on intersecting streets such as Albion, Islington, Weston, and Jane. That's more a long term problem (LRT not to frequent now, we don't have an aggressive TSP, and we don't know if ridership will increase) but I feel like it was poor planning on Metrolinx part not to take that into consideration when planning the line.
mikey7767
Active Member
Absolutely not. We also have a right to be heard and push for what we want. And that's in line with what most of Torontonians want. We wasted money on a system that should have never been built in Toronto, and it's people like me that organized and pushed to kill any consideration of more LRTs on Sheppard and continues to push for no more of these slow overpriced streetcars that do not have place in Toronto that are only wanted by short sighted geezers who are fine with snail like travel times at half the cost of a subway, but not even close to 10% the value of a subway. And quite frankly, the public agrees and the political sentiment is leaning in the same direction. So no, Absolutely Not.
Allandale25
Superstar
nfitz
Superstar
I don't see how the two lines are comparable. The latter is souping up a commuter rail line - much more comparable to the Ontario line than anything else.
Surely Line 6 in Toronto is more comparable to the promised Lines 8, 10, and 11 that the government promised in 1984. How's the ride on those 3 lines?
This figure should probably be updated to show that Metro Côte-Vertu has since been completed - in 1986 - it's still shown as under construction here. I wonder if the new Metro Vertières is designed to add platforms for Line 7 one day.
Last edited:
turbanplanner
Senior Member
I'm pro subway but the city would never build an entire line to Humber college! If it was a subway I think it was only supposed to go to Jane. Look at the cancelled Eglinton line? it would only go from Cedarvale to black creek.
robmausser
Senior Member
basically building LRT's like our streetcar system (embedded rail, in the centre of the lane) was a mistake.
but thats what we do in Toronto. Do things the Toronto way! Oh, someone else did it better elsewhere? Put those blinders on folks, because the only way is the Toronto way!
urbanclient
Senior Member
K I'll take that at face value, that you're apparently pro subway, but you clearly just strawmanned @mikey7767 .
He never said that Line 6 should've been a subway. Line 6 bad =/= Line 6 should've been a subway.
Can we please move on from this persistent logical fallacy to the point where every time anyone makes a post remotely critical of trams in Toronto that they have to make a disclaimer that they don't think Finch West deserved a subway? Just because someone is critical of Line 6 does not mean they think it should've been a subway.
Obsidian
Active Member
The cost difference between LRT and Subways in Toronto is 4.7x, Finch LRT per km compared to the Ontario Line per km, The Ontario line is using a lot of elevated sections and and GO right of way so most likely the difference is 5x+ to build a subway instead of an LRT. Finch West costs 3.7Billion as an LRT and would cost around 17.5 Billion as a Subway at the same per km as the Ontario line..
Northern Light
Superstar
Careful about what's in those numbers, in both cases.
That's not quite an accurate picture.
Though it is certainly accurate to suggest a 100% tunneled project would have cost more money, and indeed it would be a multiple of the LRT figure.
Last edited:
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Because the 7+ year debate on subways vs lrt's for Scarborough went from a facts based plan to an ideological "haves vs have nots"
If I ask any person I know in Scarborough why is the LRT "bad" they say because we don't want the city to short change us. The experimental and underfunded RT made them feel 2nd class.
I made my disclaimer cause I want don't want people to assume I'm in that group.
Northern Light
Superstar
We certainly should push for better than what was delivered.
However, it is important not to conflate different things.
The vehicles/rolling stock here are perfectly capable of being speedy. It is a choice to operate them slowly. You can operate subways at different speeds too, Toronto runs subways in regular rather than high-rate motor operation which would provide more speed. We've also had issues w/extended or delayed door opening/closing times, particularly on Line 1.
Again, choices. Now there are reasons for said choices, its not just whimsy, but that doesn't mean the TTC got it right.
****
In respect of Finch, we need to be clear, a subway was not ever going on this route. Period. So litigating that would be silly. The alternatives were 'Do nothing'; some variant of BRT, or simply a modified version of what was built.
Lets review what is pure 'choice', in other words reversible now, without major cap-x.
1) Schedules
2) Permitted operating speeds mid-stop (between stops) and through intersections.
3) Transit Priority signalling that is more aggressive.
4) Lagging lefts and/or left turn prohibitions at some intersections.
In varying degrees, these could be delivered, in part, as soon as March; while some changes would require longer, perhaps until late this year.
****
Now lets look at major changes that could be made that do require cap-x, but are realistic and feasible.
1) Really this is removing and/or relocating some surface stops, that's pretty much it.
2) We truly should fix that completely unacceptable turning radii in the Humber tunnel, but that would be expensive and profoundly disruptive.
****
I think BRT and 'Do Nothing' are straight forward as alternatives.
IF we were designing this as LRT, from the start, there are different choices we could have made.
1) We could have trenched or elevated over select intersections, depending on method, depth etc. maybe add 150M per intersection.
2) We could have had open-ballast track (this would allow better heating for switches in the winter.)
3) We could have chosen different rolling stock, considered running to the side of the road, rather than the middle, and certainly build a better portal at Humber.
Of the above, only 1 (and the portal issue) would have represented faster travel times in a material way.
****
Subject to different design choices, there is no inherent reason an LRT can't perform as fast as a subway, but to be clear, that would mean far fewer stops, which would likely necessitate a residual local bus service.
****
To sum up, LRT could be fine here, it just isn't because of bad design and operating choices.
Fixing the operations part will make this much better, but not ideal.
The point of any other discussion really ought to be on insuring whatever choices we make in the future we do better than we did here, significantly so.
That may well mean subway in some cases, but will not mean subway in every case.
The problem with McGrath's piece is not that LRT is inherently evil; its that he wrote a throw-away column in which he failed to address the failures on Finch and with the Miller era plans more broadly in an effort to
simply say 'Miller was right' and people who don't like this are wrong.
On that, he's out to lunch.
Finch is not ok, as operated today.
His defense of that was poorly considered.
Last edited:
Steve X
Senior Member
My bigger fear is subway might still suffer the same speed restriction that is applied to this LRT line. It is clear that Metrolinx will own the subway extensions with TTC just rolling their trains onto ML tracks. At this point, we don't know who will be responsible for track maintenances but it could be part of the P3 contracts. If they damage TTC trains, who will pay for that and they can pretty much put speed restrictions on Scarborough or Yonge North extensions to reduce wear and tear. At this point if ML allows the consortium to save money by restricting how TTC operates the trains, it doesn't even matter what they build, it can be slow.
Kyle Campbell
Senior Member
It'll be interesting how the Ontario line is when it finally opens. It's totally new and different technology compared to the other lines, not just an extension of an existing one
I believe Metrolinx can totally screw up a subway too, so everyone here thinking that a line 6 subway would have been so much better than the LRT, I say wait and see
Bojaxs
Senior Member
Metrolinx CEO, Michael Lindsay recently made comments regarding "teething issues" with the Finch West LRT. His comments focus solely on the issues with track switches in cold temperatures which cause delays and the line to shut down temporarily. Unfortunately, he doesn't address the line's slow operating speeds or discuss ways to speed up the line.
globalnews.ca
Metrolinx CEO acknowledges launch problems with Finch West LRT - Toronto | Globalnews.ca
Metrolinx CEO Michael Lindsay acknowledged in a social media post on Friday that the new Finch West LRT has struggled on cold days since it launched in December.
globalnews.ca