[Bojaxs]

Many times, you see the trains dwell for a whole minute at platforms and traffic lights. They could have totally gone through.

They should just make Don Valley the end of the line and have riders transfer onto a bus to Kennedy. Honestly, what difference would it make at this point?

This is what happens when you have a single transit line that operates as a subway for 2/3, and than switches to a streetcar for the last 1/3.

The surface portion of the line is going to have a negative impact on the underground portion. How can the TTC properly schedule westbound trains in the underground portion if those same trains are constantly being held up by red lights on the surface portion of the line?

 

[urbanclient]

I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but are the seating arrangements for ECLRT (and FLRT) the same as the Flexity Streetcars in circulation? I hate those so much: the 4-seat boxes where you play footsy with people across from you, and the very narrow aisles that make walking front or back in the train virtually impossible without jostling everyone in an aisle seat. These things definitely impact loading times too, especially when someone needs to move to an exit with a mobility device or a stroller.

One thing that has been briefly mentioned in the past, but worth mentioning again is the dubious claim that the Flexity Freedom (Line 5 Eglinton) cars have a max capacity of 251 per 5 module train around 30 metres in length. Two trains per trainset for Line 5 would be a total of ~60 metres and ~500 passengers. This has implications for the true route capacity of Line 5. Bombardier claimed this number was with an insane 6 passenger per square metre crush load. (https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attachments/bombardier-flexity-freedom-brochure-2011-pdf.95184/)

Since seating layout and rolling stock size is virtually identical to the Outlook streetcars, I highly doubt it would be possible to fit 251 passengers per train. People on the train would start crowding the doors and those waiting to board would skip one train to wait for the next. Furthermore, each Flexity Freedom Eglinton car only has 2 small and 2 large doors for a total of 4 doors over 30 metres. The Toronto Rocket trains on Line 1 have 4 doors 1.5 metres wide for every ~23 metre long car. The widest doors on Line 5 trains would still be narrower than those on Lines 1, 2, 4.

A more reasonable number would be 198 per train (see pdf above), but that would still entail a standing density of ~4.3 passengers/m^2. To roughly match the typical (not max) standing density of a Toronto Rocket, it would be more like 160 per train (~3 passenger/m^2). Thus, two car trainsets would have a typical capacity of 320. If they run them every 5 minutes that would be only 3840 people per direction per hour. Every 3 minutes would be 6400.

The Toronto Rocket 6 car typical capacity is 1080 with 400 seats at a standing density of ~3 passenger/m^2. (https://www.ttc.ca/transparency-and...erating-Statistics---2018/Conventional-System)
^Note: TTC claimed in 2018 that the Flexity Outlook streetcars had a typical capacity of 130. The Flexity Freedom Line 5 trains are only ~4% wider, 2.65 vs. 2.54 metres.

 

[Voltz]

One thing that has been briefly mentioned in the past, but worth mentioning again is the dubious claim that the Flexity Freedom (Line 5 Eglinton) cars have a max capacity of 251 per 5 module train around 30 metres in length. Two trains per trainset for Line 5 would be a total of ~60 metres and ~500 passengers. This has implications for the true route capacity of Line 5. Bombardier claimed this number was with an insane 6 passenger per square metre crush load. (https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attachments/bombardier-flexity-freedom-brochure-2011-pdf.95184/)

Since seating layout and rolling stock size is virtually identical to the Outlook streetcars, I highly doubt it would be possible to fit 251 passengers per train. People on the train would start crowding the doors and those waiting to board would skip one train to wait for the next. Furthermore, each Flexity Freedom Eglinton car only has 2 small and 2 large doors for a total of 4 doors over 30 metres. The Toronto Rocket trains on Line 1 have 4 doors 1.5 metres wide for every ~23 metre long car. The widest doors on Line 5 trains would still be narrower than those on Lines 1, 2, 4.

A more reasonable number would be 198 per train (see pdf above), but that would still entail a standing density of ~4.3 passengers/m^2. To roughly match the typical (not max) standing density of a Toronto Rocket, it would be more like 160 per train (~3 passenger/m^2). Thus, two car trainsets would have a typical capacity of 320. If they run them every 5 minutes that would be only 3840 people per direction per hour. Every 3 minutes would be 6400.

The Toronto Rocket 6 car typical capacity is 1080 with 400 seats at a standing density of ~3 passenger/m^2. (https://www.ttc.ca/transparency-and...erating-Statistics---2018/Conventional-System)
^Note: TTC claimed in 2018 that the Flexity Outlook streetcars had a typical capacity of 130. The Flexity Freedom Line 5 trains are only ~4% wider, 2.65 vs. 2.54 metres.

Okay, they did use a high passenger density number, but the trains can be three cars long to begin with. And if the line does actually have passenger capacity concerns then you can't possibly be the first person in the more than 15 years that the lines been under study and construction to notice it.

 

[Voltz]

They should just make Don Valley the end of the line and have riders transfer onto a bus to Kennedy. Honestly, what difference would it make at this point?

The bemoaning of a forced linear transfer from the anti Sheppard LRT crowd was deafening.

 

[bearcat]

This will change, Ferrand is getting lights and will be a cross street. (whether that justifies a stop is a different question)



Correct.

One-way cross street on the south side no? I doubt buses will run on it. And you won't be able to get to the Ferrand LRT stop from the intersection with Eglinton, and the Don Valley LRT station entrance will be closer.

 

[KhalilHeron]

I've heard somewhere that the stops on the Scarborough portion of the line were spaced so close together because the plan was to not need a supplementary 34 bus once operational.

Not sure how true that is though

Yet the spacing in north york made them keep the parallel 34 : (
Once development in Golden Mile gets going i could see them moving 34 service to either Golden Mile Blvd or the new O'Connor

 

[Northern Light]

One-way cross street on the south side no? I doubt buses will run on it. And you won't be able to get to the Ferrand LRT stop from the intersection with Eglinton, and the Don Valley LRT station entrance will be closer.

Looking north towards Eglinton on Ferrand:

Source: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-115657.pdf

Map showing proposed road/mobility connections:

Orientation of above, North on Left, East on top, South to right, bottom is West.

Source: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-115649.pdf

 

[urbanclient]

Okay, they did use a high passenger density number, but the trains can be three cars long to begin with. And if the line does actually have passenger capacity concerns then you can't possibly be the first person in the more than 15 years that the lines been under study and construction to notice it.

They don't have enough cars to run three car trainsets with a decent frequency and the platforms are not fully ready for 90 metre trains. They would need to place an order for new rolling stock which would take years. In Metrolinx time, that would be 3-5 years.

 

[Rainforest]

They don't have enough cars to run three car trainsets with a decent frequency and the platforms are not fully ready for 90 metre trains. They would need to place an order for new rolling stock which would take years. In Metrolinx time, that would be 3-5 years.

That's right. But it will take a lot more than 5 years from the open date to reach the point where additional cars are needed.

Not a problem at all, just a regular transit planning situation. If and when you detect the need for more hardware, you order more hardware.

 

[Rainforest]

They should just make Don Valley the end of the line and have riders transfer onto a bus to Kennedy. Honestly, what difference would it make at this point?

Add a transfer, plus lose the benefit of the surface right-of-way between Don Mills and Kennedy. And you don't even get rid of all traffic lights, the one at Leslie still remains.

All of that for what kind of gain? Perhaps some transit purists will enjoy the updated map with the subway-like operation not contaminated by the surface section. But 99% of riders who want to cross Don Mills will dislike that arbitrary transfer.

I don't disagree that Eglinton is designed as an odd duck, and should have been done differently. Nevertheless, at this point the best option is to use this line as is, and work around its deficiencies.

This is what happens when you have a single transit line that operates as a subway for 2/3, and than switches to a streetcar for the last 1/3.

The surface portion of the line is going to have a negative impact on the underground portion. How can the TTC properly schedule westbound trains in the underground portion if those same trains are constantly being held up by red lights on the surface portion of the line?

Measure the actual average travel time in the surface section, and set the schedule accordingly. No rocket science involved. Actually, a math problem for middle school Grade 7.

 

[Rainforest]

It is ridiculous that the left turn signal for a few cars take priority over the hundreds of riders on the train. By simply placing the left turn phase after straight traffic, the same amount of cars still get through each cycle with the benefit of shaving off a few minutes. This city is so backwards.

Advanced left-turn phase is supposedly done for the safety of pedestrians. The reasoning is that if the left-turn phase comes after the straight phase (when the pedestrians are crossing too), then some of the pedestrians may still be in the road lanes when the left-turn phase begins and the cars are rushing to complete their left turn and might hit them. I don't know how much the advanced left-turn actually helps though.

In any case, simply changing the sequence of transit phases will not necessarily improve the LRT's average travel time. Yes, the optics will be better; LRT crosses first, while the cars wait.

But in fact, it is possible that the LRT will not finish the boarding before the end of the straight phase and will not be able to cross until the next cycle. While if the advanced left-turn phase was in place, the LRT would finish the boarding during that phase, and then cross during the straight phase.

I'm thinking, a better option is to give the LRT more chances to cross. That could be achieved by adding a short LRT-only straight phase, active only when the LRT is present. For example, the Eglinton & Warden phases would be:
1. Warden straight
2. Eglinton LRT-only, lasts about 20 seconds, regular traffic does not go (would be too confusing to stop it after 20 s)
3. Eglinton left-turns
4. Eglinton straight (LRT can cross during this phase, too)
5. Warden left-turns
[and the cycle repeats]

 

[urbanclient]

That's right. But it will take a lot more than 5 years from the open date to reach the point where additional cars are needed.

Not a problem at all, just a regular transit planning situation. If and when you detect the need for more hardware, you order more hardware.

The truth is, nobody knows for sure what will happen when the Line 5 opens in 2025/2026, and how fast ridership will grow as people get used to a (hopefully) reliable and fast crosstown transit option. As Reece Martin and many other people have predicted, the ridership estimates for Eglinton could be woefully low. As late as 2016, Metrolinx predicted only 162,000 daily riders by 2031, a third of Line 2's current daily weekday ridership. In 2017, Metrolinx predicted the GTHA would reach 10 million by 2041, but by the most conservative estimates it is already around 8.5 million, and likely closer to 9.5 million when factoring in disproportionate growth in the GTHA vs. non-metropolitan areas since 2021 and overstayed visas (Benjamin Tal from CIBC).

In 2022, Metrolinx themselves revised their plans to adjust to predicted demand:
"TTC has been preparing to open the LRT at what the P3 agreement calls Service Level 1, which would see trains run as often as every 5 minutes at the busiest times.
But the TTC is now in discussion with Metrolinx about starting at Level 6, under which trains would run as often as every 3 minutes and 10 seconds. Metrolinx proposed the higher service levels, which would be a major change — the LRT wasn’t expected to reach Level 6 for another 15 years."
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/ho...cle_06cc18ba-5c29-5cd1-87b9-251b9dc6b574.html

Sources:
https://economics.cibccm.com/cds?id=858756bd-a8fc-4920-8ea4-e1dcd1c104d4&flag=E
https://www.mpamag.com/ca/mortgage-industry/industry-trends/we-are-in-a-recession-cibcs-tal/553608
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710015201

Opinions:
https://reecemartin.ca/139657085/the-problems-with-the-eglinton-crosstown-are-just-getting-started
https://www.reddit.com/r/TTC/comments/1mttuzb/comment/n9nbsir/

 

[Dan416]

I wish the Eglinton Line would finally open so that we can see if it really is a failure or overcrowded or whatnot. There's been a lot of speculation on this matter. Would just like to see who was right.

 

[nfitz]

One thing that has been briefly mentioned in the past, but worth mentioning again is the dubious claim that the Flexity Freedom (Line 5 Eglinton) cars have a max capacity of 251 per 5 module train around 30 metres in length. Two trains per trainset for Line 5 would be a total of ~60 metres and ~500 passengers.

Where have you seen Metrolinx using that (very crush) capacity for line capacity calculations? I've discussed capacity an hour a couple of times above, and I've used 450 to 500 for a 2-car train - which will more than suffice based on the numbers and demand estimates for many years, even assuming initial demand is much higher than estimated.

The truth is, nobody knows for sure what will happen when the Line 5 opens in 2025/2026, and how fast ridership will grow as people get used to a (hopefully) reliable and fast crosstown transit option.

The truth is that experts have been modelling and predicting this for years.

I don't think us transit geeks are going to successfully predict that the initial ridership is double what the current capacity is designed for (which can then be quadrupled with more cars to provide more frequent service and longer trains). That would certainly be amazing if we all had that problem - but I'm tired of people dismissing science in so many parts of society and deciding they know more than the ones who actually do this for a living.

Metrolinx predicted the GTHA would reach 10 million by 2041, but by the most conservative estimates it is already around 8.5 million, and likely closer to 9.5 million when factoring in disproportionate growth in the GTHA vs. non-metropolitan areas since 2021 ...

They do take disproportionate growth into account when they do southern Ontario population estimates - which is why you actually see some population shrinkage in some areas, with big growth elsewhere. Those experts also take into account where in the GTHA the growth is. This all feeds into the modelling. I'll agree that growth was ahead of the predicted population growth - but now that Ontario population growth is all but eliminated, it's unlikely that the 2041 predictions will be that far out.

In 2022, Metrolinx themselves revised their plans to adjust to predicted demand:
"TTC has been preparing to open the LRT at what the P3 agreement calls Service Level 1, which would see trains run as often as every 5 minutes at the busiest times.
But the TTC is now in discussion with Metrolinx about starting at Level 6, under which trains would run as often as every 3 minutes and 10 seconds. Metrolinx proposed the higher service levels, which would be a major change — the LRT wasn’t expected to reach Level 6 for another 15 years."

We've been discussing this for a while. But I've not seen any indication that this based on higher demand. Though the original opening estimates were I think for 2016 - not 2026 - so not surprising if it's gone up a bit. Still the initial capacity was designed for 2031 if I remember correctly.

Yet the spacing in north york made them keep the parallel 34 : (
Once development in Golden Mile gets going i could see them moving 34 service to either Golden Mile Blvd or the new O'Connor
View attachment 692551

That's an interesting thought! And I hadn't seen the Ashtonbee plans before - wonderful! With the 34 Eglinton less necessary east of Victoria Park (or even Leslie), running it down Victoria Park and along the O'Connor extension would be great! Meanwhile the O'Connor bus could go up Victoria Park and along Golden Mile and/or Ashtonbee, if there's enough demand.

 

[urbanclient]

Where have you seen Metrolinx using that (very crush) capacity for line capacity calculations? I've discussed capacity an hour a couple of times above, and I've used 450 to 500 for a 2-car train - which will more than suffice based on the numbers and demand estimates for many years, even assuming initial demand is much higher than estimated.

Here is an example:

Who We Are | Crosslinx Transit Solutions

[...]Read More...

www.crosslinxtransit.ca

750 for a 3 car trainset, 20 times an hour (3 minute frequency) is needed to hit the max planned capacity of 15,000 passengers per hour per direction (or ~250 per car as opposed to a more typical ~160).

Please correct me if I am wrong, and intervals can actually go below 3 minutes.

My personal opinion is that 6 passengers/m^2 is wholly feasible with a Line 1 subway train due to the seating layout and wide doors. 6p/m^2 is very difficult to pull off on a Flexity Freedom. Crush load capacity for similar sized 6 car metro trains is often listed at ~1800 abroad implying 6 passengers/m^2, rather than the 1080 or ~1500 listed in TTC sources.

In this source, Metrolinx goes with the conservative 163 passengers per car for 490 three car max.

The differences between trains, light rail vehicles and subways

The features that set these transit vehicles apart in design, speed and purpose.

www.metrolinx.com