News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.8K     0 
urbanclient said:
No, of course not, the implication being, which I've elaborated on the streetcar thread, is that it will be virtually impossible for Toronto's streetcars to reach the average speed of New York's subways.
Click to expand...
Nor should they ever, except for maybe very late at night when there is no other traffic on the streets. The serve a very, very different type of service structure. A streetcar or a bus running down a street like Queen or Dundas serve primarily a local ridership, a subway serves a more inter-neighbourhood one.

urbanclient said:
If Line 1, with 1 km spacing, is sometimes the same speed, how are the 200-300 m stop spacing streetcars supposed to achieve those speeds?
Click to expand...
They aren't. See above.

urbanclient said:
Similar case with Eglinton, with 620 m spacing east of DV and 700 m east of Laird. We shouldn't be comparing apples to oranges.
Click to expand...
Eglinton is supposed to replace the surface bus. Having stops every concession, or even every kilometer isn't going to do that.

urbanclient said:
Going off Google Maps and the TTC service summary does not reflect Line 1's real speeds. That's why I mentioned the slow zones.
Click to expand...
Cool. Totally irrelevant if you're going to compare the average speeds of other subways by not using the same methodology, don't you think?

urbanclient said:
I appreciate your insider information on many things, but you're not always right Dan.
Click to expand...
It may behoove you not to do so much assuming of others. I'm not interested in your congratulations, or your opinion for that matter.

Dan
 
NY99 said:
Perhaps it could have been an acceptable low-traffic stop... if it simply were located on the south side with some kind of grade-separated access to the platforms. But that's not what we got.

Do people think this mistake could be rectified without too much additional cost?
Click to expand...

Perhaps the south side thing is still possible but not by moving the tracks, but moving the road instead.
 
M II A II R II K said:
Perhaps the south side thing is still possible but not by moving the tracks, but moving the road instead.
Click to expand...
Don't even have to move the road. Block of the ROW such that the eastbound lanes of Eglinton can't turn left onto Leslie, and you can't turn left from Leslie on Eglinton. Provide those turn movements with two road modifications:
  • Modify the Eglinton underpass just East of the CP bridge to allow for a complete U-turn movement from Eastbound to Westbound on Eglinton.
  • Add a new U-turn light just west of the Brentcliffe portal
It'll add a couple of minutes to driving times on those routes, and isn't perfect, but it should be much simpler and cheaper than a full relocation of the tracks or road. Definitely less disruptive to execute.
 
tsm1072 said:
Don't even have to move the road. Block of the ROW such that the eastbound lanes of Eglinton can't turn left onto Leslie, and you can't turn left from Leslie on Eglinton. Provide those turn movements with two road modifications:
  • Modify the Eglinton underpass just East of the CP bridge to allow for a complete U-turn movement from Eastbound to Westbound on Eglinton.
  • Add a new U-turn light just west of the Brentcliffe portal
It'll add a couple of minutes to driving times on those routes, and isn't perfect, but it should be much simpler and cheaper than a full relocation of the tracks or road. Definitely less disruptive to execute.
Click to expand...
Bit unfortunate for the 51 bus, but I think this would work. If we do the above, and remove the Sunnybrook stop (which may be advisable, pending station usership data), we could get ATC to Don Mills.

Following that, we could remove Aga Khan station, modify the DVP interchange to remove ROW conflicts, and grade-separate Wynford station (with a pedestrian overpass or underpass to access the platforms). This would bring ATC up to Bermondsey with relatively minimal hard infrastructure costs.

Bermondsey onward would need an elevated guideway, which is where things get pricey.
 
Which would end up unnecessarily being the Scarborough RT story all over again.

If only that initial Rob Ford vote to tunnel the whole thing didn’t fail. May have also offset the extra cost by having it also act as the RT replacement instead of that Line 2 extension.
 
Last edited:
M II A II R II K said:
Which would end up unnecessarily being the Scarborough RT story all over again.
Click to expand...

What's done is done. We gotta look out for the best interests of the transit network this point forward, and if that means a duplication of hard infrastructure, so be it.

For the short to medium term, I think we're fine (assuming the efforts to speed up the surface section bear fruit). However, once the residential market recovers and the Golden Mile redevelopment kicks off in earnest, Line 5 will be in a world of trouble.
 
Given that there were so many staircases they could put in the Line 1 Eglinton platform, in rush hour there’s a bottleneck of people lining up for the stairs to transfer from the LRT to Line 1.

I guess there wasn’t any possibility or space for converting Line 1 platform to Spanish so more staircases and elevators could be added.
 
M II A II R II K said:
Given that there were so many staircases they could put in the Line 1 Eglinton platform, in rush hour there’s a bottleneck of people lining up for the stairs to transfer from the LRT to Line 1.

I guess there wasn’t any possibility or space for converting Line 1 platform to Spanish so more staircases and elevators could be added.
Click to expand...
To Spanish? I know we get compared to the US a lot, but, that's not one of our official languages. ;)
 
nfitz said:
It was simple incompetence and ignorance. That's all.
Click to expand...
Just like building the eastern section above ground to begin with.

It's funny how all of the people here who were so gung ho about this LRT being above ground were talking about pushing for and advocating for better, and how "signal priority" would save the day. But are now either silent, or just lie about "sources" saying timings are improved, when clearly nothing's changed in terms of timing, is still slower than the bus like half the time, and people like me get accused of "trolling" for pointing out the obvious and calling out the hypocrisy of these above ground supporters....
 
And I'm not gonna go away. Because most of the premise of these folks for improvement was "signal priority". That hasn't happened other than a rotation. And there hasn't been any updates. And these "advocates" have pretty much disappeared from what I've seen and the conversation surrounding it in the municipal level and among the public seems to be fading. But I'm sure these LRT fans will be back touting the benefits of LRTs when the next project is proposed and talking about how fast it will be and how it will have the green light, etc acting like it will actually happen, and then disappear again later when it turns out to be another expensive disaster.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top