[BurlOak]

How could a transit line that was planned (and started construction) as a subway in the early 1990's not have the ridership to warrant a 4 car grade-separated transit line a quarter century later?

Maybe the numbers were exaggerated back in the day, but they are likely underestimated by a similar degree today.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

His assertion isn't totally incorrect. However, we would like to have continuous lines where possible. A transfer at Mt Dennis is not optimal, and the LRT extension will not cost that much.

Transit lines have to stop somewhere. We can't have a one seat ride everywhere.

 

[Adjei]

Transit lines have to stop somewhere. We can't have a one seat ride everywhere.

Yeah and this is a line continuing to the airport which is a big trip destination in the area and not some random stop at Weston and Eglinton.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

His assertion isn't totally incorrect. However, we would like to have continuous lines where possible. A transfer at Mt Dennis is not optimal, and the LRT extension will not cost that much.

Ehh... This extension will probably cost between a billion and $1.5 Billion. That's a lot of money. I couldn't support that if it'd move something low like 2,000 ppphpd.

What I could stand behind, if there is low usage, is an Eglinton West BRT. The wonderful thing about this is that it would be cheaper than the LRT and should be just as fast. This is because, for the most part, people using the Eglinton West corridor would be transferring from bus routes. With the BRT these bus routes could now run along the BRT straight to Mt. Dennis Station, where riders could transfer to the ECLRT.

Regardless of if a BRT or LRT is selected, commuters would have the same amount of transfers. The difference in downtown-bound commute times between BRT and LRT should be negligible. In fact, the BRT might be faster because shorter headways would be needed to accommodate lower capacity vehicles moving the same amount of people. This means that the wait time would be shorter for the bus than an LRT.

So we'd get just as fast commute times, while saving maybe billion dollars that could be used for something more impactful like DRL

Yeah and this is a line continuing to the airport which is a big trip destination in the area and not some random stop at Weston and Eglinton.

The airport is not a big trip generator, as seen in the ECLRT Environmental Assessment.

 

[dowlingm]

How could a transit line that was planned (and started construction) as a subway in the early 1990's not have the ridership to warrant a 4 car grade-separated transit line a quarter century later?

Maybe the numbers were exaggerated back in the day, but they are likely underestimated by a similar degree today.

Yeah but SmartTrack didn't exist in Mike Harris' day.

 

[dowlingm]

The airport is not a big trip generator, as seen in the ECLRT Environmental Assessment.

After riding on the new LFLRVs downtown, I'm not sure the extra 12cm of width on uptown cars is gonna make it seem attractive to bring luggage on. And if the answer to that is "people do it on 58/192" the answer is "we need an extension to pull in new people, not just redistribute existing ridership".

 

[ehlow]

After riding on the new LFLRVs downtown, I'm not sure the extra 12cm of width on uptown cars is gonna make it seem attractive to bring luggage on. And if the answer to that is "people do it on 58/192" the answer is "we need an extension to pull in new people, not just redistribute existing ridership".

The new streetcars aren't bad for carrying luggage in the open areas near the door. Did that going to the island airport

 

[crs1026]

Ehh... This extension will probably cost between a billion and $1.5 Billion. That's a lot of money. I couldn't support that if it'd move something low like 2,000 ppphpd.

What I could stand behind, if there is low usage, is an Eglinton West BRT. The wonderful thing about this is that it would be cheaper than the LRT and should be just as fast. This is because, for the most part, people using the Eglinton West corridor would be transferring from bus routes. With the BRT these bus routes could now run along the BRT straight to Mt. Dennis Station, where riders could transfer to the ECLRT.

Well, if we wanted to be really creative - this BRT could give Miway the franchise for all passengers all the way from Renforth to Mount Dennis. Call it the first step to fare integration. That way the BRT is seamless, and there aren't duplicate bus lines on the same street. TTC could run a 192 style Rocket frm Mount Dennis to the Airport.

It all depends on the ridership numbers.

- Paul

 

[BurlOak]

Yeah but SmartTrack didn't exist in Mike Harris' day.

LRT did exist in the Bob Rae era. The Spadina and Harborfront LRT had just opened. Obviously the projections then were beyond the capacity of LRT.

Are there any documents available that state what the demand was projected to be for the Eglinton West Subway?

 

[sixrings]

Transit lines have to stop somewhere. We can't have a one seat ride everywhere.

who doesnt hate linear transfers.. I get that they need to end somewhere but weston is random and considering the size of the line they are so close to finishing it.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

who doesnt hate linear transfers.. I get that they need to end somewhere but weston is random and considering the size of the line they are so close to finishing it.

It's not random. Ridership dramatically drops at Jane Street, which is pretty close to Mt. Dennis. I might support extending a few hundred meters to Jane, but west of there (based on EA results) doesn't make any sense. Especially with a price approaching, and likely exceeding, $1.2 Billion.

Build the rest as BRT and save taxpayers a billion dollars. Sure the linear transfer won't look as pretty on a map, but it should improve commutes just as well as LRT.

 

[sixrings]

It is random as it is not a destination. it seems you want to save money which I understand. But the suburbs should be getting decent transit too. BRT just creates a transfer. It isnt about having a pretty map its about eliminating as many linear transfers as possible. This is why the Sheppard LRT doesnt get traction and this is why many people want the RT to be subway the whole way. I get your numbers argument both ridership and costs but at some point we are cheaping out on something that will probably eventually need an extension, which is practically shovel ready to save money for a DRL which doesnt have a route. Anyways what is the purpose of using LRT technology if we cant extend it in sections. The whole purpose is to use technology that is relatively cheap to build and fast which is what a city in gridlock should be about.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

It is random as it is not a destination. it seems you want to save money which I understand. But the suburbs should be getting decent transit too. BRT just creates a transfer. It isnt about having a pretty map its about eliminating as many linear transfers as possible. This is why the Sheppard LRT doesnt get traction and this is why many people want the RT to be subway the whole way

The BRT doesn't create a transfer, it just moves the transfer point.

The vast majority of people using the Eglinton West corridor will be transferring from bus routes operating north/south in Etobickoe. For these people, with the BRT, their transfers are:
1. Bus from home to Mt. Dennis Station via traditional streets and BRT.
2. Mt. Dennis to Eglinton West via LRT
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

With the LRT extension, their transfers would be:
1. Bus from home to LRT stop
2. LRT stop to Eglinton West
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

So for these people, whether or not an LRT or BRT is built, they have the same number of transfers. Heck, the BRT might even have a better user experience, since the transfer point will be in a station, rather than a cold, dark, windy transit shelter on some random spot on Eglinton. Transferring on Eglinton West at night is actually my least favourite place to wait for transit since it's so secluded.

And for people who live on Eglinton, the BRT will get them to their destinations even faster than the LRT. The reason is:
1. BRT is travel speed is as fast as LRT, as long as they're built to the same specifications
2. Frequencies on BRT will be higher. The ECLRT would likely have every second westbound train terminate at Mt. Dennis, due to low usage west of that point. That means that the Eglinton West corridor would see peak hour headways of 6 min, and approaching 10 mins at night! Because the BRT has lower capacity vehicles, necessitating higher headways, and has multiple routes running along Eglinton West, the BRT would see headways likely approaching or exceeding twice as frequent as an LRT. That's shaving 3 to 5 minutes off commutes.

Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail.

Anyways what is the purpose of using LRT technology if we cant extend it in sections. The whole purpose is to use technology that is relatively cheap to build and fast which is what a city in gridlock should be about.

The BRT doesn't preclude future extensions of the ECLRT. Decades from now, if the area warrants an LRT extension, it will be a simple upgrade as all the right of ways are in place. Lay the track, run the electrical and that's it. Simple and cheap(er).

In the mean time, the Billion dollar saved can go to beinging the DRL to Eglinton or beyond, something that is a much higher priority and will conservatively impact 10x the commuters an Eglinton LRT extension would.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Well, if we wanted to be really creative - this BRT could give Miway the franchise for all passengers all the way from Renforth to Mount Dennis. Call it the first step to fare integration. That way the BRT is seamless, and there aren't duplicate bus lines on the same street. TTC could run a 192 style Rocket frm Mount Dennis to the Airport.

It all depends on the ridership numbers.

- Paul

That is a really good idea. Eliminates a transfer for people coming from Mississauga to Toronto. The TTC could continue to operate the rest of the north/south routes that would use the BRT to get to Mt. Dennis.

 

[sixrings]

The BRT doesn't create a transfer, it just moves the transfer point.

The vast majority of people using the Eglinton West corridor will be transferring from bus routes operating north/south in Etobickoe. For these people, with the BRT, their transfers are:
1. Bus from home to Mt. Dennis Station via traditional streets and BRT.
2. Mt. Dennis to Eglinton West via LRT
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

With the LRT extension, their transfers would be:
1. Bus from home to LRT stop
2. LRT stop to Eglinton West
3. Eglinton West to downtown via subway.

So for these people, whether or not an LRT or BRT is built, they have the same number of transfers. Heck, the BRT might even have a better user experience, since the transfer point will be in a station, rather than a cold, dark, windy transit shelter on some random spot on Eglinton. Transferring on Eglinton West at night is actually my least favourite place to wait for transit since it's so secluded.

And for people who live on Eglinton, the BRT will get them to their destinations even faster than the LRT. The reason is:
1. BRT is travel speed is as fast as LRT, as long as they're built to the same specifications
2. Frequencies on BRT will be higher. The ECLRT would likely have every second westbound train terminate at Mt. Dennis, due to low usage west of that point. That means that the Eglinton West corridor would see peak hour headways of 6 min, and approaching 10 mins at night! Because the BRT has lower capacity vehicles, necessitating higher headways, and has multiple routes running along Eglinton West, the BRT would see headways likely approaching or exceeding twice as frequent as an LRT. That's shaving 3 to 5 minutes off commutes.

Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail.



The BRT doesn't preclude future extensions of the ECLRT. Decades from now, if the area warrants an LRT extension, it will be a simple upgrade as all the right of ways are in place. Lay the track, run the electrical and that's it. Simple and cheap(er).

In the mean time, the Billion dollar saved can go to beinging the DRL to Eglinton or beyond, something that is a much higher priority and will conservatively impact 10x the commuters an Eglinton LRT extension would.

Lets pretend you are somewhere on Kipling or Isslington. Typically in 2016 you take the bus to the bloor subway, which gets you to st george and then another transfer to downtown. Thats 1 Bus 2 Subway rides. If you made the LRT get to the airport the person could choose to take 1 Bus 1 LRT 1 Subway ride to get to the same location. Your set up would mean 1 Bus to Eglinton 1 Bus BRT to Weston, 1 LRT to Eglinton west, 1 Subway downtown. So in fact you have created one extra transfer. You could argue that the people could simply stay on their original route to the bloor line but shouldnt we be trying to divert some people off the bloor west line. And what happens if the person is trying to get to yonge and eglinton which is about to boom big time, again an additional transfer.

Also "Thus, the only benefit I see LRT offering riders in the area (assuming BRT range ridership), is the more comfortable ride of rail." this is really a problem. Many people for whatever reason are adverse to taking buses. Some find it uncomfortable how it weaves in and out of traffic for stops. Some outright think buses are for poor people. I would not agree with the latter but buses are simply not as comfortable as LRT. In a city which is grid locked we need people to take transit who can choose and afford other means of transportation , a car, but choose transit because it works for them. A big part of this is comfort. I cant see how one can argue that we should have elaborate stations to encourage ridership but at the same time not be in favour of transit which is more "comfortable." I guess the buck has to stop somewhere.