The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Since so many people are talking about how this or that transit technology will or won't keep people in their cars, I would like to point out that rapid transit can't reduce congestion ― it can only provide an alternative to congestion.

When you implement transit, you might attain a certain modal shift - let's say there are now 25% fewer people driving to work. That means that driving is much more fluid, which, exactly in the same way that a 10% increase in road capacity begets a 10% increase in miles traveled within 4-6 years, will induce demand until you're back to square one. Or, on a smaller scale; if there are 25% fewer people in line for a limited quantity of free pizza, the remaining 75% will each eat 25% more, eliminating any pizza savings you might have hoped to get.

This is basic supply and demand.

The only difference between a congested street and a congested street with transit is that people aren't forced to sit in congestion in the second street. Since access (which includes mobility) creates wealth, that means a network of congestion+transit ― even slow transit ― will be able to support a healthier and more dynamic economy than an equally congested network sans transit, not to mention the innumerable other personal and societal benefits of taking transit.

So even if you build the deepest subway or fastest skytrain between every Oshawa, Mississauga and Toronto, your roads won't be any less congested just as the slowest LRT won't do the opposite.

FYI.

Subways and Skytrains aren't about reducing congestion but providing a better alternative to driving. If I have to cross the city at an excruciating slow speed in my car, in a train or in a bus; I'll take my car! Got my music, I can sing and dance and stretch out. Open windows!

But, if I have secret option number 4, that train running 20 feet underground that will zoom past everything else, then I'll take the subway.

Spending hundreds of millions on trains running in mixed traffic, vulnerable to accidents, protests, parades and all sorts of unpredictable, yet fairly common crap in the city, is asinine. Bus lanes for now, subways/skytrains when you can afford it.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

In the case of Finch at least, there's also a strong social/community case to be made for LRT, aside from strictly transportation planning perspectives.

Why? First of all, Finch Ave West is hardly as poor as people make it sound.
Secondly, you do not plan public transit on income. You plan it on building a transit network that serves everyone. When you plan just for the poor, you end up with the subpar transit systems you see in the USA.

Secondly, how does an LRT that is almost the same speed of the bus it is replacing help disadvantaged people? Does it get them to their multiple jobs faster? No it does not.
An express bus would probably offer more benefits.

[caltrane74]

The LRT might not be any faster than a bus Mike, but, in combination with the ROW, Signal priority and the new Spadina Subway it will certainly speed things along, in addition it will provide slightly more dignity to these low-income folks rather than getting crammed on the Finch West bus. Jane and Finch is a neighborhood which has a serious lack of fast reliable transit, the improvements which are coming over the next 6 years or so, should dramatically improve the lives of those not only living there but Rexdale as well.

[Innsertnamehere]

LRTs run faster than the bus, you are deluded to think otherwise. Currently the fastest route downtown from Humber college is to take the express bus down 27/427 to Kipling, while with the LRT it will be the LRT over to spadina.

[caltrane74]

I'm still trying to figure out how an LRT Train with all door boarding, a Right of Way and Signal Priority runs at the same speed as a Bus or Express Bus, all other factors remaining equal. If true here you could say that about any new LRT Line being built anywhere in the country, considering it will have to move some 50,000 people per day.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I'm still trying to figure out how an LRT Train with all door boarding, a Right of Way and Signal Priority runs at the same speed as a Bus or Express Bus, all other factors remaining equal. If true here you could say that about any new LRT Line being built anywhere in the country, considering it will have to move some 50,000 people per day.

Easy. It will not be fast because of the following:

-Station stops will be not be built to rapid transit spacing, but rather just as close together as a limited stop bus line. In some cases even closer than that.

-The LRT will not have full signal priority. Trains will still have to stop at many red lights, and wait for left turn signals.

-While they will have their own lane (row), the row is not protected by fences or walls. This means LRT trains will not be able to travel at high speeds like you see in Calgary or Edmonton.

Couple this all together, and you really don't have anything better than a bus in a bus lane.

Just look at Minneapolis' Green Line to see this. The line is just as slow as the bus it replaced, and some say actually slower.

Or look at St. Clair and just think of Finch as that, but with a few less stops.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

LRTs run faster than the bus, you are deluded to think otherwise. Currently the fastest route downtown from Humber college is to take the express bus down 27/427 to Kipling, while with the LRT it will be the LRT over to spadina.

And it will still be when the LRT opens. The express bus will be faster.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

in addition it will provide slightly more dignity to these low-income folks rather than getting crammed on the Finch West bus.

And do thousands of middle and upper middle class people not cram onto buses as well, some of them on Finch?

This is a very slippery slope to go down, planning transit based on poverty.
Toronto's success and Canada's in general, has come from providing high quality transit to everyone regardless of income.

If a transit line is heavily used, you upgrade the service. You don't upgrade a service just because it goes through a poor neighborhood, which is why Finch West was picked.
There are countless busier bus routes that actually do have crowding problems worse than Finch.

The only thing that will benefit Jane-Finch is the Spadina subway extension, as it will put residents within a fast feeder bus ride of the subway.

Jane-Finch is also not as poor as people may think. It is only a few buildings near the intersection, and some of the town homes. The rest of the neighborhood, and majority of the population are middle class, and live in houses approaching $600,000.

Want to help outlying areas? Do this with the buses until the subway extension opens.

http://www.transitmix.net/map/42875

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

When you implement transit, you might attain a certain modal shift - let's say there are now 25% fewer people driving to work. That means that driving is much more fluid, which, exactly in the same way that a 10% increase in road capacity begets a 10% increase in miles traveled within 4-6 years, will induce demand until you're back to square one. Or, on a smaller scale; if there are 25% fewer people in line for a limited quantity of free pizza, the remaining 75% will each eat 25% more, eliminating any pizza savings you might have hoped to get.

The goal should be 100% transit use.

[VIce]

Originally Posted by Beedok

The goal should be 100% transit use.

100% transit use, achieved by a lunatic:
• Video Link

[caltrane74]

By Toronto standards, Jane and Finch is low income, whether you live in an apartment or million dollar house off the main streets. Low income in Toronto likely means the people here whether they live in a house or apartment have less resources and access to cars, therefore more likely to use public transit. There is nothing wrong with planning our transit around the income of the residents there, if you need proof of this just take a look at the Sheppard Subway that tunnels its way into one of the richest neighborhoods in the city and the resulting usage, as evidence of not considering all factors when implementing new rapid transit.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

By Toronto standards, Jane and Finch is low income, whether you live in an apartment or million dollar house off the main streets. Low income in Toronto likely means the people here whether they live in a house or apartment have less resources and access to cars, therefore more likely to use public transit. There is nothing wrong with planning our transit around the income of the residents there, if you need proof of this just take a look at the Sheppard Subway that tunnels its way into one of the richest neighborhoods in the city and the resulting usage, as evidence of not considering all factors when implementing new rapid transit.

Planning transit based on income does not good, because you need quality transit to all corners of the city to actually get low income and all residents to jobs and other places. Having a good quality line in a low income area does nothing for these people, if they can't rely on good quality transit lines to complete their entire commute. If the King car is packed and slow, it effects them when they transfer onto it.


Transit usage rates do not vary that highly between income groups in Toronto. In fact higher income groups may take transit to higher degrees to get to work, due to high income jobs usually being downtown.

All I am saying is Canada needs to work at building good quality transit for everyone, in all our cities, regardless of income.

I think the USA shows pretty well that planning transit based on poverty does not work.

ook at the Sheppard Subway that tunnels its way into one of the richest neighborhoods in the city and the resulting usage, as evidence of not considering all factors when implementing new rapid transit.

Do you mean a Sheppard subway that has higher passenger loads per KM than most subway lines in London or New York? A subway line that carries more people in 6km, than many Transit City lines will carry in 20?

[ehlow]

At-grade LRT will be significantly faster than a local bus in mixed traffic in Toronto.

Of course it will. The difference is 22-25 km/h average speed for LRT vs 16-17 km/h for local bus (or less, when traffic is really bad). This comes from the EAs (for comparison Bloor is ~30 km/h, Spadina streetcar is 10.5 km/h).

Firstly, stop spacing is wider on the LRT, 400-500m vs. 200-300m on buses.

Secondly, time spent per stop is lower since it's all door low-floor with POP, so large groups of people can get on & off the vehicle fast like a subway.

Thirdly, it's in its own lane. Yes, things can obviously still block the intersections, but it's still much better than being in regular traffic lanes and much less likely to be affected by traffic. In addition, it doesn't need to switch lanes to go in & out of traffic at each stop.

With wider stop spacing and it's own lane, and fast boarding, how can it possible be as slow as the current local bus?

A bus can have its own lane, but in most cases, it doesn't.

Sorry, but I've heard this "myth" over and over and I don't get it. Sure, LRT is slower than a typical subway, but it is faster than a typical bus in Toronto. It's an in-between option in terms of speed, stop spacing and capacity.

In addition to the advantages in speed & reliability, capacity is also higher because each car is 30 meters vs. 18 in an articulated bus, HOWEVER, the cars can be coupled in multi unit trains to be even longer.


Of course, all of the above is for at-grade LRT on streets in their own ROW. Eglinton will be more than half underground, with an average speed of 28km/h, waaay faster than the current Eglinton bus, and approaching subway speeds. The elevated LRT that would have been in Scarborough would have been fully grade separated and be very high speed.

[miketoronto]

Originally Posted by ehlow

At-grade LRT will be significantly faster than a local bus in mixed traffic in Toronto.

You do know these are suburban bus routes right? Despite all the talk about traffic, and yes there is some, these buses generally make very good time. I know, as I have used them extensively.

You do know the Finch West bus tops out at 19km/h during peak periods. And on weekends it tops out at 25-26km/h. It does go down to 17 km/h in the middle of the day and during some periods in the peak.
This is from the TTC service planning sections.

Further, the signal priority as I have already said will actually cause the LRT to be slower, just like on Spadina and St. Clair. Unless you have full priority, LRT will always have to wait for turning cars, etc. All this slows down service. Stop spacing of 500m is still too close will not really do much to improve travel times. In some cases the LRT stops are even closer together.

Edmonton would be wise not to start building a mistake like this. They have a good thing going with true "lrt". Why they want to follow Portland, Minneapolis, and countless other US cities, and build slow transit that ends up not attracting many people is beyond me.

[GreaterMontréal]

Montréal will have a BRT on Pie-IX, with 70,000rpd (14km, 21 stations ), a LRT could have been possible, but they chose to use the bus instead. The Pie-IX corridor provides the displacement of nearly 40,000 people per weekday (2014). Two bus routes serve this artery: the local circuit 139 and 439 express route, peak hours. Some 200 buses a day in each direction are used to ensure the presence of a bus every two minutes during rush hour. With the BRT, you could see a gain of 10 minutes per bus between Blvd. Henri-Bourassa Metro Station Pie-IX, (8.6km).

It will be as fast as a LRT.

[itom 987]

Amsterdam has ground floor LRT and it works fine. Thanks to smartphones there is more incentive to use public transportation now than ever before. We have time to look at skyscraperpage in the morning before work, and on the way home! You can't do that while driving a car.

[Metro-One]

3 lines in Amsterdam are full metro though, with a 4th being built (full grade separation)

[Innsertnamehere]

and toronto doesnt have a metro line?

[Metro-One]

I thought we are talking about Edmonton here? This conversation is getting confusing...

[ehlow]

Originally Posted by miketoronto

You do know these are suburban bus routes right? Despite all the talk about traffic, and yes there is some, these buses generally make very good time. I know, as I have used them extensively.

You do know the Finch West bus tops out at 19km/h during peak periods. And on weekends it tops out at 25-26km/h. It does go down to 17 km/h in the middle of the day and during some periods in the peak.
This is from the TTC service planning sections.

Further, the signal priority as I have already said will actually cause the LRT to be slower, just like on Spadina and St. Clair. Unless you have full priority, LRT will always have to wait for turning cars, etc. All this slows down service. Stop spacing of 500m is still too close will not really do much to improve travel times. In some cases the LRT stops are even closer together.

Edmonton would be wise not to start building a mistake like this. They have a good thing going with true "lrt". Why they want to follow Portland, Minneapolis, and countless other US cities, and build slow transit that ends up not attracting many people is beyond me.

Note I was talking average speed over the whole route.

Average stop spacing has a direct impact on speed, and like it or not, the LRTs have much much wider stop spacing than the current buses. You can easily verify this on Google Maps, it shows the current bus stops, and you can compare with the proposed LRT stops, notice a huge percentage of the stops are now gone.

For example, the current typical bus stop spacing on Finch W bus is 250-300 m.
The stop spacing on the LRT is 400-600m. That's pretty much double. You're telling me that much of a stop spacing increase, plus all door boarding, has no impact on speed?

Criticize LRT for stoping at signals, that's correct. Criticize it for not being as fast as a fully grade separated line, that's correct as well. But to say that it's the same speed as the current bus is NOT correct.