The Great Canadian Transit Thread

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I would add Main Street-Science Centre to your list, around the corner from your first example. The renovated station looks amazing and the integration of the guideway under the building is well executed.

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2730712,...p9XDAvm0XpexyIl2Ny8pg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Hmm, that would be an interesting option. Instead of having the guideway run down the middle of the street in the median, build it on one side over what are now mostly parking lots and have new development built around it, integrating the line into the new structures, almost like a tree growing around and enveloping a fence.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[SteelTown]

Looks like we're getting one step closer to implementing the A-Line.

$8.5M recommended for A-Line Priority Bus Corridor (airport to waterfront along Upper James) in tomorrow's Canada Infrastructure Program grant submission - great news for #HamOnt mountain, #Ward8Hamilton residents & entire city

John-Paul Danko
https://twitter.com/JohnPaulDanko/status/1179240785474142209

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by SteelTown

Looks like we're getting one step closer to implementing the A-Line.


John-Paul Danko
https://twitter.com/JohnPaulDanko/status/1179240785474142209

I have always thought that the BLAST network really should start with express buses. Then it becomes part of people's natural commute.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

This is not the single biggest mistake in Toronto's transit construction. Eglinton is wide enough and major intersections are far apart to support lrt here. An elevated lrt is not the same price as a surface lrt and would negatively impact the urban boulevard they are trying to create. I really don't get the obsession with grade separation. There are times when lrt in right of ways are sufficient. Europe does it successfully. Eglinton is a hybrid line for both commuter and local as a true commuter line would be heading towards Union in the straightest line possible with spread out stations and as close to neighbourhood centres as allowable instead of positioned right in them.

I appreciate what Vancouver has done with the Skytrain and the density nodes built up around the stations. It's not something I have ever envisioned for Toronto.

https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2663155,...itch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192
Fuck no to Eglinton!

Ok but a car crash in an intersection of Eglinton East would still bring the line to a standstill . I think the question of lower income commuters crossing town being able to reliably (and affordably) get to work on time is more important than a frivilous matter like the aesthetics of Eglinton East. Aboveground rail has worked fine in Chicago as far as I know.

I agree the ROW surface street LRT works in Europe. But bear in mind that Europe has a more robust social safety net (not to mention more affordable housing stock) where getting to work on time (6-7 days a week for lower income people) isnt a matter of making rent or becoming homeless like it is in Toronto. So I dont think using Europe as a model is appropriate.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Ok but a car crash in an intersection of Eglinton East would still bring the line to a standstill . I think the question of lower income commuters crossing town being able to reliably (and affordably) get to work on time is more important than a frivilous matter like the aesthetics of Eglinton East. Aboveground rail has worked fine in Chicago as far as I know.

I agree the ROW surface street LRT works in Europe. But bear in mind that Europe has a more robust social safety net (not to mention more affordable housing stock) where getting to work on time (6-7 days a week for lower income people) isnt a matter of making rent or becoming homeless like it is in Toronto. So I dont think using Europe as a model is appropriate.

You're speculation on car crashes. That's not to say I don't think there were/are opportunities to tunnel the line under the busiest intersections like you see with ROW lines in Europe.

To quote the Donald, the areas beside the EL are mostly shitholes.

I find it ludicrous to propose an elevated LRT at the costs of hundreds of millions that saves a negligible amount of time as a means of addressing overworked, overtaxed Torontonians that live on the verge of homelessness. It's not just lower income families as, by definition, earning over $65,000 (?) means you get almost nothing in return for your tax dollars. $65,000 in Toronto is peanuts.

[ssiguy]

Except grade separated lines are far more reliable and cheaper to run due to automation. Of course they are also faster but also have far higher capacity due to being able to run comfortably every 90 seconds while LRT can, at best, run every 3 minutes.

Eglinton should have been completely grade separated using a combination of tunneling and elevation and Miller and the province knew it but it had little to do with money, serving the public, and everything to do with politics. If Miller was given all the money he needed for a totally grade separated line he still would make sure there was a one lone grade crossing to ensure the line could not be automated to keep his union backers happy.

[SFUVancouver]

Wait, Eglinton Crosstown isn't fully grade separated? I thought that was the whole point of tunneling large sections of it. Is Toronto really building a new rapid transit line that's not fully grade separated? That's just preposterous.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Wait, Eglinton Crosstown isn't fully grade separated? I thought that was the whole point of tunneling large sections of it. Is Toronto really building a new rapid transit line that's not fully grade separated? That's just preposterous.

Of course it's not grade-separated. It was a politicians half-baked compromise plan.

Same as why Ottawa has low floor trains. Politics.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by p_xavier

Of course it's not grade-separated. It was a politicians half-baked compromise plan.

Same as why Ottawa has low floor trains. Politics.

Ottawa didn't get LRT because of politics. At the time, it was thought that the LRT would run at-grade in the suburbs. We've not reached the suburbs yet. So there's no idea whether or not they will use that capability.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

You're speculation on car crashes. That's not to say I don't think there were/are opportunities to tunnel the line under the busiest intersections like you see with ROW lines in Europe.

Good feedback in your last post.

Tunneling under the major intersection would the perfect compromise. In addition to timed lights, I agree this could be almost as efficient as an elevated line without detracting from the commercial street level experience. You mentioned the cost savings (of the surface model on Eglinton East vs an elevated alternative) would be better directly used to directly address cost of living or affordable housing for the working poor as opposed to going to the ends of the earth to try to create a delay-free Eglinton LRT (which as we know with lines 1,2,3 is impossible to do even on underground heavy rail!)

The flaw in my argument that you quoted is I drew parallels to Vancouvers elevated skytrain. I falsely assumed because a smaller city like Vancouver has built tonnes of elevated line that Toronto can easily afford to do the same. I was failing to take the size/capacity difference between each cities trains/transit stations into account.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Except grade separated lines are far more reliable and cheaper to run due to automation. Of course they are also faster but also have far higher capacity due to being able to run comfortably every 90 seconds while LRT can, at best, run every 3 minutes.

Eglinton should have been completely grade separated using a combination of tunneling and elevation and Miller and the province knew it but it had little to do with money, serving the public, and everything to do with politics. If Miller was given all the money he needed for a totally grade separated line he still would make sure there was a one lone grade crossing to ensure the line could not be automated to keep his union backers happy.

You could also make the argument that it would be better to go with the cheaper option on Eglinton and put the cost savings towards automating the GO commuter lines and subsidization to drive down the egregious GO ticket prices.

[p_xavier]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Ottawa didn't get LRT because of politics. At the time, it was thought that the LRT would run at-grade in the suburbs. We've not reached the suburbs yet. So there's no idea whether or not they will use that capability.

There was ONE at-grade crossing planned. High floor LRT can still do the job (Edmonton and Calgary) for crossings. The expansions are all planned to be grade separated.

Stupider is no GOA4 on a fully grade seperated corridor.

[Nouvellecosse]

Tunneling under the busiest intersections is... interesting. But we'd need to see the actual cost analysis. With underground urban rail, the cost of the stations tends to be 50% of the cost of the line. All else being the same, lines with more frequent stations will be much costlier than ones with fewer stations (the main reason the BD line extension was trimmed down to a silly 6km route with a single station). Of course all else isn't necessarily the same since platform length affects station cost greatly as well and lines with more frequent stops may (or may not) have shorter trains.

The problem with Eglinton is that the planned stations tend to be at major intersections. So if the stations were underground below the intersections you'd have a situation where a mainly surface line could have a good 50% the cost of an underground line which are potentially as or more costly elevated. However, there are a lot of variables including that cut and cover is a bit cheaper than tunneled, soil/rock type can make it much more/less challenging, presence of underground utilities or proximity to building foundations, etc. all greatly affects costs. If this was similar or even slightly costlier than elevated it would be the best option - to me - but of course not for anyone mainly looking for cheap.

[lrt's friend]

Does ridership along Eglinton justify the expense of fully grade separated ROW especially as you get a distance away from the Yonge corridor? I don't think ridership is expected to be anywhere close to the Yonge line and then think about all the arguing about the Scarborough subway extension which goes on year after year with arguments there about ridership as well. I think Toronto should be thankful that something is being built and that financial resources are much better spent on getting the Ontario line underway, which is critical to Toronto's future. Even there, we see that process dragging on and on. Subways are a dream but so few get built these days because of their enormous cost.

[Nouvellecosse]

I agree that i would have directed the funding toward the DRL as a higher priority as well and extended it up to Don Mills diverting some of the traffic along Eglinton away from the overcrowded buses. Obviously it wouldn't cover the whole cost but it would have been a valuable contribution. That being said, comparison to the Yonge Line current ridership isn't a particularly relevant metric by which to judge the value of a rapid transit corridor. Even the Yonge Line wouldn't have come close to that standard when the first section was built. Not even the entire Chicago L system has greater average daily ridership.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I really think we need to move ahead with night services in this country, I definitely think Toronto should consider some limited 24h Subway service: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXiSRolgPe0&t=8s

Shocking that Calgary still has 0!

Yeah I've always found it really stupid that Calgary doesn't have a couple night bus lines. We have 24 hour Ctrain transit for 1.5 weeks every July but can't figure out a night bus.

It's not that a-typical for a city our size though, Edmonton's night bus only goes to 3 am. Ottawa's lucky to have two 24-hour routes. *sigh*

[niwell]

I’m in Ottawa right now and just rode the new LRT - it’s fantastic. Also reminded how good the bus service is for a city of this size. In suburban Nepean but getting downtown is dead easy.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

I really think we need to move ahead with night services in this country, I definitely think Toronto should consider some limited 24h Subway service: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXiSRolgPe0&t=8s

Shocking that Calgary still has 0!

It makes me wonder how great an advantage there would really be compared to the existing Blue Night network. You mention that a 24 hr Yonge service on Friday and Saturday wouldn't need high frequency with service as little as every 1/2 hr but that's already the minimum frequency of the BN network with services on the subway corridors operating much more frequently (I believe on Yonge it's every 7-8 minutes). Plus, overnight there would be less advantage for the subway compared to bus service since road congestion tends to be much lower. The subway would still have higher average speeds but would that really be enough to make up for the loss of frequency? Perhaps it would be better to simply have a series of BN express buses that take faster, more direct routes to outer areas such as reaching NYCC via the DVP/Sheppard operating every 1/2 or better.