News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.6K     0 

BurlOak said:
I thought they wanted to run the SRT through with Eglinton, but then the EA found that the PPPHD projections were way too high - since people dislike transfers, many would continue along Eglinton. The two choices were:
  1. Elevate the line above Eglinton to allow it to have adequate capacity.
  2. Force a transfer to the subway at Kennedy to drop the demand on Eglonton.


Considering that the only reason the continuous SRT/Eglinton could not be done was because people want the transfer free (or reduced) ride, it is no wonder that the Transit City plan they chose was defeated - because of the transfer. To recap; people hate transfers - have a plan to force a transfer, -people complain about transfer - very expensive solution proposed to eliminate transfer.
Click to expand...

I don't know, that was 7-8 years ago when the Transit City stuff was happening, I was much younger, in school, and didn't pay attention to transit at all back then, so I wasn't there at any public meetings or anything. Were you?

From what I read in the EA here: http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/defaul...udies-and-major-functional-design-options.pdf

It says that the projected demand in 2031 is 5400 passengers per hour, and since that is less than 10,000 passengers per hour, it does not require full grade separation.
 
BurlOak said:
I thought they wanted to run the SRT through with Eglinton, but then the EA found that the PPPHD projections were way too high - since people dislike transfers, many would continue along Eglinton. The two choices were:
  1. Elevate the line above Eglinton to allow it to have adequate capacity.
  2. Force a transfer to the subway at Kennedy to drop the demand on Eglonton.


Considering that the only reason the continuous SRT/Eglinton could not be done was because people want the transfer free (or reduced) ride, it is no wonder that the Transit City plan they chose was defeated - because of the transfer. To recap; people hate transfers - have a plan to force a transfer, -people complain about transfer - very expensive solution proposed to eliminate transfer.
Click to expand...
This whole nonsense about a transfer boggles my mind. It really does. If you come along Bloor line, you transfer to go south at Yonge or St George. Never-mind the fact there was a transfer from bus to the subway in the first place. Unreal. It really is
 
Palma said:
This whole nonsense about a transfer boggles my mind. It really does. If you come along Bloor line, you transfer to go south at Yonge or St George. Never-mind the fact there was a transfer from bus to the subway in the first place. Unreal. It really is
Click to expand...

There's also that transfer to switch from Danforth to Bloor, the transfer to switch from Allen Road to Spadina Avenue and the soon to be transfer from Keele to Allen Road.
 
ehlow said:
Right, from what I read they studied whether they needed to fully grade separate the line or not, and based on the ridership and PPPHD projections, decided that it doesn't need to be grade separated. That's what the EA says.
Click to expand...

pfft.

Who cares about EA's and exhaustive studies when you have people's opinion on a messageboard!
 
ehlow said:
Right, from what I read they studied whether they needed to fully grade separate the line or not, and based on the ridership and PPPHD projections, decided that it doesn't need to be grade separated. That's what the EA says.
Click to expand...

ehlow said:
I don't know, that was 7-8 years ago when the Transit City stuff was happening, I was much younger, in school, and didn't pay attention to transit at all back then, so I wasn't there at any public meetings or anything. Were you?

From what I read in the EA here: http://thecrosstown.ca/sites/defaul...udies-and-major-functional-design-options.pdf

It says that the projected demand in 2031 is 5400 passengers per hour, and since that is less than 10,000 passengers per hour, it does not require full grade separation.
Click to expand...
But if there was no transfer, you don't think the ppg projections would be much higher?
 
Transfer less beats transfer, but not at any price. The number of passengers gained must justify higher capital cost.
 
dowlingm said:
Transfer less beats transfer, but not at any price. The number of passengers gained must justify higher capital cost.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but you can't have a subway to everyone's front door. They need to transfer to a final mode, be it car, bus or foot, somewhere.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.
 
dowlingm said:
Transfer less beats transfer, but not at any price. The number of passengers gained must justify higher capital cost.
Click to expand...

Transfers actually wind up being more expensive. Because we tried to save a few hundred million by forcing the transfer, the expected happened and people and politicians reacted. The result was an extra $2B being spent on the B-D subway extension.
This is another example of penny wise, pound foolish. Congratulations on saving a few hundred million, but now that decision cost us $2B.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
But if there was no transfer, you don't think the ppg projections would be much higher?
Click to expand...

Not sure, first question is, how many of the SRT riders would stay on if it were through routed to Eglinton, and are they enough to push it from 5400 passengers per hour to over 10,000 PPH?

I could see many SRT passengers transferring to Bloor anyways because their final destination might be on Bloor-Danforth, or they may take the Bathurst streetcar south, or many possible combinations.

If most do stay on Eglinton and transfer south at Yonge-Eglinton station, is that more desirable than doing the Danforth-extension? I would think Danforth would have more capacity because it's a subway, even if Eglinton is fully grade separated it will have smaller vehicles.

If it does push Eglinton's ridership to be so high that it requires full grade separation, do we want that? Why? It clearly would cost much more to either elevate or tunnel it. If we're keeping the line fully grade separated, it seems less likely that it will be extended West to the airport.
 
You can look for the pphpd for the ECLRT/SRT combo on Metrolinx's website. This is from when the ECLRT underground option was being studied. The pphpd of the SRT/ECLRT combo was significantly higher than what the ECLRT would have alone.
 
Sorry I should've googled & educated myself more:
http://stevemunro.ca/?p=5461

Still though, not sure why the grade-separated Eglinton + SRT through routed is better than Danforth Extension + Partly at-grade Eglinton (the current plan), both seem to have advantages and disadvantages. But anyways I'm going to read up more on this topic.
 
BurlOak said:
Transfers actually wind up being more expensive. Because we tried to save a few hundred million by forcing the transfer, the expected happened and people and politicians reacted. The result was an extra $2B being spent on the B-D subway extension.
This is another example of penny wise, pound foolish. Congratulations on saving a few hundred million, but now that decision cost us $2B.
Click to expand...

I really don't where you're getting this overwhelming anti transfer sentiment from, people were far more against the SLRT because of the simple fact that it was not a subway, not because there was a transfer. The battle cry was Scarborough deserves subways, and a bunch of other garbage slogans.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top