[Darwinkgo]

Of course, the link to the airport is really only relevant if the entire west line is LRT, but that link could potentially bring in tens of thousands of riders a day.

Experiences elsewhere with airport links do not paint that picture. I doubt the link will capture much more than the current bus links. Most if not every captive rider already takes the bus, either Go or TTC, and speed/cost isn't going to convert taxi travelers.

 

[Darwinkgo]

Precisely SIP. Today the Eglinton corridor sees about 150,000 ppd or 9400pphpd. That is higher than the total number of riders for the Bloor-Danforth streetcar at the time of its update. Then there's the incentive for thousands of more transit users from Mississauga and the airport to deisre utilizing such a subway line instead of relying on GO Transit or a long bus trip to the Bloor-Danforth. So easily 250,000ppd or 12,500pphpd is a reasonable Day One service projection that the TTC, if not so blindly focused on LRT, should've taken notice of.

Is the Eglinton number you speak of total trips per hour, or total trips across a certain line an hour. People per day cannot be simply translated to people per hour per direction.

The 10,000 pphpd projection from the City/TTC/Metrolinx is peak throughput at the busiest point, not peak ridership.

 

[Darwinkgo]

Ridership in this corridor will certainly depend on whether it is subway or LRT.

If it is subway (and long), then indeed it will divert a large portion of B-D ridership. So, the total of at least 12k pphpd is very likely (B-D is 24k now), maybe even more given the expected overall ridership growth and the contribution from air travellers.

If it is LRT, it will divert midtown-to-midtown trips only. For trips to CBD, which are the largest contribution, it would make more sense to keep using B-D. So, the TTC's model (that predicts about 8k) seems reasonable for this case.

I think your missing the point that between Jane and Don Mills the service level will be roughly equivalent no matter the technology choice. Why would someone whose bus route on the way to B-D intercepted Eglinton that is going somewhere on the YUS continue in mixed traffic instead of transferring to Eglinton? Certainly that the vehicle looks different wouldn't prejudice riders that much.

Outside of between Jane and Don Mills there will be falloff in ridership compared to subway to be sure, but total ridership per capital dollar will be higher, and likely total ridership will be higher since an LRT will be much longer than a subway.

 

[kettal]

I suppose, the busiest bus route in Toronto, due to the frequency of bus services. I have not seen other routes with this much frequencies. I might be wrong, but this is why most of the discussion about TC is focused on this route. Probably, to alleviate the demand for bus services? Relieve congestion at midtown? More development potential?

Finch Avenue has higher ridership. But Eglinton is near the top.

 

[Fresh Start]

Experiences elsewhere with airport links do not paint that picture. I doubt the link will capture much more than the current bus links. Most if not every captive rider already takes the bus, either Go or TTC, and speed/cost isn't going to convert taxi travelers.

What cities are you basing this comparison on? The 192 Rocket only sees 2500 passengers per day, but that is only because it is a non-stop express that doesn't cater to the commuter niche that requires points in and around the airport e.g. Dixon/Carlingview or the ACC. And we're not concerned about taxi-drivers, although arguably the trains would have the spare capacity to accomodate one's luggage. We're concerned about the hundreds of thousands of West-enders and Mississaugans whom dump onto the Bloor-Danforth Line daily making a train trip packed by Runnymede. Square One is geographically more closely aligned to Renforth/Eglinton than it is Kipling or worse Sherway where any subway extension into 905 west is likely to stopover. So imagine that all those folk who crash-load onto the Dundas or Burnhamthrope buses inwards would now opt to use the 35 or the Transitway to the Eglinton subway instead. Even better if the DRL is interlined onto Eglinton West ROW, so a one-seat ride is guaranteed to most.

Is the Eglinton number you speak of total trips per hour, or total trips across a certain line an hour. People per day cannot be simply translated to people per hour per direction.

The 10,000 pphpd projection from the City/TTC/Metrolinx is peak throughput at the busiest point, not peak ridership.

What is it that you don't get? Areas of lower ridership can be compensated for via the high-demand segments of the service. What if the Bloor-Danforth subway had stopped at Dundas West and Pape because of areas of lower passenger turnout at the outer stations. How would major "destinations" like Kennedy/Warden or Kipling/Islington be reached, areas of unquestionable ridership demand? I tend to look at Richview in the same manner. People want to go to the west end, and that corridor provides the fastest and most direct means with which to get there. It'd also be cost-effective due to minimal expropriations involved and the possibility of more affordable trenched or elevated ROW. And don't count out the 5 subway stops of Richview either, there low ridership turnover could still amount to 10,000 users per day given the concentration of high-rise apartments near the major cross arteries and the popularity of the north-south bus routes.

 

[Fresh Start]

Finch Avenue has higher ridership. But Eglinton is near the top.

Finch's numbers are only that high due to the lack of a viable alternative for riders to use. Most the people filtering onto Finch/Yonge subway aren't necessarily doing so out of want. If parallel BRT services in the F.H.C. and along Hwy 27 were established, the 36's numbers would plummet.

 

[yin_yang]

Anyone who thinks that an LRT on Eglinton won't be packed between 7am-10am and 3pm-6pm are mistaken. It is clear that even a subway (especially a 4-car version like on Sheppard) will be packed during rush hours. The TTC are insane to agree to an LRT into a major artery in Canada's biggest and most mass transit-oriented metropolis. Where is Giambrone? Is he just looking to get something built as opposed to the appropriate infrastructure? This is all a bit insane to me. LRT on Jane and Don Mills makes sense...but on Eglinton? No way.

 

[urbanboom]

^
Perhaps in certain areas, like Bayview to Eglinton West, but what about other places, such as the Golden Mile in Scarborough. Do we really need a subway to the giant parking lots by the Cineplex and Walmart?

I could possibly see a subway at one point, but it'd be just a stubway like Sheppard and of not much use. Plus to cross this corridor, you'd have to bus, subway and then bus again (Talk about a REAL Transfer City!). I like this plan: one form of public transportation to encourage some mid-level density and turn it into a real "corridor", with an underground subway-like section where it's needed. Maybe when the Walmart's gone, we can talk about a YYZ to Kennedy subway, but for the time being it just to easy to draw a line on the map and say "yeah, that'd make the subway map look nicer, subway it is!" Transit planning shouldn't work that way.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Anyone who thinks that an LRT on Eglinton won't be packed between 7am-10am and 3pm-6pm are mistaken. It is clear that even a subway (especially a 4-car version like on Sheppard) will be packed during rush hours. The TTC are insane to agree to an LRT into a major artery in Canada's biggest and most mass transit-oriented metropolis. Where is Giambrone? Is he just looking to get something built as opposed to the appropriate infrastructure? This is all a bit insane to me. LRT on Jane and Don Mills makes sense...but on Eglinton? No way.

That's a pretty good point. If anyone thinks that Eglinton LRT west of Don Mills won't be packed, then they need a serious reality check. I agree that a 4 car subway train like Sheppard would probably be reaching the limit after the first year.

Though I think that you just have to say Canada's biggest metropolis. There was a graph somewhere around here that showed transit ridership, and it was quite easy to see that Canada was in general much, much more transit-friendly than the US. And anyways, Montreal has the highest transit ridership in Canada.

 

[Second_in_pie]

^
Perhaps in certain areas, like Bayview to Eglinton West, but what about other places, such as the Golden Mile in Scarborough. Do we really need a subway to the giant parking lots by the Cineplex and Walmart?

I think that we all agree that a subway isn't currently needed past Don Mills. The only use it would have is past Kennedy as a connector with the B-D and for the Kennedy-Kingston Road stretch, those 2 or 3 stations being quite comparable to some low-ridership stations on the B-D or YUS. Anyways, that stretch would be pretty easy to build with a raised guideway either through the centre of the road or across the side.

I could possibly see a subway at one point, but it'd be just a stubway like Sheppard and of not much use.

I laugh at this comment, simply because it's regarding a route that would directly connect the main subway line with the Airport.

Plus to cross this corridor, you'd have to bus, subway and then bus again (Talk about a REAL Transfer City!)

There's a difference between making a transfer like Sheppard East, which is a long-lasting transfer that totally disregards the needs of the corridor, with a transfer because we can't build 30 km of subway at once. Seriously, how long will it take to reeducate you people that it's not unreasonable to build things over time. I know we've been lacking in transit improvements for the past 30 years or so, but that's all the more reason to build a strong network instead of the quick-fix solution that Transit City is.

I like this plan: one form of public transportation to encourage some mid-level density and turn it into a real "corridor", with an underground subway-like section where it's needed. Maybe when the Walmart's gone, we can talk about a YYZ to Kennedy subway, but for the time being it just to easy to draw a line on the map and say "yeah, that'd make the subway map look nicer, subway it is!"

If you think that Richview will turn into a pretty little European avenue with LRT running through the middle, you're dreaming. Again, LRT is not a one-size fits all solution.
You also can't just say "LRT is better because it goes further." Again, we've all agreed that subway isn't needed past Don Mills, and might not be for a while. That doesn't automatically make the LRT better because it will go to Kennedy. Bus will most probably be sufficient for the eastern corridor, and subway could always be built if the ridership is actually warranted, something that can't be done with LRT.

And if you're saying we're pushing the Eglinton subway because it'll make the subway map prettier, I'm afraid I can't take your opinion seriously anymore.

 

[lead82]

Why is it that lrt cant be replaced with subway once demand warrants? Both Yonge and Bloor were successful tram lines first.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Why is it that lrt cant be replaced with subway once demand warrants? Both Yonge and Bloor were successful tram lines first.

That's hardly a valid argument. Streetcars were the busses of the early 20th Century. It's comparing apples to oranges.

EDIT: Also, LRT could be replaced by subway. But we'd just be playing catch up with ourselves. We have to get ahead of things by building a subway. Also, I have doubts that the City/Province would be very willing to build a subway just 10 years after we've built a LRT on the same corridor.

 

[Fresh Start]

^^ Yes it can be replaced. BUT... it is cost-prohibitive. It's an admission that it should have been built as subway in the first place. It will cost future generations more to retrofit the LRT ROW, more than two-thirds of which would have to be totally scraped in order to replace with subway. If the cost estimate to replace Sheppard subway with LRT is $600 million in today's dollars, how much inflation do you think the City will have to contend with 25-50 years from now? Eglinton's an unique opportuntity the city cannot afford to screw up.

^
Perhaps in certain areas, like Bayview to Eglinton West, but what about other places, such as the Golden Mile in Scarborough. Do we really need a subway to the giant parking lots by the Cineplex and Walmart?

I could possibly see a subway at one point, but it'd be just a stubway like Sheppard and of not much use. Plus to cross this corridor, you'd have to bus, subway and then bus again (Talk about a REAL Transfer City!). I like this plan: one form of public transportation to encourage some mid-level density and turn it into a real "corridor", with an underground subway-like section where it's needed. Maybe when the Walmart's gone, we can talk about a YYZ to Kennedy subway, but for the time being it just to easy to draw a line on the map and say "yeah, that'd make the subway map look nicer, subway it is!" Transit planning shouldn't work that way.

Lol! If the TTC were to use your critieria for subway-building the subway would not have extended past Lawrence, Coxwell or Keele. There'd be no University-Spadina Line. You have to understand that ridership of a route grows over time. That is how 38,000ppd on the 85 bus turned into 45,000ppd for the Sheppard subway and now today is closer to 55,000ppd. Once the public is convinced that the ride will be faster and more direct, more people will convert, park their cars at home and ride. Transfer City promises 5 minute headways at 23kmph stopped by red lights and exposed to the cold. Subways can push 35kmph and traverse two kilometres within 2 1/2 minutes. Pick your poison.

And we shouldn't build a subway to Warden/Eglinton because it is a sea of parking lots? Have you even been to Warden subway station before? Eglinton unlike around St Clair isn't parkland and infill urbanism is more than possible. By contrast how many fatalities should we risk the public to, having them cross Eglinton at its busiest car-oriented stretch in order to access road-median LRT.

 

[urbanboom]

I think that we all agree that a subway isn't currently needed past Don Mills. The only use it would have is past Kennedy as a connector with the B-D and for the Kennedy-Kingston Road stretch, those 2 or 3 stations being quite comparable to some low-ridership stations on the B-D or YUS. Anyways, that stretch would be pretty easy to build with a raised guideway either through the centre of the road or across the side.


I laugh at this comment, simply because it's regarding a route that would directly connect the main subway line with the Airport.

There's a difference between making a transfer like Sheppard East, which is a long-lasting transfer that totally disregards the needs of the corridor, with a transfer because we can't build 30 km of subway at once. Seriously, how long will it take to reeducate you people that it's not unreasonable to build things over time. I know we've been lacking in transit improvements for the past 30 years or so, but that's all the more reason to build a strong network instead of the quick-fix solution that Transit City is.

No thanks, I'd rather not wait 40+ years to get off the stupid bus on Eglinton. We have a funded solution which has the option of turing into a subway when the need arises. I really don't see the need for this to be cancelled so we can debate using money we don't have to build something we don't need and wait using time we don't have. Talk to me about subways when we need it. I'd use this subway everyday, but I don't live in a fantasy. This whole "SUBWAYS OR NOTHING!" bothers me. It does a lot more harm than good, because we'll more likely end up with option number 2 in that equation.

If you think that Richview will turn into a pretty little European avenue with LRT running through the middle, you're dreaming. Again, LRT is not a one-size fits all solution.

Your right, LRT wouldn't work on Yonge. But it works on Eglinton.

You also can't just say "LRT is better because it goes further." Again, we've all agreed that subway isn't needed past Don Mills, and might not be for a while. That doesn't automatically make the LRT better because it will go to Kennedy. Bus will most probably be sufficient for the eastern corridor, and subway could always be built if the ridership is actually warranted, something that can't be done with LRT.

And if you're saying we're pushing the Eglinton subway because it'll make the subway map prettier, I'm afraid I can't take your opinion seriously anymore.

I take the bus on Eglinton every day. Compare the densities of Bloor or Yonge to Eglinton. It isn't in the same league. I'm sure looking on a map from Markham, it must look like a major urban centre but, it's not. Yonge and Eg is only NOW starting to be developed to what is should be. And I'm afraid I can't say anyting more of the subject; this is what I feel. (Of course I could say the same thing AGAIN and AGAIN on different threat while having nothing new to say. People here have certainly found away to turn it into an artform. Say a lot, but don't really saying anything at all!)

 

[Dan416]

I'd prefer a subway on Eglinton, I really would. But I think for the time-being, we should just accept the LRT here and focus our energies on subway EXTENSIONS that are more beneficial (e.g Sheppard in both directions, Danforth to STC) and the one new line needed more than any other (DRL).