nfitz
Superstar
The point was that there was still significant excess capacity that could be used simply by making the trains more frequent. Even with currently signalling they triple the current load.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Dan416
- Start date
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
Regarding Finch and the Hydro Corridor, a full RT route could probably be built on the Finch Hydro Corridor for around the same cost/km that LRT could, especially when you factor in congestion and inconveniences caused by LRT construction.
A regional route could potentially take a lot of pressure of Finch. I think that a LRT will be warranted anyways, but the Hydro Corridor has a lot of regional potential. They should both be looked at deeply, but I think it'd be best for a Hydro Corridor RT route to run from Weston-Seneca, then for LRT to be put in once/if a higher capacity or better local service is needed. Since the Sheppard Subway is already there, I don't think that Finch East would need any more than mild BRT with this Hydro Corridor RT, but Finch West could still need something.
A regional route could potentially take a lot of pressure of Finch. I think that a LRT will be warranted anyways, but the Hydro Corridor has a lot of regional potential. They should both be looked at deeply, but I think it'd be best for a Hydro Corridor RT route to run from Weston-Seneca, then for LRT to be put in once/if a higher capacity or better local service is needed. Since the Sheppard Subway is already there, I don't think that Finch East would need any more than mild BRT with this Hydro Corridor RT, but Finch West could still need something.
kettal
Banned
Somehow I think they'll add an extra car or two to the trains, before going to 90-second headways.
nfitz
Superstar
I'd think so too ... but I thought that much detail was pedantic ...
Dan416
Senior Member
Yeah because leaving out important details is pedantic.
nfitz
Superstar
My point was simply that there was a lot of excess of capacity on the Sheppard line; and that you could carry a lot more passengers if the trains ran more frequently than once every 6 minutes; The debate of whether it could carry 3 times more passenger or 4 times more passengers without lengthening the train seems pretty tangential.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Sheppard frequently leaves people behind on the platform, so it's not like the current capacity is even sufficient. The frequency needs to be increased now. Theoretical capacities are not goals, they are problems if approached. Service degrades long before theoretical capacities are reached. Even 2/3 of theoretical capacity is probably near the limit of what's practical and anything beyond that is extremely undesirable...assuming people move away from the doors and make such loads even possible. Throw in obesity, winter coats, canes, strollers, backpacks, briefcases on wheels, large purses, smelly people, etc., etc., and even 2/3 gets dicey.
The staircase nearest to the Sheppard trains already has trouble handling the crowds and gets clogged...the escalator/stairs at Don Mills also gets clogged. If crowds were tripled, the Y&S transfer would be quite overwhelmed and people would have to stand on the platform for a minute or two waiting to move between stations. By the time they did, another train would arrive, and the station would become dangerously overpopulated. The triple platform was built for a reason, but that doesn't do much for crowding on the Yonge platform at Sheppard.
For easy numbers' sake, let's say the Eglinton LRT could move 10,000 people per hour. If "demand" was 9000 per hour, yes, it may be within theoretical capacity, but this just won't work in real life. When we're spending billions, no level of overcrowding or people getting left behind on the platform is acceptable, just like forcing people to be left behind on the platform on Sheppard is incredibly stupid when the trains can simply run more often.
Of course, Eglinton may never see that kind of peak demand. Eglinton West is a busy route but the ridership is split by the Spadina line. Eglinton East is actually busier than West, but only because so many routes overlap east of Yonge and east of Kennedy...these routes can be diverted/altered and much of this ridership base would simply not switch to an Eglinton line. It's not like Midland bus users are going to transfer at Eglinton and transfer again 400m later to the subway - the 57 will just run straight to Kennedy station.
The staircase nearest to the Sheppard trains already has trouble handling the crowds and gets clogged...the escalator/stairs at Don Mills also gets clogged. If crowds were tripled, the Y&S transfer would be quite overwhelmed and people would have to stand on the platform for a minute or two waiting to move between stations. By the time they did, another train would arrive, and the station would become dangerously overpopulated. The triple platform was built for a reason, but that doesn't do much for crowding on the Yonge platform at Sheppard.
For easy numbers' sake, let's say the Eglinton LRT could move 10,000 people per hour. If "demand" was 9000 per hour, yes, it may be within theoretical capacity, but this just won't work in real life. When we're spending billions, no level of overcrowding or people getting left behind on the platform is acceptable, just like forcing people to be left behind on the platform on Sheppard is incredibly stupid when the trains can simply run more often.
Of course, Eglinton may never see that kind of peak demand. Eglinton West is a busy route but the ridership is split by the Spadina line. Eglinton East is actually busier than West, but only because so many routes overlap east of Yonge and east of Kennedy...these routes can be diverted/altered and much of this ridership base would simply not switch to an Eglinton line. It's not like Midland bus users are going to transfer at Eglinton and transfer again 400m later to the subway - the 57 will just run straight to Kennedy station.
nfitz
Superstar
The capacity if fine; the frequency needs an increase. I've never seen it leave people behind, even in rush-hour ... but I don't use it every day. I assume that those that are are making regualr complaints to TTC about this?
If trains are packed that full, then the stairs won't become any busier than they are with the trains completely packed; obviously it's going to be busy, but I've never seen anything like Yonge-Bloor.
Any Don Mills problems will get a lot smaller once the LRT opens, if it does indeed use the same platform as proposed.
It seems a simple frequency increase would solve all the problems there.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
The current capacity is not fine...it needs to be improved via frequency boosts.
Yes, it leaves people behind on the platform surprisingly often. Suggesting that it doesn't and then saying you don't use the line much proves nothing other than unfamiliarity. The crowds left behind don't number in the hundreds like they can at Y&B, but, still, leaving a single person behind is completely unnecessary. The Yonge line runs more often and can dump two or maybe three loads of people off before a single Sheppard train can leave, so the crowds vary.
People, including me, have complained about the frequency, but I'm sure the TTC is working off of "theoretical capacity" figures that assume no winter coats, no backpacks, no obese people, a willingness to touch others and cram together, etc., that is not based on reality. Perhaps on paper the frequency is sufficient but in reality it is not, particularly when people stand near the door and block others from getting on and when people begin choosing to wait for the next because their definition of "full train" and "comfort" is different from someone more willing to fight their way on and share a pole with 4 other people or surf the train holding on to nothing. With the low frequency, if a train is full, you literally have to wait like 10 minutes for the next to leave. Why not run it every 3 minutes and give many more people a seat? That's how you increase ridership.
Uh, yes, the stairs would be vastly more crowded if the ridership triples. The stairs would be completely overburdened and the crowds on both platforms would be very dangerous. There's a second staircase to the south, but people must pass the first to get to it. If Sheppard's ridership tripled, I think the Sheppard platform on the Yonge line could end up being the most overcrowded platform in the entire city...at the very least, it'd give the Yonge platform on the Bloor line a good run for its money. Unlike Y&B, there's just one pinch point at Y&S and the entire train empties and heads for this one point.
kettal
Banned
So what you are saying is... you think it should be a metro... despite the fact that a metro will be slower, because a metro has to make all stops, even those that are empty?
Juan_Lennon416
Senior Member
So what you are saying is... you think it should be a metro... despite the fact that a metro will be slower, because a metro has to make all stops, even those that are empty?
Sounds to me Fresh Start is saying the Eglinton LRT would feel like a Metro and not advocating for one
Ansem
Banned
$$$$$$
It's a big factor for the majority of commuters espacially those living in Toronto
Fresh Start
Banned
How is this at all relevant to the Eglinton corridor?
T
Tdot_one
Guest
It is, because the primary function of the Eglinton line isn't crosstown travel. Instead it involves turning the Eglinton corridor into a Bloor. There is so much potential in the area and most Torontonians in those parts aren't scared of intensification. Most live in towers, so it shouldn't be an issue.
By using a local LRT solution, Eglinton could develop into an attractive medium density corridor. I could see Lawrence and St. Clair developing seeing similar development and that can be seen with the huge high rise development near Warden station. The DRL and the electrification of GO (with unification) would cover longer-range travel.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Eglinton LRT: speed and demand
Secondly, if they do achieve that 30-31 kph speed from Don Mills to Pearson - on one hand it is nice, but on the other, it can create a problem.
The ridership projections (5,400 pphpd per this display panels; 7,000 - 8,000 pphpd per other estimates) are, most likely, based on the assumption that Eglinton LRT will be somewhat slower than Bloor subway. If so, passengers for whom Elginton Crosstown is the shortest route will use it; but many other passengers, including those traveling from the north to downtown, will mostly stay in their buses until they reach Bloor subway. In that case, Bloor subway will continue to carry more people than Eglinton LRT.
However, demand in Eglinton corridor will obviously be very dependent on the speed. If the LRT in the west is as fast as subway, many people will switch to using it instead of Bloor subway. In fact, demand in Bloor and Eglinton corridors will likely be very similar. If so, we have to assume that about half of Bloor's peak demand (24,000 pphpd) will shift to Eglinton, and then we are at 12,000 pphpd already. Adding the ridership growth due to population growth and increase of the transit modal share, we can easily reach 15,000 or 18,000 pphpd.
If so, handling that demand with LRT technology might be difficult. Currently, TTC is planning 3-car (about 500 people) trains on 3-min headways (20 trains per hour), that means capacity of 10,000 pphpd. To get more than that, they would probably have to run short-turns in the tunneled section, for a combined 1.5 min headways there. And even then, there may be issues with the load balance between the short-turn and the long-haul branches ...
So, it almost sounds like, either build subway, or make LRT a little slower so it does not divert too many riders from Bloor : )
Secondly, if they do achieve that 30-31 kph speed from Don Mills to Pearson - on one hand it is nice, but on the other, it can create a problem.
The ridership projections (5,400 pphpd per this display panels; 7,000 - 8,000 pphpd per other estimates) are, most likely, based on the assumption that Eglinton LRT will be somewhat slower than Bloor subway. If so, passengers for whom Elginton Crosstown is the shortest route will use it; but many other passengers, including those traveling from the north to downtown, will mostly stay in their buses until they reach Bloor subway. In that case, Bloor subway will continue to carry more people than Eglinton LRT.
However, demand in Eglinton corridor will obviously be very dependent on the speed. If the LRT in the west is as fast as subway, many people will switch to using it instead of Bloor subway. In fact, demand in Bloor and Eglinton corridors will likely be very similar. If so, we have to assume that about half of Bloor's peak demand (24,000 pphpd) will shift to Eglinton, and then we are at 12,000 pphpd already. Adding the ridership growth due to population growth and increase of the transit modal share, we can easily reach 15,000 or 18,000 pphpd.
If so, handling that demand with LRT technology might be difficult. Currently, TTC is planning 3-car (about 500 people) trains on 3-min headways (20 trains per hour), that means capacity of 10,000 pphpd. To get more than that, they would probably have to run short-turns in the tunneled section, for a combined 1.5 min headways there. And even then, there may be issues with the load balance between the short-turn and the long-haul branches ...
So, it almost sounds like, either build subway, or make LRT a little slower so it does not divert too many riders from Bloor : )