[BurlOak]

This has to be a mistake. If the travel time time is the same as the current bus why the heck are spending a billion dollars on this.

1. Vanity.
2. Because the contract was signed days before the election campaign and cancellation costs are too high.

We should just stick with the current bus.

I was eyeing BRT.
Queue jump lanes between highway 27 and Weston. Dedicated bus route in hydro corridor from Weston to Seneca College.
(alternatively, spend a bit more and get SkyTrain).

 

[BurlOak]

Reliability will improve. I wouldn't say wasted but not as great as anticipated. The 400 area is really congested, the LRT will be able to get through there easily.

Imagine how much worse the 400/Finch area will become when two lanes are stolen for the LRT. I sense many turning vehicles getting stuck in the intersection and clogging everything up. This 50 year old bridge should have been replaced with a longer one to accommodate an additional 2 lanes on Finch. Then, add pedestrian tunnels inserted behind each abutment to accommodate bikes as well. These tunnels could have extended beyond the highway ramps. Instead, it is a major bridge rehabilitation (likely cost 2/3 or replacement), with no change in geometry.

 

[rbt]

... why the heck are spending a billion dollars on this. Then it's a waste of money. We should just stick with the current bus.

Current bus is at maximum capacity. They run already run 2 (45 second bus frequencies, 90 second lights) for every greenlight; getting 3 buses through every single green reliably is hard without a dedicated ROW.

If you're going to spend ~$500M widening the street for a ROW, then you might as well put a larger vehicle (whether LRT or super-long bus) to reduce operating overhead for a bit of extra cost (~$200M). Bus storage is also out of capacity, so whether bus or LRT you're going to be building one of those too (~$150M for McNicoll yard; this project includes a small yard and maintenance facilities).

The other ~$400M is for the 2 underground terminal stations (Finch Station and Humber College) and to avoid traffic at Highway 27. Doing those things with buses would also add around ~$500M.

Simply put, Finch ridership continues to grow but bus in mixed traffic was at maximum capacity. To continue to grow ridership it needed structural changes BUT still serve locals just as well as the bus.

Doing a BRT without additional loss of roadway capacity, keeping traffic avoidance bits, and a maintenance yard would still be in the $1B range.

 

[Neutrino]

Stealing car lanes? This sounds like something that the Fords would be saying.

A totally valid argument. Good luck winning people over to LRT if it makes so many other people's commutes worse.

 

[Rainforest]

Imagine how much worse the 400/Finch area will become when two lanes are stolen for the LRT. I sense many turning vehicles getting stuck in the intersection and clogging everything up. This 50 year old bridge should have been replaced with a longer one to accommodate an additional 2 lanes on Finch. Then, add pedestrian tunnels inserted behind each abutment to accommodate bikes as well. These tunnels could have extended beyond the highway ramps. Instead, it is a major bridge rehabilitation (likely cost 2/3 or replacement), with no change in geometry.

I heard they are retaining 3 car traffic lanes in each direction, in addition to the light rail lanes, in the 400/Finch area.

 

[Rainforest]

Similarly the 510 Spadina streetcar was never faster than the 77 Spadina bus on opening day. The streetcar still makes sense since ridership has doubled since the bus era and wouldn't be able to cope with current demands. Even the current streetcar operation is overcrowded leading to excessive dwelling at times.

The 510 Spadina is functionally very different from Finch LRT. Spadina streetcar is good for capacity, it carries a lot more riders than a bus could, but it cannot be fast because of the street design (very closely spaced cross-streets with traffic lights). Even if 1/2 of stops were removed from the Spadina route, it wouldn't become much faster because of those traffic lights.

Finch LRT, on the other hand, will have relatively wide stop spacing, and much fewer traffic lights to deal with. The Phase 1 Keele - Humber section (11 km) will have 17 intervals, that means about 600 m average distance between the stops.

Design for the future Yonge - Keele section has 3 mid-block stops for each 2-km concession, that would be 500 m between stops; still a lot wider than on Spadina.

 

[Steve X]

Imagine how much worse the 400/Finch area will become when two lanes are stolen for the LRT. I sense many turning vehicles getting stuck in the intersection and clogging everything up. This 50 year old bridge should have been replaced with a longer one to accommodate an additional 2 lanes on Finch. Then, add pedestrian tunnels inserted behind each abutment to accommodate bikes as well. These tunnels could have extended beyond the highway ramps. Instead, it is a major bridge rehabilitation (likely cost 2/3 or replacement), with no change in geometry.

Nothing is being stolen. Check the design before you comment. All 3 lanes will be retained between Weston and Jane.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/Finch_West_201601_Open_House_Map_4_of_5_EN.pdf

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/Finch_West_201601_Open_House_Map_5_of_5_EN.pdf

This is actually better than the EA where the road will lose a lane under than CPR bridge between Weston and Signet/Arrow. http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf/finch_west_ea/chapter_2_plates_part_1.pdf#page=20

Reliability is 100% not a buzz word, when I used to live in Vancouver I used to need to factor in an extra 30 minutes into a 30-minute driving commute because the travel time was so variable. When you have vehicles with an open lane dedicated to them, you can be fairly sure that travel time will always be around the same.

I completely agree. Reliability is why GO buses factored in excessive 30-40% time in their schedules when they use the 401 or QEW. Traffic is so unpredictable over long distance. ML also bought out most of the tracks for their GO Trains just so they can keep reliability as CN/CP will schedule their freight trains first leaving passengers waiting and waiting for them to pass.

It is much more important for public transit to be reliable than fast without reliability. If you want people to use transit, it has to arrive every X minutes and take Y minutes to travel. Arriving time should only be within a range of +/- 3 minutes while travel time shouldn't exceed 10% of the average time. People won't get a good first impression when they have to wait 20 minutes for a bus that suppose to arrive every 6 minutes and take 60 instead of 40 minutes to travel cause it was late and packed like sardines.

 

[BurlOak]

Nothing is being stolen. Check the design before you comment. All 3 lanes will be retained between Weston and Jane.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/Finch_West_201601_Open_House_Map_4_of_5_EN.pdf

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpansionprojects/Finch_West_201601_Open_House_Map_5_of_5_EN.pdf

It's going from 4 lanes (3 plus an acceleration lane) to 3 (2 plus a combined through and acceleration lane). It's a reduction of 1.
How well that combined through/acceleration lane will work depends on traffic volumes. If virtually nobody enters onto highway 400 - then it should work fine.
If a large number of vehicles enter 400, it could mean problems. Now those who enter 400 get onto the acceleration lane and leave the through lane for Finch traffic. Now they can't do that until they pass under the bridge. One or two trucks caught at the light is enough to block access to that acceleration lane. those under the bridge can't get on it and then the right lane backs up with those wanting to get onto 400. This backup quickly extends beyond the 400 lights on the other side of the bridge. Worst case scenario, it becomes the acceleration lane and Finch acts as having 2 through lanes. (It all depends on the numbers of people entering 400 - which I don't know, but suspect is quite high). The current acceleration lane is there for a reason and it's removal is bound to cause some type of backups.

This is actually better than the EA where the road will lose a lane under than CPR bridge between Weston and Signet/Arrow. http://www.metrolinx.com/en/docs/pdf/finch_west_ea/chapter_2_plates_part_1.pdf#page=20

This is true.

 

[smallspy]

Captive ridership - just because 70% chose not to drive doesn't mean the commute itself is great.

AoD

That's not "captive ridership" by any definition of the term.

Ultimately, most people who ride the TTC do so by choice. Not because they are forced to.

Dan

 

[nfitz]

It's going from 4 lanes (3 plus an acceleration lane) to 3 (2 plus a combined through and acceleration lane). It's a reduction of 1.

The "acceleration lane" isn't a through lane - it's the ramp from Finch to the 400. Yeah, a couple are a bit shorter - this isn't going to decrease capacity.

Why do mention such an insignificant change, but then fail to mention that additional lanes are being added in places that will increase capacity. Look just to the west at the Signet Drive intersection. Currently westbound there's 3 through lanes, and one left-turn lane - for 4 lanes. This will be increased to 3 through lanes, 1-right turn lane, and two-left turn lanes, for 6 lanes total. Eastbound it's currently 3 through-lanes, and a very short left-turn lane, which is being significantly lengthened.

It seems rather disingenuous to be saying that " two lanes are stolen for the LRT". If you are willing to grossly exaggerate this, then presumably everything else you say should be taken with a lot of salt!

 

[TransitBart]

The "acceleration lane" isn't a through lane - it's the ramp from Finch to the 400. Yeah, a couple are a bit shorter - this isn't going to decrease capacity.

Why do mention such an insignificant change, but then fail to mention that additional lanes are being added in places that will increase capacity. Look just to the west at the Signet Drive intersection. Currently westbound there's 3 through lanes, and one left-turn lane - for 4 lanes. This will be increased to 3 through lanes, 1-right turn lane, and two-left turn lanes, for 6 lanes total. Eastbound it's currently 3 through-lanes, and a very short left-turn lane, which is being significantly lengthened.

It seems rather disingenuous to be saying that " two lanes are stolen for the LRT". If you are willing to grossly exaggerate this, then presumably everything else you say should be taken with a lot of salt!

Let's not have an absurd discussion.

It is clear that some participants here are professional "whatevers".

Each of us has worked on a variety of projects and in a variety of positions in our careers. At some point, this is the accumulated experience that we bring to an issue. We form opinions based on our experience. It's not unheard of for professionals to disagree on the specific consequences of a course of action. In fact, it happens regularly and in medicine too where the outcomes can be life and death.

Two persons having a discussion and disagreeing is deadlock. Three or more and there can be a consensus. Each person expressing an opinion has their own valid reasons for drawing a certain conclusion.

And then there is the law of unintended consequences which makes our experience worthless sometimes.

 

[Tuck]

Reliability, capacity and comfort are important, dont get me wrong. But speed is also important and theres no reason for a 1.2 billion dollar line we shouldn't expect that.

Its like being told you'd get an entire cake and end up only getting three quarters. Still good, but not as good as you rightfully expected or paid for.

We should be expecting more than bare minimum when we are spending this much on a new line.

 

[Steve X]

It's going from 4 lanes (3 plus an acceleration lane) to 3 (2 plus a combined through and acceleration lane). It's a reduction of 1.
How well that combined through/acceleration lane will work depends on traffic volumes. If virtually nobody enters onto highway 400 - then it should work fine.
If a large number of vehicles enter 400, it could mean problems. Now those who enter 400 get onto the acceleration lane and leave the through lane for Finch traffic. Now they can't do that until they pass under the bridge. One or two trucks caught at the light is enough to block access to that acceleration lane. those under the bridge can't get on it and then the right lane backs up with those wanting to get onto 400. This backup quickly extends beyond the 400 lights on the other side of the bridge. Worst case scenario, it becomes the acceleration lane and Finch acts as having 2 through lanes. (It all depends on the numbers of people entering 400 - which I don't know, but suspect is quite high). The current acceleration lane is there for a reason and it's removal is bound to cause some type of backups.

The goal is to prevent exactly what you said and would depends on signal timing. If the 400 off ramp to Finch signals is timed to give green to Finch, vehicles will not build up to the point of blocking the entrance to the 400. This would also require synchronization between the previous signal. The signal after the entrance ramp should turn green first to allow vehicles to clear the right lane first before letting more vehicles towards the ramp. Careful signal timing would be able to solve the the issue you mention in most off peak hours when the road isn't too congested.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Here is thing: this is not what people want when the LRT was being built. It was supposed to be faster then the bus, this is not that. This will be the first serious LRT. If it fails, then that's it for LRT in Toronto. One shot at this and Metrolinx is blowing it. But if this was going to Finch Station, this would not be such a big deal. Being hacked off at Finch West Station amplifies the issue. This will either be a sucess, or the next SRT.

 

[innsertnamehere]

There will still be acceleration lanes from westbound Finch to both northbound and southbound 400.. I imagine that the eastbound finch to 400 ramps are lower volume. At the end of the day they are all still slip ramps which are still very high capacity. Removing the acceleration lanes will marginally reduce capacity but I imagine it will only make a difference of a matter of seconds in terms of travel times. The much bigger capacity reductions on the road will come with the longer signal times it takes to clear LRTs.

This will all be offset by the removal of an extremely frequent bus service from the roads which regularly gums up the right lane for private vehicles.