sixrings
Senior Member
So it is essentially a streetcar? Just rip it up and give finch what they deserve. Subway. Subway. Subway.
|
|
|
- Thread starter W. K. Lis
- Start date
nfitz
Superstar
I don't see how you go from it being twice as fast as a streetcar in rush hour, to being just a streetcar.
cplchanb
Senior Member
well for many the mere sight of a rail vehicle operating above grade is grounds to label it as a streetcar.
robmausser
Senior Member
All street level track transit in Toronto has the ability and the technology implemented for full signal priority.
Every single one is completely neutered and made basically useless by the boomers at Toronto Transportation Authority.
sixrings
Senior Member
Well I’m sure cars will be running into the trains and stopping the vehicles which will make the service twice as slow so there’s that. Doesn’t that happen all the time with streetcars?
crs1026
Superstar
It happens, but only about as often as newspapers blow under subway trains and cause small fires that result in bustitutions.
Really, your exaggeration is not making for a constructive discussion.
- Paul
sixrings
Senior Member
My exaggeration is how politicians got Transit City cancelled and Subways Subways Subways to Scarborough. It's plain silly but apparently not silly enough not to throw billions to get some votes.
Last edited:
crumplescotch
New Member
"More likely" isn't really a hard solid evidence to build your case upon. There are plenty of places in the developed world where such sights are extremely common (hence the 'low effort' remark).
Take aforementioned London, UK for example. London has a very similar housing shortage/crisis as we have here. Despite its size and rather dense central boroughs; population density in most of the city is still somewhat low "in a city like that", it's not uncommon to see North America-style "missing middle" scenery and single family type houses in 15-30 minutes off Canary Wharf or The City of London.
As a matter of fact, the "badly planned, North American, Yellowbelt ridden Toronto" population density is 4,427.8/km2 and the "big, properly planned, very dense London UK" population density is 5,598/km2
These two figures aren't exactly night and day.
just east of the creek
Active Member
And the London Housing 'Crisis' has existed for over a decade - limited housing choices for those in the median and lower wage groups, pushing them to the outer fringes, being very transit dependent, and facing very difficult times 'getting ahead'. We were recruiting in London in 2005 or 6 and we heard about the challenges constantly. SInce then, I have heard the same stories in Rome, Milan, Amsterdam...it is the curse of a well liked, job producing, economically active metropolis offering employment, services, culture, entertainment...the vibe etc. etc. People want to be there, but where? We should be promoting, incentivizing places like Cornwall, North Bay, Sudbury, WIndsor and perhaps even Ottawa (surely they need some residents that are not employed by a government institution) with jobs and housing, but with due respect, who wants to live in these places (compared to T.O.). They are small, cold, far away, and in the case of Ottawa, you have to cheer for the Senators and that is a game breaker for sure. And all of those reasons, well maybe not the Senators, are relevant to many people who would rather be in the GTA. I would be building far more four-plexes and walkups myself, the housing market is going to be a goldmine for years.
T3G
Senior Member
We can thank Rob Ford's inane downtown vs. suburbs culture war for that.
It may be his most lasting and widespread influence.
toaster29
Active Member
If it does have an average speed of around 16km/h, it is very similar to the other streetcar speed in Etobicoke, the 501 Queen average speed along the whole line is said to be around 18km/h, surely faster in the section along the Queensway that is grade-separated. This fits much more in the definition (and speed) of a streetcar line, and shouldn't be on the rapid transit maps for our city if this number is correct. I'm curious what the criteria the TTC has for deciding what gets on their Rapid Transit maps - this really should be called the 513, not a "line" implying that there are stations along the way (which there are not - there are "stops", again like a streetcar). I think a lot of people in Toronto are embarrassed that our subway/rapid transit map has basically a line and a "U", and we are so eager to want to add to it and feel better when comparing and sharing this map with our friends in colleagues in other major cities, but this train shouldn't be on it if these speeds/times are accurate.
chrisw
Active Member
Well it does have the benefit of running on it's own dedicated RoW which should have the benefit of reliability and less variation in trip times.
Rainforest
Senior Member
16 kph average speed looks very bad, compared to how the street-median LRT was presented when Transit City was first introduced.
They did modeling primarily for the Sheppard East line in mind, but the assumptions would apply to any street-median line. The forecast was 22-23 kph for the 400 m average stop spacing, or 27 kph for the 800 m spacing.
For Finch West, the average spacing is 670 m, that's between 400 and 800 m. So, one could expect something like 25 kph.
16 kph is 1.5 times slower, thus if that new forecast is correct, the travel time will be 1.5 longer. For the cost of LRT, hopefully a better outcome can be achieved.
Sure, less delays is a benefit in any case, but if all we can get is 16 kph, then why not build a street-median BRT for a fraction of LRT cost.
They did modeling primarily for the Sheppard East line in mind, but the assumptions would apply to any street-median line. The forecast was 22-23 kph for the 400 m average stop spacing, or 27 kph for the 800 m spacing.
For Finch West, the average spacing is 670 m, that's between 400 and 800 m. So, one could expect something like 25 kph.
16 kph is 1.5 times slower, thus if that new forecast is correct, the travel time will be 1.5 longer. For the cost of LRT, hopefully a better outcome can be achieved.
Sure, less delays is a benefit in any case, but if all we can get is 16 kph, then why not build a street-median BRT for a fraction of LRT cost.
Last edited:
The REAL
New Member
I believe when this opens something will have to give from the public and the TTC will be forced to change their speed models. The whole point of these projects was to get more bang for your buck. And if that fails then best believe they (TTC) will see very angry customers coming their way.
allengeorge
Senior Member
Someone mentioned Andy Byford having an outside consultant evaluate the MTA’s operational rules and suggest streamlining. It seems like the TTC would benefit from that when it comes to surface ops. That, and stop rationalization and SOGR wrt streetcar lines.
Sometimes you need a consultant to tell you something you already know for political reasons.
Sometimes you need a consultant to tell you something you already know for political reasons.