[nfitz]

Well, pedestrians shouldn't be able to cross the ROW except at intersections to make sure that the LRT vehicles can operate at optimal speed without having to break causing a delay.

I really haven't seen streetcars having to brake a lot for pedestrians crossing Spadina. Is this a real problem?

This line should be operated like a rapid transit line is supposed to be operated, not like a streetcar

With a car only coming every few minutes, I can't see pedestrians crossing as a major issue. You look both ways and cross; far easier than crossing the traffic on Sheppard; which is also perfectly legal. Why would you make it illegal to cross the LRT tracks, when you can cross the much more dangerous car lanes?

 

[Ansem]

I really haven't seen streetcars having to brake a lot for pedestrians crossing Spadina. Is this a real problem?

West of Bathurst on St.Clair it happens. They obviously have to break or/and slow down when that happens

With a car only coming every few minutes, I can't see pedestrians crossing as a major issue. You look both ways and cross; far easier than crossing the traffic on Sheppard; which is also perfectly legal. Why would you make it illegal to cross the LRT tracks, when you can cross the much more dangerous car lanes?

Councilors are already thinking of ways to speed up the LRT and make it as grade separated as possible. Why so defensive? The LRT is going to get built so, why is it taboo for people to suggest ways to ensure it runs faster and not like a streetcar?

 

[nfitz]

Councilors are already thinking of ways to speed up the LRT and make it as grade separated as possible. Why so defensive? The LRT is going to get built so, why is it taboo for people to suggest ways to ensure it runs faster and not like a streetcar?

Not defensive ... simply don't see point making it difficult to cross the road.

Speed up by all means. Not sure how it's "not a streetcar". Same technology, all that varies is the stop spacing, mostly. The TTC has been calling streetcars "LRVs" for decades.

 

[gweed123]

I really haven't seen streetcars having to brake a lot for pedestrians crossing Spadina. Is this a real problem?

Not specifically on Spadina, but there was an entire Baseball team named after the art of crossing the street and not being hit by a streetcar! The Brooklyn Dodgers. (Full name being the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers)

 

[nfitz]

Not specifically on Spadina, but there was an entire Baseball team named after the art of crossing the street and not being hit by a streetcar! The Brooklyn Dodgers. (Full name being the Brooklyn Trolley Dodgers)

That was back in 1890 ... you only have to look at that video above from 1900 to see why! Note the complete absence of traffic signs, traffic lights, or any kind of control at an intersection.

 

[Dan416]

Not defensive ... simply don't see point making it difficult to cross the road.

Speed up by all means. Not sure how it's "not a streetcar". Same technology, all that varies is the stop spacing, mostly. The TTC has been calling streetcars "LRVs" for decades.

And now suddenly Sheppard is a streetcar.

After the LRTistas worked so hard to say that LRT and streetcar aren't the same thing.

 

[nfitz]

And now suddenly Sheppard is a streetcar.

After the LRTistas worked so hard to say that LRT and streetcar aren't the same thing.

But, as we've clearly demonstrated. I'm pro-subway. I've never said that LRT isn't streetcars. But clearly you can't compare the King streetcar service to what is being built on Sheppard.

 

[Ansem]

But, as we've clearly demonstrated. I'm pro-subway. I've never said that LRT isn't streetcars. But clearly you can't compare the King streetcar service to what is being built on Sheppard.

In the end, the vehicles are irrelevant.It's how you operate the line that truly matters.
DLR in London is a light rail rapid transit

Sheppard is a light rail streetcar. Faster than Spadina and St.Clair but not rapid transit.

 

[Lone Primate]

And $14/Litre gas is?

Of course, that's not an arbitrary figure, or anything.

 

[gweed123]

In the end, the vehicles are irrelevant.It's how you operate the line that truly matters.
DLR in London is a light rail rapid transit

Sheppard is a light rail streetcar. Faster than Spadina and St.Clair but not rapid transit.

Exactly, operating environment matters more than technology does.

Sheppard isn't a streetcar, but the operating environment has more in common with the St. Clair Streetcar than it does the Bloor-Danforth Subway, or even with the Scarborough RT.

 

[Lone Primate]

if it's 20,000 then it means that it's a complete and total mess, operating well above capacity.

Well, yes... I'm genuinely surprised that this is apparently coming as news to you. The 401 has been beyond stipulated design capacity for decades, and it's no secret. Just about every year one paper or another does a major piece on it. I might be off the mark, but I seem to recall, about twenty years ago, the figure of design capacity quoted in an article of the Toronto Star of 48.000 vehicles a day past any given point when it was opened. Back then, it had four lanes. So if we extrapolate and assume a capacity of 12,000 cars per day per lane, the 440,000 using it vastly exceeds the 144,000 at a typical 12-lane point and the 192,000 at a 16-lane point. That's why the traffic crawls for about four hours in the morning and four hours again in the evening. I'm guessing you don't travel the 401 during rush hour all that often. Neither do I, thank God.

Part of the change is due to the growth of Toronto, part of it is due to women now typically working outside the home, and part of it is due to a sea change in the way we ship things. In the 1950s, rail and water transport were more important than they are now. Sometime in the 70s, shipping by 18-wheeler in "just in time" scenarios really took off. The 401 is very much a part of that. I read a few years ago that the US Defense Department considers Hwy 401, due to its importance in trade, the most important strategic asset outside the United States. Most of those changes weren't anticipated when the 401 was designed in the 50s and redesigned in the 60s. Even if they had been, we can only make a given highway so big. The 407 was planned, roughly, in the 1960s, but it wasn't realized for 30 years and when it was, it was as a toll road that hobbles its attractiveness as an alternative to the freeway.

REX is what you replace 401 with.

I think it's useful for getting some people off the highway, but it really wouldn't change all that much. REX isn't going to get people to the DVP, the 404, the 427, the 410, or other routes north and south. The problem with rail transit is that it's doomed to remain on rails. It can't turn at right angles, take a new course, or deliver you directly to your destination. It sure isn't going to get goods from the distribution centre straight to POS locations... that's one of the reasons 18-wheelers became so crucial to our delivery systems. We went from putting it on a truck to put it on a train to put it on a truck, to just putting it on a truck. Don't get me wrong; I'd be delighted to see high speed rail transit between cities. But it's only a partial solution; it can't replace the facility and virtuosity of the road grid. Something might, one day, but I really can't conceive of what yet so I imagine that "one day" is still a long way off.

 

[gweed123]

I think it's useful for getting some people off the highway, but it really wouldn't change all that much. REX isn't going to get people to the DVP, the 404, the 427, the 410, or other routes north and south. The problem with rail transit is that it's doomed to remain on rails. It can't turn at right angles, take a new course, or deliver you directly to your destination. It sure isn't going to get goods from the distribution centre straight to POS locations... that's one of the reasons 18-wheelers became so crucial to our delivery systems. We went from putting it on a truck to put it on a train to put it on a truck, to just putting it on a truck. Don't get me wrong; I'd be delighted to see high speed rail transit between cities. But it's only a partial solution; it can't replace the facility and virtuosity of the road grid. Something might, one day, but I really can't conceive of what yet so I imagine that "one day" is still a long way off.

GO REX is the single most important system that the GTHA will be building in the next 20 years. More important than any changes to the highway network, more important than the LRT network.

And yes, it will get people off the DVP, 404, 427, and 410. Most of the people using those highways are eventually headed downtown. 10-15 minute rush hour service in the 905, 5 min service in the 416. It'll do quite well. But let's not get into GO REX too much, there was a discussion about it in the fantasy thread if you want to continue talking about it there.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Well, yes... I'm genuinely surprised that this is apparently coming as news to you. The 401 has been beyond stipulated design capacity for decades, and it's no secret. Just about every year one paper or another does a major piece on it. I might be off the mark, but I seem to recall, about twenty years ago, the figure of design capacity quoted in an article of the Toronto Star of 48.000 vehicles a day past any given point when it was opened. Back then, it had four lanes. So if we extrapolate and assume a capacity of 12,000 cars per day per lane, the 440,000 using it vastly exceeds the 144,000 at a typical 12-lane point and the 192,000 at a 16-lane point. That's why the traffic crawls for about four hours in the morning and four hours again in the evening. I'm guessing you don't travel the 401 during rush hour all that often. Neither do I, thank God.

Part of the change is due to the growth of Toronto, part of it is due to women now typically working outside the home, and part of it is due to a sea change in the way we ship things. In the 1950s, rail and water transport were more important than they are now. Sometime in the 70s, shipping by 18-wheeler in "just in time" scenarios really took off. The 401 is very much a part of that. I read a few years ago that the US Defense Department considers Hwy 401, due to its importance in trade, the most important strategic asset outside the United States. Most of those changes weren't anticipated when the 401 was designed in the 50s and redesigned in the 60s. Even if they had been, we can only make a given highway so big. The 407 was planned, roughly, in the 1960s, but it wasn't realized for 30 years and when it was, it was as a toll road that hobbles its attractiveness as an alternative to the freeway.



I think it's useful for getting some people off the highway, but it really wouldn't change all that much. REX isn't going to get people to the DVP, the 404, the 427, the 410, or other routes north and south. The problem with rail transit is that it's doomed to remain on rails. It can't turn at right angles, take a new course, or deliver you directly to your destination. It sure isn't going to get goods from the distribution centre straight to POS locations... that's one of the reasons 18-wheelers became so crucial to our delivery systems. We went from putting it on a truck to put it on a train to put it on a truck, to just putting it on a truck. Don't get me wrong; I'd be delighted to see high speed rail transit between cities. But it's only a partial solution; it can't replace the facility and virtuosity of the road grid. Something might, one day, but I really can't conceive of what yet so I imagine that "one day" is still a long way off.

The 400 series of highway had traffic lights. So did the QEW, along with level railway crossings and even cross streets with stop signs. Congestion led to the removal of traffic signals, and level crossings, and bridging of cross streets.

 

[nfitz]

Of course, that's not an arbitrary figure, or anything.

I agree ... but that's the basis that that andrewpmk made to initiate this discussion "Gas prices would have to go up by an order of magnitude for the 401 to be empty." A magnitude increase from the current $1.40 a litre would be $14/litre. Seems pretty unlikely that would happen, but when gas hit 20 ¢/L, who thought we'd see it at $1.40?

I think it's useful for getting some people off the highway, but it really wouldn't change all that much.

Check the context of my comment. This is if no one is left on the 401, because they have all switched to the LRT.

What's interesting in all this, is the entire 401 in rush-hour, only carries a bit more than what an LRT could handle, and far less than a single subway line. It's amazing how much of our resources and landscape we devote to these masssive, expensive structures, compared to something more efficient, like the Sheppard East LRT.

 

[andrewpmk]

The vast majority of people in the GTA do not work downtown and are travelling between suburbs. Subways along Eglinton and Sheppard as well as the CP line and Lakeshore/Milton/Georgetown are all essential to getting people off the 401 and other congested roads that cross the city. The whole point is that they form a network and connect to each other, so people can easily get from anywhere in the GTA to anywhere else in the GTA without driving even if they are not going downtown. Eglinton for instance connects to 4 GO lines plus the CP freight line and has 3 interchanges with the existing subway system and crosses dozens of bus routes and could potentially be extended as far as Hurontario in the west. Once extended it will provide a connection to the airport area which is a huge employment hub and the single biggest source of congestion on the 401. When the GTA reaches 10 million people this sort of infrastructure will be absolutely vital. If we skimp and build light rail to save money then we will be forced to waste money replacing the overloaded light rail lines with real subways 20 years from now, when the population of the GTA will be around 8 million and thousands of condo towers will have been built.