[AnarchoSocialist]

Again, I fail to see why this is a knock on BRT as a technology. Bloor-Yonge has the same type of passenger backlog, does that make subway technology inferior? The buses are backed up because there are more passengers than the current system can effectively deal with. LRT is not better or worse than BRT, each of them is right for a given scenario and a given capacity range. Ottawa's downtown portion just happens to have outgrown the capacity range that BRT can effectively deliver. LRT will deliver the necessary capacity.

I totally agree gweed. I wasn't trying to knock BRT as a technology. I was just pointing out some of the reasons why BRT is starting to fail in Ottawa. It isnt a problem with the technology necessarily, only the infrastructure hitting capacity.

 

[gweed123]

Sure it does. It benefits anyone in Toronto travelling from Toronto up to Highway 7. Only 2 stations will be in Toronto, but there's plenty of benefit.

It's a subway designed to cater to the 905 commuter. Period. Without the DRL, it will be an INCONVENIENCE for Toronto commuters, because it will ensure the Yonge line will backlog even further north than it already does. Saying a subway to Richmond Hill will benefit Toronto residents is like saying widening the 401 east of Pickering will benefit Toronto workers who work in Ajax. It's a BS argument, plain and simple.

You're (corrected your grammar) kidding right? Have you tried driving around that neighbourhood in rush hour? It's a nightmare. There's lots of benefit. Both the immediate area and anyone who is commuting from the west, will have a much shorter bus ride. Yes, it's being built now. Though they certainly hadn't broken ground back in 2008 when that document came out. Even now, it isn't as far advanced as the Eglinton West subway was when it was cancelled.

Again, it's a subway that will mainly benefit 905 commuters.

Don't be sillly ... have you read the plans? They are planning on running LRT in a subway tunnel. It has the speed of a subway. It has grade-separated underground stations. It has trains running every 3-minutes (better than every 6-minutes on Sheppard). And it costs as much as a subway (likely because the bigger tunnels for LRT cancel out the savings for the smaller stations). There is no benefit from building a YUS-style service instead ... if anything it would provide worse services with less frequent trains, and forced transfers.

Any "subway" that has to stop at red lights outside of the tunnel is NOT a subway. Stop trying to make it sound like it is. Yes, the tunnelled portion will be similar to a subway, but you're conveniently ignoring the other 2/3 of the line that will be outside the tunnel. Come the first major snowstorm after the line opens, you'll see exactly what I mean.

Perhaps it is yourself that your deceiving then.

Perhaps you need to stop claiming that I'm deceiving people just because you disagree with me. That's such a Bill O'Reilly thing to do "I disagree with you, therefore your points are deceitful and anti-American".

 

[gweed123]

I totally agree gweed. I wasn't trying to knock BRT as a technology. I was just pointing out some of the reasons why BRT is starting to fail in Ottawa. It isnt a problem with the technology necessarily, only the infrastructure hitting capacity.

In most other contexts, transit planners would be thrilled that their system is hitting design capacity. That means the system is doing its job and raising transit ridership. It's like a restaurant owner complaining that their restaurant is too full.

 

[BMO]

It's a subway designed to cater to the 905 commuter. Period. Without the DRL, it will be an INCONVENIENCE for Toronto commuters, because it will ensure the Yonge line will backlog even further north than it already does. Saying a subway to Richmond Hill will benefit Toronto residents is like saying widening the 401 east of Pickering will benefit Toronto workers who work in Ajax. It's a BS argument, plain and simple.



Again, it's a subway that will mainly benefit 905 commuters.

it's ok York Region would gladly take a subway that goes from highway 7 to steeles, and stop it right there and take a bus down to finch, don't worry we don't mind, we're used to making a bunch of transfers to get to Toronto, oh and BTW next time you need to go outside of Toronto don't bother taking transit we could probably discontinue buses up to York Region because apparently it is much better to have York Region residents clogging up Toronto's streets with their SUVs then it is for them to clog up TTC buses or Subways to get to work.

Oh yea and BTW all those people who would be paying to clog up the Yonge Subway extension line, are probably already clogging the current line, therefore this imaginary image of the line becoming overly clogged because it serevs peoeple whoa re ALREADY using the line is quite comical.

seriously can we all just get by this silly argument about who these lines benefit, to say that a line that crosses toronto to York Region barely benefits Toronto makes you seem very narrow minded, and incapable of believing that maybe York Region would rather have decent transit system now that will help reduce sprawl rather than be stuck with buses forever.

 

[nfitz]

It's a subway designed to cater to the 905 commuter. Period.

It certainly gives the most benefit to the 905 ... but it does provide benefit to Toronto as well. I'd certainly use it to go to businesses further north for meetings. And what's wrong with providing benefit to 905? We don't seem to have problems for providing subways to other cities outside of Toronto historically, such as North York, Scarborough, and Etobicoke.

Without the DRL, it will be an INCONVENIENCE for Toronto commuters, because it will ensure the Yonge line will backlog even further north than it already does.

The DRL is essential - no question about that. The way politics work these days, the best way to get DRL might be to push Yonge.

Saying a subway to Richmond Hill will benefit Toronto residents is like saying widening the 401 east of Pickering will benefit Toronto workers who work in Ajax. It's a BS argument, plain and simple.

It's not a bull shit argument. And it's not comparable ... widening 401 would not benefit Toronto workers, as it would not decrease counter-peak travel times. Building the subway north will reduce counter-peak travel times.

Any "subway" that has to stop at red lights outside of the tunnel is NOT a subway.

I spent enough time today staring at Danforth trains parked at red lights outside of tunnels ...

But seriously ... I'm not claiming the surface LRT is a subway. Only that the 12-km of LRT in a subway tunnel that operates at subway speeds at a higher frequency than a subway is for all intents and purposes a subway.

Yes, the tunnelled portion will be similar to a subway, but you're conveniently ignoring the other 2/3 of the line that will be outside the tunnel.

I wasn't referring to that. It's not like anyone would ever suggest that a full-scale subway would be built from Don Mills Road to Kennedy on Eglinton in the foreseeable future, given the demands.

Come the first major snowstorm after the line opens, you'll see exactly what I mean.

The streetcars operate reasonable well in a snow-storm ... better than the buses that seem to get stuck on hills. And how is this different than subways with outdoor sections?

Perhaps you need to stop claiming that I'm deceiving people just because you disagree with me.

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. I have problems with you - and especially a couple of the other Save our Sheppard folks who make false claim after false claim.

That's such a Bill O'Reilly thing to do "I disagree with you, therefore your points are deceitful and anti-American".

I'm not really familiar with Bill O'Reilly - I don't think I've ever seen him. Not sure the point here ...

Perhaps a mod should move some of this to one of the Transit City threads.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Any transit system where multiple lines or branches share one common central stretch is going to be extremely vehicle-heavy unless the frequency on each branch/line is reduced, which isn't exactly desirable.

Yonge extension barely benefits Toronto. The Spadina extension is already underway, and aside from York University, barely benefits Toronto.

It's a subway designed to cater to the 905 commuter. Period. Without the DRL, it will be an INCONVENIENCE for Toronto commuters, because it will ensure the Yonge line will backlog even further north than it already does. Saying a subway to Richmond Hill will benefit Toronto residents is like saying widening the 401 east of Pickering will benefit Toronto workers who work in Ajax. It's a BS argument, plain and simple.

Again, [the Spadina extension is] a subway that will mainly benefit 905 commuters.

Have you ever been to Toronto? The 905 doesn't begin at the 401. These two subway extensions may only add about 7 or 8km inside the 416, but they directly affect roughly 10% of the TTC's entire bus ridership and are of substantial benefit to at least 8 city wards. Thousands of daily transit trips made by 416ers will be created by each of these extensions in addition to the tens of thousands of existing trips that will be improved. The parade of buses up Yonge was fun for a while but it needs to be put down. How can York U be put aside?

 

[rbt]

Because you somehow think that buses cannot cross over painted lines on the road. I would say that you aren't thinking outside the box, but come on, that's just common sense...

If the BRT is high speed (> 60km/h) there is a very good chance a physical divider will be between the two directions.

I can't imagine a worse accident (news wise) than two buses filled with standees in a head-on collission at 160km/h (80km/h per direction).

 

[waterloowarrior]

If the BRT is high speed (> 60km/h) there is a very good chance a physical divider will be between the two directions.

I can't imagine a worse accident (news wise) than two buses filled with standees in a head-on collission at 160km/h (80km/h per direction).

Parts of the Transitway have a 90 km/hr speed limit with no divider. Off the top of my head, the only median dividers I can think of are the ones near the stations to prevent pedestrians from crossing.

Obviously no one would pass on those sections though... passing lanes are located near the stations where there are 50 km/hr speed limits IIRC.

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

Parts of the Transitway have a 90 km/hr speed limit with no divider. Off the top of my head, the only median dividers I can think of are the ones near the stations to prevent pedestrians from crossing.

Obviously no one would pass on those sections though... passing lanes are located near the stations where there are 50 km/hr speed limits IIRC.

Your right. The speed limits are 50 km/h near and at stations. In between, speed limits range from 70 km/h to 90km/h. The only exceptions are parts where it is rather curvy (the Transitway from Hurdman to South Keys has quite a few curvy sections).

Most non-downtown stations have barriers (metal rails) between the two sides, but this is, as you said, to stop pedestrians from crossing. They have started installing more barriers along the sidewalk and roadway at some downtown stations too (Laurier and Metcalfe, as well as more barriers at Rideau, immediately come to mind).

The only time I have seen drivers go into the oncoming lane is to pass a stalled bus or because of construction.

 

[gweed123]

It certainly gives the most benefit to the 905 ... but it does provide benefit to Toronto as well. I'd certainly use it to go to businesses further north for meetings. And what's wrong with providing benefit to 905? We don't seem to have problems for providing subways to other cities outside of Toronto historically, such as North York, Scarborough, and Etobicoke.

A subway to York Region benefits mainly York Region residents. A subway through central and downtown Toronto benefits everybody, including those York Region residents who work in Toronto, and specifically in downtown. A less crowded subway makes it a more enjoyable (or tolerable) ride for everybody. Worry about the stability of the trunk of the tree before you start to add more branches.

The DRL is essential - no question about that. The way politics work these days, the best way to get DRL might be to push Yonge.

I disagree. If you NEED Project A but want Project B, and Project B's success is contingent on Project A, you don't ask for Project B and hope that Project A will magically appear a few years later. If you want Project A, ask for Project A. We want the DRL. We need the DRL. So ASK for the DRL.

It's not a bull shit argument. And it's not comparable ... widening 401 would not benefit Toronto workers, as it would not decrease counter-peak travel times. Building the subway north will reduce counter-peak travel times.

You're right. The QEW would have been a more appropriate example. It's jam packed going both ways through Mississauga every morning and afternoon.

I spent enough time today staring at Danforth trains parked at red lights outside of tunnels ...

But seriously ... I'm not claiming the surface LRT is a subway. Only that the 12-km of LRT in a subway tunnel that operates at subway speeds at a higher frequency than a subway is for all intents and purposes a subway.

Yes, but if the 'subway' portion's headways and overall speed are determined by how well the line moves on the surface sections, it's not a true subway. That's like saying "It's a 400 series highway. It just has a couple stop lights on it."

I wasn't referring to that. It's not like anyone would ever suggest that a full-scale subway would be built from Don Mills Road to Kennedy on Eglinton in the foreseeable future, given the demands.

Even SOS is demanding that. We realize that the ridership numbers on Eglinton east of Don Mills are too low to justify a subway. Heck, they're even low enough to justify a BRT, which is what we're doing.

The streetcars operate reasonable well in a snow-storm ... better than the buses that seem to get stuck on hills. And how is this different than subways with outdoor sections?

Subways on surface sections don't have to deal with Toronto drivers who become morons as soon as an inch of snow hits the ground...

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. I have problems with you - and especially a couple of the other Save our Sheppard folks who make false claim after false claim.

I do not see my claims as being false claims. I tell it how I see it. You see it differently. It doesn't mean either of us is wrong.

 

[kEiThZ]

That's what I would expect, but that's not what I see. I just got back from Ottawa, and the buses were piled up on Slater and Albert every day. There was surprisingly little passing going on. See the pictures I took yesterday on Slater at the Bay stop:
...
Obviously, OC Transpo drivers don't think outside the box.

My guess is that Justin1000 is right. Yes, the buses could go around the lineup, but then they would just create a bottleneck at the next stop, where they would have to merge back in.

Did you actually get on an OC Transpo bus at all? If you did, you would have realized that the backlog is caused by the fact that each one of those buses needs to stop at each stop in the core. It does not mean that they can't pass each other. It means that in the core, they have to service each stop and that leads to congestion.

If you were too ignorant to figure that part out, well then....

 

[Justin10000]

Straw man. Buses can go around obstructions. In this very specific case, they can't go around the "obstruction" because the "obstruction" is the destination itself. Your own two feet can go faster if they start skipping all the places you want to go.

The straw man is the stupid claim buses can just pass any obstruction, and somehow this a great advantage. Fact is, BRT can suffer from blockages, and delays just like any transport system. Pictures, and observation prove it.

And doing such a great job using absolute exceptions to the norm. If you've used the Transitway, you know quite well that buses routinely pass each other. To portray the situation as any different is a mistruth and you know it.

You just love trying to twist words, and facts don't you? You do it a lot.Then you try to play the "gotcha" card. It doesn't work. A bus stopped at a station is not a blockage!(unless it is stalled, of course. Considering drivers pull up practically to the rear bumper, it can be a problem.) If there is a blockage somewhere in the transitway when the road is 2 lanes, a bus is NOT going to simply bypass the blockage, because that is a potential for a collision. And there are BRT systems where passing lanes do not even exist, on the assumption buses can just simply use the opposite lane. Guess what occured? Crashes. Fact it, the claim is BS, unless the entire BRT is built with passing lanes. I have yet to see a BRT in North America invest that sort of money. And blockages occur at intersections too. Point is, BRT is prone to blockages,and breakdowns just like any other transit system. It happens.

Right. Just like the old plan (albeit with a slightly different alignmen) which called for spending tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars running track through greenbelt to bring LRT to one of the smallest and least dense communities in Ottawa. It was the Ottawa equivalent of running the SELRT to the zoo. Good thing, they've scrapped that plan and they are now insisting that the LRT not leave the greenbelt unless the suburb they are bound for meets minimum densification targets. And that motion by the way was put forward by a suburban coucnillor from Kanata.

I remember( or some other subway advocate) touting the development potential of extending the Spadina Line to a field. Hypocritical, much? Riverside South was slated for development, and could have developed around the line.

As for "much" of the existing transitway being converted over....count the kms. It's not "much" by any stretch of the imagination. Or least not any time soon. For the forseeable future Ottawa will still have more BRT than LRT...even inside the greenbelt for a decade or two at least, where they will be building new transitways to help them get through construction and add service post-construction.

I do not need to count anything. much of the grade-seperated transitway is being converted to LRT, Sorry, but I do not consider curb-lanes to be "BRT".

 

[reaperexpress]

Did you actually get on an OC Transpo bus at all? If you did, you would have realized that the backlog is caused by the fact that each one of those buses needs to stop at each stop in the core.

No, I didn't get on an OC transpo bus, nor did I ever claim to. In fact what I said was essentially "here are my observations", followed by "here is my guess as to why this is". I don't know why you are getting so riled up about it.

And your explanation is more or less what I said (or meant to say).

Because buses have to serve every stop, they must be able to get to every stop, and there isn't enough room, hence the congestion. In the end, it works out to the same thing. I apologize if I didn't spell it out for you.

It does not mean that they can't pass each other.

That's funny, I don't seem to recall saying that. In fact, I said:

Yes, the buses could go around the lineup, but then they would just create a bottleneck at the next stop, where they would have to merge back in.

To which you replied:

It means that in the core, they have to service each stop and that leads to congestion.

Obviously buses can leave their lanes, but there would be no benefit in doing so since they have to serve the stops anyway and would have to merge in, causing a bottleneck. (bottlenecks mean congestion)

If you were too ignorant to figure that part out, well then....

Then...

What I said was more or less the same thing as what you said. Of what am I ignorant?

 

[gweed123]

You just love trying to twist words, and facts don't you? You do it a lot.Then you try to play the "gotcha" card. It doesn't work. A bus stopped at a station is not a blockage!(unless it is stalled, of course. Considering drivers pull up practically to the rear bumper, it can be a problem.) If there is a blockage somewhere in the transitway when the road is 2 lanes, a bus is NOT going to simply bypass the blockage, because that is a potential for a collision. And there are BRT systems where passing lanes do not even exist, on the assumption buses can just simply use the opposite lane. Guess what occured? Crashes. Fact it, the claim is BS, unless the entire BRT is built with passing lanes. I have yet to see a BRT in North America invest that sort of money. And blockages occur at intersections too. Point is, BRT is prone to blockages,and breakdowns just like any other transit system. It happens.

If a bus is stalled, it puts its four-ways on. The oncoming bus slows down to see if there is a bus coming up behind it. If there is, it lets it through. It's not rocket science. If a car is stalled in front of you, do you just sit there until it starts to move? No. You wait until there's an opening, and you go around. Amazing what happens when you apply logic for 5th graders...

I remember( or some other subway advocate) touting the development potential of extending the Spadina Line to a field. Hypocritical, much? Riverside South was slated for development, and could have developed around the line.

There's a difference between TOD development and typical low-density suburban development. Riverside South would have been the latter.

I do not need to count anything. much of the grade-seperated transitway is being converted to LRT, Sorry, but I do not consider curb-lanes to be "BRT".

And by much of, you mean about 20% of the grade-separated Transitway? Because that's about the percentage that's being converted.

And by your logic then, the only part of Transit City that's LRT is the central portion of Eglinton, because the rest is just in a dedicated lane in the middle of the street, which BY YOUR OWN WORDS is NOT rapid transit, because curb lanes and lanes down the middle of the street are nearly exactly the same thing. Thank you for that comment, glad to see the double standard of the LRT-istas is alive and well!

 

[Fresh Start]

A few reasons why Ottawa wants to replace their bus rapid transit with light rail:

Wow! So I guess the myth "Bus can bypass each other" is blown out of the water! I thought the Brisbane backup was bad.

Whatever. Buses in the absence of dedicated bypass lanes tend to do that. Focusing in on a few select bottlenecks, when overall the Transitway outside of the CBD operates efficiently is playing fast and loose with the truth.

I'm still waiting to be impressed by this:

and this

and this (nice butchering job the take away of the 2 centre lanes of Spadina Ave has done for other road users, btw)

and this

and this

and this

and this

All hail the power of light-rail.