[innsertnamehere]

No, not if I say so; if all the traffic impact studies submitted with the associated development along the Golden Mile say so, which they do, and those have been published here, along with the Golden Mile Transportation Masterplan.

Red is over capacity, in the preferred build-out scenario:
(two variations)

View attachment 561219

View attachment 561220

Source: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/97a2-CityPlanning_GoldenMile_TMPDraft_Part3.pdf


Further, from the above:

View attachment 561221

* before you say...... but we can have shorter headways.............. Nope, we can't, because the service has to interleave w/the short-turning service.

Ah, but you say, we can run ALL the service out to Kennedy. Nope, can't do that either as this would reduce the headway in the central section of the line.

****

Same thing I have had to say to a lot of posters today. I don't guess much. Its not a hunch, its not an intuition. I do my homework. If I'm guessing, I'll say so.

I mean it's only over capacity at full buildout of the Golden Mile secondary plan and with 5 minute headways on 2-car trains.

The ECLRT is capable of 90-second headways underground, which means 3-minute headways at grade, and has been built to easily accommodate 3-car trains. Even if we shifted to 3-car trains and 2/4 minute frequencies (more realistic, IMO), that is an increase in capacity from 6,000 PPHD to 11,250 PPHD on the surface section, or nearly double.

The ECLRT will likely be under capacity for at least another generation or two given it's ability to expand capacity within the existing line.

The Golden Mile development indeed will likely eventually overwhelm the LRT on it's day-1 operating capacities, but it has a lot of room for additional capacity above that. You also have to consider how long the Golden Mile will take to actually build out. Likely 30-40 years.

This is especially true now in the era of remote work, when peak-hour loads are not as extreme. Also, transit trip generation in Scarborough isn't going to be as aggressive as many here assume, and will have larger proportions of off-peak commuting given the employment patterns in the area.

 

[Northern Light]

I mean it's only over capacity at full buildout of the Golden Mile secondary plan and with 5 minute headways on 2-car trains.

The ECLRT is capable of 90-second headways underground, which means 3-minute headways at grade, and has been built to easily accommodate 3-car trains. Even if we shifted to 3-car trains and 2/4 minute frequencies (more realistic, IMO), that is an increase in capacity from 6,000 PPHD to 11,250 PPHD on the surface section, or nearly double.

To my understanding the currently implemented transit priority on the ECLRT in the east end will not deliver the projected capacity.

Increasing the level of priority will impede N-S movements, including transit.

The studies cited show N-S routes over capacity. So its not quite as simple as all that.

I also question the ability of Mx to operate an interleaved service on a 2/4 basis, where vehicle timing from the east is simply never going to be highly reliable when subject to traffic lights.

The ECLRT will likely be under capacity for at least another generation or two given it's ability to expand capacity within the existing line.

Clearly this is the case initially, thereafter, its dependent on the build-out rate, that's really something of an unknown. But the studies cited suggest the problem based on the initial service model occurs with 17 years, maybe sooner.

Again, that can be mitigated, to a point, by running more service/longer trains, that will delay the moment of reckoning, but I don't see this currently projected build out being adequately serviced by what is in place now (at optimal service/train size). Be that a problem 20 years from or 30 etc.

 

[innsertnamehere]

If we aren't running into capacity issues for another half-century, I don't think that's a valid concern or important factor in a decision today.

Even if Metrolinx can't manage better frequencies than every 5 minutes, We can still boost capacity by 50% through running 3-car trains. If we hit "over capacity" on initial operating capacity in, say, 2040, you aren't likely hitting capacity on 3-car trains until the 2060's or 2070's.. Lets just say I'm not wasting a particularly large amount of my thoughtspace on that theoretical.

And again, a reminder that the Golden Mile has yet to see a single unit start construction, yet alone be completed. Assuming that the corridor will see 25,000+ units built out in relatively short order is a BIG assumption. We are likely a minimum of 5 years out from the first new unit reaching occupancy, yet alone seeing tens of thousands of units coming online.

 

[Northern Light]

If we aren't running into capacity issues for another half-century, I don't think that's a valid concern or important factor in a decision today.

Up to a point, we can merely differ, but I do find your statements exaggerative, which is somewhat problematic.

And again, a reminder that the Golden Mile has yet to see a single unit start construction, yet alone be completed.

This is true, however, 2 sales offices are going up right now.

The Choice site at VP and the current piping plant over at Pharmacy.

Assuming that the corridor will see 25,000+ units built out in relatively short order is a BIG assumption.

I don't believe I ever suggested that 25,000 units will be built in 'short order'. I don't know why you find it difficult to debate with accurate quotes. You really do seem like a smart, knowledgeable guy, but one who can't resist talking about his 200-hour work week or or the quadrillion dollar deficit etc.

We can have a much better discussion without hyperbole.

We are likely a minimum of 5 years out from the first new unit reaching occupancy, yet alone seeing tens of thousands of units coming online.

The proponents building the sales offices are hoping for something slightly sooner, but I grant, not so much sooner, and sales will dictate that.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I'm not pulling the 25,000 number out of a hat. It's the assumed unit count for the full buildout of the secondary plan as identified in the TMP you quoted (plus a small bit of rounding).

Specifically:

The Secondary Plan advances a vision for a new mixed-use community that has the potential to accommodate approximately 24,000 residential units, 43,000 residents and 19,000 jobs over the next 20+ years, in a mix of tall, mid and low-rise buildings ranging in height from 4 to 35 storeys (Attachment 5: Draft Official Plan Amendment No. 499, Golden Mile Secondary Plan

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/sc/bgrd/backgroundfile-154881.pdf

This is the number which was used in the TMP study you quoted which identified that the corridor would be over capacity on 2-car, 5 minute frequencies. So according to that study, we need 24,000 units completed here to see capacity issues on 2-car, 5-minute service levels on the ECLRT. The TMP also includes full buildout of the Don Mills Secondary Plan as well of course, so the actual assumed unit construction number along the ECLRT is actually far higher than 24,000.

Now - that said, the actual planned densities are actually higher than 24,000 units as developers will always build higher densities than the City's Secondary Plan, but also, are likely not going to see buildout any time soon. Each landowner is going to be slowly building phases sequentially as market absorption allows. As I've already discussed, the ECLRT is also very much capable of delivering far higher capacity than that identified in the TMP as well. Which leads me to believe that capacity won't be a huge concern here for a very, very long time.

While I am sure we will see some developments start up with some level of occupancies occurring within the next 5-10 years, I remain skeptical we will see 10,000 units completed within the next 15-20 years, yet alone 24,000+. Also - we need to understand that the effective capacity of the ECLRT is actually much higher than the limit assumed in the TMP study, so understand that even if we see 24,000 units completed, the line still won't be close to capacity. I just don't believe the ECLRT will have significant capacity problems within our lifetimes.

 

[Northern Light]

I'm not pulling the 25,000 number out of a hat. It's the assumed unit count for the full buildout of the secondary plan as identified in the TMP you quoted (plus a small bit of rounding).

I wasn't suggesting that you were in error on this point. It was the suggestion that I or anyone was assuming the units would be built in 'short order' that I felt was unreasonable.

This is the number which was used in the TMP study which identified that the corridor would be over capacity on 2-car, 5 minute frequencies. I assumed since you were providing the information identified in the TMP, that you were making the same assumptions that the TMP did.

Given the date of the TMP, I'm unclear if they were aware of the extent of transit priority being delivered here vs what was initially envisioned. I'm not sure if that is buried in the report or not.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I wasn't suggesting that you were in error on this point. It was the suggestion that I or anyone was assuming the units would be built in 'short order' that I felt was unreasonable.



Given the date of the TMP, I'm unclear if they were aware of the extent of transit priority being delivered here vs what was initially envisioned. I'm not sure if that is buried in the report or not.

I guess given that you quoted the TMP, which assumed full buildout, as evidence that you thought the line would be over capacity in short time frame, inferred that you thought the underlying assumptions of the study would occur within that short timeframe. The TMP made the 2041 demand assumptions assuming full buildout of the Secondary Plan by that time, which just isn't going to happen. Which is what you were quoting that the line goes over capacity in it "17 years, maybe sooner". The full buildout of the secondary plan just isn't going to happen by 2041.

Regarding the ability of the line to deliver capacity - even without significant TSP, I would be surprised if Metrolinx can't operate the ECLRT at 5-minute frequencies. Even at that frequency it can deliver a capacity of 9,000 PPHD, which is still suggesting that the line will largely run under-capacity by 12-15% even at full buildout of the secondary plan through the Golden Mile. And if they can get it to 4-minute frequencies, it becomes even less of a problem.

Even without TSP changes, we are looking at needing 24,000 units in Golden Miles plus however many thousand more at Don Mills before the line goes over capacity. I just don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[nfitz]

To my understanding the currently implemented transit priority on the ECLRT in the east end will not deliver the projected capacity.

I don't think I've seen a projected capacity east of Don Mills station as high as even 3,000 per hour per direction. One 2- car train every 10 minutes should more than suffice.

Golden Mile isn't going to magically appear overnight - it will take years to build out. And lots of time to procure extra cars if we are lucky enough to have an increased modal split.

I don't understand this handringing about unlikely hypotheticals given how much overcapacity they've designed.

Surely a more likely scenario is that the trains will be concerningly empty west of Jane and east of Don Mills (maybe Victoria Park) at peak?

 

[Northern Light]

Surely a more likely scenario is that the trains will be concerningly empty west of Jane and east of Don Mills (maybe Victoria Park) at peak?

Clearly, you have not used the Eglinton bus.

 

[nfitz]

Clearly, you have not used the Eglinton bus.

Not west of Jane, I'll admit. But I do sometimes east of Don Mills.

And I very frequently am in a north-south bus that crosses Eglinton. In fact I'm on a southbound 924 right now near Ellesmere.

I simply don't see anywhere near the number of people on the Eglinton bus (and much fewer buses) at VP that I used to see 35 years ago on Sheppard approaching Don Mills. Easily half a dozen counter-peak in site most mornings.

Edit, I pulled out my camera as I just passed Eglinton to show the bus not being packed. But despite its getting caught by the light, I didn't see a bus - even in the distance.

I did though at that intersection observe a 24A, 24B, 70, and 924 heading the other way.

There's not much point changing from the 24s to Line 5 at Victoria Park. The 24 is quick from Eglinton to Danforth, seldom seeing the congestion you see further north.

 

[Northern Light]

I simply don't see anywhere near the number of people on the Eglinton bus (and much fewer buses) at VP that I used to see 35 years ago on Sheppard approaching Don Mills. Easily half a dozen counter-peak in site most mornings.

The number of buses out on this section of Eglinton, right now:

Current service reports as every 3'30

As to crowding, let's look at what the TTC's charts show:

This definitely shows the current buses in this areas a relatively full (look at all the yellow on Victoria Park as well.

Can't find one for the peak period just now.

 

[nfitz]

The number of buses out on this section of Eglinton, right now.

Is that all? Oh wait, you didn't include the 934.

Not much yellow I think. That's midday though. As you note.

Also see my edit above.

 

[Northern Light]

Is that all? Not much yellow I think.

On Eglinton, its mostly near Kennedy Stn.

The surface construction here for the....many, many years did drive a lot of people away from that bus.

* side note *, the big walk I did in the west end......I was actually read to stop and grab the bus at Avenue Road..........but after waiting more than 10M for a bus, in rush hour, with none in sight on the horizon, at a bus stop with over 20 people at it, I gave up, and walked to Yonge. That section is not this one, of course. I would simply say this corridor has some terrible service (not that its the only one!)

Oh wait, you didn't include the 934.

Correct, I didn't see a way to overlay them.

 

[micheal_can]

Is there a source for daily boardings for buses?

 

[nfitz]

Correct, I didn't see a way to overlay them.

Oh ... perhaps because there is no 934 currently! I'm surprised that hasn't been restored with major construction on Eglinton long gone.

So it is only 34A during peak through the Golden Mile (or anywhere east of Wynford Drive in North York). I see every 9 minutes (6⅔ buses an hour) in AM peak and every 7½ minutes (8 buses an hour) in PM peak. A capacity of 350 to 400 per hour.

What's your source for every 3'30"? (still only about 17 buses an hour - about 875 passengers an hour).

Compare to the July 1991 service summary for Sheppard East, just west of Don Mills Road. (non-summer would be better, but that's all I have access to).

In the 1991 AM peak, the 85 Sheppard East was every 5.25 (about 11.4 vehicles an hour), while the 85F was every 10 minutes (6 more buses an hour). The 139 Huntingdon was every 12.5 minutes (4.8 buses an hour). The 139 Consumers Park was every 10 minutes (6 buses an hour) And the 10 Van Horne was every 10 minutes (6 buses an hour). That's a total of 34.2 buses an hour. A bus almost every 1.75 minutes. A capacity of about 1,750. (there's no point looking at PM peak, as back then, the PM demand was lower than AM).

The AM peak capacity for Sheppard East at Don Mills was 5 times higher in 1991, than the Eglinton East ridership through the Golden Mile today.

Why does anyone think that a day one capacity of 6,000 an hour (a 2-car train every 6 minutes) wouldn't work; that's more than the capacity of Line 4 today! Two decades after it opened!

Currently Line 4 runs every 7.33 minutes. About 8.2 trains an hour. That's a capacity of 5,480 an hour. If Eglinton in Scarborough works out the same was as Line 4, we'd need a capacity of 1,100 in 2045.

(I certainly hopes it does better - the original forecast was an AM peak of 2,900 an hour westbound at Victoria Park in the 2030s, assuming that Don Mills LRT was built from Danforth to Steeles, and Line 7 was complete from Kennedy to Malvern north of Sheppard, Line 3 was extended to Sheppard/Markham Road, and the operating speed was 25 km/hr on the surface).