[44 North]

Why would there need to be LRT trains? Just run the whole thing with normal six car TRs (or something similar). Some of them could short turn at Kennedy (or wherever)

My idea behind it was to be 'light' rail, with smaller, shorter trains and thus smaller, shorter stations. My assumption is that light or ICTS vehicles are quieter (maybe they aren't), but I don't see it being realistic running 6-car trains overtop of streets, on tall flyover bridges, or behind homes at high frequencies. Not to mention that the curves proposed are quite tight and I don't believe are realistic with our current subways.

I wasn't aware of Gweed's point about 6-car trains being unable to run on elevated sections. This may require a rethink, and possible reconfiguration with the Scarborough Branch being interlined with Eglinton Crosstown(?).

 

[TheTigerMaster]

My idea behind it was to be 'light' rail, with smaller, shorter trains and thus smaller, shorter stations.

Well the stations would be smaller and shorter. But that wouldn't save any significant money if the stations are elevated or at-grade

My assumption is that light or ICTS vehicles are quieter (maybe they aren't)

My educated guess is that LRT and subway cars are of similar noisiness (very quiet). I think ICTS may be a little louder.

but I don't see it being realistic running 6-car trains overtop of streets, on tall flyover bridges, or behind homes at high frequencies.

Why not? I assume that you worry that the 6 car trains will cause more disruption.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I have to say, I really like that plan! If it's using LRT trains, they'll need to be 6 car trains in order to handle the demand. Unfortunately, unless the Don Branch is elevated, that would need to be 3 car trains, max. That would mean running mixed-length trains on the downtown portion, but that's far from the end of the world.

I wasn't aware of Gweed's point about 6-car trains being unable to run on elevated sections. This may require a rethink, and possible reconfiguration with the Scarborough Branch being interlined with Eglinton Crosstown(?).

Why can't six car trains be used on elevated portions of the line?

 

[gweed123]

Why would there need to be LRT trains? Just run the whole thing with normal six car TRs (or something similar). Some of them could short turn at Kennedy (or wherever)

Well the plan was to run surface on Don Mills north of Eglinton, correct? That would require LRT.

Why can't six car trains be used on elevated portions of the line?

"Unfortunately, unless the Don Branch is elevated, that would need to be 3 car trains, max." If the Don Branch was elevated, 6 car trains would be no problem. But if it's surface operations, then 6 car trains is an issue.

 

[WislaHD]

Well the plan was to run surface on Don Mills north of Eglinton, correct? That would require LRT.

Unless it is in a trench.

Is that possible? I think Don Mills is wide enough.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Well the plan was to run surface on Don Mills north of Eglinton, correct? That would require LRT.



"Unfortunately, unless the Don Branch is elevated, that would need to be 3 car trains, max." If the Don Branch was elevated, 6 car trains would be no problem. But if it's surface operations, then 6 car trains is an issue.

Why would 6 car trains be an issue with surface operations?

 

[Rainforest]

Why would 6 car trains be an issue with surface operations?

That 6-car train will be 150-180 m long. When it stops at a major intersection, its end will block the previous street in many cases.

A platform will have to be up to 200 m long. At major stops, the amount of passengers trying to cross from / to the street-median LRT lines will not be manageable by pedestrian traffic lights. The platform will need an under/overground connection to the sidewalks. That kind of structure is not easy to fit at every major intersection.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

That 6-car train will be 150-180 m long. When it stops at a major intersection, its end will block the previous street in many cases.

A platform will have to be up to 200 m long. At major stops, the amount of passengers trying to cross from / to the street-median LRT lines will not be manageable by pedestrian traffic lights. The platform will need an under/overground connection to the sidewalks. That kind of structure is not easy to fit at every major intersection.

Ahh I see. I misunderstood the proposal. I was under the assumption that the trains would not be interacting with street level traffic.

 

[gweed123]

Unless it is in a trench.

Is that possible? I think Don Mills is wide enough.

A trench would be possible. The other option is to have the line be surface between stations, but have it dip under major intersections where a station is located, and have the station be semi-underground, much like Ottawa's Transitway stations along the Scott St trench, or many of the proposed surface LRT stations. That way you could run 6 cars while still being somewhat surface.

The reality is though that running mixed vehicle lengths isn't that big of a deal. Boston's Green Line runs longer trains on some branches than it does on others. You just need to develop a system whereby people know where to stand for the next vehicle coming. Boston doesn't do that part so well, and I got euchred a couple times when I was waiting for what I was expecting to be a 3 car train and it was only a 2 car train, on a full platform no less.

 

[Rainforest]

Speaking of the Sheppard corridor: the city cannot afford to extend Sheppard subway in the near future, as is has committed serious money to Danforth - Scarborough subway.

The city council narrowly backed Scarborough subway (24 to 20), but it will not back a second subway to STC. If such proposal is presented for a vote, councilors from other parts of the city will demand subways to their wards instead.

That leaves only a few options: Sheppard LRT as planned; modified Sheppard LRT or BRT within $1.1 billion allocated for this corridor; or nothing at all.

Maybe, the solution is to conduct a poll in the area, east of Hwy 404 and bounded by Finch and Ellesmere. It does not have to be a formal plebiscite; a large phone-based poll should be sufficient. The participants should be clearly informed that a) LRT is not as fast as subway but is faster and more reliable than bus; b) all through traffic lanes will be preserved, only the central left-turn lanes will be lost; c) if they reject LRT, the city will not start planning the subway for at least 15 years, and will not build it for at least 25 years.

If the majority turns out against LRT, then the project should be cancelled and the funding transferred to other projects, such as DRL, SmartTrack, extending Eglinton to the airport, extending Finch LRT to Yonge, or building Waterfront East LRT.

Although, I doubt that merchants concerned about the loss of left turns represent a sizeable portion of the local population. The count of businesses potentially affected should not be more than say 100. With family members and employees, that translates to perhaps 1,000 voters. The total population of this area is probably no less than 100,000.

 

[Dan416]

I don't think anyone will mourn the loss of the SELRT. Much more pressing priorities.

 

[gweed123]

The $1.1 billion from the SELRT is a drop in the bucket for the DRL, but it could really come in handy for building the East Bayfront and Waterfront West LRTs, projects that are unlikely to ever see significant Provincial funding, and would probably end up being city-only projects. That or the Eglinton West extension.

Or if the Province really wanted to give a "fuck you for wasting our time" message, they could divert the funding to the Hurontario and/or Hamilton LRT projects. That'd really piss Toronto off, and would be a good lesson too: Don't waste time bickering and complaining when you're being given free transit. I'll say it once and I'll say it again, other municipalities in Ontario would have killed to have been given the deal Toronto was, and Toronto abused it. I'm sure Ottawa could coherently line up another $1.1 billion in transit projects (Kanata extension, Barrhaven extension, O-Train electrification) no problem.

 

[Adjei]

Why don`t we cancel this LRT project, transfer the money to complete Eglinton to the airport and let all these residents crying for subways have their fairy tale subway..

 

[WislaHD]

I would drop the SELRT for a WWLRT in a heartbeat.

 

[kEiThZ]

"Drop this. Get that."

Not going to happen. At least not with federal money. They pitched in for a specific project for a specific area. Good luck getting them to divert to another project in a riding where they have no chance.

Not saying it should be that way. Just realities. The money will stay on Sheppard or end up in the SRT replacement project.