[Amare]

Although Canada line capacity is greater than Eglinton.
- Canada Line cost $110M/km for 9 km tunnel and 10 km elevated.
- Eglinton cost $280M/km for 11 km tunnel and 8 km at-grade in-median.

What are you talking about? The Canada Line has a current capacity of ~6000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd) with a max capacity of 15,000 if expanded to 3 car trains with less than 2 minute frequencies; Eglinton would have an estimated capacity of ~15000 pphpd without tinkering with longer trains and higher frequencies than currently planned. Eglinton has wider diameter tunnels (among many of the differences between it and the Canada Line), while in Vancouver the Canada line has a smaller tunnel diameter.

There is only one set of tracks on this elevated structure. They didn't want twice as much cluster.

Very true, but it wouldnt be that much of a difference if it was 2 sets of tracks because Vancouver/Richmond actually planned how it would integrate into the street fabric.

 

[MisterF]

Things are nice when they are not half-assed.

This is Toronto. If we did elevated, we would make Philly blush.

You're not actually suggesting that new elevated transit in Toronto would look like this are you? This kind of misinformation is exactly why Toronto keeps building the wrong kind of transit. Stuff like the elevated lines in Philly simply don't get built anymore. The Skytrain is a much more relevant example and would be fantastic for the suburban parts of Eglinton.

 

[BurlOak]

What are you talking about? The Canada Line has a current capacity of ~6000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd) with a max capacity of 15,000 if expanded to 3 car trains with less than 2 minute frequencies; Eglinton would have an estimated capacity of ~15000 pphpd without tinkering with longer trains and higher frequencies than currently planned. Eglinton has wider diameter tunnels (among many of the differences between it and the Canada Line), while in Vancouver the Canada line has a smaller tunnel diameter.


Very true, but it wouldnt be that much of a difference if it was 2 sets of tracks because Vancouver/Richmond actually planned how it would integrate into the street fabric.

According to Wiki, Canada line carried 228k riders per day during Olympics. Assuming equal ridership for full 16 hours per day, with ridership fully equal in both directions, it works out to 7,000. I believe the actual capacity is ~12k to 15k, with expansion to the low 20's.


Edit: Found it in the same wiki article. Capacity is 15k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line

 

[idc24]

https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-t...sit-system-crossing-over-a-busy-71662331.html

You're not actually suggesting that new elevated transit in Toronto would look like this are you? This kind of misinformation is exactly why Toronto keeps building the wrong kind of transit. Stuff like the elevated lines in Philly simply don't get built anymore. The Skytrain is a much more relevant example and would be fantastic for the suburban parts of Eglinton.

You are correct, modern elevated rapid transit lines around the world are all built out of reinforced concrete viaducts like the Skytrain.

Skytrain

DLR, London U.K.
http://www.keolis.co.uk/news/2014/keolisamey-docklands-commences-operation-dlr-network

SMRT, Singapore
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/singapore-metro.html

 

[syn]

To be fair Vancouver cheaped out as well with the Canada Line by choosing to build it at lower capacity than what was actually needed, and now they are really regretting it.

Toronto on the other hand has a serious issue with integrating transit into our urban framework. Here we do all of these "studies" to see how we can integrate things better, and at the end we choose the worst option (ie: see Queen's Quay and St.Clair for further proof). We havent gone the way of building things to a lower capacity than what is needed, but that may very well change with the DRL South.

In terms of integrating in to an urban framework, I think the current configuration of the LRT is the best. Hopefully it will help encourage pedestrian friendly development.

 

[Rainforest]

The Canada Line has a current capacity of ~6000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd) with a max capacity of 15,000 if expanded to 3 car trains with less than 2 minute frequencies; Eglinton would have an estimated capacity of ~15000 pphpd without tinkering with longer trains and higher frequencies than currently planned. Eglinton has wider diameter tunnels (among many of the differences between it and the Canada Line), while in Vancouver the Canada line has a smaller tunnel diameter.

The ability of Eglinton line to handle 15,000 pphpd is questionable because of the street-median segments that limit the frequency. Wider tunnels do not help in that respect, they are needed just to accommodate the pantographs.

That said, the 15,000 might never be needed on Eglinton. It is not the city's main trunk E-W line; the BD subway line exists south of Eglinton, and hopefully more lines will be added in the north.

Vancouver' Canada Line might actually cause more troubles in the future, as it is the city's main N-S trunk with no other parallel lines. It may have a slightly higher capacity than Toronto's ECLRT, but once that capacity is used up, there is no immediate relief in sight.

 

[Leo_Chan]

When Eglinton is jammed to the gills (which won't be long if the success of something like the Canada Line and the general high ridership of the TTC is accounted for) I wouldn't be so sure, Toronto doesn't have a good reputation for building the lines that are needed

Lets say in 2023 when the Crosstown has opened for a year and it is already at capacity for the planned initial frequencies and train length and Eglinton Station is over capacity, what would be the next step to increase capacity on the line?

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Lets say in 2023 when the Crosstown has opened for a year and it is already at capacity for the planned initial frequencies and train length and Eglinton Station is over capacity, what would be the next step to increase capacity on the line?

Build the Relief Line.

 

[innsertnamehere]

it would be to buy a few more trains.

 

[Rainforest]

Lets say in 2023 when the Crosstown has opened for a year and it is already at capacity for the planned initial frequencies and train length and Eglinton Station is over capacity, what would be the next step to increase capacity on the line?

That would mean a huge failure of all ridership forecast models. All forecasts for Eglinton are in the range of 5,500 to 7,000 pphpd.

The first step would be expanding the underground platforms and running 3-car trains instead of 2-car trains. The underground section is built compatible with 3-car trains, and the expansion would be relatively cheap and fast. Obviously more cars will be needed, but those can be purchased within a couple years, or some may be taken from other lines if the rolling stock is compatible. With 3-car trains, the capacity can reach something like 12,000 or 13,000 pphpd (anything above that is questionable).

The downtown-bound component of ridership may be largely diverted from the busiest sections by adding diagonal lines. In the east, that's DRL Long. In the west, SmartTrack / RER between Mt Dennis and Union.

 

[Amare]

According to Wiki, Canada line carried 228k riders per day during Olympics. Assuming equal ridership for full 16 hours per day, with ridership fully equal in both directions, it works out to 7,000. I believe the actual capacity is ~12k to 15k, with expansion to the low 20's.

Edit: Found it in the same wiki article. Capacity is 15k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line

Again, the Canada Line's current capacity is closer to 6-7K at the moment. With various means of expansion it can reach between 15K-20K, with 20K being the absolute crush load capacity with all forms of extensions completed.

Vancouver' Canada Line might actually cause more troubles in the future, as it is the city's main N-S trunk with no other parallel lines. It may have a slightly higher capacity than Toronto's ECLRT, but once that capacity is used up, there is no immediate relief in sight.

To be blunt, Vancouver really screwed themselves with the Canada line the way they built it. It is indeed the main N-S line with no clear possibles alternatives, and it's ability to expand is very limited in the future. Its situation is going to be much worse compared to the Yonge line in Toronto once it reaches capacity.

 

[ssiguy2]

The CL, unlike the other SkyTrain lines, was built short-sighted and it will come back and bite them in the ass. That said, the Canada Line still has higher capacity than the Eglinton line with it`s 100 meter stations as opposed to 50 meter CL ones. CL can run every 90 seconds and it is impossible for ANY grade line to run more than every 3 minutes especially one that goes right down the centre of a busy road. The CL is cheaper to run due to automation, is faster, and far more reliable than Eglinton.

Eglinton should be a completely grade separated line but Miller`s `LRT or nothing mantra` greatly limits the speed, reliability, and capacity of the line.

 

[Steve X]

The CL, unlike the other SkyTrain lines, was built short-sighted and it will come back and bite them in the ass. That said, the Canada Line still has higher capacity than the Eglinton line with it`s 100 meter stations as opposed to 50 meter CL ones. CL can run every 90 seconds and it is impossible for ANY grade line to run more than every 3 minutes especially one that goes right down the centre of a busy road. The CL is cheaper to run due to automation, is faster, and far more reliable than Eglinton.

Eglinton should be a completely grade separated line but Miller`s `LRT or nothing mantra` greatly limits the speed, reliability, and capacity of the line.

Canada Line was designed to be a fast link between the airport and downtown Vancouver. Transit City LRT lines were designed to prioritize local access instead of a fast link to no where.

I disagree with a fully grade separated line, especially Eglinton West line. It would be a redundancy of the UPX. If the crosstown is built as an automated line, Eglinton West should be retained as LRT. The section east of Leslie to Kennedy could be grade separated.

I also have doubts Toronto transit can operate at 90 seconds unless they start handcuffing everyone that charges and jams the doors on the spot.

 

[allabootmatt]

You're not actually suggesting that new elevated transit in Toronto would look like this are you? This kind of misinformation is exactly why Toronto keeps building the wrong kind of transit. Stuff like the elevated lines in Philly simply don't get built anymore. The Skytrain is a much more relevant example and would be fantastic for the suburban parts of Eglinton.

The probable difference: the bare-minimum standard of public realm design and implementation is just much higher in Vancouver and environs. Both the underground and elevated sections of the Canada Line got very, very nice street-level upgrades rolled in as part of the construction, and as compensation of sorts to local communities for the attendant disruption. Cambie (the underground part) and No3 Road (the elevated part) simply look great. Given that the central section of Eglinton isn’t even getting its Hydro wires buried despite being torn up down to the dirt for the better part of a decade, I find it hard to believe Toronto could easily pull off a similar result.

 

[BurlOak]

Canada Line was designed to be a fast link between the airport and downtown Vancouver. Transit City LRT lines were designed to prioritize local access instead of a fast link to no where.

When citizens desperately needed fast reliable rapid transit, Transit City LRT lines were designed to prioritize local access.
People wanted Vancouver style rapid transit and were given Spadina type LRT.