News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

It won't be overcapacity in the first year, or in the first 5 years. Probably, not in the first 10 years either. Eglinton is a popular route, but doesn't have huge trip generators or destinations.

Many of the riders will only take Eglinton to the nearest Line 1 station. Which means, all of those riders count towards the total ridership, but they do not all count as part of the peak load at the peak point. Say, if the peak load is AM rush approaching Yonge from the east, then riders who board at Weston Rd and transfer at Allen Rd do not add to that peak load. Or, vice versa.

We can't predict what happens in 20 or 30 years. If the demand for transit trips grows steadily, but the new transit construction stalls, then Eglinton might be at risk of overloading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMO
BMO said:
what's the over/under on the crosstown being overcapacity in the first year?
Click to expand...
About the same that the Sheppard East subway would be overcapacity the first year.

Which is near zero, 20-years later. I think 76 cars is more than enough to carry far more than predicted. Metrolinx says with 76 cars than can run every 190 seconds. That's 19 trains a hour (in each direction). If you guestimate a capacity of 400 per (two-car) train, that's 7,600 each hour. The predicted 2031 ridership was about 5,000 an hour - before Covid.

If somehow they have completely blown it, they can always replace service between Don Mills and Kennedy with buses, and push the trains to 3 cars, increasing capacity to 10,000 an hour.

Of course, that assumes that the line opens sometime in the 2020s.

Rainforest said:
We can't predict what happens in 20 or 30 years. If the demand for transit trips grows steadily, but the new transit construction stalls, then Eglinton might be at risk of overloading.
Click to expand...
We can't, but there's years to order additional cars to lengthen the trains from 62 metres to 93 metres. And frequencies can get much higher.

At full capacity, they should be able to get over 20,000 an hour between Don Mills and Pearson; and the Don Mills to Kennedy section is no where near the peak point. If they break 20,000 one day, time to build an additional east-west line somewhere.
 
Last edited:
Dan416 said:
I think the thing that’ll really determine how well Eglinton will work is the interface between the “subway” portion and the on-street portion and if the at grade portion really screws up the line or not. Hopefully not.
Click to expand...
I completely agree. I think that the public will be disappointed by the long stops at traffic lights that can be seen in testing videos, both old and recent. The trains also just crawl through at-grade intersections.
My guess is that riders won't see the surface section of the line as being an improvement over the streetcar. I also don't think that the catch-up signal priority will be handled well, although I would concede that we will have to wait until the line opens.

If the surface section is as bad as I predict it will be, then I am at least hopeful it will lead to improvements in transit signal priority across the city.
 
Voltz said:
You're willing to bet that the ridership demand will jump from a mixed traffic bus route to 90 meter underground trains in one year? You must feel lucky.
Click to expand...
A lot has changed since the pandemic, and the route has been delayed while we've had record population growth. I'm excited to see how it all plays out when it opens! I was just curious what others' thoughts were. Glad everyone seems to think we have nothing to worry about.
 
Dan416 said:
I think the thing that’ll really determine how well Eglinton will work is the interface between the “subway” portion and the on-street portion and if the at grade portion really screws up the line or not. Hopefully not.
Click to expand...
This is a key physical constraint for sure. I would think something that would make-or-break the line is also the number of people switching from using Line 2 to using Line 5, as that determines how big of an issue the design is. I imagine it won’t be a small number given how many buses will be looping into stations.

The previous bus routes aren’t the best indicator as those only served Eglinton itself- the number of people transferring onto those routes was for local travel, but a TTC subway is more than that. If you were heading downtown from Jane and Lawrence and went to Jane Station before, you are almost certainly going to use Line 5 at Mount Dennis now instead. Now apply that logic across every intersecting bus route, and factor that most subway ridership comes from feeder buses.

In essence, It will all depend how much system demand Line 5 takes over. I might be wrong, but I don’t think that’s something you can mitigate for if you’re inducing the behaviour with high quality transfers. GO transfers might be the only reasonable way to ensure trains aren’t always full at Eglinton/Eg West in the long term.
 
If the surface-level portion of the line doesn't perform well, they should just start tunnelling again and extend the subway part east to Kennedy. Let the surface LRT handle 5-10 years of usage during the construction, and then turn it into a landscaped median. Alternatively, run a Vancouver-style elevated light rail line.
 
CapitalSeven said:
An alternative would be to pay someone 5 million to engineer proper signal priority instead of 5 billion to build a subway under a new surface line.
Click to expand...

That wouldn’t eliminate the potential for accidents with pedestrians or the need to slow at intersections to reduce the likelihood of accidents with vehicles. But it would be a good interim measure.
 
There is no need to slow at intersections, other than the TTC's own convention (or, if you prefer, paranoia).

As for the potential for accidents with pedestrians, I don't believe any stations on the line are supposed to get platform screen doors, including the underground ones.
 
T3G said:
There is no need to slow at intersections, other than the TTC's own convention (or, if you prefer, paranoia).

As for the potential for accidents with pedestrians, I don't believe any stations on the line are supposed to get platform screen doors, including the underground ones.
Click to expand...

Do me a favor. Cross the street against the light in front of a streetcar going 60 KPH.

I am sure you will be fine when it takes you out.
 
Richard White said:
Do me a favor. Cross the street against the light in front of a streetcar going 60 KPH.

I am sure you will be fine when it takes you out.
Click to expand...
And after I do that, I will cross in front of a train doing 100 km/h, and then in front of a bus doing 60 km/h, and then perhaps a car doing 70 km/h while its driver attempts to send a text message, none of which will bother to slow down for me.

Could it be that when the tram has the light, I'm not supposed to be crossing? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
T3G said:
And after I do that, I will cross in front of a train doing 100 km/h, and then in front of a bus doing 60 km/h, and then perhaps a car doing 70 km/h while its driver attempts to send a text message, none of which will bother to slow down for me.

Could it be that when the tram has the light, I'm not supposed to be crossing? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The tram needs to be prepared to stop if the light changes. This isn't like Vienna, where there is a distant signal for the tram (which isn't possible in Toronto for safety reasons).
 
What safety reasons are those?

As for the light changes, don't all traffic light cycles come with brief periods of time where no one has the light, to deal exactly with scenarios like this? A fully loaded bus or an 18 wheeler can't stop at a moment's notice, either.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top