[Parkdalian]

People are arguing with me as if I have some power over the way the transit line will work. I have zero power over it. I am explaining why the "need for speed" is really not practical for an above-ground line. LRVs bombing through intersections is not going to happen for many reasons. First and foremost: Toronto is a risk-averse place.

And yes, some people are not going to take the new Eglinton line because it will be too slow. But I know people who prefer their car over the subway because of the delays and problems on the subway. The Eglinton line, no matter how fast, will not please many car people.

And we are forgetting that there are also a vast number of people for whom public transit is their main way of getting around the city: they don't have a car, they don't have a licence, they prefer to take transit for environmental reasons, etc, etc. These are the people who will benefit from the Eglinton crosstown. If you don't think there's a lot of people like this, take any one of the Finch buses and see how many people take transit in the "suburban" parts of Toronto.

TL;DR: If you think the Eglinton crosstown needs to travel at fast speeds through intersections to be a viable form of transit in Toronto - then you have to accept it's already a failure. If you think that Eglinton crosstown should optimize travel times while ensuring safety - then you are like me, waiting to see what happens when the line opens.

 

[Jimvee]

Warning - Old man rant ahead…. Just prioritize the signals and increase speed between stops. If someone drives a car in front of a train this is 9 times out of 10 because they are in a rush, don’t care or not interested in obeying traffic signals. Self importance and entitlement has become an epidemic.
Honestly, Metrolinx/TTC needs to invest in really good video cameras and lawyers to start going after drivers for lost revenue, repairs, and whatever they can.

 

[crs1026]

I don't expect a surface LRT to zoom through intersections - that's clearly risky for riders and for drivers and pedestrians. However...... .with TTC having a track record of imposing excessive speed restraints on surface trams - and then adopting an operating mentality which prefers slow speed over optimal speed......and with a roads administration that is not accountable for making our trams more useful...... there is good reason to be apprehensive about how Crosstown is going to perform.
We need to watch closely and critically and keep up the pressure to ask whether trams can be better expedited - and ensure that Crosstown is not seen as "just another streetcar line" and subject to all the disfunctional operating practices that TTC accepts as normal.
Even if it isn't, I would like to see Crosstown operated by the subway people and not the streetcar people. The mentality should be, stop, get going, stop get going (with proper care and appropriate speed through intersections) and not plod, pause, plod, short turn, plod.....

- Paul

 

[ARG1]

People are arguing with me as if I have some power over the way the transit line will work. I have zero power over it. I am explaining why the "need for speed" is really not practical for an above-ground line. LRVs bombing through intersections is not going to happen for many reasons. First and foremost: Toronto is a risk-averse place.

Nobody is claiming you have power. You asserted that you would prefer that streetcars drive more slowly if it meant smaller chance of accidents, and I'm explaining why that mentality is a huge problem when it comes to attracting ridership.

And yes, some people are not going to take the new Eglinton line because it will be too slow. But I know people who prefer their car over the subway because of the delays and problems on the subway. The Eglinton line, no matter how fast, will not please many car people.

Unfortunately anecdotal examples don't supercede statistics, that being the fact that the existing Toronto Subway is incredibly busy due to its speed and (relative) reliability. In fact, the existing subway network carries more passengers than every metro system in the US besides NYC. York Mills station alone, a station that is found in the middle of nowhere with no TOD or development, gets more riders than every station on the Washington D.C. Metro, including interchange stations, and this is before we compare it to cities that forwent Metros in favour of tram-train style light rail systems (I drew the comparison between Vancouver and Portland before, suffice to say the difference in ridership numbers between them speaks volumes).

This generally falls down to 2 reasons:

1. Toronto does a great job running frequent bus connections to subways making reaching the subway incredibly convenient.
2. The subway lines themselves being fully grade separated allow them to have a speed and reliability advantage that make using the bus worth it.

Had we approached the same attitude to building the Yonge Subway as we did building Eglinton (reminder, that the original plan for the subway was a streetcar subway similar to the Boston Green Line or the Philly subway surface lines), I imagine the Yonge Subway wouldn't have anywhere near the ridership it has today.

And we are forgetting that there are also a vast number of people for whom public transit is their main way of getting around the city: they don't have a car, they don't have a licence, they prefer to take transit for environmental reasons, etc, etc. These are the people who will benefit from the Eglinton crosstown. If you don't think there's a lot of people like this, take any one of the Finch buses and see how many people take transit in the "suburban" parts of Toronto.

So your argument is that because there are captured riders who don't have any other choice, it is justified to build slower and more inefficient infrastructure because some people's lives will be improved regardless? That is... quite the mindset to approach city building with.

The reason why I focus so much on choice riders is because transit shouldn't be treated like a social safety net/welfare program, and rather the goal should be to make sure that public transit exists as the primary form of transportation for the people of most, if not all classes. This means capturing those who can drive, and make using public transit as a more appealing offer for a variety of reasons, namely cost and speed. The captured riders aren't going anywhere, any improvements that are made to attract choice riders will directly benefit captured riders just as well (outside of cases where transit is built solely around park and rides, but I'm pretty sure nobody on this forum is advocating for this).

TL;DR: If you think the Eglinton crosstown needs to travel at fast speeds through intersections to be a viable form of transit in Toronto - then you have to accept it's already a failure. If you think that Eglinton crosstown should optimize travel times while ensuring safety - then you are like me, waiting to see what happens when the line opens.

That is such a strange, black and white dichotomy you're presenting here. Yes, me and many others do feel that Eglinton was a very flawed project in its design and execution, but its not like the moment construction is finished everything is over. There is going to be ample time and opportunity to change operating procedures, rebuild segments that are problematic, and most importantly, to learn from our mistakes and make sure we don't repeat them with future transit projects.

 

[hawc]

What goes together better than 80s music and Yonge & Eglinton?

(I grew up there in the 80s.)

Really amazing to see the growth that's happened here in the last 10 years.

And the Crosstown LRT is only going to make it bigger and better.

Enjoy in 4K!

 

[Natika33]

What goes together better than 80s music and Yonge & Eglinton?

(I grew up there in the 80s.)

Really amazing to see the growth that's happened here in the last 10 years.

And the Crosstown LRT is only going to make it bigger and better.

Enjoy in 4K!

Nice!

 

[evandyk]

What goes together better than 80s music and Yonge & Eglinton?

(I grew up there in the 80s.)

Really amazing to see the growth that's happened here in the last 10 years.

And the Crosstown LRT is only going to make it bigger and better.

I didn't grow up there, but it was the first neighbourhood I lived in when I came to Toronto 20+ years ago. It was so sleepy and boring back then, but has gotten a lot better since.

 

[dowlingm]

There were two LRV trains testing yesterday on the overground section west of Science Centre at about 0830 - one holding at Leslie stop EB, and another holding before the EB signal at the entrance to the Science Centre ramp. May be old hat to people who watch the line more closely but it was the first time I recall seeing two trains at once on that section (certainly operating the same direction)

 

[ssiguy2]

I think in 30 years there will be no such thing as "The Crosstown". Due to Miller's "streetcar or nothing" mentality and ML very short-term thinking, the current Eglinton Line will simply not have the capacity needed to meet future demands.

The underground section from approx DM to Renforth will be one line with much higher frequencies, probably automated, and a stand-alone transit line. The at-grade section will be the other other line and in order to connect they will have a seamless cross-platform transfer. The at-grade section is not going to be able to offer the frequency and reliability of the underground section and automating the underground section would also lower operational costs. Also, the at-grade section is at the whim of local traffic and one accident brings the entire line to a screeching halt.

A transit line is only as strong as it's weakest point and the Eglinton has 10km of it but if they divide the line in 2 then at least half of the line has no weak points and could provide a lot more service to a lot more passengers. The future TTC map will have no reference to "Crosstown" but rather 2 different lines, one subway and one LRT showing an interchange station.

 

[Bojaxs]

I think in 30 years there will be no such thing as "The Crosstown". Due to Miller's "streetcar or nothing" mentality and ML very short-term thinking, the current Eglinton Line will simply not have the capacity needed to meet future demands.

The underground section from approx DM to Renforth will be one line with much higher frequencies, probably automated, and a stand-alone transit line. The at-grade section will be the other other line and in order to connect they will have a seamless cross-platform transfer. The at-grade section is not going to be able to offer the frequency and reliability of the underground section and automating the underground section would also lower operational costs. Also, the at-grade section is at the whim of local traffic and one accident brings the entire line to a screeching halt.

A transit line is only as strong as it's weakest point and the Eglinton has 10km of it but if they divide the line in 2 then at least half of the line has no weak points and could provide a lot more service to a lot more passengers. The future TTC map will have no reference to "Crosstown" but rather 2 different lines, one subway and one LRT showing an interchange station.

Wouldn't surprise me if we see LRV trains rushing through the western and underground portions of the line, only to get backed up on the above ground, Scarborough portion. Much like we see with the downtown streetcars all bunching up together.

The other issue with the above ground portion of the Eglinton line is they added too many stops.

 

[mrgrieves]

I think in 30 years there will be no such thing as "The Crosstown". Due to Miller's "streetcar or nothing" mentality and ML very short-term thinking, the current Eglinton Line will simply not have the capacity needed to meet future demands.

The underground section from approx DM to Renforth will be one line with much higher frequencies, probably automated, and a stand-alone transit line. The at-grade section will be the other other line and in order to connect they will have a seamless cross-platform transfer. The at-grade section is not going to be able to offer the frequency and reliability of the underground section and automating the underground section would also lower operational costs. Also, the at-grade section is at the whim of local traffic and one accident brings the entire line to a screeching halt.

A transit line is only as strong as it's weakest point and the Eglinton has 10km of it but if they divide the line in 2 then at least half of the line has no weak points and could provide a lot more service to a lot more passengers. The future TTC map will have no reference to "Crosstown" but rather 2 different lines, one subway and one LRT showing an interchange station.

Agree w everything you said except for the 30 years part. Some high profile incidents shutting down the line will make headlines. This will be an issue on Day 1 and will need to be addressed sooner than later.

 

[cplchanb]

Wouldn't surprise me if we see LRV trains rushing through the western and underground portions of the line, only to get backed up on the above ground, Scarborough portion. Much like we see with the downtown streetcars all bunching up together.

The other issue with the above ground portion of the Eglinton line is they added too many stops.

hopefully then the city managers will have their eyes opened to the fact they need signal priority... or maybe not since theyve had 50 years on their streetcar lines to figure that out.

 

[hw621]

I think in 30 years there will be no such thing as "The Crosstown". Due to Miller's "streetcar or nothing" mentality and ML very short-term thinking, the current Eglinton Line will simply not have the capacity needed to meet future demands.

The underground section from approx DM to Renforth will be one line with much higher frequencies, probably automated, and a stand-alone transit line. The at-grade section will be the other other line and in order to connect they will have a seamless cross-platform transfer. The at-grade section is not going to be able to offer the frequency and reliability of the underground section and automating the underground section would also lower operational costs. Also, the at-grade section is at the whim of local traffic and one accident brings the entire line to a screeching halt.

A transit line is only as strong as it's weakest point and the Eglinton has 10km of it but if they divide the line in 2 then at least half of the line has no weak points and could provide a lot more service to a lot more passengers. The future TTC map will have no reference to "Crosstown" but rather 2 different lines, one subway and one LRT showing an interchange station.

In 30 years it will be obsolete and scrapped like the SRT.

 

[christiesplits]

In the last few weeks, have there been any new tea leaves to speculate on the opening date? Sorry If I'm sounding like a broken record.

What do you think the odds are of a staggered opening? For instance, certain stations (like Eglinton) being inaccessible for the first few months after opening.

 

[T3G]

In 30 years it will be obsolete and scrapped like the SRT.

I promise you this will not happen.

BTW, the SRT was not obsolete. Vancouver still uses the tech and will do so for the foreseeable future. The SRT was doomed because of its incompatibility with bitter winters, and poor routing. Let's take the merits, or lack thereof, of the Crosstown such as they are rather than engaging in low information populism.