[christiesplits]

lso, the at-grade section is at the whim of local traffic and one accident brings the entire line to a screeching halt.

This is a serious concern of mine. Footage of the testing shows just how easy it will be for a distracted driver to ram into the side of the LRT. Think Queen's Quay but 10x worse.

 

[Bojaxs]

I'm really hoping the at-grade stretch of the line will be as quick as the underground portion. But I'm concerned about how many stops there are on the at-grade stretch. From Victoria Park Ave to Ionview Rd. there are 5 stops along a less than 3km stretch. Not to mention all the red lights the LRV's will encounter. Seems like the LRV's are being setup to behave much like the downtown streetcars.

When I was in Calgary last month, I was surprised at how fast the C-trains traveled. Not slowing down or stopping at intersections. Stations spaced further apart with city buses filling the gaps. The trains moved so fast even out pacing the cars on the road. The whole network seemed to behave like an at-grade subway.

 

[cplchanb]

I'm really hoping the at-grade stretch of the line will be as quick as the underground portion. But I'm concerned about how many stops there are on the at-grade stretch. From Victoria Park Ave to Ionview Rd. there are 5 stops along a less than 3km stretch. Not to mention all the red lights the LRV's will encounter. Seems like the LRV's are being setup to behave much like the downtown streetcars.

When I was in Calgary last month, I was surprised out how fast the C-trains traveled. Not slowing down or stopping at intersections. Stations spaced further apart with city buses filling the gaps. The trains moved so fast even out pacing the cars on the road. The whole network seemed to behave like an at-grade subway.

A bit late to the game are we? Get used to it. Ttc will not allow for lrt signal priority

 

[Bojaxs]

A bit late to the game are we? Get used to it. Ttc will not allow for lrt signal priority

Signal priority still won't solve the issue of too many stops over such a short distance.

 

[cplchanb]

Signal priority still won't solve the issue of too many stops over such a short distance.

still...way too late to the game for you to make that observation lol. about 10 years too late...

 

[T3G]

But I'm concerned about how many stops there are on the at-grade stretch. From Victoria Park Ave to Ionview Rd. there are 5 stops along a less than 3km stretch.

Well, let's see.

Victoria Park and Pharmacy are both major concession roads, so skipping them would be dumb.

Pharmacy to Hakimi Lebovic is about 500 m, which is not dissimilar to the stop spacing on the successful Bloor-Danforth subway.

Warden is a major concession road, so skipping it would be dumb.

Birchmount is a major concession road, so skipping it would be dumb. Furthermore, the distance between Warden and Birchmount is 850 m.

Birchmount to Ionview is 550 m, which is not dissimilar to the stop spacing on the successful Bloor-Danforth subway.
So... which stop, exactly, would you cut?

Not to mention all the red lights the LRV's will encounter.

This is the problem, not the stop spacing.

eems like the LRV's are being setup to behave much like the downtown streetcars.

The downtown streetcars have stops MUCH closer than the Crosstown.

A bit late to the game are we? Get used to it. Ttc will not allow for lrt signal priority

It would be helpful to lay the blame at the feet of the correct entity, which is the city. Why would the TTC be the one to not allow for signal priority? Why would they intentionally handicap their system? It makes no sense.

 

[Bojaxs]

still...way too late to the game for you to make that observation lol. about 10 years too late...

It's never too late to demo. I would gladly knock down a couple stations. Particularly the Ionview Rd. stop which is 2 blocks from Kennedy station.

 

[Bojaxs]

Well, let's see.

Victoria Park and Pharmacy are both major concession roads, so skipping them would be dumb.

Pharmacy to Hakimi Lebovic is about 500 m, which is not dissimilar to the stop spacing on the successful Bloor-Danforth subway.

Warden is a major concession road, so skipping it would be dumb.

Birchmount is a major concession road, so skipping it would be dumb. Furthermore, the distance between Warden and Birchmount is 850 m.

Birchmount to Ionview is 550 m, which is not dissimilar to the stop spacing on the successful Bloor-Danforth subway.
So... which stop, exactly, would you cut?

Some of these can easily be served by a city bus and transfer to the LRT further down the line.

Someone can make a case for why the LRT should stop at every intersection. Doesn't mean we should.

EDIT: I would knock down Pharmacy, Hakimi and Ionview.

Victoria Park and Birchmount being at opposite ends of the golden mile with warden serving the middle. Buses can fill the gaps in between.

 

[cplchanb]

It would be helpful to lay the blame at the feet of the correct entity, which is the city. Why would the TTC be the one to not allow for signal priority? Why would they intentionally handicap their system? It makes no sense.

Had TTC been adamant on signaling priority they would've made a huge public fuss about it and it would've made torstar headlines that the city/ML is actively handicapping the line against TTCs wishes. Alas it's been silent, proving that TTC doesn't give a damn about it, or at least enough to stand their ground.

Don't forget this is the same ttc that ordered new street cars with trolley poles even though the whole system is converted to panto. They aren't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer

 

[T3G]

I do not think, in this era of inflation and general purse tightening, that running a parallel bus is a good idea. And how frequently would you run this bus? Is this going to become a 97 Yonge situation, where those not fortunate enough to live within walking distance of a station have to wait 15-30 minutes for a bus, while the subway rumbles past every 2 minutes not 6 feet below them?

 

[Bojaxs]

I do not think, in this era of inflation and general purse tightening, that running a parallel bus is a good idea. And how frequently would you run this bus? Is this going to become a 97 Yonge situation, where those not fortunate enough to live within walking distance of a station have to wait 15-30 minutes for a bus, while the subway rumbles past every 2 minutes not 6 feet below them?

I can easily turn that argument around and say in this era of "purse tightening" we should be constructing lines with fewer stations and opting for buses instead.

Is it cheaper to construct a line with more stations and fewer buses, or fewer stations and more buses?

 

[T3G]

I can easily turn that argument around and say in this era of "purse tightening" we should be constructing lines with fewer stations and opting for buses instead.

You could, but it doesn't answer the question. Keep in mind that these "stations" you refer to are surface stops, scarcely more than a concrete platform and a shelter. We aren't talking about underground stations.

So, keeping that in mind, how exactly does constructing lines with fewer stations, and running buses instead, which requires more employees, make more fiscal sense?

Is it cheaper to construct a line with more stations and fewer buses, or fewer stations and more buses?

I don't know, is it cheaper to nix a couple of stops to save 1-3 minutes of travel time, or is it cheaper to have a parallel bus service running a 37 km round trip and averaging 17-18 km/h in mixed traffic, because "new urbanist" transit buffs don't care about the usability of a rapid transit line, only its speed?

 

[adys123]

I do not think, in this era of inflation and general purse tightening, that running a parallel bus is a good idea. And how frequently would you run this bus? Is this going to become a 97 Yonge situation, where those not fortunate enough to live within walking distance of a station have to wait 15-30 minutes for a bus, while the subway rumbles past every 2 minutes not 6 feet below them?

The problem is that for most of the route, a parallel bus service will already be running.

 

[T3G]

The problem is that for most of the route, a parallel bus service will already be running.

Yes, which is a fault in the design of the line. But the more stops you cut, the more people you exclude from the line's catchment area, and the more frequently you will have to run the parallel bus.

 

[adys123]

Yes, which is a fault in the design of the line. But the more stops you cut, the more people you exclude from the line's catchment area, and the more frequently you will have to run the parallel bus.

It depends on the function that you want the line to serve.